The real idiot is the person who bought this shit book, the greater idiot is the one who actualy slugged through it
The characters all suck and the plot is so weak it is nearly non existant, it could be written in a 50 page soap opera for house wives
You're a clown
Call me a pleb, but I'm about 200 pages in and I have to ask...are the remaining ~600 worth reading?
I'm a big Jordyn peterson fanboy (call me a pleb again if you wish), and I picked it up after he described it as an exhibition of the ethos which eventually led to the Bolshevik Revolution. But so far it's been almost entirely expository material about minor squabbles amongst Russian high society...
Basically it's been fucking boring so far.
Does it ever actually "pick up"? I'm not asking for car crashes or sword fights or anything, but just some conflict that is actually interesting.
>The characters suck
In what way?
>Reading for the plot
Alright, fuckers, I'm out. Yea Forums is no longer better than Reddit in any way. I think I'll take a break from the Internet.
This book is a mirror, if a monkey looks in he will not see a wise man looking out.
Whatever you do, don't read Demons.
I'm almost finished it now, but it has been a really fucking difficult book to read. Every 10 pages there is a three page long narrator monologue/description of events which is one huge unbroken paragraph. On maybe two occasions have I come across some great philosophical dialogues, but the rest of the book has been boring as shit. Hopefully the last part after the fête will be more interesting.
Yep lmao
>It's supposed to be bad that's what makes it a good book
No my friend, you are the pleb
OP didn't even explain why the book is bad, he just said the characters "suck"
Suck like yo mama bitch
I character development, rambling dialogue, I could go on for pages and pages but instead of spoon-feeding you how about you actually read the book
Just fucking leave holy shit. You don't need to force yourself to read to seem smart buddy just go watch your Jordan Peterson videos and be content.
Jesus Christ why do people like you come here?
To talk about books that are actually good
>You're an idiot if you read this book
>Wanna know why? Read the book!
Literally kill yourself, your IQ is under 90
>Le you have a low IQ phrase
IQ literally beans nothing you alt right incdl, go back to /Pol/ and cry about blacked threads pathetic excuse for a human being, nh
Stop replying to this thread, it's bait.I bet is samefaging
Me and ur dad are the samefag because I fucked your mother
Unironically I really liked this book and never found it a slog. It’s not as good as C&P or TBK tho
Agreed, very boring book.
Retard
>in the end, i guess we were the real The Idiot after all
really coagulates my cashews
>led to the Bolshevik Revolution
Never heard of this guy but he sounds like he hasn't the slightest idea of what he's talking about
This op.
>the reader was the idiot all along
deep
This book had great influence on me.
I shaped my personality after the Prince after reading it as a 15/16 yo.
yes it is worth reading and yes you are a pleb. peterson is a pleb too, a heretic who restates Christianity without its central tenets for his own profit.
no there are no explosions or deep conspiracy theories in the book, EXCEPT the conspiracy against your soul. read it and pray you do not become like the insufferable ingrates common to the book, nor like the beautiful myshkin who is too pure for this world.
just do your best user.
I read it when I was in my early 20s. I couldn't help seeing myself as Myshkin. How are you doing now, user?
>the greater idiot is the one who actualy slugged through it
so you have read the book, congratulations OP
>plot is so weak it is nearly non existant
Can't think of better book recommendation. kys pseud.
Decently, people treat me better ever since I embraced a more enthusiastic way of interacting with the others and allowing myself to laugh and be silly.
I too saw myself as the prince at that time, since I was struggling with anemia and I too felt something was wrong with people around me.
Used to be more of a mysanthrope, now life is good... could be better I won't deny it, but I'm moving forward.
>I read it when I was in my early 20s. I couldn't help seeing myself as Myshkin.
not him, but same here, user. read it at the start of this year, and the book made me feel hugely insecure for a good few months. all the incisive, subtle manipulation and unwarranted judgement of the prince really got to me. my mind felt (and to some degree, still feels) weak and unable to stand up for myself.
really liked the book, but part of me wishes the prince rose up past his problems and became a stronger, better individual. probably would've been a better model for me to live my life.
how was your experience, my friend?
The same. It depressed me for a while. Partly because I couldn't shake Myshkin's point of view, and in some ways still haven't. I would stop short of saying we are not a good species. We were made by God. We are good. But we do sin, and sin is the thing to keep vigilant against.
I'm glad user.
Immigration has really killed Yea Forums.
does anyone have an antidote to the despair caused by reading the idiot? i'd like my mind to become stronger
Kierkegaard
Great philosophy to read along with Dostoevsky fiction
This and Father Seraphim Rose
No you're thinking of The Possessed not the Idiot.
