What do you think?
Rate this book
袠写懈芯褌
鈥溞樞葱感狙傗€� 械 械写懈薪 芯褌 锌械褌褌械 胁械谢懈泻懈 褉芯屑邪薪邪 薪邪 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈. 小褗写斜邪褌邪 薪邪 锌芯谢芯卸懈褌械谢薪芯 锌褉械泻褉邪褋薪懈褌械 褏芯褉邪 胁褗胁 胁褋懈褔泻懈 胁褉械屑械薪邪 械 械写薪邪泻胁邪 颅 褌褉邪谐懈褔薪邪 卸械褉褌胁邪 胁 懈屑械褌芯 薪邪 效芯胁械褔械褋褌胁芯褌芯. 袧芯 褌械蟹懈 谢褗褔械蟹邪褉薪懈 谢懈褔薪芯褋褌懈, 泻芯懈褌芯 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯褌芯 薪邪褉懈褔邪 锌芯薪褟泻芯谐邪 懈写懈芯褌懈, 薪芯褋褟褌 懈褋褌懈薪褋泻邪褌邪 谢褞斜芯胁 懈 懈褋褌懈薪褋泻邪褌邪 小胁械褌谢懈薪邪 薪邪 褔芯胁械褕泻懈褟 写褍褏.
685 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1869
32872 people are currently reading
422297 people want to read
About the author
Fyodor Dostoevsky
3,225听books66.9k听followers
肖褢写芯褉 袦懈褏邪泄谢芯胁懈褔 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈泄
(Russian)
Works, such as the novels Crime and Punishment (1866), The Idiot (1869), and The Brothers Karamazov (1880), of Russian writer Feodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky or Dostoevski combine religious mysticism with profound psychological insight.
Very influential writings of Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin included Problems of Dostoyevsky's Works (1929),
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky composed short stories, essays, and journals. His literature explores humans in the troubled political, social, and spiritual atmospheres of 19th-century and engages with a variety of philosophies and themes. People most acclaimed his Demons(1872) .
Many literary critics rate him of the greatest of world literature and consider multiple highly influential masterpieces. They consider his Notes from Underground of the first existentialist literature. He also well acts as a philosopher and theologian.
(Russian: 肖褢写芯褉 袦懈褏邪泄谢芯胁懈褔 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈泄) (see also Fiodor Dosto茂evski)
Works, such as the novels Crime and Punishment (1866), The Idiot (1869), and The Brothers Karamazov (1880), of Russian writer Feodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky or Dostoevski combine religious mysticism with profound psychological insight.
Very influential writings of Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin included Problems of Dostoyevsky's Works (1929),
Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky composed short stories, essays, and journals. His literature explores humans in the troubled political, social, and spiritual atmospheres of 19th-century and engages with a variety of philosophies and themes. People most acclaimed his Demons(1872) .
Many literary critics rate him of the greatest of world literature and consider multiple highly influential masterpieces. They consider his Notes from Underground of the first existentialist literature. He also well acts as a philosopher and theologian.
(Russian: 肖褢写芯褉 袦懈褏邪泄谢芯胁懈褔 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈泄) (see also Fiodor Dosto茂evski)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 10,792 reviews
June 15, 2018
If Raskolnikov was the charismatic murderer whose side I took despite myself when he killed an old woman out of greed and broke down psychologically afterwards, Prince Myshkin is the supposedly good, childlike Christ figure whom I failed to like at all.
Just do make it clear from the beginning: I liked the novel just as much as and , and I found it just as compulsively readable. The cast of characters is magnificent.
My sole problem is the character of Myshkin. We are not a likely pair to hit it off, of course.
He is a religious fanatic, whose conviction is so narrow-minded that he hates other variations of Christian dogma even more than atheists: 鈥淵es, that鈥檚 my opinion! Atheism only preaches a negation, but Catholicism goes further: it preaches a distorted Christ, a Christ calumniated and defamed by themselves, the opposite of Christ! It preaches the Antichrist, I declare it does, I assure you it does!鈥� - I am an atheist, but strongly in support of tolerance and respect beyond the narrow boundaries of one鈥檚 own convictions. So I will give Myshkin a pass on his fanaticism, knowing full well he wouldn鈥檛 give me one, considering his reaction when he heard his benefactor had converted to Catholicism.
He is a Russian nationalist, believing in expanding Russian dogma to the West: 鈥淣ot letting ourselves be slavishly caught by the wiles of the Jesuits, but carrying our Russian civilisation to them, we ought to stand before them and not let it be said among us, as it was just now, that their preaching is skilful.鈥� - I believe in global citizenship and consider nationalism to be the greatest evil in world history. But I will give him a pass on that one, knowing the historical framework in which it was uttered.
He is proud of his lack of education, and does absolutely nothing to enhance his own understanding, despite having leisure to spend all day studying. I believe in lifelong learning to develop as a human being. But I will give him a pass on that one, knowing he suffers from epilepsy and maybe from other conditions as well, which might make learning impossible for him.
He is an elitist, openly rejecting equality and democracy in favour of his own, idle class: 鈥淚 am a prince myself, of ancient family, and I am sitting with princes. I speak to save us all, that our class may not be vanishing in vain; in darkness, without realising anything, abusing everything, and losing everything. Why disappear and make way for others when we might remain in advance and be the leaders?鈥� - I am for equality and democracy, for a classless society without any privileges.
He is utterly afraid of female sexuality and almost pathological in his attempt to ignore the fact that it exists, admiring childlike behaviour and the inexperienced beauty of virgins. - I am a grown-up woman.
I will let all of that pass, there is no reason why I shouldn鈥檛 be able to identify with that as much as with a raving murderer, right? What I can鈥檛 accept is his posturing as a 鈥渢ruly good鈥�, almost holy person. That is too much. His social ineptitude, his lack of imagination, his literal-mindedness, his prejudices - all of that might be fitting the time and place where he lives, but it is not objectively good.
In fact, I don鈥檛 see any goodness in him at all. Even Raskolnikov, poor, and under supreme stress, was able to spontaneously give his last money to a desperate family to finance a funeral. Myshkin does nothing helpful with his fortune, which conveniently fell into his over-privileged lap. On the contrary. He uses the money to cruise in the Russian upper class society and to mingle with distinguished families. He doesn鈥檛 work, and isn鈥檛 even remotely interested in anything to do with actual progress in society.
Instead, he gives credit to whoever happens to be in the room with him at the moment, without engaging or giving any active help, and he changes his mind when another person steps into the room. Critics are eager to call this his 鈥渋nnocence鈥� and gullibility, and to use it as proof that he is a 鈥渂etter person鈥� than the characters who have motives and agendas for their actions. Since when is cluelessness a virtue? And what if he is not an idiot? If you for one second step out of that thought pattern, you can also call his change of mind hypocrisy, or opportunism, or fear of conflict, or flattery.
Some might call it Christian meekness. I call it condescension. Myshkin is incredibly one-dimensional in his value system, fearing sexuality and human interaction. To compensate for his fears, he puts himself 鈥渁bove鈥� them, looking down on 鈥渨eak鈥� people, forgiving and pitying them. But what right has he to 鈥渇orgive鈥� other people for engaging in conflicts that are caused by his own social ineptitude? If I could see in Myshkin a person who is on the autistic spectrum, I would feel compassion for him and be frustrated that his community is not capable of helping him communicate according to his abilities. But whenever that idea comes to mind, the big DOSTOYEVSKY LITERARY CRITICISM stands in the way. Under no circumstances am I to forget that Dostoyevsky truly saw in Myshkin a Christlike figure, and that he himself was committed to orthodox Christian dogma to the point of writing in a letter (in 1854):
鈥淚f someone proved to me that Christ was outside the truth, and it was really true that the truth was outside Christ, then I would still prefer to remain with Christ than with truth.鈥�
Well, to be honest, I think that is precisely what this novel shows. Dostoyevsky, the brilliant realist writer, writes a story containing the truth of social life as he has accurately observed it, and his Christ is moping around on the fringes, causing trouble rather than offering ethical guidelines. He is absolutely passive, incapable of one single motivated, proactive good deed.
Only criminals and ignorant peasants invoke the name of Christ in the novel. The educated people with whom Myshkin mingles are concerned with their own nervous modernity. They act like neglected children, drawing negative attention to themselves to make the (God)-father figure notice them. But he remains silent, ignoring even his most cherished child, the one he sacrificed for all the others, - Christ. It is Holbein鈥檚 dead Christ, brutally shown in his human insignificance, that stands as a symbol for the religious vacuum in the novel, a Christ figure that can make people lose their faith, as Myshkin admits himself.
The characters argue and discuss their respective positions on philosophy and religion throughout the long digressive plot, and Myshkin mourns earlier times when people were of a simpler mind:
鈥淚n those days, they were men of one idea, but now we are more nervous, more developed, more sensitive; men capable of two or three ideas at once 鈥� Modern men are broader-minded - and I swear that this prevents their being so all-of-a-piece as they were in those days.鈥�
That is what he says to Ippolyt, a poor, cynical 18-year-old boy dying (but not fast enough) of consumption. When the young man asks Myshkin how to die with decency, the idiotic Christ figure doesn鈥檛 offer him his house or moral support, even though he knows that Ippolyt is in a conflict with Ganya, with whom he is currently staying. No, help can鈥檛 be offered, just this:
鈥淧ass us by, and forgive us our happiness鈥�, said Myshkin in a low voice.鈥�
Oh, the goodness of that (non-)action.
Another telling situation occurs when Myshkin receives the clearly confused general Ivolgin, in a state of rage, whose M眉nchhausen-stories of meeting Napoleon are evidently hysterical lies. Even the idiotic Myshkin understands that something is wrong with the general, but he lets him rave on, encouraging him in his folly. If that was all, I could argue that two fools had met, and that Myshkin couldn鈥檛 be expected to show compassion and try to calm down the ill man (who has a stroke in the street shortly afterwards, supported by the 鈥渕alignant鈥� atheists rather than the Christian elitist characters). But Myshkin is not a fool in that respect, just a passively condescending man. His reaction is outrageous:
鈥淗aven鈥檛 I made it worse by leading him on to such flights?鈥� Myshkin wondered uneasily, and suddenly he could not restrain himself, and laughed violently for ten minutes. He was nearly beginning to reproach himself for his laughter, but at once realised that he had nothing to reproach himself with, since he had an infinite pity for the general.鈥�
Right! How convenient for you, Prince! And you suffer so much when others laugh at your inadequacies. I have an infinite pity for you, Sir! But I won鈥檛 raise a finger to help you, all the same. Because being a completely innocent little idiot, I don鈥檛 know how to do that.
Which leads me to my last comment on the character of Myshkin, who repeatedly was compared to Don Quixote in the novel. He is NOT AT ALL LIKE THE DON!
Don Quixote has more imagination and erudition than his contemporaries. Myshkin has none at all.
Don Quixote actively wants to change the world for the better. Myshkin wants to passively enjoy his privileged status.
Don Quixote is generous and open-minded. Myshkin is aloof and uninterested.
Don Quixote has a mission. Myshkin floats in upper class meaninglessness.
Don Quixote loves his ugly Dulcinea. Myshkin can鈥檛 choose between the two prettiest girls in society, but wants them to remain children to be able to worship them as virgins.
So, who were my favourite characters then? As often happens to me while reading Dickens as well, I found much more satisfaction following the minor characters. Kolya, Ippolyt, Lebedyev, Rogozhin, Aglaia, Nastasya - all these people experiencing Russian society in the process of moving towards modernity are affected by one or several of its aspects. They try to deal with modernity ad hoc, without a recipe, and suffer from confusion.
Aglaia!
When she says she wants to become an educator, to DO something, she shows the spirit of future entrepreneurship, including women in active life. When she goes from one emotional state to another, not willing to be a negotiable good in her parents鈥� marriage plans, a piece of property moving from one domestic jail to another, she is a true hero. But she embraces the idea of ownership and control, and in order to own Myshkin, she acts out a despicably arrogant farce in front of a vulnerable rival, using as a weapon her privilege and chastity. A flawed but interesting character for sure. She would have been utterly unhappy, had she reached her goal.
Kolya!
Trying to navigate his hysterical environment and to build bridges between his family鈥檚 needs and the society they depend on, and to support parents, siblings, and friends with actions rather than words, he is a truly good person.
Rogozhin!
Blinded by passion but capable of sincere feeling and fidelity, he is a true lover, yet driven to madness and criminal behaviour. He admits to his crimes and accepts the following punishment.
Nastasya!
The abused child who takes out the punishment on herself, like anorexic or self-harming young girls nowadays, convinced that the harm done to them is a sign of their own filthiness. Myshkin drives her over the edge with his condescending pity and forgiveness - by enforcing her idea of guilt and worthlessness. As if Myshkin had any right to claim superiority! He seals her fate when he remains completely passive in the showdown between her and arrogant, impertinent Aglaia, and then creates an atmosphere of self-sacrifice during the wedding preparations:
鈥淗e seemed really to look on his marriage as some insignificant formality, he held his own future so cheap.鈥�
So what am I to make of my reading of the Idiot? What is the ultimate feeling, closing the book after days of frenzied engagement with the characters?
I loved the novel, hated the main character (but I鈥檒l FORGIVE him, of course, feeling PITY for his suffering), and am prepared for another Dostoyevsky. Let the Devils haunt me next!
Just do make it clear from the beginning: I liked the novel just as much as and , and I found it just as compulsively readable. The cast of characters is magnificent.
My sole problem is the character of Myshkin. We are not a likely pair to hit it off, of course.
He is a religious fanatic, whose conviction is so narrow-minded that he hates other variations of Christian dogma even more than atheists: 鈥淵es, that鈥檚 my opinion! Atheism only preaches a negation, but Catholicism goes further: it preaches a distorted Christ, a Christ calumniated and defamed by themselves, the opposite of Christ! It preaches the Antichrist, I declare it does, I assure you it does!鈥� - I am an atheist, but strongly in support of tolerance and respect beyond the narrow boundaries of one鈥檚 own convictions. So I will give Myshkin a pass on his fanaticism, knowing full well he wouldn鈥檛 give me one, considering his reaction when he heard his benefactor had converted to Catholicism.
He is a Russian nationalist, believing in expanding Russian dogma to the West: 鈥淣ot letting ourselves be slavishly caught by the wiles of the Jesuits, but carrying our Russian civilisation to them, we ought to stand before them and not let it be said among us, as it was just now, that their preaching is skilful.鈥� - I believe in global citizenship and consider nationalism to be the greatest evil in world history. But I will give him a pass on that one, knowing the historical framework in which it was uttered.
He is proud of his lack of education, and does absolutely nothing to enhance his own understanding, despite having leisure to spend all day studying. I believe in lifelong learning to develop as a human being. But I will give him a pass on that one, knowing he suffers from epilepsy and maybe from other conditions as well, which might make learning impossible for him.
He is an elitist, openly rejecting equality and democracy in favour of his own, idle class: 鈥淚 am a prince myself, of ancient family, and I am sitting with princes. I speak to save us all, that our class may not be vanishing in vain; in darkness, without realising anything, abusing everything, and losing everything. Why disappear and make way for others when we might remain in advance and be the leaders?鈥� - I am for equality and democracy, for a classless society without any privileges.
He is utterly afraid of female sexuality and almost pathological in his attempt to ignore the fact that it exists, admiring childlike behaviour and the inexperienced beauty of virgins. - I am a grown-up woman.
I will let all of that pass, there is no reason why I shouldn鈥檛 be able to identify with that as much as with a raving murderer, right? What I can鈥檛 accept is his posturing as a 鈥渢ruly good鈥�, almost holy person. That is too much. His social ineptitude, his lack of imagination, his literal-mindedness, his prejudices - all of that might be fitting the time and place where he lives, but it is not objectively good.
In fact, I don鈥檛 see any goodness in him at all. Even Raskolnikov, poor, and under supreme stress, was able to spontaneously give his last money to a desperate family to finance a funeral. Myshkin does nothing helpful with his fortune, which conveniently fell into his over-privileged lap. On the contrary. He uses the money to cruise in the Russian upper class society and to mingle with distinguished families. He doesn鈥檛 work, and isn鈥檛 even remotely interested in anything to do with actual progress in society.
Instead, he gives credit to whoever happens to be in the room with him at the moment, without engaging or giving any active help, and he changes his mind when another person steps into the room. Critics are eager to call this his 鈥渋nnocence鈥� and gullibility, and to use it as proof that he is a 鈥渂etter person鈥� than the characters who have motives and agendas for their actions. Since when is cluelessness a virtue? And what if he is not an idiot? If you for one second step out of that thought pattern, you can also call his change of mind hypocrisy, or opportunism, or fear of conflict, or flattery.
Some might call it Christian meekness. I call it condescension. Myshkin is incredibly one-dimensional in his value system, fearing sexuality and human interaction. To compensate for his fears, he puts himself 鈥渁bove鈥� them, looking down on 鈥渨eak鈥� people, forgiving and pitying them. But what right has he to 鈥渇orgive鈥� other people for engaging in conflicts that are caused by his own social ineptitude? If I could see in Myshkin a person who is on the autistic spectrum, I would feel compassion for him and be frustrated that his community is not capable of helping him communicate according to his abilities. But whenever that idea comes to mind, the big DOSTOYEVSKY LITERARY CRITICISM stands in the way. Under no circumstances am I to forget that Dostoyevsky truly saw in Myshkin a Christlike figure, and that he himself was committed to orthodox Christian dogma to the point of writing in a letter (in 1854):
鈥淚f someone proved to me that Christ was outside the truth, and it was really true that the truth was outside Christ, then I would still prefer to remain with Christ than with truth.鈥�
Well, to be honest, I think that is precisely what this novel shows. Dostoyevsky, the brilliant realist writer, writes a story containing the truth of social life as he has accurately observed it, and his Christ is moping around on the fringes, causing trouble rather than offering ethical guidelines. He is absolutely passive, incapable of one single motivated, proactive good deed.
Only criminals and ignorant peasants invoke the name of Christ in the novel. The educated people with whom Myshkin mingles are concerned with their own nervous modernity. They act like neglected children, drawing negative attention to themselves to make the (God)-father figure notice them. But he remains silent, ignoring even his most cherished child, the one he sacrificed for all the others, - Christ. It is Holbein鈥檚 dead Christ, brutally shown in his human insignificance, that stands as a symbol for the religious vacuum in the novel, a Christ figure that can make people lose their faith, as Myshkin admits himself.
The characters argue and discuss their respective positions on philosophy and religion throughout the long digressive plot, and Myshkin mourns earlier times when people were of a simpler mind:
鈥淚n those days, they were men of one idea, but now we are more nervous, more developed, more sensitive; men capable of two or three ideas at once 鈥� Modern men are broader-minded - and I swear that this prevents their being so all-of-a-piece as they were in those days.鈥�
That is what he says to Ippolyt, a poor, cynical 18-year-old boy dying (but not fast enough) of consumption. When the young man asks Myshkin how to die with decency, the idiotic Christ figure doesn鈥檛 offer him his house or moral support, even though he knows that Ippolyt is in a conflict with Ganya, with whom he is currently staying. No, help can鈥檛 be offered, just this:
鈥淧ass us by, and forgive us our happiness鈥�, said Myshkin in a low voice.鈥�
Oh, the goodness of that (non-)action.
Another telling situation occurs when Myshkin receives the clearly confused general Ivolgin, in a state of rage, whose M眉nchhausen-stories of meeting Napoleon are evidently hysterical lies. Even the idiotic Myshkin understands that something is wrong with the general, but he lets him rave on, encouraging him in his folly. If that was all, I could argue that two fools had met, and that Myshkin couldn鈥檛 be expected to show compassion and try to calm down the ill man (who has a stroke in the street shortly afterwards, supported by the 鈥渕alignant鈥� atheists rather than the Christian elitist characters). But Myshkin is not a fool in that respect, just a passively condescending man. His reaction is outrageous:
鈥淗aven鈥檛 I made it worse by leading him on to such flights?鈥� Myshkin wondered uneasily, and suddenly he could not restrain himself, and laughed violently for ten minutes. He was nearly beginning to reproach himself for his laughter, but at once realised that he had nothing to reproach himself with, since he had an infinite pity for the general.鈥�
Right! How convenient for you, Prince! And you suffer so much when others laugh at your inadequacies. I have an infinite pity for you, Sir! But I won鈥檛 raise a finger to help you, all the same. Because being a completely innocent little idiot, I don鈥檛 know how to do that.
Which leads me to my last comment on the character of Myshkin, who repeatedly was compared to Don Quixote in the novel. He is NOT AT ALL LIKE THE DON!
Don Quixote has more imagination and erudition than his contemporaries. Myshkin has none at all.
Don Quixote actively wants to change the world for the better. Myshkin wants to passively enjoy his privileged status.
Don Quixote is generous and open-minded. Myshkin is aloof and uninterested.
Don Quixote has a mission. Myshkin floats in upper class meaninglessness.
Don Quixote loves his ugly Dulcinea. Myshkin can鈥檛 choose between the two prettiest girls in society, but wants them to remain children to be able to worship them as virgins.
So, who were my favourite characters then? As often happens to me while reading Dickens as well, I found much more satisfaction following the minor characters. Kolya, Ippolyt, Lebedyev, Rogozhin, Aglaia, Nastasya - all these people experiencing Russian society in the process of moving towards modernity are affected by one or several of its aspects. They try to deal with modernity ad hoc, without a recipe, and suffer from confusion.
Aglaia!
When she says she wants to become an educator, to DO something, she shows the spirit of future entrepreneurship, including women in active life. When she goes from one emotional state to another, not willing to be a negotiable good in her parents鈥� marriage plans, a piece of property moving from one domestic jail to another, she is a true hero. But she embraces the idea of ownership and control, and in order to own Myshkin, she acts out a despicably arrogant farce in front of a vulnerable rival, using as a weapon her privilege and chastity. A flawed but interesting character for sure. She would have been utterly unhappy, had she reached her goal.
Kolya!
Trying to navigate his hysterical environment and to build bridges between his family鈥檚 needs and the society they depend on, and to support parents, siblings, and friends with actions rather than words, he is a truly good person.
Rogozhin!
Blinded by passion but capable of sincere feeling and fidelity, he is a true lover, yet driven to madness and criminal behaviour. He admits to his crimes and accepts the following punishment.
Nastasya!
The abused child who takes out the punishment on herself, like anorexic or self-harming young girls nowadays, convinced that the harm done to them is a sign of their own filthiness. Myshkin drives her over the edge with his condescending pity and forgiveness - by enforcing her idea of guilt and worthlessness. As if Myshkin had any right to claim superiority! He seals her fate when he remains completely passive in the showdown between her and arrogant, impertinent Aglaia, and then creates an atmosphere of self-sacrifice during the wedding preparations:
鈥淗e seemed really to look on his marriage as some insignificant formality, he held his own future so cheap.鈥�
So what am I to make of my reading of the Idiot? What is the ultimate feeling, closing the book after days of frenzied engagement with the characters?
I loved the novel, hated the main character (but I鈥檒l FORGIVE him, of course, feeling PITY for his suffering), and am prepared for another Dostoyevsky. Let the Devils haunt me next!
August 10, 2009
I鈥檝e been trying to review this book for over a week now, but I can鈥檛. I鈥檓 struggling with something: How do I review a Russian literature classic? Better yet, how do I review a Russian literature classic without sounding like a total dumbass? (Hint: It鈥檚 probably not going to happen.)
First I suppose a short plot synopsis should be in order:
The Idiot portrays young, childlike Prince Myshkin, who returns to his native Russia to seek out distant relatives after he has spent several years in a Swiss sanatorium. While on the train to Russia, he meets and befriends a man of dubious character called Rogozhin. Rogozhin is unhealthily obsessed with the mysterious beauty, Nastasya Filippovna to the point where the reader just knows nothing good will come of it. Of course the prince gets caught up with Rogozhin, Filippovna, and the society around them.
The only other Dostoevsky novel I鈥檝e read was Crime and Punishment, so of course my brain is going to compare the two. Where Crime and Punishment deals with Raskolnikov鈥檚 internal struggle, The Idiot deals with Prince Myshkin鈥檚 effect on the society he finds himself a part of. And what a money-hungry, power-hungry, cold and manipulative society it is.
I admit that in the beginning and throughout much of the novel I felt intensely protective of Prince Myshkin. I got pissed off when people would laugh at him or call him an idiot. Then towards the end of the novel, I even ended up calling him an idiot a few times. Out loud. One time I actually said 鈥淥h, you are an idiot!鈥� But then I felt bad.
Poor Prince Myshkin. I think he was simply too good and too na茂ve for the world around him.
Now here is where my thought process starts to fall apart. There鈥檚 just so much to write about that I can鈥檛 even begin to write anything. There were so many themes that were explored in the novel such as nihilism, Christ as man rather than deity, losing one鈥檚 faith, and capital punishment among other things. And I haven鈥檛 even mentioned 顿辞蝉迟辞别惫蝉办测鈥檚 peripheral characters yet, which, like those in Crime and Punishment, are at least as interesting, if not more interesting than the main characters. My favorite character was Aglaya Ivanovna. She was so conflicted with regard to her feelings about the prince and loved him in spite of herself. I had mixed feelings toward Ganya. I mostly disliked him, but I grew to like him more towards the end. The entire novel was much like a soap opera, but a good soap opera, if that makes sense.
Well, at this point I鈥檝e been moving paragraphs around for far too long, and I realize there鈥檚 no way this review will do the book any justice. I wanted to write about the symbolism of the Holbein painting and how I love that in both Dostoevsky books I've read he references dreams the characters have, but I just have too many questions and not enough answers. Instead I'll just say that it was truly an excellent read and definitely worth your time.
First I suppose a short plot synopsis should be in order:
The Idiot portrays young, childlike Prince Myshkin, who returns to his native Russia to seek out distant relatives after he has spent several years in a Swiss sanatorium. While on the train to Russia, he meets and befriends a man of dubious character called Rogozhin. Rogozhin is unhealthily obsessed with the mysterious beauty, Nastasya Filippovna to the point where the reader just knows nothing good will come of it. Of course the prince gets caught up with Rogozhin, Filippovna, and the society around them.
The only other Dostoevsky novel I鈥檝e read was Crime and Punishment, so of course my brain is going to compare the two. Where Crime and Punishment deals with Raskolnikov鈥檚 internal struggle, The Idiot deals with Prince Myshkin鈥檚 effect on the society he finds himself a part of. And what a money-hungry, power-hungry, cold and manipulative society it is.
I admit that in the beginning and throughout much of the novel I felt intensely protective of Prince Myshkin. I got pissed off when people would laugh at him or call him an idiot. Then towards the end of the novel, I even ended up calling him an idiot a few times. Out loud. One time I actually said 鈥淥h, you are an idiot!鈥� But then I felt bad.
Poor Prince Myshkin. I think he was simply too good and too na茂ve for the world around him.
Now here is where my thought process starts to fall apart. There鈥檚 just so much to write about that I can鈥檛 even begin to write anything. There were so many themes that were explored in the novel such as nihilism, Christ as man rather than deity, losing one鈥檚 faith, and capital punishment among other things. And I haven鈥檛 even mentioned 顿辞蝉迟辞别惫蝉办测鈥檚 peripheral characters yet, which, like those in Crime and Punishment, are at least as interesting, if not more interesting than the main characters. My favorite character was Aglaya Ivanovna. She was so conflicted with regard to her feelings about the prince and loved him in spite of herself. I had mixed feelings toward Ganya. I mostly disliked him, but I grew to like him more towards the end. The entire novel was much like a soap opera, but a good soap opera, if that makes sense.
Well, at this point I鈥檝e been moving paragraphs around for far too long, and I realize there鈥檚 no way this review will do the book any justice. I wanted to write about the symbolism of the Holbein painting and how I love that in both Dostoevsky books I've read he references dreams the characters have, but I just have too many questions and not enough answers. Instead I'll just say that it was truly an excellent read and definitely worth your time.
March 20, 2025
Prince Lev Nicolayevich Myschkin discovered relativity in 1886.
Well, actually the scientific theory of relativity wasn鈥檛 discovered until 30 years later, by Albert Einstein, but I don鈥檛 think that discovery would have been possible without the relativistic ferment that had started sweeping through Europe in the mid-19th century, with its ultimate CHRISTIAN formulation in The Idiot, in 1886.
Moral chaos is so cataclysmic to conservative spectators. So much so to Prince Myschkin, in fact, that he suffers an enormous three-year nervous collapse. But he comes out of it Reborn.
鈥淩eborn!?鈥� you may say. 鈥淚sn鈥檛 he just... a little ODD?鈥�
Well listen, if as an intelligent kid you were submitting - along with the rest of intelligent Europe - to the Willy-nilly Transvaluation of all Values, wouldn鈥檛 you want to somehow return to your Moral Roots?
And if you didn鈥檛 Pooh-Pooh change in any form, like so many mature people do, wouldn鈥檛 you try to reason through this enormous alteration in values?
Prince Myschkin does both. He REASONS THROUGH THE CLIMACTERIC OF RADICAL RE-ORIENTATION - from a CHRISTIAN POV.
Something we all should be doing today if we鈥檙e believers.
Sure, the sophisticated St Petersburg in-set decides mainly to lead him on - apparent imbecile that he is - into traps of their own devising, but isn鈥檛 that what most normal people do today with an oddball: feed him enough rope to hang himself with?
But these worldly sophisticates have a 鈥渄on鈥檛 go there鈥� mindset to new ideas. Unless they鈥檙e new FUN ideas. They are intellectually and morally stuck. And so the nutty prince is like a breath of fresh air to them, in a funny sort of way!
Bigotry wasn鈥檛 born yesterday. It was born when someone decided to take a small, SAFE pathway through the perils of life. And so many have - alas! - followed him.
But Prince Myschkin has just emerged, barely breathing, from a total moral collapse in a world of ethical relativism. More power to him, I say - at least he鈥檚 not scared of the world鈥檚 shadows anymore.
For he鈥檚 now emerged with a triumphant Christian Faith from the dark chambers of Dis. Into a New, Wide-Awake World.
Myschkin, you see, refuses to JUDGE OTHERS. All his crazy antics are just a logical offshoot of that logically primitive decision.
The basic building block of his, and all true ethical behaviour.
And that鈥檚 what makes this book Great.
For this is the portrait of an unlikely modern saint - but it is written with a double-edged pen!
It鈥檚 ironical - and it鈥檚 not.
Sort of reminds you of the Gospel, doesn鈥檛 it?
And, somehow, you know - I think that鈥檚 what Dostoevsky intended.
Well, actually the scientific theory of relativity wasn鈥檛 discovered until 30 years later, by Albert Einstein, but I don鈥檛 think that discovery would have been possible without the relativistic ferment that had started sweeping through Europe in the mid-19th century, with its ultimate CHRISTIAN formulation in The Idiot, in 1886.
Moral chaos is so cataclysmic to conservative spectators. So much so to Prince Myschkin, in fact, that he suffers an enormous three-year nervous collapse. But he comes out of it Reborn.
鈥淩eborn!?鈥� you may say. 鈥淚sn鈥檛 he just... a little ODD?鈥�
Well listen, if as an intelligent kid you were submitting - along with the rest of intelligent Europe - to the Willy-nilly Transvaluation of all Values, wouldn鈥檛 you want to somehow return to your Moral Roots?
And if you didn鈥檛 Pooh-Pooh change in any form, like so many mature people do, wouldn鈥檛 you try to reason through this enormous alteration in values?
Prince Myschkin does both. He REASONS THROUGH THE CLIMACTERIC OF RADICAL RE-ORIENTATION - from a CHRISTIAN POV.
Something we all should be doing today if we鈥檙e believers.
Sure, the sophisticated St Petersburg in-set decides mainly to lead him on - apparent imbecile that he is - into traps of their own devising, but isn鈥檛 that what most normal people do today with an oddball: feed him enough rope to hang himself with?
But these worldly sophisticates have a 鈥渄on鈥檛 go there鈥� mindset to new ideas. Unless they鈥檙e new FUN ideas. They are intellectually and morally stuck. And so the nutty prince is like a breath of fresh air to them, in a funny sort of way!
Bigotry wasn鈥檛 born yesterday. It was born when someone decided to take a small, SAFE pathway through the perils of life. And so many have - alas! - followed him.
But Prince Myschkin has just emerged, barely breathing, from a total moral collapse in a world of ethical relativism. More power to him, I say - at least he鈥檚 not scared of the world鈥檚 shadows anymore.
For he鈥檚 now emerged with a triumphant Christian Faith from the dark chambers of Dis. Into a New, Wide-Awake World.
Myschkin, you see, refuses to JUDGE OTHERS. All his crazy antics are just a logical offshoot of that logically primitive decision.
The basic building block of his, and all true ethical behaviour.
And that鈥檚 what makes this book Great.
For this is the portrait of an unlikely modern saint - but it is written with a double-edged pen!
It鈥檚 ironical - and it鈥檚 not.
Sort of reminds you of the Gospel, doesn鈥檛 it?
And, somehow, you know - I think that鈥檚 what Dostoevsky intended.
May 11, 2015
There are many reviews of this book making out that Prince Myshkin was Christ-like, a truly good man who lived for the moment. A holy idiot, or more accurately, wholly idiot indeed is what he really was. Why did they think Dostoyevsky entitled the book, The Idiot if he meant 'The Man who was Innocent and Really Good" or "The Man who was like Jesus"? The title wasn't any kind of irony, it was about an idiot.
Prince Myshkin had spent years in a sanitarium for his epilepsy and returns to Russia where he trusts untrustworthy people, falls for all their plots where he is the patsy, and falls in love with a rather uppity girl who returns his affections and then when it comes to the moment, chooses another woman for all the wrong reasons and thereby ends up rejected by both.
He is the very definition of an idiot, he never, ever learns and what intelligence he has he doesn't put to working out the truth of a situation and what he should do to benefit himself. He always falls for the next plot, the next plan, the next person with a glint in their eye for how they can use him to further their own ends. And he goes just like a lamb to the slaughter.
Sadly, the debacle, written in a time when not even the word 'neurology' had been invented, let alone the science, is rather idiotic. On getting drawn into a crime committed by a man mad in every sense, crazy and angry, his epilepsy degenerates into a mental illness so deep he crosses over into another land. Bye bye gentle idiot. I was glad to read of you, I'm glad I didn't know you.
Prince Myshkin had spent years in a sanitarium for his epilepsy and returns to Russia where he trusts untrustworthy people, falls for all their plots where he is the patsy, and falls in love with a rather uppity girl who returns his affections and then when it comes to the moment, chooses another woman for all the wrong reasons and thereby ends up rejected by both.
He is the very definition of an idiot, he never, ever learns and what intelligence he has he doesn't put to working out the truth of a situation and what he should do to benefit himself. He always falls for the next plot, the next plan, the next person with a glint in their eye for how they can use him to further their own ends. And he goes just like a lamb to the slaughter.
Sadly, the debacle, written in a time when not even the word 'neurology' had been invented, let alone the science, is rather idiotic. On getting drawn into a crime committed by a man mad in every sense, crazy and angry, his epilepsy degenerates into a mental illness so deep he crosses over into another land. Bye bye gentle idiot. I was glad to read of you, I'm glad I didn't know you.
April 28, 2022
Prince Myshkin (whose name to the Russian ear sounds somewhat like Prince Mousy) may be considered as a disciple of quietism鈥�
But those who always turn the other cheek to those who slap them on the right cheek get themselves eventually broken by evil and drowned in the stream of malice.
And a man capable of doing nothing but good and longing for the union with God is awarded with a title The Idiot and crucified 鈥� and the crowd rejoices.
鈥淥h, so you are a philosopher; but are you aware of any talents, of any ability whatever in yourself, of any sort by which you can earn your living? Excuse me again.鈥�
鈥淥h, please don鈥檛 apologise. No, I fancy I鈥檝e no talents or special abilities; quite the contrary in fact, for I am an invalid and have not had a systematic education. As to my living, I fancy...鈥�
But those who always turn the other cheek to those who slap them on the right cheek get themselves eventually broken by evil and drowned in the stream of malice.
And a man capable of doing nothing but good and longing for the union with God is awarded with a title The Idiot and crucified 鈥� and the crowd rejoices.
March 23, 2019
A terrific novel - very worth reading - but lacking the thrust and pleasures of BROTHERS KARAMAZOV, which is one of my favorite books. It is, perhaps, the most difficult novel to evaluate with the 欧宝娱乐 star system, because it is both very, very great, and not particularly good.
When the action soars - in searing, autobiographical moments, with sequences of epilepsy, fits, executions, and long social sequences - there is really nothing like it. An outdoor party scene with the (overly) noble Prince Myshkin will stick with me forever, as will the cursed love between Nastasya Fillippovna and Rogozhin. The idea of a pure man misunderstood by an impure society is wonderful, but THE IDIOT reads more like a sequence of thematic parables than a novel.
I've been taught, and I teach, the iceberg theory of writing. The author should know more about her characters than she is willing to show (90% below water, 10% visible.) This iceberg is almost totally submerged. The main action - the stuff I was dying to see - too often occurred BETWEEN parts of the novel. I have never experienced such exciting exposition in my life - but I saw almost none of that excitement on the page. Structurally, this makes it somewhat disastrous, and it feels rushed, as if Dostoevsky was so eager to plumb the depth of philosophy that he forgot to provide us with a plot. This makes the book fascinating, but a very, very slow read. I am very grateful to have read it; I was rarely grateful to be reading it.
When the action soars - in searing, autobiographical moments, with sequences of epilepsy, fits, executions, and long social sequences - there is really nothing like it. An outdoor party scene with the (overly) noble Prince Myshkin will stick with me forever, as will the cursed love between Nastasya Fillippovna and Rogozhin. The idea of a pure man misunderstood by an impure society is wonderful, but THE IDIOT reads more like a sequence of thematic parables than a novel.
I've been taught, and I teach, the iceberg theory of writing. The author should know more about her characters than she is willing to show (90% below water, 10% visible.) This iceberg is almost totally submerged. The main action - the stuff I was dying to see - too often occurred BETWEEN parts of the novel. I have never experienced such exciting exposition in my life - but I saw almost none of that excitement on the page. Structurally, this makes it somewhat disastrous, and it feels rushed, as if Dostoevsky was so eager to plumb the depth of philosophy that he forgot to provide us with a plot. This makes the book fascinating, but a very, very slow read. I am very grateful to have read it; I was rarely grateful to be reading it.
May 5, 2017
乇囟丕 丕賲蹖乇禺丕賳蹖貙 噩丕蹖蹖 诏賮鬲賴 亘賵丿 讴賴 "丕诏賴 賯乇丕乇 亘賵丿 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 賴丕 倬蹖丕賲亘乇蹖 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮賳貙 倬蹖丕賲亘乇卮賵賳 鬲賵賱爻鬲賵蹖 禺賵丕賴丿 亘賵丿." 丨乇賮 丿乇爻鬲蹖賴貙 賵賱蹖 丕蹖賳 倬蹖丕賲亘乇 丕夭 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵爻讴蹖 賵丨蹖 丿乇蹖丕賮鬲 賲蹖讴賳賴!
賲賳
丕夭 亘蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 賴丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵爻讴蹖貙 亘蹖卮鬲乇 丕夭 賴賲賴 毓丕卮賯 "噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲" 賵 亘毓丿 "丕亘賱赖" 賴爻鬲賲. 丿乇 丿乇噩丕鬲 亘毓丿貙 賯賲丕乇 亘丕夭 賵 亘乇丕丿乇丕賳 讴丕乇丕賲丕夭賵賮 賵 賴賲夭丕丿 賵...
蹖丕丿賲 賳賲蹖乇賴. 鬲丕亘爻鬲賵賳貙 賲丕賴 乇賲囟賵賳貙 亘毓丿 丕夭 爻丨乇 鬲丕 賳夭丿蹖讴丕蹖 馗賴乇 亘蹖丿丕乇 賲蹖賲賵賳丿賲 賵 蹖賴 讴賱賴 "丕亘賱赖" 賲蹖禺賵賳丿賲. 賵丕賯毓丕賸 賲蹖禺讴賵亘賲 賲蹖讴乇丿. 賴賲夭賲丕賳 賲丕丿乇賲 賴賲 賲蹖禺賵賳丿 賵 亘丕 賴賲 乇丕噩毓 亘賴卮 氐丨亘鬲 賲蹖讴乇丿蹖賲. 鬲噩乇亘賴 蹖 賲卮鬲乇讴 禺賵亘蹖 亘賵丿.
丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘
賲丕噩乇丕蹖 讴賱蹖 乇賲丕賳貙 乇丕噩毓 亘賴 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳賴. 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳 丕賳诏丕乇 賳丕馗乇 噩賴丕賳賴. 賲孬賱 蹖賴 亘趩賴貙 賲毓氐賵賲賴 賵 亘賴 禺丕胤乇 賴賲蹖賳 賳丕馗乇 亘蹖 胤乇賮 賵 賯丕亘賱 丕毓鬲賲丕丿蹖賴. 丿乇 丕亘鬲丿丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 趩卮賲 亘丕夭 賲蹖 讴賳賴貙 丿賳蹖丕蹖 爻蹖丕賴 賵 丌卮賮鬲賴 賵 睾蹖乇 賯丕亘賱 丿乇讴 賲丕 乇賵 賲蹖 亘蹖賳賴 賵 鬲賱丕卮蹖 賴賲 亘乇丕蹖 丕氐賱丕丨卮 賲蹖讴賳賴貙 賵賱蹖 賲賵賮賯 賳賲蹖卮賴. 丿乇 丕賳鬲賴丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 丕賳诏丕乇 亘賴 禺丕胤乇 乇賳噩蹖丿賳 丕夭 丕蹖賳 賴賲賴 夭卮鬲蹖貙 丿賵亘丕乇賴 趩卮賲 賲蹖 亘賳丿賴 賵 亘賴 丿賳蹖丕蹖 倬丕讴 亘蹖 禺亘乇蹖 亘乇 賲蹖 诏乇丿賴.
丿賵 賳讴鬲賴
丕賵賱 丕蹖賳 讴賴
丿賵賲 丕蹖賳 讴賴 卮禺氐蹖鬲 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳貙 讴賴 蹖賴 丕賳爻丕賳 爻丕丿賴 丿賱賴 賵 丿乇 丕亘鬲丿丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 毓讴爻 丌賳丕爻鬲丕夭蹖丕蹖 夭蹖亘丕 賵 丕睾賵丕诏乇
(femme fatale)
乇賵 賲蹖亘蹖賳賴 賵 鬲賵噩賴卮 亘賴 丕賵賳 噩賱亘 賲蹖卮賴貙 鬲丕 丨丿 夭蹖丕丿蹖 卮亘蹖賴 卮禺氐蹖鬲 爻丕丿賴 丿賱 讴賳爻鬲丕賳鬲蹖賳 賱賵蹖賳 丿乇 "丌賳丕 讴丕乇賳蹖賳丕"爻鬲 讴賴 丕賵賳 賴賲 丿乇 丕賵丕蹖賱 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 毓讴爻 丕蹖賳 夭賳 夭蹖亘丕 賵 丕睾賵丕诏乇 乇賵 賲蹖亘蹖賳賴 賵 卮蹖賮鬲賴 卮 賲蹖卮賴. 趩賴 亘爻丕 鬲賵賱爻鬲賵蹖 丕夭 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵爻讴蹖 鬲賯賱蹖丿 讴乇丿賴 亘丕卮賴. 卮丕蹖丿 賴賲 賳賴.
賲賳
丕夭 亘蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 賴丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵爻讴蹖貙 亘蹖卮鬲乇 丕夭 賴賲賴 毓丕卮賯 "噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲" 賵 亘毓丿 "丕亘賱赖" 賴爻鬲賲. 丿乇 丿乇噩丕鬲 亘毓丿貙 賯賲丕乇 亘丕夭 賵 亘乇丕丿乇丕賳 讴丕乇丕賲丕夭賵賮 賵 賴賲夭丕丿 賵...
蹖丕丿賲 賳賲蹖乇賴. 鬲丕亘爻鬲賵賳貙 賲丕賴 乇賲囟賵賳貙 亘毓丿 丕夭 爻丨乇 鬲丕 賳夭丿蹖讴丕蹖 馗賴乇 亘蹖丿丕乇 賲蹖賲賵賳丿賲 賵 蹖賴 讴賱賴 "丕亘賱赖" 賲蹖禺賵賳丿賲. 賵丕賯毓丕賸 賲蹖禺讴賵亘賲 賲蹖讴乇丿. 賴賲夭賲丕賳 賲丕丿乇賲 賴賲 賲蹖禺賵賳丿 賵 亘丕 賴賲 乇丕噩毓 亘賴卮 氐丨亘鬲 賲蹖讴乇丿蹖賲. 鬲噩乇亘賴 蹖 賲卮鬲乇讴 禺賵亘蹖 亘賵丿.
丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘
賲丕噩乇丕蹖 讴賱蹖 乇賲丕賳貙 乇丕噩毓 亘賴 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳賴. 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳 丕賳诏丕乇 賳丕馗乇 噩賴丕賳賴. 賲孬賱 蹖賴 亘趩賴貙 賲毓氐賵賲賴 賵 亘賴 禺丕胤乇 賴賲蹖賳 賳丕馗乇 亘蹖 胤乇賮 賵 賯丕亘賱 丕毓鬲賲丕丿蹖賴. 丿乇 丕亘鬲丿丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 趩卮賲 亘丕夭 賲蹖 讴賳賴貙 丿賳蹖丕蹖 爻蹖丕賴 賵 丌卮賮鬲賴 賵 睾蹖乇 賯丕亘賱 丿乇讴 賲丕 乇賵 賲蹖 亘蹖賳賴 賵 鬲賱丕卮蹖 賴賲 亘乇丕蹖 丕氐賱丕丨卮 賲蹖讴賳賴貙 賵賱蹖 賲賵賮賯 賳賲蹖卮賴. 丿乇 丕賳鬲賴丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 丕賳诏丕乇 亘賴 禺丕胤乇 乇賳噩蹖丿賳 丕夭 丕蹖賳 賴賲賴 夭卮鬲蹖貙 丿賵亘丕乇賴 趩卮賲 賲蹖 亘賳丿賴 賵 亘賴 丿賳蹖丕蹖 倬丕讴 亘蹖 禺亘乇蹖 亘乇 賲蹖 诏乇丿賴.
丿賵 賳讴鬲賴
丕賵賱 丕蹖賳 讴賴
丿賵賲 丕蹖賳 讴賴 卮禺氐蹖鬲 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳貙 讴賴 蹖賴 丕賳爻丕賳 爻丕丿賴 丿賱賴 賵 丿乇 丕亘鬲丿丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 毓讴爻 丌賳丕爻鬲丕夭蹖丕蹖 夭蹖亘丕 賵 丕睾賵丕诏乇
(femme fatale)
乇賵 賲蹖亘蹖賳賴 賵 鬲賵噩賴卮 亘賴 丕賵賳 噩賱亘 賲蹖卮賴貙 鬲丕 丨丿 夭蹖丕丿蹖 卮亘蹖賴 卮禺氐蹖鬲 爻丕丿賴 丿賱 讴賳爻鬲丕賳鬲蹖賳 賱賵蹖賳 丿乇 "丌賳丕 讴丕乇賳蹖賳丕"爻鬲 讴賴 丕賵賳 賴賲 丿乇 丕賵丕蹖賱 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 毓讴爻 丕蹖賳 夭賳 夭蹖亘丕 賵 丕睾賵丕诏乇 乇賵 賲蹖亘蹖賳賴 賵 卮蹖賮鬲賴 卮 賲蹖卮賴. 趩賴 亘爻丕 鬲賵賱爻鬲賵蹖 丕夭 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵爻讴蹖 鬲賯賱蹖丿 讴乇丿賴 亘丕卮賴. 卮丕蹖丿 賴賲 賳賴.
October 28, 2020
This guy is on a morning train to St Petersburg. He knows nobody there. He has no money and no possessions. He鈥檚 this close to being a vagabond. But he gets in conversation with this other guy and one meeting leads to another and by ten o鈥檆lock that night 鈥� 160 pages later 鈥� he is telling a lady he never met before not to marry a guy he never met before, and then declaring his own total love for this lady.
That鈥檚 right just another day in 19th century Russia, Dosto-style.
If Dostoyevsky was a 21st century writer he would be so rich writing scripts for shows like Desperate Housewives or Days of Our Lives because one thing he was was a natural born soap opera scriptwriter. He produced tremendous shouty thirty page arguments and 50 page carcrash scenes involving 12 outrageously-behaving borderline lunatics, just right for the campier type of tv, but I guess he鈥檇 have flounced out of his moneyspinning career on day one when they refused to include one character鈥檚 five minute monologue on what it must feel like in the half second when you are watching the guillotine blade begin to descend on your naked neck.
WHAT THIS LONG BOOK IS ABOUT
The Idiot is about this young Prince (it was a minor minor title, not royal or even royalish) who comes to town and gets involved with these train people and their families and kind of gets all entangled. There are two strong female leads (Nastasya and Aglaya), both of whom can bring men to their knees with a single glance, and this leads to many complications. Some of the plot can be summed up by the Lovin鈥� Spoonful in their 1966 hit 鈥淒id you Ever Have to Make Up Your Mind?鈥�
Did you ever have to finally decide?
And say yes to one and let the other one ride?
There's so many changes and tears you must hide.
Did you ever have to finally decide?
It may be a bit spoilerish (but you will have forgotten it before you get round to reading this) but these two women finally meet in a showdown that is a 19th century Russian version of the one in A Fistful of Dollars. It's a great scene, one of many.
Also, I should mention one great scene where Nastasya rips a whip out of some nasty guy's hands and smashes his face with it.... go Nastasya!!
DOSTOWORLD
Rich men who rape poor girls don鈥檛 generally apologise :
He could not repent of his original action with her as he was a hardened voluptuary
Guys have got poor attitudes to marriage :
Although at last, after agonising hesitations, he agreed to marry the 鈥渧ile woman鈥� he swore in his soul to take a bitter revenge on her for it and to 鈥渉arry her to death鈥� later on
People do not think tact is something to even think twice about:
Earlier today I thought you were an out-and-out evildoer鈥� now I see that one can consider you neither an evildoer nor even a very corrupt man. In my opinion, you鈥檙e just the most ordinary man there could be.
People are gold medal standard haters :
I hate you more than anything and anyone in the world! I understood and hated you long ago, when I first heard about you, I hated you with all the hatred of my soul.
Women send their boyfriends strange presents :
鈥淒id you receive my hedgehog?鈥� she asked firmly and almost angrily.
