The Stranger Vs C&P

Like Josh, I too found certain parallels between Crime and Punishment and another book that we have read in our class. The Stranger by Camus has a lot of similar themes, ideas, and concepts to C&P that I have really started to take notice of recently. One thing in particular, is how the women of each novel seemingly effect the men of the novels. Love is a driving force in both of the stories and it plays a huge role in how the characters (Meursault and Raskolnikov) are developed from beginning to end. Both men are misfits from society, the black sheep of their family, so to speak. They do not believe in a lot of societal norms and have their own ways of perceiving life in general. Love does not seem like it would be a major force in either of their lives, but if one stops and thinks about it, love is responsible for a lot of decisions the two characters make in their respective novels. In my opinion, Raskolnikov confessed to committing the murders as a pure act of love for his sister. Sonia obviously means a great deal to him and he trusted her enough to keep his secrets. In The Stranger, Marie is the only person who is able to get Meursault to show emotion and feel something about life. Before she came along, he never really felt anything, let along took notice of the things that go on around him. These important women are the only two characters of each book that are responsible for effecting the men of those books in a positive way. Their love and affection ultimately led to the character transformations of Raskolnikov and Meursault. Their opinions on society and how they function in it completely changed all due to them. While the ways that the two women go about with their acts of love are completely different, their love is love, regardless of how it is shown. And the male characters ended up being the way they were due to that love. 

“It was as though a fog had fallen upon him and wrapped him in a dreary solitude from which there was no escape” (Alexia Barrios)

Since the beginning of Crime and Punishment, one of the aspects of the novel that I really enjoyed was the psychology aspect of it. Throughout the novel we have seen Rodia slowly begin to break down psychology such as in the beginning of this weeks reading we see how he is coming close to his demise as he enters a “strange period” (417) where “it was as though a fog had fallen upon him and wrapped him in a dreary solitude from which there was no escape” (417). Throughout the novel we have seen the psychological aspects that have occurred to Rodia due to the murders he committed and along with this I enjoyed the psychological mind games that were going on between Porfiry, the policeman, and Rodia. Rodia has allowed the emotional and mental reactions to the murders almost reveal his role in the act several times, many of them being in front of Porfiry such as him fainting in the police station and his remarks to Zamyotov. Even with a suspect who has confessed to the murders, Porfiry, who I am assuming has had some training in psychology, was able to determine that those events were associated with those of someone who is guilty of something.

In my last post near the end I noted how I was unsure of Svidrigailov’s intentions, and now those intentions were made quite clear. For a while this character emitted a “bad vibe” to me, which wasn’t surprising at all since there are rumors he played a role in the death of both his late wife and one of his maids. There was just something that was entirely off about him beginning when he mysteriously was in Rodia’s room discussing his affection for Dunya and even more so when he offered to pay for Sonia’s mother’s funeral, and provide them money. When Rodia learns that Dunya received a mysterious letter that upset here, I immediately knew that it must have been written by Svidrigailov based on what I had perceived him to be cunning and manipulative enough to pull that off. This was a conniving and somewhat brilliant way to lure Dunya into his hands so he could give tell her that Rodia is the murderer and offer his services only if she marries him. An interesting aspect of this predicament that Dostoevsky throws in there is the fact that though Svidrigailov is threatening her life due to his angered reaction to her rejection, Dunya is unable to go through with murder. The shots she fired barely draw blood and I found this to be important because it showed that Dunya does not share the same rationalizations when it comes to murder as her brother.

Parallels Between Raskolnikov, the Underground Man, and Dostoevsky

          After reading Notes from the Underground, this book is making a lot more sense now, the common themes and ideas that Dostoyevsky presented are highly evident in the way Raskolnikov is acting. Either Raskolnikov is supposed to be a representative of the underground man, in that he acts and thinks very similarly, or Dostoyevsky cannot help but write himself into all of his characters, and it would make sense seeing how well he can capture the insane societal outcast character. The main point of comparison between Raskolnikov and the underground man is the fact that Raskolnikov spent so much time planning out and trying to exact his revenge, only to be met with indecision and doubts. He also regrets every time he performs something as a man of action was, as he did when he murdered the women. Even though he had planned the whole thing he cannot deal with the fact that he had actually done something. Also, Raskolnikov exhibits the same wariness towards the concept of “the wall” in the way that he both seeks to confess about his crimes, yet he constantly shies away from the absoluteness of the punishment.  Then there is the whole debate in notes from the underground about the fact that one can truly enjoy being punished because it confirms their existence. It seems that Raskolnikov is not quite entirely over-conscious, it seems as if he fades in and out of periods of consciousness, which would explain why his rambles are somewhat random. Yet he still exhibits the idea of a mouse under the floorboards in the way that he seems to look down on those in power, even though he is well aware of just how low he is in society.  Yet there is a part of Raskolnikov’s personality that is different from the underground man so far, unless we have not discussed it yet, and that is the whole Napoleonic adoration that Raskolnikov has and his theories of “great men.” His definition of great men almost perfectly parallels the idea of the “man of action” in notes from the underground, the fact that they are able to charge towards a goal no matter what is put in their way. Yet in this case, that type of man is being praised for that ability which is not the same for the underground man, who seems to hold content for these “men of action.” Personally, I think the relationship of these two characters and what it entails about the author would make for an interesting thesis, but I will have to wait until the complete analysis of the underground man to choose.  

