Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov and Crime and Punishment

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.

In the beginning of Chapter XII of Tolstoy’s story, Ivan starts to painfully scream loudly for three consecutive days, during which time Ivan realizes that his doubts are still unsolved. During this moment, Ivan realizes that moving up in social esteem has not led to joy, fulfillment, and life, but to misery, emptiness, and death instead. Blinded by the values of high society, he

Dostoevsky’s beliefs and philosophies are reflections of the Russian philosophies from his era. He incorporates many of his own opinions and beliefs into his work in Crime and Punishment. Dostoevsky’s insight affects the novel as he integrates his views into his characters.

Individuals have different ways in responding to hardships based on the principles they live by. In Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky explores contrasting ways of response to adversity. In the novel, there are those who don’t commit crimes while facing the hardships of life, like Sonia, Lizaveta, and Mikolka. Those like Raskolnikov, however, try to change the elements of life that provide challenges by taking drastic measures to modify society and life: by murdering an opportunist pawnbroker in his case. When reading Crime and Punishment, one can see that the difference in one’s response to suffering depends on whether or not violence is used. While Raskolnikov uses violence to change his circumstances, other characters respond to the same challenges of life in a way that does not generate violence. Approach to suffering is strictly rooted in the contrasting principles that the characters in the novel posses. Sonia, Lizaveta, and Mikolka’s way of life contradicts the principles that Raskolnikov lives by. Raskolnikov, in contrast, views himself as a Napoleonic figure, which takes his fate in his own hands in the beginning of the novel. By presenting these two opposing sides, Dostoevsky shows those who “step over” the laws to bring change into society and those who don’t. Raskolnikov establishes himself as a person who has new ideas.

In 1880 he finished his novel, The Brothers Karamazov, which opened many discussions on ethics and the nature of God. He dug into the difficult topic of human suffering under a perfect God. He seemed to be responding to the idea that suffering brought harmony to universe, claiming that joy would not be true joy if it there was not suffering as well. Dostoevsky seemed to accept the notion that adults’ suffering is just because they often choose evil things which brings suffering on them. On the other hand, he argued, children’s suffering should not be called just because they are incapable of choosing evil. I agree with this argument in arguing against divine harmony being the reason for human suffering, but I would say that even most adults do not deserve many of the afflictions they receive. The problem is that Dostoevsky implies that this is a reason to rebel against God here he makes an appeal to ignorance fallacy. He is saying that because we do not know why children suffer under a perfect God means there must not be a logical explanation. So in the end, Dostoevsky does give a reason to question the divine harmony argument, but does not give us reason to question the justice of God. This pulls philosophers back to the drawing board to solve the problem of human

In its historical context Notes from the Underground was written at a time when Russian writers were attempting to revive opposition to Reformation. These writers emphasized the ills of “separation, egotism and autonomy” that permeated much of 19th century Russia (Golstein 1998, p. 194). Russian writers were expressing the opinion that humanity was lacking in meaningful direction. In this regard, Dostoevsky’s Notes from the Underground is a representation of the hero who embodied separation but invariably fails, thus embodying the concept of anti-heroism (Golstein 1998, p. 194).

Imperial Russian society during the time of serfdom was characterized by constantly changing social order. The society experienced a complex social change at the threshold to emancipation. It was undergoing many changes with increasing westernization and serfdom culture that gave rise to formation of new classes (raznochintsy) during the nineteenth century. Many authors have reflected and emphasized this component of change in the structure of pre-emancipation Russian society. This paper will examine how two writers: Nikolai Gogol and Ivan Turgenev, in their novels, Dead Souls and Fathers and Sons depict the society’s constantly changing nature through the relationships between their characters and the development in their beliefs and ideas. Although both the novels explore societal change during the pre-emancipation of serfs, the emphasis of change is different in both the novels. In Fathers and Sons, Turgenev oversees shifting values prevalent in the society. He explores the shift in generational values by depicting the difference in beliefs of characters like Bazarov and Nikolai. On the other hand, in Dead Souls Gogol focuses on issues of morality in society. He depicts a struggle for morality and portrays a corrupt society through the landowners and the protagonist, Chichikov, in his book.

One of the themes of Tolstoy’s story of The Death of Ivan Ilych is detachment from life, considering that all material things can substitute the true meaning of life: compassion and care for others. “Everywhere in the novel, Tolstoy speaks of Iván Ilych's desire for propriety, decorous living, and pleasantness all while making this his first and most important priority. This motivation is a poor

In this paper, I plan to explain Dostoevsky’s criticism of Western Individualism. Dostoevsky’s first criticism resides in the idea to “love life more than the meaning of it, “which is presented by the character Alyosha (Dostoevsky 3). Allowing this character to discuss this topic, along with the commentary of Ivan, demonstrates their mindset to solely focus on their own lives, opposed to caring for others. This leads to them living for the now, and not focusing on how their decisions will affect their future or others. Dostoevsky disapproves of this notion because living by this mentality encourages the guidance of logic, which is dangerous because it could tell you to kill yourself. From Dostoevsky’s Eastern Orthodox background, he believes that the only way from living from this situation is to deny it. By denying this way of living, the focus toward life will not be directed toward yourself, but toward the way you can impact the environment around you. Ivan clearly does not believe in these values, due to his intentions to commit suicide at the age of thirty. As said before, living by the idea to “love life more than the meaning of it” leads to death, and Ivan indulges in this to the fullest (Dostoevsky 3).

The title of Feodor Dostoevsky’s work, Crime and Punishment, leads the mind to think that the book will focus on a great punishment set by enforcers of the law that a criminal will have to endure, but the book does not really focus on any physical repercussions of the crimes of the main character, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov.

If I could meet Dostoevsky I would ask him what his inspiration for Crime and Punishment was. Sometimes I wonder if the novel was written to give us insight to how Dostoevsky felt about the world. Maybe he is using the character Raskolnikov to portray a part of him who feels alienated from the world, and is torn apart

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.

Before the interactive oral, I noticed the numerous dreams and hallucinations in the novel Crime and Punishment, but I was not quite able to grasp the deeper meaning of some of the dreams and hallucinations. After this interactive oral, I see how important dreams are in this novel. They serve to illuminate the state of a character in a way that would not otherwise be clear.

In the novel “Crime and Punishment”, by Fyodor Dostoevsky, Dostoevsky expresses his disapproval of the Ubermensch theory by using his main character; Raskolnikov who tries to become an extraordinary person but fails to do so. Raskolnikov is put in a group where people maintain the idea that man is not actually equal but are divided into two separate groups which are; the ordinary people who are locked within the laws and tradition of society by only reproducing their own kind, and the extraordinary who believe that people should have the moral right to break laws if their violation is for the greater society.

The author showed his opinion on the structure of the society, social norms and beliefs. He expressed his disagreement with “The Extraordinary Man Theory”. He told the audience that all people have feelings and emotions and cannot rely only on logic and calculations. People cannot hurt others and go unpunished. The ending of the novel helped to strengthen his ideas and convictions. In the end, everyone in the novel received the deserved punishment assigned either by the law or by fate. Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov realized that their actions were wrong and contradicted to the all social norms. They recognized that they were not extraordinary men. Dostoevsky made this novel very educative and filled with morality. It is great for people of all times and generations. It reveals what is good and wrong; it teaches how to be a