Crime and Punishment

by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, David McDuff (Translator)

Crime and Punishment (Penguin Classics)

Genres: Classics, Russian Literature, Crime

300 pages, Hardcover

Published January 1, 2022

About the author

Alternate spelling, see main profile Fyodor Dostoevsky

Reviews

[Eddie · Rating 5 out of 5]

What was immediately striking about Crime and Punishment for me was Dostoyevsky's total adherence to Shakespearean conventions. I was initially tempted to write off this novel as a lengthier version of Macbeth mixed in with some of Poe's the Tell Tale Heart, and I am glad to say that I was absolutely wrong on that account.

For starters, the setting of Crime of Punishment leaves one with perhaps a true sense of what it feels like to be impoverished in one of the most expansive and resource rich countries on this Earth. Russia has always been a land so vast and unconquerable, so dense and populated by a diverse array of various cultural/ethnic groups; yet, this is all hidden when you experience the narrative through the claustrophobic living quarters of the impoverished underground of 19th century St. Petersburg.

In fact, it becomes inherently evident that the imposing forces of poverty, shame, and social degradation imposed on Raskolnikov serve to make the reader feel as if there is an invisible noose tightening around them as well. Raskolnikov, whose name directly translates to something along the lines of "split", "schism", or "heresy", is then lead to challenge moral conventions of right and wrong through intellectual theories of the Ubermensh or "exceptional man" theory that must have gained traction through various social circles during Dostoyevsky's lifetime. This of course blows up in Raskolnikov's face.

Dostoyevsky attacks intellectualism as a whole in this novel. It's clear that it isn't natural ignorance the novel would suggest that we should fear but the over-rationalization of our own actions which will inevitably lead to ignorance. It's Raskolnikov's fatal seduction as a result of his education that primarily leads him to his heretic split from social morals to prove he's an exceptional man, which Dostoyevsky seems to refute and prove is entirely impossible.

What I really found delightful in this novel, aside from the wonderful and brutally real cast of characters, was that it isn't so much a tragedy but a comedy. Dostoyevsky is able to provide a certain level of spontaneity as well as a complex web of subplots that all merge to deliver an experience that is both claustrophobic due to the mood and setting but also humorous and vexing when it counts, all elements of which converge to justify the marriage at the end. I never once found myself bored reading this Penguin Classics translation, and the final surprise in the epilogue at the end, as heavily criticized as it has been, served to reinforce the idea for me that Crime and Punishment is a black comedy that is in some ways social satire of over-rationalizing intellectuals but also a staunch defense of Christianity in a scientific ever becoming secular world.

I think we all have a schism within us like Raskolnikov, not just of right and wrong but a need to feel a sense of suffering/struggle when we feel a lack of progress in our own lives. It's stagnation and feeling as if you have everything figured out in a hyper-rational way that breeds illness. It isn't until Raskolnikov experiences the hellish pains of his guilt that he realizes that people are wholly unable to remain detached from society for long; moreover, that to commit murder on one person is to spiritually commit murder on one's self. It's through suffering that we grow and recreate ourselves. Raskolnikov's punishment and initial ignorance are all too relatable.

[Carys Attwater-Sheen · Rating 5 out of 5]

When I started reading Crime and Punishment, I had no knowledge of the story except for the contents of the blurb. Thus, it was exciting to go into it not knowing what to expect.
The story was instantly gripping and highly intruiging from the start. the story follows a young man, Raskolnikov who commits two murders. The book is about Raskolnikov, dodging police connvictions and reuniting with his family and old acquaintances and solving issues along the way.

The blurb lead me to believe that the whole book would be about Raskolnikov and him keeping away from the police and their investigation to catching him, although the book was highly different. there was onluy one policeman who was onto him and that wasn't apparent till the end of the book. which, is a bit misleading, however it doesn't matter too much as what was presented in the story was very good. I did however notice that some parts in the book was a bit drawn out and irrelevant to the actual plot line, but they all did come nicely together with paitence.

I think that Crime and Punishment is an influential read for classic lit or if you're looking for some philosophical thinking as the book explores some interesting themes. I would highly recommend this enjoyable read:)

[bahattin · Rating 5 out of 5]

a deep philosophical reflection on guilt and atonement, on hope and despair

[Emmanuel Montoya · Rating 4 out of 5]

"All of these things tormented him, yet at the same time left him somehow indifferent. The strange thing, which possibly no one would have believed, was that the question of his present, immediate destiny left him only faintly and somewhat absent-mindedly preoccupied. He was being tormented by something else, something of a far more important and ultimate nature - something that concerned himself and no one else, but that was different from all this, something essential. Furthermore, he was experiencing a sense of infinite moral weariness, even though his reason was functioning better than it had during all these recent days."

