Psycho Killer, The Russian Edition [Archive]

Sancho

01-20-2024, 09:03 PM

Also known as — Преступление и наказание

Oh alright, for us gringos it’s Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky.

So, a few of us here have decided to start reading this book in a couple weeks’ time, and I’d like to invite anybody else with an interest in Russian literature to join us. One thing I’ve always enjoyed about the Litnet is that it’s a happy place for book worms to gather and share ideas about what they’re reading. Mostly. Every once in while there’s a shouting match over important topics such as comma placement. Hey, I get it, people have strong opinions about the Oxford comma. Apostrophes too. Is it — a couple of weeks' time? week's time? weeks time? weekes times? Donno, but I digress. Speaking if digression, as with all Sancho-initiated threads, straying off topic is not discouraged; in fact it’s highly encouraged. Digression from the mean is where all the fun stuff happens, eh?:

Also, on Sancho-initiated threads, I like to start with a tune:

https://youtu.be/eauZzwt8Ci8?si=tMIbZYzszSvV48B6
Talking Heads, Psycho Killer

I don’t really know if that's appropriate theme music or not. I haven’t read the book yet. I'm a blank slate. Just in case I’m way off base, here’s another candidate:

https://youtu.be/iCEDfZgDPS8?si=V7Y59WbfWHWrr_gI
Modest Mussorgsky, Night on Bald Mountain

Woo! This one might be a good late-night read.

By the way I’m not even going to try to read the Russian edition. I’ve got a copy of the Pevear/Volokhonsky translation. That’s the one I’m planning to start reading…in a couple of weeks.

hellsapoppin

01-20-2024, 11:06 PM

For years I thought the name Raskolnikov meant something like "rascal" or evil rascal. I sure as heck was wrong as it has far more transcendent implications than that:

Raskolnikov is the protagonist of the novel, and the story is told almost exclusively from his point of view. His name derives from the Russian word raskolnik, meaning “schismatic” or “divided,” which is appropriate since his most fundamental character trait is his alienation from human society. His pride and intellectualism lead him to disdain the rest of humanity as fit merely to perpetuate the species. In contrast, he believes that he is part of an elite “superman” echelon and can consequently transgress accepted moral standards for higher purposes such as utilitarian good. However, that guilt that torments him after he murders Alyona Ivanovna and Lizaveta and his recurring faintness at the mention of the murders serve as proof to him that he is not made of the same stuff as a true “superman” such as Napoleon. Though he grapples with the decision to confess for most of the novel and though he seems gradually to accept the reality of his mediocrity, he remains convinced that the murder of the pawnbroker was justified. His ultimate realization that he loves Sonya is the only force strong enough to transcend his ingrained contempt of humanity. Raskolnikov’s relationships with the other characters in the novel do much to illuminate his personality and understanding of himself. Although he cares about Razumikhin, Pulcheria Alexandrovna, and Dunya, Raskolnikov is so caught up in his skeptical outlook that he is often unappreciative of their attempts to help him. He turns to Sonya as a fellow transgressor of social norms, but he fails to recognize that her sin is much different from his: while she truly sacrifices herself for the sake of others, he essentially commits his crime for his sake alone. Finally, his relationship with Svidrigailov is enigmatic. Though he despises the man for his depravity, he also seems to need something from him—perhaps validation of his own crime from a hardened malcontent.

https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/crime/character/raskolnikov/

hellsapoppin

01-21-2024, 12:13 AM

Years ago I wrote an essay about my reflections on 19th century Russian classical literature. Part of it was published in the NY Times book forum. The forum and its many writings are now archived and I was not able to trace it.

One thing that I remember about it was my view that these great Russian classics were apocalyptic and warned of an impending socio-political cataclysm. That because of a historical dialectic, something wicked was about to transpire. There was so much injustice, economic disparity, political repression, suppression of free thought and free speech, that religious institutions failed to provide the comforts they promised and that, instead, were supporters of the coercive and repressive state, that nihilism was the truth in that there was no after life, no heavenly Reward as promised by the churches, that all this government terror would lead to a highly violent revolution, that unjust wars of imperialistic terrorism would lead to counter war with countless casualties, and so on. History shows that, indeed, there was such a catastrophic response through the Revolution of 1917 and the emergence of Bolshevism. It was inevitable as Hegel and Marx taught. The difference between Hegel and Marx being IIRC that the former wrote how alienation of the people from their religious institutions was the cause of the world's problems while the latter believed it was the great economic disparities that was the real cause. They were both correct but I believe history shows that Marx was a bit more on point.

While many Americans are fascinated with those great books, they fail to note that the post Bolshevik era saw the emergence of equally great literature. Sadly, much of it was destroyed by the Bolsheviks for supposedly being bourgeoisie (it wasn't). Instead, the genre revealed the many shortcomings of the Soviet Revolution and its aftermath. For a listing and review of this, I recommend the following site:

http://www.sovlit.net/

Very little of this was openly published under dictator Stalin. When he died in the 1950s a gradual release of some of these writings took place. Much of which was done under the direction of Aleksandr Tvardovsky of Novy Mir:

https://chronicle6883.files.wordpress.com/2021/01/tvardovsky-alexander.jpg?w=640

I credit him with doing more to destroy the Soviet empire than any other person. This because the truths he exposed caused socialists and other members of the extreme left to renounce Sovietism and communism.

bounty

01-21-2024, 10:34 AM

ive got ~200 pgs left in house of sand and fog. if we set the first weekend in February as a start date for Dostoevsky, that should work for me.

the idea of theme music is fun---I love night on bald mountain, but I wonder about my ability to see 19th century Russians as opposed to mickey mouse and john Travolta from fantasia and Saturday night fever.

if you could transport Dostoevsky ~200 yrs into his future/our present, do you think he could listen to the talking heads and go "that's it!!"

I just grabbed my copy of crime and punishment, mines a translation by constance garnett. I thought for sure I had a sparks/cliff/monarch notes of the book, but at first glance I didn't see one.

poppin, your revelation about tvardovsky was interesting. the subversive nature of literature is fascinating. some years ago I really enjoyed reading Lolita in tehrehan.

Sancho

01-21-2024, 01:14 PM

Night on Bald Mountain was my introduction to classical music. I think my dad was tired of me cranking Zeppelin at the house, so he gave me a copy of it on LP — “You might want to try this.” It was a good choice. I wore it out. The cover art was eerie, and on that version the title was translated as A Night on Bare Mountain, which I mentally converted to A Night on Bear Mountain. I thought it was about some poor guy in the mountains being chased by bears all night long.

It was a great introduction to a class of music I’d never really paid any attention to. Next was Scheherazade by Nicolai Rimsky-Korsakov — “hey, if you liked that one, you might like this jazzy little number by the drummer, Rim-Shot Korsakov.” Yuk-yuk. A while back I mentioned this to one of our Litnet members who goes by Scheherazade and she told me I might like the book A Thousand and One Arabian Nights. — Wait! There’s a book too! Awesome! So, full circle, it’s just another example of why I like this website.

Hellsapoppin, have you tried an e-reader? I’m a recent convert and I’m wondering why I didn’t go this way a long time ago. I’m not trying to put any more money in Jeff Bezos’ pocket, but I’m sold on the Kindle Paperwhite. The text is scalable, it’s easy on the eyes, you can highlight and make all the notes you want, and with the app on an iPad you can even cut-and-paste text onto a literature website. Ahem.

By the way, that Sovlit website is fantastic!

Danik 2016

01-21-2024, 01:19 PM

Lol. Great reading project and as it is on Litnett one can be sure of unconventional and original opinions. Read the book more than once but many, many years ago Dosto being a favorite author. So if my eyesight allows, I will but in occasionally.

Speaking of Dostoevsky reminds me of Prendle Le Mick, who was a great Dosto man. Where might he be?

hellsapoppin

01-21-2024, 08:53 PM

Sancho,

Hellsapoppin, have you tried an e-reader? I’m a recent convert and I’m wondering why I didn’t go this way a long time ago. I’m not trying to put any more money in Jeff Bezos’ pocket, but I’m sold on the Kindle Paperwhite. The text is scalable, it’s easy on the eyes, you can highlight and make all the notes you want, and with the app on an iPad you can even cut-and-paste text onto a literature website.

Haven't tried one yet as they are so expensive. But mebbe some day ...

hellsapoppin

01-22-2024, 01:58 AM

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/nihilistic-movement-russia-rodolph-zgheib

The nihilistic movement or the anarchist movement is a rather important Russian political current, although it is fragmented into different movements such as liberating communism, anarcho-syndicalism, individualist anarchism and nonviolent anarchism (Michael. A, 1866).

Among the most prominent symbols of the nihilistic movement are Nikolai Chernyshevsky, a pioneering nihilistic theorist and utopian socialist, Dmitry Pisarev, a prominent nihilist theorist and defender of natural sciences, Sergei Nechayev, a revolutionary nihilist often associated with propaganda for action and terrorism, and Leo Tolstoy, a great writer, considered by many to be a pacifist anarchist and a Christian anarchist, and "Nikolai Chernyshevsky" a Russian literary and social critic, journalist, novelist, and socialist philosopher, often identified as a utopian and a Russian socialist (Scanlan, 1998).

The nihilist movement rebelled against tradition and social order by abolishing any authority wielded by the state, religion, or family. As a result, student engagement increased, providing the backdrop for a series of educational changes performed by Alexander II under the supervision of Minister of Education Alexander Golovnin (Scanlan, 1998). These changes were rejected by the rebellious students, and the nihilism movement created significant social and economic turmoil throughout the country, providing the incentive for revolutionary activity among university students in Moscow and Saint Petersburg. Concurrent with these upheavals, a massive fire broke out in Saint Petersburg in the spring and summer of 1862, threatening to destroy the city. The arson spread throughout Russia as well. Fyodor Dostoevsky allegedly blamed Nikolai Chernyshevsky for inspiring revolutionaries to action and begged him to cease (Petrov, 2019, p. 73).

The nihilist movement also engaged in a campaign of political terror through clandestine anti-absolutist organizations. Sergei Nechayev was charged with the most significant political killings, most notable as King Alexander II's assassination in 1881 (Hingley 1969, p.90).

During 1863, Russia's revolutionary situation was nearly exhausted; a general peasant uprising began, but the revolutionary action began to fade, and many members of the assembly were arrested or forced to emigrate, and they failed in their attempts to arrange Chernyshevsky's escape from criminal slavery, who was detained as a political prisoner in the Peter and Paul Fortress. In the 1870s and early 1880s, Sergei Nechaev's pamphlet fueled revolutionary aggression within the movement and pushed for a violent confrontation with the tsarist authority, resulting in scores of attacks against the Russian state (Hingley 1969, p.92).

Eventually, the 1860s and 1870s nihilists were viewed as unkempt, unorganized, disobedient, and torn persons who revolted against tradition and social order. The concept of nihilism was thus incorrectly connected with the assassination of King Alexander II in 1881 and the political terror employed by individuals engaged at the time in underground anti-absolutist groups. For conservative elements, then, nihilists were the curse of the age (Gillespie, 1996, p. 140).

Friedrich Nietzsche is most known for coining the word nihilism to characterize the dissolution of conventional morality in twentieth-century Western civilization. (Michael. A, 1996). A conservative journalist, Mikhail Nikiforovich Katkov, understood nihilism as identical with revolution and portrayed it as a societal hazard owing to its rejection of all moral values (Lovell, 1998). Chernyshevsky strove to identify the good sides of nihilism at the time, and described it as a symbol of resistance to all forms of oppression, hypocrisy, artificiality, and for individual freedom; It established a view on scientific fact alone, and that science is the answer to all societal issues (Lovell, 1998). According to nihilists, all misfortunes stem from one source: ignorance, which science alone can remove (Petrov, 2019, p.71).

✱ ✱ ✱ ✱ ✱

Nikolai Chernyshevsky fiery book What Is to be Done? set the 19th century Russian literary house afire and influenced all the great writers we cherish today. But Alexander Pushkin was probably the true Founding Father of the genre. He wrote of injustices, revolution, social reform, and was himself exiled for his bold writings. However, his writings had more of a Romanticist element to them. One example I can immediately think of the short story "Dubrovsky" which was made into a neat silent film comedy entitled "The Eagle" [1925] with Rudolph Valentino:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/The-eagle-1925.jpg/330px-The-eagle-1925.jpg

I don't want to give away the plot or conclusion but there was one scene that always got me - one I could never forget. It dealt with a certain creature hidden away in a wine cellar. I will say no more so as not to despoil.

One thing that is perfectly clear with all these writings is that the writers were disgusted with every manner of evil injustice that befouled Russia in those days. Small wonder why they had such a great influence on so many social reform movements including the Hippy movement of the 1960s.

hellsapoppin

01-22-2024, 02:19 AM

Sorry if this is a worthless repetition but here is Valentino in The Eagle:

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=the+Eagle+valentino

https://archive.org/details/TheEagleRudolphValentinoAppleTV2ndGen..mp4

For years I thought this movie was based on Pushkin's Kavkaskii Plenik (Prisoner of the Caucasus) but was instead on the unfinished novel Dubrovsky.

http://faculty.washington.edu/jdwest/russ430/prisoner.pdf

Sancho

01-22-2024, 02:57 PM

Fyodor Dostoevsky’s dates are November 11, 1821 — February 9, 1881
He was born in Moscow and he died in St Petersburg

Crime and Punishment was published in 1866 in serial installments in The Russian Messenger, an influential literary/political magazine based in St Petersburg.

For context here are the dates of a few important guys:

Leo Tolstoy: 1828 - 1910
Nicholas I of Russia: 1796 - 1855
Friedrich Nietzsche: 1844 - 1900
Karl Marx: 1818 - 1883
Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky 1840 - 1893
Napoleon Bonaparte 1769 -1821
Charles Darwin 1809 - 1882
Abraham Lincoln 1809 - 1865
Vladimir Lenin 1870 - 1924
Mark Twain 1835 - 1910
Anton Chekov 1860 - 1904

I’m still trying to wrap my head around the broad swath of Russian history. Early on there were Scythians, Goths, Huns, Khazars, and Slavs from 3 points of the compass. Vikings showed up in the early/high middle ages and were called ‘Rus’, which means ‘red’ (evidently a lot of them had red hair). Mongols invaded. Power coalesces around Moscow. Mongols are tossed. Tzars take over. Russian Empire rises. What can I say, Revolution happens. (Power to the people, baby) Soviet Union. Russian Federation. Next, who knows?

The above paragraph is reductive to the point of stupidity, but, as Popeye famously said, “I yam who I yam.”

Hey, hellsapoppin, thanks for all the background and links. The more I can understand about Dostoevsky’s time and place, and influences, the better the reading experience of this book will be. You know, I think an e-reader device itself can be had fairly inexpensively, but they get you with the downloads. It’s almost like a 25 cent hamburger at McD’s — they’re making their money on the fries. Anyway I left my Kindle on an airplane a while back and a week or so later I went to the lost-and-found at the airport. A nice lady took me back to where they had all the stuff turned in by the airplane cleaners. There were boxes and boxes of e-readers. Mine wasn’t there, but the lady said, “take your pick.”

Sancho

01-23-2024, 08:00 AM

Some time during his 20s Fyodor Dostoevsky started suffering epileptic seizures, which continued on and off for the rest of his life. The seizures most likely began while he was imprisioned in Siberia. He wrote about the conditions in a Siberian prison, which evidently make a place like San Quentin or Angola look like a community center. He also wrote about the experience of having an epileptic seizure. He had chronic money problems, which sometimes meant he wrote furiously to meet a deadline so he could pay his bills. His difficulty with money was closely related to his love of gambling, which he also wrote about.

— One thousand rubles on a six, the hard way. C’mon, c’mon, baby needs new shoes. Aw Jeeze, crapped out —

Danik 2016

01-23-2024, 08:06 AM

Haven't tried one yet as they are so expensive. But mebbe some day ...

I use a Sansung tablet in the evenings, poppins. There are several gratis e-readers on Google Playstore for you to choose. I use the Russian Read Era but of course there are others.

bounty

01-23-2024, 09:11 AM

I think if we're trying to get a small handle on Dostoevsky's times and some of the influences that are going to show up in his literature, you cannot forego the eastern orthodox church. im by far not an expert on Russian history but the presence of the church during his time was huge and I wouldn't be surprised to see the church appear, in some form, in the novel.

Sancho

01-23-2024, 02:02 PM

I bet you’re right. I don’t know much about the Russian Orthodox Church either, but I’m pretty sure it falls on the Constantinople side of the schism. Being a man of faith, though, makes Dostoevsky an outlier with members of the Russian literati. I’ve read a lot of Flannery O’Connor’s work. She was a devout Roman Catholic, but approached her work from a non-religious viewpoint. She had a strong faith in grace and redemption and she wanted to explore those ideas, but she wrote for people who were skeptical of those ideas.

Years ago took a class on the “long 19th century”, which was about European history from the French revolution to WWI. It’s a complex era. What I remember most about the Russian part of the long 19th century was that it was mostly “General Winter” who defeated Napoleon.

bounty

01-23-2024, 04:39 PM

havent read this yet, but it looks like it hits the mark:

Christianity and the 19th Century Russian Novel

https://www.thinkingfaith.org/articles/20101119_1.htm

Sancho

01-23-2024, 09:28 PM

That was a good essay, bounty. Thanks. It explained a lot. And as a bonus, there were no spoilers. The essayist seemed to think that Dostoevsky’s faith got him through his time as a political prisoner, or at least he didn’t loose his faith while there:

His exile had been a sort of brutal ‘retreat’ but from it he emerged with his faith in Christ strengthened and without any feeling of bitterness. His description of convict life in The House of the Dead is remarkably mild and forgiving.

I don’t know how much of that is attributable to his faith and how much of it is attributable to his nature.

His crime was membership in the Petrashevsky Circle, a literary group that discussed philosophy, social reform, and occasionally read dangerous books. His sentence was death by firing squad. He and his compadres were hauled out to the square, hooded, and tied to a post. The rifles were raised, but before the order to fire was given, a message from the Tzar was delivered commuting their executions to prison time. The mock execution was all planned out in advance, but the prisoners didn’t know that. They all thought they were going to die. That’s gotta leave a mark. I wish I could remember where I saw it, but in some of web-surfing on this subject I found the comment that at least one of the prisoners went insane and another went on to write Crime and Punishment.

bounty

01-24-2024, 08:39 AM

I have heard that story about him before.

i think the question where and how the overlapping circles of genetics, socialization, and environment occur is an interesting one.

I mentioned earlier, and its worth repeating---the subversive potential of literature is also an interesting thing. I have to recommend reading Lolita in Tehran again.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7603.Reading_Lolita_in_Tehran

hellsapoppin

01-24-2024, 02:21 PM

One thing that we often overlook was the so called woman question that existed in that milieu:

The Woman Question, as it developed in the 1860s, also had a performative aspect. Male radicals
played the parts of knights rescuing women, while women often dressed and acted as nihilists, who violated
the norms of high society. They cut their hair short, wore black dresses, smoked cigarettes, used coarse
language, addressed everyone as equals (using “ty,” the familiar form), lived in communal apartments.
Scholars have often interpreted this latter behavior as part of the rise of the people of mixed rank
[raznochintsy] in Russia in this period [6:215-22, 29:17-20]. While this is an important part of the story, it
also has very much to do with a wholesale rejection of “civility,” “high society,” and “femininity”
[zhenstvennost’], which was perceived as being linked to the alienation of the superfluous man. Women
wanted to have their own autonomy, their own “personality” [37, 38]

https://history.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Woman-Question-2008.pdf

Such issues often appear in these books but have generally been given scant attention by modern readers.

Sancho

01-25-2024, 03:04 AM

I wonder what Russia would look like today if the Decembrists had been successful in 1825. I wonder what the US of A would look like if George McClelland would’ve defeated Abraham Lincoln in the 1864 presidential election.

I enjoyed that paper, hellsapoppin, and I can’t help but to compare their history ours:

Emancipation of the serfs (Russia) 1861
Emancipation Proclamation (USA) 1862
National women’s suffrage (Russia) 1917
National women’s suffrage (USA) 1920

Also as I was reading up on Dostoevsky’s life and times, I noted that the Decembrist Women helped the members of the Petrashevsky Circle with clothing and supplies as they arrived in Siberia.

This from the paper you linked:

The Decembrist wives represented an important link in the chain of ideas leading up to the celebrated Woman Question of the 1860s precisely because they demonstrated the importance of nineteenth century men’s ideals for women. The core notion associated with the Decembrist wives was one of self-sacrifice, an ideal aspired to by both men and women in the generation of repentant noblemen (the 1830s and ‘40s). Egotism in the Woman Question, i.e., trying to emancipate women for their own sake, was considered unacceptable, but women taking actions that would benefit the larger collective were lauded, especially when they were perceived as martyrs.

So to the casual observer it probably seems like a crazy-harsh sentence the members of the Petrashevsky Circle received, but of course it was a direct result of the Decembrist revolt as Nicolas I took over as emperor. Stuff like that tends to make your average Tsar a tad jumpy, paranoid even. And again, it makes me wonder how history would have changed if the Decembrists had been successful.

hellsapoppin

01-25-2024, 09:55 AM

Sancho,

The core notion associated with the Decembrist wives was one of self-sacrifice, an ideal aspired to by both men and women in the generation of repentant noblemen (the 1830s and ‘40s)

~self-sacrifice~

https://imusic.b-cdn.net/images/item/original/998/9798514052998.jpg?maxim-gorky-2021-mother-paperback-book&class=scaled&v=1624625954

~repentent noblemen~

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51TF+o3+DnL._AC_UF1000,1000_QL80_.jpg

Mother and Resurrection embodied both themes even though they were written decades after the period mentioned in the quote above. Indeed, it does make you wonder what Russia's fate would have been if the Decembrists had succeeded. It is highly likely that the Bolshevik cataclysm would not have taken place and millions of lives could have been spared.

Sancho

01-25-2024, 04:38 PM

I'm slowly starting to get sense for it. Russia has always had one foot in the east and one in the west and has leaned on one leg or the other over the course of her history. After the Decembrist Revolt, during the reign of Nicholas I, the literati fell broadly into two camps — Slavophiles and Westernizers.

From Encyclopedia Brittanica:

The difference between Westernizers and Slavophiles was essentially that between radicals and conservatives, a familiar theme in the history of most European nations. It was the difference between those who wished to pull the whole political structure down and replace it with a new building, according to their own admirable blueprints, and those who preferred to knock down some parts and repair and refurnish others, bit by bit. Another basic difference was that the Slavophiles were Orthodox Christians and the Westernizers either atheists or, like the historian T.N. Granovsky, Deists with their own personal faith.

It seems to me Dostoevsky had a foot in each camp. He was jailed and exiled for reading banned literature (Belinsky) and yet he was a man of the Russian Orthodox Christian faith. Interestingly, according to the World Wide Web, his writing explores ideas on both sides of that divide.

Also interesting is what the movers and shakers (Kings, Popes, Tsars, Bishops, Generals, Dukes, and such) were doing, but what I want to know is — what was life like for average, 19th century, Russian Joe. What was the peasantry doing? What was their life like? That was one of the great pleasures of reading Don Quixote. Cervantes was really good at depicting day-to-day life on the Iberian Peninsula in the 16th century. A chubby little guy who rides a donkey was liable to get tossed in blanket by young rapscallions at the local inn. At any rate, despite their differences, it looks like the Slavophiles and the Westernizers were in agreement that serfdom needed to end.

I don't know, but it could be that Dostoevsky was good at writing about the man on the street. We'll see. He sort of straddled the divide here too. Where most of the young poets and writers of his time were nobles; he was not.

I'm looking forward to getting started.

hellsapoppin

01-25-2024, 10:22 PM

Sancho,

Slavophiles and Westernizers

Years ago I read a long book written by Tomas Masaryk (Czechoslovakia, Russian scholar, polymath, later became Democratic President and said to be the only man who could have averted World War II but died before he could do so) on this subject with particular emphasis on Dostoyevsky*. Masaryk believed that the church was so entrenched in the Russian character and exerted such a great influence that it stifled intellectual inquiry. This distinguished Russians from most Westerners. It led to unequivocal acceptance of doctrine, rigid conformity, and ultimately to Russia's isolation from the West.

It is a well established historical fact that the Orthodox church strongly supported the Tsar and his repressive ways: The Church reinforced his authority: Official Church doctrine stated that the Tsar was appointed by God. Any challenge to the Tsar - the 'Little Father' - was said to be an insult to God. The Church was very influential among the largely peasant population.

source = https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z6rjy9q/revision/3

Then came the changes -- Russian scholars saw how much the West (in particular, Germany) had advanced so much because of science and intellectual inquiry, that the church descended in social regard and that Westernizers now had the means to advance Russia through Marxist reform which sought to end financial disparities, education especially in the sciences, the importing of scholars to teach at their academies, and by increasing literacy. Church corruption much of which seemed like headlines we see today also contributed to the decline of the religious institutions.

Bottom line is that the Westernizers won out.

*IIRC the name was rendered Dostoyevskii in those days.

