Crime and Punishment and Raskolnikov's article, "On Crime"
Raskolnikov's article, "On Crime," is vital to the understanding of his beliefs. This article also has a profound effect on Crime and Punishment as a whole, the subject matter being one of the main themes of the novel. The idea of the "extraordinary man" is referred to literally throughout the book, but also notable is the subconscious effect the idea has on Raskolnikov. Sometimes Raskolnikov is not even aware of this influence. It is important to note originality, or the ability to "utter a new word," as a defining characteristic of the extraordinary man. Therefore, we must take into account the presence of similar ideas, those of Pisarev, Nietzsche, and nihilism, as these might bring to light the possibility that Raskolnikov is not original, a possibility that haunts him throughout the novel.
Within the article Raskolnikov analyzes the psychology of a criminal before and after the crime. This main portion of the article is not discussed, but it is likely that the psychological explanation that Porfiry gives Raskolnikov later, in the examination, is very similar. During this later examination, Raskolnikov appears resentful, but never disputes what Porfiry tells him, perhaps because it is a regurgitation of Raskolnikov's own thoughts. In the last meeting of the two men, Porfiry admits that he liked the article very much, and actually felt a connection with it. The one part of the main body of the article that is mentioned is "that the perpetration of a crime is always accompanied by illness" (225). Porfiry comments that this idea is very original; Raskolnikov welcomes this praise.
Shortly, Porfiry moves on to the main topic of their discussion, a topic only mentioned briefly in the article, the idea that "certain persons...have a perfect right to commit breaches of morality and crimes" (225). Raskolnikov immediately realizes that Porfiry is intentionally exaggerating the idea, and "decided to take up the challenge" (226). Dostoevsky lets the reader know that the conversation will be a battle of wits. The ensuing argumentative dialogue makes the passage very entertaining, especially in contrast to later interviews between the two, in which Porfiry does nearly all the talking (he loves to hear himself talk). Raskolnikov attempts to clarify his idea, explaining that the "extraordinary" people have the right, but are not bound, to "overstep obstacles" if it is "essential" for the fulfillment of their idea.
Plato's The Apology is an account of the speech. Socrates makes at the trial in which he is charged with not recognizing the gods recognized by the state, inventing new gods, and corrupting the youth of Athens. For the most part, Socrates speaks in a very plain, conversational manner. He explains that he has no experience with the law courts and that he will instead speak in the manner to which he is accustomed with honesty and directness. Socrates then proceeds to interrogate Meletus, the man primarily responsible for bringing Socrates before the jury. He strongly attacks Meletus for wasting the court¡¦s time on such absurd charges. He then argues that if he corrupted the young he did so unknowingly since Socrates believes that one never deliberately acts wrongly. If Socrates neither did not corrupt the young nor did so unknowingly, then in both cases he should not be brought to trial. The other charge is the charge of impiety. This is when Socrates finds an inconsistency in Meletus¡¦ belief that Socrates is impious. If he didn¡¦t believe in any gods then it would be inconsistent to say that he believed in spiritual things, as gods are a form of a spiritual thing. He continues to argue against the charges, often asking and answering his own questions as if he were speaking in a conversation with one of his friends. He says that once a man has found his passion in life it would be wrong of him to take into account the risk of life or death that such a passion might involve.
Dostoyevsky's writing in this book is such that the characters and setting around the main subject, Raskolnikov, are used with powerful consequences. The setting is both symbolic and has a power that affects all whom reside there, most notably Raskolnikov. An effective Structure is also used to show changes to the plot's direction and Raskolnikov's character. To add to this, the author's word choice and imagery are often extremely descriptive, and enhance the impact at every stage of Raskolnikov's changing fortunes and character. All of these features aid in the portrayal of Raskolnikov's downfall and subsequent rise.
In Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky gives the reader an inside look to the value system that he holds for himself, as well as the type of characteristics that he abhors in people as well as the characteristics that he admires in people. He uses characters in the novel to express his beliefs of what a person should be like in life to be a “good'; person. Specifically he uses Raskolnokv to show both good and bad characteristics that he likes in people. Also he uses Svidriglaiov and Luzin to demonstrate the characteristics that people should shun and his personal dislikes in people.
In Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov's initial crime, failure, and acceptance of mistakes are his road to overcoming his ego, as well as self discovery.
Raskolnikov holds that by a law of nature men have been "somewhat arbitrarily" divided into two groups--ordinary and extraordinary. Raskolnikov believe that the duty and vocation of the first group is to be servile, the material out of which the world and society is to be formed. The first group are the people of the present, the now. The second group, those who are extraordinary, are a step above the normal, ordinary curs. They have the ability to overstep normal bounds and transgress the rights of those who are simply ordinary. They are the prime movers--they have a right to transcend normal societal strictures to accomplish those things they have determined are valid in their conscience. Extraordinary men are the prime movers. He cites such extraordinary men as Newton, Mahomet, and Napoleon. He tells us that Newton had the right to kill hundreds of men if need be in order to bring to the world knowledge of his findings. Napoleon and other leaders created a new word. They overturned ancient laws and created new ones. They had the right to uphold their new ideal, even if it meant killing innocent men defending the ancient law. "The first class of people preserve and people the world, the second move the world and lead it to its goal." Despite these tremendous differences in his theory, and the obvious superiority that the extraordinary people are afforded, Raskolnikov maintains that both classes have an equal right to exist. This is interesting, and anyone who sees tremendous problems with this theory must realize this very important point--both classes of men and women are necessary to understand the true meaning of Raskolnikov's theory.
Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment begins with Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov living in poverty and isolation in St. Petersburg. The reader soon learns that he was, until somewhat recently, a successful student at the local university. His character at that point was not uncommon. However, the environment of the grim and individualistic city eventually encourages Raskolnikov’s undeveloped detachment and sense of superiority to its current state of desperation. This state is worsening when Raskolnikov visits an old pawnbroker to sell a watch. During the visit, the reader slowly realizes that Raskolnikov plans to murder the woman with his superiority as a justification. After the Raskolnikov commits the murder, the novel deeply explores his psychology, yet it also touches on countless other topics including nihilism, the idea of a “superman,” and the value of human life. In this way, the greatness of Crime and Punishment comes not just from its examination of the main topic of the psychology of isolation and murder, but the variety topics which naturally arise in the discussion.
Often times in literature, we are presented with quintessential characters that are all placed into the conventional categories of either good or bad. In these pieces, we are usually able to differentiate the characters and discover their true intentions from reading only a few chapters. However, in some remarkable pieces of work, authors create characters that are so realistic and so complex that we are unable to distinguish them as purely good or evil. In the novel Crime and Punishment, Fyodor Dostoevsky develops the morally ambiguous characters of Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov to provide us with an interesting read and to give us a chance to evaluate each character.
In his book Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky explores the paths of two men, Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov. These two men encompass many similar problems and obstacles throughout their lives. Both commit murders and are faced with the long and mentally excruciating journey of seeking redemption. They also share many characteristics of their personalities. The reason that the outcomes of their lives are so drastically different is due to the fact that they have completely different perspectives on life.
Dostoevsky's 1865 novel Crime and Punishment is the story of an expelled university student's murder of an old pawnbroker and her sister. The idealistic ex-student, Raskolnikov, is ultimately unable to live up to his own nihilistic theory of what makes a "Great Man" and, overcome by fits of morality, betrays himself to the police. Exiled to Siberia, suffering redeems the unfortunate young dreamer. Crime and Punishment is similar in many ways to Balzac's Pere Goriot, especially in respect to questions of morality. In Balzac, the master-criminal Vautrin lives by an amoral code similar to Raskolnikov's theory of Great Men--unrestrained by conscience, Vautrin holds that laws are for the weak, and those clever enough to realize this may overstep any boundaries they wish and dominate the rest of mankind. But where Balzac's characters act on this idea without repercussion, Raskolnikov makes a transgression and then begins immediately to question it. The result is a psychological inner battle between rationality and sentimental moralism which is as much a contest between Empiricism and Romanticism as it is a contest between good and evil, or God and the Devil.
