Crime and Punishment (
Prestuplenie i
nakazanie) is a
novel by
Russian author Fyodor Dostoyevsky that was first
published in the literary journal
The Russian Messenger in twelve
monthly installments in 1866. It was later published in a single
volume.
It
is the second of Dostoevsky's full-length novels after he returned
from his exile in Siberia
, and the
first great novel of his mature period.
Crime
and Punishment focuses on the mental anguish and moral
dilemmas of Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov,
an impoverished St.
Petersburg
ex-student
who formulates and executes a plan to kill a hated, unscrupulous
pawnbroker for her money, thereby solving
his financial problems and at the same time, he argues, ridding the
world of an evil, worthless parasite. Raskolnikov also
strives to be an extraordinary being, similar to
Napoleon, believing that murder is
permissible in pursuit of a higher purpose.
Creation
Dostoevsky conceived the idea of
Crime and Punishment in
the summer of 1865, having lost all his money at the casino, unable
to pay his bill or afford proper meals. At the time the author owed
large sums of money to creditors, and he was trying to help the
family of his brother Mikhail, who had died in early 1864. The work
was originally conceived in terms that suggest
Émile Zola. Projected under the title
The Drunkards, it was to deal "with the present question
of drunkness ... [in] all its ramifications, especially the picture
of a family and the bringing up of children in these circumstance,
etc., etc." Once Dostoevsky conceived Raskolnikov and his crime,
now inspired by the case of
Pierre François Lacenaire,
this theme became ancillary, centering on the story of the
Marmeladov family.Yousef,
About Crime and Punishment
* Fanger (2006), 17–18
Dostoevsky offered his story or novella (at the time Dostoevsky was
not thinking of a novelFrank, 170
* Peace (2005), 8
* Simmons (2007), 131) to the publisher
Mikhail Katkov. His monthly journal,
The Russian
Messenger, was a prestigious publication of its kind, and
the outlet for both
Ivan Turgenev and
Leo Tolstoy, but Dostoevsky, having
carried on quite bruising polemics with Katkov in early 1860s, had
never published anything in its pages. Dostoevsky turned as a last
resort to Katkov, and asked for an advance on a proposed
contribution after all other appeals elsewhere failed. In a letter
to Katkov written in September 1865, Dostoevsky explained to him
that the work was to be about a young man who yields to "certain
strange, 'unfinished' ideas, floating in the air";Miller (2007),
58
* Peace (2008), 8 he had thus embarked on his plan to explore the
moral and psychological dangers of the "radical" ideology. In
letters written in November 1865 an important conceptual change
occurred: the "story" has become a "novel", and from here on all
references to
Crime and Punishment are to a novel.
Dostoevsky had to race against time, in order to finish on time
both
The Gambler and
Crime and Punishment. Anna Snitkina, a
stenographer who would soon become his second
wife, was a great help for Dostoevsky during this difficult
task.Frank (1995), 39
* Peace (2005), 8 The first part of
Crime and Punishment
appeared in the January 1866 issue of
The Russian
Messenger, and the last one was published in December
1866.
“ |
At the end of November much had been written and was ready; I
burned it all; I can confess that now. I didn't like it myself. A
new form, a new plan excited me, and I started all over again. |
” |
— Dostoevsky's letter
to his friend Alexander Wrangel in February 1886 |
In the
complete edition of Dostoevsky's writings published in the Soviet Union
, the editors reassembled and printed the notebooks
that the writer kept while working on Crime and
Punishment, in a sequence roughly corresponding to the various
stages of composition. Because of these labors, there is now
a fragmentary working draft of the story, or novella, as initially
conceived, as well as two other versions of the text. These have
been distinguished as the Wiesbaden edition, the Petersburg
edition, and the final plan, involving the shift from a
first-person narrator to the indigenous variety of third-person
form invented by Dostoevsky. The Wiesbaden edition concentrates
entirely on the moral/physic reactions of the narrator after the
murder. It coincides roughly with the story that Dostoevsky
described in his letter to Katkov, and written in a form of a diary
or journal, corresponds to what eventually became part II.Carabine
(2000), x
* Frank (1994), 170–172
* Frank (1995), 80
“ |
I wrote [this chapter] with genuine inspiration, but perhaps it
is no good; but for them the question is not its literary worth,
they are worried about its morality. Here I was in the
right—nothing was against morality, and even quite the contrary,
but they saw otherwise and, what's more, saw traces of nihilism ...
