Everand Logo

Добро пожаловать в Everand!

  • Откройте для себя миллионы электронных книг, аудиокниг и многого другого в бесплатной пробной версии

    Всего $11.99/в месяц после завершения пробного периода. Можно отменить в любое время.

    Idiot: Russian Language
    Idiot: Russian Language
    Idiot: Russian Language
    Электронная книга1 136 страниц12 часов

    Idiot: Russian Language

    Автор Fyodor Dostoyevsky

    4/5

    ()

    Читать отрывок

    Об этой электронной книге

    Роман, в котором творческие принципы Достоевского воплощаются в полной мере, а удивительное владение сюжетом достигает подлинного расцвета. Яркая и почти болезненно талантливая история несчастного князя Мышкина, неистового Парфена Рогожина и отчаявшейся Настасьи Филипповны, много раз экранизированная и поставленная на сцене, и сейчас завораживает читателя...
    ЯзыкРусский
    ИздательGlagoslav E-Publications
    Дата выпуска12 янв. 2015 г.
    ISBN9781909156906
    Idiot: Russian Language
    Автор

    Fyodor Dostoyevsky

    Fyodor Dostoyevsky was born in Moscow in 1821. He died in 1881 having written some of the most celebrated works in the history of literature, including Crime and Punishment, The Idiot, and The Brothers Karamazov.

    Похожие авторы

    Связано с Idiot

    Похожие электронные книги

    «Классика» для вас

    Показать больше
    Показать больше

    Похожие эпизоды подкаста

    Похожие статьи

    • Статья

      Подзарядка Батареек

      20 июл. 2020 г.

      Подзарядка Батареек
      1 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      Подзарядка Батареек

      20 авг. 2020 г.

      Вернуть хорошее настроение и подзарядить внутренние батарейки поможет интересная книга с захватывающим сюжетом. Например, книга Владимира Гречинова «Хатуна. Девочка с куклой». Конец XIX века, Российская империя, мистические события… Представляем отры

      2 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      АЛЕКСАНДРА МАРИНИНА: «ИСТОРИЯ ДВИЖЕТСЯ ПОСТУПКАМИ ЛЮДЕЙ, А Люди, Как Известно, Не Меняются»

      23 июл. 2022 г.

      АЛЕКСАНДРА МАРИНИНА: «ИСТОРИЯ ДВИЖЕТСЯ ПОСТУПКАМИ ЛЮДЕЙ, А Люди, Как Известно, Не Меняются»
      4 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      ЛОВКО Обманула

      14 мар. 2020 г.

      ЛОВКО Обманула
      3 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      Отношения новые – ОШИБКИ СТАРЫЕ?

      27 июн. 2020 г.

      Недаром говорят, что во многом знании – многие печали. Сорок лет – это действительно как новые двадцать пять: ты отлично выглядишь, умеешь справляться с разными пробелами, нашла себя и ту сферу, в которой тебе интересно развиваться, обустроила дом… Н

      3 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      А Мы Такие Отдыхаем...

      26 сент. 2020 г.

      А Мы Такие Отдыхаем...
      3 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      Kакое-то Волшебство!

      25 дек. 2021 г.

      Kакое-то Волшебство!
      3 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      Общее Хобби Объединяет

      7 февр. 2019 г.

      Общее Хобби Объединяет
      2 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      Полчаса До Чуда

      4 янв. 2020 г.

      Полчаса До Чуда
      4 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      50 – Это Новые 30?

      24 сент. 2022 г.

      50 – Это Новые 30?
      3 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      Однажды На Диком западе...

      9 янв. 2021 г.

      Однажды На Диком западе...
      7 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      ОСОБЫЕ Приметы

      17 окт. 2020 г.

      ОСОБЫЕ Приметы
      3 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      ИМ ВСЕМ НУЖНО Только Одно

      1 февр. 2020 г.

      ИМ ВСЕМ НУЖНО Только Одно
      2 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      Любовь В Законе

      28 мар. 2020 г.

      Любовь В Законе
      3 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      К Т Е Ри Е Ж Н Д Н Ы Ый Р Щ

      14 апр. 2020 г.

      К Т Е Ри Е Ж Н Д Н Ы Ый Р Щ
      2 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      Интервью

      25 сент. 2017 г.

      Майкл, пока мы договаривались об этом интервью и я готовила во-просы, ты сменил четыре страны. Где тебя застало мое письмо? В Гонконге. Поддерживать контакт с интерна-циональной командой компаний, которые находятся на разных кон-тинентах, под силу то

      5 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      История Вещей

      15 сент. 2020 г.

      История Вещей
      3 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      Дина Рубина: «наша Жизнь Такова: не Успеешь Отсмеяться, Как Заливаешься Слезами»

      19 февр. 2022 г.

      Дина Рубина: «наша Жизнь Такова: не Успеешь Отсмеяться, Как Заливаешься Слезами»
      2 мин. чтения

    • Статья

      А Снег Идет

      28 дек. 2019 г.

      А Снег Идет
      5 мин. чтения

    Связанные категории

    Отзывы о Idiot

    4/5

    2 475 оценок51 отзыв

    Ваше мнение?

    Нажмите, чтобы оценить

    Отзыв должен содержать не менее 10 слов

    • 5/5
      My first Dostoyevsky novel was “Crime and Punishment,” and I thought it was excellent. “The Idiot” blew it away. The plot and many subplots, and the great characters! The way the intricate storyline spun and swirled was wonderful. I absolutely loved this book!
    • 3/5
      Eerste 100 bladzijden zijn zeer boeiend en vlot geschreven. Wat daarna volgt is een bijna onontwarbare opeenvolging van intriges en gesprekken, waarvan de functionaliteit zeer ondoorzichtig is. Gemeenschappelijk element: bijna altijd beweging.Al een eerste keer gelezen op 18jaar; nogal verward geheel
    • 5/5
      My first Dostoyevsky novel was “Crime and Punishment,” and I thought it was excellent. “The Idiot” blew it away. The plot and many subplots, and the great characters! The way the intricate storyline spun and swirled was wonderful. I absolutely loved this book!
    • 5/5
      Great novel, and still recognizable. Easy to identify with main character
    • 4/5
      The title character of The Idiot is Prince Myshkin, a poor Russian nobleman who is returning to Russia after spending several years in a Swiss sanatorium to recover from epilepsy. Alone in the world, he is searching for some distant relatives and gets quickly caught up in a complicated love triangle that involves himself, the beautiful fallen woman, Natashya Filipovna, and the wealthy Roghozin. As with many of the Russian classics, there is a HUGE cast of characters, who are well depicted and come from a variety of classes. This book has much of what you come to expect from a Russian classic - tragic heroes, sacrifice and sad, sad endings. But The Idiot is also a wealth of philosophy. Although it departs from the main plot, there is some great philosophy in this book, with reflections on the meaning of life, especially when death is imminent.

      I listened to the audiobook and I LOVED Simon Vance's narration. From rattling off long and beautiful Russian names (my favorite was Lizaveta Prokovyevna) to his wide range of accents for some very eccentric characters, this was an enjoyable book to read and listen to.
    • 4/5
      This book was a lot of fun. I'm sure anyone will enjoy, regardless of the age.
    • 4/5
      In short, too much romance and not enough death. Actually, some of the frivolity of the female characters especially sort of reminded me of Jane Austen, who I feel is an earlier/predecessor of wretches like Danielle Steele.

      In any case, if we were to look at the way Dostoevsky writes these women, we would think they were pious, noncommittal, mentally ill, self serving, spoiled, with no sense of grasp on how to conduct themselves properly. The men are more of a varied bunch on the whole, with the intoxicated general to the well meaning prince who is truly no idiot (he's an intelligent epileptic).

