Scan barcode
sidharthvardhan's review against another edition
5.0
The tragedy of being too good
An ideal idiot
Most of my favorite characters are either pure evil or complex anti-hero type; the stereotype Mr. Goody-two-shoes has never appealed to me; however Prince Muishkin, the idiot in the novel, is now going to be an exception.
He has suffered from idiocy due to epilepsy (FD too suffered from epilepsy attacks) all his childhood and early youth. Perhaps it was due to this idiocy that he has not adopted the common sense – the ‘normal’ way of looking at the world which is formed by slow corruption of our sense of compassion on pretext of what is called self-defense in a cruel world.
P. is full of compassion – which is very clear from stories he tells (the stories you tell, tell a lot about yourself.) His goodness (unlike Evegeine’s calculated goodness and Ptitson who allows himself only small evils) makes him indifferent to harm being done to himself if it means happiness of someone else. If you try to insult or hurt him; he would feel sorry for circumstances that made you do so; and let you cheat him. It is not so much that he doesn't notice or can't defend the harm done to himself but rather he prefers to suffer himself rather than bring on others - even if others are sinister in their ways.
He has no sense of social class - he could talk in the same way with servants or master, grownups or children. He lets you make fun of him – often himself joining the lough himself.
He won’t stand for his rights but would stand to fight for others. He got into a fight twice within novel, and both times it was to defend someone.
His natural goodness won’t let him be suspicious, angry or jealous of anyone; in fact he would reproach himself if he finds himself harboring any such emotion. This restrain is contrasted by people that surround him – drunkards, rogues etc (FD’s novels are always full of contrasts) It is not that he is above all emotions – he is easily excited – but by such emotions like guilt, gratitude and happiness and never so much that he could harm someone.
He is tipsy and cuts a messy figure which makes people under-rate him – the fact that he himself is ignorant of his abilities doesn’t help. He has a kind of inferiority complex about him, can’t believe that he can be loved by a woman – which is ironical because four woman are attracted to him during the novel.
A loved idiot
Thus it is easier for you to make fun of him; but you will do it at your own peril; his turn-the-other-cheek attitude is bound to find your love sooner or later. Even those who try to cheat on him end up loving him. A third reason for which he attracts attention is curiosity. He is purely original in his thoughts (as opposed to Gania’s lack of originality.) Thus while people under-rate him in beginning; soon they all end up respecting him - in a way. They adopt him, pet him, forgive him all mistakes and want him to do well in life; because of his absolute inability to harm anyone.
Lizaveta likes him but do not want him to marry her daughter to him - knowing that his goodness won't let him survive him for long in the world. However she won’t admit to herself reasons for same. One of the women he loves, leave him as she thinks she doesn’t deserve him; another leaves him because …. Well, in being good to everyone, he ends up hurting her.
P. is a good example who shows that if we play the good Samaritan too much; it is always at cost of harming ourselves and, perhaps more importantly, those who love or depend on us.
Christ?
P. was supposed to be inspired from a Hans Holbein the Younger's painting 'The Body of the Dead Christ in the Tomb' (see below) - the realism of which struck both FD and P. powerfully.
P's reaction upon seeing painting is here:
It is the fact that in this painting Christ has wounds and looks beaten just like mortal, his body is seen putrefying. FD's wife note how she had to take him away from this painting as she was afraid he would get one of his attacks.
While P. never preached or anything, FD definitely put Christ's good heart in him. There are other important distances between two, unlike Prince, Jesus was not shocked upon discovery the barbarity prevalent in the world. Jesus was, IMO, more assertive too and at least once got angry.
Prince's complete lack of aggressiveness is completely contrasted by Rogozhin, Dostoyevsky's idea of anti-Christ. And this anti-Christ isn't pure evil but someone who can't stand the idea of being cheated upon. A person lacking ability to forgive is all that Dostoyevsky's idea of evil. However Dostoyevsky goes one step further making Prince and Rogozhin friends. In the end, Prince's couldn't defeat the anti-Christ in Rogozhin and his own compassion became his doom.
