The Idiot - Explained and Discussed

This is an explanation, discussion and critique of Fyodor Dostoevsky's book The Idiot.

My criticisms are at 20:40

[Jere]

The opening scene on the train traveling through the fog and describing how cold the Prince was due to his inadequate clothing exactly prefigures how inadequately prepared he was for the harsh cold society of Petersburg he was heading into.

[ccchefccheffchefff]

13:30 I don't think it was the epilepsy or Nastasya's death alone that caused him to go insane. I see the epileptic fits as a metaphor for the spiritual violations that Myshkin goes through: A consequence of carrying the weight of the world's sins. If you were to live like Jesus, you would die like him too.

Myshkin and Rogozhin exchanging crosses was my favourite scene. Rogozhin carries the weight of his own sins: a gold cross. Weighed down by materialism he sinks into hell. Myshkin carries a lighter physical burden: a tin cross. Myshkin's sins are non-existent, what he carries is everyone else's sins, A spiritual burden. Rogozhin sees the sinless man and believes his burden is lighter and he wants to exchange them.

[countkilroygraf]

Fyodor Dostoevsky and Victor Hugo had, in my opinion, a better understanding of the human condition than any two writers that ever lived.

[timangar]

Cool video! But were you really disgusted by Myshkin consoling Rogozhin after the murder? I felt nothing but pity for the both of them... and I do believe that Myshkin would have acted differently had Rogozhin killed Aglaya instead. You see, by the time of her death, Myshkin loved Nastasja like you love a child, not like you love a woman. That's what Jewgeni Pawlowitch ponders about: How can the prince love both Aglaya and Nastasja? Perhaps a different kind of love? Anyhow, prince Myshkin saw that Rogozhin had killed what Rogozhin most dearly loved in the world, out of jealousy, out of pain... how horrible! And what I find most horrible is that we can empathize with Rogozhin, we can see that jealousy and rejection have made us hurt those we love most in our own lives, or that we at leasted wanted to do so. And then comes Myshkin with his infinite understanding of the pain that Rogozhin experienced, and he consoles him... No, I did not find that repulsive. Because this is not stupid, this is loving. What repulsed me was how Myshkin pushed away Aglaya out of love and stupidity, how he did not recognize the seriousness of how much she loved him and how much she wanted him to come with her. That I found awful.

[matejblaha]

"You end up yelling at him and calling him and idiot" Well, I must be an idiot myself because I identified with him a lot and therefore I had to laugh. It was quite a liberating book for me and it proves that even Dostoevsky has a sense of humour. And I am certain that Myshkin was a masochist: His caregiver was too harsh on him when he was a child and Myshkin couldn't live up to his caregivers expectation due to his illness. Myshkin grew up to be overly self-critical. He is often drawn to (or doesn't avoid as a healthy person would) people who treat him badly and he almost anxiously apologises their behaviour and always thinks of ways to explain it (in this he is also very empathetic and his explanations are often spot on, actually) or blames himself instead of them. These behaviours make sense from a perspective of a (disabled) child who is trying to form a bond with an abusive caregiver

[vukjovanovic]

It's not Natasha, its Nastasya - the difference is huge. Anastasia (Nastasya is Russian form of the word, made a personal name) in Greek means resurrection, so the Christlikeness doesn't end with the prince. Great job, nevertheless!

[seanjohnson]

It is always a huge mistake to read any crib, primer, review. abstract, treatise or anything else before reading the novel; Otherwise, you end up running down a thousand rabbit holes of biographical fallacy. A work of art as great as The Idiot must first of all be taken on its own terms so as not to ruin it as a profound work of art ...

[erjondividi]

what I wonder is: was Aglaya really that innocent? I mean sometimes she was like Nastasia trying to provoke all the males they saw. she provoked and tested the prince many times, even made fun of him! I feel like the way the prince attracted her was by reverse psychology or by making her jealous of Nastasia. what Dostoevsky was trying to say was that women motivations are complex!

[Historelic]

You should read The Master and Margarita by Michael Bulgakov one of the few books I have read from cover to cover, as a confused and lost teenager and even being that way for the most part of my twenties I was helped a lot by Dostoevsky and Bulgakov. Contrary to what many people say about Bulgakov's book being about Soviet era Russia and the corruption within its establiments all I see in the book is Bulgakov's transition from being an atheist to finally becoming a believer. I am a Muslim by the way

[carlh.h.]

I read Dawkins 15 years ago and was convinced by atheism. It didn’t stick. I read Dostoyevsky 5 years ago and became an Orthodox Christian.

[KnightSansk]

I was going through a lot of explanations once I finished the book, and your's is pretty thorough. Great job please start uploading again would love to get good book recommendations

[asokt]

I read it like it was his autobiography. It made more sense for me - imagine how sensitive, and high an emotional intelligent (empathy) Dostoevsky had to have had to have a great understanding of people. Now, if he is the Prince, then imagine the emotional trauma he would have faced each time he gave his heart... and the sort of inner conflict, and pain he had experienced. He is talking about all the people who he met in his life, and how he learned to unconditionally love... even when they did ...

Because of Dostoevsky's high level of empathy, he was able to be close to the Christian idol, so each time he his heart broke, each time he was unable to find true connections, friendship... he felt a little bit like an Idiot. So, really the ending signals a start of a crisis, a crisis of his faith.

[SKMikeMurphySJ]

You are not far from the kingdom of heaven! "Without god everything is permitted." ~ D "Beauty will save the world"~ D "Atheism is so last Decade!" ~ MM SJ
Both Bowie & Iggy Pop made an album titled The Idiot, because there is something so special about it.
See how its portrayed in Russian before you judge...

[giorgosmpountoures]

Omg i totally disagree ! Is Myshkin disgusting and repulsing, god this is absolutely wrong, like i loved him throughout

[arjetaallamani]

I just finished reading The Idiot and before I had read only White Nights by Dostoevsky. I wish I had come across ur video sooner just for the tips u gave at the beginning. The book was a bit much to keep track but surely a masterpiece. And thank u for putting it all together, great summery indeed :)

[haisolungdisuang]

I like the way you critique Dawkins' arguments...

Great summary bro!🤜🤛

[rijpmajohan]

14:45 Perhaps Aldous Huxley's classic "The Doors of Perception" might change your mind on the idea of chemically induced mystical experiences. The book looks at your argument from the opposite perspective. The fact that these mystical experiences are so hard/impossible to describe in words makes us aware of our limited, semantic and time based consciousness.

[shinmen.takezo]

You read Dostoevsky and you still an atheist!?
May God guide you to the righteous way.

[carlorizzo]

Loved this, thank you. Gotta read it again, last time was 40 yrs ago (I'm 70🤣) I hate haaaate to disclose how much i identify with the title character, with the big differeence i am middle class not aristocracy. I'm not epileptic, but have a mind/brain condition (borderline? CPTSD? mild schizoid? pseudo quasi autistic?) I'm brainy, but utterly lack common sense street smarts. Authored appallingly awkward incidents, shoulda been struck by⚡️numerous times. The narrator is sadly naive re family members forgiving. Dostoevsky has a keen grip on the nature of split personality. Especially Raskolnikov. Astonishingly in The Double. Likewise Myshkin's insane simp-pathy for Rogozhin at the end

[yazanasad]

The genius of Dostoevsky is his religious archetypes can be explained rationally (Myshkin is basically crucified but is also falling ill)

A religious experience as mental damage (brain damage). Bipolar - manic episode think they are jesus

Good question - what would the modern equivalent of the characters be?