@ignacia Yes, thank you for pointing that out! I noticed that I mixed that up after I edited & posted the video 😅 Will try to add some sort of text to correct it 👍🏻
It seems like a nickname because Americans are more familiar with the English sense of the word which is reserved for members of the monarch's immediate family. Myshkin is merely a member of the nobility and a very minor one. He would probably be the equivalent of a duke or earl.
There was a very strange feature in this case, strange because of its extremely rare occurrence. This man had once been brought to the scaffold in company with several others, and had had the sentence of death by shooting passed upon him for some political crime. Twenty minutes later he had been reprieved and some other punishment substituted; but the interval between the two sentences, twenty minutes, or at least a quarter of an hour, had been passed in the certainty that within a few minutes he must die. I was very anxious to hear him speak of his impressions during that dreadful time, and I several times inquired of him as to what he thought and felt. He remembered everything with the most accurate and extraordinary distinctness, and declared that he would never forget a single iota of the experience. ‘About twenty paces from the scaffold, where he had stood to hear the sentence, were three posts, fixed in the ground, to which to fasten the criminals (of whom there were several). The first three criminals were taken to the posts, dressed in long white tunics, with white caps drawn over their faces, so that they could not see the rifles pointed at them. Then a group of soldiers took their stand opposite to each post. My friend was the eighth on the list, and therefore he would have been among the third lot to go up. A priest went about among them with a cross: and there was about five minutes of time left for him to live. ‘He said that those five minutes seemed to him to be a most interminable period, an enormous wealth of time; he seemed to be living, in these minutes, so many lives that there was no need as yet to think of that last moment, so that he made several arrangements, dividing up the time into portions-one for saying farewell to his companions, two minutes for that; then a couple more for thinking over his own life and career and all about himself; and another minute for a last look around. He remembered having divided his time like this quite well. While saying good- bye to his friends he recollected asking one of them some very usual everyday question, and being much interested in the answer. Then having bade farewell, he embarked upon those two minutes which he had allotted to looking into himself; he knew beforehand what he was going to think about. He wished to put it to himself as quickly and clearly as possible, that here was he, a living, thinking man, and that in three minutes he would be nobody; or if somebody or something, then what and where? He thought he would decide this question once for all in these last three minutes. A little way off there stood a church, and its gilded spire glittered in the sun. He remembered staring stubbornly at this spire, and at the rays of light sparkling from it. He could not tear his eyes from these rays of light; he got the idea that these rays were his new nature, and that in three minutes he would become one of them, amalgamated somehow with them. ‘The repugnance to what must ensue almost immediately, and the uncertainty, were dreadful, he said; but worst of all was the idea, ‘What should I do if I were not to die now? What if I were to return to life again? What an eternity of days, and all mine! How I should grudge and count up every minute of it, so as to waste not a single instant!’ He said that this thought weighed so upon him and became such a terrible burden upon his brain that he could not bear it, and wished they would shoot him quickly and have done with it.’
:" Just a single man, Fyodor Dostoevsky, is enough to defeat all the creative novelists of the world. If one has to decide on 10 great novels in all the languages of the world, one will have to choose at least 3 novels of Dostoevsky in those 10. Dostoevsky’s insight into human beings and their problems is greater than your so-called psychoanalysts, and there are moments where he reaches the heights of great mystics. His book BROTHERS KARAMAZOV is so great in its insights that no BIBLE or KORAN or GITA comes close. In another masterpiece of Dostoevsky, THE IDIOT, the main character is called ‘idiot’ by the people because they can’t understand his simplicity, his humbleness, his purity, his trust, his love. You can cheat him, you can deceive him, and he will still trust you. He is really one of the most beautiful characters ever created by any novelist. The idiot is a sage. The novel could just as well have been called THE SAGE. Dostoevsky’s idiot is not an idiot; he is one of the sanest men amongst an insane humanity. If you can become the idiot of Fyodor Dostoevsky, it is perfectly beautiful. It is better than being cunning priest or politician. Humbleness has such a blessing. Simplicity has such benediction."
