Virginia puts it so well.
This is my favorite work by Dostoevsky and I've read Crime & Punishment, The Brothers Karamazov (second to the novel in question), Notes From Underground, and Demons. The Idiot is the novel I am struck by the most, there is nothing more profound to me than certain passages of the novel, which generate the infatuation with the geniality of balance (which I am not only referring to Myshkin here, but the balance of other things). With that said, I'm currently re-reading one of my favorite novels!
If the fool would persist in his folly he would become wise.
-W.Blake
Just started it. I find Myshkin's story of Marie to be so moving.
The Moments of Dominion
That happen on the Soul
And leave it with a Discontent
Too exquisite — to tell —
-Emily Dickinson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVW8GCnr9-I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckGIvr6WVw4
The following post speaks of Marie:
sorry gladys the doc can't agree w/ the opinion...he was disappointed w/ the book...a real letdown after looking so forward to cracking into it this spring...
a big fan of dostoevsky's work, the doc has always been uplifted when finishing his stories...on this one, not so much...
put it behind bk, c&P, the gambler, notes...and not even close for the doc...
one thing that took away from the story was the introduction where the guy writing it had to put down what was gonna happen in the end in his explaining of the book...so there was no build up as to what was gonna happen to nastassya...
the doc's opinion, fwiw...
There is a brilliant screen version of the book. Quite authentic (especially Parfen). Sorry for original language without subtitles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THcP5...eature=related
I would like to add something else: The meaning of main characters' names is extremely important for interpretation of this masterpiece (however, the name of Raskolnikov's too).
Last edited by Leo Bloom; 06-13-2011 at 12:22 PM.
I enjoyed the YouTube.
How can the doc say that!
Dostoevsky foreshadows early the murder of Nastasya Filippovna by Roghozin because it's almost peripheral to the ending. The earth-shattering shock lies in Prince Myshkin shedding tears on the murderer, Roghozin's, cheek. And in the most curious nature of the final fate of the Prince (and Aglaya).
Did you think his actions mere madness? As for being "uplifted when finishing his stories", the ending of The Idiot is euphoric like no other Dostoevsky work.
"Love does not alter the beloved, it alters itself"
true dat on the foreshadowing...but still, when you already know from reading the intro, there was something lost there for the doc...
sorry, but there was nothing euphoric on the finishing of the book for the doc besides the fact that he could move on to another read...the pages were easy enough to turn throughout the book, but after a nice beginning, the story never took hold...
as for madness...who's to say and the doc didn't really care...just was expecting more from this one, that's all...
the afterword was filled w/ words to the effect that this was dostoevsky's most relevant novel, but it just didn't do it for the country doctor...
Read the first part again recently. Fabulous portrayal of a 'genuine man' in a world of selfish personalities. Prince M is the most astute and intelligent of all the characters,in no way an 'idiot'. And he pursues his love despite adverse circumstances. The only fault i may attribute to him is maybe he loved the wrong person?
Anyway,i wish someone would make a sequel with a happy ending.
Even that other great comparable story ends in death.
I think Dostoevsky really understood christ better than all the theologians and even many of the disciples.
And yes, real love is god!
The ending is happy: THE ENDING: ‘like a lamb dumb before his shearer’
"Love does not alter the beloved, it alters itself"
The end still has sad elements (there is elements of tragedy in this whole comedy, in a very Shakepearean way), those friendship could be the prince capacity to redeem individuals, just like Jesus dying redeem the thief at this side. It is doubtful that dostoievisky main target (the society that shuns the traits of virtuous man) is "saved", but some individuals. But then, Dostoievisky also goes to say the majority of the people in Jesus society shunned him. Which is also sad, ressurection or not. The great Inquisitor perhaps answers well that Dostoievisky was not so optmistic towards the changes, even if the great inquisitor is a tirade against western christianity.
The end is also a bit similar to the melancholic end of Quixote (the prince is Quixote as much or even more than Jesus). He is forced by society to die. He accepts it, Quixote (the idiot) is abandoned, Alonso Quijano is there.
I would say the end is unconclusive, neither optimistic or pessimist, as pretty much all dostoievisky great books are. It is better a world that had the prince and lost, than one that never had him.
Yes,there are some redemptive aspects in the way that the prince effects other people positively. But i would like to know that the prince Himself is still the same loving person,but a little more selective after his experiences. We want to see the prince ressurected!!! Jesus was,and even quixote finished on his 'epiphany or his 'new understanding of life'. Dostoevskys ending are generally dodgy,excepting the gambler and TBK to some extent.
But the problem of the prince is not due a "flaw" on his character. Dostoievisky is talking about a man falling because of others . He seems an idiot, but the function of the idiot in a story is to reflect someone else. The prince does it, so the sequel would be positive if the society or the individuals the prince touched (lets say his apostles) changed, not the prince. If he get this judgement call you ask (a sellective prince) he would lost his basic prnciples somehow. Would be a failled Jesus.
Dont you want to know what happens after Hamlet death?
(btw, not saying you cannot be moved by the character to wish him more success, but such is life )
Even the prince can learn! Anyway,i suppose its dificult to judge really. For the same reason i sometimes think why didnt jesus save himself in front of pilate? Then he could have lived happily somewhere else with his disciples and his beloved. Maybe you had to be there?