Sancho

01-26-2024, 12:26 AM

Yeah, from what I’m reading, the ROC was essentially a department of the state, which of course places way too much power on the one side with no counterbalance. But eventually something’s gotta give. Always does. Somebody’s going to push back. It’s happened in a lot of countries (and colonies) — slave revolts, wars for independence, revolutions, abolitionist movements, even hippies burning their draft cards. As you said, the Westernizers won in Russia. Although I’m thinking they apparently took the full-credit course on Karl Marx, but they must’ve audited the class on Adam Smith.

Anyway I’m thinking of reading Notes From the Underground before I start Crime and Punishment. Thoughts? Also does anyone know a good book on the Japanese Shogunate? Has anyone read James Clavelle’s Shōgun?

Sancho

01-26-2024, 01:16 AM

Whoops. Freudian slip there. It's Notes From Underground not The Underground. Duh.

Danik 2016

01-26-2024, 09:21 AM

I think "Notes From the Underground" is a good preparation for "Crime and Punishment". It shows Dostoevsky at his grumpiest and one has a view of the main character from his inside.

bounty

01-26-2024, 09:36 AM

I only have Clavell's book (and haven't read it yet) so im out of my depth there.

not to take away from what danik just said, but im only ~40 pages away from finishing house of sand and fog. ive found myself recently skimming lots as opposed to reading carefully and ive gotten through it much faster than what I would have expected.

if you wanna start crime and punishment say sunday, that works for me.

poppin, did you find a suitable copy for yourself?

Sancho

01-26-2024, 03:27 PM

Ya know, Notes from Underground is a pretty quick read. It's broken into 2 basic sections, and I read the first section last night.

I am a sick man…I am a wicked man. An unattractive man. I think my liver hurts. However, I don’t know a fig about my sickness, and am not sure what it is that hurts me.

I was prepared for, as Danik mentioned, "Dostoevsky at his grumpiest," but I wasn't prepared for Dostoevsky at his funniest. Underground man is totally relatable to our current times...and wryly hilarious. On a superficial level he reminds me of the protagonist in Diary of an Oxygen Thief, by Anonymous.

bounty

01-26-2024, 05:41 PM

well i'll shoot for being done with my book by sunday and will be ready for crime and punishment anytime afterwards. I might even go ahead and start it to build a little buffer...

Danik 2016

01-26-2024, 10:58 PM

Lol! You are absolutely right, Sancho, he is funny, though I suspect it's not intentional.

hellsapoppin

01-27-2024, 01:13 AM

hellsapoppin

01-27-2024, 02:33 AM

Among the many issues that appear in 19th classical Russian literature was the "Jewish question". What was their role in society? Should equal citizenship and status be accorded to them as to all others? Do they exert an undue influence in academia, in media, in worker-management dealings? Are Jewish soldiers truly loyal to the State - have they done their fare share in battle and in duty to the government? Do they undermine the Church and its "positive" influences? Do they pay their taxes? Do Jewish artisans create works that promote immorality? Why are they over represented in guilds and unions? Why do they have so many members in subversive groups such as anarchists, communists, rebellious organizations, and socialists? With all these issues under consideration are they or can they truly be said to be Russians? If by some chance it could be proven that they were loyal and contributive people to the State, should they be emancipated from the ghetto? Should laws that forbade marriage between Jews and non Jews be abolished? Should Jews be viewed as our 'equals'?

The issue of the "Jewish question" appeared in every country throughout Europe in that era. This especially so in Germany but was frequently addressed in classical 19th century Russian literature.

Dostoyevsky did not pay much attention to the issue directly in his books. While he clearly disdained nihilism (a movement which featured many prominent Jewish scholars), few of his characters were Jewish. He did not refer to them with the derogatory term "zhid" or write long passages in his stories which alleged that Jews were out to undermine the state. Dostoyevsky's strong nationalist tendency suggest that any alien ideal or religion represented a threat to the State. His writings clearly affirmed the Orthodox church which he viewed as a bulwark against Judaism, Catholicism, and socialist ideologies. During his lifetime he vigorously denied being an anti Semite. However, the consensus among historical scholars was that he was so:

https://community.middlebury.edu/~beyer/courses/previous/ru351/studentpapers/Anti-semite.shtml

Thus, although Crime and Punishment cannot be said to an anti Semitic, its themes of injustice, alienation, social identity, the quest for truth, the efforts to improve society ~ all of which are largely Jewish ideals and themes ~ can or should be viewed as the thoughts of someone who offers possible solutions to societal ills from the standpoint of Russian orthodoxy. This as opposed to alien ideals as possible solutions many of which have largely Jewish influence.

Don't know if I'm making myself clear here but I hope to have done so and feel that this 'question' should be considered when you make your analysis of the book.

bounty

01-27-2024, 09:59 AM

not having read Masaryk's work im at a disadvantage and shooting somewhat blindly, but as a somewhat counterpoint to poppin's post #22:

The article discusses Masaryk’s work The Spirit of Russia. In terms of methodology, The Spirit of Russia is based in Positivism, in a faith in progress and a forward-looking orientation of European development. At the same time, however, it also displays certain axiological positions that condemn conservative, monarchist or religious ideas present in Russian thought. Masaryk is critical of Russian spirituality and traditional elements of Orthodox devotion. The Orthodox faith in his view represents an antipode to progress, being non-European in character. Russia itself is presented as split internally into a progressive, European tendency, and a stagnant traditionalist segment. Masaryk’s view of Russia bears some traits of Orientalism, in particular the notion of the superiority of the European West over traditionalist Russia and the negative aspects of its traditional cultural and religious forms. He also anticipates the notion of internal colonialism within Russia itself..

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11212-020-09355-5

im deeply skeptical of the claim the church "stifled intellectual inquiry"

as a general rule, until relatively modern times, the study of the natural world was undertaken as a way of understanding god's creation.

here's a pretty large list of folks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_scientists, many of whom were believers.

classical composition was intimately associated with the church and we all know Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninoff, Korsakov, and Stravinsky.

likewise the Russian authors we know---dostoevsky, pushkin, gogol, Chekhov, and in a particularly interesting way, Tolstoy, were involved with the church.

I trust the same could be said for artists, explorers, educators, historians and any number of other erudite endeavors.

hellsapoppin

01-27-2024, 11:08 AM

not having read Masaryk's work im at a disadvantage and shooting somewhat blindly, but as a somewhat counterpoint to poppin's post #22:

.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11212-020-09355-5

im deeply skeptical of the claim the church "stifled intellectual inquiry"

as a general rule, until relatively modern times, the study of the natural world was undertaken as a way of understanding god's creation.

here's a pretty large list of folks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_scientists, many of whom were believers.

classical composition was intimately associated with the church and we all know Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninoff, Korsakov, and Stravinsky.

likewise the Russian authors we know---dostoevsky, pushkin, gogol, Chekhov, and in a particularly interesting way, Tolstoy, were involved with the church.

I trust the same could be said for artists, explorers, educators, historians and any number of other erudite endeavors.

Like you I cannot get into a prolonged discussion of Masaryk. However, I do endorse his view that "The Orthodox faith in his view represents an antipode to progress, being non-European in character." It was the church that strongly endorsed the Tsar and tsarist repression along with its stifling of progressive ideals many of which were either Jewish in origin or strongly endorsed by Jewish idealists.

As for Tolstoy, I have to disagree that he was so devoted to the church. Instead he was devoted to biblical ideals - teachings and practices taught by the Bible, not necessarily by the church. This blurb illustrates what I mean:

He struggled to finish Anna Karenina and then devoted the next several years to religious life. He returned to the fold of the Russian Orthodox Church, but soon doubted the Church's doctrines, rituals, and practices. Tolstoy found faith on his own terms. Love of God and neighbour and non-violence were at the core.

https://www.google.com/search?q=was+Tolstoy+devoted+to+Russian+orthodox+c hurch&rlz=1CAKSOU_enUS1067&oq=was+Tolstoy+devoted+to+Russian+orthodox+church&aqs=chrome..69i57.17191j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Sadly, the Orthodox church endorsed tsarist brutalism, intolerance of religious and ethnic minorities, and social injustice. The Bible teaches and promote tolerance, justice, love of others, sharing as opposed to hoarding of goods/resources. This is an applied Christianity endorsed and practiced to some extent by Tolstoy and other reformists.

Yes you are correct that many erudite artisans endorsed the Orthodox church. However, there were likely many more artisans exiled in Siberia on the grounds that they represented "subversive" elements in that turbulent society. Books such as Gorky's Mother and Tolstoy's Resurrection illustrate this.

bounty

01-27-2024, 01:23 PM

i think in this case, parsing words might be helpful. I didn't say Tolstoy was "devoted" to the church, rather he had been associated with it, but more importantly, my saying "in an interesting way."

as you pointed out, and is my understanding too, he had problems with what would be called the "institutional church" especially one deeply associated with the state, and he left it, but he had nevertheless grown up in it and however his faith life later developed, and however his faith appeared in his writings (as you hinted at), its in part attributable to his earlier experiences, which weren't necessarily stifling and to my knowledge, the church didn't actively seek to censor him in the future. so far as I know (so a lot of naivete!), it wasn't the church sending people to siberia.

that said though---I have an old seminary church history text book I picked up at a yard sale a long time ago. in the handful of pages on the Russian orthodox church, it does mention the church being both repressed and repressive. itd be good (or maybe disheartening) to learn how that was exactly.

what you said reminded me of the catholic church's relationship with Nazi germany---some supported the government, some were neutral, and some visibly opposed it, and I wonder if there was something similar going on with the 19th century Russian orthodox church as concerns the state and its depredations. in any event, the state and church being in bed with each other usually isn't a good thing.

bounty

01-27-2024, 07:55 PM

am about to start the book tonight, and at the moment im thinking of this as the theme song:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wDai9s4Hmc

hellsapoppin

01-27-2024, 08:08 PM

I do believe we both made good points on this matter, all of which should be considered when reading these 19th & early 20th century Russian classics.

Yet another theme in Dostoyevsky is the matter of repercussion. Perhaps the biggest difference, however, between this book and that of Resurrection or of Mother is that here the principle character is guilty of the crime he was charged with. In the others, more often than not, those charged were innocent. What does that say about the social milieu? Further, since the church (ever which denomination that might be) was complicit in such unjust evils, did the punishment the churches endure fit the crime of complicity?

Here's an example of the repercussions allegedly endured by the churches:

The Bolsheviks closed churches and used them for other purposes. There were accounts of drunken orgies taking place in the desecrated churches. The pretexts for these killings was usually alleged support for the enemy, criticism of the Bolsheviks and/or their ideology, or for liberal and/or bourgeois sympathies.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Bolsheviks+closed+the+churches&rlz=1CAKSOU_enUS1067&oq=Bolsheviks+closed+the+churches&aqs=chrome..69i57.7973j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

It may well be that some of these accounts are slightly or largely exaggerated. But we don't know for sure.

Anyways, all of the above serve as background which give Crime and Punishment real life and make it more accessible to the modern reader.

hellsapoppin

01-27-2024, 08:18 PM

am about to start the book tonight, and at the moment im thinking of this as the theme song:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wDai9s4Hmc

I would love to see/hear Maestro Leonid Kharitonov sing "Let the Punishment Fit the Crime":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UadpOCWhQVc

I bet he would do that phenomenally well!

Danik 2016

01-27-2024, 10:48 PM

bounty

01-28-2024, 08:22 AM

im 3/4 of the way through the introduction. up until this point the intro has been biographical in nature (did we know dostoevsky had a gambling problem?) but now he's at the point where he's going to talk about the novel. I dont necessarily mind spoilers, but I often skip introductions because I know they contain them. sometimes introductions are better read after the book. I think in this case though im going to finish it.

hellsapoppin

01-28-2024, 10:45 AM

I will try to follow you on the following site which has both audio & video:

https://archive.org/details/crime-and-punishment-fyodor-dostoyevsky-pdf

Couldn't find a large print edition of the book but will increase the size of the font as the narration takes place. From the very beginning you can tell that this is one compelling and thought provoking book. And yes, everyone should read the intro as it gives vital background data which may provide further meaning to the reader.

Sancho

01-28-2024, 01:55 PM

bounty

01-28-2024, 02:34 PM

heck Sancho, you might have just been referring to your friend's family, but in general itd probably be safe to say that Russia has had the most complicated history of all the places on the planet.

poppin how does the video work? is it the prose scrolling across the screen?

heres a gem from the introduction:

for Dostoevsky the "idea" behind the novel he was writing was of paramount significance. if all there was in "crime and punishment" was the story of a murder, it would simply be another detective tale, an early and rather successful forerunner of the modern crime novel. obviously, there is something else in the book which gives it a transcending importance in world literature. for the chief figures of his great novels are often embodied ideas. the struggle of these intellectual heroes for a faith, for a way out of the dilemma of life, usually takes the form of an idea which represents a solution of the characters spiritual existence.

hellsapoppin

01-28-2024, 08:31 PM

poppin how does the video work? is it the prose scrolling across the screen?

That's precisely what happens. This way you can increase the size of the font (very important to those with weak eyes like me) and heard what words are written at the same time. There are, however, two drawbacks - the voice is drone like and some of the names are mispronounced. But heck, who's complaining?

hellsapoppin

01-28-2024, 08:44 PM

I have a friend who has a Russian last name. I asked him once if still has any people back in the old country. He said, "No...Maybe... Probably not. Cossacks ran my people outta there a long time ago. We're Jews."

Anyway, it's a complicated history.

My ancestors had similar experiences.

Over my years online I've come across many Spaniards who enjoy American sports. We exchange ideas and often get personally acquainted in sports chats. I've told them that most of my family line came from Spain and how I wish I could have lived in that fascinating land but that the family had been exiled. When they ask why I use the word "marranos" which literally means "pigs" and was used as an anti Semitic derogation. Instantly, they know my ancestors (most of whom had converted to Christianity) were exiled by the evil Inquisition and by the decree of 1479 which ordered the purging of all Jews and all people who had a trace of Judaism in their bloodline for the past 500 years. Some of them tell how sorry they are that their beautiful land had such a tragic and shameful history.

Sancho

01-28-2024, 09:39 PM

When I read Don Quixote this last time (with the help of Danik), I came across an essay that speculated that Cervantes came from a family of Conversos, and that the whole story of a wandering knight had a Jewishness or Yiddishness about it:

Still, Jewish readers need no convincing of Don Quixote’s inherent Yiddishkeit, especially with regard to the modern Hebrew translation by the poet Chaim Nachman Bialik (1873-1934). Working from an abridged Russian translation of Cervantes’ masterpiece — Bialik could not read Spanish — he cut the novel by over one-half. In a letter to a friend, Bialik stated: “I read [“Don Quixote”] in Russian when I first came to Odessa as a teenage yeshiva boy, trying to become a poet. I was living in poverty in Odessa, and the book had enthralled me… Dostoyevsky made me weep and Cervantes made me laugh. I alternated between laughing and crying.”
From the essay — The Secret Jewish History of Don Quixote, by Benjamin Ivry

Back to Crime and Punishment. Does anybody know why Dostoevsky blanked out the street names?

By the way, bounty, good musical choice with the Yo-Ho Heave Ho song. How about a little Khachaturian:

https://youtu.be/8ob0nRhSKAw?si=C21bQvZMHvOhvJTP
Saber Dance

“Chacho. When you are a man, sometimes you wear stretchy pants, in your room. Ees for fun.”
— Nacho Libre

hellsapoppin

01-29-2024, 01:58 AM

Sancho,

Why did Dostoyevsky blank out the street names

I understand there were several reasons ~ first this was done to hide anonymity of real life people who may have inspired the creation of certain particular characters. Second, so that street names that did not exist could not be made up and so that no one could say "couldn't happen there as that street doesn't exist".

Let us say that a certain Smithsky existed. That a character names Jonessky was created and his actions based on those of Smithsky. Had the writer included the actual street name and had there been a socialist guild or lyceum on that block, and that Jonessky frequented that establishment, the censors could have accused the real life Smithsky of treason.

Because of this the writer gave realism to the story while retaining anonymity.

At the same time, if the establishment provided humane services in defiance of the Tsar and his puppet administrators, the censors would have come down on him severely. By not providing the street name, Dostoyevsky protected himself.

There may have been other reasons.

Re Cervantes, I recall a segment in which Sancho Panza took special pride in being Cristiano viejo y rancio. This mean that he was of pure Castilian blood which had not been "tainted" by having Jewish ancestry.

Sefardic Jews are very different from Ashkenazim Jews. They do not generally speak Yiddish which has a German base. They speak Ladino which has a Spanish base. It is undoubtedly the easiest language in Europe to understand and to learn. Other Sefardic Jews used a different language called Haketia.

I can see where someone may suggest that Don Quixote may have represented some form of Jewish ideals though of Sefardic, not Ashkenazim origin. He went on a quest to do daily good (called mitzvah), he sought to promote justice, to serve mankind, to reward good (he promised an island to Sancho Panza for his services), he forswore materialist reward for his own good deeds, and he sought to defeat the wickedness of the world.

When I think about it, Don Q is the antithesis of the mythic wandering Jew - a legendary figure who was forced to wander the earth just like Cain for supposedly mocking Jesus at the crucifixion. This person was punished in that he had to continually travel endlessly until the Messiah returned. He would survive in poverty having no particular trade or home and always be dressed in threadbare drags. Unlike Don Q he does not do good deeds and in some incarnations seeks redemption for his past misdeeds.

bounty

01-29-2024, 10:50 AM

hellsapoppin

01-29-2024, 08:38 PM

whenever I watch shows or movies on the computer poppin, even in English, I like having the subtitles on. as far as books, im very thankful my eyesight still allows me to read okay.

having grown up in western ny, and being a sports fan, outside of the music on looney tunes, the (buffalo) sabre dance was probably the first classical music I was exposed to.

im ~halfway through the 2nd chapter and marmeladov is still droning. im impressed with Raskolnikov's patience but I have to say, if Dostoevsky is so keen on human nature, how come when marmeladov mentions his teenage daughter, Raskolnikov doesn't say "um, excuse me, do you have a photo I can see?" I mean, what the heck?

on the 2nd page of the first chapter, when the authors talking about the "special Petersburg stench" he mentions the "insufferable stench from the pot-houses which are particularly numerous in that part of the town..."

I don't know if he's talking about taverns, drugs, or some version of public toilets.

im somewhat instantly reminded of a lot of dickens---life is difficult and bleak.

~ subtitles ~

Good idea. It's precisely what I do whether for stories or movies.

~ Western, NY ~

Beautiful part of the country. I bet you played lots of lacrosse in your youth. I played lots of baseball when growing up in Brooklyn but we did not have lax in our part of the world. Never got a chance to play, sad to say. Been a Cuse fan for many moons.

re Sabre ~ I well remember the French Connection Line and hard nose Rick Dudley. All gave it 100% every time they got on the ice sheet.

~ marmeladov ~

Interesting character. IIRC his role was to posit the idea of redemption through confession and repentance. This ultimately would become Raskolnikov's only alternative in return for the evil he committed. As to why he didn't inquire into the daughter's appearance, I believe it was because he was so self absorbed initially. He had a bold task in mind (a truly evil one), was ashamed by his poverty and social status, was so strenuously upset at what he perceived to be the world's injustices against him and others, and was single mindedly preoccupied with his errant thoughts.

~ stench ~

I do believe this was a reference to the "pot houses" (taverns or more correctly, the dives) in town and to the inevitable stench that surrounds these polluted establishments. Sorta like the bars in Philadelphia on January 1 when the Mummers have their parade and get so drunk that the bathrooms get clogged and they wind up p!ssing in the back alley of those buildings. Imagine the smell - check that: don't imagine it!

Mummer's use side of building to relieve their bladders: https://phillydeclaration.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/dsc_2575.jpg

Yeech!

~ Dickens ~

Exactly the same idea I had. The milieu is so much like that of Dickens though it was probably worse. Brits, like the Irish, who were poor could pack up their belongings and re-settle in the USA, Canada, or Australia. Poor folks in Russia did not quite have the same option. Because of that the many problems continued to exist until it all boiled over. While Dostoyevsky's premise was that the Russian Orthodox church and its doctrines offered solutions to the problems encountered in these tales, history shows that the religion, the church, the god, and the doctrines all represented a god who failed.

Sancho

01-29-2024, 09:44 PM

I think he does have a keen insight to human nature, bounty. And based on his experience in that Siberian prison, he must’ve seen a side of human nature most of us will only read about (thank god). You know, I keep being pleasantly surprised whenever I try to read one of the great classics of literature. I go into it with a mild sense of trepidation, thinking the ideas will be too high falutin to be any fun to read, but then I get into it and find, on one level anyway, the book is highly readable and very down-to-earth. This one is no exception.

Anyhow, Raskolnikov may not have asked for the daughter’s photo, but I’ll bet he was thinking it. — “Hey, Marm’, got any naked pictures of your wife?”… “No?” … “Wanna see some?” Yuk yuk.

I could almost smell the stink when I got to the part you mentioned, bounty. I think St Petersburg was built on a swamp, so there’d be naturally occurring methane clouds that’re much more potent in warm weather than in cold. (I lived in Louisiana a while back — I myself know about me some swamp gas) I’m not sure what a pot house is, but I sort of assumed it was a communal outhouse. And I’m sure St Petersburg at the time had a state-of-the-art sewer system, ie open ditches that dumped into the ocean. Phew!

I remember several places in Don Quixote where Sancho declares himself an “Old Christian.” His self image is tied up into his identity as a “pure Roman Catholic”. Of course Sancho is not a terribly deep thinker, so he seems to use his religious identity as a way to look down on others. Sadly, not much has changed. — my church is the only right and true church and yours is not, so I’m going to the good place when I die, and too bad for you, ‘cos you’re gonna fry.

I found this passage in part two: The Don and Sanch’ are sitting around the campfire philosophizing. The Don, of course, has his feelings about the righteousness of knight errantry and he equates it to religious faith. He also talks about the evils of vice. Sancho falls back onto his Roman Catholic faith:

Don Quixote:

All vices, Sancho, bring with them some kind of delight, but envy brings nothing but vexation, rancor, and rage.

Sancho:

I have some guile in me, and a touch of cunning, but all of it is covered and concealed by the great cloak of my simplicity, which is always natural and never sly. And even if I had nothing else, there is my belief, and I’ve always believed, firmly and truly, in God and in everything that is thought and believed by the Holy Roman Catholic Church, and there is my being, as I am, a mortal enemy of the Jews, and so the historians ought to take pity on me and treat me well in their writings. But let them say whatever they want; naked I was born, I’m naked now: I haven’t lost or gained a thing; as long as I’ve been put in books and passed from hand to hand out in the world, I don’t care what they say about me.

Given the speculation that Cervantes may have been a converso, this section takes on a whole new weight.

hellsapoppin

01-30-2024, 01:43 AM

I doubt that Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra was of converso origin because his family would have been persecuted by the Inquisition if it had been "tainted" with Jewish blood within the 500 years before he was born (in 1547). The family would certainly have been exiled if it had been discovered that they were so, just like my family was. The church under the Dominican order was very thorough in ferreting out Judios. Both Cervantes & Saavedra surnames were of Galician origin. Galicia (in the northern part of Spain) was a part of the Asturian-Leonese kingdom for centuries and remained a Christian stronghold even when it was briefly conquered by the Andalucian Moriscos.

Don Quijote's actual name was Alonso Quijano - the name Quijano was also of Galician (and surely of Christian) origin.

We know for a certainty that Sancho Panza was Cristiano viejo y rancio, that is of "pure" Christian Hispanic blood. Quijano does not make such a declaration. In view of all this speculation and history, I wonder why.

bounty

01-30-2024, 08:57 AM

often when I tell people where im from, especially international people, I make sure to say "new York state" (or some other qualifier) as opposed to just "new York" because so many people just think of the city.

there are bunches of memes that address that. ive attached one.

I remember the "French connection" well poppin, even though I didn't pay as much attention to hockey compared to the other major sports.

for the most part when I was a kid lacrosse was confined to schools that were on reservation land so we never played it. however the sport has grown in the years since to be pretty ubiquitous across the state.

I finished chapter three last night.

im finding it relatively easy to read too.

I was mostly teasing about Sonia, but had I been Dostoevsky's editor/publisher, I might have said, "hey, put this in!"

but that's an interesting point poppin---Raskolnikov being self-absorbed by his impending act.

one of the things that makes reading enjoyable is caring about the characters---im trying to figure out how knowing ahead of time that Raskolnikov is going to commit murder affects my reading and my view of him. I already don't like him because he's a dead beat tenant.

I noted his mother mentions in her letter "I have noticed more than once in my life that husbands don't quite get on with their mothers-in-law..." its interesting to see that phenomena cross culture and time. I wonder when/where the first mention of it in literature is.

oh, and I loved the phrase nastaya said to raskol early in chapter three when they were talking about his "work" and he was giving excuses---"don't quarrel with your bread and butter."

im also wondering how many copecks in a ruble.

and there has been some word mentioned twice that I didn't recognize---i'll have to go back through slowly later to see if I can find it. pauma pouma pauta something like that...

hellsapoppin

01-30-2024, 12:28 PM

~ how many copecks in a ruble ~

100 cps = 1 RR

hellsapoppin

01-30-2024, 12:31 PM

~ for the most part when I was a kid lacrosse was confined to schools that were on reservation land so we never played it. however the sport has grown in the years since to be pretty ubiquitous across the state ~

Wish I could say that was true for NYC. No varsity lax or hockey. So many athletic kids and the financing means to have it but nobody pursues it. Very sad waste of opportunity.

