The Idiot by Fyodor Dostoevsky (novel #113)

(translation by Eva Martin)

I made up my mind to be honest, and steadfast in accomplishing my task. Perhaps I shall meet with troubles and many disappointments, but I have made up my mind to be polite and sincere to everyone; more cannot be asked of me. People may consider me a child if they like. I am often called an idiot, and at one time I was certainly so ill that I was nearly as bad as an idiot; but I am not an idiot now. How can I possibly be so when I know myself that I am considered one? ~ Prince Muishkin

This is the first time I’ve read The Idiot and the third novel I’ve read by Dostoevsky. Due to my previous experiences and a peek at a synopsis, I was anticipating a very enjoyable read.

But no! I was quite disappointed. I really wanted to love this for both my admiration of the author and my interest in the premise: the story of a man so sincere, so kind, so artless, that he was thought an idiot by his acquaintances. The title character is Dostoevsky’s

…positively good and beautiful man

Characters in the novel said of him:

You are more honest than all, and better, nobler, kinder, wiser than all. There are some here who are unworthy to bend and pick up the handkerchief you have just dropped. ~ Aglaya Ivanovna

 

I ought to tell you that I never in my life met a man anything like him for noble simplicity of mind and for boundless trustfulness. I guessed that anyone who lied could deceive him, and that he would immediately forgive anyone who did deceive him… ~ Nastasia Philipovna

To be astonished by nothing is a sign, they say, of a great intellect. ~ Hippolyte commenting on the Prince’s unflappable character

Besides wanting to love the novel, I also wanted to love the protagonist, Prince Muishkin, and I did – at first. But as the novel wears on, I confess I began to think him rather absurd myself, though not quite an idiot.

But most of the characters were absurd. Aglaya Ivanovna – the fickle and flighty love interest of the Prince; Nastasia Philipovna – her beautiful and bitter rival; Rogojin the vicious and vain antithesis to the Prince; Hippolyte the tedious and tubercular nihilist; Elizabetha Prokofievna the proper and passionate mother of Aglaya; and on and on.

Perhaps it suffered in translation, translation not of words, but translation of 19^thcentury Russian society vs 21^stcentury Western society – perhaps, but that can’t really explain it fully. I loved The Brothers Karamazov and Crime and Punishment after all.

Perhaps I’m the idiot, but this just didn’t work for me. I’m sorry brother D, but I feel I’m being generous to even give this…

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Dostoevsky said himself:

I do not stand behind the novel, but I do stand behind the idea.

I agree with that.

This novel satisfies – Back to the Classics Challenge 2018 – Category: a classic in translation.

Other excerpts:

In a word, the world spoke well of the girls; [Aglaya and her sisters] but they were not without their enemies, and occasionally, people talked with horror of the number of books they had read.

A fool with a heart and no brains is just as unhappy as a fool with brains and no heart. ~ Elizabetha Prokofievna

Exactly as is a mother’s joy when her baby smiles for the first time into her eyes, so is God’s joy when one of his children turns and prays to Him for the first time, with all his heart. ~ Prince Muishkin

Things are hidden from the wise and prudent, and revealed unto babes. ~ Lebedeff

References to Classic Literature

Don Quixote

Gogol

Hamlet

Moliere

Madame Bovary

 .

Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky (78 down 22 to go)

(translation by Constance Garnett)

The candle-end was flickering out in the battered candlestick, dimly lighting up in the poverty-stricken room the murderer and the harlot who had so strangely been reading together the eternal book. 

This is the first time I’ve read Crime and Punishment, and the second work I’ve read by Dostoevsky. Crime and Punishment is a realist novel, with existential elements; it is the third-person narrative of Rodion Raskolnikov, a troubled young intellectual, mid 19th Century, Petersburg, Russia.

This novel satisfies category #12, a Russian Classic in observance of the 100th Anniversary of the Russian Revolution, from the 2017 Back to the Classics Challenge.

My rating:  4 of 5 stars

 

SPOILER ALERT – This following contains spoilers.

Rodion Raskolnikov is an unemployed, impoverished, former student, wasting away in near squalor in Petersburg. He is also a self-satisfied intellectual/philosopher. In my humble opinion, he thinks too much.

When the novel opens, Raskolnikov is in dire straits financially. He speaks to himself frequently, and through this, the reader becomes aware Raskolnikov is planning, but not firmly committed to some desperate act.

