Sunday, September 15, 2013
Comentary on Raskolnikov Moral Compass Chapters 5-6
In this reading we get another example of how Raskolnikov thinks that he is following a perfectly just moral
compass, at least, based on his perception of the world. According to him, killing
his pawn broker is only the right thing to do, he overhears another person
complaining about her lending rates and just how badly she treats her sister,
so Raskolnikov uses that as a reason to finally decide to kill her. From
any outside perspective, his decisions would seem rash and unnecessary, but the
novel is intentionally trying to make a distinction between different opinions on
what is morally just. For me, I find that Raskolnikov is not truly a good
person, even though the writing style and the way he portrays his actions, show
him as morally perfect. This shows that in anyone’s eyes, without input from
other people as to what is right and what is wrong, they might think that
something as terrible as murdering an old woman, is completely justified. One
explanation for this over assumption of justice on Raskolnikov’s part might be
due to his overexposure to the unjust and morally degraded sides of society
throughout his life. That combined with his anti-social nature gives him no direction
for what is right outside of his own perception. It is almost as if Raskolnikov
gets on a power high whenever he feels he is doing something morally just. He
is not doing it to help other people, he only does it so that he can fulfill
his desire to have power over someone else who is in a worse condition to him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
After I read your post, and now that I think about it, I completely agree with you. I never even thought to look at it in that aspect. In Raskolnikov's mind, everything he does is moral or justified in some way or another. But why? I've brought this up in almost every one of my posts thus far, but why is he like this?! All these unanswered questions I have are slowly driving me insane. A part of me wants to like Raskolnikov, for some weird reason, but I just can't seem to get myself to give his character a chance; he's annoying with his bipolar tendencies. I also agree with you on the topic of Raskolnikov getting a power high whenever he feels like he's doing something right. No matter what he does, he does it for the wrong reasons. Sure he can do a good deed, but that still doesn't make him a good person. One's actions don't necessarily define a person, and Raskolnikov, in my opinion, only does things to fulfill his desire to control others and be above them in any given situation. But that doesn't explain much of anything. The ideas that Josh and I share are only that: ideas. Our theories shed no light on why Raskolnikov does the things he does or thinks the things he thinks. When is Dostoyevsky going to explain more about Raskolnikov? That's pretty much the only thing I care to know.
ReplyDelete