Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer
Home / Crime and Punishment Art What Games Did Czarist Russia Play

Crime and Punishment Art What Games Did Czarist Russia Play

Post a Comment

1866 Russian-language novel by Dostoyevsky

Criminal offence and Penalty
Crimeandpunishmentcover.png

1956 Random House printing of Law-breaking and Penalty, translated by Constance Garnett
Writer Fyodor Dostoevsky
Original title Преступление и наказание
Language Russian
Genre Philosophical novel
Psychological fiction
Crime fiction
Publisher The Russian Messenger (series)

Publication appointment

 1866; separate edition 1867
OCLC 26399697

Dewey Decimal

 891.73/3 20
LC Class PG3326 .P7 1993
Text Criminal offence and Penalization at Wikisource

Criminal offence and Punishment (pre-reform Russian: Преступленіе и наказаніе ; post-reform Russian: Преступление и наказание , tr. Prestupléniye i nakazániye , IPA: [prʲɪstʊˈplʲenʲɪje ɪ nəkɐˈzanʲɪje]) is a novel by the Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky. It was showtime published in the literary journal The Russian Messenger in twelve monthly installments during 1866.[i] It was afterwards published in a single book. It is the second of Dostoevsky's full-length novels following his return from ten years of exile in Siberia. Offense and Punishment is considered the first great novel of his mature period of writing.[2] The novel is often cited equally one of the supreme achievements in earth literature.[3] [4] [5] [six]

Crime and Punishment follows the mental anguish and moral dilemmas of Rodion Raskolnikov, an impoverished ex-student in Saint Petersburg who plans to kill an unscrupulous pawnbroker, an old woman who stores money and valuable objects in her flat. He theorises that with the coin he could liberate himself from poverty and go on to perform neat deeds, and seeks to convince himself that certain crimes are justifiable if they are committed in order to remove obstacles to the higher goals of 'boggling' men. Once the human action is washed, notwithstanding, he finds himself racked with defoliation, paranoia, and disgust. His theoretical justifications lose all their power every bit he struggles with guilt and horror and confronts both the internal and external consequences of his deed.

Groundwork [edit]

Dostoevsky conceived the idea of Crime and Punishment in the summer of 1865. He had been working on another project at the fourth dimension entitled The Drunkards, which was to deal with "the present question of drunkenness ... [in] all its ramifications, peculiarly the picture show of a family and the bringing up of children in these circumstances, etc., etc." This theme, centering on the story of the Marmeladov family, became ancillary to the story of Raskolnikov and his crime.[7]

At the time Dostoevsky owed large sums of money to creditors and was trying to help the family of his brother Mikhail, who had died in early on 1864. Afterward appeals elsewhere failed, Dostoevsky turned as a last resort to the publisher Mikhail Katkov and sought an advance on a proposed contribution.[8] He offered his story or novella (at the fourth dimension he was not thinking of a novel[9]) for publication in Katkov's monthly periodical The Russian Messenger—a prestigious publication of its kind, and the outlet for both Ivan Turgenev and Leo Tolstoy. Dostoevsky, having been engaged in polemical debates with Katkov in the early 1860s, had never published anything in its pages before. In a letter of the alphabet to Katkov written in September 1865, Dostoevsky explained to him that the work was to be near a beau who yields to "certain strange, 'unfinished' ideas, nonetheless floating in the air".[ten] He planned to explore the moral and psychological dangers of the ideology of "radicalism", and felt that the projection would appeal to the conservative Katkov.[11] In messages written in Nov 1865 an of import conceptual change occurred: the "story" had become a "novel". From and then on, Law-breaking and Punishment is referred to as a novel.[12]

At the end of Nov much had been written and was prepare; I burned it all; I can confess that now. I didn't like it myself. A new form, a new program excited me, and I started all over again.

— Dostoevsky's alphabetic character to his friend Alexander Wrangel in Feb 1866[13]

In the consummate edition of Dostoevsky'south writings published in the Soviet Wedlock, the editors reassembled the writer's notebooks for Crime and Penalisation in a sequence roughly corresponding to the various stages of composition.[ citation needed ] As a effect, there exists a fragmentary working typhoon of the novella, equally initially conceived, as well as two other versions of the text. These accept been distinguished equally the Wiesbaden edition, the Petersburg edition, and the concluding plan, involving the shift from a beginning-person narrator to Dostoevsky's innovative use of third-person narrative to achieve first-person narrative perspectives.[14] Dostoevsky initially considered 4 first-person plans: a memoir written past Raskolnikov, his confession recorded viii days afterwards the murder, his diary begun five days after the murder, and a mixed form in which the first half was in the form of a memoir, and the 2d half in the form of a diary.[xv] The Wiesbaden edition concentrates entirely on the moral and psychological reactions of the narrator after the murder. Information technology coincides roughly with the story that Dostoevsky described in his letter to Katkov and, written in the form of a diary or journal, corresponds to what eventually became part 2 of the finished work.[16]

I wrote [this affiliate] with 18-carat inspiration, merely possibly information technology is no good; just for them[,] the question is not its literary worth, they are worried near its morality. Here I was in the correct—goose egg was confronting morality, and even quite the contrary, simply they saw otherwise and, what'south more, saw traces of nihilism ... I took information technology back, and this revision of a big chapter cost me at to the lowest degree three new capacity of piece of work, judging by the effort and the weariness; but I corrected it and gave it back.

— Dostoevsky'south letter to A.P. Milyukov[17]

Why Dostoevsky abased his initial version remains a thing of speculation. According to Joseph Frank, "one possibility is that his protagonist began to develop beyond the boundaries in which he had beginning been conceived".[18] The notebooks point that Dostoevsky became enlightened of the emergence of new aspects of Raskolnikov's character equally the plot developed, and he structured the novel in conformity with this "metamorphosis".[19] The final version of Criminal offence and Penalisation came into being only when, in Nov 1865, Dostoevsky decided to recast his novel in the third person. This shift was the culmination of a long struggle, present through all the early on stages of limerick.[twenty] Once having decided, Dostoevsky began to rewrite from scratch and was able to hands integrate sections of the early on manuscript into the final text. Frank says that he did non, every bit he told Wrangel, fire everything he had written earlier.[21]

Dostoevsky was under bang-up force per unit area to finish Crime and Punishment on time, as he was simultaneously contracted to cease The Gambler for Stellovsky, who had imposed extremely harsh weather. Anna Snitkina, a stenographer who after became Dostoevsky's wife, was of great help to him during this difficult job.[22] The first office of Crime and Penalty appeared in the January 1866 issue of The Russian Messenger, and the last one was published in Dec 1866.[23]

Plot [edit]

Part i [edit]

Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, a former constabulary student, lives in extreme poverty in a tiny, rented room in Petrograd. Isolated and antisocial, he has abased all attempts to support himself, and is heart-searching obsessively on a scheme he has devised to murder and rob an elderly pawn-banker. On the pretext of pawning a watch, he visits her apartment, merely remains unable to commit himself. Later in a tavern he makes the associate of Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov, a boozer who recently squandered his family's little wealth. Marmeladov tells him about his teenage daughter, Sonya, who has get a prostitute in order to support the family unit. The next day Raskolnikov receives a letter from his female parent in which she describes the problems of his sis Dunya, who has been working as a governess, with her ill-intentioned employer, Svidrigailov. To escape her vulnerable position, and with hopes of helping her brother, Dunya has chosen to marry a wealthy suitor, Luzhin, whom they are coming to meet in Petersburg. Details in the letter suggest that Luzhin is a complacent opportunist who is seeking to accept advantage of Dunya's situation. Raskolnikov is enraged at his sister's sacrifice, feeling information technology is the aforementioned as what Sonya felt compelled to do. Painfully aware of his own poverty and impotence, his thoughts return to his idea. A farther series of internal and external events seem to conspire to compel him toward the resolution to enact it.