I took it back, and this revision of a large chapter cost me at
least three new chapters of work, judging by the effort and the
weariness; but I corrected it and gave it back. |
” |
— Dostoevsky's letter
to A.P. Milyukov |
Why Dostoevsky abandoned his initial version remains a matter of
speculation. According to Joseph Frank, "one possibility is that
his protagonist began to develop beyond the boundaries in which he
had first been conceived". The notebooks indicate that Dostoevsky
was aware of the emergence of new aspects of Raskolnikov's
character as the plot action proceeded, and he structured the novel
in conformity with this "metamorphosis," Frank says. Dostoevsky
thus decided to fuse the story with his previous idea for a novel
called
The Drunkards. The final version of
Crime and
Punishment came to birth only when, in November 1865,
Dostoevsky decided to recast his novel in the third person. This
shift was the culmination of a long struggle, present through all
the early stages of composition. Once having decided, Dostoevsky
began to rewrite from scratch, and was able to easily integrate
sections of the early manuscript into the final text—Frank says
that he did not, as he told Wrangel, burn everything he had written
earlier.Frank (1994), 170, 179–180, 184
* Frank(1995), 93
* Miller (2007), 58–59
The final draft went smoothly, except for a clash with the editors
of
The Russian Messenger, about which very little is
known. Since the manuscript Dostoevsky turned in to Katkov was
lost, it is unclear what the editors had objected to in the
original. In 1889, the editors of the journal commented that "it
was not easy for him [Dostoevsky] to give up his intentionally
exaggerated idealization of Sonya as a woman who carried
self-sacrifice to the point of sacrificing her body". It seems that
Dostoevsky had initially given Sonya a much more affirmative role
in the scene, in which she reads the Gospel story of the raising of
Lazarus to Raskolnikov.Frank (1994),
184–185
* Frank(1995), 93–94
Plot
Raskolnikov, a mentally unstable drop-out student, chooses
to live in a tiny, rented room in Saint
Petersburg
. He refuses all help, even from his friend
Razumikhin, and devises a plan to murder and to rob an unpleasant
elderly money-lender, Alëna— his motivation, whether personal or
ideological, remains unclear. He soon sneaks into Alëna's apartment
one day, where he murders her with an axe; however, he is also
forced to kill her half-sister, Lizaveta, who happens to enter the
scene of the crime.
After the bungled murder, Raskolnikov falls into a feverish state.
He behaves as though he wishes to betray himself, and the detective
Porfiry begins to suspect him purely on psychological grounds. At
the same time, a chaste relationship develops between Raskolnikov
and Sonya—a prostitute full of Christian virtue, driven into the
profession by the habits of her father—and Raskolnikov confesses
his crime to her. The confession is overheard by Svidrigaylov, a
shadowy figure whose aim is to seduce Raskolnikov's sister, Dunya.
Svidrigaylov appears to have a hold over Raskolnikov, but after
realizing that Dunya could never love him, he unexpectedly ends his
own life. Raskolnikov eventually goes to the police himself to
confess. He is sentenced to penal servitude in Siberia; Sonya
follows him, and the Epilogue holds out hope for Raskolnikov's
redemption and moral regeneration under her influence.
Characters
In
Crime and Punishment Dostoevsky succeeds in fusing the
personality of his main character,
Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov
(Russian: Родион Романович Раскольников), with his new anti-radical
ideological themes. The main plot involves a murder as the result
of "ideological intoxication," and depicts all the disastrous moral
and psychical consequences that result from the murderer.
