In September, we will be reading Dostoevsky's The Idiot.
Please post your thoughts and questions in this thread.
Online Text
Printable View
In September, we will be reading Dostoevsky's The Idiot.
Please post your thoughts and questions in this thread.
Online Text
Ok, well I have my copy but it may take me a little while to get started :( i'll finish off my current book in a few days but unfortunately I'm as busy as all hell at the moment with work and study so at best I'll manage one and a half hours a day of reading... Remains to be seen if that's enough for me to finish a book of this size in a month :/
Well.. having been one of the individuals who voted for We, I jumped ahead and started reading The Idiot. I can say that I am delightfully pleased so far. I must admit Dostoevsky's style of writing is easy and descriptive. The story line is interesting in and of itself.
What I particularly am intrigued with is that everyone implicates Muishkan as a simple minded creature. Furthermore, that he is mentally unstable. To be frank, I think that he is the most sane person presented so far. I am sure the extent of other characters bizzar behavior is to enhance a particular point.
Mickitaz, I agree with every syllable. The Idiot is brimming with warmth.
I will not be reading this excellent book with the group but give it my highest recommendation. When I read it years ago what stood out for me was Myshkin's parallels with Jesus:
Both were 'princes' (Jesus = prince of peace), both very passive in the face of much social anxiety, both seemingly in a quest for truth, and both subjected to ridicule. There was also some tension over materialist values which both dismissed as insignificant to themselves.
Sorry to say I don't recall how it ended but I'm sure it will keep your attention until the very last sentence.
Enjoy!
:)
I agree with Prince Muishken being portrayed at "Jesus" in a sense. You see the imagry as far as his being described in light colors, a childlike expression and such. What I also find interesting, is we experience other character's houses... The Epanchin's estate, Rogojins's house, even Hippolyte's room. But not once, (so far at least) do we have a description of the prince's house.
To further enhance the savior image, Rogojin's house is described as dark and allowing no sunlight to come through. Furthermore, his attitude in general is dark and unforgiving. This is more evident when he speaks directly to the prince himself.
What is even more interesting, is at the party of the prince's birthday Lebedeff goes off on a tangent, first describing the Apocolypse, then going into a general description of Satan. Specifically, he states that Satan probably doesn't look like the monster with the horns as society has built, but rather like a regular human being.
Interesting that there's no description of the prince's house. Maybe, he's just a stranger and pilgrim in Russia, from far-away Switzerland?
What are we to make of Evgenie Pavlovitch?
I thought of that at first, regarding his traveling through Russia. But not once is it mentioned that he has a place of residence, or renting a room somewhere. Hmm.. I will have to think more on that.
In refrence to Evgenie Pavlovitch.. I am not really sure to be honest. I get the impression that one should not trust him. Then again, at this point, I am not trusting a lot of the characters. I almost feel as not one of them is true or safe, and in some way they will hurt Muishken to his own detriment. Must.... read.... on.....
Gladys.. have you read this book previously?
Oh, Just wondering, what translations are we all reading?
I have the Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky - its new apparently :-/
The version I am reading was published in 1868 and translated by Eva Martin.
I'm also reading this translation. I picked up a copy from the library today and finished the introduction a few minutes agoQuote:
Originally Posted by DapperDrake
Starting tomorrow.
As I just finished chapter 9 part 1, I've noticed that Dostoevsky is using Mushkin to deliver his views about execution and other matters. However, the novel is going smoothly and carefully built. I liked it so far.
I'm enjoying it very much :) just hit chapter 16, I must say its very amusing and a good flowing read - in a word its delightful.
I'm off to Canary Wharf by train for work tomorrow, so I hope shall be able to get a good chunk of reading done, assuming I can get a seat on the train back.
Well, I have just finished the book. Very good indeed. There were many times I had to force myself to put the book down (since I had to go to sleep for work the next morning).
One bit of irony I found... they said that Natasia had the book of Madame Bovary. I couldn't help but think of the similarities in character between herself and Madame Bovary. I distained both of them in such a strain...Oh!
Oh my mickitaz,you had finished reading the book!!!!!!
In train, Prince answered to Rogozhin that he doesn't have a house or anything in Peterburg and he's not sure where he will stay.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickitaz
A total stranger in every aspect.