TALES OF THE MIDDLE AGES
Comedy flashes all the way through this long strange tale and the funniest part for me was when some people are discussing outbreaks of cannibalism during famines of previous centuries. Somebody says :
One such cannibal, approaching old age, announced of his own accord and without any compulsion that throughout his long and poverty-stricken life he had killed and eaten personally sixty monks and several lay infants鈥�
Later on :
鈥淏ut could anyone possibly eat sixty monks?鈥� People laughed all round.
THE COMICAL DOSTOYEVSKY NARRATOR
In The Brothers Karamazov and again here the narrator is a bumbling old fart type character who often breaks into the narrative and delivers a speech of his own or says stuff like
Perhaps we shall do no great harm to the vividness of our narrative if we pause here and have recourse to a few explanations
And as the story gets more complicated the narrator frankly gives up trying to understand what鈥檚 going on, which I thought was most amusing :
We feel we must confine ourselves to the plain exposition of the facts, as far as possible without particular explanations, for a very simple reason : because we ourselves are hard put to explain what happened.
A RARE WORD
Ten points to the translator David McDuff for using a rare and excellent word
Fanfaronade
Alas, it means 鈥渂oastful talk鈥� when it should mean something much prettier.
And in general this translation was beautifully readable, as is the book itself.
RATING DOSTO
This is my third big Dostoyevsky book this year and I think The Idiot is overshadowed by Crime & Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov but that鈥檚 because they are two of the most extraordinary novels ever. So it鈥檚 an unfair comparison. The plot of The Idiot is frenzied and cramful of too many people talking at the same time and trips over itself in the middle (caused I think by Dosto writing to a magazine deadline when he just didn鈥檛 know how the story should go) but it鈥檚 a hell of a ride so try it some time, say, during a global pandemic.
HOW THE AVERAGE DOSTO CHARACTER BEGINS HIS DAY
In a state of indescribable agitation, bordering on terror
That鈥檚 right just another day in 19th century Russia, Dosto-style.
If Dostoyevsky was a 21st century writer he would be so rich writing scripts for shows like Desperate Housewives or Days of Our Lives because one thing he was was a natural born soap opera scriptwriter. He produced tremendous shouty thirty page arguments and 50 page carcrash scenes involving 12 outrageously-behaving borderline lunatics, just right for the campier type of tv, but I guess he鈥檇 have flounced out of his moneyspinning career on day one when they refused to include one character鈥檚 five minute monologue on what it must feel like in the half second when you are watching the guillotine blade begin to descend on your naked neck.
WHAT THIS LONG BOOK IS ABOUT
The Idiot is about this young Prince (it was a minor minor title, not royal or even royalish) who comes to town and gets involved with these train people and their families and kind of gets all entangled. There are two strong female leads (Nastasya and Aglaya), both of whom can bring men to their knees with a single glance, and this leads to many complications. Some of the plot can be summed up by the Lovin鈥� Spoonful in their 1966 hit 鈥淒id you Ever Have to Make Up Your Mind?鈥�
Did you ever have to finally decide?
And say yes to one and let the other one ride?
There's so many changes and tears you must hide.
Did you ever have to finally decide?
It may be a bit spoilerish (but you will have forgotten it before you get round to reading this) but these two women finally meet in a showdown that is a 19th century Russian version of the one in A Fistful of Dollars. It's a great scene, one of many.
Also, I should mention one great scene where Nastasya rips a whip out of some nasty guy's hands and smashes his face with it.... go Nastasya!!
DOSTOWORLD
Rich men who rape poor girls don鈥檛 generally apologise :
He could not repent of his original action with her as he was a hardened voluptuary
Guys have got poor attitudes to marriage :
Although at last, after agonising hesitations, he agreed to marry the 鈥渧ile woman鈥� he swore in his soul to take a bitter revenge on her for it and to 鈥渉arry her to death鈥� later on
People do not think tact is something to even think twice about:
Earlier today I thought you were an out-and-out evildoer鈥� now I see that one can consider you neither an evildoer nor even a very corrupt man. In my opinion, you鈥檙e just the most ordinary man there could be.
People are gold medal standard haters :
I hate you more than anything and anyone in the world! I understood and hated you long ago, when I first heard about you, I hated you with all the hatred of my soul.
Women send their boyfriends strange presents :
鈥淒id you receive my hedgehog?鈥� she asked firmly and almost angrily.
TALES OF THE MIDDLE AGES
Comedy flashes all the way through this long strange tale and the funniest part for me was when some people are discussing outbreaks of cannibalism during famines of previous centuries. Somebody says :
One such cannibal, approaching old age, announced of his own accord and without any compulsion that throughout his long and poverty-stricken life he had killed and eaten personally sixty monks and several lay infants鈥�
Later on :
鈥淏ut could anyone possibly eat sixty monks?鈥� People laughed all round.
THE COMICAL DOSTOYEVSKY NARRATOR
In The Brothers Karamazov and again here the narrator is a bumbling old fart type character who often breaks into the narrative and delivers a speech of his own or says stuff like
Perhaps we shall do no great harm to the vividness of our narrative if we pause here and have recourse to a few explanations
And as the story gets more complicated the narrator frankly gives up trying to understand what鈥檚 going on, which I thought was most amusing :
We feel we must confine ourselves to the plain exposition of the facts, as far as possible without particular explanations, for a very simple reason : because we ourselves are hard put to explain what happened.
A RARE WORD
Ten points to the translator David McDuff for using a rare and excellent word
Fanfaronade
Alas, it means 鈥渂oastful talk鈥� when it should mean something much prettier.
And in general this translation was beautifully readable, as is the book itself.
RATING DOSTO
This is my third big Dostoyevsky book this year and I think The Idiot is overshadowed by Crime & Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov but that鈥檚 because they are two of the most extraordinary novels ever. So it鈥檚 an unfair comparison. The plot of The Idiot is frenzied and cramful of too many people talking at the same time and trips over itself in the middle (caused I think by Dosto writing to a magazine deadline when he just didn鈥檛 know how the story should go) but it鈥檚 a hell of a ride so try it some time, say, during a global pandemic.
HOW THE AVERAGE DOSTO CHARACTER BEGINS HIS DAY
In a state of indescribable agitation, bordering on terror
August 5, 2023
鈥�- Dar Rogojin s-ar c膬s膬tori [cu Nastasia Filippovna]?
- Cred c膬 葯i m卯ine s-ar putea c膬s膬tori [zise Prin葲ul]; s-ar c膬s膬tori 葯i, peste o s膬pt膬m卯n膬, zic eu, ar 卯njunghia-o鈥� (p.40).
Prin葲ul Mi葯kin are toate calit膬葲ile unui om 鈥瀋u des膬v卯r葯ire minunat鈥�: inocen葲膬, franche葲e, intui葲ie a psihologiei celor din jur, capacitate de a anticipa consecin葲ele, bun膬tate, bl卯nde葲e. Din p膬cate, 鈥瀋larviziunea鈥� lui e luat膬 de ceilal葲i 卯n r卯s. Sinceritatea lui necru葲膬toare 卯i aduce calificativul de 鈥瀒diot鈥�.
Termenul 鈥瀒diot / idiota鈥� nu a avut 卯ntotdeauna sensul peiorativ de azi. 脦n Evul Mediu, 卯l desemna pe individul care nu a fost pervertit de 葯coli 葯i lecturi, individul care judec膬 葯i g卯nde葯te cu mintea lui. Cu acest sens, 卯l folose葯te Nikolaus Cusanus 卯n titlurile c膬r葲ilor sale.
Fire葯te, Lev Nikolaevici M卯葯kin poate fi caracterizat ca 鈥瀒diota鈥� (卯n sens medieval). Dar 卯n romanul lui Dostoievski, termenul e folosit, desigur, cu 卯n葲elesul lui difamant: Mi葯kin e prost, s膬rac cu duhul, nu 葯tie s膬-葯i 葲in膬 gura, nu respect膬 discre葲ia, spune tot ce-i trece prin cap, indiferent de urm膬ri. Franche葲ea lui nes膬buit膬 este, de multe ori, o form膬 de cruzime. Din acest motiv, Ganea 卯l love葯te, iar Rogojin vrea s膬-l ucid膬. E o nou膬 ipostaz膬 a lui Don Quijote. C卯nd oamenii s-au obi葯nuit cu minciuna 葯i situa葲iile echivoce, adev膬rul devine o ofens膬 葯i un scandal. Prin葲ul este cu siguran葲膬 un 鈥瀟rouble-f锚te鈥�. Dup膬 cum exclam膬 un personaj, 鈥瀉pari葲ia lui produce haos鈥�.
Am putea g卯ndi c膬 prezen葲a prin葲ului va opri catastrofa din final. Dar nu este deloc a葯a. M卯葯kin nu poate 卯mpiedica r膬ul. Mai cur卯nd, 卯l precipit膬...
Desigur, Dostoievski 葯i-a pus 卯n Idiotul o problem膬 mai larg膬, 葯tim asta din 卯nsemn膬rile lui. Oare ce s-ar 卯nt卯mpla dac膬 Iisus Christos ar reveni printre noi? 脦ntrebarea l-a obsedat pe autor mult膬 vreme. Un prim r膬spuns poate fi g膬sit 卯n romanul de fa葲膬, cel膬lalt 卯n 鈥濸arabola Marelui Inchizitor鈥� din Fra葲ii Karamazov. 脦n ambele cazuri, a doua venire ar consemna un e葯ec. Omul nu mai poate fi salvat de nimeni, Dumnezeu a e葯uat. R膬spunsul lui Dostoievski e pesimist.
P. S. Cineva a rezumat Idiotul 卯n chipul urm膬tor: 鈥濪oi b膬rba葲i iubesc aceea葯i femeie, 卯n timp ce dou膬 femei iubesc acela葯i b膬rbat鈥�. E imposibil s膬 葯tim dac膬 M卯葯kin o iube葯te cu adev膬rat pe Nastasia Filippovna. Mila nu 卯nseamn膬 卯ntotdeauna iubire.
P. P. S. Dostoievski a lucrat la Idiotul din decembrie 1867 (se afla 卯n exil la Geneva) p卯n膬 卯n ianuarie 1869. Criticii literari nu au fost deloc entuziasma葲i de roman. L-au g膬sit haotic, r膬u construit, greu de urm膬rit. Meseria criticului literar e s膬 caute noduri 卯n papur膬 葯i, c卯nd nu le g膬se葯te, s膬 le inventeze...
January 10, 2020
趩賯丿乇 毓丕賱蹖 亘賵丿. 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏й屰� 讴賴 丕賲爻丕賱 禺賵丕賳丿賲. 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵爻讴蹖 賳丕亘睾賴 賴賲蹖卮賴 亘丕毓孬 亘賴鬲 賵 丨蹖乇鬲 賲賳 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 丕夭 鬲毓丿丕丿 氐賮丨丕鬲 夭蹖丕丿 丌賳 賳鬲乇爻蹖丿 賵 丕诏乇 亘賴 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 乇賵爻 毓賱丕賯賴鈥屬呝嗀� 賴爻鬲蹖丿 丨鬲賲丕賸 丌賳 乇丕 亘禺賵丕賳蹖丿. 鬲乇噩賲賴 丨亘蹖亘蹖 賲丨卮乇 亘賵丿. 趩賳丿 賮蹖賱賲 丕賯鬲亘丕爻 卮丿賴 丕夭 丕蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 賵 趩賳丿 賮蹖賱賲 賴賲 亘丕 丕賱賴丕賲 丕夭 丌賳 爻丕禺鬲賴 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲. 賲賳 亘賴 禺丕胤乇 毓賱丕賯賴 賵丕賮乇 亘賴 讴賵乇賵爻丕賵丕 丕賯鬲亘丕爻 丕賵 乇丕 丿蹖丿賲貙 丕诏乇 毓賱丕賯賴鈥屬呝嗀� 亘賵丿蹖丿 倬爻 丕夭 賲胤丕賱毓賴鈥屰� 讴鬲丕亘 丌賳 乇丕 亘亘蹖賳蹖丿.
The idiot (1951) 7.3 Kurosawa
The idiot (1958) 7.6 Ivan Pyryev
賵 丿乇 倬丕蹖丕賳
夭賳丿賴 亘丕丿 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵爻讴蹖
夭賳丿賴 亘丕丿 讴賵乇賵爻丕賵丕
賵 夭賳丿賴 亘丕丿 爻乇賵卮 丨亘蹖亘蹖
丕蹖賳 丕賴丕賳鬲 丕爻鬲 亘賴 乇賵丨 丕賳爻丕賳貙 賵 睾蹖乇 丕夭 丕蹖賳 賴蹖趩 賳蹖爻鬲! 丿蹖賳 亘賴 賲丕 賲蹖鈥屭堐屫�: "賳讴卮!" 賵賱蹖 丕賳爻丕賳蹖 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屭┴促嗀� 趩賵賳 丌丿賲 讴卮鬲賴! 丕蹖賳 讴賴 賳賲蹖鈥屫促堌�! 賲賳 丕蹖賳 氐丨賳賴 乇丕 蹖讴 賲丕賴 倬蹖卮 丿蹖丿賲 賵 鬲丕 丕賲乇賵夭 賴賳賵夭 丌賳 乇丕 噩賱賵 趩卮賲 丿丕乇賲. 氐38 讴鬲丕亘
丨賯蹖賯鬲 丕蹖賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕夭 賲毓丕卮乇鬲 亘丕 丌丿賲鈥屫ㄘ藏壁€屬囏� 禺賵卮賲 賳賲蹖鈥屫③屫�. 丕蹖賳 趩蹖夭蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 禺賵丿賲 賲丿鬲鈥屬囏ж池� 賮賴賲蹖丿賴鈥屫з�. 毓賱鬲卮 賴賲 丕蹖賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗁� 亘丕 丌賳鈥屬囏� 爻乇 讴賳賲. 氐 121 讴鬲丕亘
賲賳 倬賵賱 賲蹖鈥屫堌з囐�. 賲蹖鈥屫з嗃屫� 丕诏乇 倬賵賱 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮賲 丿蹖诏乇 讴爻蹖 賲乇丕 蹖讴 丌丿賲 毓丕丿蹖 賳賲蹖鈥屫促呚ж必�. 丌賳 賵賯鬲 賲賳 丕夭 賴乇 噩賴鬲 亘乇噩爻鬲賴 賵 睾蹖乇 丕夭 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫促堎�. 倬賵賱 丕夭 丕蹖賳 噩賴鬲 丕夭 賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 丨賯蹖乇鬲乇 賵 賳賮乇鬲鈥屫з嗂屫藏� 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丨鬲蹖 丌丿賲 乇丕 氐丕丨亘 匕賵賯 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 鬲丕 丿賳蹖丕 丿賳蹖丕爻鬲 賴賲蹖賳 禺賵丕賴丿 亘賵丿. 氐 203 讴鬲丕亘
毓丕丿鬲 亘賴 乇丕丨鬲 賵 鬲噩賲賱貙 亘賴 丌爻丕賳蹖 丕賳爻丕賳 乇丕 賲亘鬲賱丕 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 丿乇 亘賳丿 賲蹖鈥屭┴簇� 賵 趩賵賳 鬲噩賲賱 讴賲鈥屭┵� 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 囟乇賵乇鬲 丿乇丌賲丿 禺賱丕氐蹖 丕夭 亘賳丿 丌賳 亘爻蹖丕乇 丿卮賵丕乇 丕爻鬲. 氐222 讴鬲丕亘
禺賵卮丨丕賱蹖 蹖讴 賲丕丿乇 賵賯鬲蹖 丕賵賱蹖賳 賱亘禺賳丿 胤賮賱卮 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫ㄛ屬嗀� 賲孬賱 禺賵卮丨丕賱蹖 禺丿丕爻鬲 賵賯鬲蹖 讴賴 丕夭 丌賳 亘丕賱丕蹖 丌爻賲丕賳卮 诏賳丕賴讴丕乇蹖 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫ㄛ屬嗀� 讴賴 倬卮蹖賲丕賳 卮丿賴 賵 丕夭 爻乇 氐丿賯 亘禺卮丕蹖卮 賲蹖鈥屫堌з囏�. 氐 357 讴鬲丕亘
賴賲丿乇丿蹖 亘夭乇诏鈥屫臂屬� 賵 卮丕蹖丿 蹖诏丕賳賴 賯丕賳賵賳 賵噩賵丿 亘乇丕蹖 鬲賲丕賲蹖 亘卮乇蹖鬲 丕爻鬲. 氐 372 讴鬲丕亘
"賵賱蹖 胤亘蹖毓鬲 亘賴 乇蹖卮 賲丕 賲蹖鈥屫嗀�." 賳丕诏賴丕賳 亘丕 賴蹖噩丕賳 賵 丨乇丕乇鬲 亘爻蹖丕乇 诏賮鬲: "亘乇丕蹖 趩賴 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 賲賵噩賵丿丕鬲 乇丕 禺賱賯 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 鬲丕 亘毓丿 亘賴 乇蹖卮鈥屫簇з� 亘禺賳丿丿責 賲诏乇 賳讴乇丿賴責 鬲賳賴丕 賲禺賱賵賯蹖 乇丕 讴賴 賴賲賴 亘賴 讴賲丕賱卮 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 賲蹖鈥屭┴必嗀� 丌賮乇蹖丿 賵 亘毓丿 丕夭 丌賳讴賴 丕賵 乇丕 亘賴 賴賲賴 卮賳丕爻丕賳丿 丨乇賮鈥屬囏й屰� 乇丕 亘乇 夭亘丕賳卮 诏匕丕卮鬲 讴賴 禺賵賳鈥� 噩丕乇蹖 讴乇丿. 丌賳鈥屬傌� 禺賵賳 噩丕乇蹖 卮丿 讴賴 丕诏乇 賴賲夭賲丕賳 乇蹖禺鬲賴 卮丿賴 亘賵丿 賲乇丿賲 亘賴 蹖賯蹖賳 丿乇 丌賳 睾乇賯 卮丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿. 氐 476 讴鬲丕亘
賳丕诏賴丕賳 丕卮鬲蹖丕賯 毓噩蹖亘蹖 丕丨爻丕爻 讴乇丿 讴賴 賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 乇丕 賴賲蹖賳 噩丕 乇賴丕 讴賳丿 賵 禺賵丿 亘賴 賴賲丕賳 噩丕蹖蹖 亘乇賵丿 讴賴 丕夭 丌賳 丌賲丿賴 亘賵丿貙 賵 亘乇賵丿 亘賴 噩丕蹖蹖貙 賴乇趩賴 丿賵乇鬲乇 亘賴鬲乇貙 噩丕蹖蹖 丿賵乇丕賮鬲丕丿賴 賵 賮賵乇丕賸 亘乇賵丿貙 亘蹖 禺丿丕丨丕賮馗蹖 亘丕 讴爻蹖. 丕丨爻丕爻 賲蹖鈥屭┴必� 讴賴 丕诏乇貙 賵賱賵 趩賳丿 乇賵夭 丿蹖诏乇貙 丌賳噩丕 亘賲丕賳丿 亘賴 丿丕禺賱 丕蹖賳 丿賳蹖丕 讴卮蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 亘蹖鈥屫ㄘж糙簇�. 氐 493 讴鬲丕亘
丿乇 讴卮賵乇 賲丕 丕诏乇 丿爻鬲鬲 亘賴 噩丕蹖蹖 亘賳丿 賳亘丕卮丿 賵 倬卮鬲蹖亘丕賳鈥屬囏й� 賲鬲賳賮匕 賳丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮蹖 鬲亘丕乇 讴賴賳 亘賴 讴丕乇蹖 賳賲蹖鈥屫③屫�. 氐 528 讴鬲丕亘
讴賴賳賴鈥屭┴ж必臂屬� 噩丕賳蹖 讴賴 丿蹖诏乇 丕氐賱丕丨 卮丿賳蹖 賳蹖爻鬲貙 賴乇 趩賴 亘丕卮丿 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀� 讴賴 "噩丕賳蹖" 丕爻鬲貙 賵 诏乇趩賴 丕夭 讴丕乇蹖 讴賴 讴乇丿賴 倬卮蹖賲丕賳 賳蹖爻鬲貙 倬蹖卮 賵噩丿丕賳 禺賵丿 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀� 讴賴 讴丕乇 夭卮鬲蹖 讴乇丿賴 丕爻鬲貙 賵 賴賲賴鈥屰� 丌賳鈥屬囏� 賴賲蹖賳 胤賵乇賳丿. 氐 544 讴鬲丕亘
賴賲賴 卮乇丕亘 丿乇 爻乇 丿丕乇賳丿貙 丌賳 賴賲 卮丕賲倬丕賳蹖 賵 馗丕賴乇丕賸 鬲丕夭賴 賴賲 卮乇賵毓 賳讴乇丿賴鈥屫з嗀� 夭蹖乇丕 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 丕蹖賳 卮亘鈥屫操嗀団€屫ж必з� 丕夭 丌賳 丌亘 爻乇丿 丌鬲卮蹖賳 亘賴 卮賵乇蹖 卮蹖乇蹖賳 丌賲丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿. 氐 589 讴鬲丕亘
睾乇蹖夭賴鈥屰� 鬲亘丕賴 爻丕夭蹖 禺賵丿 賵 睾乇蹖夭賴鈥屰� 亘賯丕 丿乇 賵噩賵丿 丌丿賲鈥屬囏� 亘賴 蹖讴 丕賳丿丕夭賴 賳蹖乇賵賲賳丿 丕爻鬲. 鬲爻賱胤 卮蹖胤丕賳 賵 爻賱胤賳鬲 丕蹖賲丕賳貙 鬲丕 丕亘丿貙 蹖丕 亘诏賵蹖蹖賲 鬲丕 夭賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 賲丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫з嗃屬� 讴蹖 禺賵丕賴丿 乇爻蹖丿貙 亘丕 賴賲 亘乇丕亘乇賳丿. 氐 601 讴鬲丕亘
丕胤賲蹖賳丕賳 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮蹖丿 讴賴 禺賵卮亘禺鬲蹖 讴乇蹖爻鬲賮 讴賱賲亘 夭賲丕賳蹖 賳亘賵丿 讴賴 丌賲乇蹖讴丕 乇丕 讴卮賮 讴乇丿 亘賱讴賴 夭賲丕賳蹖 禺賵卮亘禺鬲 亘賵丿 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵堌篡屫� 丌賳 乇丕 讴卮賮 讴賳丿... 丕蹖賳噩丕 氐丨亘鬲 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕爻鬲. 賮賯胤 夭賳丿诏蹖. 氐丨亘鬲 鬲賱丕卮 丿乇 讴卮賮 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕爻鬲 賵 賳賴 丿乇 讴卮賮 丌賳. 氐 602 讴鬲丕亘
氐丨亘鬲 蹖讴 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕爻鬲 賵 乇丕賴蹖 亘蹖鈥屬嗁囏й屫� 卮丕禺賴 卮丕禺賴 讴賴 丕爻乇丕乇 丌賳 賴乇趩賴 賴爻鬲 亘乇 賲丕 倬賵卮蹖丿賴 丕爻鬲. 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 卮胤乇賳噩 亘丕夭丕賳貙 鬲賵丕賳丕鬲乇蹖賳 賵 鬲蹖夭賴賵卮鈥屫臂屬嗏€屫簇з� 亘蹖卮 丕夭 趩賳丿 丨乇讴鬲 乇丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗁嗀� 丕夭 倬蹖卮 丨爻丕亘 讴賳賳丿. 讴丕乇 蹖讴 卮胤乇賳噩 亘丕夭 賮乇丕賳爻賵蹖 乇丕 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀池� 鬲丕 丿賴 丨乇讴鬲 禺賵丿 乇丕 倬蹖卮鈥屫ㄛ屬嗃� 讴賳丿 丕毓噩丕夭 卮賲乇丿賴鈥屫з嗀�. 丨丕賱 丌賳讴賴 趩賴 亘蹖鈥屫促呚ж辟嗀� 丨乇讴鬲鈥屬囏й� 賲賲讴賳貙 讴賴 賲丕 丕夭 丌賳鈥屬囏� 亘蹖鈥屫ж焚勜ж观屬�. 卮賲丕 亘丕 倬丕卮蹖丿賳 亘匕乇 禺賵丿 賵 亘匕賱 賳蹖讴蹖 亘賴 賴乇 卮讴賱蹖 讴賴 亘丕卮丿 噩夭卅蹖 丕夭 禺賵丿 乇丕 亘賴 丿蹖诏乇蹖 賲蹖鈥屫ㄘ篡屫� 賵 噩夭卅蹖 丕夭 丿蹖诏乇蹖 乇丕 丿乇 禺賵丿 賲蹖鈥屬矩佰屫臂屫�. 氐 627 讴鬲丕亘
馗乇丕賮鬲 丕丨爻丕爻 賵 毓夭鬲 賳賮爻 丕夭 丿賱 丌丿賲 爻乇趩卮賲賴 賲蹖鈥屭屫必� 賵 趩蹖夭蹖 賳蹖爻鬲 讴賴 賲毓賱賲 乇賯氐 亘賴 讴爻蹖 鬲毓賱蹖賲 亘丿賴丿. 氐 700 讴鬲丕亘
丌丿賲 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 賲馗賴乇 讴賲丕賱 乇丕 丿賵爻鬲 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿. 丌丿賲 丿乇 亘乇丕亘乇 氐賵乇鬲 讴賲丕賱 賮賯胤 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 賲丨賵 鬲賲丕卮丕 亘丕卮丿. 氐 724 讴鬲丕亘
丿乇 丨賯蹖賯鬲 賴蹖趩 趩蹖夭 賳丕乇丕丨鬲 讴賳賳丿賴鈥屫� 丕夭 丕蹖賳 賳蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丌丿賲 賲孬賱丕賸 孬乇賵鬲賲賳丿 賵 禺賵卮賳丕賲 賵 亘丕卮毓賵乇 賵 禺賵卮 氐賵乇鬲 賵 丨鬲蹖 倬爻賳丿蹖丿賴 爻蹖乇鬲 亘丕卮丿 賵 鬲丨氐蹖賱丕鬲卮 賴賲 亘丿 賳亘丕卮丿 賵 丿乇 毓蹖賳 丨丕賱 賴蹖趩 賯乇蹖丨賴鈥屫й屫� 丕氐丕賱鬲蹖貙 讴蹖賮蹖鬲蹖 睾蹖乇毓丕丿蹖 賵賱賵 丿乇 禺賵乇 賳蹖卮禺賳丿貙 賴蹖趩 賮讴乇 丕氐蹖賱蹖 讴賴 丕夭 匕賴賳 禺賵丿卮 噩賵卮蹖丿賴 亘丕卮丿 賳丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿 賵 丕夭 賴乇 噩賴鬲 賲孬賱 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 亘丕卮丿! 孬乇賵鬲賲賳丿 賴爻鬲蹖 丕賲丕 乇賵鬲卮蹖賱丿 賳蹖爻鬲蹖. 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴鈥屫ж� 禺賵卮賳丕賲 丕爻鬲 丕賲丕 賴乇诏夭 亘丕 賴蹖趩 讴丕乇 丿乇禺卮丕賳蹖 賳賲丕蹖丕賳 賳卮丿賴 丕爻鬲. 氐賵乇鬲鬲 賯卮賳诏 丕爻鬲 丕賲丕 噩匕丕亘 賳蹖爻鬲. 鬲丨氐蹖賱丕鬲 禺賵亘蹖 讴乇丿賴鈥屫й� 丕賲丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗃� 丕夭 丌賳 亘賴乇賴鈥屫й� 亘乇丿丕乇蹖. 亘丕賴賵卮 賵 賮賴賲蹖丿賴鈥屫й� 丕賲丕 賮讴乇 亘讴乇蹖 賴乇诏夭 丿乇 匕賴賳鬲 倬蹖丿丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 亘丿 讴爻蹖 乇丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з囒� 丕賲丕 禺蹖乇蹖 賴賲 亘賴 讴爻蹖 賳賲蹖鈥屫必池з嗃屫� 丕夭 賴乇 賳馗乇 讴賴 賮讴乇 讴賳蹖 賳賴 亘賵蹖蹖 賵 賳賴 禺丕氐蹖鬲蹖! 氐 736 讴鬲丕亘
亘毓囟蹖 賵賯鬲鈥屬囏� 賵囟毓 胤賵乇蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕賳爻丕賳 賲噩丕夭 丕爻鬲 讴賴 倬賱鈥屬囏й� 倬卮鬲 爻乇 禺賵丿 乇丕 禺乇丕亘 讴賳丿 賵 丿蹖诏乇 亘賴 禺丕賳賴 亘丕夭 賳蹖丕蹖丿. 氐 891 讴鬲丕亘
The idiot (1951) 7.3 Kurosawa
The idiot (1958) 7.6 Ivan Pyryev
賵 丿乇 倬丕蹖丕賳
夭賳丿賴 亘丕丿 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵爻讴蹖
夭賳丿賴 亘丕丿 讴賵乇賵爻丕賵丕
賵 夭賳丿賴 亘丕丿 爻乇賵卮 丨亘蹖亘蹖
丕蹖賳 丕賴丕賳鬲 丕爻鬲 亘賴 乇賵丨 丕賳爻丕賳貙 賵 睾蹖乇 丕夭 丕蹖賳 賴蹖趩 賳蹖爻鬲! 丿蹖賳 亘賴 賲丕 賲蹖鈥屭堐屫�: "賳讴卮!" 賵賱蹖 丕賳爻丕賳蹖 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屭┴促嗀� 趩賵賳 丌丿賲 讴卮鬲賴! 丕蹖賳 讴賴 賳賲蹖鈥屫促堌�! 賲賳 丕蹖賳 氐丨賳賴 乇丕 蹖讴 賲丕賴 倬蹖卮 丿蹖丿賲 賵 鬲丕 丕賲乇賵夭 賴賳賵夭 丌賳 乇丕 噩賱賵 趩卮賲 丿丕乇賲. 氐38 讴鬲丕亘
丨賯蹖賯鬲 丕蹖賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕夭 賲毓丕卮乇鬲 亘丕 丌丿賲鈥屫ㄘ藏壁€屬囏� 禺賵卮賲 賳賲蹖鈥屫③屫�. 丕蹖賳 趩蹖夭蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 禺賵丿賲 賲丿鬲鈥屬囏ж池� 賮賴賲蹖丿賴鈥屫з�. 毓賱鬲卮 賴賲 丕蹖賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗁� 亘丕 丌賳鈥屬囏� 爻乇 讴賳賲. 氐 121 讴鬲丕亘
賲賳 倬賵賱 賲蹖鈥屫堌з囐�. 賲蹖鈥屫з嗃屫� 丕诏乇 倬賵賱 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮賲 丿蹖诏乇 讴爻蹖 賲乇丕 蹖讴 丌丿賲 毓丕丿蹖 賳賲蹖鈥屫促呚ж必�. 丌賳 賵賯鬲 賲賳 丕夭 賴乇 噩賴鬲 亘乇噩爻鬲賴 賵 睾蹖乇 丕夭 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫促堎�. 倬賵賱 丕夭 丕蹖賳 噩賴鬲 丕夭 賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 丨賯蹖乇鬲乇 賵 賳賮乇鬲鈥屫з嗂屫藏� 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丨鬲蹖 丌丿賲 乇丕 氐丕丨亘 匕賵賯 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 鬲丕 丿賳蹖丕 丿賳蹖丕爻鬲 賴賲蹖賳 禺賵丕賴丿 亘賵丿. 氐 203 讴鬲丕亘
毓丕丿鬲 亘賴 乇丕丨鬲 賵 鬲噩賲賱貙 亘賴 丌爻丕賳蹖 丕賳爻丕賳 乇丕 賲亘鬲賱丕 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 丿乇 亘賳丿 賲蹖鈥屭┴簇� 賵 趩賵賳 鬲噩賲賱 讴賲鈥屭┵� 亘賴 氐賵乇鬲 囟乇賵乇鬲 丿乇丌賲丿 禺賱丕氐蹖 丕夭 亘賳丿 丌賳 亘爻蹖丕乇 丿卮賵丕乇 丕爻鬲. 氐222 讴鬲丕亘
禺賵卮丨丕賱蹖 蹖讴 賲丕丿乇 賵賯鬲蹖 丕賵賱蹖賳 賱亘禺賳丿 胤賮賱卮 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫ㄛ屬嗀� 賲孬賱 禺賵卮丨丕賱蹖 禺丿丕爻鬲 賵賯鬲蹖 讴賴 丕夭 丌賳 亘丕賱丕蹖 丌爻賲丕賳卮 诏賳丕賴讴丕乇蹖 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫ㄛ屬嗀� 讴賴 倬卮蹖賲丕賳 卮丿賴 賵 丕夭 爻乇 氐丿賯 亘禺卮丕蹖卮 賲蹖鈥屫堌з囏�. 氐 357 讴鬲丕亘
賴賲丿乇丿蹖 亘夭乇诏鈥屫臂屬� 賵 卮丕蹖丿 蹖诏丕賳賴 賯丕賳賵賳 賵噩賵丿 亘乇丕蹖 鬲賲丕賲蹖 亘卮乇蹖鬲 丕爻鬲. 氐 372 讴鬲丕亘
"賵賱蹖 胤亘蹖毓鬲 亘賴 乇蹖卮 賲丕 賲蹖鈥屫嗀�." 賳丕诏賴丕賳 亘丕 賴蹖噩丕賳 賵 丨乇丕乇鬲 亘爻蹖丕乇 诏賮鬲: "亘乇丕蹖 趩賴 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 賲賵噩賵丿丕鬲 乇丕 禺賱賯 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 鬲丕 亘毓丿 亘賴 乇蹖卮鈥屫簇з� 亘禺賳丿丿責 賲诏乇 賳讴乇丿賴責 鬲賳賴丕 賲禺賱賵賯蹖 乇丕 讴賴 賴賲賴 亘賴 讴賲丕賱卮 丕毓鬲乇丕賮 賲蹖鈥屭┴必嗀� 丌賮乇蹖丿 賵 亘毓丿 丕夭 丌賳讴賴 丕賵 乇丕 亘賴 賴賲賴 卮賳丕爻丕賳丿 丨乇賮鈥屬囏й屰� 乇丕 亘乇 夭亘丕賳卮 诏匕丕卮鬲 讴賴 禺賵賳鈥� 噩丕乇蹖 讴乇丿. 丌賳鈥屬傌� 禺賵賳 噩丕乇蹖 卮丿 讴賴 丕诏乇 賴賲夭賲丕賳 乇蹖禺鬲賴 卮丿賴 亘賵丿 賲乇丿賲 亘賴 蹖賯蹖賳 丿乇 丌賳 睾乇賯 卮丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿. 氐 476 讴鬲丕亘
賳丕诏賴丕賳 丕卮鬲蹖丕賯 毓噩蹖亘蹖 丕丨爻丕爻 讴乇丿 讴賴 賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 乇丕 賴賲蹖賳 噩丕 乇賴丕 讴賳丿 賵 禺賵丿 亘賴 賴賲丕賳 噩丕蹖蹖 亘乇賵丿 讴賴 丕夭 丌賳 丌賲丿賴 亘賵丿貙 賵 亘乇賵丿 亘賴 噩丕蹖蹖貙 賴乇趩賴 丿賵乇鬲乇 亘賴鬲乇貙 噩丕蹖蹖 丿賵乇丕賮鬲丕丿賴 賵 賮賵乇丕賸 亘乇賵丿貙 亘蹖 禺丿丕丨丕賮馗蹖 亘丕 讴爻蹖. 丕丨爻丕爻 賲蹖鈥屭┴必� 讴賴 丕诏乇貙 賵賱賵 趩賳丿 乇賵夭 丿蹖诏乇貙 丌賳噩丕 亘賲丕賳丿 亘賴 丿丕禺賱 丕蹖賳 丿賳蹖丕 讴卮蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 亘蹖鈥屫ㄘж糙簇�. 氐 493 讴鬲丕亘
丿乇 讴卮賵乇 賲丕 丕诏乇 丿爻鬲鬲 亘賴 噩丕蹖蹖 亘賳丿 賳亘丕卮丿 賵 倬卮鬲蹖亘丕賳鈥屬囏й� 賲鬲賳賮匕 賳丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮蹖 鬲亘丕乇 讴賴賳 亘賴 讴丕乇蹖 賳賲蹖鈥屫③屫�. 氐 528 讴鬲丕亘
讴賴賳賴鈥屭┴ж必臂屬� 噩丕賳蹖 讴賴 丿蹖诏乇 丕氐賱丕丨 卮丿賳蹖 賳蹖爻鬲貙 賴乇 趩賴 亘丕卮丿 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀� 讴賴 "噩丕賳蹖" 丕爻鬲貙 賵 诏乇趩賴 丕夭 讴丕乇蹖 讴賴 讴乇丿賴 倬卮蹖賲丕賳 賳蹖爻鬲貙 倬蹖卮 賵噩丿丕賳 禺賵丿 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀� 讴賴 讴丕乇 夭卮鬲蹖 讴乇丿賴 丕爻鬲貙 賵 賴賲賴鈥屰� 丌賳鈥屬囏� 賴賲蹖賳 胤賵乇賳丿. 氐 544 讴鬲丕亘
賴賲賴 卮乇丕亘 丿乇 爻乇 丿丕乇賳丿貙 丌賳 賴賲 卮丕賲倬丕賳蹖 賵 馗丕賴乇丕賸 鬲丕夭賴 賴賲 卮乇賵毓 賳讴乇丿賴鈥屫з嗀� 夭蹖乇丕 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 丕蹖賳 卮亘鈥屫操嗀団€屫ж必з� 丕夭 丌賳 丌亘 爻乇丿 丌鬲卮蹖賳 亘賴 卮賵乇蹖 卮蹖乇蹖賳 丌賲丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿. 氐 589 讴鬲丕亘
睾乇蹖夭賴鈥屰� 鬲亘丕賴 爻丕夭蹖 禺賵丿 賵 睾乇蹖夭賴鈥屰� 亘賯丕 丿乇 賵噩賵丿 丌丿賲鈥屬囏� 亘賴 蹖讴 丕賳丿丕夭賴 賳蹖乇賵賲賳丿 丕爻鬲. 鬲爻賱胤 卮蹖胤丕賳 賵 爻賱胤賳鬲 丕蹖賲丕賳貙 鬲丕 丕亘丿貙 蹖丕 亘诏賵蹖蹖賲 鬲丕 夭賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 賲丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫з嗃屬� 讴蹖 禺賵丕賴丿 乇爻蹖丿貙 亘丕 賴賲 亘乇丕亘乇賳丿. 氐 601 讴鬲丕亘
丕胤賲蹖賳丕賳 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮蹖丿 讴賴 禺賵卮亘禺鬲蹖 讴乇蹖爻鬲賮 讴賱賲亘 夭賲丕賳蹖 賳亘賵丿 讴賴 丌賲乇蹖讴丕 乇丕 讴卮賮 讴乇丿 亘賱讴賴 夭賲丕賳蹖 禺賵卮亘禺鬲 亘賵丿 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵堌篡屫� 丌賳 乇丕 讴卮賮 讴賳丿... 丕蹖賳噩丕 氐丨亘鬲 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕爻鬲. 賮賯胤 夭賳丿诏蹖. 氐丨亘鬲 鬲賱丕卮 丿乇 讴卮賮 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕爻鬲 賵 賳賴 丿乇 讴卮賮 丌賳. 氐 602 讴鬲丕亘
氐丨亘鬲 蹖讴 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕爻鬲 賵 乇丕賴蹖 亘蹖鈥屬嗁囏й屫� 卮丕禺賴 卮丕禺賴 讴賴 丕爻乇丕乇 丌賳 賴乇趩賴 賴爻鬲 亘乇 賲丕 倬賵卮蹖丿賴 丕爻鬲. 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 卮胤乇賳噩 亘丕夭丕賳貙 鬲賵丕賳丕鬲乇蹖賳 賵 鬲蹖夭賴賵卮鈥屫臂屬嗏€屫簇з� 亘蹖卮 丕夭 趩賳丿 丨乇讴鬲 乇丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗁嗀� 丕夭 倬蹖卮 丨爻丕亘 讴賳賳丿. 讴丕乇 蹖讴 卮胤乇賳噩 亘丕夭 賮乇丕賳爻賵蹖 乇丕 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀池� 鬲丕 丿賴 丨乇讴鬲 禺賵丿 乇丕 倬蹖卮鈥屫ㄛ屬嗃� 讴賳丿 丕毓噩丕夭 卮賲乇丿賴鈥屫з嗀�. 丨丕賱 丌賳讴賴 趩賴 亘蹖鈥屫促呚ж辟嗀� 丨乇讴鬲鈥屬囏й� 賲賲讴賳貙 讴賴 賲丕 丕夭 丌賳鈥屬囏� 亘蹖鈥屫ж焚勜ж观屬�. 卮賲丕 亘丕 倬丕卮蹖丿賳 亘匕乇 禺賵丿 賵 亘匕賱 賳蹖讴蹖 亘賴 賴乇 卮讴賱蹖 讴賴 亘丕卮丿 噩夭卅蹖 丕夭 禺賵丿 乇丕 亘賴 丿蹖诏乇蹖 賲蹖鈥屫ㄘ篡屫� 賵 噩夭卅蹖 丕夭 丿蹖诏乇蹖 乇丕 丿乇 禺賵丿 賲蹖鈥屬矩佰屫臂屫�. 氐 627 讴鬲丕亘
馗乇丕賮鬲 丕丨爻丕爻 賵 毓夭鬲 賳賮爻 丕夭 丿賱 丌丿賲 爻乇趩卮賲賴 賲蹖鈥屭屫必� 賵 趩蹖夭蹖 賳蹖爻鬲 讴賴 賲毓賱賲 乇賯氐 亘賴 讴爻蹖 鬲毓賱蹖賲 亘丿賴丿. 氐 700 讴鬲丕亘
丌丿賲 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 賲馗賴乇 讴賲丕賱 乇丕 丿賵爻鬲 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿. 丌丿賲 丿乇 亘乇丕亘乇 氐賵乇鬲 讴賲丕賱 賮賯胤 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 賲丨賵 鬲賲丕卮丕 亘丕卮丿. 氐 724 讴鬲丕亘
丿乇 丨賯蹖賯鬲 賴蹖趩 趩蹖夭 賳丕乇丕丨鬲 讴賳賳丿賴鈥屫� 丕夭 丕蹖賳 賳蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丌丿賲 賲孬賱丕賸 孬乇賵鬲賲賳丿 賵 禺賵卮賳丕賲 賵 亘丕卮毓賵乇 賵 禺賵卮 氐賵乇鬲 賵 丨鬲蹖 倬爻賳丿蹖丿賴 爻蹖乇鬲 亘丕卮丿 賵 鬲丨氐蹖賱丕鬲卮 賴賲 亘丿 賳亘丕卮丿 賵 丿乇 毓蹖賳 丨丕賱 賴蹖趩 賯乇蹖丨賴鈥屫й屫� 丕氐丕賱鬲蹖貙 讴蹖賮蹖鬲蹖 睾蹖乇毓丕丿蹖 賵賱賵 丿乇 禺賵乇 賳蹖卮禺賳丿貙 賴蹖趩 賮讴乇 丕氐蹖賱蹖 讴賴 丕夭 匕賴賳 禺賵丿卮 噩賵卮蹖丿賴 亘丕卮丿 賳丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿 賵 丕夭 賴乇 噩賴鬲 賲孬賱 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 亘丕卮丿! 孬乇賵鬲賲賳丿 賴爻鬲蹖 丕賲丕 乇賵鬲卮蹖賱丿 賳蹖爻鬲蹖. 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴鈥屫ж� 禺賵卮賳丕賲 丕爻鬲 丕賲丕 賴乇诏夭 亘丕 賴蹖趩 讴丕乇 丿乇禺卮丕賳蹖 賳賲丕蹖丕賳 賳卮丿賴 丕爻鬲. 氐賵乇鬲鬲 賯卮賳诏 丕爻鬲 丕賲丕 噩匕丕亘 賳蹖爻鬲. 鬲丨氐蹖賱丕鬲 禺賵亘蹖 讴乇丿賴鈥屫й� 丕賲丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗃� 丕夭 丌賳 亘賴乇賴鈥屫й� 亘乇丿丕乇蹖. 亘丕賴賵卮 賵 賮賴賲蹖丿賴鈥屫й� 丕賲丕 賮讴乇 亘讴乇蹖 賴乇诏夭 丿乇 匕賴賳鬲 倬蹖丿丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 亘丿 讴爻蹖 乇丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з囒� 丕賲丕 禺蹖乇蹖 賴賲 亘賴 讴爻蹖 賳賲蹖鈥屫必池з嗃屫� 丕夭 賴乇 賳馗乇 讴賴 賮讴乇 讴賳蹖 賳賴 亘賵蹖蹖 賵 賳賴 禺丕氐蹖鬲蹖! 氐 736 讴鬲丕亘
亘毓囟蹖 賵賯鬲鈥屬囏� 賵囟毓 胤賵乇蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕賳爻丕賳 賲噩丕夭 丕爻鬲 讴賴 倬賱鈥屬囏й� 倬卮鬲 爻乇 禺賵丿 乇丕 禺乇丕亘 讴賳丿 賵 丿蹖诏乇 亘賴 禺丕賳賴 亘丕夭 賳蹖丕蹖丿. 氐 891 讴鬲丕亘
October 26, 2022
賱賷爻 兀氐丿賯 賵 賱丕 兀亘爻胤 賲賳 兀賲孬賱丞 丕賱卮毓賵亘 賵 兀睾賳賷丕鬲賴賲 丕賱卮毓亘賷丞 賮賷 鬲氐賵賷乇 兀丨賵丕賱 丕賱賳丕爻 賵 賲卮丕毓乇賴賲 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷丞 毓賱賶 賵噩賴 丕賱丨賯賷賯丞 亘賱丕 鬲噩賲賷賱 兀賵 睾卮.
賵 賯丿 賯賷賱 "丕賱胤賷亘 賮賷 丕賱夭賲丕賳 丿賴 賷賯賵賱賵丕 毓賱賷賴 囟毓賷賮" 亘賱 賷賯賵賱賵賳 兀賷囟丕 毓亘賷胤 賵 兀賴亘賱 兀賷 兀亘賱賴.
"兀氐賱 賮賱丕賳 乇丕噩賱 胤賷亘 賵 毓賱賶 賳賷丕鬲賴" 兀賵 賰賲丕 賯丕賱鬲 丕賱賲胤乇亘丞 廿賷丕賴丕 "丨亘賷亘賷 毓賱賶 賳賷丕鬲賴. 賰賱 丕賱亘賳丕鬲 丕禺賵丕鬲賴" 賵 賴賵 兀賲乇 賱賵 鬲毓賱賲賵賳 毓馗賷賲.
兀賲賷乇賳丕 赖賳丕 賱賷爻 胤賮賱丕 賵 賱丕 兀亘賱賴 亘賱 乇噩賱丕 賱賴 賯賱亘 胤賮賱 賵 賲丕 兀丿乇丕賰 賲丕 賯賱亘 丕賱胤賮賱. 毓賳丿賲丕 兀爻兀賱 丕亘賳賷 丕賱氐睾賷乇 匕賵 丕賱兀毓賵丕賲 丕賱爻亘毓賴: 賴賵 丕賳鬲 賲賵噩賵丿 賷丕 毓丕氐賲責 賷乇丿 亘亘乇丕亍丞 賵 賯丿 賱賲毓鬲 毓賷賳丕賴: 兀賷賵賴 賲賵噩賵丿 賷丕 亘丕亘丕. 賮兀賯賵賱 賲丕夭丨丕: 賵 丕賷賴 丕賱賱賷 賷孬亘鬲 丕賳賰 賲賵噩賵丿責 賷乇賮毓 賷丿賴 兀賲丕賲 毓賷賳賴 賵 賷賳馗乇 廿賱賷賴丕 賲鬲兀賲賱丕 孬賲 賷賳馗乇 賱賷 賵 賷賯賵賱: 兀賴賵賴 賲賵噩賵丿 兀賴賵賴 丨鬲賶 卮賵賮.
賱丕 賷禺胤乇 亘亘丕賱 丕賱兀胤賮丕賱 兀賳賳丕 賳丿丕毓亘賴賲 賵 賳賱丕毓亘賴賲 亘賱 賵 賳爻禺乇 賲賳賴賲 兀丨賷丕賳丕 賮賱賲丕匕丕責 賴賱 賷噩亘賱 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳 毓賱賶 丕賱禺賷乇 兀賲 賷噩亘賱 毓賱賶 丕賱卮乇責 賴賱 賳賵賱丿 氐賮丨丕鬲 亘賷囟丕亍 鬲賱賵孬賴丕 賳賯丕胤 丕賱丨亘乇 兀賵 鬲賱賵賳賴丕 賵 鬲夭禺乇賮賴丕責! 兀賲 賷賵賱丿 賰賱 賲賳丕 賵 賱丿賷賴 亘匕乇丞 賲禺亘賵亍丞 賮賷 賯乇丕乇丞 賳賮爻 賲胤賲卅賳丞 兀賵 賳賮爻 賱賵丕賲丞 兀賵 賳賮爻 兀賲丕乇丞 亘丕賱爻賵亍 兀賵 亘禺賱賷胤 賲賳 賰賱賺.
亘胤賱賳丕 丕賱兀賲賷乇 賲賷卮賰賷賳 賴賵 赖賳丕 賴匕丕 丕賱胤賮賱 賯賱亘丕 賵 乇賵丨丕 丕賱乇噩賱 噩爻賲丕 賵 毓賯賱丕 賵 毓賱賲丕. 賰賱丐賱丐丞 毓丕卮鬲 賮賷 丕賱賲丨丕乇 賮賷 馗賱賲丕鬲 丕賱亘丨乇 兀毓賵丕賲丕 毓丿賷丿丞 賮賱賲丕 禺乇噩鬲 賲賳 丕賱亘丨丕乇 賵 兀賱賯賷鬲 賮賷 丕賱鬲噩乇亘丞 賵 鬲賱賯賮鬲賴丕 兀賷丿賷 丕賱賳丕爻 兀亘賴乇鬲賴賲 亘囟賵卅賴丕 賵 噩賲丕賱賴丕 賮氐丕乇 賰賱 賲丕 毓丿丕賴丕 賯亘賷丨丕 賵 賰賱 賲丕 亘噩賵丕乇賴丕 夭賷賳丞 賱賴丕.
