Crime and Punishment

This one took me quite some time to get through but I really enjoyed it. My third Dostoevsky read, I’m learning that the likelihood of me enjoying anything penned by him will be high.

That being said, I’d definitely say I preferred Dostoevsky’s Demons to C&P. Part 1 of this novel started and hooked me right away, and I flew through Parts 1 and 2, but then I slugged through 3 & 4. Things certainly picked up again and I later flew through 5 & 6.

This book had some astoundingly well-articulated themes which were incredibly thought-provoking. Still, while I adore Dostoevsky’s narrative voice and overall characterisation, I personally was not very interested in many of the women in this novel, who seemed slightly more one-dimensional than I would expect for Dostoevsky, which is a shame. I think particularly background around Sonya’s character didn’t really grab me, sections/plot with Katerina Ivanonva sort of didn’t really tie in too much to a lot of important plot points (in my opinion). Having said this, I do think Sonya was a fantastic symbolic representation of the nihilistic ‘power’ (selfless autonomy of suffering) that Raskolnikov fails to reach. 

Your worst sin is that you have destroyed and betrayed yourself for nothing.

As a byproduct to the above, I found these sections a bit harder to get through (except for that one argument between Ivanonva and Polina Mikhailovna, I was grabbing for popcorn at that one).

Continuing on more about the characters, I absolutely adored Razumikhin’s character, he was so much fun and I loved watching him interact with other characters throughout this entire novel. And of course, Raskolnikov was a super interesting protagonist; I stand by my annotated claims that this man has the most chronically-online-anime-nerd-incel energy that I’ve ever seen in a 19th century Russian literature novel. The amount of “I am the victorious winner, I have thought three steps ahead like a mastermind… unless…” inner dialogue reminded me so much of Light Yagami in Death Note honestly… Sometimes it made me cringe but in a way that was really entertaining.

On a more serious note, the actual reflection points in this novel were geneuinely phenomenal. Aside from generally just enjoying the novel, I really loved the psychological dynamics of Raskolnikov’s self doubt throughout the novel— particularly when his thoughts around ‘the powerful/extra-ordinary are willing to do the things that set them above the ordinary’, it was a very ‘Will-to-power’ style Nietzsche-esque argument, and I loved seeing Raskolnikov not only double down in this belief system but also sort of internally collapse at the idea that his own guilt, remorse, and worry were indication that he was ‘ordinary’ after all. But interestingly– we see Raskolnikov fall short of this in his actions, in his nihilistic attempt to transcend ‘morality’ he simultaneously manages to double down and reaffirm the structures of the social system through which he navigates. 

It’s a rather interesting notion– one I could genuinely sit and prattle on about for hours– this failed <Übermensch> that Raskolnikov’s character nearly hits, yet simultaneously misses the mark of. I think if we were to hear Nietzsche’s thoughts on this one, he would have really had a field day, but ultimately would have condemned Raskolnikov for his inability of truly exemplifying the idea of the <Übermensch> and playing right back into the structure he so despises.

People with new ideas, people with the faintest capacity for saying something new, are extremely few in number, extraordinarily so, in fact.

 Overall I really enjoyed and glad to finally be able to say I’ve read this classic. I’m looking forward to listening to some analytical dissections of this text in the future as well.

Overall Rating: 4.5/5

Would I Recommend? Yes