      Also, my version of the novel has been translated by Constance Garnett. I know there are fierce debates amongst fans of Dostoevsky about who is the best translator (I seriously think some of them meet in the night over intense chess games to verbally assault eachother over whose translation is superior.) In my opinion, Garnett does well to translate all of the French terms and phrases that are used, the familiarizations in terms of referencing people with different friendly versions of you and their names, and explains what the Russian words that don't translate exactly mean. At the same time, it doesn't seem as poetic as it may have been written in some places and it gets entirely confusing when there are two separate princes and they all have about ten surnames and full names. There are points in the novel when just "the prince" is the reference point but you won't know which prince is being referred to or is speaking for an entire long winded paragraph at least. To me, that just isn't a recommended way of translating and it should be clarified sooner.

      The novel's strengths by and large lie within the philosophical discussions about class and politics as well as capital punishment. In comparison, the love triangle aspect might make the book more accessible to the average reader but greatly lessens the impact of these points. I'd love to read a long essay on these subjects without any female characters involved because, the way Dostoevsky has written these few ladies, I wouldn't care to ever know them.
    • 3/5
      I had wanted to read this book for the longest time. I loved the audiobook of “Crime and Punishment” and thought this would be as good. However, “The Idiot” was a bit disappointing. The reader was not as good and the number of Russian names and places were incomprehensible to my ear. In the printed edition, the names would have been more recognizable, so I recommend reading it, not listening to it.The story is intricate and intense. The characters are not very likeable. They are pompous, devious and scheming all the time. They thrive on gossip and rumors. They are judgmental and cruel at times, and tend to angry outbursts and sometimes violence. They seem eccentric, unhappy and unfulfilled, disloyal, often rudely arrogant and completely untrustworthy. The upper class is viewed negatively, as shallow and conniving, rarely loyal and mostly self-serving.The main character, Prince Myshkin is supposedly an Idiot. He calls himself that, however, he seems to have more common sense at times, than all the other characters. He suffers from epilepsy, and as a result, his education was limited, yet he seems to think more logically, in his innocence, than many of those he encounters throughout the book. He is easily admired because of his honesty, even as they laugh at his simplicity or naïveté. Each of the characters is a contrarian, taking the opposite point of view than the one prevailing in their conversations. They seem to enjoy the banter. They constantly contradict each other’s judgment so that what you think is happening is generally not exactly what does occur. The say one thing, mean another. Myshkin’s naive remarks invariably cause havoc and/or inspire respect. Many of the characters accuse each other of being mad. Prince Myshkin, who is supposedly the least sane, is perhaps the sanest of all until the very end when the severe emotional trauma of certain events causes what may be irreversible damage to his psyche. There are some nasty references to Jews which I found disheartening, but I believe it was because of the time in which the book was written. Many books portrayed Jews negatively. (I wonder if Jews, like the blacks and now the American Indians have done, should lobby to alter the wording in these offensive books.) Jews were definitely not thought well of in the few places they are mentioned, and they were presented stereotypically in the view of the prevailing times.Myshkin meets a stranger, Rogozhin, on the train taking him to Russia, and from that moment, his life takes an ultimately tragic turn. Both men become involved with the same woman, Nastasya Filippovna, a beautiful but flighty woman of changeable, perhaps demented, mind. Both men love her, one in a romantic way while the other believes he loves her because he pities her. Myshkin is in and out of another romantic relationship, with Aglaya. He, like Nastasya, has issues with being faithful and true to those to whom they pledge themselves. He is almost the comic foil; he can’t win for losing. He is the most compassionate and trustworthy, but his judgment is faulty and immature. He lacks he reason to truly think through the consequences of his actions; although he analyzes the situations he is in quite logically, he makes illogical conclusions. Myshkin is the subject of what starts out as elaborate deceptions and schemes and then become reality. He is always somewhat of a victim and a hero, at the same time. There are so many ridiculous explanations and assumptions that the truth is elusive; facts are not facts, rumors take on a life of their own, the pomposity of the elite class is irritating. They are all responsible for their own failures and disasters. Their own behavior brings them down and they move each other around like pawns in a game of chess.The book is brilliant but it should be read, not listened to so that the characters are more easily identified by name recognition. Sometimes the reader’s interpretation was frantic with emotion and often the dialogue seemed too long. At times I felt as confused as Myshkin, however, the author examines the minds of his characters in great detail and with enormous depth so that I was able to get to know Myshkin.All for the love of the woman Nastasya Filippovna, Myshkin and Rogozhin ultimately destroy themselves and the woman. There are so many betrayals; brides and grooms are left at the altar, and often mental incompetence is almost presented as the norm. It is as if what we call sanity is unattainable or non existent.It was not until the very last part of the book that it all began to fall into place for me which is probably the mark of the exceptionality of this book. This great author was able to hold my attention, guide me through my confusion and finally allow me to reach the end without having thrown up my hands in despair and frustration!
    • 5/5
      Not a typical character- one who you often feel ashamed or embarrassed for. Interesting parallels to the author's life. Prison- epilepsy- are prevalent topics. Distracting change of tone at the end of the book.
    • 3/5
      Lengthy examination of a virtuous man, Myshkin, and how Russian society ruins him--okay but overly long
    • 5/5
      Princy Myshkin is perceived by others around him as being an idiot, but I will leave it up to the reader to decide whether he really is one. Some characters perceive him to be the most trustworthy man they have ever meant, while others call him an intellectual and a democrat. Yet, most revert back to calling him an idiot. The book is full of the basest characters, and only Myshkin can offer them a shot at redemption. He sees them for their true selves, good or bad, and loves them for who they are. Myshkin has been called a Russian Christ and is one of the most provocative characters that I have come accross in literature. In addition to Dostoevsky's strong characterization, this book also includes the author's critique of capital punishment, the role of women in society, and the role of aristocracy. The book is both introspective and political, although not overly so. I found it to be a new favorite of mind, and I am sure it will stick with me for awhile. It is a very good novel.
    • 5/5
      I absolutely loved this story. Dostoevsky is so elegant in his writing about The Prince. Throughout the story I found myself loving Myshkin and then hating him and then loving him again. The characters are so well described that you can really imagine them so well everything from what they wear to what they look like. Their personalities are so perfectly described, each character is in his or her own way perfect.
    • 4/5
      This book was incredibly long and at times rather dull. Though I feel that it is worth reading, it is not for the faint of heart. Picking up this book is a huge commitment of time. However, looking back on it the story was an interesting one and it was not a book that I ever thought of giving up on.
