It Certainly is neither Crime nor Punishment to read Dostoevsky's masterwork (Spoilers Included)

     

Crime and Punishment was released in 1866, at a time when Russian prose was still trying to get recognition due to the fact that the massive nation was behind the Western world in those terms by centuries. After Crime and Punishment and perhaps with the help of writers such as Leo Tolstoy, Russian writing was on the map in the world's eyes. Certainly Crime and Punishment is a work that represents Russian ideals and social customs remarkably well, but it popularity can be attributed not only to its understanding of Russian culture but to its understanding of the moral and philosophical concepts that make up the fiber of every human being's psychology.

What is the book about?: Crime and Punishment is a title almost anyone with a limited knowledge of literature has heard of. It is usually, along with books such as War and Peace and Ulysses, attributed to an elite caliber of literature. In reality, the book is not at all hard to read, though it is long and has a complex system of moral psychology behind it. The plot of the book is relatively simple: it concerns the poor student Raskolnikov, who justifies to himself the murder of an old and haggard pawnbroker. Through these justifications, he murders the old lady and incidentally her half-sister as well. Afterwards, he grapples with his moral isolation and near-schizophrenic state of guilt. He is led to pursue redemption by Sonia, a prostitute he falls in love with and is pursued by a brilliant detective who plays a game of psychological cat and mouse with him. It is in jail, after falling in love with a young woman and accepting the love of God that Raskolnikov finds redemption from his crime.

Is it worth reading?: For people who are interested in moral issues, this is a very important book. Dostoevsky uses Raskolnikov as a model of askew morality, as a model of moral values gone horribly wrong and through this book, Dostoevsky is able to successfully portray the folly of Raskolnikov's ways and provides an interesting argument against Raskolnikov's abstractions on human nature.

Analysis: Raskolnikov is an interesting character to begin with. He is a walking contradiction of himself. These contradictions become apparent within the first part of the novel. Raskolnikov views himself as a "superman"; a man of higher intellect and interests than the rest of humanity yet he lives in complete poverty. He does not care about people, but he still leaves a poor family money. Contradictions are a major part of Dostoevsky's work, as well as divisions and conflicts between certain things. The conflict within Raskolnikov helps to illustrate the complexity of human nature (Freud was a big fan of the psychoanalysis of this book) and also the corruption of moral values.

To elaborate more clearly on this use of divisions and contradictions, I'll analyze the name of the main character himself: Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov. "Raskolnikov" comes from the Russian word "raskolnik" meaning "schismatic or divided", illustrating both Raskolnikov's isolation from others morally and his divide from Russian values. Breaking it down further, "kol" in "Raskolnikov" means bell in Russian. Bells serve a contradictory purpose in the book, Raskolnikov rings bells on the night of the murder but bells also connote churches as well. They serve contradictory associations within Raskolnikov's mind. "Romanovich" has the word Roman in it, which of course connotes the Roman Catholic Church. This is where we get into Dostoevsky's statements about Russian culture. Catholicism is associated with the west and is apart from the values of a mostly Orthodox Russian population. The west, during this time, was espousing a number of views that Dostoevsky found false and a danger to Russian culture. One of these is the very philosophy that Raskolnikov uses to justify the murder of the pawnbroker: utilitarianism. These new Western beliefs, such as Utilitarianism and materialistic philosophies that replaced human compassion and aesthetic values for others, Dostoevsky saw as harmful and morally repugnant. Rejecting materialistic philosophies, Dostoevsky argues that human nature is more important to the strengthening of a person's character or society. Raskolnikov is a follower of these new Western intellectual ideas and though he justifies the murder through logical means, he is unable to suppress his guilt over it. Yet again there is a contradiction. Raskolnikov, through his division from society and subsequent abstractions over human nature is driven to murder the pawnbroker, yet is unable to suppress his guilt, eventually submitting to spiritual punishment and falling in love with a young woman, which provides him redemption. As we can see, contradictions are the device by which Dostoevsky displays the ways in which Raskolnikov's mind finds justification in his criminality and eventual redemption.

What do I think?: Aside from the obvious intellectual weight of the novel, it is a thoroughly enjoyable read. The book is perhaps one of the most charged crime novels to come out of the 19th Century. The book is surprisingly well-paced and rarely dry, filled with vivid depictions of the poverty in Russia at this time period and the broken psyche of a man bent over his own guilt. The characters are believable as well such as Porfiry Petrovich (the brilliant investigator after Raskolnikov) and Sonia Seminovitch (the prostitute Raskolnikov falls in love with), though I do feel that Raskolnikov alone was the only character I can truly say was masterfully written, since he emulates such a complex psychology, alternating from hatred to love within instants and prone to delirium and hallucinations among other things. 

We must also not forget the moral value of reading this and Dostoevsky's work in general. The book, while giving us a raw and truthful look at poverty, crime, and pathology also demonstrates the power and triumph of love over all else, as when Raskolnikov redeems himself through his love of Sonia. There is also the religious aspect of reading it as well. Raskolnikov also redeems himself through his accepting of Christian virtues. I, myself, do not fully embrace all of Dostoevsky's conservative outlooks on spirituality, but I do see that in a larger sense, Dostoevsky is not simply arguing for Judeo-Christian values, he is arguing for a sense of spirituality over materialism, over materialistic philosophies. Which, of course, is the whole subversive message of the book as a whole, underneath the crime and its punishment itself.

A very, very good read. Masterwork.