Psycho Killer, The Russian Edition

Quote:

---

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.

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.

Ha, ha!

GREAT post!

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hellsapoppin

...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.

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.

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.

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 —

Quote:

---

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 —

Quote:

---

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 —

Quote:

---

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 —

Quote:

---

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

---

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

Quote:

---

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 —

Quote:

---

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 —

Quote:

---

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 —

Quote:

---

…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.

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.

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.

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 ...

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?

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danik 2016

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!

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:

Quote:

---

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.

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/...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.

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.

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.co...il_3poems.html

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:

Quote:

---

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:

Quote:

---

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.

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

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.

^ 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

^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.

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.

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.

"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

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.

Quote:

---

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:

Here’s the initial description of Marmeladov:

Quote:

---

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:

Quote:

---

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!

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.

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…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sancho

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.

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

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 ...

Article neatly summarizes what the book is all about:



https://www.tometailor.com/articles/...ern-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

I think there are a number of reasons people don’t like the epilogue.

The first one that comes to mind is what I’ll call the Walter Sobchak theory. That is, we’ve just gone through 500 some odd pages of Raskol’s inner struggle, the crime and then the punishment, and then in the epilogue he has an epiphany and is redeemed!? No way, man! This book is called Crime and Punishment, not Crime and Punishment and Redemption. This ain’t Vietnam, man! This is literature. Literature has rules, Dude!

The second is sort of related to the first. The whole book, the whole universe converges on one, crystal clear moment of clarity for Raskol — his confession. It’s a beautiful thing. It’s the perfect denouement. Why muck it up with — Later, in Siberia…

Another is, maybe, just maybe, readers want to decide for themselves what happens to Raskol and Sonya after he confesses. Some people think Dostoevsky is pushing his churchy views a little too hard in the epilogue.

Me? Again, I liked the epilogue, but then El Sancho has always been a sucker for a happy ending. So to speak.

So what will be our next reading project? Hmmm. I have some ideas. But first, what do you-all think?