Raskolnikov's psychology is placed at the center, and carefully
interwoven with the ideas behind his transgression; every other
feature of the novel illuminates the agonizing dilemma in which
Raskolnikov is caught. From another point of view, the novel's plot
is another variation of a conventional nineteenth-century theme: an
innocent young provincial comes to seek his fortune in the capital,
where he succumbs to corruption, and loses all traces of his former
freshness and purity. However, as Gary Rosenshield points out,
"Raskolnikov succumbs not to the temptations of high society as
Honoré de Balzac's
Rastignac or
Stendhal's
Julien Sorel, but to those of
rationalistic Petersburg".
Raskolnikov is the
protagonist, and the story is primarily told
from his perspective. Despite its name, the novel does not so much
deal with the crime and its formal punishment, as with
Raskolnikov's internal struggle. The book shows that his punishment
results more from his conscience than from the law. He committed
murder with the belief that he possessed enough intellectual and
emotional fortitude to deal with the ramifications, [based on his
paper/thesis, "On Crime", that he is a
Napoleon], but his sense of guilt soon overwhelms
him. It is only in the epilogue that he realizes his formal
punishment, having decided to confess and end his alienation.
Sofia Semyonovna Marmeladova (Russian: Софья
Семёновна Мармеладова), variously called Sonia and Sonechka, is the
daughter of a drunk, Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov, whom
Raskolnikov meets in a tavern at the beginning of the novel. She is
a prostitute who, Raskolnikov discerns, shares the same feelings of
shame and alienation as he does. She becomes the first person
Raskolnikov confesses his crime to, and she supports him even
though she was friends with one of the victims (Lizaveta). For most
of the novel, Sonya serves as the spiritual guide for Raskolnikov.
After his confession she follows him to Siberia where she lives in
the same town as the prison.
Other characters of the novel are:
- Porfiry Petrovich (Порфирий Петрович) – The detective in charge of solving the murders of
Lizaveta and Aliona Ivanovna, who, along with Sonya, guides
Raskolnikov towards confession. Unlike Sonia, however, Porfiry does
this through psychological games. Despite the lack of evidence, he
becomes certain Raskolnikov is the murderer following several
conversations with him, but gives him the chance to confess
voluntarily. He attempts to confuse and to provoke the unstable
Raskolnikov in an attempt to coerce him to confess.
- Avdotya Romanovna Raskolnikova (Авдотья Романовна
Раскольникова) – Raskolnikov's strong willed and self-sacrificial
sister, called Dunya, Dounia or Dunechka for short. She initially
plans to marry the wealthy, yet smug and self-possessed, Luzhin, to
save the family from financial destitution. She has a habit of
pacing across the room while thinking. She is followed to Saint
Petersburg by the disturbed Svidrigailov, who seeks to win her back
through blackmail. She rejects both men in favour of Raskolnikov's
loyal friend, Razumikhin.
- Arkady Ivanovich Svidrigailov (Аркадий Иванович Свидригайлов) –
Sensual, depraved, and wealthy former employer and current pursuer
of Dunya, Svidrigailov is suspected of multiple acts of murder, and
overhears Raskolnikov's confessions to Sonya. With this knowledge
he torments both Dunya and Raskolnikov but does not inform the
police. When Dunya tells him she could never love him (after
attempting to shoot him) he lets her go and commits suicide. Whereas Sonya represents the path to
salvation, Svidrigailov represents the other path towards suicide.
Despite his apparent malevolence, Svidrigailov is similar to
Raskolnikov in regard to his random acts of charity. He fronts the
money for the Marmeladov children to enter an orphanage (after both their parents die), gives
Sonya five percent bank notes totalling three thousand rubles, and
leaves the rest of his money to his juvenile fiancée.
- Marfa Petrovna Svidrigailova (Марфа Петровна Свидригайлова) –
Arkady Svidrigailov's deceased wife, whom he is suspected of having
murdered, and who he claims has visited him as a ghost. Her bequest
of 3,000 rubles to Dunya allows Dunya to reject Luzhin as a
suitor.
- Dmitri Prokofich Razumikhin (Дмитрий Прокофьич Разумихин) –
Raskolnikov's loyal friend. In terms of Razumikhin's contribution
to Dostoevsky's anti-radical thematics, he is intended to represent
something of a reconciliation of the pervasive thematic conflict
between faith and reason. The fact that his name means reason shows
Dostoevsky's desire to employ this faculty as a foundational basis
for his Christian faith in God.