    • 4/5
      After reading this book, I know that when I am in the mood for a Russian novel to keep me company, I will reach for Dostoyevsky.
    • 5/5
      One of my favorite books. In mine modest opinion the best Dostoevsky's novel. His descriptions of a perfectly good, pure human are even better then Cervantes' in his Don Quixote. His ideas about religion, meaning of life, love, women's position in the society, the secrets of human soul are refreshing even now-a-days. I am not going to say anything about his amazingly beautiful style of writing... Reading of any of his books definitely contributes to intellectualism, widens perspectives, and brings indefinite joy to all literature lovers.
    • 4/5
      A good novel about a guy whose illness is misdescribed, possibly misdiagnosed...who is a very nice person, who is a very nieve person and the storyline makes you feel really bad for him because the real idiots misuse and abuse him...a rather sad story....
    • 5/5
      In this book Dostoyevsky does what few other novelist have done successfully--he makes a very good man interesting. It is easy to make evil interesting. But to make good interesting--that is an accomplishment. Prince Myshkin arrrives from Switzerland, where he was undergoing "medical" treatment. (We would call it psychiatric treatment today.) On the train his destiny is set when he meets Rogozhin who becomes first his friend, then his rival in love. They both love Nastasya Filippovna, although the Prince wants his love to save her, and Rogozhin wants to possess her. In the end, Rogozhin ends up killing Fillippovna. Dostoyevsky is throwing a "positively good man" (his phrase for Prince Myshkin) into the ebb and flow of St. Petersburg social life, and the result is not pretty. He is not crucified, but he might as well be by the end of the book. The superficial life of the characters is exposed by the Prince, but in a way that drives home their rational for their lives. The hard part about the book is that we can easily recognize ourselves in its pages, and often NOT in the person of Myshkin. This is a MUST READ for any serious reader.
    • 5/5
      I have a soft spot for Dostoyevsky, and I really liked this one. By the end, I felt like I knew the characters personally. I won't spoil it, but I rather liked the twist at the end, though I felt more could have been made of it and the simple "report like" conclusion left me feeling a little unsatisfied given how close the reader becomes to the characters. That said, I still really liked it!
    • 5/5
      Prince Mishkyn returns from the mental hospital in Switzerland. But the world has changed. He's dragged into Russion society, but in the end he decides to go back to the hospital. When reading the book, gradually you feel it's not Mischkyn who's crazy. It's all the others. I enjoyed this book more than Crime and Punishment.
    • 4/5
      The Idiot is Dostoevsky's second novel. The book is a hybrid of biographical sketches and anecdotes of the writer. The protagonist, Prince Myshkin, bears traces of his creator in his suffering of epilepsy. Dostoevsky often deviates from the main plot and voices his perspectives on pain, suffering, capital punishment, and moral goodness. The notion of suffering incessantly sifts through the novel as if true suffering plays a key role in purifying the protagonist and granting him the overriding power to the [evil] society in which he seeks to gain acceptance. However excruciating and painful it might be, physical suffering and bodily agony would distract the mind from spiritual suffering. That is, the physical aching deprives functioning of mental thinking. The worst suffering, as Prince Myshkin contemplates, are the knowledge and the inevitable truth of one's imminent death, the invincible parting of soul with the body. Being mindful of one's death would only perpetuate suffering. Readers should grip this idea and bear in mind.Morally upright, magnanimous, forgiving, humble, loving, honest, virtuous and mindful of others needs, Prince Myshkin embodies all human virtue and goodness. He is almost like God, or perfecting to be like God. He is a man capable of an ideal. He is stuck and torn between the love of Aglaia and Natasya upon his return to Russia from medical treatment in Switzerland. Myshkin's self-stigmatizing, humble, and diffident element often agitated Aglaia whose love for him manifests to the full in her passionate recital of a poor knight poem. She shows desire to marry him despite the wonted taunting. She assures that Myshkin is more honorable than anybody is and nobody is worth his little finger let alone his heart and soul.Out of volition and obligation, Myshkin believes he is responsible to rescue the vile, [evil] Natasya from her deranged mental state. The cause of his love for her was more than just the bewitching, demonical beauty: it is rather eagerness on Myshkin's part to be of service to his country after being abroad. He has long set an ideal and having faith in such ideal empowers him to give up his life blindly to it. Though Natasya is surprised at Myshkin's discerning words that she ought to be ashamed and that she is not what she pretends to be, she tortures herself by not falling in love with him lest to disgrace and ruin his life.In her importunate letters to Aglaia, Natasya implored and coaxed her to marry Myshkin as she did not wish to besmirch him. But destiny plays a cruel joke on them. Myshkin bears such tender spot for the afflicted, disgraced women in Natasya. However pertinacious not to love him, Natasya acknowledges his irresistible impact on her and regards him as the first and only man she has met in her whole life that she has believed in as a sincere friend. When Aglaia accuses her being a manipulator, Natasya falls down on her knees and thwarts Myshkin from leaving, who then comforts her and agrees to marry her.Many readers, myself included, would mull at the meaning of the title. It would be impossible to do Myshkin justice by abasing him as an idiot. A simpleton at best? Myshkin is looked upon as an idiot (from Greek meaning private and ignorant) for his not being compromised with the vanity, vices, [evilness], mendacity, and avarice of a vain society. Unyielding as he might be, it is almost like naivete that Myshkin always resolves to be courteous, honest, and trustful with everyone. Such naivete somehow gives way to philosophical outlook and idealism and thus ennobled him. Others harbor the effrontery to inveigle him, to launch a calumny against him in order to usurp his fortune. Maybe his ignorance of the vile and magnanimity for others' wrongdoings create in him an idiot (a private person).The Idiot, as cumbersome and lengthy as it seems, is rather a simple novel in plot. Dostoevsky often deviates from the main plot to reflect (and to reiterate) his philosophy through the prince, somehow bears an overriding sense of mission in the society, if not the whole world. I have denounce some critics' portraying the story as some bitter love triangle, for Dostoevsky has no room for a melodrama. In an epic that evokes Tolstoy's Anna Karenina, Dostoevsky seeks out the most ordinary characters whose ordinary tales (Madame Epanchins' imaginative troubles and whining, Ippolit's nightmares, General Ivolgin's delirious memories of his childhood encounter with Napoleon) lend a special note of verisimilitude in the lives of Russians. Like Crime and Punishment, The Idiot is dim, melancholy, doleful, and somber though the Epanchins, Lebedyev, and General Ivolgin animated, lightened up with a tinge of comic relief. Myshkin's desire to cure Natasya of her madness only relapsed himself into insanity. The Idiot evokes in readers a sense of tenderness and sympathy for the protagonist whose unyielding righteousness impedes him from resolving his own plight.
    • 3/5
