Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:33:55.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

From Violence to Silence: Vicissitudes of Reading (in) The Idiot

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Abstract

How the narrative dynamics of The Idiot shape and inform its ethics is the focus of this article by Alexander Spektor. The Idiot is one of the most radical of Fedor Dostoevskii's novelistic experiments inasmuch as it questions the integrity of the self created through the process of narrative representation and interpretation. Dostoevskii achieves this effect by contrasting the idea of the inherent distance between sign and meaning with Myshkin's initial belief in the possibility of the transcendental signifier. The reader is gradually forced to accept that any form of participation in the big dialogue of the novel is bound to cause intense rivalry for the control of its meaning, which ultimately leads to physical violence either against the self (Ippolit and Nastasia Filippovna) or against others (Rogozhin). Dostoevskii undermines the integrity of any narrative formation of the self, including the self of the reader, by framing it within nonverbal acts of violence and compassion. Hence, The Idiot can be read as a Bildungsroman, in which the protagonist, Prince Myshkin, traverses the distance between the novel's is—an attempt to secure positive ethical meaning (within an established) narrative—and the novel's ought, the silent and nonsensical acts of compassion that, ultimately, defy signification. To make sense of The Idiot requires the reader to participate in an ethically compromised endeavor. Forced to do justice to the text, the reader also has to bear responsibility for the violence inherent in any narrative construction of the self.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Dostoevsky, Fyodor, The Idiot, trans. Pevear, Richard and Volokhonsky, Larissa (New York, 2003), 579–80Google Scholar. Emphasis in the original.

2. Mikhail, , Bakhtin, , Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics, ed. and trans. Emerson, Caryl (Minneapolis, 1984), 87 Google Scholar.

3. Ronell, Avital, Stupidity (Urbana, 2002), 174.Google Scholar

4. Dostoevsky, , The Idiot, 581–83Google Scholar. Emphasis in the original.

5. Ibid., 219. The translation is amended.

6. Ronell, , Stupidity, 176 Google Scholar.

7. Nussbaum, Martha C., Love's Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature (Oxford, 1990), 2324 Google Scholar.

8. Newton, Adam Z., Narrative Ethics (Cambridge, Mass., 1995), 171 Google Scholar.

9. Ibid., 17-18. Emphasis in the original.

10. See, for example, Emerson, Caryl, “Word and Image in Dostoevsky's Worlds: Robert Louis Jackson on Readings That Bakhtin Could Not Do,” in Elizabeth Cheresh Allen and Gary Saul Morson, eds., Freedom and Responsibility in Russian Literature: Essays in Honor of Robert Louis Jackson (Evanston, 1995), 245–65Google Scholar.

11. While I hope that “the reader” in this discussion can stand for a general reader of Dostoevskii's prose, my argument concerns one's personal responsibility for reading. Hence, I think it proper to choose “he” as a generic pronoun for this paper's reader if only to reflect the specific responsibility of this, gendered reader.

12. Dostoevsky, Fyodor, The Brothers Karamazov: A Novel in Four Parts with Epilogue, trans, and annotated, Pevear, Richard and Volokhonsky, Larissa (New York, 1990), 289 Google Scholar.

13. Cf. Val Vinokur, whose work on Dostoevskii—albeit from a different angle than mine—also focuses on the ethics of the dialogic activity in The Idiot: “while dialogue is often understood as an ethically positive category, Bakhtin turns it into something that is exemplary of a particular aesthetics.” Vinokur, Val, The Trace of Judaism: Dostoevsky, Babel, Mandelstam, Levinas (Evanston, 2008), 15 Google Scholar. Emphasis in the original. I address Vinokur's contrast between Bakhtinian and Levinasian ethics in Dostoevskii below.

14. Bakhtin, , Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics, 5556 Google Scholar.

15. Bakhtin, Mikhail, “Toward a Reworking of the Dostoevsky Book,” in Miller, Robin Feuer, ed., Critical Essays on Dostoevsky (Boston, 1986), 249 Google Scholar.

16. Jackson, Robert Louis, “Bakhtin's Poetics of Dostoevsky,” Dialogues with Dostoevsky: The Overwhelming Questions (Stanford, 1993), 274–75Google Scholar.

17. Emerson, , “Word and Image in Dostoevsky's Worlds,” 253 Google Scholar.

18. Emerson, Caryl, “Prefatory Comments on ‘Toward a Reworking of the Dostoevsky Book,'” in Miller, , ed., Critical Essays on Dostoevsky, 245 Google Scholar. Emphasis in the original.

19. For a most thorough critique of Bakhtin's omission of the dialogue's darker function, see Reed, Natalia, “The Philosophical Roots of Polyphony: A Dostoevskian Reading,” in Emerson, Caryl, ed., Critical Essays on Mikhail Bakhtin (New York, 1999)Google Scholar.

20. It is in this sense, I believe, that we can understand Malcolm Jones's dictum that “for Dostoevsky human language is ‘fallen discourse.'” See Malcolm, Jones, Dostoevsky and the Dynamics of Religious Experience (London, 2005), 146 Google Scholar.

