Rating: 
Summary: Fantastic Read
Review: Truly one of the greatest stories ever told, Fyodor Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment is a testament to the flaws of human nature. Crime and Punishment follows one of the most accurately human characters I have ever read of, Rodion Raskolnikov, through his trials and tribulations after committing a murder. Nearly everything about this novel is intriguing and the book has very few flaws.
Rodion Raskolnikov is a character I can absolutely relate to. His character is so natural, so real, more so than characters in the books I read. Raskolnikov commits his murder in hopes of becoming something greater, which is a flaw that he may never overcome. His reasoning in the murder is flawed and his hopes for the future are flawed as well. In his desire to become a more powerful human, such as his hero Napoleon, he damns himself to the wretched wasteland of Siberia. He never repents for killing the old woman, who is agreeably a shady character. Raskolnikov does fear he went to far in killing the kindly, yet gullible, Lizeveta, whom he never meant to attack. The emotions described in the story by all of the characters, but especially Raskolnikov, are all feelings I myself have felt. His desire for forgiveness, understanding, vindication, and power are genuine human emotions. His desire to share his pain with another, while at the same time trying to not cause anyone close to him pain, causes him to fall deeper into insanity and sickness. In the end, Raskolnikov realizes that he could never be a Napoleon, but a rather ordinary man.
The only fault of this book, in my eyes, is the long-winded thought processes of the characters. Perhaps it is only the translation, but the book goes into the deepest details in explaining the most trivial actions. It is not boring, per say, but it does make the book move much more slowly. Also, possibly again due to the translation, people seem to stare at each other for quite a while. I do not profess to have a great knowledge of nineteenth century Russia, but I find it hard to believe people would just stare at each other for four, five, and ten minutes at a time without speaking, then go on as if it never happened.
The psychology in this book is also very captivating. The paranoia experienced by Raskolnikov at the hands of Porfiry Petrovich, Razumihin knowing his friend so well, yet never realizing the truth until much later on in the book, Svidrigailov's apparent monomania over Avdotya Raskolnikov, and the unexpected psychological attack on Zametov by Raskolnikov are only a few of the great instances where thought, rather than action, tell the story.
Crime and Punishment, overall, is one of the best literary classics I have ever read. The characters are some of the easiest to relate to and the experiences they are forced to encounter force the reader to reflect on human nature and the flaws therein.
Rating: 
Summary: A classic for a reason.
Review: This novel stands out as one of the finest pieces of actual literature I have read. Top 5 at least. First, let me pay tribute to "Everyman's Library Series". They make very handsome novels, complete with soft cream pages, and a built in fabric book mark. They all come in moroon, and add a certain pinache to any book collection. Best of all, they are well priced. As for Crime and Punishment. I was very impressed. More often than not, I read the classics, and wonder how it is they have become classics. For Dostoevsky, there can be no doubt. And Crime and Punishment is his best known effort. Not his best though. C&P is the exploration of the world that it's hero/villain Raskolnikov occupies. He takes it apon himself to murder a particularly vile pawnbroker(thus making him a villain) under the guise of the highest moral resposibility. Well, no plan is perfect, and most of the book is an involved psycological examination of it's main character, the ways he tries to justify his crime to himself, and the people around him who have no idea what the hell is going on. Dostoevsky creates living breathing people that you care about in this tale. It's simple premise gives way to an incredibly complex story. The dialogues bewtween Raskolnikov, and Porfiry( the ever suspicious investigator) are wonderful. And then theres the clever and sneaky Svidrigailov, whom I found rather amusing at times. To me the book was very suspenseful. never knowing if or when young Raskolnikov would confess, or continue to hide in uncertainty due to the circumstancial evidence that linked him to the crime. SO many times I wanted to read to the end to find out. But I didn't, and neither should you. There's just so much depth to this book, I have no doubt it will recieve a return read. Perhaps in another 10 years I will read it, and get even more out of it. That's how all great books are. Highest recommendation.
Rating:
Summary: great novel not to be missed
Review: This book has everything - a great story, a bit of history, superb character development, etc. And, surprisingly, it's very easy to read despite it's length and origin. Definitely worth the effort.
