A review by jaxkab
The Idiot by Fyodor Dostoevsky

4.0

What a strange, strange novel.

Ever since I put this book down, I've been teetering between rating it either a 3 or a 5. When it comes to the drawbacks of the novel, there a few stark ones. I found that the Christ metaphor for the Prince does not really go further than the fact that he's simply pure, empathetic and non-judgmental. It was also not an easy read at times with the plot feeling disjointed, drawn out, confusing, or characters rambling for pages and pages about actual nonsense (Ippolit...).

However, it has plenty of strengths that I thoroughly enjoyed. Most characters are diverse and fleshed out like Lizaveta and Nastasya. Side characters are used as vehicles for Dostoevsky to play around with notions of different philosophical and moral beliefs as well as commentary on society during the 19th century. Some chapters became very soap opera-like and humorous, like Aglaya and the hedgehog, and there were plenty of little twists and surprises.

Though, what I liked the best was the feeling I was left with after finishing it. I didn't hate the ending, but I didn't love or like it either. It was dry and short, like a vague update. Dostoevsky himself even admitted that the novel did not "turn out well" but he stood behind the idea of it, especially at all the grief he experienced throughout writing the novel (lost of a child, exile and debt).

The ending is
Spoilerdark, almost hopeless as every character is left in a worst state than the beginning. Our Christ-like Myshkin was unable to save anyone, despite his purity and morality. The prince is in a terribly ill state, Aglaya is off with a charlatan and scammer, Rogozhin in Siberia for murdering Nastasya, etc.
The end perhaps conveys the tragedies and indifference of life, and this concept of Christ-like purity and faith is swallowed by the core of nihilistic themes.. the very philosophy that Dostoevsky criticizes in many of his works; although it has no hint of the vainglorious Russian nihilism of the 19th century -- it still shows that
SpoilerMyshkin's pure nature meant nothing in the grand tale of the novel and did not save anyone - not even himself.


I'm still mulling over this ending, but I think the depressing conclusion was due to Dostoevsky grieving over the loss of his child and his own faith being tested. I will likely pick this up again in the future as things still feel missing.

Overall, really strange. Really compelling towards the end, and a bit silly.