21. For an insightful contemplation on the differences between Jackson's and Bakhtin's readings of Dostoevskii, see Emerson's “Word and Image in Dostoevsky's Worlds.“

22. Jackson, “Bakhtin's Poetics of Dostoevsky,” 283.

23. But also see Emerson: “Bakhtin's passion for the horizontally projected dialogic word comes at the cost of Dostoevsky's more vertical gestures, those leaps into iconic or transfigured time-space in the form of personal conversion or collective apocalypse.” Emerson,“Word and Image in Dostoevsky's Worlds,” 253.

24. Epstein, Mikhail, Slovo i molchanie: Metafizika russkoi Uteratury (Moscow, 2006), 268 Google Scholar. This and all other translations from Epstein are mine.

25. Ibid., 193.

26. For the very informative discussion on the duality of silence in Brothers Karamazov, see Jones, , Dostoevsky and the Dynamics of Religious Experience, 103–47Google Scholar.

27. Dostoevsky, , The Idiot, 385 Google Scholar.

28. Cf. Geoffrey Gait Harpham's identification of narrative plot with the space of ethics: “The most general and adequate conception of a narrative plot is that it moves from an unstable inaugural condition, a condition that is but ought not—a severance of the twothrough a process of sifting and exploration in search of an unknown but retrospectively inevitable condition that is and truly ought-to-be.” Harpham, Geoffrey Gait, Shadows of Ethics: Criticism and the Just Society (Durham, 1999), 36 Google Scholar.

29. Jones, , Dostoevsky and the Dynamics of Religious Experience, 92.Google Scholar

30. Dostoevsky, , The Brothers Karamazov, 108.Google Scholar

31. Jones, Malcolm, Dostoevsky after Bakhtin: Reading in Dostoevsky's Fantastic Realism (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), 181 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32. The importance for Dostoevskii of the search for a word that does not promulgate the split within the consciousness of the other but heals it can be seen by the central position this quest takes in all of his fiction, but especially in The Brothers Karamazov. While Zosima's life story and teachings stand their ground against the verbal aggression of The Grand Inquisitor, the philosophical drama of the novel consists in figuring out whether Zosima's word retains its power once it trickles down from above into the world and is taken on by Alesha and other characters. Robin Feuer Miller makes an important point that Zosima's life comes to the reader as “a product of indirection, of multiple layers of mediation.Miller, Robin Feuer, The Brothers Karamazov: Worlds of the Novel (New York, 1992), 74.Google Scholar

33. Emerson, Caryl, The First Hundred Years of Mikhail Bakhtin (Princeton, 1997), 128 Google Scholar.

34. See Robin Feuer Miller, Dostoevsky and The Idiot: Author, Narrator, and Reader (Cambridge, Mass., 1981), and Jones, , Dostoevsky after Bakhtin. Google Scholar

35. Newton, , Narrative Ethics, 19 Google Scholar.

36. Jones, , Dostoevsky after Bakhtin, 142 Google Scholar.

37. Young, Sarah J., Dostoevsky's The Idiot and the Ethical Foundations of Narrative: Reading, Narrating, Scripting (London, 2004), 17 Google Scholar.

38. Ibid., 18. Emphasis in the original.

39. Dostoevsky, , The Idiot, 309 Google Scholar.

40. Coetzee, J. M., “Confession and Double Thoughts: Tolstoy, Rousseau, Dostoevsky,” Comparative Literature 37, no. 3 (Summer 1985): 222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

41. Ibid.

42. Man, Paul de, Blindness and Insight: Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism (Minneapolis, 1983), 11 Google Scholar.

43. Dostoevsky, , The Idiot, 308 Google Scholar.

44. Coetzee, , “Confession and Double Thoughts,” 226 Google Scholar.

45. Ronell, , Stupidity, 175 Google Scholar. Emphasis in the original.

46. Young, , Dostoevsky's The Idiot and the Ethical Foundations of Narrative, 93 Google Scholar.

47. Ibid.

48. Dostoevskii, Fedor, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v tridtsati tomakh (Leningrad, 1973), 20:172–75Google Scholar. Emphasis in the original.

49. Jones, , Dostoevsky after Bakhtin, 181 Google Scholar.

50. Dostoevsky, , The Idiot, 36 Google Scholar. This, perhaps, is why Dostoevskii presents us, not with a portrait, which is already an interpretation, but with a photograph, which, at least symbolically, insists on presenting the image “as is.”

51. Vinokur, , Trace of Judaism, 18 Google Scholar.

52. See ibid., 15-34.

53. Levinas, Emmanuel, Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority (Pittsburgh, 1969), 23 Google Scholar, cited in Vinokur, Trace of Judaism, 17.

54. Vinokur, , Trace of Judaism, 22 Google Scholar.

55. In her feminist reading of the novel, Nina Pelican Straus makes a similar point by addressing the tension between Dostoevskii's desire to “save women ‘through Christ'” and a “dramatized apprehension of the ways Christianity makes that wish impossible to fulfill.” Nina Pelican Straus, “Flights from The Idiot's Womanhood,” in Liza Knapp, ed., Dostoevky's The Idiot; A Critical Companion (Evanston, 1998), 107 Google ScholarPubMed.