- Katerina Ivanovna Marmeladova (Катерина Ивановна Мармеладова) –
Semyon Marmeladov's consumptive and
ill-tempered second wife, stepmother to Sonya. She drives Sonya
into prostitution in a fit of rage, but later regrets it, and beats
her children mercilessly, but works ferociously to improve their
standard of living. She is obsessed with demonstrating that slum
life is far below her station. Following Marmeladov's death, she
uses Raskolnikov's money to hold a funeral.
- Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov (Семён Захарович Мармеладов) –
Hopeless but amiable drunk who indulges
in his own suffering, and father of Sonya. Marmeladov could be seen
as a Russian equivalent of the character of Micawber in Charles Dickens' novel, David Copperfield.
- Pulkheria Alexandrovna Raskolnikova (Пульхерия Александровна
Раскольникова) – Raskolnikov's relatively clueless, hopeful and
loving mother. Following Raskolnikov's sentence, she falls ill
(mentally and physically) and eventually dies. She hints in her
dying stages that she is slightly more aware of her son's fate,
which was hidden from her by Dunya and Razumikhin.
- Pyotr Petrovich Luzhin (Пётр Петрович Лужин) – A well-off
lawyer who is engaged to Raskolnikov's sister Dunya in the
beginning of the novel. His motives for the marriage is rather
despicable, as he states more or less that he chose her since she
will be completely beholden to him financially.
- Andrey Semyenovich Lebezyatnikov (Андрей Семёнович
Лебезятников) – Luzhin's utopian
socialist roommate who witnesses his attempt to frame Sonya and
subsequently exposes him.
- Alyona Ivanovna (Алёна Ивановна) – Suspicious old pawnbroker
who hoards money and is merciless to her patrons. She is
Raskolnikov's intended target.
- Lizaveta Ivanovna (Лизавета Ивановна) – Alyona's simple and
innocent sister. Raskolnikov murders her when she walks in
immediately after Raskolnikov had killed Alyona. Lizaveta was a
friend of Sonya's.
- Zosimov (Зосимов) – A friend of Razumikhin and a doctor who
cared for Raskolnikov.
- Nastasya Petrovna (Настасья Петровна) – Raskolnikov's
landlady's servant and a friend of Raskolnikov.
- Nikodim Fomich (Никодим Фомич)– The amiable Chief of
Police.
- Ilya Petrovich (Илья Петрович) – A police official and Fomich's
assistant.
- Alexander Grigorievich Zamyotov (Александр Григорьевич Заметов)
– Head clerk at the police station and friend to Razumikhin.
Raskolnikov arouses Zametov's suspicions by explaining how he,
Raskolnikov, would have committed various crimes, although Zametov
later apologizes, believing, much to Raskolnikov's amusement, that
it was all a farce to expose how ridiculous the suspicions were.
This scene illustrates the argument of Raskolnikov's belief in his
own superiority as Übermensch.
- Nikolai Dementiev (Николай Дементьев) – A painter and sectarian
who admits to the murder, since his sect holds it to be supremely
virtuous to suffer for another person's crime.
- Polina Mikhailovna Marmeladova (Полина Михайловна Мармеладова)
– Ten-year-old adopted daughter of Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov
and younger stepsister to Sonya, sometimes known as Polechka.
