In pursuit of a reading of Crime and Punishment as a secular story of Jesus, I want to

consider it as a story of secularization, and of the ways in which theological narratives in the case
of Jesus are already self-secularizing. To read the novel this way, I will put it into dialogue with
the Christian existentialist Soren Kierkegaard’s The Sickness Unto Death. Although the subtitle
is A Christian Psychological Exposition for Upbuilding and Awakening, it is anything but a self-
help book. It brings the possibility of self-realization from the realm of the theological into the
existential. Instead of relying on a higher power to overcome the despair of life brought about by
the human consciousness, Kierkegaard places the responsibility on the shoulders of the
individual. According to him, despair arises out of the misrelation between the finite and infinite
parts of being. This state prevent humans from finding happiness and contentment in life. Read
as a Kierkegaardian novel, Crime and Punishment serves as an outline for the evolution of the
“sickness unto death.” Although Kierkegaard does not provide a cure for his diagnosis, I want to
show that Dostoevsky’s application of the emulation of Christ can help an individual overcome
Kierkegaardian despair and find redemption in this life. Although many are able to do so by
means of a theological application of this concept, it is possible to be redeemed through the
secular acceptance of suffering and attribution of value to good deeds. For Dostovesky, however,
the secular form of the novel has to return to a theological model in order for any kind of human
redemption to be possible. My reading will reveal, however, that the theological is in a perpetual
state of secularization because any strength, hope, or reason derived from it is applied to life here
on earth.
Redemption is necessary for the characters in Crime and Punishment to overcome the
suffering brought about by what Kierkegaard labels as despair. According to him, this is the
natural state of man brought about by a misrelation within the self. He believes “The self is a
relation that relates itself to itself or is the relation’s relating itself to itself in the relation; the self
is not the relation but is the relation’s relating itself to itself. A human being is a synthesis of the
infinite and the finite, or the temporal and the eternal, of freedom and necessity, in short, a
synthesis” (Kier. 13). Standing in contrast to these two parts is what he terms the “positive
third.” It is the self that has realized it is self and has united the temporal and the eternal parts of
being. This process of becoming is what each individual must undergo in order to overcome
despair. Kierkegaard argues that the only way one is able to achieve a synthesis of the self is
through the original creator of the self. He says, “The misrelation of despair is not a simple
misrelation but a misrelation in a relation that relates itself to itself and has been established by
another, so that the misrealtion in that relation which is for itself also reflects itself infinitely in
the relation to the power that established it” (Kier. 14). He does not specify what exactly this
“power” is, but gives two possibilities. “Such a relation that relates itself to itself, a self, must
either have established itself or have been established by another” (Kier. 13). The ability to
overcome despair lies either inside of the self or in an external power, i.e. God.
According to Kierkegaard, despair is something that is inescapable because it arises from
our continual freedom. “Every moment of despair is traceable to possibility; every moment he is
in despair he is bringing it upon himself” (Kier. 17). The self in despair is in a continual
“process of becoming, for the self in potentiality does not actually exist, is simply that which
ought to come into existence. Insofar, then, as the self does not become itself, it is not itself; but
not to be itself is precisely despair” (Kier. 30). Despair does, however, exist in different forms
brought about by the degree of consciousness in an individual. He says, “The ever increasing
intensity of despair depends upon the degree of consciousness or is proportionate to its increase:
the greater the degree of consciousness, the more intensive the despair” (Kier. 42). The more
aware of existence someone is, the deeper and more maturely he or she can despair.
The most basic form is what Kierkeggard calls “the despair that is ignorant of being
despair, or the despairing ignorance of having a self and an eternal self” (Kier. 42). This
ignorance, however, does not prevent someone from being in despair. “This condition is
nevertheless despair and is properly designated as such manifests what in the best sense of the
word may be called the obstinacy of truth” (Kier. 42). Those ignorant of despair hide from the
“truth” that they are a synthesis of eternal and temporal parts. A slightly more mature form of
despair is the “despair over the earthly.” He includes this in the broader category “in despair not
to will to be oneself: despair in weakness.” This form of despair is brought about by external
factors, not from within the self.
The deepest forms are those in which the individual is aware of his or her own despair.
The problem is recognized, but the solution is unobtainable. These levels are reached through
the personal process of reflection. According to Kierkegaard, the deeper the level of reflection
and introspection in the individual, the deeper he or she will despair. Greater self-awareness
causes one to become increasingly aware of despair. Knowing there to be a misrelation between
the eternal and temporal parts of being, the individual is unable to do anything about it and
therefore “despairs over weakness.” He says of this struggle, “To what extent perfect clarity
about oneself as being in despair can be combined with being in despair, that is, whether this
clarity of knowledge and of self-knowledge might not simply wrench a person out of despair,
make him so afraid of himself that he would stop being in despair, we will not determine here”
(Kier. 47). This form of despair is not occasioned by a blow. Instead it slowly manifests in an
individual at a level proportionate to the amount of time spent in reflection. The more one
ponders the situation of despair, the deeper one sinks into it. Kierkegaard views his “sickness
unto death” to be unescapable. Even the act of suicide is only one which embeds a person
deeper in despair. He says, “The person who, with a realization that suicide is despair and to
that extent with a true conception of the nature of despair, commits suicide is more intensely in
despair than one who commits suicide without a clear idea that suicide is despair; conversely, the
less true his conception of despair, the less intensive his despair” (Kier. 48).