In a land of extreme nervous tension, Raskolnikov steals an axe and makes his style over again to the old woman'south apartment. He gains access by pretending he has something to pawn, and and so attacks her with the axe, killing her. He also kills her one-half-sister, Lizaveta, who happens to stumble upon the scene of the offense. Shaken by his actions, he steals only a handful of items and a small pocketbook, leaving much of the pawn-banker's wealth untouched. Due to sheer skilful fortune, he manages to escape the building and render to his room undetected.

Part 2 [edit]

In a feverish, semi-delirious state Raskolnikov conceals the stolen items and falls asleep wearied. He is profoundly alarmed the adjacent morning when he gets a summons to the constabulary station, but it turns out to exist in relation to a debt notice from his landlady. When the officers at the agency brainstorm talking about the murder, Raskolnikov faints. He rapidly recovers, but he tin can see from their faces that he has angry suspicion. Fearing a search, he hides the stolen items under a large stone in an empty yard, noticing in humiliation that he hasn't even checked how much money is in the bag. Without knowing why, he visits his old university friend Razumikhin, who observes that Raskolnikov seems to exist seriously ill. Finally he returns to his room where he succumbs to his affliction and falls into a prolonged delirium.

When he emerges several days later he finds that Razumikhin has tracked him downwards and has been nursing him. Still feverish, Raskolnikov listens nervously to a conversation between Razumikhin and the doctor about the status of the police investigation into the murders: a muzhik called Mikolka, who was working in a neighbouring flat at the time, has been detained, and the old woman's clients are being interviewed. They are interrupted by the arrival of Luzhin, Dunya's fiancé, who wishes to innovate himself, simply Raskolnikov deliberately insults him and kicks him out. He angrily tells the others to go out as well, and so sneaks out himself. He looks for news virtually the murder, and seems near to want to depict attention to his own part in information technology. He encounters the police official Zamyotov, who was present when he fainted in the bureau, and openly mocks the young man'due south unspoken suspicions. He returns to the scene of the crime and re-lives the sensations he experienced at the fourth dimension. He angers the workmen and caretakers by asking casual questions near the murder, fifty-fifty suggesting that they accompany him to the police station to discuss it. Every bit he contemplates whether or non to confess, he sees Marmeladov, who has been struck mortally past a wagon. He rushes to help and succeeds in carrying the stricken man dorsum to his family's apartment. Calling out for Sonya to forgive him, Marmeladov dies in his daughter's artillery. Raskolnikov gives his last 20 five roubles (from money sent to him by his female parent) to Marmeladov'southward consumptive widow, Katerina Ivanovna, saying information technology is the repayment of a debt to his friend.

Feeling renewed, Raskolnikov calls on Razumikhin, and they go back together to Raskolnikov'south building. Upon entering his room Raskolnikov is deeply shocked to see his mother and sis sitting on the sofa. They have just arrived in Petersburg and are ecstatic to see him, but Raskolnikov is unable to speak, and collapses in a faint.

Part 3 [edit]

Razumikhin tends to Raskolnikov, and manages to convince the distressed mother and sister to return to their apartment. He goes with them, despite beingness drunk and rather overwhelmed by Dunya's dazzler. When they return the side by side morning Raskolnikov has improved physically, but it becomes apparent that he is however mentally distracted and merely forcing himself to endure the coming together. He demands that Dunya interruption with Luzhin, merely Dunya fiercely defends her motives for the marriage. Mrs Raskolnikova has received a note from Luzhin demanding that her son not be present at any future meetings betwixt them. He also informs her that he witnessed her son give the 25 rubles to "an unmarried woman of immoral behavior" (Sonya). Dunya has decided that a meeting, at which both Luzhin and her brother are present, must take place, and Raskolnikov agrees to attend that evening forth with Razumikhin. To Raskolnikov's surprise, Sonya of a sudden appears at his door. Timidly, she explains that he left his address with them last nighttime, and that she has come to invite him to attend her father's funeral. As she leaves, Raskolnikov asks for her address and tells her that he volition visit her before long.

At Raskolnikov's behest, Razumikhin takes him to come across the detective Porfiry Petrovich, who is investigating the murders. Raskolnikov immediately senses that Porfiry knows that he is the murderer. Porfiry, who has just been discussing the instance with Zamyotov, adopts an ironic tone during the conversation. He expresses extreme marvel well-nigh an commodity that Raskolnikov wrote some months ago chosen 'On Crime', in which he suggests that certain rare individuals—the benefactors and geniuses of flesh—have a right to 'step across' legal or moral boundaries if those boundaries are an obstruction to the success of their idea. Raskolnikov defends himself skillfully, only he is alarmed and angered by Porfiry'southward insinuating tone. An appointment is made for an interview the following forenoon at the law bureau.

Leaving Razumikhin with his mother and sis, Raskolnikov returns to his ain building. He is surprised to notice an former artisan, whom he doesn't know, making inquiries nigh him. Raskolnikov tries to find out what he wants, but the artisan says merely one word – "murderer", and walks off. Petrified, Raskolnikov returns to his room and falls into thought and and then sleep. He wakes to observe another complete stranger present, this time a human being of aristocratic appearance. The homo politely introduces himself as Arkady Ivanovich Svidrigailov.

Part 4 [edit]

Svidrigailov indulges in an amiable only disjointed monologue, punctuated by Raskolnikov's terse interjections. He claims to no longer have any romantic interest in Dunya, but wants to stop her from marrying Luzhin, and offer her 10 k roubles. Raskolnikov refuses the coin on her behalf and refuses to facilitate a coming together. Svidrigailov also mentions that his wife, who dedicated Dunya at the time of the unpleasantness merely died shortly afterwards, has left her 3000 rubles in her will.

The meeting with Luzhin that evening begins with talk of Svidrigailov—his depraved character, his presence in Petersburg, the unexpected expiry of his wife and the 3000 rubles left to Dunya. Luzhin takes offence when Dunya insists on resolving the issue with her brother, and when Raskolnikov draws attention to the slander in his alphabetic character, Luzhin becomes reckless, exposing his true grapheme. Dunya tells him to leave and never come back. Now free and with pregnant capital, they excitedly begin to discuss plans for the futurity, but Raskolnikov suddenly gets up and leaves, telling them, to their keen consternation, that it might be the last time he sees them. He instructs the baffled Razumikhin to remain and e'er treat them.

Raskolnikov proceeds to Sonya'due south identify. She is gratified that he is visiting her, simply as well frightened of his strange mode. He asks a series of merciless questions most her terrible situation and that of Katerina Ivanovna and the children. Raskolnikov begins to realize that Sonya is sustained just by her faith in God. She reveals that she was a friend of the murdered Lizaveta. In fact, Lizaveta gave her a cantankerous and a copy of the Gospels. She passionately reads to him the story of the raising of Lazarus from the Gospel of John. His fascination with her, which had begun at the time when her father spoke of her, increases and he decides that they must confront the time to come together. Every bit he leaves he tells her that he will come back tomorrow and tell her who killed her friend Lizaveta.

