F. M. Dostoevsky's novel "Crime and Punishment" was created in 1866. This was the hour of reform; the old “masters of life” began to be replaced by new ones - bourgeois businessmen and entrepreneurs. And Dostoevsky, as a writer who subtly felt all the changes in society, in his novel raises those topical problems for Russian society that worried the majority: who is to blame for the troubles and misfortunes ordinary people, what to do for people who do not want to accept this life.
The main character of the novel "Crime and Punishment" is Rodion Raskolnikov. “He was remarkably handsome, with beautiful dark eyes, dark blond, above average height, thin and slender.” Rodion was poorly dressed: “He was so poorly dressed that another, moreover, an ordinary person, would have been ashamed to crawl out into the street in such rags during the day.” Raskolnikov was forced to quit his studies due to the fact that he did not have enough finances, due to nervous and physical exhaustion. He lived in a small closet with old yellow wallpaper; the furniture included three old chairs, a table and a sofa, which occupied almost the entire room. Raskolnikov was “crushed by poverty,” so he could not pay the landlady more than that for such a poor dwelling. For this reason, he tried not to show himself to her.
Raskolnikov understands that the world is not built fairly, and he rejects it. Raskolnikov's protest against an unjust world results in a personal rebellion. He creates his own theory, according to which people are divided into two categories: “powerful people and ordinary people.” There are very few “Lords” in the world; these are those who carry out the progress of society, such as Napoleon. Their task is to manage other people. The task of “ordinary people,” according to the hero, is to reproduce and submit to the “lords.” For the sake of any great goal, “lords” can sacrifice by any means, including human life. Raskolnikov was a supporter of this theory, considered himself a “ruler,” but he wanted to use his capabilities and his political elite in order to help poor people.
In order to check which category of people he belongs to, Rodion decides to kill the old pawnbroker. The test of his theory that he put forward was main reason crimes, and helping the “humiliated and insulted” was the main reason for the crime, and helping the “humiliated and insulted” was only a moral justification for him. The second reason is material. Raskolnikov knew that the old woman was rich, but all her money was wasted. He understands that they can save dozens of lives. And the third reason for murder is social. Having robbed the old woman, he could continue his studies at the university and live in abundance.
In the world in which Raskolnikov lives, violation of moral standards has become commonplace and, in his opinion, killing a person does not contradict the laws of this society. But in his logical crimes he did not take into account one thing: if he takes the path of violence kind person who cannot be indifferent to other people's pain and suffering, then inevitably he brings trouble not only to others, but also to himself. In his theory, Raskolnikov forgot about human qualities: conscience, shame, fear.
After committing a crime, Raskolnikov feels cut off from the world around him, from the people close to him. He was overcome with fear at the thought that someone knew about his action, he was afraid of everything (he flinched from a rustle in the room, from a shout on the street). Reason began to speak in him, he realized that he was not a “lord”, but a “trembling creature.” And the knowledge that Raskolnikov so strived for turned into a terrible disappointment for him. The hero enters into a fierce struggle, but not with an external enemy, but with his own conscience. In his mind there lurks hope that the theory put forward by him will nevertheless be justified, but in the subconscious there is already terror and fear.
But not only inner world Raskolnikova pushes him to think that the idea is wrong, as well as those around him. The most significant role in the disappointment of these calculations by Rodion was played by Sonya Marmeladova.
Sonya endured, and at the same time she is the embodiment of compassion, she does not judge anyone, only herself, she pities everyone, loves and helps as much as she can. It is in conversations with Sonya that Raskolnikov begins to doubt his theory. He wants to get an answer to the question: is it possible to exist without paying attention to the suffering and torment of others. Sonya with all her destiny opposes his cruel and strange idea. And when Raskolnikov breaks down and opens up to her, this theory horrifies Sonya, although she ardently sympathized with him. Raskolnikov, suffering himself and making her suffer, still hopes that she will offer him another path, and not a confession.