This could have been a great review, hadn't you mixed Rogozin with Ganya. I doubt Nastasya Philippovna represents beauty. She is deeply hurt and broken to the point she can't be saved. She is punishing everyone around, including herself, herself first of all, not living a single chance for other people to help, her pride doesn't leave her space for forgiveness.
I like the video but you mixed Ganya with Rogozhin and made everything confusing. You should've corrected it before posting it coz the whole video looks so wrong
Thanks for pointing that out. I realized that I had mixed them up after I finished shooting & editing the video. Will include a disclaimer in the description to clarify soon 👍🏻
Myshkin doesnt attempt to kill Ganya, he just absent-mindedly continues to pick up the gardening knife off Rogozhin's desk when theyre discussing Nastasya Fillipovna, which turns out to be the same knife Rogozhin attempts to kill Myshkin with, and the same knife he murders Nastasya with at the end of the book from brain fever/madness.
I don't think he murdered Nastasya because of brain fever, but because she left him earlier despite her promise to marry him. It was said near the end that Nastasya was afraid that Rogozhin would kill her. That brain fever part was a reason his lawyer gave to the court after the murder.
@@gigachad8275i think that nastasia was simply driving him insane, constantly bouncing back and forth, leaving him and then being with him. She was unpredictable with her love
Amazing breakdown of this book! Couldn't decide between The Brothers Karamazov or The Idiot, and I can't wait to read the latter now. Look forward to watching your other videos!
It’s been a few years since I read The Idiot. The main character Myshkin (or however it’s spelled) seems to symbolize the inability of humanity to die to self and stick to what makes him comfortable like being around children. We have a distinct lack of blood being shed which has been alluded to in the scriptures since the fall of Adam and Eve. All the different points of view and never arriving at a conclusion is more like Thomas Aquinas’ or Aristotle’s dialectics in philosophy. This is not some light reading for the novel enjoyer.
Also you missed the most important part of why imitating jesus in an age of rationality caused him to go catatonic. Its the paradox of the circumstances. He just wants to be good and help others but when he genuinely trys to help everyone it only hurts them because it causes them to compare themselves to an impossible standard of goodness and hurts them because they will always fall short of that standard. So by him helping it just ends up hurting and its this paradox that destroys his mind.
Somehow I carry the traditional that allows for mystery and the rational that perhaps doesn’t within me. I come from a scientific family but carry my own private notion of Christ within. Knowing of other religions, I don’t think Christianity is required to maintain ethics. Plus my grandfather was a Darwinian atheist and a happy, good man.
I understood Myshkin to be a Christian figure and the philosophical thought process that comes through his view - my issue with The Idiot was the utter lack of character development despite the abundance of them to the point it was confusing. There's no one to really care for, neither of the main love interests - Nastasya F. and Aglaya - are likeable, and him being "torn" didn't really come through to me. Myshkin is often passive and when he seems to express his thoughts if any, it's some disassembled and prolonged rambling. I believe this should have been more of an essay than contrived into a story. The dialogues could have been more to the point, to me. I just don't see why the point he was trying to illustrate, had to be stretched into 700 pages of...no story. The facade that it's a story was rather distracting, and often tended to drive me away from his points... side-note, it was also irritating that Dostoyevsky started using words mid-novel as if he just learned about it. Like "paterfamilias" to refer to Ivan Fyodorovich.
Nietzsche loved Dostoevsky so there may be hope yet. Nietzsche’s unbelief may have contributed to his nervous breakdown. And his lack of faith may have resulted in no support when he brilliantly pulled away the illusions of all philosophy. Unlike Nietzsche, I would be led by the Spirit to say it is time to, “Let our souls magnify the Lord” -- and realize there are no borders, especially when we blow into the sails of another's boat. We don’t believe in God. God believes in us. As we are divinized, God literally indwells our soul and believes on our behalf by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost.
