APLC Summer Reading
A. Books
1. How to Read Literature like a Professor
by Thomas C. Foster: the ultimate cheat sheet for students. It gives
you the inside scoop on how your teachers figure out all that meaning
stuff about literature. It divides major concepts (symbol, archetype,
allusion, pattern, etc.) up into small, easy-to-digest chapters and
relates them to popular movies, TV, and literature (look for references
to mythology, The Simpsons, Cinderella, The Great Gatsby, The Odyssey, Oedipus, Gilligan’s Island, the Bible, Mark Twain, Shakespeare, and Ghostbusters).
Although
you will be expected to read the whole book this fall, focus on the
following chapters: Introduction, 5-7, 11-15, 19, and 25.
Read this book prior to reading Crime and Punishment—it will help you understand major themes and ideas, thus improving your posts.
2. Crime and Punishment
by Fyodor Dostoevsky: Fyodor Dostoevsky’s psychological novel probes
the inner workings of the criminal mind both before and in the aftermath
of premeditated murder. This novel of realism takes the reader into the
innermost thoughts of the central character and also probes the central
philosophical issues of good and evil.
B. Assignments and Due Dates
Postings are due by midnight on the following dates:
July 8—Parts I and II
July 21—Parts III and IV
August 7—Parts V and VI and Epilogue
Register on the blog. By each due date, you need post at least twice:
1 original post analyzing a specific quote with page number from the assignment. Your analysis must:
Be a minimum of 200 words, not including the quote.
Must tie the quote to an idea from How to Read Literature like a Professor.
Should not be a paraphrase or summary of the quote—think significance.
Stay within the assigned section.
1 response to another
student’s post that must:
Be a minimum of 100 words, not including the textual support.
Must use textual references for support.
Must be an actual response to what someone said—“I agree with Jacob” is
neither sufficient nor a good thing to state generally.
Feel free to respond and continue the discussion in addition to your
required posts. Just keep the discussion on topic and handle
disagreements maturely.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
48 comments:
“He used to beat her at the end: and although she paid him back, of which I have authentic documentary evidence, to this day she speaks of him with tears and she throws him up at me; and I am glad, though only in imagination, she should think of herself as having once been happy.... And she was left at his death with three children in a wild and remote district where I happened to be at the time....” (Part I, Chapter II, Page 12). This quote comes from Marmeladov when describing his wife’s deceased, first husband and explaining their love story but also details the cruelty she faced while in the marriage and the helplessness and poverty she was left with when he passed. The excerpt from Crime and Punishment can tie into Thomas Foster’s How to Read Literature like a Professor novel in chapter 11, “Writers kill off characters for the same set of reasons-make action happen, cause plot complications, end plot complications, put other characters under stress” (Page 97). Dostoyevsky did not include the actual death of Mr. Lebeziatnikov’s but he adds it into the plot in order to give Marmeladov and his family more of a background story and more ‘complications’ as Foster calls it. It adds to the storyline by including two, somewhat indirect, points of Foster’s list. It essentially causes Marmeladov stress by now being married to his wife and having to provide for his family, which he does quite unsuccessfully (see “It’s the fifth day....and it’s the end of everything!” page 17). It causes plot complications by Marmeladov having to provide for the family and his wife, and now having the complications of facing his wife once she finds out how he is unemployed and has spent money on alcohol in a bar.
Maya
#1 “No, Dounia, I see it all and I know what you want to say to me; and I know too what you were thinking about, when you walked up and down all night, and what your prayers were like before the Holy Mother of Kazan who stands in mother’s bedroom. Bitter is the ascent of Golgotha” (Part I chapter IV, Page 33) At this point in the book, Raskolnikov has just finished reading a letter sent from his mother. The letter addresses his sister’s plan to help him by marrying a man with money. Many connections involving religion, specifically Christianity, come along with Raskoliknov’s reaction to his sister’s plans. The word Golgotha ,in which Raskoliknov compares with bitterness, to me strikes a powerful memory revealing a picture of a rock with a skull like shape to it. I saw this image looking through my parent’s pictures from their trip to Israel and it evoked a sense of uneasiness. This could be easily relatable to how Raskolnikov feels as he is pondering about his sister. Under the picture was a small description stating that it was the very place where Christ had died. Similarly to Christ dying to save the souls of his people, I feel as if Raskolnikov is associating his sister’s sacrifices in order to protect him to the way Christ gave his life to forgive people’s sins. Thomas C. Foster in his book How To Read Literature Like A Professor emphasizes that in most classic novels the author has a pretty good understanding of the Bible and typically incorporates it throughout the novel. He describes biblical language as “... apocalyptic rhetoric and imagery.” (page 42) This imagery that Foster describes is strongly equated to the feeling captured in this quote.The deep and moral meaning behind the bible conjures a mix of emotions that are easily relatable in the story as well as in real life and creates sympathy to Raskoliknov’s feelings.
The quote, “Raskolnikov thrust it in his pocket without looking at it, flung the crosses on the old woman's body and rushed back into the bedroom, this time taking the axe with him” (p. 81) is one of the many powerful moments in which Dostoevsky references the Bible throughout the novel. After Raskolnikov gothically murders the elderly women, he attempts to “better” his actions by throwing crosses on the dead body. By sharply contrasting his horrid actions with the Godly symbol of the crosses, Dostoevsky shows the emotions felt by Raskolnikov in the moments immediately following his crime. Reflecting how Raskolnikov felt as though his actions were justified, yet he still felt guilty for his crime. As explained in How to Read Literature Like a Professor by Thomas Foster, Biblical references are used commonly by authors prior to the 20th century because the Bible was considered to be information that readers could relate to. Many of the biblical references used by Dostoevsky throughout the novel relate to crucifixion and sacrifices, correlating with the way that Jesus sacrificed himself for the sins of the people. Foster explains that crosses are often used to display irony, holding steadfast in this instance. The symbol of the cross is commonly used to represent Christ as well as the faith of Christians. Raskolnikov uses the crosses in this instance in an attempt to pacify his actions and ask for forgiveness.
Maya,
I agree with your analysis of Marmeladov and his development of a character caused by the death of his wife. Not only is Marmeladov put under an extreme level of stress, and many internal problems arise for him; But his daughter also suffers severely because of Marmeladov’s actions. As expressed by Marmeladov, he went to his daughter Sonia for money. Without a word his daughter gives him the money. Although he is unsure of how she will now support herself, she gives her father the money anyway. And more importantly, Marmeladov takes the money from her. “It costs money, that smartness, that special smartness, you know? Do you understand?” (22). Not only does Marmeladov acknowledge the fact that he is causing others extreme hardship through his drinking problems, but he requests that individuals in the bar pity him. Through the death of Marmeladov’s wife, Dostoevsky causes extensive plot complications for Marmeladov by worsening the tension between him and his daughter, as well as his internal conflicts.
“He, too, would apparently have liked to approach the girl with some object of his own. He, too, had probably seen her in the distance and had followed her, but found Raskolnikov in his way. He looked angrily at him, though he tried to escape his notice, and stood impatiently biding his time, till the unwelcome man in rags should have moved away. His intentions were unmistakable.” (Part I, Chapter IV, page 78). This scene sets the stage for Raskolnikov’s collection of morally ambiguous actions. Crime and Punishment will see its protagonist through a series of events driven by the his desperation and sense of ethics (or lack thereof). That said, Raskolnikov’s true moral boundaries are a bit foggy. In a fit of righteous anger, he saves a young girl from what Thomas C. Foster (author of How to Read Literature Like a Professor) would refer to as a “vampire”: someone who represents “selfishness, exploitation, a refusal to respect the autonomy of other people…”. The man in this scenario is a textbook vampire, in that he places his ugly desires over the needs of others. Characters such as these present an opportunity for other characters to show who they really are. With this in mind, Raskolnikov’s actions paint him as a good person, which conflicts with his later doings… such as murder. The situation presented by the “vampire” helps to establish Raskolnikov’s moral standing as neither-here-nor-there, especially when juxtaposed with his later pursuit of homicide.
Emily,
I agree with your statement that Dostoyevsky uses many biblical references relating to crucifixion and sacrifices. One point in the novel I noticed it was when Marmeladov claimed with his arms outstretched, “And he will say, Come to me! I have already forgiven thee once...’” (Part I, chapter II, page 18). Marmeladov is saying he can do anything and the Lord will always forgive because he was crucified for the sake of others. It is later in chapter 3 that Raskoliknov receives a letter from his mother and at the end of the letter the author is sure to make a reference to how his mother does believe he is still praying and believing in God, “Do you still say your prayers, Rodya, and believe in the mercy of our Creator and Redeemer? I am afraid in my heart that you may have been visited by the new spirit of infidelity that is abroad to-day; If it is so, i pray for you” (Part I, Chapter III, Page 32-33). The mother is also adding to the fact that Raskoliknov does have a lot of religious tendencies, but that he should and the fact that he does not have a lot of faith in the Lord is a foreshadow for his actions later in the novel.
The quote “Raskolnikov was not used to crowds, and, as we said before, he avoided society of every sort, more especially of late. But now all at once he felt a desire to be with other people.” (Chapter two, part one, page.43) Is the beginning to the first time where we are introduced to Raskolnikov. We learn of his social awkwardness and how he favors being a recluse. I believe that in this part Dostoevsky is trying to convey to us the psychopathic qualities of which Raskolnikov has. The method that Dostoevsky is using, as explained in Thomas C. Foster's book "How To Read Literature Like a Professor", is referred to as "communion". This is when two characters in a novel dine or drink together. This method allows authors, such as Dostoevsky, to emphasize and convey who their character is and their intentions. It allows them to get a feel for the character and let us obtain a better mental image of the character. For me, I was able to obtain an idea of how Raskolnikov's mind might work and why he has a a taste for murder. This method sets the stage for the rest of the book. Through this we are enabled to make assumptions and get a feel for future happenings in the book,such as Raskolnikov's murder.
Jock,
I completely agree with you about Raskolnikov's attempt to use a good deed to cover up his evil intentions. I belive that his actions cause confusion into who he really is. At first, when I read this passage from the book, I believed that Raskolnikov was on some sort of guilt trip. Possibly could it be that Raskolnikov was feeling guilty for his evil intentions? It also made me ponder why he was killing and my thinking ultimately lead me to the assumption to that it was out of pride. I began to think that possibly he saved the girl out of his thirst for pride as well. Also earlier in the novel it was noted that Raskolnikov was "crushed by poverty"(Part One,Chapter One,Page Nineteen), could it be that he wanted to prove to the other man that he was superior to him? This passage in the novel brings about many questions and much skepticism about who Raskolnikov is and makes his true moral boundaries a bit "foggy" like you said. Thank you for you addition to the blog Jock, I thought that your post was very well done and, to that, I say bravo!
Jock, I agree that Raskolnikov struggles with his moral self and I also agree that Raskolnikov is a vampire. According to Thomas C. Foster, a vampire “…really comes down to, whether in Elizabethan, Victorian, or more modern incarnations; exploitation in its many forms. Using other people to get what we want. Denying someone else’s right to live in the face of our overwhelming demands” (Chapter 3, page 22) Raskolnikov is an extremely complexed character and his actions can suddenly contradict one another. In a sense, he is more than one person. However, I believe that Dostoevsky shows us that no matter how troubled a mind may become, a person’s ethics are strongly ingrained in their character. In a way his true self is at odds with his sickness.
Maya, Callie, Emily, Jock, and Ross –
Thanks for getting this assignment off to a very good start! You have selected some excellent and important episodes/scenes/quotes, identified and begun to discuss several of the novel’s central themes, and made some insightful and original connections to Foster’s categories of literary analysis.
I do not have enough time to critique or respond to each of your posts, so I am going to focus on some of the issues raised in Jock’s which I thought was particularly interesting and good…why does Raskolnikov kill Alyona Ivanovna? (The novel being in some ways an allegory, the real question it asks is why does anyone commit murder or any other crime?) If your answer to that question is “Because he is an evil person,” I think your reading of the novel is so superficial as to really be a misreading (in other words, you are wrong!). Jock’s post does an excellent job of illustrating this paradox…Raskolnikov is a good person in many, many ways. (If you are far enough into the novel you know of other good things he has done besides keeping the predator away from the drunken teenage girl). One of the big philosophical questions the novel raises is whether or not the utilitarian view (referred to in the novel as the modern “scientific” way of looking at society or as the conclusions of the school of “political economy”) is viable and true, and this is one of the big questions/themes you will be dealing with in the latter parts of the novel.
One more thing I want to tell you if I have not already done so in a post or email…Raskol in Russian means “split” or “divided.” The Raskolniki were a schismatic group within the Russian orthodox church in the 18th c. So basically Raskolnikov means “one who is split” or “one who is divided.” In this case he is both split/isolated from society of any sort and divided within or against himself. There is also an important sense in which the book itself is split between the social commentary and straight forward 19th c. realist story of the Marmeladov’s (highlighted in Maya’s post) and the convoluted psychological and existential investigation of Raskolnikov’s motivations, actions, contradictions, etc.
Feel free to either email me or just post any questions you have about the novel, Foster, or this first round of posts, and if you have not yet posted and/or responded to a post, get on it!
Mr. D
Cali,
While analogies to the Bible could be made throughout the novel, I don’t believe the scenario you outlined was included for the sole purpose of biblical parallels. As I see it, this scene was included for plot progression first, and symbolism second. Dounia is willing to make a sacrifice, yes, but sacrifice in and of itself is not indigenous to the stories of the Bible. If one chooses to look at the scene in a way such as this, it seems more and more like the author’s intentions were to use it as a plot mover. It is Raskolinikov’s subsequent reference to the crucifixion of Christ that could make the attentive reader hunt for biblical symbolism. This scene’s significance to the plot largely outweighs its biblical allusions, and providing the reader with said biblical allusions was not its intended purpose.
“Pulcheria Alexandrovna, who seemed also a little embarrassed, hastened to make them all sit down at the round table where a samovar was boiling. Dounia and Luzhin were facing one another on opposite sides of the table. Razumihin and Raskolnikov were facing Pulcheria Alexandrovna, Razumihin was next to Luzhin and Raskolnikov was beside his sister” (Page 234, Part IV, chapter II). When reading this chapter it seems impossible to not think of Thomas Foster’s How to Read Literature Like a Professor’s second chapter titled “Nice to eat with you: Acts of Communion”. Foster’s chapter centers around how authors struggle to include dining scenes because they must be extremely compelling in order to retain the reader’s attention, “to put characters, then, in this mundane, overused, fairly boring situation, something more has to be happening than simply beef, forks, and goblets” (pg 9). This is exactly what Fyodor Dostoyevsky does in Crime and Punishment because it is when the confrontations begin to turn nasty between Luzhin, Raskolnikov, and Dounia. Dounia exclaims, “Your request that my brother should not be present at our meeting was disregarded solely at my instance...You wrote that you had been insulted by my brother; I think that this must be explained at once, and you should be reconciled. And if Rodya really has insulted you, then he should and will apologise” (Page 238). It comes to the reader’s attention that Dounia ignored Luzhin’s demand for the absence of Raskolnikov because she needed them to have the confrontation in front of her for her to decide who was exaggerating and which side she needed to take. In Foster’s chapter in HTRLLAP , he says that an act of communion is either an act of peace and unification, or an act of ruin, when people are pushed to not get along. The latter is the technique that Dostoyevsky uses in his communion scene, Luzhin goes after Raskolnikov and vice versa while Dounia argues with Luzhin. The insults and lies fly around the table ultimately ending the relationship between Luhzin and Dounia and still causing strains between Raskolnikov and the rest of the family.
Maya
While Raskolnikov is being visited by his mother and sister, it is expressed by Pulcheria, “What a wretched lodging you have, Royda! It’s like a tomb,” said Pulcheria Alexandrovna, suddenly breaking the oppressive silence. “I am sure it’s quite half through your lodging you have become so melancholy.”... “Yes, the lodging had a great deal to do with it… I thought that, too” (232). This is an example of an instance where the author uses the location of the novel as more than a setting, but rather as a symbolic message. It is believed by many that Raskolnikov’s illness is caused by the crowded, dirty, stuffy room which he has been residing in for the length of the novel. In How to Read LIterature Like a Professor, Foster recognizes the importance of the geography of a novel simply through the impact that the setting has on the characters and the plot of the book. Geography allows the characters to be influenced by the social, political, and natural aspects of that region. “Geography is setting, but it also (or can be) psychology, attitude, finance, industry- anything that place can forge in the people who live there” (174). The crowded streets, dark alleys, and tall buildings of St. Petersburg (along with the hot summer weather) invoke the pressure of stress; that is seen through the character of Raskolnikov. Raskolnikov’s apartment is also a critical component of the geography because it solidifies the cramped and stressful feeling of St. Petersburg.
Maya,
I agree with you on your analysis of the dinner table quote. The scene is filled with nasty dialogue between the characters that results in the end of the relationship between Dounia and Luzhin as well as significantly straining the relationship that Raskolnikov has with his family. I found Dounia particularly interesting in this portion of the novel because it seems as though she is looking for a reason not to marry Luzhin. By bringing Raskolnikov to the meeting with Luzhin, Dounia is testing her fiance to see how well he can handle a situation in which he does not have total control. “You see Pyotr Petrovitch writes that you are not to be with us this evening, and that he will go away if you come. So will you… come?”. Just as Foster explains in his book, Dostoevsky is using the setting of a dinner table to force conversation, particularly hostile conversation because of the utter defiance of Luzhin’s request.
“The yellow, scratched and shabby wall-paper was black in the corners. It must have been damp and full of fumes in the winter. There was every sign of poverty; even the bedstead had no curtains.” (Part 4, Chapter 4 Page 250) This description of Sonia’s room leads the reader to believe that her room is poor and distasteful. The word yellow stands out by exemplifying this feeling in the novel where you can strongly relate to the atmosphere in the room. To me and many others, yellow represent a feeling of poverty and disgust. The color appears at many points in the book where the author is trying to connect with the readers, giving them a sense of mood and surroundings. An earlier example of the word yellow in the book occurs when the author describes Sonia’s yellow card depicting her as a prostitute. This example also brings up feelings of disgust. Another occurrence is when Sonia’s father is yellow from drinking. All of these examples evoke a sense of hardship. By relating this color to emotion and repeating its use, it allows the reader to connect to the symbolism of yellow and absorb the context. Not only is the author using descriptive words to bring the story alive, but he is provoking senses and color to make this symbolism stand out. Some might argue that to them, yellow isn't a color of poverty but a feeling of happiness. Though that can easily be argued, in the book How To Read Literature Like A Professor, it seems to be the authors premise to teach individuals to have a personal experience with the novel that he or she is reading. “ Everyone thinks I’m either being a wise guy or ducking responsibility, but neither is the case. Seriously what do you think it stands for, because that’s probably what it does, at least for you.” (chapter 12, page 104) This quote describes that any sort of feeling you believe is symbolic or meaningful, it most likely is. This is why everyone seems to have different experiences while reading the same book. Every reader connects with the book differently. Therefore, while the audience may have different depictions of the color yellow, it is up to the reader to relate it with however they feel.
Cali, I agree with you with the fact that everyone perceives symbols in novels differently as can be seen in Foster's How toe Read Literature like a Professor, “Here’s the problem with symbols: people expect them to mean something. Not just any something, but one something in particular. Exactly. Maximum. You know what? It doesn’t work like that....Some symbols do have a relatively limited range of meanings, but in general a symbol cant be reduced to standing for only one thing” (page 105-106). With your example of the color yellow being used in the novel most people, like myself would perceive it the same way you did, as it symbolizing poverty and unhappiness. But also like what Foster states in his book, symbols are necessary to the novel to make readers reflect on self experiences and feelings to determine their own interpretations of the symbols in the novel. So even though we see the color yellow symbolizing the same things, people who have different emotions that they may associate with the color may reflect with the color differently and see it as symbolizing something else.
Maya
“In the corridor they came upon Luzhin; he had arrived punctually at eight, and was looking for the number, so that all three went in together without greeting or looking at one another. (Chapter II, Part IV) And so begins a most uncomfortable luncheon. When Raskolinikov, Razumihin, Luzhin, Dunya, and Pulcheria Alexandrovna meet at the restaurant, they come together in what Thomas C. Foster (from How to Read Literature Like a Professor) would refer to as “communion”: “And in literature, there is another reason: writing a meal scene is so difficult, and so inherently uninteresting, that there really needs to be some compelling reason to include one in the story. And that reason has to do with how characters are getting along. Or not getting along.”. Getting along or not getting along… In comparison to Foster’s quote, the scene referenced from Crime and Punishment is most definitely the latter. Foster goes on to define communion as characters coming together to perform some sort of intimate ritual (such as sharing a meal), ultimately revealing how said characters feel about one another. The cited example is no exception to Foster’s idea, which depicts rising hostilities from Luzhin when he realizes Raskolinikov and Ruzumihin are in attendance, despite his specific request for their absence. The two friends, as well as the rest of the group, are quick to turn on Luzhin, leading to the derailment of his relationship with Dunya. The group’s actions support Foster’s idea that “communion” presents the reader with pivotal insight regarding the characters and their relationships with one another.
Emily, I strongly agree with your comment about the author of Crime and punishment using Geography to impact the characters. As the story unfolds and settings changes, you start to see the characters develop along with it. For example, after Raskolnikov has committed his crime, the places that he encounters are described as crowded and dark, just as his emotions are. During part three and four, Raskolnikov is always on edge, overthinking everything and second guessing all of his choices. The small, crowded places he comes across seemed to suffocate him as well as his overwhelming thoughts. Most people tend to associate geography with physical and natural things such as “hills, creeks, deserts, beaches, degrees latitude. Stuff like that.” (chapter 19 page 173) According to Thomas C Foster in his book How To Read Literature Like A Professor. He also describes that “Geography can also define or even develop a character.” (Chapter 19 page 175) Though we might have never correlated an apartment building to Geography, Foster teaches us how to really look at every detail to connect settings to symbolic geography. Geography also intern can act as a sort of parallel to character emotions.
“You think I am delirious? No... You are marrying Luzhin for my sake. But I won't accept the sacrifice. And so write a letter before to-morrow, to refuse him... Let me read it in the morning and that will be the end of it!”(Part 3, Chapter 1, Page. 573) Raskolnikov's selfish feelings blind him from the happiness of the people that he loves. In this scene Raskolnikov refuses a wedding between his sister, Dounia, and Luzhin simply because he believes that Luzhin is, for lack of a better word, an idiot. When reading this chapter it is tough to not think of the situational archetypes that Thomas C. Foster mentioned in "How To Read Literature Like A Professor". Foster explains that situational archetypes are commonly used to test characters' nobility and courage. Typically, as Foster explains in his novel, situational archetypes have to do with family struggles. In this situation, the family struggle that Raskolnikov is facing, is the need to protect his family. This method does show the reader something about Raskolnikov's courage and nobility, but I believe that in this situation the reader learned more about Raskolnikov's selfishness. It looks like to me that Raskolnikov wants to be the only man of the house, so he doesn't allow the marriage because he doesn't want to relinquish any control of his family. This is another clear example of how Raskolnikov is a power and pride hungry man and that he will do anything to keep his position.
Jock, I completely agree with your comments about communion and how it is used to detail characters relationships with each other. The luncheon was initially used to mend a relationship between Raskolnikov and Luzhin, but instead proved to be the end of their short lived friendship. This meeting gave readers future insight to how the novel will progress, aswell as provide us with more knowledge of Raskolnikov's behavior so that we could better formulate our opinions on him. Typically communion is used to better relationships or solve problems but in this case it proved to be the death of a friendship and possibly a marriage. In my opinion, I believe that the luncheon should have never occurred. Luzhin made it very clear that he didn't want to see Raskolnikov again but Dounia went against his wishes and organized a meeting. Dounia should've known that setting up a meeting between her psychotic brother and her fiancé would lead to the downfall of their relationship.
Ross, the reason Raskolnikov objects to his sister’s marriage is not because he is a “power and pride hungry man and that will do anything to keep his position”, but because he feels that Dounia is only marrying Luzhin in order to help him. Raskolnikov does not believe that his sister is marrying Luzhin because of any attraction she has to him, but rather that the union exists solely to help him back onto his feet. Raskolnikov’s pride is what gets in the way of a friendly relationship with Luzhin, not some need to be The Number 1 Alpha Male.
During the epilogue, the reader gets an indepth look into Raskolnikov’s life in prison and his relationship with Sonya while he is living in Siberia. She has moved to Siberia because of a promised life with Raskolnikov after his punishment is served. Siberia, which is normally seen as one of the coldest, and lifeless places on earth is uncharacteristically seen in a different life during the Epilogue: Springtime. In How to Read Literature Like a Professor (chapter 20), Foster emphasizes the importance of the seasons to a story line as well as the development of a character. Spring is normally used as a symbol for rebirth, life, and growth. A direct correlation can be drawn between the time of year, and the relationship that Raskolnikov has with Sonya. In a moment of intense emotion, “He wept and embraced her knees. For the first moment she was terribly frightened, and her whole face went numb. She jumped up and looked at him, trembling. But all at once, in that same moment, she understood everything. Infinite happiness lit up in her eyes; she understood, and for her there was no longer any doubt that he loved her” (541). Similarly to the way in which Spring is a time of change and rebirth in nature, Spring brings change in Raskolnikov which allows him to realize that he loves Sonya. Furthermore, Raskolnikov is able to begin his journey back into society by allowing himself to have the natural and normal emotions he lost after his crimes.
“It was only in that he recognized his criminality, only in the fact that he had been unsuccessful and had confessed it.” (page 425, Epilogue) During this point in the book, Raskolnikov’s character evolves out of his state of denial as he accepts the hash reality of responsibility. Raskolnikov faces the truth and can no longer justify his actions based on political views. The author of Crime and Punishment, Fyodor Dostoyevsky wrote this book revealing some of his personal views on politics and incorporating them throughout the story. Like Raskolnikov, Dostoyevsky was arrested by the government and penalized for his offense. He was punished for his radical socialist positions, only to later reject these ideas. Through the story, the author incorporates a strong message of just how powerful the government is and the strong effect of politics. He boldly reveals his beliefs about politics through the main character’s actions. The message of the story revolves around the broad idea of Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a concept based on doing something for more happiness rather than personal or limited happiness. Raskolnikov committing his murders reflects this view by him believing that his crime would be better for the world, “A hundred thousand good deeds could be done and helped, on that old women’s money…Kill her, take her money and with the help of it devote oneself to the service of humanity and the good of all”. (page 54, chapter VI). Eventually, Raskolnikov loses his utilitarian views by admitting that he is a murder. In the book How To Read Literature Like A Professor, the author Thomas C. Foster describes how authors tend to use their own political beliefs in stories to get their point across to influence their audience. And what better way to do it than through meaningful literature? Foster writes about how if you look deeper into a story “you can tell somethings is going on beyond the story” (page 116, chapter 13) Anyone that dedicates their time to reading a book, the author’s intended views will clearly stand out. Foster also begins to state that “Nearly all writing is political on some level.” (page 118, chapter 13) Every author has an opinion and to hide it from their literature would be nearly impossible. Politics are a major factor in life and each author has a personal view on it.
“He did not know that the new life would not be given to him for nothing, that he would have to pay dearly for it, that it would cost him great striving, great suffering. But that is the beginning of a new story- the story of the gradual renewal of a man, the story of his gradual regeneration, of his passing from one world into another, of initiation into a new unknown life” (Epilogue, Chapter II, Page 430). I liked this quote and how it ended the novel, stating that Raskolnikov became a new person after his confession and imprisonment, that he went on to become a reinvigorated person with Sonia. This particular part of the book, describing his future in prison and future with Sonia, reminded me a lot of Thomas Foster’s first chapter in “How To Read Literature Like A Professor”. The first chapter is titled “Every trip is a quest (except when it’s not)”, and Dostoyevsky really tied in all the points Foster makes about a quest. In HTRLLAP Foster states, “On the surface, sure. But let’s think structurally. The quest consists of five things: (a) a quester, (b) a place to go, (c) a stated reason to go there, (d) challenges and trials en route, and (e) a real reason to go there..... The real reason for a quest is always self-knowledge” (Page 3). Raskolnikov would be the quester and his place to go is prison, with the reason being he committed a crime. Now his challenges en route could be a possibility of different things, some including his dying mother, his relationship with Sonia, and so on, but then it comes down to the real reason he went. I saw his real reason for going to be his self-knowledge that would be a changed man. I also saw a change in the way he became more fascinated with the New Testament that Sonia had given him when he requested it, because prior to that in the novel, he really had no interest in religion.
Maya
Emily, I agree with you that Dostoyevsky used the season to describe Raskolnikov’s rebirth as a person, and how it was ironic about the novel’s setting in Siberia. I also think that this can relate to Foster’s nineteenth chapter in How To Read Literature Like a Professor because it talks about how the geography matters to the basis if the story. In other words, the setting and where certain events take place can lead to a deeper meaning behind the actual event. “Geography is setting, but it’s also (or can be) Psychology, attitude, finance, industry....” (Page 174). in the novel, Raskolnikov is sent to prison in Siberia, but in particular this prison is designated as a work camp, which harshens the setting. I think Dostoyevsky used Siberia as the place of prison on purpose because like you had stated, it is usually known for being lifeless and harsh.
Maya
“In the last letter Sonia wrote that he had been taken very seriously ill and was in the convict ward of the hospital.” - Epilogue, Chapter I. After some time spent in his Siberian prison, Raskolnikov falls ill. Illness, as Thomas C. Foster would put it, should “have strong symbolic or metaphorical possibilities”. Raskolnikov supports this quote (from How to Read Literature Like a Professor) by emphasizing that it was not a mere illness that was weakening him, but his wounded pride (“It was wounded pride that made him ill.” - Epilogue, Chapter II), as well as his incapacity to blame himself for his crimes. It is rare to see the symbolism of such an illness so plainly explained within the story, but nevertheless, Crime and Punishment’s narrator proceeds to trace the origins of its protagonist’s newest conflict - the origins being Raskolnikov’s innate self-importance, and inability to shake the idea that he is not only above the law, but that the subsequent confession to his crime is a synonym for weakness: “…and his exasperated conscience found no particularly terrible fault in his past, except a simple blunder which might happen to anyone. He was ashamed just because he, Raskolnikov, had so hopelessly, stupidly come to grief through some decree of blind fate, and must humble himself and submit to "the idiocy" of a sentence, if he were anyhow to be at peace.” - Epilogue, Chapter II. With little to no detective work required, Foster’s idea that an illness is never simply an illness proves true once more.
“Siberia. On the banks of a broad solitary river stands a town, one of the administrative centres of Russia; in the town there is a fortress, in the fortress there is a prison. In the prison the second-class convict Rodion Raskolnikov has been confined for nine months.”(Pg.1305, Epilogue, Chapter I) Thomas C. Foster, In "How To Read Literature Like a Professor", explains the factor of setting is to help a reader visualize, establish mood, and foreshadow future happenings of the novel. By using words such as "Broad" and "Solitary" Doestoevsky enables the reader to experience and get a feel for how lonely the town is and how lonely Raskolnikov will be during the tenure of his sentence. When he uses the word "Fortress" we are able to visualize the building. It paints a mental picture of a large, thick-walled, brick building that even the most skilled criminals cold not escape from. If you were to place the story in a different setting the novel would be completely different than what it is now. To me, setting is a canvas and what you paint on it is the story. If you were to use a circular canvas the painting would be perceived in a totally different way than it would be if it were on a rectangular canvas. Setting is a crucial device that is used by authors that shapes the way the book is understood and read by readers.
*(Quotes were done with Ibooks)
Maya, I strongly agree with your blog comparing Raskolnikov’s quest to the first chapter of How To Read Literature Like A Professor. From start to finish, Raskolnikov’s journey includes everything that is described by Thomas C. Foster in order for it to be classified as a quest. It is easy not to be aware of the fact that this entire story is overall a huge quest from the beginning to end. As Foster states “A quester is just a person who goes on a quest, whether or not he knows it’s a quest. In fact, usually he doesn’t know.” (page 3) Through the entire story, I think that Raskolnikov was oblivious to the fact that he was a quester and thought of his adventure simply as getting through life after committing a crime rather than a mission to gain self knowledge.
Jock,
Throughout the novel, Raskolnikov's illness is accompanied by a paranoid mindset that causes him, and those around him (such as his mother) great stress. However, it is believed by some that he is actually just a hypochondriac, and not ill like Raskolnikov assumes. Raskolnikov is explained by Razumikhin as, "sullen, gloomy, arrogant, proud; recently (and maybe much earlier) insecure and hypochondriac. Magnanimous and kind. Doesn’t like voicing his feelings, and would rather do something cruel than speak his heart out in words. At times, however, he’s not hypochondriac at all, but just inhumanly cold and callous, as if there really were two opposite characters in him, changing places with each other" (204). Just as you said, his "illness" can be seen as much more than just an illness; it represents Raskolnikov's stubbornness and extreme guilt, which he has leading up to his imprisonment and confession. Not until Raskolnikov is sent to the hospital ward of the prison does he finally become well once again.
Maya, I disagree with you on the subject of WHY Raskolnikov went to prison. I do not believe it was so that he may come out on the other side as a changed person (which through analysis and elimination of character traits would mean a better one), but to relieve himself of his guilt. Raskolnikov views his guilt as weakness, and his crimes as impulsive blunderings. I do not see his character as one on a quest for retribution, but rather one whose goal is to quell his own unpleasant emotions.
Emily, I completely agree with what you stated about the connection between setting and its purpose in the novel. I believe that Dostoevsky used such a damp, cold, dark place to convey to the reader how miserable Roskolnikov's sentence would be. The use of the solitary place was crucial in conveying of the fact that Raskolinikov was truly paying for his crime. Another good quote that exemplifies the usefulness of this device is when the novel states “Siberia. On the banks of a broad solitary river stands a town, one of the administrative centres of Russia; in the town there is a fortress, in the fortress there is a prison. In the prison the second-class convict Rodion Raskolnikov has been confined for nine months.”(Pg.1305, Epilogue, Chapter I). The quote also is another key piece of evidence that would support the assumption that Dostoevsky used Siberia to give the reader a deeper understanding of the novel. Without setting the reader would not be able to experience as deep of a connection to the novel as they would with it.
Part 1 & 2
Trying to select a single quote to summarize even just one concept of this novel thus far was a daunting task. Any line from any given chapter of either section could have worked, honestly. Dostoevsky’s writing style is just so multi-faceted that the interpretations and critiques of even just the first page provide enough support to illicit a four page essay. So much can be taken from each quote that choosing a single one was quite near impossible. But alas.
“He suddenly heard steps in the room where the old woman lay. He stopped short and was still as death” (Part 1, Chapter VII, page 152).
This is the moment where any prior justification Raskolnikov has for murder dissipates. While it is debatable at this point in the novel why he does choose to kill Alyona, he believes he is justified in feeling that he must murder her for reasons that are bigger than just himself. This quote exemplifies Foster’s theory ( of How To Read Literature Like a Professor) in Chapter 11 titled “Writers Kill Off Characters For The Same Set of Reasons- to make action happen, cause plot complications, end plot complications, put other characters under stress”. Raskolnikov’s first murder pertains to the “making action” type of character-killing-off. If only Alyona had been murdered, this would have only been some much-needed action to the story. However, when Raskolnikov murders Lizaveta as well, Dostoevsky checks off all but one of the reasons authors kill characters (all but ending plot complications). Lizaveta’s murder causes Raskolnikov to have guilt (therefore putting his character under stress). It is an act that he does solely to protect himself (I can’t necessarily blame him, though) and thus causes him great grief. While I would like to think he would have experienced some guilt if only the murder of Alyona had occurred, I cannot say for certain as I feel I do not know his character all that well yet and any judgement I have as of now would be presumptuous. I do know that if that was the case, he would have felt his action was justified (but, again, not necessarily guilt-free). Raskolnikov thought that he was destined to murder Alyona by finding reason behind coincidences like conveniently finding an axe in the shed while on his way to murder her. Prior to the murder, he believes this serves as his way of clearing his conscious and avoiding responsibility for the crime (thus absolving all guilt). So while I can only speculate as to whether or not he would have had guilt if only murdering Alyona, he thought that he would not thus making the murder of Lizaveta the epitome of all crime and punishment in the novel thus far.
Megan, I must disagree with you. You say Raskolnikov lacks emotion. I beg to differ. Within these first two sections there are plenty of instances where his emotion is what drives him crazy. He seems to have two inward personas, one with quite distinct emotion. In Part 1 Chapter 3, Raskolnikov cries after reading the letter from his mother. He cries because he loves his sister and does not want her to have to sacrifice herself for his sake by marrying Luzhin. This shows he definitely had emotion before committing the crime. Guilt, I think, is an emotion, or at least shows existence of emotion. You say that it is his lack of emotion that leads him to be able to commit the crime, but he clearly does not lack emotion. I think a better way to say that would have been to say that he is capable of suppressing his emotions easily (which I don’t think is true, but I think is the point you were trying to make).
Part 3 &4
Oh Dostoevsky, how I wish I could see inside of your brain. Up until these sections I thought the number of characters was superfluous. However, it can really be seen in these sections just how much each character adds to the plot. Each one has a specific purpose and reason for being there. Dostoevsky creates such an interconnected web of personalities, all essential to the overall plot. It is truly impressive. That being said, I would like to focus in on two characters: Lizaveta and Sonia. In Part Four Chapter Four, Raskolnikov goes to speak with Sonia after deciding to separate himself from his family. He is drawn to her. Sonia is portrayed as a deeply religious, almost pious, character. Raskolnikov is curious, almost skeptical, of her devout spirituality due to her horrendous circumstances. Sonia informs him that she received her cross and Bible from her friend, Lizaveta.
(“Where did you get that?” he called to her across the room.
She was still standing in the same place, three steps from the table.
“It was brought me,” she answered, as it were unwillingly, not looking at him.
“Who brought it?”
“Lizaveta, I asked her for it.”) Part 4 Chapter 4 Page 257
I’m sure many people will argue that Sonia is a Christ figure, but I disagree. Sonia is a disciple (not a direct reflection of one of the twelve, but her story works enough). Chapter Seven of “How To Read Literature Like A Professor” discusses how authors before the mid-20th century used Biblical references because, during that period of time, they could rely on the Bible being common knowledge all of their readers could relate to. I actually looked up the name “Sonia” to see if it had any biblical connections. Indeed it does! Sonia comes from the word “sophos or "wise men" and is mentioned 44 times in the Bible. It is used in the New Testament to describe the men who came to worship the baby Jesus”. So Sonia’s name literally hints at the fact that she is a follower of Jesus. I’m sure Dostoevsky was well aware of this when choosing her name. Foster notes that this is a common method of authors when drawing a connection between biblical and literary characters.
I agree with Sammy when he says there is no true Christ figure in this book. I at first thought that Sonia is a Christ figure. However, she is too sinful to be Christ. I know that sounds awful of me to say because she in some ways cannot avoid her sin and her sin is well intended and she feels bad for it and she repents, but it is still sin. I think Sammy’s point about her sacrificing being what makes her happy is very interesting. I had not thought of it in that way previously, but I now agree with him. She is somewhat of a self-inflicted martyr. Upon further reflection, I thought Lizaveta is a Christ figure because she was spreading the word of God and was killed. She too is not a Christ figure because she has no self-sacrifice. She just dies innocently and by a vicious hand, perhaps analogous to the death of Christ but not a figure of his life.
Parts 5, 6 and Epilogue
In these parts of the novel, Dostovesky further illustrates the philosophical differences between Dunia and her brother that lead to their eventual split.
“At last they both went out. It was hard for Dunia, but she loved him. She walked away, but after going fifty paces she turned round to look at him again. He was still in sight. At the corner he too turned and for the last time their eyes met; but noticing that she was looking at him, he motioned her away with impatience and even vexation, and turned the corner abruptly.” (section 6 chapter 7 page 409)
This passage symbolizes not only the physical separation between brother and sister, but the definite moral separation. Previously in this section, Dunia is faced with the possibility of committing murder to protect herself from being raped. She is unable to do it. This disproves Raskolnikov’s theory that was the basis of his murders. Even as an act of self-defense, Dunia cannot bring herself to kill. Raskolnikov was easily able to off Lizaveta as an act of “protection”. In Chapter Twelve of “How To Read Literature Like a Professor”, Foster discusses symbols and how actions, as well as images and objects, can be symbols. This action of Dunia with the gun not being able to fire a lethal shot is symbolic of her inability to kill even as an act of self defense. This moment creates a clear separation between her and her brother’s ideologies and true character. It foreshadows their eventual split that occurs in the above-mentioned quote. Even in the mannerisms and spirits of their parting, one can see their differences
Jock, I love this quote that you chose. I love it because it really shows how Raskolnikov is the only true protagonist in the story. Nothing in the world made him commit the crimes, and nothing held him back from confessing or forgiving himself. He got what he deserved. In the Epilogue, Dostoevsky illustrates how Raskolnikov causes his own unraveling. He becomes so frustrated with himself that he becomes ill, as is shown in the quote. I agree with you that it was his wounded pride that made him ill. He never shows signs of true guilt, only regret that he was not as above human emotion as he had once thought.
Here we have Raskolnilkov's project talked about for the first time we can only assume its a crime due to the nature of the book and this quote so far. As talked about in Thomas C. Foster's hit book "How to Read Literature like a Professor "Chapter 11 More than its Gonna Hurt You...Concerning Violence". Violence in literature often means a lot more than just a simple act of aggression that some has. When someone is violent or talks about violence it usually represents something else and obviously in this case it does. The violence that Raskolnikov demonstrates and the giddiness shown, only in three pages into the book, show that our protagonist might have a couple of issues going on in his head. Also the excitement that he has about his mysterious "project" is a bit of foreshadowing about his character and the morals that he has pertaining to the amount of guilt he will show after this still unknown project has been carried out by Raskolnikov. This quote also helps develop the character of Raskolnikov by making us wonder whether we like the character of Raskolnikov or not because of these strange violent thoughts he suddenly has. Apple
"Even as it is, she was quite right: she was suffering and that was her asset, so to speak, her capital which she had a perfect right to dispose of."In this quote (Part 5 Chapter 1) Semyonovitch is talking about how suffering as a prostitute is a whole the better than suffering and starving to death. I think it is evident that in Crime and Punishment Sonia represents a Christ like figure in book. As stated in Thomas C. Foster's book " How to Read Literature like a Professor"(Yes, She's a Christ Figure too.) most unmarried celibate females that go through some sort of suffering are. Obviously due to Sonia's job that she has to have to feed herself and more importantly to her her family she is not celibate. But, stated in Chapter 6 of Foster's book "Or the Bible" a lot of Christ figures are the exact opposite of what a traditional Christ figure is and obviously this is the case with Sonia who is the exact opposite of being celibate but checks all the other boxes of a Christ figure. And on top of it all through out the whole book whenever Sonia is around she's usually saying something about God or saying some verse from the Bible. And in the very end she is the person who leads Raskolnikov to "salvation" and convinces him to turn himself in.
"It was only in that that he recognised his criminality, only in the fact that he had been unsuccessful and had confessed it." (Epilogue ) In Thomas C. Foster's book "How to Read Literature like a Professor" (Chapter 12 Is that a Symbol?) he tells us that even that smallest action or sentence an be symbolic.This is the case in the very end of Crime and Punishment, we discover through this quote that Raskolnikov, does not feel a whole lot of regret and remorse about killing Alyona and Lizetta, at least he never directly comes out and says it although he actions speak differently. It also says that Raskolnikov views his "project" as unsuccessful meaning he's sad that his killing of those two women didn't have a positive effect on the world which is essentially dehumanizing them. He also said the only reason the murders are crimes is because he admitted to the police that he killed them and got sent to jail for it. This is symbolic because even though he's in jail for what he has done he feels absolutely no remorse or sadness what so ever for what he has done showing you that while Rskolnikov has some moments of compassion and generosity deep down he is sill passionate about his beliefs and Sonia, Christ or Siberia will never be able to change that.
Post a Comment