When Raskolnikov presents himself for his interview, Porfiry resumes and intensifies his insinuating, provocative, ironic chatter, without ever making a direct accusation. With Raskolnikov's anger reaching fever pitch, Porfiry hints that he has a "little surprise" for him behind the partitioning in his office, but at that moment there is a commotion exterior the door and a young man (Mikolka the painter) bursts in, followed by some policemen. To both Porfiry and Raskolnikov's astonishment, Mikolka gain to loudly confess to the murders. Porfiry doesn't believe the confession, only he is forced to permit Raskolnikov get. Back at his room Raskolnikov is horrified when the onetime artisan of a sudden appears at his door. Only the human bows and asks for forgiveness: he had been Porfiry'southward "niggling surprise", and had heard Mikolka confess. He had been i of those present when Raskolnikov returned to the scene of the murders, and had reported his behavior to Porfiry.

Office 5 [edit]

Raskolnikov attends the Marmeladovs' post-funeral banquet at Katerina Ivanovna'south apartment. The atmosphere deteriorates every bit guests become drunk and the half-mad Katerina Ivanovna engages in a verbal assail on her German language landlady. With anarchy descending, everyone is surprised past the sudden and portentous advent of Luzhin. He sternly announces that a 100-ruble banknote disappeared from his apartment at the precise time that he was being visited by Sonya, whom he had invited in order to make a pocket-sized donation. Sonya fearfully denies stealing the money, simply Luzhin persists in his accusation and demands that someone search her. Outraged, Katerina Ivanovna abuses Luzhin and sets well-nigh emptying Sonya'due south pockets to bear witness her innocence, simply a folded 100-ruble note does indeed fly out of one of the pockets. The mood in the room turns confronting Sonya, Luzhin chastises her, and the landlady orders the family out. Merely Luzhin's roommate Lebezyatnikov angrily asserts that he saw Luzhin surreptitiously slip the money into Sonya's pocket as she left, although he had thought at the fourth dimension that it was a noble act of anonymous clemency. Raskolnikov backs Lebezyatnikov past confidently identifying Luzhin's motive: a want to avenge himself on Raskolnikov by defaming Sonya, in hopes of causing a rift with his family. Luzhin is discredited, but Sonya is traumatized, and she runs out of the flat. Raskolnikov follows her.

Back at her room, Raskolnikov draws Sonya's attention to the ease with which Luzhin could have ruined her, and consequently the children as well. Simply it is but a prelude to his confession that he is the murderer of the quondam woman and Lizaveta. Painfully, he tries to explain his abstract motives for the crime to the uncomprehending Sonya. She is horrified, non just at the criminal offense, but at his own self-torture, and tells him that he must manus himself in to the police. Lebezyatnikov appears and tells them that the landlady has kicked Katerina Ivanovna out of the apartment and that she has gone mad. They find Katerina Ivanovna surrounded by people in the street, completely insane, trying to force the terrified children to perform for money, and near decease from her illness. They manage to get her dorsum to Sonya's room, where, distraught and raving, she dies. To Raskolnikov's surprise, Svidrigailov suddenly appears and informs him that he will be using the 10 thousand rubles intended for Dunya to make the funeral arrangements and to place the children in expert orphanages. When Raskolnikov asks him what his motives are, he laughingly replies with direct quotations of Raskolnikov's own words, spoken when he was trying to explicate his justifications for the murder to Sonya. Svidrigailov has been residing adjacent door to Sonya, and overheard every give-and-take of the murder confession.

Part 6 [edit]

Razumikhin tells Raskolnikov that Dunya has go troubled and distant after receiving a alphabetic character from someone. He besides mentions, to Raskolnikov'southward astonishment, that Porfiry no longer suspects him of the murders. Equally Raskolnikov is nigh to set off in search of Svidrigailov, Porfiry himself appears and politely requests a brief conversation. He sincerely apologises for his previous beliefs and seeks to explain the reasons behind it. Strangely, Raskolnikov begins to feel alarmed at the thought that Porfiry might retrieve he is innocent. But Porfiry's changed mental attitude is motivated by genuine respect for Raskolnikov, not past any thought of his innocence, and he concludes past expressing his absolute certainty that Raskolnikov is indeed the murderer. He claims that he will be absorbing him soon, but urges him to confess to arrive easier on himself. Raskolnikov chooses to continue the struggle.

Raskolnikov finds Svidrigailov at an inn and warns him against budgeted Dunya. Svidrigailov, who has in fact arranged to meet Dunya, threatens to go to the constabulary, simply Raskolnikov is unconcerned and follows when he leaves. When Raskolnikov finally turns abode, Dunya, who has been watching them, approaches Svidrigailov and demands to know what he meant in his alphabetic character about her brother's "underground". She reluctantly accompanies him to his rooms, where he reveals what he overheard and attempts to use it to make her yield to his desire. Dunya, however, has a gun and she fires at him, narrowly missing: Svidrigailov gently encourages her to reload and try again. Somewhen she throws the gun bated, but Svidrigailov, crushed past her hatred for him, tells her to leave. Later that evening he goes to Sonya to discuss the arrangements for Katerina Ivanovna'southward children. He gives her 3000 rubles, telling her she will need it if she wishes to follow Raskolnikov to Siberia. He spends the night in a miserable hotel and the following morning commits suicide in a public place.

Raskolnikov says a painful goodbye to his mother, without telling her the truth. Dunya is waiting for him at his room, and he tells her that he will exist going to the police to confess to the murders. He stops at Sonya's place on the style and she gives him a crucifix. At the bureau he learns of Svidrigailov'southward suicide, and almost changes his heed, even leaving the building. But he sees Sonya, who has followed him, looking at him in despair, and he returns to make a full and frank confession of the murders.

Epilogue [edit]

Due to the fullness of his confession at a fourth dimension when another man had already confessed Raskolnikov is sentenced to only viii years of penal servitude. Dunya and Razumikhin marry and plan to motility to Siberia, but Raskolnikov'south female parent falls ill and dies. Sonya follows Raskolnikov to Siberia, but he is initially hostile towards her as he is still struggling to acknowledge moral culpability for his crime, feeling himself to be guilty merely of weakness. It is only subsequently some time in prison that his redemption and moral regeneration begin under Sonya's loving influence.

Characters [edit]

Character names
Russian
and romanization
First name, nickname Patronymic Family proper name
Родиóн
Rodión		 Ромáнович
Románovich		 Раскóльников
Raskól'nikov
Авдо́тья
Avdótya		 Рома́новна
Románovna		 Раско́льникова
Raskól'nikova
Пульхери́я
Pulkhería		 Алексáндровна
Aleksándrovna
Семён
Semyón		 Заха́рович
Zakhárovich		 Мармела́дов
Marmeládov
Со́фья, Со́ня, Со́нечка
Sófya, Sónya, Sónechka		 Семёновна
Semyónovna		 Мармела́дова
Marmeládova
Катери́на
Katerína		 Ива́новна
Ivánovna
Дми́трий
Dmítriy		 Проко́фьич
Prokófyich		 Вразуми́хин, Разуми́хин
Vrazumíkhin, Razumíkhin
Праско́вья
Praskóv'ya		 Па́вловна
Pávlovna		 Зарницына
Zarnitsyna
Арка́дий
Arkádiy		 Ива́нович
Ivánovich		 Свидрига́йлов
Svidrigáilov
Ма́рфа
Márfa		 Петро́вна
Petróvna		 Свидрига́йлова
Svidrigáilova
Пётр
Pyótr		 Петро́вич
Petróvich		 Лужин
Lúzhyn
Андре́й
Andréy		 Семёнович
Semyónovich		 Лебезя́тников
Lebezyátnikov
Порфи́рий
Porfíriy		 Петро́вич
Petróvich
Лизаве́та
Lizavéta		 Ива́новна
Ivánovna
Алёна
Alyóna
An astute accent marks the stressed syllable.