      I'd like to suggest that reading choice, at all ages, resembles a vortex. One's favourite books and authors swirl round, and are re-read (I've always been a great re-reader). New books are sucked in to join the vortex, and some of the favourites gradually sink down, just occasionally bobbing back up, possibly to be re-read for the sake of nostalgia. The core of the reading remains books I've enjoyed, or authors I've enjoyed, or books recommended as being not dissimilar to those I've enjoyed, but actual content of the core changes over time, as new interests or authors join in the swirl, often inspired by wanting to read more widely on topics raised by the old favourites. For me that would be Shakespeare. I re-read The Idiot for the first time recently and formed a new and rather confused opinion of the book and the Prince. The tremendous passages and themes - mortality, redemption - had a much greater impact on me this time around. At the same time, the more hysterically written sections had a greater impact too. My brain started to develop a tic from all the exclamation marks and superfluous ellipses and melodramatic plot twists. The big surprise came with the dénouement. After having first read it, I'd been catching up on my Shakespeare. When I got to the grand finale of "The Idiot" this time, I realised: 'It's bloody Othello.' The end of Othello is always heart-searing. It makes my eyes fill every time. It is truly dramatic. By comparison, the end of "The Idiot" now seems hysterically melodramatic and has no emotional effect on me at all. Unless wanting to take Prince Myshkin by the shoulders to give him a damned good shaking counts as emotional effect.All to the good, of course. Every time we re-read one book, we're newly informed by the hundreds of other books we've read in the meantime. So I already look forward to re-rereading "The Idiot" to see what I make of it next time.
    • 3/5
      Nun ja. Ich hatte, ehrlich gesagt, etwas mehr erwartet.Der Stil ist teils etwas umständlich, aber gut lesbar, letztlich leichter als ich dachte. Immer wieder steigert sich die Erzählung zu sehr furiosen, extrem spannenden Szenen, dafür ist dazwischen wieder viel langweiliges Dahingeplätscher angesagt.Umständlicher als der Stil ist die Erzählweise. Die handelnden Personen, zumindest die wichtigsten, werden in großer Ausführlichkeit geschildert, vor allem ihr Verhalten und ihre Gedankenwelt während der vielen Skandalszenen.Die waren es hauptsächlich, die mir das Buch verleideten. Ein Buch wie das „prominent!“-TV-Magazin auf Vox, nur eben in Papierform und aus dem 19. Jahrhundert. Sicher, etwas mehr Tiefgang und vor allem der Versuch, die Charaktere zu verstehen, machen durchaus einen Unterschied. Letztlich fühlte sich das Buch für mich aber tatsächlich an wie Klatsch auf hohem Niveau.Dazu noch der unangenehme Charakter fast aller Hauptpersonen, die sich andauernd gegenseitig beleidigen und auslachen, dabei aber immer auf den eigenen Status bedacht sind und dafür über Leichen gehen, sofern das gesellschaftlich akzeptiert ist … Natürlich hält Dostojewskij hier auch der Gesellschaft einen Spiegel vor, aber ich kann mich des Eindrucks nicht erwehren, dass er das sehr genüsslich tut.Dabei schafft er er Szenen von ausufernder Peinlichkeit, schlimmer noch als Loriot: Fremdschämen auf allerhöchstem Niveau. Das hat mir persönlich überhaupt keinen Spaß gemacht.Fazit: Stilistisch und erzählerisch hochstehender Boulevard aus dem Russland des 19. Jahrhunderts. Nichts für mich.
    • 4/5
      I'd mentioned earlier I was super loving this book, but in the end it didn't top Demons (it'd seemed to be heading there for the first half or so). But naturally, still a very worthwhile read - it is Dostoevsky after all! I do wish it hadn't gone so gloomy in the later part, I was so enjoying the lightheartedness of the first half or so, constantly smiling and even laughing aloud a bunch. It still had its moments later, of course, but it got much weightier with much less of the lightness as time went on. Every morning the same bright sun rises; every morning there is a rainbow over the waterfall; every evening the snowy peak of the highest mountain there in the distance on heaven's very edge is bathed in purple iridescence; every tiny mosquito, which buzzes around him in the warm ray of the sun, is part of the glorious ensemble, knows its place, is sure of it and is unspeakably happy; every blade of grass grows and is happy. And all things have their appointed path, and all things can find their way along that path, they go with a song and they come with a song; he alone knows nought, understands nought, neither people, nor sounds; a stranger to all, an alien, a reject.The book is really something, though. It kind of defies simple explanation. Dostoevsky said "the main aim of the novel is to depict a wholly virtuous man. There's nothing more difficult in the world," and noted that the only ones who come close are Don Quixote and Mr Pickwick, and that it is the combination of their ridiculousness and goodness that makes them so sympathetic to readers. This is the path he set out to follow, entirely in his own way. Avsey notes in his extra material at the end, "Dostoevsky revels in peopling his novels with every kind of oddball imaginable. He may be accused of having taken the reader into a lunatic asylum, but never into a museum of waxworks. And in the treatment of them he is loving and compassionate throughout, or he would not have devoted so much attention to those that are spiritually and mentally unbalanced." This novel, in particular, really is peopled with every sort of personality, lively and evocative and extreme, and you really can't help but love them, or hate them, or pity them ...or all the above.Definitely worth a gander, especially if you've read & enjoyed Dostoevsky already.
    • 4/5
      This book is all over the place, but when it is good . . . it is great. The ending has an hallucinatory/dreamlike feel to it that is chilling. I read this long ago, had heard that Myshkin was Christ-like, so of course didn't respond to him at all. The "Christ-like" thing is true, but it's much more interesting than pure perfection. As a person constantly trying to do good, in fact, Myshkin in this messy world actually causes a lot of harm.
    • 4/5
      I'm not worthy enough to review Dostoyevsky.
    • 5/5
      "It's actually rather Austenesque," I told my friend, shortly before reading a bit about eating clerics and completely changing my mind about that statement. Indeed, I was surprised, having only read the author's "Crime and Punishment" and "The Gambler," at how much of a love story this novel initially seemed to be. "The Idiot" filters nineteenth century society, and the unfortunate game, for many women, of trying to make or maintain their station by catching a husband (or, alternatively, to make or maintain their pleasure by being kept as a mistress), through the eyes of Prince Myshkin, a recent returnee to Russia from Switzerland where he was receiving treatment for seizures. It is never clear throughout the novel to what extent Myshkin actually suffers from being an "idiot," and to what extent others' perception of him as one simply makes him so. In him, Dostoevsky portrays love at its purest, most noble, and most confused--for in a world where agape love and friendship can and should exist, but only romantic love is honoured by most, how can one not be confused? The story leads the reader through the agony of trying to understand how these kinds of love can be untangled when Myshkin often seems to love two, but can only marry one."This is a sort of sequel to nihilism, not in a direct line, but obliquely, by hearsay," Lebedyev proclaims, and in a similar fashion, the book picks up in some ways where "Crime and Punishment" left off in terms of its themes, if not in terms of its characters or its overall arc. The religion of Russia's "Old Believers" and Dostoevsky's concern for philosophy and politics figure into the story, moreso in the latter half of the book. The first two parts open in a very narrative style, while the latter two jarringly shift to a style that addresses the reader more openly. Characters in this latter half also go into the question, raised in Dostoevsky's earlier novel, of whether crime is a natural occupation in conditions of poverty. However, the question of human perceptions of others and the constraints society places on interpersonal relationships form the driving thread of the book. Dostoevsky, like Myshkin, suffered from seizures, so it is interesting to investigate the relationship between the author and his character(s). I felt a constant sense of duplicity in the character of