Crime and Punishment

Crime and Punishment  
Author Fyodor Dostoevsky
Original title Преступление и наказание
Language Russian
Genre(s) Novel
Publisher The Russian Messenger (series)
Publication date 1866
Media type Print (Hardback & Paperback) & Audio book
ISBN NA

Crime and Punishment (Russian: Преступление и наказание) is a novel by Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky that was first published in the literary journal The Russian Messenger in twelve monthly installments in 1866,[1] and was later published in a single volume. It is the second of Dostoevsky's full-length novels after he returned from his exile in Siberia, and the first great novel of his mature period.[2]

Crime and Punishment focuses on the mental anguish and moral dilemmas of Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, an impoverished St. Petersburg ex-student who formulates and executes a plan to kill a hated, unscrupulous pawnbroker seemingly for her money, thereby solving his financial problems and at the same time, he argues, ridding the world of an evil worthless parasite. Raskolnikov also strives to be an extraordinary being, similar to Napoleon, believing that murder is permissible in pursuit of a higher purpose.

Contents

Creation

Dostoevsky conceived the idea of Crime and Punishment in the summer of 1865, having lost all his money at the casino, unable to pay his bill or afford proper meals. At the time the author owed large sums of money to creditors, and he was trying to help the family of his brother Mikhail, who had died in early 1864. The work was originally conceived in terms that suggest Émile Zola. Projected under the title The Drunkards, it was to deal "with the present question of drunkness ... [in] all its ramifications, especially the picture of a family and the bringing up of children in these circumstance, etc., etc." Once Dostoevsky conceived Raskolnikov and his crime, this theme became auxiliary, centering on the story of the Marmeladov family.[3]

Dostoevsky offered his story or novella (at the time Dostoevsky was not thinking of a novel[4]) to the publisher Mikhail Katkov. His monthly journal, The Russian Messenger, was a prestigious publication of its kind, and the outlet for both Ivan Turgenev and Leo Tolstoy, but Dostoevsky, having carried on quite bruising polemics with Katkov in early 1860s, had never published anything in its pages. Dostoevsky turned as a last resort to Katkov, and asked for an advance on a proposed contribution after all other appeals elsewhere failed.[5] In a letter to Katkov written in September 1865, Dostoevsky explained to him that the work was to be about a young man who yields to "certain strange, 'unfinished' ideas, floating in the air";[6] he had thus embarked on his plan to explore the moral and psychological dangers of the "radical" ideology.[7] In letters written in November 1865 an important conceptual change occurred: the "story" has become a "novel", and from here on all references to Crime and Punishment are to a novel.[8]

Dostoevsky had to race against time, in order to finish on time both The Gambler and Crime and Punishment. Anna Snitkina, a stenographer who would soon become his second wife, was a great help for Dostoevsky during this difficult task.[9] The first part of Crime and Punishment appeared in the January 1866 issue of The Russian Messenger, and the last one was published in December 1866.[10]

“ At the end of November much had been written and was ready; I burned it all; I can confess that now. I didn't like it myself. A new form, a new plan excited me, and I started all over again. ”
— Dostoevsky's letter to his friend Alexander Wrangel in February 1886[11]

In the complete edition of Dostoevsky's writings published in the Soviet Union, the editors reassembled and printed the notebooks that the writer kept while working on Crime and Punishment, in a sequence roughly corresponding to the various stages of composition. Because of these labors, there is now a fragmentary working draft of the story, or novella, as initially conceived, as well as two other versions of the text. These have been distinguished as the Wiesbaded edition, the Petersburg edition, and the final plan, involving the shift from a first-person narrator to the indigenous variety of third-person form invented by Dostoevsky.[12] The Wiesbaded edition concentrates entirely on the moral/physic reactions of the narrator after the murder. It coincides roughly with the story that Dostoevsky described in his letter to Katkov, and written in a form of a diary or journal, corresponds to what eventually became part II.[13]

