======================================================================
= The_Idiot =
======================================================================
Introduction
======================================================================
'The Idiot' (pre-reform Russian: ; post-reform ) is a novel by the
19th-century Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky. It was first published
serially in the journal 'The Russian Messenger' in 1868-1869.
The title is an ironic reference to the central character of the
novel, Lev Nikolayevich Myshkin, a young prince whose goodness,
open-hearted simplicity, and guilelessness lead many of the more
worldly characters he encounters to mistakenly assume that he lacks
intelligence and insight. In the character of Prince Myshkin,
Dostoevsky set himself the task of depicting "the positively good and
beautiful man." The novel examines the consequences of placing such a
singular individual at the centre of the conflicts, desires, passions,
and egoism of worldly society, both for the man himself and for those
with whom he becomes involved.
Joseph Frank describes 'The Idiot' as "the most personal of all
Dostoevsky's major works, the book in which he embodies his most
intimate, cherished, and sacred convictions." It includes descriptions
of some of his most intense personal ordeals, such as epilepsy and
mock execution, and explores moral, spiritual, and philosophical
themes consequent upon them. His primary motivation in writing the
novel was to subject his own highest ideal, that of true Christian
love, to the crucible of contemporary Russian society.
The artistic method of conscientiously testing his central idea meant
that the author could not always predict where the plot was going as
he was writing. The novel has an awkward structure, and many critics
have commented on its seemingly chaotic organization. According to
Gary Saul Morson, "'The Idiot' violates every critical norm and yet
somehow manages to achieve real greatness." Dostoevsky himself was of
the opinion that the experiment was not entirely successful, but the
novel remained his favourite among his works. In a letter
to Nikolay Strakhov he wrote, "Much in the novel was written
hurriedly, much is too diffuse and did not turn out well, but some of
it did turn out well. I do not stand behind the novel, but I do stand
behind the idea."
Background
======================================================================
In September 1867, when Dostoevsky began work on what was to become
'The Idiot', he was living in Switzerland with his new wife Anna
Grigoryevna, having left Russia in order to escape his creditors. They
were living in extreme poverty, and constantly had to borrow money or
pawn their possessions. They were evicted from their lodgings five
times for non-payment of rent, and by the time the novel was finished
in January 1869 they had moved between four different cities in
Switzerland and Italy. During this time Dostoevsky periodically fell
into the grip of his gambling addiction and lost what little money
they had on the roulette tables. He was subject to regular and severe
epileptic seizures, including one while Anna was going into labor with
their daughter Sofia, delaying their ability to go for a midwife. The
baby died aged only three months, and Dostoevsky blamed himself for
the loss.
Dostoevsky's notebooks of 1867 reveal deep uncertainty as to the
direction he was taking with the novel. Detailed plot outlines and
character sketches were made, but were quickly abandoned and replaced
with new ones. In one early draft, the character who was to become
Prince Myshkin is an evil man who commits a series of terrible crimes,
including the rape of his adopted sister (Nastasya Filippovna), and
who only arrives at goodness by way of his conversion through Christ.
By the end of the year, however, a new premise had been firmly
adopted. In a letter to Apollon Maykov, Dostoevsky explained that his
own desperate circumstances had "forced" him to seize on an idea that
he had considered for some time but had been afraid of, feeling
himself to be artistically unready for it. This was the idea to
"depict a completely beautiful human being". Rather than bring a man
to goodness, he wanted to start with a man who was already a truly
Christian soul, someone who is essentially innocent and deeply
compassionate, and test him against the psychological, social, and
political complexities of the modern Russian world. It was not only a
matter of how the good man responded to that world, but of how it
responded to him. Devising a series of scandalous scenes, he would
"examine each character's emotions and record what each would do in
response to Myshkin and to the other characters." The difficulty with
this approach was that he himself did not know in advance how the
characters were going to respond, and thus he was unable to pre-plan
the plot or structure of the novel. Nonetheless, in January 1868 the
first chapters of 'The Idiot' were sent off to 'The Russian
Messenger'.
Part 1
========
Prince Myshkin, a young man in his mid-twenties and a descendant of
one of the oldest Russian lines of nobility, is on a train to Saint
Petersburg on a cold November morning. He is returning to Russia
having spent the past four years in a Swiss clinic for treatment of a
severe epileptic condition. On the journey, Myshkin meets a young man
of the merchant class, Parfyon Semyonovich Rogozhin, and is struck by
his passionate intensity, particularly in relation to a woman--the
dazzling society beauty Nastasya Filippovna Barashkova--with whom he
is obsessed. Rogozhin has just inherited a very large fortune due to
the death of his father, and he intends to use it to pursue the object
of his desire. Joining in their conversation is a civil servant named
Lebedyev--a man with a profound knowledge of social trivia and gossip.
Realizing who Rogozhin is, Lebedyev firmly attaches himself to him.
The purpose of Myshkin's trip is to make the acquaintance of his
distant relative Lizaveta Prokofyevna, and to make inquiries about a
matter of business. Lizaveta Prokofyevna is married to General
Epanchin, a wealthy and respected man in his mid-fifties. When the
Prince calls on them he meets Gavril Ardalionovich Ivolgin (Ganya),
the General's assistant. The General and his business partner, the
aristocrat Totsky, are seeking to arrange a marriage between Ganya and
Nastasya Filippovna. Totsky had been the orphaned Nastasya
Filippovna's childhood guardian, but he had taken advantage of his
position to groom her for his own sexual gratification. As a grown
woman, Nastasya Filippovna has developed an incisive and merciless
insight into their relationship. Totsky, thinking the marriage might
settle her and free him to pursue his desire for marriage with General
Epanchin's eldest daughter, has promised 75,000 rubles. Nastasya
Filippovna, suspicious of Ganya and aware that his family does not
approve of her, has reserved her decision, but has promised to
announce it that evening at her birthday soirée. Ganya and the General
openly discuss the subject in front of Myshkin. Ganya shows him a
photograph of her, and he is particularly struck by the dark beauty of
her face.
Myshkin makes the acquaintance of Lizaveta Prokofyevna and her three
daughters--Alexandra, Adelaida and Aglaya. They are all very curious
about him and not shy about expressing their opinion, particularly
Aglaya. He readily engages with them and speaks with remarkable candor
on a wide variety of subjects--his illness, his impressions of
Switzerland, art, philosophy, love, death, the brevity of life,
capital punishment, and donkeys. In response to their request that he
speak of the time he was in love, he tells a long anecdote from his
time in Switzerland about a downtrodden woman--Marie--whom he
befriended, along with a group of children, when she was unjustly
ostracized and morally condemned. The Prince ends by describing what
he divines about each of their characters from studying their faces
and surprises them by saying that Aglaya is almost as beautiful as
Nastasya Filippovna.
The prince rents a room in the Ivolgin apartment, occupied by Ganya's
family and another lodger called Ferdyschenko. There is much angst
within Ganya's family about the proposed marriage, which is regarded,
particularly by his mother and sister (Varya), as shameful. Just as a
quarrel on the subject is reaching a peak of tension, Nastasya
Filippovna herself arrives to pay a visit to her potential new family.