The only hint Kierkegaard provides to overcome his “sickness unto death,” is to find
synthesis in “the power that established it.” I want to read Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment
as a suggested solution to the Kierkegaardian problem of despair. The “cure” found in the novel
lies in the characters’ emulations of Christ. In the form of literature, Dostoevsky offers his
readers a new kind of imitaio Chrisit. My reading shows there to be two possible routes utilizing
this idea based on different systems of belief. The theological path places the belief of the
establishing power in God. It is He who created the self, and therefore it is only through Him
that the self can come to terms with itself and overcome despair. The secular path, on the other
hand, places the origin of self within the self. Because there is no God, the individual must
create personal reasons for existence in order to find happiness in this life without relying on the
prescriptions of The Bible. In order for either strategy to be successful, the characters must
mirror two crucial aspects of Christ’s character: His attribution of value to beneficent
interactions between humans and his embrace of suffering as an essential means to achieving
redemption. The deeper the characters in Crime and Punishment sink into Kierkegaardian
despair, the more difficult it is to complete these tasks.
Marmeladov, Dunya, and Sonya all experience varying degrees of despair, but unite in
pursuing redemption by means of an imitation of Christ based in theology. They look to The
Bible for the reasons for suffering and are motivated by the thought of a reward in heaven after
death. Although they are motivated by the hope of a future life, their emulation of Christ still
allows them to achieve redemption in this life and find a measure of peace and happiness
because of the hope and sense of purpose they gain from religion. Contrariwise, are the
enigmatic Svidrigailov and the central character of the novel Raskolnikov. They utilize
Dostoevsky’s “cure” to fight against despair, but look outside of theological motivation. Both
attempt to find a proper way to live without the aid of religion. Their attempts at redemption are
based on the secular attribution of value to suffering and good deeds. Raskolnikov is the central
character in the novel because his great struggle and intense despair are eventually overcome
through the accomplishment of these goals. He finds rewards can be found in this life through
the emulation of Christ, even without theological reasons and promises. Svidrigailov also
pursues his own path to fulfillment and embraces a secular belief in power. He strives to fulfill
his own desires without feeling any remorse as to the effects they have on others. According to
this reading, it is possible to find contentment in this life through the secularized process of
mirroring Christ, but Dostoevsky makes it essential to return to the Christian ideal of love in
order to realize final redemption and cure Kierkegaard’s sickness. Svidrigailov fails to make this
return and dies fearful, alone, and unredeemed. Raskolnikov, however, finally does embrace his
love for Sonya and at last is redeemed and can live out his life in happiness.
The theological narrative of Jesus is, in a way, already self-secularizing. It can be seen as
an example of how to come to terms with this life and achieve redemption and a sense of
happiness. Although emulation of his good deeds and self-sacrifice are important, they pale in
comparison to Jesus’s most important act of embracing suffering. It was absolutely essential for
him to suffer because it was the means by which he redeemed the world and ascended to heaven
as divine. All the characters in the novel are subject to the universality of suffering and seek to
use it as a means to emulate Christ and achieve redemption. The retired officer Marmeladov
attempts to use suffering to cleanse himself of the guilt he has for not taking care of his family.
Like Christ’s act of suffering to wash away the sins of man, he strives to find redemption by
emerging himself joyfully in it. His daughter Sonya’s reasons for suffering, on the other hand,
are much more noble. She suffers so her family can have a means, although meager, by which to
live. She places her reasons for suffering into the realm of the divine and believes that through
the acceptance of her situation and her belief in God, she will be able to go to heaven. Dunya and
her mother suffer selflessly as well. Like Christ, they seek to sacrifice themselves for another.
Raskolnikov suffers the most of any character in the novel and has the most difficult time
accepting it because he strives to create his own secular meaning. He fears there is no reason for
human suffering and that it serves no purpose. If this is true, then there is no reason not to act as
the evil Svidrigailov and pursue whatever personal desires one wishes. It is crucial to note,
however, that throughout his journey to redemption he emulates Christ by doing good deeds.
Part of overcoming despair is the act of attributing secular value to helping others. It is not until
Raskolnikov is able to do this and replicate Christ’s act of accepting suffering that he opens
himself up to the possibility of redemption and a final cure for his “sickness.”
Marmeladov seeks to hide from despair by indulging himself in suffering. He attaches
himself to it because he believes it will purify him of his sins and earn him a place in heaven. By
mirroring Christ’s acceptance of suffering, he hopes to be able to cure his despair and find
redemption. So caught up in his religious reasons, however, he refuses the possibility of
incorporating suffering into a definition of happiness in this life. After losing his position in the
army due to a change of staff he marries Katerina because he “could not look on at such
suffering” (Dost. 17). Marmeladov perpetuates the destitute nature of his situation by sinking
further and further into alcoholism even though his family is in extreme poverty. His eventual
return to the army does him little good because he has such a strong inclination to suffering. He
has the chance to earn a steady living and take care of his family, but instead clings to his
poverty. He takes what little money they have and wastes it on a drinking binge that causes him
to lose his job. When he returns home to his wife she begins beating him. Instead of crying out
in pain, he begins to yell that such beatings are a pleasure and a delight to him. Marmeladov
wants to hide from despair by emulating Christ’s acceptance of suffering, hoping it will grant
him a means of redemption. He asks Raskolnikov, “Why pity me, you say? Yes! There’s
nothing to pity me for! I ought to be crucified, crucified on a cross, and not pitied! But crucify,
O judge, crucify, and having crucified, pity the man! And then I myself will come to you to be
crucified, for I thirst not for joy, but for sorrow and tears” (Dost. 23). Not able to find earthly
reasons for despair, he seeks to be ignorant of it by hiding in religion.
