Scan barcode
A review by loyaultemelie
The Idiot by Fyodor Dostoevsky
challenging
dark
reflective
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
I honestly have no idea what to think of this book
I should preface this review by saying I definitely did not have the most optimal reading experience of the Idiot. I started it, left off 60 pages in, restarted it during a frankly rough period of my life, and then took months to complete because of busyness. So, a lot of the cohesion of the book sort of flew out the window, making it appear more haphazard and disjointed to me than I think it is - though I do think the problem still stands.
So what are my thoughts? I think the A plot - the relationship between Lev Nikolaevich, Rogozhin, and Nastasya Filippovna - is incredibly strong, incredibly nuanced, incredibly well written. The end of this book genuinely floored me, and I wish we'd seen more of Nastasya Filippovna because she is an incredibly complex and tortured character. The sort of character the Dostoevsky writes well. She's probably the most complex of Dostoevsky's women that I've read so far.
However this is tempered by the fact that the B plot - the plot with the Epanchins - dominates the middle of the novel. And, to be frank, I didn't really 'get,' these parts as much. More specifically, I really did not understand Aglaya Ivanovna at all. In fact I rather disliked her. I understand her character motivation, and in fact I don't think the motivations were a bad foundation for a character at all. But the way that she just consistently laughs at Lev Nikolaevich and torments him makes it very difficult to then feel that she truly loves him. Loves him to the extent that is painted at the end of the novel. I just can't buy it. I know that love makes people act ridiculous - believe me I know - but when it comes to novels I feel you should at least get a sense that Aglaya even enjoys being around the person she's in love with. Does she even like Myshkin? I'm still not convinced. And this made all the scenes between her and Myshkin incredibly irritating to read. It just dragged on and on and all I could think was that everyone was going in circles, that I'd already read this before, and that I felt bad for Myshkin. This was really what soured the book for me.
But again, this book has moments of genius writing, and everything else in the book was also quite compelling. I was especially interested by Ippolit Terentyev, and the parallels between him and Myshkin. The scene where he reads his letter was one of the best of the novel. I also enjoyed Ganya and Varya more than I thought I would originally, and I liked that Dostoevsky owns up to their ordinariness and talks about how they both react to it.
Myshkin was also a fascinating character to me because I found myself at times infantilizing him in the way that the characters wrongly did. If he is Christ-like, I thought, then why does he lie to people at times, feel angry, and become involved in intrigue? But I think the Christ-like part of him is his incredibly capacity to forgive - as well as the honest way he sees the world. While reading this book I thought of the Tarkovsky film (yes I am a snob) Andrei Rublev, and the scene where I believe Andrei says "If Jesus was alive they'd crucify him again." I think it's very apt as to the way that people react to Myshkin. Though I don't really have a conclusion to my thoughts about him yet. We shall see.
So, in conclusion, a bunch of conflicting thoughts. Some wonderful characters and moments ultimately bogged down by tedium. Perhaps I don't get it, but I hope that upon reread I will - especially since I will reread it in the original next time. Or, I probably will. I think for now I am content to let the Idiot go and move on to the next Dostoevsky. But, as always, I could not regret the read.
I should preface this review by saying I definitely did not have the most optimal reading experience of the Idiot. I started it, left off 60 pages in, restarted it during a frankly rough period of my life, and then took months to complete because of busyness. So, a lot of the cohesion of the book sort of flew out the window, making it appear more haphazard and disjointed to me than I think it is - though I do think the problem still stands.
So what are my thoughts? I think the A plot - the relationship between Lev Nikolaevich, Rogozhin, and Nastasya Filippovna - is incredibly strong, incredibly nuanced, incredibly well written. The end of this book genuinely floored me, and I wish we'd seen more of Nastasya Filippovna because she is an incredibly complex and tortured character. The sort of character the Dostoevsky writes well. She's probably the most complex of Dostoevsky's women that I've read so far.
However this is tempered by the fact that the B plot - the plot with the Epanchins - dominates the middle of the novel. And, to be frank, I didn't really 'get,' these parts as much. More specifically, I really did not understand Aglaya Ivanovna at all. In fact I rather disliked her. I understand her character motivation, and in fact I don't think the motivations were a bad foundation for a character at all. But the way that she just consistently laughs at Lev Nikolaevich and torments him makes it very difficult to then feel that she truly loves him. Loves him to the extent that is painted at the end of the novel. I just can't buy it. I know that love makes people act ridiculous - believe me I know - but when it comes to novels I feel you should at least get a sense that Aglaya even enjoys being around the person she's in love with. Does she even like Myshkin? I'm still not convinced. And this made all the scenes between her and Myshkin incredibly irritating to read. It just dragged on and on and all I could think was that everyone was going in circles, that I'd already read this before, and that I felt bad for Myshkin. This was really what soured the book for me.
But again, this book has moments of genius writing, and everything else in the book was also quite compelling. I was especially interested by Ippolit Terentyev, and the parallels between him and Myshkin. The scene where he reads his letter was one of the best of the novel. I also enjoyed Ganya and Varya more than I thought I would originally, and I liked that Dostoevsky owns up to their ordinariness and talks about how they both react to it.
Myshkin was also a fascinating character to me because I found myself at times infantilizing him in the way that the characters wrongly did. If he is Christ-like, I thought, then why does he lie to people at times, feel angry, and become involved in intrigue? But I think the Christ-like part of him is his incredibly capacity to forgive - as well as the honest way he sees the world. While reading this book I thought of the Tarkovsky film (yes I am a snob) Andrei Rublev, and the scene where I believe Andrei says "If Jesus was alive they'd crucify him again." I think it's very apt as to the way that people react to Myshkin. Though I don't really have a conclusion to my thoughts about him yet. We shall see.
So, in conclusion, a bunch of conflicting thoughts. Some wonderful characters and moments ultimately bogged down by tedium. Perhaps I don't get it, but I hope that upon reread I will - especially since I will reread it in the original next time. Or, I probably will. I think for now I am content to let the Idiot go and move on to the next Dostoevsky. But, as always, I could not regret the read.