Crime and Punishment
- Downloads：2295
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-05-23 10:56:28
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Fyodor Dostoyevsky
- ISBN：0241347688
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
Part of Penguin's beautiful hardback Clothbound Classics series， designed by the award-winning Coralie Bickford-Smith， these delectable and collectible editions are bound in high-quality colourful， tactile cloth with foil stamped into the design。
Raskolnikov， a destitute and desperate former student， wanders through the slums of St Petersburg and commits a random murder without remorse or regret。 He imagines himself to be a great man， a Napoleon: acting for a higher purpose beyond conventional moral law。 But as he embarks on a dangerous game of cat and mouse with Porfiry， a suspicious detective， Raskolnikov is pursued by the growing voice of his conscience and finds the noose of his own guilt tightening around his neck。 Only Sonya， a downtrodden prostitute， can offer the chance of redemption。 As the ensuing investigation and trial reveal the true identity of the murderer， Dostoyevsky's dark masterpiece evokes a world where the lines between innocence and corruption， good and evil， blur and everyone's faith in humanity is tested。
Raskolnikov， a destitute and desperate former student， wanders through the slums of St Petersburg and commits a random murder without remorse or regret。 He imagines himself to be a great man， a Napoleon: acting for a higher purpose beyond conventional moral law。 But as he embarks on a dangerous game of cat and mouse with Porfiry， a suspicious detective， Raskolnikov is pursued by the growing voice of his conscience and finds the noose of his own guilt tightening around his neck。 Only Sonya， a downtrodden prostitute， can offer the chance of redemption。 As the ensuing investigation and trial reveal the true identity of the murderer， Dostoyevsky's dark masterpiece evokes a world where the lines between innocence and corruption， good and evil， blur and everyone's faith in humanity is tested。
Reviews
Maria
，
En la lectura de clásicos uno se encuentra de todo。 Esta vez， una historia con la que es muy difícil conectar。 Sin bien， se ponen en duda los principios morales， la justificación no es suficiente para hacer un análisis interesante。 Probablemente el contexto es muy ajeno y esto limita la comprensión y el valor de la historia。
Marina
，
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 This book was really interesting and went from a dispairing note to the epilogue which gave the reader immense hope for Rodion。 The only HUH moments were how each character had nicknames that you had to just figure out on your own！ But besides that little confusion it was an excellent read。
Érika
，
Fue imposible conectar con la historia， se me hizo pesado y eterno。
Gregory
，
Stare， ale jare。 To by się mogło obronić nawet napisane w tym roku。 Podobało mi się， choć nie na 5 gwiazdek。 Warto przeczytać tego klasyka， bo nie męczy i pozwala docenić kunszt autora nawet po tylu latach od napisania。
Alyssa
，
I enjoyed this book a lot more than I thought I would。 The psychology was fascinating。 It was an ongoing process to figure out when characters were being honest vs lying vs lying to themselves。 No character was all good or all bad， which also made it interesting。 My only reason for four stars is that I didn't feel that pull to keep reading after I out the book down。 I enjoyed this book a lot more than I thought I would。 The psychology was fascinating。 It was an ongoing process to figure out when characters were being honest vs lying vs lying to themselves。 No character was all good or all bad， which also made it interesting。 My only reason for four stars is that I didn't feel that pull to keep reading after I out the book down。 。。。more
Nurhanisah
，
'While committing his crime， almost every criminal seemed subject to a failure of judgement and of the will， which gave way to a phenomenal， childish recklessness at the very moment when he needed caution and judgement the most。 He became convinced that this failure of judgement and collapse of will take hold of a man like a disease， develope gradually， and mount in the intensity of their possession until just before the crime is committed。'It took me months to finish this book。 It is indeed one 'While committing his crime， almost every criminal seemed subject to a failure of judgement and of the will， which gave way to a phenomenal， childish recklessness at the very moment when he needed caution and judgement the most。 He became convinced that this failure of judgement and collapse of will take hold of a man like a disease， develope gradually， and mount in the intensity of their possession until just before the crime is committed。'It took me months to finish this book。 It is indeed one of the most intellectually challenging classics plus the reading slump I was in further delayed my reading progress。 Which reminds me to choose a lighter and more casual read next， just so that my mind can rest for a wee bit。Crime & Punishment is a story of murder， by a decent young man named Rodion Romanych or Raskolnikov， who killed a pawnbroker woman and her daughter with an ax。 What follows was an account of how Raskolnikov fell into some sort of a delirium and manic episodes whereby he:。