One of the most enjoyable parts of The Idiot is that it contains so much of Dostoevsky’s philosophy. His writing is filled with his reflections on life and it becomes very obvious why Nietzsche respected him so immensely. Even his smallest thoughts that embellish the narrative are extraordinarily interesting and offer many deep insights for readers to glean if they take time to reflect.
One of the more interesting thoughts that is presented in the book is expressed by the only relative of The Prince, Madame Yepanchin. She says to The Prince, “The heart is the main thing, the rest is nonsense.” Which is an interesting (despite somewhat cliché) thought. However, she explains what she means:
“A fool with a heart and no brains is as unhappy a fool as a fool with brains, but no heart. An old truth. I am a fool with a heart but no brains, and you are a fool with brains but no heart; and we’re both unhappy, and we both suffer.”
At face value, this may seem somewhat shallow, but if you read deeper into the subtext, it's a very interesting existential thought. No matter what you have, you wish for what you don’t have (a brain, or a heart). People can never be happy with what they have, whether or not it is something that can be changed: “We are both unhappy, and we both suffer.”
Perhaps Dostoevsky’s writing can offer some solace in the knowledge that the feeling is universal, and that even a man who may seem perfect (such as The Prince), is, in himself, still unhappy. Maybe if you understand that it is human nature to want what you can’t or don’t have, then you can try to overcome your shortfalls and realize how privileged you may be. Even if that privilege is something as basic as your heart or your brain.
One of the more interesting thoughts that is presented in the book is expressed by the only relative of The Prince, Madame Yepanchin. She says to The Prince, “The heart is the main thing, the rest is nonsense.” Which is an interesting (despite somewhat cliché) thought. However, she explains what she means:
“A fool with a heart and no brains is as unhappy a fool as a fool with brains, but no heart. An old truth. I am a fool with a heart but no brains, and you are a fool with brains but no heart; and we’re both unhappy, and we both suffer.”
At face value, this may seem somewhat shallow, but if you read deeper into the subtext, it's a very interesting existential thought. No matter what you have, you wish for what you don’t have (a brain, or a heart). People can never be happy with what they have, whether or not it is something that can be changed: “We are both unhappy, and we both suffer.”
Perhaps Dostoevsky’s writing can offer some solace in the knowledge that the feeling is universal, and that even a man who may seem perfect (such as The Prince), is, in himself, still unhappy. Maybe if you understand that it is human nature to want what you can’t or don’t have, then you can try to overcome your shortfalls and realize how privileged you may be. Even if that privilege is something as basic as your heart or your brain.
Your exploration of the the philosophy presented in the novel was a wize choice, and your conclusions are both insighful and interesting to read. Have you given thought to how this can be used to support your argument concerning the classic novel, without falling into the cliché of being "relatable".
ReplyDelete