First reading response, Anya

Cheers to the first reading response!

[It turned out kind of long. Please don’t get scared, it’s only to start things off. I won’t go into as broad a response every time. Also, the whole “Laughter” part is just a list of quotes, no analysis for now. I’m just keeping it for myself].

I underlined way too much as I read, it would take too long to go into all the little themes and subthemes, so I will try to organize my thoughts into several trends: character development, curious details, and my pet subject—laughter.

-          Character development

Rogozhin: What struck me is that Rogozhin is described as short. Having read the novel before (no spoilers coming), I have to say I am surprised by this. I definitely have a hard time envisioning him as short. Why does the author do that to him? My association with short guys is (I hope I do not offend) often insecurity and a desire to prove themselves. He also has small and grey eyes… mousy, perhaps? Though full of fire. I don’t say mousy for no reason… I’m going to try following parallels between these two strangers on the train as the novel develops. For now I’ll keep it down for fear of spoilers.

Prince Myshkin: Curiously, Myshkin is described as the physical opposite of his train neighbor. I wonder what this look in his eye is from which you can immediately guess epilepsy. I’ve never seen it. Tsk tsk. Did you guys know that Dostoyevsky himself suffered from epilepsy? I’m ashamed to say I somehow missed this fact until this summer (and I call myself a Russian lit major!). I’m not sure how clinically accurate his description of epilepsy is, maybe someone would like to write about than when we have more details.

The first utterance Myshkin makes already foils his interlocutor’s [собеседник’s] expectations. Rogozhin asks him sarcastically, but Myshkin responds openly and readily. This seems to be his trump card in many conversations: foiling people’s negative expectations.

People start giving Myshkin characteristics pretty early on. Lebedev says that he is “простодушны и искренны, а сие похвально!” (simple and sincere, which is praiseworthy). This will be a trend—people giving him characteristics. What about his personality makes that happen?

Curious that when Rogozhin tells Myshkin that he loves him (when the train arrives in the station), Myshkin is not totally gushing in response, but speaks to him politely… almost coolly? He “politely” offered his hand and “amiably” said… that he also liked him very much. Definitely missing Rogozhin’s impulsiveness and passion. Right?

When Myshkin meets Gen. Epanchin, he tells him that he thought, “"Это почти родственники, начну с них; может быть, мы друг другу и пригодимся, они мне, я им, -- если они люди хорошие". А я слышал, что вы люди хорошие.” [They are practically relatives and we may find each other useful, if they are good people. And he heard that they are good people.] This sounds like flattery to me!!! What is the fine line between open-heartedness, simplicity, straightforwardness… and flattery? Is the Prince playing dumb, but is actually very clever? Is he really all that pleasant? How come people just can’t help liking him?

A little later he says that he would not stay at the General’s even if he received an invitation, because it is not in his character “а так... по характеру.” Implying that he has… a character. Not just meekness.

Look at his other words soon after: first he readily gets up to leave, saying that he expected that the meeting would come to nothing, and maybe it is for the best. He says all of this with such a gentle expression on his face and such a genuine smile that the General can’t help but ask him to stay. As soon as that happens, Myshkin readily puts down his hat, and says that he figured Lizaveta Prokofyevna would like to meet him. S o w h a t  e x a c t l y  d i d  h e  f i g u r e  o n? Why does he change his tune in a heartbeat? Wily like a snake, that’s my impression right now.

I was in this mood when I read the calligraphy passage for the second time in recent memory. My first “aha! moment” is described below under “curious details,” but my second “aha! moment” has to do with what Myshkin’s description of the various scripts may say about his personality. His ability to perfectly mimic these various scripts, and even assign personalities to them and describe them in the minutes details… is kind of unnerving. Is he a perfect chameleon? Can he read people like he reads their handwriting? Perhaps he is an acute psychologist, that’s all. Certainly not something you would expect from a self-described “idiot.”

Lebedev: Who is this character? He is a buffoon, but is there more to him? Can Dostoyevsky’s work contain a purely flat character, I wonder?

