My rating:

add to my books

read book

The Idiot

by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Constance Garnett (Translator), Joseph Frank (Introduction), Anna Brailovsky (Translator)

4.08 · rating details · 18,366 ratings · 1,079 reviews

Returning to Russia from a sanitarium in Switzerland, the Christ-like epileptic Prince Myshkin finds himself enmeshed in a tangle of love, torn between two women—the notorious kept woman Nastasya and the pure Aglaia—both involved, in turn, with the corrupt, money-hungry Ganya. In the end, Myshkin’s honesty, goodness, and integrity are shown to be unequal to the moral empti...more

Paperback, 720 pages

Published April 8th 2003 by Modern Library (first published 1868)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

There is a good chance some of your friends read this book. Sign in to see!

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix by J.K. Rowling

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire by J.K. Rowling

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban by J.K. Rowling

Best Books Ever

294th out of 17,082 books — 57,489 voters

Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky

The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoyevsky

The Master and Margarita by Mikhail Bulgakov

Best Russian Literature

6th out of 215 books — 598 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 34,204)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Dec 09, 2011

Petra X rated it

Shelves: 2011, fiction, x

There are many reviews of this book making out that Prince Myshkin was Christ-like, a truly good man who lived for the moment. A holy idiot, or more accurately, wholly idiot indeed is what he really was. Why did they think Dostoyevsky entitled the book, The Idiot if he meant 'The Man who was Innocent and Really Good" or "The Man who was like Jesus"? The title wasn't any kind of irony, it was about an idiot.

Prince Myshkin had spent years in a sanitarium for his epilep...more

like 23 likes

· see review

Aug 09, 2009

Michelle rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: classics

I’ve been trying to review this book for over a week now, but I can’t. I’m struggling with something: How do I review a Russian literature classic? Better yet, how do I review a Russian literature classic without sounding like a total dumbass? (Hint: It’s probably not going to happen.)

First I suppose a short plot synopsis should be in order:

The Idiot portrays young, childlike Prince Myshkin, who returns to his native Russia to seek out distant relatives after he ha...moreI’ve been trying to review this book for over a week now, but I can’t. I’m struggling with something: How do I review a Russian literature classic? Better yet, how do I review a Russian literature classic without sounding like a total dumbass? (Hint: It’s probably not going to happen.)

First I suppose a short plot synopsis should be in order:

The Idiot portrays young, childlike Prince Myshkin, who returns to his native Russia to seek out distant relatives after he has spent several years in a Swiss sanatorium. While on the train to Russia, he meets and befriends a man of dubious character called Rogozhin. Rogozhin is unhealthily obsessed with the mysterious beauty, Nastasya Filippovna to the point where the reader just knows nothing good will come of it. Of course the prince gets caught up with Rogozhin, Filippovna, and the society around them.

The only other Dostoevsky novel I’ve read was Crime and Punishment, so of course my brain is going to compare the two. Where Crime and Punishment deals with Raskolnikov’s internal struggle, The Idiot deals with Prince Myshkin’s effect on the society he finds himself a part of. And what a money-hungry, power-hungry, cold and manipulative society it is.

I admit that in the beginning and throughout much of the novel I felt intensely protective of Prince Myshkin. I got pissed off when people would laugh at him or call him an idiot. Then towards the end of the novel, I even ended up calling him an idiot a few times. Out loud. One time I actually said “Oh, you are an idiot!” But then I felt bad.

Poor Prince Myshkin. I think he was simply too good and too naïve for the world around him.

Now here is where my thought process starts to fall apart. There’s just so much to write about that I can’t even begin to write anything. There were so many themes that were explored in the novel such as nihilism, Christ as man rather than deity, losing one’s faith, and capital punishment among other things. And I haven’t even mentioned Dostoevsky’s peripheral characters yet, which, like those in Crime and Punishment, are at least as interesting, if not more interesting than the main characters. My favorite character was Aglaya Ivanovna. She was so conflicted with regard to her feelings about the prince and loved him in spite of herself. I had mixed feelings toward Ganya. I mostly disliked him, but I grew to like him more towards the end. The entire novel was much like a soap opera, but a good soap opera, if that makes sense.

Well, at this point I’ve been moving paragraphs around for far too long, and I realize there’s no way this review will do the book any justice. I wanted to write about the symbolism of the Holbein painting and how I love that in both Dostoevsky books I've read he references dreams the characters have, but I just have too many questions and not enough answers. Instead I'll just say that it was truly an excellent read and definitely worth your time.(less)

like 66 likes

· see review

May 16, 2007

Andrew rated it

Recommends it for: idiots - know your role, i do

I love this book because it made me think. Hard.

