The character of Raskolnikov is interesting in Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky. A failed visualization of the Ubermensch to begin with, there is leagues more depth to the character, not only in a psychological way but in the context of his own creation and purpose in the narrative. Looking at how Raskolnikov's psychosis develops in Crime and Punishment, the reader can see that he begins to betray his own Marxist ideals. This is important because Crime and Punishment is not only a gripping detective novel, it is also a personal statement by author Fyodor Dostoyevsky about the failure of Marxism itself and the fact that redemption and Religious reforms are what Russia really needs to see a prosperous future. no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Raskolnikov is recognized as a character with many mental flaws even before committing his crime. The novel begins with vivid descriptions of how much Raskolnikov suffers "in isolation", setting the stage for his character and actions and allowing us to immediately get inside his head. The reader is bombarded with crude details about his environment and can infer that a disturbed individual like Raskolnikov is the product of his disturbed environment. In Dostoyevsky's vision of St. Petersburg: "The heat in the street was terrible...the unbearable stench of the taverns...an expression of the deepest disgust shone...on the refined face of the young man" (Dostoyevsky 6). Such a horrible place caused Raskolnikov to hate life exponentially. So too was the mindset of the average young Russian adult of the time, carried away by the broad and ill-defined ideals of Karl Marx. It is here, so early in the exposition, that the reader discovers that Raskolnikov is one of these individuals. As Chijioke Uwasomba notes, “there seems to be too much uncertainty and indeterminacy in the behavior of these characters” (Uwamsoba 15). Dostoyevsky says that Raskolnikov is not the only victim of an imperfect society. It is also important to note that when Raskolnikov is forced to leave this troubled, dark, oppressive city and sent to a Siberian prison, far from society, that is when he begins to recover. George Gibian says that this natural location "awakened in him the feelings of his youth, thanks to which he came close to avoiding his crime and finding regeneration without having to go through the cycle of crime and punishment" because he is far from an oppressive society. and is instead locked in a room alone with his own thoughts. (Gibian 1) This horror of an “imperfect” society makes Raskolnikov a Marxist and a nihilist. Marxism is the belief in higher mass government which includes the labor theory of value, dialectical materialism, class struggle and the dictatorship of the proletariat until the establishment of a classless society, while nihilism is the belief that life has no purpose, that existence is suffering, and that to survive is to try to discover meaning in suffering. As the reader actually enters the mind of this strange man, we learn about his beliefs. However, these views are seriously distorted. Raskolnikov takes it upon himself to interpret being a nihilistic Marxist as believing oneself superior among commoners. He asks: "And if a man is not really a scoundrel...we make the rules. We ourselves, there are no natural laws." (Dostoyevsky 24), he tests the waters with his thesis according to which he is exempt from the laws of societybecause they are inferior to him. Raskolnikov idolizes Napoleon Bonaparte. Thus, it is easy to believe that since Napoleon killed to achieve greatness, Raskolnikov himself can do it. (Uwamsoba 143). Raskolnikov endures a number of horrific nightmares, each of which is essential to the development of his character. None are as important as his very first, a dream in which a mare is beaten to death. Raskolnikov's dream about the mare signifies Raskolnikov's change from a schizoid disorder to a maniac with potentially murderous intentions. Could his murder really be predestined or did this dream trigger his inner violent intentions? Chijoke Uwamsoba believes that “savagely beating the mare in his dream foreshadows his own ax murder” (147). His ax murder is even more horrible than the death of the mare and is just as disruptive to his psyche. The fictional death of the mare is what sets the stage, but the death of the pawnbroker is what ends the show, making Raskolnikov's fate increasingly deranged and lost. It is important to note that Raskolnikov's dreams "are bound by violence" (146). This first dream, in particular, affects him in a way that parallels his future guilt over his future murder. It is also the novel's first act of violence, an act that exists only inside