General Epanchin: Upon first meeting him, he is described as clever, maybe even cunning. A lot of his “sincere” actions are calculated, he likes to appear “even Russian and warm-hearted.” But as the chapter progresses… he doesn’t look so bad. He loves his wife and his daughters. He seems to have sincere and fair reactions in his conversation with Ganya. He likes the Prince (even though he wants to use him as a distraction for his family, but still). So far, despite the narrator’s jabs at him, I like him.

Lizaveta Prokofyevna: For now, she is described as having had neither education nor beauty when she was young, and as getting capricious and impatient with age, and even becoming something of a чудачка… except something tells me that in Dostoyevsky’s book, being a чудачка is not a bad thing. Curious for later. The narrator is prickly in his descriptions of both her and her husband, and their daughters (see below). But he is not prickly in his description of Totsky (also see below). But the Epanchin family seems to be a good, wholesome one, with plenty of love among the family members. Perhaps a certain kind of prickliness from this narrator is a sign of affection, then?

Epanchin girls: “Но были и недоброжелатели. С ужасом говорилось о том, сколько книг они прочитали.” Hah! Also “Все три девицы Епанчины были барышни здоровые, цветущие, рослые, с удивительными плечами, с мощною грудью, с сильными, почти как у мужчин, руками, и, конечно вследствие своей силы и здоровья, любили иногда хорошо покушать, чего вовсе и не желали скрывать.” [First line of Chapter IV, Part I] Is this really a description of beauty?  The powerful breasts and hands almost like men’s… not really what we consider the standard of feminine beauty. And the appetites! Not typical for Russian literature ideals of the feminine (unless they Tolstoy’s peasant girls, I’d say). Why is the narrator making fun of them? It’s funny, they are models of socialist realism beauty :o) Also, they wake up at 10am. Tolstoy would so disapprove :P

The Narrator’s comical (mocking?) description of them really contrasts to the almost passionate description of the fragile and stunning NF. I wonder who the author is more in love with.

Gavrila Ardalionych Ivolgin, Ganya: Clearly unpleasant in my book. Beautiful, but with a cruel smile. I wonder what light Ganya’s beauty sheds on Dostoyevsky’s general feelings about physical beauty (ok, I gotta admit, I heard this in Meerson’s class ;-). Also, when he talks about how he treats his father and how he likes to keep his household in check: bleh. I think he is a negative character forever now. In my eyes, at least. Can you recover from an introduction like that one? But again, can a character be flat in a Dostoyevsky work…

Totsky: When we hear the story of Totsky and NF, the narrator gives us one clue that he is about to launch into this story from the POV of Totsky. At the very start he says “As Totsky himself would say.” And then the whole sad story of NF’s life is told from Totsky’s point of view. I guess to give the reader a glimpse of Totsky’s worldview. Which, I would say, is repulsive. I could go into the little details, but it looks like my response is already 5 pages long. But just one example: “Себя, свой покой и комфорт он любил и ценил более всего на свете, как и следовало в высшей степени порядочному человеку.” [He loved himself and his comfort above all things in the world, as befits an extremely decent man.] *Shudder*

Nastasiya Filippovna: Sounds like an unpredictable, proud, passionate, impulsive, tormented, confused girl. What Totsky did to her, and the way it’s described in his приятный и изящный [pleasant and elegant] style, is awful.

One of her main things is her beauty, of course. Myshkin characterizes her pretty well when he looks at her portrait and tells his impression to Ganya.

-          Curious details

o   The novel opens with the words “end of November.” I recently had a gtalk chat with a friend from Russia about the symbolism of autumn. Pretty much, it is not a positive thing. It is the season of withering, the preparation for the death of winter. The opening of the novel is clearly dreary. How come? What is it setting the stage for? It was so damp and foggy that the sunrise barely happened…

o   The narrator is shifty, he sometimes switches and speaks from various people’s perspectives. Or he might throw in something like “как сказал бы современный мыслитель” (as a modern thinker might say). What modern thinker? Why are we given the opinion of this modern thinker, why do we care? Are we going to keep getting things from the point of view [POV] of a modern thinker in the future? My guess is the narrator is toying with us, having fun, poking fun at modern thinkers… whoever they may be.

