Veronika brantova

IB English A1

World Literature 2

“I teach you the Superman. Man is something that is to be surpassed. What have ye

done to surpass man?” (Nietzsche) Such superman theory, idea which German

philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche develops already in the 1880s becomes a main concern

of Dostoyevsky’s work Crime and Punishment. During nineteenth century such a theory

blossoms—besides Friedrich Nietzsche, Georg Hegel contributed highly to the “so

called” theory of extraordinary man. Although the background for Dostoyevsky’s novel

is full of extraordinary ideas, what counter-arguments bring religion even more does

religion ensures any further development of the book? Although the fact that

Raskolnikovs foil character, Sonya, illustrates great devotion to God and brings religion

into account, the theory that influences Dostoevsky’s writing still remains greater power.

Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, the main protagonist of Crime and Punishent is in

fact a desperate man. He appears psychically and emotionally wrecked but on the other

hand he considers himself to be a superman, a man who is superior to other humans even

more a man who sees himself above all moral rules which control the remaining society.

According to his theory – each person can belong only into one of two branches; ordinary

and extraordinary. The first group has the duty to be slavish, form the society and let

other people to control them. The extraordinary group of few people, those are a step

above normal, ordinary standards they can overstep even laws if such moves the world

forward and in their eyes benefits the society. He considers himself a part of the
extraordinary group. In the novel Dostoyevsky gives us a big hint to Raskolnikov´s

character in choosing such name for him. Part of the word – raskol, in Russian, means

“split”. Raskolnikov and the novel itself demonstrate such duality in various way. On

wan hand Raskolnikov respects people around him and tries to help them when he gives

money to Marmeladov´s family, helps a young girl to get home. Such deeds simply feels

right to do at that time and also by doing such noble deeds Dostoevky makes clear that

Raskolnikov is deeply in his heart a generous person. The problem, the ambivalance rises

a little bit later, in stead of feeling beneficial to the society comes deep regret of doing

such deeds. Since he has the sense of ethics therefore apparently becomes a part of

ordinary society he does not lack the consciousness of what is ethically right but he also

has the characteristic of being self-centric. He wishes to be as Napoleon and other

extraordinary man, step above but does he really believe in such group of people?

He believes so therefore commits a double murder – again the path o dualism in this

novel. By the way, the word for "crime" in Russian is "prestuplenie",

which literally means "stepping across", or crossing the boundary in

this case. But instead of feeling extraordinary he regrets such a crime and suffers until

the end of the novel. It would seem that Dostoevsky is trying to

demonstrate the fallacy of rational egoism by taking it to its logical

conclusion in Raskolnikov's crime. R. himself states further on in his

argument with Luzhin on p. 133-134 that to carry the theory all the

way means that there really is no absolute moral boundary, and that

"people may be killed." It is interesting to note, just on the side, that

this exact philosophy was used by such leaders as Lenin, Stalin, and
Hitler, who believed that if someone was hindering their ability to

govern for the "general welfare", the only logical conclusion would be

to eliminate them (concentration camps, Siberia, Stalin's secret police,

etc.)

“I didn’t kill a human being. A principle! I killed a principle!” (78).

“Raskolnikov was not accustomed to crowds and…had been avoiding all

forms of society, particularly of late” (10).

Raskolikov of Sonia “She’s a holy fool!” (317).

“You must accept suffering and redeem yourself by it; that’s what you must do
…. For broad understanding and deep feeling you need pain and suffering”
(480).

These shifts between two distinct personalities give Raskolnikov two separate points of view. 

The novel is founded on the distinctions between the two points of view, and the reader gets both 

angles. Both Raskolnikov's generous, and evil actions are essential to his character because they 

allow the reader to identify with these two points of view and the two facets of his personality.

In choosing Raskolnikov's name, Dostoevsky has given an important clue to his character. The 

word raskol, in Russian, means "schism" or "split." Dualism is key to Raskolnikov's character: he 

is torn between the desire of his mind to prove his theories through evil, and the necessity to 

satisfy his conscience by doing good (Nutall 160). Throughout Crime and Punishment, the reader 
observes   Raskolnikov   undertake   acts   of   extreme   magnanimity,   such   as   offering   to   pay   for 

Marmeladov's funeral. And yet his character is ultimately defined by his one evil deed (Frank 

Dostoevsky   50).   The   ability   of   Raskolnikov   to   ultimately   separate   (at   least   temporarily)   his 

conscience from his mind explains his ability to go through with the murderous act. In addition, 

Raskolnikov's split between reason and morality epitomizes Dostoevsky's view on the relationship 

between reason and ethics: that reason and morality are completely separate spheres. Despite 

the   impact   of   rationalization,   morality   will   remain   objective   and   immutable   because   it   is   so 

universal and so far ingrained into the human spirit. No amount of reason, says Dostoevsky, can 

forever rid a man of his conscience (Frank Dostoevsky 251).

