Crime and Punishment - Wikipedia
These two men encompass many similar problems and obstacles throughout their lives. Dunya was the same objective to Svidrigailov as the superman theory to . Aside from this obvious connection, Sonia and Gretchen have a variety of. Svidrigailov would never leave Marfa Petrovna and would always be her husband; be any questions connected to Russian law - khoukharev at gmail. com the Dunya/Svidrigailov relationship and the Dunya/Raskolnikov. The relationship between Svidrigailov and Dunya is a mirage. Svidrigailov reveals his true character to Dunya in the concluding moments of Fyodor Dostoevsky's ''Crime and Punishment.'' This is how Arkady Ivanovich Svidrigailov reacts when Avdotya (Dunya) Romanovna Raskolnikova.
After appeals elsewhere failed, Dostoevsky turned as a last resort to the publisher Mikhail Katkovand sought an advance on a proposed contribution. Dostoevsky, having carried on quite bruising polemics with Katkov in the early s, had never published anything in its pages before. In a letter to Katkov written in SeptemberDostoevsky explained to him that the work was to be about a young man who yields to "certain strange, 'unfinished' ideas, yet floating in the air".
From then on, Crime and Punishment is referred to as a novel. I didn't like it myself. A new form, a new plan excited me, and I started all over again. 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. It coincides roughly with the story that Dostoevsky described in his letter to Katkov and, written in the form of a diary or journal, corresponds to what eventually became part 2.
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.
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". This shift was the culmination of a long struggle, present through all the early stages of composition. Frank says that he did not, as he told Wrangel, burn everything he had written earlier.
Anna Snitkina, a stenographer who later became Dostoevsky's wife, was of great help to him during this difficult task. Isolated and antisocial, he has abandoned all attempts to support himself, and is brooding obsessively on a scheme he has devised to murder and rob an elderly pawn-broker.
On the pretext of pawning a watch, he visits her apartment, but remains unable to commit himself. Later in a tavern he makes the acquaintance of Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov, a drunkard who recently squandered his family's little wealth.
Marmeladov tells him about his teenage daughter, Sonya, who has chosen to become a prostitute in order to support the family. The next day Raskolnikov receives a letter from his mother in which she describes the problems of his sister Dunya, who has been working as a governess, with her ill-intentioned employer, Svidrigailov.
To escape her vulnerable position, and with hopes of helping her brother, Dunya has chosen to marry a wealthy suitor, Luzhin, whom they are coming to meet in Petersburg.
Details in the letter suggest that Luzhin is a conceited opportunist who is seeking to take advantage of Dunya's situation. Raskolnikov is enraged at his sister's sacrifice, feeling it is the same as what Sonya felt compelled to do.
Painfully aware of his own poverty and impotence, his thoughts return to his idea. A further series of internal and external events seem to conspire to compel him toward the resolution to enact it. In a state of extreme nervous tension, Raskolnikov steals an axe and makes his way once more to the old woman's apartment.
He gains access by pretending he has something to pawn, and then attacks her with the axe, killing her. He also kills her half-sister, Lizaveta, who happens to stumble upon the scene of the crime. Shaken by his actions, he steals only a handful of items and a small purse, leaving much of the pawn-broker's wealth untouched.
Due to sheer good fortune, he manages to escape the building and return to his room undetected. Part 2[ edit ] In a feverish, semi-delirious state Raskolnikov conceals the stolen items and falls asleep exhausted. He is greatly alarmed the next morning when he gets a summons to the police station, but it turns out to be in relation to a debt notice from his landlady. When the officers at the bureau begin talking about the murder, Raskolnikov faints. He quickly recovers, but he can see from their faces that he has aroused suspicion.
Crime and Punishment | Fyodor Dostoyevsky | Lit2Go ETC
Fearing a search, he hides the stolen items under a building block in an empty yard, noticing in humiliation that he hasn't even checked how much money is in the purse. Without knowing why, he visits his old university friend Razumikhin, who observes that Raskolnikov seems to be seriously ill.
Finally he returns to his room where he succumbs to his illness and falls into a prolonged delirium. When he emerges several days later he finds that Razumikhin has tracked him down and has been nursing him. Still feverish, Raskolnikov listens nervously to a conversation between Razumikhin and the doctor about the status of the police investigation into the murders: He angrily tells the others to leave as well, and then sneaks out himself. He looks for news about the murder, and seems almost to want to draw attention to his own part in it.
He encounters the police official Zamyotov, who was present when he fainted in the bureau, and openly mocks the young man's unspoken suspicions.
He returns to the scene of the crime and re-lives the sensations he experienced at the time. He angers the workmen and caretakers by asking casual questions about the murder, even suggesting that they accompany him to the police station to discuss it. As he contemplates whether or not to confess, he sees Marmeladov, who has been struck mortally by a carriage.