Sancho

01-30-2024, 01:23 PM

I told myself when I started this book that I’d stick firmly to the Russian pronunciation of the names, and I almost immediately reneged. It’s probably a common thing for an English speaker. Raskolnikov has become Rascal (not such a thing, eh Poppin?). Marmeladov has become Marmaduke.

I suppose Raskolnikov is a bit of a rascal. He’s got nothing but loathing for Alyona Ivanovna, the pawn broker. But he seems to have a huge amount of sympathy for Marmeladov, even to the point of leaving a few coppers on the his sill. The one is an old lady making her way as best she can. The other is a hopeless drunk whose family is living in crushing poverty. Maybe the emotion is not so much sympathy, but rather empathy. Alyona totally destroyed Raskolnikov in the negotiation over his father’s watch and he can only see that transaction from his own perspective, not her’s. By contrast he can empathize somewhat with Marmeladov’s situation.

Marmaduke is probably a less apt nickname. He’s not so much a lovable Great Dane, but he is likable on a personal level. He’s self aware. He just can’t seem to break the cycle of addiction. And his wife did drag him by his hair across the room as though he were a dog.

Sancho

01-30-2024, 04:01 PM

If I had to pick two personality traits that we westerners associate with prostitutes, I’d say we tend to think they are lazy and stupid. Similarly we tend to think drunks are weak and lazy. And yet in Chapter Two Dostoevsky introduces us to a pure soul, Sonya, a prostitute. She is Sonechka to her father, Marmeladov, and even though he is a drunk, he is a sympathetic character. Sonya’s step mother, Katerina Ivanovna, sort of pushed her into prostitution, and yet even she also is a sympathetic character.

Katerina to Sonya:

'You live with us,' she says, 'you good-for-nothing, you eat and drink and use up warmth'
Sonya:

'What, Katerina Ivanovna, must I really go and do such a thing?'
Katerina:

'And what,' Katerina Ivanovna answered mockingly, 'what's there to save? Some treasure!'
Marmeladov watches what happens later that night:

I see Sonechka get up, put on her kerchief, put on her wrap, and go out, and she came back home after eight. She came in, went straight to Katerina Ivanovna, and silently laid thirty roubles on the table in front of her. Not a word with it, not even a glance; she just took our big green flannel shawl (we have this one flannel shawl for all of us), covered her head and face with it completely, and lay down on her bed, face to the wall; only her little shoulders and her whole body kept trembling...
And:

I saw Katerina Ivanovna go over to Sonechka's bed, also without saying a word, and for the whole evening she stayed kneeling at her feet, kissing her feet, and would not get up, and then they both fell asleep together, embracing

This was the point where I knew Dostoevsky had me. He’s a master of his craft.

I even had sympathy for Alyona Ivanovna, the mean old pawn broker. If there’s a truly despicable character in Ch-2, I’d say it’s Ivan Ivanovich, a relatively high-level bureaucrat. Sonya had made him a half dozen shirts but he refused to pay, telling her she’d made the collars wrong. He even chased her away, cursing her. What a Scum-Bag! I really wanted to go all Tony Soprano up on him!

bounty

01-31-2024, 07:10 AM

i cant speak to the city poppin, but I know lacrosse is pretty big on the island. if I had to guess, id say city schools in general lack the space/facilities for it.

I usually go in knowing there'll be some names i'll say, some i'll shorten, and some just almost completely gloss over. I toyed with marmeladov as greg marmalade from animal house but the imagery wasn't working, thankfully his names pretty easy.

I think the dramatic tension between Sonia and her stepmother and their desperate straights is an interesting one. but do we think Katerina would be putting her out there "on the streets" so to speak if Sonia were her own biological daughter?

I also wonder if Katerina expecting this of Sonia, seemingly as coldly as she has, is attributable in part to the failures of her father to provide for the family, almost as a form of punishment.

chapter 4 endears raskol a little bit, endears him so more (he plays a white knight really well), but then leaves him all the more wretched in my mind (abandoning his white knight), then chapter 5 kinda decides his fate as he takes one step closer to his murderous aims (that Dostoevsky makes more conclusive through a disturbing, and distressing to read, dream raskol had) and then a chance meeting that sorta seals the deal.

having known for years that the book involved a murder, I always assumed the victim was a man---that its going to be a woman seems to make it and raskol, all the more despicable.

Sancho

01-31-2024, 03:27 PM

Yeech! I got some catching up to do. Been on the road working this week.

bounty

01-31-2024, 06:36 PM

have you been leaving any of your excess books around for bookcrossing?

bounty

02-01-2024, 08:15 AM

I have a couple pages left in chapter 6. something in the chapter was strongly suggestive of further securing raskol on his murderous path, but it also got me wondering if we'll ever hear his justifications.

by the way, it'll be fun sometime to pick a key sentence and compare how the two different translations we have render it.

ive included a scanned shot of my cover. I take the character to be Raskolnikov (with a dark heart) but he looks thicker and older and maybe more menacing than I would otherwise imagine him.

Sancho

02-01-2024, 11:23 AM

Good idea. Surfing around the web I find that people either love or hate the Pevear and Volokhonsky translation. Their translation reads fairly naturally to my ear. Here’s the openings if the first 4 chapters:

Chapter 1

At the beginning of July, during an extremely hot spell, towards evening, a young man left the closet he rented from tenants in S------y Lane, walked out to the street, and slowly, as if indecisively, headed for the K------n Bridge.

Chapter 2

Raskolnikov was not used to crowds and, as has already been mentioned, fled all company, especially of late. But now something suddenly drew him to people. Something new was happening in him, as it were, and with that a certain thirst for people made itself felt. After a whole month of this concentrated anguish, this gloomy excitement of his, he was so tired out that he wished, if only for a moment, to draw a breath in another world, whatever it might be, and, despite all the filthiness of the situation, it was with pleasure that he now went on sitting in the tavern.

Chapter 3

He woke up late the next day, after a troubled sleep, but sleep had not fortified him. He woke up bilious, irritable, and angry, and looked with hatred at his little room. It was a tiny closet, about six paces long, of a most pathetic appearance, with yellow, dusty wallpaper coming off the walls everywhere, and with such a low ceiling that a man of any height at all felt creepy in it and kept thinking he might bump his head every moment.

Chapter 4

His mother's letter had tormented him. But concerning the main, capital point he had not a moment's doubt, not even while he was reading the letter. The main essence of the matter was decided in his mind and decided finally: “This marriage will not take place as long as I live, and to the devil with Mr. Luzhin!

No hits yet from Book Crossing. And I’ve flung them far and wide. Somebody may have gotten a good read outta one or two, but nobody’s registered any of them on the web site yet.

bounty

02-01-2024, 11:53 AM

my constance garnett:

1:
on an exceptionally hot evening early in july a young man came out of the garret in which he lodged in s.place and walked slowly, as though in hesitation, towards k.bridge.

2:
Raskolnikov was not used to crowds, and, as we said before, he avoided society of every sort, more especially of late. but now all at once he felt a desire to be with other people. something new seemed to be taking place within him, and with it he felt a sort of thirst for company. he was so weary after a whole month of concentrated wretchedness and gloomy excitement that he longed to rest, if only for a moment, in some other world, whatever it might be, and, in spite of the filthiness of the surroundings, he was glad now to stay in the tavern.

3:
he waked up late next day after a broken sleep, wondering why he did not ask for a photograph of Sonia, but no use crying over spilt milk. but his sleep had not refreshed him; he waked up bilious, irritable, ill-tempered, and looked with hatred at his room. it was a tiny cupboard of a room, a lesser version of which would later appear in harry potter, but of course my author would have no way of knowing that, about six paces in length. it had a poverty-stricken appearance with its dusty yellow paper peeling off the walls, and it was so low-pitched that a man of more than average height was ill at ease in it and felt every moment that he would knock his head against the ceiling.

4:
his mother's letter had been a torture to him, but as regards the chief fact in it, he had felt not one moment's hesitation, even whilst he was reading the letter. the essential question was settled, and irrevocably settled, in his mind: "never such a marriage while im a alive and mr luzhin be damned!"

Sancho

02-01-2024, 03:42 PM

Arhgg! New page. Here's a repost for ease of comparison.

Pevear and Volokhonsky:

Chapter 1

At the beginning of July, during an extremely hot spell, towards evening, a young man left the closet he rented from tenants in S------y Lane, walked out to the street, and slowly, as if indecisively, headed for the K------n Bridge.

Chapter 2

Raskolnikov was not used to crowds and, as has already been mentioned, fled all company, especially of late. But now something suddenly drew him to people. Something new was happening in him, as it were, and with that a certain thirst for people made itself felt. After a whole month of this concentrated anguish, this gloomy excitement of his, he was so tired out that he wished, if only for a moment, to draw a breath in another world, whatever it might be, and, despite all the filthiness of the situation, it was with pleasure that he now went on sitting in the tavern.

Chapter 3

He woke up late the next day, after a troubled sleep, but sleep had not fortified him. He woke up bilious, irritable, and angry, and looked with hatred at his little room. It was a tiny closet, about six paces long, of a most pathetic appearance, with yellow, dusty wallpaper coming off the walls everywhere, and with such a low ceiling that a man of any height at all felt creepy in it and kept thinking he might bump his head every moment.

Chapter 4

His mother's letter had tormented him. But concerning the main, capital point he had not a moment's doubt, not even while he was reading the letter. The main essence of the matter was decided in his mind and decided finally: “This marriage will not take place as long as I live, and to the devil with Mr. Luzhin!

Sancho

02-01-2024, 05:18 PM

Bah-hahaha

...wondering why he did not ask for a photograph of Sonia, but no use crying over spilt milk...

I'm sure that's what she'd'a translated if she'd'a had our insight.

You know the translations really are quite different.

bounty

02-02-2024, 08:13 AM

words and meanings and how they move across languages are interesting things. i belong to a web-based international penpal site. not long after i first joined i had a Russian penpal who wanted to be a translator (or was it an interpreter?) and we used to have fun with translations. right now i have a penpal in china who is learning to do something similar.

i finished chapter 6 last night. i could have read more but the ending was so creepy and ominous that i didn't want to go to sleep with any more of that playing out. i think we are in a drum roll position for raskol's murdering.

hellsapoppin

02-02-2024, 11:56 AM

I was also going over the murder scene last night and could not help but admire the wording which was done with almost surgical precision in the narrative by Dostoyevsky. Rascal goes to the scene, there are doors open (mere coincidence? fate?), and it seems that everything is ripe precisely so that such a horrendous act can take place. But just when he lowers the boom, the sister appears. Then he croaks her as well. Then when he tries to escape, an intruder stumbles upon the scene. Then a neighbor. Now it seems like he's cooked. But as Fate would have it, both the intruder and neighbor walk away and he stumbles upon an apartment whose door, just coincidentally, is open. He hides briefly as everyone walks past him and then makes his escape. Free at last, Thank God Almighty, Free at Last!

But this is only the beginning of his self created nightmare as we are soon to learn.

Again, I go back to the almost surgical precision in the narrative ~ as a reader you can just see the perspiration in Rascal's forehead in your imagination. You can see him fumbling the hatchet in his hand, the way he tries to wipe the blood from his garments and hands, the heavy breathing, the look of fear, the frightful anticipation, him hurrying and trying to look inconspicuous, etc. Scary but fascinating sequence made all the more real by the superbly written narrative.

hellsapoppin

02-02-2024, 12:55 PM

There's so much more that I can add to all the above.

I was struck by the continued stream of conscience in the narrative. This was something you did not see in those days and this is why commentators called it the first existential novel in history (dunno if they do anymore). Rascal listens in on a student and soldier commenting about the wicked old lady whom he calls "an old witch". Not that they say croaking her was a good thing. But that if someone croaked her it would be well deserved and constituted 'justice' as she was such a b_____h. Because of all that he determines that killing her "was not a crime".

"When reason fails, the Devil helps". Indeed, when he makes his escape, a city bus goes by and obscures him so that witnesses cannot see him fleeing.

I'm now up to the part where he receives a summons from the fuzz. Don't recall what precisely happened at that point but will return to the online book later tonight. Again, what is so striking is the suspense ...

Sancho

02-02-2024, 02:53 PM

I just finished the first section, chapters 1-7, and to your point, Poppin, it is masterfully written and very readable. Anyone who has avoided Dostoevsky thinking his books are dense, egg-headed fiction can rest easy and shouldn’t hesitate to give him a read. On one level this book is a page-turner crime novel. I can’t take credit for this, but somebody on-line said it’s not so much a who-done-it as it is a why-he-done-it.

After Moby Dick I couldn’t help but to notice how many women characters were in the first section. Sonya and Dunya. Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna. The moms Katerina and Pulcheria. The drunken girl being pursued by the creepy chubby guy. Even the old draft horse in Raskol’s dream was a mare. I also couldn’t help but to notice most of these women lacked agency. They are largely are victims of circumstance. So far anyway.

bounty

02-02-2024, 06:20 PM

I just finished chapter 7 also.

a good question about the "why he done it"----ive been finding myself wondering about raskol's motivation---covetousness, envy, and desperation seem to be factors, but I don't recall Dostoevsky touching on those things. we've got ~400 pages in the aftermath of the murder and I wonder if we'll ever know, or if the emphasis is going to be on the turmoil he's bound to face.

he's a despicable character and I also wonder if as we get to know what goes on inside his heart and head, if my view of him will soften and include forgiveness.

poppin, I had to smile, your use of the word "fuzz" gives your time period away!

hellsapoppin

02-03-2024, 01:16 AM

bounty,

poppin, I had to smile, your use of the word "fuzz" gives your time period away!

Over the years I've had numerous online pals to whom I have confessed that I feel I was born in the wrong century. That the real me sat in on old meetings of the Transcendentalist lyceum meetings or in late 1700s reading societies mentioned by Prof Jon Robison in his Proofs of a Conspiracy [1797] or possibly in Russian intellectual circles at the time of Dostoyevsky.

https://www.library.illinois.edu/spx/rusread/bookstor.gif

Am now in my 70s but still cannot get over this belief. So yes, I did grow up in the 1960s and have used the term fuzz often preceded by a four letter term that begins with a capital F. This despite being related to several cops.

Sancho

02-03-2024, 01:20 AM

Haha, Fuzzy Wuzzy was a Bear. Smokey Bear that is.

Yeah I think that was the Crime part. The rest of the book concerns the Punishment. The cover art on your book, bounty, seems to suggest a tell-tale heart sort of thing going on.

I think it’s a combination of motivations for Rascol. There are those you mentioned as well as a few others and a few events he had no control over. So it’s a pile-on effect, and this on top of an already angsty young guy. And he’s an angsty young guy who’s bad need of a girl friend. And that’s a volatile mix.

I read somewhere the greatest predictor of a community having a higher than average murder rate is if that community has a higher than average percentage of young men in it.

bounty

02-03-2024, 07:40 AM

Sancho

02-03-2024, 10:00 AM

I don't think I've ever wished I lived in another time and place. I have however fantasized about getting a redo. You know, going back in time and fixing all the stupid stuff I've done over the years... and maybe buying a few different stocks than the ones I bought.

hellsapoppin

02-03-2024, 11:50 AM

i wonder what the 19th century Russian slang for the police was.

I don't necessarily see myself as being born in the wrong century so to speak, but somewhat consistent with what you wrote, I often wonder what I might have been if I found myself in some other century. I do appreciate the nerdy intellectual parts, but I can also imagine being a lewis & clark explorer type.

Sancho,

Sancho
I don't think I've ever wished I lived in another time and place. I have however fantasized about getting a redo. You know, going back in time and fixing all the stupid stuff I've done over the years... and maybe buying a few different stocks than the ones I bought.

If you haven't done so already, please read

https://www.boweryboyshistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Time-2Band-2BAgain-195x300.jpg

https://www.boweryboyshistory.com/2011/10/jack-finneys-time-and-again.html

A true modern CLASSIC.

Also please watch,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjCp3wFQrKI

Going back in time and doing good along the way. Both great stories.

hellsapoppin

02-03-2024, 12:09 PM

Back to Rascal's misadventures:

Turns out that the summons was re his default on financial pledges. Am surprised that this was brought to the attention of the police rather than to a court of equity. In response to the cop's inquiry he replies, "I am a student, poor, and sick". He is forced to sign yet another pledge and faints at the compound. Upon returning to his flat he despairs as to ridding himself of any evidence. He succeeds in hiding the stuff away under a large rock not having checked for cash and not knowing the full contents of what he disposed.

He ventures onto Razumihin's flat and wonders if he got there by fate or by chance. They discuss a certain party named Heruvimov and discuss the "woman question". Rascal is so disoriented that he refused to give German lesson and rejects a small honorarium for the lessons. He briefly causes a disruption on the street and is whipped by a teamster for it. People laugh but a gentlelady gives him 20 cps out of kindness. Then he stupidly dumps the cash.

Thereafter he stops at a place where he often ventured as a student and wonder if fate again drew him there.

Upon returning to his flat he goes almost completely delusional and faints again. He imagined that police were beating the landlady even though it was he who dispatched the old wicked wench. Nastasya the housekeeper does all she can to feed and nurse him but he raves on and does not eat.

It is only too clear that Rascal is a few cards short of a full deck and lacks full mental capacity. Very self defeating and suicidal. He may well hate injustices but he has more hate for himself.

Danik 2016

02-03-2024, 02:12 PM

I still have to read all posts about C&P but this part is terrible. Looking back I don´t remember if R. was already ill, when he commited the crimes or if he fell ill because he commited them.

bounty

02-03-2024, 05:11 PM

thanks poppin, i'll keep my eyes peeled for it.

nothing showed up in your second part of that post though. does it for you, and just maybe not for me?

Sancho, you just reminded me of hot tub time machine which is really not worth watching, and a little of about time which is delightful and totally worth watching.

haven't started part II yet, but danik, im confident all the mental and physical reactions poppin described are post-murder and attributable to it, so at least raskols not a sociopath.

in the meantime...

a short poll:

will the authorities discover raskol's crime? I lean towards no

will he confess them? I lean towards yes

hellsapoppin

02-03-2024, 08:00 PM

bounty
nothing showed up in your second part of that post though. does it for you, and just maybe not for me?

Am surprised it does not appear on your screen.

The title is Time And Teresa Golowitz - The New Twilight Zone 1985 TV Series on The Haunted Channel within You Tube. It was based on a story written by Pete (Parke) Godwin who was a pal of mine many years ago. He was one of those guys who you never forget.

Re your short poll, I prefer not to spoil. But they are good questions.

hellsapoppin

02-03-2024, 08:45 PM

For some reason, I forgot to include a note on this incident which appeared in Ch 5.

You know how to British and Americans the dog is regarded as mankind's best friend. To us Hispanics the horse is regarded as such. My understanding is that horses were also held in very high regard among Russians and Ukrainians. This should not come as a surprise since their ancestors were warriors who roamed Central Asia and Europe relying heavily on the horse to provide the means to make capital and conquests.

But in this terrible incident in C & P a horse is tortured by a teamster with members of the unwashed crowd joining in on the "fun" of destroying this noble and utilitarian creature. This incident IIRC was a nightmare that Rascal had and not an actual event. But it likely represents how to his twisted mind (and those of the imaginary, unwashed, and unwise crowd) is because a noble innocent creature is reduced to a play thing, a punching bag, a crash test dummy. They use clubs and iron bars as well as kicks and the drivers whip. Perhaps the dream also foretells Rascal fate as the weight of the world and universe falls upon him for his evil. It also displays the conformity of the crowd which no longer regards old ways taught by Old Order Russia and regards those lessons as useless, frivolous, and deserving of severest retributive punishment. Indeed, one older person asks the driver, "What are you about, are you a Christian, you devil?” shouted an old man in the crowd ... “No mistake about it, you are not a Christian,” many voices were shouting in the crowd." Thus, old order Russians conformed to the traditions values and ways. New order Russians don't as shown by that rowdy and unkempt crowd.

As a child Rascal accepted and conformed to Old Order Russia values and ways. This is why he sympathized with the horse and the nobility it represented. Before it is revealed that he had that dream of the horse, he had another dream about an old church where his sibling and grandmother are buried. It is said that he,

"In the middle of the graveyard stood a stone church with a green cupola where he used to go to mass two or three times a year with his father and mother, when a service was held in memory of his grandmother, who had long been dead, and whom he had never seen. On these occasions they used to take on a white dish tied up in a table napkin a special sort of rice pudding with raisins stuck in it in the shape of a cross. He loved that church, the old-fashioned, unadorned ikons and the old priest with the shaking head ..."

Now as an adult he has no regard for the church, for compliance with the law, no regard for intellectual pursuits, for material rewards in return for hard work and industry. Why are New Order Russians like this? Nihilism, socialism, anarchism, New Thought?

Whatever the cause, these people who destroyed the horse are not Christian. He says he will perform a similar act upon the wretched old woman. Thus, he, too, is not a Christian. He is not a true Russian. His mind corrupted not just by mental deficiency, but, no doubt, from corrupting influences which to this point in the story have not been entirely revealed by the author.

A few posts earlier I may have mentioned that there appear to be Apocalyptic warnings in these great Russian classics. That these authors were telling their society that it is on the verge of a irreversible cataclysm for various reasons - that it is too unjust, that people are under influence of alien thoughts, that Jews have an undue influence over intellectual circles and that they exert corrupting influences over many, and that people are leaving the church and the good things it represents. That when combined all this would lead to the dissipation of Russian society. I feel that this chapter starts to illustrate this in C & P.

Sancho

02-04-2024, 06:09 AM

To Danik's question, he was sick before the murders. At first he was just faking illness to get rid of Nastasya, the cleaning lady. But as time goes by he seems to actually be getting sick, and then sicker and sicker. Fake it til you make it, right? Even before the murders he's a bundle of nerves and he's getting nervier. He isn't eating right. He doesn't sleep well. From part one to part two he's gone from an angsty young guy who's prone to mild anxiety attacks to a full blown paranoid schizophrenic.

As for the survey, I'll participate because I have no idea where this thing is going. I’ll bet the Po-Po (that'd be the Fuzz for you Poppin) do pursue the case. (This is pre-Soviet Russia after all.) I'm less sure about Raskol's fate. But I think I'll put him on a suicide watch.

The old draft horse scene is hard to read, particularly because the old gal is trying so hard to please her master. The peasant who owns her and the cart is a boor. The drunken revelers think it’s fun to make the horse suffer. And the bystanders don’t have the spleen to intervene. I’ll only point out here that (again) this is pre-Soviet Russia, but not by much, and Dostoevsky had just written Notes From Underground in part as an answer to Nikolai Chernyshevsky’s nihilist novel What Is To Be Done.

From a story standpoint, the horse scene reminded me of two things. First was the drunken hay merchant in The Mayor of Casterbridge auctioning off his wife and child for a few coins. And second was a line from Peace Frog, a Doors tune:

Indians scattered on dawn’s highway bleeding. Ghosts crowd the young child’s fragile eggshell mind.

Evidently as a small child Jim Morrison and his family came upon a bad wreck on a highway near Albuquerque where a number of native Americans were bleeding to death. It effected him for the rest of his life.

More theme music. Peace Frog, The Doors:

https://youtu.be/6lnoM25D-js?si=crTHnw3e4koJBJxq

Hot Tub Time Machine. Great movie — "Hey, Uncle Adam, what's that thing on the back of the TV?”

bounty

02-04-2024, 08:13 AM

I have some weird things going on poppin with browsers, staying logged on, and being able to use the site. I end up having to use the "internet explorer" tool within my browser and so some of the posts and features here aren't supported.

I think one of you guys mentioned this already, or something close to it---the poor horse beating scene as both warning and foreshadowing of raskols murder of the pawnbroker. whats fascinating was he received it as a warning, renounced the path, but then went ahead and took it anyways.

i got partway into part II last night, hopefully lots more today but one really nifty line from last night:

the conviction, that all his faculties, even memory, and the simplest power of reflection were failing him, began to be an insufferable torture. "surely it isn't beginning already! surely it isn't my punishment coming upon me? it is!"

Danik 2016

02-04-2024, 01:11 PM

Danik 2016

02-04-2024, 01:26 PM

I have some weird things going on poppin with browsers, staying logged on, and being able to use the site. I end up having to use the "internet explorer" tool within my browser and so some of the posts and features here aren't supported.

I think one of you guys mentioned this already, or something close to it---the poor horse beating scene as both warning and foreshadowing of raskols murder of the pawnbroker. whats fascinating was he received it as a warning, renounced the path, but then went ahead and took it anyways.

i got partway into part II last night, hopefully lots more today but one really nifty line from last night:

Do you have a good PC anti virus, bounty? This annoying popping up of things which appear in more recent browsers can be at least partially if not wholly blocked. Take a look at the settings of your browser. Then go to Google Playstore and find you an gratis add blocker.
There are several sites though, like news sites in general, who will ask you to allow adds to let you access their content.