Name |
Word |
Meaning (in Russian) |
Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov |
raskol |
a schism, or split; "raskolnik" is "one who splits" or
"dissenter"; the verb raskalyvat' means "to cleave", "to chop","to
crack","to split" or "to break" |
Pyotr Petrovich Luzhin |
luzha |
a puddle |
Dmitri Prokofich Razumikhin |
razum |
reason, intelligence |
Alexander Grigorievich Zamyotov |
zametit |
to notice, to realize |
Andrey Semyenovich Lebezyatnikov |
lebezit |
to fawn on somebody, to cringe |
Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov |
marmelad |
marmalade/jam |
Arkady Ivanovich Svidrigailov |
Svidrigailo |
a Lithuanian duke of the fifteenth century |
Structure
Crime and Punishment has a distinct beginning, middle and
end. The novel is divided into six parts, with an
epilogue. The notion of "intrinsic
duality" in
Crime and Punishment has been
commented upon, with the suggestion that there is a degree of
symmetry to the book. Edward Wasiolek who
has argued that Dostoevsky was a skilled craftsman, highly
conscious of the formal pattern in his art, has likened the
structure of
Crime & Punishment to a "flattened X",
saying:
This compositional balance is achieved by means of the symmetrical
distribution of certain key episodes throughout the novel's six
parts. The recurrence of these episodes in the two halves of the
novel, as David Bethea has argued, is organized according to a
mirror-like principle, whereby the "left" half of the novel
reflects the "right" half. For her part, Margaret Church discerns a
contrapuntal structuring: parts I, III
and V deal largely with the main hero's relationship to his family
(mother, sister and mother surrogates), while parts II, IV and VI
deal with his relationship to the authorities of the state "and to
various father figures".
The seventh part of the novel, the Epilogue, has attracted much
attention and controversy. Some of Dostoevsky's critics have
criticized the novel's final pages as superfluous, anti-climactic,
unworthy of the rest of the work, while others have rushed to the
defense of the Epilogue, offering various ingenious schemes which
conclusively prove its inevitability and necessity. Steven Cassedy
argues that
Crime and Punishment "is formally two distinct
but closely related, things, namely a particular type of tragedy in
the classical Greek mold and a Christian resurrection tale".
Cassedy concludes that "the logical demands of the tragic model as
such are satisfied without the Epilogue in
Crime and
Punishment ... At the same time, this tragedy contains a
Christian component, and the logical demands of this element are
met only by the resurrection promised in the Epilogue".
Crime and Punishment is written from a
third-person omniscient perspective. It is told primarily from
the point of view of Raskolnikov; however, it does at times switch
to the perspective of Svidrigailov, Razumikhin, Peter Petrovich, or
Dunya. This narrative technique, which fuses the narrator very
closely with the consciousness and point of view of the central
characters of the plot, was original for its period. Franks notes
that his identification, through Dostoevsky's use of the time
shifts of memory and his manipulation of temporal sequence, begins
to approach the later experiments of
Henry
James,
Joseph Conrad,
Virginia Woolf, and
James Joyce. A late nineteenth-century reader
was however accustomed to more orderly and linear types of
expository narration. This led to the persistence of the legend
that Dostoevsky was an untidy and negligent craftsman, and to
critical observations like the following by
Melchior de Vogüé:
Dostoevsky uses different speech mannerisms and sentences of
different length for different characters. Those who use artificial
language—Luzhin, for example—are identified as unattractive people.
Mrs. Marmeladov's disintegrating mind is reflected in her language
too. In the original Russian text, the names of the major
characters have something of a
double
meaning, but in translation the subtlety of the language is
sometimes lost. There is even a play with the Russian word for
crime ("prestuplenie"), which is literally translated as a stepping
across or a transgression. The physical image of crime as a
crossing over a barrier or a boundary is lost in translation. So is
the religious implication of transgression, which in English refers
to a sin rather than a crime.
Symbolism
The Dreams
Rodya's dreams always have a symbolic meaning, which suggests a
psychological view. In the dream about the horse, the mare has to
sacrifice itself for the men who are too much in a rush to wait.
This could be symbolic of women sacrificing themselves for men,
just like Rodya's belief that Dunya is sacrificing herself for
Rodya by marrying Luzhin. Some critics have suggested this dream is
the fullest single expression of the whole novel, containing the
nihilistic destruction of an innocent creature and Rodion's
suppressed sympathy for it (although the young Rodion in the dream
runs to the horse, he still murders the pawnbroker soon after
waking).The dream is also mentioned when Rodya talks to Marmeladov.
He states that his daughter, Sonya, has to sell her body to earn a
living for their family. The dream is also a blatant warning for
the impending murder.