19th Century Russian Literature » Crime and Slime
He rushes to help and succeeds in conveying the stricken man back to his family's apartment. Calling out for Sonya to forgive him, Marmeladov dies in his daughter's arms. Raskolnikov gives his last twenty five roubles from money sent to him by his mother to Marmeladov's consumptive widow, Katerina Ivanovna, saying it is the repayment of a debt to his friend. Feeling renewed, Raskolnikov calls on Razumikhin, and they go back together to Raskolnikov's building.
Upon entering his room Raskolnikov is deeply shocked to see his mother and sister sitting on the sofa. They have just arrived in Petersburg and are ecstatic to see him, but Raskolnikov is unable to speak, and collapses in a faint. Part 3[ edit ] Razumikhin tends to Raskolnikov, and manages to convince the distressed mother and sister to return to their apartment.
He goes with them, despite being drunk and rather overwhelmed by Dunya's beauty. When they return the next morning Raskolnikov has improved physically, but it becomes apparent that he is still mentally distracted and merely forcing himself to endure the meeting.
He demands that Dunya break with Luzhin, but Dunya fiercely defends her motives for the marriage. Mrs Raskolnikov has received a note from Luzhin demanding that her son not be present at any future meetings between them. He also informs her that he witnessed her son give the 25 rubles to "an unmarried woman of immoral behavior" Sonya.
Dunya has decided that a meeting, at which both Luzhin and her brother are present, must take place, and Raskolnikov agrees to attend that evening along with Razumikhin. To Raskolnikov's surprize, Sonya suddenly appears at his door. Timidly, she explains that he left his address with them last night, and that she has come to invite him to attend her father's funeral.
As she leaves, Raskolnikov asks for her address and tells her that he will visit her soon.
At Raskolnikov's behest, Razumikhin takes him to see the detective Porfiry Petrovich, who is investigating the murders. Raskolnikov immediately senses that Porfiry knows that he is the murderer.
Porfiry, who has just been discussing the case with Zamyotov, adopts an ironic tone during the conversation. He expresses extreme curiosity about an article that Raskolnikov wrote some months ago called 'On Crime', in which he suggests that certain rare individuals—the benefactors and geniuses of mankind—have a right to 'step across' legal or moral boundaries if those boundaries are an obstruction to the success of their idea.
Raskolnikov defends himself skillfully, but he is alarmed and angered by Porfiry's insinuating tone. An appointment is made for an interview the following morning at the police bureau.
Leaving Razumikhin with his mother and sister, Raskolnikov returns to his own building. He is surprised to find an old artisan, who he doesn't know, making inquiries about him. Raskolnikov tries to find out what he wants, but the artisan says only one word — "murderer", and walks off. Petrified, Raskolnikov returns to his room and falls into thought and then sleep.
Sophie Clarke April 13th, 8: I have to admit that the theory of the extraordinary man was once a compelling one to me. Lisa Eppich April 13th, The narrator seems to imply that when one hits rock bottom, one should just accept it in every respect and revel in squalor.
Katerina Ivanovna is a real portrait of courage: Ashley Quisol April 13th, 4: She is the first real female that we have encountered in our assigned literature, and I find her to be the most intriguing of all of the characters. Though the second part of this statement seems to be weak and ignorant, we see later that her silence in this matter is rewarded when the truth comes to light, because not only was she wronged by Svidrigailov, but she had also accepted this burden silently in order not to make a disturbance to cause further dishonor to her family.
Her second decision to marry Luzhin was one of practicality: Though this was not an arrangement made out of love for her future spouse, it was made out of love for her family, a feat that is equally admirable. She was attracted to him only when he stimulated her intellectually. On top of her reasonability and honor, Dounya also retains intuition especially in terms of understanding her brother and beauty, two traditionally feminine characterastics.
I admire that Dostevsky had the insight to attribute many male attributes of that time to a women while retaining her female qualities as well. It is often the case that people not just 19th century authors feel the need to force a character to one gender normative side or another, while it is evident with the example of Dounya that a character can break from these models and still be believable.
Could it be that an external force has predetermined their words and actions so that they have absolutely no control? Could at be that they are simply dragged into the cogs of a machine, as it were, pawns in a cosmically prearranged world?
Anyway, I read this conversation between Raskolnikov and Sonya very carefully and the changes that take place in Raskolnikov, both outwardly through his actions and inwardly through his thoughts, are striking. He begins the conversation with his old standby: The best example of this is on p.
Though he does the right thing and turns himself in, the hateful, spiteful side of him questions this decision until the very end. At the end of the sixth part, the schizophrenic fight seems to be over, and the bad side seems to have won. Elise Hanks April 13th, 7: Dostoevsky uses the choice of clothing and dress to mirror the choices of redemption, belief, refutation, and salvation.