Raskolnikov's subconscious. Now driven by a passion for murder, Raskolnikov, justified or not, set the stage for his psychosis. Raskolnikov states that his intentions are strictly Marxist. Raskolnikov's murderous intent is based on a perverse sense of Marxism. He believes that killing the pawnbroker is morally justified. simply because he is the “Ubermensch” (Dostoyevsky 40). Raskolnikov views the pawnbroker as “vermin who are part of a class that sucks him and his ilk” (147). He was furious at her social status and hated her by association, believing that her elite status killed all of her potential. This is part of a Marxist ideology according to which the proletariat opposes the bourgeoisie. Raskolnikov gives 5 motives for his murder. "First… because he was poor and needed money. This motive is the social justification for poverty. Then he maintains that he wanted to benefit society, that the old woman was useless and would have left rotting his money. This motive is utilitarian. Gennaro Santangelo says that these first two are coupled because "they exist at the level of consciousness" (Santangelo 1 also thinks that Raskolnikov's neurosis is due to incestuous desires, although this. undermines his overall goal as a character).(Santangelo 1) However, it is possible that he is using the broad spectrum of Marxism to hide his own intentions. According to Thomas Fiddick, it is entirely reasonable that “Raskolnikov. could also be considered an intellectually motivated psychopath" and he simply couldn't. I don't have to face the fact that a man he considered such a utilitarian superior might actually be a lowly criminal case (Fiddick. 1). Although he calls himself so many names, he doesn't quite pursue his own ideals. Stated by Kieran James, Raskolnikov's ideals mirror those of Luzhin and Svidrigailov, but he denounces them, showing that he never truly adhered to his preachings (James 4). In his climatic confession to Sonia, Raskolnikov tells her "that low ceilings and small, cramped rooms distort the mind and soul." (Dostoyevsky 403). Raskolnikov attributes the pawnbroker's murder to the fact that he was psychologically coerced into doing so, once again blaming his own environment and home for raising him in trouble. This disturbed psyche hasalso made envious; not only is he envious of the pawnbroker's wealth, but also because Raskolnikov felt that he "could not place himself in the mystical structure of man's internal relationships and in an entity external to himself – d 'where his personality divided'. (Santangelo 1). Even its name “Raskol” means “to divide” in Russian. Raskolnikov being a hypocrite, he becomes more and more clueless, paranoid and crazy. The justification for his assassination was not one he subscribed to. He did not think of his own clear mind, but rather his actions were “executed in the most masterful and cunning manner, while the direction… is disturbed… like a dream” (Dostoyevsky 197). This leads Raskolnikov to destroy himself. The "punishment" in the title is not his eventual arrest, but rather his self-suffering and pity. Raskolnikov was never a sane man, as many critics were mistaken. He is “severely injured psychologically, exposing himself to extreme individualism and the resulting dementia” (Uwamsoba 146). During the period that Crime and Punishment was written, Marxism was spreading across Russia, being embraced and misunderstood by many susceptible individuals, believing that Marx's ideal society was, in fact, a cry to destroy the upper class in order to redeem his humble selves. Thus, Raskolnikov's actions are those of twisted interpretations of Marxism, twisted by his own psychosis. Raskolnikov admits to Sonia that guilt is killing him, as well as the paranoia of Svidrigailov and Porphyrius who suspect him. (Uwamsoba 144). Despite this, "Even in prison... Raskolnikov remains inflexibly attached to the idea that murder is justifiable. And yet his whole being, according to Alfred Bem, his entire moral nature is shaken precisely by the moral aspect of murder" (Bem 1 ). He's gone so far down the rabbit hole that he absolutely refuses to escape. This echoes and even reflects the fate of Russia. Russia was going through an almost existential crisis similar to Raskolnikov's, and it seemed that Marxism was the answer. In reality, it was the twisted minds of the communist leaders we know, like Stalin, who triggered the fall of Russia. Dostoyevsky knew what he was talking about when he wrote Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment. He's not just a crazed lunatic, he's a personification of Dostoyevsky's fears about Russia. Raskolnikov remains a fascinating character to delve into, and he is much more complex than just a stand-in author. As