Reviews with content warning for Violence - Crime and Punishment

Reviews tagging 'Violence'

Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky

79 reviews

alexandra_skl's review against another edition

challenging dark emotional hopeful informative reflective sad tense medium-paced

Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

This is the best book I’ve ever read. Truly a wonderful and insightful exploration of humanity and morality. While the premise is tragic the book leaves you with a feeling of hope and warmth.

Content Warnings

francescazksxmc's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

Content Warnings

nikolas_kolinski's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging emotional informative reflective sad slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? Yes
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

Crime and Punishment - review

"Crime and Punishment" is a journey.
A journey that I believe every lover of literature should take. The path, however, is often winding, and although the work is in every way a cornerstone of literature, one often has to wonder whether the journey travelled is really worthy of the destination reached.

Opinions on style :
Dostoevsky is and remains a master in writing. The dialogues and his characteristic style are excellent, at the basis of which is an elaborate and elegant language, rich in rhetorical figures, even haughty perhaps, but which almost never flows into uselessness and ostentation:
- The characters are well delineated; each of them retains his or her own personality, their own ideologies and their own thoughts, so much so that many of them turn out to be protagonists themselves, and their story is addressed even in the deepest details. The psychological nuance of meaning present throughout the entire work, which is usual for the author in other novels as well, is functional and gives the story a profound meaning.

- The landscape that serves as a backdrop to the story is perfectly evoked by the author, down to the smallest details; he tells the story of his homeland in a compelling, emotional way, and also provides an important socio-cultural vision of the people, places, traditions and customs of the time, in a way that is in some ways even emotional and affectionate, but at the same time St. Petersburg turns out to be a background that is often confusing and unfamiliar to Western readers who are not accustomed to the Russian environment, and who find themselves lost in an environment that is difficult to recognise.

- The author skilfully manages to close almost every subplot introduced in the narrative, with a slow and suffering rhythm, but still firm and steady.

- The book is complex and can easily be subjected to multiple re-readings and careful literary and philosophical critical analysis.

- The names of the various characters can sometimes sound too similar or complex, and it is often difficult to clearly recognise which character one is dealing with.

We therefore note how, despite its acknowledged and deserved greatness as a literary work, many aspects of the novel may be alien to today's readers, due above all to great temporal and cultural differences.
One should not be surprised, therefore, if some readers often claim that the work can be boring and unentertaining.
It seems fair to say, however, that the novel's merits can be at the same time its downsides: often, the language is very complex and the reading can be heavy for the reader. The author's narrative technique is excellent, but sometimes confusing; the protagonist's dialogues are sometimes too delirious and difficult to understand; but nothing is accidental, every word is chosen with profound care and almost every chapter turns out to be fundamental and useful for the plot's progress, just as every character plays a precise role in function of the story and the protagonist and represents a certain type of morality or a certain socio-political idea.

Character analysis :

- The official Marmeladov, who lives in misery, suffers and seeks earthly salvation in the hope of salvation after death (believing in the Christian religion) through his suffering, is an anticipation for the outcome of the story, in that, just as Raskol'nikov will later do, he has resorted to self-inflicted punishment and retribution, through suffering, in order to be able to absolve himself of his sins (in the case of the protagonist, his crime).

- Raskol'nikov's delirious thoughts, in the narrative sequences following his murder of the usurer, are sublime, characterising the mental madness inherent in the murderer's soul, with the terror that his crime will be discovered, but here again it is possible for the reader to get lost in the reading of the work, as complex as its protagonist. Raskol'nikov also represents the schism (raskol'nik = schismatic) between tradition (viewed negatively, perhaps more aptly described by the term 'antiquity') and modernity, moving from an extremely elitist idea to an existentialist style of thinking. It seems natural, however, to observe how the protagonist of the literary work is a controversial and certainly interesting character, but, although this is part of his characterisation, the continuous radical changes of ideas or opinions and the constant back-and-forth between small actions of sudden goodness and a sadistic attraction to evil and to the terrible conditions of many humans, may be excessive, 'too literary' and not very real.

- During the first meeting between Raskol'nikov and the police officer Zamëtov, the reader is introduced to the protagonist's ideas: he believes himself to be a so-called Übermann, a superman; believing himself to be superior to anyone or anything, Raskol'nikov unwittingly admits his faults to Zamëtov, causing him to be highly suspicious of his guilt.