Danik 2016

02-04-2024, 01:30 PM

To Danik's question, he was sick before the murders. At first he was just faking illness to get rid of Nastasya, the cleaning lady. But as time goes by he seems to actually be getting sick, and then sicker and sicker. Fake it til you make it, right? Even before the murders he's a bundle of nerves and he's getting nervier. He isn't eating right. He doesn't sleep well. From part one to part two he's gone from an angsty young guy who's prone to mild anxiety attacks to a full blown paranoid schizophrenic.

As for the survey, I'll participate because I have no idea where this thing is going. I’ll bet the Po-Po (that'd be the Fuzz for you Poppin) do pursue the case. (This is pre-Soviet Russia after all.) I'm less sure about Raskol's fate. But I think I'll put him on a suicide watch.

The old draft horse scene is hard to read, particularly because the old gal is trying so hard to please her master. The peasant who owns her and the cart is a boor. The drunken revelers think it’s fun to make the horse suffer. And the bystanders don’t have the spleen to intervene. I’ll only point out here that (again) this is pre-Soviet Russia, but not by much, and Dostoevsky had just written Notes From Underground in part as an answer to Nikolai Chernyshevsky’s nihilist novel What Is To Be Done.

From a story standpoint, the horse scene reminded me of two things. First was the drunken hay merchant in The Mayor of Casterbridge auctioning off his wife and child for a few coins. And second was a line from Peace Frog, a Doors tune:

Evidently as a small child Jim Morrison and his family came upon a bad wreck on a highway near Albuquerque where a number of native Americans were bleeding to death. It effected him for the rest of his life.

More theme music. Peace Frog, The Doors:

https://youtu.be/6lnoM25D-js?si=crTHnw3e4koJBJxq

Hot Tub Time Machine. Great movie — "Hey, Uncle Adam, what's that thing on the back of the TV?”

Thanks, Sancho! In modern courts, the fact that he was mentally ill when he commited the crimes should warrant R. a lighter sentence, I think.

bounty

02-04-2024, 04:30 PM

its not an anti-virus thing danik, its the site and the browser interacting with each other. YouTube no longer works with internet explorer.

im not of a mind that raskol was mentally ill prior to his committing the murder, unless we accept a sorta prima facie position that a desire to commit murder is indicative of mental illness (but I don't think that's what Sancho is saying).

I finished the rest of the part II first chapter and oh he was thisssss close to confessing while in the police station!

and what terrifying coincidences for him---being called to the police station to begin with, and then hearing the account of the witnesses while he was there!

hellsapoppin

02-04-2024, 10:44 PM

Thanks for this post Poppins. On account of my eyes I haven´t read all posts on C&P yet and I´m reading then starting with the last. This horse episode is (understandably) fully erased of my memory. It helps to establish the obsessively criminal atmosphere that installs itself in Raskolnikovs sick brain long before he commits the actual crimes ( not forgetting the poor sister of the old lady who was at the wrong place at the wrong time.

As to his beliefs, Raskolnikov comes up with a sort of nihilist theory. I don´t remember the details, but maybe one of you guys may refer to it if you haven´t already done so in an older post.

Re his sick mind, I wonder if the death of his intended did not play some role in the degeneration of his thinking faculties. This has happened in life when someone loses a loved one. Am not sure he actually loved his betrothed by maybe he did and her death caused him to lose his marbles much of which may have been exceedingly limited from the very beginning.

As for Rascal's nihilist mysticism, again, I don't want to needlessly spoil but it is evident from the outset that he harbors such aberrant sentiments. His ideas of negation, his beliefs that all is naught, that values are baseless and that life is purposeless manifest a mindlessness that is disposed to create trouble for himself and others. His murder of the wicked b_atch, her sister, his frantic efforts to hide and disguise it all, the fainting and mad ravings that he went into while in a catatonic state all show how limited his faculties were.

But my question is, where did his nihilism come from?

Lyceums, guilds, law school, taverns, reading societies? Chernychevkii? Decembrists? Jewish anarchists?

I could look ahead in the book to see for myself but will read along and see if I can ferret out this matter eventually.

bounty

02-05-2024, 12:17 PM

I think too much speculation as to how the death of his betrothed affected him. raskol brings it up, almost in passing, seemingly with the intent to gain sympathy for his argument with the police. other than that, the author doesn't give us anything to go by. it almost reads to me as if the relationship were one of convenience, expedience, or even self-serving. kinda like George Costanza dating the unemployment clerk's daughter on Seinfeld.

in terms of nihilism---if we're going to claim Raskolnikov was himself nihilistic, as opposed to presuming it because the movement was afoot in Russia at that time, there should be lots of evidence presented. I think the things you said poppin have potential, and might be precursors but aren't necessarily evidence, and they should be inextricably linked with direct passages from the book that illustrate them.

I don't know what he is, other than an aimless and somewhat adrift wretched character.

hellsapoppin

02-05-2024, 12:32 PM

It is clear that he harbors such aberrant thoughts but, again, the question is what is/are the source(s) for these inane ideals. The only thought I have on this (again, remembering that I read the book 50+ years ago) is the old story of to be continued. We shall see as we go along in the book ...

hellsapoppin

02-05-2024, 01:17 PM

Interesting character to say the least.

Every woman's nightmare - Dounia's temporary suitor, happiest when women are suffering at his hand and feeling that men are their benefactors. She sought him but only to be relieved of poverty.

When Rascal is incapacitated by illness, he is surrounded by his pals. Luzhin walks in. He is superbly well dressed unlike those in the fold and says that he expects to meet Pulcheria & Dounia. There seems to be something Old World about him and mentions how "all the novelties , reforms, ideas have reached us in the provinces, but to see it all clearly one must be in Petersburg ... New valuable ideas are emerging ... We are cutting ourselves off from our past." But he feels those reforms are useless as everything good is based on self interest [clearly this is anti-nihilist which asserts that there is no social or utilitarian value in the world]. He condemns crime which is erupting everywhere as everyone wants to get rich. He, too, is a materialist but is not shown to be willing to kill or to undermine society in order to achieve his goals or advancement.

But Luzhin does genuinely appear to wish Rascal well so that he can fully recover from his illness. Rascal clearly hates his guts and says that he wants to exploit his sister (I'd say it does appear that way). He order Luzhin to leave after insulting him. He remains determined to break up that marriage and doesn't appear to care that this can only lead to Dounia's financial ruin.

✱✱✱✱✱

I like the way the conversation among the fold changed thereafter. Razumikhin was a thoughtful and insightful man who came up with a highly intelligent idea: that whoever the culprit was that croaked the old b_atch was an inexperienced hoodlum. That his escape was only by chance, not by design. Then he notes how Rascal gets all excited whenever the conversation turns to the crime. Earlier in the chat he dismisses all thought of Dushkin and Nikolay as the culprits (this despite Nikolay's suicide attempt) and gives rationales for why they could not have the causes of it. Though he is just as poor as Rascal, he is so much more rational, so much more positive, has a good sense of morality (no doubt representing old order Russian thought & ideals), very motivated to stand up for others (after all, they had been law students), and so much more inclined to see the good in people and in life circumstances. A friend in need, a friend in deed.

Sancho

02-05-2024, 08:57 PM

I’m learning all kinds of good stuff. For instance, poor people in Dostoevsky’s time would put a sugar cube between their teeth and suck tea through it. This was because sugar was expensive and by drinking tea this way rather than plopping a whole cube into their cup, they could stretch it out.

Also, talk about the opiate of the masses, they drank a lot! (I guess I knew that already)

What do you-all make of Raskol not being able to hang on to one thin dime? He throws money into the canal. He gives money to a busker who is singing a song he likes. He gives A LOT of money to Marmaduke’s wife, and it is money his mother had given him and didn’t really have to give.

As for Pyotr, typical lawyer, eh? He’s got enough money to go to the beauty parlor and have his hair curled, but his future fiancé and mother-in-law have to ride to the train station in a hay cart, and then once in St Petersburg, he puts them up in a dive. What a chump!

bounty

02-06-2024, 08:58 AM

im only on chapter 4 so im behind where you guys are.

the last chapter left me in a sort of personnel tizzy and I felt like I needed a scorecard to keep track of all the people. now who is that person? and who is this person?

im not sure Sancho---in the book I just finished, the house of sand and fog, the Persians did the same thing with the sugar cube and tea. they had been well off in iran and so im wondering if that's just a different cultural way of drinking it.

to your question about raskol and his finances---it hits home especially with me because I own rental property, so ive been noticing his ruble handling. without dismissing the role that structure plays in poverty, there is still a lot of truth in the saying that people are poor because they make poor choices.

bounty

02-06-2024, 02:42 PM

nearing the end of chapter 4, the main part of which seems to be that someone's been arrested for the murder, and raskol has to sit and listen to the account. it'll be interesting to see if he experiences some guilt, and at the same time, what happens if the accused painter progresses towards a conviction, or worse.

Sancho

02-06-2024, 05:01 PM

…the last chapter left me in a sort of personnel tizzy and I felt like I needed a scorecard to keep track of all the people. now who is that person? and who is this person?

No doubt about that, bounty. I thought I could tough it out, but I had to resort to jotting down a simple character map to keep track of everybody. A lot of the names are similar and it doesn’t help that the Russians like to use pet names or attach familiar suffixes to names. At any rate I realized I had to do this when Raskol meets Zametov in a bar and goes into a discussion of the crime, basically telling him how he did it. The whole time I’m thinking he’s talking to Zossimov the doctor and I’m thinking — hmm, the doctor must be an amateur crime sleuth. But it turns out Zametov is a clerk at the police station.

hellsapoppin

02-07-2024, 11:32 AM

~ Zametov & Zossimov ~

Confession: I also confused the two of them. Re-read it for clarification and see that Zossimov claims that Zametov is corrupt and takes bribes. Rascal seems to take that to mean that he is an elitist of some kind. Just the same he talks to the bureaucrat almost as if he had committed the crime or was at the crime scene. He resents Zametov's analyses that the crime was committed by an amateur criminal. In reply he tells Rascal, "you are a mad man". How true!

Rascal leaves the tavern only to be immediately confront by Razumihkin who asks why he was in the tavern. Thereupon Ras goes into a highly emotional outburst that he wants to be left alone. He continues to walk where he sees a suicidal woman about to jump off a bridge. It appears as if he had contemplated doing the same but changed his mind.

Then he goes to the crime scene where he finds the place has been changed and talks as if he will confess to everything that happened.

Yeah, Ras is a mess. He had been sent money by his mom. New clothes were bought by his pal Razumihkin which he now uses to walk the street. He gave away some of his money to beggars perhaps because he was seeking some form of redemption. His mind is filled with guilt and conflict as to whether he should confess to the crime. What a sicko!

Sancho

02-07-2024, 01:16 PM

Hah! It’s good to know I’m not alone in keeping the names straight.

It does seem pridefulness is one of Raskol’s prime movers early on. He gets highly upset whenever anybody posits the murders were an amateur job. And in some ways his intelligence is well above average, but in others he’s a total lug nut. He seems remorseful at times and impenitent at others. He’s all over the map. Dostoevsky is good at exploring all the emotions and psychological states a murderer can go through. I’m sure he spent time with murderers while he was incarcerated.

From a story standpoint I keep thinking how once a murder is comitted, everything changes. Things will never again be the same. Meeting old friends, having a drink or a good meal, mom and sis showing up for a visit, or even stopping for a moment to enjoy the singing of a street performer isn’t the simple pleasure it could be. Raskol will never be able to go back and simply be a poor university student with a future. It’s like the old joke:

Q - What’s the difference between a lightbulb and a pregnant woman?
A - You can unscrew a lightbulb.

bounty

02-08-2024, 10:18 AM

in the past ive considered taking notes about the characters just to keep them straight, this would have indeed been a good book for that.

im a little behind where you are poppin, but early on in part II chapter 6 I thought there was something worth focusing on:

...he had one thought only "that all this must be ended to-day, once for all, immediately; that he would not go on living like that." how, with what to make an end? he had not an idea about it, he did not even want to think of it. he drove away thought; thought tortured him. all he knew, all he felt, was that everything must be changed "one way or another" he repeated with desperate and immovable self-confidence and determination.

the timing, the context, and what follows, make it seem like its related to the presence of all these people busy-bodying themselves into his life but to your point above Sancho, I think that normal life is starting to weigh heavily on him, and the above section kinda shows that.

its fascinating that he seems to be on the cusp of actually confessing to zametov, and that the latter is faced with the fantastical question of "my goodness what am I really hearing?"

addendum from this morning. I just finished six and it refines the quote above, consistent with what you said poppin about the suicide and the crime scene "come to the police station" utterances. in both cases, Dostoevsky references back to the quote. in the suicide scene he says "to make an end of it all" and in the crime scene scene, he says "it would all soon be over."

hellsapoppin

02-08-2024, 09:49 PM

... fess up (?)

Raz hassles people at the crime scene, acts strangely, and refuses to divulge why he's bothering them.

{Ch 7}

Rascal had been contemplating whether he should fess up and surrender when he is distracted by a tragedy: Marmeladov is struck by a horse drawn cart and is critically injured. The carriage belonged to an elitist but was unoccupied except for the driver. Was it a suicide attempt? Or was he so drunk that he was terribly inattentive? This is not made clear in the narrative.

Rascal points out that he was "a drunkard." He is so shocked by the incident that he keeps repeating "I'll pay". But for what? Pay for the doctor's attention or for his crimes or for both? Marmeladov is put on a couch and calls for a priest who promptly administers ceremonials given to those about to die. He dies in his daughter Sonia's arms. She had promptly responded when summoned to go to his side appearing in tawdry garments.

Katerina Ivanova is Marmeladov's wife/widow. She is consumptive and spiteful who blames for husband for the family woes because hubby is a drunk and a no count. Rascal gives her 20RR.

We learn more about Ras in this segment: he hates injustice and can, somehow, "rationalize" in his mind the killing of an abusive old wench like the landlady. But he hates it when the poor are abused whether by injustice or by Fate. Polenka (another daughter) speaks to him about prayer. Perhaps it can ultimately lead to redemption and salvation (?). Then he starts to think,

Haven't I lived just now? My life did not end with that old woman ... now for the reign of reason ... Pride and self confidence grew in him ... He was {now} in the best of spirits."

Upon concluding his business in Marmelov's residence, and while renewed in the spirit, he returns to his garret accompanied by Nikodim Fomitch (superintendent cop). There he finds his mom and sister. Again he faints!

Strange how he can think about surrender, then drops it. Faints but is renewed. But faints again. Hates injustice but doesn't take all that long to kill. Has no regard for after life retribution but speaks of prayer with the priest and Polenka. Rascal is a living human dichotomy.

Sancho

02-09-2024, 03:28 AM

Oh yeah. Maybe even a trichotomy. If I had to give an amateur diagnosis, I’d say he’s got schizoid personality disorder.

I like the structure of this book. I know I’ve said it before, but Crime and Punishment is a pleasure to read. It’s got 6 sections and an epilogue. Each section has 6 or 7 chapters and the chapters are just about the perfect length for me to read in one sitting. At the end of most of the chapters there’s a hook that makes me look forward to my next chance to read.

Several of the chapters have reminded me of popular detective shows or police procedurals. I think Hollywood has been borrowing from Dostoevsky for years.

And then I got to Ch-5 in section 3. Raskol and Razumikhin go police detective Porfiry Petrovich’s place ostensibly to file a claim for Raskol’s property that was being held in hock by the murdered pawn broker. There’s a back and forth between the two and it’s clear Porfiry is questioning Raskol. Porfiry’s style of questioning made me think I was watching an episode of Columbo. Y’all remember that show? Anyway I checked the wiki page for Columbo and there it was:

The character of Columbo was created by the writing team of Richard Levinson and William Link, who said that Columbo was partially inspired by Fyodor Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment character Porfiry Petrovich,[12][13] as well as G. K. Chesterton's humble cleric-detective Father Brown. Other sources claim Columbo's character is also influenced by Inspector Fichet from the French suspense-thriller film Les Diaboliques (1955).[14]

bounty

02-09-2024, 07:30 AM

quick note to say holy cow Sancho, slow down, im way behind.

Danik 2016

02-09-2024, 08:51 AM

Lol! Sancho read the two respectable volumes of D. Quixote in less than a mount.

Danik 2016

02-09-2024, 09:00 AM

hellsapoppin

02-09-2024, 10:26 AM

Sancho,

The character of Columbo was created by the writing team of Richard Levinson and William Link, who said that Columbo was partially inspired by Fyodor Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment character Porfiry Petrovich,[12][13] as well as G. K. Chesterton's humble cleric-detective Father Brown. Other sources claim Columbo's character is also influenced by Inspector Fichet from the French suspense-thriller film Les Diaboliques (1955).[14]

WOW!!!

Hadn't read or known of that before. Awesome post!

Sancho

02-09-2024, 12:48 PM

Ah yes, I’m at a pretty good pause point. I kinda need to digest sections 1-3 anyhow.

Speaking of which, maybe it’s a good time to talk about the multiple personalities of Raskolnikov. I mean we’ve all got different sides to our personalities, but the different sides are not usually in such direct conflict with each other as they are in Raskol.

In the forward of my copy of the book, Richard Pevear touches on this, as well as the derivation of the name:

Petersburg is not a backdrop for the events Dostoevsky narrates, but a constant participant in them, and a mirror of Raskolnikov's soul. The enigma of the city and the enigma of the hero are one.

This is not to say that Raskolnikov is a neurotic who cannot keep from projecting his inner states upon the world. The truth is that we all see as we feel, or, better, that our vision is always complex, always moral, always spiritual: we “see” beauty and ugliness, we “see” good and evil. The struggle to empty himself of such complexities leads to the terrible splits and estrangements in Raskolnikov. His name comes from the word raskolnik, meaning “schismatic,” one who has split away from the body of the Church; but he is also divided against himself. He is, as the critic Konstantin Mochulsky wrote, “a demon embodied in a humanist.”

I gotta say, I’m getting a certain Osama bin Laden energy outta Raskol.

As characters go, Porfiry is a much more likable fellow. And the Columbo connection takes me back. My dad and I used to love watching that show, one of the few things we agreed on.

hellsapoppin

02-09-2024, 01:48 PM

enigma of the city and the enigma of the hero

Very good wording, there.

When Rascal tells his sister to reject Luzhin he says because he "won't accept the sacrifice" she is making in marrying that man of money for his sake.

In return Razumihin (the name is spelled differently in some translations) says, "he is raving ... You are not of your mind! Despot!" He then tells the mother and sister what he feels is the source for all the drunkenness, dissipation, and discord among the fold that Rascal is a part of:

"Would you believe they insist on complete absence of individualism and that's just what they relish! Not to be themselves, to be unlike themselves as they can. That's what they regard as the highest point of progress. If only their nonsense were their own ... Through error you come to the truth ... We live on other people's ideals.

"We talk a lot of trash ... {but} we shall talk our way to the truth ... the right path."

Although Razumihin also drinks he is or tries to be reasonable often intervening to break up disputes or to put people at peace. Note how he says that the problem here is how alien influences corrupt the already vulnerable people into conflict and dissipation. Since he mentions that individualism is condemned this shows that he likely means it is the alien ideals of socialism that are corrupting this circle of intellectual friends. However he remains optimistic that these corrupting influences can be overcome.

Sancho

02-09-2024, 07:55 PM

Dostoevsky doesn’t miss too many opportunities to take a shot at the socialists, or really at any of the “new” ideas coming out of the parlors of St Petersburg.

When Razumikhin called Raskol a despot because he was trying to forbid her to marry the sleaze lawyer, he was a tad drunk and Raskol was still pretty ill. The next day they’re both a bit more in control of their senses, but Raskol is still adamantly opposed to the marriage:

“Listen, Dunya,” he began seriously and dryly, “I must, of course, ask your forgiveness for yesterday, but I consider it my duty to remind you again that I will not renounce my main point. It's either me or Luzhin. I may be vile, but you must not be. One of us is enough. And if you marry Luzhin, I will immediately cease to regard you as my sister.”

This time, though, Dunya is ready. She evokes the “D” word too:

“It's not true, I'm not lying! . . .” Dunechka cried out, losing all her composure. “I won't marry him unless I'm convinced that he values and appreciates me; I won't marry him unless I'm convinced that I can respect him. Fortunately, I can be convinced of that quite certainly, and even today. And such a marriage is not vile, as you say! And if you were right, and I had really made up my mind to do something vile, isn't it merciless on your part to talk to me that way? Why do you demand a heroism of me that you may not even have in yourself? That is despotism; that is coercion! If I ruin anyone, it will only be myself...I haven't gone and put a knife into anyone yet! ... Why are you looking at me like that? Why did you get so pale? Rodya, what's wrong? Rodya, dear!”

Raskol comes back:

“Strange,” he said slowly, as if suddenly struck by a new thought, “why am I making such a fuss? Why all this outcry? Go and marry whomever you like!”
(!?)

My immediate thought was — well, Dunya hasn’t put a knife to anyone, but Rodya has (or an axe anyway). Perhaps he had an epiphany — Who am I to tell her how to live her life? At any rate it was an abrupt about-face, and maybe a little more manic than schizoid. But who am I to say? I ain’t no head doctor.

Raz' is a good character foil to Raskol. He's not simple, but he does seem to be guileless. I'm constantly asking myself why he continues to hang with Raskol.

You-all know I have an annoying propensity for posting tacky tunes from the 70s to express an idea, and here I go again. I yam who I yam. C&P is set in the summer and Raz' is a happy-go-lucky guy, so here's some theme music for Razumikhin:

Summertime, by Mungo Jerry:

https://youtu.be/wvUQcnfwUUM?si=-U_tJftkJHKWUO1h

We love everybody, but we do as we please
When the weather's fine
We go fishin' or go swimmin' in the sea
We're always hap-happy
Life's for livin', yeah, that's our philosophy

A slightly more optimistic tone than was in the Talking Heads tune I posted earlier.

hellsapoppin

02-09-2024, 10:49 PM

Sancho,

Dostoevsky doesn’t miss too many opportunities to take a shot at the socialists, or really at any of the “new” ideas coming out of the parlors of St Petersburg.

Recall my earlier note re Dostoyevsky and anti-Semitism. From my past readings of the Jewish question and socialism, Marx condemned Slavophilism (don't recall why but may have to look it up to know for certainty). Razumihin's condemnation of those opposed to individualism is clearly Dostoyevsky's condemnation of Marxism. And, as I mentioned before, many leaders within Marxist, socialist, anarchist, anti-Tsarist circles were largely led by Jewish reformers. Thus, this is the author's indirect way of attacking Jews for preaching such "subversive" ideas which "corrupt" the populace and "undermine" the social order.

hellsapoppin

02-09-2024, 11:08 PM

Ignacy Hryniewiecki - his terrorist bomb attacked killed the Tsar:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/I_Grinevizky.jpg/188px-I_Grinevizky.jpg

His nickname = Kitten

✱ ✱ ✱ ✱ ✱

Communist VI Lenin adored and could not live without cats:

https://i.stack.imgur.com/XdF3K.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/7c/e7/a1/7ce7a111396e9e59af99b56a98e9bece.jpg

✱ ✱ ✱ ✱ ✱

Communist cats:

https://scontent-den2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.18169-9/14054120_1612568932369634_2983837242636583138_n.jp g?_nc_cat=107&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=be3454&_nc_ohc=kWzYRLmr2LoAX9Ib-rE&_nc_ht=scontent-den2-1.xx&oh=00_AfBo6Whanb9PzDvZQIbSQB_Jd7ylhT_qoPb6Uy2FyK5v lw&oe=65EE5AB4

https://cdn.dribbble.com/users/5316383/screenshots/12157910/media/13748e6f89241f20302fb4ae8a089751.jpg?resize=1600x1 200&vertical=center

Beware of subversive ideologies and activities promoted by cats & their hoomans!!!:smash::smash::smash:

bounty

02-10-2024, 08:48 AM

be back later in the day for Dostoevsky but in the meantime, those were good poppin. theres so much funny stuff out there with cats.

have you guys seen "owlkitty?" this is one of the better ones:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3rQ3328Tok

Danik 2016

02-10-2024, 08:52 AM

Poor cat, bounty! I hope all images were made by AI.

bounty

02-10-2024, 09:03 AM

owlkitty is a real cat and her homepage actually has lots of clips of "the making of..." that you might enjoy danik.

Sancho

02-10-2024, 11:54 AM

I do remember you pointing that out, Poppin. I’ve been keeping my eyes peeled for it in the book. So far the only overt jewish references I’ve come across are when one of the characters referred to Alyona as “rich as a Jew,” and another when Raz’ refers to Luzhin as a Jew. I suppose the underpinning of Slavophilism is racism or xenophobia, which the Jewish diaspora would be keenly aware of.