The first time we hear of Jesus Christ is from Marmeladov, a drunk in

a bar (3/4 of the way through part I, ch. II, p. 20 in my edition). We are

introduced to the notion of mercy overcoming the cold, selfish, rational

demands of justice. The entire paragraph starting with "Why am I to be

pitied..." is the essence of Christian mercy. For a remarkable parallel,

refer to the story of the adulterous woman in the Bible, John ch.8 v1-

11. We learn of the Christian notion of self-sacrifice through Sonya, who

sacrifices literally everything she has, including her own virtue, to save

her family from starvation. Such characters as Sonya cannot be clified

in terms of Pyotr Petrovich's rational egoism. That theory cannot

explain actions such as hers - they just don't fit in anywhere, they are

beyond those terms of rational explanation. It seems as though

Dostoevsky uses Pyotr Petrovich as the embodiment of one side of the

spectrum and Sonya as the embodiment of the other, and that

Raskolnikov kind of splits between the two. "Raskol" in Russian literally

means "split" or "schism". At the beginning of the novel, D. uses R. to

portray the essence of rational egoism, with occasional flashes of

mercy, such as when he gives money to Marmeladov's family or pays

for the taxi to get the drunk girl home safely. Through his psychological

punishment, we see the fallacy in rational egoism, and then ultimately

we see R. as the manifestation of the true redemptive power of

Christianity, the opposite end of the spectrum, through which he truly

finds ultimate freedom and joy.

CITE (NIETZCHE)

Sonia and Raskolnikov are two characters that interact with each other in the novel, Crime and 

Punishment. They interact on multiple levels, sharing several likenesses. Both of these characters 

are at­times self­sacrificing, both are struggling for meaning in a dreary existence, and both are 

generally unhappy people, but brighten and seem to enjoy each other's presence­­even when 

Raskolnikov  is  berating  her  religion.  What  is  self­sacrifice,  for   which   these  characters   and  so 

many people around the world engage in? It is a desire to help those around us more than we 

wish to help ourselves.

Due in part to their self­sacrificing lives, both characters are also trying to search for meaning 

in the dreary existence which they are subjected to. Sonia finds this meaning in the Bible, in a 

belief in God. Raskolnikov writes a theory. He finds solace in thinking that he himself is a god­like 

creature, he believes he is extraordinary. A belief in being a subject of the Divine and thinking that 
there   are   two   divisions   of   men   is   extremely   close.   Both   of   these   characters   also   have   their 

meaning   attacked.   Porfiry  Petrovich   attacks  and   picks   for  holes   in   the   theory  of   Raskolnikov. 

Perhaps as a reaction to this, Raskolnikov picks holes in the support for meaning in Sonia's life­­

God, the Bible, and her faith. The final glues that continually attracts these two characters is the 

fact that all their morbid similarities bring them together so that they actually enjoy each other's 

presence. Although Raskolnikov berates her religion mercilessly, there have been at least two 

other major instances in which Raskolnikov has showered great charity and love upon the head of 

Sonia and her family. Raskolnikov lives life according to his theory in his mind, unfortunately he is 

not able to realize behaviors that aligned with his moral code. Therefore by his own code, not 

even ours or societies, he is morally bankrupt. Yet Sonia and Raskolnikov enjoy each other's 

presence and time­­misery loves company.

Christianity stood in the way of the superman, and Nietzsche scorned Christianity as a

"slave morality." Dostoyevsky's view of the superman is absolutely opposed to

Nietzsche's. For Dostoyevsky, following the "superman" theory to its natural conclusion

inevitably leads to death, destruction, chaos, and misery. Rather than seeing Christianity

as a "slave mentality,".

Although Raskolnikov is far too arrogant throughout the majority of the novel to come

to terms with religion or his conception of God, all around him there are a number of

religious messages come at him from Sonia and others. The presence of religion offers

readers a unique paradox because on the one hand, this novel is about an essentially
godless person who commits an awful and grave sin. For this essay, examine the ways in

which this might be a religious parable. Make connections between biblical characters

(Cain and Abel, Mary Magdalene, etc) and if you want to be more complex, consider

these issues in light of the context of Dostoevsky’s life and religious conversion

The best example of this is that its lead character, Rodion Romanovitch Raskolnikov,

is not a realistic villain, but an archetype- and really a symbol. The sound of his name

connotes his being a rascal or rapscallion, and in Russian raskolnik even means to be

divided, or schismatic. His swings between guilt and mendacious evil are better seen as

devices serving the drama of the narrative than as any true portrait of a sociopath- be it a

modern serial killer, a gangster, or any other form. Raskolnikov has many seeming

virtues- he loves his mother and sister, he has saved people from death, he protects a

young girl from a would-be john, and treats the drunken Marmeladov and his clan with

respect. Yet, he also views himself as above the law of man, perhaps because of these

virtues, and his undoing and seeming acceptance of Christianity by tale’s end has been

seen as suggesting that he has submitted only to the higher law of God, one which even

Napoleonic supermen, as he fancies himself to be, must give in to. This idea of the higher

man has also led to a Nietszchean interpretation of the book, even though it preceded that

philosophy.

Raskolnikov ends the speech strangely and emphatically, saying "vive la guerre

eternelle - till the New Jerusalem, of course!" (227). This translates 'live the eternal war'

(alluding to life), until one goes to heaven. This statement prompts Porfiry to ask a few
religious questions. He asks if Raskolnikov believes in heaven, in God, and in the story of

Lazarus, to which Raskolnikov answers firmly each time, "I do." This confuses Porfiry,

who has been thinking Raskolnikov more of an atheist, but these questions prove he is

not. Raskolnikov's literal belief in the Bible is instrumental in bringing about his

confession. As Raskolnikov points out to Sonia, there are three ways to go: suicide,

insanity, or depravity, but he doesn't realize at the time how strong her faith is.

Dostoevsky portrays his own belief by making religion the saving grace.