Diane Telgen points out, Raskolnikov “is schizophrenic…socially withdrawn, reclusive, alone, and seems incapable…of forming…social relationships” (Telgen 1). The only two characters he truly has a relationship with are his sister and Sonia, both of the opposite sex. It can be inferred that he cannot connect with his own gender. Even in the presence of his supposed best friend Razumikhin, he doesn't seem at ease. Razumikhin is Raskolnikov's foil, being outgoing and friendly while Raskolnikov is lonely and hateful. He eventually wins the love of Raskolnikov's sister as she disappears from his narrative as he leans towards Sonia. Sonia also acts as a foil to Raskolnikov, being kind and religious. Raskolnikov becomes so desperate to belong in the wake of his crime that he sheds the facade of Marxism and nihilism to be accepted by her, and more importantly by God. Raskolnikov referring to the irrational customs of religion contradicts the fact that he spent most of the novel trying to demonstrate how rational he is as a being (Gibian 1). A victim of an underdeveloped mentality and sense of belonging, Raskolnikov finally ends hischildish tantrum and finds his place in this world he hated so much. Raskolnikov is Dostoyevsky's foil in the face of the radical movements that tormented Russia. During this period, all aspects of Russian society were challenged by rationalist, Marxist and nihilist revolutionaries. Fyodor Dostoyevsky "intended to show how destructive [these political ideals] were...to humanity" by creating a classic definition of how these ideals manifesting in a fragile, broken mind only lead to destruction. personal suffering and pity. Raskolnikov's proclaimed motive in his presentation is to prove "that he is beyond good and evil, a 'superman' whose 'will to power' was in part with this 'Antichrist'" (Fiddick 1). This reflects the ideas of nihilism, particularly those expressed by the famous philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. The idea of ​​the "Ubermensch", the "superman", the supreme human, is supposed to be seen as an ultimate and benevolent teacher for humanity, but Raskolnikov interprets it as a title of superiority that he imposed. What Dostoyevsky is trying to say is that "following the 'superman' theory... leads to death, destruction, chaos and misery" (Telgen, p. 78). Raskolnikov does not die physically, his soul and spirit are killed by his own tormented psyche, leading him to destroy others while sinking into a state of chaos and self-imposed misery. “Raskolnikov…reacts with horror to his own crime,” showing that these pseudo-Marxists and nihilists are not even ready to confront their own philosophies (Telgen 78). He does not have the courage to see the effect of his cause, his own ideologies preached so harshly by himself and realized in flesh and blood. When Raskolnikov goes to Petrovich, Petrovich welcomes the fact that Raskolnikov considers "all the attractions of life" as nothing and says that he is "an ascetic, a monk, a hermit!" » with "a book, a pen behind [his] ear, scholarly research", going on to say that there are "a large number of nihilists these days… and indeed, there is no need to s 'to astonish', finally asking Raskolnikov directly if he is a nihilist (Dostoyevsky, 538). Raskolnikov responds with a muttered "N-no...", he has realized that his definition of nihilism is incorrect, that all of his previous beliefs that he held so strongly to were null and void, that he will never become the great Napoleonic figure he had. sought so strongly to be. (Dostoyevsky, 538). Petrovich also asks Raskolnikov if he believed in the New Jerusalem. Raskolnikov's positive response is significant insofar as "the New Jerusalem of which he speaks is a utopian perversion, which must be built on the foundations of individual crime, self-assertion and transgression" (Gibian 1). . Dostoyevsky was not a pessimist, however. , and it ends Raskolnikov's plight on a happy (and sad) note. As Diane Telgen said, Raskolnikov believed that Christianity was "the true vision of the human place in the world," so it's fitting that Raskolnikov gets his redemption (Telgen 78). ). Locked in prison, forced inside his own psyche, he eventually emerges from his adult anguish and, with the help of Sonia, redeems himself through Christianity. Just as Raskolnikov forced Sonia to read him the story of Lazarus, he suffered hers. “resurrection…new life” under God. Raskolnikov kisses the ground as Sonia begs him to do (Dostoevsky 520). This is a classic Russian and pre-Christian idea that the Earth is the mother of man (Gibian 1). conclusion, “the river that Raskolnikov sees… is no longer a means of committing suicide… it is the river of life”; he finally found. 2014.