According to my understanding of "The Idiot," Dostoevsky's definition of an idiot is someone who actually believes that everyone is trying to do their best and do no harm. This is in utter ignorance, usually, of everyone's tendencies to do harm to others, regardless of intent. Hooray for idiots!

Ippolit Terentyev, one of the minor characters, is a socialist, and a suicide. He has one of the great lines in literature...moreI love this book because it made me think. Hard.

According to my understanding of "The Idiot," Dostoevsky's definition of an idiot is someone who actually believes that everyone is trying to do their best and do no harm. This is in utter ignorance, usually, of everyone's tendencies to do harm to others, regardless of intent. Hooray for idiots!

Ippolit Terentyev, one of the minor characters, is a socialist, and a suicide. He has one of the great lines in literature, I think, and I will share it now. "We degrade God too much, ascribing to him our ideas, in our vexation at being unable to understand Him." Not verbatim, necessarily, but that's the sense.

Also included in this story is a story about how governments are not scared of atheists, because atheists have no real back-bone. When it comes down to it, if life is the end-all, be-all, then anyone who is sane (having some idea of self-preservation) will break at threats on their life. Whereas if someone believes that there is a payoff greater than life can offer, or better yet, has an internal motivation that comes from somewhere else, he or she is less likely to be afraid of death. What capitalist governments are really scared of is socialists with a moral imperative that drives them to offer something better than the "one-step-out-of-the-cave" animalism of capital. Luckily, anyone who actually believes that they can or should offer anything better will be rendered ineffective by the capital machine. Anyone with this perspective will be unable to function in real life (The Idiot, I forget the main character's name) or will become so stricken with the dichotomy of living in a way that completely contradicts their philosophy that they will eventually kill themselves (Terentyev).

Back to the question of God -- who says that God isn't a kind of mean drunk, watching the folly of man, laughing, falling asleep, sobering up and making things okay for a while? Ha ha. The best thing about life is that it has a begninning and an end. A lot of the stuff in between kind of sucks.(less)

like 13 likes

· see review

Sep 08, 2008

Martine rated it

· review of another edition

Recommends it for: people who like long dialogue and larger-than-life characters

Shelves: continental-european, nineteenth-century, psychological-drama, russian

Are there countries in the world which are more likely to produce depressing literature than others? If so, Russia must be pretty much top of the list. I have yet to read a Russian novel which ends well for all the protagonists. I can only think of a few in which things end well for even a few of the protagonists. And Dostoyevsky of course loves his tragedies. The Idiot is one of them. While it's not as tragic as, say, Crime and Punishment, nearly all of its protagonists come to a sticky end, an...moreAre there countries in the world which are more likely to produce depressing literature than others? If so, Russia must be pretty much top of the list. I have yet to read a Russian novel which ends well for all the protagonists. I can only think of a few in which things end well for even a few of the protagonists. And Dostoyevsky of course loves his tragedies. The Idiot is one of them. While it's not as tragic as, say, Crime and Punishment, nearly all of its protagonists come to a sticky end, and as always, they meet plenty of drama and intrigue on their way there. And it's all classical Russian drama and intrigue, which is to say it's full of passion, obsession, sudden mood swings, tantrums and hysterical fits. In short, The Idiot is a book full of histrionics, but I love it, because for one thing, there's something grand about all those huge emotions, and for another, Dostoyevsky is such a good writer that he gets away with making his characters behave like Greek gods. Every time I read a book of his, I come away wishing he had written his own version of Greek mythology. I'm sure it would have been an astonishing read.

As for the book at hand, it's a book about society -- more specifically, about a modern society that is so corrupt and materialistic that a good man simply cannot survive in it. In The Idiot, that good man is Prince Lyov Nikolayevitch Myshkin, who has spent most of his life in a Swiss hospital because of his epileptic fits, and now returns to the country of his youth. Although many people call him an idiot, Myshkin is not actually stupid; he is just innocent and naïve, and likely to forgive those who have trespassed against him as he is sure they meant no harm. Needless to say, there are those who dismiss him as an inconsequential figure or try to take advantage of him, but he also wins over a lot of people with his innate goodness and refusal to think ill of others. He's a Christ-like figure, but was Christ allowed to live in the society he lived in? He wasn't, and neither, sadly enough, is Myshkin, one of Dostoyevsky's more likeable protagonists. Because Russia, to which Dostoyevsky devotes some choice paragraphs, is too jaded for people like him -- too corrupt and too, well, Russian.