The murder drew an insurmountable line between people and Raskolnikov: “a gloomy, painful feeling of endless solitude and alienation suddenly appeared deliberately in his soul.” He also suffers because his mother and sister, the murderer, love him. Only Sonya helps him find the meaning of life, helps him cleanse himself spiritually and morally and begin the difficult and gradual path of returning to people.
Raskolnikov was exiled to Siberia for hard labor, but Raskolnikov’s moral torment was a more severe punishment for him than exile. Thanks to Sonya, he returned to real life and to God. Only at the very end did he realize that “life has come.”
The novel “Crime and Punishment” is a work dedicated to the history of how long and difficult it is for the human essence to rush through suffering and mistakes to comprehend the truth. The author's task was to show what kind of political elite thought can have over a person, and how terrible thought itself can be. Dostoevsky explores in detail the theory of his hero, which led him to a topical dead end. The author, of course, does not agree with Raskolnikov’s opinion and forces him to dissuade him, and this can only be achieved through suffering. Dostoevsky conducts a subtle psychological investigation: what does the criminal feel after his crime? He shows how the hero is forced to confess on himself, because this ominous secret weighs on him and interferes with his life.
“Crime and Punishment” is one of Dostoevsky’s most complex and perfect works, around which there are still debates to this day. And this is understandable. “Crime and Punishment” is an unusual novel in all respects. This is a problematic, “ideological” novel, the like of which has never been seen before in either Russian or world literature. Dostoevsky tried to solve many problems in it: from social and moral to philosophical. “To search through all the questions in this novel” - this is the task the writer set himself.
We are introduced to Rodion Raskolnikov, the main character of the novel, from the first lines of the work. This is a student forced to leave his studies due to lack of funds. His mother, the widow of a provincial official, lives after the death of her husband on a modest pension, most of which she sends to her son. Raskolnikov's sister, Dunya, was forced, in order to help her mother and brother, to become a governess in the family of the wealthy landowner Svidrigailov, where she was subjected to insults and humiliation.
Raskolnikov is a naturally gifted, intelligent and honest young man. Living in a cramped closet that looked like a coffin, constantly observing the life of the poor and bourgeois population of St. Petersburg, he is painfully aware that not only he himself, but also thousands of other people are inevitably doomed under the existing order to early death, poverty, lack of rights. At every step, Raskolnikov encounters powerless, persecuted people who have nowhere to go, nowhere to go. “After all, it is necessary that every person has at least somewhere to go,” Marmeladov, crushed by fate, tells him with pain, “... after all, it is necessary that every person has at least one place where they would feel sorry for him!.. Do you understand?” , do you understand... what it means when there is nowhere else to go! And Raskolnikov himself, in essence, also has nowhere to go. All this makes him think about what is happening around him, how this inhuman world works, where injustice, cruelty, greed reign, where the strongest power is the power of money, where a poor person has nowhere to lay his head; a world where “a man without a million is... the one with whom they do whatever they want.”
But Raskolnikov also thinks about where and how to find a way out of this situation, why no one protests and everyone is silent, obediently bearing the burden of poverty and humiliation. But the hero is painfully proud, uncommunicative, full of consciousness of his exclusivity; he is not used to the company of other people, he avoids and shies away from them. Therefore, he alone, leaving everyone, “like a turtle in its shell,” tries to independently resolve all these issues and gradually comes to the conclusion that existing laws are eternal and unchangeable, that human nature cannot be corrected or transformed in any way. In his confession to Sonya Marmeladova, Raskolnikov says: “Then I learned, Sonya, that if you wait until everyone becomes smart, it will take too long... Then I also learned that this will never happen, that people will not change and no one can change them , and it’s not worth the effort! Yes, that's right! This is their law... And now I know, Sonya, that whoever is strong and strong in spirit and mind is the ruler over them! Those who dare a lot are right! Whoever can spit on the most is their legislator, and whoever can dare the most is rightest! This is how it has been done until now – and this is how it will always be!”