In Law-breaking and Penalization, Dostoevsky fuses the personality of his master character, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, with his new anti-radical ideological themes. The main plot involves a murder every bit the result of "ideological intoxication," and depicts all the disastrous moral and psychological consequences that issue from the murder. Raskolnikov'due south psychology is placed at the center, and carefully interwoven with the ideas behind his transgression; every other feature of the novel illuminates the agonizing dilemma in which Raskolnikov is defenseless.[24] From another point of view, the novel's plot is some other variation of a conventional nineteenth-century theme: an innocent young provincial comes to seek his fortune in the capital, where he succumbs to corruption, and loses all traces of his erstwhile freshness and purity. Nonetheless, as Gary Rosenshield points out, "Raskolnikov succumbs not to the temptations of high society as Honoré de Balzac's Rastignac or Stendhal'southward Julien Sorel, but to those of rationalistic Petersburg".[25]

Major characters [edit]

Raskolnikov (Rodion Romanovitch) is the protagonist, and the novel focuses primarily on his perspective. A 23-yr-onetime man and former student, now destitute, Raskolnikov is described in the novel as "exceptionally handsome, beneath the average in height, slim, well built, with cute night eyes and dark brown hair." On the one manus, he is cold, blah, and antisocial; on the other, he can be surprisingly warm and compassionate. He commits murder likewise as acts of impulsive charity. His chaotic interaction with the external earth and his nihilistic worldview might be seen as causes of his social breach or consequences of it.

Despite its championship, the novel does not and so much bargain with the crime and its formal punishment as with Raskolnikov'southward internal struggle – the torments of his own censor, rather than the legal consequences of committing the crime. Assertive society would be amend for it, Raskolnikov commits murder with the idea that he possesses enough intellectual and emotional fortitude to bargain with the ramifications, but his sense of guilt shortly overwhelms him to the indicate of psychological and somatic illness. Information technology is simply in the epilogue that he realizes his formal punishment, having decided to confess and end his alienation from social club.

Sonya (Sofya Semyonovna Marmeladova), is the daughter of a drunkard named Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov, whom Raskolnikov meets in a tavern at the first of the novel. She is frequently characterized as self-sacrificial, shy, and innocent, despite being forced into prostitution to assistance her family. Raskolnikov discerns in her the aforementioned feelings of shame and breach that he experiences, and she becomes the get-go person to whom he confesses his crime. Sensing his deep unhappiness, she supports him, fifty-fifty though she was friends with ane of the victims (Lizaveta). Throughout the novel, Sonya is an important source of moral force and rehabilitation for Raskolnikov.

Razumíkhin (Dmitry Prokofyich) is Raskolnikov'southward loyal friend and also a former constabulary pupil. The character is intended to stand for something of a reconciliation between faith and reason (razum, "sense", "intelligence"). He jokes that his name is actually 'Vrazumíkhin' – a proper noun suggesting "to bring someone to their senses".[26] He is upright, strong, resourceful and intelligent, only likewise somewhat naïve – qualities that are of great importance to Raskolnikov in his desperate situation. He admires Raskolnikov's intelligence and character, refuses to give any credence to others' suspicions, and supports him at all times. He looks later on Raskolnikov's family when they come to Petersburg, and falls in honey with Dunya.

Dunya (Avdotya Romanovna Raskolnikova) – Raskolnikov's beautiful and strong-willed sis who works as a governess. She initially plans to marry the wealthy but unsavory lawyer Luzhin, thinking information technology will enable her to ease her family unit'southward desperate financial situation and escape her erstwhile employer Svidrigailov. Her state of affairs is a cistron in Raskolnikov's decision to commit the murder. In St. Petersburg, she is eventually able to escape the clutches of both Luzhin and Svidrigailov, and later marries Razumikhin.

Luzhin (Pyotr Petrovich) – A well-off lawyer who is engaged to Dunya in the offset of the novel. His motives for the marriage are dubious, as he more or less states that he has sought a woman who will be completely beholden to him. He slanders and falsely accuses Sonya of theft in an try to harm Raskolnikov'southward relations with his family. Luzhin represents immorality, in dissimilarity to Svidrigaïlov's amorality, and Raskolnikov'south misguided morality.

Svidrigaïlov (Arkady Ivanovich) – Sensual, depraved, and wealthy erstwhile employer and former pursuer of Dunya. He overhears Raskolnikov's confessions to Sonya and uses this noesis to torment both Dunya and Raskolnikov, but does not inform the police force. Despite his credible malevolence, Svidrigaïlov seems to be capable of generosity and compassion. When Dunya tells him she could never dearest him (afterward attempting to shoot him) he lets her become. He tells Sonya that he has made fiscal arrangements for the Marmeladov children to enter an orphanage, and gives her 3 thousand rubles, enabling her to follow Raskolnikov to Siberia. Having left the residue of his money to his juvenile fiancée, he commits suicide.

Porfiry Petrovich – The head of the Investigation Section in charge of solving the murders of Lizaveta and Alyona Ivanovna, who, along with Sonya, moves Raskolnikov towards confession. Unlike Sonya, however, Porfiry does this through psychological ways, seeking to misfile and provoke the volatile Raskolnikov into a voluntary or involuntary confession. He later drops these methods and sincerely urges Raskolnikov to confess for his own proficient.

Other characters [edit]