乇噩賱 賱賲 鬲賱賵孬賴 丕賱禺胤賷卅丞 丕賱亘卮乇賷丞 丕賱賲賲鬲丿丞 賲賳 丕賱賲賴丿 廿賱賶 丕賱賱丨丿 賵 賱賲 鬲鬲賲賱賰賴 丕賱兀賴賵丕亍 賵 賲丕 賲賱賰賴丕 賵 賱丕 毓乇賮賴丕. 賴匕丕 賴賵 丕賱兀亘賱賴 賷丕 爻丕丿丞. 賴賵 丕賱賮丕乇爻 丕賱匕賷 賱賲 賷禺囟 丨乇亘丕 賲賳 賯亘賱 賵 賱丕 丕賲鬲胤賶 噩賵丕丿丕.
兀賲丕 賳丕爻鬲丕爻賷丕 賮賷賱亘賵賮賳丕 賮賴賷 丕賱兀賷賯賵賳丞 丕賱禺丕賱丿丞 賱賱禺胤賷卅丞 丕賱鬲丕卅亘丞 賵 賱賰賳賴丕 鬲賵亘丞 賲賳 賳賵毓 禺丕氐. 鬲賵亘丞 廿亘賱賷爻賷丞 賲賱丕卅賰賷丞 賮賷 匕丕鬲 丕賱賵賯鬲. 鬲爻毓賶 賱鬲賱賵孬 賳賮爻賴丕 兀賰孬乇 賮兀賰孬乇 賱賰賷 鬲胤賴乇 賴匕丕 丕賱毓丕賱賲 賲賳 丕賱丿賳爻. 鬲丨賲賱 胤賲賵丨丕鬲賴丕 丕賱爻賷夭賷賮賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲氐毓丿 亘賴丕 廿賱賶 賯賲丞 丕賱噩亘賱 賰賱 賷賵賲 賯丕胤毓丞 賳賮爻 丕賱賲爻丕賮丞 賮賷 賳賮爻 丕賱廿鬲噩丕賴 亘賱丕 兀賲賱 賮賷 丕賱賵氐賵賱 賵 賱賰賳 賷賰賮賷賴丕 兀賳 賷乇丕賴丕 丕賱賳丕爻 賲鬲賲乇睾丞 賮賷 丕賱禺胤賷丞.
兀賲丕 兀噩賱丕賷丕 丕賷賮丕賳賵賮賳丕 賮賴賵 丕賱賳賯賷囟 賲賳 賳丕爻鬲丕爻賷丕 賮賷賱亘賵賮賳丕 兀賵 賴賷 丕賱賵噩賴 丕賱兀禺乇 賱賱噩賲丕賱 丕賱賲賴丕賳. 賴賷 丕賱噩賲丕賱 丕賱賲氐丕賳 賲賳 賰賱 爻賵亍. 賴賷 丕賱鬲賷 賳卮兀鬲 賮賷 丕賱丨賱賷丞 賵 賵賱丿鬲 賮賷 丕賱賳毓賷賲 賵 賲賴丿 賱賴丕 丕賱胤乇賷賯 賱鬲鬲賳賯賱 賲賳 賴匕丕 丕賱賳毓賷賲 廿賱賶 賳毓賷賲 賲賯賷賲. 賵 賰兀賳賴 賷氐賵乇 賱賳丕 胤乇賷賯賷賳 賱賱噩賲丕賱 賰賱 丨爻亘 賯丿乇賴 賵 亘賷卅鬲賴 賵 馗乇賵賮 賲噩鬲賲毓賴.
乇賵丕賷丞 賲噩賳賵賳丞 賲噩賳賵賳丞 賲噩賳賵賳丞 乇睾賲 賰賱 賲丕 亘賴丕 賲賳 賲胤 賵 鬲胤賵賷賱 賱丕 賲賰丕賳 賱賴 賮賷 賳爻賷噩 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 賵 賱丕 賲賵囟賵毓賴丕 廿賱丕 兀賳賴 賲毓 丕賱乇丕卅毓 丿賷爻鬲賵賮爻賰賷 鬲胤賵賷賱 噩賲賷賱 賳鬲賯亘賱賴 賲賳賴 亘賰賱 爻乇賵乇.
鬲噩丿 廿賯鬲亘丕爻丕鬲 丕賱噩夭亍 丕賱兀賵賱 賲賳 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 赖賳丕
鬲噩丿 廿賯鬲亘丕爻丕鬲 丕賱噩夭亍 丕賱孬丕賳賷 賲賳 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 赖賳丕
August 3, 2024
Prince Myshkin, 26, arrives in St. Petersburg, Russia by train, "The Beautiful Man" has too much compassion for this cynical age. He believes every person, trusts all, feels the pain of the suffering unfortunates, thus has no common sense. Simple? Gullible? An idiot? Or a Saint? That question only you can decide. Set in the 1860's, the sick prince (he's an epileptic, like the author of this novel) alone, frightened, no relatives or friends or money, in the world, but with a desire to see his beloved native land, again. That he hardly remembers, having lived in Switzerland, treated by a kindly Doctor Schneider, without charge for years. However meets two men that will be friends or enemies (in the future), inside his train compartment. Rogozhin, a young man who can't control his emotions, very unstable, just inheriting a vast fortune, eager to show the whole city, it. And Lebedev , a minor clerk the kind of gentleman who knows everything about Petersburg's important people. Myshkin, doesn't even have proper clothes for the cold, late November day as he steps down into the unknown metropolis. Nevertheless he has valuable information received from the well informed Mr. Lebedev . Seeing General Epanchin retired, his wife has the same name as our "hero," maybe some kind of relation? With difficulties, servants are such doubters and have good reason to be, Myshkin finally gets in the house's family quarters. Meeting the three beautiful daughters of the general, and his volatile and scary wife, Lizaveta. Falling in love with the youngest, prettiest daughter Aglaia, she's 20, very immature, has crushes on every handsome suitor she's introduced to. The inexperienced prince, also loves Nastasya a kept woman he sees soon after, the best looking female in the country. He wants to save this lady, from a life of inevitable degradation and doom, the eternal triangle. Later entering society, they the ruling class look at him, the eccentric Myshkin closely, an oddity a childish fool, not suitable for them as a friend. Yet these citizens have no real ones, themselves ... Good fortune comes to Prince Lev Nikolayevich Myshkin, he inherits a lot of money, unexpectedly, when he goes to Moscow. A letter tells him, naturally he gives away most of it to people, who say the prince owes them money. And the "poor", those asking for a little help, how can he refuse? Fleeing Moscow, the ill man goes back to the Russian capital, the two women in his life, are there. Rents a villa in the suburbs from Mr. Lebedev , invites the consumptive boy that he befriended, Ippolit, ( an unpleasant youth) to stay during his last days and still earns no respect, from anyone ... The "Idiot", has proposed marriage, to both of his loves!
April 27, 2023
芦Quer铆a hablar a menudo, pero, la verdad, no sab铆a qu茅 decir. 驴Sabe usted? En ciertos casos es mejor no decir nada禄.
Como siempre me pasa con Dostoievski, debo decir que he disfrutado mucho la historia del Pr铆ncipe Lev Nikol谩ievich Mishkin, quien vuelve luego de cuatro a帽os de un sanatario en Suiza para recuperarse... 驴adivinen de qu茅? si, de epilepsia, como Dostoievski, hacia P谩vlovsk en Rusia. De ah铆, que, a partir de su epilepsia, es considerado por todos como un idiota.
Al volver a insertarse en la sociedad rusa, la encuentra totalmente fr铆a, distorsionada, mezquina y mal茅vola y es mensaje que Dostoievski realmente quiso mostrar acerca de su presente, all谩 por 1868-1869.
Debo reconocer que cuando lo le铆 en su momento 鈥淓l adolescente鈥� me gust贸 mucho, pero 鈥淓l idiota鈥� m谩s a煤n porque me pareci贸 m谩s fluido, m谩s ameno de leer, tal vez con una historia menos enrevesada y con personajes m谩s marcados (en El adolescente los parentescos confunden, los apellidos se repiten y es necesario apoyarse en las notas aclaratorias al final del libro).
Otro aspecto interesante del libro son los di谩logos. Tal vez, lo atribuyo a los traductores que hacen que la lectura del libro que sea fluida.
La concepci贸n de Dostoievski sobre el personaje es muy rica, ya que se propuso crear en Mishkin un personaje totalmente antag贸nico a Rodion Rask贸lnikov (recordemos que escribi贸 Crimen y Castigo en 1866) y esto se nota en el car谩cter del pr铆ncipe, dado que el hombre tiene sus convicciones, pero estas no logran ser refutadas o respetadas, como las del Rask贸lnikov.
Mishkin es d茅bil, ingenuo, influenciable, indeciso. Su relaci贸n con las mujeres es conflictiva, enfermiza y angustiante; por momentos por culpa de su propia decisi贸n, en otras por estar negativamente influenciado.
El tri谩ngulo amoroso (y enfermizo) que forma que involucra al pr铆ncipe con Aglaia Ivanovna y a Nastasia Fil铆ppovna es por donde pasa el nudo de esta historia.
Tambi茅n he de destacar que algunos personajes son muy importantes en esta historia, puesto que tienen implicancia directa. Cito entre ellos a Parfi贸n Rogozhin, a Lizaveta Prokofievna, el General Ivolguin, Ippolit Terentiev, Kostia Lebediev y Gavrila Ardali贸novich, entre otros.
Siempre en las novelas de Dostoievski, las conexiones entre personajes son el modo de llevar adelante la historia.
Como creador de la novela polif贸nica, Dostoievski le da a sus h茅roes la funci贸n fundamental de que cada uno desarrolle su propia idea y sea portador de su voz, y a la vez, cada una de estas voces hace al conjunto de la historia.
Dicen que Dostoievski quiso hacer confluir en el pr铆ncipe Mishkin caracter铆sticas de Jesucristo y Don Quijote. Yo particularmente me quedo con el segundo. Realmente hay momentos en que Mishkin va interactuando con los dem谩s personajes de una manera tristemente quijotesca, sobre todo al exponer sus ideales (su discurso sobre el Catolicismo, el Ate铆smo y el Nihilismo es muy importante e interesante de leer con detenimiento).
Y por 煤ltimo creo que el concepto de Don Quijote cuadra m谩s porque, sin hacer spoiler, todo eclosiona en el final.
La belleza salvar谩 al mundo proclama el pr铆ncipe Mishkin en un pasaje de la novela.
Es probable que la ingenuidad de esta frase encierre la naturaleza de su fracaso.
Como siempre me pasa con Dostoievski, debo decir que he disfrutado mucho la historia del Pr铆ncipe Lev Nikol谩ievich Mishkin, quien vuelve luego de cuatro a帽os de un sanatario en Suiza para recuperarse... 驴adivinen de qu茅? si, de epilepsia, como Dostoievski, hacia P谩vlovsk en Rusia. De ah铆, que, a partir de su epilepsia, es considerado por todos como un idiota.
Al volver a insertarse en la sociedad rusa, la encuentra totalmente fr铆a, distorsionada, mezquina y mal茅vola y es mensaje que Dostoievski realmente quiso mostrar acerca de su presente, all谩 por 1868-1869.
Debo reconocer que cuando lo le铆 en su momento 鈥淓l adolescente鈥� me gust贸 mucho, pero 鈥淓l idiota鈥� m谩s a煤n porque me pareci贸 m谩s fluido, m谩s ameno de leer, tal vez con una historia menos enrevesada y con personajes m谩s marcados (en El adolescente los parentescos confunden, los apellidos se repiten y es necesario apoyarse en las notas aclaratorias al final del libro).
Otro aspecto interesante del libro son los di谩logos. Tal vez, lo atribuyo a los traductores que hacen que la lectura del libro que sea fluida.
La concepci贸n de Dostoievski sobre el personaje es muy rica, ya que se propuso crear en Mishkin un personaje totalmente antag贸nico a Rodion Rask贸lnikov (recordemos que escribi贸 Crimen y Castigo en 1866) y esto se nota en el car谩cter del pr铆ncipe, dado que el hombre tiene sus convicciones, pero estas no logran ser refutadas o respetadas, como las del Rask贸lnikov.
Mishkin es d茅bil, ingenuo, influenciable, indeciso. Su relaci贸n con las mujeres es conflictiva, enfermiza y angustiante; por momentos por culpa de su propia decisi贸n, en otras por estar negativamente influenciado.
El tri谩ngulo amoroso (y enfermizo) que forma que involucra al pr铆ncipe con Aglaia Ivanovna y a Nastasia Fil铆ppovna es por donde pasa el nudo de esta historia.
Tambi茅n he de destacar que algunos personajes son muy importantes en esta historia, puesto que tienen implicancia directa. Cito entre ellos a Parfi贸n Rogozhin, a Lizaveta Prokofievna, el General Ivolguin, Ippolit Terentiev, Kostia Lebediev y Gavrila Ardali贸novich, entre otros.
Siempre en las novelas de Dostoievski, las conexiones entre personajes son el modo de llevar adelante la historia.
Como creador de la novela polif贸nica, Dostoievski le da a sus h茅roes la funci贸n fundamental de que cada uno desarrolle su propia idea y sea portador de su voz, y a la vez, cada una de estas voces hace al conjunto de la historia.
Dicen que Dostoievski quiso hacer confluir en el pr铆ncipe Mishkin caracter铆sticas de Jesucristo y Don Quijote. Yo particularmente me quedo con el segundo. Realmente hay momentos en que Mishkin va interactuando con los dem谩s personajes de una manera tristemente quijotesca, sobre todo al exponer sus ideales (su discurso sobre el Catolicismo, el Ate铆smo y el Nihilismo es muy importante e interesante de leer con detenimiento).
Y por 煤ltimo creo que el concepto de Don Quijote cuadra m谩s porque, sin hacer spoiler, todo eclosiona en el final.
La belleza salvar谩 al mundo proclama el pr铆ncipe Mishkin en un pasaje de la novela.
Es probable que la ingenuidad de esta frase encierre la naturaleza de su fracaso.
May 27, 2024
螘魏蔚委 蟺慰蠀 蟺慰位蔚渭慰蠉谓 慰喂 维谓胃蟻蠅蟺慰喂 渭蔚 蟿喂蟼 伪未蠀谓伪渭委蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀蟼 魏伪喂 蟿伪 蠈谓蔚喂蟻伪, 蔚魏蔚委 蟺慰蠀 慰喂 未蔚喂位慰委 蟺蔚胃伪委谓慰蠀谓 蟺蟻喂谓 蟿慰谓 胃维谓伪蟿慰 蟿慰蠀蟼, 蔚魏蔚委 蟺慰蠀 慰喂 蟽魏苇蠄蔚喂蟼 魏维谓慰蠀谓 蟺蟻蠈尾伪 纬喂伪 谓伪 魏蟻蠉蠄慰蠀谓 蠈,蟿喂 伪喂蟽胃维谓慰谓蟿伪喂 萎 谓伪 伪喂蟽胃伪谓胃慰蠉谓 蠈,蟿喂 魏蟻蠉尾慰蠀谓, 蔚魏蔚委 蟺慰蠀 未蔚谓 尉苇蟻蔚喂蟼 蟺慰喂慰谓 蠁蠈尾慰 蟽慰蠀 谓伪 伪纬伪蟺萎蟽蔚喂蟼 蟺蔚蟻喂蟽蟽蠈蟿蔚蟻慰,
蔚魏蔚委 胃伪 蟺蔚蟻喂渭苇谓蔚喂 蟺维谓蟿伪 苇谓伪蟼 芦畏位委胃喂慰蟼禄 谓伪 蟽蔚 魏伪位蠅蟽慰蟻委蟽蔚喂 蟽蟿慰 渭蠀伪位蠈 蟿慰蠀.
螔喂尾位委慰 蠀蟺苇蟻慰蠂慰. 螔喂尾位委慰 未蠉蟽魏慰位慰. 螔喂尾位委慰 蔚渭渭慰谓喂魏蠈. 螔喂尾位委慰 魏位蔚喂蟽蟿慰蠁慰尾喂魏蠈. 螔喂尾位委慰 蔚蟺伪谓伪位伪渭尾伪谓蠈渭蔚谓慰, 蟽魏慰蟿蔚喂谓蠈 魏伪喂 伪蟽蠀渭尾委尾伪蟽蟿慰.
危魏位畏蟻萎 未喂伪尾维胃渭喂蟽畏 伪尉喂蠋谓. 螝位伪蟽喂魏萎 渭蔚位苇蟿畏 魏慰喂谓蠅谓喂魏蠋谓 蠁伪喂谓慰渭苇谓蠅谓. 螆谓伪蟼 魏伪胃蟻苇蠁蟿畏蟼 蟺慰蠀 未蔚谓 魏慰位伪魏蔚蠉蔚喂.
螒谓 蟿慰谓 魏慰喂蟿维尉蔚喂蟼 蟺蟻慰蟽蔚魏蟿喂魏维 胃伪 未蔚喂蟼 蟿慰谓 蔚伪蠀蟿蠈 蟽慰蠀 魏伪喂 苇谓伪 蟻维纬喂蟽渭伪 蟽蟿畏 渭苇蟽畏. 螒谓蔚蟺伪委蟽胃畏蟿慰 魏伪喂 尾伪胃蠉 蟻维纬喂蟽渭伪, 未喂蟺位伪蟽喂维味蔚喂 蔚委未蠅位伪 魏伪喂 蟽蔚 伪谓伪纬魏维味蔚喂 谓伪 蟽蠀纬魏蟻委谓蔚喂蟼 蟿喂蟼 魏伪蟿维蟻蔚蟼 渭蔚 蟿喂蟼 蔚蠀蠂苇蟼.
螣 芦畏位委胃喂慰蟼禄, 慰 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪蟼 螠委蟽魏喂谓, 蔚委谓伪喂 慰 蠀蟺苇蟻位伪渭蟺蟻慰蟼 魏蔚谓蟿蟻喂魏蠈蟼, 未喂蟿蟿蠈蟼 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻伪蟼.
螒蠀蟿蠈蟼 魏蟻伪蟿维蔚喂 蟿慰 蟻伪纬喂蟽渭苇谓慰 魏伪胃蟻苇蠁蟿畏.
螠喂伪 蠀蟺苇蟻慰蠂畏 蠄蠀蠂萎 蟺慰蠀 尾蟻委蟽魏蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蔚 蟽蠉纬蠂蠀蟽畏.
螠喂伪 位伪蟿蟻蔚渭苇谓畏 蠉蟺伪蟻尉畏 蠂伪蟻喂蟽渭伪蟿喂魏维 维蟻蟻蠅蟽蟿畏 蟺慰蠀 蠄维蠂谓蔚喂 蟿慰 谓蠈畏渭伪 蟿畏蟼 味蠅萎蟼 魏伪喂 慰未畏纬蔚委蟿伪喂 伪蟺慰 蟿畏谓 蔚蟺喂胃蠀渭委伪 蟿慰蠀 纬喂伪 味蠅萎.
螣喂 蟺蟻慰胃苇蟽蔚喂蟼 蟿慰蠀 蟺维谓蟿伪 魏伪位苇蟼 渭伪 蔚位伪蟿蟿蠅渭伪蟿喂魏苇蟼 蟽蟿畏谓 蔚魏蟿苇位蔚蟽畏 蟿慰蠀蟼.
螠喂伪 蠉蟺伪蟻尉畏 蟺慰蠀 苇蠂蔚喂 蟽蠂蔚未蠈谓 伪谓伪魏维渭蠄蔚喂 伪蟺慰 蟿喂蟼 蔚蟺喂位畏蟺蟿喂魏苇蟼 魏蟻委蟽蔚喂蟼 魏伪喂 伪蟺慰魏伪位蠉蟺蟿蔚喂 蟿伪 魏委谓畏蟿蟻伪 蟿慰蠀 蠅蟼 蔚蠂苇纬纬蠀伪 蟺蟻慰蟼 蟿畏谓 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺喂谓畏 蠁蠉蟽畏.
螤蟻慰蟽蟺伪胃蔚委 谓伪 蟺蟻慰蟽蔚纬纬委蟽蔚喂 蟿慰蠀蟼 蟽蠀谓伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀蟼 蟿慰蠀 渭蔚 未喂维胃蔚蟽畏 蟺伪喂未喂魏萎蟼 伪蠁苇位蔚喂伪蟼, 伪纬谓蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟼, 蟿蟻蠀蠁蔚蟻蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟼 魏伪喂 蟽蠀渭蟺蠈谓喂伪蟼.
惟蟼 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 伪谓蟿喂位伪渭尾维谓蔚蟿伪喂 未喂伪蠁慰蟻蔚蟿喂魏维 蟿慰谓 魏蠈蟽渭慰.
惟蟼 维蟻蟻蠅蟽蟿慰蟼 蔚蟺喂未蔚喂魏谓蠉蔚喂 蟿喂蟼 蟽魏苇蠄蔚喂蟼 蟿慰蠀 蟺慰蠀 蔚委谓伪喂 伪谓蟿伪谓伪魏位维蟽蔚喂蟼 蟿畏蟼 蔚喂位喂魏蟻委谓蔚喂伪蟼 蟿慰蠀, 蟿慰蠀 蟺位慰蠉蟿慰蠀 蟿畏蟼 伪纬纬蔚位喂魏萎蟼 魏伪蟻未喂维蟼 蟿慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟿畏蟼 蔚蠀蟻蠉蟿畏蟿伪蟼 蟿慰蠀 渭蠀伪位慰蠉 蟿慰蠀.
螌蟽慰 伪蟺委蟽蟿蔚蠀蟿慰 魏喂 伪谓 蠁伪委谓蔚蟿伪喂 伪蠀蟿蠈蟼 慰 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 苇蠂蔚喂 渭喂伪 伪谓蠋蟿蔚蟻畏 魏伪蟿伪谓蠈畏蟽畏 魏伪喂 苇魏蠁蟻伪蟽畏. 螠喂伪 蠀蟺苇蟻蟿伪蟿畏 未喂伪蠂蔚委蟻喂蟽畏 蟿蠅谓 蟽蠀谓伪喂蟽胃畏渭伪蟿喂魏蠋谓 未蠀谓维渭蔚蠅谓 蟺慰蠀 蟿慰谓 蟺蟻慰蠅胃慰蠉谓 谓伪 蠀蟺伪纬慰蟻蔚蠉蔚喂 蟽蠂蔚未蠈谓,蟿喂蟼 魏伪蟿伪蟽蟿蟻蔚蟺蟿喂魏苇蟼 蔚谓苇蟻纬蔚喂蔚蟼 蟿蠅谓 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺蠅谓 纬蠉蟻蠅 蟿慰蠀.
螣 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 伪蠀蟿蠈蟼, 慰 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪蟼 螠委蟽魏喂谓, 蔚委谓伪喂 渭喂伪 伪蟽蟿蔚委蟻蔚蠀蟿畏 蟺畏纬萎 苇渭蟺谓蔚蠀蟽畏蟼 纬喂伪 魏维胃蔚 维谓胃蟻蠅蟺慰.
螌蟺慰喂慰蟼 蟿慰谓 魏蟻委谓蔚喂 蠅蟼 伪胃蠋伪 蟺伪胃畏蟿喂魏蠈 蟺蟻蠈蟽蠅蟺慰 苇蠂蔚喂 蠂维蟽蔚喂 蟿畏谓 慰蠀蟽委伪.
螣 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻伪蟼 蟿慰蠀 未喂伪魏蟻委谓蔚蟿伪喂 魏蠀蟻委蠅蟼 纬喂伪 蟿畏谓 慰尉蠀渭苇谓畏 伪谓蟿委位畏蠄畏 蟺蟻慰蟼 蟿畏 蟽魏苇蠄畏 魏伪喂 蟿畏 未蟻维蟽畏, 蟿畏 尾伪胃喂维 魏伪蟿伪谓蠈畏蟽畏 蠈位蠅谓 蟿蠅谓 魏伪蟿伪蟽蟿维蟽蔚蠅谓 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 蔚蠀蠁蠀螑伪 蟿畏蟼 蟽蠀谓伪喂蟽胃畏渭伪蟿喂魏萎蟼 蟿慰蠀 谓慰畏渭慰蟽蠉谓畏蟼.
螘委谓伪喂 畏位委胃喂慰蟼, 蔚委谓伪喂 蟺蟻维纬渭伪蟿喂, 未喂伪蠁苇蟻蔚喂 伪蟺慰 蠈位慰蠀蟼.
螚 畏位喂胃喂蠈蟿畏蟿伪 蟿慰蠀 渭蔚蟿伪蠁苇蟻蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蠀谓慰蟺蟿喂魏维 渭蔚 伪位位畏位蔚蟺喂未蟻维蟽蔚喂蟼 蟺慰蠀 未畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬慰蠉谓 蟿蠈蟽慰 伪纬维蟺畏, 蠈蟽慰 魏伪喂 未蠀蟽伪蟻苇蟽魏蔚喂伪.
螤伪位蔚蠉蔚喂 谓伪 尾蟻蔚喂 蠂蠋蟻慰 纬喂伪 谓伪 味萎蟽蔚喂 渭苇蟽伪 蟽蔚 苇谓伪谓 魏蠈蟽渭慰 蠀位喂蟽蟿喂魏蠈, 伪蠀蟿蠈蟼 蠈渭蠅蟼 未蔚谓 蔚谓未喂伪蠁苇蟻蔚蟿伪喂 纬喂伪 蟿伪 蠀位喂魏维 伪纬伪胃维, 未喂伪魏蟻委谓蔚喂 伪位位慰蠉 蟿慰谓 蟺位慰蠉蟿慰 魏喂 苇蟿蟽喂 未蔚谓 渭蟺慰蟻慰蠉谓 谓伪 蟿慰谓 魏位苇蠄慰蠀谓 蟽蟿畏 渭慰喂蟻伪蟽喂维.
螠伪 蟺蠈蟽慰 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 蟺喂伪, 蟺蠈蟽慰;
巍伪纬委味蔚喂 畏 魏伪蟻未喂维 蟿慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟽蟺维蔚喂 伪蟺慰 蔚谓伪 蟺伪喂未喂魏蠈 蠂伪渭蠈纬蔚位慰, 位喂蠋谓蔚喂 畏 蠄蠀蠂萎 蟿慰蠀, 魏伪委纬蔚蟿伪喂, 伪蟺慰 蟿慰 蠂维未喂 渭喂伪蟼 蔚蟻蠅蟿喂魏萎蟼 未喂维蟺蠀蟻畏蟼 渭伪蟿喂维蟼, 渭伪 蔚委谓伪喂 蟺伪纬蔚蟻维 伪未喂维蠁慰蟻慰蟼 渭蟺蟻慰蟽蟿维 蟽蟿畏谓 魏慰喂谓蠅谓喂魏萎 魏伪蟿伪尉委蠅蟽畏, 蟿畏谓 伪蟻喂蟽蟿慰魏蟻伪蟿喂魏萎 蔚魏位蔚蟺蟿蠀蟽渭苇谓畏 伪蟺位畏蟽蟿委伪, 蟿喂蟼 蠁喂位慰尉慰尉委蔚蟼 纬喂伪 蔚尉慰蠀蟽委伪 魏伪喂 蟺蔚蟻喂慰蠀蟽委伪, 蟿畏谓 蟺慰位蠀蟿苇位蔚喂伪, 蟿慰 魏苇蟻未慰蟼.
螤蠈蟽慰 蟺喂慰 畏位委胃喂慰蟼, 蠈蟿伪谓 未蔚谓 渭蟺慰蟻蔚委 谓伪 蟽蟿伪胃蔚委 蟽蟿畏谓 魏位伪蟽喂魏萎 蟿维尉畏 蟿畏蟼 伪蟽蟿喂魏萎蟼 蠀蟺慰魏蟻喂蟽委伪蟼.
螌蟿伪谓 伪蟻谓蔚委蟿伪喂 谓伪 蟽蠀渭渭蔚蟿苇蠂蔚喂 蟽蟿畏谓 未喂伪蠁胃慰蟻维 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 蟺位维谓畏 蠅蟼 蠀蟺慰蟽蟿畏蟻喂魏蟿喂魏蠈 蟽魏慰蠀蟺委未喂 谓蔚蠀蟻蠅蟿喂魏蠋谓 魏位畏蟻慰谓蠈渭蠅谓.
螌蟿伪谓 伪谓维渭蔚蟽伪 蟽蔚 蟽谓慰渭蟺 蔚魏渭蔚蟿伪位位蔚蠀蟿苇蟼 魏伪喂 伪谓萎胃喂魏慰蠀蟼 谓维蟻魏喂蟽蟽慰蠀蟼 蟺蟻慰蟿喂渭维蔚喂 蟿慰 尾维胃慰蟼 蟿畏蟼 伪纬维蟺畏蟼 魏伪喂 蟿畏蟼 伪蠀蟿慰胃蠀蟽委伪蟼.
螣 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 位慰喂蟺蠈谓 伪蠀蟿蠈蟼, 未蔚谓 未苇蠂蔚蟿伪喂 魏慰蟽渭喂魏维 蟽蠉谓慰蟻伪 蟺慰蠀 蠂伪蟻维味慰蠀谓 蟿慰 蟽蠋渭伪 蟿慰蠀 蟺位伪谓萎蟿畏.
螖蔚谓 渭蟺慰蟻蔚委 谓伪 未喂伪位苇尉蔚喂 伪谓维渭蔚蟽伪 蟽蔚 伪纬维蟺畏 魏伪喂 渭委蟽慰蟼. 韦慰 渭委蟽慰蟼 未蔚谓 蠀蟺维蟻蠂蔚喂, 未蔚谓 蟿慰 纬谓蠋蟻喂蟽蔚, 未蔚谓 蟿慰 苇谓喂蠅蟽蔚 蟺慰蟿苇.
螤蟻慰蟽蟺伪胃蔚委 谓伪 蠂蔚喂蟻喂蟽蟿蔚委 蟿畏谓 伪纬维蟺畏 蟿慰蠀.
螡伪 魏伪蟿伪谓慰萎蟽慰蠀谓 蠈位慰喂 蟺蠅蟼 未蔚谓 纬委谓蔚蟿伪喂 谓伪 渭畏谓 伪纬伪蟺维蔚喂, 未蔚谓 渭蟺慰蟻蔚委 谓伪 蠀蟺维蟻蠂蔚喂 蠂蠅蟻委蟼 伪纬维蟺畏.
螒纬伪蟺维蔚喂 魏伪胃慰位喂魏维 魏伪喂 伪蟺蔚蟻喂蠈蟻喂蟽蟿伪 蠂蠅蟻委蟼 谓伪 渭蟺慰蟻蔚委 谓伪 蟽蠀渭蠁喂位喂蠋蟽蔚喂 蟿慰 蟺伪胃喂伪蟽渭苇谓慰 魏伪喂 蟿慰 蟽蠀渭蟺慰谓蔚蟿喂魏蠈.
螒魏蠈渭畏 魏喂 蠈蟿伪谓 尾蟻委蟽魏蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蟿畏 未委谓畏 蟿慰蠀 蔚蟻蠅蟿喂魏慰蠉 慰委蟽蟿蟻慰蠀 伪谓维渭蔚蟽伪 蟽蔚 未蠀慰 纬蠀谓伪委魏蔚蟼, 蟿慰蠀 蠁伪委谓蔚蟿伪喂 伪未喂伪谓蠈畏蟿畏 畏 蔚蟺喂位慰纬萎, 伪蟻蟻蠅蟽蟿伪委谓蔚喂, 蠂维谓蔚蟿伪喂 渭蟺蟻慰蟽蟿维 蟽蟿慰 未委位畏渭渭伪 蟺慰蠀 蟿慰蠀 胃苇蟿慰蠀谓 慰喂 魏伪谓蠈谓蔚蟼. 螒纬维蟺畏 伪蟺慰 慰委魏蟿慰 魏伪喂 未苇慰蟼 萎 苇蟻蠅蟿伪蟼 蟺伪胃慰蠀蟼 渭蔚 伪纬维蟺畏 纬伪位萎谓喂伪 魏伪喂 蟺伪谓蟿慰蟿喂谓萎;
螆谓伪 蔚蟺喂位畏蟺蟿喂魏蠈 伪蟻喂蟽蟿慰蠉蟻纬畏渭伪 纬蟻伪渭渭苇谓慰 伪蟺慰 渭喂伪 位慰纬慰蟿蔚蠂谓喂魏萎 喂未喂慰蠁蠀螑伪.
螝蔚谓蟿蟻喂魏蠈蟼 维尉慰谓伪蟼 慰 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪蟼 螠委蟽魏喂谓 魏伪喂 纬蠉蟻蠅 蟿慰蠀 蟺位萎胃慰蟼 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻蠅谓 蠁蠀位伪魏喂蟽渭苇谓蠅谓 蟽蔚 苇谓伪 蟿蟻慰渭蔚蟻蠈 蟺伪喂蠂谓委未喂 蟺蟻伪纬渭伪蟿喂魏蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟼.
螘委谓伪喂 蠈位慰喂 蟿慰蠀蟼 伪尉喂慰胃伪蠉渭伪蟽蟿慰喂, 蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁喂魏慰委,蟺慰位蠉蠂蟻蠅渭慰喂, 蟺伪蟻慰蟻渭畏蟿喂魏慰委, 蔚谓未慰蟽魏慰蟺喂魏慰委, 蔚谓蔚蟻纬畏蟿喂魏慰委, 蔚蟺喂位蔚纬渭苇谓慰喂 蟽慰蠁维 纬喂伪 谓伪 蟽蠀渭渭蔚蟿苇蠂慰蠀谓 蟽蔚 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟿慰 蟺伪喂蠂谓委未喂, 蟽蔚 伪蠀蟿萎 蟿畏谓 蟺伪蟻维蟽蟿伪蟽畏 喂未蔚蠋谓.
螣 螡蟿慰蟽蟿慰纬苇蠁蟽魏喂 伪蟺慰魏伪位蠉蟺蟿蔚喂, 未喂蔚蟻蔚蠀谓维 魏伪喂 蔚蟺畏蟻蔚维味蔚喂.
螠苇蟽伪 蟽蟿慰 蟺伪喂蠂谓委未喂 蟿慰蠀 蟺蔚蟿维蔚喂 谓慰慰蟿蟻慰蟺委蔚蟼, 蟺维胃畏, 位维胃畏, 蟽魏苇蠄蔚喂蟼, 蔚谓苇蟻纬蔚喂蔚蟼,蟺慰蠀 蔚尉畏纬慰蠉谓 蟿畏 蠁蠉蟽畏 蟿慰蠀 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟿畏蟼 魏慰喂谓蠅谓委伪蟼.
螤蟻慰维纬慰蠀谓 蟿畏谓 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺喂谓畏 尾慰蠉位畏蟽畏 渭蔚 蟺慰喂魏委位慰蠀蟼 尾伪胃渭慰蠉蟼 未喂伪蟿伪蟻伪蠂萎蟼 蟿畏蟼 蟺蟻慰蟽蠅蟺喂魏蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟼, 蟺伪蟻伪谓慰蠆魏苇蟼 蟺伪蟻伪位畏蟻畏渭伪蟿喂魏苇蟼 喂未苇蔚蟼 萎 渭伪谓喂伪魏苇蟼 蔚蟺喂未喂蠋尉蔚喂蟼.
螘蟺慰渭苇谓蠅蟼 畏 慰蠀蟽委伪 蟿畏蟼 伪蠁萎纬畏蟽畏蟼 尾蠀胃委味蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蔚 渭喂伪 胃维位伪蟽蟽伪 位维蟽蟺畏蟼 伪蟺慰 蔚魏慰蠉蟽喂伪 魏慰喂谓蠅谓喂魏维 魏伪喂 魏伪魏慰蟺蟻慰伪委蟻蔚蟿伪 蟽蠂蠈位喂伪, 喂未喂慰蟽蠀纬魏蟻伪蟽委蔚蟼 尉蔚蠂蠅蟻喂蟽蟿苇蟼 魏伪喂 蟽慰蠀蟻蔚伪位喂蟽蟿喂魏萎 尾蟻伪未蠉蟿畏蟿伪 蟽蠀蟽蠂蔚蟿喂蟽渭蠋谓.
桅蠀蟽喂魏维 蟽蔚 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟿慰 蟺伪喂蠂谓委未喂 未蔚谓 蠀蟺维蟻蠂慰蠀谓 谓喂魏畏蟿苇蟼 魏伪喂 蟽蔚 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟿慰 渭蠀胃喂蟽蟿蠈蟻畏渭伪 未蔚谓 蠀蟺维蟻蠂蔚喂 蟿委蟺慰蟿伪 位喂纬蠈蟿蔚蟻慰 伪蟺慰 蟿畏谓 蟿蔚位蔚喂蠈蟿畏蟿伪.
螖蠉蟽魏慰位慰, 尾伪蟻蠉 魏伪喂 蟽蟺慰蠀未伪委慰 蟺谓蔚蠀渭伪蟿喂魏蠈 苇蟻纬慰.
鉁★笍馃煢鉁★笍馃煢
危伪蟼 蟺蟻慰魏伪位蠋
螒谓蟿苇蠂蔚蟿蔚;
螝伪位萎 伪谓维纬谓蠅蟽畏.
螤慰位位慰蠉蟼 伪蟽蟺伪蟽渭慰蠉蟼.
蔚魏蔚委 胃伪 蟺蔚蟻喂渭苇谓蔚喂 蟺维谓蟿伪 苇谓伪蟼 芦畏位委胃喂慰蟼禄 谓伪 蟽蔚 魏伪位蠅蟽慰蟻委蟽蔚喂 蟽蟿慰 渭蠀伪位蠈 蟿慰蠀.
螔喂尾位委慰 蠀蟺苇蟻慰蠂慰. 螔喂尾位委慰 未蠉蟽魏慰位慰. 螔喂尾位委慰 蔚渭渭慰谓喂魏蠈. 螔喂尾位委慰 魏位蔚喂蟽蟿慰蠁慰尾喂魏蠈. 螔喂尾位委慰 蔚蟺伪谓伪位伪渭尾伪谓蠈渭蔚谓慰, 蟽魏慰蟿蔚喂谓蠈 魏伪喂 伪蟽蠀渭尾委尾伪蟽蟿慰.
危魏位畏蟻萎 未喂伪尾维胃渭喂蟽畏 伪尉喂蠋谓. 螝位伪蟽喂魏萎 渭蔚位苇蟿畏 魏慰喂谓蠅谓喂魏蠋谓 蠁伪喂谓慰渭苇谓蠅谓. 螆谓伪蟼 魏伪胃蟻苇蠁蟿畏蟼 蟺慰蠀 未蔚谓 魏慰位伪魏蔚蠉蔚喂.
螒谓 蟿慰谓 魏慰喂蟿维尉蔚喂蟼 蟺蟻慰蟽蔚魏蟿喂魏维 胃伪 未蔚喂蟼 蟿慰谓 蔚伪蠀蟿蠈 蟽慰蠀 魏伪喂 苇谓伪 蟻维纬喂蟽渭伪 蟽蟿畏 渭苇蟽畏. 螒谓蔚蟺伪委蟽胃畏蟿慰 魏伪喂 尾伪胃蠉 蟻维纬喂蟽渭伪, 未喂蟺位伪蟽喂维味蔚喂 蔚委未蠅位伪 魏伪喂 蟽蔚 伪谓伪纬魏维味蔚喂 谓伪 蟽蠀纬魏蟻委谓蔚喂蟼 蟿喂蟼 魏伪蟿维蟻蔚蟼 渭蔚 蟿喂蟼 蔚蠀蠂苇蟼.
螣 芦畏位委胃喂慰蟼禄, 慰 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪蟼 螠委蟽魏喂谓, 蔚委谓伪喂 慰 蠀蟺苇蟻位伪渭蟺蟻慰蟼 魏蔚谓蟿蟻喂魏蠈蟼, 未喂蟿蟿蠈蟼 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻伪蟼.
螒蠀蟿蠈蟼 魏蟻伪蟿维蔚喂 蟿慰 蟻伪纬喂蟽渭苇谓慰 魏伪胃蟻苇蠁蟿畏.
螠喂伪 蠀蟺苇蟻慰蠂畏 蠄蠀蠂萎 蟺慰蠀 尾蟻委蟽魏蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蔚 蟽蠉纬蠂蠀蟽畏.
螠喂伪 位伪蟿蟻蔚渭苇谓畏 蠉蟺伪蟻尉畏 蠂伪蟻喂蟽渭伪蟿喂魏维 维蟻蟻蠅蟽蟿畏 蟺慰蠀 蠄维蠂谓蔚喂 蟿慰 谓蠈畏渭伪 蟿畏蟼 味蠅萎蟼 魏伪喂 慰未畏纬蔚委蟿伪喂 伪蟺慰 蟿畏谓 蔚蟺喂胃蠀渭委伪 蟿慰蠀 纬喂伪 味蠅萎.
螣喂 蟺蟻慰胃苇蟽蔚喂蟼 蟿慰蠀 蟺维谓蟿伪 魏伪位苇蟼 渭伪 蔚位伪蟿蟿蠅渭伪蟿喂魏苇蟼 蟽蟿畏谓 蔚魏蟿苇位蔚蟽畏 蟿慰蠀蟼.
螠喂伪 蠉蟺伪蟻尉畏 蟺慰蠀 苇蠂蔚喂 蟽蠂蔚未蠈谓 伪谓伪魏维渭蠄蔚喂 伪蟺慰 蟿喂蟼 蔚蟺喂位畏蟺蟿喂魏苇蟼 魏蟻委蟽蔚喂蟼 魏伪喂 伪蟺慰魏伪位蠉蟺蟿蔚喂 蟿伪 魏委谓畏蟿蟻伪 蟿慰蠀 蠅蟼 蔚蠂苇纬纬蠀伪 蟺蟻慰蟼 蟿畏谓 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺喂谓畏 蠁蠉蟽畏.
螤蟻慰蟽蟺伪胃蔚委 谓伪 蟺蟻慰蟽蔚纬纬委蟽蔚喂 蟿慰蠀蟼 蟽蠀谓伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀蟼 蟿慰蠀 渭蔚 未喂维胃蔚蟽畏 蟺伪喂未喂魏萎蟼 伪蠁苇位蔚喂伪蟼, 伪纬谓蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟼, 蟿蟻蠀蠁蔚蟻蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟼 魏伪喂 蟽蠀渭蟺蠈谓喂伪蟼.
惟蟼 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 伪谓蟿喂位伪渭尾维谓蔚蟿伪喂 未喂伪蠁慰蟻蔚蟿喂魏维 蟿慰谓 魏蠈蟽渭慰.
惟蟼 维蟻蟻蠅蟽蟿慰蟼 蔚蟺喂未蔚喂魏谓蠉蔚喂 蟿喂蟼 蟽魏苇蠄蔚喂蟼 蟿慰蠀 蟺慰蠀 蔚委谓伪喂 伪谓蟿伪谓伪魏位维蟽蔚喂蟼 蟿畏蟼 蔚喂位喂魏蟻委谓蔚喂伪蟼 蟿慰蠀, 蟿慰蠀 蟺位慰蠉蟿慰蠀 蟿畏蟼 伪纬纬蔚位喂魏萎蟼 魏伪蟻未喂维蟼 蟿慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟿畏蟼 蔚蠀蟻蠉蟿畏蟿伪蟼 蟿慰蠀 渭蠀伪位慰蠉 蟿慰蠀.
螌蟽慰 伪蟺委蟽蟿蔚蠀蟿慰 魏喂 伪谓 蠁伪委谓蔚蟿伪喂 伪蠀蟿蠈蟼 慰 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 苇蠂蔚喂 渭喂伪 伪谓蠋蟿蔚蟻畏 魏伪蟿伪谓蠈畏蟽畏 魏伪喂 苇魏蠁蟻伪蟽畏. 螠喂伪 蠀蟺苇蟻蟿伪蟿畏 未喂伪蠂蔚委蟻喂蟽畏 蟿蠅谓 蟽蠀谓伪喂蟽胃畏渭伪蟿喂魏蠋谓 未蠀谓维渭蔚蠅谓 蟺慰蠀 蟿慰谓 蟺蟻慰蠅胃慰蠉谓 谓伪 蠀蟺伪纬慰蟻蔚蠉蔚喂 蟽蠂蔚未蠈谓,蟿喂蟼 魏伪蟿伪蟽蟿蟻蔚蟺蟿喂魏苇蟼 蔚谓苇蟻纬蔚喂蔚蟼 蟿蠅谓 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺蠅谓 纬蠉蟻蠅 蟿慰蠀.
螣 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 伪蠀蟿蠈蟼, 慰 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪蟼 螠委蟽魏喂谓, 蔚委谓伪喂 渭喂伪 伪蟽蟿蔚委蟻蔚蠀蟿畏 蟺畏纬萎 苇渭蟺谓蔚蠀蟽畏蟼 纬喂伪 魏维胃蔚 维谓胃蟻蠅蟺慰.
螌蟺慰喂慰蟼 蟿慰谓 魏蟻委谓蔚喂 蠅蟼 伪胃蠋伪 蟺伪胃畏蟿喂魏蠈 蟺蟻蠈蟽蠅蟺慰 苇蠂蔚喂 蠂维蟽蔚喂 蟿畏谓 慰蠀蟽委伪.
螣 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻伪蟼 蟿慰蠀 未喂伪魏蟻委谓蔚蟿伪喂 魏蠀蟻委蠅蟼 纬喂伪 蟿畏谓 慰尉蠀渭苇谓畏 伪谓蟿委位畏蠄畏 蟺蟻慰蟼 蟿畏 蟽魏苇蠄畏 魏伪喂 蟿畏 未蟻维蟽畏, 蟿畏 尾伪胃喂维 魏伪蟿伪谓蠈畏蟽畏 蠈位蠅谓 蟿蠅谓 魏伪蟿伪蟽蟿维蟽蔚蠅谓 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 蔚蠀蠁蠀螑伪 蟿畏蟼 蟽蠀谓伪喂蟽胃畏渭伪蟿喂魏萎蟼 蟿慰蠀 谓慰畏渭慰蟽蠉谓畏蟼.
螘委谓伪喂 畏位委胃喂慰蟼, 蔚委谓伪喂 蟺蟻维纬渭伪蟿喂, 未喂伪蠁苇蟻蔚喂 伪蟺慰 蠈位慰蠀蟼.
螚 畏位喂胃喂蠈蟿畏蟿伪 蟿慰蠀 渭蔚蟿伪蠁苇蟻蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蠀谓慰蟺蟿喂魏维 渭蔚 伪位位畏位蔚蟺喂未蟻维蟽蔚喂蟼 蟺慰蠀 未畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬慰蠉谓 蟿蠈蟽慰 伪纬维蟺畏, 蠈蟽慰 魏伪喂 未蠀蟽伪蟻苇蟽魏蔚喂伪.
螤伪位蔚蠉蔚喂 谓伪 尾蟻蔚喂 蠂蠋蟻慰 纬喂伪 谓伪 味萎蟽蔚喂 渭苇蟽伪 蟽蔚 苇谓伪谓 魏蠈蟽渭慰 蠀位喂蟽蟿喂魏蠈, 伪蠀蟿蠈蟼 蠈渭蠅蟼 未蔚谓 蔚谓未喂伪蠁苇蟻蔚蟿伪喂 纬喂伪 蟿伪 蠀位喂魏维 伪纬伪胃维, 未喂伪魏蟻委谓蔚喂 伪位位慰蠉 蟿慰谓 蟺位慰蠉蟿慰 魏喂 苇蟿蟽喂 未蔚谓 渭蟺慰蟻慰蠉谓 谓伪 蟿慰谓 魏位苇蠄慰蠀谓 蟽蟿畏 渭慰喂蟻伪蟽喂维.
螠伪 蟺蠈蟽慰 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 蟺喂伪, 蟺蠈蟽慰;
巍伪纬委味蔚喂 畏 魏伪蟻未喂维 蟿慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟽蟺维蔚喂 伪蟺慰 蔚谓伪 蟺伪喂未喂魏蠈 蠂伪渭蠈纬蔚位慰, 位喂蠋谓蔚喂 畏 蠄蠀蠂萎 蟿慰蠀, 魏伪委纬蔚蟿伪喂, 伪蟺慰 蟿慰 蠂维未喂 渭喂伪蟼 蔚蟻蠅蟿喂魏萎蟼 未喂维蟺蠀蟻畏蟼 渭伪蟿喂维蟼, 渭伪 蔚委谓伪喂 蟺伪纬蔚蟻维 伪未喂维蠁慰蟻慰蟼 渭蟺蟻慰蟽蟿维 蟽蟿畏谓 魏慰喂谓蠅谓喂魏萎 魏伪蟿伪尉委蠅蟽畏, 蟿畏谓 伪蟻喂蟽蟿慰魏蟻伪蟿喂魏萎 蔚魏位蔚蟺蟿蠀蟽渭苇谓畏 伪蟺位畏蟽蟿委伪, 蟿喂蟼 蠁喂位慰尉慰尉委蔚蟼 纬喂伪 蔚尉慰蠀蟽委伪 魏伪喂 蟺蔚蟻喂慰蠀蟽委伪, 蟿畏谓 蟺慰位蠀蟿苇位蔚喂伪, 蟿慰 魏苇蟻未慰蟼.
螤蠈蟽慰 蟺喂慰 畏位委胃喂慰蟼, 蠈蟿伪谓 未蔚谓 渭蟺慰蟻蔚委 谓伪 蟽蟿伪胃蔚委 蟽蟿畏谓 魏位伪蟽喂魏萎 蟿维尉畏 蟿畏蟼 伪蟽蟿喂魏萎蟼 蠀蟺慰魏蟻喂蟽委伪蟼.
螌蟿伪谓 伪蟻谓蔚委蟿伪喂 谓伪 蟽蠀渭渭蔚蟿苇蠂蔚喂 蟽蟿畏谓 未喂伪蠁胃慰蟻维 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 蟺位维谓畏 蠅蟼 蠀蟺慰蟽蟿畏蟻喂魏蟿喂魏蠈 蟽魏慰蠀蟺委未喂 谓蔚蠀蟻蠅蟿喂魏蠋谓 魏位畏蟻慰谓蠈渭蠅谓.
螌蟿伪谓 伪谓维渭蔚蟽伪 蟽蔚 蟽谓慰渭蟺 蔚魏渭蔚蟿伪位位蔚蠀蟿苇蟼 魏伪喂 伪谓萎胃喂魏慰蠀蟼 谓维蟻魏喂蟽蟽慰蠀蟼 蟺蟻慰蟿喂渭维蔚喂 蟿慰 尾维胃慰蟼 蟿畏蟼 伪纬维蟺畏蟼 魏伪喂 蟿畏蟼 伪蠀蟿慰胃蠀蟽委伪蟼.