Good side trip, by the way. I live in a house with a highly opinionated Siamese cat. His name is Neko-san. We wanted to give him an Asian name and that’s all we could think of. His superpower is peeing on the sofa.

bounty

02-10-2024, 04:53 PM

that columbo connection was pretty neat. my mother was a big fan of that show and I remember it well.

i finished part II last night, which ended with his family in his room waiting for him, and am just about to enter into the conversation between raskol and dounia.

I was on a long walk in the woods this morning with an old friend and one of the things that came up in conversation is germane to both raskol and dounia, and raskol and raz---to what extent our we our brothers keepers.

off in a slightly different direction but also hearkening back to some earlier posts:

I think it might have taken phil liggett some years before he and some of his fellow cycling commentators figured out how to pronounce peter sagan's last name.

they still continue to mess up Jonas vingegaard to the point of me wanting to writing them a letter yelling at them all.

a few years ago a kazahkstani tennis player burst on to the women's tour, elena rybakini. views would go back and forth between hearing rye-back-uh-nuh and rye-buh-kee-nee. I had a Russian penpal at the time and asked her, if I remember rightly I think she nodded at the latter as correct. my goodness ask the girl!

for the occasional character in the book:

(I find myself wondering if there is phonetic consistency in name pronunciation. can maria Sharapova be a useful guide?)

theres "Petrovitch." petro-vitch or puh-trovich? seems like all the Russians in movies ive seen would have gone for the latter.

zametov: zah-met-off or zam-uh-toff? seems like the latter here too.

semyon zaharovitch marmeladov---"semyon" seems straight forward. the middle name seems easily phonetic but actually could be said two different ways too. and the last name allows for mar-muh-layd-off or mar-mel-a-doff.

bounty

02-11-2024, 08:51 AM

someone lots smarter than me is going to have to explain how raz's behavior while walking raskol's mother and sister home was anything other than bizarre.

hellsapoppin

02-11-2024, 10:50 AM

Raz led them to Zossimov who was Rascal's doctor. He appears to have some superficial insight into Rascal's state of mind and health. He attributes the bizarre behavior to difficult life circumstances and to certain outside influences. The "product of several material and moral influences ... certain ideas." He feels that the family presence will provide comfort and relief to the patient. No doubt this viewpoint represents Dostoyevsky's idea that traditional Russian values are the remedy for society's discord and for comforting malcontents like the Nihilists, socialists, and other dissenters in that society.

IIRC from past readings (again, going back 50+ years or so), socialists or other dissenters of that era were reputed to be anti-family. There was Freidrich Engels who wrote a treatise on families that supposedly taught how families emerged as a way to suppress the masses while elites governed and exploited all. Therefore, families were said to be some form of evil. Though Engel's book was written a few years after Dostoyevsky wrote C+P these ideas were floated around by other thinkers of that era.

Here Dostoyevsky is opposing such views by saying families bring about relief, comfort, and stabilize the social order.

bounty

02-11-2024, 12:24 PM

i'll buy lots of what youre saying poppin, but I don't think Dostoevsky having raz behave like that towards raskol's mother and sister can be completely attributable to the author trying to make a case for the worth of family. that could have been accomplished with some simple and commonplace dialog---"im glad youre here, family is important and your son needs you." instead, he's saying things that are over the top---"you are a fount of goodness, purity, sense, and perfection....I want to kiss your hands here at once, on my knees..." and indeed he falls on his knees.

he barely knows raskol, barely has a relationship with him, raskol wasn't near death, and has never met the mother or sister before. his behavior is already obsequious, given these other elements, it becomes excessively so, and it makes raz out to be a bit of an over the top whack job.

so the question becomes to me---is Dostoevsky doing what youre suggesting, and if so, is it effective (im rather distracted by its absurdity), or contrarily, is he telling us something more about raz that's going to develop as the story goes along.

bounty

02-11-2024, 01:17 PM

ah---there you go! (from later in the chapter):

razumihin, of course, was ridiculous in his sudden drunken infatuation for avdotya romanovna. yet apart from his eccentric condition, many people would have thought it justified if they had seen avdotya romanovna…

Sancho

02-11-2024, 03:30 PM

That’s kinda what I thought about it. Raz’ was pretty polluted when he first met mom and sis, hence his emotions were all over the place.

I’ll also say, I see three broad levels of this story (so far). There’s the crime story level, the political commentary level, and psychological exploration level. The first is easy. The second and the third are gonna take some work.

Danik 2016

02-11-2024, 03:42 PM

bounty

02-11-2024, 04:16 PM

drunk and presaging wayne and garth: we're not worthy!

Sancho

02-11-2024, 05:12 PM

Raz is drunk. But I think this exaggerated sentimental behavior has may be to do with him being Russian and certainly with him being a Dostoevsky character.

Haha. True dat!

hellsapoppin

02-11-2024, 06:15 PM

ah---there you go! (from later in the chapter):

I was going to answer your question with that quote but you beat me to it.

Still the part about certain elements in that society foreshadowing Engels' anti family views is true. Sorry, but I just can't go into researching that part of history to prove the point. So, I'll leave the thought up in the air to be accepted or not as people see fit.

bounty

02-13-2024, 03:38 PM

i think for sure its possible Dostoevsky could write pro-family themes into his stories as a response to Marxist thought, but I don't see the brief interaction between raz and raskols family as necessarily being evidence of that. if we want to make that argument, there would have be a lot more of the remainder of the story grounded in and around his mother and sister. and maybe not even then---raz's interaction can easily be viewed as a one-off, and raskols having them in his life is just a normal matter of course; family has been important ever since theres been family, so families appear in stories. their presence just as easily could have been written at any time period in history regardless of what social-political movements were afoot.

I just finished chapter 3 in part III, and it ends with a little hook of dounia and her mother saying they want raskol to appear that evening, even after luzhin tells them to not. brava!

Sancho

02-14-2024, 01:35 AM

The chapter that covers the evening meet-up is a good one. (I’ve been reading ahead. I can’t help myself. I have no will power. I’ve been known to be in the kitchen, at the table, at 2am, with a jar of Nutella and a wooden mixing spoon, you see.)

bounty

02-15-2024, 08:21 AM

who doesn't like Nutella!

i appreciate your restraint on posting until im caught up, thank you. im partway into the chapter where raskol meets porfiry.

I had just been thinking again about Dostoevsky's "need" to introduce the predominant trait of young men, that is, thinking about young women, when raskol seemed to have gotten the revelation that raz has the hots for his sister.

I thought it was fascinating that Russians could use "Romeo" in the same way we would use it here.

I wonder if raskol is going to end up attracted to Sonia.

and he seems to be constantly plagued by viewing everything in life as either suspecting or indicting him on the murder. he's frequently a bundle of nerves.

Sancho

02-16-2024, 12:04 AM

No spoilers.
You know Darth Vader is Luke’s pops, right?
Aaarrrggg!

Anyway, this book seems like it sticks tightly to it’s outline, with sections and chapters logically presented and, as I mentioned earlier, a sort of hook at the end of each chapter. This ain’t no spoiler but here’s the hook at the end of Chapter 5, Section 4:

But here a strange incident occurred, something so unexpected, in the ordinary course of things, that certainly neither Raskolnikov nor Porfiry Petrovich could have reckoned on such a denouement.

I mean, even if I planned to stop there, I’m gonna go ahead and read the next few pages. And I’m pretty sure the 19th century folks who were reading the book in serial installments in the periodical, The Russian Messenger, would go ahead and plan to buy the next issue just to see what Raskol and Porfiry could not have reckoned.

But… narration-wise the book seems loose to my 21st century sensibilities. And I think this is because I just haven’t read that many modern books written with a third-person omniscient narrator. I’ve read a number of books recently that’ll take turns, chapter by chapter, going from one character’s perspective to another’s, but in C&P we can go from Raskol’s thoughts to Porfiry’s thoughts from one sentence to the next.

I donno. Has anybody here read a recent book that uses a third person omniscient POV?

bounty

02-16-2024, 09:00 AM

yes but I don't know who shot JR.

you are five chapters ahead of me, im just wrapping up the last few pages of section III.

that particular chapter seems to be very revelatory---holy cow, raskol wrote a paper on crime that got published in a magazine! and he's still, maybe all the more so given the topic of conversation and the people with whom he's having it, a bundle of nerves.

its fun to consider the narrative style. the book I read just before this, house of sand and fog took turns chapter by chapter telling the story from the first person point of view of each of the two main characters.

as we're doing crime and punishment im also reading broken prey by john Sandford. id call that a 3rd person omniscient narration. some of the lee child "jack reacher" books I enjoy change styles between books.

bounty

02-16-2024, 05:01 PM

double holy cow batman! near the end of the section, some random fellow purposely sought out raskol, walked away, and when the latter confronted him, the random fellow shouted "murderer!"

Sancho

02-16-2024, 11:52 PM

Jumpin' Jehoshaphat!

At first I thought he hallucinated it.

Sancho

02-17-2024, 04:45 PM

I had to take a side trip and learn the story of Lazarus as is laid out in The Gospel of John. Four days dead and shazam!

And it's been 4 days since Raskol murdered Alyona and Lizaveta and I'm thinking the sh*t's about to go down.

bounty

02-18-2024, 08:28 AM

i wondered too, and had to go back to read if he was dreaming at night, hallucinating, or otherwise unconscious---he does seem to pass out a lot.

maybe I remember a reference to Lazarus in passing---or am I making that up? do you remember what page that was on? I can go and take a peek.

I just finished the chapters where dounia's old employer, svidrigailov, shows up and tries to enlist raskols help with what---putting the moves on his sister? and with quite a bit of financial influence to boot.

and then the chapter where raskol and luzhin were together visiting mother and sister. that was a great read. though Dostoevsky didn't mention it, raz must have been loving it.

Sancho

02-18-2024, 01:27 PM

Man! They are sick a lot in this book. Raskol’s sickness seems to be psychosomatic, but Katerina’s “consumption” is real and probably not all that unusual for the people of Petersburg in the mid 1800s. I’m thinking she has tuberculosis.

There’s a passing reference to Lazarus in Part 3, Chapter 4. In a conversation with Raz, Raskol wonders if he’ll have to “sing Lazarus” to him, which is a reference to beggars in St. Petersburg asking for alms.

Then in the next chapter Lazarus comes up again. Raskol is talking with Porfiry, ostensibly trying to reclaim his property from the murdered pawn broker. Porfiry however is gently interrogating Raskol for the murder. The paper Raskol had published comes up and Raskol goes into a long monologue defending his ideas and he finishes with this:

In short, for me all men's rights are equivalent—and vive la guerre éternelle—until the New Jerusalem, of course!

According to the annotations in my copy of the book, “New Jerusalem” comes up in Revelations at the end of the New Testament as a sort of heaven on earth. New Jerusalem was interpreted and adopted as a popular theory in Russia at the time as a Socialist utopia. That gives rise to this exchange:

“So you still believe in the New Jerusalem?”

“I believe,” Raskolnikov answered firmly; saying this, as throughout his whole tirade, he looked at the ground, having picked out a certain spot on the carpet.

“And...and...and do you also believe in God? Excuse me for being so curious.”

“I believe,” Raskolnikov repeated, looking up at Porfiry.

“And...and do you believe in the raising of Lazarus?”[79]

“I be-believe. What do you need all this for?”

“You believe literally?”

“Literally.”

But then the big Lazarus part is in Section 4, Chapter 4. Raskol and Sonya have a heart-to-heart. In the interest of no spoilers, I’ll leave the discussion for later. I will say though that I think it’s an important part of the book.

bounty

02-19-2024, 07:03 AM

and also raped, and suicided, and murdered and apparently all of Katerina's children are sick too.

yes, "consumption" is an old term for tuberculosis.

im just about to start chapter 5

a few things from the most recent chapters:

the little section where raskol and raz are facing each other and...

something strange as it were, passed between them...some idea, some hint as it were, slipped, something awful, hideous, and suddenly understood on both sides...razumihin turned pale.

when I first read that, my impression was, okay, raz knows raskols the murderer, and raskol knows that raz now knows. on second thought, its possible that interaction might be interpreted to be in reference to raskol abandoning his family, which seems the more likely.

the whole chapter/interaction with Sonia was both interesting and a puzzler. im at a loss to understand his insistence on hearing the account of Lazarus being raised from the dead. I think something so weighty is bound to be important (as you are hinting at) so it remains to be seen as to how.

raskol, seems to be on the cusp of something---apart from leaving his family, he told Sonia if she sees him tomorrow, he'll tell her who killed lizeveta.

and to add to the intrigue, svidrigailov was eavesdropping!

Sancho

02-19-2024, 01:58 PM

I thought it was interesting how Porfiry sowed the seed and then Raskol went to Sonya to hear the story of Lazarus. Sonya resisted mightily reading the bible to him, but Raskol persisted. I think Sonya, as a devout believer, resists reading to Raskol because she thinks he is contemptuous of the bible. But Raskol genuinely wants to hear the story. He is keenly interested when he finds out the bible was given to Sonya by Lizaveta, the primary source of his feelings of remorse.

Not sure but I think he still sort of believes Alyona had it coming and the world is a better place without her. But how does he atone for killing Liz? He contemplates suicide while standing on a bridge, staring down at the water, but weirdly a distraught woman beats him to the punch and leaps off the bridge right beside him. He contemplates running to America and starting a Wild West Show (I added that last part). He has already isolated himself from Mom and Sis. Now he seems to be asking himself if wasting away in an arctic prison will cleanse him of his (sins?). Is redemption even possible?

I gotta say, I was again reminded of Flannery O’Connor’s writing, particularly a couple of stories in her collection, A Good Man Is Hard To Find. I am certain she was influenced by Dostoevsky. She definitely explored some of the same ideas.

Anyway, last night La Señora and I were watching a documentary about a hiker whose emaciated corpse was found in a tent, in a remote place in southwest Florida. So the authorities set out to find out who he was. Turns out he’d hiked the Appalachian Trail, north to south, and had met a lot of people along the way, but nobody knew his name. Hikers of the AT tend to know each other by trail names — his was “Mostly Harmless”. Everybody liked the guy. Most of the show was about figuring who he was, and it was way more difficult than anyone thought it would be. ***Spoiler Alert*** When they finally get an identity on the guy, they find out he was not at all the easy-going hiker he seemed to be, but rather he’d been a bit of a-hole in his previous life. So I was thinking he was on a Raskol-like journey, trying to think about how to deal with things. He hadn’t killed anybody, but he had been abusive to people who loved him. His conclusion, evidently, was to starve himself to death. Raskol’s conclusion is yet to be seen.

HBO MAX — They Called Him Mostly Harmless
Was based on an article by Nicholas Thomson in Wired magazine

bounty

02-19-2024, 04:28 PM

im nearing the end of chapter 5 with raskol in Russian columbo's office...

I don't know what the number is but ive read something like there are basically 7 (or 12 or whatever) stories that exist, just told in different ways. Id have to guess that how humans deal with guilt is one of them. in my view, that's gotta be Dostoevsky's aim and that'll be the eventual ending of crime and punishment.

not that O'Connor couldn't have been influenced by him, but i suspect the relative reductive universality (if that phrase makes sense) of stories helps to explain similarities too. all the more so as I understand she was a devout catholic and her faith infused her writing.

and that all helps to explain the unfortunate "mostly harmless" hiker too.

and interesting timing---I just finished a ride while watching another DS9 episode. the spiritual leader (kai winn) of bajor (the nearby planet) has devoted her life to the prophets, but in actuality, she has been more motivated by her own power and political gain, and the prophets have never spoken to her. she just recently had a vision/visitation that she originally thought was the prophets, but it turned out it was from their demonic counterparts, the pah-wraiths. when she realizes this, she is crushed, and the pain initially seems to humble her. she seeks guidance from one of the main characters who is bajoran. the character tells her she should step down from being kai, that its her lust for power that's interfering with a her spiritual well-being. but instead of continuing on her humbling path, repenting and seeking forgiveness, she hardens her heart, turns away from the prophets and embraces the pah-wraiths.

as you hinted at---the remainder of the book for me is a matter of how raskol ultimately deals with his guilt and what becomes of him when he's decided that question. among other things, it'll be interesting to see if the solution can be tied back to the Lazarus passages.

Sancho

02-19-2024, 06:20 PM

That theory about 7 or 12 types of stories rings true to my ear and I know you've heard the quip that there's only 2 plots — Stranger comes to town, and Hero takes a journey. Iliad and Odyssey. Inevitably any road-trip story with adventures and stuff is going to be compared to Homer. No doubt about it, I'm always seeing correlations between what I'm reading and what's currently going on. The better the book the more connections I see. I can't help but to think the tragedy of Alexei Navalny is in Dostoevsky somewheres.

Anyway the theory kinda reminds me of the world's greatest country song, You Never Even Call Me By My Name, by David Allen Coe. (The last verse is the clincher)

https://youtu.be/Sco_eBvXGTQ?si=lFg8fAJOrNWlGqN9

I was drunk the day my mama got out of prison
And I went to pick her up in the rain
But before I could get to the station in the pickup truck
She got ran over by a damned old train.

The song was written by Steve Goodman ( yep the same guy who did the Call Me Ismael tune over on the Moby! tread)

Danik 2016

02-20-2024, 07:43 AM

I think, since there exist values at all one of the basic narratives literature is reproducing again and again is this fight between good and evil in a multiplicity of forms.

i I don´t know if the notions of guilt and repentance were introduced together with the idea of Religion. It probably was and it is one of the recurring Themes of Dostoevsky.

In "Crime and Prejudice" some of the characters seem to serve as a sort of guides to Raskol in his fight between guilt and repentance. One of them is this detective Porfiry, who seems to have come of a Freudian school of psychoanalysis rather than the police.

bounty

02-20-2024, 08:22 AM

can both the iliad and odyssey start with "it was a dark and stormy night?"

or dostoesvky was the original alexei navalny.

theres another facet to the universal stories concept I find fascinating, the idea of Jungian archetypes. I think I have mentioned them before and I love reading about them. I wonder about the relationship between the two.

here are a few informative peeks to maybe whet the appetite:

https://blog.reedsy.com/12-common-character-archetypes-every-writer-should-already-know/

https://conorneill.com/2018/04/21/understanding-personality-the-12-jungian-archetypes/

https://www.learning-mind.com/12-archetypes/

I have thought for years that analyzing song lyrics and categorizing by type within genre would be really interesting.

im just about to start part V chapter 1. the previous section ended with raskol getting a sort of "reprieve" when he figured out Russian columbo really doesn't have evidence of his involvement in the murders.

bounty

02-20-2024, 08:31 AM

Sancho

02-20-2024, 11:15 AM

To Danik’s point, (I’ll echo a lot of what bounty said),

I think, since there exist values at all one of the basic narratives literature is reproducing again and again is this fight between good and evil in a multiplicity of forms.

I don´t know if the notions of guilt and repentance were introduced together with the idea of Religion. It probably was and it is one of the recurring Themes of Dostoevsky.

In "Crime and Prejudice" some of the characters seem to serve as a sort of guides to Raskol in his fight between guilt and repentance. One of them is this detective Porfiry, who seems to have come of a Freudian school of psychoanalysis rather than the police.

During the punishment phase (section 2 and beyond), Raskol is frantically and at times despairingly searching for a way out. He went into the murder with the idea that the “thinking class” is above the law and since Alyona contributes to the suffering of the poor, taking her out is justified. He seems to be taking Nietzsche’s idea of the Ubermensch to the extreme, like the Nazis did a couple of generations later. Anyway once the murder is done and he has broken man’s law, the full weight of natural law is upon him. He feels guilt immediately, but I think repentance (and maybe redemption) comes later. I’m not sure it’s so much an idea of religion as an idea of the divine, or God with a capital G.

Great links, bounty. From your earlier post I immediately began thinking about exactly that — archetypal characters in literature (right after thinking about the perfect country and western song anyway). I think Hollywood writers and song writers can plug-and-chug typical characters into their scripts and verses, but one of the things that makes literature interesting is when a character breaks free of typical behavior and does something truly interesting.

Dostoevsky gives us archetypes, but that’s only a starting point. Then things get interesting. I found a lot of his characters are ripe for comparison. I’m thinking here initially of Raskol and Svidrigailov. Both commit crimes, but only Raskol has guilt over it. Svid’ is an atypical character and an amoral actor, and yet is somehow charming. The chapters with Raskol and Svidrigailov I came away from with a creepy, dark feeling. By contrast the chapter with the second big meet-up between Raskol and Porfiry (Part 6 Chapter 2) I came away from with a tremendous feeling of good will.

Full disclosure, I finished the book last night and now I’m kinda going back over it in an effort to understand it. I’ll do my best to avoid spoilers.

bounty

02-20-2024, 01:04 PM

heck i have gone from being ~5 chapters behind to 170 pages!

Sancho

02-20-2024, 02:56 PM

Ah well, last night was a dark and stormy night… Come to think of it, in western Washington this time of year they’re all dark and stormy nights, and that’s good reading weather.

Danik 2016

02-20-2024, 03:57 PM

danik, I think one of the fun tensions about raskol is indeed that of guilt and repentance but its also one of the innate value of human life. despite raskols irreligiousity, despite his intellectual arguing to the contrary, the question arises of is his anxiety coming from a position of just not wanting to get caught, or rather one from his knowing indeed he has done something wrong. the book seems to have a fair deal of both.

I fully agree with you, bounty, but I'm afraid these values are changing. I one looks at the murders commited today and the international wars ( any of them) where the civil population is merciless killed there seems not much room for feelings of guilt and less still of repentance. If Dosto came back in the 21. C he would be surely horrified. And that having witnessed one or another thing in his days.

Danik 2016

02-20-2024, 04:21 PM

"During the punishment phase (section 2 and beyond), Raskol is frantically and at times despairingly searching for a way out. He went into the murder with the idea that the “thinking class” is above the law and since Alyona contributes to the suffering of the poor, taking her out is justified. He seems to be taking Nietzsche’s idea of the Ubermensch to the extreme, like the Nazis did a couple of generations later. Anyway once the murder is done and he has broken man’s law, the full weight of natural law is upon him. He feels guilt immediately, but I think repentance (and maybe redemption) comes later. I’m not sure it’s so much an idea of religion as an idea of the divine, or God with a capital G."

Maybe one of the things about Raskol and that is his undoing is that he is very theoretical about committing a crime. He reminds me of those haters of the social nets today. The danger is when the imaginary crime becomes a real crime for then there is no going back. But a true feeling of guilt and a genuine repentance reveal a soul that can still be healed. Unfortunately, as I commented with bounty these feelings seem to be changing or even vanishing.

Sancho

02-21-2024, 10:33 AM

Going from a theoretical crime to a real crime ... there's the rub, eh? Raskol is smart enough to identify a social ill and one of its causes — poverty and predatory lending — but then he's stupid enough to act on it in the particular way he did — taking an axe to an old lady. And you just can't stuff that toothpaste back into the tube.

He's not the only one who's had this thought. Early on in the book, before he's committed the murders, he overhears a conversation in a tavern between two guys who are discussing the exact thing he's considering. They're asking each other if all the good that will arise from killing Alyona the pawn broker is enough to wipe out the bad of the crime. They seem to come to the conclusion that — yeah, it probably would. But then one asks the other — so, you gonna do it? And the answer is — naw, man, rack em up. Let's play pool. (F**k it, Dude, let's go bowling) According the the notes in my book, this was a popular thought experiment of the day put forth by the German philosopher, Hegel. In my world, you can have a ton of "atta-boys" but they all get wiped out with one "awe-sh*t". So I'm gonna have to go with the analysis of the pool-room boys (or Walter in The Big Lebowski).

But to go back to my earlier (clumsy) metaphor, you can't stuff the toothpaste back into the tube. Or maybe you can, but it's gonna take divine intervention, and that seems to be a large concern of the book from here on out.

hellsapoppin

02-21-2024, 11:44 AM

All my life I have always been a humongous fan of the Three Stooges. Throughout their long career they made several episodes that revolved around the issue of heredity vs environment such as in Hoi Polloi:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSnJXjmW4sM

Evidently, the issue was a big matter during the time that C & P took place. Raz and Rascal appear before Petrovich. Raz says "we are all fool". What follows is a blurb that deals with the Hoi Polloi issue:

Part III Ch V:

Whether there is such a thing as crime. I told you that we talked our heads off.”

“What is there strange? It’s an everyday social question,” Raskolnikov answered casually.

“The question wasn’t put quite like that,” observed Porfiry.

“Not quite, that’s true,” Razumihin agreed at once, getting warm and hurried as usual. “Listen, Rodion, and tell us your opinion, I want to hear it. I was fighting tooth and nail with them and wanted you to help me. I told them you were coming…. It began with the socialist doctrine. You know their doctrine; crime is a protest against the abnormality of the social organisation and nothing more, and nothing more; no other causes admitted!...”

“You are wrong there,” cried Porfiry Petrovitch; he was noticeably animated and kept laughing as he looked at Razumihin, which made him more excited than ever.

“Nothing is admitted,” Razumihin interrupted with heat.