Right.. that was at the beginning of the book. I was referring towards the middle, after he finds out he inherited a sizable fortune. Our narrator indicates that Prince went abroad for several months to set his affairs in order.Quote:
Originally Posted by bazarov
I find it interesting that while we get a description of General Involgin's house and summer house, Roginin's house, even Lebedef's establishment; not once is it mentioned that the Prince made some sort of dwelling place his.
Yes, during his travels he stayed with many friends. I find also a similarity that people enjoy his stories. Someone mentioned here during chat, that they felt Dostoevsky used the Prince as a sounding board for all his own political and religious views. To this I agree. However, this ties in to the preacher/Jesus analogy.
Yep.. .finished the book. However, I seemed to have paid a price :bawling: Somehow, from reading so much the one night, I gave myself a muscle spasm in my neck. Went to the doctor and now I am on muscle relaxer's and going for physical therapy.. I am such a geek sometimes.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by wilbur lim
Unlike 'the idiot', you didn't like Nastasya Filippovna?Quote:
Originally Posted by mickitaz
No, I didn't like Nastasia. She was a shrewd woman who played men till she was tired of them. She used each and every one of them to her advantage. However, she just wasn't quite smart enough though. Since Roginin ended her reign.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gladys
Aglaya was different. She was afraid of how others viewed her actions, so she acted one way, and felt another. I really was quite surprised as to her reaction to loosing the Prince. To be honest, I thought she was just playing a mean joke on him by going along with the proposal. But after you hear of her reaction to him leaving her at Natasia's; it was truly heart breaking.
Natasia was just an empty shell of a woman; spreading her infection to all those around her. Ugh!
Oh, so unkind, Mickitaz.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickitaz
Nastasya Filippovna is a tragic shell of woman who has lost all self-respect, in part, through the shameless paedophilia of her guardian, Totski. She's only good enough for the terrible Roghozin! The prince hopes he can save her from herself. But, no. Twice, on the eve of their wedding, the sinner flees from the pure and unadulterated light of ‘the idiot’. A 'worthless creature', she finally sacrifices herself!
Aglaya, tragically, understands none of this.
I read it, loved it, and am now tempted to reread it. I actually memorized lines from chapters. When you read Dostoevsky, you feel you could paint the imagery he gives. Vivid, funny, and thought provoking. Don't hurry through it.:thumbs_up
I would like to join the reading ad well. Still I will need some time to catch up because I started reading today. I hope this isn't going to be a problem? :)
Yes, I also just started...Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexei
But that was enough to remind me...
...what a great book this is!Quote:
I believe that to execute a man for murder is to punish him immeasurably more dreadfully than is equivalent to his crime. A murder by sentence is far more dreadful than a murder committed by a criminal. The man who is attacked by robbers at night, in a dark wood, or anywhere, undoubtedly hopes and hopes that he may yet escape until the very moment of his death. There are plenty of instances of a man running away, or imploring for mercy--at all events hoping on in some degree--even after his throat was cut. But in the case of an execution, that last hope--having which it is so immeasurably less dreadful to die,--is taken away from the wretch and certainty substituted in its place! There is his sentence, and with it that terrible certainty that he cannot possibly escape death--which, I consider, must be the most dreadful anguish in the world. You may place a soldier before a cannon's mouth in battle, and fire upon him--and he will still hope. But read to that same soldier his death-sentence, and he will either go mad or burst into tears. Who dares to say that any man can suffer this without going mad? No, no! it is an abuse, a shame, it is unnecessary--why should such a thing exist? Doubtless there may be men who have been sentenced, who have suffered this mental anguish for a while and then have been reprieved; perhaps such men may have been able to relate their feelings afterwards. Our Lord Christ spoke of this anguish and dread. No! no! no! No man should be treated so, no man, no man!"
It's amazing how often people care for behavior toward animals, and do things like this to humans:(
Wow, two pages already. From what I have read so far on this thread, I am interested in reading it, even though I did not vote for it. It was however, on my reading list for the near future. I have to finish another book and hope to join in before the month is through. I purchased the book a few months back; been curious to read it.
In Brothers Karamazov, Ivan speaks with Devil and Devil states:''Satan sum, et nihil humanum ame alienum puto''....I am Satan, and nothing human isn't strange to me.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by mickitaz
You're too harsh on Nastasya; her behavior is just a reflection of male actions toward her.
