September / Russia Reading: The Idiot by Dostoevsky

[Janine]

I did read the first chapter in the book and found it quite interesting. I liked the style of writing very much and the book grabbed my attention immediately. I know it has to be a great read; one can always tell from the first chapter. It is a long book and I am a slow reader so I can't promise too much in the way of commentary. I haven't been well lately so I will see what I can do after I complete the novel. At least I probably will be able to write up a few thoughts on the book.

[lugdunum]

How are you getting on Janine?
I'll be starting part 2 tonight, and have been looking forward to it all day.

I have to say that I am very positively surprised with this book (I voted for We). I haven't read any other Dostoievski's books but went to a play based on C&P and almost died of boredom (must have been the play though and not the text itself).

I find the Idiot easy to read, a nice storyline and lot's of interesting characters (regardless of whether I like them or not).

I haven't read all of your comments (-I'm afraid of coming across a spoiler or getting preconceived ideas) but for now I tend to agree with Mickitaz on many points, particularly :

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.

I wouldn't have said it better myself Why do you think that is? because he seems so naive or because he speaks the truth and expresses his feelings out loud instead of getting into lies, treacheries and calculating every single move like he's playing a game of chess (like most of all the other characters do)?

About Nastasia, I still can't decide whether to despise her or take pity on her...

Just an additional question - I'm reading the book in French and I was wondering if in the English version there are lots of words or sentences in French because in the footnotes it says that they were in French in the original version... Just curious.

PS: Mickitaz, how's your neck by the way ?

[Nightshade]

I finally finally got hold of a copy of the idiot today, I might read it on friday...

[Janine]

How are you getting on Janine?

Thanks for asking, lugdunum, lots of ups and downs lately; will be ok if I get my meds straightened out; long complicated story.

I'll be starting part 2 tonight, and have been looking forward to it all day.

I may read some tonight. I liked it so far.

I have to say that I am very positively surprised with this book (I voted for We). I haven't read any other Dostoievski's books but went to a play based on C&P and almost died of boredom (must have been the play though and not the text itself).

Same here, and actually I voted on "Notes From the Underground" - I admit since I saw that was the shortest and I happen to have the book; I did start that book but it did not catch my interest as this one does. I was also surprised at how I took to the writing in "The Idiot" - besides the title sort of makes me curious. It flows quite nicely. I was not sure what you meant by C&P, but now I see what you are talking about and that the play was merely based on the book. I just bought a book of some Russian plays by different authors; hope that is good. Think there is one in there by D. of it may have been Chekhov.

I find the Idiot easy to read, a nice storyline and lot's of interesting characters (regardless of whether I like them or not).

So did I find it easy to read and I am reading in English.

I haven't read all of your comments (-I'm afraid of coming across a spoiler or getting preconceived ideas) but for now I tend to agree with Mickitaz on many points, particularly :

Oh, referring to me or someone else?

I wouldn't have said it better myself Why do you think that is? because he seems so naive or because he speaks the truth and expresses his feelings out loud instead of getting into lies, treacheries and calculating every single move like he's playing a game of chess (like most of all the other characters do)?

That was good, the way Mickitaz put that. I have a feeling I will agree with this once I read more of the book.

About Nastasia, I still can't decide whether to despise her or take pity on her...

Just an additional question - I'm reading the book in French and I was wondering if in the English version there are lots of words or sentences in French because in the footnotes it says that they were in French in the original version... Just curious.

PS: Mickitaz, how's your neck by the way ? [/QUOTE]

I know you are probably speaking to

Michitaz,

but I am reading it in English; so far I haven't gotten far enough to run into phrases in French, but I will let you know.

[bazarov]

I wouldn't have said it better myself Why do you think that is? because he seems so naive or because he speaks the truth and expresses his feelings out loud instead of getting into lies, treacheries and calculating every single move like he's playing a game of chess (like most of all the other characters do)?

He doesn't realize how the society and human relationships function. He was too long with kids, and he doesn't realize that people are rude, bad and selfish. People find him stupid, then they realize his is just too good and his stupidness is a result of strange belief that every human is actually good; and the truth is that almost every human is actually bad, and then they start to like him. But, they still treat him as an Idiot. Poor Knight, Aglaya, Eugene Pavlich, etc - more then few examples.

About Nastasia, I still can't decide whether to despise her or take pity on her...

Why people generally despise her? I don't get it.

Just an additional question - I'm reading the book in French and I was wondering if in the English version there are lots of words or sentences in French because in the footnotes it says that they were in French in the original version... Just curious.