But The Idiot is not just a novel about a corrupt society. Ultimately (and this is probably why I like it so much) it's about love. About the different ways in which people love each other. About loving out of pity. About loving against reason. About mad, obsessive, possessive love. About angry love. About humiliating love. About corrupting love and the fear of love. About the things people do for love, the mistakes they make in the name of love, and the love they simply fail to notice because their eyes are directed elsewhere. At the heart of the book is a fascinating love triangle (or is it a quadrangle? or even a pentagon?), which makes it incredibly romantic despite all the ugly stuff that is going on at the same time. It doesn't have a happy-ever-after ending, but there's something terrifically grand and romantic about the ways in which the various lovers end, and I like that. It's realism with a dose of Romanticism with a capital R, and it works.

As always, Dostoyevsky's characterisation is superb. His naïve hero is pitched against a fabulous cast of sophisticated nobles, desperate wannabes, highly strung concubines, passionate schoolgirls, mad stalkers, dramatic nihilists, and so on. Many of the characters are larger than life, yet you somehow believe them, because let's face it, Russia is the kind place that could spawn these people, isn't it? By and large, the characters are well drawn, and if many of them are either unsympathetic or a tad capricious, so be it. There is enough passion, grandstanding and back-stabbing going on between them to keep things interesting, and plenty of twisted love, too.

The only thing I dislike about Dostoyevsky (and the one reason why I'm not giving The Idiot five stars) is his tendency to go off on tangents just when something exciting is about to happen. In The Idiot, he relates the events of an evening, tells us that the hero will have a secret and obviously important meeting with the girl he loves in the morning, and then, rather than relating the events of the next morning in the next chapter, proceeds to spend four chapters (some sixty pages altogether) telling the reader what happens at the Prince's house late at night, none of which has anything to do with the upcoming meeting with the girl. I'm sure I'm not the only reader who felt cheated there. Other than the tangents, though, Dostoyevsky is a superb writer, and The Idiot is as fine an example of classic Russian literature as you're likely to find anywhere (provided you like long dialogue and slightly mad characters). I'd give it 4.5 stars if I could, but in the absence of half stars, four will have to do.

(And for those of you who care about translations: I read the Bantam version by Constance Garnett and was quite happy with it.)(less)

like 18 likes

· see review

Jul 30, 2009

Bonnie rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: reviewed-books, classics, recommended

I read The Idiot while I was in the hospital – in isolation, to be precise. What I remember is that the “idiot”, Prince Myshkin, lived in the moment; and that I became so absorbed in his ability to see good in others – no matter what they did – that I forgot where I was for long periods of time. I remember being very surprised – and thankful – for that. (Hence the 4 stars; not sure what I would give it if I were to read it again!)

like 14 likes

· see review

May 28, 2008

Ameer rated it

· review of another edition

لئو میشکین آدمی نیست که هر جایی پیدا بشه ولی همه مون فکر می کنیم خیلی شبیهشیم

like 6 likes

· see review

Aug 18, 2007

Dianna rated it

Shelves: over-my-head

I liked the other two books I read by this author but I just could not get into this one.

like 4 likes

· see review

Jun 23, 2008

Douglas rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: never-finished, 19th-c, russian

got to page 400, so even though i haven't closed the deal, i feel like i have.

like 3 likes

· see review

Mar 26, 2008

Kristina rated it

I love how Dostoevsky's plots are driven not by external circumstances but by the internal workings of his characters' minds, and the choices they make.
There were a few times when I actually slammed my book angrily against a table or wall and yelling "you stupid a** what did you do that for???"...my paperback is now a little worse for wear.

People in this book make stupid choices, and their misery is primarily a result of these stupid choices. "The Idiot" ...moreI love how Dostoevsky's plots are driven not by external circumstances but by the internal workings of his characters' minds, and the choices they make.
There were a few times when I actually slammed my book angrily against a table or wall and yelling "you stupid a** what did you do that for???"...my paperback is now a little worse for wear.

People in this book make stupid choices, and their misery is primarily a result of these stupid choices. "The Idiot" refers not to The Prince's intellectual capacity but to his inability to understand and emulate the manipulative, multi-layered social interactions of the society he enters upon returning to Russia. Because everything he does is simple and straightforward, he comes off as an "idiot".

