Rating: 
Summary: One of the top five novels written
Review: This is book is one of the greatest novels written. It was however written originally as a piece of propaganda. Its author was a political conservative who was concerned about the spread of Western ideas in Russia and how they could destroy society. It was a theme that he was to return to in some of his other novels notably the Devils. The book was written at a time when novels produced in Russia had to be supportive of the autocratic system and this was passed by a state board. The central theme is about a young student who decides to kill an older woman in his apartment block. The reason for the murder is not gain but rather to show that he is a person who is free and like a Napoleon. Dostoevsky also intended to write another novel called the drunkard at the same time. The plot of that novel involved a man who forces his daughter into prostitution because of his inability to control his urges. Instead of bringing them out as separate novels Dostoevsky intertwines the two stories and makes the young prostitute the means by which his main character can be redeemed. The book starts with the murder and follows the gradual realisation by the police of the identity of the murderer. Although the book started out as a simple expose of the way that western ideas could corrupt the youth of Russia it grew into something else. In part that was because of the development, some time after the novel was published, of philosophical systems which stressed a moralism of self actualisation. The sorts of systems of Nietchze and Kirkagaard. It is also a novel which tends to speak to young people. At least once in a young person's life they feel like the hero, wanting to do some act which defines them as superior to the common heard, to express their freedom or individuality. Ironically they identify with the hero who is meant to be an example of a person who is redeemed by rejecting the sorts of ideas which is the reason why people now read the book. Whilst the main attraction of the book is a message which was at variance with the reason it was written it is still a classic. Everyone has to read this as it is one of the most remarkable books written.
Rating:
Summary: Great Work
Review: Raskolnikov is a young student in 19th century Petersburg. He quits school because he can't afford to put himself through, he has sold most of his Earthly possessions so that he can eat, and then he takes the life of a wealthy pawnbroker and robs her house because he feels a sense of entitlement. This story brings the 19th century of Russia to life, Raskolnikov is such an intriguing character, and its characters are one of the book's greatest strengths. The settings are vivid, the plot itself is wonderful. The book is very coherent, it loses little in the translation, which is a credit to the translator, because a bad translator can screw up a book like this. This is a great book and definitely worth reading.
Rating: 
Summary: Death, Noir and the Thirty Roubles...
Review: Whoa! Look out, this one's scary!! Just kidding. Fyodor Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment is a dark or noirish story of Rodian Raskolnikov's journalist life. He's portrayed as some what of a "wishy-washy" main character/protagonist who lives his life in the attempt to do good. However, since he lives in bleak times and is under pressure (he's the early form of manic depression) Rodya takes out his aggression on his old pawnbroker and her sister so to speak. The story takes form as Rodya attempts to hide the truth about his ax-murdering tendencies through his good deeds. Functionally, Dostoevsky's piece is very long winded. Many scenes are drawn out to the point of monotony and yet others go by almost too fast as the reader gets involved in the story. My views of this piece would go as far as to say, "It's a dark film noir thriller of the 19th Century..." and I emphasize the 19th Century. Thematically, the piece is very melodious, bits and pieces coming together slowly. Metaphor and imagery are used extensively to show a dark side of life in the late 1800s Russia. Symbolism is rich but story line lacks any great coherence. But enough of that, What is it? You might ask... Well, simply put, Crime and Punishment is a story about a man on a mission of redemption through his acts and the way he treats people. Rodya is truly sorry for the things he's done but at the same time isn't very remorseful of the deaths. It's a hard read, no doubt, but is it worth it? I should say, if you like thriller novels and don't think you'd have a hard time with this one, go for it! Dostoevsky very readily set about to write a story with his biblical-bashing background and did indeed manage to pull it off again. His characters are very proud and very emotional, and even though its and older piece, its worthy of a little more scrutiny.
Rating:
Summary: Redemption through suffering.
