Crime and Punishment - Re-reading.

The objective is to analyze quotations from, Crime and Punishment regarding poverty, alienation, human nature, religion, society, and other forms of interpretation of the Russian novel written by Fyodor Dostoevsky.


Novel characters reflect human qualities we often overlook or perceive as insanity. Progressive ideas in certain eras are construed as radical and unaccepted in society. Fyodor Dostoevsky depicts this in his renown novel, Crime and Punishment. Dostoevsky illustrates his narrative like a stage play performed by puppets and the author casting the role as the puppet master. Dostoevsky used the character of Raskolnikov as a pawn to expose universal truths he attempts to communicate with his audience. The protagonist represents an antagonist, particularly a contradiction, and humanity as a whole. The rest of the cast seems to represent traits found in human nature, and the setting symbolizes the external influences during the course of life. The main themes the reader may derive from the text are; poverty, alienation, human nature, religion, and society impacted with a complex amount of symbolism.

"It had a poverty-stricken appearance with its dusty yellow paper peeling off the walls, and the ceiling was so low that a man of just a little more than average height was ill at ease in it and kept feeling that every moment that he would knock his head against the ceiling." (29)

The significance of the "dusty yellow" paper distinguishes Raskolnikov's poverty status, and similar descriptions of the color yellow is also distributed in the setting of other apartments. Aging inferences may be evoked from the reader's perception because often material withers into yellow tinted coloration which is most likely how it appeared in the apartment. His room is repulsively "poverty-stricken," and it leads one to ponder the reasoning behind his lifestyle when he is portrayed as an intellectual. Raskolnikov's perception of his apartment reflects his attitude towards society, revealing is self pity, drowning himself in the "dusty yellow" paper that may represent a certain state of madness. The question of madness is not referred to as a mental illness, but his dazed state of mind.

Raskolnikov is reduced to damnation in poverty because he allows it. He fails to complete his studies at the university, but why quit? If critics are correct in their analysis that Raskolnikov is a man of pride, why would he choose to give up especially when his mind is bound with intelligence. Possibly, he chose this because he felt as though he would not amount to his own expectations, or he found no meaning in obtaining a career. From another perspective, he could have believed that college was not able to offer him what he wanted or needed. In other words, Raskolnikov was unable to prosper from the professors teachings, and it is not compatible for what he was meant to do.

Poverty in the city of St. Petersburg may carry a heavy influence in Raskolnikov's point of view. However, viewers may interpret that his lifestyle did not concern that reasoning behind Aliona Ivanova and Lizaveta Ivanova's murders because he had plenty of choices to remove himself from it. In Raskolnikov's case, some may argue that he did not kill the old pawnbroker, Aliona and her sister, Ivanova since the fault is not poverty or anything external, but it is the individual's choice. He allows it to influence him in various ways, but he could have always subsided those thoughts. Readers may believe it is merely an external influence that cannot dictate your choices, but the internal is the strongest since the perspective is the source of information from what the individual sees. In other simple terminology, perception is what computes decision making. Conceivably, even if he was not living in poverty, he would still be prone to murder to ameliorate society by murdering. That being said, poverty may or may not be the source of crime personally or formally in Raskolnikov's mind set. On a personal stand point, by judging by his character, his reasoning is most likely derived from a formal manner that entails society's poverty and flaws overall.

"Sonia's room looked like a barn; it was a very irregular quandrangle, giving it a grotesque appearance...The yellow, scratched and shabby wall-paper was black in the corners." (302-301)

Sonia's apartment is described similar to Raskolnikov's with the "yellow" wall paper imagery. Her living quarters may have served as suitable amounts of evidence to make up Raskolnikov's statement, "It was not because of your dishonor and your sin I said that of you, but because of your great suffering. But you are a great sinner, that's true." he added solemnly, "and your worst sin is that you have destroyed and betrayed yourself for nothing." (308) Sonia occupation in prostitution is not the sin that she has committed in Raskolnikov's viewpoint, but it is the fact that her self sacrifice is worthless. Suffering in her room that "looked like a barn" along with her other turmoils are endured as just a cost and no payment. Sonia degrades her physically, and mentally by choosing her lifestyle in order to sustain her family's welfare. Some may believe that she was forced into prostitution, but others may argue that since that it was her choice despite limitations. As mentioned earlier, her poverty is just an outer force that cannot rape her of her decisions even if the alternatives seem uglier than others.