Many his novels are filled with French, and especially Idiot. I asked the same once my Russian teacher; Russians just loved French. In Dead souls Gogol wrote: Every Russian girl in schools learns three things: house keeping, piano and French. Of course, it's not always in that order; sometimes it's piano, French and house keeping.

[lugdunum]

He doesn't realize how the society and human relationships function. He was too long with kids, and he doesn't realize that people are rude, bad and selfish. People find him stupid, then they realize his is just too good and his stupidness is a result of strange belief that every human is actually good; and the truth is that almost every human is actually bad, and then they start to like him. But, they still treat him as an Idiot. Poor Knight, Aglaya, Eugene Pavlich, etc - more then few examples.

Agreed, he does sometimes act like a child. And as you say probably because he spent too much time with them when he was already an adult. But he also has some very adult reasoning and (at least so far) it seems to me that he is getting more and more adult reactions (in the good way) as the book goes on I might be proved wrong though.
And he is good at psychologically analyzing people (-at least that's what I gathered do far).
And it's true that people seem to like him and some even come to him for advice, thing you probably wouldn't do if you thought someone was a real idiot and yet they keep saying that he is...

Why people generally despise her? I don't get it.

I don't know. On one hand I think I despise her because everything she does seems so weird, so childish, so annoying. I mean why on earth would she want to marry Rogojine (not sure of the spelling) and then keep running back and forth from this wedding. Why can she not calm down, think and decide on what to do instead of running around like that? And also, like someone said previously, she's playing around with men in a annoying way. But then again, she's being completely manipulated by them and considered like an object or a hunting prize so that could justify it...

Then on the other hand I can't help feeling sorry for her because she does look a bit mentally ill, and who wouldn't with the past that she's had... So I'm not really sure what to think about her. I'll try to make up my mind after finishing the book

Every Russian girl in schools learns three things: house keeping, piano and French. Of course, it's not always in that order; sometimes it's piano, French and house keeping.

[islandclimber]

Myshkin is considered an "idiot", at least for much of the book, because he is entirely unaware of the societal norms and conventions of the time... mostly as bazarov points out, due to his spending his entire adulthood up this point with children... he may be intelligent and have an uncanny ability to analyze people but he is quite innocent, quite naive in a sense for lack of a better term, and quite out of place in society as is illustrated by many incidents throughout the novel..

People do realize he is quite intelligent though, at times.. I forget who said it, but someone in the novel, surprised by Myshkin's intelligence, says something about how maybe he is not the idiot after all... Dostoevsky wants us to know he is considered an idiot because of his apparent naivete and innocence regarding society... the Christ figure of the story is considered a fool and laughed at countless times... and maybe he is saying something about modern belief.. as Dostoevsky did believe the only way Russia could be saved was through the Russian Orthodox Church...

I still don't understand how anyone could really dislike Nastasia.. she is obviously somewhat mentally unstable... maybe the prince pushed her over the edge with his original marriage proposal when she decided she was not good enough for him... she seemed to have a nervous breakdown almost... and lose it... but no matter.. she is miserable and one can only feel pity for her, and her condition imo...

cheers

[Gladys]

Dostoevsky wants us to know he is considered an idiot because of his apparent naivete and innocence regarding society

The prince valued little 'societal norms and conventions of the time'. He valued integrity and compassion, spectacularly illustrated by, 'His tears flowed on to Roghozin's cheek'.

...someone in the novel, surprised by Myshkin's intelligence, says something about how maybe he is not the idiot after all

'...after leaving the prince, the doctor [in Pavlofsk] said to Lebedev: "If all such people were put under restraint, there would be no one left for keepers."'

[islandclimber]

The prince valued little 'societal norms and conventions of the time'. He valued integrity and compassion, spectacularly illustrated by, 'His tears flowed on to Roghozin's cheek'.

'...after leaving the prince, the doctor [in Pavlofsk] said to Lebedev: "If all such people were put under restraint, there would be no one left for keepers."'

I couldn't agree with you more about the prince placing little value and emphasis on those things.. I wasn't trying to say he is an idiot, just that, that is why others consider him to be an idiot... I am not sure though whether him placing little value on those things is a conscious choice that he is aware of making or not, though i think not.. he seems to just be himself for better or worse, which is another reason he is considered an idiot and out of place.. speaking his thoughts and emotions much to freely.. how awful!!!

i love the quote you chose to illustrate that... very moving...

and the second quote although it isn't the one i was thinking of .. it is another great example of someone realizing that maybe it isn't Myshkin who has something wrong with him, it is the rest of us.. .. thank you Gladys

[Janine]

I agree with many of the things you are all pointing out about the prince. I really find him fascinating and he is very childlike and innocent; he seems sensitive and honest; unpretentious.

