> And then he lists Dostoevsky and Homer. Those doesn't count as heavy reading? What counts as heavy reading? Ulysses/Paradise lost?
Dostoevsky is not difficult to read. If you like depressive psychological drama, it is quite enjoyable. Homer difficulty depends heavily on translation. It can be stiff and boring or basically just fun (but again, you gotta like the relationships non-actiony aspect of it).
If Dostoevsky is not difficult to read, then there exist only a handful of authors who are. Maybe it isn't difficult to find enjoyment in his works, but there is a hell of a lot more going on than just depressive psychological drama.
I really dont think it is so difficult to read. I was no regular reader of classic and was definitely not seeking anything difficult when I found it first time and I enjoyed it.
I used to abandon books quickly when they were hard to read or boring or anything like that.
I think there's a very wide range in difficulty for Dostoevsky's work. Crime and Punishment and Notes from Underground are a reasonable length, are told in a linear fashion, and largely easily differentiable characters. Brothers Karamazov, on the other hand, I found very challenging.
Dostoevsky is not difficult to read. If you like depressive psychological drama, it is quite enjoyable. Homer difficulty depends heavily on translation. It can be stiff and boring or basically just fun (but again, you gotta like the relationships non-actiony aspect of it).
Yeah, Ulysses is definitely hard to read.