Crime and Punishment

If I could take only one side of the argument, I would be set as a judge, but I'm incabale of doing so. Before the crime I want the victim to escape, and after the crime, I want the criminal to escape.

I guess as long as no one has to have their fate thrust upon them by someone else, I'm happy.

Based on these rules society would desintigrate.

I never liked society much anyway ;) .

Quote:

---

Originally posted by den
Because I'm Canadian and too damn polite for myself sometimes. :p

---

LOL! A critical melody preceded by an overture of courtesy, and not just courtesy but national courtesy. I hear Salieri. Personally, I’m more a fan of Mozart.

Lol why are so many people banned on this forum?? Are we at the mercy of a totalitarian moderator? I hope not. Anyway, first post. Crime and punishment. Great book but Raskolnikov's philosophy was quite simply insane. The old woman had money because she earned it. Raskolnikov was the ‘bad’ person. He was a murderous thief, but I still loved him.

I am currently reading Crime and Punishment as my freshman AP novel in highschool, however I am having trouble finding some figurative language throughout the book, I was wondering if anyone knows where some is or if there is a site out there that has this information. Please let me know.



Please and Thank You!
Jessy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hal9000

Yes, I empathize with the theme; nevertheless, it is my belief one can only be stifled by a political system when one chooses to believe their success is contingent on that system. Poverty and social injustice don’t preclude one from critical thinking and original thought. Frankly, those that are self-taught are far more inclined to be original, free thinkers and politically savvy. The formally educated study revisionist history and are molded into the matrix. Malcolm X spent six years educating himself in prison, and while I never agreed with his militant views, he emerged a clear thinker, and powerful social force.

---

Those who are free thinkers are not those who are politically savvy.

It doesn't matter whether or not the woman would have reformed. Raskolnikov had no right to take her life, and he was especially unnerved by the killing of an innocent witness after the first killing.

The whole driving force of Crime and Punishment is that Raskolnikov is not above the law; if Raskolnikov's twisted psychology throughout the whole novel does not drive that point home, surely Sonja's influence does and so does the ending.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Bookworm

It doesn't matter whether or not the woman would have reformed. Raskolnikov had no right to take her life, and he was especially unnerved by the killing of an innocent witness after the first killing.

The whole driving force of Crime and Punishment is that Raskolnikov is not above the law; if Raskolnikov's twisted psychology throughout the whole novel does not drive that point home, surely Sonja's influence does and so does the ending.

---

This is exactly the point. Raskilnokov's descent into madness is supposed to signify that his radical idea of the genius' priviledge doesn't work. Dosdoevsky is arguing against what he felt to be the rampant self-centeredness of his time. This is when Nietzsche is writing about the superman--a character similar to Raskinokov's idea of the genius. Dosdoevsky counters this most pointedly in his novel The Brothers Karamazov in which the main character is a kind Christian who spends his life in the service of others.