Crime and Punishment is a very intense book but well worth the effort it takes to read it. It is the story of a bright but mentally tortured student (Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov) whose views of human nature initially make him believe that he is justified in committing murder. He kills the pawnbroker Alena Ivanovna and her sister Lizaveta, who unexpectedly stumbles upon the scene. Raskolnikov spends a lot of time trying to analyze his motives. First he tells the character Sonia: "It was to rob her" but that motive is false and he dismisses it quickly. Next he says "I wanted to make myself a Napoleon." His last motive describes the murder as an extreme act of self-revelation: "I longed to kill without casuistry, to kill for my own benefit and for that alone! I did not commit murder in order to use the profits and power gained to make myself a benefactor to humanity. Rubbish! I simply murdered; I murdered for myself, for myself alone ... it was only to test myself." He commits the murder not "because" he is an extraordinary man but to "see" if he is an extraordinary man. The ultimate outcome suggests he is not. At the very end of the book, Raskolnikov finally accepts responsibility for his act. Most of the book however is devoted to what goes on in his mind in the days following the murder.

Sonia and Razumikhin are two other memorable characters in the book. The name "Sonia" comes from the Greek word for "wisdom." Sonia is a fervent believer in Christianity and the power of suffering. As a character, she is the embodiment of goodness. She is a meek, gentle creature who symbolizes the suffering of humanity and the power of redemption. Dmitri Prokofich Razumikhin is Raskolnikov's friend. He is not as brilliant as Raskolnikov but also he is not tortured by high-minded theories. He always wants to believe the best about his friend. Like Sonia, he is an example of goodness, but without the religious elements found in Sonia's character. Razumikhin's name is derived from the Russian word razum for reason. Razumikhin is a model of friendship – he sticks by Raskolnikov through everything.

Suffering pervades the book. For example, prostitution (Sonia), drunkeness (Marmeladov), crimes of various sorts (Raskolnikov, Svidrigailov), disease (Katherina Ivanovna's tuberculosis), poverty (Raskolnikov, Sonia, the Marmeladovs, Rasumikhin), despair and suicide (Svidrigailov), and unrequited desire (Svidrigailov, Lushin). Svidrigailov ends his criminal career with despair and suicide whereas Raskolnikov rejects suicide and eventually confesses his crime and accepts punishment, but only at the very end of the book does he truly repent his crime and achieve redemption. The squalor of Petersburg during the summer also figures prominently in the book. ( )

The last half is better than the first, which is messily discursive and, when it attempts humor, annoying. Parts of the book feel written in a hurry, which in fact they were. The ending is a sop tacked on for the readers of the magazine where it was first published, and this seriously hurts the narrative arc of the novel. But you have to admire D's ability to capture the broad solidity of a people and time. ( )

Klassiker. ( )

I will admit that R. is dehumanized and suffering but largely due to his own folly. Yes, it was difficult to survive in Czarist Russia, but his other friend who is also a former student, is making ends meet and hasn’t gone over the edge like R.

This novel was almost too long to preserve all of the personality traits assigned to R. and the people around him. I remember once focussing on how he felt about Sonia, the prostitute daughter of a drunk he meets once in a bar and gets told the drunk’s entire life story. Then it shifted to the relationship between himself and his mother and sister. His feelings towards his sister are almost identical to those he has towards Sonia. Both women are pure at heart and only he can save them from the world.

What I can’t understand is how caught up in and utterly slaves to emotions these people are. R. cannot do anything because he’s paralyzed by a series of emotions he cannot get under control. Rage. Self-loathing. Guilt. Outrage. Anger. All of these plague R. and he cannot act with any will of his own. Maybe that’s why he was deranged.

One example I remember of how screwed up and detached from reality R. is when he accidentally on purpose gets run down by a street coach or carriage. The people who hit him want to give him money and he eventually accepts it only to literally throw it in the river shortly thereafter. Unbelievable! He is destitute and wearing rags and hadn’t eaten in God knows how long, and he throws the money away.

Another example is that he fails to use the money and trinkets he steals from the old woman. Part of his reason for killing her is that he will free this fortune from the old woman and use it for good. The end justifies the means. After all his rationalization, he doesn’t have the resolve to do what he said he would do. The money he would get from killing her would go to good works and be much better used in the grand scheme of things than it would be if it stayed with the old woman who was mean and would never do good with her money. All she propagated was more despair and misery.

Derangement is maybe a family trait. Dunya his sister is pursued by a slightly twisted man name Svidrygaylov. When he lures her into his chambers alone and tries to rape her, she pulls a gun on him and tries to shoot him. She misses. Instead of trying again, she lowers the gun and completely surrenders to S. Is she nuts?

Anyway, the end is of course in Siberia (he takes forever to confess but in actual time it’s only a few months). He has confessed and is sent to a workhouse. Sonia follows. Dunya and his friend R. also follow and marry and live in a nearby town. His mother dies of a brain fever or something.

I don’t understand the wrestling with emotions and the lack of will power to act. I guess it was a different time and place than here but, it seemed like R. wasn’t the criminal he was supposed to be. He only killed the old woman to see if he could commit a murder. He admits that to Sonia or Dunya. I wish D. would have made the old woman act like the evil harridan that R. makes her out to be. What I get is just R’s opinion of the pawnbroker from only his interaction with her. I would have liked to see the pawnbroker cheating or humiliating other people who came to her with pledges. The way it was written, we only have R’s opinion of how unjust and cruel she is and I don’t trust R’s opinion since he seems to have no reason, just emotion.

Another thing that I wish would have been different was how much time was devoted to the most intricate details of everyone’s life. I think that if that level of fine focus was only centered on R and his immediate circle, the book would have been more understandable and the threads in the story easier to keep track of. It’s the minutiae that obscures the main plot and theme of the story for me.

Raskolnikov - the myth.
'To be a Raskolnikov without a reason' - story of his life: E.M. Cioran.

Depressing masterpiece, a very tasteful lecture though. I've always been fascinated by the influence of this character in the world's literature of the XXth century. Years ago, worked hard on a personal project: revealing Dostoievski's influence on the Romanian literature (Rebreanu - The Forest of the Hanged). Should have finished it... kept on thinking no one else would care to ever go through it.

Winter/Northern literature; no way to read such a thing during the summer. ( )