“ I wrote [this chapter] with genuine inspiration, but perhaps it is no good; but for them the question is not its literary worth, they are worried about its morality. Here I was in the right—nothing was against morality, and even quite the contrary, but they saw otherwise and, what's more, saw traces of nihilism ... I took it back, and this revision of a large chapter cost me at least three new chapters of work, judging by the effort and the weariness; but I corrected it and gave it back. ”
— Dostoevsky's letter to A.P. Milyukov[14]

Why Dostoevsky abandoned his initial version remains a matter of speculation. According to Joseph Frank, "one possibility is that his protagonist began to develop beyond the boundaries in which he had first been conceived".[15] The notebooks indicate that Dostoevsky was aware of the emergence of new aspects of Raskolnikov's character as the plot action proceeded, and he structured the novel in conformity with this "metamorphosis," Frank says.[16] Dostoevsky thus decided to fuse the story with his previous idea for a novel called The Drunkards.[17] The final version of Crime and Punishment came to birth only when, in November 1865, Dostoevsky decided to recast his novel in the third person. This shift was the culmination of a long struggle, present through all the early stages of composition.[18] Once having decided, Dostoevsky began to rewrite from scratch, and was able to easily integrate sections of the early manuscript into the final text—Frank says that he did not, as he told Wrangel, burn everything he had written earlier.[19]

The final draft went smoothly, except for a clash with the editors of The Russian Messenger, about which very little is known. Since the manuscript Dostoevsky turned in to Katkov was lost, it is unclear what the editors had objected to in the original. In 1889, the editors of the journal commented that "it was not easy for him [Dostoevsky] to give up his intentionally exaggerated idealization of Sonya as a woman who carried self-sacrifice to the point of sacrificing her body". It seems that Dostoevsky had initially given Sonya a much more affirmative role in the scene, in which she reads the Gospel story of the raising of Lazarus to Raskolnikov.[20]

Plot

Raskolnikov, a drop-out student, chooses to live in a tiny, rented room in Saint Petersburg. He refuses all help, even from his friend Razumikhin, and plans to murder an old-woman money-lender, Alëna, and profit from her wealth—his motivation, whether personal or ideological, remains unclear. When Raskolnikov kills Alëna, however, he is also forced to kill her half-sister, Liza, who happens to enter the scene of the crime.

After the bungled murder Raskolnikov falls into a feverish state. He behaves as though he wishes to betray himself, and the detective Porfiry begins to suspect him purely on psychological grounds. At the same time, a chaste relationship develops between Raskolnikov and Sonia—a prostitute full of Christian virtue, driven into the profession by the habits of her father—and Raskolnikov confesses his crime to her. The confession is overheard by Svidrigaylov, a shadowy figure whose aim is to seduce Raskolnikov's sister, Dunya. Svidrigaylov appears to have a hold over Raskolnikov, but when he unexpectedly commits suicide, Raskolnikov goes to the police himself to confess. He is sentenced to penal servitude in Siberia; Sonia follows him, and the Epilogue holds out hope for Raskolnikov's redemption and moral regeneration under her influence.[21]

Characters

In Crime and Punishment Dostoevsky succeeds in fusing the personality of his main character, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov (Russian: Родион Романович Раскольников), with his new anti-radical ideological themes. Drawing on this achievement, the main plot, which involves a murder as the result of "ideological intoxication," depicts all the disastrous moral and psychic consequences that result for the murderer. Raskolnikov's psychology is placed at the center, and carefully interwoven with the ideas behind his transgression; every other feature of the novel illuminates the agonizing dilemma in which Raskolnikov is caught.[22] From another point of view, the novel's plot is another variation of a conventional nineteenth-century theme: an innocent young provincial comes to seek his fortune in the capital, where he succumbs to corruption, and loses all traces of his former freshness and purity. However, as Gary Rosenshield points out, "Raskolnikov succumbs not to the temptations of high society as Honoré de Balzac's Rastignac or Stendhal's Julien Sorel, but to those of rationalistic Petersburg".[23]

Raskolnikov is the protagonist, and the story is primarily told from his perspective. Despite its name, the novel does not so much deal with the crime and its formal punishment, as with Raskolnikov's internal struggle. The book shows that his punishment results more from his conscience than from the law. He committed murder with the belief that he possessed enough intellectual and emotional fortitude to deal with the ramifications, [based on his paper/thesis, "On Crime", that he is a Napoleon], but his paranoia and guilt soon engulf him. It is only in the epilogue that his formal punishment is realized, having decided to confess and end his alienation.