The forward says that this story is often interpeted as a Christ allegory... I have to say I had trouble seeing it. Dostoevsky claims to portray The Prince as a "purely beautful man" - the opposite of his "Crime and Punishment" protagonist. The Prince is almost infuriatingly humble and always apologizing for...sometimes I don't even know what he's apologizing for. Usually he ends up upsetting people for accidentally calling them out on being sleazy by asking what he thinks is an innocent question. So really he has nothing to apologize for but all he can understand is that he's offended someone. What really ticked me off was how at the end, when he actually DID do something stupid, he obviously regretted his decision but still persisted in it, and expected everyone he had hurt to just understand. NO. PRINCE - IF YOU KNOW SOMETHING IS STUPID, DON'T DO IT. IT'S YOUR OWN FAULT. YOU MADE A BAD CHOICE NOW DEAL WITH IT. End of rant.

While I do really, really love Dostoevsky he has always struck me as having an extremely external locus of control (yay psych 101). Instead of holding his characters responsible for their actions, he seems to feel like some external forces are driving them to misery when clearly it is their own choices and attitudes. It's like a multi-layered psychological study.
I'm done now this review is far too long.
(less)

like 10 likes

· see review

Jan 06, 2008

Glen rated it

Another fantastic work by Dostoevsky that takes people from seemingly ordinary circumstances and weaves around them the most intricate webs of moral and ethical dilemma. In The Idiot, the protagonist (Prince Lyov Nikolayevitch Mishkin) is portrayed as a truly good person. The theme of the novel is to examine the question of whether or not a deeply kind individual can actually survive in a world of vice. Myshkin is at all times open hearted about his feelings and honest with all about his conv...more

like 7 likes

· see review

Jun 29, 2010

Mad Dog rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: re-read

You could play a drinking game where you take a drink every time someone (during a conversation in this story) "blushes", "trembles", "quivers", "becomes pale", etc. But you would get drunk pretty fast. This is a book full of drama kings and queens. Everybody is so concerned with what 'so and so did' and who 'so and so talked to'. These characters need to center themselves, maybe they all need to attend yoga classes.

I have always stated this a...more

like 3 likes

· see review

Apr 29, 2010

Allison (The Allure of Books) rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: classics, 2010, 1001-list

While I can definitively attest to the fact that The Prince, who the book is named for, is indeed AN IDIOT, I think he can rest easy knowing that he is in good company. Seriously. I think every single personage introduced into the story, whether they only appear briefly or are prominent characters, are as completely off the deep end as The Idiot himself.

For about the first half of the book (give or take), I kinda felt bad for thinking that the Prince was an idiot. Don’t get me wrong,...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Dec 19, 2009

Salma rated it

· review of another edition

لطيفة و رائعة هي الرواية. بطلها من أجمل و ألطف الشخصيات التي من الممكن أن يقرأ عنها المرء... تتحدث عن الأمير مشكين _و هو أمير لأنه ينحدر من عائلة نبيلة، بيد أنه فقير لا يملك شروى نقير_ بسيط طيب القلب جميل الروح و شفيف، مثالي حد السذاجة لا يعرف النفاق و الكذب و الخداع و لا تعنيه المادة، سمح دمث لطيف المعشر... و هذا ما جعله أبلها بحسب تعريف المجتمع... و كل من يقرأ الرواية يدرك أن الجميع كان بُلها إلاه... لكن كم تستطيع أن تحتمل روحا صافية كإياه الواقع المزري... للأسف ليس كثيرا...

صراحة ق...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Jun 09, 2010

Ben rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: favorites, good-fiction, memorable-characters, read-in-2010, romantic-love-and-hate

The Idiot is a remarkable literary feat; a true accomplishment. It not only shows and represents true human complexity, but it births it, both in the inner workings of its passionate characters, and in the overall story. It's replete with patient, mind testing issues that spring the reader’s level of understanding back-and-fourth; yet its emotional intensity is felt throughout. It speaks truth of our striving human conditions; our emotions which only know the truth of their existence in the m...more

like 46 likes

· see review

Oct 14, 2008

Jed rated it

Recommends it for: Anyone

Recommended to Jed by: My dad

Crazy about this book. I was sad to finish it.

It's been said that the character of the Prince is "Christ-like" and he is. Long-suffering, kind, gentle and given to "saving" people. It's easy, then, to make or call him a Christ figure or symbol, but I'm not keen to go that far. While I agree that his characteristics are Christ-like in that they enact His teachings, I'm not ready to accept the overwhelming futility of the Prince's actions in Petersburg as a symb...moreCrazy about this book. I was sad to finish it.

It's been said that the character of the Prince is "Christ-like" and he is. Long-suffering, kind, gentle and given to "saving" people. It's easy, then, to make or call him a Christ figure or symbol, but I'm not keen to go that far. While I agree that his characteristics are Christ-like in that they enact His teachings, I'm not ready to accept the overwhelming futility of the Prince's actions in Petersburg as a symbol of Christ and His life or mission. While His teachings are trampled under foot at every hand, Christ as a man was not the "Idiot" as portrayed here. He was not servile, weak-minded or foolish as Myshkin often was. Lovable and sweet as I found the Prince, I cannot accept him as a symbol of the savior. My friend Bradley said, and I agree with him (as I tend to agree with most of what he says) that Alyosha Karamazov was better in that role.