Rating:
Summary: Great literature, mediocre philosophy
Review: Crime and Punishment is quite possibly the most widely read 19th century Russian novel in the English-speaking world, and while I might say it's a tad overrated (for reasons discussed below), there are many good reasons for its exalted status. In case you're not familiar with the story, it begins with the decision of an impoverished student, Raskolnikov, to rob and kill a pawnbroker, having justified his decision with the argument that her death will do the world more good than harm, both because she cheats her clients and because the money from the robbery will give him the start he needs to become a great man and ultimately benefit humanity. The action of the novel is confined to the day of the murder and a few days following it, during which time, in addition to dealing with a murder investigation led by a clever and intriguing detective who suspects him, Raskolnikov spends time with his mother and sister, who have just come to visit, and with the tragic Marmeladov family, consisting of a drunken father, a consumptive mother, three young children, and an eighteen-year old girl who is forced into prostitution in order to support the family. Dostoevsky is notoriously good at investigating the psychology of his characters, and from that standpoint his treatment of Raskolnikov is probably the best in all of his work. While, as in many of his works, Dostoevsky includes a meek saint-figure (in this case Sonia, the prostitute mentioned above) through whose Christian love the other characters will hopefully be redeemed, Dostoevsky's most remarkable characters tend to be not the ones he idolizes but rather the "devil's advocates" with whom he disagrees, and Raskolnikov is probably the finest example of that. There are lots of other interesting characters too, and the plot is fairly action-packed with many moving and haunting scenes (Katerina Marmeladov's final descent into consumptive madness especially comes to mind), making the novel a surprisingly quick and enjoyable read considering its length and depth. Unfortunately, there seems to be a tendency among some readers of the novel to be interested in it exclusively for Raskolnikov's proto-Nietzschean philosophy of the "Extraordinary Man" who, like Napoleon and, or so he believes, Raskolnikov himself, has a duty to overstep the most basic bounds of morality in order to achieve a high end. I say this is unfortunate for a couple of reasons: First, the majority of the action of the novel has nothing directly to do with the idea of the Extraordinary Man, so a reader who is concentrating exclusively on Dostoevsky's treatment of this idea will be missing out on the many other redeeming qualities of the book and will probably find most of the book a bit boring as a result. Second, especially from a modern, post-Nietzschean, point of view, Dostoevsky's treatment of the Extraordinary Man doesn't strike me (especially after a second reading, by which time the novelty had worn off) as being especially interesting philosophy. Granted, given that he was writing in 1866, it does seem somewhat impressive, but I'd have to say Nietzsche advocated the position better than Raskolnikov does, and I'm not sure how much enduring value there really is in this philosophical aspect of the novel. There is, however, immense enduring value in both the characters and the action of Crime and Punishment, and that strikes me as clearly the best reason to read the book. If you read Crime and Punishment in hopes of deriving as much as you can from the work, and not just in order to read arguments about a once-fashionable philosophical idea, I can't imagine that you'll disagree with myself and the vast number of others who regard this as one of the greatest works of world literature.
Rating:
Summary: A Classic for a Reason
Review: I initially approached this book with a great deal of trepidation. I had never read Dostoyevsky, and was concerned that I would get bogged down in some lengthy, mind-numbingly boring, nineteenth-century treatise on the bestial nature of man or something. I am happy to report this is not the case. Instead, and to my delight, it is a smoothly flowing and fascinating story of a young man who succumbs to the most base desire, and the impact this has both psychologically and otherwise on himself and those around him. To be sure, the book seems wordy in places, but I suspect this has to do with the translation. And what translator in his right mind would be bold enough to edit the great Dostoyevsky? But this is a very minor problem. What we get with Dostoyevsky is dramatic tension, detailed and believable human characters, and brilliant insight into human nature. Early in the novel our hero meets and has a lengthy conversation with Marmeladov, a drunkard. This conversation is never uninteresting and ultimately becomes pathetic and heartbreaking, but I kept wondering why so much time was spent on it. As I got