Book Club Discussion 9/23/06: The Gambler (Final)

[madnak]

We're discussing The Gambler, by Dostoyevsky. Next week we'll discuss File 1 (the first 14 chapters) of Market Forces, by Richard Morgan.

On to the discussion:

Do you think the title, "the Gambler," is a good description of Alexei? Do you relate to him better or worse now that the book is over?

Has your view of Alexei and Polina changed since last week? In context, what do you think Polina meant when she said Alexei was necessary to her? What was she feeling during the last night at the hotel, and why did she throw the money into his face?

How does the grandmother affect Alexei? What about Mlle. Blanche? Astley? Why does he go to Paris? Would you have done the same thing? What is Alexei's relationship with money?

Alexei's a perceptive guy. Is there anything he seems to constantly overlook? How do you feel about the final scene? How has Alexei changed? Is Astley right in saying Alexei is hopeless?

[diebitter]

I'm trying to find time to finish this, so might contribute in a couple of days... (sorry)

[madnak]

Given the dead discussion here, we'll talk about Market Forces on October 7. That should give everyone plenty of time.

[Banditgberg]

i read an electronic copy of The Gambler in only 2 short sittings...i commented on the first part and was extremely underwhelmed by the second half and hoped to see other people opinions...but....

Characterization of Alexei was Top Notch: do i relate to him? I hope not. I do commend his never quite trying attitude (addiction?) to always wanting to hit it big, but the gamblers fallacy always catches him. You can double up infinetly but go busto once...

Polina, meh, insecure, likes to have Alexi brooding over her. Hot chick in class, never gives it up.

Sparknotes: Alexi wants money to get the girl, girl doesn't care about money...Le Sad

[katyseagull]

I am happy to report that I'm almost finished with The Gambler. I'm pretty sure if I had money I'd be just like Granny. I know I would. Alexei reminds me a lot of some of the guys in OOT.

[diebitter]

I finally finished this, and thoroughly enjoyed it.

The Gambler is indeed a perfect title for Alexei, by the end that is all he is and all he lives for. He's addicted, and winning or losing is really no consequence to him, it's just being able to play.

I do get his gambling thing, and have indeed experienced times when you do slam down a way oversized bet due to frustration at losing, and you're effectively staking your whole roll on one result, and I'm glad I don't do that any more, and recognise it for what it is. I warmed to his character in the end and felt sorry for him. Wretched as he was, he seemed a better person than the childish and frankly horrid character in the main part of the book.

I really don't understand the end part with Polina at all (or rather I don't understand her reaction), and I need to think on it more, and maybe come back about that.

Grandma is a great character, and indeed did actually bring out the better in Alexei, but she also showed him (and us) the wretched fever that gambling (and I mean gambling, not a skilled game like poker!) brings on, but she was of course a much bigger character than just a device for this. Dostoyevsky is too great a writer to just toss in characters for effect or device.


I didn't like the near-end part in Paris, and I felt D. had gone off the boil of the story there, but he reined it back in with the final scene, which was superb. One of the great book endings, possibly.


Good pick, I'll start t'other one now!

[katyseagull]

Lol- it appears there are only a couple of us still left in the book club. I can’t believe there wasn't more discussion of this small novel. Where are you book club people?!

Dostoevsky is undoubtedly a clever writer. It would have been nice to see him develop these characters better because he could have done it so well. I know I would have enjoyed it more. In my opinion it is the scenes with Granny that are the best. I could totally envision it all happening with her and I loved the way she was portrayed.

One character that I didn't get at all was De Grieux. I never felt I understood one thing about him. I don’t get the French! Was he actually in love with Polina and simply waiting for her dowry or was he never in love with her at all? The novel was too sketchy and mysterious for me to figure out.

And yeah what was up with that Polina girl? I was hoping someone would explain her to me. She turned out to be different than I originally thought. Was she just horrified that money meant so much to Alexei that it scared her off and she couldn't forgive him? What did I miss? This character was not clear at all.

So anyway, this was my first Dostoevsky book. Can anyone tell me if this is typical of his stories? He seemed to get into stereotyping nationalities. Does he do this in all his novels? Also, he clearly portrays his female characters as sort of emotionally high-strung and very mysterious. Hm, I'm not sure I like that [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[madnak]

I thought Polina always loved Alexei. She even said she needed him. But the thing is, Alexei persisted in treating her as an object, and not a person. I think the relationship between Alexei and Polina is a classic example of how the term "objectify" should really be used. He never loved her. And he proved that, more or less, when he ran off. Alexei's desire was always self-destructive, and it's exactly the desire he always gave in to.

My interpretation was that Polina didn't want Alexei to gamble in order to win money for her. That wasn't the point. See, he really was trying to buy her off with the money, and she knew it. Moreover, he obviously never had a clue why she needed him in the first place. And his offers to be a slave to her were only insults - she didn't want him as a slave. And when she punished him, or acted hurt, he just assumed she hated him. And responded in kind.

The theme of the book, as I saw it - Alexei didn't gamble to win, he gambled to lose.

[Enrique]

I have been extremely busy and just now finished the book.

In my version of the book, there was somenotes written by someone, so I guess I will be influenced in my thoughts now because of it.

I think Alexei gambled for the gamble, not to lose or to win but for the exhiliration of gambling.
The notes I read were very interesting, since they pointed out a lot of interesting things like how the book has a theme of "suddenness" (everything is sudden, gambling, appearances of characters, the backgrounds of the characters, everyone has a title that has been recently granted).

Interesting how many things get left unresolved.

I think the book was good, but I expected it to be better.

[Enrique]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, he clearly portrays his female characters as sort of emotionally high-strung and very mysterious. Hm, I'm not sure I like that

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't read other Dostoievsky books but from what I read in the introduction to the Gambler, it states some of Dostoievsky's biographical information. And it mentioned that he had two Polina like relationships. Women that were more teasers than lovers (although one of them was his wife). Of course, I don't know how biographers determine that, it seems like Dostoievsky could make them think that. Although Dostoievsky's second wife is not labelled demonic and is considered to being a force in Dostoievsky's life to put him in a more stable position.