The character of Raskolnikov is interesting in Fyodor Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment. After an initially failed display of the Ubermensch, there is greater depth to the character, not just psychologically but in the context of his creation and purpose in the narrative. By observing how Raskolnikov's psychosis develops in Crime and Punishment, the reader can see that he begins to betray his own Marxist ideals. This is important because Crime and Punishment is not only a gripping crime novel, it is also a personal statement from author Fyodor Dostoevsky on the failure of Marxism itself and how redemption and religious reform are what Russia really needs to see a prosperous future. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Raskolnikov is established as a character with many mental defects even before committing his crime. The novel begins with vivid descriptions of how much Raskolnikov suffers "in isolation", setting the stage for his character and actions and allowing us to immediately enter his head. The reader is assaulted with crude details about his surroundings and can deduce that a disturbed individual like Raskolnikov is a product of his disturbed environment. In Dostoevsky's vision of St. Petersburg, "The heat in the streets was terrible... the unbearable stench of the taverns... an expression of the deepest disgust shone... on the refined face of the young man" (Dostoevsky 6). Such a horrible place made Raskolnikov hate life exponentially more. Such was the mentality of the average Russian young adult of the time, swept away by the broad and poorly defined ideals of Karl Marx. It is here, so early in the exposition, that the reader discovers that Raskolnikov is one of these individuals. As noted by Chijioke Uwasomba, “There seems to be too much uncertainty and indeterminacy in the behavior of these characters” (Uwamsoba 15). Dostoevsky says that Raskolnikov is not the only victim of an imperfect society. It is also important to note that when Raskolnikov is forced to leave this dark, dark, oppressive city and locked in a Siberian prison away from society, that is when he begins to recover. George Gibian says that this natural place "awakened in him the feelings of his youth, through which he came close to avoiding his crime and finding regeneration without having to go through the cycle of crime and punishment" because it is far from a oppressive society and is instead locked in a room alone with his own thoughts. (Gibian 1)This repugnance for an “imperfect” society makes Raskolnikov a Marxist and a nihilist. Marxism is the belief in a government led by a superior mass which includes the labor theory of value, dialectical materialism, class struggle and the dictatorship of the proletariat until the establishment of a classless society, while nihilism is the belief that life has no purpose, that existence is suffering, and surviving means attempting to discover meaning in suffering. As soon as the reader actually enters the mind of this strange man, we learn his beliefs. However, these opinions are seriously distorted. Raskolnikov takes it upon himself to interpret being a nihilistic Marxist as believing oneself to be superior among ordinary people. He asks: "And if a man were not really a scoundrel... we make the rules. Ourselves, there are no natural laws." (Dostoevsky 24), is testing the waters for his argument that he is exempt from the laws of society because they are beneath him. Raskolnikov idolizes Napoleon Bonaparte. Therefore, it's easybelieve that because Napoleon killed to achieve greatness, it is okay for Raskolnikov himself to do so. (Uwamsoba 143). Raskolnikov endures a series of horrific nightmares, each of which is crucial to his character's development. None are as important as the first, a dream in which a mare is beaten to death. Raskolnikov's dream about the mare signifies Raskolnikov's transition from a schizoid mess to a maniac with potentially murderous intentions. Could his killing really be predestined or did this dream unleash his inner violent intentions? Chijoke Uwamsoba believes that "the savage beating of the mare in his dream foreshadows his own ax murder" (147). His ax murder is even more horrific than the mare's death and shakes his psyche just as much. The imaginary death of the mare is what sets the stage, but the death of the pawnshop is what ends the show, causing Raskolnikov's fate to become increasingly deranged and lost. It is important to note that Raskolnikov's dreams "are tied together by violence" (146). This first dream, in particular, affects him in a way that parallels his future guilt over his future murder. This is also the first act of violence in the novel, which exists only in Raskolnikov's subconscious. Now fueled by a passion for murder, Raskolnikov, justified or not, has