螣 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 位慰喂蟺蠈谓 伪蠀蟿蠈蟼, 未蔚谓 未苇蠂蔚蟿伪喂 魏慰蟽渭喂魏维 蟽蠉谓慰蟻伪 蟺慰蠀 蠂伪蟻维味慰蠀谓 蟿慰 蟽蠋渭伪 蟿慰蠀 蟺位伪谓萎蟿畏.
螖蔚谓 渭蟺慰蟻蔚委 谓伪 未喂伪位苇尉蔚喂 伪谓维渭蔚蟽伪 蟽蔚 伪纬维蟺畏 魏伪喂 渭委蟽慰蟼. 韦慰 渭委蟽慰蟼 未蔚谓 蠀蟺维蟻蠂蔚喂, 未蔚谓 蟿慰 纬谓蠋蟻喂蟽蔚, 未蔚谓 蟿慰 苇谓喂蠅蟽蔚 蟺慰蟿苇.
螤蟻慰蟽蟺伪胃蔚委 谓伪 蠂蔚喂蟻喂蟽蟿蔚委 蟿畏谓 伪纬维蟺畏 蟿慰蠀.
螡伪 魏伪蟿伪谓慰萎蟽慰蠀谓 蠈位慰喂 蟺蠅蟼 未蔚谓 纬委谓蔚蟿伪喂 谓伪 渭畏谓 伪纬伪蟺维蔚喂, 未蔚谓 渭蟺慰蟻蔚委 谓伪 蠀蟺维蟻蠂蔚喂 蠂蠅蟻委蟼 伪纬维蟺畏.
螒纬伪蟺维蔚喂 魏伪胃慰位喂魏维 魏伪喂 伪蟺蔚蟻喂蠈蟻喂蟽蟿伪 蠂蠅蟻委蟼 谓伪 渭蟺慰蟻蔚委 谓伪 蟽蠀渭蠁喂位喂蠋蟽蔚喂 蟿慰 蟺伪胃喂伪蟽渭苇谓慰 魏伪喂 蟿慰 蟽蠀渭蟺慰谓蔚蟿喂魏蠈.
螒魏蠈渭畏 魏喂 蠈蟿伪谓 尾蟻委蟽魏蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蟿畏 未委谓畏 蟿慰蠀 蔚蟻蠅蟿喂魏慰蠉 慰委蟽蟿蟻慰蠀 伪谓维渭蔚蟽伪 蟽蔚 未蠀慰 纬蠀谓伪委魏蔚蟼, 蟿慰蠀 蠁伪委谓蔚蟿伪喂 伪未喂伪谓蠈畏蟿畏 畏 蔚蟺喂位慰纬萎, 伪蟻蟻蠅蟽蟿伪委谓蔚喂, 蠂维谓蔚蟿伪喂 渭蟺蟻慰蟽蟿维 蟽蟿慰 未委位畏渭渭伪 蟺慰蠀 蟿慰蠀 胃苇蟿慰蠀谓 慰喂 魏伪谓蠈谓蔚蟼. 螒纬维蟺畏 伪蟺慰 慰委魏蟿慰 魏伪喂 未苇慰蟼 萎 苇蟻蠅蟿伪蟼 蟺伪胃慰蠀蟼 渭蔚 伪纬维蟺畏 纬伪位萎谓喂伪 魏伪喂 蟺伪谓蟿慰蟿喂谓萎;
螆谓伪 蔚蟺喂位畏蟺蟿喂魏蠈 伪蟻喂蟽蟿慰蠉蟻纬畏渭伪 纬蟻伪渭渭苇谓慰 伪蟺慰 渭喂伪 位慰纬慰蟿蔚蠂谓喂魏萎 喂未喂慰蠁蠀螑伪.
螝蔚谓蟿蟻喂魏蠈蟼 维尉慰谓伪蟼 慰 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪蟼 螠委蟽魏喂谓 魏伪喂 纬蠉蟻蠅 蟿慰蠀 蟺位萎胃慰蟼 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻蠅谓 蠁蠀位伪魏喂蟽渭苇谓蠅谓 蟽蔚 苇谓伪 蟿蟻慰渭蔚蟻蠈 蟺伪喂蠂谓委未喂 蟺蟻伪纬渭伪蟿喂魏蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟼.
螘委谓伪喂 蠈位慰喂 蟿慰蠀蟼 伪尉喂慰胃伪蠉渭伪蟽蟿慰喂, 蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁喂魏慰委,蟺慰位蠉蠂蟻蠅渭慰喂, 蟺伪蟻慰蟻渭畏蟿喂魏慰委, 蔚谓未慰蟽魏慰蟺喂魏慰委, 蔚谓蔚蟻纬畏蟿喂魏慰委, 蔚蟺喂位蔚纬渭苇谓慰喂 蟽慰蠁维 纬喂伪 谓伪 蟽蠀渭渭蔚蟿苇蠂慰蠀谓 蟽蔚 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟿慰 蟺伪喂蠂谓委未喂, 蟽蔚 伪蠀蟿萎 蟿畏谓 蟺伪蟻维蟽蟿伪蟽畏 喂未蔚蠋谓.
螣 螡蟿慰蟽蟿慰纬苇蠁蟽魏喂 伪蟺慰魏伪位蠉蟺蟿蔚喂, 未喂蔚蟻蔚蠀谓维 魏伪喂 蔚蟺畏蟻蔚维味蔚喂.
螠苇蟽伪 蟽蟿慰 蟺伪喂蠂谓委未喂 蟿慰蠀 蟺蔚蟿维蔚喂 谓慰慰蟿蟻慰蟺委蔚蟼, 蟺维胃畏, 位维胃畏, 蟽魏苇蠄蔚喂蟼, 蔚谓苇蟻纬蔚喂蔚蟼,蟺慰蠀 蔚尉畏纬慰蠉谓 蟿畏 蠁蠉蟽畏 蟿慰蠀 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟿畏蟼 魏慰喂谓蠅谓委伪蟼.
螤蟻慰维纬慰蠀谓 蟿畏谓 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺喂谓畏 尾慰蠉位畏蟽畏 渭蔚 蟺慰喂魏委位慰蠀蟼 尾伪胃渭慰蠉蟼 未喂伪蟿伪蟻伪蠂萎蟼 蟿畏蟼 蟺蟻慰蟽蠅蟺喂魏蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟼, 蟺伪蟻伪谓慰蠆魏苇蟼 蟺伪蟻伪位畏蟻畏渭伪蟿喂魏苇蟼 喂未苇蔚蟼 萎 渭伪谓喂伪魏苇蟼 蔚蟺喂未喂蠋尉蔚喂蟼.
螘蟺慰渭苇谓蠅蟼 畏 慰蠀蟽委伪 蟿畏蟼 伪蠁萎纬畏蟽畏蟼 尾蠀胃委味蔚蟿伪喂 蟽蔚 渭喂伪 胃维位伪蟽蟽伪 位维蟽蟺畏蟼 伪蟺慰 蔚魏慰蠉蟽喂伪 魏慰喂谓蠅谓喂魏维 魏伪喂 魏伪魏慰蟺蟻慰伪委蟻蔚蟿伪 蟽蠂蠈位喂伪, 喂未喂慰蟽蠀纬魏蟻伪蟽委蔚蟼 尉蔚蠂蠅蟻喂蟽蟿苇蟼 魏伪喂 蟽慰蠀蟻蔚伪位喂蟽蟿喂魏萎 尾蟻伪未蠉蟿畏蟿伪 蟽蠀蟽蠂蔚蟿喂蟽渭蠋谓.
桅蠀蟽喂魏维 蟽蔚 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟿慰 蟺伪喂蠂谓委未喂 未蔚谓 蠀蟺维蟻蠂慰蠀谓 谓喂魏畏蟿苇蟼 魏伪喂 蟽蔚 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟿慰 渭蠀胃喂蟽蟿蠈蟻畏渭伪 未蔚谓 蠀蟺维蟻蠂蔚喂 蟿委蟺慰蟿伪 位喂纬蠈蟿蔚蟻慰 伪蟺慰 蟿畏谓 蟿蔚位蔚喂蠈蟿畏蟿伪.
螖蠉蟽魏慰位慰, 尾伪蟻蠉 魏伪喂 蟽蟺慰蠀未伪委慰 蟺谓蔚蠀渭伪蟿喂魏蠈 苇蟻纬慰.
鉁★笍馃煢鉁★笍馃煢
危伪蟼 蟺蟻慰魏伪位蠋
螒谓蟿苇蠂蔚蟿蔚;
螝伪位萎 伪谓维纬谓蠅蟽畏.
螤慰位位慰蠉蟼 伪蟽蟺伪蟽渭慰蠉蟼.
June 7, 2016
This book disappointed me. I never thought I would be saying this with regard to a book by Dostoyevsky, but it's true. Perhaps this is only because I鈥檝e been spoiled by reading The Brothers Karamazov, which even admirers of The Idiot will likely admit is a much stronger work. Yet I was not merely unimpressed by this work, but was often greatly frustrated by it. To be concise, I found The Idiot to be a rambling mess.
Anyone familiar with Dostoyevsky鈥檚 work will know that he is not a versatile artist. He is a writer with obvious flaws and with tremendous strengths. It is, therefore, incumbent on the reader to look past his demerits鈥攈is clunky dialogue, his exaggerated personalities, his slipshod plots鈥攊n order to appreciate his peculiar genius, if the reader is to get anything at all out of his works. In this book, however, I found his usual deficiencies to be overabundant, and his usual brilliance to be pushed to the side.
Let us take the protagonist. He is supposed to be a nearly perfect man, the very picture of benevolence and kindness. Yet I was not at all impressed with Prince Myshkin. He was a polite and amiable fellow, sure. But did he go very far out of his way to help others? Was he capable of doing any good? Was he busying himself in improving the world? Not at all. Rather, Myshkin comes off as rather bumbling and self-absorbed.
This was, of course, partly Dostoyevsky鈥檚 goal鈥攖o show how true kindness can make you vulnerable and lead to inactivity and ruin. But the impression I was left with was not of a kind man tragically taken advantage of, but a man who was simply incapable of dealing with the world; a man not overly virtuous, but simply inept. This is in stark contrast to two of Dostoyevsky鈥檚 other characters, Father Zossima and Alyosha Karamazov, both of whom I found to be more wise, more open-hearted, more interesting, and many times more capable than Prince Myshkin鈥攚ho, to be frank, is so passive as to be dull.
It is clear that much of this novel鈥檚 design is due to the influence of Don Quixote, which Dostoyevsky refers to many times during the course of this work. Prince Myshkin is something of a Quixotic character鈥攁 bit of a dunderhead, a bit of a loon鈥攅xcept that he is tragic, whereas the Don is comic. We also see Cervantes鈥檚 influence in the large and unwieldy cast of minor characters (something not typical of Dostoyevsky), who continually intrude, sometimes violently, on the main action of the plot. It seems that Dostoyevsky vaguely wanted to write a genuine burlesque, with a witless protagonist suffering misadventure after misadventure in the real world. But of course, Dostoyevsky turns this general idea into a distorted nightmare that very often borders on absurdity.
Either from lack of practice, or simply because he wrote this novel very quickly while in dire financial straits, Dostoyevsky didn鈥檛 seem up to the challenge of keeping track of all these minor characters. All of them act erratically, often to the point that they are unrecognizable one scene to the next. They suffer acute changes of mood and opinion, veering from emotion to emotion too quickly for the reader to even keep up. Admittedly, this is characteristic of much of Dostoyevsky鈥檚 writing; and to be sure, he often uses fitful, unpredictable, and irrational characters to brilliant effect, keeping the reader constantly on edge. But in this work, I found it to be so overdone as produce a kind of apathy in me. I couldn鈥檛 wrap my head around the characters enough to care about them; and since I didn鈥檛 really know them, and thus didn鈥檛 expect anything from them, they couldn鈥檛 surprise me鈥攕ince surprise is the thwarting of expectation.
Perhaps what I most regretted about this design, however, was not the shoddy characterization, but how it forced Dostoyevsky to deal with his typical themes. Instead of putting his always arresting philosophical speeches into the mouths of major characters, several minor characters butt into the story in order to deliver lengthy and, from the perspective of the story, rather pointless harangues that are promptly swept to the side. So instead of the critique of modern society, nihilism, rationalism, and his analysis of the decline of religion being in the forefront, these themes are peripheral, which I think is a shame.
This is not to mention the several incidents that Dostoyevsky introduces apparently only to stretch the page-count (he was being paid by the page). The most egregious example of this was when a young man bursts into a drawing room, spends an hour claiming that he is the son of Prince Myshkin鈥檚 doctor and is thus owed money, and reads a lengthy and absurd article that Myshkin then refutes point by point; then, another minor character announces that he has been researching this man for some time (why?), and reveals that his claim to be the son of the doctor is false鈥攁nd this, after an interminable conversation with many other side-remarks鈥攕o that the whole affair comes to absolutely nothing, and isn鈥檛 at all important to the rest of the book.
This enormous amount of space dedicated to side issues is especially perplexing when one considers that major plot developments are, by contrast, introduced willy-nilly without much ado鈥攕uch as when Prince Myshkin simply announces, in the midst of a major scene, that he has inherited a large sum of money.
To cut short this review, I found this to be a deeply flawed book, one that obviously needed several more drafts before it could be really compelling. I am still giving it three stars, however, because there are occasional brilliant flashes. I especially liked when Prince Myshkin spoke of executions, and Lebedev鈥檚 story about the repentant cannibal who killed and ate monks. Yet these shining moments were overshadowed by the many pages of tedium. Of course, it鈥檚 quite possible that I missed something. One of my friends is a big fan of Dostoyevsky, and he says this book is his favorite. But until my eyes are opened to this book's secret merit, I will steer those who ask to Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov, which are not merely occasionally brilliant, but splendid from beginning to end.
Anyone familiar with Dostoyevsky鈥檚 work will know that he is not a versatile artist. He is a writer with obvious flaws and with tremendous strengths. It is, therefore, incumbent on the reader to look past his demerits鈥攈is clunky dialogue, his exaggerated personalities, his slipshod plots鈥攊n order to appreciate his peculiar genius, if the reader is to get anything at all out of his works. In this book, however, I found his usual deficiencies to be overabundant, and his usual brilliance to be pushed to the side.
Let us take the protagonist. He is supposed to be a nearly perfect man, the very picture of benevolence and kindness. Yet I was not at all impressed with Prince Myshkin. He was a polite and amiable fellow, sure. But did he go very far out of his way to help others? Was he capable of doing any good? Was he busying himself in improving the world? Not at all. Rather, Myshkin comes off as rather bumbling and self-absorbed.
This was, of course, partly Dostoyevsky鈥檚 goal鈥攖o show how true kindness can make you vulnerable and lead to inactivity and ruin. But the impression I was left with was not of a kind man tragically taken advantage of, but a man who was simply incapable of dealing with the world; a man not overly virtuous, but simply inept. This is in stark contrast to two of Dostoyevsky鈥檚 other characters, Father Zossima and Alyosha Karamazov, both of whom I found to be more wise, more open-hearted, more interesting, and many times more capable than Prince Myshkin鈥攚ho, to be frank, is so passive as to be dull.
It is clear that much of this novel鈥檚 design is due to the influence of Don Quixote, which Dostoyevsky refers to many times during the course of this work. Prince Myshkin is something of a Quixotic character鈥攁 bit of a dunderhead, a bit of a loon鈥攅xcept that he is tragic, whereas the Don is comic. We also see Cervantes鈥檚 influence in the large and unwieldy cast of minor characters (something not typical of Dostoyevsky), who continually intrude, sometimes violently, on the main action of the plot. It seems that Dostoyevsky vaguely wanted to write a genuine burlesque, with a witless protagonist suffering misadventure after misadventure in the real world. But of course, Dostoyevsky turns this general idea into a distorted nightmare that very often borders on absurdity.
Either from lack of practice, or simply because he wrote this novel very quickly while in dire financial straits, Dostoyevsky didn鈥檛 seem up to the challenge of keeping track of all these minor characters. All of them act erratically, often to the point that they are unrecognizable one scene to the next. They suffer acute changes of mood and opinion, veering from emotion to emotion too quickly for the reader to even keep up. Admittedly, this is characteristic of much of Dostoyevsky鈥檚 writing; and to be sure, he often uses fitful, unpredictable, and irrational characters to brilliant effect, keeping the reader constantly on edge. But in this work, I found it to be so overdone as produce a kind of apathy in me. I couldn鈥檛 wrap my head around the characters enough to care about them; and since I didn鈥檛 really know them, and thus didn鈥檛 expect anything from them, they couldn鈥檛 surprise me鈥攕ince surprise is the thwarting of expectation.
Perhaps what I most regretted about this design, however, was not the shoddy characterization, but how it forced Dostoyevsky to deal with his typical themes. Instead of putting his always arresting philosophical speeches into the mouths of major characters, several minor characters butt into the story in order to deliver lengthy and, from the perspective of the story, rather pointless harangues that are promptly swept to the side. So instead of the critique of modern society, nihilism, rationalism, and his analysis of the decline of religion being in the forefront, these themes are peripheral, which I think is a shame.
This is not to mention the several incidents that Dostoyevsky introduces apparently only to stretch the page-count (he was being paid by the page). The most egregious example of this was when a young man bursts into a drawing room, spends an hour claiming that he is the son of Prince Myshkin鈥檚 doctor and is thus owed money, and reads a lengthy and absurd article that Myshkin then refutes point by point; then, another minor character announces that he has been researching this man for some time (why?), and reveals that his claim to be the son of the doctor is false鈥攁nd this, after an interminable conversation with many other side-remarks鈥攕o that the whole affair comes to absolutely nothing, and isn鈥檛 at all important to the rest of the book.
This enormous amount of space dedicated to side issues is especially perplexing when one considers that major plot developments are, by contrast, introduced willy-nilly without much ado鈥攕uch as when Prince Myshkin simply announces, in the midst of a major scene, that he has inherited a large sum of money.
To cut short this review, I found this to be a deeply flawed book, one that obviously needed several more drafts before it could be really compelling. I am still giving it three stars, however, because there are occasional brilliant flashes. I especially liked when Prince Myshkin spoke of executions, and Lebedev鈥檚 story about the repentant cannibal who killed and ate monks. Yet these shining moments were overshadowed by the many pages of tedium. Of course, it鈥檚 quite possible that I missed something. One of my friends is a big fan of Dostoyevsky, and he says this book is his favorite. But until my eyes are opened to this book's secret merit, I will steer those who ask to Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov, which are not merely occasionally brilliant, but splendid from beginning to end.
June 9, 2010
The Idiot is a remarkable literary feat; a true accomplishment. It not only shows and represents true human complexity, but it births it, both in the inner workings of its passionate characters, and in the overall story. It's replete with patient, mind testing issues that spring the reader鈥檚 level of understanding back-and-fourth; yet its emotional intensity is felt throughout. It speaks truth of our striving human conditions; our emotions which only know the truth of their existence in the moment; yet it is a true and pure novel, like the heart of our unusual but endearing hero, Prince Myshkin: our idiot.
Nobody brings the drama like Fyodor: nobody. Yet despite all the exclamation points and the excessively passionate characters -- who all seem to speak with great clarity, with penetrating philosophical insight -- Dostoevsky novels still feel very real to me. Despite its great entertainment value and all the outbursts from its characters, very real emotional boundaries are pushed in very natural, all encompassing ways. What The Idiot bespeaks is something about life that is so real and true that the novel, while very intense, feels completely unexaggerated.
Dostoevsky novels don鈥檛 take place in, but are a world of both utter emotional madness and pure genius. And they display how the two are often inseparable:
"He fell to thinking, among other things, about his epileptic condition, that there was a stage in it just before the fit itself (if the fit occurred while he was awake), when suddenly, amidst the sadness, the darkness of soul, the pressure, his brain would momentarily catch fire, as it were, and all his life's forces would be strained at once in an extraordinary impulse. The sense of life, of self-awareness, increased nearly tenfold in these moments, which flashed by like lightning. His mind, his heart were lit up with an extraordinary light; all his agitation, all his doubts, all his worries were as if placated at once, resolved in a sort of sublime tranquility, filled with serene, harmonious joy, and hope, filled with reason and ultimate cause."
These characters, none of them were "all bad" or "all good"; in fact there was not one single character in this entire novel that I didn't feel both sympathy and contempt for, at various stages.
The Idiot is epic. The way it played out will have my mind reeling for weeks, I know. And I like that. I like that a lot.
"But I'll add though that there is something at the bottom of every new human thought, every thought of genius, or even every earnest thought that springs up in any brain, which can never be communicated to others, even if one were to write volumes about it and were explaining one's idea for thirty-five years; there's something left which cannot be induced to emerge from your brain, and remains with you forever; and with it you will die, without communicating to anyone perhaps, the most important of your ideas."
Nobody brings the drama like Fyodor: nobody. Yet despite all the exclamation points and the excessively passionate characters -- who all seem to speak with great clarity, with penetrating philosophical insight -- Dostoevsky novels still feel very real to me. Despite its great entertainment value and all the outbursts from its characters, very real emotional boundaries are pushed in very natural, all encompassing ways. What The Idiot bespeaks is something about life that is so real and true that the novel, while very intense, feels completely unexaggerated.
Dostoevsky novels don鈥檛 take place in, but are a world of both utter emotional madness and pure genius. And they display how the two are often inseparable:
"He fell to thinking, among other things, about his epileptic condition, that there was a stage in it just before the fit itself (if the fit occurred while he was awake), when suddenly, amidst the sadness, the darkness of soul, the pressure, his brain would momentarily catch fire, as it were, and all his life's forces would be strained at once in an extraordinary impulse. The sense of life, of self-awareness, increased nearly tenfold in these moments, which flashed by like lightning. His mind, his heart were lit up with an extraordinary light; all his agitation, all his doubts, all his worries were as if placated at once, resolved in a sort of sublime tranquility, filled with serene, harmonious joy, and hope, filled with reason and ultimate cause."
These characters, none of them were "all bad" or "all good"; in fact there was not one single character in this entire novel that I didn't feel both sympathy and contempt for, at various stages.
The Idiot is epic. The way it played out will have my mind reeling for weeks, I know. And I like that. I like that a lot.
"But I'll add though that there is something at the bottom of every new human thought, every thought of genius, or even every earnest thought that springs up in any brain, which can never be communicated to others, even if one were to write volumes about it and were explaining one's idea for thirty-five years; there's something left which cannot be induced to emerge from your brain, and remains with you forever; and with it you will die, without communicating to anyone perhaps, the most important of your ideas."
February 4, 2020
丕賲丕 賴賲丕賳 亘賽賴 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屭佖嗀�: 芦賲乇丿 丿丕賳丕 丿乇 賲蹖丕賳 丌丿賲蹖丕賳 趩賳丕賳 賲蹖鈥屭必� 讴賴 丿乇 賲蹖丕賳 噩丕賳賵乇丕賳.禄|賳蹖趩賴
丕亘賱赖 讴蹖爻鬲責
賲乇丿賲 亘賴 丌賳 讴爻蹖 讴賴 亘丿賴鈥屫ㄙ愗池з嗏€屬囏й屫� 亘蹖鈥屫池ж� 賵 讴鬲丕亘 亘丕卮丿 賵 亘賴 丿賳蹖丕 賵 丕賲賵乇卮 賳诏丕賴蹖 讴丕爻亘讴丕乇丕賳賴 賳丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿 賲蹖 诏賵蹖賳丿 丕亘賱赖. 丕賲丕 丿賵 賳賵毓 丕亘賱赖 丿丕乇蹖賲. 蹖讴蹖 丌賳 丕亘賱赖蹖 讴賴 丕夭 爻乇賽 倬丕蹖蹖賳 亘賵丿賳 囟乇蹖亘 賴賵卮蹖 趩賳丕賳 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 蹖讴蹖 丌賳 丕亘賱赖 賳丕亘睾賴鈥屫й� 讴賴 趩蹖夭蹖 亘賴鬲乇 丕夭 丿丕丿 賵 爻鬲丿賴丕蹖 賲毓丕賲賱丕鬲蹖/賲毓丕卮乇鬲蹖 讴卮賮 讴乇丿賴 亘丕卮丿. 蹖讴 趩賳蹖賳 丕亘賱赖蹖 亘丿賵賳 趩卮賲丿丕卮鬲 亘賴 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 禺賵亘蹖 賲蹖 讴賳丿. 丕夭 讴爻蹖 亘丿蹖 亘賴 丿賱 鈥屬嗁呟� 诏蹖乇丿 賵 讴爻蹖 乇丕 丕夭 禺賵丿 賳賲蹖 乇賳噩丕賳丿. 丿乇 毓賵囟 丕夭 趩蹖夭賴丕蹖蹖 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳丿 賱匕鬲 亘亘乇丿 讴賴 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 賯丕丿乇 亘賴 賱匕鬲 亘乇丿賳 丕夭 丌賳 賳蹖爻鬲賳丿. 丕夭 賯胤毓賴 丕蹖 卮毓乇貙 丕夭 亘賵蹖蹖 禺賵卮貙 丕夭 鬲賲丕卮丕蹖 賲賳馗乇賴 丕蹖 趩卮賲 賳賵丕夭 賵 蹖丕 卮賳蹖丿賳 丌賵丕蹖 倬乇賳丿賴鈥屫й� 丿乇 胤亘蹖毓鬲. 賵 鬲賲丕賲 丕蹖賳賴丕 乇丕 丿乇 丕蹖賳 噩賲賱賴 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳 禺賱丕氐賴 讴乇丿 讴賴 丕蹖賳 丕亘賱赖貙 丕夭 乇爻蹖丿賳 亘賴 賲賯氐丿 賱匕鬲 賳賲蹖 亘乇丿貙 亘賱讴賴 丕夭 胤蹖 讴乇丿賳 賵 倬蹖賲賵丿賳賽 賲爻蹖乇 賱匕鬲 賲蹖 亘乇丿. 禺賵丕賴 亘賴 賲賯氐丿 亘乇爻丿 賵 禺賵丕賴 賳乇爻丿. 亘乇丕蹖 丕賵 賮乇賯蹖 賳丿丕乇丿. 丕亘賱赖 丿乇 倬蹖 讴卮賮 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕爻鬲 賵 丕蹖賳 讴卮賮 讴乇丿賳 夭賳丿诏蹖 賳蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丕賵 乇丕 賲丨馗賵馗 賲蹖 讴賳丿貙 亘賱讴賴 "丿乇 倬蹖" 讴卮賮 夭賳丿诏蹖 亘賵丿賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕賵 乇丕 賲丨馗賵馗 賲蹖 讴賳丿.
亘丕 丕蹖賳 賴賲賴貙 胤亘蹖毓蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 丕賵 乇丕 丕亘賱赖 亘卮賲丕乇賳丿貙 夭蹖乇丕 丕賵 賳賴 丿乇 倬蹖 讴爻亘 賲賯丕賲 丕爻鬲 賵 賳賴 丨乇氐 孬乇賵鬲 丕賳丿賵夭蹖 丿乇 爻乇 丿丕乇丿. 丕賵 丿蹖丿诏丕賴蹖 讴丕爻亘讴丕乇丕賳賴 賳丿丕乇丿 賵 禺蹖賱蹖 賵賯鬲 賴丕 賲鬲囟乇乇 賲蹖 卮賵丿. 賲鬲囟乇乇貙 丕賱亘鬲賴 丕夭 賳诏丕賴賽 毓丕賯賱丕賳.
賲蹖 诏賵蹖賳丿 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳貙 賯賴乇賲丕賳 乇賲丕賳 丕亘賱赖 乇丕 丕夭 乇賵蹖 賲爻蹖丨 诏乇鬲賴 亘乇丿丕卮鬲賴 丕爻鬲. 賵 丕蹖賳 亘蹖乇丕賴 賳蹖爻鬲. 夭蹖乇丕 賵賯鬲蹖 丕賵氐丕賮 馗丕賴乇蹖 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳 乇丕 賲蹖 禺賵丕賳蹖丿 丕賳诏丕乇 噩賱賵蹖 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 鬲丕亘賱賵賴丕蹖 賳賯丕卮蹖 賲爻蹖丨 丕乇鬲賵丿賵讴爻蹖 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿賴 丕蹖丿. 丿乇 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲賽 倬蹖卮 丕夭 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 賵 賲毓丕氐乇 丕賵貙 趩賳丿 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕亘賱赖賽 亘乇噩爻鬲賴 丿丕卮鬲賴鈥屫й屬�: 丿賳鈥屭┷屫促堌� 倬蹖讴鈥屬堐屭� 賵 跇丕賳鈥屬堌з勞権з�. 丕賲丕 賴乇 讴丿丕賲 丕夭 丌賳賴丕 賲毓丕蹖亘蹖 乇丕 丿丕卮鬲賳丿 讴賴 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 賲蹖 禺賵丕爻鬲 賯賴乇賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 禺賱賯 賲蹖 讴賳丿貙 丿乇 毓蹖賳賽 亘賱丕賴鬲賽 馗丕賴乇蹖貙 丕夭 丌賳 賲毓丕蹖亘 亘乇蹖 亘丕卮丿. 丕賳爻丕賳蹖 讴賴 丿乇 馗丕賴乇 賲毓賲賵賱蹖 亘賴 賳馗乇 亘乇爻丿 丕賲丕 賯賱亘賽 爻丕丿賴 丕蹖 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿. 丨鬲丕 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 亘賴 丕蹖賳 賯賴乇賲丕賳 賱賯亘 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖 丿賴丿. 亘乇丕蹖 丕蹖賳讴賴 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 丕夭 倬蹖卮 亘乇丕蹖 丕賵 丕丨鬲乇丕賲蹖 賯丕卅賱 亘丕卮丿 賵 鬲乇亘蹖鬲 氐丨蹖丨 賲賵乇賵孬蹖鈥屫й� 乇丕 亘乇丕蹖 丕賵 賯丕卅賱 亘卮賵丿.
亘賴 诏賵賳賴鈥屬囏й� 丕爻鬲禺賵丕賳蹖賽 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 亘賳诏蹖乇蹖丿.
丕賵 丕夭 丌爻丕蹖卮 禺賵丿 诏匕卮鬲 鬲丕 乇賵丨賽 賲丕 乇丕 亘賴 鬲毓丕賱蹖 亘乇爻丕賳丿.
丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 乇賲丕賳 丕亘賱赖 乇丕 亘毓丿 丕夭 乇賲丕賳 噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲 賳賵卮鬲. 賵 亘乇丕蹖 爻蹖乇賽 賲胤丕賱毓賴鈥� 丌孬丕乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 亘賴鬲乇 丕爻鬲 丕夭 鬲賵丕賱蹖 賳诏丕乇卮鈥屫簇з� 倬蹖乇賵蹖 讴賳蹖賲. 乇賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 禺賵丕賳丿賳卮 賴賮鬲賴 賴丕 亘賴 胤賵賱 賲蹖 丕賳噩丕賲丿 賳賵卮鬲賳卮 賲丕賴 賲丕 亘賴 胤賵賱 丕賳噩丕賲蹖丿賴 丕爻鬲. 讴鬲丕亘蹖 讴賴 禺賱賯 讴乇丿賳卮 亘乇丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 丿卮賵丕乇 賲蹖 賳賲賵丿賴 丕爻鬲貙 胤亘蹖毓蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 賲胤丕賱毓賴 丕卮 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 賳蹖夭 丿卮賵丕乇 亘賳賲丕蹖丿. 丕賲丕 亘丿賵賳 卮讴 丕蹖賳 蹖讴 乇賲丕賳賽 賲毓賲賵賱蹖 賳蹖爻鬲 賵 丕乇夭卮 禺賵丕賳丿賴 卮丿賳 丿丕乇丿. 賯蹖賲鬲蹖 讴賴 亘丕 诏匕丕卮鬲賳 夭賲丕賳賲丕賳 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丕賳丿賳卮 倬乇丿丕禺鬲 賲蹖 讴賳蹖賲 丿乇 賲賯丕亘賱 亘賴乇賴 丕蹖 讴賴 丕夭 丌賳 賲蹖 亘乇蹖賲 賳丕趩蹖夭 丕爻鬲.
丿乇亘丕乇賴鈥屰� 丌賳 丕亘賱赖鈥� 讴賴 賲賳 禺賵丕賳丿賲
丕亘賱赖 乇賲丕賳 丨噩蹖賲蹖 丕爻鬲.丿賵 鬲乇噩賲賴 丿丕乇丿. 蹖讴蹖 爻乇賵卮 丨亘蹖亘蹖 賵 蹖讴蹖 賲賴乇蹖 丌賴蹖. 賲賳 鬲乇噩賲賴 蹖 爻乇賵卮 丨亘蹖亘蹖 乇丕 禺賵丕賳丿賴鈥屫з� 丕賲丕 亘乇丕蹖 亘丕乇 丿蹖诏乇 鬲氐賲蹖賲 丿丕乇賲 鬲乇噩賲賴鈥屰� 賲賴乇蹖 丌賴蹖 乇丕 亘禺賵丕賳賲. 趩賵賳 乇賵爻蹖 亘賱丿 賳蹖爻鬲賲 賵 鬲氐賲蹖賲 賴賲 賳丿丕乇賲 乇賵爻蹖 蹖丕丿 亘诏蹖乇賲貙 亘丕 禺賵丕賳丿賳 丿賵 鬲乇噩賲賴 賲蹖 禺賵丕賲 賲胤賲卅賳 卮賵賲 趩蹖夭蹖 乇丕 丕夭 丿爻鬲 賳丿丕丿賴 亘丕卮賲. 丨鬲丕 丿乇 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 趩賳丿 卮丕毓乇 賵 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 禺賵丕賳丿賴 丕賲 讴賴 丿乇 倬蹖乇丕賳賴鈥屰� 毓賲乇 丌孬丕乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 乇丕 亘丕夭禺賵丕賳蹖 讴乇丿賴 丕賳丿 賵 趩蹖夭賴丕蹖 毓噩蹖亘蹖 丕夭 丌賳 丿乇蹖丕賮鬲賴 丕賳丿. 丿賵亘丕乇賴 禺賵丕賳蹖 賴賲蹖卮賴 趩蹖夭賴丕蹖 噩丿蹖丿蹖 亘乇丕蹖 丌丿賲 丿丕乇丿.
诏夭蹖丿賴 丕蹖 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘 丕亘賱赖 讴賴 禺蹖賱蹖 賵賯鬲鈥屬囏� 亘丕夭禺賵丕賳蹖 賲蹖 讴賳賲 乇丕 丕蹖賳噩丕 賲蹖鈥屫①堌辟�. 丕蹖賳 丿乇 丨賯蹖賯鬲 毓賯蹖丿賴鈥屰� 禺賵丿賽 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕夭 夭亘丕賳 卮禺氐蹖鬲蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖 诏賮鬲賴 賲蹖 卮賵丿 賵 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳賲 亘诏賵蹖賲 賳诏丕賴蹖 賳亘賵睾 丌賲蹖夭 賳爻亘鬲 亘賴 丿賳蹖丕 賵 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 丿乇 丌賳 賴爻鬲 賲蹖 亘丕卮丿:
賳賲蹖 賮賴賲蹖丿賲 趩胤賵乇 丕蹖賳 丌丿賲 賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 爻丕賱 賴丕蹖 丿乇丕夭 夭賳丿诏蹖 丿乇 倬蹖卮 丿丕乇賳丿 賳賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳賳丿 孬乇賵鬲賲賳丿 亘卮賵賳丿(诏乇趩賴 賴賳賵夭 賴賲 丕蹖賳 賲毓賲丕 亘乇丕蹖賲 賳丕诏卮賵丿賴 賲丕賳丿賴). 賲乇丿 賮賯蹖乇蹖 乇丕賲蹖 卮賳丕禺鬲賲 讴賴 亘毓丿賴丕 卮賳蹖丿賲 丕夭 诏乇爻賳诏蹖 賲乇丿賴 丕爻鬲 賵 蹖丕丿賲 賴爻鬲 讴賴 丕夭 丕蹖賳 禺亘乇 讴賮乇賲 丿乇 丌賲丿. 丕诏乇 賲賲讴賳 賲蹖 亘賵丿 讴賴 丕蹖賳 賲乇丿 夭賳丿賴 亘卮賵丿 诏賲丕賳 賲蹖 讴賳賲 丕賵 乇丕 賲蹖 讴卮鬲賲. 诏丕賴蹖 蹖讴 賴賮鬲賴 丕蹖 丨丕賱賲 亘賴鬲乇 賲蹖 卮丿 賵 丕夭 禺丕賳賴 亘蹖乇賵賳 賲蹖 乇賮鬲賲. 丕賲丕 毓丕賯亘鬲 丕夭 丿蹖丿賳 禺蹖丕亘丕賳 賵 賲乇丿賲 趩賳丕賳 亘賴 禺卮賲 賲蹖 丌賲丿賲 讴賴 鬲丕趩賳丿 乇賵夭 亘賴 毓賲丿 丿乇 亘賴 乇賵蹖 禺賵丿 賲蹖 亘爻鬲賲貙 诏乇趩賴 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳爻鬲賲 賲孬賱 賴賲賴 亘蹖乇賵賳 亘乇賵賲. 鬲丨賲賱 丿蹖丿賳 丕蹖賳 賴賲賴 丌丿賲 乇丕 讴賴 賲丿丕賲 丿乇 鬲讴丕倬賵蹖賳丿 賵 亘賴 賴乇 讴賳噩 賵 讴賳丕乇 爻乇 賲蹖 讴卮賳丿 賵 倬蹖賵爻鬲賴 丿賱 賲卮睾賵賱 賵 毓亘賵爻 賵 賳诏乇丕賳 丕賳丿 賵 丿乇 倬蹖丕丿賴 乇賵 丕夭 讴賳丕乇 賲賳 賲蹖 诏匕乇賳丿貙 賳丿丕卮鬲賲. 丨丕氐賱 丕蹖賳 睾賲 丿丕卅賲 賵 賳诏乇丕賳蹖 賵 鬲讴丕倬賵蹖 賴賲蹖卮诏蹖 賵 丕蹖賳 讴蹖賳賴鈥屰� 鬲賲丕賲 賳卮丿賳蹖 丌賳賴丕 趩蹖爻鬲責 (夭蹖乇丕 丌賳 賴丕 亘丿禺賵丕賴鈥屸€嵷з嗀� 亘丿 禺賵丕賴 賵 亘丿 賳賴丕丿!) 诏賳丕賴 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 趩蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丌賳 賴丕 亘丿亘禺鬲 丕賳丿 賵 亘丕 賵噩賵丿 卮氐鬲 爻丕賱蹖 讴賴 丿乇 倬蹖卮 丿丕乇賳丿貙 賳賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳賳丿 丕夭 夭賳丿诏蹖 賱匕鬲 亘亘乇賳丿責... 賴賲賴貙 丿爻鬲賴丕蹖 倬蹖賳賴 亘爻鬲賴鈥屰� 禺賵丿 乇丕 賳卮丕賳 賲蹖 丿賴賳丿 賵 亘丕禺卮賲 賮乇蹖丕丿 賲蹖 夭賳賳丿: "賲丕 賲孬賱 禺乇 讴丕乇 賲蹖 讴賳蹖賲 賵 噩丕賳 賲蹖 讴賻賳蹖賲 賵 賲孬賱 爻诏 诏乇爻賳诏蹖 賲蹖 讴卮蹖賲 賵 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 亘賴 噩丕蹖 讴丕乇 讴蹖賮 賲蹖 讴賳賳丿 賵 孬乇賵鬲賲賳丿 賴賲 賴爻鬲賳丿."(賵 丕蹖賳 賵乇丿 賴賲蹖卮诏蹖 夭亘丕賳鈥屫簇з嗀池�!) 賲賳 讴賴 丿賱賲 亘乇丕蹖 丕蹖賳 噩賵乇 丕丨賲賯 賴丕蹖 賵丕賲丕賳丿賴 丕氐賱丕賸 賳賲蹖 爻賵夭丿. 賳賴 丨丕賱丕 賲蹖 爻賵夭丿 賵 賳賴 賴乇诏夭 爻賵禺鬲賴. 賵 丕蹖賳 丨乇賮 乇丕 亘丕 爻乇亘賱賳丿蹖 賲蹖 夭賳賲...丕诏乇 丕賵 賲蹖賱蹖賵賳 賲蹖賱蹖賵賳 倬賵賱 賳丿丕乇丿 鬲賯氐蹖乇 讴蹖爻鬲責 诏賳丕賴 丕夭 讴蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丕賵 讴賵賴 讴賵賴 爻讴賴鈥屬囏й� 胤賱丕蹖 賳丕倬賱卅賵賳 賵 賱賵蹖蹖 賳丿丕乇丿貙 亘賱賴貙 讴賵賴 讴賵賴貙 賲孬賱 爻乇爻乇賴 賴丕蹖 讴丕乇賳丕賵丕賱. 丕诏乇 丨讴賲 賲乇诏卮 賯胤毓蹖 賳蹖爻鬲 賴乇 讴丕乇 讴賴 亘禺賵丕賴丿 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳丿 亘讴賳丿. 讴爻蹖 趩賴 讴賳丿 讴賴 丕賵 丕蹖賳 乇丕 賳賲蹖 賮賴賲丿責
丕亘賱赖 讴蹖爻鬲責
賲乇丿賲 亘賴 丌賳 讴爻蹖 讴賴 亘丿賴鈥屫ㄙ愗池з嗏€屬囏й屫� 亘蹖鈥屫池ж� 賵 讴鬲丕亘 亘丕卮丿 賵 亘賴 丿賳蹖丕 賵 丕賲賵乇卮 賳诏丕賴蹖 讴丕爻亘讴丕乇丕賳賴 賳丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿 賲蹖 诏賵蹖賳丿 丕亘賱赖. 丕賲丕 丿賵 賳賵毓 丕亘賱赖 丿丕乇蹖賲. 蹖讴蹖 丌賳 丕亘賱赖蹖 讴賴 丕夭 爻乇賽 倬丕蹖蹖賳 亘賵丿賳 囟乇蹖亘 賴賵卮蹖 趩賳丕賳 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 蹖讴蹖 丌賳 丕亘賱赖 賳丕亘睾賴鈥屫й� 讴賴 趩蹖夭蹖 亘賴鬲乇 丕夭 丿丕丿 賵 爻鬲丿賴丕蹖 賲毓丕賲賱丕鬲蹖/賲毓丕卮乇鬲蹖 讴卮賮 讴乇丿賴 亘丕卮丿. 蹖讴 趩賳蹖賳 丕亘賱赖蹖 亘丿賵賳 趩卮賲丿丕卮鬲 亘賴 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 禺賵亘蹖 賲蹖 讴賳丿. 丕夭 讴爻蹖 亘丿蹖 亘賴 丿賱 鈥屬嗁呟� 诏蹖乇丿 賵 讴爻蹖 乇丕 丕夭 禺賵丿 賳賲蹖 乇賳噩丕賳丿. 丿乇 毓賵囟 丕夭 趩蹖夭賴丕蹖蹖 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳丿 賱匕鬲 亘亘乇丿 讴賴 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 賯丕丿乇 亘賴 賱匕鬲 亘乇丿賳 丕夭 丌賳 賳蹖爻鬲賳丿. 丕夭 賯胤毓賴 丕蹖 卮毓乇貙 丕夭 亘賵蹖蹖 禺賵卮貙 丕夭 鬲賲丕卮丕蹖 賲賳馗乇賴 丕蹖 趩卮賲 賳賵丕夭 賵 蹖丕 卮賳蹖丿賳 丌賵丕蹖 倬乇賳丿賴鈥屫й� 丿乇 胤亘蹖毓鬲. 賵 鬲賲丕賲 丕蹖賳賴丕 乇丕 丿乇 丕蹖賳 噩賲賱賴 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳 禺賱丕氐賴 讴乇丿 讴賴 丕蹖賳 丕亘賱赖貙 丕夭 乇爻蹖丿賳 亘賴 賲賯氐丿 賱匕鬲 賳賲蹖 亘乇丿貙 亘賱讴賴 丕夭 胤蹖 讴乇丿賳 賵 倬蹖賲賵丿賳賽 賲爻蹖乇 賱匕鬲 賲蹖 亘乇丿. 禺賵丕賴 亘賴 賲賯氐丿 亘乇爻丿 賵 禺賵丕賴 賳乇爻丿. 亘乇丕蹖 丕賵 賮乇賯蹖 賳丿丕乇丿. 丕亘賱赖 丿乇 倬蹖 讴卮賮 夭賳丿诏蹖 丕爻鬲 賵 丕蹖賳 讴卮賮 讴乇丿賳 夭賳丿诏蹖 賳蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丕賵 乇丕 賲丨馗賵馗 賲蹖 讴賳丿貙 亘賱讴賴 "丿乇 倬蹖" 讴卮賮 夭賳丿诏蹖 亘賵丿賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕賵 乇丕 賲丨馗賵馗 賲蹖 讴賳丿.
亘丕 丕蹖賳 賴賲賴貙 胤亘蹖毓蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 丕賵 乇丕 丕亘賱赖 亘卮賲丕乇賳丿貙 夭蹖乇丕 丕賵 賳賴 丿乇 倬蹖 讴爻亘 賲賯丕賲 丕爻鬲 賵 賳賴 丨乇氐 孬乇賵鬲 丕賳丿賵夭蹖 丿乇 爻乇 丿丕乇丿. 丕賵 丿蹖丿诏丕賴蹖 讴丕爻亘讴丕乇丕賳賴 賳丿丕乇丿 賵 禺蹖賱蹖 賵賯鬲 賴丕 賲鬲囟乇乇 賲蹖 卮賵丿. 賲鬲囟乇乇貙 丕賱亘鬲賴 丕夭 賳诏丕賴賽 毓丕賯賱丕賳.
賲蹖 诏賵蹖賳丿 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳貙 賯賴乇賲丕賳 乇賲丕賳 丕亘賱赖 乇丕 丕夭 乇賵蹖 賲爻蹖丨 诏乇鬲賴 亘乇丿丕卮鬲賴 丕爻鬲. 賵 丕蹖賳 亘蹖乇丕賴 賳蹖爻鬲. 夭蹖乇丕 賵賯鬲蹖 丕賵氐丕賮 馗丕賴乇蹖 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳 乇丕 賲蹖 禺賵丕賳蹖丿 丕賳诏丕乇 噩賱賵蹖 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 鬲丕亘賱賵賴丕蹖 賳賯丕卮蹖 賲爻蹖丨 丕乇鬲賵丿賵讴爻蹖 丕蹖爻鬲丕丿賴 丕蹖丿. 丿乇 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲賽 倬蹖卮 丕夭 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 賵 賲毓丕氐乇 丕賵貙 趩賳丿 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕亘賱赖賽 亘乇噩爻鬲賴 丿丕卮鬲賴鈥屫й屬�: 丿賳鈥屭┷屫促堌� 倬蹖讴鈥屬堐屭� 賵 跇丕賳鈥屬堌з勞権з�. 丕賲丕 賴乇 讴丿丕賲 丕夭 丌賳賴丕 賲毓丕蹖亘蹖 乇丕 丿丕卮鬲賳丿 讴賴 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 賲蹖 禺賵丕爻鬲 賯賴乇賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 禺賱賯 賲蹖 讴賳丿貙 丿乇 毓蹖賳賽 亘賱丕賴鬲賽 馗丕賴乇蹖貙 丕夭 丌賳 賲毓丕蹖亘 亘乇蹖 亘丕卮丿. 丕賳爻丕賳蹖 讴賴 丿乇 馗丕賴乇 賲毓賲賵賱蹖 亘賴 賳馗乇 亘乇爻丿 丕賲丕 賯賱亘賽 爻丕丿賴 丕蹖 丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿. 丨鬲丕 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 亘賴 丕蹖賳 賯賴乇賲丕賳 賱賯亘 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖 丿賴丿. 亘乇丕蹖 丕蹖賳讴賴 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 丕夭 倬蹖卮 亘乇丕蹖 丕賵 丕丨鬲乇丕賲蹖 賯丕卅賱 亘丕卮丿 賵 鬲乇亘蹖鬲 氐丨蹖丨 賲賵乇賵孬蹖鈥屫й� 乇丕 亘乇丕蹖 丕賵 賯丕卅賱 亘卮賵丿.
亘賴 诏賵賳賴鈥屬囏й� 丕爻鬲禺賵丕賳蹖賽 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 亘賳诏蹖乇蹖丿.
丕賵 丕夭 丌爻丕蹖卮 禺賵丿 诏匕卮鬲 鬲丕 乇賵丨賽 賲丕 乇丕 亘賴 鬲毓丕賱蹖 亘乇爻丕賳丿.
丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 乇賲丕賳 丕亘賱赖 乇丕 亘毓丿 丕夭 乇賲丕賳 噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲 賳賵卮鬲. 賵 亘乇丕蹖 爻蹖乇賽 賲胤丕賱毓賴鈥� 丌孬丕乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 亘賴鬲乇 丕爻鬲 丕夭 鬲賵丕賱蹖 賳诏丕乇卮鈥屫簇з� 倬蹖乇賵蹖 讴賳蹖賲. 乇賲丕賳蹖 讴賴 禺賵丕賳丿賳卮 賴賮鬲賴 賴丕 亘賴 胤賵賱 賲蹖 丕賳噩丕賲丿 賳賵卮鬲賳卮 賲丕賴 賲丕 亘賴 胤賵賱 丕賳噩丕賲蹖丿賴 丕爻鬲. 讴鬲丕亘蹖 讴賴 禺賱賯 讴乇丿賳卮 亘乇丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 丿卮賵丕乇 賲蹖 賳賲賵丿賴 丕爻鬲貙 胤亘蹖毓蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 賲胤丕賱毓賴 丕卮 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 賳蹖夭 丿卮賵丕乇 亘賳賲丕蹖丿. 丕賲丕 亘丿賵賳 卮讴 丕蹖賳 蹖讴 乇賲丕賳賽 賲毓賲賵賱蹖 賳蹖爻鬲 賵 丕乇夭卮 禺賵丕賳丿賴 卮丿賳 丿丕乇丿. 賯蹖賲鬲蹖 讴賴 亘丕 诏匕丕卮鬲賳 夭賲丕賳賲丕賳 亘乇丕蹖 禺賵丕賳丿賳卮 倬乇丿丕禺鬲 賲蹖 讴賳蹖賲 丿乇 賲賯丕亘賱 亘賴乇賴 丕蹖 讴賴 丕夭 丌賳 賲蹖 亘乇蹖賲 賳丕趩蹖夭 丕爻鬲.