The idea of charity plays an enormous role in the novel. Charity translates to a love of mankind and in the novel is associated with clothing through darning, mending, washing, and giving clothing to others. We see Katarina do this for her children as a literal labor of love. We even see Lizaveta in terms of clothing and charity as she mends and makes clothing for others and dies out of charity and love for her older sister.
At the other end of the spectrum we have hoarding of clothing and materialism. We see in both Luhzin and Svdrigailov dress foppishly and as men obsessed with materialism and immoral ideals. We even read Luhzin saying that to tear his coat in half and give half to his neighbor would only leave them both half-naked. Even the pawnbroker hoards bits of cloth along with the pledges in her apartment. His clutching at his bloody sock, his reluctance to buy new clothes or take off his old ones is the antithesis of acting charitably.
His overcoat even helps him commit the crime! Dostoevsky goes to great lengths to tie clothing to religion with charity and morals as well as with images of blood, cloth, and sacrifice. Ben Tabb April 13th, 8: By the end of the story, it appears there are two characters in particular who are frontrunners in the race for biggest ahole in the story: There is even the question of whether he poisoned his own wife to go after Dunia.
While he does nothing nearly as bad as attempting to rape someone, he is clearly cold, selfish and cheap on the inside. He sacrifices his wife for his infatuation with Dunia. He claims that he loves her, but does nothing but hurt her. He constantly lies to everyone in order to protect himself.
But he is clearly capable of selflessness. Most importantly, are his motives. Everything he does regarding Dunia, no matter how despicable, is because he truly does love her, which in my mind, makes his actions at least somewhat less reprehensible. His actions are completely misguided, but his feeling are pure. If there were any doubt left as to how much he values himself at the end, he ends his own life by shooting himself.
Luzhin, while his actions may be less damaging, is clearly the more selfish of the characters. Everything he does is to better himself and his image. In the first scene in which he appears he is wearing what seems to be a freshly bought outfit and is acting with a fake sense of sophistication. He is drawn to Dunia not by love, but by his desire to improve his image by taking on a helpless woman as his wife whom he will have complete control over.
He then displays his cheapness by putting Dunia and her mother up in a cheap apartment, and forcing them to take out a loan for the trip. He even admits his selfishness when he says he would never tear half his coat in half for a neighbor, because then they would both be half naked.
Brett Basarab April 13th, 8: Her devout religious faith and the terrible sacrifices she has made for her family say much in favor of her character. However, what is most important in the novel is the role she plays in relation to Raskolnikov.Svidrigailov'un İntiharı & Suicide / Crime and Punishment
She acts as both his conscience and his redeemer; after Raskolnikov confesses to her, she convinces him that he must accept his fate as a murderer and begin to repent.
Ultimately, Sonia sets Raskolnikov on the path to redemption. As people stand around jeering at him, he is unable to utter the words. Eventually, Raskolnikov tries to make his confession final at the police station, but even there, he cannot say the fateful words to Ilya Petrovitch.
Finally, Raskolnikov is overcome as he charges back into the police station and shouts out his confession. Only through her was he able to confess to the killings, accept that he did wrong, and thereby take the first step to redemption.
Sonia brings Raskolnikov back to earth: Patrick O'Neill April 13th, However, I have a slightly different take on the events. True, it is clear as day that her external environment utterly destroyed her, but I think in all her suffering, what may have initially been a search for dignity turned into this hysterical pride that the narrator keeps mentioning. Concerning this subject, however, I do not under any circumstances think that the reader should view her in the same light as Raskolnikov as his own actions drove him to insanity whereas although one might be able to somewhat argue the same for Katerina Ivanova, I personally do not believe her to be at all at fault, as life itself simply dealt her poor cards without end.
In my opinion, she really had no say in the matter from the beginning and in this sense is nonetheless deserving of pity, which the narrator does not give. The dynamic between the two characters is a very weird one, which ultimately shed light on other philosophical points for me.
Perhaps it is because she too is intertwined and shares part in this miserable situation. By way of her prostitution, she is in a sense bearing a cross for her family, but it does not seem to meet with too much success. On the subject of Raskolnikov, however, her religious sentiments and thoughts seem to help set him on the path towards redemption.
In this regard, I think Dostoevsky is clearly advocating a turn towards God instead of a turn away from Him, in this case by means of prostitution and trying to communicate to the reader the importance of faith in redeeming oneself from the suffering life has to offer. Zachary Harris April 13th, Porfiry has no real evidence that Raskolnikov committed the murder. He suspects Raskolnikov early in the novel based upon the fact that he becomes ill right after the murder. He becomes certain of his guilt when he is told by by a witness that Raskolnikov in a crazed state came to the apartment of the old woman asking the workers there about the blood that had been spilt there before and then asking to be taken to the police department.