- A great representative element of this work of literature is the first dialogue between Raskol'nikov and the judge Porfirij Petrovic, in which the protagonist's ideas that 'extraordinary' men are justified in performing immoral acts 'according to conscience' emerge even more. Because of this and many of the investigating judge's questions, Raskol'nikov repeatedly risks admitting his guilt and the figure of the investigating judge takes on an antagonistic function in relation to the protagonist of the story. Their entire conversation is also likened to a trial or interrogation, in which the main terms of the novel are discussed: the right to 'crime' and the realisation of 'punishment', sometimes even self-inflicted by those so-called 'extraordinary men'.

- Razumichin, on the other hand, represents the good man par excellence, not 'ideal' or exalted, but simply good, marked by his generosity and by the help he gives to the fellow man, and is thus almost the opposite of the character of Raskol'nikov (even though the two are friends and Razumichin always helps Raskol'nikov). Razumichin could thus represent liberalism, but above all a situation of stability and socio-political order (razum = reason), thus perhaps foreseeing our democracy.

- A representative element of 19th century society (specifically Russian, but also world-wide, in a more expansive sense) is the character of Luzin, who believes in his superiority and believes he can use it to control others (more specifically Dun'ja, the protagonist's sister). He thus constitutes a character who, partly because of his wealth (or the power he believes this can bring), is manipulative and narcissistic, as well as emblematic of the strong misogyny present at the time. Luzin thus represents the (at times perhaps too stereotypical) bourgeoisie and nobility of the time, still strongly influenced by patriarchy, and a moral judgement based on the social and economic level of the individual, in which money and power represent what is most important and most 'preferable' to being the best of men.

- Lebezjatnikov is representative of socialism and progressivism, and of a moral judgement based almost solely on the social circumstances in which the individual finds himself and the consequences to which these might lead.

- Marmeladov's family (and especially Sonja) represents the weaker social classes most affected by the constant social and political changes, an element that contrasts (as can be seen most clearly in the scene of the funeral banquet in Marmeladov's honour) with the character of Luzin, who is rich and interested only in his own benefit.

- Svidrigajlov, on the other hand, represents the wickedness, baseness and perversion of man in society, and thus being a negative character, appears as one of the many steps that Raskol'nikov manages to climb in order to arrive first at an understanding and then atonement for his sins, so much so that, some time after his encounter with him, Raskol'nikov confesses the murder he has carried out and thus arrives at the 'salvation through suffering'.

...The novel thus mirrors her era. In a society 'in itinere', continually changing and influenced to say the least by the smallest or weakest idea such as the Russian society of the time, all these different points of view are of great importance and serve as a way for the author to make his work also a political work, and to expound his personal 'resolution' to the problems of the time: Dostoevsky appears in this way as a strong supporter of existentialism and of the Christian religion.
It is important to note, however, that most of these elements of the novel refer to the audience present at the time of its publication, and may therefore be out of date in a world and society such as ours, with stable governments and political ideas, a precise division of rights and duties, and a great deal of attention to the problems presented in the book, which, even if they are not currently resolved absolutely and are sometimes put on the back burner, are nevertheless taken into consideration, both by governments and more so by local populations, moved (especially in recent years) by an unstoppable impetus towards a world characterised by moral equality and acceptance of the 'different'.
Western society is in fact a largely existentialist society, and although the Christian religion does not play a role as central as the one presented by the author, it nevertheless remains widespread, with a large number of believers and people using faith as a remedy for life's pains. We can therefore at least say that Dostoevsky in some ways predicted current social and political trends.
Let us now look at some similarities between the different characters in the novel:

1. The strong difference between the protagonist and Nikolaj, the painter who confesses to the murder despite being innocent. This character represents the key idea of the opera, namely, the oft-mentioned 'salvation through suffering'. Indeed, he commits no sin, he is a good person, but nevertheless he confesses, in order to taste suffering and find salvation.
Nikolaj thus represents the literary antithesis of the Raskol'nikov that we observe in the first pages of the literary work, and comes close to what Raskol'nikov becomes at the end of the story.

2.The differences between Raskol'nikov and Luzin that the author makes clear to the reader.
Raskol'nikov, despite being a murderer and experiencing moments of madness and wickedness, hardly appears as a wicked or extremely negative character, unlike Luzin, who is guilty of moral sins such as slander or defamation, but who never carries out physical actions against anyone and, nevertheless, appears as an extremely 'rotten', selfish and evil character. This is because the author is against the ideas represented by the character.

