The Idiot by Dostoevsky discussion

For discussion of the final chapters of Book two, chapters 11-12

Nastassia's behavior in regard to Evgeny is a mystery. We can only assume that for some reason she wants to create an obstacle between Evgeny and Aglaya. Does she want to make Aglaya's life difficult because of jealousy? Gen. Epanchin thinks that for some reason Nastassia is striking out at him, but why on earth would her incongruous comment to Evgeny have anything to do with Epanchin? This doesn't seem likely.

Meanwhile Myshkin is getting worn out by the melodramas around him and wants to leave this chaos. But he thinks doing so is cowardly. Why I ask, is it cowardly? He seems to think he should put up with any amount of unpleasantness toward him rather than protect himself by avoiding toxic people and situations.

Also in chapter 11, Keller tells his life story to Myshkin, who knows that Keller is after money, but also senses in Keller some feelings of sincerity that aren't mercenary. I'm not sure what the reference is to the "duality of ideas" but it may have to do with the fact that the people around him often have dual or mixed motives.

For some unclear reason, Myshkin doesn't want to hear what Leb has to say about Aglaya. Maybe he's tired of all the gossip.

Kolya is wise for his age. He tells Myshkin that Myshkin's being a philanthropist - overly generous - is dangerous. He may be referring to dangerous to his (Myshkin's) own wellbeing, which is likely, or dangerous to others or both. In regard to dangerous to others - maybe it brings out the worst in them.

Lizabeta like her daughter Aglaya has strong contradictory feelings toward Myshkin. She views him as a friend and likes him but also considers him an idiot and also insults him. She is concerned that Myshkin might want to marry Aglaya and is determined that this not occur. Why? Myshkin has money. But Lizabeta's pride may lead her to not want her daughter to marry "an idiot". Or could Myshkin's health and epilepsy be a reason and part of the meaning of "idiot"?

But she like Aglaya is bothered by everyone making a fool of him, and she believes that he is easily deceived. Is he? Was Burdovsky indeed innocent and deceived himself? I'm not so sure that Myshkin is deceived, but it's clear that he's overly generous to those who are taking advantage of him.

For some reason, she doesn't want Aglaya to marry Evgeny either. And she doesn't trust Ganya.

Lizabeta seems to take everything personally - to act as if Myshkin behaves in ways she doesn't approve of that he is assaulting her. When Myshkin shows him Burdovsky's apologetic letter, she gets furious again - maybe because she believes it's a lie and Myshkin is being taken in again. When she gets angry, she overdoes it, with threats - like in this case, don't ever visit me again.

If I were Myshkin, I'd want to get away from all of them too, especially when they keep saying what they don't mean, changing their minds, and treating him in totally contradictory ways. Lizabeta and Aglaya are truly crazymaking, but I think that Lizabeta is more direct and sincere and likeable and not really a gameplayer like Aglaya is.

Lizabeta understands Aglaya's gameplaying - that Aglaya's forbidding Myshkin to visit means she wants him to visit. So suddenly Lizabeta does a turnaround and wants Myshkin to visit, apparently because she knows Aglaya wants to see him. Oyvey.
Myshkin, if you aren't crazy now, you're going to be if you keep hanging out with these unpredictable unstable people. He already fears that Nastassia is crazy but many of the other characters in this menagerie aren't very well-grounded and stable themselves.

And why has Varya brought about corresponce between Aglaya and Nastasya? What's that about?

No wonder Myshkin is experiencing more longings to leave these people.

Anybody out there willing to write a few comments on the final chapters of book two?

I think Lizabeta and Aglaya are two of a kind, like mother like daughter. I dislike both of them. Actually, the women in this novel do not have much going for them. I am not devoting the time to this book that it deserves since I am tied up with Anna Karenina so that may account for any depth I may be missing.

True, Natassia has much to bemoan having been taken advantage of by a man who was a father figure. But that does not mean she is justified in how she behaves. She has attracted Myshkin which is no small thing. His love may be more of pity than passion, but he goes overboard to show her affection. Perhaps I am blindsided and not giving due thought to the horror of what abuse leaves in its wake. Dostoevsky may be showing us this by creating a character who is unable to overcome her childhood.