Gabriel's complete term paper

Gabriel Magalhaes

5/1/13

Period4

Term Paper: Crime and Punishment

Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky is a novel that has made a significant impact on society for its profound and complex themes and the twisted mentality of a sociopathic criminal. Raskolnikov, the protagonist of the story, appears to be a man whose mind does not function as the rest of society does. As a result, this drives him to commit the dreadful crime of stabbing and taking the lives of two innocent women. Although he constantly attempts to convince himself that he did this as a favor to society, it is evident that he feels as if he is above society – as if he had the right to play God. This is known as the Superman theory, which occurs when a person feels he is superior to others for no apparent reason. This crime drives Raskolnikov to become tortured by an exponentially worsening guilt that he faces every moment of every day. This guilt drives him to further alienate himself from society, and also drives him to act irrationally. He becomes so overwhelmed with guilt that he becomes critically ill on multiple occasions. He faces extreme paranoia daily and is constantly anxious and worried about covering up the evidence and hiding the truth from others who attempt to help him. Raskolnikov’s true punishment in the story is in fact his psychological punishment – his overwhelming guilt that slowly leads him to his downfall.

From the beginning of the novel, it was evident that Raskolnikov had a different thought process than others. He did not see the world as others did, which led him to be unable to function in society. As a result, he alienated himself from others. He did this with the sensation that mankind was inferior to him; that no one could understand him. This feeling drove him to feel as if he had the right and authority to rid the world of the pawnbroker. He spent a lot of time scheming the ultimate plan and contemplating whether or not he should follow through with it. When he finally built the courage, he decided to follow through with his plan and stab her at her own house. However, her sister unfortunately came in and witnessed the murder, which startled Raskolnikov and made him kill her too. Killing the pawnbroker’s sister confirms the fact that he knew he was doing wrong and he knew he was guilty of a terrible crime in his subconscious, whether he wanted to know it or not. This is the first of countless acts supporting his devastating burden of guilt. He proceeds to attempt to cover up all the evidence by disposing of his knife and clothes, further emphasizing his guilty conscience. While hiding the evidence, he displays intense paranoia right from the start as he realizes the potential consequences if he were to be caught. He then decides to alienate himself more than before, but for different reasons. Previously, he simply did not wish to associate himself with society. Now, he fears for his life that he will be imprisoned or even executed. However, what he does not realize is that his punishment as already begun: the psychological torment that he must endure greatly surpasses any form of imprisonment or physical punishment that he could potentially face.

Raskolnikov’s guilt proves to be his true punishment as he attempts to justify his actions and thought process on multiple occasions. However, even as he attempts to justify his actions he provides more incriminating evidence to others. For example, Raskolnikov wrote an article that was titled “In Crime.” This article consisted of his point of view regarding justifications to committing a murder. He claims that if it is for the benefit of society, than it is not actually a crime. In fact, it would be immoral not to do the favor of ridding the world of such terrible people. When writing this, he was clearly attempting to form an argument in his head in order to convince himself to follow through with his plan to commit the murders. This once again supports the Superman theory, which states that a man has reached a state where pity and suffering are non existent and the individual feels superior to others.

This accurately describes Raskolnikov as he is not affected by pity or any of the other requirements that fit in to the Superman theory. He is considered corrupted amongst modern society because he is not affected by normal human emotions.

Throughout the story Raskolnikov expresses an immense amount of guilt, yet he never truly acknowledges it. Even after he confesses at the end of the novel, he does so mostly because Sonya influences him to follow through with it. He nearly turns away from the police station, showing his cowardly side. But after seeing Sonya following him, he gathers the courage to follow through with his confession. By doing this, he spared Nikolai from being wrongfully punished. He is sentenced to only eight years in prison. Sonya decides to follow him and support him throughout his prison experience, which finally causes Raskolinkov to express emotion and cry tears of joy as he hugged Sonya: How it happened he himself did not know, but suddenly it was as if something lifted him and flung him down at her feet. 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, loved her infinitely, and that at last the moment had come . . . (Dostoyevsky, 521).

This shows that he is on the path to redemption as he finally begins to display normal human emotions. However, it is evident that he still has not fully learned from his mistakes. This is because after everything, it is revealed that he still does not believe that anything is wrong with his personality and that the murders he committed were not necessarily sinful. He thought of them more as unfortunate errors. Although he fails to recognize the severity of his actions, the fact that he confessed while knowing that he will be imprisoned and punished shows that the guilt was too much for him to handle. He clearly preferred to be physically imprisoned than to live with the guilt like he had been previously.

In addition to Raskolnikov’s intentional alienation, he constantly pushes away the people that love him and that are trying to help him through his random illnesses. After he committed the murders and suffers from fainting, fevers, and irrational behavior, people become worried and are willing to help him. However, he disrespects them and is ungrateful of their efforts. He frequently argues with his best friend, Razumikhin, and loses his trust. Sonya, who becomes his lover toward the end of the novel, dedicates her life to attempting to save Raskolnikov and lead him toward the right path. However, Raskolnikov takes her for granted and dehumanizes her, despite her efforts to gain his love, affection, and trust.

Sonya serves as possibly the most influential character in Raskolnikov’s life. As mentioned previously, she is the reason why Raskolnikov followed through with the confession. She presented a cross to him as a gift for his decision to confess. However, this cross was not simply a gift to protect Raskolnikov. The cross was symbolic for Raskolnikov’s path to salvation, forgiveness, and a new beginning. This was meaningful as Raskolnikov played the role of an immoral, tormented, lost cause throughout the novel. However, the idea that he is opening his soul to accept the presence of God in his life and that he is willing to work on himself and accept responsibility for his crimes illustrates a new Raskolnikov; one that will accept help from others, embrace his loved ones, and live a morally acceptable life.

Dostoyevsky further emphasizes the severity of the psychological punishment through the structure that the novel is written in. He organizes the novel so that the beginning focuses on the anxiety that Raskolinkov faces while planning the murder, and then follows with the effect that his guilty conscience leaves him for the rest of the novel. Finally, the author decides to address the legal punishment, his eight-year sentence, in the epilogue of the novel. By choosing this specific layout, it is evident that the author was attempting to imply to the reader that the true punishment was the internal struggle that Raskolnikov faced daily. The fact that the psychological trauma that Raskolnikov faces is discussed for practically the entire story suggests that Dostoyevsky’s intentions were to convey to the reader that although Raskolnikov is eventually sentenced to eight years of hard labor, his constant paranoia is more torturous and detrimental to his health and sanity. As a result, Raskolnikov eventually confesses in order to ease his mindset initiate his journey to redemption.