I mentioned the spoiler – which may be unnecessary. If you’ve ever heard of this novel, you are probably aware that it involves a murder. So, this reader at least, was fairly certain that Raskolnikov was plotting a murder/robbery. He even goes through a sort of dress rehearsal, visiting a vile old, female pawn broker, his intended victim.

He does indeed carry out his desperate plan. At first things go smoothly, until the victim’s sister shows up and he murders her as well. Raskolnikov makes off with very little, and shortly after the crime, he falls into a delirium sickness that lasts several days. This is probably due to combined effects of malnourishment and emotional shock.

The rest of the novel is Raskolnikov’s inner turmoil over his crime. This can certainly be considered a crime novel – part of the title after all – but it is different than most crime dramas. This is not about “who did it?” That is never in doubt. It is about “why”.

And Raskolnikov comes up with some pretty disturbing answers to that question. In the beginning, the reader believes it is all about getting some money to relieve a desperate condition, but as Raskolnikov wrestles with his demons we learn there was much more to it than that. A bit more about the why in a moment.

The other principals: Raskolnikov’s beautiful, devoted, and sensible sister Avdotya (Dunia), his simple, loving mother Pulkheria, and his faithful friend Dmitry Razumikhin.

Then there is Dunia’s fiancé, Pyotr Petrovich Luzhin, a conceited, selfish, and ambitious lawyer. The engagement will not last – one good thing Raskolnikov accomplishes in the novel.

Arkady Ivanovich Svidrigaïlov – a depraved, but unpretentious hedonist, once Dunia’s employer and aspiring lover.

Porfiry Petrovich – a police detective who suspects Raskolnikov, but has no proof.

And Sofya (Sonia) Semyonovna – a desperately poor young woman, with a drunkard father, rather stupid, ill, and abusive mother, and three young siblings. Sonia is forced into prostitution to provide for her family. She is pitiful and virtuous – glaring contradiction notwithstanding.

In the beginning, Raskolnikov is seemingly motivated by terrible financial need. He was behind in rent, had dropped out of school for want of money, and his sister was marrying a cad for money. Money seemed the only and obvious reason.

But once the deed is done, Raskolnikov begins his slow, agonizing, debate with himself…not over guilt. He didn’t believe he was truly guilty.

Raskolnikov believes that great men, like Napoleon, are above the law because they are achieving greatness. Raskolnikov, wants to test his own mettle. Killing the old woman would almost convince himself, that he was great – that he was greater than most men. (Yes, he actually compares himself to Napoleon.)

He reasons to Sonia:

I wanted to find out then and there whether I was a louse like everybody else or a man. Whether I can overstep barriers or not, whether I dare bend down to pick up or not, whether I am a trembling creature or whether I have the right…

To kill? Have the right to kill? Sonia clasped her hands.

And then at other times, he deludes himself that he did the world a favor.

"Crime? What crime?" He cried in sudden fury. "That I killed a vile noxious insect, and old pawnbroker woman, of no use to anyone! 

 . . . Killing her was an atonement for forty sins.

As I said earlier, Raskolnikov thinks too much. He was also probably quite malnourished and not of completely sound mind when he makes the rash, and yet quite deliberate decision to carry out the crime.

I’ll admit, he was pitiable at times – but never guiltless. I had no sympathy for his intellectual indignation. I don’t believe Dostoevsky intended the reader to sympathize. Indeed, someone will probably soundly refute this, but I suggest Raskolnikov represented Russian nihilism, and Dostoevsky was offering a striking indictment.  

This would seem to mesh with the initially confusing image of Napoleon as an example. Certainly, Napoleon achieved extraordinary things, but I doubt many in Russia would ascribe to him greatness. Later, I felt this made better sense. If Dostoevsky meant to show the error of Raskolnikov’s ways, Napoleon – a villain by Russian reckoning – as his idol only accentuates Raskolnikov’s misguided philosophy.

If you like nice tidy endings, with satisfying closure – you probably won’t care for Dostoevsky. The ending is not entirely unsatisfying – but neither is it completely satisfying.

If you like flawed and complex characters, and moral dilemma – you will probably enjoy this novel.

That’s The Wander’s thoughts anyway. Have you read Crime and Punishment? What did you think?

Other excerpts:

The really great men must, I think, have great sadness on earth. ~ Raskolnikov

And now I have come simply to say (Dunia began to get up) that if you should need me or should need…all my life or anything…call me, and I’ll come. Goodbye!

