Once again, absolutely love this after the first part of ur series I went and listened to the second part in one shift. I understand, found the party to be a little boring, but that’s to be expected from a 19 year old just starting out with this kind of literature, but after this video I have a greater understanding of the part. Thank y’all again for this series, I wish we had teachers in school like you guys 😂
The painting of Jesus laying in state after the crucifixion is one of the images from this novel that left a lasting impression. The king, the savior, the hope of the Jews (and the world) lay dead and along with his body lay all the hopes of the believers (and the world). At that point, no one knew Jesus would be resurrected. A truly dark, depressing, and completely hopeless image. Powerful.
At some point you are saying for Myshkin: "He is dying on his cross for Nastasia". You've nailed that, since Anastasia means Resurrection in Greek. Myshkin as Christ is longing for Resurrection.
he goes to see nastasya philpovna right after he promises not to, but we have to remember rogozin told him something around the lines of -"take her, she is yours!"
1. he doesn't fit this society? We are not worthy of living with someone like him. 2.This society regards kindness as weakness. And especially with the presence of social media, everyone advertises themselves as kind people. With so many fake, it would be difficult to notice someone like Mishkin
I completely forgot about the correlation between Don Quixote and The Idiot when I read it again. I wish I was able to focus more on that this time around. Completely agree with Krypto's final comments--it wouldn't play out today.
Reading this along with this series. :) i still loved part 1 more than 2. Part 2 is good but adding too many characters, it's a little hard to keep up with
Sufficiently discussed like the 2nd part of the book itself. I appreciate the way you both call out the protagonists' compassion for love and affection. I am sure you are aware that we are reading the second version of the novel. In one of his biography, it's mentioned that the protagonist in the first draft was a self-centred rebel who is self-possessed by pride. I always wonder what made him change the protagonist to be a positively good man preferably Christ-like as you quote!! It would be interesting to see if you ever get to the first drafts' discussion. Also, I wish you sound more Russian whenever you take the character's name. 😅
@@TheCodeXCantina Sorry, I took the liberty to comment. I recently met with a Russian friend I realised that I am not even close to how they pronounce the names. But you do a pretty good job in comparison can be better though. However, I believe what matters is the content that you have in abundance.
Wonderful conversation. “Could a person like this exist in the real world?” I believe that both in the past and in our present a person like this could exist, because he’s human and incredibly naive. Let me explain: while he is a “Christ-like” figure (his heart is pure, his actions come from empathy and goodness), he is also very naive, insecure and inept. This is the fundamental difference between prince Myshkin and Jesus Christ: He was a leader, He won verbal skirmishes, He was obviously very clear about Himself and He always understood what was going on around Him. From this perspective, Myshkin is the complete opposite of Christ: he’s not stupid but he really is an “idiot”, a bumbling mess, a confused and inept man. Why? Because he is not divine. He is a human being, therefore imperfect, therefore a sinner. Dostoevski tried to create a character that is “only goodness”, but this character came out VERY strange and complicated because this idea crashes against the reality that only God is pure goodness. No human can be pure goodness. Take away the incredible naïveté of the prince, take away his ineptitude, give him courage and leadership, and boom 💥…. you haven’t written a character in a novel, you have literally written a novel about Jesus Christ! And Dostoevski could not do that, of course, because it wouldn’t have worked. What does work incredibly well in the novel is the psychological effect that “goodness in action”, like you guys mentioned, has on the people who witness it. It’s a devastatingly powerful effect, although, the novel seems to say, not always leading to more good actions. These are my on-the-go thoughts at 2/3 in 😄 but I’ll get back to you once I finish the book.
I'm here for the dosta-coaster!!
🎢
“Ganya turns into Perry Mason” 😂🤣
Just watched the new show with my wife so it was on my mind 😂
Once again, absolutely love this after the first part of ur series I went and listened to the second part in one shift. I understand, found the party to be a little boring, but that’s to be expected from a 19 year old just starting out with this kind of literature, but after this video I have a greater understanding of the part. Thank y’all again for this series, I wish we had teachers in school like you guys 😂
Thanks so much for the kind words. We’re just glad you could enjoy the talk!
The idiot ended up becoming my favorite novels, and I ended up reading it psychically and I absolutely love dostoyevsky :)
@@christianmcdepressed5899 Wow, one Dostoyevsky novel and you're able to read it in your mind. Impressive!
This should get millions of views!