Arguably, the only character in the story that was able to not only match but also to surpass Raskolnikov’s intelligence was Porfiry Petrovich, the police officer.  He displays a high level of confidence in his job and is able to manipulate and influence Raskolnikov psychologically. As soon as he is confident that Raskolnikov was the murderer, he does not change his opinion even when someone else confesses to the crime. This underlines Porfiry’s strong character and wisdom in his work field. In almost every conversation between Porfiry and Raskolnikov, Porfiry chooses his words and tone of voice wisely in order to lure Raskolnikov into an irresistible temptation and feel the intense desire to confess. Raskolnikov falls into his traps by acting in a predictable manner – that manner usually being in random outbursts and irrational behavior.

The fact that Raskolnikov delays reclaiming his pawned possessions longer than anyone else is another sign indicating his guilt. Porfiry is well aware that it is only a matter of time until Raskolnikov either confesses his guilt or breaks down and goes mad. The reason why he is so confident as to the outcome of the mystery is because he believes that the way murderers commit their crimes and cope with the guilt is almost formulaic. This is emphasized when he criticizes Raskolnikov’s mediocre attempts to run away from his predetermined fate:

What is it, to run away! A mere formality; that’s not the main thing; no, he won’t run away on me by a law of nature, even if he has somewhere to run to. Have you ever seen a moth near a candle? Well, so he’ll keep circling around me, circling around me, as around a candle; freedom will no longer be dear to him, he’ll fall to thinking, get entangled, he’ll tangle himself all up as in a net, he’ll worry himself to death! . . . he’ll keep on making circles around me, narrowing the radius more and more, and—whop! He’ll fly right into my mouth, and I’ll swallow him, sir, and that will be most agreeable, heh, heh, heh! (Dostoyevsky, 325)

This quote, in addition to various others, was clearly said in order to prod at Raskolnikov’s subconscious and extract a reaction out of him in order to analyze it. Porfiry’s method proved to be flawless – Raskolnikov, already feeling “restless and suspicious” (Dostoyevsky, 316) from being in the presence of the officer, was tense and on edge throughout the conversation. However, he grew livid at the witty psychological games that Porfiry was using to play with his emotions and trigger a reaction. After yelling at Porfiry and demanding to know whether he is being accused or not, Porfiry simply laughed and asked sarcastically why Raskolnikov was so anxious to know, which was clearly another attempt to play with Raskolnikov’s mind. Porfiry Petrovich played a significant role in Rakolnikov’s psychological punishment because he has the ability and experience to easily control and toy with Raskolnikov’s mentality and conscience like a puppet.

A major question that this novel raises is whether or not Raskolnikov should be perceived as a villain. Although he committed two socially unjustifiable murders, it has been established that he did not have a normal thought process, hence his rational decision making skills are severely limited. Moreover, he displayed various acts of generosity and selflessness throughout the story – one of the more charitable situations being when he donated his money to the Marmeladovs. After meeting with Semyon Marmeladov at a bar, he listens to his familial issues, specifically his financial crisis. In this conversation, Raskolnikov is informed that Semyon is an alcoholic who is unable to support his family financially. He confesses that every time he is able to gather some sort of money, he is unable to control his urges and ends up spending it all on alcohol rather than on his family, forcing his daughter to take up a life of prostitution. Although Raskolnikov does not have any previous history with this man and was just told that he spends his money on alcohol, Raskolnikov selflessly donates a large amount of money to the Marmeladovs. It is not common for a murderer with ill intentions to be so gallant as to provide money for an unrelated family in need. Therefore, it is arguable that Raskolnikov is not guilty of being a villainous character, but rather a victim of a dysfunctional mindset.

Although Raskolnikov may be viewed as a victim, it does not change the fact that he brutally took the lives of two innocent civilians. In the world that we live in, no crime goes unpunished. This punishment tends to be physical, such as jail, death or even torture. Raskolnikov, as smart as he may be, believed that he would be able to cover up his crimes and simply push them aside and proceed with his life. This proved to be an incorrect assumption, as his efforts to evade the law caused extreme paranoia and mental stress, resulting in a deteriorating health and further isolation from society. The guilt proved to be too much for Raskolnikov to handle. After realizing that there was nothing worse than his guilt that was exponentially consuming his life, he eventually turned himself in and received eight years in prison as punishment. Since he chose this punishment voluntarily in exchange for his physical freedom in order to ease his guilt and preserve the leftovers of his sanity, it is evident that the psychological punishment that he faced was far worse than the physical punishment, and was therefore the true punishment.

Works Cited

Dostoyevsky, Fyodor. Crime and punishment. New York: Modern Library, 1950. Print.

Alex's Final Term Paper

Alex Balogh

Mr. Shapiro

May 1^st, 2013

Extraordinary Man Theory in Crime and Punishment

In Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s world-renowned novel Crime and Punishment, Dostoyevsky explores the inner thoughts of a criminal by providing insight into the mind of the novel’s protagonist, Raskolnikov, after committing the most horrendous of all crimes- murder. Dostoyevsky addresses the idea of redemption through both physical and (especially) mental suffering. Throughout the course of the novel, Raskolnikov’s overbearing amount of guilt is extremely evident. This is most likely due to the fact that Dostoyevsky primarily focuses on the way the murders force Raskolnikov to deal with his tormenting sense of guilt, rather than focusing on the actual consequences of committing murder. By elaborating on Raskolnikov’s self-inflicted punishment rather than his imprisonment, Fyodor Dostoyevsky suggests the idea that one’s true punishment serves as the psychological downfall that results from battling his or her guilty conscience, and this itself is significantly worse than trial and imprisonment.

In order to cope with his extreme amount of guilt, Raskolnikov attempts to justify his vicious acts with the belief that it was what the extraordinary man would do. The theory of the "extraordinary man" plays a vital role in Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment. At the beginning of the novel, a demoralized and psychologically battered Raskolnikov, classifies himself as a “superhuman” and therefore, believes himself to be exempt from the laws of ordinary men. It is this ideology that makes Raskolnikov believe he has the right to murder Alyona Ivanova and her innocent sister, Lizaveta.

The extraordinary man theory that motivates Raskolnikov is derived from German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche’s concept of the Übermensch. According to Nietzsche, an Übermensch (which literally means “over man” when translated into English) is a human who has battled modern values and overcome the flaws and weaknesses of humanity.  This superhuman should have the ability to control and create fear amongst others, causing society to either idolize or fear them. In Friedrich Nietzsche’s 1883 book Thus Spake Zarathustra, Nietzsche (through Zarathustra) illustrates this concept when he says: 

I teach you the Superman. Man is something that shall be surpassed. What have you done to surpass him? All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughing-stock, a thing of shame. And just the same shall man be to the Superman: a laughing stock, a thing of shame...The Superman is the meaning of the earth. Let your will say: The Superman SHALL BE the meaning of the earth! (Prologue)

When Raskolnikov was first introduced to Nietzsche’s concept of the Übermensch, he became infatuated with the idea of becoming extraordinary. Crime and Punishment alludes to several historical figures as examples of supermen. Such examples, including Napoleon, serve as role models for Rodion Raskolnikov.