This is where his individualistic, terrible theory was born in Raskolnikov’s mind with the division of people into “ordinary”, whose lot is to endure and submit, and “extraordinary”, to whom everything is allowed for the sake of higher considerations. According to Raskolnikov’s theory, from time to time in the history of mankind there appeared a few “extraordinary personalities” - Lycurgis, Mohammeds, Napoleons, who, destined by nature itself for the role of “lords of fate,” boldly rebelled against the existing order and at the same time boldly violated generally accepted moral norms, without stopping at violence and crime to impose his will on humanity. These people are the real engines of history, while “ordinary” people “lived in obedience”, not having the strength to rebel against the existing order of things.
From this system of ideas, anarchic in its social content, which Raskolnikov not only thought through, but also outlined in a magazine article six months before the crime, follows the dilemma that he formulates with the words: “Am I a louse, like everyone else, or a man?” Am I a trembling creature, or do I have the right?
The horrors and misfortunes that reign in bourgeois society and surround Raskolnikov cause him anger and grief, but at the same time encourage him to “take this society into power,” pitting himself against the masses, the people, and “ordinary” ordinary people. But for this, in his opinion, only one way is possible - to prove to himself and others that he is a real “master of fate,” that is, he must “transcend” those elementary moral laws recognized as inviolable by “ordinary” people. This conclusion leads Raskolnikov to commit a crime, which he views as a test necessary to determine whether he belongs to the breed extraordinary people or he can only endure and obey like the others.
With his crime, Raskolnikov challenges the world of social inequality and suppression human personality. And at the same time, although he does not realize it, his idea perpetuates the existence of an inhuman order of things. Inequality between the strong and the weak, between predators and the oppressed, which forms the basis of class society and the state, remains for Raskolnikov in his thoughts the eternal model of any human community. Raskolnikov argues abstractly, according to the principle: “it was so - so it will be,” and therefore his protest turns into its opposite. The contradiction between the few who have the right to dictate their will to other people by any means - including violence and crime - and the majority of people deprived of basic human rights, is elevated by the hero into an inviolable law of life, established from time immemorial and not subject to repeal. It’s hard to even believe how such a contradiction can coexist in a person between a deep and sincere protest against social oppression and inequality and his own assertion of the right of one – a strong – individual to build his life on the blood and bones of others.
However, as the action of the novel develops, Dostoevsky forces the hero to personal experience to be convinced of the inconsistency of his theory, that his rebellion against existing inhumanity is itself inhuman in nature, leading not to rise and prosperity, but to suppression and moral mortification of the individual.
The terrible essence of Raskolnikov's theory is further emphasized by the images of Luzhin and Svidrigailov. These are peculiar “doubles” of Raskolnikov. It would seem, what could be in common between him and the unprincipled businessman and acquirer Luzhin, on the one hand, and the swindler and murderer Svidrigailov? Meanwhile, Raskolnikov himself, having met Luzhin, becomes convinced that they have a lot in common. For the sake of profit, for the sake of strengthening his position, Luzhin is ready for any meanness. The basis of his behavior is the principle: “love yourself, for everything in the world is based on personal interest.” Listening to Luzhin, Raskolnikov could not help but feel that such judgments were nothing more than a moderate version of his own theory. “Bring it to the consequences,” he says to Luzhin with disgust, “and it turns out that people can be slaughtered...”
Raskolnikov has even more points of contact with Svidrigailov, who, not without reason, says that there is a “common point” between them and that they are “birds of a feather.” Svidrigailov is a cynical, depraved person and at the same time, deep down in his soul, aware of his moral emptiness. He doesn't believe in anything and has long ago lost the distinction between good and evil. And if Luzhin’s principles can ultimately lead to Raskolnikov’s theory, then the same theory in its development must inevitably degenerate into Svidrigailovism, leading to complete moral decline and decomposition of the individual.
Raskolnikov’s idea of the “right to blood,” the right to assert one’s “I” through crime, could only arise in the conditions of bourgeois society, as a reaction to its unjust structure, as a rebellion against it.
Page: [ 1 ]
In the novel, two main ideologies collide: the ideology of individualism, the exceptional personality (a prototype of fascism) and Christian ideology. The first, in one way or another, is nurtured by Luzhin, Svidrigailov, Porfiry Petrovich in his youth, Raskolnikov, and the second by Sonya, to whom Raskolnikov painfully goes throughout the entire novel.