Sofia Semyonovna Marmeladova (Russian: Софья Семёновна Мармеладова), variously called Sonia and Sonechka, is the daughter of a drunk, Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov, whom Raskolnikov meets in a tavern at the beginning of the novel. She becomes the first person Raskolnikov confesses his crime to, and she supports him even though she was friends with one of the victims (Lizaveta). For most of the novel, Sonia serves as the spiritual guide for Raskolnikov. After his confession she follows him to Siberia where she lives in the same town as the prison.

Other characters of the novel are:

Name Word Meaning (in Russian)
Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov raskol a schism, or split; "raskolnik" is "one who splits" or "dissenter" (an allusion to Raskolnikov's self-imposed schism from Russian society, as well as his own split personality and constantly changing emotional state)
Pyotr Petrovich Luzhin luzha a puddle
Dmitri Prokofych Razumikhin razum reason, intelligence
Alexander Grigorievich Zamyotov zametit to notice, to realize
Andrey Semyenovich Lebezyatnikov lebezit to fawn on somebody, to cringe
Semyon Zakharovich Marmeladov marmelad marmalade/jam
Arkady Ivanovich Svidrigailov Svidrigailo a Lithuanian duke of the fifteenth century, who died one year before the fall of Constantinople

Structure

Crime and Punishment has a distinct beginning, middle and end. The novel is divided into six parts, with an epilogue. The notion of "intrinsic duality" in Crime and Punishment has been commented upon, with the suggestion that there is a degree of symmetry to the book.[24] Edward Wasiolek who has argued that Dostoevsky was a skilled craftsman, highly conscious of the formal pattern in his art, has likened the structure of Crime & Punishment to a "flattened X", saying:

Parts I-III [of Crime and Punishment] present the predominantly rational and proud Raskolnikov: Parts IV-VI, the emerging "irrational" and humble Raskolnikov. The first half of the novel shows the progressive death of the first ruling principle of his character; the last half, the progressive birth of the new ruling principle. The point of change comes in the very middle of the novel.[25]

This compositional balance is achieved by means of the symmetrical distribution of certain key episodes throughout the novel's six parts. The recurrence of these episodes in the two halves of the novel, as David Bethea has argued, is organized according to a mirror-like principle, whereby the "left" half of the novel reflects the "right" half.[24] For her part, Margaret Church discerns a contrapuntal structuring: parts I, III and V deal largely with the main hero's relationship to his family (mother, sister and mother surrogates), while parts II, IV and VI deal with his relationship to the authorities of the state "and to various father figures".[26]

The seventh part of the novel, the Epilogue, has attracted much attention and controversy. Some of Dostoevsky's critics have criticized the novel's final pages as superfluous, anti-climactic, unworthy of the rest of the work,[27] while others have rushed to the defense of the Epilogue, offering various ingenious schemes which conclusively prove its inevitability and necessity. Steven Cassedy argues that Crime and Punishment "is formally two distinct but closely related, things, namely a particular type of tragedy in the classical Greek mold and a Christian resurrection tale".[28] Cassedy concludes that "the logical demands of the tragic model as such are satisfied without the Epilogue in Crime and Punishment ... At the same time, this tragedy contains a Christian component, and the logical demands of this element are met only by the resurrection promised in the Epilogue".[29]