Review: In Crime and Punishment Dostoyevsky explored the complex workings of a person's mind and eventually came to the conclusion that the character Raskolnikov's only redemption was to accept suffering and be cleansed by it. The work covers a great many things but basically, he wanted to say that this move to pure reason is nihilistic and has no place in Russia and probably the world at large. I centered in on Sonya Marmeladov. Sonya comes across as attractive and repelling. Raskolnikov is attracted to her deep sense of faith and compassion. She is, however, an enigma to him. He has created a philosophy or mindset that somehow is a misreading of utilitarianism. It has allowed him to take it to a logical conclusion. He is allowed to kill. Somehow, I don't think he is convinced that his model is redeeming. She is a contradiction. She represents an inner peace despite the suffering. He represents the lack of inner peace in the avoidance of suffering. Sonya, moreover, does not conform to the ideation of his a world run by pure reason. In the scene where he questions her beliefs about god. Questions her belief in god. Finding it the ultimate irony that she a harlot, of all people, actually believes in god. Hunched over a bible the harlot and the murderer are, in their own way, looking for redemption. In the end, he embraces the very mindset that he had rejected to begin with. He begins to feel. Passion serves as a check on reason and vice versa. A world of pure reason could lack the compassion that makes us human. A world devoid of reason lacks for a sense of order and direction. If one frames reason as a sense of order and passion as a sense of chaos, Sonya embodies as sense of order within chaos and Raskolnikov as a sense of chaos within order. Sonya, grounded on deep (some would argue un-reasoned position) faith, embodies a sense of order and is not seen to be irrational but has found "ground" and is centered. On the other hand, Raskolnikov in his conscious denial of faith, seems to harbour an unconscious need to find Sonya's (although he has identified her as non-reasoned and non-intellectual) sense of inner peace. In this light, Sonya embodies once more, the passion of compassion, a redemption in faith. Not unlike Mary Magdalen's situation, Sonya as well as Raskolnikov are sinners in need of saving. I would ask the question, would Sonya have the deep well of compassion if she did not have faith. Is her deep religious grounding or a real sense of self delusion? Is she addicted to the "opium of the masses"? Sonya, is then, to me a reconciliation of the dichotomy of the delusion of religion, and the freedom within limits that the judeo christian modality provides. She has saved the sinner. She has taught him to feel. All this creates Raskolnikov as a character with no hope for redemption. Sonya is one-dimensional. She is a one dimensional but highly important character to the plot and Dostoyevsky's philosophy but not very developed as a character. Sonia is observed by Dunya as "too good" or saint like in her humility, silence and submission. She was merely a metaphor and not a flesh and blood character. She embodies the redemption through suffering. Don't you find it interesting that Dostoyevsky decided to utilize a "whore" or "prostitute" as the means to the salvation. Simone de Beauvoir has an intersting take on Sonia. Sonia is an archetype that she examines in her book the Second Sex - in the Dreams, Fears, Idols chapter around the section on Myth. de Beauvoir examines Sonya in the section "la fille perdue": "Since she is a kind of pariah, living at the margin of a hypocritically moral world, we can also regard the "fille perdue" as the invalidator of all the official virtues; her low estate relates her to the authentic saints; for that which has been downtrodden shall be exalted. Mary Magdalen was a favorite of Christ; sin opens heaven's gate more readily than does a hypocritical virtue. Dostoyevsky's Raskolnikov sacrifices at Sonya's feet the arrogant masculine pride that led him to the crime; he has aggravated by the murder that will to separation which is in every man: a humble prostitute, resigned abandoned by all, can best receive the avowal of his abdication." Sonia embodies for Raskolnikov, the "irrevocable decision" The attraction/repulsion serves as the dynamic tension that springs back and forth to accept the suffering and to be redeemed by it. Raskolnikov wishes but he is torn. She does not conform to his reason. She is mad! or is he? We don't really meet Sonya until the end of Book 2. We begin to hear of her in the tragic tale from Marmeladov. We then here of Dunya's impending prostitution. Raskolnikov then encounters the prostitute on the street. Funny, everyone who read the book tells me they anticipated her to be Sonya. Sonya is offered as an essential woman-as-redemption symbol. Sonya is a manifestation of what one possible scenario awaited the bourgeois woman of the day. When you finally meet her at her father's death, she forgives him, foreshadowing the redemption she has to offer, to offer Raskolnikov and us all. She is accepted by Dunya. Raskolnikov's mother would "gladly take her as my daughter." She then turns and saves the Siberian colony. She is Raskolnikov's redemption, Russia's redemption and our redemption. When it comes to Raskolnikov, I have to say who is more dangerous to the "common good," the person who does evil (or at least in the David Hume's sense, the consensus of what is evil), knowing it is evil or one who does evil thinking it is good. As simple as it sound, that I feel that what is the embodiment Raskolnikov's and his tragic flaw. The truth is despite the need to transcend, despite the need to be better than the common person, is the inherent delusion that we are doing good when we are actually doing harm or evil. I agree that in certain times and places, the law serves to limit. Murder, in this case does not. There such things as unjust laws, unjust people and unjust situations. Power makes us so. The outright exploitation without recourse to human rights is a classic example, does it justify murder, No. To say that Raskolnikov killed because he felt it was his duty to kill - he felt he was placed in a situation of self defense of the common good, that the pawnbroker was expendable. We can debate around this issue forever. However, she was in no way a direct threat to him physically - he did not have the right to kill. Was he an eagle? Was he better than all the rest? No on both counts. It was not a sense of transcendence that drove him to kill, it was reason gone awry. According to Mr. Dostoyevsky, the only way out is to recognize that redemption will only be found in suffering, The redemption he got by accepting responsibility for his action. The redemption he got from Sonya. Don't believe me - read it for yourself. It might not be the Grand Inquisitor but it is Dostoyevsky at his finest!