Shocked and embarrassed, Ganya succeeds in introducing her, but when
she bursts into a prolonged fit of laughter at the look on his face,
his expression transforms into one of murderous hatred. The Prince
intervenes to calm him down, and Ganya's rage is diverted toward him
in a violent gesture. The tension is not eased by the entrance of
Ganya's father, General Ivolgin, a drunkard with a tendency to tell
elaborate lies. Nastasya Filippovna flirtatiously encourages the
General and then mocks him. Ganya's humiliation is compounded by the
arrival of Rogozhin, accompanied by a rowdy crowd of drunks and
rogues, Lebedyev among them. Rogozhin openly starts bidding for
Nastasya Filippovna, ending with an offer of a hundred thousand
rubles. With the scene assuming increasingly scandalous proportions,
Varya angrily demands that someone remove the "shameless woman". Ganya
seizes his sister's arm, and she responds, to Nastasya Filippovna's
delight, by spitting in his face. He is about to strike her when the
Prince again intervenes, and Ganya slaps him violently in the face.
Everyone is deeply shocked, including Nastasya Filippovna, and she
struggles to maintain her mocking aloofness as the others seek to
comfort the Prince. Myshkin admonishes her and tells her it is not who
she really is. She apologizes to Ganya's mother and leaves, telling
Ganya to be sure to come to her birthday party that evening. Rogozhin
and his retinue go off to raise the 100,000 rubles.
Among the guests at the party are Totsky, General Epanchin, Ganya, his
friend Ptitsyn (Varya's fiancé), and Ferdyshchenko, who, with Nastasya
Filippovna's approval, plays the role of cynical buffoon. With the
help of Ganya's younger brother Kolya, the Prince arrives, uninvited.
To enliven the party, Ferdyshchenko suggests a game where everyone
must recount the story of the worst thing they have ever done. Others
are shocked at the proposal, but Nastasya Filippovna is enthusiastic.
When it comes to Totsky's turn he tells a long but innocuous anecdote
from the distant past. Disgusted, Nastasya Filippovna turns to Myshkin
and demands his advice on whether or not to marry Ganya. Myshkin
advises her not to, and Nastasya Filippovna, to the dismay of Totsky,
General Epanchin and Ganya, firmly announces that she is following
this advice. At this point, Rogozhin and his followers arrive with the
promised 100,000 rubles. Nastasya Filipovna is preparing to leave with
him, exploiting the scandalous scene to humiliate Totsky, when Myshkin
himself offers to marry her. He speaks gently and sincerely, and in
response to incredulous queries about what they will live on, produces
a document indicating that he will soon be receiving a large
inheritance. Though surprised and deeply touched, Nastasya Filipovna,
after throwing the 100,000 rubles in the fire and telling Ganya they
are his if he wants to get them out, chooses to leave with Rogozhin.
Myshkin follows them.
Part 2
========
For the next six months, Nastasya Filippovna remains unsettled and is
torn between Myshkin and Rogozhin. Myshkin is tormented by her
suffering, and Rogozhin is tormented by her love for Myshkin and her
disdain for his own claims on her. Returning to Petersburg, the Prince
visits Rogozhin's house. Myshkin becomes increasingly horrified at
Rogozhin's attitude to her. Rogozhin confesses to beating her in a
jealous rage and raises the possibility of cutting her throat. Despite
the tension between them, they part as friends, with Rogozhin even
making a gesture of concession. But the Prince remains troubled and
for the next few hours he wanders the streets, immersed in intense
contemplation. He suspects that Rogozhin is watching him and returns
to his hotel where Rogozhin--who has been hiding in the
stairway--attacks him with a knife. At the same moment, the Prince is
struck down by a violent epileptic seizure, and Rogozhin flees in a
panic.
Recovering, Myshkin joins Lebedyev (from whom he is renting a dacha)
in the summer resort town Pavlovsk. He knows that Nastasya Filippovna
is in Pavlovsk and that Lebedyev is aware of her movements and plans.
The Epanchins, who are also in Pavlovsk, visit the Prince. They are
joined by their friend Yevgeny Pavlovich Radomsky, a handsome and
wealthy military officer with a particular interest in Aglaya. Aglaya,
however, is more interested in the Prince, and to Myshkin's
embarrassment and everyone else's amusement, she recites Pushkin's
poem "The Poor Knight" in a reference to his noble efforts to save
Nastasya Filippovna.
The Epanchins' visit is rudely interrupted by the arrival of
Burdovsky, a young man who claims to be the illegitimate son of
Myshkin's late benefactor, Pavlishchev. The inarticulate Burdovsky is
supported by a group of insolent young men. These include the
consumptive seventeen-year-old Ippolit Terentyev, the nihilist
Doktorenko, and Keller, an ex-officer who, with the help of Lebedyev,
has written an article vilifying the Prince and Pavlishchev. They
demand money from Myshkin as a "just" reimbursement for Pavlishchev's
support, but their arrogant bravado is severely dented when Gavril
Ardalionovich, who has been researching the matter on Myshkin's
behalf, proves conclusively that the claim is false and that Burdovsky
has been deceived. The Prince tries to reconcile with the young men
and offers financial support anyway. Disgusted, Lizaveta Prokofyevna
loses all control and furiously attacks both parties. Ippolit laughs,
and Lizaveta Prokofyevna seizes him by the arm, causing him to break
into a prolonged fit of coughing. But he suddenly becomes calm,
informs them all that he is near death, and politely requests that he
be permitted to talk to them for a while. He awkwardly attempts to
express his need for their love, eventually bringing both himself and
Lizaveta Prokofyevna to the point of tears. But as the Prince and
Lizaveta Prokofyevna discuss what to do with the invalid, another
transformation occurs and Ippolit, after unleashing a torrent of abuse
at the Prince, leaves with the other young men. The Epanchins also
leave, both Lizaveta Prokofyevna and Aglaya deeply indignant with the
Prince. Only Yevgeny Pavlovich remains in good spirits, and he smiles
charmingly as he says good-bye. At that moment, a magnificent carriage
pulls up at the dacha, and the ringing voice of Nastasya Filippovna
calls out to Yevgeny Pavlovich. In a familiar tone, she tells him not
to worry about all the IOUs as Rogozhin has bought them up. The
carriage departs, leaving everyone, particularly Yevgeny Pavlovich and
the Prince, in a state of shock. Yevgeny Pavlovich claims to know
nothing about the debts, and Nastasya Filippovna's motives become a
subject of anxious speculation.
Part 3
========
Reconciling with Lizaveta Prokofyevna, the Prince visits the Epanchins
at their dacha. He is beginning to fall in love with Aglaya, and she
likewise appears to be fascinated by him, though she often mocks or
angrily reproaches him for his naiveté and excessive humility. Myshkin
joins Lizaveta Prokofyevna, her daughters and Yevgeny Pavlovich for a
walk to the park to hear the music. While listening to the
high-spirited conversation and watching Aglaya in a kind of daze, he
notices Rogozhin and Nastasya Filippovna in the crowd. Nastasya
Filippovna again addresses herself to Yevgeny Pavlovich, and in the
same jolly tone as before loudly informs him that his uncle--a wealthy
and respected old man from whom he is expecting a large
inheritance--has shot himself and that a huge sum of government money
is missing. Yevgeny Pavlovich stares at her in shock as Lizaveta
Prokofyevna makes a hurried exit with her daughters. Nastasya
Filippovna hears an officer friend of Yevgeny Pavlovich suggest that a
whip is needed for women like her, and she responds by grabbing a
riding-whip from a bystander and striking the officer across the face
with it. He tries to attack her but Myshkin restrains him, for which
he is violently pushed. Rogozhin, after making a mocking comment to
the officer, leads Nastasya Filippovna away. The officer recovers his
composure, addresses himself to Myshkin, politely confirms his name,
and leaves.