Crime and Punishment is written from a third-person omniscient perspective. It is told primarily from the point of view of Raskolnikov; however, it does at times switch to the perspective of Svidrigailov, Razumikhin, Peter Petrovich, or Dunya. This narrative technique, which fuses the narrator very closely with the consciousness and point of view of the central characters of the plot, was original for its period. Franks notes that his identification, through Dostoevsky's use of the time shifts of memory and his manipulation of temporal sequence, begins to approach the later experiments of Henry James, Joseph Conrad, Virginia Woolf, and James Joyce. A late nineteenth-century reader was however accustomed to more orderly and linear types of expository narration. This led to the persistence of the legend that Dostoevsky was an untidy and negligent craftsman, and to critical observations like the following by Melchior de Vogüé:

"A word ... one does not even notice, a small fact that takes up only a line, have their reverberations fifty pages later ... [so that] the continuity becomes unintelligible if one skips a couple of pages."[30]

Dostoevsky uses different speech mannerisms and sentences of different length for different characters. Those who use artificial language—Luzhin, for example—are identified as unattractive people. Mrs. Marmeladov's disintegrating mind is reflected in her language too. In the original Russian text, the names of the major characters have something of a double meaning, but in translation the subtlety of the language is sometimes lost. There is even a play with the Russian word for crime ("prestuplenie"), which is literally translated as a stepping across or a transgression. The physical image of crime as a crossing over a barrier or a boundary is lost in translation. So is the religious implication of transgression, which in English refers to a sin rather than a crime.[31]

Symbolism

The Dreams

Rodya's dreams always have a symbolic meaning, which suggests a psychological view. In the dream about the horse, the mare has to sacrifice itself for the men who are too much in a rush to wait. This could be symbolic of women sacrificing themselves for men, just like Rodya's belief that Dunya is sacrificing herself for Rodya by marrying Luzhin. Some critics have suggested this dream is the fullest single expression of the whole novel,[32] containing the nihilistic destruction of an innocent creature and Rodion's suppressed sympathy for it (although the young Rodion in the dream runs to the horse, he still murders the pawnbroker soon after waking). The dream is also mentioned when Rodya talks to Marmeladov. He states that his daughter, Sonya, has to sell her body to earn a living for their family. The dream is also a blatant warning for the impending murder.

In the final pages, Raskolnikov, who at this point is in the prison infirmary, has a feverish dream about a plague of nihilism, that enters Russia and Europe from the east and which spreads senseless dissent (Raskolnikov's name alludes to "raskol", dissent) and fanatic dedication to "new ideas": it finally engulfs all of mankind. Though we don't learn anything about the content of these ideas they clearly disrupt society forever and are seen as exclusively critical assaults on ordinary thinking: it is clear that Dostoevsky was envisaging the new, politically and culturally nihilist ideas which were entering Russian literature and society in this watershed decade, and with which Dostoevsky would be in debate for the rest of his life (cp. Chernyshevsky's What Is to Be Done?, Dobrolyubov's abrasive journalism, Turgenev's Fathers and Sons and Dostoesvsky's own The Possessed). Just like the novel demonstrates and argues Dostoevsky's conviction that "if God doesn't exist (or is not recognized) then anything is permissible" the dream sums up his fear that if men won't check their thinking against the realities of life and nature, and if they are unwilling to listen to reason or authority, then no ideas or cultural institutions will last and only brute barbarism can be the result. Janko Lavrin, who took part in the revolutions of the WWI era, knew Lenin and Trotsky and many others, and later would spend years writing and researching on Dostoevsky and other Russian classics, called this final dream "prophetic in its symbolism".

The Cross

Sonya gives Rodya a cross when he goes to turn himself in. He takes his pain upon him by carrying the cross through town, like Jesus; he falls to his knees in the town square on the way to his confession. Sonya carried the cross up until then, which indicates that, as literally mentioned in the book, she suffers for him, in a semi-Christ-like manner. Sonya and Lizaveta had exchanged crosses and become spiritual sisters, originally the cross was Lizaveta's - so Sonya carries Lizaveta's cross, the cross of Rodya's innocent victim, whom he didn't intend to kill.

