Преступление и наказание

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Преступление и наказание [Prestupleniye i nakazaniye] There was a time in my life when I couldn’t get enough of reading Dostoevsky. Maybe because his books made me think so deeply about being human and how we choose to live our lives. I began with Crime and Punishment, probably the work he is best known for. What I remember is being fascinated by Dostoevsky’s brilliant understanding of human nature. I remember thinking what a deep study this book was; an incredible examination of a man who commits murder and how he is “punished” for it. I remember thinking that here was a master storyteller. Not only able to create complex characters, but able to take the reader deeply inside a character’s mind. Best of all, I remember that I would stop reading periodically and think; not a mindless read, but an absorbing one. 6.0 Stars. One of my All Time Favorite novels. In addition to being one of the first works of Classic Literature that I suggest when asked for recommendations from others, this story holds a special place in my heart as it was the story, along with Moby Dick, that began my love of the “classics” for which I will always be grateful. So often we are forced to read the great works of literature for school or at times not of our choosing and I think it tends to lead to a lifelong aversion to themlike being forced to eat vegetables as a childyuck. I was fortunate enough to come back to these stories on my own terms while I was in College. My parents, at my request, bought me a subscription to several Easton Press library collections including the “100 Greatest Books Ever Written” and “Books That Changed the World.” Two of the first three books I received were Moby Dick and Crime and Punishment. So I took a weekend off from getting drunk and running naked through Downtown San Diego and decided instead to get drunk in my apartment and read Crime and Punishment….and I fell head over heals in man love with Dostoyevsky. I loved this book from the opening scene in which Raskolnikov is convincing himself about the rightness of committing the murder of the money lending pawn broker all the way through the bittersweet end and the beginning of his redemption. Powerful, brilliant, insightful and surprisingly engaging despite the fact that it is far from being a "light" read in either prose or content. The central theme of this story is not really the crime (i.e. Murder) or punishment (i.e., incarceration) in the formal sense of the word. The real crime is Raskolnikov’s arrogance in placing himself above his fellow man and thus is not bound by the rules of society (i.e., his belief he is like Napoleon). Likewise, the punishment is the deeply felt, and unexpected from his standpoint, guilt over what he has done. It is Raskolnikov’s personal, internal struggle with the evil he has perpetrated. His mind, his body, his very essence rails against his actions and leads him down the path that will eventually lead to the possibility of redemption. It is such a deeply personal, emotionally evocative journey that it was impossible for me not to become intensely invested in the story. Something that struck me as I was reading about Raskolnikov’s struggle with his conscience was the thought that everybody does things that they are ashamed of or wish they could change. That is part of being human. It is our ability to feel genuine remorse over our bad actions and voluntarily take steps to rectify those mistakes that leads to growth and character. I think this is why I have always loved stories of redemption because it is such a classic theme of being human. On the other hand, I also realized why I get so bat shit crazy with anger when I hear of certain kinds of what people terms "non violent" crime. Rapists and murderers when they get caught are punished and sent to places I have nightmares about. Whether or not it is enough, we can debate, but it is defintely not a fun place. What bothers me are the slime balls who steal and pillage millions and billions of $$$ from people who need it and end up spending time in cushy federal prisons with cable TV and other amenities. I see these "crimes" as bad as most violent crimes because they lead to real severe pain and devastation for many of the victims and yet the punishment never seems commensurate. And yet, these “white collar” criminals get off so much easier and you NEVER (or rarely) see genuine remorse over the destruction they have caused. It lead me to do a little justice fantasizing and I came up with this that I thought I would share Sorry for the less smooth segue, but it was something that came to me while I was reading the book. Anyway, unlike those