@@rktsnail We should never forget the assassination of Anwar El-Sadat on October 6, 1981 We should never forget the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin on November 4, 1995 May their names be blessed forever within the Almighty De Facto (From the Fact - What Happens in Reality) vs. De Jure (From the Law - What is Actually Notated in Legal Code) Classical Liberalism never changed. I have been both Republican and Democrat. Yet I have always voted what I believed to be Classical Liberalism. War profiteering drifts from Manichean Heresy (far right wing politics) to Albigensian Heresy (far left wing politics) as people explain themselves. My prayer is for the Holy Spirit to indwell you and wake you up. ❤ You understand the U.S. Democrats and the U.S. Republicans have colluded to War Profiteering since they assassinated JFK on November 22, 1963? Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly. -- Leviticus 19:15
your take on Prince is utterly wrong. Prince was a noble title in Russia. like Prince Sheremetev or Prince Yusupov and it was how people were addressed so, your take on it makes little sense.
You’re right, Myshkin definitely did not kill anyone. I was new to making youtube videos when I made this & I messed up the names a few times during filming. Always trying to improve.
I agree with you. I was new to RUclips when I made this video & recording myself on camera was very frustrating & embarrassing. I mixed the names up & didn’t realize until post production…& at that point I couldn’t fathom filming the whole thing again. In hindsight I wish I had, to maintain accuracy…maybe I’ll remake it sometime 😁
@@alexmostella No worries 😉 it was a very brave attempt at navigating through the quagmire of Dostoyevsky characters. Nonetheless, it was an insightful and interesting video. Thank you 😊
My friend . . . . Film it again and remove this one from RUclips. For me, as an orchestral/choral composer, the beauty of your work must shine through as a perfect expression of art. I challenge you.@@alexmostella
Jesus wasn’t a real person. The story was written by Greeks long afterwards it’s a mythology. It’s not Wednesday like the Jews say. It’s Wondanaz Day. And always will be.
Historians argue with each other whether those miraculous accounts about Jesus can be taken seriously or not but historians do not argue whether Jesus was a real person or not because all of them (aside of mythicists) agree that the historical evidence is clear, He was a real space-time person who lived in Judea, modern day Israel about 2000 years ago.
By Ganya, I believe you mean Rogozhin, who competes for Nastasya's affection and later attempt to murder Myshkin despite their friendship.
@ignacia Yes, thank you for pointing that out! I noticed that I mixed that up after I edited & posted the video 😅 Will try to add some sort of text to correct it 👍🏻
He doesn’t exchange crosses with gania, he does so with Rhoghozin
That was single handedly the greatest breakdown of a book I’ve ever heard
Prince was not a nickname it was a title.
Such a blunder
@@user-ly7ke7xt9l I don’t think this guy read the book and he’s doing a book review - absolutely insane
I still see where he's coming from, though. Prince may have been a title, but those surrounding Myshkin see it in quite the derogatory way.
It seems like a nickname because Americans are more familiar with the English sense of the word which is reserved for members of the monarch's immediate family. Myshkin is merely a member of the nobility and a very minor one. He would probably be the equivalent of a duke or earl.
The Grand Inquistor was not a book but part of "The Brothers Karamasov"....just in case some people are looking for the title !
PS: Subscribed.
All the Best from GB and A Happy Christmas 🙂
When Dostoyevsky said, "Beauty will save the world," he meant the beauty of Christ.
Which could be a horrific death, but from the right angle…
This video put a lot of feelings I had into words, more people need to hear this
Thank you for the kind words. I’m glad it resonated with you
You mixed up rogozhin with ganya. And myshkin was trying to kill rogozhin? 😂 it's hard to take a essay seriously after seeing these crucial mistakes.
True.