"What was taking place in him was totally unfamiliar, new, sudden, never before experienced. Not that he understood it, but he sensed clearly, with all the power of sensation, that it was no longer possible for him to address these people in the police station, not only with heartfelt effusions, as he had just done, but in any way at all, and had they been his own brothers and sisters, and not police lieutenants, there would still have been no point in this addressing them, in whatever circumstances of life." (103)

By this point, in reference to the direct quote above, Raskolnikov realizes that he seems detached from society as a result of the murders. Dostoevsky portrays the protagonist's environment as "unfamiliar," which the reader may interpret as alienation. "…Brothers and sisters…" could be referring to humanity as a whole, not the literal meaning. He may not find meaning in socializing with him because he perceives pointless to talk to an "alien"(human being). To elaborate, why talk to others if you feel as though you are starting to become something else completely different since most would label him as a madman. Another perspective could lean more towards how most conversations are tedious, predictable, and meaningless. Often our lives are presented in mundane in the topics we tend to talk about especially the repetitive The majority of what people say is not meant which does not have much value in most literal translations.


Trust is also another factor that can be interpreted. Indicating from Raskolnikov's response and reaction to the murders, he can no longer trust even his closest companions because he would be endangered into giving away his secret. Perhaps, he is fearful of accidentally spurting out a confession, and the prospect that even the slightest detail about his body language or dialogue will give him away. His paranoia may be evoked from his trust issues which are a "gateway" to other psychological obstacles. He claims to be an "illness" which will be elaborated further on.


"I've known Rodion for a year and a half: sullen, gloomy, arrogant, proud; recently (and maybe much earlier) insecure and hypochondriac. Magnanimous and kind. Doesn't like voicing his feelings, and would rather do something cruel than speak his heart out in words. At times, however, he's not hypochondriac at all, but just inhumanly cold and callous, as if there really were two opposite characters in him, changing places with each other. At times he's terribly taciturn! He's always in a hurry, always too busy, yet he lies there doing nothing. Not given to mockery, and not because he lacks sharpness but as if he had no time for such trifles. Never hears people out to the end. Is never interested in what interests everyone else at a given moment. Sets a terribly high value on himself and, it seems, not without a certain justification." (206)


Razumikhin offers a descriptive profile of Roskolnikov while he is drunk in the presence of Roskolnikov's family. In this passage, it explains to the reader straightforward about the protagonist's character that we may agree or disagree with the drunkard's analysis. "…As if he were really two opposite characters…" depicts Roskolnikov's conflicting personalities that many readers may mistake it for a mental disorder. Some may argue that everyone has various personas according to their surroundings or mind set. Our personalities change like how a chameleon blends in with the background for safety. Humans do the same thing by changing whether it be intentional or unintentional. Our multiple personas are a result to confusion when we ask the main controversial question, "who am I?"


"Hypochondriac" is referring to Roskolnikov's belief that he is ill which basically becomes his obsession. Some may believe his bedridden and odd activity are mere side effects of his inner conflict rather then clinically ill. Psychologically, he creates the illness in his mind to the point where his body can physically feel the side effects if it truly were real.

"Doesn't like voicing his feelings, and would rather do something cruel than speak his heart out in words." Razumikhin's statement may be impact the reader because it is true in the recent events that has happened at this point. Raskolnikov shies away from his emotion, avoids it and preferred to murder as his solution instead of seeking counsel from someone of his choosing. Another outlook that could be derived from this is that he would be defensive, elusive, and harsh instead of being upfront with his true thoughts. Raskolnikov appears as a man of denial and his anger is merely a response to his frustration.


Roskolnikov is also portrayed has a hypocrite which is expected because of his contradicting attitudes. During the coarse of the novel, he is the protagonist and antagonist of is life. Present society can relate to this since we are not always the victim in certain situations. He constantly complains about the flaws he perceives in his lifestyle and society, but he hardly does anything about it. Some readers may interpret him as a whiner and it is something we all can relate to. During most of the novel, he is lying down even when he first contemplated the murders. He ridiculed others which may be referred to as egotistical or pride.


Razumikhin states that Raskolnikov is a poor listener, "never hears people out to the end." This reflects Raskolnikov's pride or disinterest in words. Indicating what Roskolnikov's character, he perceives simple discussion as stale to Raskolnikov, and he does not care to show or admit during certain circumstances. He only takes pleasure in conversations that he gives meaning to.