above, Raskolnikov’s story is one of true growth and redemption and is definitely a story that I think everyone should read. HIGHEST POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATION!!P.S. The second time I “read” this I listened to the unabridged audio as read by George Guidall and he did his usual AMAZING job. I think his narration is superb and truly enhanced the experience of the story. What can I add to 7000 reviews (at the time I write)? I think this book is fascinating because of all the topic it covers. Like the OJ trial, it is about many important interconnected things and those things remain important today, even though this book was originally published in 1865.Sure, it has a lot about crime and punishment. But also insanity and temporary insanity, the latter a legal plea that could be entered in Russia of the mid 1800's. It's about guilt and conscience, long before Freud. In fact, this book was written at a time when psychological theories were coming into vogue. It's about false confessions. It's about poverty and social class and people who rise above their class and people who fall from the class they were born into. It's about the wild dreams and the follies of youth.There is also mention of many social theories that were in vogue at that time, so, for example, if you want to, you can click on Wikipedia to find out about "Fourier's system" and his phalansteres. There is attempted rape, blackmail, child labor, child prostitution, child marriage and child molestation. There is discussion of marrying for money. There are ethnic tensions between Russians and the Germans of St. Petersburg. Should you give to charity or should you give to change the conditions that caused the poverty? Like me, you may have thought that was a modern idea, but here it is, laid out in 1865. There's a lot about alcoholism. Stir in a cat and mouse detective and a bit of Christian redemption. No wonder this is a classic. “Trying to untie the string and going to the window, to the light (all her windows were closed, despite the stuffiness), she left him completely for a few seconds and turned her back to him. He unbuttoned his coat and freed the axe from the loop but did not quite take it out yet; he just held it in his right hand under the coat. His hands were terribly weak; he felt them growing and numb and stiff every moment. He was afraid he would let go and drop the axe…suddenly his head seemed to spin…” Fyodor Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment (My raging, Raskolnikov like conscious could not rest without warning you of potential spoilers ahead!)The problem with being a high school student with average intelligence is that you can get fairly good grades with fairly minimal effort. It is an invitation to cut corners and utilize only one half your ass. This happened to me in English class. I'd sit back, take good notes, and bluff my way through various tests (this was back in the day before Google, when my family only had an AOL dial up connection and all the answers, right and wrong, were on the internet). For these sins, I am now fated to read the classics long after I was supposed to read them. On the plus side, coming to the classics on my own volition has given me a better appreciation than having to read them with a figurative gun to the head. This has allowed me to enjoy certain works to a higher degree.However, I don't think any number of years will allow me to appreciate or enjoy or even suffer Fyodor Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment. First published in 1866, Crime and Punishment is the excruciatingly detailed psycho epic about the murder of a pawn shop owner (and her sister). The murderer is named Raskolnikov. He is a former student living in a wretched little closet apartment. He is utterly unlikable: smug, arrogant, temperamental, condescending and self delusional. Today, we would recognize this person as having a serious mental illness (and the book would be called Inability To Form Criminal Intent and Involuntary Commitment instead of Crime and Punishment). Dostoevsky, though, presents Raskolnikov's malady as spiritual, rather than mental. In a way, he is just like every grad student you've ever met: shiftless; over educated and under employed; haughty, yet prone to bouts of self loathing. I imagine if this book was written in the next century, Raskolnikov would have shaggy sideburns, wear a t shirt emblazoned with Che's image, and have a well hidden addiction to prescription pain pills. Raskolnikov has some interesting theories. He's a Nietzsche inspired proto Nazi who believes that the world can be divided into two classes: an elite, Napoleonic class, free to do what they wish; and a second class comprised of