Rating: 
Summary: Why would a man commit murder?
Review: The central figure of this expansive work, Raskolnikov, is an impoverished student - largely of his own making. As the book opens we find him occupied with a thought - an "idea". During the development we realize that the idea is a murder of an old woman who Raskolnikov sees as evil. The plot is very simple. Raskolnikov murders the woman, and her step-daughter who has the misfortune to walk in at the wrong time, he makes a botched search for money and escapes without anyone seeing him. The remainder of the book involves his attempts, or lack thereof, to prevent the truth from being discovered. This novel is not about plot, though. It is about Raskolnikov's mind - specifically why he committed the murder and his nagging conscience that won't seem to let him get away with it. As with other 19th century Russian novels we also get a commentary on the times, political arguments and many sub-plots intertwined. All of this is handled masterfully. The characters are what gives this novel such depth. At first glance some of the characters may appear to be too pat - the lazy student, the alcoholic, the prostitute, the bumbling policeman, etc. But all of Dostoevsky's characters are imbued with such life, such vigor that they leap off the page and stay in their minds. And Raskolnikov's thoughts stay with us too - we really do wonder about whether murder can ever be right, whether people can be above the law and so on. I highly recommend this book.
Rating:
Summary: The Folly of a Scholar and a Youth...
Review: I read this book of my own accord during the summer before I started college. Honestly, there could have been no better book for me to read. With the bigheadedness and desire to prove something that often come hand in hand with higher education, a student must always check himself so as not to start down the wrong path towards egotism. Egotism will surely lead to thoughts of one's own superiority. This is where the main character in 'Crime and Punishment' goes wrong. He fancies himself a genius and an anomoly among the 'idiots' in St. Petersburg. Therefore, if he were to exceed the law in order to further his own genius for the betterment of humanity (like, for instance, Napolean) it would be perfectly legitimate. One problem: Rodya is a bigheaded student with a thirst to prove something and, unfortunately, is not a genius nor does he offer anything to justify a crime by way of societal betterment. Along his psychological journey through guilt, self-righteousness, egotism, arrogance, intolerance, and frustration; he finds simplicity and relentless care through some of the most absurdly 'un-genius' and 'common' of folk. Rodya finds a student unwilling to accept the bitterness of men even beyond the most brutal verbal assualts, a woman unreasonably devoted to a hopeless family and a non-existent God (at least in Rodya's mind), and a sister who does not need to ponder the complexities of life and take into account her tribulations in order to love her exsitence without reservation. 'Crime and Punishment' is thought-provoking, powerful, sometimes tragic, oftentimes absurdly funny and witty, and ultimately uplifting. Here's an except of the book that clearly shows its message: "[Rodya] dreamt that the whole world was condemned to a terrible new strangle plague...Some new sorts of microbes were attackning the bodies of men, but these microbes were endowed with intelligence and will...Never had men considered themselves so intellectual and so completely in possession of truth as these sufferers, never had they considered their decisions...so infallible...Each thought that he alone had the truth...Men killed each other in a sort of senseless spite." Sorry, long excerpt, but Dosteovsky's intent was to say that if every man took the time to dissected the complexities of life and form their own opinions on every topic; then firstly, no one would have time for happiness; secondly, those opinions would evolve into forceful convictions causing everyone to argue and later kill everyone else in the name of some ridiculous opinion; thridly, nothing would be making the world turn if there were no working class; and finally, every man would be imprisoned by the ferocity and supposed 'infallibility' of his own independent thought. I love Dosteovsky...bloody genius!
Rating:
Summary: A PSYCHOLOGICAL MASTERPEACE!!!
Review: This is a little bit heavy book as a size,but the expereance is unforgettable.All caracters in the book are strange and in the same time AWFULLY real.Every heroe has his own micro world.An amazing caracter gallery!!!I have seen the movie version of Hallmark.What a shame!!!One of the greatest books of all times presented like a stupid soap opera.
Rating:
Summary: Incredibly Rich
Review: Crime and Punishment is a complex, rich, and deeply satisfying work. Indeed, the story is far too complex to relate it in this space. What you need to know is that the story centers around the consequences of one man's horrible action, committing a murder. Much of the story is spent exploring the psychology of guilt and what happens to this man when he breaks so thoroughly with the his own human nature. The author shows, in detail, what becomes of men and society when intellectualism, individualism, and all of the many other 'isms that affected Russia at the time this story was written are taken to their logical conclusion. Humans are more than the sum of their thoughts, and tradgedy is sure to ensue when we shut off the rest of our nature. Ultimately, Crime and Punishment is a morality tale. What happens when men refuse the mores of a society to prove that they are unneeded? What happens when men convince themselves that they are special and above the law? This story is long, complex, and rich. Do not try to rush through it. Read this in the quiet times of your day and absorb each part slowly. You'll find it to be the literary equivalent of an extremely fine wine.
Rating: 
Summary: A commonly misunderstood, but wonderful piece of literature.
Review: This book is a masterpiece of fiction, and like other masterpieces, misunderstood. Dostoyevsky leads us on a trip into the utter dangers of independent reason, of intellectualism run amok. The main character, Raskolnikov, sickly and self-absorbed, works out the end results of a seemingly innocous theory. We see that false theories are only innocuous to those who dismiss their power. Raskolnikov, not so much a criminal as a victim,labors under the delusion that he is working for the good of mankind, when in fact it is for petty selfishness that the crime is committed. But we do not realize this until the end of the book, and neither does he - through the silent faith of the child prostitute, Sonia. Dostoyevsky has enormouse faith in the simple people of the earth, the drunkards, the prostitutes, the paesants, the sinners, and it is their dumb faith that saves the literati from themselves. Any person disenchanted with Christianity and its modern interpreters will thrill at the link Dostoyevsky forges between the basic Christian view of the world and the spiritual realities of life that so move us, that so permeate all we do.