Saint Petersburg

“ On an exceptionally hot evening early in July a young man came out of the garret in which he lodged in S. Place and walked slowly, as though in hesitation, towards K. bridge.[33] ”
 
— Fyodor Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment, I, I

The above opening sentence of the novel has a symbolic function: Russian critic Vadim K. Kozhinov argues that the reference to the "exceptionally hot evening" establishes not only the suffocating atmosphere of Saint Petersburg in midsummer but also "the infernal ambience of the crime itself".[34] Dostoevsky was among the first to recognize the symbolic possibilities of city life and imagery drawn from the city. I. F. I. Evnin regards Crime and Punishment as the first great Russian novel "in which the climactic moments of the action are played out in dirty taverns, on the street, in the sordid black rooms of the poor".[35]

Dostoevsky's Petersburg is the city of unrelieved poverty; "magnificence has no place in it, because magnificence is external, formal abstract, cold". Dostoevsky connects the city's problems to Raskolnikov's thoughts and subsequent actions.[36] The crowded streets and squares, the shabby houses and taverns, the noise and stench, all are transformed by Dostoevsky into a rich store of metaphors for states of mind. Donald Fanger asserts that "the real city [...] rendered with a striking concreteness, is also a city of the mind in the way that its atmosphere answers Raskolnikov's spiritual condition and almost symbolizes it. It is crowded, stifling, and parched."[37]

Themes

Dostoevsky's letter to Katkov reveals his immediate inspiration, to which he remained faithful even after his original plan evolved into a much more ambitious creation: a desire to counteract what he regarded as nefarious consequences arising from the doctrines of Russian nihilism.[38] In the novel, Dostoevsky pinpointed the dangers of both utilitarianism and rationalism, the main ideas of which inspired the radicals, continuing a fierce criticism he had already started with his Notes from Underground.[39] A Slavophile religious believer, Dostoevsky utilized the characters, dialogue and narrative in Crime and Punishment to articulate an argument against westernizing ideas in general. He thus attacked a peculiar Russian blend of French utopian socialism and Benthamite utilitarianism, which had led to what radical leaders, such as Nikolai Chernyshevsky, called "rational egoism".

The radicals refused however to recognize themselves in the novel's pages (Dimitri Pisarev ridiculed the notion that Raskolnikov's ideas could be identified with those of the radicals of his time), since Dostoevsky portrayed nihilistic ideas to their most extreme consequences. The aim of these ideas was altruistic and humanitarian, but these aims were to be achieved by relying on reason and suppressing entirely the spontaneous outflow of Christian pity and compassion. Chernyshevsky's utilitarian ethic proposed that thought and will in man were subject to the laws of physical science.[40] Dostoevsky believed that such ideas limited man to a product of physics, chemistry and biology, negating spontaneous emotional responses. In its latest variety of Bazarovism, Russian nihilism encouraged the creation of an élite of superior individuals to whom the hopes of the future were to be entrusted.[41]

Raskolnikov exemplifies all the potentially disastrous hazards contained in such an ideal. Frank notes that "the moral-psychological traits of his character incorporate this antinomy between instinctive kindness, sympathy, and pity on the one hand and, on the other, a proud and idealistic egoism that has become perverted into a contemptuous disdain for the submissive herd".[42] Raskolnikov's inner conflict in the opening section of the novel results in a utilitarian-altruistic justification for the proposed crime: why not kill a wretched and "useless" old moneylender to alleviate the human misery? Dostoevsky wants to show that this utilitarian type of reasoning and its conclusions had become widespread and commonplace; they were by no means the solitary invention of Raskolnikov's tormented and disordered mind.[43] Such radical and utilitarian ideas act to reinforce the innate egoism of Raskonikov's character, and to turn him into a hater rather than a lover of his fellow humans. He even becomes fascinated with the majestic image of a Napoleonic personality who, in the interests of a higher social good, believes that he possesses a moral right to kill. Indeed, his "Napoleon-like" plan drags him to a well-calculated murder, the ultimate conclusion of his self-deception with utilitarianism.[44]