“I am not wrong. I’ll show you their pamphlets. Everything with them is ‘the influence of environment,’ and nothing else. Their favourite phrase! From which it follows that, if society is normally organised, all crime will cease at once, since there will be nothing to protest against and all men will become righteous in one instant. Human nature is not taken into account, it is excluded, it’s not supposed to exist! They don’t recognise that humanity, developing by a historical living process, will become at last a normal society, but they believe that a social system that has come out of some mathematical brain is going to organise all humanity at once and make it just and sinless in an instant, quicker than any living process! That’s why they instinctively dislike history, ‘nothing but ugliness and stupidity in it,’ and they explain it all as stupidity! That’s why they so dislike the living process of life; they don’t want a living soul! The living soul demands life, the soul won’t obey the rules of mechanics, the soul is an object of suspicion, the soul is retrograde! But what they want though it smells of death and can be made of India-rubber, at least is not alive, has no will, is servile and won’t revolt! And it comes in the end to their reducing everything to the building of walls and the planning of rooms and passages in a phalanstery! The phalanstery* is ready, indeed, but your human nature is not ready for the phalanstery—it wants life, it hasn’t completed its vital process, it’s too soon for the graveyard! You can’t skip over nature by logic. Logic presupposes three possibilities, but there are millions! Cut away a million, and reduce it all to the question of comfort! That’s the easiest solution of the problem! It’s seductively clear and you musn’t think about it. That’s the great thing, you mustn’t think! The whole secret of life in two pages of print!”

“Now he is off, beating the drum! Catch hold of him, do!” laughed Porfiry. “Can you imagine,” he turned to Raskolnikov, “six people holding forth like that last night, in one room, with punch as a preliminary! No, brother, you are wrong, environment accounts for a great deal in crime; I can assure you of that.”

To this day, the conflict has never been fully concluded.

*phalanstery - utopian housing complex

Sancho

02-21-2024, 01:48 PM

Legalize Shemp!

Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk

I tell ya, that story never gets old, and neither do The Stooges. I used to love watching The Stooges in Latin America — Los Tres Idiotos. They’re even funnier in Spanish.

One thing I noticed in C&P was social distance with regard to class. I’m pretty sure Porfiry was playing him for a confession, but he seems to defer a lot to the young gentleman, Raskol. And Raskol of course is consistently talking down to the detective. So the socialists want to tear down the class-based society. And democracies are built on equality, one man one vote. Does Pygmalion work in a modern society? Well, sure it does:

“Looking good Billy Ray.”
“Feeling good Louis.”

(Ackroyd and Murphy in Trading Places, where money is the class distinction)

Ya know what else never gets old? The canapés/can-o-peas schtick.

bounty

02-21-2024, 04:43 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HejBwiwVlXI

hellsapoppin

02-22-2024, 11:27 AM

Was this a dream?

Rascal is stalked by a mysterious character who utters, "Murderer ... You are a murderer ... " and then he vanishes into thin air.

Immediately thereafter Rascal finds himself on his sofa. "He thought of nothing. Some thoughts or fragments of thoughts, some images without order or coherence floated before his mind—faces of people he had seen in his childhood or met somewhere once, whom he would never have recalled, the belfry of the church at V., the billiard table in a restaurant and some officers playing billiards, the smell of cigars in some underground tobacco shop, a tavern room, a back staircase quite dark, all sloppy with dirty water and strewn with egg-shells, and the Sunday bells floating in from somewhere…. The images followed one another, whirling like a hurricane."

Now comes Razumihin who says "Don’t disturb him! Let him sleep. "

Rascal continues to descend and rants even more: "At moments he felt he was raving. He sank into a state of feverish excitement. “The old woman is of no consequence,” he thought, hotly and incoherently. “The old woman was a mistake perhaps, but she is not what matters! The old woman was only an illness…. I was in a hurry to overstep…. I didn’t kill a human being, but a principle! I killed the principle, but I didn’t overstep, I stopped on this side…. I was only capable of killing. And it seems I wasn’t even capable of that… Principle? Why was that fool Razumihin abusing the socialists? They are industrious, commercial people; ‘the happiness of all’ is their case. No, life is only given to me once and I shall never have it again; I don’t want to wait for ‘the happiness of all.’ I want to live myself, or else better not live at all. I simply couldn’t pass by my mother starving, keeping my rouble in my pocket while I waited for the ‘happiness of all.’ I am putting my little brick into the happiness of all and so my heart is at peace. Ha-ha! Why have you let me slip? I only live once, I too want…. Ech, I am an æsthetic louse and nothing more,” he added suddenly, laughing like a madman. “Yes, I am certainly a louse,” he went on, clutching at the idea, gloating over it and playing with it with vindictive pleasure. “In the first place, because I can reason that I am one, and secondly, because for a month past I have been troubling benevolent Providence, calling it to witness that not for my own fleshly lusts did I undertake it, but with a grand and noble object—ha-ha!"

Such rants are not normal but are, instead, indicative of sick mindedness. And yet, he had enough rationality to defend the socialists who, he felt, had the best of intentions for society. Further, he considers Christian ideals as a means of justifying his actions.

Evidently, the word "murderer" was from a dream. Or was it? "“Is it still a dream?” he wondered." IIRC from my previous reading it was not a dream. But Dostoyevsky's writing style is so clever that he makes it appear as if it was so. One clear thing is that Rascal has a sick mind.

Sancho

02-22-2024, 01:47 PM

Dreams-Schreams

Oh yeah, he is quite the clever writer. More than once I felt like a fish taking the bait and running for the reeds while somebody yells FISH ON, and Fyodor’s on the boat with a rod, paying out the line.

Three dreams immediately come to mind that’d be fun to compare:

At first I thought he was dreaming when the guy in the street called him a murderer, but then he goes home, falls asleep, and has a dream about the murder/social intervention.

Earlier I thought he was remembering an actual event from his childhood when he dreamed of the old draft horse getting beaten in the streets.

Finally there’s the dream in the epilogue of a dystopian future, a nightmare really.

(Danik, the final dream tells me maybe he wouldn’t be so surprised at the shenanigans of the present day)

(Bounty, hahaha, “well, they’re 3 kinda funny-looking guys who hit each other a lot”)

bounty

02-22-2024, 04:26 PM

i will show you the stooges.

im partway through chapter 3, late into the after-funeral dinner party, and luzhin has just appeared on the scene and...poppin, would I spoil it for you if I say anything?

hellsapoppin

02-22-2024, 04:32 PM

Sancho

02-22-2024, 06:14 PM

Well, I’ll weigh in on the memorial dinner. I’m sure critics over the years have found deep meaning in it, but I found myself sort of snickering all the way through it. You see, it reminded me of just about every family get-together I’ve ever been to.

To channel Seinfeld again — Shall we begin with the airing of grievances? I got a lot of problems with you people!

bounty

02-22-2024, 06:34 PM

fire away ...

I stopped before the concluding point but luhzin accused Sonia of stealing a hundred rouble note from him. she says she didn't do it, and as they searched her, the note fell out of one her pockets. she still says she didn't do it.

its interesting how we also want beauty to be good and if she did indeed steal it, maybe itd be all the more tragic on that account.

raskol is eyeing her in the midst of the conflict---Dostoevsky says his eyes were glowing. im not sure how to take that yet---maybe something along the lines of admiration.

I havent noticed a festivus pole in the chapter yet.

hellsapoppin

02-23-2024, 02:10 PM

After a prolonged argument/discussion among Rascal, Raz, Svidrigailov, and Dounia, Rascal ventures to Sonia's garret. It is clearly evident that he is troubled by his conscience. She also is not doing all that well. Earlier, there had been some discussion that only the sick (mentally, spiritually, physically) see ghosts. She believes she sees her dead father. Rascal says "perhaps there is no god at all". He proceeds to kiss her feet and explains that "I bowed down to all the suffering of humanity".

Throughout this I was reminded of Mary Magdalene and Mary of Bethany in the New Testament. Both of them were said to be women of sin which suggests they were prostitutes. Mary of Bethany washed Jesus's feet as an act of penance. Mary Magdalene served Jesus also as an act of penance. "What would I be without God" she asks. "Ras says "she is a religious maniac". Sonia prostitutes herself in order to financially support her family. Ras says all this results in "shame and dogmatic - better to go into the water".

Ras asks about Lazarus who was raised from the dead. "I shall be a religious maniac - it's infectious". He proceeds to tell her "I have abandoned my family today" and (paraphrasing Chernychevksy) asks "what is to be done?" His answer: "break what must be broken = freedom and power".

He indicates that he knows who killed Lizaveta leaving Sonia with the idea that he may or will soon reveal the answer to that mystery.

bounty

02-24-2024, 08:27 AM

wait until you get to chapter 4 in the next part poppin---raskols interaction with Sonia is huge!

bounty

02-25-2024, 07:13 PM

it popped into my head today that Katerina is in great need and raskol has a stash stolen from his victim. if I remember rightly though, he doesn't know what it consists of.

hellsapoppin

02-25-2024, 11:13 PM

Part 4, Ch 5:

Rascal retained some degree of discretion in that he observes the subtle but persuasive methods used by cops to ferret out suspects. He goes promptly on time in the morning to the compound but for some unknown reason is kept waiting. "He looked uneasily and suspiciously about him to see whether there was not some guard, some mysterious watch being kept on him to prevent his escape." After that prolonged wait Porfiry Petrovitch (cop) finally calls him in and seemingly takes forever to get to the bottom of why he was summoned to the compound. Ras then challenges him, thus:

“Tell me, please,” he asked suddenly, looking almost insolently at him and taking a kind of pleasure in his own insolence. “I believe it’s a sort of legal rule, a sort of legal tradition—for all investigating lawyers—to begin their attack from afar, with a trivial, or at least an irrelevant subject, so as to encourage, or rather, to divert the man they are cross-examining, to disarm his caution and then all at once to give him an unexpected knock-down blow with some fatal question. Isn’t that so? It’s a sacred tradition, mentioned, I fancy, in all the manuals of the art?” The cop replies with "I look upon you simply as a visitor ... “You see, I’m a bachelor, a man of no consequence and not used to society."

Ras knows the cop is trying to lay a trap and he is doing his best to avoid one. Cop does his best to put words into his mouth and makes references to matters that are of no consequence to the case at hand. "An examining lawyer cannot be bounded by formality at every step. The work of investigation is, so to speak, a free art in its own way ..."

Ras responds to the game playing by asserting, "“It’s a lesson,” he thought, turning cold. “This is beyond the cat playing with a mouse, like yesterday. He can’t be showing off his power with no motive… prompting me; he is far too clever for that… he must have another object. What is it? It’s all nonsense, my friend, you are pretending, to scare me! ... let us see what you have in store for me.”" He angrily threatens to storm out of the office when something quite unexpected (or was it so) happens.

Ch 6

Nikolay "confesses" to the murder! “I am guilty! Mine is the sin! I am the murderer,” Nikolay articulated suddenly, rather breathless, but speaking fairly loudly.

''For ten seconds there was silence as though all had been struck dumb; even the warder stepped back, mechanically retreated to the door, and stood immovable.

“What is it?” cried Porfiry Petrovitch, recovering from his momentary stupefaction.

“I… am the murderer,” repeated Nikolay, after a brief pause.

“What… you… what… whom did you kill?” Porfiry Petrovitch was obviously bewildered.

Nikolay again was silent for a moment.

“Alyona Ivanovna and her sister Lizaveta Ivanovna, I… killed… with an axe. Darkness came over me,” he added suddenly, and was again silent."

“I suppose you didn’t expect it?” said Raskolnikov ... Porfiry had shown almost all his cards—of course, he had risked something in showing them—and if he had really had anything up his sleeve (Raskolnikov reflected), he would have shown that, too. What was that “surprise”? Was it a joke? Had it meant anything?

Thereupon Ras meets the man who called him "murderer".

When I read the book years ago, like Ras, I wondered if that "confession" was staged in order to make Ras more vulnerable to the subtle police tactics. I'm sure that will unfold as I read on.

Sancho

02-26-2024, 01:23 PM

Ya know, I wondered about that, but in the translation I’m reading it makes it pretty clear Porfiry is as surprised as Raskol at the false confession. I thought the detective was about at arrest him but was thrown off by Nikolai the painter, sort of, bursting in and confessing. I could almost see the thought bubble over Porfiry’s head — what the…!?

Okie-Dokie, I’m going back over some my highlights, chapter 1, the act of the murder itself:

He could not waste even one more moment. He took the axe all the way out, swung it with both hands, scarcely aware of himself, and almost without effort, almost mechanically, brought the butt-end down on her head. His own strength seemed to have no part in it. But the moment he brought the axe down, strength was born in him.

Any thoughts? It almost seems as though Raskol was a witness to the murder, not a volitional actor in it, and then a “strength was born in him.”

bounty

02-27-2024, 08:56 AM

im almost done with the first chapter of the last section.

yes, I agree, Russian columbo seemed surprised.

as far as the confession---(I think it was) raz who was just recently visiting raskol to chastise him for his treatment of his family, and he mentioned the confession as if it were a done deal and one wonders the effect that will have on raskol.

the murder---the re-reading of what you just posted reminds me almost of an out of body experience.

just finished chapter 2 of the last section---talk about your Russian columbo!

back a few pages to a meaningful passage (p400)

it had been too stifling, too cramping, the burden had been too agonizing....and he had agreed at the time with Sonia, he had agreed in his heart he could not go on living alone with such a thing on his mind!

I used to be a huge fan of the reality show survivor---one of the things I noted about the contestants was how often they would do themselves in because the burden of their secret knowledge was too great for them not to share.

hellsapoppin

02-29-2024, 01:02 AM

Pyotr Petrovitch Luzhin has pangs of guilt over whether he should have given Dounia and her mother more money as he wanted to have control over them. He muses, "why was I such a Jew?" and realizes that he made a mistake in not doing so.

He goes onward to the memorial dinner for Marmeladov. His widow Katerina Ivanovna Marmeladova ('proud, excessively proud') spent ten roubles for the dinner - this evidently to show that she was somehow not impoverished and of some financial means. The dinner draws a number of interesting characters which kinds remind me of Bohemian type parties I attended in NYC in the late 1970s and early 1980s: lots of intellectual types speculating on "free marriages", the woman question, marital dissolution (always a big no no among Christians in those days and up to the early 1960s), progressive politics, nihilism, communal living, "stupid dullards". He is quite uncertain of himself among these people. He wonders,

Even if he had been certain that all the progressives were fools like him, it would not have allayed his uneasiness. All the doctrines, the ideas, the systems, with which Andrey Semyonovitch pestered him had no interest for him. He had his own object—he simply wanted to find out at once what was happening here. Had these people any power or not? Had he anything to fear from them? Would they expose any enterprise of his? And what precisely was now the object of their attacks? Could he somehow make up to them and get round them if they really were powerful? Was this the thing to do or not? Couldn’t he gain something through them? In fact hundreds of questions presented themselves.

He makes a prediction of an anticipated Utopian society ~ "in the future society there will be no need of assets, but her part will have another significance, rational and in harmony with her environment ... The community is established that there should be no such rôles. In a community, such a rôle is essentially transformed and what is stupid here is sensible there, what, under present conditions, is unnatural becomes perfectly natural in the community. It all depends on the environment. It’s all the environment and man himself is nothing ... " and then he goes on to praise free marriages, especially those that are childless and non committal.

Luzhin doesn't appear to care for women all that much unless they can be used for his personal gratification. Indeed, he appears to be a character with much ambition and one who does not hesitate to exploit others for his own gain. As a consequence, he does not appear to have many friends in the story, if any at all.

And one last note - I misplaced my note re something in the book which appeared to suggest that 'cleaning out the cesspool is more honorable than the institution of the family' or something like that. I believe it was either Luzhin or Lebeziatnikov. Something to do with social standing which, again, is a recurring theme in Dostoyevsky's writings particularly in C & P.

Sancho

02-29-2024, 11:39 PM

Yep, Luzhin cares mainly for Luzhin. I don’t think he feels guilty so much about not giving Dunya and Pulcheria enough money as he is remorseful he didn’t see how giving them more money would make them more beholding to him.

“Moreover, it was also a mistake not to give them any money at all,” he was thinking, as he sadly made his way back to Lebezyatnikov's closet. “Devil take it, why did I turn into such a Jew? There wasn't even any calculation in it! I thought I'd keep them on a short tether for a bit, and get them to see me as their Providence, and now look! ... Pah! ... No, if I'd handed them, say, fifteen hundred meanwhile, for the trousseau, and for presents, for all sorts of little boxes, toilet cases, trinkets, fabrics, and all that trash from Knop's, and from the English store,[106] things would be better now...and firmer! They wouldn't have refused me so easily! They're of such mold that they'd be sure to regard it as their duty, in case of refusal, to return the gifts and the money; and to return them would be a bit difficult, and a pity! And conscience would prick them: how can you suddenly chase a man out like this, when all along he's been so generous and rather delicate?...Hm! I missed that one!” And snarling once more, Pyotr Petrovich told himself then and there—but only himself, naturally—that he was a fool.

Also, correct me if I’m wrong, I don’t think Luzhin’s Jewish. I think he’s using that expression because he’s thrifty. My mom used to use an unfortunate expression when she was particularly successful in the negotiation over the price of a used car or something. She’d say, with a smile, she “jewed him down.” She probably picked it up from her father and never thought too much about it, but eventually she quit using it. I think she figured out it just wasn’t kosher.

hellsapoppin

03-01-2024, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Sancho
Yep, Luzhin cares mainly for Luzhin. I don’t think he feels guilty so much about not giving Dunya and Pulcheria enough money as he is remorseful he didn’t see how giving them more money would make them more beholding to him.

Also, correct me if I’m wrong, I don’t think Luzhin’s Jewish. I think he’s using that expression because he’s thrifty. My mom used to use an unfortunate expression when she was particularly successful in the negotiation over the price of a used car or something. She’d say, with a smile, she “jewed him down.” She probably picked it up from her father and never thought too much about it, but eventually she quit using it. I think she figured out it just wasn’t kosher.

This episode is a prelude to the dinner party which reveals much about the character of the people in the novel. Indeed, Luzhin is a villain who doesn't give a flip about anyone. But then neither does anyone else or so it appears as, evidently, the only people who show up for the commemorative dinner are those low lifes who are more interested in getting their bellies full rather than honoring the poor dude who just got croaked. Interestingly, only Rascal was thought to have any class (they thought he was headed towards a distinguished legal career) and refinement.

Katerina Ivanova (widow) treats the dinner guests like crap. But she made sure everyone ate and drank to their full. Throughout the unceremonious proceedings all looked disgustful or expressed disgust and mistrust about one another. There were also negative expressions about foreigners such as Germans and Poles {interestingly, no anti Semitism}. Landlady Amalia Ivanova (I don't believe there is any relation between the two women) is of German origin. There is much talk about social status and pretended advanced social rank. The widow claims to be descended of high rank and says she hopes (or had hoped) to use inherited monies to create a school for girls. The landlady says to always mind die Wäsche or the laundry. In other words, always check for propriety under all circumstances. A statement dismissed by the widow. Everyone was enthralled by their conflict and wanted to see a fight.

That's some company these people keep! I couldn't help but laugh at this segment.

But then things get really serious.

Luzhin (just a note to Sancho ~ Luzhin so far as I know is an old Russian name with most of these people being Orthodox Christian, not Jewish) appears and makes a serious charge against Sonya who had arrived late. After some wrangling, a 100RR note falls out of her pocket. He claims he will prosecute but relents and offers to dismiss all charges. Then, Lebeziatnikov fires out against him and says that he saw Luzhin slip the money into Sonya's pocket in order to cause trouble. The entire crowd in the party start to get hostile. Luzhin accuses him of being a hate filled radical liberal and atheist. "I do not agree with your free thinking ... propositions!"

This is when Rascal finally stands up and asserts that he was aware of Luzhin's plan because it was part of his deal to show he had been victimized when the family condemned Luzhin's proposals to Sonya. That this was all a set up to make the family, esp Sonya, to look bad in order to make him look good.

Now the entire party is furious at Luzhin who does not challenge them and he storms out of the building after vowing to get revenge on all of them.

Interesting how the conservative, Orthodox, traditional Russian turned out to be the crook while everyone else was either victim or used by him. Kinda reminds me of today's headlines with politician Boebert always claiming to subscribe to moral, Christian principles while she engages in open drunkeness and perverse sexual activity and while her sons commits crimes and is thrown into jail (same with Palin but that's a different story). Biggest advocates being biggest hypocrites. As the Bible says, there is nothing new under the sun.

Luzhin reminds me of Tulkinghorn in Dicken's Bleak House as both were crooked lawyers who sought to exploit others for their financial gain or for social advancement. Tulkinghorn paid a steep price for his corruption. We shall see what transpires next for Luzhin.

Sancho

03-01-2024, 12:45 PM

Haha. Poppin, it’s funny that Rep. Boebert comes to mind when reading the memorial dinner chapter. That chapter reminded me of just about every family get-together I’ve ever been to, on the Irish side anyway. Every once in a while we’ve had firearms produced to settle arguments, produced but not discharged thank god. So I’m thinking firearms probably appear at every Boebert family reunion. In fact, I’m thinking it’d be foolish for a Boebert family member to not be packing heat at a get-together. To borrow a phrase from Hunter Thompson, her people seem like the kind of people who live their lives — armed and drunk.

hellsapoppin

03-01-2024, 01:04 PM

Ha, ha!

GREAT post!

hellsapoppin

03-01-2024, 01:45 PM

In that segment above a certain Madame Kobilatnikov and her writing entitled 'General Treatise on the Positive Method' was mentioned within the social context of right and wrong. I tried but could not find anything like that online. Perhaps such a writing does not even exist. The Polish term lajdak (roughly meaning bad guy) was used by the three Poles to describe Luzhin as they made threats against him. Very memorable segment in C&P ~ Part 5 Ch 3.

bounty

03-01-2024, 05:00 PM

...Interesting how the conservative, Orthodox, traditional Russian turned out to be the crook while everyone else was either victim or used by him. Kinda reminds me of today's headlines with politician Boebert always claiming to subscribe to moral, Christian principles while she engages in open drunkeness and perverse sexual activity and while her sons commits crimes and is thrown into jail (same with Palin but that's a different story). Biggest advocates being biggest hypocrites. As the Bible says, there is nothing new under the sun.

I enjoy an insightful tying of literature to current events; however, when its done from a position of both animosity and ignorance, the combination is too much to bear.

hellsapoppin

03-01-2024, 06:18 PM

Do bear in mind that Russian classicists were highly mindful of current events in their time. It comes with the territory as so many were reform minded and it often was perceived to be a threat to the powers that be. Ditto today.

Nothing new under the sun.

hellsapoppin

03-01-2024, 08:27 PM

Previously the landlady shouted "is there no justice on earth? We will see whether there is justice!" This shouting, this anxiety, this turmoil is all a set up for a truly agonizing chapter that is to follow.

Rascal leaves and compels Sonia to meet with him. Earlier he had told her he would reveal who killed Lizaveta.

Ch 4 ~ Sonia knows that Ras took her out of a tight spot by speaking out against Luzhin and feels she is in her debt to him.
This episode is intense in that you wonder ~ will he or won't he confess? Dostoyevsky's writing technique is so brilliant in that the intensity really keeps you glued to the narrative.

What's the matter? She asks. Ras' initial reply is to ask for forgiveness. Sonia asks for him to speak up - 'what do you want from me?'

Ras' mind is so tortured. He wants to confess but finds it very difficult to do so. After a long while he manages to say that Lizaveta was killed accidentally. Finally Sonia gets the hint - "He is a murderer!" He cannot come up with any real reason why he committed the atrocity. Not for money. Not to secure a better future for him mom and sis. Not out of any real spite. "It was something else". He admits to weakness and cowardice finally saying "I wanted to become a Napoleon". This may have a different meaning today than it did in that era. But from my past readings (again going back 50+ years), the Little Colonel was not viewed as one trying to conquer lands as did Hitler. Today, he is viewed as an overly ambitious and unwise conqueror. Back then he was viewed as someone trying to re-make the world in his own image. Indeed, this is how it appears for Ras as well:

"... power is only vouchsafed to the man who dares to stoop and pick it up. There is only one thing, one thing needful: one has only to dare! Then for the first time in my life an idea took shape in my mind which no one had ever thought of before me, no one! I saw clear as daylight how strange it is that not a single person living in this mad world has had the daring to go straight for it all and send it flying to the devil! I… I wanted to have the daring... and I killed her. I only wanted to have the daring, Sonia! That was the whole cause of it!”

"I only killed a louse, a useless loathsome creature."

Her answer: "“You turned away from God and God has smitten you, has given you over to the devil!”

He goes on to say that the devil did lead him on and wondered if Napoleon would have done so as well. "I wanted to find out something else; it was something else led me on. 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 ... I murdered myself, not her! I crushed myself once for all, for ever…. But it was the devil that killed that old woman, not I.”

Sonia then tries to convince him to fee up even if it means going to Siberia. She pledges to follow him there. Despite all that has been exchanged he tries to self justify: "What wrong have I done them? Why should I go to them? What should I say to them? That’s only a phantom…. They destroy men by millions themselves and look on it as a virtue."

"We will bear our crosses". Sonia is obviously a devout Orthodox Christian who sincerely believes in redemption. After a few more words were exchanged, Lebezianikov appears.