Although there seems to be no solution to Marmeladov’s situation, his emulation of
Christ gives him a sense of hope that the great deal of suffering he is experiencing will earn him
a purified existence in heaven. His life becomes bearable through the hope obtained from
religion. Thinking he will one day stand before God in judgement, he says, “when He had
finished with everyone, then He will say unto us, too, ‘You, too come forth!’ He will say,
‘Come forth, drunk ones, my weak ones, my shameless ones!’ And we will all come forth,
without being ashamed, and stand there” (Dost. 23). Religion serves as his crutch that frees him
from any actual responsibility. Through the emulation of Christ for theological reasons,
however, Marmeladov is able to achieve a measure of redemption in this life. Whether or not an
actual heaven is waiting for him when he dies is irrelevant. His beliefs allow him to die with
hope, showing that a cure is possible for Kierkegaard’s “sickness unto death.”
A Kierkegaardian reading of Crime and Punishment shows an evolution of despair in the
character of Dunya. She embodies Christ’s love and seeks to act as a savior first to Svidrigailov
and then to Raskolnikov. Her care for others shows she despairs over the earthly. It is not her
situation that causes her pain, but the situations of others. She attempts to cure this despair by
emulating Christ for theological reasons. First she tries to save Svidrigailov from his evil ways
while working as a governess in Katerina’s household. She is moved to pity by him and seeks to
act as a savior. Dunya is a Christian and believes it is her duty to help a man she views to be
poor and wretched. As a result of her kindness, she ends up suffering. Katerina discovers them
together and, even though she has refused his advances, comes to the conclusion Dunya is trying
to seduce her husband. Katerina slanders her character and destroys her reputation only later to
realize she was wrong.
Dunya is driven deeper into despair by her concern for her brother Raskolnikov. She
attempts to sacrifice herself for him by marrying the army official Pyotr Luzhin. Through this
marriage she hopes to pull his life from the destitution it has sunk into since leaving the
university. In a letter, their mother writes, “So, dear Rodya, he may also be quite useful to you,
even in everything, and Dunya and I have already decided that from this very day you could
definitely begin your future career and consider your lot clearly determined” (Dost. 36-7).
Dunya is simulating Christ by sacrificing herself for another. She is taking a chance at complete
ruin and unhappiness so Raskolnikov can have a chance at a future away from poverty. He
comments on Dunya’s sacrifice saying, “The thing is clear: for herself, for her own comfort,
even to save herself from death, she wouldn’t sell herself; no, she’s selling herself for someone
else! For a dear, beloved person she will sell herself! That’s what our whole catch consists of:
for her brother, for her mother, she will sell herself! She’ll sell everything” (Dost. 43). Dunya is
a Christian and believes she is doing the right thing by sacrificing herself for her brother. She
despairs over his situation and future and mirrors Christ in an attempt to overcome it. Her
reasons are based in religion and her redemption comes by means of the theological. While
confronted by Svidrigailov in his apartment, she is able to refuse him despite his lavish promises
because she views him as the embodiment of evil. Her belief in Christian values gives her the
strength to escape from what appears to be a hopeless situation. Her redemption becomes
complete after Raskolnikov admits his crime. Freed from the Kierkegaardian despair over the
external, she is able to achieve happiness and marry Razumikhin.
The degree of suffering by the characters in Crime and Punishment increases as they
despair in more mature forms. This process is brought about through an increase in reflection.
In Crime and Punishment, this is evident in the character Sonya, who questions her beliefs and
the reasons for her suffering and, as a result, despairs to a greater degree than Marmaledov and
Dunya. She serves as an example of how a deep religious conviction can act as a cure for the
worst Kierkegaardian despair and lead to redemption. Faced with a hopeless situation, Sonya
emulates Christ through both her meekness and self-sacrifice. Forced to adopt a sinful
profession in order to carry out her Christ emulation, Sonya has the most difficult time
attributing meaning to her suffering. She looks to religion for this, but struggles with the idea of
an omnipotent God deeply entrenching her life in so much pain.
Sonya despairs over her family and the seemingly hopeless situation they are in. Despite
her best efforts, she is unable to do anything to help them. Her awareness of despair causes her
to suffer greatly. Although she could easily run away and attempt to support herself, she chooses
to stay. She hopes to be able to cure her despair through the emulation of Christ’s self-sacrifice
and humble acceptance of suffering, believing these will offer hope for her situation. Sonya’s
suffering begins with her stepmother Katerina. Forced into a household with a woman as proud
and domineering as any on earth, she is forced to suffer. Marmeladov says of his daughter,
“What she had to suffer from her stepmother while she was growing up, that I shall pass over in
silence” (Dost.17). Out of the deep commitment she has to her family, Sonya acts upon
Katerina’s insulting suggestion that she get a yellow pass. Motivated by love, Sonya has to sin
to become like Christ. Marmeladov tells Raskolnikov, “So then, some time after five, I see
Sonechka get up, put on her kerchief, put on her wrap, and go out, and she came back home after
eight. She came in, went straight to Katerina Ivanova, and silently laid thirty roubles on the table
in front of her” (Dost. 18). Despite her great sacrifice, the meager amount of money she makes
does little, if anything, to help the family. She is driven deeper into despair by the idea that if
there is no God, she is giving herself up for nothing. .