Before and following Raskolnikov’s murder, he lives a life of anxiety and pride. Raskolnikov has no concern for anyone. But gradually Raskolnikov changes his attitude and actions. This alteration then leads him to confess and recognize his crime. This positive change is all thanks to Sonia. Throughout Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov meets with Sonia and at each meeting Raskolnikov advances in recovering his lost emotions. Sonia was necessary for Raskolnikov’s growth because without her Raskolnikov would have remained a prideful, miserable, man. Sonia’s actions and thoughts for Raskolnikov influence and move him. Yet Raskolnikov is the one who truly changes himself. But this transformation is only possible by Sonia. So she is a positive and
Within the tortured mind of a young Russian university student, an epic battle rages between two opposite ideologies - the conservative Christianity characteristic of the time, and a new modernist humanism gaining prevalence in academia. Fyodor Dostoevsky in the novel Crime and Punishment uses this conflict to illustrate why the coldly rational thought that is the ideal of humanism represses our essential emotions and robs us of all that is human. He uses the changes in Raskolnikov's mental state to provide a human example of modernism's effect on man, placing emphasis upon the student's quest for forgiveness and the effect of repressed emotion. The moral side of Raskolnikov's mind requires absolution in a Christian manner. This need obliviates his claim to be a Nietzschean superman, and illustrates that all humans have a desire for morality.
In Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, Raskalnikov undergoes a period of extreme psychological upheaval. By comparing this death and rebirth of Raskalnikov's psyche to the story of the resurrection of Lazarus, Dostoevsky emphasizes not only the gravity of his crimes, but also the importance of acceptance of guilt.
In his novel Crime and Punishment Fyodor Dostoevsky uses Raskolnikov as a vessel for several different philosophies that were particularly prominent at the time in order to obliquely express his opinions concerning those schools of thought. Raskolnikov begins his journey in Crime and Punishment with a nihilistic worldview and eventually transitions to a more optimistic one strongly resembling Christian existentialism, the philosophy Dostoevsky preferred, although it could be argued that it is not a complete conversion. Nonetheless, by the end of his journey Raskolnikov has undergone a fundamental shift in character. This transformation is due in large part to the influence other characters have on him, particularly Sonia. Raskolnikov’s relationship with Sonia plays a significant role in furthering his character development and shaping the philosophical themes of the novel.
Literary critic and the novel’s annotator Alfred Appel Jr. claims “what is extraordinary about Lolita is the way in which Nabokov enlists us, against our will, on Humbert’s side… Humbert has figuratively made the reader his accomplice in both statutory rape and murder” (Durantaye, Style Is Matter: the Moral Art of Vladimir Nabokov 8). Nabokov employs various literary devices such as direct second reader address, metaphor, and allusions through Humbert Humbert as a means to conjure up feelings of empathy. The reader comes to find that . It is clear that Humbert Humbert uses second person address as a way to control how the reader perceives him. Through the use of this narrative mode, he aims to convince the reader that his sexual violence is artistically justifiable and that the art he creates is a remedy for mortality. I will argue is that art is not a remedy for mortality because in Humbert Humbert’s creation of Lolita, t...
In Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita, the overruling drive of the narrator, Humbert Humbert, is his want to attest himself master of all, whether man or woman, his prime cravings, all-powerful destiny, or even something as broad as language. Through the novel the reader begins to see Humbert’s most extreme engagements and feelings, from his marriage to his imprisonment, not as a consequence of his sensual, raw desires but rather his mental want to triumph, to own, and to control. To Humbert, human interaction becomes, or is, very unassuming for him: his reality is that females are to be possessed, and men ought to contest for the ownership of them. They, the women, become the very definition of superiority and dominance. But it isn’t so barbaric of Humbert, for he designates his sexuality as of exceptionally polished taste, a penchant loftier than the typical man’s. His relationship with Valerie and Charlotte; his infatuation with Lolita; and his murdering of Quilty are all definite examples of his yearning for power. It is so that throughout the novel, and especially by its conclusion, the reader sees that Humbert’s desire for superiority subjugates the odd particularities of his wants and is the actual reason of his anguish.