Throughout the story, Dostoyevsky's philosophy is clearly in evidence: atheism, nihilism, socialism, are not substitutes for Orthodox teaching and Christian salvation. That conforming to true Orthodox teaching by actually practicing what is taught in the Bible and living the virtuous life are what lead to fulfillment, order, and ultimately to human salvation.

Sancho

03-01-2024, 10:43 PM

Nice rundown, Poppin. Speaking of turning away from god, I couldn’t help myself, I’m rereading Flannery O’Connor’s Wise Blood. It’s not exactly current events, but I just kept thinking about it while reading Crime and Punishment. Maybe it’s the salvation-through-suffering thread that runs through both books. Apologies for the diversion. Here’s my rundown of the main characters:

Hazel Motes. We meet him on a train, returning from WWII —

The army sent him halfway around the world and forgot him. He was wounded and they remembered him long enough to take the shrapnel out of his chest—they said they took it out but they never showed it to him and he felt it still in there, rusted, and poisoning him—and then they sent him to another desert and forgot him again. He had all the time he could want to study his soul in and assure himself that it was not there.

Enoch Emery. A young, somewhat neurotic, man who tries to befriend Hazel and —

looked like a friendly hound dog with light mange.

Asa Hawks and his daughter Lily Sabbath. Street preachers. Asa is seemingly blind and Lily is definitely sin-curious. Asa tells Hazel —

The blind man gave his edgy laugh. “Listen boy,” he said, “you can’t run away from Jesus. Jesus is a fact.”

Leora Watts. Prostitute. Hazel visits her after reading this graffiti on the wall of the men’s room —

Mrs. Leora Watts!
60 Buckley Road
The friendliest bed in town!
Brother.

Hazel was meant to be a preacher. It’s in his blood —

He knew by the time he was twelve years old that he was going to be a preacher. Later he saw Jesus move from tree to tree in the back of his mind, a wild ragged figure motioning him to turn around and come off into the dark where he was not sure of his footing, where he might be walking on the water and not know it and then suddenly know it and drown.

But Hazel has had a crisis of faith. The cab driver who takes him to Leora’s house assumes he’s a preacher by the way he’s dressed and asks him if he knows about Leora. Hazel replies —

Haze put his head in at the window, knocking the hat accidentally straight again. He seemed to have knocked his face straight too for it became completely expressionless. “Listen,” he said, “get this: I don’t believe in anything.”

He thinks he’s a nihilist.

There ain’t too much new under the sun.

I’ll see where it goes.

hellsapoppin

03-01-2024, 11:02 PM

Darn, I was just looking at the notes I made prior to making that post above and forgot to include the following blurb:

“Go at once, this very minute, stand at the cross-roads, bow down, first kiss the earth which you have defiled and then bow down to all the world and say to all men aloud, ‘I am a murderer!’ Then God will send you life again."

She had said previously, "What would I be without God". Like Jesus who supposedly sacrificed himself for the good and salvation of humanity, Sonia will follow through on her pledge to sacrifice herself by following Ras to Siberia when he is punished by the authorities for his crime. In turning his back on God he has killed his soul. The only way to recover his life and spiritual salvation is to report his crime and to repent and to atone for his evil. His mind will always be tormented with guilt and he must be divinely reconciled or he will have no life whether on earth or in the afterlife. Sonia, like those who subscribe to Christian Orthodoxy, impart this teaching as Ras does not go to church and will not hear of this lesson anywhere else.

hellsapoppin

03-01-2024, 11:10 PM

Flannery O’Connor’s Wise Blood ~ I just may have to put this on my to do list.

At one time this was not considered much of a story. But in recent years it has been praised, indeed highly praised. Hollywood never did care much for stories dealing with hardships returning veterans endured. Good to see that the reading public has attempted to come to terms with these problems. Maybe some day a movie will be made about this.

Danik 2016

03-03-2024, 08:01 AM

While we are at it, some confusion about names:Rascol or Rascal as Rascolnikov is ok. But Ras appears in the post as shortage for Raskolnikov but also for another name, Razumikin I think.

And I always knew Hazel as a female name.

Sancho

03-03-2024, 10:35 AM

Hah, indeed, it’s confusing. Hazel, I think, started as mostly a man’s name, but later morphed into mostly a lady’s name. There was a big ole fella named Hazel in Steinbeck's Cannery Row, which is from the same general time period.

Wise Blood is a strange novel, but in a good sort of way. You might like it, Poppin. I sure did. I’m always a little reluctant to make a book recommendation because, well, one man’s cheese is another’s sour milk, eh? At any rate it’s a comic novel with a serious theme, where as Crime and Punishment is a serious novel with some comedic parts. As bounty pointed out earlier, if you apply a philosophy of relative reductive universality, all stories are related, some how, some way. So I guess I have to ask myself, did I find textual similarities in these books? Or did I find similarities because I knew both writers were devout Christians and neither wrote in a preachy way? If it was the second, I’m thinking that’s putting the horse before the cart. That’s bass-ackwards. That’s the scientific method in a bizarro-world. You know, rather than — ask a question, do some research, form a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, analyze the results, and form a conclusion; I’d be — forming a conclusion, and then doing all that other stuff to support my conclusion.

Anyway, this time through Wise Blood I’m a little more tuned into Ms O’Connors humor. This book is hilarious. Enoch lives in a rented room much like Raskol’s, and here he is cleaning (and considering) some of his furnishings —

It was a low round chair that bulged around the legs so that it seemed to be in the act of squatting. The gold began to appear with the first touch of water but it disappeared with the second and with a little more, the chair sat down as if this were the end of long years of inner struggle. Enoch didn’t know if it was for him or against him.

Enoch continues tidying up and contemplates the artwork on the walls of his tiny apartment —

…So before he tackled the washstand, he took care of the pictures in the room.

These were three, one belonging to his landlady (who was almost totally blind but moved about by an acute sense of smell) and two of his own. Hers was a brown portrait of a moose standing in a small lake. The look of superiority on this animal’s face was so insufferable to Enoch that, if he hadn’t been afraid of him, he would have done something about it a long time ago. As it was, he couldn’t do anything in his room but what the smug face was watching, not shocked because nothing better could be expected and not amused because nothing was funny.

O’Connor is good at free indirect discourse.

Sancho

03-03-2024, 10:59 AM

On the topic of books about soldiers returning from war, Poppin, have you read Nelson Algren’s Man With The Golden Arm? It’s from the same time period as Wise Blood, but is set in and around the Division-Street Polish community in Chicago where as Wise Blood is set in Tennessee. The title character is Francis Majcinek but he goes by Frankie Machine. Frankie is fresh back from WWII with a chunk of nazi shrapnel in his liver and a wicked addiction to morphine. He goes back dealing cards in an underground casino on Division Street, hence the nickname.

You know, come to think of it, Frankie and Francis are also names that Americans apply to men and women.

hellsapoppin

03-03-2024, 12:44 PM

Man With The Golden Arm

Never read the book, darn it. But did watch the film noir movie with Frank Sinatra and beautiful Kim Novak. It came out about 1955 or thereabout. Was widely regarded, too, as it well deserved to be. I recall that there had been some controversy about it since it dealt with drug addiction - a real no no subject back then. Plus, Hollywood had a tendency to idealize American life. The movie showed how a poor dude from the Chicago South Side ghetto was terribly exploited by the war and not regarded as a self sacrifice hero the way he should have been. This would never have happened to a wealthy suburbanite and that was suggested by the movie. I should have read the book to see if this was the author's thematic intent.

hellsapoppin

03-03-2024, 01:34 PM

pp 438-462,3 onto Part VI, Ch 1

Rascal goes home and Sister says Dmitri Prokofitch & the cops are after him. Like the self sacrificing Sonia she also pledges to sacrifice for him.

The narrative shifts to Katerina Ivanova who has gone crazy. She abuses her children and forces them to publicly sing/perform in order to generate farthings. Then she raves about how cruel life is by forcing her to descend from an aristocratic family into an impoverished one. Evidently, the story of descending from aristocracy was all made up. She even forced her kids to speak French in order to give the appearance of gentility. Then she rants about the Tsar as protector of the helpless (must have been really crazy to say that). An older gent gives her 3RR. Then she croaks.

Svidrigailov enters the fray. He pledges to provide for the orphans. I was forced to wonder, if he had access to this money before, why didn't he just provide the means of this sustenance to the kids previously and attend to their mother's medical needs? Perhaps I read it and forgot the answer. Who knows.

Then he goes to ask Rascal about the murdered landlady - was she a louse? Hmmm ~ does he know something about her unhappy fate and Ras possible role in it? Why did he use Ras' words when speaking to him??

The scene shifts to Ras at home. A "fog" befalls him. One from which there is "no escape". He is fretting over Svidrigailov and what possible consequences his knowledge (if any) may have for him.

Services are conducted for Katerina Ivanova.

Nastasya again brings food for Ras (as always, the women self sacrifice for him). As a reader, I wonder~ why, indeed, are all these women sacrificing for him?

Razmuhin asks him, "have you gone mad?" This over his mistreatment of his mom and sis. Mom goes ill. Then, Rascal cedes his sister to Razmuhin who had told him that the 'murderer' had confessed to the crime of croaking off the old landlady. To Raz, Rascal is "a political conspirator'.

Dostoyevsky, an apologist for the Tsarist system, adherent of old Orthodoxy, and one who affirms/upholds the Russian state as if it was the New Jerusalem sure does a thorough job of illustrating that this is not Paradise. So many people are languishing in poverty. There is so much dissipation with all the drinking, brawling, argumentation, and dyspeptic clamoring among all the malcontents in the story. There are so many threats about calling the police, taking people to court, even calling upon the Tsar to render judgment and retribution among social contestants and all these disagreeable people.

"All you need is fresh air" they say. But will fresh air (possibly symbolizing new social thoughts and ideologies) change the atmosphere, the socio-political milieu? We know that Dostoyevsky has already said that confession is good for the soul which is to insure a better after life. But heck, what about life in the here and now? For those who have read the Bible, they know that the expression "no justice, no peace" can be traced to it as per Isaiah 59:8. The author did not provide any actual practical preventive hints/methods/reforms as to how all this moral decay, all this anarchy could have been prevented in pre Bolshevik, Tsarist Russia.

Anyways, the story then turns to the entrance of Porfiry who delights in a cigarette with Rascal.

Onto Ch 2 in this part of the book ...

hellsapoppin

03-03-2024, 03:32 PM

I believe it was Sancho who earlier on mentioned that there are considerable differences in the translations of Dostoyevsky's writings. Indeed, there are. Even the spelling of his name and that of many characters are different.

In the episode that I just summarized above, there is a matter that may have some impact on the incident. This was re the landlady Amalia Ivanova Lippeweschel who hates Katerina so much and forces her to leave the tenancy. My understanding is that Lippeweschel used certain German idioms in her speech. That she spoke with a heavy German accent meaning that she was never fully acclimated into the Russian culture. You wonder what this mean? That Germans were an alien threat to Russia? That they represented Westernization and a materialist mentality that is a threat to Russian culture? Germans were either Lutherans or Catholics ~ were their religion something that could undermine the allegedly wholesome teachings and influence of the Orthodox church??? {Watch the movie Alexander Nevsky by Eisenstein (1938). It warned that Germans were an alien threat. Perhaps Dostoyevsky thought the same???}

In the translation that I am reading online, the heavy German accent/idiom is not something the reader can ascertain. Perhaps in the translation you are using it may be. What does that symbolize to you?

Danik 2016

03-04-2024, 06:59 AM

hellsapoppin

03-04-2024, 10:39 AM

Which translation are you reading Poppins? I would like to have a look at this German as reproduced by Dostoyevsky.

Maybe there was a certain ambivalence, because many Germans emigrated to Russia. One famous personage of German ascendance that comes to mind in the director Serjey Eisenstein.

Note: Downloaded "Wise Blood" to read later.

Garnett: https://archive.org/details/crimepunishment00dostuoft

I looked back on some of the pages and see that there were some German references such as "Gott der Barmherizige". It just didn't danw on me that this was German, not Russian. Shows how ignorant I am!

Sancho

03-04-2024, 10:47 AM

The translation I have (Pevear and Volokhonsky) rendered Amalia Ivanovna’s speech in a way a native English speaker would expect a native German speaker, with a strong accent, to speak. It added to the comedy of the chapter for me. I kept hearing Colonel Klink — “Hogan! Vee hass vays ov maykink you speak!”

Here’s Amalia when Katerina calls her a slut:

This was too much for Amalia Ivanovna, and she declared at once that her “fater aus Berlin vas fery, fery important mann and vent mitt both hands into the pockets and alvays made like that: poof! poof!” and for a more lifelike portrayal of her fater, Amalia Ivanovna jumped up from her chair, thrust both hands into her pockets, puffed out her cheeks, and began producing some sounds vaguely resembling “poof, poof with her mouth, to the accompaniment of loud guffaws from all the tenants, who, anticipating a skirmish, deliberately encouraged Amalia Ivanovna with their approval.

There’s definitely bad blood between the two women. Both insist they have noble blood, but I doubt either does. Both are putting on airs and both know what the other is doing. It takes a BS-er to recognize BS-er. But the contract between liars is of course broken when they call each other out, hence the big hullabaloo.

Speaking of blood, I hope you enjoy Wise Blood, Danik. One if the things I enjoyed about the book was the phonetic rendering of the speech of the characters. The book is set ten or twenty years before my time, but it is in the region of the country where I grew up, so those accents were familiar to me, they tend to mark the speaker’s social class and education. Anyway it was like putting on an old glove. I hope it doesn’t cause too much confusion.

hellsapoppin

03-04-2024, 11:04 AM

Friedrich Schiller's name is invoked several times. He was a German Romanticist poet who idealized beauty. Evidently, he also wrote about crime and punishment.

https://udpress.udel.edu/book-title/friedrich-schiller-crime-aesthetics-and-the-poetics-of-punishment/

I could not ascertain what the references in C & P meant. But perhaps these quotes may help:

The rich become richer and the poor become poorer is a cry heard throughout the whole civilized world.

Every true genius is bound to be naive.

Who dares nothing, need hope for nothing.

Happy he who learns to bear what he cannot change.

Happy he who learns to bear what he cannot change.

Full of wisdom are the ordinations of fate.

Having seen these quotes (and a few more) I do believe that now I understand what Dostoyevsky was referring to by quoting Schiller.

hellsapoppin

03-04-2024, 11:29 AM

Petrovich plays his cat and mouse game with Rascal once again. The latter can see this and becomes quite uncertain as he did before. The cop admits to spreading rumors with Razumihin and sought to exploit his anger and unease. He admits "I played pranks on you." He expects Nicolay to renounce his admission to committing the crime because of inconsistencies in his testimony.

"Not the work of of a Nicolay -- YOU are!" [p 470]

"The rascal is an inveterate drunkard and notoriously so." {see? he was a rascal after all!}

He tries to get Ras to fess up. "Seek and ye shall find. This may be God's means for bringing you to Him ... Perhaps God is saving you for something ... keep a good heart and have less fear! Are you afraid of the great expiation before you? No, it would be shameful to be afraid of it. Since you have taken such a step, you must harden your heart. There is justice in it. You must fulfil the demands of justice. I know that you don’t believe it, but indeed, life will bring you through. You will live it down in time. What you need now is fresh air, fresh air, fresh air!” ... suffering is good.''

Ras steadfastly denies any guilt. But Petrovich won't arrest hum just yet. He will allow him to mull over everything and, in time, to come forward with an admission. "Come, till we meet! Good thoughts and sound decisions to you!”

✱✱✱✱✱✱✱

I find this sequence to be fascinating.

Over the years I've read of police and government authorities during the Tsarist era to have been highly brutal. They used brutal and inhumane tactics to get people to confess to crimes whether they actually committed them or not. Because of this, many innocent along with guilty people were forced into exile. Here, Petrovich plays cat and mouse. He doesn't stomp on or threaten Rascal with violence. Instead he employs innuendo, pranks, plants ideas and words into his mouth. He then lets him know that he will ultimately arrest him. In all my readings of classical Russian literature, this, so far as I can recall, was the only time cops were tactful and diplomatic in their dealings with a crook or a suspect.

Danik 2016

03-04-2024, 12:20 PM

The quotes are very much to the point. Schiller was indeed concerned with crime and punishment as shows one of his most famous ballads.

"The Cranes of Ibykus

Unto the songs and chariot fighting
Which all the strains of Greece are joining,
On Corinth's isthmus festive gay,
Made Ibycus, gods' friend, his way.
The gift of song Apollo offer'd,
To him the sweeten'd voice of song;
Thus on a light staff forth he wander'd,
From Rhegium, with god along.
Now beckons high on mountain ridges
High Corinth to the wand'rer's glances,
nd then doth he, with pious dread,
to Poseidon's spruce grove tread.
Naught stirs about him, just a swarming
Of cranes which join him on his way,
Which towards the distant southern warming
Are flying forth in squadrons grey.
"Receive my greetings, squads befriended,
Which o'er the sea have me escorted!
I take you as a goodly sign,
Your lot, it doth resemble mine
From distant lands we are arriving
And pray for a warm dwelling place.
Be the hospitable good willing,
Who wards the stranger from disgrace!"
And merrily he strides on further
And finds himself i'th' forest's center
Abruptly, on the narrow way,
Two murderers upon him prey.
He must himself for battle ready,
Yet soon his wearied hand sinks low,
It had the lyre's strings drawn so gently,
Yet ne'er the power of the bow.
He calls on men, and on the godly.
No savior answers his entreaty,
However wide his voice he sends,
No living thing him here attends.
So must I here foresaken perish, -
On foreign soil, unwept-for be,
Through evil scoundrels' hands thus vanish,
Where no avenger do I see!"
And gravely struck he sinketh under,
The feathers of the cranes then thunder,
He hears, though he can see no more,
Their nearing voices dreadful roar.
"From you, ye cranes that are up yonder,
If not another voice doth rise,
Be rais'd indictments for my murder!"
He calls it out, and then he dies.
The naked body is discover'd,
And soon, though 'tis from wounds disfigur'd,
The host in Corinth doth discern
Those traits, which are his dear concern.
"And must I thee so rediscover
And I had hop'd with wreath of pine
To crown the temples of the singer,
Which from his glow of fame do shine!"
And all the guests hear it lamenting,
While at Poseidon's fest assembling,
The whole of Greece with pain doth toss,
Each heart doth suffer from his loss;
The people crowd to the Prytanis
Astorm, his rage they supplicate
To vengeance of the slain man's tresses,
With murd'rers' blood to expiate.
Yet where's the clue, that from the crowding,
Of people streaming forth and thronging,
Enchanted by the pomp of sport,
The blacken'd culprit doth report?
Is't robbers, who him slew unbravely?
Was't envy of a secret foe?
That Helios can answer only,
Who on each earthly thing doth glow.
Perhaps with bold steps doth he saunter
Just now across the Grecian center,
While vengeance trails him in pursuit,
He savors his transgression's fruit;
Upon their very temple's op'ning
He spites perhaps the gods, and blends
Thus boldly in each human swelling,
Which towards the theater ascends.
For crowded bench to bench they're sitting,
The stage's pillars are near breaking,
Assembl'd from afar and near,
The folk of Greece are waiting here;
Just like the ocean waves' dull roaring,
With humans teeming, swells the place
In arched curves forever wid'ning
Into the heaven's bluish space.
Who names the names, who counts the people
Who gather'd here together cordial?
From Theseus' town, from Aulis' strand
From Phocis, from the Spartan's land
And from the distant Asian region,
From every island did they hie
And from the stage they pay attention
To th' chorus's dread melody,
Which, stern and grave, i'th' custom aged,
With footsteps lingering and gauged
Comes forward from the hinterground,
The theater thus strolling round.
Thus strideth forth no earthly woman,
They are no mortal progeny!
The giant size of each one's person
Transcends by far what's humanly.
Their loins a mantle black is striking,
Within their fleshless hands they're swinging
The torch's gloomy reddish glow,
Within their cheeks no blood doth flow;
And where the locks do lovely flutter,
And friendly wave o'er human brow,
There sees one snakes and here the adder
Whose bellies swell with poison now.
And in the circle ghastly twisted
The melody o'th' hymn they sounded,
Which through the heart so rending drives,
The fetters round the villain ties.
Reflection robbing, heart deluding
The song of Erinnyes doth sound, it sounds,
The hearer's marrow eating,
And suffers not the lyre to sound.
"He's blest, who free from guilt and failing
The child's pure spirit is preserving!
We may not near him vengingly,
He wanders on life's pathway free.
Yet woeful, woeful him, who hidden
Hath done the deed of murder base!
Upon his very soles we fasten,
The black of night's most dreadful race.
And hopes he to escape by fleeing,
On wings we're there, our nets ensnaring
Around his flying feet we throw,
That he is to the ground brought low.
So tiring never, him we follow,
Repentance ne'er can us appease,
Him on and on unto the Shadow
And give him even there no ease."
So singing are they roundly dancing,
And silence like the hush of dying
Lies o'er the whole house heavily,
As if had near'd the deity.
And solemnly, i'th' custom aged,
The theater thus strolling round,
With footsteps lingering and gauged
They vanish in the hinterground.
And 'twixt deceit and truth still hovers
Each hesitating breast, and quivers
And homage pays to that dread might,
That judging watches hid from sight,
Inscrutably, and fathomlessly,
The darksome coil of fate entwines,
Proclaims what's in the heart so deeply,
Yet runs from where the sunlight shines.
Then hears one from the highest footing
A voice which suddenly is crying:
"See there! See there, Timotheus,
Behold the cranes of Ibycus!"
And suddenly the sky is dark'ning,
And o'er the theater away,
One sees, within a blackish swarming,
A host of cranes pass on its way.
"Of Ibycus!" - That name beloved
Each breast with new grief bath affected,
As waves on waves in oceans rise,
From mouth to mouth it quickly flies:
0f Ibycus, whom we are mourning,
Whom by a murd'rer's hand was slain!
What is't with him? What is his meaning?
And what is't with this flock of crane?"
And louder still the question's growing,
With lightning strikes it flies foreboding
Through every heart: "Tis clear as light,
'Tis the Eumenides' great might!
The poet's vengeance is now granted,
The murderer hath self-confess'd!
Be him, who spoke the word, arrested,
And him, to whom it was address'd!"
But scarce the word had him departed,
Fain had he in his breast it guarded;
In vain! The mouth with horror white
Brings consciousness of guilt to light.
And 'fore the judge they're apprehended,
The scene becomes the justice hall,
And guilty have the villains pleaded,
Struck by the vengeance beam they fall.

translated by William F. Wertz

NOTES:
Ibykus was a famous poet who came from Rhegium in Southern Italy, one of many poets in the 6th Cenury BC, who was attracted to the court of Polycrates of Samos. Schiller writes about Polycrates' court elsewhere. Ibykus was known for his popular love poems, but he also wrote longer mythological poems, fragments of which survived.

It is called the "Ibykus principle," when, as even Shakespeare said in Hamlet, "Murder, though it have no tongue, will speak." History delivers poetic justice, and as Truth appears, no more weapon than Truth itself, will render to the memories of such criminals, the dramatic justice of which Shakespeare and Schiller wrote."
https://archive.schillerinstitute.com/transl/trans_schil_3poems.html

Sancho

03-04-2024, 03:14 PM

Nice. Thanks for the poem, Danik. It explains a lot. I came across quite a few references to Schiller in the novel. Here’s one I highlighted. Part 6, Chapter 2. Porfiry is speaking to Raskol, who has, as usual, been sharpshooting him. So Porfiry, in his Lieutenant Columbo sort of way, is pretending to defer to his social better:

Why are you smiling again—because I'm such a Schiller? I bet you think I'm trying to cajole you! And, who knows, maybe that's just what I'm doing, heh, heh, heh! Perhaps, Rodion Romanych, you shouldn't take me at my word, perhaps you even should never believe me completely—for such is my bent, I agree. Only I would like to add this: you yourself seem able to judge how far I am a base man and how far I am honest!”

The annotation by Pevear and Volokhonsky is reductive but squarely on point:

A broad reference to the works and ideas of the German poet and playwright Friedrich Schiller (1759-1805), who stood, in Dostoevsky's keyboard of references, for notions of the ideal, the "great and beautiful," and a simplified struggle for freedom, all with a Romantic glow. Having loved Schiller's poetry as a young man, Dostoevsky indulged in a good deal of indirect mockery of him in his later works. Further references to Schiller in CP are all in the same tone.

That’s pretty much how many of us have traveled through life, eh? We start out optimistic and romantic but then we wind up cynical and beaten down.

hellsapoppin

03-04-2024, 03:54 PM

#182 #183 = very good posts ~ thanks for both as they clarify points that had been lost on me

hellsapoppin

03-04-2024, 04:46 PM

The more I think about it, the more I find this character to be rather fascinating. Like Rascal, he is a villain. A thinking villain. One who, despite all his wickedness, is thoughtful, generous, gives money to the needy, and even served as momentary deus ex machina like Rascal did.

