Making of The Idiot
Dostoevsky left for Western Europe with his bride, Anna
Grigoryevna Snitkina, on April 14, 1867 and lived in various cities until
1871. The Idiot was created during this period of his foreign residency.
Dostoevsky made the first notebook entry toward a new novel that would be
The Idiot on September 14 in Geneva; the novel was finished on January 17,
1869 in Florence.
Here is a summary of how The Idiot developed to be what we read
today. This summary is an abstraction and reorganization of the first part
of Chapter XV (pp. 334 - 348) of "Dostoevsky: his life and work" written
by Konstantin Mochulsky and translated by Michael A. Minihan. We can
observe two stages in Dostoevsky's work on The Idiot. The first produced a
series of plans, underlying thoughts, character and plot sketches. Though
they formed the platform for the next development and some of them
maintained the remnance of their original forms in the final version of
the novel, they were rejected on December 4, 1867. The second led directly
to the writing of the novel. As we will see, the writing of The Idiot was
characterized by numerous difficulties for the writer: struggle with a
"premature thought" of depicting "a wholly beautiful individual," the
birth and loss of his first daughter, and continuous attack of fits...
Stage 1
- Aug 1867 letter to Maikov from Geneva
- "I have a novel... there
isn't much yet down in black and white"
- Oct 1867 letter to Maikov
- "I'm throwing myself full force into the
novel..."
- Jan 1868 letter to Maikov
- "... but December 4th I tossed the lot
to the
devil."
Development of ideas for the first rejected version
- 1. Mignon and the Umetsky case
- On the first page of notebook No. 3 that dates from September 14
to October 27 appears the name Mignon. There is substantial evidence to
support that Dostoevsky conceived the new novel as a story of the Russian
Mignon substantiated by the artistic dramatization of the story of Olga
Umetskaya. Dostoevsky writes in the notebook: "The story of Mignon is
exactly the same as the story of Olga Umetskaya." His then-newly-wed wife
Anna Grigorevna Snitkina later writes: "I remember that in the winter of
1867 F. M. was interested in the details of the Umetsky trial, which had
raised a great tumult at that time. He was interested to the point that he
intended to make the heroine of the trial, Olga Umetskaya, the heroine of
his new novel."
- 2. The decomposition of the Russian cultured class
- The novel expanded around the Mignon-Umetskaya core to encompass
the decomposition of the Russian landowning gentry [6 Liberation of the
serfs]. In this stage appear the prototypes of the members of General
Ivolgin's family. The family at this stage includes an abject father who
is reduced into thievary, his wife who is "a person worthy of respect and
noble, but without sense," their handsome elder son "with pretention to
originality," and daughter who has a fiance, an officer who earns living
by money lending.
- 3. An idiot
- Dostoevsky first conceives of a character with the quality of "an
idiot" at this stage and makes him another son of the ruined landowning
family. The "idiot" of the first version is, however, directly opposite in
character to Prince Myshkin, though they both suffer from epileptic and
nervous fits. Here are some of the characteristics and themes which
Dostoevsky conceived and experimented to create an attractive idiot.
- (a) Pretended humility out of pride
In his notebook Dostoevsky writes: "The idiot's passions are
strong, his need of love burning, his pride excessive; out of pride he
wants to master himself and conquer himself. Finds pleasure in
humiliation." The idiot is to find himself in a chancery and to end the
affair with a scandal.
(b) Fortune and love-egoism
Dostoevsky, dissatisfied with the quality of proud humility,
introduces the motif of fortune. The idea of covetous knight, who is to be
obsessed by the fortune he accidentary obtains and to run away with the
foster-child of the family, Mignon, is combined with the idea of love
egoism. The "selfness" of the idiot is to manifest itself in love, which
is "both love and the highest satisfaction of pride and vanity."
Dostoevsky calls the idiot's love "the ultimate degree of ego" and "its
kingdom." In this egoistic personality, however, one can observe the
instinctive character of Rogozhin as well. The author writes: "His love is
strange: it is purely an immediate feeling, wihout any reflections. He
does not dream and does not calculate, for example, whether she'll be his
wife, whether this is possible, etc. It is enough for him to love."
(c) Oppression and pride - murder of the beloved
Dostoevsky revives the motif of oppression and humiliation; this
time, however, he creates an idiot who is oppressed and ashamed and who,
therefore, justifies his base acts that arise from viciousness. In pride
the idiot seeks a way out and salvation. Thus, his love itself is at the
end turned into pride. Here, Dostoevsky conceives the theme that
love-egoism can drive a man to murder his beloved and ascribes to the
idiot this possibility of the crime that Rogozhin is later to assume. At
this stage the story is to remind the reader of the capability of the
idiot to murder Mignon, who is captivated by his wild pride. The
"Karamazov" elemental vitality sustains the idiot through all his falls
and leads him to a way. However, Dostoevsky seems to remain unclear with
what " divine act" the idiot will end at this point.
(d) Theme of the "ressorection" of the strong personality with the
quality
of a "holy-fool"
Dostoevsky thinks of starting the novel from the place at which
"Crime and Punishment" was concluded. He characterizes the idiot by the
villainy of Iago [7]. The idiot, however, is to resurrect, as Raskolnikov
was to, "in a divine way" with the help of meekness and forgiveness of his
half-brother who is earlier wronged by the idiot. This half-brother, the
legitimate son of the family, occupies the spacial position of the future
Ganya Ivolgin and assumes the role of the future Prince Myshkin.
Meanwhile, in the idiot of this stage the character of Prince Myshkin is
not separated from that of Rogozhin. The idiot retains not only the
character of a villain, but also that of a "holy-fool," which is to
persist and finally to become the main trait of Myshkin.
