Dostoevsky's 'The Idiot' and the Ethical Foundations of Narrative: Reading, Narrating, Scripting by Sarah J. Young (review)

Abstract

736 SEER, 83, 4, 2005 Tolstoi's own dualism with regard to sexuality would have broken Alexandrov 'srulesof criticalengagement, but it might ironicallyhave allowed a more ambivalent assessment of Anna and Vronsky's 'sin'. Occasionally, indeed, real-life opinions break through the textual membrane, as in Alexandrov's brief discussion of Svidrigailov's suicide in Crimeand Punishment, in which Dostoevskii'sdescriptionof the surrealcharacterwho witnessesSvidrigailov's last moments supposedlyrevealsthe author'santi-Semitism(p. 41). Such points, however, do not detract from the overall value of this major contribution to Tolstoian scholarship, not least because of the self-aware critical stance that Alexandrov adopts. He takesus on ajourney through the novel, noting and examining details along the way that have hitherto been given only cursoryattention or even overlookedaltogether.It is not alwaysan easy ride: some of the ideas, particularlyin the earlier chapters, could have been expressed more simply (as Alexandrov at one point himself acknowledges ), and there is a tendency to use dauntingvocabulary.Butjourney's end marks, as Alexandrov notes on the final page, 'a point of departure' from which readerscan begin to explorethe novel anew, with manypreconceptions abandoned and with eyes and perceptionsrefreshed. Department ofRussian ROGER COCKRELL University ofExeter Young, Sarah J. Dostoevsky's 'TheIdiot'andtheEthicalFoundations ofNarrative. Reading, Narrating, Scripting.Anthem Press, London, 2004. iX + 2I5 PP. Abbreviations.Notes. Bibliography.?39.99;I6.99. 'THEidiot is a sphinx',wrote Dostoevskiiin his notebooksforthe novel. Many readers, baffled by Idiot'sdiffuse narrative, agree. Perhaps because of its structural riddles, the novel has attracted some of the most sophisticated commentary in Dostoevskii criticism, as well as some of the worst (and most bizarre). Sarah Young's book, undoubtedly in the first category, examines Idiot's narrative. Young's argument is that its characters -autonomous and 'not subordinated to the will of the author-creator' are 'responsible for the structuring of the novel', giving Idiotthe 'narrational analogy of free will' (P. 9). Idiot's'most remarkablefeature', says Young, is 'the interactive nature of the characters'narrationalactivity'.Narrationdepends on others,and has the 'potential to affect and change the stories of others, and vice versa'. Young callsthis 'scripting' characters'enacting theirstoriesin orderto provokethe other into an active rejoinder,transformingstory-tellinginto a form of roleplay in which all the charactersare participants'.The purpose of scriptingis: ' I. to elude the definitionsotherstryto impose on one; 2. to establisha distinct social identity for oneself; 3. to break down other peoples' scripts for themselves where they are in conflict with (i) and (2); 4. to make others act accordingto one's own script(s)'(p. I 7). Because Nastas'iais the characterwho most successfullyimposes her script on the narrative,it is she who shapes its structure.In doing so, Youngargues, REVIEWS 737 she successfullycontains the attemptsof othersto finalizeher, but also wreaks havoc on the storythe narratorwishesto tell. The discussionof Nastas'ia'sscript the subjectof the firstof three parts in Young's book will surprise some readers. Young finds the heroine dominating the novel even before she has appearedin 'real-time'(p. 30). Her portrait(which Myshkinsees prior to Nastas'ia'sappearancein the flesh)is a tool for her scripting: 'the photograph is the only true presence Nastas'ia Filippovnahas in the earlypart in the novel and thereforeher only means of presenting a scriptof her own at this stage' (p. 38). Thus Nastas'ia'sactions, prior even to her appearance, seek to establish her 'as a conscious human subject, [retaining] the right to utter the last word about herself, and escape objectificationand finalizationby others'(p. 39). So dominant is Nastas'ia'sscript,arguesYoung,that when she is absentthe narrative'threatensto descend into chaos;the "true"plot [. . .] appearsto be happening elsewhere' (p. 57). Idiot'sabrupt ending is 'ultimate proof that Nastas'iaFilippovna'sscriptsucceeds';the novel 'cannot exist afterher death' (p. 67). This radical reading of Nastas'ia'srole extends to Young seeing her death as 'assisted suicide' (p. 70), given that she chooses both the means of her murder as well as its perpetrator.If this is correct, why, one might ask, does Nastas'iawait for Rogozhin and his knifeinsteadof, say,jumping in frontof a train at a convenient moment (as another deranged heroine once did)?Is the murderat the end of Idiotnot...