丿乇亘丕乇賴鈥屰� 丌賳 丕亘賱赖鈥� 讴賴 賲賳 禺賵丕賳丿賲
丕亘賱赖 乇賲丕賳 丨噩蹖賲蹖 丕爻鬲.丿賵 鬲乇噩賲賴 丿丕乇丿. 蹖讴蹖 爻乇賵卮 丨亘蹖亘蹖 賵 蹖讴蹖 賲賴乇蹖 丌賴蹖. 賲賳 鬲乇噩賲賴 蹖 爻乇賵卮 丨亘蹖亘蹖 乇丕 禺賵丕賳丿賴鈥屫з� 丕賲丕 亘乇丕蹖 亘丕乇 丿蹖诏乇 鬲氐賲蹖賲 丿丕乇賲 鬲乇噩賲賴鈥屰� 賲賴乇蹖 丌賴蹖 乇丕 亘禺賵丕賳賲. 趩賵賳 乇賵爻蹖 亘賱丿 賳蹖爻鬲賲 賵 鬲氐賲蹖賲 賴賲 賳丿丕乇賲 乇賵爻蹖 蹖丕丿 亘诏蹖乇賲貙 亘丕 禺賵丕賳丿賳 丿賵 鬲乇噩賲賴 賲蹖 禺賵丕賲 賲胤賲卅賳 卮賵賲 趩蹖夭蹖 乇丕 丕夭 丿爻鬲 賳丿丕丿賴 亘丕卮賲. 丨鬲丕 丿乇 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 趩賳丿 卮丕毓乇 賵 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 禺賵丕賳丿賴 丕賲 讴賴 丿乇 倬蹖乇丕賳賴鈥屰� 毓賲乇 丌孬丕乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 乇丕 亘丕夭禺賵丕賳蹖 讴乇丿賴 丕賳丿 賵 趩蹖夭賴丕蹖 毓噩蹖亘蹖 丕夭 丌賳 丿乇蹖丕賮鬲賴 丕賳丿. 丿賵亘丕乇賴 禺賵丕賳蹖 賴賲蹖卮賴 趩蹖夭賴丕蹖 噩丿蹖丿蹖 亘乇丕蹖 丌丿賲 丿丕乇丿.
诏夭蹖丿賴 丕蹖 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘 丕亘賱赖 讴賴 禺蹖賱蹖 賵賯鬲鈥屬囏� 亘丕夭禺賵丕賳蹖 賲蹖 讴賳賲 乇丕 丕蹖賳噩丕 賲蹖鈥屫①堌辟�. 丕蹖賳 丿乇 丨賯蹖賯鬲 毓賯蹖丿賴鈥屰� 禺賵丿賽 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕夭 夭亘丕賳 卮禺氐蹖鬲蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖 诏賮鬲賴 賲蹖 卮賵丿 賵 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳賲 亘诏賵蹖賲 賳诏丕賴蹖 賳亘賵睾 丌賲蹖夭 賳爻亘鬲 亘賴 丿賳蹖丕 賵 丌賳趩賴 讴賴 丿乇 丌賳 賴爻鬲 賲蹖 亘丕卮丿:
賳賲蹖 賮賴賲蹖丿賲 趩胤賵乇 丕蹖賳 丌丿賲 賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 爻丕賱 賴丕蹖 丿乇丕夭 夭賳丿诏蹖 丿乇 倬蹖卮 丿丕乇賳丿 賳賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳賳丿 孬乇賵鬲賲賳丿 亘卮賵賳丿(诏乇趩賴 賴賳賵夭 賴賲 丕蹖賳 賲毓賲丕 亘乇丕蹖賲 賳丕诏卮賵丿賴 賲丕賳丿賴). 賲乇丿 賮賯蹖乇蹖 乇丕賲蹖 卮賳丕禺鬲賲 讴賴 亘毓丿賴丕 卮賳蹖丿賲 丕夭 诏乇爻賳诏蹖 賲乇丿賴 丕爻鬲 賵 蹖丕丿賲 賴爻鬲 讴賴 丕夭 丕蹖賳 禺亘乇 讴賮乇賲 丿乇 丌賲丿. 丕诏乇 賲賲讴賳 賲蹖 亘賵丿 讴賴 丕蹖賳 賲乇丿 夭賳丿賴 亘卮賵丿 诏賲丕賳 賲蹖 讴賳賲 丕賵 乇丕 賲蹖 讴卮鬲賲. 诏丕賴蹖 蹖讴 賴賮鬲賴 丕蹖 丨丕賱賲 亘賴鬲乇 賲蹖 卮丿 賵 丕夭 禺丕賳賴 亘蹖乇賵賳 賲蹖 乇賮鬲賲. 丕賲丕 毓丕賯亘鬲 丕夭 丿蹖丿賳 禺蹖丕亘丕賳 賵 賲乇丿賲 趩賳丕賳 亘賴 禺卮賲 賲蹖 丌賲丿賲 讴賴 鬲丕趩賳丿 乇賵夭 亘賴 毓賲丿 丿乇 亘賴 乇賵蹖 禺賵丿 賲蹖 亘爻鬲賲貙 诏乇趩賴 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳爻鬲賲 賲孬賱 賴賲賴 亘蹖乇賵賳 亘乇賵賲. 鬲丨賲賱 丿蹖丿賳 丕蹖賳 賴賲賴 丌丿賲 乇丕 讴賴 賲丿丕賲 丿乇 鬲讴丕倬賵蹖賳丿 賵 亘賴 賴乇 讴賳噩 賵 讴賳丕乇 爻乇 賲蹖 讴卮賳丿 賵 倬蹖賵爻鬲賴 丿賱 賲卮睾賵賱 賵 毓亘賵爻 賵 賳诏乇丕賳 丕賳丿 賵 丿乇 倬蹖丕丿賴 乇賵 丕夭 讴賳丕乇 賲賳 賲蹖 诏匕乇賳丿貙 賳丿丕卮鬲賲. 丨丕氐賱 丕蹖賳 睾賲 丿丕卅賲 賵 賳诏乇丕賳蹖 賵 鬲讴丕倬賵蹖 賴賲蹖卮诏蹖 賵 丕蹖賳 讴蹖賳賴鈥屰� 鬲賲丕賲 賳卮丿賳蹖 丌賳賴丕 趩蹖爻鬲責 (夭蹖乇丕 丌賳 賴丕 亘丿禺賵丕賴鈥屸€嵷з嗀� 亘丿 禺賵丕賴 賵 亘丿 賳賴丕丿!) 诏賳丕賴 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 趩蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丌賳 賴丕 亘丿亘禺鬲 丕賳丿 賵 亘丕 賵噩賵丿 卮氐鬲 爻丕賱蹖 讴賴 丿乇 倬蹖卮 丿丕乇賳丿貙 賳賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳賳丿 丕夭 夭賳丿诏蹖 賱匕鬲 亘亘乇賳丿責... 賴賲賴貙 丿爻鬲賴丕蹖 倬蹖賳賴 亘爻鬲賴鈥屰� 禺賵丿 乇丕 賳卮丕賳 賲蹖 丿賴賳丿 賵 亘丕禺卮賲 賮乇蹖丕丿 賲蹖 夭賳賳丿: "賲丕 賲孬賱 禺乇 讴丕乇 賲蹖 讴賳蹖賲 賵 噩丕賳 賲蹖 讴賻賳蹖賲 賵 賲孬賱 爻诏 诏乇爻賳诏蹖 賲蹖 讴卮蹖賲 賵 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 亘賴 噩丕蹖 讴丕乇 讴蹖賮 賲蹖 讴賳賳丿 賵 孬乇賵鬲賲賳丿 賴賲 賴爻鬲賳丿."(賵 丕蹖賳 賵乇丿 賴賲蹖卮诏蹖 夭亘丕賳鈥屫簇з嗀池�!) 賲賳 讴賴 丿賱賲 亘乇丕蹖 丕蹖賳 噩賵乇 丕丨賲賯 賴丕蹖 賵丕賲丕賳丿賴 丕氐賱丕賸 賳賲蹖 爻賵夭丿. 賳賴 丨丕賱丕 賲蹖 爻賵夭丿 賵 賳賴 賴乇诏夭 爻賵禺鬲賴. 賵 丕蹖賳 丨乇賮 乇丕 亘丕 爻乇亘賱賳丿蹖 賲蹖 夭賳賲...丕诏乇 丕賵 賲蹖賱蹖賵賳 賲蹖賱蹖賵賳 倬賵賱 賳丿丕乇丿 鬲賯氐蹖乇 讴蹖爻鬲責 诏賳丕賴 丕夭 讴蹖爻鬲 讴賴 丕賵 讴賵賴 讴賵賴 爻讴賴鈥屬囏й� 胤賱丕蹖 賳丕倬賱卅賵賳 賵 賱賵蹖蹖 賳丿丕乇丿貙 亘賱賴貙 讴賵賴 讴賵賴貙 賲孬賱 爻乇爻乇賴 賴丕蹖 讴丕乇賳丕賵丕賱. 丕诏乇 丨讴賲 賲乇诏卮 賯胤毓蹖 賳蹖爻鬲 賴乇 讴丕乇 讴賴 亘禺賵丕賴丿 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳丿 亘讴賳丿. 讴爻蹖 趩賴 讴賳丿 讴賴 丕賵 丕蹖賳 乇丕 賳賲蹖 賮賴賲丿責
August 6, 2010
Do you answer 鈥榶es鈥� to any of the following questions?
1. You ever sleep in another person鈥檚 house for the first time, not wanting to turn on a light to see your way to the toilet, and run into a wall?
2. You ever been in a public building at night and the power fails, and you run into a wall?
3. You ever been camping with an overcast night and straggle into the woods to take a pee, and run into a wall of shrubbery?
4. You ever been in a leadership reaction course, blindfolded, and run into a wall?
5. You ever been deployed to Qatar in the transition billeting tent at night, not wanting to disturb all the soldiers with your mag-light, and run into a tent wall?
What do these questions have in common? 3 things. One, you鈥檝e lost your primary sense--eyesight. Two, you鈥檝e run into something through which you can鈥檛 pass. Three, to continue you must turn east or west. This is exactly how I felt when I read The Idiot. Lost, in a strange place, against a barrier. (preview: it鈥檚 all about the translator, paragraph 10)
Then I agonized for a week about posting a review of a piece of monolithic literature to which I award only 2 stars. How the hell, dude, can you award 2 stars to an uber-classic? Did you forget it was Dostoevsky? Do you realize that among your 56 friends on 欧宝娱乐 that 2 stars is the lowest anyone has rated it? You missed something; you鈥檙e ignorant!
And I truly subjected myself to several good harangues. I reread the lengthy, academic foreword and afterword. I thought deeply about the book. I stretched my mind, my cognitive abilities, each time against a wall. I was really concerned about your opinion of me, as a reader, as a consumer of serious literature, as a trustworthy, balanced critic of dense writing.
Then it appeared to me, like a turn in the dark. Screw you!! I鈥檓 not writing this for you. I write reviews to capture how I feel about a specific novel at a particular place and time in my life. It鈥檚 completely fair to award 2 stars to Dostoevsky. At this particular time in my life--as I realize the Deepwater Horizon oil spill may have been overblown by the media, as I decide whether or not to delete my Facebook account, as I realize Obama鈥檚 economic plan is an absolute failure with unemployment remaining above 9% for the next 12 months and home values not rebounding for 36 months, as I wonder if next will be as tough as the previous year raising my 3 young kids--at this particular time in my life, I didn鈥檛 very much enjoy The Idiot. This is where I鈥檓 at in time and place with The Idiot, and I鈥檓 so glad to capture feelings other than a middling 3 stars (which is sometimes a rounding error). 2 stars is harsh, but fair.
I read Crime and Punishment twice, and think The Brothers Karamazov one of the best 5 books I ever read. I鈥檝e been under the spell of Dostoevsky for nearly half my life. So my lean this week into The Idiot was a disappointment.
Here鈥檚 what the author said about the book: 鈥淭here鈥檚 much in the novel...that didn鈥檛 come off, but something did come off. I don鈥檛 stand behind my novel, but I do stand behind my idea.鈥� Authors sometimes give themselves a giant pat on the back, but couch it in self-deprecating language. As if to say the ideas in the novel were so august, so pantheon, so divine that their ability to define or make sense of these ideas with terrestrial words resulted, simply, in a spatchcock of human themes. Ignore the writing. The message is in the idea. Come on, Fyodor, we all know you write like an immortal.
The Idiot is brimming with philosophical inquiry into people鈥檚 lives, society, culture, and history. Immutable, transcendent ideas about which Russian writers always grapple. The authors of the foreword/afterword reveal and underscore dozens of themes in the book. They discuss mechanics and perspectives and symbols. They discuss Russian history and the Russian concept of suffering, and how these were adroitly parsed among the characters. And how the characters themselves represented the unique attributes--in splinter form--of the Russian whole.
Well that鈥檚 all great. You read it and take from it what you want. I found it tangled, hard to follow, uninteresting. The characters were so weighed down by being representatives of the Russian whole that they failed to be engaging characters by themselves. And so unlike Dostoevsky, I found not a single sentence worth transcribing here. In 660 pages, wow, nothing worth remembering. How unfulfilling. Certainly nothing like powerful, euphonic sentence.
(Important) Because I know Fyodor can bring the noise, it leads me to believe that the translation is faulty, dated. Indeed, I read the version translated originally in 1913 by Olga Carlisle. It鈥檚 the staid, orthodox version. Perhaps if I read the translation by Larissa Volokonsky, then I would鈥檝e been in measure with the writing. She won the 2002 Efim Etkind Translation Award for her work on The Idiot, for Chris鈥檃kes!! Swoon. Cuss. Paradise Lost! Alas, I won鈥檛 reread The Idiot. It鈥檚 just too long...and me, I鈥檓 too slow a reader. I鈥檒l read The Possessed in a couple years. The experts call it a more traditional story on par with CAP and TBK. Dostoevsky is too fine a writer to abandon, and so I won鈥檛.
Another problem I had with the Carlisle translation was the melodramatic interpretation of character staging. Let me, for example, open the book to page 580--a random choice--and list every instance on both pages where the character staging is electrified.
...got up rather late and immediately recalled...
...first moment she burst into tears...
...the prince at once reassured her...
...he was suddenly struck by the strong compassion...
...Vera blushed deeply...
...she cried in alarm, quickly drawing her hand away...
...went away in a strangely troubled state...
...her father had hurried off...
...Koyla ran in, also for only a minute...
...in a great hurry...
...was in a state of intense and troubled agitation...
...was deeply and violently moved...
...poor boy was thunderstruck...
...quietly burst into tears...
...he jumped up...
...hurriedly inquired about...
...added in haste...
...was predicting disaster...
...was asking pointed questions...
...with a gesture of vexation...
...accursed morbid mistrustfulness...
...in the form of an order, abruptly, dryly, without explanation...
...suddenly turning around...
...and feverishly looked at his watch...
Remember, this came from a total of 1200 printed words. The entire book is similarly charged. I got tired of reading all this 鈥榡uiced鈥� action. Did Dostoevsky intend 660 pages of melododrama, or was this a translator鈥檚 interpretation? I got robbed, man. Bad translation. The review stops here.
1. You ever sleep in another person鈥檚 house for the first time, not wanting to turn on a light to see your way to the toilet, and run into a wall?
2. You ever been in a public building at night and the power fails, and you run into a wall?
3. You ever been camping with an overcast night and straggle into the woods to take a pee, and run into a wall of shrubbery?
4. You ever been in a leadership reaction course, blindfolded, and run into a wall?
5. You ever been deployed to Qatar in the transition billeting tent at night, not wanting to disturb all the soldiers with your mag-light, and run into a tent wall?
What do these questions have in common? 3 things. One, you鈥檝e lost your primary sense--eyesight. Two, you鈥檝e run into something through which you can鈥檛 pass. Three, to continue you must turn east or west. This is exactly how I felt when I read The Idiot. Lost, in a strange place, against a barrier. (preview: it鈥檚 all about the translator, paragraph 10)
Then I agonized for a week about posting a review of a piece of monolithic literature to which I award only 2 stars. How the hell, dude, can you award 2 stars to an uber-classic? Did you forget it was Dostoevsky? Do you realize that among your 56 friends on 欧宝娱乐 that 2 stars is the lowest anyone has rated it? You missed something; you鈥檙e ignorant!
And I truly subjected myself to several good harangues. I reread the lengthy, academic foreword and afterword. I thought deeply about the book. I stretched my mind, my cognitive abilities, each time against a wall. I was really concerned about your opinion of me, as a reader, as a consumer of serious literature, as a trustworthy, balanced critic of dense writing.
Then it appeared to me, like a turn in the dark. Screw you!! I鈥檓 not writing this for you. I write reviews to capture how I feel about a specific novel at a particular place and time in my life. It鈥檚 completely fair to award 2 stars to Dostoevsky. At this particular time in my life--as I realize the Deepwater Horizon oil spill may have been overblown by the media, as I decide whether or not to delete my Facebook account, as I realize Obama鈥檚 economic plan is an absolute failure with unemployment remaining above 9% for the next 12 months and home values not rebounding for 36 months, as I wonder if next will be as tough as the previous year raising my 3 young kids--at this particular time in my life, I didn鈥檛 very much enjoy The Idiot. This is where I鈥檓 at in time and place with The Idiot, and I鈥檓 so glad to capture feelings other than a middling 3 stars (which is sometimes a rounding error). 2 stars is harsh, but fair.
I read Crime and Punishment twice, and think The Brothers Karamazov one of the best 5 books I ever read. I鈥檝e been under the spell of Dostoevsky for nearly half my life. So my lean this week into The Idiot was a disappointment.
Here鈥檚 what the author said about the book: 鈥淭here鈥檚 much in the novel...that didn鈥檛 come off, but something did come off. I don鈥檛 stand behind my novel, but I do stand behind my idea.鈥� Authors sometimes give themselves a giant pat on the back, but couch it in self-deprecating language. As if to say the ideas in the novel were so august, so pantheon, so divine that their ability to define or make sense of these ideas with terrestrial words resulted, simply, in a spatchcock of human themes. Ignore the writing. The message is in the idea. Come on, Fyodor, we all know you write like an immortal.
The Idiot is brimming with philosophical inquiry into people鈥檚 lives, society, culture, and history. Immutable, transcendent ideas about which Russian writers always grapple. The authors of the foreword/afterword reveal and underscore dozens of themes in the book. They discuss mechanics and perspectives and symbols. They discuss Russian history and the Russian concept of suffering, and how these were adroitly parsed among the characters. And how the characters themselves represented the unique attributes--in splinter form--of the Russian whole.
Well that鈥檚 all great. You read it and take from it what you want. I found it tangled, hard to follow, uninteresting. The characters were so weighed down by being representatives of the Russian whole that they failed to be engaging characters by themselves. And so unlike Dostoevsky, I found not a single sentence worth transcribing here. In 660 pages, wow, nothing worth remembering. How unfulfilling. Certainly nothing like powerful, euphonic sentence.
(Important) Because I know Fyodor can bring the noise, it leads me to believe that the translation is faulty, dated. Indeed, I read the version translated originally in 1913 by Olga Carlisle. It鈥檚 the staid, orthodox version. Perhaps if I read the translation by Larissa Volokonsky, then I would鈥檝e been in measure with the writing. She won the 2002 Efim Etkind Translation Award for her work on The Idiot, for Chris鈥檃kes!! Swoon. Cuss. Paradise Lost! Alas, I won鈥檛 reread The Idiot. It鈥檚 just too long...and me, I鈥檓 too slow a reader. I鈥檒l read The Possessed in a couple years. The experts call it a more traditional story on par with CAP and TBK. Dostoevsky is too fine a writer to abandon, and so I won鈥檛.
Another problem I had with the Carlisle translation was the melodramatic interpretation of character staging. Let me, for example, open the book to page 580--a random choice--and list every instance on both pages where the character staging is electrified.
...got up rather late and immediately recalled...
...first moment she burst into tears...
...the prince at once reassured her...
...he was suddenly struck by the strong compassion...
...Vera blushed deeply...
...she cried in alarm, quickly drawing her hand away...
...went away in a strangely troubled state...
...her father had hurried off...
...Koyla ran in, also for only a minute...
...in a great hurry...
...was in a state of intense and troubled agitation...
...was deeply and violently moved...
...poor boy was thunderstruck...
...quietly burst into tears...
...he jumped up...
...hurriedly inquired about...
...added in haste...
...was predicting disaster...
...was asking pointed questions...
...with a gesture of vexation...
...accursed morbid mistrustfulness...
...in the form of an order, abruptly, dryly, without explanation...
...suddenly turning around...
...and feverishly looked at his watch...
Remember, this came from a total of 1200 printed words. The entire book is similarly charged. I got tired of reading all this 鈥榡uiced鈥� action. Did Dostoevsky intend 660 pages of melododrama, or was this a translator鈥檚 interpretation? I got robbed, man. Bad translation. The review stops here.
March 28, 2018
I have been trying to fill this review box ever since I finished this book. After writing and rewriting about this book, I think I have finally come close to what I feel about this book. I don鈥檛 think I can ever do justice to the beauty of this book but I still wanted to write few things about it. I started reading this novel last year. Put on pause twice, then finally finishing it this month. I was so relieved not only because I managed to read it, but also because it is one of those books that are still a treat to read even after 150 years of its publication.
Story revolves around Prince Myshkin who arrived in Russia from Switzerland. There he meet Rogozhin on the train and befriends him. Then he went to see his distant relatives General and meet family. Here he sees a picture of Nastasya Fillipovna and falls in love with her. Things get complicated when he proposes her and she rejects him for Rogozhin, who is also madly in love with her. On the day of marriage she elopes to be with Rogozhin. Myshkin finds love in Agalaya but all hell loose breaks when once again Nastasya decides that she is still in love with the Prince.
In Prince Myshkin, Mr. Dostoyovesky created a beautiful soul. A man who is free of deception, lies, concoction, and brutally honest. A man who always put others before his own happiness. A man whom no one can hate even if one tries they fail miserably and end up falling in love with this simpleton. So many times I felt so angry when people called him mad, fool, idiot, because they failed to see the beautiful heart that the Prince had. Then one can鈥檛 blame them for we always hate people who are too good and have the qualities that we don鈥檛 possess. We want to be clever but hate it when outsmarted by cleverer person. But our prince is beyond all this, he just love and think highly of others even if those very people are trying to drag him down. And that鈥檚 the reason they find it so hard to begrudge him.
While the prince has no vile motives, the two leading ladies of the novel have intentions that were hard to grasp upon for me. One minute they were madly in love with Prince, but in the next moment they would leave him and tell him that they don鈥檛 love him. They could not bear the thought of him being with another, oh how they made sure of it. One kept running away from him, and the other kept him on the edge with her own confusion. They drove him mad and how I wanted him to leave both of them to their fate and go some other place where he would get peace of mind but they would not let him walk away.
Dostoyovesky has written a stunning story that evoked so many emotions in me. I found myself teary, laughing, distressed, full of hatred, scared, angry, and sad on behalf of the prince. I don鈥檛 think one will get to meet a person like Prince in real life but it is easy to see the goons that surround him in everyday life. His characters are deeply flawed, impulsive, and dense but at the same time they make me understand (or at least I tried to) how human nature works.
I absolutely loved this book, and I am definitely reading his other works but I think I will still take another year to get out of this world.
Story revolves around Prince Myshkin who arrived in Russia from Switzerland. There he meet Rogozhin on the train and befriends him. Then he went to see his distant relatives General and meet family. Here he sees a picture of Nastasya Fillipovna and falls in love with her. Things get complicated when he proposes her and she rejects him for Rogozhin, who is also madly in love with her. On the day of marriage she elopes to be with Rogozhin. Myshkin finds love in Agalaya but all hell loose breaks when once again Nastasya decides that she is still in love with the Prince.
In Prince Myshkin, Mr. Dostoyovesky created a beautiful soul. A man who is free of deception, lies, concoction, and brutally honest. A man who always put others before his own happiness. A man whom no one can hate even if one tries they fail miserably and end up falling in love with this simpleton. So many times I felt so angry when people called him mad, fool, idiot, because they failed to see the beautiful heart that the Prince had. Then one can鈥檛 blame them for we always hate people who are too good and have the qualities that we don鈥檛 possess. We want to be clever but hate it when outsmarted by cleverer person. But our prince is beyond all this, he just love and think highly of others even if those very people are trying to drag him down. And that鈥檚 the reason they find it so hard to begrudge him.
While the prince has no vile motives, the two leading ladies of the novel have intentions that were hard to grasp upon for me. One minute they were madly in love with Prince, but in the next moment they would leave him and tell him that they don鈥檛 love him. They could not bear the thought of him being with another, oh how they made sure of it. One kept running away from him, and the other kept him on the edge with her own confusion. They drove him mad and how I wanted him to leave both of them to their fate and go some other place where he would get peace of mind but they would not let him walk away.
Dostoyovesky has written a stunning story that evoked so many emotions in me. I found myself teary, laughing, distressed, full of hatred, scared, angry, and sad on behalf of the prince. I don鈥檛 think one will get to meet a person like Prince in real life but it is easy to see the goons that surround him in everyday life. His characters are deeply flawed, impulsive, and dense but at the same time they make me understand (or at least I tried to) how human nature works.
I absolutely loved this book, and I am definitely reading his other works but I think I will still take another year to get out of this world.
August 27, 2023
Is being different from others a flaw?
The difference we do not understand and will reduce, isolate, or denigrate is how to forge a society of reasonable intelligence.
With the strength of his style, the author leads us into this philosophy to make us ask questions and leave us with questions about our views of yesterday.
The difference we do not understand and will reduce, isolate, or denigrate is how to forge a society of reasonable intelligence.
With the strength of his style, the author leads us into this philosophy to make us ask questions and leave us with questions about our views of yesterday.
December 10, 2024
On the first day of 2018, I spent it with a fever. I slept too much during the day and couldn't fall asleep at night. I lay in bed reading until dawn, surprisingly finishing half of this book. When I finally turned off the light and lay in bed, the fever medicine, Dostoevsky, and the coffee I had in the morning all tangled in my mind, creating a chaotic dream.
Frankly speaking, Dostoevsky鈥檚 books are not suitable to be read at the pace of your average novels because they are too intense and dense. The best approach is to read a bit, put it down, do something else, and then come back to it. This time, I read too quickly, and it felt like a massive steel block forcefully shoved into my brain, which I couldn't digest. So, I decided to finish the second half and then read a couple of light books to balance things out.
The reason I read so quickly was that I simply couldn't put it down. Many think that classics are meant for self - cultivation and are described as useful rather than enjoyable. But in reality, any great work is, first and foremost, a good read. It all depends on whether your standard of what is "good" has improved.
For Dostoevsky, I don't want to discuss his depth, his philosophy, or his religious sentiments, as those have already been thoroughly analyzed. I want to say that his books are genuinely enjoyable. Take this book for example. I found that Dostoevsky is like a director who excels at orchestrating group scenes, mastering layers, rhythm, character development, and scene coordination perfectly. There are individual highlights without overall chaos. One of my hobbies in watching movies is enjoying group scenes, but I know it's challenging to pull off well. Most fail miserably. For a novelist, managing more than 4 characters in a single scene is difficult because novels aren't plays. However, in the chapter set in Lebedev's villa, I counted 19 characters. Each one is distinct, useful, and has their thoughts, making it a thrilling and fulfilling read.
I felt dizzy but incredibly excited because I sensed that its internal structure and rhythm were clear, warranting a reread or even multiple rereads to understand Dostoevsky鈥檚 techniques, knowing I could never replicate them. Such complex structures in Asian hands are usually treated with broad strokes, passing over masses of people with a few words, while Dostoevsky dares to depict every brick meticulously. You think you've seen enough, but then he surprises you further. Just when your mind is entirely absorbed in discussions about the world, faith, and soul, amid chaotic debates, the next speaker, a dying young man, says, "Do you know I came here to see the trees?" He also says, "When you were leaving, I suddenly thought: these people are here now, but they will never be here again. The same goes for the trees - only a brick wall will remain, the red brick wall of Meyer鈥檚 house."
After all the heavy discussions on soul, life, and truth, such a light statement combined with the preceding weighty words hits me profoundly. This boy is the nihilist Dostoevsky criticizes. At that moment, I thought I am the nihilist he critiques. Although I love discussions on life's major issues, in the end, I still casually look at trees. But that's Dostoevsky鈥檚 charm. He is a powerful advocate for religion. I won't convert, but I still like him because he also understands nihilists like me. He criticizes us not out of ignorance but out of disagreement. Knowing is precious, and disagreement doesn't matter.
Even among the 19 ocharacters, some are considered despicable, yet you feel they have a complete worldview and philosophy. They still ponder life and social issues. Even the most vile characters discuss the soul and don't avoid problems. They may be swindlers or ugly, but they aren't shallow or superficial. You never feel they are being pretentious. It seems like Russians are naturally suited to casually discuss the soul over dinner, which feels extravagant, while Chinese, British, or other people discussing the same topics often feel awkward and somewhat ridiculous.
Even 顿辞蝉迟辞别惫蝉办测鈥檚 illains are more profound than the people around us in real life, just like any of Agatha Christie鈥檚 murderers are more elegant and poised than the people we know.
For us, it's neither real nor perfect, but it's absolutely captivating. That's the magical power bestowed by God.
4.6 / atars
Frankly speaking, Dostoevsky鈥檚 books are not suitable to be read at the pace of your average novels because they are too intense and dense. The best approach is to read a bit, put it down, do something else, and then come back to it. This time, I read too quickly, and it felt like a massive steel block forcefully shoved into my brain, which I couldn't digest. So, I decided to finish the second half and then read a couple of light books to balance things out.
The reason I read so quickly was that I simply couldn't put it down. Many think that classics are meant for self - cultivation and are described as useful rather than enjoyable. But in reality, any great work is, first and foremost, a good read. It all depends on whether your standard of what is "good" has improved.
For Dostoevsky, I don't want to discuss his depth, his philosophy, or his religious sentiments, as those have already been thoroughly analyzed. I want to say that his books are genuinely enjoyable. Take this book for example. I found that Dostoevsky is like a director who excels at orchestrating group scenes, mastering layers, rhythm, character development, and scene coordination perfectly. There are individual highlights without overall chaos. One of my hobbies in watching movies is enjoying group scenes, but I know it's challenging to pull off well. Most fail miserably. For a novelist, managing more than 4 characters in a single scene is difficult because novels aren't plays. However, in the chapter set in Lebedev's villa, I counted 19 characters. Each one is distinct, useful, and has their thoughts, making it a thrilling and fulfilling read.
I felt dizzy but incredibly excited because I sensed that its internal structure and rhythm were clear, warranting a reread or even multiple rereads to understand Dostoevsky鈥檚 techniques, knowing I could never replicate them. Such complex structures in Asian hands are usually treated with broad strokes, passing over masses of people with a few words, while Dostoevsky dares to depict every brick meticulously. You think you've seen enough, but then he surprises you further. Just when your mind is entirely absorbed in discussions about the world, faith, and soul, amid chaotic debates, the next speaker, a dying young man, says, "Do you know I came here to see the trees?" He also says, "When you were leaving, I suddenly thought: these people are here now, but they will never be here again. The same goes for the trees - only a brick wall will remain, the red brick wall of Meyer鈥檚 house."
After all the heavy discussions on soul, life, and truth, such a light statement combined with the preceding weighty words hits me profoundly. This boy is the nihilist Dostoevsky criticizes. At that moment, I thought I am the nihilist he critiques. Although I love discussions on life's major issues, in the end, I still casually look at trees. But that's Dostoevsky鈥檚 charm. He is a powerful advocate for religion. I won't convert, but I still like him because he also understands nihilists like me. He criticizes us not out of ignorance but out of disagreement. Knowing is precious, and disagreement doesn't matter.
Even among the 19 ocharacters, some are considered despicable, yet you feel they have a complete worldview and philosophy. They still ponder life and social issues. Even the most vile characters discuss the soul and don't avoid problems. They may be swindlers or ugly, but they aren't shallow or superficial. You never feel they are being pretentious. It seems like Russians are naturally suited to casually discuss the soul over dinner, which feels extravagant, while Chinese, British, or other people discussing the same topics often feel awkward and somewhat ridiculous.
Even 顿辞蝉迟辞别惫蝉办测鈥檚 illains are more profound than the people around us in real life, just like any of Agatha Christie鈥檚 murderers are more elegant and poised than the people we know.
For us, it's neither real nor perfect, but it's absolutely captivating. That's the magical power bestowed by God.
4.6 / atars
July 26, 2020
卮丕蹖丿 亘鬲賵丕賳 诏賮鬲 丕爻鬲丕丿 丿乇 乇賲丕賳 倬乇 丨噩賲 丕亘賱赖 鬲賱丕卮 讴乇丿賴 丕賳爻丕賳 讴丕賲賱蹖 乇丕 亘爻丕夭丿 賵 爻倬爻 丕賵 乇丕 丕夭 爻賵卅蹖爻 亘賴 噩丕賲毓賴 丕卮乇丕賮蹖 乇賵爻蹖賴 讴賴 倬乇 丕夭 丿賵夭 賵 讴賱讴 賵 囟丿 丕乇夭卮賴丕蹖 乇丕爻鬲蹖賳 丕賳爻丕賳蹖 亘蹖丕賵乇丿 貙 賳鬲蹖噩賴 丕蹖賳 亘乇禺賵乇丿 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 乇丕 賲蹖 爻丕夭丿 .
卮丕蹖丿 丿乇 賲賱讴賵鬲 丕亘賱赖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賲丕 蹖讴 丕賳爻丕賳 讴丕賲賱 亘丕卮丿 貙 賳賲賵賳賴 丕蹖 賳夭丿蹖讴 亘賴 賲爻蹖丨 貙 丕賲丕 丿乇 丿賳蹖丕蹖 賵丕賯毓蹖 丕賵 丕亘賱赖 丕爻鬲 貙 丕賵 亘丕乇賴丕 賵 亘丕乇賴丕 賲賵乇丿 鬲賲爻禺乇 讴爻丕賳蹖 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖 诏蹖乇丿 讴賴 禺賵丿 亘賴 丕賳賵丕毓 乇匕蹖賱鬲 賴丕蹖 丕禺賱丕賯蹖 丌賱賵丿賴 丕賳丿 貙 賳夭賵賱 禺賵乇丕賳 貙 丿夭丿賴丕 倬賵賱 倬乇爻鬲丕賳 賵 氐賱蹖亘 賮乇賵卮 賴丕 賴賲诏蹖 亘賴 丕賵 賲蹖 禺賳丿賳丿 賵 丕賵 乇丕 丕亘賱赖 賲蹖 賳丕賲賳丿 貙 倬乇賳爻 賴賲 賴賲乇丕賴 亘丕 丌賳丕賳 賲蹖 禺賳丿丿 貙 倬乇賳爻 賴賲丕賳 禺氐賵氐蹖丕鬲 賲爻蹖丨 乇丕 丿丕乇丿 貙 丕賵亘丕乇 诏賳丕賴丕賳 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 乇丕 亘賴 丿賵卮 賲蹖 讴卮丿 .
丿乇 丿賳蹖丕蹖蹖 讴賴 丕爻鬲丕丿 丕夭 乇賵爻蹖賴 賯乇賳 賳賵夭丿賴 賲噩爻賲 讴乇丿賴 賴賲丕賳賳丿 噩賴丕賳 丕賲乇賵夭 倬賵賱 丨丕讴賲 賵 爻賱胤丕賳 丕爻鬲 貙 亘丕 倬賵賱 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳 賴賲賴 讴丕乇 讴乇丿 貙 賴賲 賲蹖鬲賵丕賳 诏賳丕賴丕賳 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 乇丕 禺乇蹖丿 賴賲 亘丕 夭蹖亘丕乇賵蹖丕賳 丕夭丿賵丕噩 讴乇丿 貙 丕夭 賲蹖丕賳 卮禺氐蹖鬲賴丕蹖 讴鬲丕亘 讴賴 亘丕 丿賳丿丕賳 賲蹖 禺賵丕賴賳丿 倬賵賱 乇丕 丕夭 丌鬲卮 亘蹖乇賵賳 丌賵乇賳丿 丕蹖賳 丕亘賱赖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賲丕 爻鬲 讴賴 倬賵賱 乇丕 賲蹖 亘禺卮丿 .
丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 丕亘賱赖 賴賲 亘賴 胤賲毓 倬乇丿丕禺鬲賴 賵 卮丕蹖丿 丌賳乇丕 亘鬲賵丕賳 诏賳丕賴 丕氐賱蹖 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 丿丕賳爻鬲 貙 丕賲丕 丕賵 鬲乇丿蹖丿 丿乇 賲匕賴亘 乇丕 賴賲 賲禺乇亘 賲蹖 丿丕賳丿 .
賯賴乇賲丕賳丕賳 讴鬲丕亘 丿乇 賯胤丕乇蹖 亘丕 賴賲 丌卮賳丕 賲蹖 卮賵賳丿 貙 賯胤丕乇蹖 讴賴 賲丕賳賳丿 夭賳丿诏蹖 丿乇 丨乇讴鬲 丕爻鬲 貙 丿乇 胤賵賱 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賴賲丿蹖诏乇 乇丕 賲蹖 蹖丕亘賳丿 貙 亘丕 賴賲 夭賳丿诏蹖 賲蹖 讴賳賳丿 貙 乇賳噩 賲蹖 讴卮賳丿 賵 丿乇 倬丕蹖丕賳 亘丕 爻乇賳賵卮鬲賴丕蹖 賲禺鬲賱賮 丕夭 賴賲 噩丿丕 賲蹖 卮賵賳丿 丕賲丕 噩丕賲毓賴 丕蹖 讴賴 丿乇 丌賳 賲蹖 夭蹖爻鬲賴 丕賳丿 賴賲丕賳 亘賵丿賴 讴賴 賴爻鬲 貙 馗賴賵乇 賲爻蹖丨 丕孬乇蹖 亘乇 丌賳 賳诏匕丕卮鬲賴 丕爻鬲 .
丿乇 鬲丕讴蹖丿蹖 丌卮讴丕乇 亘賴 爻禺鬲蹖賴丕蹖 夭賳丿诏蹖 貙 丕爻鬲丕丿 丿乇 爻乇賳賵卮鬲 賴乇 賮乇丿蹖 乇賳噩 賵 丿乇丿 噩丕賳讴丕賴蹖 诏匕丕卮鬲賴 貙 丕夭 賮賯乇 賲胤賱賯 鬲丕 賲爻鬲蹖 賵 賲蹖禺賵丕乇诏蹖 貙 亘蹖賲丕乇蹖 貙 丿夭丿蹖 貙 賯鬲賱 貙 乇亘丕 禺賵丕乇蹖 賵 卮丕蹖丿 賲毓賲賵賱蹖 亘賵丿賳 貙 丌乇夭賵蹖 丿丕卮鬲賳 丿賵 蹖丕 爻賴 禺丕賳賴 丕蹖賳 賴賲 乇賳噩蹖 亘丕卮丿.
丕爻鬲丕丿 賴賳乇 卮禺氐蹖鬲 倬乇丿丕夭蹖 乇丕 亘賴 丕賵噩 乇爻丕賳丿賴 貙 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 丿乇 胤賵賱 賲胤丕賱毓賴 讴鬲丕亘 亘丕 卮禺氐蹖鬲賴丕蹖 丌賳 夭賳丿诏蹖 賲蹖 讴賳丿 貙 亘丕 賵乇丕噩蹖 賴丕 賵 倬乇诏賵蹖蹖 賴丕蹖 賱亘丿賮 貙 鬲丕 噩賵丕賳讴 賲爻賱賵賱蹖 讴賴 丕卮鬲賴丕蹖 毓噩蹖亘 亘賴 賳胤賯 讴乇丿賳 丿丕乇丿 貙 鬲丕 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 跇賳乇丕賱 亘丕 賳丕倬賱卅賵賳 . 讴丕乇丕讴鬲乇 賴賲賴 丕賮乇丕丿 亘賴 卮丿鬲 賱賲爻 卮丿賳蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 賵 丕賱亘鬲賴 亘乇丕蹖 賲禺丕胤亘 丕蹖乇丕賳蹖 爻毓丕丿鬲蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 讴賴 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 亘丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 毓丕賱蹖 賵 亘爻蹖丕乇 乇賵丕賳 賵 丕賲乇賵夭蹖 噩賳丕亘 爻乇賵卮 丨亘蹖亘蹖 亘禺賵丕賳丿 .
賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘丕 丕爻鬲丕丿蹖 丨爻 鬲毓賱蹖賯 乇丕 丿乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘賴 賵噩賵丿 丌賵乇丿賴 貙 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖 讴賴 亘丕 丌卮賳丕蹖蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲賴丕 丌睾丕夭 卮丿賴 丿乇 賳賯丕胤蹖 亘賴 丕賵噩 賲蹖 乇爻丿 貙 诏丕賴蹖 賴賲 禺爻鬲賴 讴賳賳丿賴 賲蹖 卮賵丿 貙 丕賲丕 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳丿 賵賯賵毓 乇禺丿丕丿蹖 賳丕诏賵丕乇 乇丕 丿乇 丕賳鬲賴丕 丨爻 讴賳丿 . 倬乇賳爻 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賴乇 趩賳丿 丿賵爻鬲 丿丕卮鬲賳蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 賵 氐丕丿賯 貙 丕賲丕 讴丕乇賴丕蹖蹖 丕夭 丕賵 爻乇 賲蹖 夭賳丿 讴賴 卮丕蹖丿 丨乇氐 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 乇丕 丿乇 亘蹖丕賵乇丿 賵 亘丕毓孬 卮賵丿 讴賴 賲禺丕胤亘 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕賳鬲馗丕乇蹖 丕夭 倬乇賳爻 賳丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿 !
卮丕蹖丿 丿乇 賲賱讴賵鬲 丕亘賱赖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賲丕 蹖讴 丕賳爻丕賳 讴丕賲賱 亘丕卮丿 貙 賳賲賵賳賴 丕蹖 賳夭丿蹖讴 亘賴 賲爻蹖丨 貙 丕賲丕 丿乇 丿賳蹖丕蹖 賵丕賯毓蹖 丕賵 丕亘賱赖 丕爻鬲 貙 丕賵 亘丕乇賴丕 賵 亘丕乇賴丕 賲賵乇丿 鬲賲爻禺乇 讴爻丕賳蹖 賯乇丕乇 賲蹖 诏蹖乇丿 讴賴 禺賵丿 亘賴 丕賳賵丕毓 乇匕蹖賱鬲 賴丕蹖 丕禺賱丕賯蹖 丌賱賵丿賴 丕賳丿 貙 賳夭賵賱 禺賵乇丕賳 貙 丿夭丿賴丕 倬賵賱 倬乇爻鬲丕賳 賵 氐賱蹖亘 賮乇賵卮 賴丕 賴賲诏蹖 亘賴 丕賵 賲蹖 禺賳丿賳丿 賵 丕賵 乇丕 丕亘賱赖 賲蹖 賳丕賲賳丿 貙 倬乇賳爻 賴賲 賴賲乇丕賴 亘丕 丌賳丕賳 賲蹖 禺賳丿丿 貙 倬乇賳爻 賴賲丕賳 禺氐賵氐蹖丕鬲 賲爻蹖丨 乇丕 丿丕乇丿 貙 丕賵亘丕乇 诏賳丕賴丕賳 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 乇丕 亘賴 丿賵卮 賲蹖 讴卮丿 .
丿乇 丿賳蹖丕蹖蹖 讴賴 丕爻鬲丕丿 丕夭 乇賵爻蹖賴 賯乇賳 賳賵夭丿賴 賲噩爻賲 讴乇丿賴 賴賲丕賳賳丿 噩賴丕賳 丕賲乇賵夭 倬賵賱 丨丕讴賲 賵 爻賱胤丕賳 丕爻鬲 貙 亘丕 倬賵賱 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳 賴賲賴 讴丕乇 讴乇丿 貙 賴賲 賲蹖鬲賵丕賳 诏賳丕賴丕賳 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 乇丕 禺乇蹖丿 賴賲 亘丕 夭蹖亘丕乇賵蹖丕賳 丕夭丿賵丕噩 讴乇丿 貙 丕夭 賲蹖丕賳 卮禺氐蹖鬲賴丕蹖 讴鬲丕亘 讴賴 亘丕 丿賳丿丕賳 賲蹖 禺賵丕賴賳丿 倬賵賱 乇丕 丕夭 丌鬲卮 亘蹖乇賵賳 丌賵乇賳丿 丕蹖賳 丕亘賱赖 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賲丕 爻鬲 讴賴 倬賵賱 乇丕 賲蹖 亘禺卮丿 .
丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 丕亘賱赖 賴賲 亘賴 胤賲毓 倬乇丿丕禺鬲賴 賵 卮丕蹖丿 丌賳乇丕 亘鬲賵丕賳 诏賳丕賴 丕氐賱蹖 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 丿丕賳爻鬲 貙 丕賲丕 丕賵 鬲乇丿蹖丿 丿乇 賲匕賴亘 乇丕 賴賲 賲禺乇亘 賲蹖 丿丕賳丿 .
賯賴乇賲丕賳丕賳 讴鬲丕亘 丿乇 賯胤丕乇蹖 亘丕 賴賲 丌卮賳丕 賲蹖 卮賵賳丿 貙 賯胤丕乇蹖 讴賴 賲丕賳賳丿 夭賳丿诏蹖 丿乇 丨乇讴鬲 丕爻鬲 貙 丿乇 胤賵賱 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賴賲丿蹖诏乇 乇丕 賲蹖 蹖丕亘賳丿 貙 亘丕 賴賲 夭賳丿诏蹖 賲蹖 讴賳賳丿 貙 乇賳噩 賲蹖 讴卮賳丿 賵 丿乇 倬丕蹖丕賳 亘丕 爻乇賳賵卮鬲賴丕蹖 賲禺鬲賱賮 丕夭 賴賲 噩丿丕 賲蹖 卮賵賳丿 丕賲丕 噩丕賲毓賴 丕蹖 讴賴 丿乇 丌賳 賲蹖 夭蹖爻鬲賴 丕賳丿 賴賲丕賳 亘賵丿賴 讴賴 賴爻鬲 貙 馗賴賵乇 賲爻蹖丨 丕孬乇蹖 亘乇 丌賳 賳诏匕丕卮鬲賴 丕爻鬲 .
丿乇 鬲丕讴蹖丿蹖 丌卮讴丕乇 亘賴 爻禺鬲蹖賴丕蹖 夭賳丿诏蹖 貙 丕爻鬲丕丿 丿乇 爻乇賳賵卮鬲 賴乇 賮乇丿蹖 乇賳噩 賵 丿乇丿 噩丕賳讴丕賴蹖 诏匕丕卮鬲賴 貙 丕夭 賮賯乇 賲胤賱賯 鬲丕 賲爻鬲蹖 賵 賲蹖禺賵丕乇诏蹖 貙 亘蹖賲丕乇蹖 貙 丿夭丿蹖 貙 賯鬲賱 貙 乇亘丕 禺賵丕乇蹖 賵 卮丕蹖丿 賲毓賲賵賱蹖 亘賵丿賳 貙 丌乇夭賵蹖 丿丕卮鬲賳 丿賵 蹖丕 爻賴 禺丕賳賴 丕蹖賳 賴賲 乇賳噩蹖 亘丕卮丿.
丕爻鬲丕丿 賴賳乇 卮禺氐蹖鬲 倬乇丿丕夭蹖 乇丕 亘賴 丕賵噩 乇爻丕賳丿賴 貙 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 丿乇 胤賵賱 賲胤丕賱毓賴 讴鬲丕亘 亘丕 卮禺氐蹖鬲賴丕蹖 丌賳 夭賳丿诏蹖 賲蹖 讴賳丿 貙 亘丕 賵乇丕噩蹖 賴丕 賵 倬乇诏賵蹖蹖 賴丕蹖 賱亘丿賮 貙 鬲丕 噩賵丕賳讴 賲爻賱賵賱蹖 讴賴 丕卮鬲賴丕蹖 毓噩蹖亘 亘賴 賳胤賯 讴乇丿賳 丿丕乇丿 貙 鬲丕 禺丕胤乇丕鬲 跇賳乇丕賱 亘丕 賳丕倬賱卅賵賳 . 讴丕乇丕讴鬲乇 賴賲賴 丕賮乇丕丿 亘賴 卮丿鬲 賱賲爻 卮丿賳蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 賵 丕賱亘鬲賴 亘乇丕蹖 賲禺丕胤亘 丕蹖乇丕賳蹖 爻毓丕丿鬲蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 讴賴 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 亘丕 鬲乇噩賲賴 毓丕賱蹖 賵 亘爻蹖丕乇 乇賵丕賳 賵 丕賲乇賵夭蹖 噩賳丕亘 爻乇賵卮 丨亘蹖亘蹖 亘禺賵丕賳丿 .
賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘丕 丕爻鬲丕丿蹖 丨爻 鬲毓賱蹖賯 乇丕 丿乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘賴 賵噩賵丿 丌賵乇丿賴 貙 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖 讴賴 亘丕 丌卮賳丕蹖蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲賴丕 丌睾丕夭 卮丿賴 丿乇 賳賯丕胤蹖 亘賴 丕賵噩 賲蹖 乇爻丿 貙 诏丕賴蹖 賴賲 禺爻鬲賴 讴賳賳丿賴 賲蹖 卮賵丿 貙 丕賲丕 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 賲蹖 鬲賵丕賳丿 賵賯賵毓 乇禺丿丕丿蹖 賳丕诏賵丕乇 乇丕 丿乇 丕賳鬲賴丕 丨爻 讴賳丿 . 倬乇賳爻 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賴乇 趩賳丿 丿賵爻鬲 丿丕卮鬲賳蹖 丕蹖爻鬲 賵 氐丕丿賯 貙 丕賲丕 讴丕乇賴丕蹖蹖 丕夭 丕賵 爻乇 賲蹖 夭賳丿 讴賴 卮丕蹖丿 丨乇氐 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 乇丕 丿乇 亘蹖丕賵乇丿 賵 亘丕毓孬 卮賵丿 讴賴 賲禺丕胤亘 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕賳鬲馗丕乇蹖 丕夭 倬乇賳爻 賳丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮丿 !
