Even couched in terms of a 150 year old book translated from a foreign language, I found this book a real struggle to get though. Rambling, incoherent dialog where the details were often lost in a haze of circumlocution. Patronymic references to every character making it harder to keep track of who was who.

There were a number of passages I genuinely enjoyed but overall it was hard work to read. In hindsight, my first Dostoyevsky should have been The Brothers Karamazov or Crime and Punishment which are apparently some of his less polarising and more approachable works. ( )

Very good book. One of my favorites by Dostoevsky so far. I am excited to read what is to come ( )

Only 3 stars? The low mark pains me, since I gave 5 stars to "Crime and Punishment" and "The Brothers Karamazov." So I plunged into this 26-hour audiobook with patience and hope.

The narrator, Norman Dietz, was excellent and such a pleasure to listen to. According to his website, he's a professional reader with quite a talent for voices and accents. However, he may read a bit too slow on this one, as the story often dragged and my attention drifted elsewhere. Not a problem, since the story itself was pretty slow, so I could always delve back in without missing too much.

Until some library grinch put a hold on the book when I was at 80%. In my rush to finish, I increased the reading speed to 1.5x. It worked beautifully! I was still able to follow the reading, and actually focused better since it didn't drag as much. I should have increased the speed at the beginning! Instead of 26 hours, it would have taken 17. ( )

Dostoevsky described Prince Lev Nikolaevich Myshkin as a 'positively beautiful man' and he succeeds in making this protagonist innocent and beautiful without being too simple or boring. He is quite a contrast to Raskolnikov, but reminded me of Alyosha Karamazov in some ways. But he's less of a holy fool and more of an idiot, which is the word constantly used to bring down Prince Myshkin, who seems to be undeserving of the harsh title. Sure he's awkward and epileptic, but he's quite articulate and has lots on his mind (ie. his hilarious anti-Catholic rant). Sadly, he is reduced to idiocy at the end of the novel after the shitshow involving Nastasya Filippovna, femme fatale extraordinaire. She brings down Rogozhin and the Prince- so is she crazy or just in love with her fallen woman stance? The line between sanity and craziness is quite blurry in this novel, as is the line between intelligence and idiocy. We've got both extremes in us.

As usual with Dostoevsky, this had an exciting plot and was filled with memorable characters ie. pathetic Lebedev, consumptive Ippolit, and compulsive liar General Ivolgin. I loved the Nastasya/Aglaya foil and the jealousy between them was well depicted. It's always interesting when Dostoevsky draws on his own experiences- his epilepsy and his near execution- as he discusses both within the novel. There's lots of religion too, but lots of atheism and disbelief. Some good thoughts on religion vs. rationality (spirituality doesn't fit in with reason) and on how Russian passion causes such extreme conviction in religious belief or disbelief. It's amazing how he weaves these heavy and serious subjects through the novel but still makes it so damn enjoyable to read! ( )

Нещо средно между Форест Гъмп и Гордост и предразсъдъци, Идиот е историята на (басирам се, ще се сетите след това сравнение) простичък, но добродушен и всъщност умен младеж, който за изненада на всички успява да плува в аристократичните води на Русия от 19 в. с всичките им там женитби, годежи, заговори и т.н.

Тъй като нито Форест Гъмп, нито Гордост и предразсъдъци ми харесват, Идиот също не ме впечатли - дотолкова, че не можах да го издържа до края. Има някаква граница на безкрайните описания на безмислените подробности от междусемейната история и отношения на руската аристокрация, които мога да издържа и тя е около стотната страница. Да, разбрах - най-важното нещо в живота на всички тогава е било да се оженят/омъжат, точно както в Гордост и предразсъдъци, само не ми е ясно защо трябва да говорят само за това. ( )