set the stage for his psychosis. Raskolnikov claims that his intentions are strictly Marxist. Raskolnikov's murderous intent is based on a distorted sense of Marxism. He believes that killing the pawnbroker is morally justified. simply because he is the “Ubermensch” (Dostoevsky 40). Raskolnikov sees the pawnbroker as "a parasite who is part of a class that sucks him and his kind" (147). He was furious about her social status and hated her by association, believing that her elite status was killing all her potential. This is part of the Marxist ideology, that the proletariat goes against the bourgeoisie. Raskolnikov gives 5 reasons for his murder. "First of all... because he was poor and needed money. This reason is the social justification of poverty. Then he claims that he wanted to do good for society, that the old woman was useless and would let her money rot. This reason it is utilitarian. Gennaro Santangelo says that these first two are paired because they "exist at the level of consciousness" (Santangelo 1) also believes that the basis of his Raskolnikov neurosis is due to incestuous desires, although this detracts from his overall purpose as well. character (Santangelo 1). However, it is possible that he uses the broad blanket of Marxism to hide his intentions. According to Thomas Fiddick, it is entirely reasonable that "Raskolnikov could also be seen as an intellectually motivated psychopath" and simply not. could. Not face the fact that a man he considered so utilitarian superior might actually be a lowly, petty criminal case (Fiddick 1). Even though he goes by so many names, he doesn't quite follow his ideals. Stated by Kieran James, Raskolnikov's ideals mirror those of Luzhin and Svidrigailov, yet he denounces them, demonstrating that he never truly agreed with their preaching (James 4). In his climactic confession to Sonia, Raskolnikov tells her "that low ceilings and small, cramped rooms warp the mind and soul." (Dostoevsky 403). Raskolnikov attributes the killing of the pawnbroker to being psychologically forced to do so, once again blaming his surroundings and home for having disturbed him growing up. This disturbed psyche also made him envious; not only is he envious of the pawnshop's wealth, but due to the fact that Raskolnikov felt of"not being able to place himself in the mystical structure of man's internal relationships and in some entity outside himself, therefore his personality was divided." (Santangelo 1). Even his name "Raskol" means "divided" in Russian. Due to Raskolnikov being a hypocrite, he becomes more and more distraught, paranoid and mad. The justification for his killing was not the one he had signed up to. He did not think of his own clear mind, but rather his actions were “masterfully and most cunningly executed, while the direction…is unbalanced…like a dream” (Dostoevsky 197). This leads Raskolnikov to destroy himself. The "Punishment" in the title is not his eventual arrest, but rather his self-suffering and mercy. Raskolnikov was never a sensible man, as many critics have mistaken. He is “severely injured psychologically by exposing himself to extreme individualism and resulting dementia” (Uwamsoba 146). During the time Crime and Punishment was written, Marxism was spreading throughout Russia, being adopted and misunderstood by many susceptible individuals who believed that Marx's ideal society was actually a cry to destroy the upper class in order to redeem your humble ones. Therefore, Raskolnikov's actions are distorted interpretations of Marxism, distorted by his own psychosis. Raskolnikov admits to Sonia that guilt is killing him, along with the paranoia of Svidrigailov and Porphyrius suspecting him. (Uwamsoba 144). Despite this, "Even in prison...Raskolnikov remains firmly convinced that murder is justifiable. Yet his whole being, according to Alfred Bem, his whole moral nature is shaken precisely by the moral aspect of murder" (Bem 1 ). He has gone so far down the rabbit hole that he absolutely refuses to escape. This echoes and even mirrors Russia's fate. Russia was going through a Raskolnikov-like almost existential crisis, and it seemed that Marxism was the answer. In reality, the twisted minds of the communist leaders we know as Stalin triggered the fall of Russia. Dostoevsky knew what he was writing about when he wrote Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment. He's not just a crazy lunatic, he's the personification of Dostoevsky's fears of Russia. Raskolnikov is still a fascinating character to immerse yourself in, and is much more complex than just a stand-in for an author. As Diane Telgen clarified, Raskolnikov “is schizophrenic…socially withdrawn, solitary, lonely, and appears to be incapable of…forming…social relationships” (Telgen 1). The only two characters he actually has a relationship with