everyone else. This former class, because of their elevated standing, don't have to follow the rules. Armed with this self serving worldview, Raskolnikov, in need of money, determines that the pawn broker Alyona Ivanovna is a louse who deserves to die. So he takes his axe and a fake pledge to her apartment and bashes her head in. The crime is suitably graphic: He took the axe all the way out, swung it with both hands, scarcely aware of himself, and almost without effortbrought the butt end down on her headBecause she was short, the blow happened to land right on the crown of her head. She cried out, but very faintly, and her whole body suddenly sank to the floor, though she still managed to raise both hands to her headThen he struck her again and yet again with all his strengthBlood poured out as from an overturned glassOnce the murder is complete, very early in the novel, the long, slow, excruciating psychological unraveling begins. Some of Raskolnikov's madness is displayed through seemingly endless internal monologues. Is this what it's like to be a crazy person? Maybe, maybe not. But it's effective in its way, because it drove me insane reading it. Raskolnikov's deterioration is also presented via his relationships. Despite being an utter jackass, he has a lot of friends and family who care for him. Among them is the doting Natasha, a housekeeper at Raskolnikov's apartment; a doctor named Zossimov; and Raskolnikov's “best friend” Razumikhin, who is a bit like Milhouse from The Simpsons, though a bit refined. He looks after Raskolnikov, tries to get him a job, and suffers all Raskolnikov's verbal abuse with unflagging patience. I couldn't decide what annoyed me : Raskolnikov's monomania or Razumikhin's spinelessness. Complicating this picture are several uninteresting plot threads that eventually, finally, after hundreds of pages, merge. One thread deals with Marmeladov, a wrecked old drunk whose daughter, Sonia, is a prostitute (with a heart of gold!). Raskolnikov is eventually redeemed by Sonia and Sonia's faith. A second thread has to do with Raskolnikov's mother and sister. His sister, Dunya, has come to St. Petersburg under a cloud, though things are looking brighter for her and the family, as she is engaged to Luzhin. Luzhin has money, and a keen eye for beautiful, vulnerable women. Raskolnikov rightly senses Luzhin's ill intent, and the animosity between the two men does not help Raskolnikov's troubled mind. On top of all this, there is a clever, Dickensian police inspector named Porfiry Petrovich. He knows immediately that Raskolnikov is the murderer, yet insists on playing a lame game of cat and mouse. One of the few enjoyments I got from this novel was the cold irony of a Russian police officer patiently waiting for his suspect to confess. In Dostoevsky's Russia, the law is clever, intelligent, and implacable. Of course, just a few decades later, the NKVD and KGB would be breaking down doors in the middle of the night and hustling people off to Siberia for no reason at all. To Dostoevsky's credit, all these characters intertwine, and all the stories pay off, such as it is. In order to do so, however, there are plot contrivances piled atop plot contrivances. Dostoevsky relies heavily on characters overhearing important bits of information. The only Russian novels I've read have been by Tolstoy, so I don't have much to compare this to. I'm not fit to analyze Crime and Punishment against other works of Russian literature, or even against Dostoevsky's other books. All I know was that this was a drag to read. There are paragraphs that go on for pages, and the density – unleavened by any action – is numbing. One of the most common complaints when reading Russian literature is the names. It's almost become a cliché. Well, in this case, it's true. At least – for the benefit of English speakers – Tolstoy gave his characters American nicknames. Here, you have to deal with both the patronymics and identical sounding or near identically named characters. The easiest task you have is not mixing up Raskolnikov with Razumikhin. It gets a little harder trying to keep Alyona Ivanovna (the pawnbroker), Katerina Ivanovna (Sonia's mother) and Amalia Ivanovna (Sonia's mother's landlord) straight. Also remember that Dunya goes by the name Dunechka or Avdotya Romanovna (but that Porfiry Petrovich is not the same as Ilya Petrovich). These complaints are childish, I know, and I have no excuse. Yet I feel the need to unburden myself now, as I missed my chance in high school many, many (many, many) years ago. More confusing than the names is the culture shock. When I first tried to read Crime and Punishment as a teenager, I chalked my confusion up to a poor translation. Well, this