Myshkin follows the Epanchins back to their dacha, where eventually
Aglaya finds him alone on the verandah. To his surprise, she begins to
talk to him very earnestly about duels and how to load a pistol. They
are interrupted by General Epanchin who wants Myshkin to walk with
him. Aglaya slips a note into Myshkin's hand as they leave. The
General is greatly agitated by the effect Nastasya Filippovna's
behavior is having on his family, particularly since her information
about Yevgeny Pavlovich's uncle has turned out to be completely
correct. When the General leaves, Myshkin reads Aglaya's note, which
is an urgent request to meet her secretly the following morning. His
reflections are interrupted by Keller who has come to offer to be his
second at the duel that will inevitably follow from the incident that
morning, but Myshkin merely laughs heartily and invites Keller to
visit him to drink champagne. Keller departs and Rogozhin appears. He
informs the Prince that Nastasya Filippovna wants to see him and that
she has been in correspondence with Aglaya. She is convinced that the
Prince is in love with Aglaya, and is seeking to bring them together.
Myshkin is perturbed by the information, but he remains in an
inexplicably happy frame of mind and speaks with forgiveness and
brotherly affection to Rogozhin. Remembering it will be his birthday
tomorrow, he persuades Rogozhin to join him for some wine.
They find that a large party has assembled at his home and that the
champagne is already flowing. Present are Lebedyev, his daughter Vera,
Ippolit, Burdovsky, Kolya, General Ivolgin, Ganya, Ptitsyn,
Ferdyshchenko, Keller, and, to Myshkin's surprise, Yevgeny Pavlovich,
who has come to ask for his friendship and advice. The guests greet
the Prince warmly and compete for his attention. Stimulated by
Lebedyev's eloquence, everyone engages for some time in intelligent
and inebriated disputation on lofty subjects, but the good-humoured
atmosphere begins to dissipate when Ippolit suddenly produces a large
envelope and announces that it contains an essay he has written which
he now intends to read to them. The essay is a painfully detailed
description of the events and thoughts leading him to what he calls
his 'final conviction': that suicide is the only possible way to
affirm his will in the face of nature's invincible laws, and that
consequently he will be shooting himself at sunrise. The reading drags
on for over an hour and by its end the sun has risen. Most of his
audience, however, are bored and resentful, apparently not at all
concerned that he is about to shoot himself. Only Vera, Kolya,
Burdovsky, and Keller seek to restrain him. He distracts them by
pretending to abandon the plan, then suddenly pulls out a small
pistol, puts it to his temple and pulls the trigger. There is a click
but no shot: Ippolit faints but is not killed. It turns out that he
had taken out the cap earlier and forgotten to put it back in. Ippolit
is devastated and tries desperately to convince everyone that it was
an accident. Eventually he falls asleep and the party disperses.
The Prince wanders for some time in the park before falling asleep at
the green seat appointed by Aglaya as their meeting place. Her
laughter wakes him from an unhappy dream about Nastasya Filippovna.
They talk for a long time about the letters Aglaya has received, in
which Nastasya Filippovna writes that she herself is in love with
Aglaya and passionately beseeches her to marry Myshkin. Aglaya
interprets this as evidence that Nastasya Filippovna is in love with
him herself, and demands that Myshkin explain his feelings toward her.
Myshkin replies that Nastasya Filippovna is insane, that he only feels
profound compassion and is not in love with her, but admits that he
has come to Pavlovsk for her sake. Aglaya becomes angry, demands that
he throw the letters back in her face, and storms off. Myshkin reads
the letters with dread, and later that day Nastasya Filippovna herself
appears to him, asking desperately if he is happy, and telling him she
is going away and will not write any more letters. Rogozhin escorts
her.
Part 4
========
It is clear to Lizaveta Prokofyevna and General Epanchin that their
daughter is in love with the Prince, but Aglaya denies this and
angrily dismisses talk of marriage. She continues to mock and reproach
him, often in front of others, and lets slip that, as far as she is
concerned, the problem of Nastasya Filippovna is yet to be resolved.
Myshkin himself merely experiences an uncomplicated joy in her
presence and is mortified when she appears to be angry with him.
Lizaveta Prokofyevna feels it is time to introduce the Prince to their
aristocratic circle and a dinner party is arranged for this purpose,
to be attended by a number of eminent persons. Aglaya, who does not
share her parents' respect for these people and is afraid that
Myshkin's eccentricity will not meet with their approval, tries to
tell him how to behave, but ends by sarcastically telling him to be as
eccentric as he likes, and to be sure to wave his arms about when he
is pontificating on some high-minded subject and break her mother's
priceless Chinese vase. Feeling her anxiety, Myshkin too becomes
extremely anxious, but he tells her that it is nothing compared to the
joy he feels in her company. He tries to approach the subject of
Nastasya Filippovna again, but she silences him and hurriedly leaves.
For a while the dinner party proceeds smoothly. Inexperienced in the
ways of the aristocracy, Myshkin is deeply impressed by the elegance
and good humour of the company, unsuspicious of its superficiality. It
turns out that one of those present--Ivan Petrovich--is a relative of
his beloved benefactor Pavlishchev, and the Prince becomes
extraordinarily enthusiastic. But when Ivan Petrovich mentions that
Pavlishchev ended by giving up everything and going over to the Roman
Catholic Church, Myshkin is horrified. He launches unexpectedly into
an anti-Catholic tirade, claiming that it preaches the Antichrist and
in its quest for political supremacy has given birth to Atheism.
Everyone present is shocked and several attempts are made to stop or
divert him, but he only becomes more animated. At the height of his
fervor he begins waving his arms about and knocks over the priceless
Chinese vase, smashing it to pieces. As Myshkin emerges from his
profound astonishment, the general horror turns to amusement and
concern for his health. But it is only temporary, and he soon begins
another spontaneous discourse, this time on the subject of the
aristocracy in Russia, once again becoming oblivious to all attempts
to quell his ardour. The speech is only brought to an end by the onset
of an epileptic seizure: Aglaya, deeply distressed, catches him in her
arms as he falls. He is taken home, having left a decidedly negative
impression on the guests.
The next day Ippolit visits the Prince to inform him that he and
others (such as Lebedyev and Ganya) have been intriguing against him,
and have been unsettling Aglaya with talk of Nastasya Filippovna.
Ippolit has arranged, at Aglaya's request and with Rogozhin's help, a
meeting between the two women. That evening Aglaya, having left her
home in secret, calls for the Prince. They proceed in silence to the
appointed meeting place, where both Nastasya Filippovna and Rogozhin
are already present. It soon becomes apparent that Aglaya has not come
there to discuss anything, but to chastise and humiliate Nastasya
Filippovna, and a bitter exchange of accusations and insults ensues.
Nastasya Filippovna orders Rogozhin to leave and hysterically demands
of Myshkin that he stay with her. Myshkin, once again torn by her
suffering, is unable to deny her and reproaches Aglaya for her attack.
Aglaya looks at him with pain and hatred, and runs off. He goes after
her but Nastasya Filippovna stops him desperately and then faints.