are his sister and Sonia, both of the opposite sex. It can be inferred that he cannot connect with his own gender. Not even with his supposed best friend Razumikhin seems comfortable. Razumikhin is Raskolnikov's foil, being outgoing and friendly while Raskolnikov is reclusive and obnoxious. He ends up winning the love of Raskolnikov's sister as she fades from his narrative while he leans towards Sonia. Sonia also serves as a foil to Raskolnikov, being kind and religious. Raskolnikov becomes so desperate for his sense of belonging following his crime that he throws off the façade of Marxism and nihilism to be accepted by her, and, more importantly, by God. Raskolnikov's adherence to the irrational mores of religion it contradicts the fact that he spent most of the novel attempting to point out how rational of a being he is (Gibian 1). A victim of an underdeveloped mentality and sense of belonging, Raskolnikov finally puts an end to his childish tantrums and finds a place in this world he hated so much. Raskolnikov is Dostoevsky's counterpart to the radical movements that plagued Russia. During this period, everyaspect of Russian society was questioned by rationalists, Marxists and nihilistic revolutionaries. Fyodor Dostoevsky "intended to show how destructive [these political ideals] were... to humanity" by creating a textbook definition of how these ideals manifested in a fragile and broken mind lead to nothing but self-suffering and pity. Raskolnikov's proclaimed motive in the exposition is to demonstrate that "he is beyond good and evil, a 'superman' whose 'will to power' was partly with that 'Antichrist'" (Fiddick 1 ) This reflects the ideas of nihilism, especially those expressed by the famous philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche. The idea of ​​the "Ubermensch", the "overman", the supreme human being, is to be seen as a supreme and benevolent teacher for l. humanity, but Raskolnikov interprets this as a self-imposed title of superiority What Dostoevsky is trying to say is that "following the 'superman' theory... leads to death, destruction, chaos and misery" (Telgen 78). ).Raskolnikov does not physically die, his soul and spirit are killed by his own tormented psyche, forcing him to destroy others as he descends into a state of chaos and self-imposed misery “Raskolnikov…reacts with horror to his own crime ” proving that these pseudo-Marxists and nihilists are not even prepared to deal with their own philosophies (Telgen 78). He does not have the courage to see the effect of his cause, his own ideologies preached so hard by himself realized in flesh and blood. When Raskolnikov hands himself over to Petrovitch, Petrovitch praises the fact that Raskolnikov sees "all the attraction of life" as nothing and says that he is "an ascetic, a monk, a hermit!" with "a book, a pen behind the ear, learned research", continuing by saying that there are "very many nihilists nowadays... and in fact it is no wonder", finally asking Raskolnikov directly if he is a nihilist (Dostoevsky, 538). Raskolnikov responds with a muttered "N-no...", he has realized that his definition of nihilism is wrong, that all his previous beliefs he held so strongly are null and void, that he will never become the great Napoleonic figure he has tried so hard to be. (Dostoevsky, 538). Petrovitch also asks Raskolnikov if he believed in the New Jerusalem. Raskolnikov's positive response is significant because "New Jerusalem, what he means, is his utopian perversion, to be built on the foundations of crime, self-affirmation and individual transgression (Gibian 1). Dostoevsky was not a pessimist, however, and ends Raskolnikov's plight on a happy (and sappy) note As said by Diane Telgen, Raskolnikov believed that Christianity was "the true vision of the human place in the world," so it's only right that Raskolnikov gets his redemption (Telgen). 78).) Locked in prison, forced into his own psyche, his adult anguish finally matures and with Sonia's help he is redeemed by Christianity. Just as Raskolnikov forced Sonia to read him the story of Lazarus, so has he experienced his “resurrection…new life” under God. Raskolnikov kisses the earth as Sonia begs him to do (Dostoevsky 520) This is a classical Russian and pre-Christian idea that the Earth is the mother of man (Gibian 1). conclusion: "the river that Raskolnikov sees... is no longer a means of committing suicide... it is the river of life"; he has finally found true beauty in life, and goes to bed with the Bible under his pillow, for the first time in the entire novel, happy. " (Gibian 1). What Dostoevsky is trying to say is that Russian pseudo-philosophers should accept Christian communism in their hearts instead of this abominable false interpretation of communism. When Raskolnikov does this, he stops suffering from sense of. 2014.