Rating: 
Summary: Dostoevsky at his best
Review: Dostoevsky is brilliant in this fascinating portrayal of an innocent thrust into the modern world. As always, he creates characters so realistic and multi-faceted that they transform into living, breathing, pitiable, three-dimensional people - as real as your own family, by the novel's end.One particularly fascinating passage describes a man's thoughts and emotions as he endures the final minutes before his own impending execution, until his life is suddenly spared at the last moment. Dostoevsky himself narrowly escaped execution in his youth, having been granted a last-minute reprieve. This passage not only sheds new light on his experience, but manages to make the death penalty forever more real for us all. Dostoevsky's insights into what motivates humans to behave as they do, including the insane, the hopelessly in love, the greedy, and the pure in heart, is heart-breaking in its accuracy. A good read that will keep you thinking about it for days and weeks after its conclusion.
Rating:
Summary: a masterpiece revealing our imperfect world all too nakedly
Review: Fyodor Dostoevsky's "The Idiot" is a compelling mixture of extremely well-drawn characterizations as well as an adept representation of the author's persistently over-arching world view concerning the "perennial questions" of human existence. The novel's main subject, Prince Myshkin, is a sublime and unforgettable character. I certainly wouldn't dispute Myshkin's centrality in "The Idiot" but here Dostoevsky has fleshed out many more distinctive personalities ( Aglaya, Rogozhin, Lebedev, Ippolit ) than ( if my memory serves me correctly ) in his "Crime and Punishment" ( another masterwork ), which focused pretty much on Raskolnikov's decaying interior world ( an extension of his "underground man" from the famous "Notes" of 1864 ). To speak of the plot would be irresponsible ( I do recommend reading the main text PRIOR to reading the scholarly introduction by the translator ) but you can be assured that if you have enjoyed the novels of Thomas Mann ( "Magic Mountain" in particular ), Joseph Conrad or Nikos Kazantzakis, you will appreciate "The Idiot". Also, it seems fairly obvious that a person who has already read several of Dostoevsky's other works will be interested in this particular novel. I admit that at first, not having read a 19th century novel for quite a while ( in fact, since "Crime & Punishment" about 10 years ago ), I had to get used to the "salon culture" ( for want of a better term ) and the ( seemingly ) melodramatic exchanges between the characters in their frequent soirees, which appeared, initially, to be somewhat strained. However, it was instructive for me to meditate on the fact that this was an era ( c.1868 ) without the "benefit" ( ?!? ) of our advanced technological distractions ( radio, television, internet ) and so, if one was NOT to participate in such gatherings, one would be resigned to a life of solitude ( with a capital "S" ). Therefore, such "melodramatic" exchanges seemed less unrealistic than at first I thought. And, as an aside, Dostoevsky was in his early adulthood a frequenter of all sorts of literary gatherings ( this aspect of his life is superbly revealed in Joseph Frank's multi-volume biography ). Undoubtedly he drew upon his memories of such social circles when writing "The Idiot". In any case, whether it was by bearing these historical points in mind or by naturally adjusting to the author's emotional landscape, I did eventually adjust and felt the dialogue to transform into a compellingly realistic vision, at turns exhilarating and sorrowful ( inevitably, the latter mood prevails ). My choice of translation was the Alan Myers/OXFORD PRESS version. I noticed that the PENGUIN translation was about 60-70 pages shorter. I didn't find that either mentioned "abridged" ( or "unabridged" ) but ended up basing my purchase on the OXFORD's ( apparently ) longer version. Also, the Myers/OXFORD version has a black and white map of St Petersburg and some helpful notes explaining various obscure references. However, having read the novel only once, I'm obviously not in the position to call this version definitive. I imagine the old Constance Garnett translation has some merit ( she's been in print for some 70 years now and that must say something of her abilities ) and perhaps the acclaimed team of Richard Pevear and Larissa Volakhonsky, who've already translated "C&P", "Demons", "Karamazov" as well as "Notes from the Underground", will be tackling "The Idiot" in the near future.