Raskolnikov’s convoluted understanding of Nietzsche’s Übermensch theory is shown through an article he wrote as a student titled “On Crime.” This article, which, to Raskolnikov’s surprise, was published in a magazine, argues that:

An “extraordinary” man has…an inner right to decide in his own conscience to overstep certain obstacles, and only in case it is essential for the practical fulfillment of his idea (sometimes, perhaps, of benefit to the whole of humanity)…In short, I maintain that all great men or even men a little out of the common…must from their very nature be criminals—more or less, of course. Otherwise it’s hard for them to get out of the common rut; and to remain in the common rut is what they can’t submit to…Men are in general divided by a law of nature into two categories, inferior (ordinary)…and men who have the gift or the talent to utter a new word…The first category, generally speaking, are men conservative in temperament and law-abiding; they live under control and love to be controlled…The second category all transgress the law; they are destroyers or disposed to destruction according to their capacities. The crimes of these men are of course relative and varied; for the most part they seek in very varied ways the destruction of the present for the sake of the better. But if such a one is forced for the sake of his idea to step over a corpse or wade through blood, he can, I maintain, find within himself, in his conscience, a sanction for wading through blood—that depends on the idea and its dimensions, note that…The first category is always the man of the present, the second the man of the future. The first preserve the world and people it, the second move the world and lead it to its goal (Dostoevsky 206-207).

Simply put, “On Crime” states Raskolnikov’s opinion that the common man is a weak human being who is incapable of controlling society. Some extraordinary people, however, are more powerful than the common man, and it is these supermen who shall determine the fate of society. These extraordinary men can violate the rules and laws of society in order to refrain from becoming ordinary, and according to Raskolnikov, this essentially gives all extraordinary men the right to commit murder in addition other crimes. Raskolnikov’s fear of remaining ordinary and not living up to the achievements of the idolized Napoleon drive him to murder Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanova.

The article displayed the immoral and corrupt side of Raskolnikov’s personality, which made it relatively easy for others to point fingers at him when hypothesizing whom the true killer is. For example, the article causes detective Porfiry Petrovich to grow extremely suspicious of Raskolnikov, which is apparent when he states “Surely you couldn't have helped fancying yourself as an 'extraordinary' man... And, if so, could you bring yourself…for some service to humanity… to overstep obstacles? For instance, to rob and murder?” (Dostoyevsky 210). Raskolnikov’s immense guilt and fear of getting caught result in his conflicting thoughts on whether or not he truly qualifies as one of the proclaimed “super humans.” Raskolnikov’s inability to rid himself of the guilt he feels over murdering the Ivanova sisters is enough to prove that he is not a superhuman, but nonetheless, Raskolnikov remains unwilling to accept the idea that he is just as average as the rest of society. The mental breakdown that Raskolnikov faces due to his severe guilt results in several irrational thoughts, such as the idea that by murdering the pawnbroker, he was contributing to the greater good of society. When discussing the murders with his sister Dunya, Raskolnikov responds angrily towards the public’s reaction to the murders:

Crime? What crime! ...I killed a vile, harmful louse, an old hag of a moneylender for no use to anybody, for whose murder one should be forgiven forty sins, and who bled poor people dry. Can that be called a crime? I don’t think about it and I have no desire to wipe it out (Dostoyevsky 407).

In addition, several other aspects of the novel support Raskolnikov’s failure to “become a Napoleon” and live up to the standards of an extraordinary man. Guilt and penance are exhibited in his character even before the murders are committed. The simple thought of murdering the pawnbroker produces a “feeling of intense repulsion, which had begun to oppress and torture his heart while he was on his way to the old woman… (the feeling) had taken such a definite form that he did not know what to do with himself to escape from his wretchedness” (Dostoyevsky 7). Raskolnikov’s aversion to his future actions does not correspond with the idea of a superhuman. Moreover, he asks himself  “If I am so scared now, what would it be if it somehow came to pass that I were really going to do it?” (Dostoyevsky 3-4). Thereby indicating that because, Raskolnikov fears the consequences of his actions, he falls into the category of an ordinary man. In contrast, supermen do not burden themselves by fearing the repercussions of their behavior.

Additionally, when Raskolnikov finally follows through with his plan and murders the pawnbroker, he is plagued by guilt causing his psychological condition to deteriorate rapidly. Immediately after the murders, Raskolnikov falls ill. Both his physical and mental health are on a rapid decline due to his guilt over the murders. Raskolnikov’s judgment is even more irrational than before resulting in foolish and inane acts, such as volunteering information to the police and claiming that he knows who the true murderer is, forgetting to pick up his pawned items, failing to keep his composure at the slight mention of the murders, and writing “On Crime,” which definitely draws attention to Raskolnikov’s involvement with the murders. The fact that Raskolnikov cannot handle the liability and guilt that has resulted from his actions causes Raskolnikov to contemplate the idea of confession. This further indicates that Raskolnikov completely contradicts that of an extraordinary man. Likewise, Raskolnikov contends that an extraordinary man must be self-reliant, depend on no one, and be able to survive when cut off from society (Dostoyevsky 206). At first, Raskolnikov’s pride separates him from society. After the murders, however, Raskolnikov’s isolation takes a turn for the worse. Immediately following the murders, Raskolnikov becomes tormented with uncertainty, responsibility, and doubt. His beliefs and actions make it impossible to relate to others and as a result, Raskolnikov sets himself apart from the masses. However, Raskolnikov’s alienation contributes to his rash judgment. Unlike the depicted Übermensch, Raskolnikov longs for companionship and acceptance. He periodically confides in Sonya, eventually informing her of his wrongful actions because he could no longer bear the burden that resulted from keeping the murders a secret (Dostoyevsky 329). Sonya’s acceptance of the truth ultimately serves as a primary motivating factor in Raskolnikov’s confession to the authorities. Her understanding of Raskolnikov’s sins proves that the act of confession will end his dreadful solitude and he will once again become a part of society. Raskolnikov’s longing for communion proves that he does not fulfill his own requirements of superiority.

Other factors disproving Raskolnikov’s extraordinariness include the fact that practically all of Raskolnikov’s ideas are unoriginal. He admits that he often questions his actions “wondering whether Napoleon would have done it or not” (Dostoyevsky 329). However, constantly trying to live up to another extraordinary superhuman does not qualify Raskolnikov as a superhuman, himself. On page 232, Raskolnikov thinks to himself, “does Napoleon crawl under an old woman’s bed?” It is somewhat ironic that Raskolnikov attempts to prove his superiority simply by doing what other extraordinary men have done because trying to fit the mold of previous supermen actually eliminates Raskolnikov from being one. In order to be extraordinary, Raskolnikov’s ideas and motives must be genuine and original. Copying Napoleon and other supermen of the past basically proves that Raskolnikov does not fall into the category of “people with new ideas, people with the faintest capacity for saying something new” (Dostoyevsky 209).