Sonya’s situation worsens after Marmeladov is run over by a carriage and dies. The
family is now left to rely solely on her and the money she acquires through her yellow pass.
Katerina is gradually succumbing to tuberculosis and the children are forced to endure her
spastic beatings and neurotic behavior. Sonya could run away from the situation, but she decides
to stay. Rakolnikov confronts here about this choice. He can not understand why she would
remain in such a destitute situation. Her intense religious belief, however, prevents her from
leaving. Her deep seeded Christian love for her family serves as continual motivation for her
sacrifice. A great turning point appears on the horizon, however, with Katerina’s impending
death due to tuberculosis. When she dies, their situation will become absolutely hopeless, likely
ending with the children living on the street. These great worries fall on the small frail shoulders
of Sonya. She becomes the embodiment of human suffering and Raskolnikov is drawn to her
because of this. After bowing at her feet he says, “I was not bowing to you, I was bowing to all
human suffering” (Dost. 322). Raskolnikov wants to see how efficient religious belief is when
attempting to attribute meaning to the pain experienced in life.
Raskolnikov takes a great deal of interest in Sonya’s situation because they both despair
the deepest in their attempts to attribute meaning to their suffering. He struggles to do so by
means of a secular route, but sees that Sonya is actually succeeding through religion. He
believes, however, that it will eventually fail her and she will be forced into insanity. When this
arises, the most logical solution would be suicide. He confronts her asking, “But tell me, finally,
how such shame and baseness can be combined in you beside other opposite and holy feelings?
It would be more just, a thousand times more just and reasonable, to jump headfirst into the
water and end it at once” (Dost. 322). By the look in her eyes, he is able to tell she has
considered this before. “He read everything in that one glance of hers. So she really had already
thought of it herself. Perhaps many times, in despair, she had seriously considered how to end it
all at once, so seriously, indeed, that now she was almost not surprised by his suggestion” (Dost.
322). According to Kierkegaard, Sonya despairs deeper than Marmeladov and Dunya because
she is aware of her despair. She has thought about her situation and the possible solutions to it
and has deeply considered the reasons for her suffering. She knows, however, her death will
serve only as an escape and will do nothing to alleviate the suffering of her family. Suicide only
serves as a deeper manifestation of despair. Her refusal to end her life plays a large role in her
theological redemption. It serves to drive her deeper and deeper into her faith, giving her hope
that one day it will all be better. As her suffering increases, so does the strength of her resolve to
continue to act like Christ.
Sonya’s redemption is brought about by her intense faith. It gives a reason for her
suffering and therefore a reason to emulate Christ. This aspect of her character is one which
Raskolnikov, the priest of doubt, confronts her about. He tells her how bleak and hopeless her
situation is and points out the horrors that await the children after Katerina dies. He wants to see
just how far blind faith can go. Sonya belief, however, keeps her alive and gives her hope.
Religion’s greatest gift is a reason. It gives a sense of purpose to her suffering and makes it
easier to bear. Raskolnikov directly attacks the uncertainty of the theological reasons for her
suffering. He yells, “Most of all you are a sinner because you destroyed yourself and betrayed
yourself in vain. Isn’t that a horror! Isn’t it a horror that you live in this filth which you hate so
much, and at the same time know yourself (you need only open your eyes) that you’re not
helping anyone by it, and not saving anyone from anything” (Dost. 322). Raskolnikov does not
believe in God and is amazed that Sonya’s faith is so great that she is able to destroy herself in
the hope she is doing good. He has rejected the idea of theological redemption and is beginning
to believe that a secular one may not be possible either.
Raskolnikov wants to see whether or not Sonya’s faith is capable of believing the
impossible. He grabs the bible, ironically enough belonging to Lizaveta, from the table and gives
it to Sonya, asking her to read the story of Lazarus. Of all the stories in the bible, this is one
which requires a great deal of faith to believe because the events occur outside the realm of
earthly possibility. He wants to force her to confront her faith. He wants to know if she really
does believe it. “He understood only too well how hard it was for her now to betray and expose
all that was hers. He understood that these feelings might indeed constitute her secret, as it were,
real and long-standing, going back perhaps to her adolescence, when she was still with her
family” (Dost. 326). Raskolnikov’s deepest secret is the knowledge that he is the murder of the
widow and Lizaveta. Before he can bring himself to reveal this to Sonya, he wants to hear her
deepest and most revealing secret, her faith. As she reads the story of Lazarus, Sonya steadily
approaches the part about his resurrection. He grows excited at the conflict approaching in her
mind. “Raskolnikov turned and looked at her anxiously: yet, that was it! She was already
trembling in a real, true fever. He had expected that. She was approaching the word about the
greatest, the unheard-of miracle, and a feeling of great triumph took hold of her” (Dost. 327).