At first glance, it seems that the idea of rebellion is embodied in the novel by Raskolnikov, and the idea of Christian humility is embodied by Sonya. Raskolnikov's rebellion is justified by his Napoleonic theory, according to which a select few are allowed to step over even blood for high purposes, while the rest are only obedient before the law. “Am I a louse like everyone else or a human being? Am I a trembling creature or do I have the right? - Raskolnikov thinks painfully.
For him, the murder of the old woman is a test, not of theory, but of himself, of his ability to transcend, to become a ruler for good deeds. The hero’s goal is humane: to rid the world of the bloodsucker and help loved ones get out of poverty, thereby restoring justice.
But even before the murder, and even more so after it, all logically verified constructions collapse. His cold theory refuted, first of all, by his own soul, conscience, human nature who appeared in the first dream. In a fit of semi-madness after the murder of the pawnbroker, he kills her kind, childishly defenseless sister Lizaveta, who in his mind is on a par with Dunya, Sonya, and his own heart. It is not for nothing that he would later call himself an “aesthetic louse,” meaning that, having imagined himself to be a ruler and killed, he could not bear these murders, his soul turned out to be too beautiful and moral.
Adding to Raskolnikov’s torment are the so-called “doubles” - heroes whose theories or actions to one degree or another reflect the ideas and actions of the main character. Among them is the complete scoundrel Luzhin, who went through his cynical path as a ruler to the end, morally killing many people; depraved and at the same time unhappy Svidrigailov, whom internal struggle between permissiveness and one’s own soul leads to self-destruction; Porfiry Petrovich, who had nurtured such a “theory” in his youth, now tormented Raskolnikov during interrogations with his understanding and insight.
But Raskolnikov’s main punishment is Sonya, to whom the hero opens up first, withdrawing into himself and hiding from everyone else, even from his mother and Dunya. Sonya is not only a real heroine, but also a kind of symbol of conscience, the humanity of Raskolnikov himself, the second side of his consciousness. They both stepped over and both altars. But he overstepped, physically sacrificing the lives of others, ultimately killing himself mentally. And Sonya, transgressing the moral law, initially sacrifices herself for the sake of saving others and turns out to be right, because she acts not in the name of evil or profit, but in the name of good, out of compassion and love. Her humility is tantamount to genuine rebellion, since it was she, and not Raskolnikov, who was able to change something for the better as a result. It is not for nothing that in the scene of Raskolnikov’s confession to Sonya, the heroine looks much stronger and more confident than the hero, which is easily confirmed by textual analysis.
In hard labor, Raskolnikov goes through alienation, hatred from others and illness. And the loving Sonya helps everyone, the convicts are instinctively drawn to her. Her love and compassion, complemented by Christian inner strength, they save Raskolnikov, cleansing his soul from filth, and give birth to reciprocal love in him, which finally destroys the cold theory. At the end of the novel, the great confused and holy sinner was “resurrected by love.” Sonya became not only Raskolnikov’s main punishment, but also his main savior.
Dostoevsky in his novel, through the fates of the two main characters, puts forward, but then artistically convincingly and comprehensively destroys the rational Napoleonic idea of restoring justice by assigning to a select few the right to violence and blood.
Rough plan portrait characteristics hero
1. General overview about the work and the hero.
2. Characteristics of the fragment of text in which the portrait of the hero is found, with a definition of its text volume, place, role, meaning.
3. Detailed analytical observation of the elements of the portrait, drawing psychological image hero.
4. Comparison of this portrait with others (if they are in the work).
6. Additional observations,
F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment” was created in 1866. It was a time of reforms; the old “masters of life” began to be replaced by new ones - bourgeois businessmen and entrepreneurs. And Dostoevsky, as a writer who subtly felt all the changes in society, in his novel raises those topical problems for Russian society that worried the majority: who is to blame for the grief and troubles of ordinary people, what should people do who do not want to accept this life.
