Raskorailov: A Psychological Analysis Of Svidrigailov

Keeping this in mind, it comes as no surprise that Raskolnikov would feel utterly abhorred when Svidrigaïlov refers to them as “birds of a feather”(p.340; Part 4, Chapter 1). While Svidrigaïlov is rather keen of their shared similarities, such as their status as murderers, Raskolnikov willingly fails to realize these associations. Raskolnikov’s better side objects to the hedonistic behavior of Svidrigaïlov, decrying him as a man of the most abject nature. The dramatic irony lies in the fact that Raskolnikov desires to be an “extraordinary” man, the very epitome of Svidrigaïlov, a man he holds in no high regard. Despite their superficial variances and dissidences, Raskolnikov had slowly rendered himself into a facsimile of the man he detested, Svidrigaïlov. Although both men, whether knowingly or unknowingly, desire to transcend above the ordinary masses, it is only a matter of time before self-realization indicates the folly of their ways.

In order to understand Raskolnikov’s guilt, it is important to understand the religious influences at work in the time period and place he lived in. In St. Petersburg where Raskolnikov lives, there are strong Christian influences from the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Church condemns killing people with few exceptions. Although is not a devout believer, these influences are still at work in the book. It is clear that Raskolnikov is struggling to fight God away because, as he says that “once God’s will gets mixed up in it, nothing will be done” (389). He acknowledges that the guilt he has is God’s doing, and he struggles internally to get rid of it. The idea that he is not able to feel good about the murder that he knows improved society. He states that “what bothers [him] is this permission according to conscience” (253). Even though he wants to establish his own moral code, it is impossible for him to do so because of the influence of religion.

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.

meek and submissive, and would give her father her last copeck even if he comes to her brutally drunk. Raskolnikov is at once attracted to and repulsed by this personality. Svidrigailov is the cold

First, let me introduce you to the main character himself otherwise known as the murderer in this story. Raskolnikov is the main protagonist of the novel, making the story in his point of view. He is very alienated from society due to his

When Raskolnikov was a student he enjoyed the debate and human contact, but also strived for acceptance. He had a dual nature to himself, which could be characterized by his cold intelligence, which separated him from society, and his compassionate side. After Raskolnikov murdered Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna

“I wanted to find out then and quickly whether I was a louse like everybody else or a man. Whether I can step over barriers or not, whether I dare stoop to pick up or not, whether I am a trembling creature or whether I have the right…” (329). This quote shows the reason why Raskolnikov wanted to commit the murder. He wants to prove that he has the power to control his own life.

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

A shy and timid seventeen year old girl, Sonia is wary of Raskolnikov when she first meets him. Her tenacious religious faith is a vital part of her character; she is shy and timid, but also truly compassionate and altruistic (especially towards Raskolnikov). In this sense, Raskolnikov is quite different from Sonia; where he is uncaring and ignorant, she is warm-hearted and thoughtful. Sonia helps to bring back the humane aspects of Raskolnikov’s personality. “There, not far from the entrance, stood Sonia, pale and horror-stricken. She looked wildly at him… There was a look of poignant agony, of despair in her face...His lips worked in an ugly, meaningless smile. He stood still a minute, grinned, and went back into the police office” (Dostoevsky 447). At this moment in time, Raskolnikov had gone into the police station to confess his crime, but in a lack of better judgement, he returns back to Sonia without telling about his crime. Had Raskolnikov not been motivated by the repugnant look on Sonia’s face, it is unlikely that he would have gone back into the police station. This is perhaps the prime example of how Sonia brings out the best in Raskolnikov. Sonia’s sympathetic and doting personality is polar to Raskolnikov’s selfish beliefs and his “extraordinary man theory”. However, when all is said and done, Sonia guides Raskolnikov to face the punishment of his wrong doing. Had Raskolnikov not had a tenacious relationship with Sonia, it likely would have taken him a much

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

After the murder, his restless conscience tortures him, leading him into madness. Throughout the novel, Dostoevsky describes Raskolnikov as “delirious” and “fanatical,” likening him to a madman. Stemming from his guilt, this condition, remarked upon by his friend Razumihkin, the doctor Zossimov, the inspector Porfiry Petrovich, and others, consumes him and manifests as a physical disease. By portraying him as diseased, Dostoevsky links his murder with corruption – a corruption so great that it infects both his mind and body.

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

Throughout the story we are shown that he is not above the emotions and guilt that are the basic human reactions to an action as extreme as murder. His downfall comes because of this very fact, as he mentally and physically deteriorates under the stress of his culpability. His arrogance is proven to be the unfounded and foolhardy ideas of one who is truly a deeply insecure and unstable person (though Raskolnikov never truly realizes this).

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.

His desire is to use the old ladies money to help people who were imprisoned by poverty. Despite this, in the moment, he realizes that he was not “capable of seeing and reasoning” as a normal person would be (71). He knows that, in societies eyes, what he did was wrong, but he does not feel guilt over it. Had he felt guilty, he would have been able to make amends of the situation. As it was, he viewed it as more of an “atonement for forty sins” rather than a crime (446). Raskolnikov can reason, but he is emotionally motivated, and these emotions enhance his split personality. For this reason, the internal struggle increases as his emotions become