Understanding Dostoevsky Essay

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 central theme of Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky deals with conformity’s role in society. Dostoyevsky uses conformity to make Raskolnikov mentally ill and eventually turn himself in to face the punishment for his crimes. Religion influences every character in the book, but none more ardently than Raskolnikov. Understanding religion’s role as a force for conformity in Crime and Punishment provides a powerful insight into character motives and, furthermore, philosophical influences.

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.

The room is as shabby as it is small--not a seemingly likely place for posing intellectual questions of great significance. But Dostoevsky is a writer fond of achieving great things with equally great economy. Just as he stretches a two-week period into a hefty novel, Dostoevsky makes a dingy student's apartment more important than a grand palace. Raskolnikov's room becomes a nexus for the story. It is there Raskolnikov cowers, broods and slips into depraved and fitful slumber. Almost all of the major characters in the book pay a visit to the room, and sometimes it even seems as if they are all stuffed into the tiny space at once. Yet the room is more than just a meeting place, more than a central location. It takes on a character of its own, illustrating Raskolnikov's mental turmoil, becoming an image of him to others and perhaps even doing much to induce or at least enforce his degenerate state.

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.

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.

Were it a testimony to the rigors and cruelness of human nature, it would be crushing. As it is, it shatters our perception of man and ourselves as no other book, besides perhaps Anne Franke`s diary and the testimony of Elie Wiesl, could ever have done. The prisoners of the labor camp, as in Shukhov?s predicament, were required to behave as Soviets or face severe punishment. In an almost satirical tone Buinovsky exclaims to the squadron that ?You?re not behaving like Soviet People,? and went on saying, ?You?re not behaving like communist.? (28) This type of internal monologue clearly persuades a tone of aggravation and sarcasm directly associated to the oppression?s of communism.

my capacity for life” (Dostoyevsky, 19) By using himself as an example, and describing reason as only “one twentieth” of a person’s capabilities of life, the Underground Man emphasized the small role that reason plays.

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.

Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Notes from the Underground (1864/2008) comes across as a diary penned by a self-described “spiteful” and “unattractive” anonymous narrator (p. 7). The narrator’s own self-loathing characterized by self-alienation is so obvious, that he is often referred to by critics as the Underground Man (Frank 1961, p. 1). Yet this Underground Man is the central character of Dostoyevsky’s novel and represents a subversion of the typical courageous hero. In this regard, the Underground man is an anti-hero, since as a protagonist he not only challenges the typical literary version of a hero, but also challenges conventional thinking (Brombert 1999, p. 1).

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.

That Rodya is convinced by this line of reasoning to the point of action suggests that he also is devoid of the deontological ethics that are associated with the traditional, Orthodox Russia. Rodya’s willingness to commit this heinous crime which ultimately destroys not only Alyona, but also Rodya himself and the innocent Lizaveta suggests that Dostoevsky's novel is a critique of the nihilistic utilitarianism of Rodya.

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).

Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment offers much social commentary. The novel is brimming with architectural imagery, including mentions of stairs and doors. Dostoevsky’s use of architectural imagery seems to comment on the morality of characters in the novel and in extension, the morality that exists within society, as well as the idea of an extraordinary man.

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