It's a lovely illustration, however, of the effect that The Word can and does have on people. Lovely and sad. While only a handful of characters commit a sin of any gravity, the Petersburg described is an evil place, and the poor Prince is drown in it, it seems, with his hands tied behind his back. While he never gives in to the evil around him, he is ultimately destroyed by it. One can't say that he had no effect on the people he met, but he certainly had limited influence. Which is what makes it so sad. The Prince's undying kindness and gentle tolerance of his wicked friends was always seen as what made him an Idiot.

Which isn't, I'm sure, a lot different from the way many people see Christ's earthly ministry: Lovely and sad. But I "personally" do not see Him that way, nor do I see his mission as futile. His death (destruction) was not a result of a failed attempt to save, rather, his death was his own sacrifice-- totally within his control. And it was that sacrifice that saved us. There are many things we can and should feel in the face of the Savior's story. Pity is not one of them.(less)

like 4 likes

· see review

Sep 21, 2008

Bruno-Ken rated it

i admit i enjoyed reading this one; it was hard to put down. and i admit i have not been reading much fiction lately, except for very modern stuff, so perhaps i am just not used to a somewhat "older" style of writing. but while the main idea of a "truly good human" being trying to survive in a morally corrupt, petty and vindictive society (that, to boot, is having a two-fold identity crisis regarding its position vis-a-vis the West and "modernization") is a great pr...morei admit i enjoyed reading this one; it was hard to put down. and i admit i have not been reading much fiction lately, except for very modern stuff, so perhaps i am just not used to a somewhat "older" style of writing. but while the main idea of a "truly good human" being trying to survive in a morally corrupt, petty and vindictive society (that, to boot, is having a two-fold identity crisis regarding its position vis-a-vis the West and "modernization") is a great premise, and his depiction of the characters are astonishingly vivid, and this was the first time that i can recall actually being moved to tears by a passage in a novel (that of poor Marie, in the Swiss village where Myshkin lived for his treatment), in the end, i was more disappointed than impressed.

first of all, what a giant hairball of a plot, that jumps here and there, leaving subplots and threads abruptly, only to come back to them (sometimes) to finish them (often only in part), and leaving you wondering, "So what was the point of that?" it seems that Dostoyevsky wrote this novel in a state of utter financial duress, while he was in Europe running away from creditors and trying to support his family while he was at it, moving from one country to another, having epileptic fits at an unprecedented rate. Furthermore, he started and trashed several previous versions of the novel, with very different (though not altogether unrelated) story lines and characters, before settling on this final version. so this may explain the hectic, dishevelled organization of the book. and under those circumstances, it may even be a testament to his skill that the novel is as tight as it is. neverthless, i could not help wishing he could have cleaned it up a bit, slimmed it down, or at least -- failing that -- made more clear to the reader why he included so many (to my simple eye) extraneous episodes and people.

second, while the novel is supposed to condemn modern Russian society, especially its elite (and wannabe-elite), i got the feeling that Dostoyevsky, after all an aristocrat himself, was still a closet elitist: this is given away by how fussily he describes the mannerisms, mores and "morals" of the Yepanchins and their acquaintances, as well as the poorly disguised condescension (disguised in compassion) for the misfits of the underclass, of whom i cannot think of one positive example, except perhaps Kolya Ivolgin, who, however, gets a pass because (1) he is just a kid (and therefore not yet completely lost through his class predicament) and (2) he is devout admirer of the protagonist, who is a prince of an "ancient family". No, sorry, this is definitely closet, or at least covert, conservativism, in fact, reactionism. and it all comes out, with a bunch of undiluted slavophilism in Myshkin's pre-epileptic soliloquy during his "socity debut" on the eve of his engagement to Aglaya. (Marie is also an exception, but she is so pathetic [in the most Christian sense of the word], so extreme, that she might as well be an angel: indeed, that whole episode, if not his whole stay in Switzerland, was like a surreal interlude, before his reintroduction into the gritty "reality" of St. Petersburg and Russia.)

