September / Russia Reading: The Idiot by Dostoevsky

[Janine]

Now when Janine is over

In 1848 Dostoevsky was sentenced to death...........1869.''I am unsatisfied with novel, it does not express even tenth of what I wanted to express. Still, I won't throw it away; I like my fallen idea equal.''

Very helpful! Thank you bazarov. I copied to my hard-drive and want to read the whole article and will later tonight. I got tied up with other things and only skimmed it so far. I love to learn the background and biography of the authors - this fully enriches my appreciation of their themes and their goals in writing. I did finish the novel and stated so above. Now I am letting it all sink in; I plan to read some notes on it and a few essays from other authors on "The Idiot". It was a very good read and wonderful book. The added material I read should suggest some more questions and some discussion topics.

[bazarov]

''I am unsatisfied with novel, it does not express even tenth of what I wanted to express. Still, I won't throw it away; I like my fallen idea equal.''


Don't know have you noticed, but Myshkin said something quite exact like this.

[Gladys]

''I am unsatisfied with novel, it does not express even tenth of what I wanted to express. Still, I won't throw it away; I like my fallen idea equal.'' Don't know have you noticed, but Myshkin said something quite exact like this.

To Lizabetha Prokofievna:

There are certain things, certain great ideas, which I must not so much as approach, as Prince S. has just reminded me, or I shall make you all laugh. I have no sense of proportion, I know; my words and gestures do not express my ideas--they are a humiliation and abasement of the ideas, and therefore, I have no right--and I am too sensitive.

About Rogozhin:

Here was I, with my days numbered, and he, a man in the full vigour of life, living in the present, without the slightest thought for 'final convictions,' or numbers, or days, or, in fact, for anything but that which-which--well, which he was mad about, if he will excuse me the expression--as a feeble author who cannot express his ideas properly.

[Janine]

Gladys, Interesting that those two quotes, directly from the book, express exactly what Bazarov has quoted from Dostoyevski himself. Personally, I would agree with the author that is does falls some short of what he was trying to say. I just feel like there should have been more at the end but maybe that is just me.

I read D.H.Lawrence's biting commentary on Dostoyevski last night, although I have not read any other novels of D's so I can hardly judge if he is even close. Apparently he liked BK first time around and then changed his mind later in life. I think he basically says of all the D novels he liked "The Idiot" for certain reasons. I will have to quote some of those from his essay, plus read some online commentary on this book.

[lugdunum]

Thanks Bazarov for the very interesting article.
I think I'll leave the Idiot behind for now and move on to other books.
However, like janine I plan to read the book again with notes and taking into consideration all that you all said...
And as someone suggested read other Dostoevksy's novels.

I'll probably do so over the Christmas holidays since I have over a month off...

I hope to post other comments, but in the meantime I'll keep reading yours

[Janine]

I think I'll leave the Idiot behind for now and move on to other books.
However, like janine I plan to read the book again with notes and taking into consideration all that you all said...
And as someone suggested read other Dostoevksy's novels.

I'll probably do so over the Christmas holidays since I have over a month off...

I hope to post other comments, but in the meantime I'll keep reading yours

I will do as well, lugdunum, move on now to another book or the Shakespeare play; but don't know if I will get to another D book until next year. I have too many others within sight that I wish to read now. At least, by reading this book by Dostoyevsky, I have gotten a sampling of the author's work - that is a start. I may read a short story by D which I discovered in a compiled volume of stories (happen to pick up recently free from my library). I don't know if I will entirely re-read "The Idiot", because I doubt I will find the time, but I may read over some parts again - like the train scene and several other key scenes.

[Gladys]

I just feel like there should have been more at the end

For those who see the ending as flat, let me recount my pathway to an appreciation of an ending, which is still magic, a year later. I tend to avoid reading commentaries because they channel my thinking.

At the end, I expected high drama in relation to Nastasya Filippovna, but I was nonplussed when the Prince shed tears on cheek of the detestable Roghozin. 'How trite' I thought: the prince is committed to a Swiss asylum because his behaviour is evidently madness. But having read other Dostoevsky novels, I expect more. What had I missed?

In vain, I immediately scrutinised each word for some reaction from the prince to the murder of Nastasya Filippovna. Nothing. It gradually dawns on me that he actually pities the living (a murderer) rather than the dead (his fiancée) who is now beyond help. Imagine that! A similar event had occurred in the confrontation at the house of Nastasya Filippovna, where the prince chose to save Nastasya and Roghozin (I now know) at the expense of the less needy Aglaya. And much earlier when he befriended Ippolit.

Lying in the bed with the murderer, all see his pity - his love - as madness. They commit the prince. Days later, I realise they have ‘crucified’ him.

But the last page has a perplexingly positive flavour. Many weeks later, it dawns on me that here is a ‘resurrection’, if only in spirit.

I would be interested to hear what others made of the ending, soon after finishing the book.

