Moral Conflicts in Fydor Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment
Crime and Punishment by Fydor Dostoyevsky has been hailed as the greatest literary work in the Western hemisphere. Crime and Punishment was written in pre-Communist Russia under the Tsar. Dostoyevsky's writing shows insight into the human mind that is at once frightening and frighteningly real. His main character, around who all other characters are introduced, is Rodion Romanovitch Raskolnikov.
Raskolnikov murders an old pawnbroker woman for seemingly no reason at all. His sister and mother move to St. Petersburg following his sister's engagement to a man whom Raskolnikov was extremely displeased. Raskolnikov undergoes severe mental trauma, and falls ill after the
…show more content…
Dostoyevsky gives the reader no such comfort. The reader wants to see Raskolnikov have some good excuse for killing the old woman, some sense of moral justification of the act so we can turn his accusers into "bad guys" and himself and his friends the "good guys". The reader gets nothing of the sort, Crime and Punishment is no fairy tale. The suspense in Crime and Punishment is caused by Dostoyevsky's superb characters, and the longing for a moral sense of right and wrong.
In a normal novel, there is a protagonist that the Western reader wants to identify with himself. Everyone wants to think of themselves as have some redeeming value in their lives, and for the most part, people usually think the good in them outweighs the bad. So how come in many Western novels the bad guy is thoroughly and totally corrupt and evil. The antagonist in Western literature today has become someone who the reader can look at and hate. Raskolnikov is definitely the protagonist, for clearly the action of the novel centers around him. But can he be called the "good guy"? He does terrible things on impulse, but his urge for doing good and kind acts is just as impulsive. He saves a family from certain destitution, and helps many people before he is sent to Siberia at the end of the novel. The reader wants to identify with Raskolnikov, but can't because of the murders. The reader also can't side against Raskolnikov and identify with Porifry Petrovitch, the
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.
Dostoevsky, the author of Crime and Punishment, was extremely concerned with many of the social issues of his day. It his work, he addresses the rise of nihilism and disregard for moral responsibility that overtook Russia’s youth during the 1860s through Raskolnikov, who murders a pawnbroker.
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.
In the novel “Crime and Punishment”, the author, Fyodor Dostoevsky gives the reader a glimpse into the mind of a tormented criminal, by his guilt of a murder. Dostoevsky’s main focal point of the novel doesn’t lie within the crime nor the punishment but within the self-conflicting battle of a man and his guilty conscience. The author portrays tone by mood manipulation and with the use of descriptive diction to better express his perspective in the story, bringing the reader into the mind of the murderer.
No matter what job you have in the criminal justice system there will always be ethical dilemmas that arise. As a person who’s job is to enforce the law there is always a way to step over the boundaries whether it be unfair treatment to citizens, inmates or agencies. There is always areas of the career to consider and in order to make everyone happy there are steps that need to be taken. From the police officer on the street to the parole board there is always something that could come up which could have consequences for either decision so which is the right one?
As Raskolnikov’s internal struggle becomes evident, Dostoevsky uses Raskolnikov’s disoriented state to illustrate nihilism’s ineffectiveness as a catalyst for social change. Raskolnikov’s radical philosophy is initially used as justification of his murder, a gambit to escape St. Petersburg’s poverty crisis. By labeling the pawnbroker Alyona Ivanovna as a “louse” and being largely apathetic towards any emotional or social repercussions, it is suggested that her death is for the greater good of not only Raskolnikov, but the whole of society; this lack of emotional substance in his logic brands him as a cold-blooded utilitarianist. However, it is a different story after the murder, where even Raskolnikov begins to doubt the legitimacy of his own argument. He realizes that his adrenaline rush prevents him from stealing much of the pawnbroker’s money, and with what he does manage to salvage, it is hidden away, nullifying any constructive benefit he had hoped to provide. Additionally, the murder of the pawnbroker’s innocent sister Lizaveta, whom prior to the even Raskolnikov feels
Therefore Amoia notes that, "as the implications of the deed unfold in his conscience, Raskolnikov attempts to jusitfy his actions as a 'rational' crime" (53). Though he understands that he will be able to escape the physical punishement for the crime, he has yet to comprehend the burden that comes with such an unethical action. Even when Porfiry suggests that the criminal who murdered the pawnbroker may run away but, "psychologically he won't escape" (287), Raskolnikov becomes infuriated and accuses Porfiry of trying to scare him. However, Raskolnikov fails to understand the meaning behind Porfiry's words perhaps because he still chooses not to rely on his conscience and confess to the crime.While the superiority complex sets him apart from the society in the beginning, his piercing conscience distances him from people later on in the novel. He refuses to speak to Razumuikhin or to his family. It only before he goes to jail, that he decides to see his mother. Even when he does so, he is relieved that Dunya is not in the room. He later admits to Dunya that he doesn't, "even remember why [I] even went" to meet his mother. His conscience does not allow him to face his loved ones and eventually, he tries to isolate himself from society. While Raskolnikov tries to alienate himself from his own conscience, he is alienating himself from humanity in general.