deeper into the book, I understood why this conversation was so important, and realized that I was in the hands of a master storyteller. This is also indicative of the way in which the story reveals itself. Nothing is hurried. These people speak the way we actually speak to one another in real life, and more importantly, Dostoyevsky is able to flesh out his characters into whole, three-dimensional human beings. And what a diverse group of characters! Each is fleshed out, each is marvelously complex. Razujmikhin, the talkative, gregarious, good-hearted, insecure and destitute student; Sonia, the tragic child-prostitute, with a sense of rightness in the world; Petrovich, the self-important, self-made man, completely out of touch with his own humanity; Dunia, the honorable, wronged sister: we feel like we know these people because we've met people like them. They fit within our understanding of the way human beings are. Dostoyevsky also displays great insight into human nature. Svidrigailov, for example, talks of his wife as liking to be offended. "We all like to be offended," he says, "but she in particular loved to be offended." It suddenly struck me how true this is. It gives us a chance to act indignantly, to lash out at our enemies, to gain favor with our allies. I don't believe I've ever seen this thought expressed in literature before. In fact, it never occurred to me in real life! Petrovich, Dunia's suitor, not only expects to be loved, but because of his money, and her destitution, he expects to be adored! To be worshipped! He intentionally sought out a woman from whome he expected to get this, and is comletely flummoxed when she rejects him. His is an unusual character, but completely realized. There is so much more to talk about: the character of Raskolnikov, which is meticulously and carefully revealed; the sense of isolation which descends on him after committing his crime; the cat and mouse game played on him by the police detective. I could go on and on. I haven't even mentioned the historical and social context in which this takes place. Suffice to say this is a very rich book. Do not expect it to be a rip-roaring page turner. Sit down, relax, take your time, and savor it. It will be a very rewarding experience. And thank you SL, for recommending it.
Rating:
Summary: A book written by ourselves
Review: Crime and Punishment", published in 1866, is one of those books that one reads many times in his/her lifetime and which impregnates your spirit and soul with the self-imprecatory and dense prose of a deranged and disillusioned man, its author being the greatest of the Russian prose writers, Fiodor Dostoievski (1821-1881).This is my second time reading and I am sure I will get back to it eventually many times still. Despite the deep density of all its characters, all of them unabashedly portraying and surrendering themselves to the reader's judgement, sometimes even anticipating them, in the most clear-cut and realistic way - but at the same time seemingly disdaining the pity that one should visit upon them - this is one of those very few books you read with the weird sensation that you are the author, not Dostoievski, something that can only be ascribed to the profoundly realistic knowledge of the human dramas that surround human condition at its worst, in this case, the poor inhabitants of czarist Saint Petersburgo of the XIX century. Also, besides being essentially Russian and universal at the same time, it is auto-biographical at its core, where the protagonist Raskolnikov is easily identified with the man Dostoievsky not only for the Oedipus complex open ajar to the reader discretion. In my opinion, this is one of the 10 best prose books of the Occidental Classical Literature ever written and I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.
Rating:
Summary: A wonderful exploration into the depths of the criminal mind
Review: This book is a true masterpiece. It's a wonderful trip into the criminal mind. It doesn't spare a thought, it includes everything that the killer is feeling before he commits the crime, after he commits the crime, and while he's committing the crime. It's filled with his conflicting feelings of pride and regret. It displays the theme that someone can't get away with such a terrible crime because there is no escape from their own mind. Raskolnikov could never escape the constant repulsion at himself, and the repulsion of the loved ones around him who knew of his deadly sin. There were some things, though, that put a damper on the reading. I felt like a lot was lost in the translation. While reading I noticed quite a few grammatical errors, and I don't know if that's how it is with most editions of this book, or if it was only mine. It was distracting at times to have to put up with the errors, but it didn't take too much from the book. Once I looked past the errors, I found it an extremely interesting book that is definitely worth investing some time into.
