Discovering Russian Literature discussion
Group Reads Archive - 2012
>
The Idiot Part 1 Chapters 8 thru 16 (January 8 to 14)
date
newest »
newest »
Chapter 8. Nastasya’s stormy entrance, flinging her fur coat at the prince, mistaking him for a servant: “Ah, what an idiot!” Nastasya Filippovna cried indignantly, stamping her foot at him. “Well, what are you doing? Who are you going to announce?”Chapter 9. Nastasya sits down uninvited next to Ganya and starts questioning her: “Where’s your study? And . . . and where are the tenants? Don’t you keep tenants?”
Chapter 10. The extraordinary purchase scene: “Eighteen thousand for me? You can tell a boor at once!” she cried suddenly . . .
Chapter 16. The infamous fireplace scene: “She’s lost her mind, she’s lost her mind!” they cried all around.
Does anyone have a random or selected sentence for this section? There are some very powerful scenes with incredible human drama.
I don't have much to say about the dramatic scenes--mostly because I don't want to leak anything regarding future events, considering I'm already on Part IV and close to finishing the book--but I did remember laughing out loud at General Ivolgin's story about the lapdog and the Englishwoman on the train. Dostoevsky could have written comedies based on the strength of that little story!
Mod
Another one is calling Myshkin "a sheep." I don't know if I'm reading too much into it but, I'm thinking it's the image of The lamb of God/Jesus or a sheep as a the sacrificial lamb or both . Myshkin is the only one who sees through her behavior and confronts her with the assertion that it does not match her real personality which I expected. Then the slapping, he should have challenged Ganya to a duel in response to the slap but did not do so it's almost like turning the other cheek. Then the whole idea of him being a Prince but without a Kingdom & relatives known to others in this world. Am I reading too much into it or is he a Christ figure?
Amalie wrote: "Here are few things I noticed. Firstly, it's difficult to feel sorry for Nastasya, although she is a facinating character. She is unpredictable, rude and her actions has no limits. It looks like sh..."I don't think that's pareidolia at all--those all sound like very astute observations, and Myshkin is indeed Christ-like, in some regards.
Steve wrote: "I don't have much to say about the dramatic scenes--mostly because I don't want to leak anything regarding future events, considering I'm already on Part IV and close to finishing the book--but I d..."
Steve, I think other than the comedy element, that story is very important to the main plot. I felt it symbolizes Nastasya's revengeful acts against Ganya. Nastasya is not letting Ganya's secret contempt for her pass without revenge.
As for characters, yes, we can't admire anything about Nastasya but I always felt that she acts not out of vanity, but rather out of spite and despair.
Steve, I think other than the comedy element, that story is very important to the main plot. I felt it symbolizes Nastasya's revengeful acts against Ganya. Nastasya is not letting Ganya's secret contempt for her pass without revenge.
As for characters, yes, we can't admire anything about Nastasya but I always felt that she acts not out of vanity, but rather out of spite and despair.
Amalie wrote: "Here are few things I noticed. Firstly, it's difficult to feel sorry for Nastasya, although she is a facinating character. She is unpredictable, rude and her actions has no limits. It looks like sh..."
Oh yes, now I see it too! Unfortunately my knowledge in Christianity is very limited.
Here's what I've heard: In The Idiot Dostoevsky attempts to portray the ideal man— a "positively beautiful individual." Prince Myshkin represents all the qualities Dostoevsky deems the best aspects of a human being. Which brings us to the question, why is he an Idiot?
I think the idea of Christ-like character also fits really well. Thanks for explaining it!
Oh yes, now I see it too! Unfortunately my knowledge in Christianity is very limited.
Here's what I've heard: In The Idiot Dostoevsky attempts to portray the ideal man— a "positively beautiful individual." Prince Myshkin represents all the qualities Dostoevsky deems the best aspects of a human being. Which brings us to the question, why is he an Idiot?
I think the idea of Christ-like character also fits really well. Thanks for explaining it!
Amalie wrote: "Here are few things I noticed. Firstly, it's difficult to feel sorry for Nastasya, although she is a facinating character. She is unpredictable, rude and her actions has no limits. It looks like sh..."Nastasya has suffered a lot and now it's as if she wants a revenge, she wants to make others feel bad. Or because she has too much anger inside or because unconsciously she provokes others to be hated. It happens often in people who are angry with the whole world, that kind of people who can not find peace in any way, it seems that they are looking for more suffering, as if they were masochists. In reality these people are seeking to be understood, they are looking for somebody who sees what really is behind their behavior. I make an example to explain better: as for example the mistreated kids who become bullies but they are kids with problems who seek attention for help. Such people need compassion more than others.
Shanez wrote: "Here's what I've heard: In The Idiot Dostoevsky attempts to portray the ideal man— a "positively beautiful individual." Prince Myshkin represents all the qualities Dostoevsky deems the best aspects of a human being. Which brings us to the question, why is he an Idiot?"