third, this book is a cruel fantasy for hopelessly romantic adolescent boys whom it will lead to believe that the most beautiful, brilliant and loving women will fall all over them -- in fact, fight viciously over them -- simply if they are "nice guys". what a joke! Dostoyevsky surely was not so naîve. he was in his 40s and was no romantic fool. but my guess is that in his distaste and perhaps fear at the breathtaking economic, technological and social advancement of the Europe he was observing during his debtor's exile, and his turn to a pro-Russia, pro-Orthodox, anti-technology, anti-modernism point of view, carried him back to some schoolboy utopian construal of women that led to such paragons of feminity -- the virgin good yet sassy girl Aglaya and the fallen passionate yet brilliant Nastasya -- who, if they exist in reality, would hardly fall for a guy like Myshkin. it's so absurd that in a way, i think this novel should be placed in the "Fantasy" section of bookstores and libraries, because that's pretty much the only audience that will buy such wishful thinking.

my guess is that Dostoyevsky wrote this as a warning to Russia high society: shape up, or else Europe (or at least European forces) are going to swirl in and wipe you out. and the way to shape up is, return to your basic Orthodox Christian roots. and like i said, he got carried away by his simplistic idealism. and yet he knew it was unrealistic and bound to fail, and that's when he said "screw it, i am just going to indulge in all these repressed romantic fantasies." and we know he knew these were just useless fantasies and that the fate of Russian's ancien régime was sealed: because of the abrupt and pointless and of course absolutely negative way in which the book ends.

but in one way, Dostoyevsky was not a fantasist, but the coldest realist, for his prophecy in the end became true. (less)

like 2 likes

· see review

Sep 11, 2008

bup rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: 2008, audiobook, classic, 1001, novel

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. This is the most confusing book I've ever read. I'm sure it's my fault, because it's a dense book. By the end I could keep most of the characters straight.

Here's what I got: some guy (our hero) comes to Russia on a train and meets a nasty guy who just became rich. In Russia, he goes and meets a general and talks about how he was treated for epilepsy and some people think he's an idiot. The general has a family and a portrait of some woman.

The woman in the portrait burns s...more

like 5 likes

· see review

Aug 19, 2008

Cheryl Terrel rated it

While it seems that most literary critics have dubbed Prince Lev Nikolayevitch Myshkin (the idiot) Dostoyevsky's Russian savior*, it seems far more likely to me that Dostoyevsky is using Myshkin as an allegory for would-be saviors who are too naive, too indecisive, weak rather than meek, foolish rather than wise, full of intellectual idealism without prudence and all-in-all completely incapable of doing what they propose. If Dostoyevsky intends the prince to be a savior, he either sees no hope ...more

like 3 likes

· see review

Feb 15, 2008

HM rated it

· review of another edition

وقتي بدانيم كه داستايوسكي خود بيماري صرع و حال غش داشته و روزگاري به راستي تا پاي جايگاه اعداميان پيش رفته، در مي يابيم كه چرا وضع و حال پرنس میشکین و خاطره ي آن اعدامي رهايي يافته را اين قدر زنده و مشروح باز مي گويد او خود اذعان دارد كه از زير شنل گوگول بيرون آمده ولي به گمانم سبك پيشنيان را با شناخت ظريفش از حالات دروني و بيروني انسان ها و بصيرتش بر محيط پيرامون، آشكارا به كمال رسانده است
همواره در آثارش شاهد گفتگوهايي دراز و شلوغ هستيم ولي جزيياتشان چنان پرداخته و مواج و پيش بيني ناپذير...more

like 1 like

· see review

Jun 05, 2008

Greg Raburn rated it

Our protagonist here, Myshkin, is an example of a selfless love, moving to marry a woman to save her from falling into the arms of Rogozhin, who represents darkness. Remind any of you good ol’ boys of that girl in high school who kept running back to the man who didn’t deserve her affections? Well, in this case, the girl runs back to Rogozhin, who, in spite of, and perhaps because of, his deep passion, rewarded her by…killing her. Thanks, honey! Myshkin is considered the “idiot” because of his ...more

like 1 like

· see review

Jan 05, 2011

Spencer rated it

Not sure it's quite a book I "really liked," but it was compelling, excellently written, and quite sad. Opposite his guilty man, Roskolnivok, in "Crime and Punishment," this book seems to be about a completely innocent man, Prince Lev Nikolaivich, or simply 'the Prince.' He's a wonderfully innocent man who's not necessarily good, but amazingly frank, open, simple, kind, etc. His innocence includes a naivete and world view that clashes severely with those around him, so of cou...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Feb 19, 2009

