Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment and “The Unknown Citizen” by W.H. Auden are similar in the ways that they use analysis of social collectivism to explore existential themes. The main character of Crime and Punishment struggles with the implications of his conviction that he is above the bulk of his society. This differs from “The Unknown Citizen,” where the main focus of the poem is a man who has no apparent distinguishing traits to set him aside from the rest of society, yet at his death, the Auden’s society erects a monument in honor of his “achievements”. Each work explores the existential consequences of their respective protagonist’s situation through the use of archetypes in order to expose issues in the societies in which they …show more content…
Auden explores the consequences of existentialism through the subject of a man only memorialized by the facts of his life that fit societal standards whereas Dostoevsky explores this concept through a character suffering from his own delusions of grandeur. Auden’s unknown citizen is referred to only by a government identification number, which immediately strips the man of any individualism. To even further deface the man, the statue of the man is constructed not to memorialize him but to hold up the conformist ideals in his society. Auden was part of a generation that believed that the modern world was subject to diminishing individualism and “The Unknown Citizen” is a satirical piece highlighting Auden’s own fears of society becoming increasingly totalitarian. This fear appears again in Crime and Punishment, which reflects on Dostoevsky’s own life experience. The main character of Crime and Punishment relies heavily on his own theory which pushes him above normal social consequences. This is further explained by Uwamsoba in her article analyzing the socio-psychological aspect of Crime and Punishment as she discusses the Raskolnikov’s delusions, “We discover a direct and obvious source of Raskolnikov’s notion of inferior and superior men; the superior ones having the right to commit breaches of morality while the inferior ones are obliged to …show more content…
Each author creates an archetype to portray their societies. In Auden’s work, his archetype lacks the depth necessary to fully develop the character, as Auden begins the poem, “(To JS/07 M 378 This Marble Monument is Erected by the State) He was found by the Bureau of Statistics to be one against whom there was no official complaint” (Auden). whereas in Crime and Punishment the archetype has the necessary depth, but the schism seen in Raskolnikov creates both a protagonist and an antagonist out of the character. This duality seen in both works through each author’s archetype can be taken to represent the complex nature of the author’s fictional and own societies that they set to critique through these works. The actions of the unknown citizen may be viewed as actions of a person without a purpose for life, so, consequently, by creating the perfect citizen, Auden ultimately creates an imperfect character. Such is said by Arvind Deshmukh on his in-depth discussion on “The Unknown Citizen”, “The Unknown Citizen is nobody. He has no individuality. That is why he is 'unknown citizen ' -he is anybody. He is not a free human being. He is submissive, meek, passive. He accepts everything meekly. It has become a habit with him. He never asserts himself. He always swims along the stream, and never against it. He takes the trodden path. He is with the world” (Deshmukh 2). However, in Dostoevsky’s novel, the
Raskolnikov, the main character of Crime and Punishment, sat down for dinner with Dunya, his sister, and her fiancée. While this dinner unfolds, we
Although I think that the arguments Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor provide an insightful outlook on humanity, I don’t believe that overall story expresses Dostoyevsky 's own point of view. This type of narrative may seem peculiar considering many existentialists’ convictions regarding free will and autonomy. Nevertheless, it is important to remember that the Grand Inquisitor is simply a fictional character. Therefore, the reader cannot attribute his characters’ beliefs to his own view. As an existentialist author, he uses this story to emphasize the absurdity surrounding this ideology present in his community.
In Nabokov’s “Invitation to Beheading” and Shalamov’s “An Individual Assignment,” totalitarian society represents a metaphorical prison that deprives the characters of their freedom and only through the renewal of their individual freedoms can the character’s break from their oppressors. In “Invitation to Beheading” Cincinnatus is imprisoned and sentenced to death for not fitting in with society and the opaqueness of his soul. Cincinnatus was always different throughout his life, but he managed to hide his strangeness. Eventually the masking of his unnatural behaviors subsides with his wife’s disloyalty and he is arrested and sentenced to death.
Usefulness of Sparks and Loader’s Personas in Contemporary Criminology In modern society, various criminologists and activists represent different values regarding specific crimes and they also believe in specific manners of addressing those crimes. Sparks and Loader (2011) identify six of those “personas” that are present in the criminological world; the Democratic Under Labourer, the Scientific Expert, the Policy Advisor, the Observer-Turned-Player, the Social Movement Theorist/Activist, and the Lonely Prophet. These various “characters” as described by Sparks and Loader (2011) are useful in their own way because they all represent different methods of addressing crime and punishment while some also use their acquired knowledge to educate
In modern society, capital punishment is the understood punishment for those that commit violent crimes. In the confined walls of prison, the inmates have to adapt to the institution and except the differing norms of the surrounding they may call home for many years. This adaptation is seen as wealthy banker, Andy Dufresne, was found guilty for the murder of his wife and her lover. The film follows Andy through his journey as he runs into unique characters like Brooks, Red, and the warden. Although, Andy was falsely convicted, he was able to experience prison and all of the negative stigmas that prison entails.