Rating: 
Summary: Stupid
Review: I hated this book. Whoever enjoyed needs a life. Read the Lord of the Rings. Tolkien is a fantasy God!!
Rating:
Summary: another classic
Review: Dostoyevsky wrote with an understanding of humans that is rarely seen from anyone. His characters might not all be realistic but you can always find truth in each one. This novel takes the completely moral man and contrasts him with characters of vice. Throughout the novel we see that good is never as good as it seems, while evil is simple never at it appears on face value. All I have left to say is that I imagine this novel has the most tragic ending anyone could ever come up with.
Rating:
Summary: The Best Book Ever Written!
Review: Yes! This is clearly the best book ever written by the best author of all time. There's simply no question about it. Dostoevsky was the greatest writer to ever live. Better than Homer, Virgil, Shakespeare, Dante, Milton, and Moliere put together. The Idiot has the philosophical depth of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason and the seductive, fast-paced action of Le Carre's Russia House. Is such a thing possible? I didn't think so, but then I read the Idiot. Wow, am I ever glad. I once read that Dostoevsky was an anti-semite whose beliefs added to the atmosphere that would ultimately result in the Soviet abuses of Jews while Tolstoy wrote important tracts defending Jews. Well, after reading the Idiot, all I can say is that that doesn't matter because Dostoevsky is a far, far, far, far more sensitive writer. I really think Dostoevsky is just the best. If you don't believe me just check out my other reviews.
Rating:
Summary: What an infuriating hero! What a glorious book!
Review: I agree with all of the other reviewers: read this book. There were three things from this book which stand out for me. The first is that the English transalation of the title is not entirely accurate. Most people, myself included, think of a very stupid person when we think of an idiot. Myshkin is not an idiot in that sense at all. A more accurate sense of the Russian title would be an extremely naive person. Secondly, near the end of the book, at the ball, one of the characters tells Myshkin that Russians have no moderation in their character. "They can't just convert to Catholicism, they have to become Jesuits," they said. I thought immediately of Lenin and the other Bolsheviks who took power only 35 years after this book was written. They illustrated Dostoyevsky's point. Lastly, while there is much action in this novel, I can't remember any other I've read where the main character is not directly involved. Very little happens due to any direct action by him. Most of the novel he is not doing much of anything but talking, while all the other character are scheming, lying, drinking, fornicating, etc. When he does finally take direct action, it turns out to be disastrous for himself and those closest to him. A truly great book and unlike any other.
Rating: 
Summary: Not his best, but come on!
Review: I never believed that television, particularly MTV, was making us less impatient as readers, but after reading a couple of reviews lamenting that little happens plotwise, I am beginning to change my mind. This books doesn't have fireworks or explosions, but the relationships between characters are simply riveting. I turn the page eagerly waiting to see what will transpire next between Natasya and the Prince, betweem Roghozin and Natasya, between Aglaya and the Prince, between Roghozin and the Prince, and so on. This is a brilliant character study, but it also has terrific plot. If you don't like this, then you probably dislike plays, because that is what this reads like--actors performing on simple but fully realized stage sets. This is definitely not Dostoevsky's best novel, but it far surpasses most other novels being published today. Give it a try. If you love Russian novels, you will certainly enjoy this.