56. One only needs to remember the famous letter to Fonvisina in which Dostoevskii soberly announces himself “a child of this century,” not impervious to the epoch's doubts and religious skepticism. See Dostoevsky, Fyodor, Selected Letters of Fyodor Dostoevsky, ed. Frank, Joseph and Goldstein, David I., trans. MacAndrew, Andrew R. (New Brunswick, 1987), 68 Google Scholar.

57. Vinokur, Val, Trace of Judaism, 20 Google Scholar.

58. Dostoevskii, , Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, 20:175 Google Scholar.

59. Ibid., 173.

60. Since Vinokur uses Tolstoi (and Anna Karenina) as a foil for Dostoevskii, it is perhaps useful to compare Tolstoi's ambivalence toward language as a tool of communication in this novel (but also in War and Peace—especially in the hunt scene) to Dostoevskii's more radical stance in The Idiot (as argued here).

61. Benjamin, Walter, “Dostoevsky's The Idiot,” in Benjamin, Selected Writings, ed. Bullock, Marcus and Jennings, Michael W. (Cambridge, Mass., 1996), 1:80.Google Scholar

62. Similarly, what inspires Myshkin to believe Keller's intentions is, in Myshkin's words, Keller's “childlike trustfulness and extraordinary honesty.” Dostoevsky, , The Idiot, 308 Google Scholar. In the novel, Switzerland and childhood are the unreachable regions where a human being can still be whole, while Russia and adulthood are the markers of the fallen state, where the reader resides together with the novel's characters. Not surprisingly, Myshkin prefers to be with children, and those who, like Lizaveta Prokof'evna, are “childlike,” follow Myshkin readily, or at least, more willingly than others. It is also children's souls that Myshkin saves from perdition in Switzerland, the only place where his presence is able to save anyone.

63. In this sense, the novel can be seen as an inside-out twin of “The Dream of a Ridiculous Man.” While in the story the narrator's morally corrupt word is sufficient to destroy a Utopian and sinless society, in The Idiot Prince Myshkin's morally pure word has the same effect: it destroys a corrupt society.

64. Or as Benjamin puts it, the relationship of human life to the living.” Benjamin,“ Dostoevsky's The Idiot,” 81 Google ScholarPubMed.

65. Robbins, Jill, Altered Reading: Levinas and Literature (Chicago, 1999), 12 Google Scholar.

66. Ibid.

67. Here I have to confess that the futility of language to express the inexpressible is overwhelming. Whether we can speak of “acquiring knowledge” in Myshkin's case remains a question I cannot resolve.

68. It is perhaps in the first part that Myshkin's voice is most unambiguously salutary, and his meek presence, making the ripe conflicts explode, leads to a temporary resolution. Still, it is also in the first part where the intrigue and rivalry that beset the rest of the book begin to germinate. Even here Myshkin's voice manages to seduce both of the female protagonists. In this sense, while the story of Marie is irresistable, its asexual dynamics prove to be unsustainable in the world of the novel.

69. Dostoevsky, , The Idiot, 227 Google Scholar.

70. Ibid. 234. See Bethea, David, “The Idiot: Historicism Arrives at the Station,” in Knapp, ed. Dostoevsky's The Idiot: A Critical Companion, 130–90Google Scholar; and Emerson, Caryl, “Problems with Baxtin's Poetics,” Slavic and East European Journal 32, no. 4 (Winter 1988): 503–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

71. Or so he writes in the letter to his niece, Sofia Ivanova. See Dostoevsky, , Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, 28. 2:318.Google Scholar

72. Dostoevsky, , The Idiot, 610 Google Scholar.

73. See, for example, Wachtel, Andrew, “Dostoevsky's The Idiot: The Novel as Photograph,” History of Photography 26, no. 3 (2002): 205–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar; or Skakov, Nariman, “Dostoevsky's Christ and Silence at the Margins of The Idiot,” Dostoevsky Studies, n.s. 13 (2009): 121–40Google Scholar.

74. For a discussion of the anachronistic, Enlightenment nature of this interpretation, see Gatrall, Jeff, “Between Iconoclasm and Silence: Representing the Divine in Holbein and Dostoevskii,” Comparative Literature 53, no. 3 (Summer 2001): 215n3CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

75. Ibid., 218. For Ippolit this painting represents the triumph of nature and progress over spirituality: “Nature appears to the viewer of this painting in the shape of some enormous, implacable, and dumb beast, or to put it more correctly,… in the shape of some huge machine of the most modern construction, which has senselessly seized, crushed, and swallowed up, blankly and unfeelingly, a great and priceless being—such a being as by himself was worth the whole of nature and all its laws, the whole earth, which was perhaps created solely for the appearance of this being alone“! Ibid., 408.

76. See Coetzee, “Confession and Double Thoughts,” for a more thorough discussion of the nature of confessions in Dostoevskii in general and in The Idiot in particular. For a somewhat different reading of this scene, see Skakov, “Dostoevsky's Christ and Silence at the Margins of The Idiot.”

77. Skakov, , “Dostoevsky's Christ and Silence at the Margins of The Idiot,” 132Google Scholar.