I am deeply content for finiding this content.. Your way is smooth yet feeply analytical.. great work
There was a very strange feature in this case, strange because of its extremely rare occurrence. This man had once been brought to the scaffold in company with several others, and had had the sentence of death by shooting passed upon him for some political crime. Twenty minutes later he had been reprieved and some other punishment substituted; but the interval between the two sentences, twenty minutes, or at least a quarter of an hour, had been passed in the certainty that within a few minutes he must die. I was very anxious to hear him speak of his impressions during that dreadful time, and I several times inquired of him as to what he thought and felt. He remembered everything with the most accurate and extraordinary distinctness, and declared that he would never forget a single iota of the experience. ‘About twenty paces from the scaffold, where he had stood to hear the sentence, were three posts, fixed in the ground, to which to fasten the criminals (of whom there were several). The first three criminals were taken to the posts, dressed in long white tunics, with white caps drawn over their faces, so that they could not see the rifles pointed at them. Then a group of soldiers took their stand opposite to each post. My friend was the eighth on the list, and therefore he would have been among the third lot to go up. A priest went about among them with a cross: and there was about five minutes of time left for him to live. ‘He said that those five minutes seemed to him to be a most interminable period, an enormous wealth of time; he seemed to be living, in these minutes, so many lives that there was no need as yet to think of that last moment, so that he made several arrangements, dividing up the time into portions-one for saying farewell to his companions, two minutes for that; then a couple more for thinking over his own life and career and all about himself; and another minute for a last look around. He remembered having divided his time like this quite well. While saying good- bye to his friends he recollected asking one of them some very usual everyday question, and being much interested in the answer. Then having bade farewell, he embarked upon those two minutes which he had allotted to looking into himself; he knew beforehand what he was going to think about. He wished to put it to himself as quickly and clearly as possible, that here was he, a living, thinking man, and that in three minutes he would be nobody; or if somebody or something, then what and where? He thought he would decide this question once
for all in these last three minutes. A little way off there stood a church, and its gilded spire glittered in the sun. He remembered staring stubbornly at this spire, and at the rays of light sparkling from it. He could not tear his eyes from these rays of light; he got the idea that these rays were his new nature, and that in three minutes he would become one of them, amalgamated somehow with them. ‘The repugnance to what must ensue almost immediately, and the uncertainty, were dreadful, he said; but worst of all was the idea, ‘What should I do if I were not to die now? What if I were to return to life again? What an eternity of days, and all mine! How I should grudge and count up every minute of it, so as to waste not a single instant!’ He said that this thought weighed so upon him and became such a terrible burden upon his brain that he could not bear it, and wished they would shoot him quickly and have done with it.’
Bruh, learn how to make a paragraph FFS.
:" Just a single man, Fyodor Dostoevsky, is enough to defeat all the creative novelists of the world. If one has to decide on 10 great novels in all the languages of the world, one will have to choose at least 3 novels of Dostoevsky in those 10. Dostoevsky’s insight into human beings and their problems is greater than your so-called psychoanalysts, and there are moments where he reaches the heights of great mystics. His book BROTHERS KARAMAZOV is so great in its insights that no BIBLE or KORAN or GITA comes close.
In another masterpiece of Dostoevsky, THE IDIOT, the main character is called ‘idiot’ by the people because they can’t understand his simplicity, his humbleness, his purity, his trust, his love. You can cheat him, you can deceive him, and he will still trust you. He is really one of the most beautiful characters ever created by any novelist. The idiot is a sage. The novel could just as well have been called THE SAGE. Dostoevsky’s idiot is not an idiot; he is one of the sanest men amongst an insane humanity. If you can become the idiot of Fyodor Dostoevsky, it is perfectly beautiful. It is better than being cunning priest or politician. Humbleness has such a blessing. Simplicity has such benediction."
Who are you quoting here?
@@07bmarshall from a talk by Osho
Wow! Amazing analysis... Thank you ❤
I have just finished the reading of the "Idiot" and all my mind is still there in that book...
He gets like everything wrong about it I don’t think he’s even read it
This could have been a great review, hadn't you mixed Rogozin with Ganya.
I doubt Nastasya Philippovna represents beauty. She is deeply hurt and broken to the point she can't be saved. She is punishing everyone around, including herself, herself first of all, not living a single chance for other people to help, her pride doesn't leave her space for forgiveness.
Nastasya is actually a slut. :)) Horrible character, but I get the importance of her role in the novel.
Beautiful analysis brother. Christ is the essential grounding factor for morality
I'm touched.
I like the video but you mixed Ganya with Rogozhin and made everything confusing. You should've corrected it before posting it coz the whole video looks so wrong
Thanks for pointing that out. I realized that I had mixed them up after I finished shooting & editing the video. Will include a disclaimer in the description to clarify soon 👍🏻
Great video, it really motivated me to read this book. Im starting today!