  • Pulkheria Alexandrovna Raskolnikova – Raskolnikov'south naïve, hopeful and loving female parent. Following Raskolnikov'due south sentence, she falls ill (mentally and physically) and somewhen dies. She hints in her dying stages that she is slightly more than aware of her son'southward fate, which was hidden from her by Dunya and Razumikhin.
  • Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov – Hopeless drunk who Raskolnikov meets while yet because the murder scheme. Raskolnikov is deeply moved by his passionate, almost ecstatic confession of how his abject alcoholism led to the devastation of his life, the destitution of his married woman and children, and ultimately to his girl Sonya being forced into prostitution.
  • Katerina Ivanovna Marmeladova – Semyon Marmeladov's consumptive and ill-tempered second wife, stepmother to Sonya. She drives Sonya into prostitution in a fit of rage, but afterwards regrets information technology. She beats her children, but works ferociously to improve their standard of living. She is obsessed with demonstrating that slum life is far below her station. Following Marmeladov's death, she uses the coin Raskolnikov gives her to agree a funeral. She somewhen succumbs to her illness.
  • Andrey Semyonovich Lebezyatnikov – Luzhin'southward utopian socialist roommate who witnesses his attempt to frame Sonya and afterwards exposes him. He is proven correct by Raskolnikov, the simply one knowing of Luzhin's motives.
  • Alyona Ivanovna – Suspicious old pawnbroker who hoards coin and is merciless to her patrons. She is Raskolnikov's intended target, and he kills her in the kickoff of the volume.
  • Lizaveta Ivanovna – Alyona's handicapped, innocent and submissive sister. Raskolnikov murders her when she walks in immediately later on Raskolnikov had killed Alyona. Lizaveta was a friend of Sonya.
  • Zosimov (Зосимов) – A friend of Razumikhin and a doctor with a item interest in 'psychological' illnesses. He ministers to Raskolnikov during his delirium and its aftermath.
  • Nastasya Petrovna (Настасья Петровна) – Raskolnikov'southward landlady's cheerful and talkative servant who is very caring towards Raskolnikov and often brings him food and drink.
  • Nikodim Fomich (Никодим Фомич) – The affable master of police.
  • Ilya Petrovich (Илья Петрович) – A police official and Nikodim Fomich'south assistant, nicknamed "Gunpowder" for his very bad temper. He is the commencement to accept suspicions about Raskolnikov in relation to the murder, and Raskolnikov ultimately makes his official confession to Gunpowder.
  • Alexander Grigorievich Zamyotov (Александр Григорьевич Заметов) – Head clerk at the police force station and friend to Razumikhin.
  • Praskovya Pavlovna Zarnitsyna – Raskolnikov'southward landlady (called Pashenka). Shy and retiring, Praskovya Pavlovna does not effigy prominently in the course of events. Raskolnikov had been engaged to her girl, a sickly daughter who had died, and Praskovya Pavlovna had granted him extensive credit on the basis of this date and a promissory note for 115 roubles. She had so handed this note to a court councillor named Chebarov, who had claimed the note, causing Raskolnikov to be summoned to the police force station the day after his crime.
  • Marfa Petrovna Svidrigaïlova – Svidrigaïlov's deceased married woman, whom he is suspected of having murdered, and who he claims has visited him as a ghost. In Pulkheria Alexandrovna's letter to her son, Marfa Petrovna is said to take vigorously defended Dunya against Svidrigailov, and introduced her to Luzhin. She leaves Dunya 3000 rubles in her will.
  • Nikolai Dementiev (Николай Дементьев), also known as Mikolka – A business firm painter who happens to be nearby at the time of the murder and is initially suspected of the crime. Driven by memories of the teachings of his Old Laic sect, which holds it to exist supremely virtuous to suffer for another person's criminal offence, he falsely confesses to the murders.
  • Polina Mikhailovna Marmeladova (Полина Михайловна Мармеладова) – Ten-year-one-time adopted girl of Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov and younger stepsister to Sonya, sometimes known every bit Polechka and Polya.
Name Word Meaning in Russian
Raskolnikov raskol a schism, or split; "raskolnik" is "one who splits" or "dissenter"; the verb raskalyvat' means "to carve", "to chop","to crevice","to split" or "to break". The former translations clarify the literal significant of the word. The figurative pregnant of the discussion is "to bring to low-cal", "to make to confess or acknowledge the truth", etc. The word Raskol is meant to evoke the ideas of the splitting of the Russian Orthodox Church under Patriarch Nikon.
Luzhin luzha a puddle
Razumikhin razum rationality, mind, intelligence
Zamyotov zametit to observe, to realize
Lebezyatnikov lebezit to fawn on somebody, to blench
Marmeladov marmelad marmalade/jam
Svidrigaïlov Svidrigailo a Lithuanian duke of the fifteenth century (the name given to a grapheme rather past sound, than past meaning)
Porfiry Porphyry (perhaps) named after the Neoplatonic philosopher or after the Russian "порфира" ("porphyra") pregnant "regal, purple mantle"
Sonya Sofya from the Greek significant "wisdom"

Themes [edit]

Nihilism, rationalism and utilitarianism [edit]

Dostoevsky's letter to Katkov reveals his immediate inspiration, to which he remained true-blue fifty-fifty later on his original plan evolved into a much more than ambitious cosmos: a desire to counteract what he regarded as nefarious consequences arising from the doctrines of Russian nihilism.[27] In the novel, Dostoevsky pinpointed the dangers of both utilitarianism and rationalism, the main ideas of which inspired the radicals, continuing a vehement criticism he had already started with his Notes from Underground.[28] Dostoevsky utilized the characters, dialogue and narrative in Law-breaking and Punishment to clear an argument against Westernizing ideas. He thus attacked a peculiar Russian blend of French utopian socialism and Benthamite utilitarianism, which had developed nether revolutionary thinkers such as Nikolai Chernyshevsky and became known as rational egoism. The radicals refused to recognize themselves in the novel's pages, since Dostoevsky pursued nihilistic ideas to their most extreme consequences. Dimitri Pisarev ridiculed the notion that Raskolnikov's ideas could be identified with those of the radicals of the time. The radicals' aims were altruistic and humanitarian, but they were to be accomplished past relying on reason and suppressing the spontaneous outflow of Christian compassion. Chernyshevsky's utilitarian ethic proposed that idea and volition in Human were subject to the laws of physical science.[29] Dostoevsky believed that such ideas express man to a production of physics, chemical science and biology, negating spontaneous emotional responses. In its latest variety, Russian nihilism encouraged the creation of an élite of superior individuals to whom the hopes of the future were to be entrusted.[30]

Raskolnikov exemplifies the potentially disastrous hazards independent in such an ideal. Contemporary scholar Joseph Frank writes that "the moral-psychological traits of his character incorporate this antinomy between instinctive kindness, sympathy, and pity on the one hand and, on the other, a proud and idealistic egoism that has get perverted into a contemptuous disdain for the submissive herd".[31] Raskolnikov'southward inner disharmonize in the opening section of the novel results in a utilitarian-altruistic justification for the proposed crime: why not kill a wretched and "useless" former moneylender to alleviate the man misery? Dostoevsky wants to bear witness that this utilitarian style of reasoning had go widespread and commonplace; it was by no means the lone invention of Raskolnikov's tormented and matted listen.[32] Such radical and commonsensical ideas act to reinforce the innate egoism of Raskolnikov'southward character, and assist justify his antipathy for humanity's lower qualities and ideals. He even becomes fascinated with the majestic image of a Napoleonic personality who, in the interests of a higher social expert, believes that he possesses a moral correct to kill. Indeed, his "Napoleon-like" plan impels him toward a well-calculated murder, the ultimate conclusion of his self-charade with utilitarianism.[33]

The surround of Saint Petersburg [edit]

Dostoevsky was among the first to recognize the symbolic possibilities of city life and imagery drawn from the metropolis. I. F. I. Evnin regards Criminal offense and Penalization as the first great Russian novel "in which the climactic moments of the action are played out in dirty taverns, on the street, in the sordid dorsum rooms of the poor".[34]

Dostoevsky'southward Petersburg is the metropolis of unrelieved poverty; "magnificence has no place in it, because magnificence is external, formal abstract, cold". Dostoevsky connects the city'due south bug to Raskolnikov's thoughts and subsequent actions.[35] The crowded streets and squares, the shabby houses and taverns, the dissonance and stench, all are transformed by Dostoevsky into a rich shop of metaphors for states of mind. Donald Fanger asserts that "the real city ... rendered with a hit concreteness, is also a city of the mind in the way that its temper answers Raskolnikov's land and virtually symbolizes it. It is crowded, stifling, and parched."[36]

In his depiction of Petersburg, Dostoevsky accentuates the squalor and human being wretchedness that laissez passer before Raskolnikov's eyes. He uses Raskolnikov'due south meet with Marmeladov to contrast the heartlessness of Raskolnikov'southward convictions with a Christian approach to poverty and wretchedness.[32] Dostoevsky believes that the moral "freedom" propounded by Raskolnikov is a dreadful liberty "that is contained by no values, because it is before values". In seeking to affirm this "freedom" in himself, Raskolnikov is in perpetual defection against society, himself, and God.[37] He thinks that he is self-sufficient and self-contained, but at the finish "his boundless cocky-conviction must disappear in the face up of what is greater than himself, and his self-fabricated justification must apprehensive itself before the higher justice of God".[38] Dostoevsky calls for the regeneration and renewal of "sick" Russian guild through the re-discovery of its national identity, its religion, and its roots.[39]