Myshkin stays with her.
In accordance with Nastasya Filippovna's wish, she and the Prince
become engaged. Public opinion is highly critical of Myshkin's actions
toward Aglaya, and the Epanchins break off all relations with him. He
tries to explain to Yevgeny Pavlovich that Nastasya Filippovna is a
broken soul, that he must stay with her or she will probably die, and
that Aglaya will understand if he is only allowed to talk to her.
Yevgeny Pavlovich refuses to facilitate any contact between them and
suspects that Myshkin himself is mad.
On the day of the wedding, a beautifully attired Nastasya Filippovna
is met by Keller and Burdovsky, who are to escort her to the church
where Myshkin is waiting. A large crowd has gathered, among whom is
Rogozhin. Seeing him, Nastasya Filippovna rushes to him and tells him
hysterically to take her away, which Rogozhin loses no time in doing.
The Prince, though shaken, is not particularly surprised at this
development. For the remainder of the day he calmly fulfills his
social obligations to guests and members of the public. The following
morning he takes the first train to Petersburg and goes to Rogozhin's
house, but he is told by servants that there is no one there. After
several hours of fruitless searching, he returns to the hotel he was
staying at when he last encountered Rogozhin in Petersburg. Rogozhin
appears and asks him to come back to the house. They enter the house
in secret and Rogozhin leads him to the dead body of Nastasya
Filippovna: he has stabbed her through the heart. The two men keep
vigil over the body, which Rogozhin has laid out in his study.
Rogozhin is sentenced to fifteen years hard labor in Siberia. Myshkin
goes mad and, through the efforts of Yevgeny Pavlovich, returns to the
sanatorium in Switzerland. The Epanchins go abroad and Aglaya elopes
with a wealthy, exiled Polish count who later is discovered to be
neither wealthy, nor a count, nor an exile--at least, not a political
exile--and who, along with a Roman Catholic priest, has turned her
against her family.
Major characters
==================
:'(For further discussion of the major characters see Prince Myshkin)'
Prince Myshkin, the novel's central character, is a young man who has
returned to Russia after a long period abroad where he was receiving
treatment for epilepsy. The lingering effects of the illness, combined
with his innocence and lack of social experience, sometimes create the
superficial and completely false impression of mental or psychological
deficiency. Most of the other characters at one time or another refer
to him disparagingly as an "idiot", but nearly all of them are deeply
affected by him. In truth he is highly intelligent, self-aware,
intuitive, and empathic. He is someone who has thought deeply about
human nature, morality and spirituality, and is capable of expressing
those thoughts with great clarity.
Nastasya Filippovna, the main female protagonist, is darkly beautiful,
intelligent, fierce, and mocking. She is an intimidating figure to
most of the other characters. Of noble birth but orphaned at age 7,
she was manipulated into a position of sexual servitude by her
guardian, the voluptuary Totsky. Her broken innocence and the social
perception of disgrace produce an intensely emotional and destructive
personality. The Prince is deeply moved by her beauty and her
suffering, and despite feeling that she is insane, remains devoted to
her. She is torn between Myshkin's compassion and Rogozhin's obsession
with her.
Rogózhin (Parfyón Semyónovich), who has just inherited a huge fortune
from his merchant father, is madly in love with Nastasya Filippovna,
and recklessly abandons himself to pursuing her. He instinctively
likes and trusts the Prince when they first meet, but later develops a
hatred for him out of jealousy. The character represents passionate,
instinctive love, as opposed to Myshkin's Christian love based in
compassion.
Agláya Ivánovna is the radiantly beautiful youngest daughter of
Myshkin's distant relative Lizaveta Prokofyevna and her husband, the
wealthy and respected General Epanchin. Aglaya is proud, commanding,
and impatient, but also full of arch humour, laughter, and innocence.
The Prince is particularly drawn to her after the darkness of his time
with Nastasya Filippovna and Rogozhin.
Ippolít Teréntyev is a young nihilist intellectual who is in the final
stages of tuberculosis and near death. Still full of youthful
idealism, he craves love and recognition from others, but their
indifference and his own morbid self-obsession lead him to increasing
extremes of cynicism and defiance. The character is a "quasi-double"
for Myshkin: their circumstances force them to address the same
metaphysical questions, but their responses are diametrically opposed.
Other characters
==================
*Gánya (Gavríl Ardaliónovich) - a capable but extremely vain and
avaricious young man, he offers himself in marriage to Nastasya
Filippovna, whom he secretly hates, on the promise of riches from
Totsky, but she rejects and humiliates him. He also tries to compete
with Myshkin for Aglaya's affections. A mediocre man who is resentful
of his own lack of originality, Ganya represents love from vanity, and
is contrasted with Myshkin and Rogozhin.
*Lébedyev (Lukyán Timoféevich) - a roguish drunkard whose restless
curiosity and petty ambition have made him into a kind of repository
of social information. He uses this to ingratiate himself with
superiors, and to pursue various schemes and intrigues. His unpleasant
tendencies are offset to some extent by a mischievous sense of humour,
a sharp intellect, and occasional bouts of abject self-condemnation
and compassion for others.
*Lizavéta Prokófyevna - Aglaya's mother and Myshkin's distant
relative. Though child-like in the spontaneity of her emotions, she is
strong-willed and imperious, particularly about matters of honour and
morality. Myshkin considers her and Aglaya to be very alike.
*General Iván Fyódorovich Epanchín - Aglaya's father.
*Alexándra Ivánovna - Aglaya's sister, eldest daughter of Ivan
Fyodorovich and Lizaveta Prokofyevna.
*Adelaída Ivánovna - Aglaya's sister, second daughter of Ivan
Fyodorovich and Lizaveta Prokofyevna.
*Prince Shch. (or Prince S) - a "liberal" aristocrat who marries
Adelaida Ivanovna.
*Yevgény Pávlovich Radómsky - a handsome military officer who is a
close friend of the Epanchins. His rumoured interest in Aglaya leads
Nastasya Filippovna (who wants to bring Aglaya and the Prince
together) to publicly expose some unsavoury aspects of his background.
Despite this, he and the Prince become friends and have a mutual
respect for each other's intelligence.
*Afanásy Ivánovich Tótsky - a wealthy aristocrat and libertine, a
friend and business associate of General Epanchin. He is the former
guardian of Nastasya Filippovna.
*General Ívolgin (Ardalión Alexándrovich) - Ganya's father, a highly
honourable man, but a drunkard and mythomaniac. He is the subject of a
subplot in Part 4, involving the theft of 400 rubles from Lebedyev.
*Nína Alexándrovna - General Ivolgin's long-suffering wife, and mother
of Ganya, Varya and Kolya.
*Kólya (Nikolay Ardaliónovich) - Ganya's younger brother. He is a
friend of Ippolit's, and also becomes a friend and confidant of the
Prince.
*Várya (Varvára Ardaliónovna) - Ganya's sister.
*Iván Petróvich Ptítsyn - Ganya's friend and Varya's husband.
*Ferdýshchenko - a lodger with the Ivolgins, a drunkard whose
inappropriate manner and coarse but cutting wit is valued by Nastasya
Filippovna.
*Antíp Burdóvsky - a young man who mistakenly thinks he is the
illegitimate son of Myshkin's benefactor Pavlishchev. He begins by
aggressively demanding money from the Prince, but later becomes an
admirer.