"In his article, all men are divided into 'ordinary' and 'extraordinary.' Ordinary men have to live in submission, have no right to transgress the law because, don't you see, they are ordinary. But extraordinary men have a right to commit any crime and to transgress the law in any way, just because they are extraordinary..." (247)


Porfiry Petrovich, the police officer, calls attention to Raskolnikov's article at a meeting about the murder of the pawnbroker and her sister. Raskolnikov was one of Aliona's customers that left his bonds there. This is a tactic of Porfiry's tactic of cross examining Raskolnikov. Petrovich alludes to Raskolnikov's article that was published into the Periodical of which Petrovich interprets as the division of humanity into the "ordinary" man and "extroadinary man."


If the critics are correct in their perception that Raskolnikov is attempting the "extraordinary" man than the audience may surmise that he would be content with loneliness which distinguishes him from society. Instead, he battles his conscience between taking pleasure in his isolation and despising it. Readers may believe he hates himself, attempting to psychologically create his egotistical pride. As an example of present society, those with poor self esteem wear extravagant clothing to make themselves feel better about themselves. He goes to great extremes to separate himself from humanity. Perhaps, he is trying to transform himself something other than human, but he fails to do so obviously. If he is trying to be someone or something else, it is like a dog trying to be human or vice versa. His goal throughout the novel is unattainable especially since his human nature is what mostly prevents him from becoming the "superman" by his own definition.


It is interesting that Raskolnikov chooses murder as a solution to become what he seeks whether it is to be an "extraordinary man," "superman," or something undefined. Some may not even believe in either the "extraordinary man" or "superman" because no matter what our human nature still resides with us, and it not something you can eliminate except in the psychological aspect. We may also not believe in the "ordinary man" either because we are each conformists and non-conformists to a point. Meaning, we sometimes follow society's expectations along with defiance that does not necessarily need to be society.


Raskolnikov's response to Petrovich's analysis by stating that, "innumberable sub-divisions," (248) are also to be found in the categories in the divisions of men that delves into the technicality, and the narrowing down between "extraordinary" man or "ordinary." Judging by what Raskolnikov is explaining, criminals to a certain extent are considered classified as "extraordinary." In that case, then we may be perceived to be all criminals because we all persist to make mistakes whether it be by our defination or the law. In a way, we are both "ordinary" and "extraordinary."


"And, if so, could you bring yourself in a case of worldly difficulties and hardships or for some service to humanity - to overstep obstacles?...For instance, to rob and murder?" (253)


Petrovich's questions for Raskolnikov hints towards the reader, and the characters that he suspects Raskolnikov for the murders. Raskolnkikov's article seems to be evidence that psychologically profiles his own ideas. Petrovich is smart enough to analyze his material, and he certainly knows how to question him in person. The prospect of "service to humanity" connects to his reasoning behind the murders. It also foreshadows Raskolnikov's thought process in which he raged, "The old woman was a mistake perhaps, but she isn't what matters! The old woman was just an illness...I was in a hurry to overstep...I didn't kill a human being! I killed a principle, but I didn't overstep, I stopped on this side...I was only capable of killing..."


Roskolnikov often pondered about the murders and how to justify the pawnbroker's death, not so much Lizaveta. He perceived Alyona as "merely a sickness," the carrier of a disease , so to speak. Perhaps part of his reasoning leans towards justification to soothe his human mind, but I think it is most likely linked to his original purpose. He contemplated the concept of killing her to better society before the actual act so it may have not even been over defensive in his speech.


"...It wasn't a human being I killed, it was a principle!" Readers believe that what helped him through the murder was to convince himself that she was just a form, a symbol of corruption without the shades of grey entwined with it. Perhaps if his mental blockage cracked he would have not been able to murder her because of his conscience. In a way, he wins against his battle against his conflicting thoughts because he is able to follow through the plan.


Aliona and Lizaveta may be seen as foil characters by how they contrast with one another. Alyona resembles corruption, greed, dishonesty, vile, ugliness, anger, jealousy, and everything Roskolnikov wishes to destroy. The old pawnbroker may represent a form of government so Roskonlnikov displays an anarchist's viewpoint to overthrow her, but at the same time, why would he care so much about society if he condemns it? Why even bother trying to reform it when the idea seems so far fetched? On the contrary, Lizaveta represents kindness, beauty, innocence in society, defenseless, and everything that Roskolnikov wishes to preserve.