Rating:
Summary: Even A Saint Can Reap Havoc
Review: I came to Dostoevsky through the back door, so to speak. In about 1958 or 1959, a small art theater in Dallas, Texas was showing a movie of THE IDIOT that had been filmed in Russia in 1958, under the direction of Ivan Pyriev, a leading Russian director. How this movie ever got from Russia to Dallas or where it disappeared to after I saw it, I don't know. I do know that it is impossible to find. All this is by way of introduction. This stark, black and white film so fascinated me that I had to read the book. THE IDIOT had such an impact on me that I felt compelled to search out and read everything I could find by and about Dostoevsky. His body of work then led me to many of the other great Russian writers; Tolstoy, Turgenev, Gogol, and, of course, the father of them all, Aleksandr Pushkin. I even discovered some of the "lesser" Russian writers such as Goncharev. In my case, at least, one good book led to years of wonderful reading. THE IDIOT, the book that started it all for me, stands on its own as a wonderful piece of literature. It can be read by itself, or as a part of the body of Dostoevsky's work, or within the framework of great Russian literature. Attempting to determine which book or which of these authors is better is an exercise in futility and, if you'll pardon me, of sophistry. To paraphrase Gertrude Stein, "A good book is a good book is a good book." Dostoevsky did say that THE IDIOT was his favorite of his books. Perhaps that was because of certain biographical aspects of the book. Dostoevsky, like Myshkin, was an epileptic. Myshkin returns to St. Petersburg and its callous society after years of absence during which he underwent medical treatment for his "idiocy." Dostoevsky, in real life, returned to St. Petersburg after a long absence that consisted of his incarceration in Siberia for four years followed by an additional four years of enforced army duty. These are not the only biographical aspects of THE IDIOT. I would not want to be misunderstood, however. Dostoevsky incorporated aspects of his own life into the book but it is not, in any way, a work of fictionalized autobiography. Prince Myshkin, the "idiot" of the title, is as near to being a saint as is possible for a flesh and blood human being. His saintliness is accompanied by naivete. He is naive to such a degree that he cannot anticipate the consequences of his actions. His attempts to do good often reap havoc on those about whom he cares. Because he loves one woman and pities another, he inadvertantly ends up being a destructive force in both their lives. In trying to redeem one, who is essentially unredeemable, he indirectly causes her to be murdered. From the standpoint of pure innocence a case could be made that Myshkin was the model for Jerzy Kosinski's Chauncey Gardener. Dostoevsky is certainly a master of the psychological novel, and THE IDIOT is a novel that delves into the soul of a man. He investigates the impact that a corrupt society has on the soul of an incorruptable man and, conversely, the impact of goodness and spirituality on a corrupt society which is unwilling to be swayed. I wish that I could say that society was improved for having been exposed to Myshkin, but it wasn't changed any more than the wealthy of Rome were changed by their exposure to the early Christian martyrs. THE IDIOT is a book that is well worth reading. It is not necessary to "ease into it" by reading another of his novels first as has been suggested elsewhere on these pages. What is necessary is to bring a thoughtful mind along with you when you sit down to what should be one of the greater reading experiences that may come your way.
Rating:
Summary: Perfection of Literature, Perfection of Soul
Review: Shortly after the publishing of the critically acclaimed Crime and Punishment, Dostoyevsky once again showcases his talent as a versatile writer capturing the essense of the soul, plunging into the darkness of the human spirit, and manifests a trace of faltering light in his attempt to portray a Christ-figure, Prince Myshkin. Selfless, innocent, truthful...our sickly hero fascinates the glamorous St. Petersburg society while blindly stumbling into an unseemly liason with a notorious "fallen angel". All the while claiming to love out of pity, the saintly antagonist grows to love a young beauty lurking behind a persona of nonchalance. Love is selfish, and selflessness is of the characteristics that defines the Christ-figure Dostoyevsky tries to present here. The Christ-figure fails b/c perfection is suffering...like all idealism sprung from the pursuit of perfection as our world is a battleground where no extremeties thrive. Myshkin does love two women, but is ultimately lost in his pathos toward "sinners". After all, what would Christ choose between passion and compassion?
Rating:
Summary: By far, the best book I've read
Review: Dostoyevsky is the master of the art of creating the character. All his characters have a distinct personality, each of them behaving in a certain way, until you truly feel for those characters. But in The Idiot, things are different. You see the corruption of the people through the eyes of the innocent and loveable Prince Myshkin. But Myshkin is seen as an 'Idiot' because of his true kindness. Only the strong can survive in this world, or so it seems. The character of Hippolite is also a truly great character, as well as Rogozhin. Not a word should ever be changed from this awesome novel. Read it, change your view on life.
|
