Book Report of the Novel 'Crime and Punishment'

Raskolnikov’s brusque affectation eventually yields to his predilection for salvation and redemption. He ultimately comes to the realization that he is not worthy of being “extraordinary” because of the crippling guilt that followed his murder of the pawnbroker. Raskolnikov reflects upon the implications of his crime on his psyche, “I murdered myself, not her! I crushed myself once for all,

In Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky creates a psychological thriller, in which he reimagines his own life through the eyes of Raskolnikov. Whereas the Russian government sentences Dostoevsky to Siberia as punishment for sedition, Siberia serves a means of atonement for Raskolnikov. This type of religious undertone reinforces the novel’s existentialistic messages that emphasizes individual existence, freedom and choice. It holds the view that humans define their own meaning in life, and try to make rational decisions despite existing in an irrational universe. Thus, humans create their own purpose in life and their choices define who they are. Dostoevsky utilizes figurative language, specifically biblical allusions, as a way of conveying and clarifying these themes to the reader. By connecting to Bible, the author universalizes the intention, allowing the reader to apply the text to their own lives, and granting the audience further insight into the novel. Thus, biblical allusions help enrich the themes of Crime and Punishment while also cementing the central message of salvation- anyone, even murderers, have the potential to redeem themselves.

The point Dostoevsky is trying to make with Raskolnikov’s arc is truly laid bare when examining raskolnikov’s mental state. In the early portions of Crime and punishment Raskolnikov is, for the most part, neutrally charged emotionally speaking: dreary, dismal, and in poor spirits, but not despairing, just average for someone of his walk of life. Crime and Punishment begins with our protagonist having just published an article explaining an idea of society where “exceptional” people may do unjust things, such as robbery or murder, to help the greater mass of “ordinary” people. His article roughly parrots utilitarianism (an action can be justified by the amount of overall pleasure it creates). Following this logic, Raskolnikov begins planning the “just” murder of a pawnbroker and tries to justify it to himself, but has second thoughts. Significant narrative is spent on his internal conflict, as he tries to convince himself that his dark plans are nothing more than flights of fancy, and he becomes increasingly panicked and upset at the thoughts he is having. As more pages pass filled with internal struggle, Raskolnikov accepts that he really does want to kill the person he sees as the cause of his misery, (a stingy elderly pawnbroker,) and seeks validation in any form; he listens to people in pubs mumble about how awful the woman is, and even refers to his own article. After Raskolnikov kills the old woman, he is plagued

James Swanson’s intent in writing Bloody Crimes, The Chase for Jefferson Davis and the Death Pageant for Lincoln’s Corpse, is to compare the journey and fanfare that followed the funeral pageantry of Abraham Lincoln with the desperate escape attempt made by Jefferson Davis. Swanson states that, “The people of the Union and the Confederacy both shared a common belief and could agree upon one thing. In the spring of 1865, an era of bloody crimes had reached its climax.” (Swanson xiv) Abraham Lincoln’s death pageantry directly affected over seven million people, leaving a lasting impact on generations to come. Abraham Lincoln’s assassination was the event that reinvigorated the North, giving them the strength and determination to win the war.

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.

The protagonist, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, a former student, decides to murder and rob an old pawn broker, Alyona Ivanovna, not due to his desperate need of money, but due to a theory he wants to test. Raskolnikov leaves no evidence which would lead the investigation to him; however, the police lieutenant in charge of the case, Porfiry Petrovich, a meticulous thinker, understands Raskolnikov’s theory and has a big role in influencing the student to confess. Between the murder and the confession, Raskolnikov undergoes a long and painful process of thought. His friend, Razumikhin Prokofych, along with a prostitute and his future significant other, Sonia Semyonovna Marmeladova, are part of the protagonist’s path. In the end, Sonia turns out to be Raskolnikov’s salvation as she helps him find redemption and start living

He is a delinquent just like Raskolnikov except the majority of his crimes are in the past besides for the most recent one of him trying to rape Dunya and getting turned away. (Which later causes him to commit suicide from heartbreak because she will never love him back. Which allows him to keep his pride in who he is.) Svidrigailov like Raskolnikov is very prideful but he is able to hide his true colors as if he has an on off switch to flip-flop between the two. On the outside he seems as a man that knows how to carry him and very suave, but on the inside he is utterly depraved. Since he believes in the same theory of Ubermenche and being Superman as Raskolnikov does, he feels no remorse for the murders he has committed in the past. Upon meeting, Svidrigailov declares that him and Raskolnikov have something in common because he has eavesdropped and heard about the murders but Raskolnikov does not like the idea and declares it not true although later he realizes that it was. After being with Svidrigailov for so long and coming to understanding of why he is who he is, Raskolnikov ends up looking to Svidrigailov as a validation for his crimes. Although Raskolnikov looks to Svidrigailov for validation he believes that he is morally wrong with his theory of the Ubermenche and does not like him for it, but what he does not realize that he too is wrong as well. He believes that he is still somewhat