Students have discussed the reasoning behind why Roskolnikov does not show much remorse for Lizaveta, and many may concur that he is avoiding her accidental death. He almost seems to forget she ever died because he is too preoccupied analyzing the good deeds that has become as a result. Raskolnikov may be have done this to maintain his sanity, at least in the way he interpreted it. Despite the vague description of his reflecting Lizaveta's murder, some may believe all these conflicting thoughts between positive and negative keep bombarding into what seems to be gibberish to the readers. In this case, we overlook and may misinterpret which actually is there in the context and beneath it.


Another factor that is crucial to observe is that Raskolnikov knew exactly what he was doing when he murdered the two women. It was premeditated during his contemplation to kill Aliona beforehand, and Lizaveta was merely an accident. That being said, he was not mentally ill. Individuals have undergone certain thoughts and actions that would be perceived as insane, but what is normal? If it is indeed the case that he is a "sick" man, it would be fair to say that we are all sick people.


"They wanted to speak, but could not; tears stood in their eyes. They were both pale and thin; but those sick pale faces were bright with the dawn of a new future, of a full resurrection into a new life."


Sonia and Raskolnikov both recognize the love they share between each other. "Full resurrection," may be pertaining to the biblical story of the rising of Lazarus which is an important factor that occurs periodically throughout the novel. When Sonia first read to Raskolnikov, he was emotionally drawn to the story, and some may indicate that it represents him. By this point, it represents the rebirth of Raskolnikov's acceptance with his humanity along with a chance at happiness with love. Sonia's illness might have evoked his epiphany that he loved her which is understandable since life changing events can lead to those sorts of realizations.


Roskonlnikov is disillusioned with his feeling for Sonia which clearly expresses his love for her. At first, she is confused by his dramatic action by "embraced her knees," but then she comes to understand his meaning. She interprets it as the beginning of repenting his sins, but it is not clear if he really did pay penance for what he has done except for the narrator concludes, "Tears and agonies would least been his life, but he did not repent for his sins. One may believe he has repented for his crimes because he confessed to the murders, and he admitted it to himself. However, given evidence from the book that denies this prospect, the reader may be inclined agree.


His perception is still concentrated his belief that he was not morally wrong. Another contributing factor is that since he did not feel remorse, then he would see no need to be forgiven. He is most likely that his actions dealing with confession are derived from fear instead of admirable traits of turning himself in. Despite his moral interpretation, some may believe that he is in conflict between believing in God, and questioning His existance.


When he presented his case, Raskolnikov depicts himself as a man condemned in poverty and that his motive was to steal money for his family. He fails to also conclude he murdered them for the sake of society and maybe even himself. He did not do this his family to obtain money. Instead, he lied to regain a lighter sentence. Even if he thought he was wrong in murdering the pawnbroker and his sister, he would have not repented for his sins because he lied selfishly, which some would interpret as admirable.


Regarding more from the religious perspective, Raskolnikov may be searching for Utopia, and Sonia represents an "angel-like" figure to guide him towards his goal. The original purpose to kill Aliona was to improve society, and perhaps he thought by doing this it would bring a sense of the "perfect world" by his own definition. Raskolnikov claims to believe in God, but he seems unsure of his existance. Possibly, he may be attempting to play God so that he may create a different world that is compatible with is "transformation" into something else other than human, mentally speaking. However, near the end of the novel, it leaves an open ended, but a concise ending as to whether he realizes that perfection does not exist, and he should grasp is humanity.



Conclusively, Fyodor Dostoevsky constructs his novel based off his surroundings in his era. He uses his observations as a muse into developing the story of Crime and Punishment. Personally, I believe most of the material is inspired by true events especially the descriptive prison scenes since Dostoevsky was sent to prison for an absurd reason. Dostoevsky combines the main components in which he was exposed to while he was alive. There are many contributing themes throughout the novel that is not presented separately, but rather as the universe in general. I have not even gone on to concentrate on each detail of the novel which would be sure to fill a book, or even perhaps never ending. The objective is reduced to only concentrate on the following themes that have been derived from the text: poverty, alienation, human nature, religion, society, and other forms of interpretation. As a personal interpretation, I believe Crime and Punishment is a fictional work on the surface, and a symbolic diary of Dostoevsky's mind.