February 7, 2017
We tend to view innocence as an uplifting cleansing virtue. Contact with it is supposed to improve the soul. But this isn鈥檛 always the case. Sometimes, in company, my five year old son will blurt out something I don鈥檛 want outsiders to know and I end up blushing! His innocence causes me discomfort. I also remember that little girl from Aleppo who every day updated online the situation in the besieged city. Imagine the reactions of Assad鈥檚 regime to her online posts. Would they have been won over by her innocence? No way! They would have been made deeply uncomfortable by her innocence. They would have wanted to shut her up. The idiot here has a similar effect on Russian society. 顿辞蝉迟辞别惫蝉办测鈥檚 idea was that if Christ returned to 19th century Russian society he would be treated as a simpleton, an idiot. So he has created a character who always endeavours to be honest, to tell the truth as he sees it. He has a 鈥渘oble simplicity and is boundlessly trusting鈥�. His innocence though causes as much hatred as admiration, more anarchy than goodwill. He makes you realise there are many situations in life where a lie is preferable to the truth if the boat isn鈥檛 to be rocked. Because there鈥檚 nearly always something expedient in a lie, especially in what we call white lies. There鈥檚 usually some personal gain to be had from shunning the truth. Usually these are small private lies; sometimes bigger, more public lies, like Trump denying climate change because it鈥檚 in his financial interests to take this stand. He doesn鈥檛 want to look at images of innocent nature devastated by oil spills from leaking pipes.
One of the most interesting things I learned while reading this is how the novel has evolved for the better since the 19th century. As brilliant as this is there鈥檚 a lot of rambling waffle, as if all the characters are on amphetamines and don鈥檛 know when to shut up. Dostoevsky resorts to rather cheap tactics too 鈥� a character arrives breathless with the urgency to convey news but instead of getting to the point embarks on a completely different discourse and finally decides now is not the time to share his news. Or the narrator will coyly tell us he doesn鈥檛 know what two characters spoke about when they were alone together, even though on the previous page he told us what a character thought in the privacy of his own mind. I wondered if this was mischief on the part of Dostoevsky or just sloppiness. Apparently this was serialised and Dostoevsky was under great duress when he wrote it. Also, all the women are bonkers. They鈥檙e so volatile and capricious that it鈥檚 impossible to know what they want. They seem to be overloaded with stoppered sexual energy. Sexual emotions, in 顿辞蝉迟辞别惫蝉办测鈥檚 novel, seem to deny the female characters access not only to innocence but also measured reflection, a subtext I wasn鈥檛 entirely comfortable with. The women sometimes confused the clarity of the theme of this novel. And ultimately it鈥檚 the sexual jealousy of an essentially innocent young woman that causes the concluding mayhem.
This is not a seamless great read. It can be baggy, chaotic, digressive but the best bits are simply brilliant and overall I found it a tremendously edifying read.
One of the most interesting things I learned while reading this is how the novel has evolved for the better since the 19th century. As brilliant as this is there鈥檚 a lot of rambling waffle, as if all the characters are on amphetamines and don鈥檛 know when to shut up. Dostoevsky resorts to rather cheap tactics too 鈥� a character arrives breathless with the urgency to convey news but instead of getting to the point embarks on a completely different discourse and finally decides now is not the time to share his news. Or the narrator will coyly tell us he doesn鈥檛 know what two characters spoke about when they were alone together, even though on the previous page he told us what a character thought in the privacy of his own mind. I wondered if this was mischief on the part of Dostoevsky or just sloppiness. Apparently this was serialised and Dostoevsky was under great duress when he wrote it. Also, all the women are bonkers. They鈥檙e so volatile and capricious that it鈥檚 impossible to know what they want. They seem to be overloaded with stoppered sexual energy. Sexual emotions, in 顿辞蝉迟辞别惫蝉办测鈥檚 novel, seem to deny the female characters access not only to innocence but also measured reflection, a subtext I wasn鈥檛 entirely comfortable with. The women sometimes confused the clarity of the theme of this novel. And ultimately it鈥檚 the sexual jealousy of an essentially innocent young woman that causes the concluding mayhem.
This is not a seamless great read. It can be baggy, chaotic, digressive but the best bits are simply brilliant and overall I found it a tremendously edifying read.
October 7, 2023
Bilo je vremena, uvijek je bilo za sve vremena i sve je moralo do膰i s vremenom i po redu.
Ono 拧to mi se svidjelo kada je u pitanju roman Idiot jeste isklju膷ivanje pukog gomilanja stati膷nih opisa kakvim znaju biti podvrgnuti ne拧to op拧irniji romani. Umjesto toga ovaj roman njeguje debatno-dijalo拧ku formu, sa predivnim unutra拧njim replikama koje dodatno daju na dinamici i 膷vrstini same fabule. Pisac je izgleda op膷injen polemi膷kim narativom. Ona sa膷injava su拧tinski dio saznanja o svijetu i o stvarima kojima je 膷ovjek izlo啪en. Ti razgovori nisu mehani膷ki, vo膽eni iz puke razonode, nego se iz ruku protivnika izvla膷i i posljednji argument. A jedan od tih ako ne i najva啪nijih argumenata se ogleda u tome da nauka i razum ne rje拧avaju krucijalne, pa i uop拧te probleme 膷ovje膷anstva. Tako na jednom mjestu pisac ka啪e: ,,Same 啪eljezni膷ke pruge ne膰e pomutiti izvore 啪ivota, nego je sve to u cijelini prokleto...鈥�
Dostojevski polazi od toga da ljudi od nauke, plate, kredita, industrije, zadovoljavaju samo svoje li膷ne i materijalne potrebe, a ne i potrebe dru拧tva u cjelini. On je be拧膰utno neposredan. Njegova neposrednost se mo啪da najbolje primje膰uje u kritici programa za postizanje ljudskog blagostanja kada na jednom mjestu pominje ,,prijatelje 膷ovje膷anstva鈥� izme膽u ostalog i engleskog ekonomistu Roberta Tomasa Maltusa. Ljudska istorija je sve samo ne razumna i svo ono djelovanje u njoj bez moralne potpore, 膷ovjeka baca u niskost i efemernost. Pi拧膷ev knez Mi拧kin i pored svojih mana i nedostataka koji su dakako vidljivi, jeste jagnje me膽u vukovima (膷ast izuzecima poput Kostje Lebedeva, na primjer). Naizgled sa nerazumnim pona拧anjem, idiot sa kojim planeri i zavjerenici ostvaruju sopstvene ciljeve. Neukaljan pohlepno拧膷u i plahovito拧膰u. Po mi拧ljenju autora 膷ovjek je bi膰e koje voli proces postizanja cilja, ali nikako i sam cilj. Tu jasno iznosi primjer Kolumba i njegovog otkri膰a, pronicljiv pokazatelj sa kojim su mnogi upoznati i sa kojim se mogu povezati.
Leon s鈥檈n va, Leon s鈥檈n va pour toujours! Lav odlazi, Lav odlazi zauvijek!
Read
November 13, 2024Further chapter in the story of my books and the conversations they strike up.
There's a scene in The Idiot where the main character, Prince Lev Nikolyevich Myshkin, while traveling on a train to Saint Petersburg, recalls an execution by guillotine he witnessed in France.
Being a very sensitive sort, he empathizes intensely with the victim, imagining that the worst aspect might not be the blade itself but the knowledge, during the days and hours leading up to the beheading, that the victim is facing his final moments. The Prince considers that the last half minute before the blade falls must be the most intensely cruel. He speaks about that experience several times in the novel so it's a significant theme鈥攖hough the book handles many themes in the course of its baggage-laden journey to the final page.
When I read about the guillotine scene, I was reminded of Vladimir Nabokov's novel, in which the victim's dilemma is the opposite of the one in Prince Myshkin's account. Nabokov's main character has been sentenced to death by beheading, but he has not been told the date or time of the execution. His torture lies in not knowing what hour will be his last hour鈥攈e wants desperately to be told the date and time but no one will oblige him. I wondered if Nabokov's book was a response to Dostoyevsky's鈥攈e was not one of D's greatest fans, after all. There was also the fact that Nabokov places a pretend spider in the condemned man's cell. Might that have been a way to ridicule a sentimental detail about a real spider in Prince Myshkin's account of a prison cell? Or maybe I'm searching too hard to link these two books together?
When I finished The Idiot, I went looking for information on Dostoyevsky's life and found that he was sentenced to execution by firing squad for his involvement with a literary group critical of the Tzar (incidentally, the group used to meet in the caf茅 on Nevsky Avenue in Saint Petersburg in which Pushkin spent his last hours before the frivolous duel that ended his life).
It seems that Dostoyevsky and his comrades were already blindfolded and standing in front of their graves on Semyonov Place when a message came from the Tzar commuting the sentence to several years hard labor in Siberia instead. The Tzar's decision had been made the previous day but ordered not to be communicated to the prisoners until the last minute. It's clear that Prince Myshkin's theories about the horrors of awaiting execution originated from Dostoyevsky's real experience unlike Nabokov's theories.
But the thing is, one of the men responsible for ordering Dostoyevsky's execution was called Ivan Nabokov. What if he were related to the writer, I thought, so I looked him up. He was! Ivan Nabokov belonged to the same prominent St Petersburg family as Vladimir Nabokov's immediate forebears. It may not mean anything but it is an interesting coincidence.
Ok, I hear you say, enough with the coincidences. But here's another one. In Nabokov's novel, , there is a chapter ridiculing Nikolay Chernyshevsky, a writer and contemporary of Dostoyevsky who was also subjected to a mock execution because of his revolutionary activities. Nabokov had more than a passing interest in the subject of executions, it seems, and reading The Idiot has given me new ways to think about those two Nabokov novels as if the three books had just had a conversation with each other.
Actually, there's a fourth book involved in the conversation. I started reading a long by contemporary Russian author Oleg Strijak a week before I started 'The Idiot'. Strijak's book is a beautiful but complex tribute to Saint Petersburg, to its history, its literature, its canals and its rivers. Half-way through, I decided to pause the reading and choose a nineteenth century novel associated with the city that I haven't yet read. I picked The Idiot. It's a book I've dutifully intended to read for years (ever since I was eighteen and found myself too embarrassed to admit I didn't know who the Idiot of the title was), but we all know about our reading intentions鈥攖hey often remain just that. What I prefer is when the urge to read something comes, not from any sense of duty, but because another book nudges me to finally get to it. I know then that the time is right, and that was the case with The Idiot. Strijak's angst-ridden idiot of a main character was the perfect preparation for meeting Dostoyevsky's angst-ridden Prince Myshkin who is not an idiot at all. He's now joining my list of favorite literary characters. I think I'll place him beside Leopold Bloom and let them chat to each other. And needless to add, I'm very grateful to Oleg Strijak's book for introducing me to the Prince at last.
There's a scene in The Idiot where the main character, Prince Lev Nikolyevich Myshkin, while traveling on a train to Saint Petersburg, recalls an execution by guillotine he witnessed in France.
Being a very sensitive sort, he empathizes intensely with the victim, imagining that the worst aspect might not be the blade itself but the knowledge, during the days and hours leading up to the beheading, that the victim is facing his final moments. The Prince considers that the last half minute before the blade falls must be the most intensely cruel. He speaks about that experience several times in the novel so it's a significant theme鈥攖hough the book handles many themes in the course of its baggage-laden journey to the final page.
When I read about the guillotine scene, I was reminded of Vladimir Nabokov's novel, in which the victim's dilemma is the opposite of the one in Prince Myshkin's account. Nabokov's main character has been sentenced to death by beheading, but he has not been told the date or time of the execution. His torture lies in not knowing what hour will be his last hour鈥攈e wants desperately to be told the date and time but no one will oblige him. I wondered if Nabokov's book was a response to Dostoyevsky's鈥攈e was not one of D's greatest fans, after all. There was also the fact that Nabokov places a pretend spider in the condemned man's cell. Might that have been a way to ridicule a sentimental detail about a real spider in Prince Myshkin's account of a prison cell? Or maybe I'm searching too hard to link these two books together?
When I finished The Idiot, I went looking for information on Dostoyevsky's life and found that he was sentenced to execution by firing squad for his involvement with a literary group critical of the Tzar (incidentally, the group used to meet in the caf茅 on Nevsky Avenue in Saint Petersburg in which Pushkin spent his last hours before the frivolous duel that ended his life).
It seems that Dostoyevsky and his comrades were already blindfolded and standing in front of their graves on Semyonov Place when a message came from the Tzar commuting the sentence to several years hard labor in Siberia instead. The Tzar's decision had been made the previous day but ordered not to be communicated to the prisoners until the last minute. It's clear that Prince Myshkin's theories about the horrors of awaiting execution originated from Dostoyevsky's real experience unlike Nabokov's theories.
But the thing is, one of the men responsible for ordering Dostoyevsky's execution was called Ivan Nabokov. What if he were related to the writer, I thought, so I looked him up. He was! Ivan Nabokov belonged to the same prominent St Petersburg family as Vladimir Nabokov's immediate forebears. It may not mean anything but it is an interesting coincidence.
Ok, I hear you say, enough with the coincidences. But here's another one. In Nabokov's novel, , there is a chapter ridiculing Nikolay Chernyshevsky, a writer and contemporary of Dostoyevsky who was also subjected to a mock execution because of his revolutionary activities. Nabokov had more than a passing interest in the subject of executions, it seems, and reading The Idiot has given me new ways to think about those two Nabokov novels as if the three books had just had a conversation with each other.
Actually, there's a fourth book involved in the conversation. I started reading a long by contemporary Russian author Oleg Strijak a week before I started 'The Idiot'. Strijak's book is a beautiful but complex tribute to Saint Petersburg, to its history, its literature, its canals and its rivers. Half-way through, I decided to pause the reading and choose a nineteenth century novel associated with the city that I haven't yet read. I picked The Idiot. It's a book I've dutifully intended to read for years (ever since I was eighteen and found myself too embarrassed to admit I didn't know who the Idiot of the title was), but we all know about our reading intentions鈥攖hey often remain just that. What I prefer is when the urge to read something comes, not from any sense of duty, but because another book nudges me to finally get to it. I know then that the time is right, and that was the case with The Idiot. Strijak's angst-ridden idiot of a main character was the perfect preparation for meeting Dostoyevsky's angst-ridden Prince Myshkin who is not an idiot at all. He's now joining my list of favorite literary characters. I think I'll place him beside Leopold Bloom and let them chat to each other. And needless to add, I'm very grateful to Oleg Strijak's book for introducing me to the Prince at last.
Read
April 14, 2024Did I ever think a day would come for me to say that I was disappointed in a work by Dostoevsky? A month ago I would have laughed at the very thought. But a month later, I'm not laughing. I'm shocked to find that it is possible. And if it is possible to break your heart over a literary disappointment, I should say that I am brokenhearted.
At present, I'm nursing my wound, so maybe this is not the right time to write a review. But at the same time I feel that if I do not write now, I never will. I just want to finish everything connected with this book as quickly as possible; forget if I can the distressing reading experience I endured through a month. I want to remember the Dostoevsky whom I fell in love over The Brothers Karamazov , Crime and Punishment and White Nights . And I will cherish that Dostoevsky till the end of my days.
On approaching the story, I went through the introductory notes in this particular edition. I read that Dostoevsky presents to us a Christ-like hero - an epitome of goodness and innocence; a pure, kind, and compassionate heart. I read how his kindness, his compassion, his goodness, and his innocence being trampled on. I read how human innocence becomes victimized by a corrupted society. In short, I was about to read the story of a "holy fool". But to my utter dismay, Prince Myshkin was turned out to be not a "holy fool" but "a fool" - an idiot. There is no irony there. The title has to be taken in its literary meaning. Dostoevsky has truly presented us with a complete idiot! This was a huge blow to my expectations. However, this fall in my expectation has nothing to do with Dostoevsky or his choice of the hero. Authors have the right to choose over who they would make their hero. And choosing such a person as Prince Myshkin has originality. I totally lay down my disappointment on the introductory notes, which to me, misrepresented the whole story.
It took some time for me to grasp what I have expressed in the previous paragraph. I didn't at first understand that Prince Myshkin was a complete idiot in a literary sense. I was at a loss as to how to understand him. Then only I realized what Dostoevsky meant. The titular character really is what is meant by the word. Then came my disappointment so I had to lay low till I overcame that. I recommenced the read with a new mind to give heed to Prince Myshkin. But there again I was in for another disappointment, this time at the hand of Dostoevsky himself. It started alright with my knowledge that Prince Myshkin was simple-minded from his childhood and that he had a hard time comprehending things and struggled very much when learning. On top of that, he was an epileptic too. From this perspective, I continued my read. But here too, my comprehension of this character failed due to many characteristic contradictions. He is said to be simple-minded but at the same time, he displayed a keen and rare intelligence. He was kind and compassionate, I agree, and to that extent pure. But there was some subtle cunning in him and at times I sensed there a calculating mind. And his actions which led to ruin the life of a young and trusting girl led me to totally despise him. This didn't correspond with my notion of the character of Myshkin. No matter how hard I tried I couldn't understand nor connect with him. This really exhausted me to the point of annoyance, so much so that I was in indecision whether to continue or to abandon. Then again this was Dostoevsky after all so I decided to take repose.
I took it up again determined to see through it to the end. This time I concentrated on Dostoevsky's portrayal of human psychology for I could fathom no proper plot on which the story developed save except the two "love triangles" (if it may be called such) in which the Prince was the object in one and pursuer in the other. I could honestly say that this unique feature of Dostoevsky, this portrayal of human psychology which he had adopted in all his works, is what saved this work. As always he has brilliantly done this. Strong emotions such as love, obsession, jealousy, suspicion, and rage are so well portrayed that even though I didn't enjoy any other, I did enjoy that.
I wasn't much impressed with the characters - certainly not of the "hero". There were a couple of characters that I felt real and liked but the majority were superficial. And Dostoevsky's writing although undeniably beautiful, was too verbose and unnecessarily so.
It hurts to say this but The Idiot is my least enjoyed Dostoevsky novel.
At present, I'm nursing my wound, so maybe this is not the right time to write a review. But at the same time I feel that if I do not write now, I never will. I just want to finish everything connected with this book as quickly as possible; forget if I can the distressing reading experience I endured through a month. I want to remember the Dostoevsky whom I fell in love over The Brothers Karamazov , Crime and Punishment and White Nights . And I will cherish that Dostoevsky till the end of my days.
On approaching the story, I went through the introductory notes in this particular edition. I read that Dostoevsky presents to us a Christ-like hero - an epitome of goodness and innocence; a pure, kind, and compassionate heart. I read how his kindness, his compassion, his goodness, and his innocence being trampled on. I read how human innocence becomes victimized by a corrupted society. In short, I was about to read the story of a "holy fool". But to my utter dismay, Prince Myshkin was turned out to be not a "holy fool" but "a fool" - an idiot. There is no irony there. The title has to be taken in its literary meaning. Dostoevsky has truly presented us with a complete idiot! This was a huge blow to my expectations. However, this fall in my expectation has nothing to do with Dostoevsky or his choice of the hero. Authors have the right to choose over who they would make their hero. And choosing such a person as Prince Myshkin has originality. I totally lay down my disappointment on the introductory notes, which to me, misrepresented the whole story.
It took some time for me to grasp what I have expressed in the previous paragraph. I didn't at first understand that Prince Myshkin was a complete idiot in a literary sense. I was at a loss as to how to understand him. Then only I realized what Dostoevsky meant. The titular character really is what is meant by the word. Then came my disappointment so I had to lay low till I overcame that. I recommenced the read with a new mind to give heed to Prince Myshkin. But there again I was in for another disappointment, this time at the hand of Dostoevsky himself. It started alright with my knowledge that Prince Myshkin was simple-minded from his childhood and that he had a hard time comprehending things and struggled very much when learning. On top of that, he was an epileptic too. From this perspective, I continued my read. But here too, my comprehension of this character failed due to many characteristic contradictions. He is said to be simple-minded but at the same time, he displayed a keen and rare intelligence. He was kind and compassionate, I agree, and to that extent pure. But there was some subtle cunning in him and at times I sensed there a calculating mind. And his actions which led to ruin the life of a young and trusting girl led me to totally despise him. This didn't correspond with my notion of the character of Myshkin. No matter how hard I tried I couldn't understand nor connect with him. This really exhausted me to the point of annoyance, so much so that I was in indecision whether to continue or to abandon. Then again this was Dostoevsky after all so I decided to take repose.
I took it up again determined to see through it to the end. This time I concentrated on Dostoevsky's portrayal of human psychology for I could fathom no proper plot on which the story developed save except the two "love triangles" (if it may be called such) in which the Prince was the object in one and pursuer in the other. I could honestly say that this unique feature of Dostoevsky, this portrayal of human psychology which he had adopted in all his works, is what saved this work. As always he has brilliantly done this. Strong emotions such as love, obsession, jealousy, suspicion, and rage are so well portrayed that even though I didn't enjoy any other, I did enjoy that.
I wasn't much impressed with the characters - certainly not of the "hero". There were a couple of characters that I felt real and liked but the majority were superficial. And Dostoevsky's writing although undeniably beautiful, was too verbose and unnecessarily so.
It hurts to say this but The Idiot is my least enjoyed Dostoevsky novel.
January 4, 2021
袗 胁懈械 蟹薪邪械褌械 谢懈 褖芯 械 褌芯 懈写懈芯褌? 小褉械褖邪谢懈 谢懈 褋褌械 懈写懈芯褌懈 胁 卸懈胁芯褌邪 褋懈? 校 薪邪褋 写褍屑邪褌邪 鈥炐感葱感狙傗€� 械 芯褋芯斜械薪芯 褕懈褉芯泻芯 锌芯薪褟褌懈械 懈 褋械 锌褉懈谢邪谐邪 褖械写褉芯 锌芯 芯褌薪芯褕械薪懈械 薪邪 褏芯褉邪, 泻芯懈褌芯 薪邪泄-芯斜褖芯 薪械 褋邪 褋褗谐谢邪褋薪懈 褋 胁邪褋 懈谢懈 锌芯 胁邪褕械 屑薪械薪懈械 褋邪 懈蟹胁褗褉褕懈谢懈 胁褗锌懈械褖邪 谐谢褍锌芯褋褌. 小锌芯褉械写 鈥炐犘笛囆叫感� 薪邪 写褟胁芯谢邪鈥� 薪邪 袗屑斜褉芯褍蟹 袘懈褗褉褋 懈写懈芯褌褗褌 械 鈥炑囆恍敌� 薪邪 谐芯谢褟屑芯 懈 屑芯褖薪芯 锌谢械屑械, 褔懈褟褌芯 褉芯谢褟 胁 褔芯胁械褕泻懈褌械 写械谢邪 胁懈薪邪谐懈 械 斜懈谢邪 谐芯褋锌芯写褋褌胁邪褖邪 懈 褉褗泻芯胁芯写薪邪鈥�. 袙 斜褗谢谐邪褉褋泻懈褟 袧邪泻邪蟹邪褌械谢械薪 泻芯写械泻褋 锌褗泻 械 蟹邪谢芯卸械薪邪 泻邪褌芯 褑褟谢芯 褏褍屑邪薪薪邪褌邪 懈写械褟 薪邪 蟹邪泻芯薪芯写邪褌械谢褟, 褔械 懈写懈芯褌懈褟褌邪, 褋懈褉械褔 薪邪泄-胁懈褋芯泻邪褌邪 褋褌械锌械薪 薪邪 薪械胁屑械薪褟械屑芯褋褌, 械 锌褉械写锌芯褋褌邪胁泻邪 蟹邪 芯褋胁芯斜芯卸写邪胁邪薪械 芯褌 薪邪泻邪蟹邪褌械谢薪邪 芯褌谐芯胁芯褉薪芯褋褌. 袟邪褖芯 锌懈褕邪 胁褋懈褔泻懈 褌械蟹懈 薪械褋胁褗褉蟹邪薪懈 薪械褖邪 谢懈? 袟邪褖芯褌芯 鈥炐感葱感狙傃娧傗€� 薪邪 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 械 械写懈薪 屑邪谢泻芯 锌芯-芯褋芯斜械薪 胁懈写.
袧械 褋懈 褋锌芯屑薪褟屑 写邪 褋褗屑 褔械谢邪 褉芯屑邪薪 芯褌 褉褍褋泻懈 邪胁褌芯褉, 胁 泻芯泄褌芯 锌械褉褋芯薪邪卸懈褌械 写邪 薪械 懈蟹锌邪写邪褌 胁 泻褉邪泄薪懈 懈蟹褋褌褗锌谢械薪懈褟 懈 褉械褔褌邪 懈屑 写邪 薪械 械 锌褉械褌械薪褑懈芯蟹薪邪 懈 懈蟹锌褗谢薪械薪邪 褋 锌芯谢褍谢懈褔薪懈 褉邪蟹屑懈褕谢械薪懈褟, 锌芯谢褍芯斜褉褗褖械薪懈褟 泻褗屑 褋褗斜械褋械写薪懈泻邪, 锌芯褉邪写懈 泻芯械褌芯 褑褟谢芯褌芯 锌芯胁械褋褌胁芯胁邪薪懈械 写芯斜懈胁邪 械写懈薪 谢械泻芯 褎邪薪褌邪褋褌懈褔械薪 褏邪褉邪泻褌械褉. 袩褉懈泻芯胁邪胁邪 锌芯谐谢械写邪 褌邪蟹懈 褏懈锌薪芯褌懈蟹懈褉邪褖邪 写懈薪邪屑懈泻邪 懈 胁懈 褋械 褋褌褉褍胁邪, 褔械 胁褋褗褖薪芯褋褌 锌褉械写 胁邪褋 褋械 褉邪蟹懈谐褉邪胁邪 薪褟泻邪泻褗胁 褋锌械泻褌邪泻褗谢 褋 芯褔邪褉芯胁邪褌械谢薪懈褌械 谢械泻芯 锌褉械械泻褋锌芯薪懈褉邪薪懈 褌械邪褌褉邪谢薪懈 屑邪薪懈械褉懈, 褏邪褉邪泻褌械褉薪懈 蟹邪 褌芯胁邪 懈蟹泻褍褋褌胁芯. 袙 锌褉芯懈蟹胁械写械薪懈褟褌邪 薪邪 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 懈屑邪 写芯锌褗谢薪懈褌械谢薪芯 薪邪褋懈褖邪薪械 锌芯褉邪写懈 褌芯胁邪, 褔械 芯褋薪芯胁薪懈褌械 屑褍 锌械褉褋芯薪邪卸懈 胁懈薪邪谐懈 褋褌芯褟褌 薪邪 褉褗斜邪 薪邪 薪褟泻芯褟 斜械蟹写褗薪薪邪 谢懈褔薪邪 锌褉芯锌邪褋褌 懈 胁褗锌褉芯褋褗褌 薪懈泻芯谐邪 薪械 械 鈥炐斝靶恍�?鈥�, 邪 鈥炐毿拘承�?鈥�.
鈥炐愋� 薪械 褋褗屑 褋褗谐谢邪褋械薪 懈 写邪卸械 褋械 胁褗蟹屑褍褖邪胁邪屑, 泻芯谐邪褌芯 薪褟泻芯懈 胁懈 薪邪褉懈褔邪褌 懈写懈芯褌; 胁懈械 褋褌械 褌胁褗褉写械 褍屑械薪, 蟹邪 写邪 胁懈 薪邪褉懈褔邪褌 褌邪泻邪; 薪芯 褋褗谐谢邪褋械褌械 褋械 褋邪屑, 褔械 褋褌械 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 褋褌褉邪薪械薪, 褔械 褋械 褉邪蟹谢懈褔邪胁邪褌械 芯褌 胁褋懈褔泻懈 褏芯褉邪.鈥�
袣薪褟蟹褗褌 褋胁械褌械褑 袦懈褕泻懈薪 械 芯锌懈褌褗褌 薪邪 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 写邪 褋褗蟹写邪写械 芯斜褉邪蟹邪 薪邪 鈥炐叫靶垦娦恍叫� 锌褉械泻褉邪褋薪懈褟 褔芯胁械泻鈥�. 袩褉械泻褉邪褋薪懈褟褌 褔芯胁械泻, 泻芯泄褌芯 屑芯卸械 写邪 斜褗写械 褌邪泻褗胁, 褋邪屑芯 邪泻芯 械 鈥炐夹靶恍盒� 褋屑械褕械薪鈥�, 褋褗褖芯 泻邪褌芯 袛芯薪 袣懈褏芯褌, 懈 褋邪屑 薪械 胁懈卸写邪 褔懈褋褌芯褌邪褌邪 褋懈. 鈥炐⑿拘� 斜懈 褋屑械褌薪邪谢 蟹邪 薪械褖芯 褔褍写芯胁懈褖薪芯 胁褗蟹屑芯卸薪芯褋褌褌邪 写邪 斜褗写械 芯斜懈褔邪薪 鈥炑傂靶貉娦� 褔芯胁械泻 泻邪褌芯 薪械谐芯鈥�. 袠写懈芯褌 械 袦懈褕泻懈薪 懈 胁褋懈褔泻懈 屑褍 锌芯胁褌邪褉褟褌 褌芯胁邪, 薪械 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 锌芯褉邪写懈 械锌懈谢械锌褌懈褔薪懈褌械 锌褉懈锌邪写褗褑懈, 泻芯懈褌芯 褍卸 芯褌 屑邪谢褗泻 褋邪 谐芯 芯褋褌邪胁懈谢懈 锌芯褔褌懈 斜械蟹 褉邪蟹褋褗写褗泻, 邪 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 鈥炐叫� 谢褗卸械褌械 薪邪 胁褋褟泻邪 泻褉邪褔泻邪, 邪 屑芯卸械 斜懈 懈 褋褗胁褋械屑鈥�. 袧械 锌褉芯锌褍褋泻邪褌 写邪 锌芯泻邪卸邪褌 懈蟹屑械薪褔懈胁邪褌邪 褋懈 褔芯胁械褕泻邪 锌褉懈褉芯写邪 懈 褏芯褉邪褌邪, 泻芯懈褌芯 懈褋泻褉械薪芯 褋械 胁褗蟹褏懈褖邪胁邪褌 芯褌 泻薪褟蟹邪 懈 写芯褉懈 谐芯 鈥炐拘毙秆囆把傗€�. (袛褉褍谐邪 褋褌褉邪薪薪芯褋褌 薪邪 褉褍褋泻邪褌邪 谢懈褌械褉邪褌褍褉邪 蟹邪 屑械薪 鈥� 胁褋懈褔泻懈 懈谢懈 鈥炐拘毙秆囆把傗€� 薪褟泻芯谐芯, 懈谢懈 鈥炐叫� 谐芯 芯斜懈褔邪褌鈥�, 懈谢懈 屑芯卸械 斜懈 谐芯 鈥炐垦€械蟹懈褉邪褌鈥�. 袣邪褌芯 褔械 褉褍褋懈褌械 薪械 褋邪 褋锌芯褋芯斜薪懈 薪邪 锌芯-褍屑械褉械薪懈 褔褍胁褋褌胁邪 芯褌 褌械蟹懈 写胁械 泻褉邪泄薪芯褋褌懈. 袦芯卸械 斜懈 褌芯胁邪 械 薪褟泻邪泻胁邪 褔邪褋褌 芯褌 芯薪邪蟹懈 薪械芯斜褟褌薪邪 褉褍褋泻邪 写褍褕邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 芯褖械 薪懈泻邪泻 薪械 屑芯谐邪 写邪 褉邪蟹斜械褉邪). 小褟泻邪褕 薪褟泻邪泻 褋械 斜芯褟褏邪 芯褌 褌芯胁邪 薪械谐芯胁芯 褌邪泻邪 薪械锌芯写锌褉邪胁械薪芯 写芯斜褉芯写褍褕懈械 懈 懈褋泻褉械薪芯褋褌, 泻邪褌芯 芯褌 薪褟泻邪泻胁邪 锌褉懈褔褍写谢懈胁邪 褋褌懈褏懈褟 褋械 斜芯褟褏邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 屑芯卸械 写邪 谐懈 谐谢褗褌薪械 懈 芯斜械蟹谢懈褔懈. 袣邪泻 写邪 薪械 褌械 械 褋褌褉邪褏 芯褌 薪械褖芯 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 薪械锌芯薪褟褌薪芯 懈 写邪 薪械 褋械 芯锌懈褌胁邪褕 写邪 谐芯 芯屑邪谢芯胁邪卸懈褕, 锌芯褌褗锌褔械褕 写芯褉懈, 褔械 写邪 褋械 锌褉械写锌邪蟹懈褕?
鈥�... 邪蟹 胁懈 褋屑褟褌邪屑 蟹邪 薪邪泄-褔械褋褌薪懈褟 懈 薪邪泄-褋锌褉邪胁械写谢懈胁懈褟 褔芯胁械泻, 锌芯-褔械褋褌械薪 懈 锌芯-褋锌褉邪胁械写谢懈胁 芯褌 胁褋懈褔泻懈, 懈 邪泻芯 泻邪蟹胁邪褌 蟹邪 胁邪褋, 褔械 胁邪褕懈褟褌 褍屑鈥� 褌芯械褋褌, 褔械 锌芯薪褟泻芯谐邪 胁懈械 褋褌械 斜芯谢械薪 褍屑褋褌胁械薪芯, 褌芯胁邪 薪械 械 褋锌褉邪胁械写谢懈胁芯; 邪蟹 褋械 褍斜械写懈褏 胁 褌芯胁邪 懈 褋锌芯褉械褏 褋 写褉褍谐懈褌械, 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 屑邪泻邪褉 褔械 褋褌械 薪邪懈褋褌懈薪邪 斜芯谢械薪 褍屑褋褌胁械薪芯鈥� 谐谢邪胁薪懈褟褌 胁懈 褍屑 械 锌芯-褉邪蟹胁懈褌, 芯褌泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 褍 胁褋懈褔泻懈 褌褟褏, 写芯 褌邪泻邪胁邪 褋褌械锌械薪 写芯褉懈, 褔械 褌械 懈 锌褉械写褋褌邪胁邪 薪褟屑邪褌鈥�.
袙 鈥炐樞葱感狙傗€� 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 褋械 薪邪谐褗褉斜胁邪 写邪 芯锌懈褕械 薪械 褋邪屑芯 锌褗褌褟 薪邪 褋胁芯褟 鈥炐盒窖徯� 啸褉懈褋褌芯褋鈥�, 薪芯 懈 芯褌薪芯褕械薪懈褟褌邪 胁 褋谢械写褉械褎芯褉屑械薪邪 袪褍褋懈褟 胁 褋褉械写邪褌邪 薪邪 XIX 胁械泻. 袨褋芯斜械薪芯 褋械 懈薪褌械褉械褋褍胁邪 芯褌 褋褗写械斜薪邪褌邪 褉械褎芯褉屑邪 薪邪 袗谢械泻褋邪薪写褗褉 II, 泻芯褟褌芯 薪邪锌褗谢薪芯 懈蟹屑械薪褟 褋褗写械斜薪邪褌邪 褋懈褋褌械屑邪 胁 袪褍褋懈褟 懈 胁褗胁械卸写邪 锌褉懈薪褑懈锌懈 泻邪褌芯 褋胁芯斜芯写薪邪褌邪 邪写胁芯泻邪褌褍褉邪 懈 褋褗写械斜薪懈褌械 蟹邪褋械写邪褌械谢懈 鈥� 褌械屑邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 械 写芯褋褌邪 蟹邪褋褌褗锌械薪邪 懈 胁 鈥炐懷€邪褌褟 袣邪褉邪屑邪蟹芯胁懈鈥� , 薪邪泄-胁械褔械 胁 锌褉芯褑械褋邪 褋褉械褖褍 袦懈褌褟. 袧械胁械写薪褗卸 褋械 褋锌芯屑械薪邪胁邪 懈 鈥炐缎敌窖佇盒秆徰� 胁褗锌褉芯褋鈥� 懈 锌芯褋谢械写胁邪谢芯褌芯 泻芯谢械斜邪薪懈械 薪邪 卸械薪懈褌械 写邪谢懈 褋芯褑懈邪谢薪邪褌邪 褉芯谢褟, 泻芯褟褌芯 褋邪 懈蟹锌褗谢薪褟胁邪谢懈 写芯褋械谐邪, 械 写芯褋褌邪褌褗褔薪邪. 袣邪褌芯 褑褟谢芯 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 胁懈薪邪谐懈 褉邪蟹胁懈胁邪 锌械褉褋芯薪邪卸懈褌械 褋懈 薪械 薪褟泻邪泻 芯褌胁谢械褔械薪芯 芯褌 懈褋褌芯褉懈褔械褋泻懈褟 泻芯薪褌械泻褋褌, 邪 谐懈 锌褉械写褋褌邪胁褟 泻邪褌芯 锌褉芯写褍泻褌 懈 锌褉芯写褗谢卸械薪懈械 薪邪 褍胁谢懈褔邪褖懈褌械 褋芯褑懈邪谢薪懈 褌械褔械薪懈褟 懈 胁 泻芯薪褌褉邪褋褌 褋 褉械邪泻褑懈芯薪薪懈褌械 胁褗蟹谐谢械写懈. 袨褋芯斜械薪芯 芯褋褌褉芯 锌邪褉胁邪 褋邪褉泻邪蟹屑褗褌 屑褍 锌芯 锌芯胁芯写 薪邪 鈥炐狙€懈谐懈薪邪谢薪懈褔械薪械褌芯鈥� 懈 褌懈锌懈褔薪懈褟 懈 写芯 写薪械褋 胁褗蟹谐谢械写 薪邪 褔芯胁械泻邪, 褔械 蟹邪 写邪 褍褋锌械械褕 胁 卸懈胁芯褌邪, 褌褉褟斜胁邪 写邪 褋懈 泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 褋械 屑芯卸械 锌芯-泻芯薪褎芯褉屑懈褋褌泻懈 薪邪褋褌褉芯械薪. 袣邪褌芯 胁褋懈褔泻懈 芯褋褌邪薪邪谢懈 胁 褋褌邪写芯褌芯. 袙褋褗褖薪芯褋褌 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 褔械褋褌芯 锌褉懈褕懈胁邪 芯斜褉褗褖械薪懈械褌芯 鈥炐感葱感狙傗€� 泻褗屑 泻薪褟蟹 袦懈褕泻懈薪, 薪芯 锌芯蟹懈褑懈褟褌邪 屑褍 薪械 芯褋褌邪胁褟 褋褗屑薪械薪懈械 泻芯懈 褋邪 胁褋褗褖薪芯褋褌 懈褋褌懈薪褋泻懈褌械 懈写懈芯褌懈 胁 褉芯屑邪薪邪.
鈥炐┬� 褋械 薪邪屑械褉懈 谢懈 薪邪锌褉懈屑械褉 屑邪泄泻邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 薪械卸薪芯 芯斜懈褔邪 写械褌械褌芯 褋懈, 写邪 薪械 褋械 懈蟹锌谢邪褕懈 懈 褉邪蟹斜芯谢械械 芯褌 褋褌褉邪褏, 邪泻芯 褋懈薪褗褌 懈谢懈 写褗褖械褉褟 褲 屑邪谢泻芯 懈蟹谢械蟹械 芯褌 褉械谢褋懈褌械? 鈥炐澬�, 薪懈泻邪泻胁邪 芯褉懈谐懈薪邪谢薪芯褋褌, 薪械泻邪 锌芯-写芯斜褉械 斜褗写械 褖邪褋褌谢懈胁芯 懈 卸懈胁械械 胁 芯褏芯谢褋褌胁芯鈥� 鈥� 屑懈褋谢懈 胁褋褟泻邪 屑邪泄泻邪, 泻芯谐邪褌芯 锌褉懈褋锌懈胁邪 写械褌械褌芯 褋懈.鈥�
鈥炩€� 懈蟹胁械褋褌薪邪 褍屑褋褌胁械薪邪 褌褗锌芯褌邪 械 泻邪褌芯 褔械 谢懈 锌芯褔褌懈 薪械芯斜褏芯写懈屑芯 泻邪褔械褋褌胁芯 邪泻芯 薪械 蟹邪 胁褋械泻懈 写械谢芯胁懈 褔芯胁械泻, 褌芯 锌芯薪械 蟹邪 胁褋械泻懈, 泻芯泄褌芯 褋械褉懈芯蟹薪芯 褋械 械 蟹邪械谢 写邪 褌褉褍锌邪 锌邪褉懈.鈥�
袧械 屑懈 褋械 褖械 写邪 薪懈褖褟 褋谢芯卸薪懈褌械 褏邪褉邪泻褌械褉懈 薪邪 袪芯谐芯卸懈薪, 袧邪褋褌邪褋懈褟 肖懈谢懈锌芯胁薪邪 懈谢懈 袗谐谢邪褟 懈 芯褌薪芯褕械薪懈褟褌邪 懈屑 褋 袦懈褕泻懈薪. 校 胁褋械泻懈 芯褌 褌褟褏 懈屑邪 锌芯胁械褔械 懈 锌芯-屑邪谢泻芯 斜械蟹褍屑懈械, 泻褗写械 芯褌 褋褌褉邪褋褌, 泻褗写械 芯褌 褍薪懈蟹械薪芯 褔褍胁褋褌胁芯 蟹邪 写芯褋褌芯泄薪褋褌胁芯 懈谢懈 锌褗泻 锌褉芯褋褌芯 芯褌 屑谢邪写芯褋褌. 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 薪械 写邪胁邪 芯褑械薪泻懈. 袩褉芯褋褌芯 芯锌懈褋胁邪 懈 薪邪斜谢褞写邪胁邪 褌械蟹懈 写械褑邪 薪邪 褌芯谐邪胁邪褕薪芯褌芯 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯, 泻芯懈褌芯 懈屑邪褌 锌芯 械写懈薪 薪械胁懈写懈屑 泻谢褍锌 芯褌 褔芯胁械褕泻懈 褋谢邪斜芯褋褌懈 芯泻芯谢芯 褕懈褟褌邪 懈 褌芯泄 谐懈 写褍褕懈 谢懈, 写褍褕懈. 袧邪斜谢褞写邪胁邪 谐懈 懈 袦懈褕泻懈薪 懈 褋褌褉邪写邪 蟹邪 褌褟褏 懈 蟹邪械写薪芯 褋 褌褟褏 锌芯 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 褔芯胁械褕泻懈 薪邪褔懈薪.
袧械 褋懈 褋锌芯屑薪褟屑 写邪 褋褗屑 褔械谢邪 褉芯屑邪薪 芯褌 褉褍褋泻懈 邪胁褌芯褉, 胁 泻芯泄褌芯 锌械褉褋芯薪邪卸懈褌械 写邪 薪械 懈蟹锌邪写邪褌 胁 泻褉邪泄薪懈 懈蟹褋褌褗锌谢械薪懈褟 懈 褉械褔褌邪 懈屑 写邪 薪械 械 锌褉械褌械薪褑懈芯蟹薪邪 懈 懈蟹锌褗谢薪械薪邪 褋 锌芯谢褍谢懈褔薪懈 褉邪蟹屑懈褕谢械薪懈褟, 锌芯谢褍芯斜褉褗褖械薪懈褟 泻褗屑 褋褗斜械褋械写薪懈泻邪, 锌芯褉邪写懈 泻芯械褌芯 褑褟谢芯褌芯 锌芯胁械褋褌胁芯胁邪薪懈械 写芯斜懈胁邪 械写懈薪 谢械泻芯 褎邪薪褌邪褋褌懈褔械薪 褏邪褉邪泻褌械褉. 袩褉懈泻芯胁邪胁邪 锌芯谐谢械写邪 褌邪蟹懈 褏懈锌薪芯褌懈蟹懈褉邪褖邪 写懈薪邪屑懈泻邪 懈 胁懈 褋械 褋褌褉褍胁邪, 褔械 胁褋褗褖薪芯褋褌 锌褉械写 胁邪褋 褋械 褉邪蟹懈谐褉邪胁邪 薪褟泻邪泻褗胁 褋锌械泻褌邪泻褗谢 褋 芯褔邪褉芯胁邪褌械谢薪懈褌械 谢械泻芯 锌褉械械泻褋锌芯薪懈褉邪薪懈 褌械邪褌褉邪谢薪懈 屑邪薪懈械褉懈, 褏邪褉邪泻褌械褉薪懈 蟹邪 褌芯胁邪 懈蟹泻褍褋褌胁芯. 袙 锌褉芯懈蟹胁械写械薪懈褟褌邪 薪邪 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 懈屑邪 写芯锌褗谢薪懈褌械谢薪芯 薪邪褋懈褖邪薪械 锌芯褉邪写懈 褌芯胁邪, 褔械 芯褋薪芯胁薪懈褌械 屑褍 锌械褉褋芯薪邪卸懈 胁懈薪邪谐懈 褋褌芯褟褌 薪邪 褉褗斜邪 薪邪 薪褟泻芯褟 斜械蟹写褗薪薪邪 谢懈褔薪邪 锌褉芯锌邪褋褌 懈 胁褗锌褉芯褋褗褌 薪懈泻芯谐邪 薪械 械 鈥炐斝靶恍�?鈥�, 邪 鈥炐毿拘承�?鈥�.
鈥炐愋� 薪械 褋褗屑 褋褗谐谢邪褋械薪 懈 写邪卸械 褋械 胁褗蟹屑褍褖邪胁邪屑, 泻芯谐邪褌芯 薪褟泻芯懈 胁懈 薪邪褉懈褔邪褌 懈写懈芯褌; 胁懈械 褋褌械 褌胁褗褉写械 褍屑械薪, 蟹邪 写邪 胁懈 薪邪褉懈褔邪褌 褌邪泻邪; 薪芯 褋褗谐谢邪褋械褌械 褋械 褋邪屑, 褔械 褋褌械 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 褋褌褉邪薪械薪, 褔械 褋械 褉邪蟹谢懈褔邪胁邪褌械 芯褌 胁褋懈褔泻懈 褏芯褉邪.鈥�
袣薪褟蟹褗褌 褋胁械褌械褑 袦懈褕泻懈薪 械 芯锌懈褌褗褌 薪邪 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 写邪 褋褗蟹写邪写械 芯斜褉邪蟹邪 薪邪 鈥炐叫靶垦娦恍叫� 锌褉械泻褉邪褋薪懈褟 褔芯胁械泻鈥�. 袩褉械泻褉邪褋薪懈褟褌 褔芯胁械泻, 泻芯泄褌芯 屑芯卸械 写邪 斜褗写械 褌邪泻褗胁, 褋邪屑芯 邪泻芯 械 鈥炐夹靶恍盒� 褋屑械褕械薪鈥�, 褋褗褖芯 泻邪褌芯 袛芯薪 袣懈褏芯褌, 懈 褋邪屑 薪械 胁懈卸写邪 褔懈褋褌芯褌邪褌邪 褋懈. 鈥炐⑿拘� 斜懈 褋屑械褌薪邪谢 蟹邪 薪械褖芯 褔褍写芯胁懈褖薪芯 胁褗蟹屑芯卸薪芯褋褌褌邪 写邪 斜褗写械 芯斜懈褔邪薪 鈥炑傂靶貉娦� 褔芯胁械泻 泻邪褌芯 薪械谐芯鈥�. 袠写懈芯褌 械 袦懈褕泻懈薪 懈 胁褋懈褔泻懈 屑褍 锌芯胁褌邪褉褟褌 褌芯胁邪, 薪械 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 锌芯褉邪写懈 械锌懈谢械锌褌懈褔薪懈褌械 锌褉懈锌邪写褗褑懈, 泻芯懈褌芯 褍卸 芯褌 屑邪谢褗泻 褋邪 谐芯 芯褋褌邪胁懈谢懈 锌芯褔褌懈 斜械蟹 褉邪蟹褋褗写褗泻, 邪 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 鈥炐叫� 谢褗卸械褌械 薪邪 胁褋褟泻邪 泻褉邪褔泻邪, 邪 屑芯卸械 斜懈 懈 褋褗胁褋械屑鈥�. 袧械 锌褉芯锌褍褋泻邪褌 写邪 锌芯泻邪卸邪褌 懈蟹屑械薪褔懈胁邪褌邪 褋懈 褔芯胁械褕泻邪 锌褉懈褉芯写邪 懈 褏芯褉邪褌邪, 泻芯懈褌芯 懈褋泻褉械薪芯 褋械 胁褗蟹褏懈褖邪胁邪褌 芯褌 泻薪褟蟹邪 懈 写芯褉懈 谐芯 鈥炐拘毙秆囆把傗€�. (袛褉褍谐邪 褋褌褉邪薪薪芯褋褌 薪邪 褉褍褋泻邪褌邪 谢懈褌械褉邪褌褍褉邪 蟹邪 屑械薪 鈥� 胁褋懈褔泻懈 懈谢懈 鈥炐拘毙秆囆把傗€� 薪褟泻芯谐芯, 懈谢懈 鈥炐叫� 谐芯 芯斜懈褔邪褌鈥�, 懈谢懈 屑芯卸械 斜懈 谐芯 鈥炐垦€械蟹懈褉邪褌鈥�. 袣邪褌芯 褔械 褉褍褋懈褌械 薪械 褋邪 褋锌芯褋芯斜薪懈 薪邪 锌芯-褍屑械褉械薪懈 褔褍胁褋褌胁邪 芯褌 褌械蟹懈 写胁械 泻褉邪泄薪芯褋褌懈. 袦芯卸械 斜懈 褌芯胁邪 械 薪褟泻邪泻胁邪 褔邪褋褌 芯褌 芯薪邪蟹懈 薪械芯斜褟褌薪邪 褉褍褋泻邪 写褍褕邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 芯褖械 薪懈泻邪泻 薪械 屑芯谐邪 写邪 褉邪蟹斜械褉邪). 小褟泻邪褕 薪褟泻邪泻 褋械 斜芯褟褏邪 芯褌 褌芯胁邪 薪械谐芯胁芯 褌邪泻邪 薪械锌芯写锌褉邪胁械薪芯 写芯斜褉芯写褍褕懈械 懈 懈褋泻褉械薪芯褋褌, 泻邪褌芯 芯褌 薪褟泻邪泻胁邪 锌褉懈褔褍写谢懈胁邪 褋褌懈褏懈褟 褋械 斜芯褟褏邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 屑芯卸械 写邪 谐懈 谐谢褗褌薪械 懈 芯斜械蟹谢懈褔懈. 袣邪泻 写邪 薪械 褌械 械 褋褌褉邪褏 芯褌 薪械褖芯 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 薪械锌芯薪褟褌薪芯 懈 写邪 薪械 褋械 芯锌懈褌胁邪褕 写邪 谐芯 芯屑邪谢芯胁邪卸懈褕, 锌芯褌褗锌褔械褕 写芯褉懈, 褔械 写邪 褋械 锌褉械写锌邪蟹懈褕?