Structure [edit]

The novel is divided into six parts, with an epilogue. The notion of "intrinsic duality" in Crime and Punishment has been commented upon, with the suggestion that in that location is a degree of symmetry to the book.[forty] Edward Wasiolek who has argued that Dostoevsky was a skilled craftsman, highly conscious of the formal pattern in his art, has likened the structure of Crime and Penalty to a "flattened X", proverb:

Parts I-Three [of Crime and Penalization] present the predominantly rational and proud Raskolnikov: Parts 4–VI, the emerging "irrational" and apprehensive Raskolnikov. The first half of the novel shows the progressive expiry of the starting time ruling principle of his graphic symbol; the terminal one-half, the progressive birth of the new ruling principle. The point of change comes in the very middle of the novel.[41]

This compositional balance is accomplished by means of the symmetrical distribution of certain key episodes throughout the novel's six parts. The recurrence of these episodes in the two halves of the novel, as David Bethea has argued, is organized according to a mirror-like principle, whereby the "left" half of the novel reflects the "correct" half.[forty]

The seventh part of the novel, the Epilogue, has attracted much attention and controversy. Some of Dostoevsky's critics accept criticized the novel'south last pages as superfluous, anti-climactic, unworthy of the remainder of the work,[42] while others have defended information technology, offer various schemes that they claim prove its inevitability and necessity. Steven Cassedy argues that Crime and Punishment "is formally two distinct but closely related, things, namely a item type of tragedy in the classical Greek mold and a Christian resurrection tale".[43] Cassedy concludes that "the logical demands of the tragic model as such are satisfied without the Epilogue in Crime and Punishment ... At the aforementioned time, this tragedy contains a Christian component, and the logical demands of this chemical element are met only past the resurrection promised in the Epilogue".[44]

Style [edit]

Crime and Penalization is written from a third-person all-seeing perspective. Information technology is told primarily from the point of view of Raskolnikov, just does at times switch to the perspective of other characters such as Svidrigaïlov, Razumikhin, Luzhin, Sonya or Dunya. This narrative technique, which fuses the narrator very closely with the consciousness and point of view of the central characters, was original for its period. Frank notes that Dostoevsky'south use of time shifts of memory and manipulation of temporal sequence begins to approach the later experiments of Henry James, Joseph Conrad, Virginia Woolf, and James Joyce. A tardily nineteenth-century reader was, however, accepted to more orderly and linear types of expository narration. This led to the persistence of the legend that Dostoevsky was an untidy and negligent craftsman, and to observations like the post-obit by Melchior de Vogüé: "A discussion ... one does not fifty-fifty notice, a small-scale fact that takes upwardly only a line, have their reverberations l pages later on ... [and so that] the continuity becomes unintelligible if one skips a couple of pages".[45]

Dostoevsky uses different speech mannerisms and sentences of dissimilar length for different characters. Those who use bogus language—Luzhin, for example—are identified as unattractive people. Mrs. Marmeladov'southward disintegrating mind is reflected in her language. In the original Russian text, the names of the major characters have something of a double meaning, only in translation the subtlety of the Russian language is predominantly lost due to differences in linguistic communication structure and culture. For case, the original Russian title ("Преступление и наказание") is not the direct equivalent to the English "Crime and Penalty". "Преступление" (Prestupléniye) is literally translated as 'a stepping across'. The concrete image of crime as crossing over a bulwark or a boundary is lost in translation, as is the religious implication of transgression.[46]

Reception [edit]

The get-go part of Law-breaking and Punishment published in the January and February issues of The Russian Messenger met with public success. In his memoirs, the conservative belletrist Nikolay Strakhov recalled that in Russian federation Crime and Penalty was the literary sensation of 1866.[47] Tolstoy's novel War and Peace was being serialized in The Russian Messenger at the same fourth dimension as Crime and Punishment.

The novel soon attracted the criticism of the liberal and radical critics. Yard.Z. Yeliseyev sprang to the defense of the Russian student corporations, and wondered, "Has in that location always been a case of a pupil committing murder for the sake of robbery?" Pisarev, aware of the novel's artistic value, described Raskolnikov every bit a product of his environment, and argued that the main theme of the work was poverty and its results. He measured the novel's excellence by the accuracy with which Dostoevsky portrayed the gimmicky social reality, and focused on what he regarded every bit inconsistencies in the novel'south plot. Strakhov rejected Pisarev's contention that the theme of environmental determinism was essential to the novel, and pointed out that Dostoevsky's attitude towards his hero was sympathetic: "This is not mockery of the younger generation, neither a reproach nor an accusation—it is a lament over it."[48] Solovyov felt that the meaning of the novel, despite the mutual failure to understand it, is articulate and simple: a man who considers himself entitled to 'step across' discovers that what he idea was an intellectually and fifty-fifty morally justifiable transgression of an arbitrary law turns out to be, for his censor, "a sin, a violation of inner moral justice... that inward sin of cocky-idolatry tin only be redeemed by an inner deed of cocky-renunciation."[49]

The early on Symbolist motion that dominated Russian messages in the 1880s was concerned more with aesthetics than the visceral realism and intellectuality of Crime and Penalisation, just a tendency toward mysticism among the new generation of symbolists in the 1900s led to a reevaluation of the novel equally an accost to the dialectic of spirit and matter.[50] In the character of Sonya (Sofya Semyonovna) they saw an embodiment of both the Orthodox feminine principle of hagia sophia (holy wisdom) –"at in one case sexual and innocent, redemptive both in her suffering and her veneration of suffering", and the most important feminine deity of Russian folklore mat syra zemlya (moist female parent earth).[51] Raskolnikov is a "son of World" whose egocentric aspirations lead him to ideas and deportment that alienate him from the very source of his strength, and he must bow down to her before she tin relieve him of the terrible burden of his guilt.[52] [53] Philosopher and Orthodox theologian Nikolay Berdyaev shared Solovyov and the symbolists' sense of the novel's spiritual significance, seeing information technology as an illustration of the modernistic age's hubristic self-deification, or what he calls "the suicide of homo by cocky-affirmation". Raskolnikov answers his question of whether he has the right to kill solely by reference to his own arbitrary volition, merely, according to Berdyaev, these are questions that can only be answered by God, and "he who does non bow before that college will destroys his neighbor and destroys himself: that is the meaning of Crime and Penalty".[54] [55]

Criminal offence and Punishment was regarded as an important piece of work in a number of 20th century European cultural movements, notably the Bloomsbury Group, psychoanalysis, and existentialism. Of the writers associated with Bloomsbury, Virginia Woolf, John Middleton Murry and D. H. Lawrence are some of those who have discussed the piece of work. Freud held Dostoevsky's piece of work in high esteem, and many of his followers have attempted psychoanalytical interpretations of Raskolnikov.[56] Amidst the existentialists, Sartre and Camus in detail have acknowledged Dostoevsky's influence.[57]