Second book of Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment with a little more story than Notes from the Underground (my first book).

Raskolnikov is our main character, a young guy in the 80's Russia, a man that we found in the middle of a no so good moment in life, having to left his studies unfinished, living in a little room, with no money, clothes or any other values and in a mental state that is no better than the other aspects of his life, actually worse if possible.

Raskolnikov found himself in the middle of a mental breakdown, seeing his current state in life and where he thinks he should be, what he ought to accomplish, the distant reality between these two; the reality and his ideals is crushing him and certain ideas start to flow in his head, those destined to greatness as he perceives himself, have a certain free pass to do lesser evils, when you put the final a outcome of their actions in the balance, a lesser evil that is just a mere obstacle in the way of greatness.

Based on these thoughts Raskolnikov breaks the law, kills two women and starts a mental down spiral between what he did, his ideas that try to rationalize his actions and his conscience. The arrival of his mother and sister, the news of his sister's recent engagement, his own delirium actions, the persecution of a really inquisitive investigator, the life of a family that he happens to know just from a random conversation in a bar and more. All of this has a great impact in Raskolnikov's life and the development of our story.

A will not go in detail of every character that's involved in this story but I think that is in these different characters and stories, backgrounds and so on that the book really keeps me attached to it. Dostoevsky has a way of describing mental states, what is going in the mind of a character at each moment that you really are in the skin of each one of them, and in describing all of this you really care for them, or find ways to be emphatic towards them.

I think at some point it seems larger than it needed to be, at least for me, something that most classics have. Not my favorite book, but also one that I am happy to have read, a good book specially from the psicollogycal point of view.

[Jonasz The brown eyed demon Szponder · Rating 5 out of 5]

A case for objective morality in a fictional narrative form that's super intricate when it comes to the psychological transformations that Raskolnikov underwent, and in the dialogues between him and the other characters (most notably Porfiry Petrovich). Dostoyevsky postulates the existence of an external and universal law which cannot be broken without repercussions of the conscience. He does this in the most fascinating way through his protagonist Raskolnikov, an impoverished, desperate and cynical university student who is not convinced of the existence of God or of any objective moral truths. He idolises historical figures like Napoleon who he sees as being the masters of their being. Masters who are able to seek their visions and aspirations through any means necessary and afterwards be in full control of their mental faculties.
After a long time ruminating his theory, Raskolnikov murders a pawnbroker old woman with an axe, along with the woman's niece who walked in on the crime being commited. The old woman (Alyona Ivanovna) is a heinous, reprehensible individual who physically used to abuse her niece prior to the murder. Raskolnikov justifies this act in his head as he sees it as doing the world a favour by getting rid of the monster and hoping to use her stolen money for good. Throughout the entire story Raskolnikov is painted as being a genuine, really intelligent and righteous person. One who means well and yet has been beat down by life's circumstances. What makes this a true masterpiece is Dostoyevsky's bravery to steel man Raskolnikov's views, by presenting the best possible case for a justifiable murder. Long story short, Raskolnikov confesses to the murder after going through severe psychological torment and spiritual sickness. As well as due to a quandary put forward by the investigator Porfiry Petrovich. Raskolnikov realises his want to live during his time in prison and ends up repenting for his 'justified crime', seeing it as a stupid and impetuous act.
I think that this arguement of conscience warfare as proof of objective morality is a good one and doesn't require the existence of God. It fits in well with Sam Harris' logical arguement - the avoidance of unnecessary suffering. My understanding of morality I feel has been revolutionised during the time of reading this book and for that reason I wholeheartedly recommend this novel.

[Caique Costa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Characters are flawed and realistic. The world setup is vivid, with the misery of 19th century Russia bleeding through every description.

Raskolnikov’s descent into madness and overall lack of mental health is presented in a realistic way. I could imagine him talking to himself as he walked down a street after waking up in a bush.

Certainly has its heavy themes, but I think it’s an amazing book.

Each character has 3-4 names they are referred to. Despite that little fact, this book is shockingly digestible for something written more than 100 years ago.

I cannot wait to dive deeper into Dostoevsky

[Olivia · Rating 5 out of 5]

classic for a reason

[Amr · Rating 5 out of 5]

Probably the first psychological horror book ever written.
Thrilling and philosophical.
My current favourite book of all time.