Raskolnikov in "Crime and Punishment" with regards to his rationale for why he committed his crime, and whether he had a solid understanding of that rationale at all points in time or whether he wavered depending on his "madness," his efforts to deceive others, and his changing spiritual understanding. While Myshkin is the complete opposite of Raskolnikov on the criminal scale, the same duality of character can be discerned in his treatment, and understanding of his own feelings towards, the two love interests in the novel. This duality explodes in a shocking twist as the novel concludes. I can not claim to understand Myshkin as well as I feel I understood Raskolnikov (which, perhaps, also speaks volumes about just how far removed Dostoevsky thinks human nature is from the ideal), but the author certainly succeeds in getting me to sympathize with him. This is a complex book that I feel the need to re-read, but do not expect to be burdened by; in its initial portions especially, it is a surprisingly warm and engaging read from an author known for his lengthy philosophical and theological expositions. Dostoevsky also deserves tremendous credit as a male author for delving so accurately into the variations of female psyches in the different relationships in which women find themselves--in this regard, comparing him to Austen or Brontë is not nearly so illogical as it might seem.
    • 5/5
      I always wanted to read one of "the classics" of Russian literature. I was recuperating from surgery and had a lot of time on my hands to do nothing but read, and this book was perfect. What a sad, beautiful story about a man too kind and good to weather the cynicism of the world around him. The grace of Dostoevsky's prose is simply breathtaking.
    • 5/5
      I've been hovering around this review, trying to think of the best way into this work. This reflects well on my own experience reading it. I found myself totally immersed in the novel, while at the same time having a difficult time coming to grips with the whole thing. It is a slow burn. Plot elements are put into place, and they develop very slowly as a whole host of characters move in and out of the story. It lacks the driving plot device of the murders at the heart of Karamazov or Crime and Punishment. Nastasya Filippovna and her relationships to Prince Myshkin and Rogozhin is clearly driving the novel, but she is rarely physically present in the middle books of the novel. As a result, it can be easy to lose the forest for the trees here. Yet, it is wholly worth it for two reasons. First, the ending scenes of the novel are riveting. Though the plot develops slowly, it is not developed aimlessly. It is not enough to set the pieces into place, but to slowly develop the mind and character of the Prince. Without this development, the ending might come across as superficial with the Prince's hesitation at a crucial moment seeming like mere indecision. The second reason is that this novel, like much of Dostoevsky's work, is a complete immersion experience. His characters are so memorable, his plots so intricate and his writing so sparkling, that even if you are lost in the forest, you'll be happy to be there. Aglaya's motivations and the nature of the Prince's goodness preyed on my mind even when I wasn't reading. Puzzling through the novel is itself an enjoyable experience. That said, the book is certainly at its strongest in the beginning and end. While the final scenes are intense, engrossing and utterly gripping, my favorite scenes took place early in the novel. When the Prince arrives at the Epanchin's, he discusses his experiences with capital punishment with a few different people. This is the Prince before the complexities of the real world have begun to affect him, and we see his pure compassion in a beautiful way. The passages are wonderfully written, and emotionally affecting. Dostoevsky anticipates Camus' remarks that the great cruelty of binding someone to die often exceeds the cruelty of the crime that is being repaid. It is the certainty of death that makes each individual moment a richer experience, but this richness comes at a price. We appreciate our moments because every moment has been pervaded with a sense of our own death (and perhaps even annihilation). Philosophically rich and intensely moving, these passages are worth reading even if one does not engage with the entire work.Perhaps the central conflict of the novel is one which my own philosophy students are quick to recognize in other areas. While the ideals of goodness (represented here by the Prince) are certainly praiseworthy and worth pursuing, these ideals can not only fail in the complexities of an imperfect world, they can lead to morally bad outcomes. I do not wish to dive too deeply into the ending, but the Prince is conflicted between a love borne out of compassion and one out of romantic feeling. They should not be in conflict, but a conflict is forced upon him nonetheless. Most importantly though, he cannot choose one or the other without causing harm, and the choice he makes certainly makes good on this fear. My students see this same worry when discussing Kant's views on ethics, which require of us compliance with exceptionless moral imperatives. Certainly, they remark, we must not lie. But what if we are in a situation where the world faces us with no choice - lie or permit a terrible fate to come to pass? Dostoevsky is sensitive to this issue, and indeed, one could perhaps read the whole novel as setting up this conflict. To see the conflict arrive on the scene, we need the layers upon layers which could embroil the virtuous Prince in the scenario, with no easy solution out of it. It leaves us with the interesting question one finds between Kant and the utilitarians - is moral goodness a matter of living up to an otherworldly ideal, or of making the best of things given the constraints of this world? Despite all of my praise for the novel, it is difficult to read it without comparing it to The Brothers Karamazov. This is unfortunate. By my (non-expert) reckoning, "Karamazov" is unsurpassed work of literary brilliance, and my favorite novel. There are a number of clear parallels between the work. The Prince's goodness and humility will be seen again in Alyosha, while Ippolit sets us up for the great Ivan Karamazov. The triad of the Prince, Ippolit and Rogozhin shares common ground with Alyosha, Ivan and Dmitri, and similar themes about the relationship between horribly unethical acts, traditional virtue and moral nihilism abound. This comparison is unfortunate, however, because The Idiot is left consistently wanting. I suspect I would have enjoyed the novel even more if I was not (sometimes explicitly, sometimes implicitly) recording these comparisons. Though it may not equal "Karamazov," The Idiot is a worthy work in its own right, and one I highly recommend to all readers.
    • 5/5
      The more I read and re-read of Dostoevsky, the more I am forced to conclude that he was every bit as medieval philosophically as Tolstoy, at least epistemologically. The most fundamental theme of all of his major works that I've read, including Notes from Underground, Crime and Punishment, The Idiot, and even The Brothers Karamazov (though in a much more subtle and sophisticated form) is that reason and the intellect are corrupting and one should instead be guided by faith and feelings. But Dostoevsky is easier to stomach because his feelings are relatively humanitarian, compared to Tolstoy's obscene misanthropy and misogyny. And for an artistic vision of why Christian morality is utterly impracticable, this is probably the greatest novel ever written...Christlike Prince Myshkin's fate is as inevitable as it is horrifying.
    • 4/5
      The life and times of the Christlike epileptic, Prince Myshkin. This was the one major Dostoevsky I had yet to read. It’s proving to be a suprisingly hilarious dark comedy so far, thought that’s by no means all it is. I do think it’s the worst of his big four novels though. Myshkin was his attempt at a perfectly good man, and much like with the Alyosha/Zossima attempted redemption in Karamazov, it comes off as less than convincing compared to the preponderance of the very non-Christlike stuff and overpowering general doubt that packs his writing(and makes it so compelling.)