Raskolnikov states that extraordinary men have the right to step over the laws of the common man if it is for the purpose of benefiting society. Therefore, simply killing without a cause does not qualify Raskolnikov as an Übermensch. His murders must serve a true purpose, but what exactly was Raskolnikov’s motive for murder? Throughout the novel, Raskolnikov (in addition to the reader) ponders the reasoning behind his actions before reaching the root cause of his behavior. At first, Raskolnikov justifies the murders by telling himself that he desperately needs the money and that murdering Alyona Ivanova benefits society by getting rid of such a wretched and callous person. He states, “it was simple arithmetic: to kill one worthless, harmful, and rich being, in order to use money to make many beautiful but poor people happy” (Dostoyevsky 54). Despite his claims, Raskolnikov’s actions and behaviors completely oppose his reasoning. First off, the amount of money that Raskolnikov stole was extremely small, and would not have been enough to improve his quality of living or to make the poor happy. Furthermore, Raskolnikov did not even use the stolen money. Rather, he buried the money and any other stolen items to get rid of any evidence linking him to the murders. Additionally, Raskolnikov’s claims that Alyona Ivanova was a “worthless being” and a harmful louse that was “for no use to anybody” (Dostoyevsky 53-54) is discredited by the amount of guilt he felt over her murder. Raskolnikov asks “what value has the life of that sickly, stupid, ill-natured old woman in the balance of existence?” (Dostoyevsky 84). However, if Alyona’s life really were as worthless as Raskolnikov originally stated, he would not have felt physically and emotionally sick after committing the crime. When Raskolnikov tries to establish a rational explanation for his behavior, he admits to himself that,

The old woman was only a symptom of my illness…I wanted to overstep all restrictions as quickly as possible…I killed not a human being but a principle! Yes, I killed a principle, but as for surmounting the barriers, I did not do that; I remained on this side… The only thing I knew how to do was kill! And I could not do that properly either (Dostoyevsky 233).

The aforementioned self-confession is the first time that Dostoyevsky indicates to the audience that Raskolnikov is finally starting to realize that he exhibits the qualities of the common man. When Raskolnikov confesses about the murders to Sonya, he finally dismisses the ideas that he murdered the pawnbroker to help his mother, for the wealth, or to better society. Raskolnikov’s true motives for murder are apparent when he states,

I wanted to murder without casuistry, to murder for my own sake, for myself alone! …It wasn’t to help my mother—that’s nonsense—I didn't do the murder to gain wealth and power and to become a benefactor of mankind. Nonsense! I simply did it; I did the murder for myself, for myself alone, and whether I became a benefactor to others, or spent my life like a spider catching men in my web and sucking the life out of men, I couldn't have cared at that moment...It was not so much the money I wanted, but something else...I know it all now. Understand me! Perhaps I should never have committed a murder again. I wanted to find out something else; it was something else led me on. I wanted to find out then and quickly whether I was a louse like everybody else or a man. Whether I can step over barriers or not, whether I dare stoop to pick up or not, whether I am a trembling creature or whether I have the right...the devil lead me on then and he has shown me since that I had not the right to take that path, because I am just such a louse as all the rest. (Dostoyevsky 328-329).

Finally, Raskolnikov acknowledges that he killed the Lizaveta sisters to prove that he is extraordinary, but instead he realized that he is “just a louse as all the rest.” By admitting that he does not qualify as an Übermensch, Raskolnikov realizes that he does not possess superiority to the rest of society, and therefore cannot justify contravening the law.

            With Sonya’s help, Raskolnikov achieves redemption in the epilogue of Crime and Punishment. Sonya’s ability to love Raskolnikov unconditionally stems from her strong Christian faith and loyalty to God. Sonya, who was forced into prostitution in order to provide for her family, strongly believes that everyone deserves a second chance in life and the opportunity to repent for their sins. Although Sonya is a sinner, her belief in God helps rid Raskolnikov of his guilt and suffering. By persuading him to confess to the authorities, Sonya shows Raskolnikov how to atone for his sins in order to be forgiven in God’s eyes. Before Raskolnikov’s confession, Sonya gives him a cross and tells Raskolnikov to "stand at the cross-roads, bow down to the people, kiss the earth for you have sinned against it too, and say aloud… ‘I am a murderer…then God will send you life again" (Dostoyevsky 389). The cross that Sonya gives Raskolnikov serves as an important symbol of his salvation. Although he has not yet atoned for his crimes, the fact that Raskolnikov finally accepts Sonya’s cross signifies that he has begun on the path towards resurrection. Before Raskolnikov goes to the police station to confess, Sonya “made the sign of the cross over herself and him” and informed Raskolnikov to “say at least one prayer” (Dostoyevsky 411). Sonya embodies Christianity in the novel and on several occasions exemplifies qualities similar to those of Jesus Christ. Throughout the novel, Sonya makes several self-sacrifices for Raskolnikov’s sake. In addition, her unconditional love and acceptance of Raskolnikov’s mistakes ultimately save and reintroduce him to society. The idea that Raskolnikov seeks redemption through Sonya and would not have achieved it without her reveals several of Sonya’s Christ-like characteristics.

            With Sonya’s wooden cross around his neck, Raskolnikov makes his way to the police station to confess to the murders, but on his way, Raskolnikov remembered Sonya’s words. Suddenly,   

It came over him like a fit; it was like a single spark kindled in his soul and spreading fire through him. Everything in him softened at once and the tears started into his eyes. He fell to the earth on the spot…He knelt down in the middle of the square, bowed down to the earth, and kissed that filthy earth with bliss and rapture. He got up and bowed down a second time (Dostoyevsky 413).

However, “the words, ‘I am a murderer,’ which were perhaps on the point of dropping from his lips, died away” (Dostoyevsky 414). While Raskolnikov acknowledges his need for redemptive suffering, his actions prove that he still does not have enough courage to admit his mistakes. Once again, Sonya provides Raskolnikov with strength and propels him to do the right thing. Through his tears, Raskolnikov notices that Sonya has been following him and

…At that moment felt and knew once for all that Sonia was with him forever and would follow him to the ends of the earth, wherever fate might take him. It wrung his heart…but he was just reaching the fatal place (Dostoyevsky 413).

Sonya’s companionship serves as the driving force behind Raskolnikov’s will to confess. When he finally tells Porfiry “I killed the old pawnbroker woman and her sister Lizaveta with an axe and robbed them” (Dostoyevsky 417), Raskolnikov is sentenced to eight years of hard labor in Siberia. The images that Dostoyevsky creates portraying Raskolnikov’s time in prison suggest that even though Raskolnikov confessed to the murders, he is still not truly apologetic for his actions. Raskolnikov continues to believe that he did not sin, contemplates suicide, and isolates himself from the other prison inmates.  Raskolnikov, who still bears the burden of his extreme guilt, remains in his mental prison until he has worked through spiritual sufferings and is ready to resurrect himself. When Raskolnikov comes to the realization that he is in love with Sonya,

…She understood, and a light of infinite happiness came into her eyes. She knew and had no doubt that he loved her beyond everything and that at last the moment had come...They wanted to speak, but could not; tears stood in their eyes. They were both pale and thin; but those sick pale faces were bright with the dawn of a new future, of a full resurrection into a new life. They were renewed by love; the heart of each held infinite sources of life for the heart of the other (Dostoyevsky 429).