The main character of the novel “Crime and Punishment” is Rodion Raskolnikov. “He was remarkably handsome, with beautiful dark eyes, dark blond, above average height, thin and slender.” Rodion was poorly dressed: “He was so poorly dressed that another, even an ordinary person, would be ashamed to go out into the street in such rags during the day.” Raskolnikov was forced to quit his studies due to the fact that he did not have enough money, due to nervous and physical exhaustion. He lived in a small closet with old yellow wallpaper; the furniture included three old chairs, a table and a sofa, which occupied almost the entire room. Raskolnikov was “crushed by poverty,” so he could not pay the landlady even for such a poor home. For this reason, he tried not to show himself to her.
Raskolnikov understands that the world is not built fairly, and he rejects it. Raskolnikov's protest against an unjust world results in an individual rebellion. He creates his own theory, according to which people are divided into two categories: “powerful people and ordinary people.” There are very few “Lords” in the world; these are those who carry out the progress of society, such as Napoleon. Their job is to control other people. The task of “ordinary people,” according to the hero, is to reproduce and submit to the “lords.” For the sake of any great goal, “lords” can sacrifice any means, including human life. Raskolnikov was a supporter of this theory, considered himself a “ruler,” but he wanted to use his capabilities and his power in order to help poor people.
In order to check which category of people he belongs to, Rodion decides to kill the old pawnbroker. Testing his theory, which he put forward, was the main reason for the crime, and helping the “humiliated and insulted” was the main reason for the crime, and helping the “humiliated and insulted” was only a moral justification for him. The second reason is material. Raskolnikov knew that the old woman was rich, but all her money was wasted. He understands that they can save dozens of lives. And the third reason for murder is social. Having robbed the old woman, he could continue his studies at the university and live in abundance.
In the world in which Raskolnikov lives, violation of moral norms has become commonplace and, in his opinion, killing a person does not contradict the laws of this society. But in his logical crimes, he did not take into account one thing: if a good person who cannot be indifferent to other people’s pain and suffering takes the path of violence, then he inevitably brings grief not only to others, but also to himself. In his theory, Raskolnikov forgot about human qualities: conscience, shame, fear.
After committing a crime, Raskolnikov feels cut off from the world around him, from the people close to him. He was overcome with fear at the thought that someone knew about his action, he was afraid of everything (he flinched from a rustle in the room, from a shout on the street). Reason began to speak in him, he realized that he was not a “lord”, but a “trembling creature.” And the knowledge that Raskolnikov so strived for turned into a terrible disappointment for him. The hero enters into a fierce struggle, but not with an external enemy, but with his own conscience. In his mind there lurks hope that the theory put forward by him will nevertheless be justified, but in the subconscious horror and fear already reign.
But not only Raskolnikov’s inner world pushes him to think that the idea is wrong, but also those around him. The most significant role in the disappointment of these calculations by Rodion was played by Sonya Marmeladova.
Sonya is a victim, and at the same time she is the embodiment of compassion, she does not judge anyone, only herself, she pities everyone, loves and helps as much as she can. It is in conversations with Sonya that Raskolnikov begins to doubt his theory. He wants to get an answer to the question: is it possible to live without paying attention to the suffering and torment of others. Sonya with all her destiny opposes his cruel and strange idea. And when Raskolnikov breaks down and opens up to her, this theory horrifies Sonya, although she ardently sympathized with him. Raskolnikov, suffering himself and making her suffer, still hopes that she will offer him another path, and not confession.
The murder drew an insurmountable line between people and Raskolnikov: “a gloomy feeling of painful, endless solitude and alienation suddenly consciously affected his soul. “He also suffers because his mother and sister, the murderer, love him. Only Sonya helps him find the meaning of life, helps him cleanse himself spiritually and morally and begin the difficult and gradual path of returning to people.
Raskolnikov was exiled to Siberia for hard labor, but Raskolnikov’s moral torment was a more severe punishment for him than exile. Thanks to Sonya, he returned to real life and God. Only at the very end did he realize that “life has come.”