While these facts certainly do allow one to be very suspicious of Raskolnikov, they do should not really make one certain that he committed the murder as he was in a crazed state from his illness when he visited the apartment. When Porfiry interrogates Raskolnikov, he uses incredible psychological mind games to attempt to extract a confession from him. He never outright accuses him of committing the murder in fact he avoids the question when Raskolnikov demands to know if Porfiry thinks he committed the murderbut acts in such a manner towards Raskolnikov that encourages him to completely break down in a way that a guiltless person would not.
He at first acts very calm discussing completely unrelated topics with Raskolnikov, which causes Raskolnikov to become uneasy.
He then discusses the way in which he conducts his investigations or at least the way he pretends torevealing that he does not accuse those he suspects right away but lets them be paranoid for a while thus revealing through their bizarre behavior that they are guilty of the crime. Is there not enough air?
Shall I open a window? While he does not have evidence that Raskolnikov committed the murder, he believes that he can prove it and force a confession from him because he knows what a murder will act like. He even is capable of pinning down which type of crazed behavior is show by a murderer. He must only release Raskolnikov from the police station because of protocol as Nikolai confesses to the murder while Raskolnikov is in the room.
Reason has no power to prevent one from feeling wretched and acting guilty if one has committed a murder, and as Sonya shows, the only cure for it is full repentance through Christ. Alexandra Boillot April 14th, However, while this seems like it should make Svidrigailov an extraordinary man, it does not in my opinion. I still cannot let go of the Napoleonic view of the extraordinary man, especially after Raskolnikov in his explanation to Sonya basically says that he fashioned his extraordinary man on Napoleon.
Even though he does perform heroic deeds, like giving much monetary assistance, these deeds come from his own resources and he does not commit a crime to help others. However, Svidrigailov is closer to the extraordinary man than Raskolnikov is because he can make clear decisions without too much anguish and once the decision is made, he accepts it and does not dwell on it, no matter how much suffering was caused by that decision.
Svidrigailov is truly independent in that no one inhibits him in his decisions. There is not even a conscious sense of having to choose one way in order to please those around him- he does what he wants.
Raskolnikov does not have this attribute: Ultimately though, Raskolnikov is the winner between these two because Svidrigailov commits suicide and dies alone while Raskolnikov gives himself up to God and suffering, with his family and Sonya in his thoughts. Hannah Wilson April 14th, From the time that we first meet him he is constantly described as this scary, sick, yellow man who has lost all faith. What is so shocking and unexpected are the moments of tenderness and the dreams he has right before he commits suicide.
It is in the last moments that we truly see his character. Perhaps I have too much sympathy for the pathetic man, but he appears never to have had anything really going for him. Contrasted with his current dismal living conditions and lack of true love, the dream provides him with an unrealized reality that may only be reached through death.
His dream paints an image of a beautiful funeral, with red roses and Chinese vases, the works. While there are no icons it appears that this is an honorable burial. However, I am not sure that this is exactly in line with what Svi. He does not pass judgment on her and also respects her for dying of a broken heart and almost envies the respect given to her.
He knows that he will not receive this kind of treatment since he is a pathetic man, but one can always dream.
It is also important to look at the parallel between him and Raskolnikov. Raskolnikov chooses life, but a Christian life, admitting that there is something greater out there. This is the opposite of Svidigailov. At the end of his life Raskolnikov is accuses of being a nihilist and denies it.
He admits that he is not an extraordinary man here because the extraordinary man would be able to forsake god and simply live with his actions. We are left with two very different ideas about life and where to find meaning in it. Raskolnikov chooses life on earth as well as religion while Svidrigailov refuses to believe that our condition can ever be changed. He clearly finds no meaning on living. For him the only way to end our suffering is to kill ourselves before it is too late. Dostoevsky clearly agrees with Raskolnikov, the entire book is about his religious redemption and he places the Svidrigailov sub-plot as merely an afterthought.
There is hardly a mention of his suicide in the end and no one makes a big deal about it. That leaves me to wonder, why did he include it at all? Sorry for such a long posting this is far longer than words, but I just had a lot to say.
Kaylen Baker April 14th, His ability to master anything allows him to get away with these crimes; we can see this talent even by the way he leaves Raskolnikov dangling by a thread even before he gains knowledge of the deaths of the Alyona and Lizaveta. Their crimes, while holding them together throughout the story, ultimately end in different directions.
I believe Dostoevsky uses this image because in the Trojan War it was honorable to die by Achilles. Why did Dostoevsky fabricate these two men?