    Предварительный просмотр книги

    Idiot - Fyodor Dostoyevsky

    ?]book_preview_excerpt.htmlܽێ%q%+/L0TEA `Ђ^@ HI^YH&Ūbɡ㳡ͰOljXzƝ~??öO/Oۿÿ~6{ÿN~?;o}~?5/;=Oo4;?W÷'5;ѷ7ߘ.o>?GSoipv\g4rXg^6ӏ4 r 4Nj?/ikMFp5͒|xpoL[5vMa3\/EB~jjB6_Q g)pw都tN}jχ/oWɗ; _L5;pqIW]L/x29w3q^ks`үZӝ:yFxz8^ಝfI5MzCÖDM&!"{if<)9|6Mh1rdt ^a%aS6-iup9Lhd.2c97Sk=WLvi@6\LOe\êm0lMƏq6z{]G/O-enVӕ^`zW _ ?~1~ٿ[vԷ˟翘ϊ_~.gkY^bs?]ؽ4z]|篦I9ou6"ɮ&Df?4c_{?wL}:}i|U1Nʾ۾oϯ5S? Ot4˱ GgK"})/u'\ SJ'Ezt%{{5}dGhzTC'a:g \Z {ӫY#v>p4{O7;n|>yG?l{:$Iy6[=ҫY&G`zsӏ y<,itZ3-fozC)_GcwNgHLK>#9̮җ֧yMieO;tӠ a'OO^#鴄:]i>>}7*\29{qpCr:2 xM=px7ZSʕ qQ7"z Am-mddm K̓.'|ev-;1|N۽tmi5lLsC,\r cAᡅF%OS9۴b3r悓];]koc+cf!!Ǔi-Dtc·퓅^XͿ8Zn,\~];vb`ὤ՝O)'Afvr“&h 7luOOYLR|:Hd!UPip-6b1VEt^!i2X;9.`ሙ|K=)qT}~genpVM5&]w1AqP9=wa]1C3].Y+1Ҽ֊+C/<2R0?x &> [s>^X:g̽5яս}D %D\3Y7?j;lgj{FGj/ma˩~ND*KyBmO`hv{=sN&ک&avNet9]O Ƹmi~;xE9ÛjbӔ+`8׊(_өS/1lpibKc]FZ2N#9fA5DۨwdiY\;;M$Y*~;I|C?f;鿈m׿0w5boq\+M 4i$[z|L Ē'Ϗx\aݧ*;92 OJzeů#}FW24s9M 5<(!W7-lwZ9KDžCPyis9.$[ѣ=E⦹$`S?1S'i(r/4]s=[2|LmP.~ K½L ণ#\wP'LH& Frv'u0$/73<7y%=]OP9Hӳ> y* Q6^MMcaR=)%X2mMvAOWصKb0s-|=~Hc^WlALT> v-J؄lȇ,eƥW$醚C-30{nsE/t'{AxtK]Kw Ԃ"Nmz#)MQ dP]ZyXy-bܞvY8t& g;Tpjd dhqlėEs4'J{14o$+~f16`zHݬ \b{'m/8Т  WAwXKzb]IdXO"Xdl%Yg13e3g fGdx۬O6|ld|S`54O+(૔]YFX m2brۃK ,v2I3`+1%d2'!azLcAH1 YD]!xf?G+Ɍ%EOg/G]}2eQI⡗a- P`,Ho~ ;KEsEsfxA١I=&)I󡊸m*T`7kHr#OLKsԄ$M &66uDd oW{#_-m`8&|i}%>%_Kq#6\1c^=`," M,P1E$VcT8xمb61Z꺗tk9Fӌ*c0"tIǵ5 L^2+yퟁF+{#GAXӄ;N6Y(WA|ǩ`}DK#%`TgPN#X˒߷:y^[Ea2X]tvubKfÝd_AR(3d[nsĐTwkas[@$2'hBHx#̂ӎ֞wp+Mcߧ!"mFwR3 z*`eF60fIJ8V#h[` & {G㴺"GNrB$Cӹ`Tyh,sN^{]š3"jWnejm2Ez'jGc0$\ܣw6%Ã.|04ۈI1h܊o݊{%抯 #ɘ_Og4˶NkD͘IV/x_"xZ^LF_%=Ce ?4ݐqO ΢aNr<$!e VS_j`nlY+{v>((x;gjZ&Ohe{fo6(2D^6& <CEwKYdv l o2 P"%!kQDpsRuѷ$sW*K' *98&4|nX8[OStANJNbMSNa7F{$#%RУs@QX ]GiL][xm[Q <<cNGcvNCr9QQ\y7 VJ{vZ:oeH x#,P c1SF`J[Kcf[hàs?Cj P#Zrή<*kV(uk-Q%RZҠ!d^; NJC*Zuqɫ;_T}Y+%QrSrLepBQEm~63ϑt飿o Z1j4> &8_"*c`f|zY S[:jyWc“2Yqh6",'Ž5ByȂT$3 J? AJJpޙ%.Ғʪn (Z|8xv4XL'2P`sCR2,㚝8NKPR?iRz - A5]!QˣDoF>%1qf[8F6gmDܯ+kGƴϒ8Kֶݔ%9> >-駃ԍϾm Aԍ6FφB#)X}G w0-IZ}!̓\_a+TTݠLqATN>r(Pܠx>Y/eCDŐl) & %73vʃҤA0.\L$vf{5AT‰“:ռPS!a."%gpW̑<TѸA,HT7o^gKK6tf(.~mEzSDZꚴ **! xBVC==^N|ǽ@lVPԽl&"5X2Hwz9dNm"hMJ ĂL@`>Z笃IgQ yk#ة|_m`OzLb3T=l/B^қ=ȒgN(>j E04;,%/FU6T}5xv5DĆ!my$;@V(X&6xluZqJ^%8{dDkn>+8Ѐ7r(ֹ7 !7g%!P}y7 o〼ƬJ~בAl+PWSLV.YMk'B+3=oO&]L8eۋ+sgnD6( #4)Z}faT>}ٲF^Cb9Є9o`"=d됹P3 V9P逋%HV+V)mgYIi[$tvha9ӓIRpBۑ5$CFH+-J{0^Oye5N8Yd![ qݠHriDRΦPe@A%).nwjzgR8W+-Ϗz13X9K$?VnXIi]!w@tQ9;(N 5"l &zBq\7R)ezf,[όPnNjau乘=}p#`Wsa/nNRx$FH*Hcr-ݵe1|ҸbE3Yv ;:)2˴Za)gͧ8K2ǫ_c]q/GV{5!}I4r͡|) 3 rhme'sܲ歾?dVͪuSWw"9K7 30LBJ +G},*D 2+5Y1CC…{ݣ,VYˊ~]_Qz;9$׊Kwgms<(ԠG B>Jhj%{>TLSS=쌍V_.:nwGA81EϐS [Lr= gK (hmym{xWTE )zfǃ2G#MkʤDGv 6/Uu 8 m.;V[؏iIH)+BCCw*#o?Mxaߞ4kC'f¬Uj|F*цQ)={y`u],Ods% 2%3XL御PKgjg.]b&!(mV.Ǣ>+A*S7bp@`>`'ɣ_$? 3O\dhoLkE:!(@@ JtOw~5nVN\&"@9/eGbd$M L!=VđvR+I ci9^5rLwmh1G}5 q _њi )!IE.Op-\ˆ9C*;<|K9Q B-s|X"ܽ"qWQFE%u]Բe\BQ1.W@G+S!6z2)jDtḞMOTШ酮 \I+t.0:E}&}QFWDݩGG[fa,]}fQ`~HnŤ E $pOa!u3Ju ,ͽAn+P.鸋"DU P-.t-NϙWHoXd&X`AZ2b;VXtG{ 2s%iDFqt)'RzöX*(GwȊZMkYτe0 Dz,}.U:G˙~Nޔƌ =u"o%7Ka!.%=Sdjo`b<8DtӤGOlft:i4e pgǁ {ߒmr50\@7Т=|J fELFk>vB\)hF"%fŖU,I0=!HI+c\HwP$3pQIA%#څ1Ƣ]W|SFW\IK;֓\|8kjp8َ9 U9YhR(SBg5^jt0AI}4 du,B NG(hعIF\j7gA|ߝ3n}pXjD"qMBHf+ruXt1b] :nbe-dO! 7P,J4!FׂRjcedw* P7(\"{wi!B{?%JU壯#8G8~`T(35(3Jj?9R_&n@5,y Kl'! ul5ll 6LZr[[i549;)YyyAaP] =8ԉ̳t׻Wvw{~j6Ikz!+0xSCV8A>ڎ[Srk,/"5Dv.