The novel “Crime and Punishment” is a work dedicated to the history of how long and difficult it is for a soul to rush through suffering and mistakes to comprehend the truth. The author's task was to show what power an idea can have over a person, and how terrible the idea itself can be. Dostoevsky explores in detail the theory of his hero, which led him to a dead end in life. The author, naturally, does not agree with Raskolnikov’s opinion and forces him to disabuse him of it, and this can only be achieved through suffering. Dostoevsky conducts a subtle psychological investigation: what does the criminal feel after his crime? He shows how the hero is forced to confess on himself, because this ominous secret weighs on him and interferes with his life.
“My whole heart will pour itself into this novel,” wrote F.M. Dostoevsky about the novel “Crime and Punishment.” This work acutely raises questions about the essence of good and evil, about human nature, about the paths leading to universal happiness. The heroes of the novel live an intense spiritual life; they not so much act as think, painfully and persistently searching for the truth. The writer deeply explores not only the inner world of an individual person, but also the psychology typical of different strata of society.
Depicting the life of contemporary Russia, exposing the psychology of an individual, Dostoevsky poses complex social, philosophical, moral questions that are relevant to his era and have universal significance. Reading a novel, we, together with the writer, go through a difficult path of search and reflection. He outlined the idea of the novel as follows: “The action is modern, this year. A young man living in extreme poverty commits murder to make his mother and sister happy, to finish his studies, and then throughout his life to be honest and steadfast in fulfilling his “humane duty to humanity” and to make amends for the crime.”
But after the murder, “unsolvable” questions arise before Rodion Raskolnikov, and unexpected feelings torment his heart. The meeting with Marmeladov and his family make a strong impression on Raskolnikov. And similar shocks await him at almost every step. He receives a letter from home. It becomes obvious that the fate of his mother, his sister Dunya is no brighter than the fate of the Marmeladovs. And, like Marmeladov, Raskolnikov understands that he is “irredeemably” guilty.
After all, it is to him, “the hope and hope of the family,” the beloved son, that the mother sends her last pennies. It is for his sake, his beloved brother, that Dunya makes a sacrifice (no better than “Sonya’s Lot”: she decides to become the wife of the disgusting Luzhin).
Raskolnikov is faced with questions that have long “begun to torment him and tormented his heart”: “What will you do to prevent this from happening?” It is the feeling of hopelessness that drives the main character to despair, to rage, almost to madness.
Here he is trying to save someone who has been disgraced teenage girl, gives the last two kopecks so that it doesn’t go to another scoundrel, the “fat dandy” who is hunting for her. And suddenly Raskolnikov realizes that it is hopeless. He is pierced by the thought of the multitude similar stories, about children deprived of their childhood, about the future humanity that is being maimed and corrupted today. But what can he do? Sufferers and those who sympathize with them seem to Raskolnikov to be powerless, and scoundrels and predators usually get their way. The entire inhuman order of life favors them.
Raskolnikov’s exhausted consciousness rushes about in search of a way out. This human world is so structured that it sometimes seems like the delirium of a madman. It is no coincidence that the last shock experienced by the main character before the crime is sleep. Rodion sees himself as a small child and with childish eyes watches how a drunken red-faced guy kills a “small, skinny peasant nag” to the laughter of the crowd. The dream breathes reality, it is believable in every detail.
The theory that led Raskolnikov to the crime appears in the novel as an inextricable unity of heartache and excited, searching thought. And the life, character, and worldview of the hero - everything was reflected in his theory. The entire course of the narrative convinces us that Raskolnikov is a person who perceives the pain of others more acutely than his own. Risking his life, he saves children from the fire and shares the latter with the Marmeladovs. But he is proud, unsociable, lonely, perhaps because he is convinced of his exclusivity. His pride is wounded at every step: he is forced to hide from the mistress to whom he owes money and explain this to the police.