Natasha rated it

· review of another edition

930 pages of nonsense. A lot of worthless writing in this book that doesn't lend itself to plot or character, but rather seems long rants of personal views of the author. Story & plotline is really wanting and not at all strong. Not great character descriptions, and leaves a lot of storyline out to include all the rants. If I could only ever put down a book I've started this wouldn't have made it past the first chapter, but I keep reading thinking surely it will get better.....alas it doesn'...more

like 4 likes

· see review

Mar 05, 2011

NicoleMichele rated it

· review of another edition

Recommends it for: ages 14+

Recommended to NicoleMichele by: "1001 Books You Must Read Before You Die" group read for February 15, 2010

Shelves: 1001youmustread, ebooks, 2011, lendable

"A fool with a heart and no sense is just as unhappy as a fool with sense and no heart." p. 75

They say never to judge a book by it's cover. Never judge a book by it's title either. I feel like I've hit the jackpot in discovering phenomenal Russian novels this year, first "Anna Karenina" and now this one. It's not about your common love triangle. It's more of a complex love pentagon connecting Myshkin, Nastassya Filippovna, Aglaya Yepanchin, Rogozhin, and Ganya. I ...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Dec 22, 2010

julie rated it

· review of another edition

oh dear. apparently, i unwittingly began reading a book which is a metaphor for jesus. too late to turn back now, i'm pretty much married to it.

this translation has a lot of typos and chapters out of sequence at the end. beware. :/

like 1 like

· see review

Oct 17, 2007

Guido rated it

Recommends it for: Russian lit masochists

This book is real close to not getting finished. How many extra characters that add minimally to the overly complex plot can we cram into each chapter? There are few moments of brilliance, but stick with Crime and Punishment or the Brothers Karamazov unless you are studying Russian lit.

Update: I toughed it out and actually managed to finish this book. It really just got worse is it went along, sort of a downward spiral. The writing isn't particularly bad, but the plot is terribl...more

like 3 likes

· see review

Jan 19, 2009

Eldar rated it

· review of another edition

Ultimately the most tragic of all Doestoevsky's work I've read to date. The story while captivating for the most part does veer off course at times for reasons which are never fully explained. Perhaps I've come to expect complete perfection from Dostoevsky, Brothers Karamazov, Demons and his short stories come to mind immediately, which is why this work falls just short of a perfect rating from me.

The story is about a "positevely good person", the idiot, as Doestoevsky hims...more

like 1 like

· see review

Dec 13, 2008

Jim rated it

Having just read a collection of reviews by Auden, Barzun and Trilling, I hesitate about putting attempting to record how I feel about this book. It would take a lot of detailed note-taking to sort it all out. It all seemed so convoluted that many times I couldn't resist the thought that severe editing should have been done, but then one reviewer commented that the book was published serially and therefore the plot had to come to a kind of conclusion over and over. That explains the book's re...more

· see review

Feb 08, 2012

Erik rated it

I'd give this book three-and-a-half stars if I could; I was under the spell of Dostoyevsky's language about 70% of the time. His descriptions of Petersberg and Pavlosk society held me fast, as did his sidenotes about human nature and existence. Had I picked this up as my first F.D. novel, I'd have been unequivocally impressed; confused over some of the choices, sure, but impressed nonetheless. However, having come to it directly from Crime and Punishment , though, I found it a letdown. After pe...moreI'd give this book three-and-a-half stars if I could; I was under the spell of Dostoyevsky's language about 70% of the time. His descriptions of Petersberg and Pavlosk society held me fast, as did his sidenotes about human nature and existence. Had I picked this up as my first F.D. novel, I'd have been unequivocally impressed; confused over some of the choices, sure, but impressed nonetheless. However, having come to it directly from Crime and Punishment , though, I found it a letdown. After penning such a masterpiece, how did this beautiful mess leave his desk? I'm sure many 19th century readers wondered the same thing.

His characters, so vivid in C&P , fall flat by comparison. While the two pairs of opposites, i.e. Myshkin & Rogozhin, Aglaya & Natassya, are often compelling, all lack believability. In contrast to Raskolnikov's beautiful and believable madness, Rogozhin plays as a mere shade, a shadowy but wooden puppet doomed to his part in the morality play of Russian vs. European values. Myshkin held my fascination, but he became steadily less real, and his outburst at the Ypanchins' party cut off any remaining belief in his existence. Dostoyevsky might better have stopped after his delicious skewering of the elite and inserted his anti-Catholic diatribe as a complete non-sequitur (why not a verbatim manifesto, nailed to the door?), and then had the prince break the vase, fall down and be done with it. The Idiot also sticks us with the impossible prospect of an asexual protagonist caught in two overlapping love triangles. Dostoevsky simply can't have it both ways - Christ never got it on, and no one in the throes of love ever thought much about redeeming humanity. The two couples' culminating confrontation might've played better with a slavic Jerry Springer presiding.