These basic forces for love, life, and truth are what finally redeem Raskolnikov through the person of Sonia, the Christ figure, the person who is in fact an instrument of love and basic world loving reality: she, in the end, is the defense of Christian truth over against the unbelievers, of feeling over mind games. An excellent book. I only gave it four stars because the author's final work, The Brother's Karamazoff, is better. In this final book all that is hinted upon in Crime and Punishment is more obviously expressed.
Rating:
Summary: Haunting and Wonderful
Review: Crime and Punishment, while at times a bit boggled down by the affairs of minor characters, is a powerful novel. The character, a murderer, is incredibly three-dimensional and true to life. His personal suffering makes you feel sorry for him, to the point in which you wish him free from jail. Fyodor's personal philosophies are sprinked all throughout the novel as well, and are a bonus to the already masterful work. A deep novel that remains one of the greatest works of prose ever written.
Rating:
Summary: Crime and Punishment
Review: "Crime and Punishment" had me hooked from the beginning. I had trouble staying with the fast flow of the story during some of the mad rages but it was very good. Not my first Russian item and definitally not my last. There was more intrest than Tolstoy and I plan to read much more of his works.
Rating:
Summary: Good intro to F.D.
Review: There's some misinformation in Amy L's review above. Sonia is not a prostitute nor is Svidrigailov her father.
Rating:
Summary: A Man Mind Wrestling
Review: Raskolnikov's moral dilemma, the beautiful Russian person and place names -- the marvelous way they roll around on the tongue, and the vivid historical setting - czarist Russia, make Crime and Punishment a classic of 19th Century world literature. Dostoevsky's masterpiece should be required reading for anyone who considers themselves well educated, as it carefully and artfully melds together a classic philosophical quandary with fantastic literary craftmanship. Particular attention obviously should be directed towards Raskolnikov's wrestling with his own mind and ethical precepts. Most readers can assuredly relate to similar questions of value in their own lives. Homicide's never been analyzed in such depth from the perspective of the perpetrator who of course happens to be the protaganist. It's this angle that Dostoevsky takes particular advantage of and makes the book hard to put down.
Rating: 
Summary: good story, bad novel, outdated ideas
Review: The "idea" behind this book surrounded the debate between intellectuals in the 1860's about whether Russia should mondernize and adopt Western ideas, gov't, culture, etc. Dostoevsky was adamantly, nay, zealously, opposed to westernization of russian life. Instead, he had this quasi-religious idea of Russia turning away from the rest of Europe and returning to its Russian Orthodox roots. This is why he has this obsession with "suffering", which, evidently, is a basic idea in the older, mystical forms of Christianity. It's also why his "good" characters - the ones who represent what traditional Russians are - like Marmeladov, Katerina Ivanovna, Sonya, Porfiry, all share his obsession and preach its virtues. The "bad" characters - Luzhin, Svidrigailov, and Lebezyatnikov (actually a muddle-headed good guy) - all represent westernized Russians, and in D's eyes have been corrupted by non-Russian ideas. Are all satirical figures. Only Raskolnikov is not thoroughly condemned. He's a bit of both Old Russia and New Europe. He's westernized on the surface - full of the new ideas, a fact fantastically illustrated by his delusion about being another "Napoleon", an obvious representative of the west. But deep down he's a "good" Russian, as his decision to turn himself in and accept the 'necessity' of suffering makes clear. Hence his name which comes from Russian "raskolnik" which means 'schism' or "divided". So the central figure embodies the struggle between East and West, and his interactions with other characters are the dramatizations of the so-called "arguments" surrounding the debate. That's the "big idea". Whether it ever made any sense - and I doubt it ever did - makes no difference now since it's obviously way out of date. So no-one in his right mind can say that C&P is a "great book" because of its "ideas". In fact, I'm not even sure it's a great book. I've never liked D as a novelist: he's third rate. What he really is is a dramatist and polemicist. He has an ear for dialogue, and a wonderful eye for drama and suspence. But he's a mediocre writer. The main difference between a play and a novel is all that stuff between the dialogue - the descriptive narrative. This is where a novelist shows what kind of writer he is. D is no Dickens, or Tolstoy, or even Eliot. He can tell a good story, but there's nothing in the writing itself that I couldn't pen myself. "All" I lack his talent for dialogue and drama. Of course, that makes all the difference, but you see the point: he has no style as a novelist. He might have made a better playwright. One last comment on this idea that Dostoevsky is some kind of "philosopher". I've never heard a philosopher make this claim. A real philosopher is a creative thinker, a person who produces original ideas. There are no original and profound philosophical "ideas" in D's writing. There is a half-baked religious notion that Russian people needed to "get back to their Orthodox roots" to escape the fate of godless Western societies. This isn't "philosophy"; it's sophistry. In fact, as a rule, literature is a bad place to look for new ideas. In the past year I've read most of Dickens and Shakespeare, two of the most original and creative writers in any language, and neither ever expressed an idea that someone else hadn't already uttered. What they did do was express old ideas in wonderfully new ways. It's how they phrased thoughts that made them worth reading, not the thoughts themselves, which were often quite banal ("to be or not to be..."!). Dostoevsky is no different. It isn't what he wrote that was important, but how he wrote it - not the ideas themselves, but how he dramatised those ideas. So if you want philosophy, then go read philosophy. But if you want nice stories, then read literature. C&P is a good, but not great, story. It's definitely not philososphy, though. Not even bad philosphy.
| 
