The Idiot Part 4 Chapter 1 thru 11 Conclusion (February 1 to 7)

[MountainAshleah]

ONLY if you comment on something beyond these chapters, please warn others with ***spoilers included**** or use the formatting tips in Goodreads, (some html is ok)

[Riya]

i finished reading this yesterday! i kept telling myself: Mariya you got to finish it because tomorrow is Feb. 1st lol

anyways i liked the ending; i think that the story couldn't have ended in any other way.

also did anybody in this group actually like Aglya? yuck. my feelings towards her went from ambivalence to annoyance to anger. she is such a bratty spoiled child. i liked natalya much more even though in the story she is viewed as a "fallen" woman.

[MountainAshleah]

Congrats Mariya! I'm proud of you for finishing the book!

I also did not care for Aglaya as a character, although she is probably far more representative of young women of the time than Natalya. So, perhaps more realistic (coddled, spoiled) but not as interesting.

[MountainAshleah]

"Aglaya blushed. Perhaps it suddenly seemed terribly strange and incredible to her that she was now sitting with 'that woman,' in 'that woman's' house, and was in need of her reply. At the first sounds of Nastasya Filippovna's voice, it was as if a shudder passed over her body."

[Azaghedi]

You weren't alone in disliking Aglaya. But, to be honest, I didn't like any of the female characters, nor any of the men, save perhaps one or two minor ones. Perhaps it was just my translation, but I just wanted to put the entire cast into a train and route it off a cliff! Especially the females, as they all seemed impulsive, tempestuous, vacuous, schizophrenic...I could go on, but I think the point is made.

In addition, despite being told over and over again, throughout the book and through reading analyses, that these two women "loved" Myshkin, well, I was done only that; told. I was never shown it. Once again, perhaps that was the translator's fault, but I felt like this was a very promising premise for a book that ultimately turned out to be a frustrating and dated execution. There were moments of genius throughout it, but they were few and far between, and not enough for me to think very much of the novel as a whole.

[Amalie]

Steve wrote: "You weren't alone in disliking Aglaya. But, to be honest, I didn't like any of the female characters, nor any of the men, save perhaps one or two minor ones. Perhaps it was just my translation, but..."

Translations actually can ruin the whole experience. Same thing happened to me with "Dead Souls". What's your translations? My one was much better.

I think Shelby is right about Aglaya. She is a typical young women of the time like Natascha in War and Peace. Yes they are childlike, spoiled, very romantic and idealistic. They make mistakes and interestingly most of them elope or plans to elope, like Aglaya here. It's interesting how these male writers represent them as "fair maiden" characters. But to them, they are innocent, romantic, young etc but when they cross the line to Nastasya's side, they are branded as "fallen women" and the writers write them to a tragic end. But you have to wonder, if they all were really like that, right?

I mean, read Dickens and you'll find bunch of Victorian "fragile little women" who is waiting to be rescued and guided bu a man etc etc and then when you read Victorian female authors like the Brontes it's quite the opposite. I'm thinking there's some gender-bias thing going on here. Too bad there wasn't any female contemporary authors.

[Amalie]

So I just finished reading. And here are somethings I found to be interesting.

Nastasya psychology is interesting. She doesn't mind harming herself to cause pain to her offender/Totsky. I think her ruin is the fault of the corrupted world than of hers. It's also interesting that none of the characters Myshkin set out to rescue were actually rescued. Hippolite, General Ivolgin, Aglaya, Nastasya, Rogozhin. So may be that's what separate him from his Jesus-like figure. He is no Messiah after all. so the massage is pessimistic. These characters can't be saved and the current spiritual state of Russia is fallen just like the characters.

I also loved the whole closing-the-circle. Not only Myshkin failed to save the characters from their self destruction but the attempt had put him to a complete mental degradation. So the whole thing is complete failure. so the massage perhaps is the world will never be ready to be saved and they will never understand characters like Jesus himself, or the once who are similar to him. I loved this reading!