In the final pages, Raskolnikov, who at this point is in the prison
infirmary, has a feverish dream about a plague of
nihilism, that enters Russia and Europe from the
east and which spreads senseless dissent (Raskolnikov's name
alludes to "raskol", dissent) and fanatic dedication to "new
ideas": it finally engulfs all of mankind. Though we don't learn
anything about the content of these ideas they clearly disrupt
society forever and are seen as exclusively critical assaults on
ordinary thinking: it is clear that Dostoevsky was envisaging the
new,
politically and culturally nihilist ideas which were
entering Russian literature and society in this watershed decade,
and with which Dostoevsky would be in debate for the rest of his
life (cp. Chernyshevsky's
What Is to Be Done?,
Dobrolyubov's abrasive
journalism,
Turgenev's
Fathers and Sons and Dostoevsky's own
The Possessed). Just
like the novel demonstrates and argues Dostoevsky's conviction that
"if God doesn't exist (or is not recognized) then anything is
permissible" the dream sums up his fear that if men won't check
their thinking against the realities of life and nature, and if
they are unwilling to listen to reason or authority, then no ideas
or cultural institutions will last and only brute barbarism can be
the result.
Janko Lavrin, who took part
in the revolutions of the WWI era, knew
Lenin
and
Trotsky and many others, and later would
spend years writing and researching on Dostoevsky and other Russian
classics, called this final dream "prophetic in its
symbolism".
The Cross
Sonya gives Rodya a
cross when he goes to turn
himself in. He takes his pain upon him by carrying the cross
through town, like
Jesus; he falls to his
knees in the town square on the way to his confession. Sonya
carried the cross up until then, which indicates that, as literally
mentioned in the book, she suffers for him, in a semi-Christ-like
manner. Sonya and Lizaveta had exchanged crosses and become
spiritual sisters, originally the cross was Lizaveta's - so Sonya
carries Lizaveta's cross, the cross of Rodya's innocent victim,
whom he didn't intend to kill.
Saint Petersburg
The above opening sentence of the novel has a symbolic function:
Russian critic Vadim K. Kozhinov argues that the reference to the
"exceptionally hot evening" establishes not only the suffocating
atmosphere of Saint Petersburg in midsummer but also "the infernal
ambience of the crime itself". Dostoevsky was among the first to
recognize the symbolic possibilities of city life and imagery drawn
from the city. I. F. I. Evnin regards
Crime and Punishment
as the first great Russian novel "in which the climactic moments of
the action are played out in dirty taverns, on the street, in the
sordid black rooms of the poor".
Dostoevsky's Petersburg is the city of unrelieved poverty;
"magnificence has no place in it, because magnificence is external,
formal abstract, cold". Dostoevsky connects the city's problems to
Raskolnikov's thoughts and subsequent actions. The crowded streets
and squares, the shabby houses and taverns, the noise and stench,
all are transformed by Dostoevsky into a rich store of metaphors
for states of mind. Donald Fanger asserts that "the real city [...]
rendered with a striking concreteness, is also a city of the mind
in the way that its atmosphere answers Raskolnikov's spiritual
condition and almost symbolizes it. It is crowded, stifling, and
parched."
Themes
Dostoevsky's letter to Katkov reveals his immediate inspiration, to
which he remained faithful even after his original plan evolved
into a much more ambitious creation: a desire to counteract what he
regarded as nefarious consequences arising from the doctrines of
Russian
nihilism. In the novel, Dostoevsky
pinpointed the dangers of both
utilitarianism and
rationalism, the main ideas of which inspired
the radicals, continuing a fierce criticism he had already started
with his
Notes from
Underground. A Slavophile religious believer, Dostoevsky
utilized the characters, dialogue and narrative in
Crime and
Punishment to articulate an argument against westernizing
ideas in general. He thus attacked a peculiar Russian blend of
French
utopian socialism and
Benthamite utilitarianism, which had
led to what radical leaders, such as
Nikolai Chernyshevsky, called
"
rational egoism".