time around, the translation is in the incredibly capable hands of Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky. They managed, in Anna Karenina and War and Peace to be both faithful and readable. (They are recognized, by people far smarter than me, as the best Russian to English translators around). Here, again, I have no complaints with the translation; but I also had a revelation: I don't get Russians. I don't fully grasp their social hierarchy; I don't get why they like mustaches on women; and I certainly don't understand their interactions. They get mad for reasons I can't comprehend; they are insulted for reasons I do not fathom. In Dostoevsky's hands, Russians are hopelessly operatic, incapable of having a subtle or nuanced reaction to anything. Every emotion has an exclamation mark. You get Dunya trying to shoot Svidrigailov one second, and then tearfully embracing him the next. Characters fall on their knees before each other, and laugh at inappropriate times, and have opaque motivations. I am not trying to be culturally insensitive when I say I am confounded by the Russians in Crime and Punishment. Of course, there are enjoyable moments, including a classic set piece following Marmeladov's funeral (imagine a Russian version of Clue, in which accusations are followed by counter accusations, and everyone is shouting and fainting). Surprisingly, there is also a good bit of humor, such as this interaction between Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov regarding the morality of eavesdropping: In that case, go and tell the authorities; say thus and so, I've had this mishap: there was a little mistake in my theory. But if you're convinced that one cannot eavesdrop at doors, but can go around whacking old crones with whatever comes to hand, to your heart's content, then leave quickly for America somewhere!When I was young, I often gave up on challenging books like Crime and Punishment. If I managed to finish – or at least come close – I treated them with snark, which was obviously a self defense mechanism, hiding an unspoken belief that maybe I just wasn’t smart enough to get it (whatever it was). When I got a little older – when I was no longer a kid, but didn’t have kids of my own – I went back to those classics I had dismissed, as a way to test myself. Older still – with kids of my own who don’t have their own kids – I circled back again, a strange sort of revisiting in which I tried to remember my past self through literature. Sometimes, I found myself revising old opinions. The Scarlet Letter, for instance, worked for me as an adult in a way it never had when I barely skimmed it in my youth. Crime and Punishment, however, is never a classic I am going to love (and I’m unlikely to give it another try). Yet, in the perverse way of classics, it is utterly memorable, if only because I struggled so hard to get through it. Believing this a worthwhile hill to climb, I did not give up, even though I could have finished three others books in the time it took me to slog through this one. Heck, despite not liking this the first time, I even gave it an entire second reading. Thus, even though I can’t stand it, Crime and Punishment will be somewhere in my headspace forever, a vague recollection of mustachioed women, strong emotional reactions, and a know it all with an axe. Well, what’s a global pandemic for if you don’t read the stuff you think you really ought to have read by now. Although I hope this strange circumstance will not result in me referring to Fyodor Dostoyevsky as The Corona Guy.Those yet to read this towering inferno of literature may wish to know what’s in the nearly 700 pages, so here is a scientific analysis :WHAT HAPPENS IN CRIME AND PUNISHMENTLong conversations between people who could talk the hind legs off a donkey: 53%People going mad and running about wildly or quietly chewing the wallpaper in their tiny room : 11%People being in debt : 41.7%People being unsteady on their legs due to vast consumption of vodka :.. 51%People being ill (physical) :.. 34%People being ill (mental) :……………37%People contemplating suicide :………………19%People enjoying a pleasant stroll in the countryside :..0%People having a friendly chat over a cup of coffee : 0.03%Men figuring they can force a poor woman to marry them :..…………………. 36%Women being terrified :………………..………………. 39%Horses being beaten :………………..………………… 2%Nothing exciting happening :…………………….. 