Rating:
Summary: Read it more than just once
Review: I was 17 when I first read this magnificent novel, ever since, I always return to this book finding in it endless treasure of human intellect. Dostoyevsky is a very special writer, and this novel is a very special novel, it's on the verge of modern novel and yet it's classic, both with epic elements and begining of the psychological novel wich questiones moral,supreme justice, and a human nature itself. Raskolnikov as a character is a paradigm of every man surching for his ideals and for himself in this cruel and unjust world. I recommend it to anyone and especially to young people that surch for their ideals.
Rating:
Summary: Understanding the Criminal Mind
Review: This is the classic psychological novel of our time! Dostoevsky examines every inch of the human mind at its most horrific moment. It will take a good hour before you are fully taken in by the story. Once you are there - you anxiously await the outcome. At the end - you will probably feel more sympathy for the murderer than the murdered, because the author gave us so much insight into the criminal mind. Dostoevsky made us believe that the main character could even be you or I.
Rating:
Summary: Worth the Challenge
Review: Crime and Punishment is an exciting novel that explored ideas that were way before its time. It is the story of a troubled young man, Raskolnikov, who commits a double murder, and how he deals with the ramifications of his act. Dostoevesky gives his readers a full and complex view of all of the characters, and in the end, you can't help sympathizing with Raskolnikov. Though the russian names are at first puzzling, once you get the hang of them it is easy reading. There are many characters who seem minor, but many develop into important pieces of the plot. Whether or not you end up forgiving Raskolnikov, this is a pyschological novel that forces the reader to look at all aspects of a person's life and then make a final judgement.
Rating:
Summary: Psychological Masterpiece
Review: I first read this book when I was fifteen years old and absolutely loved it. Dostoyevsky's depiction of Raskolnikov made him like no other character that I have come across in a novel. The author made Raskolnikov's fear and guilt come alive in a way that no other author could have. I could not help but become anxious along with Raskolnikov as he realized the enormity of the crime that he had committed. Dostoyevsky was truly a master of the psychological thriller.
Rating: 
Summary: So much depth
Review: This book is amazing in the depth of its characters. I for one, dont care what social statement is being made ( to me there is no clear statement - but one is definetly being atempted). Every caracter in this book is drawn with every intimate detail. Doestoyevsky's painstaking character development is unique in literature. If you cant take depression dont bother picking this one up, but if you stick it out you get a surprising ending (not meant to be happy but nevertheless most people feel better)
Rating:
Summary: An immortal crime novel
Review: "Crime and Punishment" is arguably the most exciting and the most philosophically complex crime novel ever written. It is also a meditation on retribution and guilt. Raskolnikov, a law student submerged by poverty and despair, dreams of becoming an overman, a Napoleon, and this provides the rationale for the murder of the old woman. He asks himself why must one, miserly old woman live on while thousands of gifted people, who are deprived of the resources that she enjoys, must toil ceaselessly without reward? Thus, Raskolnikov commits a murder on principle. It is interesting how Dostoevsky prefigured Nietzsche, as in the essay written by Raskolnikov and later discussed in the police station with Porfiry. In this discussion, Raskolnikov divides humanity into two classes, the "ordinary" and the "extraordinary". The former lead conventional utilitarian lives, reproduce their own kind and cravenly obey laws and regulations. The latter, on the other hand, are the lords of the future, the shatterers of conventions and the creators of their own laws. The parallel is clear between this formulation and Nietzsche's bifurcation of morality into a "master-morality" and a "slave-morality". The novel was greatly admired by Freud, who saw in it an element that anticipated his own formulation of "Thanatos", or the "death-drive", as in the part where Raskolnikov returns to the scene of the crime and starts to enquire about the blood.
|