[hectorschemctor]

no, this 'post' is not one to be pondered, nor thought about in depth.
there are enough philisophically curious posts as it is - which is a fine thing.
i'd like to know if there have been any paintings or expressions of Nastasya an' Aglaya.
if i've offended any pretentious self-proclaimed intellects, for not presenting them with a worthy idea about The Idiot, i apologise but am not sorry. i have my own thoughts around this particular novel, and no where near enough time or patience to share them online, for you see i'm an embarrassingly slow 'typer'.
and ha, here i am justifying my question to people i may possibly never meet... or even know exist. brilliant

[Gladys]

Aglaya Ivanovna Yepanchin - photo


Nastasya Filippovna - illustration

[bazarov]

Isn't Aglaya too old on that picture? And she had a dark hair, I think.

[Janine]

Thanks Gladys, for your post about the ending. I can well see your points in that but still I am unsure of the resurrection part of the story. I just can't clearly see that; perhaps I need to reread the ending. Maybe start with the death scene and the two men and progress from there to the end. It may stand out to me more clearly on a second reading.

I agree with Bazarov, that first woman looks too old to play Aglaya. I also picture her dark haired and quite young. I think actually she is in her early 20's (doesn't the book state that?), but she acts very youthful; so in my mind she is youthful and probably looks it also. The photo looks like it is from a stage play?
This woman /drawing? below it - do you know the artist? That does seem to depict the actual sadness of the character, but I would prefer to see the formal portrait with the hint in the eyes of deep sadness that is featured in the story.

[Gladys]

The Aglaya in the photo is too old but her expression, bearing and dress is everything I imagined.

I am unsure of the resurrection part of the story.

I've only read the book once, but have reread many parts that puzzled me...and still do. The Biblical resurrection, as I'm sure you know, Janine, was very much a private affair with an angel and the privileged few. In front of the empty tomb stood Simon Peter [the vacillating Evgenie Pavlovitch], 'And there was Mary Magdalene [the headstrong Lizabetha Prokofievna], and the other Mary [the pristine Vera Lebedev], sitting over against the sepulchre'. But the tomb was empty.

Like the prince, Jesus had risen with ‘a spiritual body’. Just as Jesus appears without fanfare before a select number, so the comatose prince eventually emerges, in spirit, first to Evgenie Pavlovitch and, later, to Lizabetha Prokofievna bringing as expected the forgiveness of sins: 'Apparently all was forgiven him'.

The idiot’s crucifixion is understated: his resurrection more so.

After each visit to Schneider's establishment, Evgenie Pavlovitch writes another letter, besides that to Colia, giving the most minute particulars concerning the invalid's condition. In these letters is to be detected, and in each one more than the last, a growing feeling of friendship and sympathy.

[bazarov]

I agree with Bazarov, that first woman looks too old to play Aglaya. I also picture her dark haired and quite young. I think actually she is in her early 20's (doesn't the book state that?), but she acts very youthful; so in my mind she is youthful and probably looks it also.

Nastasya is blond, and Aglaya is black, in early twenties, I think. I remember Alexandra was the oldest, and she was 25.

[Janine]

The Aglaya in the photo is too old but her expression, bearing and dress is everything I imagined.

I've only read the book once, but have reread many parts that puzzled me...and still do. The Biblical resurrection, as I'm sure you know, Janine, was very much a private affair with an angel and the privileged few. In front of the empty tomb stood Simon Peter [the vacillating Evgenie Pavlovitch], 'And there was Mary Magdalene [the headstrong Lizabetha Prokofievna], and the other Mary [the pristine Vera Lebedev], sitting over against the sepulchre'. But the tomb was empty.

Like the prince, Jesus had risen with ‘a spiritual body’. Just as Jesus appears without fanfare before a select number, so the comatose prince eventually emerges, in spirit, first to Evgenie Pavlovitch and, later, to Lizabetha Prokofievna bringing as expected the forgiveness of sins: 'Apparently all was forgiven him'.

The idiot’s crucifixion is understated: his resurrection more so.

After each visit to Schneider's establishment, Evgenie Pavlovitch writes another letter, besides that to Colia, giving the most minute particulars concerning the invalid's condition. In these letters is to be detected, and in each one more than the last, a growing feeling of friendship and sympathy.

Thanks, Gladys, that helps my understanding a bit; seems like you have thought about this novel for a long time and pondered it's meaning. I need to do so and re-read the ending. I now find myself already engrossed in another book and three new threads I started. Is there ever the time to do all? I guess that is my own eternal question.

Nastasya is blond, and Aglaya is black, in early twenties, I think. I remember Alexandra was the oldest, and she was 25.

I agree with you - Aglaya is youngist and she is immature and she has the dark hair; unlike this actress; who indeed, looks to be too old for the part - she looks mature.

[cicadamoon]

This is my first post to this forum, which I just discovered this morning. Coincidentally, I've been reading The Idiot throughout September as well! It is a bit mind boggling to try to read all of your posts in order to be sure that I don't repeat etc. Hopefully, this post will not seem redundant:

The commentaries describe this novel as a "clash between good and the real world", with Prince Myshkin representing "good". Rogozhin is apparently the representation of evil and Natasya Fillipovna is "wallowing in self blame". The society which we are invited to voyeur is materialistic, superficial and deceitful. The general outcome of the novel is said to be along the lines of Prince Myshkin was just too beautiful for this world and was therefore destroyed by it.

Do I have this right?

Because I took a totally different reading of it.

And that is interesting, because even Dostoyevsky said that he was trying to portray a totally beautiful human being.

Does anyone know where Nietsche makes reference to this character in his writings?