~Mq5wlݵcH3s[r8~<!zDKzSqxE)f BkL*3=:cϿ5/2KoHI)‘.ld۸y` EݚA iVzt/|ZN%YC؟H ԟ*xPjĦwqx8}{00B! >=Lf'L:˩-Sj&Hsk&tnuV`) JrnS!JQЅK h(]괽/ 5nͺҎ1,6VJ@ޠ9(D/ `)%y4&}H°kUP~o!y &?XKf~C&]sdLu:=\Fosu/KA2s򕑌*D8HFеQU}dY%\|+x-hQMc)ej1ŷ1_B)A;ӷ!J#ˀ31Fݯo mEd 7<5ޅI0嘞NdG6(A:| S]؀dI$FC;=D9ѱNzuV$ .(^ЍekmӦ0Diz+p>53ٔwY8 s yVezGۦ!}ռv*+! +e/}U_ϏkG6ca hP23S8 AՉ~}sʳrRmg($f7 r{VDiQR v&-;W/J:Þ nbW3V]K5Z`ƃn8WLkKHxqCNflyt.j:V?\tVL̟6h _HurAR:_'YT㛣1ѸJ}tN8*=W mgpz#BHP ciOP zԲ&Tl dO@Z)w4%Hq@Qtv?Sy$(NʼnTt4❨N>N{<"jڡT)(ǎ xp|8.Pj^v+ТYud:=8k }s8ʘ,sx*sXĝHV_ WɧٗCF[2M|@QBش{%xG[U,q jyec A(twWNA r#vrZh)EwK3wb<kO <OTX79);yRrJ721A'` &!1-}{H3)g\{ֿ j}+}LsߓY95X4[/uP rZ^J>-+KɏPW1VhLK:Wm-+ZDlp\})$S#@VzQְ_d8}#\ +(4K3쐧vg G8÷GO˷h3kՄJڙ\ M/ڬdH5'PY:Zwdįm3ݬH9u8h]((<1~*'yha' 4@ {Dj慆r.$e>l\+cL̤Q0!9Sxࢌ;^[ A Z>Ugk럺ENL֥5ݬ}r@5PMޙ4MW9yA-beo)<.@OZY:^ M|yp+g2+@$%;VF\O!Kqcj$pb˔ J+ՠJ!N"r RLNKqle0̞z}k PZBCaJ\62xWʶ|Vcq*{W)CpI݇ 2ͻ_skS䪨•`ma-h5@l5)vχYgt=k}-rH.\9(oc ѭ¾S<@GyO!RҲMezh_bU .3ϝ^d=4Q |gIT2 (#ZT3,ܫ2X*fY2jӜP|ӢLA?B<ƍbvZr(Mε>=X3[0 \r|*pKy:#)uEgjQ`$XGEhgtR!)V+9!=27<^XyXvI3l?# 54Qf8,"OiĀU4Vi js˰$_JphaMT޹>d&k'` Yc$A NN {4kY[p5]=ɘj:>^ki[pS&[m3)9ϸV}K0,Yt S->(:xC`?" ?!KzOT 20¢46@-Tw)D'MvR6J-…: T^!~𾰁Oƈ yX*??$nQZJ6#J,JA-BA a$Xd?ᮥMMj(a67z%́1|\09-ߴV e opӿcęMZ1j@ʪMzڍrhCU֪ 6"P;~fg 7MB댄IJ&p_8#<"0/n(ag#)xV+&UGw1{y~ ?{q7ZlErEnƽX ^yT7,a/ũ`LY%hp5kH1Hg" oth3Ϋ v`NfuAaHeEW ^wXdXVdpOkYVy@CK ye.t̸VG I[#r&v,@B㺭_޸]1=;Gi, JB-$p\%pN+fyh=*OD\fyڦjOY+w)g:aCrhJ"XTPHk+XўL8xk\'IrL“~6N4/n~| F8mJ?KR:6P>8S;hdCy>k\TR4WoR8p;ģY]@ fn~UW+KJlec GB"U 4k!?TKd A[HuGIuJ![i@XO,7u]1-q@ ; ; X e6tfgiSAC n~!Rk0]E) }8auɬ}(ՃDk X@.+``X*e\7"so `=v O}ct9RN@Rz9iNM_xhUZti;ߛLS6eM|X7qf Yk@>,#;qo^ZZ/Q<ƢY-_u0?'bUK4-ˈG:룮Tݯ:ԓtE裖CŝW2ho)!^z佉YF s@ò߭PzaCާ:LlS r3hZ2S;A"P{Eɿ$gD'ThĐ%uZ !71aGUva`?v$z=F&m')pBJ y].zJTZثR s")kg-rCF  9jfrcf~H!tcaP1Ix{+/deLk<]Ɠ%٧+\V㇚&389;YK\T%ʜ0EXyڱU<6s &X`umyM>ہ㈃k $ܸM^rYs PxC6Nϣ$^Bmf-t`]ɠ  ^g-7zAM@Gኣ惨vmXn&ǺӰyt]f:#ā־[ F|8t--GԈ"x ]#I ya͓O`zW+Fy-q4: 4]U x"m[;ل5֓ 6yCzD'Axcy8-U UyfxՐ F^f<U'w= BT|$ddH.}g@%K)"cU:Tm:ÚH+by8~wJFQȵbǑ'8+V<'WwQ; 饓 i˹CڋRqi9B yQ܏2wPJ7z3,-4/LO fBמlU7$H:w$ !5APz*>)ە)FoR:7AWb]k6qX*:Dyjß(gZ;TFf!e P3T ~ q}~=GtrvPQ֒ AGϺ6SP_﬜%zjĆI江{~ T+OΕm_X>8<͘5 ޡ%@7["5tj,YfxL^U22C"nKk{oF_ eK\{v"a92|'BqUumE:Ѹ&'J:¨+8Q K[[b4]g$J>;K vI+' "7H-c W(C0Z.ZTGI,3XӇДp<f ۨD U+"aç`9|؞3փRat(NAmQW2Zb9}eǤx#N2@EٲZ!{BAys@u{lL+,v2FiLXyC y^p͛( ],#0TZKU1X 4 d8tck1[ݢ'Sr_(94e O]"&ņ@hM s`N/^XncykSRx|8CfiQXRJz䀤s>%*y! 5;j}HʡO1NʁŹ=P*x{T-%`WV]/kXLcY<-$4 ʺHV5xi8;FЎRJ2/f;HնQg[É5Q)?Q8]џ̫0 u!k|K4/#Y*v^jJ҄1Cm3; oFȕedCbܳERX YI6hf|p z(]]9zΪqeA6嫶 *Sp1zpm<,:XL?.D!)>[vJX R6S3Fޒ57KI\ WZL/5n&\YfUI\XeSNqAX-JRәXC!n ɘۨB :K9!:;i@ȟȁp?rY`W{ <{!R CMx`y(p[89orkZQl:˅:O9a}޳I)B5d4M5Q}8q,FgB*J?[mgb99=$O \x >wLX$`rH3g;#jyQHeckPXt߅p4F(b PX7єۯ,?x+i"trdA,;JݰL+;qSvE0&8{ȿ"2YOEDܦXFƬ4#rɞəK4"/{.22}C'(N9ʇVIlSS0?ck yӝ;jW2KH_ȖϋMaWjTM=j7s}9a!nFm 0hDhPӆ~e:,1Y{'+{of'h`ϸz2+. ^&yh>hYUÂE7^ \崂Ws|dK37`v .)zh:/c$>DR `\)īVj]Qw !挧Ji"FDŽibg5ܣ,BL\r,TedbgWy=kZDWL;8:jjLInҐG@e$ Rէaeb2$ nbЌnv#9 7|vKe6Xq/ڡBL&4l?W3^zɌ/$m| 9{vΨN0a#Y&ƃ>J+ {q{U )}DD 7Bx]ZfN!^J%C M੷/u8؉贆 jrȘQپΌ8&rG) *qgzz05F︯Tig!5ҭdzH ޤBC$$2e([ &~qUKx(ap#0 eLc|9g!:\_ IS2j,1㙘Vĉ}3ӅD1&5F0^.6̴ܼk`:v4O69,9άb¼$wl3djrWyvk&*W[FYQ"Kh O:yRRJ,ְ!ҜQRETn.z[AY;%!'I!m 6rvB㞞J uLX6 'TJi- uh/0|Hͅ4h 8nXtoj]V|:AX|9UF9&oGJ<!}N$jFbN)[z zx]81Yڨ(텤W,eYnN67?-,Ӛ dX)Zgf qXC{509ېu (۠BGW~AB"Bn0[ p%`K?{KT˅_\{W\ SAdk*EԾbGp31Qb>YͫL5}tNCƀ*k-!ʛۿg;Ч >|82GW._T5W@ز$Kf\Z{:_#%Q;mcmtD2u!,I lEq~#tsLtk^еJXDp͓[]'%"[ wkAF=9౧ \\eM=`גP`Υ:Jlꋕ<jAh'9=].1͝}ݠہuK19M!