Comparison of Camus and Dostoevsky Essays

Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment is a psychologically charged novel in which the primary element that plagues the protagonist, Rodion Raskolnikov, is not a person but rather an idea; his own idea. Raskolnikov has an unhealthy obsession with rendering himself into what he perceives as the ideal, supreme human being, an übermensch. Raskolnikov forms for himself a theory in which he will live purely according to his own will and transcend the social norms and moralities that dominate society. Raskolnikov suggests that acts commonly regarded as immoral are to be reserved for a certain rank of “extraordinary” men. Raskolnikov’s faith

"The day after his mother's death, this man was out swimming, starting up a dubious liaison, and going to the movies, a comedy, for laughs. " The prosecutor uses Meursault's previous unusual actions as evidence that he is a threat to society. His actions are deemed monstrous by the jury and subsequently end in Meursault's conviction. Society uses the past in order to justify the present. It is incorrect for one to assert that Meursault has no emotion or incapable of emotion; it is simply that he fails to exhibit it for he feels it is meaningless.

Between all the other characters in Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov are the most similar in that Svidrigailov is depicted as Raskolnikov’s baser self and a depraved character. While Raskolnikov is seen to be a more repentant character who is afflicted with guilt after murdering the pawnbroker for his own selfish desires despite telling himself it is for the greater good, Svidrigailov is rumored to have committed several murders and feels nothing for his victims, one of them being his own wife. Throughout the story, Rask is shown as wanting to be like Svidrigailov just as Svidrigailov longs to be like Rask because each one has qualities that the other wants in their life.

In The Stranger by Albert Camus, the murder committed by Meursault is questionably done with no reason. Although the entirety of the second part is spent in society’s attempts to find a cause, Meursault has a durable existential mentality that proves that even he knows that there is no true reason for the crime. Through the use of light and heat imagery and diction in The Stranger, Albert Camus comments on the duality of society trying to find a cause for the murder and Meursault defying this because of his existential mentality. These elements heighten Meursault’s negative outlook on life by

Diction shows the difference in Meursault’s views and beliefs as he spends more and more time in prison, adapts to his new lifestyle,

All the facts the prosecutor presents are valid and true, though unrelated to his case. From the prosecutor's point of view, Meursault is a “monster, a man without morals” (96). Even Meursault agrees that "what he was saying was plausible" (99). The reader, who knows all of Meursault’s thoughts, knows how absurd the prosecution’s accusations are. Throughout the trial, Camus explains that perception means everything, and there is no absolute truth.

Meursault is an independent and absurd guy who refuses to lie about himself to save his life. At the beginning of the book he avoids conversation and showed existentialism. For example, when the caretaker asked him, why he doesn’t want to see his mother’s body, he just simply said “I don’t know”. Another reason is when he would say, “marriage, no marriage, who cares.” Towards the ending of the book he starts to open up. In order for him to realize how wrong he was, he had to suffer the consequences. Meursault states, “For everything to be consummated, for me to feel less alone; I had only to wish that there be a large crowd of spectators the day of my execution and that they greet me with cries of hate(2.5.165). “Meaning, he finally has awareness and is open-minded about his life.

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.

Hamlet and Crime and Punishment have many similar themes between each other. Both books deal with themes of incurring madness, being one’s own moral compass and the struggle of religion. Both of the main characters throughout both books deal with the themes in their own unique ways with varying results. In both books Hamlet and Raskolnikov both have fits of madness and insanity.

In the novel, The Stranger by Albert Camus, Meursault the protagonist, becomes drawn into a “senseless” murder that has to face the absurdity of life and because of his actions, Meursault is presented as a danger due to his lack of “morality” to society. Meursault who is not able to take control of his life but respond to what life offers him believes in the simplicity of life. He tries to understand the living through logic and objectivity, which ultimately turns futile, as he himself cannot maintain proper control over his thoughts and emotions. From the interactions between Marie, to the murder of the Arab, and the meeting with the Chaplain, Meursault overcomes his indifferent views to form an opinion about what life really means. The central theme presented by Camus is how the threat of mortality becomes a catalyst for understanding the significance of life.

From declaring he wanted to become a Napoleon to wishing for financial independence to murdering for his own sake, he rattles off various motives, showing his obsessive rationalization (394-397). By presenting his conflicting intentions, Dostoevsky exhibits the chaos within Raskolnikov’s mind.

What is equally absurd is that Meursault remains passive and detached over the course of a year of interrogations, and despite the pessimistic nature of his situation, he is able to feel a sense of comfort and belonging within the system trying to condemn him. Ironically, those witness testimonies that sought to free him prove to be the most damaging, and the religious people who surround him and purport to love all men unconditionally persecute him for his lack of belief. Everyone is astonished that Meursault has no emotions about the murder --no sense of remorse or desire to repent. Most men in his position find

office, but Algiers would do for him as well; he was willing to marry Marie,

This easy-going, pleasant hedonism is interrupted permanently by Meursault's murder of the Arab on the beach. Not only is he incarcerated, but also he must examine the reality behind the illusion of his trial and, ultimately, of his life. Introspection has not been his metier. It takes him a while to realize that the judge, the jury, the journalists, even his own lawyer, do not wish him well. Meursault finally realizes that he is going to be convicted, not because he killed an Arab but because he did not mourn his mother's death.

Even when Raskolnikov was asleep he received painful messages of others who were suffering, just as he was. In one particular instance, before the double-murder, Raskolnikov is brought back to the poverty he suffered throughout his childhood. He once again feels a great empathy toward the suffered, but this time