3. An interesting analogy is that between the protagonist's encounter with Marmeladov, in the opening part of the book, and with Svidrigajlov, in the final part. Raskol'nikov in fact meets the characters in almost the same circumstances (the former in a hostel, the latter in an inn, both intent on drinking) and these, although radically different, influence the protagonist in their own way, almost in a literary anastrophe.
In fact, Marmeladov, although a positive character, professing ideas in some ways similar to Sonja's, is supposed to influence Raskol'nikov positively, but fails to do so, so much so that the latter commits the murder some time after his meeting with him.

Interpretation of the plot of the play:

While, as Pasolini suggests, the murder enacted by the protagonist represents a way of distancing himself from his mother figure and sister, it seems natural to emphasise the importance of Raskol'nikov's departure from his sister's and mother's home in St. Petersburg. By leaving his family in the care of Razumichin, he demonstrates trust in him and, consequently, a greater tendency to trust people, one of the first steps towards purification from the crime committed. His estrangement, moreover, while being exceedingly bizarre in such circumstances, serves this time as a transitory moment towards his own autonomy and acceptance, as well as an acceptance of the presence of other people in his life, unlike the previous 'escapes' presented in the play, whose goal was isolation or the assertion of his own superiority over 'non-ordinary' men.
On this occasion, Raskol'nikov thus begins his journey of atonement from sin, thus marking a clean break from the book's initial protagonist and from what he will become at the end of the story, arriving at salvation (mental and psychological, though not physical) through his own suffering. In this way, even the crime committed at the beginning, while not representing a good deed, has a positive transformative function on the protagonist.
A strong element of transit towards an awareness of one's actions and the protagonist's path towards 'the straight path' occurs in the novel during the funeral banquet in honour of Marmeladov. In fact, Raskol'nikov, having recovered from his madness and monomania, begins to perform more and more good deeds, including defending Sonja's innocence against Luzin during the aforementioned scene, which not only benefits the girl and her family, but also the protagonist's own family, preventing Luzin from succeeding in his accusation and being seen in a positive light.
With his murder's confession to Sonja, the protagonist's story reaches its climax: the Raskol'nikov we observe on this occasion is profoundly different from the one we see at the beginning of the book and, although at times attempting to shield himself from the reality of the facts with his ideas of superiority, he has finally fully realised his guilt. We also observe the real motive of Raskol'nikov's murderer: the theft does not represent a way to secure a prosperous future for himself and his family, the murder does not represent a way to 'make a career', to assert his superiority, to be a 'Napoleon', but merely represents an act of escapism from the monotony of a melancholic and suffering mundanity and everyday life. In fact, Raskol'nikov is oppressed even by how well-liked he is by his family and the attempts his sister and mother make to help him; he feels dependent on them and feels that the future and good of the family depends on him. Then, due to the aforementioned situation of severe poverty and instability in Russia, Raskol'nikov is even more driven to carry out the murder: as a result of the crime committed, Raskol'nikov knows that he risks being caught and taken to prison, he knows that he cannot provide any good for his family after being guilty of such a sin and therefore feels that he knows, that it is not necessary for him and that he should no longer even attempt to help his family. The crime represents a condemnation for the character, but is at the same time an affirmation of independence and 'salvation'.
During the admission of his guilt to Marmeladov's daughter, the great difference, but at the same time the great similarity between Raskol'nikov and Sonja is also evident: both are the only members of their family capable of making it survive: Sonja, pure in spirit, in such a condition uses all her will to try to bring salvation to her family, thus managing to 'dare' to do good, and thanks to her faith in God she manages to resist. Raskol'nikov, on the other hand, is in the absence of a foothold or something to make him resist and thus, decides to 'dare' in evil, not feeling that he can bring salvation to his family, but not even particularly trying to do so.
With Il'ja Petrovic's remark shortly before the story's ending (as soon as Raskol'nikov has shown up at the police station) that "...the number of nihilists has increased considerably... and how much the suicides have also increased..." , the autobiographical influence that the author has included in the work is totally evident, not so much personal (although many moments or speeches in the work can be directly linked to events that Dostoevsky experienced) but above all social and historical, on behalf of the whole of Russian society and the turmoil that afflicted it at the time. One wonders, therefore, whether stories such as Raskol'nikov's were not in fact plausible in a world so full of poverty, terrible conditions, instability and very often human wickedness (which, alas, breeds almost only more wickedness), while the entire Western world ignored and left to its own devices for many years an entire population so afflicted, whose problems we were not aware of for long.
In the epilogue, we finally observe Raskol'nikov's true evolution: after a period of suffering, he realises that it is useless to rack his brains over intellectual and theoretical issues, and that all he needs is Sonja's love, which he has come to accept over time.