1。 worries about the accusation that the people around him seemed to hold on him，2。 tried to conceal his identity as the murderer，3。 intellectually and emotionally battling with his own conscience。One might questions his motives of murder， which was not primarily focused on in this story。 There are many motivations to the murder; poverty， family issues， for future good， his mental & emotional state， temptation of the devil。 In my opinion， the motive cannot be pinpointed to one， but all at once。Each crime should be accompanied by its own punishment - at least that is what I've always believed in。 And ideally， with punishment， comes guilt and repentance。 Criminals are not born to be criminals。 More often than not， it is the contributing factor - whether internally or externally - of our surrounding environment that molds and pushes one into crime。🌟 4。5/5。0。 A challenging read， not exactly a page-turner for me。 It is a good read that delves on moral， empathy and conscience。 。。。more
Serkan Olgun
，
Completed in 1866， Crime and Punishment is a classic and a masterpiece from Fyodor Dostoyevsky。 It is the story of Raskolnikov， an impoverished university dropout who commits a crime， and the story of how this crime affects him and the lives of the people around him。 A simple and neat premise but executed so brilliantly that makes this book one of the wonders of Russian literature。What makes this book so unique is not the story line or any plot twists。 If someone asks you “what happens in the bo Completed in 1866， Crime and Punishment is a classic and a masterpiece from Fyodor Dostoyevsky。 It is the story of Raskolnikov， an impoverished university dropout who commits a crime， and the story of how this crime affects him and the lives of the people around him。 A simple and neat premise but executed so brilliantly that makes this book one of the wonders of Russian literature。What makes this book so unique is not the story line or any plot twists。 If someone asks you “what happens in the book？”， you can give the whole plot in a matter of a few minutes despite how “thick” the book is。 Not much actually “happens” in the story and there is only a handful of main characters。 What is special about Crime and Punishment is that through the eyes of Raskolnikov —and people around him—， you get to see what humans are made of —figuratively—。 You get to know everything about them: how they think， what drives them， what horrifies them， how they deceive themselves etc。 Many times you may feel like you are looking into a mirror。 Dostoyevsky is a master of human psychology。 Nietzsche famously said “Dostoyevsky， the only psychologist from whom I had something to learn”。There are numerous translations of Crime and Punishment and I had to do some research beforehand as I was concerned to come across a translation with many “old” words and phrases which may be a challenge for someone English is not the first language。 After some research， I landed on the Oxford World’s Classics version of it with the translation from Nicolas Pasternak Slater —who happens to be the nephew of the renowned Russian poet Boris Pasternak。 In the end I was relieved to had made a good decision for the used language is “modern”。 Though I am not surprised to see that “learning Russian enough to read Dostoyevsky” is a popular thing according to the internet。https://serkanolgun。me/2021/05/22/review-book-crime-and-punishment。html 。。。more
Hafsa
，
رائع كعادة مؤلفات دويستوفسكي الرواية فلسفية ونفسية عميقة تتكلم عن الصراع النفسي مع الضمير وكيف ان العقاب النفسي اشد من العقاب الجسدي
Kota
，
Una novela que recorre los pensamientos oscuros de Raskolnikof， el protagonista。 Se mete en su cabeza y comparte la psicosis que este vive， costando diferir entre la realidad y sus sueños。Sin dudas es mi novela favorita y la re recomiendo。
Diana
，
Bit of a slog to get through at first， tbh！ It's very descriptive heavy for the first ~150 pages， but it really does pick up once the murder happens。 The psychological thriller aspect does kick in and becomes pretty fascinating to read。Also， I know it's a stretch， but lowkey this fits into Dark Academia？ Sure， Raskolnikov dropped out but he's still a law student whose personal theories lead him to commit murder and he published his thoughts in a literary journal。 Not an exact match， but it did r Bit of a slog to get through at first， tbh！ It's very descriptive heavy for the first ~150 pages， but it really does pick up once the murder happens。 The psychological thriller aspect does kick in and becomes pretty fascinating to read。Also， I know it's a stretch， but lowkey this fits into Dark Academia？ Sure， Raskolnikov dropped out but he's still a law student whose personal theories lead him to commit murder and he published his thoughts in a literary journal。 Not an exact match， but it did remind me a lot of Alfred Hitchcock's film Rope （1948）。 。。。more
Prateek Kansal
，
