Thursday, January 28, 2016

I Think Even The Author Of This Book Got Sick Of It

At this point in the novel the steady movement of time is scrambled to comply with the lack of anything happening.  Each chapter jumps a few months or weeks because even Fyodor himself is running out of things to write.  Basically each character does the same depressing action for a prolonged period and fails to move forward in life.  Prince Myshkin goes to Moscow to find his inheritance, but over the period of time he gives it all away.  Obviously displaying Myshkin's passiveness when faced with demand, to loose all his money is devastating.  This is the only money he has available, and it is taken away by people pretending to be family members or close friends.  Knowing that Myshkin is a highly intelligent person, I wonder if he is actually aware that there were lies, but would rather loose all his wealth than appear rude or unkind.  It would not surprise me given that Myshkin seems to be the only character who values generosity and emotional connections over material goods.  Either way, he's broke.  After spending a little under a year in Moscow, he returns to Saint Petersburg with the same amount of wealth he had before: almost nothing.  This also further perpetuates Dostoyevsky's message behind Myshkin's existence that by being kind, you will be mistreated and abused by the world.
Nastasya is another character being mistreated, but not because of her generosity.  In fact, her circumstances are unique from the other characters.  She was a rude and self centered person, and now she is violently abused by the man who paid for her hand in marriage: Rogozhin.  Although extensive and dull, Dostoyevsky basically explains that Rogozhin beats Nastasya and forces her to go to social events called "orgies" (I'm not actually aware if they really are orgies in the sense of group sex or just massive parties but that's the word that is used to describe what happens.  This is also a non direct translation of the original book in Russian, so orgy could be an inappropriate word to fit the real meaning.  Either way, Nastasya's life sucks.)  She runs away on three separate occasions, but is caught each time.  Clearly not getting the hint, Rogozhin spends the time lapse abusing Nastasya, then finding her after she's run off and returning her home.  True love.
One of the only literary devices used is the personification of Rogozhin's house.  Given this type of Russian literature is very literal and descriptive, this analysis is don't difficult or complex by any means.  At some point in Myshkins travels between Moscow and St. Petersburg he visits Rogozhin's home.  This is also during one of the periods where Nastasya has somehow fled.  Dostoyevsky's description of Rogozhin's living environment is dark, grey, and cold.  As Myshkin approaches the house, he can feel the misery and suffering within.  I don't think it's too much of a leap to assume these details were added to reference Rogozhin and Nastasya's relationship, or even Rogozhin's personality himself.  Keep in mind during all these months with Nastasya, Rogozhin is heavily drinking and lacking of a job.  His home is a wreck.  Myshkin confesses to Rogozhin that is Nastasya ever fled to the Prince he would take her in and ask her to marry him.  In a rather confusing twist, Rogozhin confesses that Nastasya does want to be with the prince, but feels she should be punished for her actions by marrying Rogozhin.  She also said the prince was too good for her.  This clearly contrasts to the girl that was introduced in the beginning of the novel, one who ego preceded her in most house holds.  Her change comes with the introduction of Myshkin to the society.  His presence continued to evoke the true nature of the people he surrounds.  Perhaps Dostoyevsky's real message is the with kindness comes the true nature of people, but often the true nature of people is malevolent and evil.  A classic love story!  Would recommend for up and coming readers.
Everyone say something nice to Kenny; he is very behind on his reading.  (Mrs. Laclair is too but I won't mention that.)
Love Owen

1 comment:

  1. So it's pretty clear that you are not a fan of the book (I'm assuming the "would recommend" was sarcastic, correct me if I'm wrong) but are there any redeeming qualities about the book? It may be boring, but is it well written? Or is this a complete waste of time in your opinion?

    ReplyDelete