Were I to recommend this book to a friend, I'd tell them to read the first part and put it away after Natassya's party, before the unities of time and location are broken, before Hippolit enters with his obtuse apologia and before we find ourselves stuck at too many upper-crust parties with too many three-part names to keep track of. I'd tell them to pick it back up for the descriptions of Myshkin's life-saving seizure, and for the terse examination of Ganya's profound averageness, and then put it down again. Dostoyevsky began publishing this, if I'm not mistaken, as a serial to make ends meet while on the outs in Europe, gambling away every last ruble he didn't spend on vodka. Many of the chapters end with the kind of cliff-hanger zingers that play better in Dan Brown, and by the time the action moves to Pavlosk, it reads more like a season of a good HBO series where each hour has a different director. Most episodes are very watchable, some are superb, and some, well, let's just say there's always next season.(less)

· see review

Jan 15, 2012

Scott Smithson rated it

· review of another edition

It is so difficult to write anything about a book by Dostoevsky. "Gee, it was really swell" doesn't quite cut it.

I first read the Idiot over 20 years ago. I didn't remember many of the details this time around, although I reread it knowing Myshkin = Christ and Ippolit is the ideological foil similar to Ivan Karamazov or the underground man.

So, rather than expound upon the well-deserved five stars, I will just say that reading Dostoevsky is never disappoin...more

· see review

Oct 04, 2011

J. Ergo rated it

· review of another edition

This review is specifically for the Richard Pevear/Larissa Volokhonsky translation and not the piece of crap Constance Garnett tank job. That woman did a number on Russian literature for many years, making it hardly coherent at times and almost unbearable to read. The Idiot and The Possessed were the only two Dostoyevsky's I read previous to the beautiful overhaul given by the new translations. I mostly liked The Idiot, but bumbled through The Possessed. It did me some good when I learned that G...more

· see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 1140 1141 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Do you think Prince Myshkin ever felt 'romantic' love?	8	38	Feb 09, 2012 06:10am
Discovering Russi...: The Idiot Part 4 Chapter 1 thru 11 Conclusion (February 1 to 7)	21	16	Feb 07, 2012 11:31am
Discovering Russi...: The Idiot Part 2 Chapters 1 thru 12 (January 15 to 25)	20	31	Jan 25, 2012 01:57pm
Discovering Russi...: The Idiot Part 1 Chapters 8 thru 16 (January 8 to 14)	19	34	Jan 24, 2012 08:36pm
Discovering Russi...: The Idiot Part 1 Chapters 1 thru 7 (January 1 to 7)	27	34	Jan 06, 2012 07:59am
Page to stage in a whole new way!	2	29	Nov 22, 2011 12:27pm
Similarities between pre-communist Russia and contemporary USA	3	58	Jul 22, 2011 10:33pm

combine
Other Editions (288)

More editions...

Videos About This Book

Add a comment

Genres

Classics

656 users

Cultural > Russia

259 users

Literature

163 users

Literature > Russian Literature

114 users

Novels

69 users

Literature > 19th Century

36 users

Philosophy

30 users

Classics > Classic Literature

21 users

Literary Fiction

23 users

Religion

9 users

See top shelves...

Readers Also Enjoyed

About Fyodor Dostoyevsky

CF also Федор Достоевский

Fyodor Mikhailovitch Dostoevsky was a Russian writer and essayist, notably known for his novels Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov.
Dostoyevsky's literary output explores human psychology in the troubled political, social and spiritual context of 19th-century Russian society. Considered by many as a founder or precursor of 20th-century existentialis...more

More about Fyodor Dostoyevsky...

Books by Fyodor Dostoyevsky

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Pin It

Trivia About The Idiot

10 trivia questions

More quizzes & trivia...

Quotes from The Idiot

“Beauty will save the world” — 135 people liked it

“Don’t let us forget that the causes of human actions are usually immeasurably more complex and varied than our subsequent explanations of them.” — 95 people liked it

More quotes…

Groups That Shelved The Idiot

De Fijne Boekenclub

4 members

last activity Feb 08, 2012 09:59pm

shelf: currently-reading

Boxall's 1001 Books You ...

10996 members

last activity 38 minutes ago

shelf: read

Romance Readers Reading C...

4392 members

last activity 2 minutes ago

shelf: read

title link	preview: The Idiot
avg rating	preview: The Idiot Goodreads rating: 4.08 (18366 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12505.The_Idiot?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1327865902m/12505.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/12505.The_Idiot?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The Idiot by Fyodor Dostoyevsky[/url]

The Idiot

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Readers Also Enjoyed

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website