Myshkin doesnt attempt to kill Ganya, he just absent-mindedly continues to pick up the gardening knife off Rogozhin's desk when theyre discussing Nastasya Fillipovna, which turns out to be the same knife Rogozhin attempts to kill Myshkin with, and the same knife he murders Nastasya with at the end of the book from brain fever/madness.
I don't think he murdered Nastasya because of brain fever, but because she left him earlier despite her promise to marry him. It was said near the end that Nastasya was afraid that Rogozhin would kill her. That brain fever part was a reason his lawyer gave to the court after the murder.
@@gigachad8275i think that nastasia was simply driving him insane, constantly bouncing back and forth, leaving him and then being with him. She was unpredictable with her love
Amazing breakdown of this book! Couldn't decide between The Brothers Karamazov or The Idiot, and I can't wait to read the latter now. Look forward to watching your other videos!
It’s been a few years since I read The Idiot. The main character Myshkin (or however it’s spelled) seems to symbolize the inability of humanity to die to self and stick to what makes him comfortable like being around children. We have a distinct lack of blood being shed which has been alluded to in the scriptures since the fall of Adam and Eve. All the different points of view and never arriving at a conclusion is more like Thomas Aquinas’ or Aristotle’s dialectics in philosophy. This is not some light reading for the novel enjoyer.
i rewatched it carefully man amazing work
Excellent commentary!!
Thank you
Also you missed the most important part of why imitating jesus in an age of rationality caused him to go catatonic. Its the paradox of the circumstances. He just wants to be good and help others but when he genuinely trys to help everyone it only hurts them because it causes them to compare themselves to an impossible standard of goodness and hurts them because they will always fall short of that standard. So by him helping it just ends up hurting and its this paradox that destroys his mind.
I don’t understand why everyone compares him to Christ
Myshkin was a prince, it’s not a nickname…
Thanks for your feedback 🙏🏻
Thank you. Halfway through and lost because it was quite heady for me and was wondering if there was a deeper meaning. Now I am understanding
There is way more to discover in "The Idiot"! This was to short to really get deep into it....
So well explained thank u so much for this video
Glad it resonated with you👏🏻
when you talk about Ganya, you are talking of Rogozhin, and The price is his real title
I think you meant Rogozhin and not Ganya.
Nastasya Filippovna really annoyed me throughout the book.
You should read the book
Кстати, вы знаете, что "Мышкин" буквально означает "мышь" (mysh')?
And also Lev.... lion.
@@peterjg67 yes
Somehow I carry the traditional that allows for mystery and the rational that perhaps doesn’t within me. I come from a scientific family but carry my own private notion of Christ within. Knowing of other religions, I don’t think Christianity is required to maintain ethics. Plus my grandfather was a Darwinian atheist and a happy, good man.
I’m not sure this guy read the book
I don’t believe you read this book, this is entirely inaccurate** commentary.
I don’t think you read your own comment. Immaculate means free from flaws; perfect. Regardless, thanks for your feedback 🙏🏻
@@alexmostella thanks, it was an autocorrect from inaccurate lmao
I understood Myshkin to be a Christian figure and the philosophical thought process that comes through his view - my issue with The Idiot was the utter lack of character development despite the abundance of them to the point it was confusing.
There's no one to really care for, neither of the main love interests - Nastasya F. and Aglaya - are likeable, and him being "torn" didn't really come through to me.
Myshkin is often passive and when he seems to express his thoughts if any, it's some disassembled and prolonged rambling.
I believe this should have been more of an essay than contrived into a story. The dialogues could have been more to the point, to me.
I just don't see why the point he was trying to illustrate, had to be stretched into 700 pages of...no story. The facade that it's a story was rather distracting, and often tended to drive me away from his points...
side-note, it was also irritating that Dostoyevsky started using words mid-novel as if he just learned about it. Like "paterfamilias" to refer to Ivan Fyodorovich.
Nietzsche loved Dostoevsky so there may be hope yet. Nietzsche’s unbelief may have contributed to his nervous breakdown. And his lack of faith may have resulted in no support when he brilliantly pulled away the illusions of all philosophy. Unlike Nietzsche, I would be led by the Spirit to say it is time to, “Let our souls magnify the Lord” -- and realize there are no borders, especially when we blow into the sails of another's boat.
