Crime and Punishment

So, in an effort to improve my standing amongst the judgmental literati in my brain, I have decided to read some ‘classics’ this summer. I started the quest with Fyodor Dostoevsky’s “Crime and Punishment,” a tale of the young Rodion Romanovitch Raskolnikov (those fiendish Russians and their names), a mentally unstable ex-student who commits a murder in an attempt to prove his theory that great men are exempt from being labeled “criminals,” since by their ‘crimes’ they contribute to the greater good of society.

This is a difficult book. The story is very intriguing, the characters are colorful and unique. However, it takes a lot of sheer willpower to get through; there are stretches of anywhere from five to ten pages of dialog at a time, and since Raskolnikov doesn’t talk much, it’s more like that much monologue, which is very difficult to wade through at a stretch. It’s worth it, however, as you get inside of Raskolnikov’s psyche and witness his growing insanity. In fact, his internal dialog becomes increasingly convoluted and illogical as the book progresses, causing the reader to grow increasingly frustrated with Raskolnikov’s obvious (to us) stupidity, but at the same time allowing one to sympathize with his feelings.

Dostoevsky uses this book to explore the psychology of a criminal. The title, “Crime and Punishment,” denotes the two end points of the story. The crime occurs in the first few pages, and the punishment does not arrive until the epilogue. The intervening several hundred pages delve into Raskolnikov’s brain as he tries to reconcile his repressed feelings of guilt with the theory that led him to commit the murder: that “supermen(such as Napoleon and as he believed himself to be)” are above the law and able to commit ‘crimes’ without guilt or regret as they are benefiting society as a whole. However, he disproves his own theory with his guilt, but his inability to admit that he is on the same level as the rest of the world drives him into delirium.

Taken in the context of which the novel was written, the story can be reduced to an examination of nihilism and utilitarianism, two areas of philosophy gaining rapid ground in Russia at the time Crime and Punishment was released. Raskolnikov commits his crime on the grounds of utilitarianism, that his victim the Pawnbroker was a useless wretch who leeched off of those in poverty, and her death will ease their lives. However, he then sinks into nihilism to deny his guilt and the feelings of those around him; however, it is this nihilism that leads to his insanity and inability to function outside of total isolation. At the very last, he is able to break out of nihilism by admitting that he truly loves another human being, and finds redemption of a sort for himself through this realization. What Dostoevsky (who experienced a religious conversion several years before Crime and Punishment’s release) is seeming to say to his fellow Russians embroiled in the Nihilist movement is that Nihilism is an ultimately destructive intellectual philosophy which imprisons it’s adherents into a cycle of Self at the cost of their fellow man, and care and respect for one’s brothers and sisters is the foundation for a soul at peace. I find this a very fitting concept; as I’ve said several times to friends, “The most important thing anyone can have in this world is something to care about more than they care about themselves.”

So, I greatly recommend picking up this book. You can find copies on Amazon or Half-Price Books for a few dollars, and Barnes & Noble Classics have released a cheap edition as well. It’s a tough read, but well-worth a look or two. If you’ve read it, share your thoughts and we can all act intellectual together.

שלם