Raskolnikov is not limited to the idea, he is looking for irrefutable proof of the justice of the murder “in good conscience.” The hero asks himself: “Am I a trembling creature or do I have the right?” He painfully ponders this question and wants to prove to himself and those around him that he is not a “trembling creature”, but a born “lord of fate.” This is how Raskolnikov’s rebellion matures. The hero of the novel thinks that people who are unable to change their lives will be saved by a certain “lord.” He decides that it is possible to pave the way to universal happiness, since he is convinced that the will and intelligence of a “strong personality” can make the “crowd” happy.
Only one thing stops him in his desire to test the theory: doubt as to whether he was born ruler over “all trembling creatures.” It is not for nothing that in his dream Rodion sees himself as a child, making his way through the crowd to Savraska, kissing her dead, bloody muzzle, then “in a frenzy he rushes at the killer,” and when he wakes up, he suddenly imagines himself in the role of a killer. Everything good, pure, and human in Raskolnikov rebels against murder. But he humbles himself with his theory, and he goes as if to execution, but he goes.
Dostoevsky devotes the main place in the novel to the story of the punishment of a criminal. It does not come down to a judicial verdict, but is concluded in moral torture, more painful for the hero than prison and hard labor. “I didn’t kill the old woman, I killed myself,” he admits to Sonya. Raskolnikov is haunted by the feeling of the meaninglessness of the crime he committed. This depresses the main character, he is detached from people, he remains in emptiness. It is especially painful to meet those who were previously infinitely close and dear. This is mother and sister.
The writer depicts Raskolnikov's torment with such force that together with him we feel alienation from people, fear, and despair. Dostoevsky convinces us that if an honest and kind person takes the path of violence, then he inevitably brings only evil to himself and others. Once you allow yourself to “bleed according to your conscience”, the blood will flow in a torrent. Did Svidrigailov, whom Raskolnikov bitterly hates, have any reason to say to him: “We are birds of a feather”? What does this criminal and the sufferer for humanity have in common? Apparently, both of them considered it possible to “step over the blood.” Svidrigailov is a repulsive figure, but at the same time tragic. He went through a “school of life” in St. Petersburg brothels; unexpected wealth corrupted him. But you can’t see him only as a villain. The writer shrouded Svidrigailov’s life in mystery. It is difficult to say what atrocities he committed and what was generated by a sick imagination and slander.
In the soul of this man, under the cover of vice, a spark of goodness still glimmers. Arkady Ivanovich's soul was awakened by love for Dunya. He unexpectedly felt sorry for her, as if something had turned over in him. Conscience spoke. The victims of previous crimes appeared in his feverishly excited imagination. Svidrigailov passes away, saving Sonya, the Marmeladov orphans and his bride from poverty and death.
Speaking of rebellion and humility, I cannot help but recall Katerina Ivanovna. An educated woman is forced to live in a squalid environment with a drunken husband, whom she married, “crying, wringing her hands,” because she “had nowhere to go.” She constantly thinks about the past, about the gold medal she graduated with educational institution, about the “shawl dance”. It is no coincidence that Marmeladova feels the contrast between her ideas about better life and real existence. Of course, she cannot reconcile herself, hence her stories addressed to the landlady about her noble origins, and “pulling the hair” of her drunken husband.
Unfortunately, Katerina Ivanovna is powerless to change better side your life and the lives of your children. Internal discord leads Katerina Ivanovna to madness. Last words Marmeladova’s words before her death show that she compares her life to a hackneyed nag who has “suffered enough.” Life is torture. Such is the lot of a poor woman who strives to rebel, but is forced to resign herself.
What did Raskolnikov come to in the epilogue? At the end of the novel, the “murderer and the harlot” awaken to a new life. “They were resurrected by love, the heart of one contained endless sources of life for the heart of the other.”
The tragic events took place against the backdrop of a gloomy urban landscape. In a different setting, the scene of Raskolnikov’s meeting with Sonya takes place, when his soul finally opened up to the impressions of a new life. It is clear that the horizons of the new and unknown are opening up before the main character. “There was freedom and other people lived there.”
"Crime and Punishment" - complex work. At its first appearance, the novel evoked mixed responses. And to this day, debates about the essence of the author's plan, about the ideological orientation of the novel, about the central character, his rebellion and humility, do not stop.