In his depiction of the Petersburg background, Dostoevsky accentuates the squalor and human wretchedness that pass before Raskolnikov's eyes. He also uses Raskolnikov's encounter with Marmeladov to present both the heartlessness of Raskolnikov's convictions and the alternative set of values to be set against them.[43] Dostoevsky believes that the "freedom" propounded by the aforementioned ideas is a dreadful freedom "that is contained by no values, because it is before values". The product of this "freedom", Raskolnikov, is in perpetual revolt against society, himself, and God.[45] He thinks that he is self-sufficient and self-contained, but at the end "his boundless self-confidence must disappear in the face of what is greater than himself, and his self-fabricated justification must humble itself before the higher justice of God".[46] Dostoevsky calls for the regeneration and renewal of the "sick" Russian society through the re-discovering of their country, their religion, and their roots.[47]

Reception

The first part of Crime and Punishment published in the January and February issues of The Russian Messenger met with public success. Although the remaining parts of the novel had still to be written, an anonymous reviewer wrote that "the novel promises to be one of the most important works of the author of The House of the Dead". In his memoirs, the conservative belletrist Nikolay Strakhov recalled that in Russia Crime and Punishment was the literary sensation of 1866.[48]

The novel soon attracted the criticism of the liberal and radical critics. G.Z. Yeliseyev sprang to the defense of the Russian student corporations, and wondered, "Has there ever been a case of a student committing murder for the sake of robbery?" Pisarev, aware of the novel's artistic value attempted in 1867 another approach: he argued that Raskolnikov was a product of his environment, and explained that the main theme of the work was poverty and its results. He measured the novel's excellence by the accuracy and understanding with which Dostoevsky portrayed the contemporary social reality, and focused on what he regarded as inconsistencies in the novel's plot. Strakhov rejected Pisarev's contention that the theme of environmental determinism was essential to the novel, and pointed out that Dostoevsky's attitude towards his hero was sympathetic: "This is not mockery of the younger generation, neither a reproach nor an accusation—it is a lament over it."[49]