This is a pivotal scene in the novel because it is the first time that Raskolnikov expresses emotion for someone other than himself and also the first time that Dostoyevsky presents this complex character as being truly happy. Not only do Sonya’s love, strength, and acceptance of Raskolnikov help to reintroduce him into society, but they also help Raskolnikov accept his guilt in order to achieve redemption…

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 his initiation into a new unknown life. That might be the subject of a new story, but our present story is ended (Dostoyevsky 430).

             

Works Cited

Dostoyevsky, Fyodor, and Constance Garnett. Crime and punishment. Mineola, N.Y.: Dover Publications, 2001. Print.

Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, and Walter Arnold Kaufmann. Thus spoke Zarathustra: a book for all and none. New York: Modern Library, 1995. Print.

Term Paper Final - Madie

Madie Benn

Period 4

May 1st 2013

Term Paper: Crime and Punishment

In Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, the main character Raskolnikov has many different relationships with the other characters, however, none are so unique as that between Raskolnikov and Sonia. Their relationship is so different from that of any other characters because for the first time it seems that Raskolnikov has found somebody who he can find solace through, and Sonia has found someone who does not look down upon her. They place a certain trust in each other and begin to seek each other out in times of need. What makes their connection closer is that although they lead different lives, they ultimately have the same troubles and conflicts. Both Raskolnikov and Sonia want and need to provide for their families. Furthermore, they both struggle with the same internal conflicts of guilt and sin that come from Sonia’s prostitution and Raskolnikov’s murderous act. The two characters find parts of their lives, the tormenting parts, that parallel each others. 

Unlike Raskolnikov’s other relationships with characters in the novel, his connection with Sonia is more intimate and trusting than any other. Throughout the novel, Raskolnikov seeks refuge from his own guilt with her. He finds comfort in her company, and although at first she seems frightened by his late night visits and outbursts, she finds herself strangely enjoying them as well. Sonia, faced with similar feelings of guilt and despair, finds solace in God, by staying religious and praying often. For her, this is a way to cope with her own conflicts of helping her family and herself through prostitution. In Raskolnikov’s case, it is Sonia who becomes his saviour, as he uses her to find his own solace. This point is further shown when he confesses to her that he was the murderer. He finds comfort in her company, and she offers him relief from his tormenting guilt. This unique relationship is not seen between any other characters in the novel, and is a positive relationship for both Raskolnikov and Sonia. The two characters are able to use this relationship to overcome their own inner troubles and conflicts. For Sonia, Raskolnikov makes her feel like a better person when he stands up for her when she is accused of theft, and also when he says “I did my sister an honor by sitting her next to you.” For the first time, Sonia gains the respect of somebody, and is not judged for her line of work. In Raskolnikov’s case, Sonia offers an outlet to stop himself from going mad. She helps him deal with his guilt of the murders by acting as his saviour and guiding him in the right direction. As the book continues they slowly become closer, finding more things that connect them, and ultimately falling in love.

From the beginning of the book, it is clear that Raskolnikov holds his family quite dear to him. Before the murder, he receives a letter from his sister that tells of her engagement and absolutely enrages Raskolnikov because he doesn’t want to see her unhappy or living with a man who will not treat her well. He immediately doesn’t like his sister’s fiance, and this hatred continues throughout the book. Family is a crucial thing to him, and he will do anything to protect his sister and mother. This point is further emphasized when, after the murder, he considers running away and leaving his family to protect them in case he got caught. Later on in the book he begins to realize that it was because of his love for his family that he even committed the crime, “if only I were alone and nobody loved me and I never loved anybody! All this wouldn’t have happened!” His love of his family takes over his life, and he strives for their welfare. He is their breadwinner and protects them, he is even driven to murder to ensure they would be financially stable. Interestingly, this is almost the same situation that Sonia Marmeladov is found in. At a young age, she had to step up to become the provider for her family, when her father became a drunk. There is nothing more important to her than her family. She was even beaten by her step mother Katherine Ivanova yet still claims she loves her dearly. When Katherine Ivanova becomes ill, Sonia is distraught with the idea that her sister may have to go into the same line of work as her. She does all she can to protect her family, and keep them safe, just like Raskolnikov. Both of them are drawn towards sin for their families. It is this love of family that connects the two characters even further. No other characters have such similar situations regarding family, therefore it seems fitting that they would seek each other out, and gravitate towards each other in times of need. They both understand what it means to undergo hardship on behalf of their families. 

Within the novel, the idea of sin also plays a huge role in both Raskolnikov and Sonia’s lives, and is a key factor that brings the two characters closer. Raskolnikov sees Sonia as similar to him particularly because they have both sinned, Raskolnikov through murder, and Sonia through prostitution. Although these sins are quite different from each other, and their severity is incomparable, Raskolnikov does not seem to realize this. He only makes a connection that they both have sinned. He believes that since they both have sinned, that Sonia must be feeling the same things that he does throughout the book. Raskolnikov is convinced that she suffers as much as he does with internal guilt, hatred, and also confusion on whether or not it was the right thing to do. In Sonia’s case she does feel the same things he does, however it is less amplified. Therefore when he confesses to her about the murders she is not angry or scared, but she sees how he suffers and even embraces him. They both understand the internal conflicts that arise from committing a sin, and this brings them closer than any other two characters in the book. 

Another important moment in Raskolnikov and Sonia’s relationship comes when Sonia reads aloud the Story of Lazarus. The story describes the miracle of how Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead, through pure faith in God. It emphasizes how belief in God and in Jesus could bring spiritual life, even if there is physical death. Faith and belief will bring back life to those who believe. This scripture is key for both Sonia and Raskolnikov. For Sonia, the scripture was  important for as she reads “her eyes misted over and the lines blurred, but she knew what she was reading by heart.” It is clear that she has read this scripture many times before, and that its words have an immense power over her. She is in such a dire position in life, that this scripture offers her hope that if she believes in God, that she will also be “resurrected” from her state of depression, guilt and sin. However, she has a difficult time reading it to Raskolnikov. She stammers over words, and shakes the whole time. Raskolnikov realizes this and understands why. For Sonia, this scripture is like his own secret of the murders. It is her outlet to calm her own guilt and sin. Raskolnikov understands how she feels, and as she reads it for once he is silent and calm, empathizing with her. He understands how she wants to read it yet can’t, the same way he wants to confess to her but it is so difficult. Not only does the meaning of the story cross over into his world, but Sonia’s difficult emotions that come with reading aloud to him further connect them. 