(e) The contemporary generation and development of the prototype of
Stavrogin
Toward the end of October 1867 the scheme of the plot and the
pictures of the main characters were determined. However, Dostoevsky still
struggles to embody the full image of the hero and to this end he tries to
represent the contemporary generation in the hero. Dostoevsky perceives
the generation the idiot is to represent as the following: "The main
thought of the novel: so much power, so much passion in the contemporary
generation and they don't believe in anything. Unlimited idealism with
unlimited sensualism.... Ergo, the entire problem is that such a colossal
and anguishing nature (inclined to love and revenge) needs life, passion,
a task, and corresponding aim." Thus, the idiot as a representative of the
generation is to be a great, idle power, exhausting itself in inactivity:
a tragic figure who thirsts for beauty and an ideal, but who, due to his
disbelief, falls into ennui and appeals to the desposition of unmerciful
passion as a means to dispelling it. Dostoevsky develops the story of the
great, noble, and heroic personality falling into evil; however, much of
this theme is to wait for "The Devils." Nevertheless, several new traits
connect the idiot with Prince Myshkin. Although the image of Stavrogin
overshadows the idiot, he still retains some of the features that later
compose Myshkin, such as his being sent to Switzerland, attractiveness by
his childish naivete, the blood of a prince, and the holy-fool nature.
f) Revival of holy-fool-just-man and abandonment of the
proto-Stavrogin
At the last moment before he actually began work o November 30,
1867, Dostoevsky abandoned the demonish character like later he developed
in Stavrogin in favor of a hero with the character of a holy-fool. Here,
the idea of relationship between the idiot and children comes into the
pictre. Although the initial images developed at this stage of the idiot
constantly sorrounded by children and of the union between the two were
realized in "the Idiot," they still keep their remnants in the life of the
idiot in Switzerland and in the episode of the children's reconciliation
with Marie. Also, at this stage the motifs of the slap given to the idiot
and Holbein's painting with its demoralizing effect were already evident.
Stage 2
- Jan 1868 letter to Maikov
- ".... to portray a wholly beautiful
individual"
A new start with "a beautiful individual" and submission of the Part
One
Despite the fact that he was obliged to submit the first part
of
the novel for the January issue of "Russian Messenger," on December 4
Dostoevsky "tossed to the devil" everything he had written since November
30 and the ideas in the notebooks No. 3 and No. 11. Konstantin Mochulsky
alludes the cause of this abrupt change in the scheme of the novel to
Dostoevsky's unsuccesful struggle to depict the religious mystery of
salvation; Dostoevsky was being stuck with the problem of ascending to
sanctity the strong individual without grace who trying to attain this
goal by his might. Thus, the significant break in the creation of the
novel was marked by the replacement of the dynamic of a strong personality
uncovering the image of God and attaining sanctity with the static of an
innately just and beautiful personality as the central current of the
novel.
Dostoevsky confesses in his letter to Maikov dated January 12,
1868 that his "desperate situation" compelled him to resort to the
fascinating and tempting, but nontheless difficult and premature thought
of portraying "a wholly beautiful individual.[11]" As a result, into the
Part One, which he started writing on December 18 and submitted in its
full form on January 11, the "beautiful individual," Prince Myshkin, was
plunged premature and "extraordinarily weak." The prince remained weakly
delineated and to be developed under the pen.
Dostoevsky writes in the letter: "On the whole I simply don't
know myself what sort of thing I've sent." Thus, he is still ambiguous
toward the work he had done so far; however, he continues his letter to
emphasize the importance of the following parts to the novel: "The first
part is, in the main, only a simple introduction. One thing is necessary:
that it excite curiosity, if only some, for what follows.... In the second
part, everything must be established definitely (but it will still be far
from being explained)."
- March 2, 1868 letter to Maikov
- "I've still not begun the 3rd (2nd)
part of the novel."
- April 9, 1868 letter to Maikov
- "Nothing comes out."
Birth and Death of daughter Sonya and delay of the Part Two
Dostoevsky was to submit the second part of "the Idiot" by
April
1; however, it was submitted only to make the July issue of the Russian
Messenger. This delay was already inherent in the first part of the novel.
The ambiguous image of the hero and the multiplicity of the potential
plots caused by the publication of his yet premature thought gave
Dostoevsky a prolonged period of agony of trial and error. This mental
agony was acompanied by a number of violent fits. Dostoevsky's anxiety can
be observed in his letter to Maikov dated March 2: "As for The Idiot, I am
so afraid, so afraid, that you cannot imagine. Even a kind of unnatural
fear. It's never been like this before."
Moreover, the organization of his "artistic thoughts" and the
"artistic excecution" of the full image were further troubled by the birth
(in February) and subsequent death (in May) of his first daughter
Sonya.
- August 2, 1868 letter to Maikov
- "Now I will make my last efforts
on the
third part."
Submission of the Part Three and revelation of the denouement
From his letter to Maikov dated August 2, 1868 we can observe
Dostoevsky's continuing struggle with the novel. That he was putting his
carrier at stake in the work is evident in his words from the letter: "If
I set my novel right, I'll recover myself, if not then I'm ruined."
However, by the time when he finished the third part, he seems to have
been quite successful in getting over the crisis at least temporarily, and
even to have begun to bring to his consciousness the composition of the
novel that consists of actions that accelerate toward a denouement.
- January 25, 1869 letter to S.A. Isanova
- "Now it is finished, at
last!"
Conclusion of the novel
The novel was finished on January 17, 1869 in Florence and its
last chapters in the Part Four were despatched as a supplement to the
February issue of The Russian Messenger for 1869. Dostoevsky exhibits his
rather dissapointed attitude towards the work in the letter to his
niece.
Return to Home