>jf?Rs~$KBnqbJH֔P:{_q"hhuw ;)Oo" A^̚FGU&.!psQ[]c:%8tRkS~-6 s[x0OgUf=ALR2ɺ ,Pk5&J ܸS颅vJ}&84e:z YTQS"9e5TJ78\RTNJɀ #5tPtnZ-~d,wZM^]r"/!8,76mX{3XL,LqJ zCl;;'{w%݇}m9P:%UC8c׉<(BX*n i>v-XkPQ'|<Иu~ Vt`&8%,ею4FK:Rp@t ~lp[ԍ 5XC̓+h"g`,$2r-`%D7fzCB= N+l詰Bܸ}N4r`E\mp4b_Spiث]'sH-^&bQ=ˆZ7%"hRi)DZ=+|| \yYh mF#b5b3֤Mdf|`^ S^i?uX_:!A2(i@˫iq4AZS4lgKBbp"||W%VŪ 3VMhX y#8tuGzňӝ1_mJP[^hu3{p{g6y~y$)Aj~Z5O}3C} p?A܉7<4$/1ՒUUyDƷEi}S~_1z]L<_\bei8xkCq%;M<C5a, y^yyκS| 8'Ni3+;}f0z-Yt4Цƫ#t2Ӟ0\Ҹ֟n~Af7 8YA%ٞcVAB%lx[(|H"nh"enك_ ߉M:=\x~WE]+K%5 '޻w"ۦqHsaK}ā(IPOfX JJ]*r]kaQ{]̝RXc`[}[&$M+6D$Y^fuB$pr\JH8lY M.l/RMAɗz:䪯΍'COZrmϳј,반\ a x+7C#Zřa_=3v n|Ű{ft :~ tNǥ`m=ؽ落 qA+I 00i,TՅEY:gpػMֿp!ST< [HMe REWT7AzygsȒn˨%Z3rAS qLd[\Q9K&TR3Dzڷa9:v+AfM)q#x0`h,ԦM./'|SkWhZn"5mHP49P\ GQc&@ RrRt {~Cp-ܩ!4"#>" Y^Է/ q69;ơIr^Y[Ȱ1܇qX:O@MuRUTPƛhǰqr4!5|qBK3Hl5KԄ(o5}df9{1فDl;!9W@k^NKeWJ1&~RP+(^7,eP*}`択,]1<Ce g{($Zۃ7 h|r~}WƁ觜bl-pSͧ UmCe3'%Ka\>{^z+y>7DS+mt^+m: :9>Ixi/B{QB[s Yd-5g|!Ti2y~ʌ]8*a9(3DiQɍ&΢Fx䕳V2U"Ȫ6 7 fv\%V a?k^EV?t|G|KB?Aa)b~m'e|X.h&nYn=_E3]U\ѕC@kndVrpPc+XryT mӷ9+ ϨUmkEH1 dygi KJ*!y{zXTg?|{"m:<.>"fϣPx-˱c{cl)|3KTA*ЭY@L ,0lfoC*?U_ _̐-RsDrV"[@{Ü>C![&tYlqla xJ5!yL/דo< ȯ24"z8e/Q^ wWRG،]0AW (\ :f[/QzXe[Up,f.?P6MJy !_,nQWl RX VƬI4Ubзz}EuoT QBd=l@Z>י!SzZ!j>`Y*QK4fe L'o![6= CbJIGZ"Lrʵcf Ŝd ? rBd>o,վ5v9igR5Oc\+xlS&Ԣ(]A|BU.D}SasPN#Hv@IkrM<ژOP9s}Zi|vD<4f4ܸf3)&Y70[I!I(5sM;OkjZH y [KUӂZRPdkfbŴR2C6zV5g*A,Q5@ hKq֚gyT. pW{ULE|KS| 0af&P00YOa9G.qЁ ՜pV~D{t(XW5,A9i-7nJVĩ9) ,}ab Y<-euVa t=X~ z]}fߌw=y18ybxf[Z9qȳ9qe(Zmj4^ iXKA*)>9'XAP8ZpFʃ832i2TOJG•13,uג&\PbDkk2}Z)R.4[\J4·E5$sKUH NZd]rx$ƶ8/ߤ2&NOVC  tlżӝ1 $蓋Aw@52u7M;0a~!).Zb,prCו^d4ǕT;(T6jN'"VIjNR9 ;6^@K )tQB\fZ5= P.!ku b=ˬQFر?yzhE,I;CNׅ[aT)<ǖB8L"UNO޲ZA@bBQD 1vu/U>z9iӮq$xNG!)eYT\dPKƴAr/dHa6>P*S0GlQ?zA?Zo]pbY Z3EƜeEW<&Vhbsj4Zj[c쮽 /bv[ާ*9oWj]/X}Kӳ>.јI=f}ԪVFj΁PeDBN=Xfs#TƾsRdS!c ;[W\B/2װ A]<ڃi_T/tdA0z]L՗5 ]|D4L$ O^W#bM0e(2O)j<.&#;>%σ|PaЁ U$Uf7"? o72{1ոSK. ih"p&*~i2=&64ûY$#._R8qxQKyL$C%?9ydo" i ew[19ܔ<[bd3@P(_x&/=rEldI4V+M4Β;4Ik9-HYIQFsJXvi&XmnfYAi$/^uQt=lcs GJ^䀇e"BTi j莬lE g2iAV1Y$9 ZQdBH rUg~s@N1¿yj˝|LvWSL>X !n*X.WUm'D[U~TQKT.iir0F *ma\ѻ3AVPJ-"秖 zpF',T4CvTD%hBoKi$HftU@.hzH'PzXQ<†~4b^$|\J]Wञ{RdFYxt!qxVi>P6xWMNr.d2Z{VmbPsΘNCGvfX&e^JG+Ѯ2+/P׼(I啂ZʅUGFO`m^|^TfUƣ x:%2cԭYXrA~,&W,A{RgItc;Fd|b,CS?k$f<+v)2v)%g`ue)#,:Gl]*@њ6) ( a7*:}H@ړ7*Ҧ UCNsS*cPΞ \GC|hQcd bzs[ТFO˞A=|(*/XC=6;~r=LO dꋔ DL\'I~nu l]?bKFtS&hoy8˞WB"^⩨J.tP񒄥3X+Fd5[GwWPT-rxy%]$x.k V$CT;f~jI4~6kq)֌^&I 1VL9~ĸݡ b/(b:$$T7R/hZף\ArJ(dJ٠|>:W|U)eʺIUfu8sUKfMFVkAQ}Bi*B.o/o"'QZ}z)YYfκağa5%+d`Z.{BBόMa؉5}sUsU5Lv|X[ȩl焜4ĩbf)?:3vNL nd*RNE91&f⤞K1qFoS_;#"~gYVb̏P@r5G(kS%I܃` %)^PS2?.\ǘ)i8*i%_Go25Y#1VV!|.ý$tKʥQ#8*K &r΋ƶإN."Ir6uYz]$ݽbl613תSOy{p R LͻVm'4;6/P-mtY(/}16ͫbg N-v=ŃkĞQB2DHٝsPѫ·wzu^UAePEM!Աƌmȑڻ>#c,-b+5z +,^;DOy3Qn۪;eC&g$wq @Y}Iq $fؙ-%4U7'ՌjyȆٮmBB:}/جIE9Z-wS%=yV;DJht['&63 &ET/k(.!/;Gj4e@qJ/zj'V=mTVBg5*f;Å: d,wS6D@ ~yMֶe'3o Nz/A`VOE HüXS2XsWO/"K/ #f^7^kcԳ)/OpcFCXrŻ`XWٿP G"gLNcXm忟X"Olq I狯Hҿ^:Æ8q񵳨ADgCf%YPS*tvxfjd[ =lrI1b{[:8Y ̵t;B4ѡQIaYnJLYEpe6βBcUo'd5E 82zYݕɍn2zclR!Q%:UbPm5 BܓY,AAeE 3'WxBRRSiglZ^Dv7jN oYr 3J";#pٰ <<ܷ72 N$. t\|Q9nx4:P{dt5>B<yNqJ`ԡDzB z81qH9Ґ=XfXP+~w` B+ w{ dI =l$`'1kTi[$&-dc jjKyY#IJNsk-V1S6pNub|ĚL%p M_A"/@4xɩK?SF@ GŸX<`͊B3*uZ}P3jsN^ÈsdL8-4lRhg@n.e]VPwLw.+J8!-bN6-Ol܊[Ej\faaYz>Q$Nt@,E &C5 `m?H%K('í!w6(
    Нравится краткая версия?
    Страница 1 из 1