0%This all adds up to than 100%. That is because CP is a very excessive novel. It has than 100% inside it.INTERVIEW WITH F DOSTOYEVSKY, 18 March 1867FD : You see, in my booksthe numbers all go to eleven. Lookright across the board. V. M Vorshynsky: Ahhoh, I see. FD : All other novelists, they only go up to 10. But I go up to 11.V. M Vorshynsky:: Does that mean you have emotion in your books ?FD: Well, it's one whole notch , isn't it? It's not ten. You see, mostmost novelists, you know, they don’t know eleven exists. I get my characters all the way to ten with their emotional situations, and thenpush over the cliff. See? V. M Vorshynsky: Put it up to eleven. FD: Eleven. Exactly. One louder.And it’s really true. If they are not about to jump into a river, they are going to fall in love with a prostitute, or they are going to get roaring drunk because they have fallen in love with a prostitute and will later jump into a river.CAN WE GET SLIGHTLY MORE SERIOUS PLEASECP surprised me. It was like a Dardenne Brothers movie with the camera tight up to Raskolnikov nearly the whole time, and the action shown in detail almost hour by hour over a couple of weeks. Yes it’s a whole lot about th psychological disintegration of this arrogant twerp who thinks he might be some kind of extraordinary person destined to improve the human race by sheer power of his brainwaves so therefore is justified in bashing in the head of some horrible old woman pawnbroker to steal her money and kickstart his wonderful career. And bash in the brains of her sister who unfortunately comes in the door at the wrong moment. Bad timing.But it seemed to me that at least half of CP was all about the horrible powerlessness of women and how they are forced into marriages which are no than licenced prostitution. An antidote to Jane Austen, indeed. And it was about how the arrogant twerp murderer can also be a guy who perceives this injustice and wants to revolutionise society. And to do that he starts by bashing in the brains of two women. So you see this is a psychological minefield we are in. Like Macbeth and An American Tragedy by Dreiser the murder is contemplated beforehand, then committed, then acts like acid on the mind of its perpetrator, and the reader is along for the excruciating ride.Thre are hundreds of connections that trigger like flashing synapses as you go through this big ass book… Freud, Leopold and Loeb, the philosophy of the Nazi Party, Camus, Beckett… I do admit that there are probably three windbags too many in CP and I could think of snipping a chapter here and a chapter there to get the whole thing down to a tight 500 pages of ranting and caterwauling. But all in all, this novel rides all over you like an out of control ox cart will leave you gasping and discombobulated.Conclusion : excellent pandemic reading I've come to the conclusion that Russian door stoppers might just be where it's at. "It" here meaning general awesomeness that combines history, philosophy and readability to make books that are both thought provoking and enjoyable. Up until this point, Tolstoy had basically taught me everything I knew about nineteenth century Russian society and its people. By that, I mean that everything I knew was about the drama and scandals of the Russian aristocracy. The difference here is that Dostoyevsky took me on an educational but also gripping journey around the backstreets and drinking dens of St Petersburg. He showed me the nitty gritty details of life in Russia for those less fortunate drunks, prostitutes, the poor and he painted a very vivid portrait of this time and culture. Raskolnikov is a great protagonist; he really is. His head is one messed up place and he constantly struggles with what he believes in, his conscience, and his desire to get what he wants. The reader is pulled so deep inside the dark depths of his mind that it's hard to avoid becoming completely absorbed in the story. He is at times nasty, at others funny, and at others pitiful. Dostoyevsky has created one extremely well rounded and complex character. Crime and Punishment shows the human capacity for evil, but also for shame and remorse. And this latter is the real "punishment" for Raskolnikov when he is driven near to insanity by his guilt.I don't really know how best to fully articulate my feelings for Crime and Punishment. I don't give many five star ratings and I rarely feel this strongly about what I've read. I actually had a dream about it! Speaking of dreams, I want to use this one example of Dostoyevsky's ability to engage the reader so thoroughly: I read one particular scene in the book that made me seriously distressed. I was furious, on the verge of tears, and like a child who wants to jump inside the TV to make everything better and then Raskolnikov awakes to discover it was just a dream. I swear that my sigh of relief fully eclipsed his! But that's how far I was drawn into this world, how much I really cared about it. That doesn't happen often.Blog | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | Youtube