Perhaps because I read Crime and Punishment after Brothers Karamazov, viz. in the reverse order in which Dostoevsky wrote them, I find the former psychologically more coherent, more relatable, than the latter, but philosophically less thought-provoking. It is almost as if Dostoevsky is working things out through his writings. When one reads them in the reverse order, like reading the end of a mystery novel first, the element of wonder is no longer present, replaced with a sense of familiarity.
Recurring Characters
Tolstoy was criticized for aristocratic snobbery, as he always wrote about the lives of aristocrats, not of the common people. He responded by saying that he wrote about the aristocracy because that is what he knew best, and one ought to write about what one knows. Dostoevsky knows the lower echelon of the Russian society, the poor, the wretched, the tormented, the dispossessed and marginalized, and that’s why we always encounter these poor folks in his novels.
Peter O’Toole once said that Irish women had great posture because they always carried water on their heads and carried their husbands home from the pub. Readers of Dostoevsky cannot but sense the oppressive burden Russian women have to bear due to the vices and weaknesses of their men.
- Split Personalities: Raskolnikov and Ivan Karamazov
As his name suggests, Raskolnikov is a man split inside. He is beset with psychological, intellectual and moral conflicts, which caused his body to break down with fever. The same happened to Ivan Karamazov.
- Drunkards: Marmeladov and Dmitri Karamazov
Marmeladov’s drunken and yet strangely dignified monologue about forgiveness, rather reminds me of Dmitri Karamazov. Is Dostoevsky suggesting that drunkards will be forgiven by God on Judgment Day, and continue their drunken ways for all eternity, in the same way that they are forgiven by the women in their lives and remain drunkards?
- Psychopaths: Smerdyakov, Svidrigailov and Luzhin
One definition of a psychopath is a person who has no conscience, no inner moral standard. In the eyes of people who see through them, they are beyond redemption from disgrace and madness. In their own eyes, psychopaths don’t see themselves as any different from other people, but perhaps even superior in some way.
The Central Question
The structure of Crime and Punishment mirrors that of Brothers Karamazov: Exactly half way through the novel, an article by one of the protagonists is discussed, and a question is posed, which captures the moral and philosophical dilemma of the entire novel. It is literally the central question of the novel.
In Crime and Punishment, the central question is the so-called “extraordinary man” theory: Extraordinary men, such as Julius Caesar and Napoleon, transcend the laws that bind ordinary men. In order to reach the grand goal they set for themselves and mankind, they are justified to commit crime, as many as necessary.
What really distinguishes an extraordinary man from the ordinary? Are there certain marks? If we grant the existence of extraordinary men, what principle would justify their crimes and condemn those of the ordinary? Raskolnikov murdered two women, and, till the very end, he shows no remorse for his crime. As he sees it, the crime of the ‘extraordinary men’ is no different from his. He ‘failed’ to live with it, proving he was not extraordinary. But there is always the possibility that he might eventually succeed, and become ‘extraordinary’.
To find an answer to the extraordinary men theory, one would need to read the sequel, i.e., Brothers Karamazov.
Dostoevsky on Science and Humanity
Dostoevsky speaks of science in a few places in the novel, all in a disapproving way. He strongly objects to the lack of compassion in society, and apparently attributes it to science and rationalism.
Upon closer inspection, however, the science Dostoevsky saw and reacted to is not science proper, but ideology masquerading as “science”. For example, eugenics is not science, it is an ideology that treats human beings as a means to an end. In this regard, Dostoevsky represents many Christians in current society, who have a similar aversion to “science”. Conversely, many secular people have a strong aversion to “religion”, not religion proper, but self-serving political ideology masquerading as religion.
Dostoevsky’s novels as a whole is a counter-argument to dispassionate or inhumane ideologies. By describing minutely their inner psychological states, subtle changes, fears, defiances, hopes, struggles, failings and triumphs, he elevates and magnifies the dignity of individual human beings, the God-given dignity of even the most despicable and pitiable among us.
Related Posts:
References:
- Dostoyevsky, Fyodor. “Crime and Punishment”. Project Gutenberg. March 28, 2006. Accessed November 27, 2017. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2554