As I write this on a Friday night carefully choosing the words to appropriately articulate my thoughts about this work of genius， my friend is sitting in the adjacent room playing Pubg。 Completely unaware and indifferent to the existence of this novel and more generally of Dostoyevsky。 I wonder if he is missing out on arguably one of the best psychological crime thrillers ever written。 What if he goes all his life without ever knowing about the genius of Dostoyevsky。But soon enough， I am reminde As I write this on a Friday night carefully choosing the words to appropriately articulate my thoughts about this work of genius， my friend is sitting in the adjacent room playing Pubg。 Completely unaware and indifferent to the existence of this novel and more generally of Dostoyevsky。 I wonder if he is missing out on arguably one of the best psychological crime thrillers ever written。 What if he goes all his life without ever knowing about the genius of Dostoyevsky。But soon enough， I am reminded of my pretentiousness， thanks to Nassim Nicholas Taleb。He coined the heuristic Wittgenstein's ruler， which suggests - " if you use a ruler to measure a table you should also be able to use the table to measure the ruler"， i。e the nobel prize for economics awarded to someone could mean two things， either the receiver knows a lot about economics or the judges know very little。I am acutely aware of how little insights I have about human psychology， but reading crime and punishment over the last two months， has given me a lot to mull over。What follows is not a critical review but a document of a deeply personal experience。So， what is the book all about？……The protagonist of the novel is a former student named Rodion Raskolnikov， who is quite miserable because of his poverty stricken life。 He relies on his mother and sister sending him money for his everyday survival but they are in a pretty dire situation themselves。He barely has anything to eat and goes on pawning his last belongings to a wretched old woman who exploits people through her crooked pawn schemes。 She hoards all this money she earns from these schemes and still goes on to live a poor life。 On top of that she also treats her mentally feeble niece like a slave。 She is a horrible woman， hated by everyone。Soon enough Raskolnikov receives a letter from her mother where she positively affirms that all their misery are coming to an end as her sister has found a man she loves， who has also agreed to help them financially。 But Raskolnikov reads between the lines and realises that the guy she is about to marry is probably a leech and her sister is essentially prostituting herself in an altruistic manner to save the family。Driven from all of this， Raskolnikov starts to breed a malevolent thought。 He contemplates "What if I murder this old good-for-nothing wastrel women？， this solves all of my money problems and then perhaps I can continue my Law education and go on to do something good for humanity"He gestates this thought and concludes that he would be doing a net positive to the society by killing the unscrupulous old woman。Despite all his misery he comes out as a pompous man with an exaggerated sense of self。His moral rationalisations are markedly elaborated in one of the articles he writes for a literary magazine。He writes……"There are two categories of people。 The first category， generally speaking， are men conservative in temperament and law-abiding; they live under control and love to be controlled。 To my thinking it is their duty to be controlled， because that's their vocation， and there is nothing humiliating in it for them。 The second category all transgress the law， they are destroyers or disposed to destruction according to their capabilities。 The crimes of these 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 the blood"The question Dostoyevsky poses through the initial thoughts of Raskolnikov is an important one。"Is it always unjustified to kill someone？， even when the act of killing has a net positive effect overall？This is the idea of utilitarianism philosophy。This is the exact philosophy used by the likes of Hitler to commit the mass murders and genocides with a perfectly intact conscience。Well， what happens next is after many internal dialogues and heavy moral rationalisations， Raskolnikov goes on to act out his thoughts and actually kills the old women in cold blood。 He hammers her skull with an axe， killing her instantaneously。At this point in the book， I presumed the rest of the book would be the exploration of the moral dilemma - "if killing is justified under any circumstance？" or "are some people more justified to kill others？"But to my surprise， it was much more than simple moralisation， it was the unravelling of the psychological turmoil Raskolnikov goes through because of the crime he commits。Even though he get's away with the murder， he starts to loose his mind。 Quite literally。"What happens when you violate an inviolable moral code？""For most people， is their internal conscience strong enough to cause extreme psychological turmoil even when they have all the necessary intellectual faculties to rationalise an act of crime？"This is the major theme Dostoyevsky explores in this 19th century Russian classic。Raskolnikov had all the rational reasons to commit that crime， his unfortunate personal situation， the cruelness and evil of the old women and the intention to do something valuable for the society。But with all the rational reasons， he couldn't withstand the effect of violating an inviolable moral code。It is truly fascinating to see the ensuing psychological struggle that Raskolnikov goes through。But it's not just this exploration that keeps you hooked though， there's much more to this masterpiece。One of the great things about Dostoyevsky is that he never creates straw-man out of his characters。You see that happening a lot in movies， there will be a clear distinction between the archetypal Hero and the villain。 Hero would be this charming， altruistic person whereas the villain or the antagonist is this excessively stupid or extremely malevolent character。Most popular cinema thrives on cheap emotions by creating a caricature out of the characters。But with Crime and punishment， you cannot get too comfortable with characterising it's characters as good or evil， you will be surprised to see acts of benevolence even by the seemingly evil characters。That's the superpower of Dostoyevsky。 He creates these complex and original characters because he doesn't need caricatures and exaggerated figures to put across his points。Or maybe he doesn't have any agenda or a point to make。 Maybe all his characters are the manifestation of his own contradictory ideas。 Maybe all of his literary work is nothing more than his own personal exploration of complex ideas he is striving to understand himself。But can we be thankful enough that we get a peek in his mind through this most amazing novel and all of his other literary work？！Crime and punishment is often cited as one of the supreme achievements of literature。 I have not read enough in my life to asses that， but it most certainly is one of the best work of fiction I have ever read。 。。。more
Mojgan Azar
，
This book is fascinating。 I want to read it again and again。 It makes you think about our lives deeply。
Marietta
，
mandatory reading
Mahmoud Eskandari
，
It is one of those books that should be read dozens of times。
Luana Milella
，
Geniale。 Un’opera attualissima， così vera da far paura se pensiamo ai recenti e raccapriccianti episodi di cronaca nera。 Uno studio psicologico dei personaggi così profondo e pazzesco degno di un criminologo。Tantissime le tematiche presenti in questo straordinario romanzo: la povertà， il problema della prostituzione， dell’istruzione femminile， la religione。 Il protagonista， un giovane studente espulso dall’Università che vive in condizioni di estrema povertà， è un figlio di quei tempi， di crisi Geniale。 Un’opera attualissima， così vera da far paura se pensiamo ai recenti e raccapriccianti episodi di cronaca nera。 Uno studio psicologico dei personaggi così profondo e pazzesco degno di un criminologo。Tantissime le tematiche presenti in questo straordinario romanzo: la povertà， il problema della prostituzione， dell’istruzione femminile， la religione。 Il protagonista， un giovane studente espulso dall’Università che vive in condizioni di estrema povertà， è un figlio di quei tempi， di crisi economica， instabilità sociale e fragilità morale。 Completamente fuori di se pianifica un efferato delitto， ma non tutto va secondo i piani。 Da quel momento la sua vita cambia e il suo stato mentale vacilla。 Il suo animo è in continua lotta la tra vita e le assurde teorie sugli uomini e sul diritto di uccidere， fino a quando è la vita a riportare la vittoria finale。 Tematica di rinascita molto cara allo stesso Dostoevsky che in una lettera al fratello scriveva: “Adesso cambiando vita， rinasco in una nuova forma， conservo il mio spirito e il mio cuore puri。 Rinascerò migliore”。 。。。more
Vincent Arias
，
Crime And Punishment is often referred to as one of the greatest works of fiction to ever be written。 Upon reading I can understand why it is met with such hugh appraisal。 One of the earliest "Psychological Thrillers"， this book is just that。 It is so well established and realistic。 It allows for the reader to understand and sometimes even sympathize with Raskolnikov so well that it is scary。 While I must admit， it wasn't as life changing to me as I've heard it described， I still feel it was an Crime And Punishment is often referred to as one of the greatest works of fiction to ever be written。 Upon reading I can understand why it is met with such hugh appraisal。 One of the earliest "Psychological Thrillers"， this book is just that。 It is so well established and realistic。 It allows for the reader to understand and sometimes even sympathize with Raskolnikov so well that it is scary。 While I must admit， it wasn't as life changing to me as I've heard it described， I still feel it was an important read。 Its certainly true that it is a difficult one， and this story gets very slow at times。 It took quiet a while to hook me， but ultimately I feel that even those slow moments are important as they ground this story in reality and help you to understand the characters as humans。 I love the points this story makes about moral relativism and feel like the themes from this story lend themselves to interesting contemporary discussions on morals。 Overall a great read！ A little exhausting but important。 。。。more
Aaron
，