Raskolnikov a destitute and desperate former student wanders through the slums of St Petersburg and commits a random murder without remorse or regret He imagines himself to be a great man a Napoleon acting for a higher purpose beyond conventional moral law But as he embarks on a dangerous game of cat and mouse with a suspicious police investigator Raskolnikov is pursued by the growing voice of his conscience and finds the noose of his own guilt tightening around his neck Only Sonya a downtrodden prostitute can offer the chance of redemption Each one of us is a Raskolnikov, you know.No, not like you’re thinking not a shabbily dressed, impoverished murderer. But we all share his nature. To a T.That, in essence, is the key to understanding Dostoevsky’s tortuous, convoluted, anxious prose it’s the one message that Fyodor Dostoevsky takes anguished pains to drum into our insulated and isolated little heads!Not that, hey, Raskolnikov’s not such a bad guy after all no it’s that he is inwardly bad and so are we, potentially at every moment, bad inside and that that that will never change. We don’t change our inner lives; but we CAN constantly be making amends for our mistakes and starting our life anew in others’ eyes at each moment, though never perhaps to our own complete inner satisfaction.For our selves aren’t static and we all invariably tend towards moral entropy.There are no easy answers in Dostoevsky!I remember so well the time I finally quit smoking cold turkey, 21 years ago. I was lucky I did it, I guess; but to face the indefinitely long rest of my life stretching out before me like a vast restless desert without smokes, seemed unbearable back then!It was just like the Zen Master says reaching the top of a thousand foot pole, and then, CONTINUING TO CLIMB. In empty air. Yikes!Panic City! The flames of utter hopeless anxiety threatened to engulf me entirely.So I started to pray. Nonstop. Like a dog chewing a meatless bone! It must have worked so saith the Preacher.And I escaped from that Inferno by the very Skin of my Teeth.So likewise, there are few pat answers in Faith, no matter what we’ve seen or heard: “Ours is only the trying,” Eliot said. Trying to make the best of a mess! And I wouldn’t be at all surprised if C.S. Lewis is right, and there remain plenty of challenges in Heaven.So, there is no finality in this life, Dostoevsky is saying. We can’t rest on our laurels.Or our guilt, either, for that matter!The best way I can sum up my thoughts on this Everest of a novel is by quoting W.H. Auden:“Faith, while it condemns no temperament as incapable of salvation, flatters none as being less in peril than any other Christianity is a way, not a state, and a Christian is never something one IS, only something we can pray to BECOME.”And if Raskolnikov is not a Christian, neither are we.But we must never give up the trying, just like RaskolnikovAnd for us, too, in time there may come Redemption.And a Peace that passes all understanding, after the intolerable Shirt of Flame is extinguished, inA condition of complete simplicityCosting not less than EVERYTHING. What a sensational reading experience, what an unconditional surrender to an atmosphere of fear, anxiety and confusion and to an epic battle of wills! Rarely these days do I read with that kind of hopeless, helpless feeling of being completely, utterly lost in the imaginary world. From the first moment, when Raskolnikov steps out on the street and begins wandering around in Petersburg, to the very last pages, I live with the characters, I am part of the story, I have my own opinions, and argue against their actions, in my head, while reading on in a frenzy. What can I say? There has been enough said of Raskolnikov’s murky motives for doing what he does. I don’t agree with him at all, neither with the theory he proposes, nor with the idea that he can expiate his crime through intense suffering. I hate the nonchalance with which he discards the murderee “a louse” as an unimportant detail in the bigger picture of him, his character, his suffering ego, and his ultimate redemption and resurrection as a “new man”. Even if the pawnbroker is not a sympathetic character, she is an independent woman, who provides for herself, without having to sell her body to a husband or a pimp. She is not a “louse”, and by killing her out of vanity, pride, self promotion, delusion or hubris, Raskolnikov destroys her. It is not the devil’s work, as Raskolnikov says at one point. A great man should be better able to take responsibility for his own actions. It is Raskolnikov himself who knowingly, condescendingly, makes the calculation that an ugly, businesslike old woman does not have any value in herself. Of course