World renowned psychologist Sigmund Freud believes that people tend to bury what they are ashamed of “in masked forms such as dreams, slips of the tongue, or neurotic behavior.” (Gillespie 47). The idea that dreams can reveal a person's deepest thoughts is prevalent in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment. The main character, Raskolnikov struggles with his mental state after premeditatively murdering an old pawnbroker named Alyona and her sister, Lizaveta. Raskolnikov thinks that he is an extraordinary man that is above the rules of humanity, which is why he believes he had the right to commit murder. Despite these notions, Raskolnikov has four fully formed dreams throughout the book that illuminate his true guilt. Dostoevsky uses Raskolnikov’s unconscious state in the form of dreams to illustrate his psychological state.
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.
It shall not be, so long as I am alive, it shall not, it shall not! I won’t accept it!” (Part 1. 4.). Raskolnikov begins to alienate himself from his ex-colleague, Razumikhin, although at points it is Razumikhin who supports Raskolnikov the most. It forces Razumikhin to replace Raskolnikov in situations that should have been left to his authority. In a situation where Raskolnikov should have reassured Dounia and Pulcheria of their safety “he waved his hand weakly to Razumikhin to cut short the flow of warm and incoherent consolations he was addressing to his mother and sister” (Part 3. 1). As Raskolnikov began to slowly move away from any form of comfortable socialization and a growing poverty situation, his stubbornness to contain his pride and dignity eventually builds up to the brutal murder of Alyona.
Raskolnikov lives an ordinary life as an ordinary man. He is a good man and has a good heart, but he soon commits a crime that will forever change his life. Raskolnikov is a good man; I believe he is kind, generous, and selfless. Now, how are all of these positive traits found in a murderer? I think was caught in a psychotic moment, his mental state was not all there, and he had a dream, he made a plan, and he committed this terrible crime. A good example of Raskolnikov being a kind hearted person, and selfless is when he sees a young girl at the end of the street, he sees by her a rough looking man staring at her. He starts to get very worried what this man might do to this young girl. He goes down the street to get this young girl, and he pays for a taxi to get her home. This was so generous, and small yet so impactful. Raskolnikov cared about what might happen to this young girl, and did something about it. This showed how selfless Raskolnikov is, and what a kind heart he has. I think this shows Raskolnikov’s true character. From here, he makes some terrible decisions, and is engulfed by guilt, but I believe he is a generous, kindhearted person. In this book, Crime And Punishment, Raskolnikov goes from being an ordinary man with an ordinary life to a murderer, tortured by guilt, haunted by the memory of his crime, and him finding himself again in society after the murders.
Being the protagonist in Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov is subject to most ridicule and analysis for his moral ambiguity and outlandish views. After reading about his dreadful murder of Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna, many come to the conclusion that Raskolnikov is purely evil. His lack of guilt and belief of justification for his crime surely points readers in this direction. Raskolnikov remains convinced that he is superior and that it was his duty to kill such a worthless person. Although some may view this as evilness, others may perceive it as downright ignorant. His atypical way of thinking doesn’t necessarily make him evil, but that is how some comprehend it. At certain points in the story, we see Raskolnikov not as a deranged man, but instead as a compassionate human being. After the murder, we see him carrying out various charitable acts, perhaps as an attempt to atone for his unforgivable crime. For example, we see some good in him when he gives Sonya’s family twenty rubbles after Marmeladov passes on. We also see this when he attempts to rescue a drunk girl from a man by giving her money for a taxi. As much as Raskolnikov expresses that he was justified in his actions, through his mental and physical illnesses it is apparent that he feels some guilt about it. This guilt makes him seem at least a little bit more human. For these reasons, when all is said and done, it is difficult to determine
Crime and Punishment, written by Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky; is a philosophical crime fiction novel. The story is very powerful in that it goes beyond the book and into the lives of the audience; making the audience feel some type of relation between themselves and the story. Dostoevsky was brilliant in creating a fictional world where the characters seem to be found within the audience, transitioning from a fictional story to a self-help book. He employes many life lessons in the story, which give the audience a new perspective on themselves.
Dostoevsky engages several postmodern ideas in a much more intricate way. The main character of Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov, seems to hold many postmodern ideals at the start of the book. He believes that ethics are based on the individual. He actually believes himself to be a kind of “super-man” who is above the regular moral standards of normal men. It is with this sense of moral ambiguity and relative truth that he commits the murders and expects to feel no guilt for them. As the novel progresses, it becomes clear to Raskolnikov and to the reader that he is not the
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