P.S. Shelby, you did a wonderful job as the discussion leader. I hope you'll join us again to another novel of your choice! :)

[Azaghedi]

Amalie wrote: "Steve wrote: "You weren't alone in disliking Aglaya. But, to be honest, I didn't like any of the female characters, nor any of the men, save perhaps one or two minor ones. Perhaps it was just my tr..."

My translation was by the Carlisles, Henry and Olga. They originally did the translation in 1969, then refreshed it in 1980, I think. It's supposed to be a decent translation, from what little information I could find. And considering it was from 1960, and not 1860, I didn't have to worry about encountering lots of stilted language that dated the translators. So unless I read it again, by another translator, I'll have no way of knowing. Unfortunately, my response was tepid at best so I doubt I'll give this one another go any time soon.

[[deleted user]]

Well, I finished reading this months ago. I enjoyed the discussion. I read in the introduction to my book that other than suicide, the criticism on Roman Catholicism, also rooted in Dostoevsky's own self. It says here that when Dostoevsky wanted to meet the Pope, he wasn't granted the permission, and therefore held a grudge all his life. Thought it would be interesting to add.

One thing I never get was why did Myshkin believe that the high society people as being good to him when clearly they are only faking it? In truth, these people are clinging to rotten threads. As for characters, I agree with Steve, none of them are admirable but they are interesting characters.


Amalie wrote: "So may be that's what separate him from his Jesus-like figure. He is no Messiah after all. so the massage is p..."

Yes, the massage is pessimistic and I think you are correct.

[dely]

Shanez wrote: "Yes, the massage is pessimistic and I think you are correct. "

In my opinion another good word is "realistic". I have never seen in Dostoyevsky's works a happy ending and this is another thing I like of him. His pessimism is in a certain way realistic; a harsh reality.
I think also that Dostoyevsky's opinion is that nobody can save other people. At the most a person can save himself but he can't save other people. I have found this idea also in other works of Dostoyevsky. For ex. I am now reading The Brothers Karamazov, I am only in "book three" and here it is written that Katerina Ivanova wanted to marry Dimitri only to save him. It is not the first time I read that there is a character that wants to save another one but always fails.

At the end of The Idiot is one of my favorite sentences ever. It is such a simply sentence but when I read it I had like a shudder down my spine. It happens when Aglay goes to Nastaya and also prince Myshikin arrives and he says to Aglaya: Don't you see how much she suffers? (translation is made by me, have read it in Italian).
I love this "love" for suffering, this don't go away in front of people that suffer, this respect for suffering. I have found it also in Crime and Punishment when Raskolnikov kisses the feet of Sofia but not because he loves her but because he loves all the suffering and has a great respect for what Sofia had to stand during her life.

Another thing, the last! I don't remember in which part we have discussed about the epilectis that are considered "touched by God" and so superior persons but I have found something similar also in The Brothers Karamazov when Dostoyevsky tells the story of Lizaveta and says that she was considered by the people "an insane inspired by God". I love these opinions about people who suffer and need more protection, as if they are special.

[MountainAshleah]

All, these comments are great. Where were all of you the first time I read this book ;}. The discussion has definitely enriched my experience with the novel, and with Dostoevsky, which of course is the point. I think the P&V translation really helped my experience--the text is very alive.

[MountainAshleah]

Shanez wrote: "Well, I finished reading this months ago. I enjoyed the discussion. I read in the introduction to my book that other than suicide, the criticism on Roman Catholicism, also rooted in Dostoevsky's ow..."

"It says here that when Dostoevsky wanted to meet the Pope, he wasn't granted the permission, and therefore held a grudge all his life." Oh, I bet D was Mr Crankypants for a good while after that!!!!

[MountainAshleah]

Amalie wrote: "So I just finished reading. And here are somethings I found to be interesting.

Nastasya psychology is interesting. She doesn't mind harming herself to cause pain to her offender/Totsky. I think h..."

dely wrote: "Shanez wrote: "Yes, the massage is pessimistic and I think you are correct. "

In my opinion another good word is "realistic". I have never seen in Dostoyevsky's works a happy ending and this is an..."