not, Raskolnikov! Neither does Shylock in The Merchant Of Venice! Not part of the mainstream community, they don’t count, in the name of law and justice and compassion. It takes a Shakespeare or a Dostoyevsky to point that out without sounding preachy and moralist, and without siding with one character against another.In a world in which women are property, the unattractive pawnbroker is meaningless, unless you turn her riches into your property. As for the brutal killing, with an axe? A mere trifle in the context!But as Dostoyevsky might well be one of the most brilliant authors ever describing an evil character, I commiserate with the scoundrel, with the egomaniac, charismatic murderer. I feel for him, with him, in his dramatic stand offs with Pyotr Petrovich, his intellectual counterpart. Their verbal exchanges evoke the image of two predators circling each other, working on their own strategies while calculating the enemy’s.I suffer with the psychopath, and take his side, even when I disagree with him. Such is the power of Dostoyevsky’s storytelling genius. He creates characters with major flaws, and very different positions, and he gives all of them their space, their say, their moment on stage. And when they appear, they have the audience’s full attention. Dostoyevsky lets a cynical self confessed abuser of women commit the one act of charity that actually has a positive impact on three children’s future. He lets a drunkard, the comical character of Marmeladov, who pushes his wife to insanity and his daughter to prostitution, revel in the pleasure of suffering, sounding almost like a philosopher when he cherishes his idea that god will honour the self sacrifice of the women he has destroyed, and that the same god will indiscriminately have mercy on himself as well, for being so willing to suffer (especially the pulling of hair does a great deal of good, according to Marmeladov, comical effect included!).Dostoyevsky lets women sacrifice themselves in the name of charity and religion. Needless to say, I have strong opinions about that, and apart from the unspeakable suffering imposed on them in their lifetime, I do not approve of any religious dogma that justifies self sacrifice as a virtue in our time of terrorist violence, it seems an almost obscene attitude. Regardless, I suffer with them through the author’s brilliantly atmospheric narrative.Dostoyevsky, the sharp psychological mind and analytic, accurately points out the difference between women in the story, sacrificing “only” themselves, and the violent men, sacrificing others (mostly women, children and innocent, intellectually inferior men) for their own benefit in their delusion that they are extraordinary, and have special rights beyond the law. And he does it so convincingly that the reader feels the urge to argue with the characters. I found myself saying:“But Raskolnikov, I really don’t think Napoleon would have killed a pawnbroker with an axe to demonstrate his greatness, that is not the way great men exert their power. And as an anachronistic side note, in these times of newspeakish, American style greatness, we need to ask ourselves if that is anything to strive for at all.”It is a powerful book, and a book about power.The hypnotic power that a charismatic personality exerts over other people.The physical power that men exert over women and children.The mental power that educated people exert over simple minds.The financial power that wealthy people exert over hungry, poor, miserable people.The religious power that dogma exerts over people to accept injustice in the hope of scoring high with god in the afterlife.The linguistic power that eloquence exerts to dominate an entire environment with propaganda.The individual power to say no. Two characters, both women, refuse to play the cards they are dealt. Dounia Romanovna and Katerina Ivanovna you are my true heroes in this endlessly deep masterpiece of a novel!Dounia holding the revolver, ready to kill the man who has lured her into a corner and tries to blackmail her into a sexual relationship! The most powerful scene of all. I shiver while reading. Literally! I have goosebumps! As will power goes, hers is brilliant. No man owns that woman. Thank you for that scene, Dostoyevsky! And she manages NOT to kill, thus showing her spoiled, attention seeking, impulsive and arrogant brother who is mentally superior despite physical weakness.Katerina committing an act of insanity while slowly dying of consumption, and leaving her three children orphans! Instead of hiding herself and suffering in secret, she takes to the streets, forces her misery upon the world, and makes it official. She has all the right in the world to dance, sing and make noise to point to the insanity of society, which creates a platform for a life like hers. And her refusal to receive the greedy priest on her deathbed is simply divine: “God can take me as I am, or be damned!” Right you are, Katerina!I could go on in infinity, but I will break off here, just like Dostoyevsky breaks off in medias res, hinting at the untold sequel the marriage between Raskolnikov and Sonia! Oh, dear, what an emotional roller coaster that must be it is quite enough to allude to it in an epilogue to make me smile. The brooding murderer and the saintly whore, joined together in holy suffering. Brilliant, even as a vague idea.Curtain.Standing, shaking, roaring ovations! 