English translations

Film adaptations

References

  1. ↑ University of Minnesota - Study notes for Crime and Punishment - (retrieved on 1 May 2006)
  2. ↑ Frank (1995), 96
  3. ↑ Yousef, About Crime and Punishment
    * Fanger (2006), 17–18
  4. ↑ Frank, 170
    * Peace (2005), 8
    * Simmons (2007), 131
  5. ↑ Frank (1994), 168
  6. ↑ Miller (2007), 58
    * Peace (2006), 8
  7. ↑ Frank (1994), 179
  8. ↑ Miller (2007), 58–59
  9. ↑ Frank (1995), 39
    * Peace (2005), 8
  10. ↑ Simmons (2007), 131
  11. ↑ Miller (2007), 58
  12. ↑ Dostoevsky initially considered four first-person plans: a memoir written by Raskolnikov, his confession recorded eight days after the murder, his diary begun five days after the murder, and a mixed form in which the first half was in the form of a memoir, and the second half in the form of a diary (Rosenshield [1973], 399).
  13. ↑ Carabine (2000), x
    * Frank (1994), 170–172
    * Frank (1995), 80
  14. ↑ Frank (1994), 185
  15. ↑ Frank (1994), 174
  16. ↑ Frank (1994), 177
  17. ↑ Frank (1994), 175
  18. ↑ Frank (1994), 179–180, 182
  19. ↑ Frank (1994), 170, 179–180, 184
    * Frank(1995), 93
    * Miller (2007), 58–59
  20. ↑ Frank (1994), 184–185
    * Frank(1995), 93–94
  21. ↑ Peace (2005), 8–9
  22. ↑ Frank (1995), 97
  23. ↑ Rosenshield (1978), 76. See also Fanger (2006), 21
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 Davydov (1982), 162–163
  25. ↑ "On the Structure of Crime and Punishment, " in: PMLA, March 1959, vol. LXXIV, No. 1, p. 132–133.
  26. ↑ Church (1983), 103
  27. ↑ Mikhail Bakhtin, for instance, regards the Epilogue a blemish on the book (Wellek [1980], 33).
  28. ↑ Cassedy (1982), 171
  29. ↑ Cassedy (1982), 187
  30. ↑ Frank (1994), 184
    * Frank (1995), 92–93
  31. ↑ Morris (1984), 28
    * Peace (2005), 86
    * Stanton–Hardy (1999), 8
  32. ↑ Monas, Sidney, "Afterword: The Dream of the Suffering Horse," from his translation
  33. ↑ Richard Gill points out that "the hump-backed bridges crisscrossing Czar Peter's labyrinthine city are, as found in the novel, likewise to be viewed as metaphorical and highly suitable for marking the stages of the tortuous course of Raskolnikov's internal drama" (Gill [1982], 146).
  34. ↑ Gill (1982), 145
  35. ↑ Fanger (2006), 24
  36. ↑ Lindenmeyr (2006), 37
  37. ↑ Fanger (2006), 28
  38. ↑ Frank (1995), 100
  39. ↑ Donald Fanger believes that "Crime and Punishment only continued the polemic, incarnating the tragedy of nihilism in Raskolnikov and caricaturing it in Lebezyatnikov and, partially, in Luzhin" .(Fanger [2006], 21 – see also Frank [1995], 60; Ozick [1997], 114; Sergeyef [1998], 26).
  40. ↑ Frank (1995), 100–101
    * Hudspith (2003), 95
  41. ↑ Pisarev had sketched the outlines of a new proto-Nietzschean hero (Frank [1995], 100–101; Frank [2002], 11).
  42. ↑ Frank (1995), 101
  43. ↑ 43.0 43.1 Frank (1995), 104
  44. ↑ Frank (1995), 107
    * Sergeyef (1998), 26
  45. ↑ Wasiolek (2005), 55
  46. ↑ Vladimir Solovyov quoted by McDuff (2002), xiii-xiv
    * Peace (2005), 75–76
  47. ↑ *McDuff (2002), xxx:"It is the persistent tracing of this theme of a 'Russian sickness' of spiritual origin and its cure throughout the book that justify the author's characterization of it as an 'Orthodox novel'."
    * Wasiolek (2005), 56–57
  48. ↑ McDuff, x–xi
  49. ↑ Jahn, Dostoevsky's Life and Career
    * McDuff, xi–xii

Text

Sources

  • Peace, Richard. "Introduction". Peace, 1–16.
  • Fanger, Donald. "Apogee: Crime and Punishment". Peace, 17–35.
  • Lindenmeyr, Adele. "Raskolnikov's City and the Napoleonic Plan". Peace, 37–49.
  • Wasiolek, Edward. "Raskolnikov's City and the Napoleonic Plan". Peace, 51–74.
  • Peace, Richard. "Motive and Symbol". Peace, 75–101.

External links

Criticism

Online Text

Works by Fyodor Dostoevsky
Novels
Poor Folk · The Double: A Petersburg Poem · Netochka Nezvanova · The Village of Stepanchikovo · The Insulted and Humiliated · The House of the Dead · Notes from Underground · Crime and Punishment · The Gambler · The Idiot · The Possessed · The Raw Youth · The Brothers Karamazov
 Fyodor Dostoevsky
Short stories
"White Nights" · "A Christmas Tree and a Wedding" · "An Honest Thief" · "The Peasant Marey" · "The Dream of a Ridiculous Man" · "A Gentle Creature" · "A Weak Heart" · "A Nasty Story"
Non-fiction
A Writer's Diary
Related topics
The Grand Inquisitor · Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov · Nastasya Filippovna