Myshkin's Language

After reading Anya and Yelena's entries, I recalled a passage where the prince's language struck me as rather odd and perhaps suggesting a not so innocent or pleasant character. In Chapter II, when he begins his discussion of the death penalty with the valet, he says, "во Франции всё головы рубят" ("in France they're constantly chopping heads off."). In Russian ("рубить") as in English ("chop"), this verb is usually used in reference to wood and other objects, not people, so it sounds rather strong in this context, even rude and morbid. When the valet asks if the criminals scream while being guillotined, the prince says "Куды!...Голова отскочит так, что и глазом не успеешь мигнуть" ("How can they?...The head jumps off before you can blink."). It's been a while since I studied Russian lit, but to me, "куды" sounds pretty colloquial (because it's Ukrainian) and, again, inappropriate in this context. "Отскочит" ("jumps off/breaks off/comes off") also sounds strange here. The verb "скакать" usually means "jump, skip," so it seems as if the head acquires a life of its own upon being cut off, which is pretty morbose. Of course, here it is probably used colloquially ("breaks off/comes off"), but that still sounds disrespectful. This contrasts with the lofty language that follows about the merits of this particular criminal and the injustice of capital punishment in general. Why does Myshkin speak like this? Judging by his ability to mimic and interpret writing styles, he is very conscious of his word choice. His language also takes a morbid twist when he says that Rogozhin "зарезал бы ее (Н.Ф.)" ("would cut her [N.F.] with a knife/cut her throat").

Perhaps he does this simply to emphasize the horror of both capital punishment and murder, to underline death's terrifying normality (colloquial language) and abnormal meaninglessness (chopping is for wood, not heads, and jumping is for living creatures). Might this be a sign of his personal fear of death? In any case, I think that his preoccupation with this subject must have to do with his illness. As an epileptic he is, in a way, sentenced to death. He knows for sure that he will never be able to have a normal life, at least in economic, academic, social, professional, and interpersonal terms. He even says, "Что же с душой в эту минуту делается, до каких судорог ее доводят?" ("What happens to the soul in that moment, what compulsions do they provoke in it?"). The word "судорога" ("cramp/convulsion") immediately brings to mind seizures, which are common to epilepsy. It appears then that Myshkin identifies with those convicted to death on both a physical and emotional level.

In fact, he indirectly explains through this discussion that this is why he is an "idiot." He says that someone convicted to death "с ума сойдет или заплачет. Кто сказал, что человеческая природа в состоянии вынести это без сумасшествия?" ("will go crazy or start crying. Who said that human nature is in the condition to undergo this without madness?"). In this sense, Myshkin's "idiocy" is not as funny or quaint or pleasant or strange as others may think--it's a coping mechanism, or at least a natural reaction to a doomed life. This is a bit reminiscent of the Underground Man, another of Dostoievski's great and complex characters.
In this fatalism, Myshkin also resembles Nastasia Filipovna, who, according to the narrator, stopped valuing her life long ago and is also, despite her new, bold character, trapped in a life she did not choose.

Also, like Misha said, here the connection between character and author is crystal clear. Aside from the fact that Dostoievski too had epilepsy, Myshkin says, "Может быть, и есть такой человек, которому прочли приговор, дали помучиться, а потом сказали: "Ступай, тебя прощают". Вот такой человек, может быть, мог бы рассказать." ("Maybe there does exist someone who heard the sentence, was allowed to suffer, and then was told, 'Go, you've been forgiven.' Now that kind of person, perhaps, could tell us about it"). Myshkin, therefore, is Dostoievski himself, but before the lifesaving news of the czar's forgiveness. The author has, in that case, a comparative advantage over his character: he can see the whole picture, perhaps even understand it, and most importantly, he has hope, although he may imply here that having epilepsy is almost as fatal as being sentenced to death.