Sonya begins to become resolute as she nears the approaching miracle. She is able to convince
herself she does believe and if this story can be true all the rest must be true as well. She finds
hope in the belief in miracles. By having the greatest religious conviction, she is able to
overcome the great hopelessness of her situation and endure the trials of her life. Her unwavering
belief in The Bible gives her the strength to emulate Christ and cure her of Kierkegaardian
despair.
Sonya’s belief in God brings with it a sense of purpose, sought for so arduously by
Raskolnikov, for her suffering. She serves as a transition from the theological to the secular
means of curing despair. Sonya is redeemed through her unquestioning belief in Jesus Christ.
She emulates him and is able to provide herself with enough strength and hope to get through her
situation. The conclusion of the novel, however, reveals an overlap in the conclusions of the
theological and secular redemptions. Although she finds purpose in her belief, Sonya’s ultimate
happiness comes through the Christian value of love manifest in this life. Raskolnikov takes a
drastically different path outside of religion and ends up at the same spot. Although he is able to
achieve purpose through the acceptance of suffering and the secular attribution of value to good
deeds, he is forced to return to the same Christian value as Sonya in order to complete his
redemption. Both this return and the acceptance of suffering are crucial to their journeys. This
reading of Crime and Punishment supports the notion that all theology is perpetually in state of
secularization. Anything gained from religion reverts back to the relationship we have with this
life, whether or not we believe a heaven is coming after. The love Sonya and Raskolnikov
discover is an example of this concept.
Set up as a counter to the theological redemptions in the novel are the secular struggles of
the main character Raskolnikov and his evil counterpart Svidrigailov. They are faced with the
difficult task of not making use of the prescribed “cure” for despair provided in The Bible. They
must decide the proper way to act without absolute definitions of good and evil. If there is no
God, then there is no purpose for our suffering and no reason to do good. The only logical way to
live is to pursue one’s own desires and appetites. This is the attitude adopted by Svidrigailov.
Although it makes sense to Raskolnikov, he still appears to be vile and disgusting in his eyes.
Raskolnikov’s task lies in attributing value to human suffering and discovering the reward of
doing good without a belief in God. He seeks to become religious without religion, and faithful
without belief. He, like the other characters in the novel, acts like Christ but seeks to understand
why one should do so outside of the theological. A Kierkegaardian reading of the novel shows it
is impossible to overcome despair and achieve redemption purely by secular means.
Svridrigailov rejects all Christian morality and dies alone and full of fear. Raskolnikov,
however, finds peace through the personal acts of accepting suffering and attributing secular
meaning to good deeds, but is not able to realize his final redemption until he makes a return to
the theological.
One of the greatest things Raskolnikov struggles with is attempting to attribute secular
meanings to good and evil. In lieu of these concepts, he develops a theory based on power. The
common man is regarded by him to be a louse. He lacks reflection and the ability to embrace the
power existing inside, resulting in a life lived underneath the law. The common man is ignorant
of despair. He gives up his freedom so as to wallow in his ignorance and live in bliss under its
false light. Existing among the common masses is what Raskolnikov terms the “extraordinary
man.” He “has the right...that is, not an official right, but his own right, to allow his conscience
to...step over certain obstacles, and then only in the event that the fulfillment of his idea -
sometimes perhaps salutary for the whole of mankind - calls for it” (Dost. 259). He goes on to
say these men are rarely recognized and often punished because the value of their contributions
exists in the future where the common man can not see it. Raskolnikov desires greatly to be one
of these “extraordinary men.” His beliefs cause him to wonder why a human should not just
embrace power and use it to pursue personal desires and appetites. He struggles with the question
of the value of helping fellow humans if there is no pay off after death. A critical step to his
redemption is learning to find the reward of doing good here in this life.
Raskolnikov greatly fears what the results will be if his theory is correct. This fear is
manifest in the character Svidrigailov who acts in the novel as an evil emulation of Christ. He
supports the interpretation that a secular redemption is not possible without a return to the
theological. Svidrigailov is one possible result of what can happen when someone emulates
Christ for nonreligious reasons. Because he does not believe in God or the validity of traditional
good and evil, he pursues his desires without hesitation or remorse. Able to see the evil in the
world, he chooses to embrace it rather than shun it. When he and Raskolnikov speak of eternity,
he confronts him with the idea that eternity may only be one small dirty room filled with spiders.
When Raskolnikov interjects that there must be something more just, he replies, “More just?
Who knows, perhaps that is just - and, you know, if I had my way, it’s certainly how I would do
it” (Dost. 289-90). If the human race is inherently evil and will never merit any sort of paradise,
then there is no reason not to embrace one’s selfish pursuits. Obsessed with the fulfillment of
sensual desires, he will stop at nothing to achieve them. Through this, he shows his ability to kill
without remorse and take advantage of the innocent in order to fulfill his wishes. Svidrigailov is
one of the “extraordinary men” Raskolnikov desires so strongly to be because he lives his life not
allowing anything to stand in the way of his goals.
Svidrigailov employs the power of Raskolnikov’s “extraordinary men” through his
actions toward children, particularly young girls. He seeks to become a God over them by
creating a sense of dependence on him. He is an evil mirror of Jesus request “Let the little
children come to me and do not hinder them” (Matt. 19:15). Not only does he help Katerina’s
children by placing them in an orphanage and leaving them money for when they come of age,
but also a girl who was barely even an acquaintance. He recounts a story to Raskolnikov in
which the young girl appeared in a dance hall by mistake and was made mocked. After
comforting the girl and her mother, Svidrigailov pays to take them home. He listens to their
story and makes a sizable contribution to the girl’s education. In addition to this, he has already
managed to procure a fiancee during his short stay in Petersburg. The sixteen year old girl
comes out to meet him while he is over speaking to her parents. He describes her saying “She
comes out, curtsies - can you imagine, she’s still in a short dress; an unopened bud - she blushes,
turns pink as the dawn (they had told her of course). I don’t know how you feel about women’s
faces, but to my mind those sixteen years, those still childish eyes, that timidity, those bashful
little tears - to my mind they’re better than beauty” (Dost. 479-80). Already fifty years old,
Svidrigailov is aroused by this great difference in age. He is attracted to her innocence and
helplessness because it allows him to feel empowered.
Svidrigailov’s evil desires culminate in his attempts at seducing Dunya. She is his new
desire and he will use all the power he has to fulfill it. He is a deceiver who uses his craftiness to
make women vulnerable, then takes advantage of them when the moment is right. Believing
himself to be a superior human being, Svidrigailov does not allow anything to stand in the way
of satiating his appetites. After Dunya refuses his advances and runs away, his resolve only
grows stronger. It is not long after this that Marfa dies a very mysterious death and he appears in
Petersburg. In the end, Svidrigailov believes there is no set rules to live by, so it is only logical to
embrace power and pursue one’s own desires separate from the opinions of others. He believes
happiness can only be a trick we convince ourselves of. He says to Raskolnikov, “Every man
looks out for himself, and he has the happiest life who manages to hoodwink himself best of all.
Ha, ha! But who are you to go running full tilt into virtue? Spare me, me my dear, I am a sinful
man” (Dost. 481).
Both Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov reject the belief in God and attempt to cure the
“sickness unto death” through their own secular means. Although he embodies his theory,
watching Svidirgialov is disgusting to Raskolnikov. He makes him doubt whether or not it is
possible to live outside of the theological and achieve any sort of redemption. If his theory is
correct, then there is nothing to stop people from acting the way Svidrigailov does. His greatest
fears are that there is no way to find any sort of reason for positive interactions between humans
and no way to achieve happiness and contentment separate from theology. My reading of Crime
and Punishment shows, however, that this is possible, but a return must be made to the Christian
ideal of love. Svidrigailov fails to make this return. His secular philosophy fails him and he is
unable to achieve any sort of redemption, resulting in a lonely and fearful death overcome with
despair. While at the hotel before his suicide, he is haunted by nightmares. His ignorance of the
suffering he has caused to those around him finally comes back to confront him before his death.
He ends up being the most wicked result of Raskolnikov’s theory. His “good deeds” are based in
evil and therefore provide him no comfort in the end. Unable to cure Kierkegaard’s “sickness
unto death” and burdened by the fear of the results of his actions, Svidrigailov puts a gun to his
head and pulls the trigger.
Although pure secular redemption is not possible for the characters in Crime and
Punishment, it is possible to overcome despair by transferring the value of theological ideals into
the secular realm. Faced with the most intense “sickness” of any character in the novel,
Raskolnikov seeks to attribute non-theological meaning to human suffering and beneficent
interaction. His large amount of reflection regarding these ideas only drives him deeper into
despair. He suffers because of the seeming impossibility of there being secular reasons for
human suffering and good deeds. Besides Svidrigailov, the other characters emulate Christ for
purely theological reasons. Through the course of the novel, however, Raskolnikov comes to
realize that a secular mirroring of Christ can merit a sense of fulfillment in this life. He gradually
learns that a Christ-like acceptance of suffering and the simulation of his actions can be applied
to life and lead to happiness and contentment. His struggle and final redemption show that
Kierkegaardian despair can be overcome by secular means so long as the final cure lies in
theological love. As it turns out, however, this manifests itself in life here on earth and the value
derived from it lies in the present.
The beginnings of Raskolnikov’s despair over his weakness can be traced to his days at
the university. His intense amounts of reflection distanced him from the other students. “He was
very poor and somehow haughtily proud and unsociable, as though he were keeping something
to himself. It seemed to some of his friends that he looked upon them all as children, from above
as though he were ahead of them all in development, in knowledge, and in conviction, and that
he regarded their convictions and interests as something inferior” (Dost. 51). At this time,
Raskolnikov is already beginning to form his theory of the separate classes of humans and is
acquiring his “sickness.” His intense degree of reflection leads to a separation of the self.
Raskolnikov begins to view himself from outside. Seeing his life as hopeless and without
meaning, he sinks into despair.