However, it becomes clear throughout the novel that he does feel guilty. For example, when Raskolnikov helps Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov return to his family after he is ran over, Raskolnikov walks away feeling like he has somewhat atoned for his sins. Also, proving that Raskolnikov feels guilty for what he did is that, at the end of the novel, Raskolnikov confesses in the street, even though there was someone charged with the crime already. If, according to Raskolnikov, an extraordinary man, which he believes himself to be, should feel no guilt, then why does Raskolnikov feel the need to atone for his sins by helping Semyon Zakharovick Marmeladov`s family and then eventually

In Part 5 of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov confesses to his crime to Sonya, and in the process reveals more about himself than he would have liked to. Once the crying has stopped, they communicate on a fundamentally deep level, with Sonya clearly expressing her love for him. Interestingly, Raskolnikov actually finds this love difficult to deal with, rather than his guilt of murder. For this entire story, Raskolnikov has been separated from the rest of humanity, yet now he has the potential to re enter, he just has to attone for the sins of his past. Raskolnikov’s belief that he is special, separates and disjoints him from the rest of society, leading to his own emotional turmoil, and now that he has found human connection and love, he has the burden of potentially losing it.

In Crime and Punishment, Fyodor Dostoevsky discusses justice, questioning who or what determines this ideal. Primarily, he focuses on a man named Raskolnikov, who murders two women and then wrestles with his motives. As Raskolnikov’s hopeless outlook drives him to madness, his friend Sonia reveals an alternative view of justice, which allows for redemption. Through analyzing his character’s viewpoints, Dostoevsky never explicitly defines justice; instead, he exposes his audience to different interpretations to form their own conclusions. However, by depicting Raskolnikov spiraling into madness, Dostoevsky guides his reader to reject justice as determined by man in favor of it established by a higher power.

He has to decide whether he wants to be in trouble or not and this is a problem! That shows that even though, physical consequences might not come, a normal person’s conscience can and will provide a much more insufferable punishment to deal with. The punishment of knowing that you have done wrong is demanding on Raskolnikov and at the end of the book, he ends up confessing to his crimes to end the torment and clear his conscience.

Through Raskolnikov’s exemplification of the impracticality of this principle\, Dostoevsky makes his greatest point in Crime and Punishment. His commentary on the subject seeks to discredit the theory in the circumstance of an individual “superman” by displaying Raskolnikov as a character who is difficult for readers to identify with because of his inanity. Even Raskolnikov’s name is a symbol of nihilistic ideas, the word “raskol” meaning schism in Russian, illustrating the shift from an older school of thought (social utopianism) to a darker philosophy: nihilism and utilitarianism. Raskolnikov seems to fluctuate back and forth between the two philosophies, acting on one and then mentally chastising himself for it, immediately and almost erratically changing his mind. This symbolizes the more human side of him struggling

In Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment, the murder of the pawnbroker bears little significance when compared to the 'punishment' that Raskolnikov endures. The murder is the direct result of Raskolnikov's Ubermensch theory. Though it takes a while for Raskolnikov to realize the profound mistake in his theory and in his logic, his tedious yet prolific journey eventually leads him to redemption. Suffering, guilt and societal alienation prompt Raskolnikov to reject his Ubermensch theory and ultimately achieve redemption. Through Raskolnikov's character, Dostoevsky reveals that the psychological punishment inflicted by an unethical action is more effective in leading to self-realization than any physical punishment.

The characteristics of the genre the work does meet is provide the reader thought provoking questions over their morals of what is considered a crime and what punishment should be made by delving into the mind of a criminal tormented by the guilt of a murder which presented psychological aspects, and displaying a situation that involves a criminal with motive and events that led to his imprisonment.

While in a conversation with Sonia, Raskolnikov says “I did not bow down to you [Sonya], I bowed down to all the suffering of humanity." (Dostoevsky, Page 350) Meaning that he went through both physical and mental suffering which contributed to the guilt that he had after the murder. But he would not have felt this guilt if he had successfully eclipsed into the Superman. But he didn’t accomplish this and still remained unaffected by his crime. Raskolnikov’s idea of the superman theory continues by a conversation he has with Porfiry Petrovitch where they talk about an essay in which Raskolnikov wrote about the superman theory with his own thoughts that got published in the newspaper, in Raskolnikov’s essay he states “In a word, you (Raskolnikov) introduce, if you remember, a hint to the effect that there are persons who are able, or rather, not who are able but who have every right, to commit any wrong or crime, and that laws, so to say, are not made for them.” (Dostoevsky, Page 220) Afterwards, Raskolnikov responds by saying “The extraordinary man has the right... I don’t mean a formal, official right, but he has the right in himself, to permit his conscience to overstep… certain obstacles, but only in the event that his ideas require it for their fulfilment.” (Dostoevsky, Page 220) Raskolnikov basically makes a distinction between the ordinary and the extraordinary. Raskolnikov’s ideology to