Rating:
Summary: A Morality Play
Review: I reacted to the book in a couple of different ways. My first reaction, from almost the very beginning, was that the book felt like a Dickens novel to me. I saw similarities in both the gothic overwrought characters and the lurking shady characters who alternately seemed for or against young Raskolnikov. The friendship between Raskolnikov and Razumikhin, in particular, reminded me of the friendship between Pip and Herbert Pocket in Great Expectations. Other similarities, I think, are structural. Both books were written serially, and as with Dickens, I looked forward to the cliffhanger at the end of each chapter which would ensure that readers would look forward to the next installment. When I read a book like this, it always occurs to me that it's too bad books aren't written that way any more. It seems like it would be a really fun way to read a book. (Now that I think of it, I'm pretty sure that Stephen King has experimented with this in recent years). My other reaction was how psychological and modern the book seemed. I never read this or any other Russian novels in school (not sure how that happened) so I had neither expectations nor preconceptions when I began. The book was, in its own verbose way, a very profound discussion of morality and power. More specifically, I was interested in the relationship between the power of murder and the power of wealth and social class. These themes were buried beneath layers of prose. The book seemed to be divided almost equally between action and Raskolnikov's internal monologue. It was very readable, but occasionally overwhelming. A final observation: the book is filled with events and real people drawn from real life in 1860s St. Petersburg. In the present day, as an established classic, it gives the book a historical context, but I couldn't help but think about how it must have appeared at the time of its publication. In this day and age, writers are often derided for relying too much on current events and pop culture. Critics claim the these books will lose their cultural significance as they become quickly dated. Yet, in C&P, Dostoyevsky's practice of referring to specific scandals and amusements that were the hot topics of conversation at the time serves to cement the book very specifically in a time and place and it manages to make the story feel real and complete. I should also mention that I really enjoyed the particular edition that I read. A multitude of informative notes augment the text, and the translation by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky felt inventive and engaging.
Rating:
Summary: A must for all who are really interested in a masterpiece
Review: Hundred and even kilometers of ink have been spread around articles, conferences and deep essays around the world about that monumental work.
However, there's an aspect that I'd rather to remark. It's well known the deep impact that the russian literature of the XIX century shocked all the world. The presence of Pushkin, Gogol, Tolstoi and this giant Fedor Dostoievsvki signed and even made grow up the russian character to a peak that literally surpased all the expectatives.
In my opinion, Crime and Punishment establishes one of the starting point of the existencialist movement years after. Let's consider, by example that Albert Camus' brilliant work named "The happy death" , and clearly you'll feel in the ten first pages the presence of the fate struggling all the performers. Mersault is in fact a far descendent of the mean character in Crime.
A ruman writer (Virgil Gheorghiou) told once in one of his works that amazing thought:"The sin hurts much more in the memory than in the flesh" .
And this is the clue to understand the sense of loss, the feeling of desperation, the loneliness in all its crude nakedness, the shame weights much more in his mind that in the rules that his crime implies. In the case of Mersault in Camus'work, the victim follows what you might consider like a suggested homicide . In other words the fear to commit suicide seems to permeate the atmosphere in all the work.
Dostoievski makes us drowning with all these characters in an ocean of deep implications, there's no doubt in the punishement; but Dostoievski makes a moral crossroad and carries by the dark shadows of this hell so particularly russian. Consider , by example the paintings of Blockin, the sense of horror in the most remarkable symphonies of Shostakovich, the sinister phantoms of Rachmaninov in his Symphonic dances. The religion, the fact you can't ignore . all the political opression all along so many centuries, have created a human being very special in the western tradition. And all these sociological aspects that depicts a soul , the sense of nosthalgia that so well defined oncethe celebrated filmaker Andrei Tarkovski (1932-1986), when he was forced to leave URSS in 1979 whe he showed his work Stalker. Remeber that his following issue was titled Nosthalghia ( and this is not a mere casuality).
When you read this book, consider you are reading more than book, you are getting close to the soul and the fears of the russian people. May be you (like me) are able to understand deeper than any essay the essential facets of this nation, his glory and his disgraces.
Rating:
Summary: Emotionally exhausting
Review: When a book has a visceral effect on the reader, the author must be doing something right. My father complained of actually feeling sick while reading this, and I had a similiar reaction. There is a pervasive darkness here which is little to do with Raskalnikov's crime and punishment and everything to do with the grime and general despair of St. Petersburg. You can almost breath the coal dust in the air; physical and moral squalor taint everything. Even the supposedly good characters live in a state of degredation, and poverty is everwhere. Given this, the pure moral which Dostoevsky seems to try to draw out of it seems a bit ridiculous, and is the main flaw of the book in my eyes. He tries in the last stretch to uplift, but he's shown us too much squalor to make it believable. This book is a bit of a chore to read, I found, given its length and unremitting tone, and while it's clearly the work of a master author, I don't reccomend it unconditonally.
|