Perhaps it was just because of the strength of his desires that he had considered himself a man to whom more was permissible than to others. ~ Narrative regarding Raskolnikov

But that is the beginning of a new story – the story of the gradual renewal of a man, the story of his gradual regeneration, of his transition from one world into another, of his initiation into a new, unknown life. ~ second to last sentence of Crime and Punishment.

.

The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky (26 down 74 to go)

(translation by Constance Garnett)

Alyosha smiled softly “God will conquer!” he thought.

This is the first time I’ve read The Brothers Karamazov, Dostoevsky, or any of the Russian authors. It is a philosophic novel told mostly in third-person narrative regarding the lives of the Karamazov brothers in 19th Century Russia. 

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

 

I had almost no expectations, other than perhaps it would be a challenging read. I like that – having no expectations. It was a pleasant surprise and not nearly as challenging as I anticipated.

SPOILER ALERT: This review contains a minor spoiler.

It started a bit slow, as Dostoevsky first introduces you to all of the principal characters, without really beginning the story. The principal principals, if you can believe it, are the Karamazov brothers: the eldest Dimitri (Mitya) is half-brother of Ivan (Vanya) and Alexi (Alyosha). I’ve hinted here, at one of the problems English readers will have with Russian stories. The characters are referred to by several name variations. Alexei has seven variations, and it isn’t always obvious to whom a newly introduced variation refers.

The story takes place in 19th century Russia. The brothers were not raised together and barely know each other until adulthood. Of course, they each have their unique personality, but Alyosha is easily the most likeable – indeed loveable. In fact, and in spite of my lukewarm feelings about The Great Gatsby, I would describe Alyosha in much the same way that Nick described Gatsby: 

...if personality is an unbroken series of successful gestures, then there was something gorgeous about him, some heightened sensitivity to the promises of life.

But, it would be better to offer Dostoevsky’s description of Alyosha. 

He was simply an early lover of humanity.

And

...he was fond of people: he seemed throughout his life to put implicit trust in people: yet no one ever looked on him as a simpleton or naïve person. There was something about him which made one feel at once (and it was so all his life afterwards) that he did not care to be a judge of others---that he would never take it upon himself to criticize and would never condemn any one for anything.

My review could easily become an ode to Alyosha, though I should mention a few other things.

Such as their father Fyodor, he was a pig. He is also murdered, and it’s hard to feel too bad about it. The family is embroiled in the investigation and trial, as one of the brothers is the only suspect.

But forget that for a second, because I want to tell you more about Alyosha. One of the most beautiful moments in the story: Alyosha, a man of faith, has a long conversation with his agnostic brother Ivan. Ivan recites a “poem” he has written, "The Grand Inquisitor". It's not really poetry, but more of a parable giving Ivan's view of corrupt religion. Christ returns to earth, is sanctioned, imprisoned, and threatened with execution by the Roman Church. The church inquisitor states that Christ’s gift of freedom to humanity was the worst thing for them, and the church was working to bring humanity back into subservience, if not slavery. In the end, the inquisitor decides to let Christ go. Christ listens to the long rebuke, makes no reply, and when released Christ…

approached the old man in silence and softly kissed him on his bloodless aged lips.

Ivan concludes his poem and he and Alyosha debate its merit. It is for the most part friendly, but Alyosha is clearly saddened by his brother’s worldview and Ivan is intentionally goading Alyosha. Ivan asks at the end…will you renounce me for that?

Alyosha got up, went to him and softly kissed him on the lips.

Spiritum Christi Alyosha, Amen!

There is a murder, a trial, and a love triangle. There's sweet young Lise, a crippled girl who's in love with Alyosha...or not so sweet. I admit I don't get Lise. There are a couple of pompous Poles, a German doctor, competing lawyers, a stinking corpse, a corpse that doesn't stink, and a dog. I already mentioned one of the critical chapters, "The Grand Inquisitor". And then, there is Father Zosima, Alyosha's teacher, at the Russian Orthodox monastery. On his deathbed, he gives a long admonition, the antithesis to Ivan's worldview. Next to Alyosha, Father Zosima is my favorite character. Finally, there is a secondary plot line of some schoolboys who befriend Alyosha, which gives the story a hopeful ending.

Quotations:

It’s the great mystery of human life that old grief passes gradually into quiet, tender joy. ~ Father Zosima

Fathers and teachers, I ponder, What is hell? I maintain that it is the suffering of being unable to love. ~ Father Zosima

They aim at justice, but denying Christ, they will end by flooding the earth with blood. ~ Father Zosima

.