Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.04 AVERAGE
4.04 AVERAGE
Storia frustrante che ti strugge. Nastasja non riesce a perdonarsi e fluisce verso la sua morte varie volte preannunciata. Se la morte di Ippolit è fisica la sua è metafisica. Incapace di accettare il sacro in se stessa si lascia uccidere dal profano, da Rogozin. Questo è il suo modo di sacrificarsi per salvare il suo Principe dall'onta di sposare una donna profanata, come un cristo in croce cammina verso la morte in un atto di redenzione,
Lei tra tutti è la più idiota.
Lei tra tutti è la più idiota.
Literature is what we would like to have read but not necessarily want to read now. Getting through 696 pages of Dostoevsky’s “The Idiot” was quite an achievement. About fifteen or twenty years ago, I laboured through “Crime and Punishment” which really was for me a drudge. I have no plans to imminently attack other great Russian literary giants like Chekhov, Tolstoy, Gogol or Pushkin. “The Idiot” was more engaging than “C & P“, but the protagonist Prince Myushkin was indeed an idiot, but not a holy fool. He begins the novel arriving on a train having come from Switzerland where he was being treated for epilepsy and mental ineptitude. He is plunged into the social intrigues of nineteenth century Petersburg: a society more concerned with wealth and power than moral values, some echoes of contemporary Russia there.
“We toil like cattle, we labour, we are poor and hungry as dogs. Others don’t toil, and don’t labour, and they are rich. (The everlasting story!)”
The book delves deeply into the Russian Psyche and the true religion (Orthodox Christianity).
The Prince falls in love with two women, who are both unsuited to him. One woman has a salubrious past, the beautiful Nastasya, the other an equally beautiful young 20 year old from a proud family, Aglaia. The novel is full of overwhelming Russian drama, the poor Prince doesn’t stand much chance of succeeding with either woman. He also naively gives away money and is taken in by various devious people. The only thing the Prince is good at seems to be a card game called “fools”, where he easily beats Aglaia despite her cheating. Like C&P and indeed Dostoevsky himself, one of the main characters ends up being sent to Siberia for a number of years but not the Idiot.
“We toil like cattle, we labour, we are poor and hungry as dogs. Others don’t toil, and don’t labour, and they are rich. (The everlasting story!)”
The book delves deeply into the Russian Psyche and the true religion (Orthodox Christianity).
The Prince falls in love with two women, who are both unsuited to him. One woman has a salubrious past, the beautiful Nastasya, the other an equally beautiful young 20 year old from a proud family, Aglaia. The novel is full of overwhelming Russian drama, the poor Prince doesn’t stand much chance of succeeding with either woman. He also naively gives away money and is taken in by various devious people. The only thing the Prince is good at seems to be a card game called “fools”, where he easily beats Aglaia despite her cheating. Like C&P and indeed Dostoevsky himself, one of the main characters ends up being sent to Siberia for a number of years but not the Idiot.
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I’m really disappointed, but I felt no strong connection to this story or its characters. I really wanted to love it but I didn’t. However, Dostoyevsky is still phenomenal and I will continue to read more of his works
emotional
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
slow-paced
I hate it when Dostoyevsky writes virtuous characters. His atheists are more interesting. He affords them more complexity than his saintly poor and blessed fools. Those are the characters he gives his own doubts. The rest get his sanctimoniousness and fervent nationalism. Myshkin is boring. I can’t blame anyone for thinking he’s full of shit because he doesn’t behave like a real person, but rather as a moral example, unwittingly exposing society’s ills. It would be a more interesting read if the Myshkin’s true motives were made more ambiguous.
Dostoyevsky’s reactionary political commentary is getting stale. I don’t think that politically he’s had anything interesting to say since crime and punishment, except for a few moments in Demons. His characterization of his political opponents is getting increasingly ridiculous.
The Idiot started off really strong and uncharacteristically fun but my impression of part I (loved Nastasia in part I, easily one of his best female characters) was immediately sullied by part II and it got only worse from there Reading part IV felt like a chore.
Dostoyevsky’s reactionary political commentary is getting stale. I don’t think that politically he’s had anything interesting to say since crime and punishment, except for a few moments in Demons. His characterization of his political opponents is getting increasingly ridiculous.
The Idiot started off really strong and uncharacteristically fun but my impression of part I (loved Nastasia in part I, easily one of his best female characters) was immediately sullied by part II and it got only worse from there Reading part IV felt like a chore.
dark
reflective
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I finally finished the book yesterday after months of putting off the last part. From the start, I really loved Nastasya’s character, especially the way Prince Myshkin sees her. Personally, she’s the best-written character in the whole book, even more than the Prince (Myshkin too was a great portrayal of a christ-like figure, he did what one in that nature would.) “Beauty will save the world,” is a quote that somehow I understand to the beauty of a woman and therefore Nastasya. Her downfall was clearly coming, but the way it happened still felt perfect in the end. She's so complex, broken, and really unforgettable.
The relationship between her, the Prince, and Rogozhin was also my most favorite thing in the book.. It was tragic yes, really intense, and strangely perfect (again with the word). I loved how the three of them seemed to understand each other’s pain so deeply that none of them wanted to cause more harm-- yet somehow, they still did, but surely you know.. without meaning to.
The relationship between her, the Prince, and Rogozhin was also my most favorite thing in the book.. It was tragic yes, really intense, and strangely perfect (again with the word). I loved how the three of them seemed to understand each other’s pain so deeply that none of them wanted to cause more harm-- yet somehow, they still did, but surely you know.. without meaning to.