*Kéller - a retired Lieutenant, initially one of Rogozhin's crew, he
becomes an associate of Ippolit and Burdovsky and writes a slanderous
article about the Prince. He later develops a great admiration for the
Prince and seeks to defend him.
*Doktorenko - Lebedyev's nephew, a nihilist who, along with Ippolit,
leads Burdovsky's attack on the Prince.
*Véra Lukyánovna - Lebedyev's daughter.
Atheism and Christianity in Russia
====================================
A dialogue between the intimately related themes of atheism and
Christian faith (meaning, for Dostoevsky, Russian Orthodoxy) pervades
the entire novel. Dostoevsky's personal image of Christian faith,
formed prior to his philosophical engagement with Orthodoxy but never
abandoned, was one that emphasized the human need for belief in the
immortality of the soul, and identified Christ with ideals of "beauty,
truth, brotherhood and Russia". The character of Prince Myshkin was
originally intended to be an embodiment of this "lofty (Russian)
Christian idea". With the character's immersion in the increasingly
materialistic and atheistic world of late 19th century Russia, the
idea is constantly being elaborated, tested in every scene and against
every other character. However, Myshkin's Christianity is not a
doctrine or a set of beliefs but is something that he lives
spontaneously in his relations with all others. Whenever he appears
"hierarchical barriers between people suddenly become penetrable, an
inner contact is formed between them... His personality possesses the
peculiar capacity to relativize everything that disunifies people and
imparts a 'false seriousness' to life."
The young nihilist Ippolit Terentyev is the character that provides
the most coherent articulation of the atheist challenge to Myshkin's
worldview, most notably in the long essay "An Essential Explanation"
which he reads to the gathering at the Prince's birthday celebration
in part 3 of the novel. Here he picks up a motif first touched upon
early in part 2, in a dialogue between Myshkin and Rogozhin, when they
are contemplating the copy of Holbein's 'Dead Christ' in Rogozhin's
house, and Rogozhin confesses that the painting is eroding his faith.
Holbein's painting held a particular significance for Dostoevsky
because he saw in it his own impulse "to confront Christian faith with
everything that negated it". The character of Ippolit argues that the
painting, which depicts with unflinching realism the tortured, already
putrefying corpse of Christ within the tomb, represents the triumph of
blind nature over the vision of immortality in God that Christ's
existence on Earth signified. He is unable to share Myshkin's
intuition of the harmonious unity of all Being, an intuition evoked
most intensely earlier in the novel in a description of the
pre-epileptic aura. Consequently, the inexorable laws of nature appear
to Ippolit as something monstrous, particularly in the light of his
own approaching death from tuberculosis: "It is as though this
painting were the means by which this idea of a dark, brazen and
senseless eternal force, to which everything is subordinate, is
expressed... I remember someone taking me by the arm, a candle in his
hands, and showing me some sort of enormous and repulsive tarantula,
assuring me that this was that same dark, blind and all-powerful
creature, and laughing at my indignation." The Prince does not
directly engage with Ippolit's atheistic arguments, as a religious
ideologist might: rather, he recognizes Ippolit as a kindred spirit,
and empathetically perceives his youthful struggle with both his own
inner negation and the cruelty, irony, and indifference of the world
around him.
Catholicism
=============
The Prince's Christianity, insofar as he is the embodiment of the
"Russian Christian idea", explicitly excludes Roman Catholicism. His
unexpected tirade at the Epanchins' dinner party is based in
unequivocal assertions that Roman Catholicism is "an unChristian
faith", that it preaches the Antichrist, and that its appropriation
and distortion of Christ's teaching into a basis for the attainment of
political supremacy has given birth to atheism. The Roman Catholic
Church, he claims, is merely a continuation of the Western Roman
Empire: cynically exploiting the person and teaching of Christ it has
installed itself on the earthly throne and taken up the sword to
entrench and expand its power. This is a betrayal of the true teaching
of Christ, a teaching that transcends the lust for earthly power
(Satan's third temptation to Christ), and speaks directly to the
individual's and the people's highest emotions--those that spring from
what Myshkin calls "spiritual thirst". Atheism and socialism are a
reaction, born of profound disillusionment, to the Roman Catholic
Church's defilement of its own moral and spiritual authority.
It is because of this "spiritual thirst" that Myshkin is so
uncompromisingly scathing about the influence of Roman Catholicism and
atheism in Russia. The Russian, he claims, not only feels this thirst
with great urgency, but is, by virtue of it, particularly susceptible
to false faiths: "In our country if a man goes over to Catholicism, he
unfailingly becomes a Jesuit, and one of the most clandestine sort, at
that; if he becomes an atheist, he will at once begin to demand the
eradication of belief in God by coercion, that is, by the sword... It
is not from vanity alone, not from mere sordid vain emotions that
Russian atheists and Russian Jesuits proceed, but from a spiritual
pain, a spiritual thirst, a yearning for something more exalted, for a
firm shore, a motherland in which they have ceased to believe..."
The theme of the maleficent influence of Catholicism on the Russian
soul is expressed, in a less obvious and polemical way, through the
character of Aglaya Epanchin. Passionate and idealistic, like "the
Russian" alluded to in the anti-Catholic diatribe, Aglaya struggles
with the ennui of middle class mediocrity and hates the moral vacuity
of the aristocracy to whom her parents kowtow. Her "yearning for the
exalted" has attracted her to militant Catholicism, and in the
Prince's devotion to Nastasya Filippovna she sees the heroism of a
Crusader-Knight abandoning everything to go in to battle for his
Christian ideal. She is deeply angry when, instead of "defending
himself triumphantly" against his enemies (Ippolit and his nihilist
friends), he tries to make peace with them and offers assistance.
Aglaya's tendency to misinterpret Myshkin's motives leads to fractures
in what is otherwise a blossoming of innocent love. When the Epanchins
go abroad after the final catastrophe, Aglaya, under the influence of
a Roman Catholic priest, abandons her family and elopes with a Polish
count.
Innocence and guilt
=====================
In his notes Dostoevsky distinguishes the Prince from other characters
of the virtuous type in fiction (such as Don Quixote and Pickwick) by
emphasizing innocence rather than comicality. In one sense Myshkin's
innocence is an instrument of satire since it brings in to sharp
relief the corruption and egocentricity of those around him. But his
innocence is serious rather than comical, and he has a deeper insight
into the psychology of human beings in general by assuming its
presence in everyone else, even as they laugh at him, or try to
deceive and exploit him. Examples of this combination of innocence and
insight can be found in Myshkin's interactions with virtually all the
other characters. He explains it himself in an episode with the
roguish but 'honourable' Keller, who has confessed that he has sought
the Prince out for motives that are simultaneously noble (he wants
spiritual guidance) and mercenary (he wants to borrow a large sum of
money from him). The Prince guesses that he has come to borrow money
before he has even mentioned it, and unassumingly engages him in a
conversation about the psychological oddity of 'double thoughts': Two
thoughts coincided, that very often happens... I think it's a bad
thing and, you know, Keller, I reproach myself most of all for it.
What you told me just now could have been about me. I've even
sometimes thought that all human beings are like that, because it's
terribly difficult to fight those 'double thoughts'... At any rate, I
am not your judge... You used cunning to coax money out of me by means
of tears, but you yourself swear that your confession had a different
aim, a noble one; as for the money, you need it to go on a drinking
spree, don't you? And after such a confession that's weakness of
course. But how can one give up drinking sprees in a single moment?