I really didn't like The Idiot
How does The Idiot cause despair? The book ends on a very happy note.
based, thanks. will it help me become stronger? which kierkegaard and seraphim rose should i read first?
anglo pigs will never understand
It never picks up and it gets even more pointless and worse.
I thought the first part (forgot how the book was organised) built up a lot of momentum but it gives up all of it and becomes unbelievably pointless.
Personally for Kierkegaard I'd recommend Sickness Until Death/The Present Age
I think it should have been wrote like the gospels. Four differented people who have lived with Myshkin talking about the experience with him. Myshkin was supposed to be like Jesus in a way if I remember well, and the Quixotic aspect of his character could come from some of the "witnesses" describing him comically/in a condescending way.
But this way of writing a novel would be probably very orthodox for the time I think, even though it's impersonating something much older.
caused despair for me anyway. read my post extremely curious how you interpreted the ending as happy. myshkin is in shambles at the swiss 'clinic' and is left very alone, except for lizeveta perhaps.
Not polyphonic not Dostoevsky
Dostoevsky doesn't finalize characters
Nihilism and orthodoxy and the religion of the future
It is the worst Dosto, but it is nonetheless great and you are a pleb for only caring about plot.
>Dostoevsky doesn't finalize characters
please explain
and also please explain perhaps more clearly why you think the book ended on a happy note
Not him I didn't find it particularly happy. But check out bahktin and his books on Dostoevsky.
>Dostoevsky does not objectify the character, finish the character, or judge the character, because, as Bakhtin writes, "in a human being there is always something that only he himself can reveal... something that does not submit to externalizing secondhand definition."(20) The "character" disappears because to view a person, or a speaking subject, as a character is to be above him, to control him, judge him, and speak not only for him but about him in a superior way. Dostoevsky allows his characters to speak for themselves because of his profound respect for the other in his otherness; he presents a speaking subject because only a speaking subject, in all its unfinalizability, is a true "other." According to Bakhtin, Dostoevsky does not present "characters" but "pesonalities"; he discovered "anew integral view on the person"(21) and realized that "personality is not subordinate to (that is, it resists) objectified cognition and reveals itself only freely and dialogically (asthoufor -I)(22). To present a character is to present a stasis, while a personality is open-ended. This Bakhtinian view of personality has less in common with materialistic than with transcendental views of the ego, such as that of Karl Jaspers, in which "the individual is seen as this unique existent, the being who freely transcends what he already is and creates himself, as it were, through the exercise of his freedom." (23)
Finished last week. After the first part it felt slow and monotonous until the lasft 50 pages or so. Liked the suicidal guy letter
Because he's going to marry Aglaya after he regains his mental faculties, which is why the Yepanchins are visiting him. They know that no one will marry Aglaya after her escapades (of which Myshkin will love her even more).
You should be banned for this lazy troll post
>Sickness Until Death/The Present Age
Could i still gain reasonable wisdom from it if i'm not christian, neither in upbringing or belief?
If you aren't Christian read The Present Age/Two Ages.
Yes, from either one.
>at the very least 10 non-trivial characters with complex relations
>wonderful picture of conflicting love in Myshkin's, Aglaya's, Nastasia's and Rogozhin's characters
>great portrayal of familial and societal dynamics
>a fully-enchanting part set in Pavlovsk
>with a touch of Tolstoy, Gogol and Turgenev
I encourage you to kindly reconsider your opinion.
Thank you, my friends
>tfw bought the book with the last 10 euros
tl;dr dude writes until it all becomes so convoluted and watered down that he just stops
>He needs objective hero's to find things interesting
Yah pal might want to stick to watching comic movies
AHEM excuse me but what is your issue with an absolute morality and heroic sacrifice?
>He thinks Jesus is a tragic hero
I guess we never rose above Greeks and pagans
>HVEM ER DEN IDIOT
Its fucking great mate. I don't even read but I found this a joy to get through. I've literally read a total of 30 books in my whole life of 27 years. So you ask, what am I doing here? I'm here to shitpost, what else?
Based
It's my favorite Dosto book, or at least right there with Brothers K.
It could've been shorter, there seemed to be a lot of contrived issues to make the plot more drawn out than necessary and I felt as if he had to reach a page number.
The characters and the monologues were brilliant and if you can't appreciate it you need to educate yourself.
>tfw you're the Idiot
he was getting payed by page and dosto nedded the money for his gambling addiction ; atleast thats what I head
Holy shit you should kill yourself if you're joking and you need to kill yourself if you're not
Kino
what