I think one of the weaknesses of some classics from this time period is that they were serialized, which means that they didn’t have the benefit of developmental editing. Some installments are brilliant and some are less so, giving an uneven feeling to the book. I read The Idiot earlier this year with r/ClassicBookClub, and I’ll speak on that rather than C&P since it’s been years since I read that. The Idiot has marvelous characters and a compelling plot. There are sections that are, indeed, quite brilliant. The opening chapters and the closing chapters in particular are memorable and beautifully crafted. In between are chapters that are delightful and chapters that were clearly the author just vamping because the muse had failed him that week. The author himself admitted that it was a failed experiment. In summary, I think there are some really good reasons why literature isn’t serialized like this anymore, and the reader benefits from that change. I would love to see what The Idiot could have become if Dostoevsky had the benefit of working through several complete drafts and then working revisions with a really talented editor.

Dostoyevsky would’ve read it to check for typos.

Let’s break this down a bit.

As the matter of fact, I think not only Dostoyevsky, but most of the other big classics of pre-20th century wouldn’t be recognized.

Of course they wouldn’t be recognized. Recognition of greatness is something that takes time. A ‘classic’ isn’t something that just pops off the printer and hits high sales, and even a lot of what we normally would consider part of the ‘Great Works of Literature.’ had more than their fair share of criticism on release. Next to no novel ever published was considered a pinnacle of literature shortly after being published, or least not with any seriousness that wasn’t a sale pitch part of a publisher’s ad campaign.

Time is also a pretty good filter. ‘People wrote better back then!’ is bullshit if you consider the hundreds of thousands of novels that have been written, read, and absolutely forgotten, and often (though not always) with good reason.

popular genres now are; fantasy, young adult, post-apocalypses, thriller, biography and others, have nothing to do with most of the classics written.

First, most of that list are considered subgenres. Second, most novels fall under several different genres. Don Quixote for example is considered both satire and fantasy, pretty easy to categorize that one. Romance novels have dominated sales since we started tracking sales, and still do today. ‘But everyone is reading YA today!’ No they’re not. They’re still reading mostly romance schlock and by the truckload. They’re not talking about them, mostly because there is little to say. Most sales charting puts classics within their own category, rather than include classical literature in another genre, so it’s not that they don’t fit into the general broad genres, it’s that we don’t usually do it with classics. For the why, you’ll need to talk to publishing companies to get a definitive answer.

Secondly, it feels (and maybe I’m wrong) that people now, prefer more fast-paced and filled with action books. I very often hear and read complains how certain books like “Crime and Punishment” or “Anna Karenina” are plain boring, and there is nothing going in them. As I see it, their is a tendency to value real physical dilemmas more then psychological ones.

You are wrong, but also right. People today prefer page turners, if we go by just general popularity of sales figures, but surprise, people of yesteryear did too though. No one has ever accused Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Bronte, or Fitzgerald of writing page turners. They wrote terrific tales woven with masterful skill, but exciting? Not really. But the exciting page turners, or even just genre trope novels, usually don’t stand the test of time. Plenty of books were written, read, and forgotten and during their short life they probably outside something that today we lump in some top 100 list. It’s all too easy to look at classical literature and think that everything written at that time period was on par. It wasn’t. Bawdy tales, bad satire, and the literary equivalent of a fart joke were often the contemporaries.

And lastly, taking the risk to sound like an old man, it seems that less teenagers and adults become interested in reading classics. If so many people are already refuse to read some big classic, there wouldn’t be a chance for it if it was published today.

Today, not that many people are reading Dostoevsky. Twenty years ago, not that many people were reading Dostoevsky. Fifty years ago, not that many people were reading Dostoevsky. No one was really reading Shakespear for like 150 years. In other words, there might very well be a terrific author that everyone is going to be talking about in 2255 who published this year, and both you and I might not even know about it at all. Even worse, we both might even read it and think ‘Well this book is pretty meh.’ and forget about it entirely. None of this is because of any great change in society, or because of ‘Kids today/people today/society today followed by whatever problematic fault is perceived to only exist now but actually has been around since we were huddled in caves.’

It’s called “literary fiction”

Google it

You’re welcome

I couldn’t disagree more.

As a counterexample, take Demon Copperhead by Barbara Kingsolver. It’s based on a 19th century classic (David Copperfield) and follows the same plot beat for beat, with the same characters recast in modern day Appalachia. It won the 2023 Pulitzer and other awards, sold well, and is widely loved.

Of course, if Crime and Punishment were written today, elements of the plot would have to be updated (the Marmeladov plotline could not happen in that way today), and Dostoevsky would no doubt have incorporated some of the fictional techniques that have been developed since. But there’s a reason why people still enjoy Crime and Punishment, and a similar book absolutely could do well.

It’s easy to get trapped in a genre and think that everything is fantasy or YA. But literary fiction exists, and many very good writers are trying to produce today’s version of Anna Karenina or Crime and Punishment with varying success.

There are plenty of people reading Crime and Punishment today because they enjoy the plot and writing. If Crime and Punishment were published today, those people would still read it.

This year I read and loved Remains of the Day and the Sympathizer by Viet Thanh Nguyen and Harlem Shuffle by Colson Whitehead, all of which are character focused interior novels like Crime and Punishment.

I think you are very much stuck in your own bubble. The biggest issue Dostoevsky would have faced today is how dominant English language publishing is in Europe. How few books are translated from non-English to English, compared to the opposite. How anyone writing in a non-English language needs to find an academic niche because publishing doesn’t pay. That is before we look at the sanctions against Russia, very deserved, but nonetheless I’m sure they would have a negative impact on the Arts.

I’m surprised that some posters agree that he wouldn’t be read today because of changed tastes. Not to mention the lack of monster trucks.

Off the top of my head I’d say that many readers aren’t willing to indulge in the leisurely way of reading (or listening: not that long ago that people would sit & listen to people reading from books in RL) nor devote the prolonged attention that earlier readers/listeners did. I doubt that tastes have changed, though, and would guess that the sort of people who read genre stuff would once have been reading lurid crime stories in newspapers rather than C&P and romantic tales of brave idealistic warriors instead of Don Quixote.

Literature was flooded with cheap paperbacks and adventure novels back then as well.

I disagree on physical versus psychological dilemmas but I agree on everything else. It’s hard to read huge books that are very slow paced. We live in different times.

My dude hasn’t heard of literary fiction or all the book prizes that focus specifically on that genre and are among the most prestigious awards around. These are (most of) the future classics, and while possibly not so buzzy on the social internet, are as popular as ever among certain groups of readers.

I think the biggest problem facing a modern day crime and punishment would be that there is soo much competition today. I would guess that there were way less books published per year then than now. Especially if you consider self-publishing. But there is clearly an appetite for books like crime and punishment today when you consider the fact that people still love crime and punishment to this day and you see a post on this subreddit discussing it pretty much every day…

You might like reading “Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote” a classic short story by Borges in which a fictional character “rewrites” (i.e., reproduces exactly the same, line by line) the entirety of Cervantes’ Don Quixote.

The story is told in the form of a literary review that compares the original and the “new” Don Quixote.

Tastes change, it’s neither good nor bad. We have more choice now. I’m Irish and thus inundated with stuff in how amazing Ulysses is, and I think it’s probably the worst book I’ve ever opened.