Raskolnikov’s theory makes him question his own value and despair in his own
weakness. He fears that if he belongs not with the “men of greatness,” he is part of the mindless
common masses. After leaving the university, he does nothing but lie around brooding over
these ideas. He sits in his closet of a room for days on end without eating or speaking to anyone
and slowly goes insane. He says to Sonya, “Low ceilings and cramped rooms cramp the soul and
mind! Oh, how I hated that kennel! And yet I didn’t want to leave it. I purposely didn’t want to”
(Dost. 417). All he did during those months was lie and think. This intense brooding leads him
to despise himself for the effect he is having on his family. His mother and sister are sacrificing
themselves so he can acquire some money and work toward a career. He simply can not deal
with this. He says, “They had begun torturing him long ago and had worn out his heart. Long,
long ago this present anguish had been born in him, had grown, accumulated, and ripened
recently and become concentrated, taking the form of a horrible, wild, and fantastic question that
tormented his heart and mind, irresistibly demanding resolution” (Dost. 45). How can an
extraordinary man have to rely on two women to support him? Lashing out against this apparent
lack of control for his own fate, he develops the idea of killing the old widow and using the
money he stole from her to regain a hold on his life. He runs into a problem, however. The men
of greatness he has in mind all seized opportunity without thought or remorse. They did not have
to sit and think to themselves whether or not they should; they just did. Raskolnikov has not
done this and he knows it. He begins to sink deeper into despair because he fears he is perhaps
only a louse. His fear of his own weakness entrenches him in Kierkegaard’s “sickness.”
Raskolnikov’s only hope to remove himself from despair is redemption.
In order to open himself up to the possibility of redemption, Raskolnikov must
accomplish a Christ-like acceptance of suffering. Throughout the novel he consistently struggles
to attribute meaning to it outside of religion. His great fear is manifest in his dream of the mare
being beaten to death. As he is walking by the cemetery with his father, he sees the grave of “his
younger brother, who died at six months old, and whom he also did not know at all and could not
remember” (Dost. 55). This event in Raskolnikov’s youth would have begun his questioning of
the value of human life. It is amazing how easily it can be extinguished and forgotten. He is
then forced to watch as a group of drunk men beat a small mare to death for not pulling a cart
filled far beyond its capacity. After this cruel and bloody scene, he looks up at his father and
asks “Papa! What did they...kill...the poor horse for?” (Dost. 59). Raskolnikov was forced to
witness a scene of meaningless cruelty. A poor animal was beaten and killed for no reason. The
thought festering in his mind is that humans are perhaps not so different than this mare.
Not only does Raskolnikov struggle with the meaning of human suffering, but also with
the value of acting positively toward other humans. After all, if there is no reason to suffer, then
there is no reason for doing good either. His conflict shows my belief that through the act of
emulating Christ, even without a belief in God, one is still able to find merit in the act of doing
good. It is possible to transfer the future theological reward for good deeds into the secular
present. This is necessary so that humans do not end up as Svidrigalov, selfishly pursuing their
own desires and digging their own graves of unhappiness. Although he doesn’t know why,
Raskolnikov consistently finds himself helping others. The end of the novel reveals that while
he was at school, he used all his money to help fellow student suffering form consumption.
After he dies he proceeds to care for the boy’s father. In addition to this, his landlady reveals
Raskolnikov saved two small children from a fire. Despite these actions, however, he is still
unable to realize the value of doing good. While walking after his talk with Marmaledov, he
encounters a young girl of only sixteen years of age stumbling through the street. She is very
drunk and it is obvious she has already been taken advantage of. Following her, he sees “a short
distance away, about fifteen steps, at the edge of the boulevard, a gentleman had stopped, who by
all evidence would also have liked very much to approach the girl with certain intentions” (Dost.
47). Raskolnikov can easily just walk away and leave the girl to the man, but he instead decides
to protect her. He speaks out against the man and the ensuing scuffle draws the attention of a
police officer. Not only does he explain the situation to him and tell him the girl must be
protected, but he also gives him all the money he has so she can afford a carriage home.
Everything changes, however, at the officers comment of “Ah, what depravity we have
nowadays” (Dost. 49). Raskolnikov is struck by the idea that this act of helping another serves
no purpose. The officers comment makes him feel helpless. What does one small good deed
matter when the world is so corrupt? As he walks away, he says to the officer “Forget it! What
do you care? Leave her alone! Let him have fun. What is it to you?” (Dost. 49).
The scenes in Crime and Punishment dealing with Marmeladov and his family are crucial
because they help Raskolnikov realize the secular value of helping a fellow man. After first
meeting him, Raskolnikov goes back to his apartment and sees the terrible condition the family is
living in. While Katerina is beating her husband, he places the last of his money on the
windowsill. Later he is wandering around in a state of delirium because the murder has nearly
driven him to insanity. He is able to escape from this, however, by helping Marmeladov again.
He finds him run over by a carriage and immediately runs over to help. Without a moments
hesitation, Raskolnikov offers to pay for a doctor for the dying man. After his death, he again
gives Katerina money to pay for the funeral. These selfless acts fill him with a sense of
fulfillment. He realizes that good deeds can serve a purpose even if there is no God. Through
the simple act of helping another human being who is suffering, one can merit a feeling of
purpose and meaning. While standing on the bridge afterwards, he says, “There is life! Was I
not alive just now? My life hasn’t died with the old crone!” (Dost. 188). Raskolnikov realizes
that he feels most alive when he is helping others.
Having overcome his doubt as to the value of good coming from one’s own secular
motivation, Raskolnikov must finally embrace suffering in order to approach his final
redemption. Porfiry’s priest-like advice states it most clearly when he says, “I’m even sure you’ll
‘decide to embrace suffering’; you won’t take my word for it now, but you’ll come round to it
yourself. Because suffering, Rodion Romanych, is a great thing” (Dost. 461). All of
Raskonikov’s suffering up until this point has been part of a purification process. In order to
finish it, however, he must turn himself in and embrace his fate. Through the embrace of
suffering he will finally accept life just as it is without any transcendental promises. Dostoevsky
chooses to mirror Christ’s death in the pagan Raskolnikov, supporting my reading that the
emulation of Christ, even for secular reasons, can lead to redemption.