We don’t believe in God. God believes in us. As we are divinized, God literally indwells our soul and believes on our behalf by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost.
Beautiful
@@rktsnail We should never forget the assassination of Anwar El-Sadat on October 6, 1981
We should never forget the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin on November 4, 1995
May their names be blessed forever within the Almighty
De Facto (From the Fact - What Happens in Reality) vs. De Jure (From the Law - What is Actually Notated in Legal Code)
Classical Liberalism never changed. I have been both Republican and Democrat. Yet I have always voted what I believed to be Classical Liberalism. War profiteering drifts from Manichean Heresy (far right wing politics) to Albigensian Heresy (far left wing politics) as people explain themselves. My prayer is for the Holy Spirit to indwell you and wake you up. ❤
You understand the U.S. Democrats and the U.S. Republicans have colluded to War Profiteering since they assassinated JFK on November 22, 1963?
Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly. -- Leviticus 19:15
I wish you'd put a spoiler alert😢
How do you only have 1k subs. That makes no sense. Your channel should be at a million.
Thanks for the support. As long as people find the reviews useful then mission accomplished
Na, quality and mass appeal share an inverse relationship. If a channel has millions of subscribers its prolly not worth listening too.
As a non native English speaker, the English version of the book vocabulary is so difficult to understand
I think yoy confused Ganya with Rogozhin in minute 4:00 He exchanges crosses with the horns guy.
Yes! I did, thanks for letting me know 👊🏻
He confused ganya and rogozhin in the whole video. He should've corrected or reposted this
your take on Prince is utterly wrong. Prince was a noble title in Russia. like Prince Sheremetev or Prince Yusupov and it was how people were addressed so, your take on it makes little sense.
It's funny how you pronounce Myshkin.
Thanks for your feedback 🙏🏻
Umm you're really mixing up the names... I'm certain Mishkin did not try to murder anyone 😂
You’re right, Myshkin definitely did not kill anyone. I was new to making youtube videos when I made this & I messed up the names a few times during filming. Always trying to improve.
I was just making a joke. I appreciated your thoughts though 🙏
Nice work, just a shame you mixed up Rogozhin with Gania
I agree with you. I was new to RUclips when I made this video & recording myself on camera was very frustrating & embarrassing. I mixed the names up & didn’t realize until post production…& at that point I couldn’t fathom filming the whole thing again. In hindsight I wish I had, to maintain accuracy…maybe I’ll remake it sometime 😁
@@alexmostella No worries 😉 it was a very brave attempt at navigating through the quagmire of Dostoyevsky characters. Nonetheless, it was an insightful and interesting video. Thank you 😊
My friend . . . . Film it again and remove this one from RUclips. For me, as an orchestral/choral composer, the beauty of your work must shine through as a perfect expression of art. I challenge you.@@alexmostella
Really a great presentation.
Thanks Julius!
@@alexmostellaCould you tell me the background music you used for this video? Thanks
Well done 👍
👏🏻
Very good...but please pronounce it Mish-kin.
damn brother well presented .💯💯
Thank you 👏🏻
You mess up because of the names
Music too high! Sorry but ruins the narrative.
Thanks for your feedback 🙏🏻
You should delete this video,..it had good content but will confuse the heck out of new readers of the book with the many AI hallucinations.
Meeshkin
Can we all take a moment the appropriate how handsome Alex is?
You’ve gotten almost everything wrong here did you even read the book? This video is infuriating!
Jesus wasn’t a real person. The story was written by Greeks long afterwards it’s a mythology. It’s not Wednesday like the Jews say. It’s Wondanaz Day. And always will be.
Historians argue with each other whether those miraculous accounts about Jesus can be taken seriously or not but historians do not argue whether Jesus was a real person or not because all of them (aside of mythicists) agree that the historical evidence is clear, He was a real space-time person who lived in Judea, modern day Israel about 2000 years ago.
@@nikokapanen82 you will never understand that God is in you. You only see the parable on the page.
R/Atheism lol
Lmao bro you need to learn history instead of believing in conspiracies you watch on RUclips every credible historian believes Jesus was a real person