Well, Jesus has been killed though he was a perfect man. I think that people don't understand persons like Jesus or Myshkin and so they make everything to let them feel different. People are scared of such kind of people because they feel they are better and superior and so they make everything to humiliate them and let them feel different but in a bad way. In this case Myshink can't be compared with Jesus because Jesus knew his condition of son of God while Myshkin is only a human being. Jesus accepted the persecution and his death; Myshkin doesn't understand and so he feels an "idiot" because it is this that people want.
Great comments. I'm wondering if part of Myshkin's Christ-like aura and status as an "idiot" goes back to the mythology surrounding epileptics, which I am pretty sure--and I am just going on a very slender memory--was still misunderstood in Dostoevsky's day (and as we know D had epileptic seizures). Epileptics were originally thought to be inhabited by demons, but then as evidence of genius: "On the other hand, epileptic seizures have a power and symbolism which, historically, have suggested a relationship with creativity or unusual leadership abilities. Scholars have long been fascinated by evidence that prominent prophets and other holy men, political leaders, philosophers, and many who achieved greatness in the arts and sciences, suffered from epilepsy." http://www.epilepsy.com/epilepsy/famousRegardless, the topic is complex, which makes for a richer reading experience.
Nastasya is filled with a magnificent, if rude, shocking, belligerent, etc. energy. I have both admiration for her and sympathy for her--because what choices can she possibly have? She will inevitably end in some sort of tragedy--death, disease, isolation, starvation--anything. I do not know if there was a courtesan tradition in Russia as there was in Venice--Nastasya seems so very, very isolated, both physically from her youth and in society, which was even more critical in 19th century Russia than it would be today (today she could go out and get a job, not rely on men to sustain her). Yet rather than shrink into nothingness (Lily Bart), she seems to revel in her unsavory status, and even gain power in it--which of course is also ultimately her undoing. The whore becomes the dark raging queen, almost warrior-like in her ferocity. For me, if Myshkin is the innocent white light, she is the magnificent dark energy. Yes, I admit I love her. ;}
MountainShelby wrote: "Great comments. I'm wondering if part of Myshkin's Christ-like aura and status as an "idiot" goes back to the mythology surrounding epileptics, which I am pretty sure--and I am just going on a very..."What made you me remember!
I don't remember in which book but I have recently read that once the epileptics were considered people "touched by God". I think it is a beautiful expression. As if these persons have something special that other people can't understand; and they need comprehension and respect.
Once, in a book of Dostoyevsky, I have read that he explained how an epileptic seizure is and he says that he begins to see a light, a wonderful light in which he feels near to God and he feels good and in harmony with the whole world. But this only at the beginning of the seizure, later came also the bad side.
Apparently epileptics experience an aura, which of course would hold mystical qualities in the absence of scientific knowledge. The Idiot is D's most autobiographical/personal novel, so surely his own experience must inform the narrative, as it does in the musings on executions.
MountainShelby wrote: "Apparently epileptics experience an aura, which of course would hold mystical qualities in the absence of scientific knowledge. The Idiot is D's most autobiographical/personal novel, so surely his ..."Yes, I agree with both your sentences though I prefer to believe that epileptics are really "touched by God".
Mod
I thought it was the other way around that they was possessed by demons. Jesus cured them and people believed they were possessed by demons, at least back then. Thanks so much for sharing those information.
Coming back to the novel, Nastasya's dinner party is very important specially for us to get an idea between herself and Totsky. This game is not a religious confession, one is to confess not to be forgiven but merely to expose oneself. This is neither a true game nor confession: it is a reflection of Nastasya herself and the entire evening.
You're right Dely, I think there's a lot more to Nastasya's character before making a judgement but I just still can't admire her but I don't dislike her. I felt the target of the game was Totsky. Upon hearing Totsky's account, Nastasya's eyes flash. Why is that? Is his story symbolic, am I missing something? Or is it because that is not the worst of all evil act he has committed meaning what Totsky did to her?
Amalie wrote: "I thought it was the other way around that they was possessed by demons. Jesus cured them and people believed they were possessed by demons, at least back then. Thanks so much for sharing those information."The sentence I have read was not related to the period of Jesus but it is more recent but before science could say it is a disease. Perhaps people seeing the tremblings of an epileptic thought it was like a mystical ecstasy. Or perhaps, because of a scientific ignorance and a strong superstition, people considered all this suffering like a gift of God. If I don't go wrong Roman catholics believe that suffering is a blessing, a gift of God to reach him; thanks to the endurance of suffering we expiate our sins.
Nastasy is not to be admired but to be accepted and understood like she is. I don't remember that evening in the book, have read it nearly two years ago and don't remember the details.
amalie, i am also curious as to why nastasya's eyes flashed after hearing totskys story. it would make sense of her to be mad for Totsky choosing to tell this story instead of the one where he seduces nastasya and takes her virtue. also for some reason i rather enjoyed watching N. mock everybody at her birthdays party and turn ganya down. it made me a little mad reading about how so many people were looking to profit in one way or another from her betrothal to ganya. Im glad she embarrassed those people
Mod
I'm not sure about that either but I think, she was expecting a different story from him, As I said earlier, the worst of all evil act he has committed is what Totsky did to her.
This second half of Part 1 belongs to Nastasya, so I've included some prompts involving my favorite scenes with her.