It's impossible. So what is to be done? It is best to leave it to your
own conscience, what do you think?
Aglaya Ivanovna, despite her occasional fury at his apparent
passivity, understands this aspect of Myshkin's innocence, and
expresses it in their conversation at the green seat when she speaks
of the "two parts of the mind: one that's important and one that's not
important".
Nastasya Filippovna is a character who embodies the internal struggle
between innocence and guilt. Isolated and sexually exploited by Totsky
from the age of sixteen, Nastasya Filippovna has inwardly embraced her
social stigmatization as a corrupted 'fallen woman', but this
conviction is intimately bound to its opposite--the victimized child's
sense of a broken innocence that longs for vindication. The
combination produces a cynical and destructive outer persona, which
disguises a fragile and deeply hurt inner being. When the Prince
speaks to her, he addresses only this inner being, and in him she sees
and hears the long dreamt-of affirmation of her innocence. But the
self-destructive voice of her guilt, so intimately bound to the
longing for innocence, does not disappear as a result, and constantly
reasserts itself. Myshkin divines that in her constant reiteration of
her shame there is a "dreadful, unnatural pleasure, as if it were a
revenge on someone." Its principal outward form is the repeated choice
to submit herself to Rogozhin's obsession with her, knowing that its
end result will almost certainly be her own death.
The theme of the intrapsychic struggle between innocence and guilt is
manifested, in idiosyncratic forms, in many of the characters in the
novel. The character of General Ivolgin, for example, constantly tells
outrageous lies, but to those who understand him (such as Myshkin,
Lebedyev, and Kolya) he is the noblest and most honest of men. He
commits a theft out of weakness, but is so overcome by shame that it
helps precipitate a stroke. Lebedyev is constantly plotting and
swindling, but he is also deeply religious, and is periodically
overcome by paroxysms of guilt-ridden self-loathing. Myshkin himself
has a strong tendency to feel ashamed of his own thoughts and actions.
The fact that Rogozhin reaches the point of attacking him with a knife
is something for which he feels himself to be equally guilty because
his own half-conscious suspicions were the same as Rogozhin's
half-conscious impulse. When Burdovsky, who has unceremoniously
demanded money from him on the basis of a falsehood, gets increasingly
insulted by his attempts to offer assistance, Myshkin reproaches
himself for his own clumsiness and lack of tact.
Capital punishment
====================
In 1849, Dostoevsky was sentenced to execution by firing squad for his
part in the activities of the Petrashevsky Circle. Shortly after the
period of interrogation and trial, he and his fellow prisoners were
taken, without warning, to Semyonovsky Square where the sentence of
death was read out over them. The first three prisoners were tied to
stakes facing the firing squad: Dostoevsky was among the next in line.
Just as the first shots were about to be fired, a message arrived from
the Tsar commuting the sentences to hard labor in Siberia.
The experience had a profound effect on Dostoevsky, and in Part 1 of
'The Idiot' (written twenty years after the event) the character of
Prince Myshkin repeatedly speaks in depth on the subject of capital
punishment. On one occasion, conversing with the Epanchin women, he
recounts an anecdote that exactly mirrors Dostoevsky's own experience.
A man of 27, who had committed a political offence, was taken to the
scaffold with his comrades, where a death sentence by firing squad was
read out to them. Twenty minutes later, with all the preparations for
the execution having been completed, they were unexpectedly reprieved,
but for those twenty minutes the man lived with the complete certainty
that he was soon to face sudden death. According to this man, the mind
recoils so powerfully against the reality of its imminent death that
the experience of time itself is radically altered. The mind speeds up
exponentially as the moment approaches, causing time to expand
correspondingly, even reaching the point where the tiny amount of
conventional human time left is experienced inwardly as unbearable in
its enormity. Eventually, the man said, he "longed to be shot
quickly".
The subject of capital punishment first comes up earlier in Part 1,
when the Prince is waiting with a servant for General Epanchin to
appear. Engaging the servant in conversation, the Prince tells the
harrowing story of an execution by guillotine that he recently
witnessed in France. He concludes the description with his own
reflections on the horror of death by execution: ... the worst, most
violent pain lies not in injuries, but in the fact that you know for
certain that within the space of an hour, then ten minutes, then half
a minute, then now, right at this moment--your soul will fly out of
your body, and you'll no longer be a human being, and that this is
certain; the main thing is that it is 'certain'. When you put your
head right under the guillotine and hear it sliding above your head,
it's that quarter of a second that's most terrible of all... Who can
say that human nature is able to endure such a thing without going
mad? Why such mockery--ugly, superfluous, futile? Perhaps the man
exists to whom his sentence has been read out, has been allowed to
suffer, and then been told: "off you go, you've been pardoned". A man
like that could tell us perhaps. Such suffering and terror were what
Christ spoke of. No, a human being should not be treated like that!
Later, when he is conversing with the Epanchin sisters, the Prince
suggests to Adelaida, who has asked him for a subject to paint, that
she paint the face of a condemned man a minute before the guillotine
falls. He carefully explains his reasons for the suggestion, enters in
to the emotions and thoughts of the condemned man, and describes in
meticulous detail what the painting should depict. In this description
Myshkin takes the contemplation of the condemned man's inward
experience of time a step further and asks: what would the mind be
experiencing in the last tenth of a second, as it hears the iron blade
sliding above? And what would be experienced if, as some argue, the
mind continues for some time 'after' the head has been cut off? The
Prince breaks off without answering, but the implication is that the
victim experiences these "moments" of unspeakable terror as vast
stretches of time.
In part 2, the usually comical character of Lebedyev also considers
the horror of the moment before execution. In the midst of a heated
exchange with his nihilist nephew he expresses deep compassion for the
soul of the Countess du Barry, who died in terror on the guillotine
after pleading for her life with the executioner.
Epilepsy
==========
For much of his adult life Dostoevsky suffered from an unusual and at
times extremely debilitating form of temporal lobe epilepsy. In 1867
(the same year he began work on 'The Idiot') he wrote to his doctor:
"this epilepsy will end up by carrying me off... My memory has grown
completely dim. I don't recognize people anymore... I'm afraid of
going mad or falling into idiocy". Dostoevsky's attacks were preceded
by a brief period of intense joyous mystical experience which he
described as being worth years of his life, or perhaps even his whole
life. A similar illness plays an important part in the
characterization of Prince Myshkin, partly because the severity of the
condition and its after-effects (disorientation, amnesia, aphasia,
among others) contributes significantly to the myth of the character's
"idiocy".
Although Myshkin himself is completely aware that he is not an "idiot"
in any pejorative sense, he sometimes concedes the aptness of the word
in relation to his mental state during particularly severe attacks. He
occasionally makes reference to the pre-narrative period prior to his
confinement in a Swiss sanatorium, when the symptoms were chronic and
he really was "almost an idiot". Paradoxically, it is also clear that
aspects of the disease are intimately connected to a profound
'intensification' of his mental faculties, and are a significant cause
of the development of his higher spiritual preoccupations: ...there
was a certain stage almost immediately before the fit itself when,
amidst the sadness, the mental darkness, the pressure, his brain
suddenly seemed to burst into flame, and with an extraordinary jolt
all his vital forces seemed to be tensed together. The sensation of
life and of self-awareness increased tenfold at those moments... The
mind, the heart were flooded with an extraordinary light; all his
unrest, all his doubts, all his anxieties were resolved into a kind of
higher calm, full of a serene, harmonious joy and hope. Although for
Myshkin these moments represented an intimation of the highest truth,
he also knew that "stupefaction, mental darkness, idiocy stood before
him as the consequence of these 'highest moments'." At the end of the
novel, after Rogozhin has murdered Nastasya Filippovna, the Prince
appears to descend completely into this darkness.