Parallels Between Notes from the Underground and Crime and Punishment

          Now that I have read Notes from the Underground, I can see a lot of constants in Dostoyevsky’s writing and the characters he creates. Especially this notion of over-consciousness and insanity that seems to carry across almost all of Dostoyevsky’s characters. Raskolnikov has many parallels to the actual underground man in the way that he acts and in many of his theories throughout the book. First of all, the seemingly insane actions that Raskolnikov goes through in his story are very reminiscent of the over conscious nature of the underground man. Raskolnikov seems to be aware of absolutely every detail of what is going on around him, and he also goes through way too many steps to prepare for one thing, and even when it is done he is not deviating from trying to plan his way through everything. Another interesting parallel is the idea of “great men” in crime and punishment and the whole page on how religion is now useless and how evolution has stopped because of humanity in the underground man. Even though these sentiments are not explicitly mentioned in the underground man, they are heavily implied in the way that the character talks about the fact that humanity is constantly working against themselves and gaining advantages in the way that they are rejecting the natural ideas that seemingly separate us from animals. This whole idea seems to be leading to the idea that some people in society cost more to society than they help, therefore they should not exist. The whole idea that the elderly should not be kept alive based solely on the fact that it uses so much more resources than it saves. This is reflected by the idea that certain people in society should be able to avoid the rules of society because they have an idea or goal that is truly great towards society and will eventually end up benefiting society greatly. The fact that sometimes if an individual has an idea that might be worth killing people, then they should be allowed to is very reminiscent of the idea that Dostoyevsky has across these writings. It is the idea that I am better than everyone else, therefore the rules that apply to everyone else should not apply to me. Personally I think this is some of Dostoyevsky’s ego showing through, and the fact that he was probably a social outcast which made him despise those who were able to actually succeed in society, and shun their rules. 

So the painter is the "murderer"?

I am past the part where Raskolnikov confesses to Sonya. Now, beginning the next chapter, I find out that not only does Sonya know that he is the murderer, but also Svidrigailov. Now is when I feel trouble will start. Now is when people he does not want to know, start to know. I feel like now he is starting to adopt a sort of "mad man's" living condition... sometimes waking up at home, sometimes waking up in the middle of the bushes. He starts to live in his own world, not having any idea what is happening around him, which I feel is why sometimes he just loses himself and wakes up in the bushes. In all honestly, that is like a lunatic's living condition because he got kicked out of his house or something like that. I do like Sonya's character. I thought it was really nice that she held his hand at Katernia's funeral, showing that she still accepts Raskolnikov regardless of the fact that he is a murderer. I was shocked when they declared the painter as the murderer..... I am curious to see what is going to unfold next.

The Beginning of a Confession

In my opinion, I did not think that Rodia's pride would allow him to confess. I know that he has not confessed to the police yet, even though he made an extremely heartfelt promise that he fully intended on doing so, but that is just it. He promised he would turn himself in but at the end of the day those are just words. Words are not actions. There is no telling whether he will or will not actually tell the police or his responsibility for the murders, no matter what he said to his sister. Pride has always played a huge role in this novel. Especially when if comes to Raskolnikov's character. His pride and ego are basically his defining character trait (however sad that might be). I really hope that he does the right thing and turns himself in. I mean, he took one step closer to doing so in confessing and confiding in Sonya, but she is not the police. Maybe now that he has gotten it off his chest and spilled his deep dark secrets to he does not have the urge to tell anybody else. If he does not, does that mean that his sister will turn him in? Would she stoop that low? Rodia has shown Sonya disrespect before so maybe it is her turn to show a little tough love. Sonya said that she would be honorable and not tell anybody but then we find out that Svidrigailov overheard their conversation. Eavesdropping is never a good sign, in any situation. Just because Sonya said she would not tell does not mean that Svidrigailov will not. He had the upper hand now, he owns Rodia. He can do whatever he wishes, whenever he wishes, due to the fact that he overheard one major conversation.  Can you say plot twist? Rodia better decide what he is going to do, and quick, before somebody else makes that decision for him. Maybe now that he has confessed to Sonya he will not have as much guilt on his shoulders. I am not excusing anything he did, because what he did was awful, barbaric, illegal, and immoral, but the guilt he has been living with seemed to consume his life. I hate to see people struggle, even those who deserve it, so maybe this helped slightly. Regardless, I still believe he should turn himself in, and sooner rather than later.

“All I wanted was to do some daring thing…that was my sole motive” (Alexia Barrios)

So now that Rodia has confessed to Sonya of his role in the murders is this internal struggle that he has been having within himself since the murder come to an end? His confessing to Sonya is a major and his promise to later come clean to the police is a major development in the novel, as it seems that he is finally choosing to beginning the road to redemption.

 In the entire book so far he has been driven both mentally and psychologically ill due to the guilt that he was carrying on his conscience, and though it was evident that his role in the murders was going to be discovered I was unsure if his pride would allow him to confess. His pride has been a big factor in keeping the truth to himself as he believe that he is a above the rest and that the murder was entirely justifiable since he believes he was ridding of a evil human being. But him confessing allows me to believe that he has overcome this believe that he holds the power to judge people and act on this judgments as he did with the pawnbroker. He realizes that his philosophy in which he used to justify this act was a total farce and he says that “All I (Rodia) wanted was to do some daring thing…that was my sole motive” proving that this act was stemmed on emotions more than a philosophy. In my opinion, this act of violence was a way to prove to himself that he was a powerful human being since unconsciously he knew he was a coward, so in order to remove that he wanted to commit an exceptional act in which he stepped over the moral boundaries set by society and take matters into his own hand. For a moment he wanted to play God. He wanted to believe that he had the power to judge people and if they were considered parasites execute them or eradicate them from society for the better good of the people.

Though he first confessed the murders to Sonya only, now the plot as thickened now that Svidrigailov overheard the conversations. Though, Sonya intents on the information are honorable being that she is attempting to get him to confess, I doubt Svidrigailov’s will be the same. The fact that Rodia has now let his secret comes out makes the plot more interesting in the sense that who knows who else will learn of the truth and what intend to do with that information.