867. Преступление и наказание = Prestupleniye i nakazaniye = Crime and Punishment, Fyodor DostoevskyCrime and Punishment is a novel by the Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky. It was first published in the literary journal The Russian Messenger in twelve monthly installments during 1866. It is the second of Dostoevsky's full length novels following his return from 5 years of exile in Siberia.Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, a former law student, lives in extreme poverty in a tiny, rented room in Saint Petersburg. Isolated and antisocial, he has abandoned all attempts to support himself, and is brooding obsessively on a scheme he has devised to murder and rob an elderly pawn broker. On the pretext of pawning a watch, he visits her apartment, but remains unable to commit himself. Later in a tavern he makes the acquaintance of Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov, a drunkard who recently squandered his family's little wealth. Marmeladov tells him about his teenage daughter, Sonya, who has chosen to become a prostitute in order to support the family. The next day Raskolnikov receives a letter from his mother in which she describes the problems of his sister Dunya, who has been working as a governess, with her ill intentioned employer, Svidrigailov. To escape her vulnerable position, and with hopes of helping her brother, Dunya has chosen to marry a wealthy suitor, Luzhin, whom they are coming to meet in Petersburg. Details in the letter suggest that Luzhin is a conceited opportunist who is seeking to take advantage of Dunya's situation. Raskolnikov is enraged at his sister's sacrifice, feeling it is the same as what Sonya felt compelled to do. Painfully aware of his own poverty and impotence, his thoughts return to his idea. A further series of internal and external events seem to conspire to compel him toward the resolution to enact it. عنوانها: «جنایت و کیفر (مترجم: محمدرضا عسکری در 147 ص)»؛ «جنایت و مکافات»؛ نویسنده: فئودور داستایوسکی؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: در ماه می سال 1970میلادیعنوان: جنایت و مکافات؛ نویسنده: فئودور داستایوسکی؛ مترجم: مهری آهی، تهران، صفیعلیشاه، 1345؛ در 790ص؛ چاپ دیگر تهران، خوارزمی، 1363؛قدیمیترین ترجمه را جناب: «اسحق لاله زاری» و انتشارات «صفیعلیشاه» از این کتاب نشر داده اند، در 396ص، سپس بانو: «مهری آهی» در 790صفحه، انتشارات «خوارزمی»، جناب «بهروز بهزاد» هم در 626ص انتشارات «دنیای کتاب»؛ جناب «اصغر رستگار» نیز در دو جلد در اصفهان، نشر فردا؛ جناب «عنایت الله شکیباپور» در 626ص؛ جناب «پرویز شهدی» کتاب پارسه در 659ص؛ جناب «احمد علیقلیان» در 730ص نشر مرکز، بانو «لویا روایی نیا» نگارستان کتاب در 976ص؛ بانو «هانیه چوپانی» در 800ص، نشر فراروی؛ بانو «مریم امیر» و بانو «آرزو پیراسته» در 811ص یاقوت کویر؛ جناب «علی صحرایی» در 775ص؛ نشر مهتاب؛ جناب «اصغر رستگار» در 711ص نشر نگاه؛ نسخه خلاصه شده: با ترجمه جناب: «امیر اسماعیلی»؛ تهران، توس، 1364؛ در 214ص؛داستان دانشجویی به نام: «راسکولْنیکُف» است، که با رعایت اصول، مرتکب قتل می‌شود.؛ با انگیزه‌ های پیچیده‌ ای، که حتی خود «راسکولنیکف» از تحلیل آنها عاجز است؛ او زن رباخواری را، همراه با خواهرش (که نامنتظره به هنگام رویدادن قتل در صحنه حاضر شده) می‌کشد، و پس از قتل، خود را ناتوان از خرج پولها، و جواهراتی که برداشته، می‌بیند؛ و آنها را پنهان می‌کند.؛ پس از چند روز بیماری، و بستری شدن در خانه، «راسکولنیکف» این تصور را، که هر کس را که می‌بیند، انگار به او مظنون است؛ و با این افکار، کارش به جنون می‌کشد.؛ در این بین او عاشق «سونیا» ست، دختری که به خاطر مشکلات مالی خانواده‌ اش، دست به تن‌ فروشی زده است؛ مضمون و درون‌مایه ی رمان، تحلیلِ انگیزه‌ های قتل، و تأثیر قتل بر قاتل است؛ که «داستایوسکی» مسئلهٔ رابطه ی میان خویشتن و جهان پیرامون، و فرد و جامعه، را در آن گنجانده است.؛ ؛ خوانش نخستین بار این کتاب مدهوشم کردتاریخ بهنگام رسانی 02/06/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی

  • Paperback
  • 671 pages
  • Преступление и наказание [Prestupleniye i nakazaniye]
  • Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  • English
  • 10 October 2014
  • 9780143058144

About the Author: Fyodor Dostoyevsky

Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский see