The Hidden Thoughts: Dreams in Dostoevsky 's Crime and Punishment Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment, set in the 1860s St. Petersburg, follows the experiences of young Rodion Raskolnikov’s mental dilemma of murdering an old woman. Throughout the novel Raskolnikov’s mind is full of thoughts that cannot be spoken out loud. Raskolnikov quietly lets the thoughts of guilt consume his mind, but he cannot afford to tell anyone in fear of being turned into the police. This struggle with self is not simply on a self-conscious level, but also on a deeper, subconscious state. Raskolnikov’s subconscious emotions is as telling as his conscious reflection.
It is explained that to be a serial killer you have to have a modus operandi, MO which is specific to him and evolves over time like a ‘signature’ or ‘visiting card’. A true serial killer only commits crimes for enjoyment. This foreword will be used in my essay to help describe the aspects of a true serial
This ties to a theme of absurdity, exhibiting the fact that there always seems to be a reason or excuse to why a person does something uncharacteristic, or immoral. While the reasoning behind the murder is less prominent, it can be seen as a way for Meursault to test his emotions, or sense of care. Throughout Meursault's trial, the jury and judge tend to question him more about his mother rather than the murder, possibly picking apart his background, hoping to find logic behind why he would kill someone. “But he cut me off and urged me one last time, drawing himself up to his full height and asking me if I believed in God. I said no” (p. 69).
However it is a win-lose situation due to the conflict being unresolved as I had to put down my dignity and let him call me names and talk bad about me throughout the clinical attachment. Be that as it may it got the best of me as I was more reluctant to go for clinical attachment. Hence this approach was not the best solution for this situation. (Marquis & Huston) Going with a different approach realising that my previous strategy made no significant improvements in managing the situation, I went with avoiding as it was a small misunderstanding and I did not want to confront him as it may turn it into rivalry between us peers. Furthermore, we may become future colleagues.
Throughout Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov, Luzhin, and Svidrigailov overtly display nihilistic thinking. When Raskolnikov murders the pawnbroker, he negates that his action stands immorally to justify his own wishes to live
This notable subject is evident in most of his works such as “The Tale-A-Tell” and “The Black Cat.” While Montresor has revealed to the readers how he murdered Fortunato, the motive behind the murder has remained a mystery. He does not mention the reason that propelled him to develop the inhuman plot to murder his friend. The paper seeks to develop meaningful assumptions that might have influenced Monstresor to commit the murder. At the beginning of the novel, Montresor says,
Even though Dr. Khan’s article is in some way persuasive and supported well with different evidence, it isn’t examined further in depth. In The Scarlet Letter there is much support to prove the idea that Dimmesdale was not killed by atropine. The main point of Dr. Khan’s article was to prove that Chillingworth wanted to kill Dimmesdale by the use of atropine poisoning, but there are different parts in the novel that hint that Chillingworth wanted to keep Dimmesdale alive so that he could suffer through his own guilt. There is evidence early on in the novel that suggests that Dr. Khan’s theory is incorrect. During the conversation between Chillingworth and Hester, he tells her, “...I shall contrive aught against his
“If still you think (the narrator) mad, you will think so no longer when (the narrator) describe the wise precautions (the narrator) took for the concealment of the body,” reveals the attention to detail the narrator had when carrying out the murder. As time goes on, the guilt makes the character conscious of every move they make. What he did is always on his mind and he is constantly wondering about what might happen next. “(The narrator) kept quite still and said nothing...hearkening to the death watches in the wall,” the narrator shows the consciousness of his actions and how guilt forces him into thinking that the hidden body is watching their every step. The murder that was committed shows that supernatural occurrences do cause characters to go insane and take actions that usually would not have been thought
For example: ‘If D foresees an outcome, and indeed welcomes it, but that outcome nonetheless plays no part in her decision to act, then she does not intend it’ (A point made by Kenny, “Intention and Purpose in Law” in Summers (ed. ), Essays in Legal Philosophy (1968)). The case of Hyam (reference the case here) supports this argument: when setting fire to the house Mrs Hyam intended on frightening Mrs Booth, despite the fact she did foresee a possibility of killing Mrs Booth, she did not start the fire with the belief that her death would occur (make sure this is different from textbook). Although she was reckless, she did not intend to kill. What distinguishes intent from recklessness in this case is that the desire to scare was intended by the setting of the fire, and the foresight of death played no part in her decision to act.