FD makes P. a true Christian – a christen by heart and default; and convinces us that it is suicidal to be good in a world of corrupt souls.
An ideal idiot
Most of my favorite characters are either pure evil or complex anti-hero type; the stereotype Mr. Goody-two-shoes has never appealed to me; however Prince Muishkin, the idiot in the novel, is now going to be an exception.
He has suffered from idiocy due to epilepsy (FD too suffered from epilepsy attacks) all his childhood and early youth. Perhaps it was due to this idiocy that he has not adopted the common sense – the ‘normal’ way of looking at the world which is formed by slow corruption of our sense of compassion on pretext of what is called self-defense in a cruel world.
P. is full of compassion – which is very clear from stories he tells (the stories you tell, tell a lot about yourself.) His goodness (unlike Evegeine’s calculated goodness and Ptitson who allows himself only small evils) makes him indifferent to harm being done to himself if it means happiness of someone else. If you try to insult or hurt him; he would feel sorry for circumstances that made you do so; and let you cheat him. It is not so much that he doesn't notice or can't defend the harm done to himself but rather he prefers to suffer himself rather than bring on others - even if others are sinister in their ways.
He has no sense of social class - he could talk in the same way with servants or master, grownups or children. He lets you make fun of him – often himself joining the lough himself.
He won’t stand for his rights but would stand to fight for others. He got into a fight twice within novel, and both times it was to defend someone.
His natural goodness won’t let him be suspicious, angry or jealous of anyone; in fact he would reproach himself if he finds himself harboring any such emotion. This restrain is contrasted by people that surround him – drunkards, rogues etc (FD’s novels are always full of contrasts) It is not that he is above all emotions – he is easily excited – but by such emotions like guilt, gratitude and happiness and never so much that he could harm someone.
He is tipsy and cuts a messy figure which makes people under-rate him – the fact that he himself is ignorant of his abilities doesn’t help. He has a kind of inferiority complex about him, can’t believe that he can be loved by a woman – which is ironical because four woman are attracted to him during the novel.
A loved idiot
Thus it is easier for you to make fun of him; but you will do it at your own peril; his turn-the-other-cheek attitude is bound to find your love sooner or later. Even those who try to cheat on him end up loving him. A third reason for which he attracts attention is curiosity. He is purely original in his thoughts (as opposed to Gania’s lack of originality.) Thus while people under-rate him in beginning; soon they all end up respecting him - in a way. They adopt him, pet him, forgive him all mistakes and want him to do well in life; because of his absolute inability to harm anyone.
Lizaveta likes him but do not want him to marry her daughter to him - knowing that his goodness won't let him survive him for long in the world. However she won’t admit to herself reasons for same. One of the women he loves, leave him as she thinks she doesn’t deserve him; another leaves him because …. Well, in being good to everyone, he ends up hurting her.
P. is a good example who shows that if we play the good Samaritan too much; it is always at cost of harming ourselves and, perhaps more importantly, those who love or depend on us.
Christ?
P. was supposed to be inspired from a Hans Holbein the Younger's painting 'The Body of the Dead Christ in the Tomb' (see below) - the realism of which struck both FD and P. powerfully.
P's reaction upon seeing painting is here:
"The prince glanced at it, but took no further notice. He moved on hastily, as though anxious to get out of the house. But Rogozhin suddenly stopped underneath the picture. […]
"I like looking at that picture," muttered Rogozhin, not noticing, apparently, that the prince had not answered his question.
"That picture! That picture!" cried Myshkin, struck by a sudden idea. "Why, a man's faith might be ruined by looking at that picture!"
It is the fact that in this painting Christ has wounds and looks beaten just like mortal, his body is seen putrefying. FD's wife note how she had to take him away from this painting as she was afraid he would get one of his attacks.