There Is More Than One Type of Hero In “Notes from the Underground”, a fiction book by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, the Underground Man is not like the traditional main character in most other fiction books. Often books have a tragic hero where he or she either saves the days or unfortunately is killed. But that is not the case for this book, the main character shows characteristics that do not fit along the lines of a tragic hero at all. This paper argues that the Underground Man is most definitely not the tragic hero, but instead an anti-hero.
Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment is a deep dive into the psyche of a young man named Raskolnikov, who is...well, who really is Raskolnikov? Through the method of unreliable narration Dostoyevsky employs, it is difficult to pinpoint just who Raskolnikov is, why he does what he does, and what the reader misses when he lapses into what is considered to be bits of fever and madness. In this paper I will attempt to unravel the ‘why’ of the murders Raskolnikov commits. I endeavour to prove that it is clear Raskolnikov kills Lizaveta and Alyona because of his need and desire for suffering in repentance for his perceived sins against his family and himself. This is not to say, however, that he may have thought of this as his motive;
Albert Camus Contents Context Plot Overview Character List Analysis of Major Characters Meursault Raymond Sintes Marie Cardona Themes, Motifs & Symbols Summary & Analysis Part One: Chapter 1 Part One: Chapters 2–3 Part One: Chapters 4–5 Part One: Chapter 6 Part Two: Chapters 1–2 Part Two: Chapters 3–4 Part Two: Chapter 5 Expand Important Quotations Explained Key Facts Study Questions & Essay Topics Quizzes Suggestion for Further Reading How to Cite This SparkNote Share this Sparknote Share on Twitter Character List Meursault - The protagonist and narrator of The Stranger, to whom the novel’s title refers. Meursault is a detached figure who views and describes much of what occurs around him from a removed position.
In fyodor dostoevsky’s “ Crime and Punishment”, The central character Raskolnikov Experiences a change in character, which later on will also change his opinion on crime as well. Raskolnikov’s conversation with Sonia allows him to experience a new outlook on the crime he has committed. Dostoyevsky’s writing closely follows the idea of “The Overman” otherwise know as the “Ubermensch”. This theory originally published by german philosopher Nietzsche is expressed in Raskolnikov’s article “on crime”. In part V, Porfiry is keen to understand what Raskolnikov intended to say with this article.
Pope Francis once said, “The worship of the golden calf of old has found a new and heartless image in the cult of money and the dictatorship of an economy which is faceless and lacking any truly human goal”. This quote explicates many of the ideals shown throughout Crime and Punishment by demonstrating that people worship money as a god. Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky takes place in 19th century Russia. During this time, there are the rich and there are poor, with very few members of the middle class. Raskolnikov, the main character, is a peasant who is enraged with the treatment he receives from the world.
Crime according to critical criminologists is political as it is responded to by those in power. Critical Criminologists want to gain an understanding of society and the state and how these two impact upon each other (Scraton & Chadwick 1998). Critical Criminologists want to turn away from other theories of crime and concentrate on inequalities within structures and power relations of different societies. There has been significant work on the relationship between deviants and the relationship they have with the state and the control and power the state has over them (Newburn, 2007). Punishment to critical criminologists is viewed as being associated with a system of social inequality and it can worsen and even produce the inequality itself
Ultimately, Dostoevsky’s critique of society attempts to explain the societal problems of individuals alienating themselves from each other by living in the
In particular, the Underground Man experienced a traumatic incident where he was lifted from his shoulders and removed from the path of an officer (Dostoevsky 49). As a result of this incident, it created a profound feeling that he is meaningless to society. This act was not only humiliating but also stripped the Underground Man from his masculinity. “I could even have forgiven a beating, but I simply could not forgive his moving me and in the end just not noticing me” (Dostoevsky 49). His masculinity grants him a personal sense of power, but that had been taken from him.
Saint Petersburg, the setting of Crime and Punishment, plays a major role in the formation in Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s acclaimed novel. Dostoyevsky’s novels focus on the theme of man as a subject of his environment. Dostoyevsky paints 1860s St. Petersburg as an overcrowded, filthy, and chaotic city. It is because of Saint Petersburg that Raskolnikov is able to foster in his immoral thoughts and satisfy his evil inclinations. It is only when Raskolnikov is removed from the disorderly city and taken to the remoteness of Siberia that he can once again be at peace.
Raskolnikov confronts reality and can never again legitimize his activities in light of political perspectives. The writer of Crime and Punishment, Fyodor Dostoyevsky composed this book uncovering some of his own perspectives on legislative issues and consolidating them all through the story. Like Raskolnikov, Dostoyevsky was captured by the administration and punished for his offense. He was rebuffed for his radical communist positions, just to later reject these thoughts. Through the story, the creator fuses a solid message of exactly how intense the legislature is and the solid impact of governmental issues.