Recurring themes:
- A recurring theme in the play is death...

, first of Marmeladov, then of his wife, and then of Svidrigajlov.
In the first two cases, although both characters have also done bad things (alcoholism and abandonment of the family for Marmeladov, not being a good mother and madness for his wife), they acknowledge their mistakes, or at least do not keep them hidden, unlike Raskol'nikov, who perhaps realises that if he were in such a situation, none of his friends or family would know his sins and he would therefore be treated by others as something he is not, thus making even his own death a lie.
Instead, the death of Svidrigajlov, a negative character, acts in a way as a 'transformation' for the character, in the same way that admitting one's crimes acts as a transformation for the protagonist.
In his last moments of life (characterised in the writing by a dreamlike and deliberately confused style, but still by the eccentricity of this character), despite his wickedness, he eventually understands his sins and somehow achieves salvation through death. This path is also contemplated by Raskol'nikov, who, however, 'prefers' the suffering of prison to death, as an opportunity for improvement and growth, if not ultimate rebirth. Whereas, however, Raskol'nikov's 'error' lies in an idea, which can be changed and which he understands to be erroneous and immoral, Svidrigajlov's 'error' lies in a primordial and savage instinct, which man has never been able to dominate during the course of his entire life. It is thus understandable how, for Raskol'nikov, salvation resides in spite of everything in life, because of its possibility of change, while for Svidrigajlov it resides in death, because of his inability to control himself and to change, having only closed doors in front of him and now almost no chance of rebirth.

- The philosophical and religious sub-theme of the work, present in the existentialism and faith in God professed by some characters,

Sonja in primis

(I feel I must state, however, my lack of interest for the religious sub-theme, even though I agree with many ideas of existentialism).

Final comparisons and opinions:

As Pasolini suggested in his analysis, Raskol'nikov is more than a little marked by a co-dependent relationship, akin to an Edipian disorder, towards his mother and sister.

...I also in some ways share Nabokov's opinion of Dostoevsky's style: although the events narrated, mainly due to their terrible and, alas, common nature in the Russia of the time, are verisimilar and mostly realistic, the way they occur and the characters in the work are exaggerated, caricatured, and far too theatrical. This is perhaps also what made the author's characters iconic, but it is important to note that it is often difficult to consider them and their thoughts completely realistic.
One may not like the novel, be it for its plot, its style, or for any other reason, but I believe that anyone should nevertheless be able to recognise the greatness of this literary work, which moreover functions as a representative text of the Russian culture of the time, providing us with many elements in this regard (also for this reason, the style and length of the novel must be contextualised and, subsequently, analysed with precise clarity of the events that happened to the author and of the historical-political situation present at the time of the book's publication).

Also excellent are the afterword, taken from an essay by Pier Paolo Pasolini (whose analysis has been mentioned several times in this review), and the introduction by Serena Prina (which, however, can only be understood after reading the novel and does not, because of this, serve as a true introduction).
Through the considerations of the two aforementioned literati, the work is dissected and the implicit mechanisms and sub-themes contained within it are explained and analysed, as well as different possibilities of analysis and different keys to interpretation. Thanks to this (and also thanks to the historical, social and political understanding of what was happening at the time of publication in Russia), the novel can be understood more clearly by the reader and, consequently, appreciated more clearly.

Final judgement:
"Crime and Punishment" should definitely be acknowledged as one of the masterpieces and a cornerstone of literature, not so much to conform to common opinion, but more as an acknowledgement of the author's sublime skills, a perfectly devised literary structure and the conveyance of his ideas using literature as a 'medium', even though it may be a work that does not entertain the modern reader enough.
There were times when I felt I wanted to leave the journey, but I believe that in the end, although the journey may be long and difficult, it is worth it.

We're always thinking of eternity as an idea that cannot be understood, something immense. But why must it be? What if, instead of all this, you suddenly find just a little room there, something like a village bath-house, grimy, and spiders in every corner, and that's all eternity is. Sometimes, you know, I can't help feeling that that's what it is.

Content Warnings