For some reason Ras goes to see him after Petrovich leaves. He does not know why he felt so compelled to go there - ''that man had some hidden power over him ... The man always had some design, some project. '' Ras wonders if Svid had spoken to Petrovich -- could he have been the one who gave hints to the cop about Ras killing the old b___atch??? "I shall kill him" he thinks. Spots him at a tavern though they tried briefly to avoid each other. Meeting there was a 'miracle', not chance. Svid told him previously that their fates intertwined. "This is a town of crazy people". A hedonist, he admits to being a gambler, one who committed other crimes, possibly even murder ~ the indirect killing of a serf who committed suicide because he was victimized by cruelty, possibly the death of a a 15 year old mute, and he may have poisoned his wife Marfa Petrovna. Ras threatens him as he has designs on sister Dounia.

While Svid is an atheist and does not believe in a Providence, he also feels there is no retribution nor salvation. Evil, to him, is the natural course of life. Life is forever a "burning ember" (perhaps an image of Hell). But he tells Ras that Dounia "saved him". I'm not sure from what but it may possibly be that she succeeded in preventing him from committing further evil. Ras was evil but was loved by Sonia and led to the path of salvation. Svid equally evil but not loved by Dounia which led to his ultimate doom. Both Ras and Svid were impulsive and felt guilt. Each sought to expiate their guilt by giving away money. Ras was from a lower class and this is why the state pursued him until his guilt could be fully established. Svid was from a higher class but was never prosecuted for his crimes. In the end Ras ''felt convinced that Svidrigailov was the most worthless scoundrel on the face of the earth.'' Svid admits, that to the world he is of no consequence ~ "a worthless low fellow like me". But Ras will have to answer to society for his crimes. Svid will not except answer except to himself.

Sancho

03-04-2024, 08:14 PM

^ Good one, Poppin!

Svidrigailov is an odd duck. A weird dude. A maaaaniac. I'm not sure I have him figured out. I tried to hate him, but he's just so charming (for a psycho-killer anyway). I mean Luzhin is easy to despise, but not so Svid. I'd think he's beyond redemption then he'd surprise me — by saving some orphans, or actually falling head over heels for Dunya and showing his human side. Of course in the end he couldn't have the one thing he needed, the one thing he could never have, the only thing that might save him, which was to have Dunya love him back. Raskol has Sonya, but Svid ain't got nobody, so there was only one way out.

Buy the ticket. Take the ride.
- HST

hellsapoppin

03-04-2024, 11:44 PM

^Thanx @Sancho :thumbsup:

All throughout C & P there are many recurring symbols, some of which have biblical implications. All help to illustrate how the story is a portrayal of a Hades like life and atmosphere. An atmosphere that with divine or divinely inspired help can possibly lead to redemption and salvation. Among these symbols are:

alcoholic beverages: Demon drink leads to much dissipation, family dissolution, poverty, and can lead to death as it did with Marmeladov who fell under a carriage. Families are torn apart because of it. Scholars become disinclined from their studies while under the influence. At a tavern Rascal listens in on (and is inspired by) a group of chatters who discussed the rationality of croaking the old b_atch of a landlady.

Haymarket: a section of the city of St Petersburg. It is terribly seedy with low class gambling joints, dives, houses of ill repute, and wide spread dissipation. The district seems to have a magic hold on certain people, including the rogues gallery that comprise the roster of characters in this book. This pull draws low lifes readily disposed to degeneracy and so many vices. It also appears that its pull leads to a determinism that stifles free will choices by its victims.

poverty: it is ever pervasive. This state of being is a curse upon everyone with but a small hand full of characters. Inspector Petrovich, Svidrigailov, and Luzhin appear to be the only ones who lived comfortably economically while everyone else lived in privation or was of lower economic class origin. Poverty was the cause of so many ills as people pushed to be free of its ravages with some resorting to social sins in order to make a livelihood. But poverty could also bring out some one's humanity as it did mostly with the female characters such as Dunia, Sonya, Nastasya, Mother, and, at times, it did the same for Rascal and Razmuhin.

St Petersburg: I was reminded of Dante Allegieri's Florence, Italy in his "Divina Comedia" and of the Bible's account of Babylon which symbolizes a Hell on earth. In Babylon so far as I can recall from past readings, the pagans did not conceive of a Divine Reward after life expired on earth. Death was ever pervasive in their art as it likely reflected the hardships and downfalls of life under the miserable circumstances there. All throughout C & P death showed its ugly head from beginning to end.

water: in the Bible water represents water and sustenance. The children of Israel escape from captivity through the parting of the waters, Moses is revived after his exile by water, Jesus in order to show his divinity walks on water, his disciples are called "fishers of men", water is turned into wine to celebrate life, people are immersed in water (a process called baptism) in order to achieve salvation and redemption. But in C & P it seems to have negative implications: Ras tries to hide stolen property in a lake but is stopped when he sees so many people, when he fainted he was revised by water, tea is used to energize the weary, Ras is repulsed by a woman who attempted suicide by drowning, and Svid croaks himself in the rain thereby purging the world of a wicked sinner.

yellow: this color appears t represent atmospheric seediness, prostitution, and negativity. Don't know why it was used that way but it is clearly in evidence. Perhaps it reflects a pervasive jaundice like life in that society. Dunno for sure.

As has been pointed out earlier, some of the character's names have symbolism as well. Please feel free to add more symbols to this list.

hellsapoppin

03-05-2024, 01:59 PM

This segment kinda makes me wish that Svidrigailov had been the main character in the book. He and Rascal were so much alike. In fact he suggested that they were "birds of a feather". But Svid has much more depth of character. There is so much more method in his madness and has had so much more life experience than did Ras. His manner of expression has greater depth as well. "... in the country, I was haunted by the thought of these places where anyone who knows his way about can find a great deal. Yes, upon my soul! The peasants have vodka, the educated young people, shut out from activity, waste themselves in impossible dreams and visions and are crippled by theories; Jews have sprung up and are amassing money, and all the rest give themselves up to debauchery."

While Ras gives token amounts of money to others in the hope of making amends for misdeeds, Svid gives enormous amounts of money for that purpose and makes arrangements so that those in need can be provided for. He even offers to help Ras escape to America with a pledge to finance his flight. Earlier he had said, "a misdeed is appropriate if the principal aim is right, a solitary wrongdoing and hundreds of good deeds ... Russians broad in their ideas."

After a prolonged meeting at the Haymarket dive, they depart.

Svid meets Dounia. He gives her water to calm down. After an intense conversation she shoots at but only grazes him. He appears to welcome this. They split as she heads for the canal, he to his flat. He goes to Sonia, gives her a bond worth 3,000RR, and says that giving it to her was like giving it to Ras. His motivation is unclear since he knows she will make every sacrifice possible for Ras. Thereafter he makes a late night visit to the family of his betrothed (a 16 year old girl) and gives them 15,000RR. Mother says he is a "great man". From here, things go downward - he goes to a very seedy hotel, one where a filthy room is of yellow color and is infested with mice. He sees or imagines flowers and a coffin containing a 14 year old girl (did he insult her or led to her death in any way?). "I never liked water ... even in a landscape" as heavy rains pour down. He appears to be getting delirious and calls out for his deceased wife. A flood is about to start and he expects rats to soon be walking the streets to escape the water. He leaves the hotel and sees a homeless 5 year old toddler. Or did he imagine this?

He sees a couple of low lifes in a park and says "I'm going to America". Then he pulls the gun out and croaks himself with them as witnesses. I'm not sure what the expression meant but it was clear he was greatly dissatisfied with conditions in his native land and sought a new home, a possible "paradise", certainly an escape in venturing to "America".

Up to just a few hours before, he was prosperous, seemingly had everything under control, had people at his command, also had Rascal's fate in his hands as well. He was making amends to those he had hurt all of whom appeared to be satisfied with the way he handled those affairs. On top of all that, unlike Ras he was not being held accountable for any crimes, society was not persecuting him, he was not on the run nor threatened by anyone or by the authorities. Previously he asked,

Well, let me tell you, Rodion Romanovich, I don’t consider it necessary to justify myself; but I would be grateful if you could explain to me what was particularly criminal about how I behaved in all this, speaking without prejudice, with common sense?

On the surface it appeared as if he croaked himself because Dounia rejected him. But there has to be more to this than just that. The world seemed to be at his feet. Yet, he self immolated because his conscience was so troubled despite not being under any form of threat. I wonder if symbolically this represent a godless Russia since he clearly was churchless and non spiritual. Could he have symbolized the direction Russia was taking when it did not submissively go to church, adhere to its teachings, lived a life of obedience to the Ten Commandments, and conform with Old World ways? What is clear is that Dostoyevsky is one to dislike those who live a life of dissipation, lack manners, practice immorality, do not adhere to churchly principles, and do not conform to traditional lifestyles. The unhappy fates suffered by those who engage in these practices illustrate this.

Sancho

03-05-2024, 04:08 PM

Well I think that’s just it. Svid has no soul. He’s a child molester and a child murderer and it bothers him not. He entered into a marriage (and a contract) with Marfa but cared not a flip about her. Then he murdered her too. His whole life was like that…until he met Dunya, at which point he fell head over heels. If he hadn’t cared about her, he’d’ve offed her way back when she was working as governess in Marfa’s household, like he offed the young serf. But he let Dunya go and even helped make sure her reputation stayed intact. From that point on everything he does is done in the interest of trying to win Dunya’s heart. And he doesn’t just want her. He needs her. He doesn’t just love her. He wants her to love him back. But that’s never going happen. The closest thing to love he gets from her is hate, but at least that's something. When she knicks him with the bullet, he kind of enjoys it. Now he knows she’ll never love him so there’s only one way to go. There is no redemption for Svid only death, and it has to be death by his own hand.

Raskol of course was badly misguided, but he has a soul. He initially thought killing Alyona would be good for the community, but he didn’t count on the collateral damage of Lizaveta. And then his crimes bother him more and more as time goes by. Svid has no guilt, but Raskol can’t escape it. Much of the last half of the novel is involved with the question of whether or not Raskol is redeemable. I think this is foremost in Profiry’s thinking when he doesn’t arrest him for murder, but rather lets him walk the streets and later turn himself in. The only way out for Svid is by his own hand, but it takes the help of Sonya and Mother Russia (by way of Siberia) to redeem Raskol.

Danik 2016

03-05-2024, 04:15 PM

"What is clear is that Dostoyevsky is one to dislike those who live a life of dissipation, lack manners, practice immorality, do not adhere to churchly principles, and do not conform to traditional lifestyles. The unhappy fates suffered by those who engage in these practices illustrate this."

One can not forget that Dosto himself was a heavy gambler and on account of this contracted big debts. He sort of was rescued by his secretary and second wife Anna Grigorievna.

Svid as described by both of you, Poppins and Sancho. As Sancho pointed out he may represent an alternative form of punishment to Raskol. Sonja´s love puts Raskol on the difficult path of redemption. Svidrigailow doesn´t have this option

Sancho

03-05-2024, 04:23 PM

Good point, Danik. I didn’t realize Dostoevsky was rescued by Anna Grigorievna. I guess we can’t separate the writer from what’s written, particularly with this writer. His religiosity, his time in prison, his personal failures all seem to be infused into his work.

Yellow.

You know, it was not lost on me that Svid’s last, cheesy hotel room had yellow walls. Raskol’s room had dusty, peeling yellow wallpaper. Alyona had yellow wallpaper as well, but hers was cheery with geraniums on it. Did this make anybody else think of Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s story, The Yellow Wallpaper?

Anyway as far as primary colors are concerned, Crime and Punishment certainly leans heavily towards yellow. I can’t remember a single instance of a cheery blue-sky day or the crystal blue waters of the Neva river, although there are many of the characters who have the blues. Red, I think, is mostly associated with blood in the book. Raskol gets it on his hands and a sock during the murder. It’s splattered on him when Marmeladov is killed. Yellow, by contrast, is everywhere.

And yellow is a highly malleable color. It can suggest happiness or sickliness, a sunshiny day or a jaundiced pallor. Yellow eyes indicate illness unless they happen to be looking at you from within a wolf’s head (and behind his fangs), in which case they signal danger.

Donno, I’m still thinking about it.

hellsapoppin

03-05-2024, 06:50 PM

Donno, I’m still thinking about it.

A thought occurred to me, one perhaps inspired by life experiences: yellow or jaundice color can also come about when one over drinks the spirits. Such over indulgence can cause your skin and eyes to turn into that color, at least on a temporary basis. Dostoyevsky portrays a highly decadent St Petersburg in which every manner of degeneracy and dissipation is on full display 24/7. Perhaps it is his way of showing that intemperance is everywhere, that it leads to social and moral decadence, and that it creates societal degeneracy. As a committed teetotaler, I couldn't argue against that. On the contrary, my wish is that people would agree and refrain from those social elements that cause such harm. But no, I'm not one to preach! :nopity:

Sancho

03-06-2024, 10:56 AM

Here’s the initial description of Marmeladov:

He was a man already past fifty, of average height and solid build, with some gray in his hair and a large bald spot, with a yellow, even greenish, face, swollen from constant drinking, and with puffy eyelids behind which his reddish eyes shone, tiny as slits, but lively.

I’m pretty much a teetotaler as well. I’ve got too many Irish uncles, you see. They were a lot of fun growing up, but after awhile I came to see the dirty underbelly of that habit and I decided not to go down that path. So by not allowing that monkey to climb upon my back, I have time to do other things, like read a great work of literature and try to figure it out with you-all.

Here’s another reference to yellow I came across. Sonya has been summoned to Luzhin’s place. The paragraph seems loaded with meaning. Before she got there Luzhin was having a discussion with his roommate, Lebezyatnikov, who was propounding the virtue of the new ideas coming out of the parlors of Petersburg at the time - socialism etc. Meanwhile Luzhin was counting his money. He still has his fat-stacks on the table when Sonya arrives and it makes her uncomfortable. The money is gray, his glasses are gold, and he a big ring with a yellow stone:

Sonya hastily sat down. The gray and iridescent bills which had not been removed from the table again began flashing in her eyes, but she quickly turned her face away and raised it towards Pyotr Petrovich: it suddenly seemed terribly indecent, especially for her, to stare at someone else's money. She tried to fix her eyes on Pyotr Petrovich's gold lorgnette, which he held in place with his left hand, and at the same time on the massive, heavy, extremely beautiful ring, with its yellow stone, on the middle finger of that hand—but suddenly she looked away from that as well, and, not knowing what else to do, ended by again staring straight into Pyotr Petrovich's eyes.

When she looks Luzhin in the eye she almost resembles a Jesus figure, tossing the money changers out of the temple of god. Luzhin gives her a few “shekels” and tells her it’s for her family, but of course we later find out this was all a ruse to frame Sonya. Ooo, burn!

hellsapoppin

03-06-2024, 08:51 PM

Ras goes to Mom/Sis, bedraggled and soaked from the heavy rain. He is determined to do/say something. Though not specified at first, we know that he was looking to fess up as he had been told to do by Sonia. Mom had read the article provided by Ras' friend Dmitri Prokofitch Razumikhin (the latter name again, spelled with or without the k several times). She believes it is a work of genius - that it will make him a leading man and inspiration to others in Russia. She asks, "where are you going?" He replies "wherever God sends me ... only pray for me." Obviously, he is now looking for some measure of redemption which he hadn't really done before. "I haven't faith ..." but did have pride [the Bible teaches pride comes before a fall]. He passed by the Neva several times, thought about suicide but couldn't bring himself to do it.

He is not entirely sure why he is giving up. "What crime?" he asks. He feels there is nothing to expiate about his action and that what he did was "not stupid" as the old b___atch exploited and harmed people.

He departs from his grieving but loving mom.

Ras then goes to Sonia's room. Dounia is with her. The sun was setting. Ras feels uncertain. Previously he had compared himself with Napoleon - one who killed with impunity and was honored for his violent work. Sonia gets crosses (wooden one for peasants, bronze one for higher class). He continues to feel guilty (perhaps more so for the unplanned and spontaneous murder of Lizaveta which may explain why he says 'I am a murderer'). After a prolonged chat he leaves. Sees a beggar woman on the street and gives her his last 5 kopecks. She says "bless you" (he's gonna need it where he's going, fer sure).

He proceeds to kiss the ground at the cross roads as Sonia had told him to do. Some say he's going to Jerusalem. This ironic in that by going to the police compound, he would help mete out justice and lead to his ultimate expiation and redemption. Sonia followed him as she pledged. She would follow him everywhere.

At first he wants to see Ilya Petrovich (explosive lieutenant). When he meets him at the compound he balks and says he wants to see Zametov. Some discussion follows "it's in the hands of fate". He learns Svidrigailov croaked himself. He leaves in a state of agitation. But he returns, is offered water to calm down and then, BOOM! He fesses up.

✱✱✱✱✱✱✱✱✱✱

Seemed like some of the dialog (esp with his mom) here was verbiage. A bit too wordy though it does prolong the tension. Obviously he was terribly divided over whether he genuinely felt he had done no wrong and you are forced to wonder whether he will actually fess up. But you can see he is now talking of divinity and of redemption so that he was leaning towards fessin up. Interesting how the women were the keys to his salvation: his mom, Dounia, and Sonia. The death of the women were what condemned him. The three women in his life his salvation. And, of course, there was also Nastasia who nursed and fed him.

Well, as some folks say, a good woman is a man's salvation. Perhaps Dostoyevsky could have agreed with that old idea.

Sancho

03-06-2024, 10:17 PM

hellsapoppin

03-06-2024, 11:52 PM

A lot of people think the book should’ve ended there. But I thought the epilogue put a cherry on top. I liked it. Also I notice the people who thought the epilogue was superfluous, had already read the epilogue, so, you know…

I am utterly puzzled as to how anyone can feel that way. To my way of thinking, it was highly significant and affirms all of what we have been discussing in these pages: that the story is one of renewal and redemption. That by confessing and purging one's soul of guilt, by adopting wholesome and regenerating Christianity, by society imposing retributive justice, by mitigation because of extenuation both in life and in the times when he was a suspect, that his confession saved society much litigation and investigatory costs (the epilogue says no actual evidence was found and that it was Rascal's detailed confession that enabled the police to find the evidence used against him in court), the fact that he did not take flight, that he had given money to save an impoverished father from bankruptcy when his son died, the fact that Rascal saved the lives of two young children and by jeopardizing his own well being in making that sacrifice, and that he genuinely was repentant ~ all these things were factors in why society imposed a relatively mild sentence.

From my past readings of classical Russian literature, I would have thought Ras would have been condemned to the gallows. I had no expectation that mitigation would be granted and that he would have been enabled to live out his life in a serene manner with Sonia. The narrative tells us that she was accepted as a guardian angel by the prisoners whim she helped in writing letters, providing goodies, and comforting them in their grief and isolation. Dostoyevsky concludes the book by telling us that both Ras and Sonia were renewed in life and lived happily thereafter. Note how there was no talk of nihilism, of reform, of Westernizing influences of any kind. Instead, Christianity was their saving grace. This message, no doubt, is what the author was trying to convey for his readers.

hellsapoppin

03-07-2024, 12:47 AM

What's the next opus on the group literary agenda?

hellsapoppin

03-07-2024, 01:11 AM

I forgot to add the following note from the Epilogue:

Ras indeed was ill, no question about that. While in prison there was bad food, very spartan existence, and he was forced to have his head shaved. He was ill several times and even suffered delirium. At one point he experiences an Apocalyptic vision:

He was in the hospital from the middle of Lent till after Easter. When he was better, he remembered the dreams he had had while he was feverish and delirious. He dreamt that the whole world was condemned to a terrible new strange plague that had come to Europe from the depths of Asia. All were to be destroyed except a very few chosen. Some new sorts of microbes were attacking the bodies of men, but these microbes were endowed with intelligence and will. Men attacked by them became at once mad and furious. But never had men considered themselves so intellectual and so completely in possession of the truth as these sufferers, never had they considered their decisions, their scientific conclusions, their moral convictions so infallible. Whole villages, whole towns and peoples went mad from the infection. All were excited and did not understand one another. Each thought that he alone had the truth and was wretched looking at the others, beat himself on the breast, wept, and wrung his hands. They did not know how to judge and could not agree what to consider evil and what good; they did not know whom to blame, whom to justify. Men killed each other in a sort of senseless spite. They gathered together in armies against one another, but even on the march the armies would begin attacking each other, the ranks would be broken and the soldiers would fall on each other, stabbing and cutting, biting and devouring each other. The alarm bell was ringing all day long in the towns; men rushed together, but why they were summoned and who was summoning them no one knew. The most ordinary trades were abandoned, because everyone proposed his own ideas, his own improvements, and they could not agree. The land too was abandoned. Men met in groups, agreed on something, swore to keep together, but at once began on something quite different from what they had proposed. They accused one another, fought and killed each other. There were conflagrations and famine. All men and all things were involved in destruction. The plague spread and moved further and further. Only a few men could be saved in the whole world. They were a pure chosen people, destined to found a new race and a new life, to renew and purify the earth, but no one had seen these men, no one had heard their words and their voices.

He envisioned this nightmarish scenario but was awakened by Easter (the Christian season of resurrection) and by the vision and ultimate presence of his Savioress Sonia. She had been ill and did not come to visit. But soon her incapacity was overcome and she appeared as he was working the fields. Thereafter like a deus ex machina she provided him with the spiritual and emotional comfort he needed. Love conquers all. The rest was history ...

hellsapoppin

03-07-2024, 01:52 AM

Article neatly summarizes what the book is all about:

https://www.tometailor.com/articles/crime-and-punishment-modern-literature

Crime and Punishment's Influence on Modern Literature
05.15.2023 // By Tome Tailor

Fyodor Dostoevsky’s 1866 magnum opus, Crime and Punishment, is one of the most prominent literary works that have deeply influenced modern literature. The book explores various themes, such as morality, guilt, redemption, and the vastness of the human psyche. However, what sets the novel apart from other literary works is the profound psychological analysis of its characters, particularly the protagonist, Rodion Raskolnikov. In this blog post, we will delve into how Crime and Punishment has left a lasting impact on contemporary literature and how its themes still resonate with readers today.

Psychological Insight into the Human Condition
The most significant influence of Crime and Punishment on modern literature lies in the insightful and meticulous exploration of the human psyche. Dostoevsky masterfully delves into the intricate labyrinth of Raskolnikov’s thoughts and emotions as he commits the crime of murder and deals with overwhelming guilt and moral dilemmas. Raskolnikov’s moral reasoning, philosophical ideas, and emotional turmoil play out on the pages, making the novel a cornerstone of psychological realism in literature.

This innovative approach has influenced the works of countless authors, including Franz Kafka, Albert Camus, James Joyce, and Virginia Woolf. For example, in Kafka’s The Trial, we can see shades of Raskolnikov’s unbearably complex mental state in the character of Joseph K, who battles the unknown forces of a corrupt, bureaucratic society. Also, Albert Camus’s The Stranger, and his concept of the “absurd,” can trace its origins to Dostoevsky’s existentialist viewpoints in _Crime and Punishment.

The Portrayal of the City as a Reflection of the Human Soul
In Crime and Punishment, the sprawling, chaotic city of St. Petersburg plays a crucial role in shaping the narrative, as well as mirroring the twisted state of Raskolnikov’s mind. The crowded streets, slums, and simmering tension lurking in the city reflect the grim, repressive atmosphere and contribute to the unsettling mood of the story.

This portrayal of a cityscape as an extension of the characters’ inner turmoil has influenced modern literature in various ways. Writers like Charles Dickens, James Joyce, and Virginia Woolf have similarly painted the city’s landscape, capturing the spirit and psyche of their characters. At the same time, they explore the city’s impact on their protagonists, exemplified in novels like Dickens’s Bleak House or Woolf’s Mrs. Dalloway.

The Pivot from Good to Evil and the Quest for Redemption
Crime and Punishment is notable for exploring the moral complexities of human actions and the struggle for redemption. Raskolnikov is initially portrayed as an intellectual but penniless individual who justifies his heinous crime by convincing himself of his superior morality. However, his escalating guilt and eventual surrender lead him to acknowledge his humanity and dependence on others, ultimately finding redemption through love and suffering with the help of the prostitute Sonya.

This theme of good versus evil and the subsequent quest for redemption is prevalent in modern literature. In classic novels such as Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird or J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye, the theme of redemption is explored through the journeys of unconventional characters who grapple with moral dilemmas, societal expectations, and personal demons.

In Conclusion
Crime and Punishment’s influence on modern literature is undeniable, from the psychological exploration of its deeply flawed characters to the portrayal of the cityscape and its impact on these individuals. Themes of morality, redemption, and existentialism are also prevalent in contemporary literature as readers continue to connect with works that discuss the complexities of human nature, much like Dostoevsky’s epic masterpiece.

Experience the enduring power and influence of Crime and Punishment yourself

Recommended Articles:
Crime and Punishment - In-Depth Analysis and Themes
5 Books Like Crime and Punishment: Gripping Tales of Morality and Redemption
The Mind of Raskolnikov: Psychological Studies of Crime and Punishment’s Protagonist
Religion and Philosophy in Crime and Punishment
Fyodor Dostoevsky: Life and Works Beyond Crime and Punishment