Suffering Crime And Punishment Essay Research Paper
Suffering Crime And Punishment Essay, Research PaperSuffering in Crime and Punishment In the novel Crime and Punishment, by Fyodor Dostoevsky, agony is an built-in portion of every character & # 8217 ; s function.
However, the message that Dostoevsky wants to show with the chief character, Raskolnikov, is non one of the Christian thought of redemption through agony. Rather, it appears to me, as if the writer ne’er lets his chief character suffer mentally throughout the novel, in relation to the offense, that is. His lone hurting seems to be physical illness.
Raskolnikov commits a premeditated slaying in a province of craze. He ends up perpetrating a 2nd slaying, which he ne’er of all time wanted to be responsible for. He kills Lizaveta, an extremely guiltless individual.
But does the writer of all time remind us of the slaying at any clip in the novel once more? Not in the physical sense of the offense itself. The reader doesn & # 8217 ; t hear about how to a great extent the slayings are weighing on his bosom, or how he is tormented by visions of the offense. He doesn & # 8217 ; t experience the least spot guilty about holding committed the offense, merely his pride & # 8217 ; s injury. He doesn & # 8217 ; t mention the thought of the hurting that might originate from perennial visions of the offense. Raskolnikov ne’er once more recalls the monolithic sums of blood everyplace, the expression on Lizaveta & # 8217 ; s face when he brings down the axe on her caput.
These things clearly show that the offense International Relations and Security Network & # 8217 ; t what might do him enduring, or hurting, it is something else. After Raskolnikov is sent away to Siberia, he doesn & # 8217 ; t experience contrite. His feelings haven & # 8217 ; t changed about his offense, he feels bad at non being able to populating up to his ain thoughts of illustriousness. He grows depressed merely when he learns of his female parent & # 8217 ; s decease. Raskolnikov still hasn & # 8217 ; t found any ground to experience compunction for his offenses. He takes Siberia as his penalty, because of how raging it is to travel through all these formalities, and ridicularities that it entails.
Yet, he really feels more comfy in Siberia than in his place in St. Petersburg. It & # 8217 ; s more comfy, and has better populating conditions than his ain H ome. But he isn’t free to do whatever he likes. But this does not contradict what I’ve said before.
He doesn’t view Siberia as suffering, but he does view it as punishment, because he would rather not have to go through seven years in his prison cell. His theory of the extraordinary, and the ordinary is something he has to follow and adhere to. His necessity to suffer is a part of his necessity to fulfill his unknown criteria to be extraordinary. His suffering, if any, is purely superficial.
The idea of suffering has to be heartfelt and well specified. Raskolnikov’s suffering is never spoken about, mainly because there is none. Even Raskolnikov views his turning himself in as a blunder, because he couldn’t take the heat. It is obvious that Raskolnikov never seems to be in a pit of despair from all the suffering he has to face from the effect of the murder. One might argue that Raskolnikov’s illnesses arise from his guilt and remorse for the crimes, but that doesn’t appear possible. Since the character never cites the murder for his sickness. In fact, Raskolnikov fell immediately sick after committing the murder.
How could he struck by guilt five seconds after committing the murder when he hasn’t even had a chance to see what events have just occurred? There is not a single instance when Raskolnikov, or the author for that matter, ever cite the dramatic effect of the murders on Raskolnikov’s conscience for his terrible illness. NOTHING in the novel would even imply that he feels remorse about committing the murders, it is just a silly idea that has been implanted in people’s minds and the seed has spread too rapidly, without analization. It is incredibly obvious that all the so-called pain and suffering that Raskolnikov feels is untrue, silly, and backed by no support. It would be incredulously moronic to attempt to view it from another point of understanding. People are entitled to their own opinions but the beliefs of that error majority should not overbear the beliefs of the correct minority.
Acceptance of a theory without analysis of it is ignorance