The painting of Jesus laying in state after the crucifixion is one of the images from this novel that left a lasting impression. The king, the savior, the hope of the Jews (and the world) lay dead and along with his body lay all the hopes of the believers (and the world). At that point, no one knew Jesus would be resurrected. A truly dark, depressing, and completely hopeless image. Powerful.
Ah, that's a really good distinction to think about it without the knowledge of the future
Good discussion and analysis. Very well done .
Thanks so much!
Other than enjoying your content, I love hearing your voices😆❤
Awwww shucks. Future audiobook career here we come
I really enjoyed Mrs Yepanchins tirade defending the idiot.
Also Myshkin is one of my favorite characters 😢 extraordinary
I liked it too!
Love this series! It's really helping me think through the novel. I picked up Don Quixote and some Pushkin to read through next!
Oh yes, same here
At some point you are saying for Myshkin: "He is dying on his cross for Nastasia". You've nailed that, since Anastasia means Resurrection in Greek. Myshkin as Christ is longing for Resurrection.
I didn’t know that about her name. Thanks for sharing that
This is a great video as it makes it so much easier to understand each part I just read. great work!
Awesome! Thanks for the kind words
he goes to see nastasya philpovna right after he promises not to, but we have to remember rogozin told him something around the lines of -"take her, she is yours!"
1. he doesn't fit this society?
We are not worthy of living with someone like him.
2.This society regards kindness as weakness. And especially with the presence of social media, everyone advertises themselves as kind people. With so many fake, it would be difficult to notice someone like Mishkin
I completely forgot about the correlation between Don Quixote and The Idiot when I read it again. I wish I was able to focus more on that this time around. Completely agree with Krypto's final comments--it wouldn't play out today.
Poor Miushkin
I love that you guys made this series
👍
Reading this along with this series. :) i still loved part 1 more than 2. Part 2 is good but adding too many characters, it's a little hard to keep up with
Man, you guys are good.
Sufficiently discussed like the 2nd part of the book itself. I appreciate the way you both call out the protagonists' compassion for love and affection.
I am sure you are aware that we are reading the second version of the novel. In one of his biography, it's mentioned that the protagonist in the first draft was a self-centred rebel who is self-possessed by pride. I always wonder what made him change the protagonist to be a positively good man preferably Christ-like as you quote!! It would be interesting to see if you ever get to the first drafts' discussion.
Also, I wish you sound more Russian whenever you take the character's name. 😅
I read about the alternative version of Miushkin. I quite like the change. Sound more Russian like our accent? Sorry if our pronunciation is terrible.
@@TheCodeXCantina Sorry, I took the liberty to comment. I recently met with a Russian friend I realised that I am not even close to how they pronounce the names. But you do a pretty good job in comparison can be better though. However, I believe what matters is the content that you have in abundance.
@@shilpagopal2925 I’ll work harder on it!
Wonderful conversation. “Could a person like this exist in the real world?” I believe that both in the past and in our present a person like this could exist, because he’s human and incredibly naive. Let me explain: while he is a “Christ-like” figure (his heart is pure, his actions come from empathy and goodness), he is also very naive, insecure and inept. This is the fundamental difference between prince Myshkin and Jesus Christ: He was a leader, He won verbal skirmishes, He was obviously very clear about Himself and He always understood what was going on around Him. From this perspective, Myshkin is the complete opposite of Christ: he’s not stupid but he really is an “idiot”, a bumbling mess, a confused and inept man. Why? Because he is not divine. He is a human being, therefore imperfect, therefore a sinner. Dostoevski tried to create a character that is “only goodness”, but this character came out VERY strange and complicated because this idea crashes against the reality that only God is pure goodness. No human can be pure goodness. Take away the incredible naïveté of the prince, take away his ineptitude, give him courage and leadership, and boom 💥…. you haven’t written a character in a novel, you have literally written a novel about Jesus Christ! And Dostoevski could not do that, of course, because it wouldn’t have worked.
What does work incredibly well in the novel is the psychological effect that “goodness in action”, like you guys mentioned, has on the people who witness it. It’s a devastatingly powerful effect, although, the novel seems to say, not always leading to more good actions.
These are my on-the-go thoughts at 2/3 in 😄 but I’ll get back to you once I finish the book.
I don’t disagree
Ethical nihilism?
You are my god….. I will never say your name
Ha!
Capitalism, or at least American capitalism, makes the prince unable to survive in the 21st century. Interesting thought though.