The affinity of Crime and Punishment with both religious mysticism and psychoanalysis led to suppression of give-and-take in Soviet Russian federation: interpretations of Raskolnikov tended to align with Pisarev'south idea of reaction to unjust socio-economic weather condition.[58] An exception was the work of Mikhail Bakhtin, considered past many commentators to exist the most original and insightful annotator of Dostoevsky's work. In Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics, Bakhtin argues that attempts to understand Dostoevsky's characters from the vantage indicate of a pre-existing philosophy, or equally individualized 'objects' to exist psychologically analysed, volition always neglect to penetrate the unique "creative architechtonics" of his works.[59] In such cases, both the critical approach and the assumed object of investigation are 'monological': everything is perceived as occurring within the framework of a single overarching perspective, whether that of the critic or that of the author. Dostoevsky's art, Bakhtin argues, is inherently 'dialogical': events proceed on the ground of interaction between self-validating subjective voices, oftentimes within the consciousness of an individual character, every bit is the case with Raskolnikov. Raskolnikov's consciousness is depicted as a battleground for all the conflicting ideas that find expression in the novel: everyone and everything he encounters becomes reflected and refracted in a "dialogized" interior monologue.[60] He has rejected external relationships and chosen his tormenting internal dialogue; simply Sonya is capable of continuing to engage with him despite his cruelty. His openness to dialogue with Sonya is what enables him to cantankerous dorsum over the "threshold into real-life advice (confession and public trial)—not out of guilt, for he avoids acknowledging his guilt, simply out of weariness and loneliness, for that reconciling step is the simply relief possible from the cacophony of unfinalized inner dialogue."[61]

English language translations [edit]

  • Frederick Whishaw (1885)
  • Constance Garnett (1914)
  • David Magarshack (1951)
  • Princess Alexandra Kropotkin (1953)
  • Jessie Coulson (1953)
  • Michael Scammell (1963)
  • Sidney Monas (1968)
  • Julius Katzer (1985)
  • David McDuff (1991)
  • Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (1992)
  • Oliver Fix (2014)
  • Nicolas Pasternak Slater (2017)
  • Michael R. Katz (2017)

The Garnett translation was the dominant translation for more than 80 years subsequently its publication in 1914. Since the 1990s, McDuff and Pevear/Volokhonsky have get its major competitors.[62]

Adaptations [edit]

There have been over 25 film adaptations of Crime and Punishment. They include:

  • Raskolnikow (aka Crime and Punishment, 1923) directed past Robert Wiene
  • Criminal offence and Penalization (1935 American film) starring Peter Lorre, Edward Arnold and Marian Marsh
  • Crime and Punishment (1970 moving picture) Soviet picture show starring Georgi Taratorkin, Tatyana Bedova, Vladimir Basov, Victoria Fyodorova) dir. Lev Kulidzhanov
  • Crime and Penalty (1979 Goggle box serial) is a iii-office 1979 tv series produced by the BBC, starring John Hurt as Raskolnikov and Timothy West as Porfiry Petrovich.
  • Crime and Punishment (1983 film) (original championship, Rikos ja Rangaistus), the offset movie by the Finnish director Aki Kaurismäki, with Markku Toikka in the lead office. The story has been transplanted to modern-day Helsinki, Republic of finland.
  • Crime and Penalty in Suburbia (2000, an adaptation set in modern America and "loosely based" on the novel)
  • Criminal offense and Penalization (2002 film), starring Crispin Glover and Vanessa Redgrave.
  • Criminal offense and Punishment (2002 Television set pic) is a 2002 tv set serial produced by the BBC, starring John Simm as Raskolnikov and Ian McDiarmid as Porfiry Petrovich.
  • Criminal offense and Punishment (2007 Russian TV serial) (ru) was a 2007 television serial directed past Dmitry Svetozarov starring Vladimir Koshevoy as Raskolnikov.

References [edit]

  1. ^ University of Minnesota – Report notes for Crime and Punishment – (retrieved on 1 May 2006)
  2. ^ Frank (1995), p. 96
  3. ^ "The 50 Well-nigh Influential Books of All Time". Open Education Database. 26 January 2010.
  4. ^ "The Greatest Books". thegreatestbooks.org.
  5. ^ Writers, Telegraph (23 July 2021). "The 100 greatest novels of all time". The Telegraph. Archived from the original on 11 January 2022.
  6. ^ "100 must-read classic books, as chosen by our readers". Penguin.
  7. ^ Yousef, Virtually Criminal offence and Punishment
    * Fanger (2006), pp. 17–18
  8. ^ Frank (1994), p. 168
  9. ^ Frank, p. 170
    * Peace (2005), p. 8
    * Simmons (2007), p. 131
  10. ^ Miller (2007), p. 58
    * Peace (2008), p. 8
  11. ^ Frank (1994), p. 179
  12. ^ Miller (2007), pp. 58–59
  13. ^ Miller (2007), p. 58
  14. ^ Essays in Poetics. University of Keele. 1981.
  15. ^ Rosenshield (1973), p. 399).
  16. ^ Carabine (2000), p. 10
    * Frank (1994), pp. 170–72
    * Frank (1995), p. 80
  17. ^ Frank (1994), p. 185
  18. ^ Frank (1994), 174
  19. ^ Frank (1994), p. 177
  20. ^ Frank (1994), pp. 179–80, 182
  21. ^ Frank (1994), pp. 170, 179–eighty, 184
    * Frank(1995), p. 93
    * Miller (2007), pp. 58–59
  22. ^ Frank (1995), p. 39
    * Peace (2005), p. 8
  23. ^ Simmons (2007), p. 131
  24. ^ Frank (1995), 97
  25. ^ Rosenshield (1978), 76. Run into also Fanger (2006), 21
  26. ^ Cox, Gary (1990). Crime and Punishment: A Listen to Murder . Boston: Twayne. p. 136.
  27. ^ Frank (1995), p. 100
  28. ^ Donald Fanger states that "Crime and Punishment did zilch just continue the polemic, incarnating the tragedy of nihilism in Raskolnikov and caricaturing it in Lebezyatnikov and, partially, in Luzhin". (Fanger (2006), p. 21 – see besides Frank (1995), p. 60; Ozick (1997), 114; Sergeyef (1998), 26).
  29. ^ Frank (1995), pp. 100–01
    * Hudspith (2003), p. 95
  30. ^ Pisarev had sketched the outlines of a new proto-Nietzschean hero (Frank (1995), pp. 100–01; Frank (2002), p. 11).
  31. ^ Frank (1995), p. 101
  32. ^ a b Frank (1995), p. 104
  33. ^ Frank (1995), p. 107
    * Sergeyef (1998), p. 26
  34. ^ Fanger (2006), p. 24
  35. ^ Lindenmeyr (2006), p. 37
  36. ^ Fanger (2006), p. 28
  37. ^ Wasiolek (2005), p. 55
  38. ^ Vladimir Solovyov quoted by McDuff (2002), pp. 13–xiv
    * Peace (2005), pp. 75–76
  39. ^ *McDuff (2002), p. xxx: "It is the persistent tracing of this theme of a 'Russian sickness' of spiritual origin and its cure throughout the book that justify the writer'south label of it as an 'Orthodox novel'."
    * Wasiolek (2005), pp. 56–57
  40. ^ a b Davydov (1982), pp. 162–63
  41. ^ "On the Structure of Crime and Penalty, " in: PMLA, March 1959, vol. LXXIV, No. 1, pp. 132–33.
  42. ^ Mikhail Bakhtin, for case, regards the Epilogue equally a blotch on the book (Wellek (1980), p. 33).
  43. ^ Cassedy (1982), p. 171
  44. ^ Cassedy (1982), p. 187
  45. ^ Frank (1994), p. 184
    * Frank (1995), pp. 92–93
  46. ^ Morris (1984), p. 28
    * Peace (2005), p. 86
    * Stanton–Hardy (1999), p. 8
  47. ^ McDuff, pp. ten–xi
  48. ^ Jahn, Dostoevsky'southward Life and Career
    * McDuff, pp. xi–xii
  49. ^ Solovyov commemorative speech communication (1881), quoted by McDuff (2002), pp. xii–xiii
  50. ^ Cox, Gary (1990). pp. 14–15
  51. ^ Cox, Gary (1990). p. xv
  52. ^ Ivanov, Viacheslav (1957). Freedom and the Tragic Life. New York: Noonday Press. pp. 77–78.
  53. ^ Cox, Gary (1990). pp. 15–16
  54. ^ Berdyaev, Nicholas (1957). Dostoevsky. New York: Meridian Books. pp. 99–101.
  55. ^ Cox, Gary (1990). p. 17
  56. ^ In "Raskolnikov's transgression and the defoliation betwixt destructiveness and inventiveness" Richard Rosenthal discusses Raskolnikov's criminal offense in terms of the projection of intrapsychic violence: "Raskolnikov believes that frustration and hurting can be evaded by attacking that role of the mental apparatus able to perceive them. Thoughts are treated as unwanted things, fit only for expulsion. Such pathological projective identification results in vehement fragmentation and the disintegration of the personality; the evacuated particles are experienced every bit having an contained life threatening him from outside." From Do I Cartel Disturb the Universe (ed. James Grotstein) (1981). Caesura Press. p. 200
  57. ^ Cox, Gary (1990). pp. xviii–21
  58. ^ Cox, Gary (1990). p. 22
  59. ^ Bakhtin, Mikhail (1984). Bug of Dostoevsky's Poetics. p. 9
  60. ^ Bakhtin (1984). pp. 74–75
  61. ^ Emerson, Caryl (1997). The First Hundred Years of Mikhail Bakhtin. Princeton University Press. p. 152.
  62. ^ Raskolnikov Says the Darndest Things