Raskolnikov’s journey to his symbolic death parallels that of Jesus. He first visits Sonya,
who he views as the epitome of selflessness, innocence, and most importantly suffering. He goes
there to get her cross. Like Jesus, this is his to bear as he goes to “die.” Dostoevsky uses Sonya
as Raskolnikov’s Mary Madeleine. She prepares to follow him all the way to his confession and
to be there as he finally embraces suffering. Before arriving at the police station, however,
Raskolnikov stops and makes a great symbolic gesture. He is finally realizing that this life can
be beautiful and that religion is not necessary to attribute value to suffering and good deeds. “It
came to him suddenly in a sort of fit, caught fire in his soul from a single spark, and suddenly,
like a flame engulfed him. Everything softened in him all at once, and the tears flowed. He
simply fell to the earth where he stood...He knelt in the middle of the square, bowed to the earth,
and kissed that filthy earth with delight and happiness” (Dost. 525). Although there is much
suffering in life, it is necessary for the creation of happiness. It is both an inseparable and
invaluable part of life. Raskolnikov finally realizes this. He doesn’t just accept life, he rejoices
in it.
Sonya continues to follow Raskolnikov as he approaches the station. Her presence is
crucial because it is through her that Raskolnikov’s redemption returns to the theological after he
is sent to Siberia. Like Jesus’s difficult ascent of Golgotha, Raskolnikov must ascend the stairs of
the police station to the third floor to face his “death.” He even views his final embracing of
suffering to be “drinking from a cup” (Dost. 526). When he gets to the office, he learns of
Svidrigailov’s suicide and loses all courage. Both of them rejected the theological and attempted
to find fulfillment in life through secular means. Svidrigailov failed miserably and ended up
destroying himself. When he hears of his fate, Raskolnikov is overcome by the fear that he may
be doing the same. He doubts his resolve and flees from the office. In the courtyard, however,
he comes face to face with Sonya, the embodiment of human suffering. Realizing he can no
longer run from it, he turns back. At the top of the stairs he has no strength left. He stumbles into
the office and mutters his confession. In answer to the exclamations around him, he mutters it
one more time and blacks out.
Raskolnikov’s redemption is made possible through a secular route. His acceptance of
suffering and attribution of value to doing good both lie outside the theological. My reading of
the novel shows these goals can be accomplished through the personal act transferring the
theological into the secular realm. Although this is a critical part of the cure for the “sickness
unto death,” Raskolnikov must return to the theological in order for redemption to at last be
realized. His symbolic burial takes place when he is sentenced to work hard labor in Siberia.
Like Jesus’s burial in the tomb, Raskolnikov is separated from the rest of the world. The way he
returns to the theological is through the power of love, the greatest of all the Christian values.
The Bible says, “Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has
been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God
is love” (1 John 4:7-8). Raskolnikov is not able to achieve his redemption until he allows
himself to be filled with the power of love. Although he reached this point by means of the
secular, it is the theological that finally redeems him and allows him to overcome his despair.
He throws himself at Sonya’s feet and she finally realizes that he loves her. His quest to attribute
meaning to suffering and find happiness in life culminate in love. It does not matter that he has a
long road ahead of him in Siberia. “They still had seven years more, and until then so much
unbearable suffering and so much infinite happiness But he was risen and he knew it, he felt if
fully with the whole of his renewed being” (Dost. 550). He is resurrected through the power of
love. His relationship with Sonya, however, offers the hope of happiness in this life, not in a life
to come. The theological is always forced to come back to the secular by means of earthly
application.
In The Sickness Unto Death, Soren Kierkegaard lays the groundwork for human despair.
Although he explores its causes and variations, he does not offer up a cure. My reading of Crime
and Punishment shows that a solution to the “sickness unto death” can be found through the act
of emulating Christ. It is evident from the course of the novel that both theological and secular
routes can be taken to realize redemption. Religion provides an easier path because it gives
prescribed reasons for human suffering and promises a reward in heaven for doing good deeds.
Marmeladov, Dunya, and Sonya all emulate Christ for religious reasons and are able to cure their
despair through accepting suffering and believing in the hope The Bible offers. Even though
they believe in heaven, they still find redemption in this life and are able to achieve happiness
and contentment despite their situations. The path to a secular redemption is much more
difficult. It implies the individual creation of reasons for human suffering and the attribution of
value to good deeds outside of transcendental rewards. After a long and difficult “sickness,”
Raskolnikov is able to accomplish these goals by emulating Christ for his own secular reasons
and avoids falling into the trap of embracing a pagan belief in power as Svidrigailov does.
According to my reading of the novel, however, he has to make a return to the Christian ideal of
love before achieving his final redemption. The secular route had to make a return to the
theological in order to be complete. Crime and Punishment shows, however, that the theological
is always in a perpetual state of secularization. Whether they found redemption through religion
or not, all the characters’ feelings of happiness and fulfillment manifest themself in their current
life on earth and serve as personal cures to Kierkegaard’s “sickness unto death.”