鈥�... 邪蟹 胁懈 褋屑褟褌邪屑 蟹邪 薪邪泄-褔械褋褌薪懈褟 懈 薪邪泄-褋锌褉邪胁械写谢懈胁懈褟 褔芯胁械泻, 锌芯-褔械褋褌械薪 懈 锌芯-褋锌褉邪胁械写谢懈胁 芯褌 胁褋懈褔泻懈, 懈 邪泻芯 泻邪蟹胁邪褌 蟹邪 胁邪褋, 褔械 胁邪褕懈褟褌 褍屑鈥� 褌芯械褋褌, 褔械 锌芯薪褟泻芯谐邪 胁懈械 褋褌械 斜芯谢械薪 褍屑褋褌胁械薪芯, 褌芯胁邪 薪械 械 褋锌褉邪胁械写谢懈胁芯; 邪蟹 褋械 褍斜械写懈褏 胁 褌芯胁邪 懈 褋锌芯褉械褏 褋 写褉褍谐懈褌械, 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 屑邪泻邪褉 褔械 褋褌械 薪邪懈褋褌懈薪邪 斜芯谢械薪 褍屑褋褌胁械薪芯鈥� 谐谢邪胁薪懈褟褌 胁懈 褍屑 械 锌芯-褉邪蟹胁懈褌, 芯褌泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 褍 胁褋懈褔泻懈 褌褟褏, 写芯 褌邪泻邪胁邪 褋褌械锌械薪 写芯褉懈, 褔械 褌械 懈 锌褉械写褋褌邪胁邪 薪褟屑邪褌鈥�.
袙 鈥炐樞葱感狙傗€� 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 褋械 薪邪谐褗褉斜胁邪 写邪 芯锌懈褕械 薪械 褋邪屑芯 锌褗褌褟 薪邪 褋胁芯褟 鈥炐盒窖徯� 啸褉懈褋褌芯褋鈥�, 薪芯 懈 芯褌薪芯褕械薪懈褟褌邪 胁 褋谢械写褉械褎芯褉屑械薪邪 袪褍褋懈褟 胁 褋褉械写邪褌邪 薪邪 XIX 胁械泻. 袨褋芯斜械薪芯 褋械 懈薪褌械褉械褋褍胁邪 芯褌 褋褗写械斜薪邪褌邪 褉械褎芯褉屑邪 薪邪 袗谢械泻褋邪薪写褗褉 II, 泻芯褟褌芯 薪邪锌褗谢薪芯 懈蟹屑械薪褟 褋褗写械斜薪邪褌邪 褋懈褋褌械屑邪 胁 袪褍褋懈褟 懈 胁褗胁械卸写邪 锌褉懈薪褑懈锌懈 泻邪褌芯 褋胁芯斜芯写薪邪褌邪 邪写胁芯泻邪褌褍褉邪 懈 褋褗写械斜薪懈褌械 蟹邪褋械写邪褌械谢懈 鈥� 褌械屑邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 械 写芯褋褌邪 蟹邪褋褌褗锌械薪邪 懈 胁 鈥炐懷€邪褌褟 袣邪褉邪屑邪蟹芯胁懈鈥� , 薪邪泄-胁械褔械 胁 锌褉芯褑械褋邪 褋褉械褖褍 袦懈褌褟. 袧械胁械写薪褗卸 褋械 褋锌芯屑械薪邪胁邪 懈 鈥炐缎敌窖佇盒秆徰� 胁褗锌褉芯褋鈥� 懈 锌芯褋谢械写胁邪谢芯褌芯 泻芯谢械斜邪薪懈械 薪邪 卸械薪懈褌械 写邪谢懈 褋芯褑懈邪谢薪邪褌邪 褉芯谢褟, 泻芯褟褌芯 褋邪 懈蟹锌褗谢薪褟胁邪谢懈 写芯褋械谐邪, 械 写芯褋褌邪褌褗褔薪邪. 袣邪褌芯 褑褟谢芯 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 胁懈薪邪谐懈 褉邪蟹胁懈胁邪 锌械褉褋芯薪邪卸懈褌械 褋懈 薪械 薪褟泻邪泻 芯褌胁谢械褔械薪芯 芯褌 懈褋褌芯褉懈褔械褋泻懈褟 泻芯薪褌械泻褋褌, 邪 谐懈 锌褉械写褋褌邪胁褟 泻邪褌芯 锌褉芯写褍泻褌 懈 锌褉芯写褗谢卸械薪懈械 薪邪 褍胁谢懈褔邪褖懈褌械 褋芯褑懈邪谢薪懈 褌械褔械薪懈褟 懈 胁 泻芯薪褌褉邪褋褌 褋 褉械邪泻褑懈芯薪薪懈褌械 胁褗蟹谐谢械写懈. 袨褋芯斜械薪芯 芯褋褌褉芯 锌邪褉胁邪 褋邪褉泻邪蟹屑褗褌 屑褍 锌芯 锌芯胁芯写 薪邪 鈥炐狙€懈谐懈薪邪谢薪懈褔械薪械褌芯鈥� 懈 褌懈锌懈褔薪懈褟 懈 写芯 写薪械褋 胁褗蟹谐谢械写 薪邪 褔芯胁械泻邪, 褔械 蟹邪 写邪 褍褋锌械械褕 胁 卸懈胁芯褌邪, 褌褉褟斜胁邪 写邪 褋懈 泻芯谢泻芯褌芯 褋械 屑芯卸械 锌芯-泻芯薪褎芯褉屑懈褋褌泻懈 薪邪褋褌褉芯械薪. 袣邪褌芯 胁褋懈褔泻懈 芯褋褌邪薪邪谢懈 胁 褋褌邪写芯褌芯. 袙褋褗褖薪芯褋褌 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 褔械褋褌芯 锌褉懈褕懈胁邪 芯斜褉褗褖械薪懈械褌芯 鈥炐感葱感狙傗€� 泻褗屑 泻薪褟蟹 袦懈褕泻懈薪, 薪芯 锌芯蟹懈褑懈褟褌邪 屑褍 薪械 芯褋褌邪胁褟 褋褗屑薪械薪懈械 泻芯懈 褋邪 胁褋褗褖薪芯褋褌 懈褋褌懈薪褋泻懈褌械 懈写懈芯褌懈 胁 褉芯屑邪薪邪.
鈥炐┬� 褋械 薪邪屑械褉懈 谢懈 薪邪锌褉懈屑械褉 屑邪泄泻邪, 泻芯褟褌芯 薪械卸薪芯 芯斜懈褔邪 写械褌械褌芯 褋懈, 写邪 薪械 褋械 懈蟹锌谢邪褕懈 懈 褉邪蟹斜芯谢械械 芯褌 褋褌褉邪褏, 邪泻芯 褋懈薪褗褌 懈谢懈 写褗褖械褉褟 褲 屑邪谢泻芯 懈蟹谢械蟹械 芯褌 褉械谢褋懈褌械? 鈥炐澬�, 薪懈泻邪泻胁邪 芯褉懈谐懈薪邪谢薪芯褋褌, 薪械泻邪 锌芯-写芯斜褉械 斜褗写械 褖邪褋褌谢懈胁芯 懈 卸懈胁械械 胁 芯褏芯谢褋褌胁芯鈥� 鈥� 屑懈褋谢懈 胁褋褟泻邪 屑邪泄泻邪, 泻芯谐邪褌芯 锌褉懈褋锌懈胁邪 写械褌械褌芯 褋懈.鈥�
鈥炩€� 懈蟹胁械褋褌薪邪 褍屑褋褌胁械薪邪 褌褗锌芯褌邪 械 泻邪褌芯 褔械 谢懈 锌芯褔褌懈 薪械芯斜褏芯写懈屑芯 泻邪褔械褋褌胁芯 邪泻芯 薪械 蟹邪 胁褋械泻懈 写械谢芯胁懈 褔芯胁械泻, 褌芯 锌芯薪械 蟹邪 胁褋械泻懈, 泻芯泄褌芯 褋械褉懈芯蟹薪芯 褋械 械 蟹邪械谢 写邪 褌褉褍锌邪 锌邪褉懈.鈥�
袧械 屑懈 褋械 褖械 写邪 薪懈褖褟 褋谢芯卸薪懈褌械 褏邪褉邪泻褌械褉懈 薪邪 袪芯谐芯卸懈薪, 袧邪褋褌邪褋懈褟 肖懈谢懈锌芯胁薪邪 懈谢懈 袗谐谢邪褟 懈 芯褌薪芯褕械薪懈褟褌邪 懈屑 褋 袦懈褕泻懈薪. 校 胁褋械泻懈 芯褌 褌褟褏 懈屑邪 锌芯胁械褔械 懈 锌芯-屑邪谢泻芯 斜械蟹褍屑懈械, 泻褗写械 芯褌 褋褌褉邪褋褌, 泻褗写械 芯褌 褍薪懈蟹械薪芯 褔褍胁褋褌胁芯 蟹邪 写芯褋褌芯泄薪褋褌胁芯 懈谢懈 锌褗泻 锌褉芯褋褌芯 芯褌 屑谢邪写芯褋褌. 袛芯褋褌芯械胁褋泻懈 薪械 写邪胁邪 芯褑械薪泻懈. 袩褉芯褋褌芯 芯锌懈褋胁邪 懈 薪邪斜谢褞写邪胁邪 褌械蟹懈 写械褑邪 薪邪 褌芯谐邪胁邪褕薪芯褌芯 芯斜褖械褋褌胁芯, 泻芯懈褌芯 懈屑邪褌 锌芯 械写懈薪 薪械胁懈写懈屑 泻谢褍锌 芯褌 褔芯胁械褕泻懈 褋谢邪斜芯褋褌懈 芯泻芯谢芯 褕懈褟褌邪 懈 褌芯泄 谐懈 写褍褕懈 谢懈, 写褍褕懈. 袧邪斜谢褞写邪胁邪 谐懈 懈 袦懈褕泻懈薪 懈 褋褌褉邪写邪 蟹邪 褌褟褏 懈 蟹邪械写薪芯 褋 褌褟褏 锌芯 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 褔芯胁械褕泻懈 薪邪褔懈薪.
September 15, 2020
螆谓伪 慰位蠈魏位畏蟻慰 谓苇慰 蟽蠉渭蟺伪谓 慰蟻委味蔚喂 慰 螡蟿慰蟽蟿慰纬喂苇蠁蟽魏喂 蟽蟿慰谓 ''螚位委胃喂慰'', 蠄蠀蠂慰纬蟻伪蠁蠋谓蟿伪蟼 位蔚蟺蟿慰渭蔚蟻蠋蟼 魏维胃蔚 蟺蟻蠈蟽蠅蟺慰, 渭蔚 未蠀谓伪蟿蠈 蟿慰蠀 蠈蟺位慰 蟿畏谓 蟽蟿蟻蠅蟿萎 纬位蠋蟽蟽伪, 蟿畏谓 伪蠁畏纬畏渭伪蟿喂魏萎 蟿慰蠀 未蔚喂谓蠈蟿畏蟿伪 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 喂魏伪谓蠈蟿畏蟿维 蟿慰蠀 谓伪 魏伪蟿伪谓慰蔚委 蟿畏谓 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺喂谓畏 蠁蠉蟽畏.
螠慰谓伪未喂魏维 慰位慰魏位畏蟻蠅渭苇谓慰喂 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻蔚蟼 蟺慰蠀 蟺蟻慰蟽蔚纬纬委味慰谓蟿伪喂 蟽蠁伪喂蟻喂魏维 魏伪喂 蟺慰蠀 慰 魏伪胃苇谓伪蟼 苇蠂蔚喂 蟿伪 魏伪位维 魏伪喂 蟿伪 魏伪魏维 蟿慰蠀, 蟿伪 蟺维胃畏 魏伪喂 蟿伪 位维胃畏 蟿慰蠀, 蟿喂蟼 伪渭伪蟻蟿委蔚蟼 魏伪喂 蟿喂蟼 伪未蠀谓伪渭委蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀 鈥�
螌位伪 伪蠀蟿维, 蟿伪 魏慰蠀尾伪位维蔚喂 蟽蟿喂蟼 蟺位维蟿蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀, 渭伪蟿蠋谓蔚喂 纬喂伪 伪蠀蟿维 (蠅蟼 维位位慰蟼 围蟻喂蟽蟿蠈蟼) 魏伪喂 蟿伪 蔚尉伪纬谓委味蔚喂 畏 魏伪位慰蟽蠀谓维蟿畏 渭慰蟻蠁萎 蟿慰蠀 螤蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪 螠喂蟽魏喂谓, 蟺慰蠀 伪纬伪蟺维蔚喂 伪谓喂未喂慰蟿蔚位蠋蟼, 蟽蠀纬蠂蠅蟻维蔚喂 伪谓蠀蟽蟿蔚蟻蠈尾慰蠀位伪 魏伪喂 蔚委谓伪喂 伪蟺伪位位伪纬渭苇谓慰蟼 伪蟺蠈 魏维胃蔚 蔚纬蠅喂蟽渭蠈 魏伪喂 渭喂魏蟻慰蟺蟻苇蟺蔚喂伪. 螆蠂蔚喂 魏伪蟻未喂维 渭喂魏蟻慰蠉 蟺伪喂未喂慰蠉, 纬喂伪 伪蠀蟿蠈 魏伪喂 位慰纬委味蔚蟿伪喂 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 蟽蟿慰谓 ''蟺蔚蠁蠅蟿喂蟽渭苇谓慰'' 魏蠈蟽渭慰 蟿蠅谓 蔚谓畏位委魏蠅谓.
鈥樷€櫸懴� 渭畏谓 尉蔚蠂谓维渭蔚 蟺蠅蟼 慰喂 伪喂蟿委蔚蟼 蟿蠅谓 蟺蟻维尉蔚蠅谓 蟿蠅谓 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺蠅谓 蔚委谓伪喂 蟽蠀谓萎胃蠅蟼 蟺慰位蠉 蟺喂慰 蟺慰位蠉蟺位慰魏蔚蟼 魏伪喂 蟺慰喂魏委位蔚蟼 伪蟺鈥� 蠈蟿喂 蟿喂蟼 蔚尉畏纬慰蠉渭蔚 蔚渭蔚委蟼 蔚魏 蟿蠅谓 蠀蟽蟿苇蟻蠅谓, 魏伪喂 蟽蟺维谓喂伪 未喂伪纬蟻维蠁慰谓蟿伪喂 渭蔚 蟽伪蠁萎谓蔚喂伪鈥欌€�.
螣 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 苇蠂蔚喂 未蠋蟽蔚喂 蟽蟿慰谓 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪 螠喂蟽魏喂谓 蟺慰位位维 未喂魏维 蟿慰蠀, 伪蠀蟿慰尾喂慰纬蟻伪蠁喂魏维 蟽蟿慰喂蠂蔚委伪: 蟿畏谓 蔚蟺喂位畏蠄委伪 伪蟺鈥� 蟿畏谓 慰蟺慰委伪 魏伪喂 慰 委未喂慰蟼 苇蟺伪蟽蠂蔚, 蟺慰位喂蟿喂魏苇蟼, 魏慰喂谓蠅谓喂魏苇蟼 魏伪喂 胃蟻畏蟽魏蔚蠀蟿喂魏苇蟼 伪蟺蠈蠄蔚喂蟼, 伪位位维 魏伪喂 蔚渭蟺蔚喂蟻委蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀, 蠈蟺蠅蟼 纬喂伪 蟺伪蟻维未蔚喂纬渭伪 蟿慰谓 蟺委谓伪魏伪 蟿慰蠀 围慰位渭蟺维喂谓 蟺慰蠀 蠈谓蟿蠅蟼 慰 螡蟿慰蟽蟿慰纬喂苇蠁蟽魏喂 蔚委蠂蔚 未蔚喂 魏伪喂 蠈谓蟿蠅蟼 蟿慰谓 蔚委蠂蔚 蟿蠈蟽慰 蟽蠀纬魏位慰谓委蟽蔚喂. 螇 蠈蟺蠅蟼 蠈蟿伪谓 蔚委蠂蔚 魏伪蟿伪未喂魏伪蟽蟿蔚委 蟽蔚 胃维谓伪蟿慰 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 蟿蔚位蔚蠀蟿伪委伪 蟽蟿喂纬渭萎 蟿慰蠀 未蠈胃畏魏蔚 蠂维蟻畏. 危蟿喂蟼 蟽蔚位委未蔚蟼 33 - 35, 苇谓伪 伪蟺蠈 蟿伪 位伪蟿蟻蔚渭苇谓伪 渭慰蠀 蟽畏渭蔚委伪, 蠈蟺慰蠀 慰 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 未喂伪蟿蠀蟺蠋谓蔚喂 蟿畏谓 维蟺慰蠄萎 蟿慰蠀 纬喂伪 蟿畏 胃伪谓伪蟿喂魏萎 蟺慰喂谓萎 蟺蔚蟻喂纬蟻维蠁慰谓蟿伪蟼 蟺蠈蟽慰 蠄蠀蠂慰蠁胃蠈蟻慰蟼, 蟽魏位畏蟻蠈蟼 魏伪喂 伪蟺维谓胃蟻蠅蟺慰蟼 蔚委谓伪喂 慰 胃维谓伪蟿慰蟼 蠈蟿伪谓 蟿慰谓 蔚蟺喂蟽蠁蟻伪纬委味蔚喂 畏 渭畏 伪谓伪蟽蟿蟻蔚蠄喂渭蠈蟿畏蟿伪 渭喂伪蟼 未喂魏伪蟽蟿喂魏萎蟼 伪蟺蠈蠁伪蟽畏蟼.
危蔚 蟽蠀味萎蟿畏蟽畏 蟿慰蠀 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪 渭蔚 蟿慰谓 巍伪纬魏蠈味喂谓 蟺蔚蟻委 胃蟻畏蟽魏蔚委伪蟼:
鈥樷€� 螣 苇谓伪蟼 未蔚谓 蟺喂蟽蟿蔚蠉蔚喂 魏伪胃蠈位慰蠀 蟽蟿慰 螛蔚蠈 魏伪喂 慰 维位位慰蟼 韦慰谓 蟺喂蟽蟿蔚蠉蔚喂 蟿蠈蟽慰 蟺慰位蠉, 蟺慰蠀 伪魏蠈渭伪 魏伪喂 蟿慰蠀蟼 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀蟼 蟿慰蠀蟼 蟽蠁维味蔚喂 蟺蟻慰蟽蔚蠀蠂蠈渭蔚谓慰蟼鈥欌€� !!!
螁位位慰 蟿蟻慰渭蔚蟻蠈 蟽畏渭蔚委慰, 畏 蟽蠀谓慰渭喂位委伪 蟿慰蠀 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪 螠喂蟽魏喂谓 渭蔚 蟿慰谓 巍伪纬魏慰味喂谓, 蟽蟿慰 蟽蟺委蟿喂 蟿慰蠀 未蔚蠉蟿蔚蟻慰蠀, 魏维蟿蠅 伪蟺蠈 蟿慰谓 蟺委谓伪魏伪 蟿慰蠀 围慰位渭蟺维喂谓 蟺慰蠀 伪蟺蔚喂魏慰谓委味蔚喂 蟿畏谓 螒蟺慰魏伪胃萎位蠅蟽畏, 蠈蟺慰蠀 蟿慰 蟽蠋渭伪 魏伪喂 蟿慰 蟺蟻蠈蟽蠅蟺慰 蟿慰蠀 围蟻喂蟽蟿慰蠉 蟺伪蟻慰蠀蟽喂维味慰谓蟿伪喂 魏伪蟿伪尾伪蟽伪谓喂蟽渭苇谓伪. 螣 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪蟼 位苇蔚喂:
鈥樷€櫸溛� 伪蟺鈥� 伪蠀蟿蠈谓 蟿慰谓 蟺委谓伪魏伪 渭蟺慰蟻蔚委 谓伪 蠂维蟽蔚喂 魏伪谓蔚委蟼 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 蟺委蟽蟿畏 蟿慰蠀 伪魏蠈渭伪!鈥欌€�.
危魏苇蠄畏 蟺慰蠀 慰 螡蟿慰蟽蟿慰纬喂苇蠁蟽魏喂 慰位慰魏位畏蟻蠋谓蔚喂 蟺慰位蠉 伪蟻纬蠈蟿蔚蟻伪 蟽蟿慰 苇蟻纬慰 (蟽蔚位. 539), 蠈蟿伪谓 渭苇蟽伪 伪蟺蠈 蟿伪 位蠈纬喂伪 蟿慰蠀 螜蟺蟺慰位蠀蟿慰蠀 位苇蔚喂:
鈥樷€櫸懳� 蔚委谓伪喂 蟿蠈蟽慰 蠁蟻喂蠂蟿蠈蟼 慰 胃维谓伪蟿慰蟼 魏喂 伪谓 蔚委谓伪喂 蟿蠈蟽慰 喂蟽蠂蠀蟻慰委 慰喂 谓蠈渭慰喂 蟿畏蟼 蠁蠉蟽蔚蠅蟼, 蟺蠋蟼 胃伪 渭蟺慰蟻苇蟽蔚喂 魏伪谓蔚委蟼 谓伪 蟿慰蠀蟼 蠀蟺蔚蟻谓喂魏萎蟽蔚喂; 螤蠋蟼 谓伪 蟿慰蠀蟼 蠀蟺蔚蟻谓喂魏萎蟽蔚喂 蠈蟿伪谓 未蔚谓 蟿慰蠀蟼 谓委魏畏蟽蔚 伪魏蠈渭伪 魏伪喂 螘魏蔚委谓慰蟼 蟺慰蠀 畏 蠁蠉蟽畏 蠀蟺慰蟿伪蟽蟽蠈蟿伪谓 渭蟺蟻慰蟽蟿维 蟿慰蠀; 螘魏蔚委谓慰蟼 蟺慰蠀 蠁蠋谓伪尉蔚 鈥樷€櫸澪滴蔽轿兾何� 蔚纬苇蟻胃畏蟿喂!鈥欌€� 魏伪喂 慰 渭喂魏蟻蠈蟼 蟽畏魏蠋胃畏魏蔚; 螘魏蔚委谓慰蟼 蟺慰蠀 蔚委蟺蔚 鈥樷€櫸浳段毕佄�, 未蔚蠉蟻慰 苇尉蠅!鈥欌€�, 魏喂 伪谓伪蟽蟿萎胃畏魏蔚 慰 谓蔚魏蟻蠈蟼鈥欌€�.
韦喂 谓伪 蟺蔚喂 魏伪谓蔚委蟼 纬喂伪 蟿畏谓 伪蟺慰位慰纬委伪 蟿慰蠀 螜蟺蟺慰位蠀蟿慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟿伪 蠈蟽伪 位苇蔚喂 蟺蔚蟻委 螛蔚委伪蟼 螤蟻蠈谓慰喂伪蟼; 螕喂伪 渭苇谓伪 苇谓伪蟼 伪蟺鈥� 蟿慰蠀蟼 蟺喂慰 蔚谓未喂伪蠁苇蟻慰谓蟿蔚蟼 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀 苇蟻纬慰蠀. 螤蠋蟼 伪谓蟿喂未蟻维, 蟿喂 蟽魏苇蠁蟿蔚蟿伪喂, 蟿喂 伪喂蟽胃维谓蔚蟿伪喂 苇谓伪蟼 维谓胃蟻蠅蟺慰蟼 蟺慰蠀 纬谓蠅蟻委味蔚喂 蟺蠅蟼 蟽蠉谓蟿慰渭伪 胃伪 蟺蔚胃维谓蔚喂;
鈥樷€櫸� 蠁蠉蟽畏 苇蠂蔚喂 蟺蔚蟻喂慰蟻委蟽蔚喂 蟽蔚 蟿苇蟿慰喂慰 尾伪胃渭蠈 蟿畏 未蟻伪蟽蟿畏蟻喂蠈蟿畏蟿维 渭慰蠀 渭蔚 蟿喂蟼 蟿蟻蔚委蟼 蔚尾未慰渭维未蔚蟼 蟺慰蠀 渭慰蠀 未委谓蔚喂 蟺蟻慰胃蔚蟽渭委伪, 蠋蟽蟿蔚 畏 伪蠀蟿慰魏蟿慰谓委伪 蔚委谓伪喂 委蟽蠅蟼 蟿慰 渭蠈谓慰 苇蟻纬慰 蟺慰蠀 渭蟺慰蟻蠋 谓伪 蟺蟻慰位维尾蠅 谓鈥� 伪蟻蠂委蟽蠅 魏伪喂 谓伪 蟿蔚位蔚喂蠋蟽蠅 渭蔚 未喂魏萎 渭慰蠀 胃苇位畏蟽畏鈥欌€�.
螝伪喂 蠈位伪 伪蠀蟿维 纬喂伪 谓伪 苇蟻胃蔚喂 谓伪 蟽蔚 渭伪蟽蟿喂纬蠋蟽蔚喂 蟿慰 蔚蟺喂魏蠈 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟿苇位慰蟼鈥� 螠蠈谓慰 苇谓伪 蟿苇蟿慰喂慰 蟿苇位慰蟼 胃伪 维尉喂味蔚 蟽蔚 苇谓伪 蟿苇蟿慰喂慰 尾喂尾位委慰!
螘蟺委蟽畏蟼 伪纬维蟺畏蟽伪 蟿畏 螡伪蟽蟿维蟽喂伪 桅喂位委蟺蟺慰尾谓伪, 蠀蟺苇蟻慰蠂慰蟼 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻伪蟼 伪位畏胃喂谓萎蟼 纬蠀谓伪委魏伪蟼 魏伪喂 蠈蠂喂 魏慰蟻喂蟿蟽维魏喂 蟽伪谓 蟿畏谓 螒纬位伪螑伪. 螒蟺鈥� 蟿畏谓 维位位畏 蟺蠈谓蔚蟽伪 魏伪喂 蟽蠀渭蟺维胃畏蟽伪 蟺慰位蠉 魏伪喂 蟿慰谓 巍伪纬魏蠈味喂谓鈥�.
螔喂尾位委慰 纬喂伪 蟺慰位位苇蟼 伪谓伪纬谓蠋蟽蔚喂蟼, 纬喂伪 蟺慰位位萎 蠀蟺慰纬蟻维渭渭喂蟽畏, 纬喂伪 蟺慰位位苇蟼 蟽魏苇蠄蔚喂蟼 魏伪喂 蟽蠀味畏蟿萎蟽蔚喂蟼... 螘喂位喂魏蟻喂谓维 渭蔚纬伪位蔚喂蠋未蔚蟼!
螠慰谓伪未喂魏维 慰位慰魏位畏蟻蠅渭苇谓慰喂 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻蔚蟼 蟺慰蠀 蟺蟻慰蟽蔚纬纬委味慰谓蟿伪喂 蟽蠁伪喂蟻喂魏维 魏伪喂 蟺慰蠀 慰 魏伪胃苇谓伪蟼 苇蠂蔚喂 蟿伪 魏伪位维 魏伪喂 蟿伪 魏伪魏维 蟿慰蠀, 蟿伪 蟺维胃畏 魏伪喂 蟿伪 位维胃畏 蟿慰蠀, 蟿喂蟼 伪渭伪蟻蟿委蔚蟼 魏伪喂 蟿喂蟼 伪未蠀谓伪渭委蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀 鈥�
螌位伪 伪蠀蟿维, 蟿伪 魏慰蠀尾伪位维蔚喂 蟽蟿喂蟼 蟺位维蟿蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀, 渭伪蟿蠋谓蔚喂 纬喂伪 伪蠀蟿维 (蠅蟼 维位位慰蟼 围蟻喂蟽蟿蠈蟼) 魏伪喂 蟿伪 蔚尉伪纬谓委味蔚喂 畏 魏伪位慰蟽蠀谓维蟿畏 渭慰蟻蠁萎 蟿慰蠀 螤蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪 螠喂蟽魏喂谓, 蟺慰蠀 伪纬伪蟺维蔚喂 伪谓喂未喂慰蟿蔚位蠋蟼, 蟽蠀纬蠂蠅蟻维蔚喂 伪谓蠀蟽蟿蔚蟻蠈尾慰蠀位伪 魏伪喂 蔚委谓伪喂 伪蟺伪位位伪纬渭苇谓慰蟼 伪蟺蠈 魏维胃蔚 蔚纬蠅喂蟽渭蠈 魏伪喂 渭喂魏蟻慰蟺蟻苇蟺蔚喂伪. 螆蠂蔚喂 魏伪蟻未喂维 渭喂魏蟻慰蠉 蟺伪喂未喂慰蠉, 纬喂伪 伪蠀蟿蠈 魏伪喂 位慰纬委味蔚蟿伪喂 畏位委胃喂慰蟼 蟽蟿慰谓 ''蟺蔚蠁蠅蟿喂蟽渭苇谓慰'' 魏蠈蟽渭慰 蟿蠅谓 蔚谓畏位委魏蠅谓.
鈥樷€櫸懴� 渭畏谓 尉蔚蠂谓维渭蔚 蟺蠅蟼 慰喂 伪喂蟿委蔚蟼 蟿蠅谓 蟺蟻维尉蔚蠅谓 蟿蠅谓 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺蠅谓 蔚委谓伪喂 蟽蠀谓萎胃蠅蟼 蟺慰位蠉 蟺喂慰 蟺慰位蠉蟺位慰魏蔚蟼 魏伪喂 蟺慰喂魏委位蔚蟼 伪蟺鈥� 蠈蟿喂 蟿喂蟼 蔚尉畏纬慰蠉渭蔚 蔚渭蔚委蟼 蔚魏 蟿蠅谓 蠀蟽蟿苇蟻蠅谓, 魏伪喂 蟽蟺维谓喂伪 未喂伪纬蟻维蠁慰谓蟿伪喂 渭蔚 蟽伪蠁萎谓蔚喂伪鈥欌€�.
螣 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 苇蠂蔚喂 未蠋蟽蔚喂 蟽蟿慰谓 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪 螠喂蟽魏喂谓 蟺慰位位维 未喂魏维 蟿慰蠀, 伪蠀蟿慰尾喂慰纬蟻伪蠁喂魏维 蟽蟿慰喂蠂蔚委伪: 蟿畏谓 蔚蟺喂位畏蠄委伪 伪蟺鈥� 蟿畏谓 慰蟺慰委伪 魏伪喂 慰 委未喂慰蟼 苇蟺伪蟽蠂蔚, 蟺慰位喂蟿喂魏苇蟼, 魏慰喂谓蠅谓喂魏苇蟼 魏伪喂 胃蟻畏蟽魏蔚蠀蟿喂魏苇蟼 伪蟺蠈蠄蔚喂蟼, 伪位位维 魏伪喂 蔚渭蟺蔚喂蟻委蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀, 蠈蟺蠅蟼 纬喂伪 蟺伪蟻维未蔚喂纬渭伪 蟿慰谓 蟺委谓伪魏伪 蟿慰蠀 围慰位渭蟺维喂谓 蟺慰蠀 蠈谓蟿蠅蟼 慰 螡蟿慰蟽蟿慰纬喂苇蠁蟽魏喂 蔚委蠂蔚 未蔚喂 魏伪喂 蠈谓蟿蠅蟼 蟿慰谓 蔚委蠂蔚 蟿蠈蟽慰 蟽蠀纬魏位慰谓委蟽蔚喂. 螇 蠈蟺蠅蟼 蠈蟿伪谓 蔚委蠂蔚 魏伪蟿伪未喂魏伪蟽蟿蔚委 蟽蔚 胃维谓伪蟿慰 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 蟿蔚位蔚蠀蟿伪委伪 蟽蟿喂纬渭萎 蟿慰蠀 未蠈胃畏魏蔚 蠂维蟻畏. 危蟿喂蟼 蟽蔚位委未蔚蟼 33 - 35, 苇谓伪 伪蟺蠈 蟿伪 位伪蟿蟻蔚渭苇谓伪 渭慰蠀 蟽畏渭蔚委伪, 蠈蟺慰蠀 慰 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 未喂伪蟿蠀蟺蠋谓蔚喂 蟿畏谓 维蟺慰蠄萎 蟿慰蠀 纬喂伪 蟿畏 胃伪谓伪蟿喂魏萎 蟺慰喂谓萎 蟺蔚蟻喂纬蟻维蠁慰谓蟿伪蟼 蟺蠈蟽慰 蠄蠀蠂慰蠁胃蠈蟻慰蟼, 蟽魏位畏蟻蠈蟼 魏伪喂 伪蟺维谓胃蟻蠅蟺慰蟼 蔚委谓伪喂 慰 胃维谓伪蟿慰蟼 蠈蟿伪谓 蟿慰谓 蔚蟺喂蟽蠁蟻伪纬委味蔚喂 畏 渭畏 伪谓伪蟽蟿蟻蔚蠄喂渭蠈蟿畏蟿伪 渭喂伪蟼 未喂魏伪蟽蟿喂魏萎蟼 伪蟺蠈蠁伪蟽畏蟼.
危蔚 蟽蠀味萎蟿畏蟽畏 蟿慰蠀 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪 渭蔚 蟿慰谓 巍伪纬魏蠈味喂谓 蟺蔚蟻委 胃蟻畏蟽魏蔚委伪蟼:
鈥樷€� 螣 苇谓伪蟼 未蔚谓 蟺喂蟽蟿蔚蠉蔚喂 魏伪胃蠈位慰蠀 蟽蟿慰 螛蔚蠈 魏伪喂 慰 维位位慰蟼 韦慰谓 蟺喂蟽蟿蔚蠉蔚喂 蟿蠈蟽慰 蟺慰位蠉, 蟺慰蠀 伪魏蠈渭伪 魏伪喂 蟿慰蠀蟼 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀蟼 蟿慰蠀蟼 蟽蠁维味蔚喂 蟺蟻慰蟽蔚蠀蠂蠈渭蔚谓慰蟼鈥欌€� !!!
螁位位慰 蟿蟻慰渭蔚蟻蠈 蟽畏渭蔚委慰, 畏 蟽蠀谓慰渭喂位委伪 蟿慰蠀 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪 螠喂蟽魏喂谓 渭蔚 蟿慰谓 巍伪纬魏慰味喂谓, 蟽蟿慰 蟽蟺委蟿喂 蟿慰蠀 未蔚蠉蟿蔚蟻慰蠀, 魏维蟿蠅 伪蟺蠈 蟿慰谓 蟺委谓伪魏伪 蟿慰蠀 围慰位渭蟺维喂谓 蟺慰蠀 伪蟺蔚喂魏慰谓委味蔚喂 蟿畏谓 螒蟺慰魏伪胃萎位蠅蟽畏, 蠈蟺慰蠀 蟿慰 蟽蠋渭伪 魏伪喂 蟿慰 蟺蟻蠈蟽蠅蟺慰 蟿慰蠀 围蟻喂蟽蟿慰蠉 蟺伪蟻慰蠀蟽喂维味慰谓蟿伪喂 魏伪蟿伪尾伪蟽伪谓喂蟽渭苇谓伪. 螣 蟺蟻委纬魏喂蟺伪蟼 位苇蔚喂:
鈥樷€櫸溛� 伪蟺鈥� 伪蠀蟿蠈谓 蟿慰谓 蟺委谓伪魏伪 渭蟺慰蟻蔚委 谓伪 蠂维蟽蔚喂 魏伪谓蔚委蟼 魏伪喂 蟿畏谓 蟺委蟽蟿畏 蟿慰蠀 伪魏蠈渭伪!鈥欌€�.
危魏苇蠄畏 蟺慰蠀 慰 螡蟿慰蟽蟿慰纬喂苇蠁蟽魏喂 慰位慰魏位畏蟻蠋谓蔚喂 蟺慰位蠉 伪蟻纬蠈蟿蔚蟻伪 蟽蟿慰 苇蟻纬慰 (蟽蔚位. 539), 蠈蟿伪谓 渭苇蟽伪 伪蟺蠈 蟿伪 位蠈纬喂伪 蟿慰蠀 螜蟺蟺慰位蠀蟿慰蠀 位苇蔚喂:
鈥樷€櫸懳� 蔚委谓伪喂 蟿蠈蟽慰 蠁蟻喂蠂蟿蠈蟼 慰 胃维谓伪蟿慰蟼 魏喂 伪谓 蔚委谓伪喂 蟿蠈蟽慰 喂蟽蠂蠀蟻慰委 慰喂 谓蠈渭慰喂 蟿畏蟼 蠁蠉蟽蔚蠅蟼, 蟺蠋蟼 胃伪 渭蟺慰蟻苇蟽蔚喂 魏伪谓蔚委蟼 谓伪 蟿慰蠀蟼 蠀蟺蔚蟻谓喂魏萎蟽蔚喂; 螤蠋蟼 谓伪 蟿慰蠀蟼 蠀蟺蔚蟻谓喂魏萎蟽蔚喂 蠈蟿伪谓 未蔚谓 蟿慰蠀蟼 谓委魏畏蟽蔚 伪魏蠈渭伪 魏伪喂 螘魏蔚委谓慰蟼 蟺慰蠀 畏 蠁蠉蟽畏 蠀蟺慰蟿伪蟽蟽蠈蟿伪谓 渭蟺蟻慰蟽蟿维 蟿慰蠀; 螘魏蔚委谓慰蟼 蟺慰蠀 蠁蠋谓伪尉蔚 鈥樷€櫸澪滴蔽轿兾何� 蔚纬苇蟻胃畏蟿喂!鈥欌€� 魏伪喂 慰 渭喂魏蟻蠈蟼 蟽畏魏蠋胃畏魏蔚; 螘魏蔚委谓慰蟼 蟺慰蠀 蔚委蟺蔚 鈥樷€櫸浳段毕佄�, 未蔚蠉蟻慰 苇尉蠅!鈥欌€�, 魏喂 伪谓伪蟽蟿萎胃畏魏蔚 慰 谓蔚魏蟻蠈蟼鈥欌€�.
韦喂 谓伪 蟺蔚喂 魏伪谓蔚委蟼 纬喂伪 蟿畏谓 伪蟺慰位慰纬委伪 蟿慰蠀 螜蟺蟺慰位蠀蟿慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟿伪 蠈蟽伪 位苇蔚喂 蟺蔚蟻委 螛蔚委伪蟼 螤蟻蠈谓慰喂伪蟼; 螕喂伪 渭苇谓伪 苇谓伪蟼 伪蟺鈥� 蟿慰蠀蟼 蟺喂慰 蔚谓未喂伪蠁苇蟻慰谓蟿蔚蟼 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻蔚蟼 蟿慰蠀 苇蟻纬慰蠀. 螤蠋蟼 伪谓蟿喂未蟻维, 蟿喂 蟽魏苇蠁蟿蔚蟿伪喂, 蟿喂 伪喂蟽胃维谓蔚蟿伪喂 苇谓伪蟼 维谓胃蟻蠅蟺慰蟼 蟺慰蠀 纬谓蠅蟻委味蔚喂 蟺蠅蟼 蟽蠉谓蟿慰渭伪 胃伪 蟺蔚胃维谓蔚喂;
鈥樷€櫸� 蠁蠉蟽畏 苇蠂蔚喂 蟺蔚蟻喂慰蟻委蟽蔚喂 蟽蔚 蟿苇蟿慰喂慰 尾伪胃渭蠈 蟿畏 未蟻伪蟽蟿畏蟻喂蠈蟿畏蟿维 渭慰蠀 渭蔚 蟿喂蟼 蟿蟻蔚委蟼 蔚尾未慰渭维未蔚蟼 蟺慰蠀 渭慰蠀 未委谓蔚喂 蟺蟻慰胃蔚蟽渭委伪, 蠋蟽蟿蔚 畏 伪蠀蟿慰魏蟿慰谓委伪 蔚委谓伪喂 委蟽蠅蟼 蟿慰 渭蠈谓慰 苇蟻纬慰 蟺慰蠀 渭蟺慰蟻蠋 谓伪 蟺蟻慰位维尾蠅 谓鈥� 伪蟻蠂委蟽蠅 魏伪喂 谓伪 蟿蔚位蔚喂蠋蟽蠅 渭蔚 未喂魏萎 渭慰蠀 胃苇位畏蟽畏鈥欌€�.
螝伪喂 蠈位伪 伪蠀蟿维 纬喂伪 谓伪 苇蟻胃蔚喂 谓伪 蟽蔚 渭伪蟽蟿喂纬蠋蟽蔚喂 蟿慰 蔚蟺喂魏蠈 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟿苇位慰蟼鈥� 螠蠈谓慰 苇谓伪 蟿苇蟿慰喂慰 蟿苇位慰蟼 胃伪 维尉喂味蔚 蟽蔚 苇谓伪 蟿苇蟿慰喂慰 尾喂尾位委慰!
螘蟺委蟽畏蟼 伪纬维蟺畏蟽伪 蟿畏 螡伪蟽蟿维蟽喂伪 桅喂位委蟺蟺慰尾谓伪, 蠀蟺苇蟻慰蠂慰蟼 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻伪蟼 伪位畏胃喂谓萎蟼 纬蠀谓伪委魏伪蟼 魏伪喂 蠈蠂喂 魏慰蟻喂蟿蟽维魏喂 蟽伪谓 蟿畏谓 螒纬位伪螑伪. 螒蟺鈥� 蟿畏谓 维位位畏 蟺蠈谓蔚蟽伪 魏伪喂 蟽蠀渭蟺维胃畏蟽伪 蟺慰位蠉 魏伪喂 蟿慰谓 巍伪纬魏蠈味喂谓鈥�.
螔喂尾位委慰 纬喂伪 蟺慰位位苇蟼 伪谓伪纬谓蠋蟽蔚喂蟼, 纬喂伪 蟺慰位位萎 蠀蟺慰纬蟻维渭渭喂蟽畏, 纬喂伪 蟺慰位位苇蟼 蟽魏苇蠄蔚喂蟼 魏伪喂 蟽蠀味畏蟿萎蟽蔚喂蟼... 螘喂位喂魏蟻喂谓维 渭蔚纬伪位蔚喂蠋未蔚蟼!
March 3, 2024
卮丕蹖丿 倬蹖卮 丕夭 丕蹖賳 賴賲 丕卮丕乇賴 讴乇丿賴 亘丕卮賲貙 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 賳讴丕鬲蹖 讴賴 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 乇丕 亘賴 禺氐賵氐 丿乇 乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 亘賱賳丿卮貙 丿乇 賲蹖丕賳 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 丿蹖诏乇 賵 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 賴賲 毓氐乇 禺賵丿 (丕夭 噩賲賱賴 鬲賵賱爻鬲賵蹖) 亘乇噩爻鬲賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 鬲賵噩賴 夭蹖丕丿 丕賵 亘賴 乇賵丕賳 丌丿賲蹖 賵 賲爻丕卅賱 賮賱爻賮蹖 (賵 诏丕賴蹖 爻蹖丕爻蹖) 丕爻鬲.
诏丕賴蹖 賴賳诏丕賲 禺賵丕賳丿賳 讴鬲丕亘鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 -賵 亘賴 禺氐賵氐 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘- 亘賴 丕蹖賳 賮讴乇 賲蹖鈥屫з佖� 讴賴 卮丕蹖丿 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿乇 賳馗乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 氐乇賮丕賸 亘爻鬲乇蹖 亘乇丕蹖 丕乇丕卅賴鈥屰� 賳馗乇丕鬲 乇賵丕賳卮賳丕爻蹖- 賮賱爻賮蹖 丕賵 亘賵丿賴 丕爻鬲.(丕蹖賳 賮乇囟蹖賴 丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕賸 賳丕丿乇爻鬲 丕爻鬲!) 蹖毓賳蹖 诏丕賴蹖 丕賳诏丕乇 丕賴賲蹖鬲 丕蹖賳 賲爻丕卅賱 丕夭 禺賵丿賽 倬蹖乇賳诏 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 噩丕蹖 鬲毓噩亘 賳丿丕乇丿 讴賴 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賳馗乇蹖丕鬲 乇賵丕賳卮賳丕爻蹖 蹖丕 乇賵丕賳讴丕賵蹖 讴賴 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賵 丨鬲蹖 亘毓丿 丕夭 丕賵 賲卮賴賵乇 卮丿賴鈥屫з嗀� 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗁嗀� 丿乇 鬲賮爻蹖乇 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賵 乇賮鬲丕乇卮丕賳 亘賴 讴丕乇 乇賵賳丿.
毓賱丕賯賴鈥屰� 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 亘賴 乇賵丕賳 丌丿賲蹖貙 丨鬲蹖 亘賴 鬲賵氐蹖賮 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賴賲 讴卮蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 蹖毓賳蹖 噩丿丕蹖 丕夭 鬲賵氐蹖賮 賵蹖跇诏蹖鈥屬囏й� 馗丕賴乇蹖 讴賴 賲毓賲賵賱丕賸 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 乇賵爻 丿乇 丌賳 賲賴丕乇鬲 丿丕乇賳丿貙 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丕夭 賵蹖跇诏蹖鈥屬囏й� 乇賵丕賳卮賳丕禺鬲蹖 賴賲 丿乇 鬲賵氐蹖賮 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏� 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�. 賲孬賱丕賸 亘賴 丕蹖賳 鬲賵氐蹖賮 爻丕丿賴 賵 讴賵鬲丕賴 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賳诏丕賴 讴賳蹖丿:
丕夭 賲爻丕卅賱 賮賱爻賮蹖 丿乇 乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賳亘丕蹖丿 睾丕賮賱 卮丿. 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賲毓賲賵賱丕 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 乇丕 亘丕 蹖讴 蹖丕 趩賳丿 倬乇爻卮 賮賱爻賮蹖 蹖丕 丿賵 乇丕賴蹖 丕禺賱丕賯蹖 賲賵丕噩賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�. 賲孬賱丕 丿乇 芦噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲禄貙卮丕蹖丿 賲賴賲鬲乇蹖賳 倬乇爻卮賽 賮賱爻賮蹖 芦賲賮賴賵賲 毓丿丕賱鬲 賵 噩賳丕蹖鬲禄 亘丕卮丿貙 蹖丕 丿乇 芦賯賲丕乇亘丕夭禄 亘丕蹖丿 亘賴 芦賵爻賵爻賴鈥屰� 賯賲丕乇禄 鬲賵噩賴 讴乇丿.
毓賱丕賯賴鈥屰� 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘賴 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 丕夭 賲爻丕卅賱 乇賵丕賳卮賳丕禺鬲蹖貙 賮賱爻賮蹖貙 丕禺賱丕賯蹖貙 賵 爻蹖丕爻蹖 丿乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 賲孬賱 卮賲卮蹖乇 丿賵 賱亘賴 丕爻鬲. 丕賮乇丕胤 丿乇 趩賳蹖賳 讴丕乇蹖 亘丕毓孬 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 讴鬲丕亘 丕夭 丨丕賱鬲 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖賽 禺賵丿 禺丕乇噩 卮賵丿 賵 鬲亘丿蹖賱 卮賵丿 亘賴 讴鬲丕亘蹖 倬乇 丕夭 賳氐蹖丨鬲鈥屬囏й� 丕禺賱丕賯蹖 蹖丕 倬蹖趩蹖丿诏蹖鈥屬囏й� 賮賱爻賮蹖 讴賴 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 乇丕 禺爻鬲賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�. 亘爻蹖丕乇賳丿 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳蹖 讴賴 讴賵卮蹖丿賴鈥屫з嗀� 丕夭 趩賳蹖賳 乇賵卮蹖 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 禺賵丿 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 讴賳賳丿 賵 亘賴 賲賵賮賯蹖鬲 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丿爻鬲 賳蹖丕賮鬲賴鈥屫з嗀�. 丿乇 賵丕賯毓 丕蹖賳 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 賴賳乇賴丕蹖 亘夭乇诏 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 鬲賵丕賳爻鬲賴 丿乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й屫� 丕蹖賳 鬲毓丕丿賱 丿賱賳卮蹖賳 乇丕 亘蹖賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賵 倬蹖丕賲鈥屬囏й� 睾蹖乇丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖貙 亘乇賯乇丕乇 讴賳丿.
賴賲賴鈥屰� 丕蹖賳鈥屬囏� 乇丕 诏賮鬲賲 讴賴 亘賴 丕蹖賳噩丕 亘乇爻賲 讴賴 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 賲賵賮賯鈥屫臂屬� 乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丌賳鈥屬囏й屰屸€屫з嗀� 讴賴 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 鬲賵丕賳爻鬲賴 丕蹖賳 鬲毓丕丿賱 乇丕 亘賴 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 卮蹖賵賴 倬蹖丕丿賴 讴賳丿: 鬲毓丕丿賱蹖 亘蹖賳 蹖讴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賽 噩匕丕亘 賵 禺賵丕賳丿賳蹖 賵 毓賲賯賽 乇賵丕賳卮賳丕禺鬲蹖-賮賱爻賮蹖.
亘賴 賴乇丨丕賱貙 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 丕蹖賳 鬲毓丕丿賱 丿乇 芦丕亘賱赖禄 丿乇 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 丨丕賱鬲賽 賲賲讴賳 賳蹖爻鬲.
倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳 丿乇 賯丕賲鬲 丕亘賱赖
丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賲丕 亘丕 噩丕賲毓賴鈥屫й� 賮丕爻丿 賵 丿乇 丨丕賱 爻賯賵胤 賲賵丕噩賴蹖賲. 噩丕賲毓賴鈥屰� 乇賵爻蹖賴鈥屰� 賯乇賳 賳賵夭丿賴賲貙 丕夭 賳馗乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 诏乇賮鬲丕乇 丿乇 丕賲賵丕噩 胤賵賮丕賳蹖 賲丕鬲乇蹖丕賱蹖爻賲貙 丌鬲卅蹖爻賲 賵 賲丿乇賳蹖鬲賴.
噩丕賲毓賴鈥屫й� 讴賴 亘乇丕蹖 賲乇丿賲卮 丿乇賵睾貙 乇蹖丕 賵 丨蹖賱賴鈥屭臂� 毓丕丿蹖 卮丿賴貙 毓卮賯 亘丕 賴賵爻 丌賲蹖禺鬲賴貙 孬乇賵鬲鈥屫з嗀堌槽� 亘賴 賴乇 賯蹖賲鬲蹖貙 鬲亘丿蹖賱 亘賴 丕乇夭卮賽 丕氐賱蹖賽 夭賳丿诏蹖 卮丿賴 賵 丕賳诏丕乇 丿乇爻鬲讴丕乇蹖 亘賴 賮乇丕賲賵卮蹖 爻倬乇丿賴 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲.
胤亘蹖毓蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丿乇 趩賳蹖賳 噩丕賲毓賴鈥屫й� 芦爻丕丿賴鈥屫勠屄� 亘賴 芦爻丕丿賴鈥屬勝堌屄� 鬲毓亘蹖乇 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 芦乇丕爻鬲诏賵蹖蹖禄 賵 芦賲賴乇亘丕賳蹖禄 乇丕 芦丨賲丕賯鬲禄 賲蹖鈥屬嗀з呝嗀�.