The radicals refused however to recognize themselves in the novel's
pages (
Dimitri Pisarev ridiculed the
notion that Raskolnikov's ideas could be identified with those of
the radicals of his time), since Dostoevsky portrayed nihilistic
ideas to their most extreme consequences. The aim of these ideas
was altruistic and humanitarian, but these aims were to be achieved
by relying on reason and suppressing entirely the spontaneous
outflow of Christian pity and compassion. Chernyshevsky's
utilitarian ethic proposed that thought and will in man were
subject to the laws of physical science.Frank (1995), 100–101
* Hudspith (2003), 95 Dostoevsky believed that such ideas limited
man to a product of physics, chemistry and biology, negating
spontaneous emotional responses. In its latest variety of
Bazarovism, Russian nihilism encouraged the creation of an élite of
superior individuals to whom the hopes of the future were to be
entrusted.
Raskolnikov exemplifies all the potentially disastrous hazards
contained in such an ideal. Frank notes that "the
moral-psychological traits of his character incorporate this
antinomy between instinctive kindness, sympathy, and pity on the
one hand and, on the other, a proud and idealistic egoism that has
become perverted into a contemptuous disdain for the submissive
herd". Raskolnikov's inner conflict in the opening section of the
novel results in a utilitarian-altruistic justification for the
proposed crime: why not kill a wretched and "useless" old
moneylender to alleviate the human misery? Dostoevsky wants to show
that this utilitarian type of reasoning and its conclusions had
become widespread and commonplace; they were by no means the
solitary invention of Raskolnikov's tormented and disordered mind.
Such radical and utilitarian ideas act to reinforce the innate
egoism of Raskonikov's character, and to turn him into a hater
rather than a lover of his fellow humans. He even becomes
fascinated with the majestic image of a Napoleonic personality who,
in the interests of a higher social good, believes that he
possesses a moral right to kill. Indeed, his "Napoleon-like" plan
drags him to a well-calculated murder, the ultimate conclusion of
his self-deception with utilitarianism.Frank (1995), 107
* Sergeyef (1998), 26
In his depiction of the Petersburg background, Dostoevsky
accentuates the squalor and human wretchedness that pass before
Raskolnikov's eyes. He also uses Raskolnikov's encounter with
Marmeladov to present both the heartlessness of Raskolnikov's
convictions and the alternative set of values to be set against
them. Dostoevsky believes that the "freedom" propounded by the
aforementioned ideas is a dreadful freedom "that is contained by no
values, because it is before values". The product of this
"freedom", Raskolnikov, is in perpetual revolt against society,
himself, and God. He thinks that he is self-sufficient and
self-contained, but at the end "his boundless self-confidence must
disappear in the face of what is greater than himself, and his
self-fabricated justification must humble itself before the higher
justice of God".
Vladimir
Solovyov quoted by McDuff (2002), xiii-xiv
* Peace (2005), 75–76 Dostoevsky calls for the regeneration and
renewal of the "sick" Russian society through the re-discovering of
their country, their religion, and their roots.*McDuff (2002),
xxx:"It is the persistent tracing of this theme of a 'Russian
sickness' of spiritual origin and its cure throughout the book that
justify the author's characterization of it as an 'Orthodox
novel'."
* Wasiolek (2005), 56–57
Reception
The first part of
Crime and Punishment published in the
January and February issues of
The Russian Messenger met
with public success. Although the remaining parts of the novel had
still to be written, an anonymous reviewer wrote that "the novel
promises to be one of the most important works of the author of
The House of the
Dead". In his memoirs, the conservative belletrist
Nikolay Strakhov recalled that in
Russia
Crime and Punishment was the literary sensation of
1866.