Mortality
===========
The consciousness of the inevitability of death and the effect that
this consciousness has on the living soul is a recurring theme in the
novel. A number of characters are shaped, each according to the nature
of their own self-consciousness, by their proximity to death. Most
notable in this respect are Prince Myshkin, Ippolit, Nastasya
Filippovna and Rogozhin.
The anecdote of the man reprieved from execution is an illustration,
drawn from the author's own experience, of the extraordinary value of
life as revealed in the moment of imminent death. The most terrible
realization for the condemned man, according to Myshkin, is that of a
wasted life, and he is consumed by the desperate desire for another
chance. After his reprieve, the man vows to live every moment of life
conscious of its infinite value (although he confesses to failing to
fulfil the vow). Through his own emergence from a prolonged period on
the brink of derangement, unconsciousness and death, the Prince
himself has awoken to the joyous wonder of life, and all his words,
moral choices and relations with others are guided by this fundamental
insight. Joseph Frank, drawing on the theology of Albert Schweitzer,
places the Prince's insight in the context of "the eschatological
tension that is the soul of the primitive Christian ethic, whose
doctrine of 'Agape' was conceived in the same perspective of the
imminent end of time." Myshkin asserts that in the ecstatic moment of
the pre-epileptic aura he is able to comprehend the extraordinary
phrase (from the Book of Revelation, 10:6): "'there shall be time no
longer'".
Like Myshkin, Ippolit is haunted by death and has a similar reverence
for the beauty and mystery of life, but his self-absorbed
atheist-nihilist worldview pushes him toward opposite conclusions.
While the Prince's worldview reflects the birth of his faith in a
higher world-harmony, Ippolit's concern with death develops into a
metaphysical resentment of nature's omnipotence, her utter
indifference to human suffering in general and to his own suffering in
particular. In the character of Ippolit, Dostoevsky again considers
the terrible dilemma of the condemned man. Ippolit speaks of his
illness as a "death sentence" and of himself as "a man condemned to
death". In his "Essential Explanation" he argues passionately that
meaningful action is impossible when one knows one is going to die.
The living soul absolutely requires that its future be open, not
pre-determined, and it rebels irrepressibly against the imposition of
a definite end. Ippolit conceives the idea of suicide as the only way
left to him of asserting his will in the face of nature's death
sentence.
Temporality
=============
Dostoevsky's notebooks for 'The Idiot' during the time of its serial
publication clearly indicate that he never knew what successive
installments would contain. The method of testing the central idea in
a series of extreme situations, allowing each character to freely
respond, meant that there could be no pre-determined development of
either plot or character: the author himself was just as surprised as
the characters at what happened or didn't happen. This uncontrived
approach to writing becomes, in the novel, a depiction of what Morson
calls "the openness of time". In the usual novel, the apparently free
acts of the characters are an illusion as they only serve to bring
about a future that has been contrived by the author. But in real
life, even with a belief in determinism or preordination, the subject
always assumes its freedom and acts as though the future were
unwritten. Dostoevsky's extemporaneous approach helped facilitate the
representation of the actual position of human subjectivity, as an
open field of possibility where the will is free at all times, despite
the apparent necessity of cause and effect. According to Mikhail
Bakhtin, "Dostoevsky always represents a person 'on the threshold' of
a final decision, at a moment of 'crisis', at an unfinalizable--and
'unpredeterminable'--turning point for their soul."
Carnivalization
=================
Bakhtin argues that Dostoevsky always wrote in opposition to modern
tendencies toward the "'reification' of man"--the turning of human
beings into objects (scientific, economic, social, etc.), enclosing
them in an alien web of definition and causation, robbing them of
freedom and responsibility. "Carnivalization" is a term used by
Bakhtin to describe the techniques Dostoevsky uses to disarm this
increasingly ubiquitous enemy and make true intersubjective dialogue
possible. The concept suggests an ethos where normal hierarchies,
social roles, proper behaviors and assumed truths are subverted in
favor of the "joyful relativity" of free participation in the
festival. In 'The Idiot', everything revolves around the two central
carnival figures of the "idiot" and the "madwoman", and consequently
"all of life is carnivalized, turned into a 'world inside out':
traditional plot situations radically change their meaning, there
develops a dynamic, carnivalistic play of sharp contrasts, unexpected
shifts and changes". Prince Myshkin and Nastasya Filippovna are
characters that inherently elude conventional social definition,
or--as Bakhtin puts it--anything that might limit their "'pure
humanness'". The carnival atmosphere that develops around them in each
situation and dialogue ("bright and joyous" in Myshkin's case, "dark
and infernal" in Nastasya Filippovna's) allows Dostoevsky to "expose a
different side of life to himself and to the reader, to spy upon and
depict in that life certain new, unknown depths and possibilities."
Polyphony
===========
Carnivalization helps generate the artistic phenomenon that Bakhtin
felt was unique to Dostoevsky in literature: Polyphony. Analogous to
musical polyphony, literary polyphony is the simultaneous presence of
multiple independent voices, each with its own truth and validity, but
always coincident with other voices, affecting them and being affected
by them. Bakhtin defines it as "the event of interaction between
autonomous and internally unfinalized consciousnesses". In the
polyphonic novel each character's voice speaks for itself: the
narrator and even the author are present in the narrative merely as
one voice among others. No voice has a privileged authority, and all
have a form that inherently expresses engagement with other voices.
Thus events unfold 'dialogically', as a consequence of the interaction
between discrete voices, not as a consequence of authorial design:
What unfolds... is not a multitude of characters and fates in a single
objective world, illuminated by a single authorial consciousness;
rather a 'plurality of consciousnesses, with equal rights and each
with its own world', combine but are not merged in the unity of the
event. Dostoevsky's major heroes are, by the very nature of his
creative design, 'not only objects of authorial discourse but also
subjects of their own directly signifying discourse'.
Narrator and author
=====================
Despite the appearance of omniscience, the narrator of 'The Idiot' is
given a distinct voice like any other character, and often conveys
only a partial understanding of the events he is describing. It is the
voice of a highly perceptive and meticulous 'reporter of the facts',
who has, despite this objectivity, a particular perspective on what he
is reporting, occasionally even lapsing into pontification. At one
point in his notes Dostoevsky admonishes himself to "write more
concisely: only the facts. Write in the sense of 'people say'..." The
narrator's resort to 'the facts' has the effect of "placing the facts
on the side of rumor and mystery rather than on the side of
description and explanation." The narrator is thus not omniscient, but
a particular kind of insightful but limited spectator, and in the end
he openly admits to the reader that the Prince's behaviour is
inexplicable to him. According to Frank, "this limitation of the
narrator is part of Dostoevsky's effort to present Myshkin's behaviour
as transcending 'all' the categories of worldly moral-social
experience."