I also think the ending appropriate--my notes in the margin said something to that effect. And yet it seemed fitting.

[Azaghedi]

For me, the realism of the novel--or pessimism, depending on your world-view--wasn't a problem for me. I've read and enjoyed plenty of pessimistic books. In fact, I probably enjoy them much more than "happy ending" ones. So the problem for me with this book didn't stem from its tone, but from how Dostoevsky achieved what he was trying to say. In my opinion, he took a story which could have been great and subverted it with gratingly annoying characters and drawn out society scenes. So what bothered me was the execution of the themes, not the nature of the themes themselves.

[Alex]

I hate to step away from the great discussion about the ending of this book, but how did you guys feel about this one compared to the rest of Dostoevsky's work? I believe D said that he enjoyed writing this book the most, but I found it lacking at times... Perhaps I've read to much Dostoevsky this year.

[MountainAshleah]

I agree Alex. I know it's D's most personal work, but I prefer his others (I have not yet read The Adolescent, but I know that's not his best either). I think he excels in darkness. I love Raskolnikov and Underground Man as characters. D understands the psychology of the obsessive, the neurotic, the narcissistic better than anyone--and all pre-Freudian. I find that completely amazing.

[MountainAshleah]

Steve wrote: "For me, the realism of the novel--or pessimism, depending on your world-view--wasn't a problem for me. I've read and enjoyed plenty of pessimistic books. In fact, I probably enjoy them much more th..."

I have been wondering if D had intended a brighter ending--and a brighter book--but his story of a "beautiful man" could not help but detour into darkness, and so we have a book that is a little schizophrenic. That was my impression--the narrative kept retreating back to the darkness, then Myshkin would appear (at times) in such opposition he woudl seem like a tinsel-type ornament, then the narrative would sink back into darkness.. . which is where I prefer it. (I admit I am a fan of dark fiction, though. My "favorites" bookshelf at home is pretty grim ;})

[Azaghedi]

I'm with you, Alex, though I'll admit I'm little qualified to make the assertion that "The Idiot" is among D's weaker works, since I've only read three of them.

[dely]

Alex wrote: "I hate to step away from the great discussion about the ending of this book, but how did you guys feel about this one compared to the rest of Dostoevsky's work? I believe D said that he enjoyed wri..."

Till now for me it is his best work (but I am still reading The Brothers Karamazov). Another book I loved a lot was The Insulted and Humiliated.
I think it depends on how much we identify with the character (but this concerns every book we read) and I have found a lot of points in common with Myshkin. I can understand his paranoid delirium, the fear of being among the people and then almost going in exaltation when he thinks to be accepted while on the other hand he is often searched to be mocked. On one hand people feel that he is special and want to know him better but on the other hand they can't understand him and so they laugh at him. This behaviour of other people is very disturbing for the mind and for the soul. I could understand his anxieties and I identify a lot with his character. And I loved that Dostoyevsky was so able to talk about such a mood.

[MountainAshleah]

Congrats on completing the book!

[Tarun]

Finished the book last night.And i thought this book had the scope of ending on a brighter side.But as Fyodor likes to end all his stories,this too was intended to end in a whimsical manner keeping the reader feeling strange about the ways of the reality and human nature.

[MountainAshleah]

I know the ending is often criticized--the obligatory epilogue, things wrapped up--or an attempt to do so--

[dely]

I loved the end of The Idiot; it couldn't have been different.
For me it means: you can't even rescue yourself, you are lost whatever you do.
We have talked about this topic, that in D.'s books there is always a character who wants to rescue another one but he fails because nobody can save someone else. In The Idiot perhaps D. wanted to say: sometimes we can't even rescue ourselves.

[Tarun]

:) I like the way u put it up Dely.And this is exactly what leaves a reader like me with an unquenched thirst while seemably being so near to the splash pool!

Although,i admit, affectuating this very feeling makes D's works all the more interesting.Just like the once banned chapter of the 'Demons' echos -- pleasure derived from exactly what u wish to absolutely avoid! :P