Read the book about a year ago.
Is there anything to be made of Myshkin's long talks about death, that he particularly makes in the earlier parts of the book. Particularly as he is portayed as a Jesus-like person. Maybe it's just me that picked up on this irrelevant point.
I couldn't understand why Myshkin left Aglaya for Nastasya. Perhaps because the saviour is needed most in the sinner's house, and in fact Aglaya has no need for redemption. Or do I sound like a buffoon? I am still pondering over the ending.
That's a true happening from Dostoevsky's life.
No, you're right; Nastasya was more in need. She was really unhappy, Aglaya was more like stupid adolescent.:D
Does anyone know if Myshkin's views of the death penalty/guillotine were concordant with Dostoyevsky's views??
(Yes--I am just starting:) )
Sorry if I offended anyone. I didn't like Natasia. But in earnest, I was having a bad day when I wrote that passage. Wanted to make my point understood, perhaps I went a bit too far.
I am only 150 pages in--but so far I don't like her either.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickitaz
I am so pleased so far, though. I really liked Crime and Punishment (liked is perhaps not really the right word)--but it was not a book which I thought each day "Boy, I can't wait to get some time to read today!!" And with The Idiot, I really just can't wait to read each day! I wonder why C&P is assigned to students more frequently than The Idiot--so far to me, The Idiot seems much more reader-friendly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Shannon_
I am making comparison between the two as well. That's because C&P is the only other book by Dostoevsky I've read :blush:The have very different rhythm for me. I find "The Idiot" easier to read as well. I suppose it is due to the fact that it is more concerned on the dialogue and character's interactions than on a dissection of the thoughts. I am captured by the simple flow of the prose, it feels like a dance - simple in its nature, but something you can fully enjoy.
As for Nastasya, I think I'll take the opposite side. I haven't even reached the middle of the book, I find her interesting and I somehow understand her. And frankly, up to now Aglaya seems to me too ordinary in comparison.
Qspeechc, I agree with your sinner theory, but since I haven't finished the book yet I am not sure if I am supposed to say this :lol:
I was thinking some of it had to do with not everybody's name beginning with the letter "R" ...:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Alexei
Been reading a while but I finished this book last night. Very good book. I'm going to read three men in a boat next by Jerome K Jerome.
Haha, yeah, probably that's the main reason :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by _Shannon_
I better get reading this book if I plan to participate or comment at all. Sorry I have not even started it yet; and I have been dying to read it for sometime. My delay really could not be helped; I have not been feeling well. I may be able to catch up but if not I will read the book and then review all of this fine discussion.
'The Idiot' is an excellent pick-me-up, Janine.
Is it really, Gladys? I will have to read it while I finish up this other book I have been reading for months. That one is so drawn out and I wish to complete it. I hate abandoning any books. Maybe I could alternate evenings reading both and somehow I have to fit in the new Shakespeare play for that discussion. I hope that play is not a long one. I will have to alternate between the three, I suppose. My gosh the month flies right by, doesnt' it?
I loved "Three Men In a Boat"... and "Idle thoughts of an Idle Fellow"... Jerome K. Jerome is a great writer.. very funny...Quote:
Originally Posted by fleaaaaaa
Back to the book at hand.. I can never decide upon of favourite of Dostoevsky's major works... each has their own unique beauty... I love them all haha..
"The Idiot" always fascinated me, with the Christ like figure of the Prince so much different from any other character in Dostoevsky really... I guess some might compare him to Alyosha from TBK or Sonia from C&P, but I find him to be so different.. his innocence and naivete with regards to social norms and conventions makes this story so interesting...
Nastasya, I sympathize with her... and find her to be the most powerful and interesting female character in the story... she has had her own sort of neervous breakdown that is continually occuring throughout the story in her flight back and forth.. never happy without the Prince, but always afraid she is not good enough for him while they are together... Myshkin maybe is delusional in trying to save her, but like Christ, just on a smaller scale he sacrifices his own well-being in the attempt...
I think too much time alone, as Myshkin must have had throughout his life, makes for thoughts of death... explaining his preoccupation with it throughout the beginning of the book... when you have no one around so often, death would likely become thought that was often on your mind... (speaking from experience here =p lol)
Some very good points by Bazarov :)... i like the use of the quote from TBK... it is fitting...:thumbs_up