While P. never preached or anything, FD definitely put Christ's good heart in him. There are other important distances between two, unlike Prince, Jesus was not shocked upon discovery the barbarity prevalent in the world. Jesus was, IMO, more assertive too and at least once got angry.
Prince's complete lack of aggressiveness is completely contrasted by Rogozhin, Dostoyevsky's idea of anti-Christ. And this anti-Christ isn't pure evil but someone who can't stand the idea of being cheated upon. A person lacking ability to forgive is all that Dostoyevsky's idea of evil. However Dostoyevsky goes one step further making Prince and Rogozhin friends. In the end, Prince's couldn't defeat the anti-Christ in Rogozhin and his own compassion became his doom.
FD makes P. a true Christian – a christen by heart and default; and convinces us that it is suicidal to be good in a world of corrupt souls.
stinky_phytoseiid's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.0
bookbadass6969's review against another edition
challenging
dark
emotional
hopeful
reflective
sad
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
4.0
stargazerfish0's review against another edition
4.0
I wanted to give this book a 4 1/2 but GoodReads doesn't do halves. I really liked this book. This is my second Dostoevsky novel, my first being Notes from Underground, which is one of my favorite books of all time. I'm binging Dostoevsky (pr@y for me) this year and I'm proud to add this to my read pile.
If you would have told me that this was basically a deconstructive novel by Dostoevsky himself, I would have finished this novel a lot faster. Unfortunately it's been sitting on my shelf for over 10 years now, although soon after I got it I had gotten 1/4 of the way in.
The quickest comparison that comes to my mind is the movie Closer from 2004 starring Natalie Portman and Julia Roberts, but since I'm not sure how many people have seen that, I'm going to say that this novel is like It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia but none of the funny and all of the tragic. I should probably specify that it has none of the IASiP funny, because there's definitely humor in it (hell, I laughed). It's more tragicomedy, but boy, that ending... Probably going to haunt me.
The only reason I did not give it a 5 is because the character Aglaya is so annoying. It was hard for me to read all of the parts with her in it, because all she does is "turn red", "stomp", or other synonymous phrases for reacting negatively to what Myshkin was saying. I think if I sensed that Dostoevsky wanted me to hate her, I would have still given it a 5, but judging from all of her admiring onlookers who just adored when she criticized someone in pretty much every part that she spoke, I think I'm supposed to find her... What? Smart? I can't.
Next is Devils!
If you would have told me that this was basically a deconstructive novel by Dostoevsky himself, I would have finished this novel a lot faster. Unfortunately it's been sitting on my shelf for over 10 years now, although soon after I got it I had gotten 1/4 of the way in.
The quickest comparison that comes to my mind is the movie Closer from 2004 starring Natalie Portman and Julia Roberts, but since I'm not sure how many people have seen that, I'm going to say that this novel is like It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia but none of the funny and all of the tragic. I should probably specify that it has none of the IASiP funny, because there's definitely humor in it (hell, I laughed). It's more tragicomedy, but boy, that ending... Probably going to haunt me.
The only reason I did not give it a 5 is because the character Aglaya is so annoying. It was hard for me to read all of the parts with her in it, because all she does is "turn red", "stomp", or other synonymous phrases for reacting negatively to what Myshkin was saying. I think if I sensed that Dostoevsky wanted me to hate her, I would have still given it a 5, but judging from all of her admiring onlookers who just adored when she criticized someone in pretty much every part that she spoke, I think I'm supposed to find her... What? Smart? I can't.
Next is Devils!
martin888's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
I had such a toxic relationship with that book. Like I wanted to give it 1 star for plot and characters, but then it throws those 5-star worthy phylosophy quotes and one liners at me??! How can I hate a book like that?
fr4nkie_99's review against another edition
challenging
emotional
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
shanehaby's review against another edition
emotional
funny
relaxing
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.25