Psycho Killer, The Russian Edition

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hellsapoppin

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.

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bounty

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sancho

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.

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danik 2016

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.

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.

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 ...

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.

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!

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bounty

…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.

~ 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!

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.

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:

Quote:

---

...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."

... 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.

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:

Quote:

---

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]

---

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hellsapoppin

... 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.

---

Good point, Poppins. I think D. left much of his personal instability to his characters. But the committing of crimes he left wholly to them.

Quote:

---

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!

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:

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

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:

Quote:

---

“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:

Quote:

---

“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:

Quote:

---

“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.

Quote:

---

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.

Ignacy Hryniewiecki - his terrorist bomb attacked killed the Tsar:


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...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...6a98e9bece.jpg




✱ ✱ ✱ ✱ ✱




Communist cats:


https://scontent-den2-1.xx.fbcdn.net...lw&oe=65EE5AB4



https://cdn.dribbble.com/users/53163...ertical=center





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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Quote:

---

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…

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bounty

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 gobe ing to develop as the story goes along.

---

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danik 2016

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bounty

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.