Text

  • Dostoevsky, Fyodor (1866). Offense and Penalisation. Translated in English by Constance Garnett.

Sources

  • Bourgeois, Patrick Lyall (1996). "Dostoevsky and Existentialism: An Experiment in Hermeunetics". In Mc Bride, William Leon (ed.). Existentialist Background. Taylor & Francis. ISBN0-8153-2492-viii.
  • Cassedy, Steven (1982). "The Formal Problem of the Epilogue in Offense and Punishment: The Logic of Tragic and Christian Structures". Dostoevsky Centenary Conference at the University of Nottingham. Vol. 3. International Dostoevsky Society. Archived from the original on 2 October 2013.
  • Church, Margaret (1983). "Dostoevsky's Criminal offence and Penalty and Kafka'due south The Trial". Structure and Theme – Don Quixote to James Joyce. Ohio Country University Press. ISBN0-8142-0348-5.
  • Davydov, Sergei (1982). "Dostoevsky and Nabokov: The Morality of Structure in Crime and Punishment and Despair". Dostoevsky Centenary Conference at the University of Nottingham. Vol. 3. International Dostoevsky Social club. Archived from the original on 20 June 2014.
  • Frank, Joseph (1994). "The Making of Criminal offense and Penalisation". In Polhemus, Robert M.; Henkle, Roger B. (eds.). Disquisitional Reconstructions: The Relationship of Fiction and Life. Stanford University Press. ISBN0-8047-2243-9.
  • Frank, Joseph (1995). Dostoevsky: The Miraculous Years, 1865–1871 . Princeton University Press. ISBN0-691-01587-2. Katkov, Law-breaking and Penalty.
  • Frank, Joseph (2002). "Introduction". Dostoevsky: The Mantle of the Prophet, 1871–1881. Princeton University Press. ISBN0-691-11569-9.
  • Gill, Richard (1982). "The Bridges of St. Petesburg: a Motive in Crime and Penalization". Dostoevsky Centenary Conference at the University of Nottingham. Vol. 3. International Dostoevsky Society. Archived from the original on xix September 2008.
  • Hardy, James D. Jr.; Stanton, Leonard J. (1999). "Introduction". Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky. Signet Classic. ISBN0-451-52723-2.
  • Hudspith, Sarah (2003). "Dostoevsky'southward Dramatization of Slavophile Themes". Dostoevsky and the Idea of Russianness. Routledge. ISBN0-415-30489-Ten.
  • Jahn, Gary R. "Dostoevsky's Life and Career, 1865–1881". University of Minnesota. Retrieved 24 August 2008.
  • McDuff, David (2002). "Introduction". Fyodor M. Dostoevsky's Law-breaking and Penalization. Penguin Classics. ISBN0-xiv-044913-2.
  • Miller, Robin Feuer (2007). "Criminal offence and Punishment in the Classroom". Dostoevsky's Unfinished Journey. Yale Academy Press. ISBN978-0-300-12015-8.
  • Morris, Virginia B. (1984). "Mode". Fyodor M. Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment. Barron'southward Educational Serial. ISBN0-8120-3409-0.
  • Ozick, Cynthia (24 Feb 1997). "Dostoyevsky'due south Unabomber". The New Yorker. p. 114. Retrieved 17 Baronial 2008.
  • Peace, Richard Arthur (2006). Fyodor Dostoevsky'due south Crime and Punishment: A Casebook. Oxford University Press. ISBN0-19-517562-X. :
    • Peace, Richard. "Introduction". Peace, 1–16.
    • Fanger, Donald. "Apogee: Crime and Punishment". Peace, 17–35.
    • Lindenmeyr, Adele. "Raskolnikov'southward City and the Napoleonic Plan". Peace, 37–49.
    • Wasiolek, Edward. "Raskolnikov's Metropolis and the Napoleonic Plan". Peace, 51–74.
    • Peace, Richard. "Motive and Symbol". Peace, 75–101.
  • Rosenshield, Gary (Winter 1973). "Offset- Versus 3rd-Person Narration in Crime and Punishment". The Slavic and East European Journal. 17 (four): 399–407. doi:10.2307/305635. JSTOR 305635.
  • Rosenshield, Gary (1978). Crime and Penalization: The Techniques of the Omniscient Author. Peter de Ridder Printing. ISBN90-316-0104-7.
  • Sergeyev, Victor G. (1998). "Moral Practices and the Law". The Wild E: Offense and Lawlessness in Postal service-communist Russia. Chiliad.E. Sharpe. ISBN0-7656-0231-viii.
  • Simmons, Ernest J. (2007). "In the Author's Laboratory". Dostoevsky – The Making of a Novelist. Read Books. ISBN978-1-4067-6362-i.
  • Wellek, René (1980). "Bakhtin's view of Dostoevsky: 'Polyphony' and 'Carnivalesque'". Dostoevsky Studies – Form and Construction. Vol. 1. International Dostoevsky Club. Archived from the original on two October 2013.

External links [edit]

Criticisms

  • University of Minnesota study guide
  • Text and Analysis at Bibliomania
  • Text virtually Offense and Punishment by Lev Oborin (in Russian)

Online text

  • Crime and Punishment at Standard Ebooks
  • Crime and Punishment at Project Gutenberg
  • Crime and Penalization public domain audiobook at LibriVox
  • Full text (in Russian)
  • Lit2Go audiobook version of the Constance Garnett translation.
  • Full text in sometime orthography (russian)

Maps

  • Mapping Petrograd – Criminal offense and Penalisation

beardgreentrion.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_and_Punishment

Post a Comment for "Crime and Punishment Art What Games Did Czarist Russia Play"