I am just past the second chapter or maybe the third and I feel a little lost. Am I daft of is it a bit confusing understanding what the general and Ganya are saying about the woman in the portrait? I could not quite get the drift there. Maybe I am not meant to know the full portent, until I get to further chapters? It was late, when I was reading it, and I did not feel well yesterday. Can someone fill me in or should I just re-read that chapter?

[Gladys]

the woman in the portrait

The prince says it all.

"It's a wonderful face," said the prince, "and I feel sure that her destiny is not by any means an ordinary, uneventful one. Her face is smiling enough, but she must have suffered terribly-- hasn't she? Her eyes show it--those two bones there, the little points under her eyes, just where the cheek begins. It's a proud face too, terribly proud! And I--It's a proud face too, terribly proud! And I--I can't say whether she is good and kind, or not. Oh, if she be but good! That would make all well!"

"And would you marry a woman like that, now?" continued Gania, never taking his excited eyes off the prince's face.

"I cannot marry at all," said the latter. "I am an invalid."

"Would Rogojin marry her, do you think?"

"Why not? Certainly he would, I should think. He would marry her tomorrow!--marry her tomorrow and murder her in a week!"

[lugdunum]

What do you all think of Elizabetha Prokofievna (Mrs. Epanchin)?

[Alexei]

What do you all think of Elizabetha Prokofievna (Mrs. Epanchin)?

Although I sometimes find her a bit silly, generally I have some sympathy for her. She is after all good-natured and I like her eccentricity. Actually, her behaviour rather amuses me

What actually puzzles me is that Aglaya is supposed to be like her, after all Elizabetha Prokofievna says so herself (there are lots of passages where amidst her thoughts concerning Aglaya's nature and future, Mrs. Epanchin says that Aglaya is exactly like her when she was young.) My problem is that I can't really see some convincing evidence of this resemblance between mother and daughter. May be I don't read carefully enough, but I don't see it. I mean I can't see how to compare the rather rational Aglaya with Elizabetha's nervous behaviour and moodiness.

[lugdunum]

Although I sometimes find her a bit silly, generally I have some sympathy for her. She is after all good-natured and I like her eccentricity. Actually, her behaviour rather amuses me

I agree with you. She usually makes me smile (even laugh), especially when she gets so carried away and excited about something.

What actually puzzles me is that Aglaya is supposed to be like her, after all Elizabetha Prokofievna says so herself (there are lots of passages where amidst her thoughts concerning Aglaya's nature and future, Mrs. Epanchin says that Aglaya is exactly like her when she was young.) My problem is that I can't really see some convincing evidence of this resemblance between mother and daughter. May be I don't read carefully enough, but I don't see it. I mean I can't see how to compare the rather rational Aglaya with Elizabetha's nervous behaviour and moodiness.

True. I've been wondering about this as well.
But if Aglaya is so like her mother, how come she stilll have loads of guys interested in marrying her???? Wouldn't it be a living nightmare being married to Ms. Epanchin hahaha

[Janine]

The prince says it all.

"It's a wonderful face," said the prince, "and I feel sure that her destiny is not by any means an ordinary, uneventful one. Her face is smiling enough, but she must have suffered terribly-- hasn't she? Her eyes show it--those two bones there, the little points under her eyes, just where the cheek begins. It's a proud face too, terribly proud! And I--It's a proud face too, terribly proud! And I--I can't say whether she is good and kind, or not. Oh, if she be but good! That would make all well!"

"And would you marry a woman like that, now?" continued Gania, never taking his excited eyes off the prince's face.

"I cannot marry at all," said the latter. "I am an invalid."

"Would Rogojin marry her, do you think?"

"Why not? Certainly he would, I should think. He would marry her tomorrow!--marry her tomorrow and murder her in a week!"

Gladys, thanks for answering my question. Yes, I know what you mean about the prince's perception gazing on the photo. I just did not quite connect what the other two men were conversing about but now that I have pushed on in the book, it has all become much clearer to me.

I am enjoying this novel very much so far. I find the story somewhat amusing so far; and the prince very intelligent and nice; he is also amusing in his own unique way; but my feeling is that he is eons ahead in his thoughts than all of the rest of the characters, so far.