Guilt In Dostoyevsky's Crime

Peter Petrovich, the fiancé of Raskolnikov’s sister, first meets Raskolnikov when Raskolnikov is ill in his apartment. Raskolnikov’s preconceived dislike towards Petrovich conveys the idea that Petrovich is not likeable. A reader could understand why Raskolnikov and Petrovich would not work well together; Petrovich carries himself well and is confident in himself while Raskolnikov has a lot of self-doubt and avoids socialization. Whether or not Petrovich is an enjoyable person, his thoughts about self-importance and self-love are easily extendable to outside the world of Crime and Punishment.

Raskolnikov is a very intelligent, prideful man, So much so that the very thought of leaving his house in tattered clothes made him anxious. Raskolnikov also refuses to go to his tutoring job because of this. despite these facts, Raskolnikov has little care for the people and the world around him believing himself to be above them because of his intelligence.

Presence of Guilt Guilt is a force that has the ability to bring people to insanity. When guilt becomes great enough, the effects it has on people go much deeper than the surface. People’s body and mind are overpowered by the guilt that consumes them every second they live with their burden. In “The Crucible”, John Proctor carries the guilt of his affair with Abigail Williams. He has deeply compromised his marriage and hurt his wife.

Out of all the emotions humans experience, guilt is one of the least pleasant. Nearly everyone has experienced it in some way or form. Often times, it is because of minor mistakes like forgetting to take out the trash. Other times it can be more serious such as seriously injuring a friend or family member. Either way, that guilt gnaws at one’s inside, chipping away at their sanity bit by bit.

Raskolnikov 's first attempt was telling Zametov. Yet once Raskolnikov remembers the implications of this action, he claims his accurate confession was a hypothetical situation. This also occurs when Raskolnikov tries to tell Sonya, he says “But if I come tomorrow, I’ll tell you who killed Lizaveta. Good-bye!” (Dostoevsky

Alyona Ivanovna, the old pawnbroker, is barely human and therefore repellant. Many people who go to her for loans complain that “she always has money to lay out,” but she cheats people by refusing to give them a fair price for the objects that people want to pawn. In addition, “if payment was only one day overdue, the pledge would be lost.” To strengthen the reliability of the opinions of the people, not only does the author, Dostoevsky, include a scene her stinginess towards Raskolnikov, but he also later includes side commentary from random others. The more negative feedback that we receive from characters remarking about her, the more we end up believing the argument that she exploits others during desperate times.

Therefore, this is the direct result of the negative mentality and the unwillingness to acknowledge that he was not liable guilty, the corrupt justice system would not be resolved. It is apparent that although the reader may think that the human nature would want righteousness or and kindness, it goes to show how people allow themselves to be manipulated and lose their self control so

He asks his father, “… why did they…kill… the poor horse!” (Dostoevsky 48), signifying that Raskolnikov himself does not know exactly why he is going to murder Alyona. Because he is unable to witness the murder of a

In the event that exclusive Alyona had been killed, this would have just been some genuinely necessary activity to the story. Be that as it may, when Raskolnikov murders Lizaveta too, Dostoevsky marks off everything except one reason creators slaughter characters (everything except closure plot inconveniences). Lizaveta's murder makes Raskolnikov have blame (thusly putting his character under anxiety). It is a demonstration that he does exclusively to ensure himself (I can't really point the finger at him, however) and subsequently causes him extraordinary pain. While I might want to think he would have encountered some blame if just the murder of Alyona had happened, I can't state for sure as I believe I don't have a clue about his character

Today in class, I presented about reform ideas during the late 18th and 19th century in Russia, especially focusing on nihilism, socialism, and utilitarianism. The explanation of utilitarianism especially helped me to better understand the beliefs of several characters in Crime and Punishment. Utilitarianism is an ethical philosophy that focuses on promoting the happiness of the greatest number of people, even if it means harming a smaller group of people. Those who support utilitarianism believe that an action, such as murder or robber, is morally right if the outcome of the action brings happiness to a majority of the group. The principles of utilitarianism are especially seen in the actions and beliefs of Raskolnikov

Raskolnikov’s accumulating debt owed to his landlord prevents him from moving outside of Saint Petersburg and causes massive emotional damage. Each time he leaves his apartment, he fears seeing his landlady, The stress and anxiety arising from the debt he owes to his landlord causes him to become unruly and he had, “fallen into a state of nervous depression akin to hypochondria,” feeding into his detachment from society. Not only does Raskolnikov’s living situation seem grim, but his room itself furthers his emotional detachment from society. Raskolnikov’s room allows him to dehumanize himself.

Tolstoy’s ability to interweave the environment with themes of materialism and death makes The Death of Ivan Ilych stand out as a piece that criticizes societal values. In his article “Tolstoy and the Moran Instructions of Death,” Dennis Sansom focuses on the influence of fighting chaos in Ivan’s eventual acceptance of his own death. Socrates wrote, “The unexamined life is not worth living,” and Ivan’s life mirrored this until the end (qtd. in Sansom 417) .

Many of the characters experience guilt in one way or another throughout the film and the guilt presented stems from multiple characters and situations to others along the way. For instance, consider Edmunds guilt for poisoning his father. After the event and turning to his old school teacher, Henning, who castigates the child in fear of being in fault, Edmund wanders the ruined streets of Berlin and Rossellini paints a vivid picture of his guilt; Edmunds face is dirty and shadowed by his untamed hair and the score supplements this with a mellow and solemn base and occasional violin strings that exemplify the uncertainty of the situation. With the power of this scene, one can assume and feel Edmunds guilt for poisoning his father and as he makes his way up a destroyed building, the viewer can deduce that his suicide is imminent. This explains an evident human toll of guilt and a question of where the fault lies in guilt--was it Henning who suggested the death of Edmunds father or was it Edmund’s father himself who hinted at the idea of

All I managed to do was kill (III. IV).” Raskolnikov cannot suppress the force of guilt weighing upon his conscience, and ultimately confesses his complicity in the crime to the police. Seeking to operate outside the confines of his conscience and societal law, Raskolnikov is driven to madness by the impossibility of his quest—cruelty simply cannot be countenanced so long as it remains in opposition to social

Petersburg is a labyrinthine city whose streets mirror the maze-like jumble of thoughts ever-present in Raskolnikov’s mind and work to remove his sense of free will. Whenever Raskolnikov leaves a small space, such as his apartment, or someone else’s apartment building, he loses the ability to navigate from one place to another in an ordinary fashion of his own free will. His feet take him places he does not consciously intend to go. For example, Dostoevsky writes, as Raskolnikov walks home through the Haymarket as opposed to by a more direct route, “it had happened to him dozens of times that he would return home without remembering what streets he had taken.” The streets, like the new utilitarian ideas, are inorganic and have a tendency to discombobulate the pedestrian protagonist.