The novel soon attracted the criticism of the liberal and radical
critics. G.Z. Yeliseyev sprang to the defense of the Russian
student corporations, and wondered, "Has there ever been a case of
a student committing murder for the sake of robbery?" Pisarev,
aware of the novel's artistic value attempted in 1867 another
approach: he argued that Raskolnikov was a product of his
environment, and explained that the main theme of the work was
poverty and its results. He measured the novel's excellence by the
accuracy and understanding with which Dostoevsky portrayed the
contemporary social reality, and focused on what he regarded as
inconsistencies in the novel's plot. Strakhov rejected Pisarev's
contention that the theme of environmental determinism was
essential to the novel, and pointed out that Dostoevsky's attitude
towards his hero was sympathetic: "This is not mockery of the
younger generation, neither a reproach nor an accusation—it is a
lament over it."Jahn,
Dostoevsky's Life and Career
* McDuff, xi–xii
English translations
Film adaptations
- Raskolnikov (aka
Crime and Punishment) (1923, directed by Robert Wiene)
- Crime
and Punishment (1935, starring Peter Lorre, Edward Arnold and Marian Marsh)
- Crime et Châtiment (1956, France directed by Georges Lampin, starring Lino Ventura and Jean
Gabin)
- Eigoban Tsumi to
Batsu (1953, manga by Tezuka Osamu, under his
interpretation)
- Crime and Punishment
(USSR
, 1970,
starring Georgi Taratorkin,
Tatyana Bedova, Vladimir Basov,
Victoria Fyodorova) dir. Lev
Kulidzhanov
- Crime and Punishment (1979, television serial starring
Timothy West and John Hurt)
- Aki
Kaurismäki's Rikos ja Rangaistus
(1983; Crime and Punishment), the acclaimed debut film of the
Finnish director with Markku Toikka in
the lead role; the story is set in modern-day Helsinki
.
- Sin Compasión (1994, directed by Francisco Lombardi).
Adaptation
of the novel set in the Lima
, Peru
.
- Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment (1998, a TV movie
starring Patrick Dempsey, Ben Kingsley and Julie
Delpy)
- Crime and
Punishment in Suburbia (2000, an adaptation set in modern
America and "loosely based" on the novel)
- Crime and Punishment (2002, starring Crispin Glover, John
Hurt, Vanessa Redgrave and
Margot Kidder).
- Crime and Punishment another television serial (2002,
starring John Simm as Raskolnikov and
Ian McDiarmid as Petrovich)
References
- University of Minnesota - Study notes for Crime and
Punishment - (retrieved on 1 May 2006)
- Frank (1995), 96
- Frank (1994), 168
- Frank (1994), 179
- Miller (2007), 58–59
- Simmons (2007), 131
- Miller (2007), 58
- Dostoevsky initially considered four first-person plans: a
memoir written by Raskolnikov, his confession recorded eight days
after the murder, his diary begun five days after the murder, and a
mixed form in which the first half was in the form of a memoir, and
the second half in the form of a diary (Rosenshield [1973],
399).
- Frank (1994), 185
- Frank (1994), 174
- Frank (1994), 177
- Frank (1994), 175
- Frank (1994), 179–180, 182
- Peace (2005), 8–9 Don't cheat
- Frank (1995), 97
- Rosenshield (1978), 76. See also Fanger (2006), 21
- Davydov (1982), 162–163
- Church (1983), 103
- Mikhail
Bakhtin, for instance, regards the Epilogue a blemish on the
book (Wellek [1980], 33).
- Cassedy (1982), 171
- Cassedy (1982), 187
- Monas, Sidney, "Afterword: The Dream of the Suffering Horse,"
from his translation
- Gill (1982), 145
- Fanger (2006), 24
- Lindenmeyr (2006), 37
- Fanger (2006), 28
- Frank (1995), 100
- Donald Fanger believes that "Crime and Punishment only
continued the polemic, incarnating the tragedy of nihilism in
Raskolnikov and caricaturing it in Lebezyatnikov and, partially, in
Luzhin" .(Fanger [2006], 21 – see also Frank [1995], 60; Ozick
[1997], 114; Sergeyef [1998], 26).
- Pisarev had sketched the outlines of a new proto-Nietzschean
hero (Frank [1995], 100–101; Frank [2002], 11).
- Frank (1995), 101
- Frank (1995), 104
- Wasiolek (2005), 55
- McDuff, x–xi
Text
Sources
- *Peace, Richard. "Introduction". Peace, 1–16.
- *Fanger, Donald. "Apogee: Crime and Punishment". Peace,
17–35.
- *Lindenmeyr, Adele. "Raskolnikov's City and the Napoleonic
Plan". Peace, 37–49.
- *Wasiolek, Edward. "Raskolnikov's City and the Napoleonic
Plan". Peace, 51–74.
- *Peace, Richard. "Motive and Symbol". Peace, 75–101.
External links
Criticism
Online Text