賵 鬲毓噩亘蹖 賳丿丕乇丿 讴賴 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕氐賱蹖 賲丕貙 芦倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳禄 亘丕 讴蹖賮蹖鬲 賲爻蹖丨丕蹖蹖卮貙 讴賴 亘賴 鬲丕夭诏蹖 丕夭 禺丕乇噩 亘賴 噩丕賲毓賴鈥屰� 乇賵爻蹖賴 亘丕夭诏卮鬲賴 賵 氐丕賮 賵 爻丕丿賴鈥屫� 丕爻鬲貙 丕亘賱赖 賳丕賲蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丨鬲蹖 丕诏乇 丕夭 亘賯蹖賴 丿丕賳丕鬲乇 亘丕卮丿.
鬲氐賵蹖乇蹖 丕夭 蹖讴 夭賳丿诏丕賳蹖
亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘貙 賲孬賱 丿蹖诏乇 讴鬲丕亘鈥屬囏й屫� 丌賵乇丿賴貙 賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖 賵丕賯毓蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 蹖丕 鬲噩乇亘蹖丕鬲 卮禺氐蹖賽 丕賵爻鬲 蹖丕 賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖 讴賴 丕賵 禺賵丕賳丿賴 蹖丕 卮賳蹖丿賴.
賲孬賱丕賸 丌賵乇丿賴鈥屫з嗀� 讴賴 禺賵丿 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 亘賴 亘蹖賲丕乇蹖 氐乇毓 賲亘鬲賱丕 亘賵丿賴貙 卮亘蹖賴 亘賴 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳.
蹖丕 鬲噩乇亘賴鈥屫й� 讴賴 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳 丕夭 賲卮丕賴丿賴鈥屰� 蹖讴 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 賲丨讴賵賲 亘賴 丕毓丿丕賲 丕乇丕卅賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 鬲噩乇亘賴鈥屫й� 丕爻鬲 讴賴 禺賵丿賽 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 倬卮鬲 爻乇 诏匕丕卮鬲賴 丕爻鬲:
賳诏丕賴 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘賴 诏賳丕賴
诏乇趩賴 賮囟丕蹖 賲爻蹖丨蹖賽 丕乇鬲賵丿讴爻 丿乇 丌孬丕乇 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 乇賵爻貙 卮丕賲賱 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賵 鬲賵賱爻鬲賵蹖 賵噩賵丿 丿丕乇丿貙 丕賲丕 丿乇 丕蹖賳 賲蹖丕賳 鬲賮丕賵鬲鈥屬囏й� 馗乇蹖賮蹖 賴賲 丿蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 丿乇 賲賵乇丿 诏賳丕賴貙 亘賴 禺氐賵氐 诏賳丕賴鈥屬囏й屰� 賴賲趩賵賳 禺蹖丕賳鬲貙 乇賵丕亘胤 噩賳爻蹖 賳丕倬爻賳丿 丿乇 丌蹖蹖賳 賲爻蹖丨蹖貙 賵 乇賵爻倬蹖鈥屭臂屫� 鬲賵賱爻鬲賵蹖 趩賳蹖賳 诏賳丕賴鈥屬囏й屰� 乇丕 毓丕賲賱 爻賯賵胤 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀� (賲丕賳賳丿 丌賳丕 讴丕乇賳蹖賳丕) 賵 丌賳鈥屬囏� 乇丕 鬲賳亘蹖賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�.
丿乇 賲賯丕亘賱貙 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丿乇 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 丌孬丕乇卮 賲毓鬲賯丿 丕爻鬲 丕乇夭卮 丌丿賲蹖 賮乇丕鬲乇 丕夭 丌賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 亘丕 趩賳蹖賳 诏賳丕賴鈥屬囏й屰� 鬲亘丕賴 卮賵丿. 丕乇鬲讴丕亘 趩賳蹖賳 诏賳丕賴鈥屬囏й屰� 賲賲讴賳 丕爻鬲 賳鬲蹖噩賴鈥屰� 夭賳丿诏蹖 丿乇 卮乇丕蹖胤 丿卮賵丕乇 賲丨蹖胤蹖 亘丕卮丿 賵 賳亘丕蹖丿 丿乇 賲賵乇丿 趩賳蹖賳 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й屰� 賯囟丕賵鬲 讴乇丿. 乇丕賴賽 鬲賵亘賴 丿乇 丌孬丕乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賲毓賲賵賱丕賸 亘丕夭 丕爻鬲.
趩賳蹖賳 賵囟毓蹖鬲蹖 乇丕 丿乇 亘蹖卮鬲乇蹖賳 丨丕賱鬲 丿乇 芦噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲禄 丿乇 卮禺氐蹖鬲 芦爻賵賳蹖丕禄 丿蹖丿賴鈥屫й屬� 讴賴 诏乇趩賴 乇賵爻倬蹖 丕爻鬲貙 丕賲丕 鬲丕 丨丿 賯丿蹖爻 亘丕賱丕 賲蹖鈥屫辟堌� 賵 爻鬲丕蹖卮 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�.
丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賴賲 亘丕 芦賳丕爻鬲丕夭蹖丕 賮蹖賱蹖倬賵賵賳丕禄 賲賵丕噩賴蹖賲 讴賴 丿乇 賳賵噩賵丕賳蹖貙 賯乇亘丕賳蹖賽 賴賵爻乇丕賳蹖鈥屬囏й� 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 卮丿賴 賵 噩丕賲毓賴 亘賴 丕賵 賳诏丕賴賽 芦夭賳 亘丿讴丕乇禄 丿丕乇丿. 丿乇 丨丕賱蹖 讴賴 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕賵 乇丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з� 賲賳賮蹖 丿乇 賳馗乇 诏乇賮鬲 賵 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘賴 賲丕 賳卮丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫囏� 丕賵 丿乇 亘丕胤賳 丕賳爻丕賳 倬丕讴蹖 丕爻鬲(诏乇趩賴 毓丕賯亘鬲賽 禺賵卮蹖 賳丿丕乇丿):
亘丕夭 賴賲 丕蹖賳 毓卮賯 賴夭丕乇 乇賳诏
丿乇 芦丕亘賱赖禄 賲丕 丨丿丕賯賱 亘丕 爻賴 賳賵毓 毓卮賯 賳爻亘鬲 亘賴 賳丕爻鬲丕夭蹖丕 賲賵丕噩賴蹖賲:
鈥� 毓卮賯 丿乇賵睾蹖賳 亘丕 胤賲毓 丿爻鬲 蹖丕賮鬲賳 亘賴 孬乇賵鬲 賵 丕賮鬲禺丕乇 讴賴 丿乇 賯丕賱亘 卮禺氐蹖鬲 芦诏丕賳蹖丕禄 賳賲丕蹖卮 丿丕丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 爻乇丕賳噩丕賲 丌賳 鬲丨賯蹖乇 賵 倬賵趩蹖 丕爻鬲.
鈥� 毓卮賯 卮賴賵丕賳蹖 賵 睾乇蹖夭蹖賽 芦乇丕诏賵跇蹖賳禄 讴賴 亘丕毓孬 噩賳賵賳 賵 賳丕亘賵丿蹖 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�.
鈥� 毓卮賯 賲爻蹖丨蹖賽 乇丕爻鬲蹖賳 丿乇 賯丕賱亘 芦倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳禄. 亘禺卮蹖 丕夭 鬲賱丕卮鈥屬囏й� 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 亘乇丕蹖 賳賲丕蹖卮 夭蹖亘丕蹖蹖 賵 丕賴賲蹖鬲 丕蹖賳 賳賵毓 毓卮賯 丕爻鬲.
丕蹖乇丕丿丕鬲 賵 丕賳鬲賯丕丿丕鬲
丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 禺賵丿卮 丿乇 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 賳丕賲賴鈥屬囏й屫� 亘賴 丕蹖賳 賲賵囟賵毓 丕卮丕乇賴 讴乇丿賴 讴賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 乇丕 亘丕 毓噩賱賴 賳賵卮鬲賴 賵 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘蹖卮 丕夭 丨丿 丿乇 賴賲 倬蹖趩蹖丿賴 卮丿賴 賵 丿乇 亘毓囟蹖 噩丕賴丕 禺賵亘 丕夭 丌亘 丿乇賳蹖丕賲丿賴 丕爻鬲. 丕賵 賳賵卮鬲賴 丕夭 丕蹖丿賴鈥屰� 乇賲丕賳卮 丨賲丕蹖鬲 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 丕賲丕 丕夭 禺賵丿 乇賲丕賳 賳賴!
丕賵賱蹖賳 丕丨爻丕爻賽 賲賳 賴賲 亘毓丿 丕夭 禺賵丕賳丿賳 讴鬲丕亘 丿賯蹖賯丕賸 丕蹖賳 亘賵丿: 芦讴鬲丕亘蹖 讴賴 賲蹖鬲賵丕賳爻鬲 卮丕賴讴丕乇 亘丕卮丿. 讴丕卮 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 丕蹖丿賴鈥屬囏й� 丿乇禺卮丕賳卮 乇丕 亘賴鬲乇 倬蹖丕丿賴 讴乇丿賴 亘賵丿.禄
亘賴 乇丕爻鬲蹖 丕蹖丿賴鈥屬囏й� 丿乇禺卮丕賳 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 賵 賱丕蹖賴鈥屬囏й� 倬蹖趩蹖丿賴鈥屸€屰� 賮讴乇蹖貙 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 亘賴 丕孬乇蹖 卮诏賮鬲鈥屫з嗂屫� 鬲亘丿蹖賱 讴乇丿賴貙 丕賲丕 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 芦丕亘賱赖禄 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 丕孬乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賳蹖爻鬲 賵 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з� 丕夭 丕蹖乇丕丿丕鬲 丌賳 诏匕卮鬲:
鈥� 丕蹖乇丕丿 丕賵賱 丕蹖賳讴賴 賴賲趩賵賳 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 丌孬丕乇 讴賱丕爻蹖讴貙 讴鬲丕亘 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 丕蹖噩丕夭賽 賱丕夭賲 乇丕 賳丿丕乇丿 賵 夭蹖丕丿賴鈥屭堐屰� 丿丕乇丿. 丿乇 夭賲丕賳賴鈥屰� 倬乇爻乇毓鬲賽 賲丕貙 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 亘賴 乇丕丨鬲蹖 丿賵蹖爻鬲- 爻蹖氐丿 氐賮丨賴 乇丕 丕夭 丕蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 賴夭丕乇 氐賮丨賴鈥屫й� 丨匕賮 讴乇丿 賵 賲丿毓蹖 卮丿 亘賴 賲丨鬲賵丕 賵 倬蹖丕賲 讴鬲丕亘貙 賱胤賲賴鈥屫й� 賵丕乇丿 賳卮丿賴 丕爻鬲.
亘毓囟蹖 丕夭 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏� 賵 禺乇丿賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й屫簇з� 丕氐賱丕賸 賲毓賱賵賲 賳蹖爻鬲 趩賴 賳賯卮蹖 丿乇 賲爻蹖乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿丕乇賳丿 賵 亘丿賵賳 丌賳鈥屬囏� 賴賲 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 禺丕氐蹖 丿乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕蹖噩丕丿 賳賲蹖鈥屫簇�.
亘賴 賴賲蹖賳 丿賱蹖賱 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕诏乇趩賴 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿乇 丨丿 蹖讴 卮丕賴讴丕乇 丌睾丕夭 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 倬丕蹖丕賳蹖 丿乇禺卮丕賳 丿丕乇丿貙 賵賱蹖 丿乇 賲蹖丕賳賴鈥屰� 讴鬲丕亘貙 亘賴 禺丕胤乇 賴賲蹖賳 夭蹖丕丿賴鈥屭堐屰屸€屬囏ж� 丕賮鬲 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 丕夭 乇蹖鬲賲 賲蹖鈥屫з佖�.
鈥� 丕蹖乇丕丿 丿賵賲 丕蹖賳讴賴 丿乇 賲噩賲賵毓 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 芦丕亘賱赖禄 丕賳爻噩丕賲 亘毓囟蹖 丿蹖诏乇 丕夭 卮丕賴讴丕乇賴丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 乇丕 賳丿丕乇丿. 丿乇 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 丌孬丕乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖貙 賲丕 蹖讴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賽 丕氐賱蹖 蹖丕 蹖讴 賴爻鬲賴鈥屰� 賲乇讴夭蹖 丿丕乇蹖賲 讴賴 鬲賲丕賲 讴鬲丕亘 賵 禺乇丿賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й屫� 乇丕 亘賴 賴賲 賲乇鬲亘胤 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�. 丕蹖賳 賴爻鬲賴鈥屰� 賲乇讴夭蹖 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丿乇 芦噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲禄 亘賴 賯鬲賱 乇爻蹖丿賳 倬蹖乇夭賳 丿丕賳爻鬲 賵 丿乇 芦賯賲丕乇亘丕夭禄貙 丕賮鬲丕丿賳 丿乇 丿丕賲 賯賲丕乇.
丕賲丕 丿乇 芦丕亘賱赖禄 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗁� 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖 乇丕 亘賴 毓賳賵丕賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕氐賱蹖 賲毓乇賮蹖 讴賳賲貙 丿乇 賵丕賯毓 讴鬲丕亘 丕夭 禺乇丿賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й屰� 鬲卮讴蹖賱 卮丿賴 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丌賳鈥屬囏� 乇丕 丿乇 賲噩賲賵毓貙 芦賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳禄 賳丕賲蹖丿 賵 倬蹖乇賳诏賽 蹖诏丕賳賴 賵 賵丕囟丨蹖 賵噩賵丿 賳丿丕乇丿. 鬲毓丕丿賱蹖 讴賴 丿乇 丕亘鬲丿丕蹖 蹖丕丿丿丕卮鬲賲 丌賳 乇丕 賴賳乇 亘夭乇诏 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賳丕賲蹖丿賲貙 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 囟毓蹖賮鬲乇 丕爻鬲 賵 亘賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 讴賲蹖 丨丕賱鬲 賳氐蹖丨鬲鈥屭堎嗁� 丿丕丿賴 丕爻鬲.
***
倬蹖鈥属嗁堌簇�: 卮丕蹖丿 丿乇 丨丕賱 丨丕囟乇貙 乇賲丕賳鈥屬嗁堐屫驰� 賴賲趩賵賳 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 爻乇丕睾 賳丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮賲 讴賴 賴乇趩賴 乇丕噩毓 亘賴 丕賵 賵 讴鬲丕亘鈥屬囏й屫� 賲蹖鈥屬嗁堐屫迟呚� 丕丨爻丕爻 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 讴賲 丕爻鬲 賵 賴賳賵夭 丨賯 賲胤賱亘 丕丿丕 賳卮丿賴! 亘丕 丕蹖賳 丨丕賱 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賲胤丕賱亘賽 賳丕诏賮鬲賴 丿乇 亘賯蹖賴鈥屰� 乇蹖賵蹖賵賴丕 诏賮鬲賴 卮丿賴 賵 禺賵丿賽 讴鬲丕亘 賴賲 賳賯丿 禺賵亘蹖 丿乇 丕賳鬲賴丕 丿丕乇丿. 倬爻 丿蹖诏乇 亘爻 丕爻鬲!
诏丕賴蹖 賴賳诏丕賲 禺賵丕賳丿賳 讴鬲丕亘鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 -賵 亘賴 禺氐賵氐 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘- 亘賴 丕蹖賳 賮讴乇 賲蹖鈥屫з佖� 讴賴 卮丕蹖丿 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿乇 賳馗乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 氐乇賮丕賸 亘爻鬲乇蹖 亘乇丕蹖 丕乇丕卅賴鈥屰� 賳馗乇丕鬲 乇賵丕賳卮賳丕爻蹖- 賮賱爻賮蹖 丕賵 亘賵丿賴 丕爻鬲.(丕蹖賳 賮乇囟蹖賴 丕丨鬲賲丕賱丕賸 賳丕丿乇爻鬲 丕爻鬲!) 蹖毓賳蹖 诏丕賴蹖 丕賳诏丕乇 丕賴賲蹖鬲 丕蹖賳 賲爻丕卅賱 丕夭 禺賵丿賽 倬蹖乇賳诏 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 噩丕蹖 鬲毓噩亘 賳丿丕乇丿 讴賴 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賳馗乇蹖丕鬲 乇賵丕賳卮賳丕爻蹖 蹖丕 乇賵丕賳讴丕賵蹖 讴賴 丿乇 夭賲丕賳 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賵 丨鬲蹖 亘毓丿 丕夭 丕賵 賲卮賴賵乇 卮丿賴鈥屫з嗀� 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗁嗀� 丿乇 鬲賮爻蹖乇 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賵 乇賮鬲丕乇卮丕賳 亘賴 讴丕乇 乇賵賳丿.
毓賱丕賯賴鈥屰� 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 亘賴 乇賵丕賳 丌丿賲蹖貙 丨鬲蹖 亘賴 鬲賵氐蹖賮 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賴賲 讴卮蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 蹖毓賳蹖 噩丿丕蹖 丕夭 鬲賵氐蹖賮 賵蹖跇诏蹖鈥屬囏й� 馗丕賴乇蹖 讴賴 賲毓賲賵賱丕賸 亘蹖卮鬲乇 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 乇賵爻 丿乇 丌賳 賲賴丕乇鬲 丿丕乇賳丿貙 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丕夭 賵蹖跇诏蹖鈥屬囏й� 乇賵丕賳卮賳丕禺鬲蹖 賴賲 丿乇 鬲賵氐蹖賮 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏� 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�. 賲孬賱丕賸 亘賴 丕蹖賳 鬲賵氐蹖賮 爻丕丿賴 賵 讴賵鬲丕賴 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賳诏丕賴 讴賳蹖丿:
賳蹖賳丕 丕賱讴爻丕賳丿乇賵賵賳丕 夭賳蹖 鄣郯 爻丕賱賴 亘賴 賳馗乇 賲蹖鈥屫必驰屫� 讴賴 趩賴乇賴鈥屫й� 賱丕睾乇 賵 賳夭丕乇 丿丕卮鬲 賵 丨賱賯賴鈥屫й� 爻蹖丕賴 鬲蹖乇賴 丿賵乇 趩卮賲鈥屬囏й屫� 乇丕 賮乇丕 诏乇賮鬲賴 亘賵丿 賵 亘蹖賲丕乇 賵 丿乇丿賲賳丿 賲蹖鈥屬嗁呝堌�. 賵賱蹖 爻蹖賲丕 賵 賳诏丕賴 賳爻亘鬲丕賸 賲胤亘賵毓蹖 丿丕卮鬲. 丕夭 賴賲丕賳 丕賵賱蹖賳 讴賱賲丕鬲卮 倬蹖丿丕 亘賵丿 讴賴 夭賳蹖 噩丿蹖 賵 丨賯蹖賯鬲丕賸 賲丨鬲乇賲 丕爻鬲. 亘丕 賵噩賵丿 馗丕賴乇 丿乇丿賲賳丿卮 丕丨爻丕爻 賲蹖鈥屭┴必� 讴賴 乇兀蹖蹖 氐丕卅亘 賵 丕乇丕丿賴鈥屫й� 丕爻鬲賵丕乇 丿丕乇丿. 賱亘丕爻卮 亘爻蹖丕乇 爻丕丿賴 賵 賮賯蹖乇丕賳賴 賵 鬲蹖乇賴 乇賳诏 亘賵丿 賵 亘賴 鬲賳鈥屬举堌� 倬蹖乇夭賳丕賳 賲蹖鈥屬呚з嗀池� 丕賲丕 亘乇禺賵乇丿 賵 诏賮鬲丕乇 賵 亘賴 胤賵乇 讴賱蹖 乇賮鬲丕乇卮 丨讴丕蹖鬲 丕夭 丌賳 賲蹖鈥屭┴必� 讴賴 乇賵夭诏丕乇 亘賴鬲乇蹖 乇丕 賳蹖夭 丿蹖丿賴 丕爻鬲.
丕夭 賲爻丕卅賱 賮賱爻賮蹖 丿乇 乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賳亘丕蹖丿 睾丕賮賱 卮丿. 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賲毓賲賵賱丕 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 乇丕 亘丕 蹖讴 蹖丕 趩賳丿 倬乇爻卮 賮賱爻賮蹖 蹖丕 丿賵 乇丕賴蹖 丕禺賱丕賯蹖 賲賵丕噩賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�. 賲孬賱丕 丿乇 芦噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲禄貙卮丕蹖丿 賲賴賲鬲乇蹖賳 倬乇爻卮賽 賮賱爻賮蹖 芦賲賮賴賵賲 毓丿丕賱鬲 賵 噩賳丕蹖鬲禄 亘丕卮丿貙 蹖丕 丿乇 芦賯賲丕乇亘丕夭禄 亘丕蹖丿 亘賴 芦賵爻賵爻賴鈥屰� 賯賲丕乇禄 鬲賵噩賴 讴乇丿.
毓賱丕賯賴鈥屰� 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘賴 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 丕夭 賲爻丕卅賱 乇賵丕賳卮賳丕禺鬲蹖貙 賮賱爻賮蹖貙 丕禺賱丕賯蹖貙 賵 爻蹖丕爻蹖 丿乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 賲孬賱 卮賲卮蹖乇 丿賵 賱亘賴 丕爻鬲. 丕賮乇丕胤 丿乇 趩賳蹖賳 讴丕乇蹖 亘丕毓孬 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 讴鬲丕亘 丕夭 丨丕賱鬲 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖賽 禺賵丿 禺丕乇噩 卮賵丿 賵 鬲亘丿蹖賱 卮賵丿 亘賴 讴鬲丕亘蹖 倬乇 丕夭 賳氐蹖丨鬲鈥屬囏й� 丕禺賱丕賯蹖 蹖丕 倬蹖趩蹖丿诏蹖鈥屬囏й� 賮賱爻賮蹖 讴賴 禺賵丕賳賳丿賴 乇丕 禺爻鬲賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�. 亘爻蹖丕乇賳丿 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳蹖 讴賴 讴賵卮蹖丿賴鈥屫з嗀� 丕夭 趩賳蹖賳 乇賵卮蹖 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 禺賵丿 丕爻鬲賮丕丿賴 讴賳賳丿 賵 亘賴 賲賵賮賯蹖鬲 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丿爻鬲 賳蹖丕賮鬲賴鈥屫з嗀�. 丿乇 賵丕賯毓 丕蹖賳 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 賴賳乇賴丕蹖 亘夭乇诏 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 鬲賵丕賳爻鬲賴 丿乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й屫� 丕蹖賳 鬲毓丕丿賱 丿賱賳卮蹖賳 乇丕 亘蹖賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賵 倬蹖丕賲鈥屬囏й� 睾蹖乇丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖貙 亘乇賯乇丕乇 讴賳丿.
賴賲賴鈥屰� 丕蹖賳鈥屬囏� 乇丕 诏賮鬲賲 讴賴 亘賴 丕蹖賳噩丕 亘乇爻賲 讴賴 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 賲賵賮賯鈥屫臂屬� 乇賲丕賳鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丌賳鈥屬囏й屰屸€屫з嗀� 讴賴 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 鬲賵丕賳爻鬲賴 丕蹖賳 鬲毓丕丿賱 乇丕 亘賴 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 卮蹖賵賴 倬蹖丕丿賴 讴賳丿: 鬲毓丕丿賱蹖 亘蹖賳 蹖讴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賽 噩匕丕亘 賵 禺賵丕賳丿賳蹖 賵 毓賲賯賽 乇賵丕賳卮賳丕禺鬲蹖-賮賱爻賮蹖.
亘賴 賴乇丨丕賱貙 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 丕蹖賳 鬲毓丕丿賱 丿乇 芦丕亘賱赖禄 丿乇 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 丨丕賱鬲賽 賲賲讴賳 賳蹖爻鬲.
倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳 丿乇 賯丕賲鬲 丕亘賱赖
丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賲丕 亘丕 噩丕賲毓賴鈥屫й� 賮丕爻丿 賵 丿乇 丨丕賱 爻賯賵胤 賲賵丕噩賴蹖賲. 噩丕賲毓賴鈥屰� 乇賵爻蹖賴鈥屰� 賯乇賳 賳賵夭丿賴賲貙 丕夭 賳馗乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 诏乇賮鬲丕乇 丿乇 丕賲賵丕噩 胤賵賮丕賳蹖 賲丕鬲乇蹖丕賱蹖爻賲貙 丌鬲卅蹖爻賲 賵 賲丿乇賳蹖鬲賴.
噩丕賲毓賴鈥屫й� 讴賴 亘乇丕蹖 賲乇丿賲卮 丿乇賵睾貙 乇蹖丕 賵 丨蹖賱賴鈥屭臂� 毓丕丿蹖 卮丿賴貙 毓卮賯 亘丕 賴賵爻 丌賲蹖禺鬲賴貙 孬乇賵鬲鈥屫з嗀堌槽� 亘賴 賴乇 賯蹖賲鬲蹖貙 鬲亘丿蹖賱 亘賴 丕乇夭卮賽 丕氐賱蹖賽 夭賳丿诏蹖 卮丿賴 賵 丕賳诏丕乇 丿乇爻鬲讴丕乇蹖 亘賴 賮乇丕賲賵卮蹖 爻倬乇丿賴 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲.
胤亘蹖毓蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丿乇 趩賳蹖賳 噩丕賲毓賴鈥屫й� 芦爻丕丿賴鈥屫勠屄� 亘賴 芦爻丕丿賴鈥屬勝堌屄� 鬲毓亘蹖乇 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 芦乇丕爻鬲诏賵蹖蹖禄 賵 芦賲賴乇亘丕賳蹖禄 乇丕 芦丨賲丕賯鬲禄 賲蹖鈥屬嗀з呝嗀�.
賵 鬲毓噩亘蹖 賳丿丕乇丿 讴賴 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕氐賱蹖 賲丕貙 芦倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳禄 亘丕 讴蹖賮蹖鬲 賲爻蹖丨丕蹖蹖卮貙 讴賴 亘賴 鬲丕夭诏蹖 丕夭 禺丕乇噩 亘賴 噩丕賲毓賴鈥屰� 乇賵爻蹖賴 亘丕夭诏卮鬲賴 賵 氐丕賮 賵 爻丕丿賴鈥屫� 丕爻鬲貙 丕亘賱赖 賳丕賲蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丨鬲蹖 丕诏乇 丕夭 亘賯蹖賴 丿丕賳丕鬲乇 亘丕卮丿.
倬乇賳爻 賵丕賯毓丕賸 賴賵卮 賵 亘氐蹖乇鬲 賮賵賯鈥屫з勜关ж団€屫й� 丿丕乇丿 賵 賴賲賴 趩蹖夭 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屬佡囐呚� 亘丕 賵噩賵丿 賴賲賴鈥屰� 丕蹖賳鈥屬囏� 丕亘賱赖 丕爻鬲. 丿乇 丕蹖賳 賴蹖趩 鬲乇丿蹖丿蹖 賳蹖爻鬲.
鬲氐賵蹖乇蹖 丕夭 蹖讴 夭賳丿诏丕賳蹖
亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖蹖 讴賴 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘貙 賲孬賱 丿蹖诏乇 讴鬲丕亘鈥屬囏й屫� 丌賵乇丿賴貙 賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖 賵丕賯毓蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 蹖丕 鬲噩乇亘蹖丕鬲 卮禺氐蹖賽 丕賵爻鬲 蹖丕 賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖 讴賴 丕賵 禺賵丕賳丿賴 蹖丕 卮賳蹖丿賴.
賲孬賱丕賸 丌賵乇丿賴鈥屫з嗀� 讴賴 禺賵丿 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 亘賴 亘蹖賲丕乇蹖 氐乇毓 賲亘鬲賱丕 亘賵丿賴貙 卮亘蹖賴 亘賴 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳.
蹖丕 鬲噩乇亘賴鈥屫й� 讴賴 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳 丕夭 賲卮丕賴丿賴鈥屰� 蹖讴 夭賳丿丕賳蹖 賲丨讴賵賲 亘賴 丕毓丿丕賲 丕乇丕卅賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 鬲噩乇亘賴鈥屫й� 丕爻鬲 讴賴 禺賵丿賽 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 倬卮鬲 爻乇 诏匕丕卮鬲賴 丕爻鬲:
丕蹖賳 卮禺氐 蹖讴 亘丕乇 賴賲乇丕賴 賲丨讴賵賲丕賳 丿蹖诏乇蹖 亘賴 乇賵蹖 爻讴賵蹖 丕毓丿丕賲 乇賮鬲賴 亘賵丿 賵 丨讴賲 丕毓丿丕賲卮 乇丕 禺賵丕賳丿賴 亘賵丿賳丿 噩乇賲卮 爻蹖丕爻蹖 亘賵丿 賵 賯乇丕乇 亘賵丿 鬲蹖乇亘丕乇丕賳卮 讴賳賳丿. 鄄郯 丿賯蹖賯賴 亘毓丿 丨讴賲 蹖讴 丿乇噩賴 鬲禺賮蹖賮賽 賲噩丕夭丕鬲卮 乇丕 禺賵丕賳丿賳丿. 賵賱蹖 禺賵亘貙 丿乇 賮丕氐賱賴 賲蹖丕賳 賯乇丕卅鬲 丿賵 丨讴賲貙 蹖毓賳蹖 鄄郯 丿賯蹖賯賴 蹖丕 丿爻鬲 讴賲 乇亘毓 爻丕毓鬲貙 亘丕 丕蹖賳 蹖賯蹖賳 夭賳丿賴 亘賵丿 讴賴 趩賳丿 丿賯蹖賯賴鈥屰� 丿蹖诏乇 亘賴 賲乇诏蹖 賮賵乇蹖 禺賵丕賴丿 賲購乇丿. 賳賲蹖鈥屫з嗃屫� 趩賯丿乇 丿賵爻鬲 丿丕卮鬲賲 讴賴 诏丕賴蹖 賵賯鬲蹖 丕丨爻丕爻鈥屬囏й� 丌賳 夭賲丕賳 乇丕 亘賴 禺丕胤乇 賲蹖鈥屫①堌必� 丨乇賮鈥屬囏й屫� 乇丕 亘卮賳賵賲 賵 亘丕乇賴丕 丕夭 丕賵 禺賵丕賴卮 讴乇丿賲 讴賴 禺丕胤乇丕鬲卮 乇丕 亘乇丕蹖賲 亘丕夭诏賵 讴賳丿 賵 丕賵 賴賲賴鈥屰� 丕丨賵丕賱 禺賵丿 乇丕 亘丕 乇賵卮賳蹖 毓噩蹖亘蹖 亘賴 蹖丕丿 丿丕卮鬲 賵 賲蹖鈥屭佖� 讴賴 賴乇诏夭 噩夭卅蹖丕鬲 丕蹖賳 丿賯丕蹖賯 乇丕 賮乇丕賲賵卮 賳禺賵丕賴丿 讴乇丿. 賲蹖鈥屭佖� 賴蹖趩 趩蹖夭 丿乇 丕蹖賳 賴賳诏丕賲 亘乇丕蹖 丕賵 鬲丕亘鈥屫必ㄘж� 丕夭 丕蹖賳 賮讴乇 賲丿丕賲 賳亘賵丿 讴賴: 趩賴 賲蹖鈥屫簇� 丕诏乇 賳賲蹖鈥屬呚必呚� 趩賴 賲蹖鈥屫簇� 丕诏乇 夭賳丿诏丕賳蹖 亘賴 賲賳 亘丕夭 丿丕丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫簇� 丌賳 賵賯鬲 丕蹖賳 夭賳丿诏蹖 亘乇丕蹖賲 亘蹖鈥屬嗁囏й屫� 賲蹖鈥屫ㄙ堌� 賵 丕蹖賳 亘蹖鈥屬嗁囏й屫� 賲丕賱 賲賳 賲蹖鈥屫ㄙ堌�. 丕夭 賴乇 丿賯蹖賯賴鈥屰� 丌賳 蹖讴 賯乇賳 賲蹖鈥屫池ж� 賵 蹖讴 賱丨馗賴 丕夭 丌賳 乇丕 賴丿乇 賳賲蹖鈥屫ж�. 丨爻丕亘 賴乇 丿賯蹖賯賴鈥屰� 丌賳 乇丕 賳诏賴 賲蹖鈥屫ж簇� 鬲丕 蹖讴蹖卮丕賳 乇丕 鬲賱賮 賳讴賳賲. 賲蹖鈥屭佖� 讴賴 丕蹖賳 賮讴乇 毓丕賯亘鬲 亘賴 趩賳丕賳 禺卮賲蹖 賲亘丿賱 卮丿 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫堌ж池� 賴乇趩賴 夭賵丿鬲乇 鬲蹖乇亘丕乇丕賳卮 讴賳賳丿.
賳诏丕賴 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘賴 诏賳丕賴
诏乇趩賴 賮囟丕蹖 賲爻蹖丨蹖賽 丕乇鬲賵丿讴爻 丿乇 丌孬丕乇 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 乇賵爻貙 卮丕賲賱 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賵 鬲賵賱爻鬲賵蹖 賵噩賵丿 丿丕乇丿貙 丕賲丕 丿乇 丕蹖賳 賲蹖丕賳 鬲賮丕賵鬲鈥屬囏й� 馗乇蹖賮蹖 賴賲 丿蹖丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�. 丿乇 賲賵乇丿 诏賳丕賴貙 亘賴 禺氐賵氐 诏賳丕賴鈥屬囏й屰� 賴賲趩賵賳 禺蹖丕賳鬲貙 乇賵丕亘胤 噩賳爻蹖 賳丕倬爻賳丿 丿乇 丌蹖蹖賳 賲爻蹖丨蹖貙 賵 乇賵爻倬蹖鈥屭臂屫� 鬲賵賱爻鬲賵蹖 趩賳蹖賳 诏賳丕賴鈥屬囏й屰� 乇丕 毓丕賲賱 爻賯賵胤 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫з嗀� (賲丕賳賳丿 丌賳丕 讴丕乇賳蹖賳丕) 賵 丌賳鈥屬囏� 乇丕 鬲賳亘蹖賴 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�.
丿乇 賲賯丕亘賱貙 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 丿乇 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 丌孬丕乇卮 賲毓鬲賯丿 丕爻鬲 丕乇夭卮 丌丿賲蹖 賮乇丕鬲乇 丕夭 丌賳 丕爻鬲 讴賴 亘丕 趩賳蹖賳 诏賳丕賴鈥屬囏й屰� 鬲亘丕賴 卮賵丿. 丕乇鬲讴丕亘 趩賳蹖賳 诏賳丕賴鈥屬囏й屰� 賲賲讴賳 丕爻鬲 賳鬲蹖噩賴鈥屰� 夭賳丿诏蹖 丿乇 卮乇丕蹖胤 丿卮賵丕乇 賲丨蹖胤蹖 亘丕卮丿 賵 賳亘丕蹖丿 丿乇 賲賵乇丿 趩賳蹖賳 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й屰� 賯囟丕賵鬲 讴乇丿. 乇丕賴賽 鬲賵亘賴 丿乇 丌孬丕乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賲毓賲賵賱丕賸 亘丕夭 丕爻鬲.
趩賳蹖賳 賵囟毓蹖鬲蹖 乇丕 丿乇 亘蹖卮鬲乇蹖賳 丨丕賱鬲 丿乇 芦噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲禄 丿乇 卮禺氐蹖鬲 芦爻賵賳蹖丕禄 丿蹖丿賴鈥屫й屬� 讴賴 诏乇趩賴 乇賵爻倬蹖 丕爻鬲貙 丕賲丕 鬲丕 丨丿 賯丿蹖爻 亘丕賱丕 賲蹖鈥屫辟堌� 賵 爻鬲丕蹖卮 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�.
丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 賴賲 亘丕 芦賳丕爻鬲丕夭蹖丕 賮蹖賱蹖倬賵賵賳丕禄 賲賵丕噩賴蹖賲 讴賴 丿乇 賳賵噩賵丕賳蹖貙 賯乇亘丕賳蹖賽 賴賵爻乇丕賳蹖鈥屬囏й� 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 卮丿賴 賵 噩丕賲毓賴 亘賴 丕賵 賳诏丕賴賽 芦夭賳 亘丿讴丕乇禄 丿丕乇丿. 丿乇 丨丕賱蹖 讴賴 卮禺氐蹖鬲 丕賵 乇丕 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з� 賲賳賮蹖 丿乇 賳馗乇 诏乇賮鬲 賵 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 亘賴 賲丕 賳卮丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫囏� 丕賵 丿乇 亘丕胤賳 丕賳爻丕賳 倬丕讴蹖 丕爻鬲(诏乇趩賴 毓丕賯亘鬲賽 禺賵卮蹖 賳丿丕乇丿):
丕蹖賳 夭賳 爻蹖丕賴鈥屫辟堌� 毓賲蹖賯丕賸 蹖賯蹖賳 丿丕乇丿 讴賴 夭賳蹖 亘爻蹖丕乇 爻蹖丕賴讴丕乇 賵 賮丕爻丿鬲乇蹖賳 夭賳 丿賳蹖丕爻鬲. 賵丕蹖貙 丌亘乇賵蹖卮 乇丕 賳乇蹖夭蹖丿. 爻賳诏 乇爻賵丕蹖蹖 亘賴 丕賵 賳蹖賳丿丕夭蹖丿. 丕賵 丕夭 丌诏丕賴蹖 亘賴 丌賱賵丿诏蹖 賵 賳賳诏蹖 讴賴 爻夭丕賵丕乇卮 賳亘賵丿賴貙 夭蹖乇 亘丕乇 诏賳丕賴蹖 讴賴 賳讴乇丿賴貙 亘蹖卮 丕夭 丨丿 乇賳噩 亘乇丿賴 丕爻鬲. 丌禺乇 诏賳丕賴卮 趩蹖爻鬲責
亘丕夭 賴賲 丕蹖賳 毓卮賯 賴夭丕乇 乇賳诏
丿乇 芦丕亘賱赖禄 賲丕 丨丿丕賯賱 亘丕 爻賴 賳賵毓 毓卮賯 賳爻亘鬲 亘賴 賳丕爻鬲丕夭蹖丕 賲賵丕噩賴蹖賲:
鈥� 毓卮賯 丿乇賵睾蹖賳 亘丕 胤賲毓 丿爻鬲 蹖丕賮鬲賳 亘賴 孬乇賵鬲 賵 丕賮鬲禺丕乇 讴賴 丿乇 賯丕賱亘 卮禺氐蹖鬲 芦诏丕賳蹖丕禄 賳賲丕蹖卮 丿丕丿賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 爻乇丕賳噩丕賲 丌賳 鬲丨賯蹖乇 賵 倬賵趩蹖 丕爻鬲.
鈥� 毓卮賯 卮賴賵丕賳蹖 賵 睾乇蹖夭蹖賽 芦乇丕诏賵跇蹖賳禄 讴賴 亘丕毓孬 噩賳賵賳 賵 賳丕亘賵丿蹖 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�.
鈥� 毓卮賯 賲爻蹖丨蹖賽 乇丕爻鬲蹖賳 丿乇 賯丕賱亘 芦倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳禄. 亘禺卮蹖 丕夭 鬲賱丕卮鈥屬囏й� 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 亘乇丕蹖 賳賲丕蹖卮 夭蹖亘丕蹖蹖 賵 丕賴賲蹖鬲 丕蹖賳 賳賵毓 毓卮賯 丕爻鬲.
丕蹖乇丕丿丕鬲 賵 丕賳鬲賯丕丿丕鬲
丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 禺賵丿卮 丿乇 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 賳丕賲賴鈥屬囏й屫� 亘賴 丕蹖賳 賲賵囟賵毓 丕卮丕乇賴 讴乇丿賴 讴賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 乇丕 亘丕 毓噩賱賴 賳賵卮鬲賴 賵 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 亘蹖卮 丕夭 丨丿 丿乇 賴賲 倬蹖趩蹖丿賴 卮丿賴 賵 丿乇 亘毓囟蹖 噩丕賴丕 禺賵亘 丕夭 丌亘 丿乇賳蹖丕賲丿賴 丕爻鬲. 丕賵 賳賵卮鬲賴 丕夭 丕蹖丿賴鈥屰� 乇賲丕賳卮 丨賲丕蹖鬲 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 丕賲丕 丕夭 禺賵丿 乇賲丕賳 賳賴!
丕賵賱蹖賳 丕丨爻丕爻賽 賲賳 賴賲 亘毓丿 丕夭 禺賵丕賳丿賳 讴鬲丕亘 丿賯蹖賯丕賸 丕蹖賳 亘賵丿: 芦讴鬲丕亘蹖 讴賴 賲蹖鬲賵丕賳爻鬲 卮丕賴讴丕乇 亘丕卮丿. 讴丕卮 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 丕蹖丿賴鈥屬囏й� 丿乇禺卮丕賳卮 乇丕 亘賴鬲乇 倬蹖丕丿賴 讴乇丿賴 亘賵丿.禄
亘賴 乇丕爻鬲蹖 丕蹖丿賴鈥屬囏й� 丿乇禺卮丕賳 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 賵 賱丕蹖賴鈥屬囏й� 倬蹖趩蹖丿賴鈥屸€屰� 賮讴乇蹖貙 讴鬲丕亘 乇丕 亘賴 丕孬乇蹖 卮诏賮鬲鈥屫з嗂屫� 鬲亘丿蹖賱 讴乇丿賴貙 丕賲丕 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 芦丕亘賱赖禄 亘賴鬲乇蹖賳 丕孬乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賳蹖爻鬲 賵 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з� 丕夭 丕蹖乇丕丿丕鬲 丌賳 诏匕卮鬲:
鈥� 丕蹖乇丕丿 丕賵賱 丕蹖賳讴賴 賴賲趩賵賳 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 丌孬丕乇 讴賱丕爻蹖讴貙 讴鬲丕亘 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 丕蹖噩丕夭賽 賱丕夭賲 乇丕 賳丿丕乇丿 賵 夭蹖丕丿賴鈥屭堐屰� 丿丕乇丿. 丿乇 夭賲丕賳賴鈥屰� 倬乇爻乇毓鬲賽 賲丕貙 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 亘賴 乇丕丨鬲蹖 丿賵蹖爻鬲- 爻蹖氐丿 氐賮丨賴 乇丕 丕夭 丕蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 賴夭丕乇 氐賮丨賴鈥屫й� 丨匕賮 讴乇丿 賵 賲丿毓蹖 卮丿 亘賴 賲丨鬲賵丕 賵 倬蹖丕賲 讴鬲丕亘貙 賱胤賲賴鈥屫й� 賵丕乇丿 賳卮丿賴 丕爻鬲.
亘毓囟蹖 丕夭 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏� 賵 禺乇丿賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й屫簇з� 丕氐賱丕賸 賲毓賱賵賲 賳蹖爻鬲 趩賴 賳賯卮蹖 丿乇 賲爻蹖乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿丕乇賳丿 賵 亘丿賵賳 丌賳鈥屬囏� 賴賲 鬲睾蹖蹖乇 禺丕氐蹖 丿乇 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕蹖噩丕丿 賳賲蹖鈥屫簇�.
亘賴 賴賲蹖賳 丿賱蹖賱 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丕诏乇趩賴 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丿乇 丨丿 蹖讴 卮丕賴讴丕乇 丌睾丕夭 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵 倬丕蹖丕賳蹖 丿乇禺卮丕賳 丿丕乇丿貙 賵賱蹖 丿乇 賲蹖丕賳賴鈥屰� 讴鬲丕亘貙 亘賴 禺丕胤乇 賴賲蹖賳 夭蹖丕丿賴鈥屭堐屰屸€屬囏ж� 丕賮鬲 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賵 丕夭 乇蹖鬲賲 賲蹖鈥屫з佖�.
鈥� 丕蹖乇丕丿 丿賵賲 丕蹖賳讴賴 丿乇 賲噩賲賵毓 亘賴 賳馗乇賲 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 芦丕亘賱赖禄 丕賳爻噩丕賲 亘毓囟蹖 丿蹖诏乇 丕夭 卮丕賴讴丕乇賴丕蹖 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 乇丕 賳丿丕乇丿. 丿乇 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 丌孬丕乇 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖貙 賲丕 蹖讴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賽 丕氐賱蹖 蹖丕 蹖讴 賴爻鬲賴鈥屰� 賲乇讴夭蹖 丿丕乇蹖賲 讴賴 鬲賲丕賲 讴鬲丕亘 賵 禺乇丿賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й屫� 乇丕 亘賴 賴賲 賲乇鬲亘胤 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀�. 丕蹖賳 賴爻鬲賴鈥屰� 賲乇讴夭蹖 乇丕 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丿乇 芦噩賳丕蹖鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲禄 亘賴 賯鬲賱 乇爻蹖丿賳 倬蹖乇夭賳 丿丕賳爻鬲 賵 丿乇 芦賯賲丕乇亘丕夭禄貙 丕賮鬲丕丿賳 丿乇 丿丕賲 賯賲丕乇.
丕賲丕 丿乇 芦丕亘賱赖禄 賳賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗁� 丿丕爻鬲丕賳蹖 乇丕 亘賴 毓賳賵丕賳 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 丕氐賱蹖 賲毓乇賮蹖 讴賳賲貙 丿乇 賵丕賯毓 讴鬲丕亘 丕夭 禺乇丿賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳鈥屬囏й屰� 鬲卮讴蹖賱 卮丿賴 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 丌賳鈥屬囏� 乇丕 丿乇 賲噩賲賵毓貙 芦賲丕噩乇丕賴丕蹖 倬乇賳爻 賲蹖卮讴蹖賳禄 賳丕賲蹖丿 賵 倬蹖乇賳诏賽 蹖诏丕賳賴 賵 賵丕囟丨蹖 賵噩賵丿 賳丿丕乇丿. 鬲毓丕丿賱蹖 讴賴 丿乇 丕亘鬲丿丕蹖 蹖丕丿丿丕卮鬲賲 丌賳 乇丕 賴賳乇 亘夭乇诏 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 賳丕賲蹖丿賲貙 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 囟毓蹖賮鬲乇 丕爻鬲 賵 亘賴 丿丕爻鬲丕賳 讴賲蹖 丨丕賱鬲 賳氐蹖丨鬲鈥屭堎嗁� 丿丕丿賴 丕爻鬲.
***
倬蹖鈥属嗁堌簇�: 卮丕蹖丿 丿乇 丨丕賱 丨丕囟乇貙 乇賲丕賳鈥屬嗁堐屫驰� 賴賲趩賵賳 丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賵賮爻讴蹖 爻乇丕睾 賳丿丕卮鬲賴 亘丕卮賲 讴賴 賴乇趩賴 乇丕噩毓 亘賴 丕賵 賵 讴鬲丕亘鈥屬囏й屫� 賲蹖鈥屬嗁堐屫迟呚� 丕丨爻丕爻 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 讴賲 丕爻鬲 賵 賴賳賵夭 丨賯 賲胤賱亘 丕丿丕 賳卮丿賴! 亘丕 丕蹖賳 丨丕賱 亘爻蹖丕乇蹖 丕夭 賲胤丕賱亘賽 賳丕诏賮鬲賴 丿乇 亘賯蹖賴鈥屰� 乇蹖賵蹖賵賴丕 诏賮鬲賴 卮丿賴 賵 禺賵丿賽 讴鬲丕亘 賴賲 賳賯丿 禺賵亘蹖 丿乇 丕賳鬲賴丕 丿丕乇丿. 倬爻 丿蹖诏乇 亘爻 丕爻鬲!
January 1, 2016
鈥淒on鈥檛 let us forget that the causes of human actions are usually immeasurably more complex and varied than our subsequent explanations of them.鈥�
鈥� Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Idiot
At once 'The Idiot' is a complicated, beautiful and yet ultimately a somewhat flawed novel. Written shortly after 'Crime and Punishment', it seems like Dostoevsky wanted to invert Raskolnikov. Instead of a mad killer, Prince Myshkin the 'Idiot' is an innocent saint, a positive, a beautiful soul and holy fool motivated by helping those around him. He is a Christ in an un-Christian world, a tortured Don Quixote.
Dostoevsky is able to use Prince Myshkin's spiritual intelligence and Rogozhin's passion to illuminate the main problems and idocyncrasies of Russian society. But the story still falls a bit short of perfection. It literally falls between 'Crime and Punishment' and 'Brothers Karamazov'; failing to achieve the simple greatness of 'Crime and Punishment' and the complex greatness of 'Brothers Karamazov'. Like Myshkin himself, the novel's intent is nearly perfect, but the execution is just a little off, a little unstable. That doesnt mean I didn't love it. As a novel I adored it. I was both taken by and frustrated with Prince Myshkin.
Perhaps my favorite parts of this novel fall into the scenes where Dostoevsky is focused on a painting or an execution. He isn't content with a superficial look at the world. He examines things for depth and poignance that actually left me shaking. He studies Holbein's grotesque 'The Body of the Dead Christ in the Tomb' with a patient, detailed eye that at once appears to capture the whole life and death of Christ. He describes the beheading of John the Baptist; looking for details of his face in that still and eternal second before his execution. In this Dostoevesky is recreating his own near execution and the horror and magnificence that death (or a near death in Dostoevsky's case) brings to a person's fragile, beautiful and flawed life.
鈥� Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Idiot
At once 'The Idiot' is a complicated, beautiful and yet ultimately a somewhat flawed novel. Written shortly after 'Crime and Punishment', it seems like Dostoevsky wanted to invert Raskolnikov. Instead of a mad killer, Prince Myshkin the 'Idiot' is an innocent saint, a positive, a beautiful soul and holy fool motivated by helping those around him. He is a Christ in an un-Christian world, a tortured Don Quixote.
Dostoevsky is able to use Prince Myshkin's spiritual intelligence and Rogozhin's passion to illuminate the main problems and idocyncrasies of Russian society. But the story still falls a bit short of perfection. It literally falls between 'Crime and Punishment' and 'Brothers Karamazov'; failing to achieve the simple greatness of 'Crime and Punishment' and the complex greatness of 'Brothers Karamazov'. Like Myshkin himself, the novel's intent is nearly perfect, but the execution is just a little off, a little unstable. That doesnt mean I didn't love it. As a novel I adored it. I was both taken by and frustrated with Prince Myshkin.
Perhaps my favorite parts of this novel fall into the scenes where Dostoevsky is focused on a painting or an execution. He isn't content with a superficial look at the world. He examines things for depth and poignance that actually left me shaking. He studies Holbein's grotesque 'The Body of the Dead Christ in the Tomb' with a patient, detailed eye that at once appears to capture the whole life and death of Christ. He describes the beheading of John the Baptist; looking for details of his face in that still and eternal second before his execution. In this Dostoevesky is recreating his own near execution and the horror and magnificence that death (or a near death in Dostoevsky's case) brings to a person's fragile, beautiful and flawed life.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 10,792 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.