In the book, there is a specific moment which ties Raskolnikov and Sonia together. The crosses. Before Raskolnikov decides to confess, he is in a fit. He storms to Sonia’s house where he demands the cross. Sonia goes to her dresser and takes out two crosses, “One of cypress wood and one of copper.” (pg.497) from her drawer and, after crossing herself and Raskolnikov, she places the crosses around both of their necks. In Christianity, the cross has symbolized Jesus’ self-sacrifice for human kind. It is an important part of the religion as it was what Jesus was crucified on. For Raskolnikov he regards the cross as a symbol of taking responsibility for his actions, as he confesses shortly after. For Sonia, the cross is her own symbol of redemption not only in death but also in life. This act solidifies her intentions to stay with him no matter what. This symbolizes her commitment to Raskolnikov. Almost acting as an engagement. They will “bear [their] cross[es] together.” Further, throughout the book they are constantly “crossing” each others paths, and these meetings have a profound effect on Raskolnikov. For example, just before he goes to kill the pawnbroker and Lizaveta he “crosses” Sonia. They make eye contact for a brief moment and then he walks on. Moreover, after failing to confess he sees her in the street watching him, imploring him to confess through the look in her eyes. He returns to the office and confesses. Their “crosses” as well as their physical crosses bring them closer, and ultimately help Raskolnikov to confess as well as giving Sonia redemption and hope. 

After Raskolnikov’s confession to the police, he is sentenced to eight years of hard labour in Siberia. It is here that Raskolnikov finally repents for his crime and offers remorse however this is only after he realizes that he loves Sonia. She had come with him to Siberia and visited him all the time, but at first he seemed annoyed by her presence more than comforted. She sat outside his window, and one day, after not seeing her for a while, he was able to meet her outside without a guard. He finally feels the love she feels for him. It is this moment that makes him truly repent for his crime. That night he reads her New Testament that he had under his pillow, which shows how much he loves her. He is willing to convert not just because he loves her but because he believes in her and what she believes in. She was the influential character that allowed him to truly atone for what he did. Without Sonia, he would have carried the crime as well as the severe punishment with him until he broke down into madness. She acted as his saviour. However, Raskolnikov acted as Sonia’s saviour as well. In Siberia, Sonia is loved by the people, unlike in St. Petersburg where she was treated as a second class citizen. Here she finally finds a place where she can find solace, just like Raskolnikov finally does. 

The relationship between Raskolnikov and Sonia is one of mutual benefit, and internal healing. They are drawn to each other through similar feelings and circumstances which bring them closer, and allow them to relate to each other. Their relationship is so unique in that they both trust each other, and ultimately fall in love. However, it is more than love, because they are able to act much like each others saviours, guiding the other through their own inner turmoil while fixing their own as well. They find deep connections through things like the Story of Lazarus, and they seek each other out in times of need. Their relationship offers guidance and hope to the other, Sonia leads Raskolnikov to confess and do the right thing while Raskolnikov leads Sonia to a place where she is loved. This sort of relationship is not seen between any other two characters, and therefore is unique to Raskolnikov and Sonia. 

Term Paper- alex

In Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s world-renowned novel Crime and Punishment, Dostoyevsky explores the inner thoughts of a criminal by providing insight into the mind of the novel’s protagonist, Raskolnikov, after committing the most horrendous of all crimes- murder. Dostoyevsky addresses the idea of redemption through both physical and (especially) mental suffering. Throughout the course of the novel, Raskolnikov’s overbearing amount of guilt is extremely evident. This is most likely due to the fact that Dostoyevsky primarily focuses on the way the murders force Raskolnikov to deal with his tormenting sense of guilt, rather than focusing on the actual consequences of committing murder. By elaborating on Raskolnikov’s self-inflicted punishment rather than his imprisonment, Fyodor Dostoyevsky suggests the idea that one’s true punishment serves as the psychological downfall that results from battling his or her guilty conscience, and this itself is significantly worse than trial and imprisonment.

In order to cope with his extreme amount of guilt, Raskolnikov attempts to justify his vicious acts with the belief that it was what the extraordinary man would do. The theory of the "extraordinary man" plays a vital role in Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment. At the beginning of the novel, a demoralized and psychologically battered Raskolnikov, classifies himself as a “superhuman” and therefore, believes himself to be exempt from the laws of ordinary men. It is this ideology that makes Raskolnikov believe he has the right to murder Alyona Ivanova and her innocent sister, Lizaveta.

The extraordinary man theory that motivates Raskolnikov is derived from German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche’s concept of the Übermensch. According to Nietzsche, an Übermensch (which literally means “over man” when translated into English) is a human who has battled modern values and overcome the flaws and weaknesses of humanity.  This superhuman should have the ability to control and create fear amongst others, causing society to either idolize or fear them. In Friedrich Nietzsche’s 1883 book Thus Spake Zarathustra, Nietzsche (through Zarathustra) illustrates this concept when he says: 

I teach you the Superman. Man is something that shall be surpassed. What have you done to surpass him? All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughing-stock, a thing of shame. And just the same shall man be to the Superman: a laughing stock, a thing of shame...The Superman is the meaning of the earth. Let your will say: The Superman SHALL BE the meaning of the earth!

When Raskolnikov was first introduced to Nietzsche’s concept of the Übermensch, he became infatuated with the idea of becoming extraordinary. Crime and Punishment alludes to several historical figures as examples of supermen. Such examples, including Napoleon, serve as role models for Rodion Raskolnikov.

Raskolnikov’s convoluted understanding of Nietzsche’s Übermensch theory is shown through an article he wrote as a student titled “On Crime.” This article, which, to Raskolnikov’s surprise, was published in a magazine, argues that:

An “extraordinary” man has…an inner right to decide in his own conscience to overstep certain obstacles, and only in case it is essential for the practical fulfillment of his idea (sometimes, perhaps, of benefit to the whole of humanity)…In short, I maintain that all great men or even men a little out of the common…must from their very nature be criminals—more or less, of course. Otherwise it’s hard for them to get out of the common rut; and to remain in the common rut is what they can’t submit to…Men are in general divided by a law of nature into two categories, inferior (ordinary)…and men who have the gift or the talent to utter a new word…The first category, generally speaking, are men conservative in temperament and law-abiding; they live under control and love to be controlled…The second category all transgress the law; they are destroyers or disposed to destruction according to their capacities. The crimes of these men are of course relative and varied; for the most part they seek in very varied ways the destruction of the present for the sake of the better. But if such a one is forced for the sake of his idea to step over a corpse or wade through blood, he can, I maintain, find within himself, in his conscience, a sanction for wading through blood—that depends on the idea and its dimensions, note that…The first category is always the man of the present, the second the man of the future. The first preserve the world and people it, the second move the world and lead it to its goal. (Dostoevsky 247-249)

Simply put, “On Crime” states Raskolnikov’s opinion that the common man is a weak human being who is incapable of controlling society. Some extraordinary people, however, are more powerful than the common man, and it is these supermen who shall determine the fate of society. These extraordinary men can violate the rules and laws of society in order to refrain from becoming ordinary, and according to Raskolnikov, this essentially gives all extraordinary men the right to commit murder in addition other crimes. Raskolnikov’s fear of remaining ordinary and not living up to the achievements of the idolized Napoleon drive him to murder Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanova.