For Bakhtin the narrator's voice is another participant, albeit of a
special kind, in the "great dialogue" that constitutes the Dostoevsky
novel. All voices, all ideas, once they enter the world of the novel,
take on an imaginary form that positions them in dialogical
relationship with the other voices and ideas. In this sense, even the
author's own ideological positions, when they are expressed through
the narrator, or Myshkin, or Lebedyev, "become thoroughly dialogized
and enter the great dialogue of the novel on 'completely equal terms'
with the other idea-images". Since the most important thing for
Dostoevsky in the construction of his novels is the dialogic
interaction of a multiplicity of voices, the author's discourse
"cannot encompass the hero and his word on all sides, cannot lock in
and finalize him from without. It can only address itself to him."
Reception
======================================================================
Critical reception of 'The Idiot' at the time of its publication in
Russia was almost uniformly negative. This was partly because a
majority of the reviewers considered themselves to be opposed to
Dostoevsky's "conservatism", and wished to discredit the book's
supposed political intentions. However the chief criticism, among both
reviewers and general readers, was in the "fantasticality" of the
characters. The radical critic D.I. Minaev wrote: "People meet, fall
in love, slap each other's face--and all at the author's first whim,
without any artistic truth." V.P. Burenin, a liberal, described the
novel's presentation of the younger generation as "the purest fruit of
the writer's subjective fancy" and the novel as a whole as "a
belletristic compilation, concocted from a multitude of absurd
personages and events, without any concern for any kind of artistic
objectivity." Leading radical critic Mikhail Saltykov-Schedrin
approved of Dostoevsky's attempt to depict the genuinely good man, but
castigated him for his scurrilous treatment of "the very people whose
efforts are directed at the very objective apparently pursued by
him... On the one hand there appear characters full of life and truth,
but on the other, some kind of mysterious puppets hopping about as
though in a dream..." Dostoevsky responded to Maykov's reports of the
prevailing 'fantastical' criticisms with an unashamed characterization
of his literary philosophy as "fantastic realism", and claimed that it
was far more real, taking contemporary developments in Russia in to
consideration, than the so-called realism of his detractors, and could
even be used to predict future events.
French and English translations were published in 1887, and a German
translation in 1889. European critical response was also largely
negative, mainly due to the novel's apparent formlessness and rambling
style. Morson notes that critics saw it as "a complete mess, as if it
were written extemporaneously, with no overall structure in mind--as,
in fact, it was." Typical of the western critics was the introduction
to the first French translation which, while praising the energetic
style and characterization, notes that "they are enveloped in a
fantastic mist and get lost in innumerable digressions."
Prominent modern critics acknowledge the novel's apparent structural
deficiencies, but also point out that the author was aware of them
himself, and that they were perhaps a natural consequence of the
experimental approach toward the central idea. Joseph Frank has called
'The Idiot' "perhaps the most original of Dostoevsky's great novels,
and certainly the most artistically uneven of them all," but he also
wondered how it was that the novel "triumphed so effortlessly over the
inconsistencies and awkwardnesses of its structure." Gary Saul Morson
observes that "'The Idiot' brings to mind the old saw about how,
according to the laws of physics, bumblebees should be unable to fly,
but bumblebees, not knowing physics, go on flying anyway."
The twentieth century Russian literary critic Mikhail Bakhtin regarded
the structural asymmetry and unpredictability of plot development, as
well as the perceived "fantasticality" of the characters, not as any
sort of deficiency, but as entirely consistent with Dostoevsky's
unique and groundbreaking literary method. Bakhtin saw Dostoevsky as
the preeminent exemplar of the Carnivalesque in literature, and as the
inventor of the polyphonic novel. A literary approach that
incorporates carnivalisation and polyphony in Bakhtin's sense
precludes any sort of conventionally recognizable structure or
predictable pattern of plot development.
English translations
======================================================================
Since 'The Idiot' was first published in Russian, there have been a
number of translations into English, including those by:
* Frederick Whishaw (1887)
* Constance Garnett (1913)
** Revised by Anna Brailovsky (2003)
* Eva Martin (1915)
* David Magarshack (1955)
* John W. Strahan (1965)
* Henry Carlisle and Olga Andreyeva Carlisle (1980)
* Alan Myers (1992)
* Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (2002)
* David McDuff (2004)
* Ignat Avsey (2010)
The Constance Garnett translation was for many years accepted as the
definitive English translation, but more recently it has come under
criticism for being dated. The Garnett translation, however, still
remains widely available because it is now in the public domain. Some
writers, such as Anna Brailovsky, have based their translations on
Garnett's. Since the 1990s, new English translations have appeared
that have made the novel more accessible to English readers.
The 'Oxford Guide to Literature in English Translation' (2000) states
that the Alan Myers version is the "best version currently available".
Since then, however, new translations by David McDuff and Pevear &
Volokhonsky have also been well received.
Adaptations
======================================================================
* Several filmmakers have produced adaptations of the novel, among
them 'Wandering Souls' (Carl Froelich; 1921) 'L'idiot' (Georges
Lampin; 1946), a 1951 version by Akira Kurosawa, a 1958 version by
Russian director Ivan Pyryev, and a 1992 Hindi version by Mani Kaul.
An unfinished silent version by Sergei Eisenstein was once shown in
the Soviet Union, the last reel "lost" over a disagreement with Joseph
Stalin on the ending. Andrei Tarkovsky aspired to eventually produce a
film adaptation of 'The Idiot', but was constantly obfuscated by
Soviet state censors. He was contracted by Mosfilm to write a
screenplay in 1983, but production halted after he announced his
intent never to return to the Soviet Union. Tarkovsky's other films,
such as 'Stalker', incorporate many themes from 'The Idiot'.
* In 1966, the British Broadcasting Corporation screened a five-part
adaptation of 'The Idiot' on BBC-2. It was directed by Alan Bridges
and starred David Buck as Prince Myshkin and Adrienne Corri as
Nastasia.
* In 2003, Russian State Television Network VGTRK produced a 10-part,
8-hour mini-series of the work, directed by Vladimir Bortko for
Telekanal Rossiya, which is available with English subtitles.
* BBC Radio 7 broadcast a 4-episode adaptation of 'The Idiot' entitled
'Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Idiot', in June 2010. It starred Paul Rhys as
Prince Myshkin.
* Mieczysław Weinberg adapted the novel into a Russian-language opera.
*John Eaton adapted the novel into a television opera, 'Myshkin', in
1974. It was produced by the Indiana University School of Music and
WTIU.
* The Royal National Theatre staged an adaptation of the novel by
English theatre director Katie Mitchell. It was titled '...some trace
of her' and premiered at the Cottesloe (later Dorfman) Theatre in July
2008, starring Ben Whishaw as Myshkin and Hattie Morahan as Nastasya.
Sources
======================================================================
* See also Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics in Wikipedia.
*
*
*
*
*
*
External links
======================================================================
*
* (Eva Martin translation)
*
[
http://www.litteratureaudio.com/livre-audio-gratuit-mp3/dostoievski-fedor-lidiot.html
French Audiobook of 'L'Idiot']
* [
http://klassikaknigi.info/dostoevsky-s-heroes/ Dostoevsky`s Heroes]
* [
http://ilibrary.ru/text/94/p.1/ Full text of 'The Idiot']
*
License
=========
All content on Gopherpedia comes from Wikipedia, and is licensed under CC-BY-SA
License URL:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
Original Article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Idiot