o   When I was reading this time, Myshkin’s description of his love for calligraphy made me think of Gogol’s Akakiy Akakievich from The Overcoat. There are parallels, I think, maybe even very telling ones. Allow me to post this long quote from The Overcoat:

"Оставьте меня, зачем вы меня обижаете?" И что-то странное заключалось в словах и в голосе, с каким они были произнесены.  В нем слышалось что-то такое преклоняющее на жалость, что один молодой человек, недавно определившийся, который, по примеру других, позволил было себе  посмеяться над ним, вдруг остановился, как будто пронзенный, и с тех пор как будто все переменилось перед ним и показалось в другом  виде. Какая-то неестественная сила оттолкнула его от товарищей, с которыми он познакомился, приняв их за приличных, светских людей. И долго потом, среди самых веселых минут, представлялся ему низенький чиновник с лысинкою на лбу, с своими проникающими словами: "Оставьте меня, зачем вы меня обижаете?" -  и  в этих проникающих словах эвенели другие слова: "Я брат твой".  И закрывал себя рукою бедный молодой человек, и много раз содрогался он потом на веку своем, видя, как много в человеке бесчеловечья, как много скрыто свирепой грубости в утонченной, образованной светскости, и, боже! даже в том человеке, которого свет признает благородным и честным…

For English speakers, this is the quote when A.A. says “Leave me, why do you insult/make fun of me?” It’s one of the most famous passages in the work.

My God. I LOVE GOGOL!!! There will be quite a range of polemics with Gogol in this work, I think it’s a major thing for Dostoyevsky.

-          Laughter (for now I will just keep an ongoing list of its occurrences, maybe I’ll do something with it later if it remains interesting) [For the sake of quickness, I’m going to skip translating quotes unless they are essential to my point, despite my own instructions. If you’d like to know where it’s from, ask me or google translate. Sorry :-/]

o   Rogozhin and Lebedev laugh at Myshkin on the train. At one point Myshkin joins their laughter while they are laughing at him: “Узелок ваш все-таки имеет некоторое значение, -- продолжал чиновник, когда нахохотались досыта (замечательно, что и сам обладатель узелка начал наконец смеяться, глядя на них, что увеличило их веселость)”

o   Rogozhin on the train is “Он был как-то рассеян, что-то очень рассеян, чуть ли не встревожен, даже становился как-то странен: иной раз слушал и не слушал, глядел и не глядел, смеялся и подчас сам не знал и не понимал, чему смеялся.” 

o   Myshkin’s first impression of Ganya: "Он, должно быть, когда один, совсем не так смотрит и, может быть, никогда не смеется", -- почувствовалось как-то князю.

o   -- То, стало быть, вставать и уходить? -- приподнялся князь, как-то даже весело рассмеявшись, несмотря на всю видимую затруднительность своих обстоятельств.

o   Взгляд князя был до того ласков в эту минуту, а улыбка его до того без всякого оттенка хотя бы какого-нибудь затаенного неприязненного ощущения, что генерал вдруг остановился и как-то вдруг другим образом посмотрел на своего гостя; вся перемена взгляда совершилась в одно мгновение.

o   -- Удивительно, -- сказал Ганя, -- и даже с сознанием своего назначения, -- прибавил он, смеясь насмешливо .   -- Смейся, смейся, а ведь тут карьера, -- сказал генерал

o   NF: “Не только не было заметно в ней хотя бы малейшего появления прежней насмешки, прежней вражды и ненависти, прежнего хохоту, от которого, при одном воспоминании, до сих пор проходил холод по спине Тоцкого, но, напротив, она как будто обрадовалась тому, что может наконец поговорить с кем-нибудь откровенно и по-дружески. Она призналась, что сама давно желала спросить дружеского совета, что мешала только гордость, но что теперь, когда лед разбит, ничего и не могло быть лучше. Сначала с грустною улыбкой, а потом весело и резво рассмеявшись, она призналась, что прежней бури во всяком случае и быть не могло […]”