The article displayed the immoral and corrupt side of Raskolnikov’s personality, which made it relatively easy for others to point fingers at him when hypothesizing whom the true killer is. For example, the article causes detective Porfiry Petrovich to grow extremely suspicious of Raskolnikov, which is apparent when he states “Surely you couldn't have helped fancying yourself as an 'extraordinary' man... And, if so, could you bring yourself…for some service to humanity… to overstep obstacles? For instance, to rob and murder?” (Dostoyevsky 253). Raskolnikov’s immense guilt and fear of getting caught result in his conflicting thoughts on whether or not he truly qualifies as one of the proclaimed “super humans.” Raskolnikov’s inability to rid himself of the guilt he feels over murdering the Ivanova sisters is enough to prove that he is not a superhuman, but nonetheless, Raskolnikov remains unwilling to accept the idea that he is just as average as the rest of society. The mental breakdown that Raskolnikov faces due to his severe guilt results in several irrational thoughts, such as the idea that by murdering the pawnbroker, he was contributing to the greater good of society. When discussing the murders with his sister Dunya, Raskolnikov responds angrily towards the public’s reaction to the murders:

Crime? What crime! ...I killed a vile, harmful louse, an old hag of a moneylender for no use to anybody, for whose murder one should be forgiven forty sins, and who bled poor people dry. Can that be called a crime? I don’t think about it and I have no desire to wipe it out. (Dostoyevsky 491)

In addition, several other aspects of the novel support Raskolnikov’s failure to “become a Napoleon” and live up to the standards of an extraordinary man. Guilt and penance are exhibited in his character even before the murders are committed. The simple thought of murdering the pawnbroker produces a “feeling of intense repulsion, which had begun to oppress and torture his heart while he was on his way to the old woman… (the feeling) had taken such a definite form that he did not know what to do with himself to escape from his wretchedness” (Dostoyevsky 11). Raskolnikov’s aversion to his future actions does not correspond with the idea of a superhuman. Moreover, he asks himself  “If I am so scared now, what would it be if it somehow came to pass that I were really going to do it?” (Dostoyevsky 11). Thereby indicating that because, Raskolnikov fears the consequences of his actions, he falls into the category of an ordinary man. In contrast, supermen do not burden themselves by fearing the repercussions of their behavior.

Additionally, when Raskolnikov finally follows through with his plan and murders the pawnbroker, he is plagued by guilt causing his psychological condition to deteriorate rapidly. Immediately after the murders, Raskolnikov falls ill. Both his physical and mental health are on a rapid decline due to his guilt over the murders. Raskolnikov’s judgment is even more irrational than before resulting in foolish and inane acts, such as volunteering information to the police and claiming that he knows who the true murderer is, forgetting to pick up his pawned items, failing to keep his composure at the slight mention of the murders, and writing “On Crime,” which definitely draws attention to Raskolnikov’s involvement with the murders. The fact that Raskolnikov cannot handle the liability and guilt that has resulted from his actions causes Raskolnikov to contemplate the idea of confession. This further indicates that Raskolnikov completely contradicts that of an extraordinary man. Likewise, Raskolnikov contends that an extraordinary man must be self-reliant, depend on no one, and be able to survive when cut off from society (Dostoyevsky 276). At first, Raskolnikov’s pride separates him from society. After the murders, however, Raskolnikov’s isolation takes a turn for the worse. Immediately following the murders, Raskolnikov becomes tormented with uncertainty, responsibility, and doubt. His beliefs and actions make it impossible to relate to others and as a result, Raskolnikov sets himself apart from the masses. However, Raskolnikov’s alienation contributes to his rash judgment. Unlike the depicted Übermensch, Raskolnikov longs for companionship and acceptance. He periodically confides in Sonya, eventually informing her of his wrongful actions because he could no longer bear the burden that resulted from keeping the murders a secret (Dostoyevsky ####). Sonya’s acceptance of the truth ultimately serves as a primary motivating factor in Raskolnikov’s confession to the authorities. Her understanding of Raskolnikov’s sins proves that the act of confession will end his dreadful solitude and he will once again become a part of society. Raskolnikov’s longing for communion proves that he does not fulfill his own requirements of superiority.

Other factors disproving Raskolnikov’s extraordinariness include the fact that practically all of Raskolnikov’s ideas are unoriginal. He admits that he often questions his actions “wondering whether Napoleon would have done it or not” (Dostoyevsky 398). However, constantly trying to live up to another extraordinary superhuman does not qualify Raskolnikov as a superhuman, himself. On page 232, Raskolnikov thinks to himself, “does Napoleon crawl under an old woman’s bed?” It is somewhat ironic that Raskolnikov attempts to prove his superiority simply by doing what other extraordinary men have done because trying to fit the mold of previous supermen actually eliminates Raskolnikov from being one. In order to be extraordinary, Raskolnikov’s ideas and motives must be genuine and original. Copying Napoleon and other supermen of the past basically proves that Raskolnikov does not fall into the category of “people with new ideas, people with the faintest capacity for saying something new” (Dostoyevsky 25#).

Raskolnikov states that extraordinary men have the right to step over the laws of the common man if it is for the purpose of benefiting society. Therefore, simply killing without a cause does not qualify Raskolnikov as an Übermensch. His murders must serve a true purpose, but what exactly was Raskolnikov’s motive for murder? Throughout the novel, Raskolnikov (in addition to the reader) ponders the reasoning behind his actions before reaching the root cause of his behavior. At first, Raskolnikov justifies the murders by telling himself that he desperately needs the money and that murdering Alyona Ivanova benefits society by getting rid of such a wretched and callous person. He states, “it was simple arithmetic: to kill one worthless, harmful, and rich being, in order to use money to make many beautiful but poor people happy” (Dostoyevsky 489). Despite his claims, Raskolnikov’s actions and behaviors completely oppose his reasoning. First off, the amount of money that Raskolnikov stole was extremely small, and would not have been enough to improve his quality of living or to make the poor happy. Furthermore, Raskolnikov did not even use the stolen money. Rather, he buried the money and any other stolen items to get rid of any evidence linking him to the murders. Additionally, Raskolnikov’s claims that Alyona Ivanova was a “worthless being” and a harmful louse that was “for no use to anybody” (Dostoyevsky 489-491) is discredited by the amount of guilt he felt over her murder. Raskolnikov asks “what value has the life of that sickly, stupid, ill-natured old woman in the balance of existence?” (Dostoyevsky 84). However, if Alyona’s life really were as worthless as Raskolnikov originally stated, he would not have felt physically and emotionally sick after committing the crime. When Raskolnikov tries to establish a rational explanation for his behavior, he admits to himself that,

The old woman was only a symptom of my illness…I wanted to overstep all restrictions as quickly as possible…I killed not a human being but a principle! Yes, I killed a principle, but as for surmounting the barriers, I did not do that; I remained on this side… The only thing I knew how to do was kill! And I could not do that properly either (Dostoyevsky 233).

The aforementioned self-confession is the first time that Dostoyevsky indicates to the audience that Raskolnikov is finally starting to realize that he exhibits the qualities of the common man. When Raskolnikov confesses about the murders to Sonya, he finally dismisses the ideas that he murdered the pawnbroker to help his mother, for the wealth, or to better society. Raskolnikov’s true motives for murder are apparent when he states,

I wanted to murder without casuistry, to murder for my own sake, for myself alone! …It wasn’t to help my mother—that’s nonsense—I didn't do the murder to gain wealth and power and to become a benefactor of mankind. Nonsense! I simply did it; I did the murder for myself, for myself alone, and whether I became a benefactor to others, or spent my life like a spider catching men in my web and sucking the life out of men, I couldn't have cared at that moment...It was not so much the money I wanted, but something else...I know it all now. Understand me! Perhaps I should never have committed a murder again. I wanted to find out something else; it was something else led me on. I wanted to find out then and quickly whether I was a louse like everybody else or a man. Whether I can step over barriers or not, whether I dare stoop to pick up or not, whether I am a trembling creature or whether I have the right...the devil lead me on then and he has shown me since that I had not the right to take that path, because I am just such a louse as all the rest. (Dostoyevsky 398-399).

Finally, Raskolnikov acknowledges that he killed the Lizaveta sisters to prove that he is extraordinary, but instead he realized that he is “just a louse as all the rest.” By admitting that he does not qualify as an Übermensch, Raskolnikov realizes that he does not possess superiority to the rest of society, and therefore cannot justify contravening the law.

            With Sonya’s help, Raskolnikov achieves redemption in the epilogue of Crime and Punishment. Sonya’s ability to love Raskolnikov unconditionally stems from her strong Christian faith and loyalty to God. Sonya, who was forced into prostitution in order to provide for her family, strongly believes that everyone deserves a second chance in life and the opportunity to repent for their sins. Although Sonya is a sinner, her belief in God helps rid Raskolnikov of his guilt and suffering. By persuading him to confess to the authorities, Sonya shows Raskolnikov how to atone for his sins in order to be forgiven in God’s eyes. Before Raskolnikov’s confession, Sonya gives him a cross and tells Raskolnikov to "stand at the cross-roads, bow down to the people, kiss the earth for you have sinned against it too, and say aloud… ‘I am a murderer…then God will send you life again" (Dostoyevsky 389). The cross that Sonya gives Raskolnikov serves as an important symbol of his salvation. Although he has not yet atoned for his crimes, the fact that Raskolnikov finally accepts Sonya’s cross signifies that he has begun on the path towards resurrection. Before Raskolnikov goes to the police station to confess, Sonya “made the sign of the cross over herself and him” and informed Raskolnikov to “say at least one prayer” (Dostoyevsky 482). Sonya embodies Christianity in the novel and on several occasions exemplifies qualities similar to those of Jesus Christ. Throughout the novel, Sonya makes several self-sacrifices for Raskolnikov’s sake. In addition, her unconditional love and acceptance of Raskolnikov’s mistakes ultimately save and reintroduce him to society. The idea that Raskolnikov seeks redemption through Sonya and would not have achieved it without her reveals several of Sonya’s Christ-like characteristics.

            With Sonya’s wooden cross around his neck, Raskolnikov makes his way to the police station to confess to the murders, but on his way, Raskolnikov remembered Sonya’s words. Suddenly,   

It came over him like a fit; it was like a single spark kindled in his soul and spreading fire through him. Everything in him softened at once and the tears started into his eyes. He fell to the earth on the spot…He knelt down in the middle of the square, bowed down to the earth, and kissed that filthy earth with bliss and rapture. He got up and bowed down a second time (Dostoyevsky ###).

However, “the words, ‘I am a murderer,’ which were perhaps on the point of dropping from his lips, died away” (Dostoyevsky ###). While Raskolnikov acknowledges his need for redemptive suffering, his actions prove that he still does not have enough courage to admit his mistakes. Once again, Sonya provides Raskolnikov with strength and propels him to do the right thing. Through his tears, Raskolnikov notices that Sonya has been following him and

…At that moment felt and knew once for all that Sonia was with him forever and would follow him to the ends of the earth, wherever fate might take him. It wrung his heart…but he was just reaching the fatal place (Dostoyevsky ###).

Sonya’s companionship serves as the driving force behind Raskolnikov’s will to confess. When he finally tells Porfiry “I killed the old pawnbroker woman and her sister Lizaveta with an axe and robbed them” (Dostoyevsky 458), Raskolnikov is sentenced to eight years of hard labor in Siberia. The images that Dostoyevsky creates portraying Raskolnikov’s time in prison suggest that even though Raskolnikov confessed to the murders, he is still not truly apologetic for his actions. Raskolnikov continues to believe that he did not sin, contemplates suicide, and isolates himself from the other prison inmates.  Raskolnikov, who still bears the burden of his extreme guilt, remains in his mental prison until he has worked through spiritual sufferings and is ready to resurrect himself. When Raskolnikov comes to the realization that he is in love with Sonya,

…She understood, and a light of infinite happiness came into her eyes. She knew and had no doubt that he loved her beyond everything and that at last the moment had come...They wanted to speak, but could not; tears stood in their eyes. They were both pale and thin; but those sick pale faces were bright with the dawn of a new future, of a full resurrection into a new life. They were renewed by love; the heart of each held infinite sources of life for the heart of the other (Dostoyevsky 504).

This is a pivotal scene in the novel because it is the first time that Raskolnikov expresses emotion for someone other than himself and also the first time that Dostoyevsky presents this complex character as being truly happy. Not only do Sonya’s love, strength, and acceptance of Raskolnikov help to reintroduce him into society, but they also help Raskolnikov accept his guilt in order to achieve redemption…

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 his initiation into a new unknown life. That might be the subject of a new story, but our present story is ended (Dostoyevsky ##).

Works Cited

Dostoyevsky, Fyodor, and Constance Garnett. Crime and punishment. Mineola, N.Y.: Dover Publications, 2001. Print.

Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, and Walter Arnold Kaufmann. Thus spoke Zarathustra: a book for all and none. New York: Modern Library, 1995. Print.

*Ps: I still have to go back and make sure the page numbers are correct, but im basically finished with everything else!