The Idiot

The Idiot

by

Fyodor Dostoevsky

The Idiot: Part Three, Chapter Six Summary & Analysis

Summary
Analysis
When Ippolit became very ill about eight months ago, he cut himself off from his friends, and was also isolated within the context of his family. He is disappointed to see that Kolya, who has always been a loyal friend, has taken on Myshkin’s “Christian humility,” which Ippolit finds “ridiculous.” In March, Ippolit began to feel a little better. While he was walking outside, a man in front of him dropped his wallet, which Ippolit picked up. He ran after the man, which caused him to lose his breath. He managed to follow the man into a house, and found him lying, drunk, in bed. Ippolit could see from the state of the house and the man’s family are terribly impoverished. 
Ippolit’s disdain for Myshkin’s “Christian humility” is arguably a case of youthful arrogance. Yet it also might indicate that the kindness and innocence of Myshkin’s way of being in the world might be too much for someone in as much pain and despair as Ippolit. Facing the cruel absurdity of life and the certainty of death, nihilism is the only ideology that makes sense to him.
Themes
Innocence v. Foolishness Theme Icon
Money, Greed, and Corruption Theme Icon
Social Hierarchy, Authority, and Rebellion Theme Icon
Absurdity and Nihilism Theme Icon
Passion, Violence, and Christianity Theme Icon
At first, the drunk man was angry that Ippolit came into his house, but when Ippolit showed him the wallet and explained that he dropped it, the man was stunned. He said that all of his documents were in there, and that he would have been destroyed if the wallet was lost. Seeing Ippolit coughing, the man came to sit next to him and told him he was a “medical man.” (Ippolit notes that he specifically did not say “doctor.”) The man went on to explain that he had been a provincial doctor but had lost his job. He’d come to St. Petersburg to try and get reinstated, and in the meantime his family sank into a state of extreme poverty.
Ippolit’s act of kindness seems like a strange anecdote to include in a speech about nihilism. Indeed, this is the kind of anecdote one would expect to find in Christian writing. This is particularly true because of how it demonstrates that vulnerable people, despite their own misfortune, are capable of helping each other. This provides a redemptive aspect to suffering.
Themes
Innocence v. Foolishness Theme Icon
Money, Greed, and Corruption Theme Icon
Absurdity and Nihilism Theme Icon
Passion, Violence, and Christianity Theme Icon
Ippolit told the man that he knew the nephew of the state councilor who would be able to reinstate him. This nephew, named Bakhmutov, was an old schoolmate of Ippolit’s. Back at school, Bakhmutov was very popular; Ippolit was the only one who didn’t like him. Where Bakhmutov was been friendly to Ippolit, Ippolit was rude in response. Now, when Ippolit went to see Bakhmutov and told him the story about the doctor, Bakhmutov promised to talk to his uncle immediately. Within six weeks, the doctor was granted a new post, and Bakhmutov even threw him a farewell party. After the party, when the two of them were walking alone, Bakhmutov thanked Ippolit for making it possible for him to do this good deed.
Clearly, Ippolit and Bakhmutov are opposites. Unlike Ippolit, Bakhmutov is a kind, happy person who doesn’t hold grudges and relishes the opportunity to do a good deed. Another key piece of information provided in this passage is that Ippolit’s grouchy, misanthropic character actually preceded his affliction with tuberculosis. Even as a healthy schoolboy, he was rude to Bakhmutov for no reason.
Themes
Innocence v. Foolishness Theme Icon
Money, Greed, and Corruption Theme Icon
Social Hierarchy, Authority, and Rebellion Theme Icon
Absurdity and Nihilism Theme Icon
In response, Ippolit told Bakhmutov about an old state councilor in Moscow who always went to visit prisoners about to be sent to Siberia and called them “dear hearts,” giving them money and gifts. Ippolit reflects that in doing good for others, one ends up transforming the world more than it is possible to know. Bakhmutov exclaimed how tragic it was that Ippolit was soon going to die. Around this time, Ippolit developed a sense of his “ultimate conviction,” although he doesn’t yet reveal what this is. About 10 days ago he went to see Rogozhin, whom he had never met before. Ippolit was intrigued by Rogozhin, who he believes is a “man of intelligence.”  
Again, this anecdote does not appear to be heading in the direction that one would expect for a speech about nihilism. On the other hand, it is important to remember that the form of nihilism under the discussion in the novel did not reject social goods altogether. In fact, it advocated for radical change to Russian society in order to make it more egalitarian.
Themes
Innocence v. Foolishness Theme Icon
Money, Greed, and Corruption Theme Icon
Social Hierarchy, Authority, and Rebellion Theme Icon
Absurdity and Nihilism Theme Icon
Passion, Violence, and Christianity Theme Icon
Get the entire The Idiot LitChart as a printable PDF.
The Idiot PDF
Ippolit was also struck by Rogozhin’s gloomy house. After the visit, he felt very unwell, and was delirious. He suddenly remembers a painting he saw in Rogozhin’s house, the copy of Holbein’s “The Dead Christ.” Ippolit notes that, unlike other paintings of Jesus’s dead body, this depiction does not show Christ as “beautiful,” but rather a totally devastated, lifeless, and even disgusting corpse. He reflects that if this is truly what Jesus’s body looked like after the crucifixion, he cannot imagine how any of his disciples truly believed in the resurrection. The painting thus depicts Christ as having been destroyed by the cruel and ultimately senseless and absurd forces of nature.
By “nature,” Ippolit does not necessarily mean the natural world of trees, plants, and animals. Rather, he means a physical world without God or religion. He argues that Holbein’s painting shows Christ to be only a man in the sense that he was not able to overcome or transcend the physical reality of what was done to him. He seems to suggest that once someone has seen the visual reality of this possibility (in the painting), they will not be able to maintain Christian belief.
Themes
Innocence v. Foolishness Theme Icon
Social Hierarchy, Authority, and Rebellion Theme Icon
Absurdity and Nihilism Theme Icon
Passion, Violence, and Christianity Theme Icon
Quotes
Ippolit says these thoughts came to him in pieces, and asks: “Can something that has no image come as an image?” After the visit to Rogozhin’s house, Ippolit lay in bed, and at 1 a.m. Rogozhin came in. He sat silently and stared at Ippolit. Feeling infuriated, Ippolit then wondered if Rogozhin is really there, or if he is just hallucinating. He had never hallucinated before, not even in the midst of his illness. Whereas earlier at his house Rogozhin was wearing slippers, now, sitting in Ippolit’s room, he was dressed in white tie. He is not sure how long Rogozhin stayed, and only knows that eventually, he left as silently as he first came in. After, Ippolit realized the door was locked from the inside the whole time.
Ippolit’s possibly hallucinatory encounter with Rogozhin echoes exactly what happened to Myshkin when he felt Rogozhin’s eyes on him. Both characters wonder if their illness is to blame, but—at least in Myshkin’s case—it turned out that Rogozhin was really there (and was trying to kill him). The spectral, monstrous presence of Rogozhin in both these scenes emphasizes the idea that he is straightforwardly evil, an ongoing foil to the way that Myshkin is straightforwardly good.
Themes
Absurdity and Nihilism Theme Icon
Passion, Violence, and Christianity Theme Icon