This may have just shot up the charts to become one of the best books I've ever read。 At first glance， not much happens in this book: a young man plots a murder， commits a murder， and is then consumed by guilt for the rest of the runtime。 Everything else is ancillary: his greatest ally， a fellow student whom Raskolnikov hardly notices; his mother and sister's entrapment and suffering; the desperate， insane poverty and vice into which so many characters sink。 I felt the simple horror of their dai This may have just shot up the charts to become one of the best books I've ever read。 At first glance， not much happens in this book: a young man plots a murder， commits a murder， and is then consumed by guilt for the rest of the runtime。 Everything else is ancillary: his greatest ally， a fellow student whom Raskolnikov hardly notices; his mother and sister's entrapment and suffering; the desperate， insane poverty and vice into which so many characters sink。 I felt the simple horror of their daily lives pressing down on me。 I saw the miserable， cramped quarters in which they lived。 I endured the disgust of their single outfit， more rags than garment， and their all-too-tenuous grip on their own sanity。Dostoyevsky stares straight at the most wretched parts of the human condition and refuses to look away。 The realism is relentless。 The dirt， the filth， the cracked and worn furniture， the meager meals， all jumped out at me far more vividly than any other book has managed in quite some time。 So many other books committed to worldbuilding and realism do it by exhaustively explaining the colour and shape of every single item in every single room。 Here， it is done in broad strokes， and is all the more impactful for it。And the dialogue！ Quite often I fret that my 'inner reader'， the voice in my head actually reciting the words I read， is quite flat and does not convey tone。 It was impossible not to convey the madness， the despair， the grief and the guilt all these characters felt。 I heard their horrible shrieks， the quaver in Raksolnikov's voice， the weakness as they can hardly keep on their feet from the weight of their situation。I approached this book with a little bit of wariness。 It was very long， and my last Dosty-outing - Notes From The Underground - was incredibly hard going in the first half （though it rose to excellence in the second）。 I needn't have worried。 650 pages flowed by like water。 I'm already certain， at some point in my life， that I'll read this again。 I know I'll be talking about it plenty， too。 。。。more
Heather
，
A far better book than expected。 The author did an admirable job discussing various philosophical issues and other topics without it coming off as boring exposition。 There is plenty of suspense even though we know "who dunnit。" A bit confusing with the names but I generally was able to follow who was who。 Only complaint is that， as the translator noted in the forward， the author is rumored to not edit down his books and I feel it should have been tightened up a bit。 A far better book than expected。 The author did an admirable job discussing various philosophical issues and other topics without it coming off as boring exposition。 There is plenty of suspense even though we know "who dunnit。" A bit confusing with the names but I generally was able to follow who was who。 Only complaint is that， as the translator noted in the forward， the author is rumored to not edit down his books and I feel it should have been tightened up a bit。 。。。more
Steve Scordino
，
Another classic， another dud。 I continue to not understand why some books are called classics。 The characters in the book are unsympathetic and boring。 The only character I found interesting was the Smirnikiof （I listened to the book， so just spelling phonetically and with bad memory）。 His evilness was at least done out of sense of fun。 The action was also senseless。 I can understand the sister falling in love （or at least in marriage） with the guy who helped the student while he was sick。 Howev Another classic， another dud。 I continue to not understand why some books are called classics。 The characters in the book are unsympathetic and boring。 The only character I found interesting was the Smirnikiof （I listened to the book， so just spelling phonetically and with bad memory）。 His evilness was at least done out of sense of fun。 The action was also senseless。 I can understand the sister falling in love （or at least in marriage） with the guy who helped the student while he was sick。 However， the guy helping the student made no sense。 The student was such a jerk， I couldn't see him ever making a friend good enough to invest such time especially immediately after acting strangely to him and turning down an opportunity to make money that the friend had offered。Sonia is even stranger。 The student gave his last dollar to her mother for a funeral， but otherwise again acted like a jerk to her。 Why would she love him？ I understand the prospects of a 16-year old prostitute are not good， but she still seemed to have better options。Considering the stupidity of the plot and the irrational actions of the characters， I would have assumed that the book just had beautiful prose or made you think deeply。 I sure didn't find either to be the case。Oh well， I read this book as a recommendation of the best Russian classic。 I will avoid that person's recommendations in the future as we appear to have very different tastes in books。 。。。more
Lidia
，
Easily my all time favorite work of Dostoyevsky！
Jeanne Modisett
，
I read it because it was a classic。 I will never get those hours back。
Fethi。Belhadji
，
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 Book review ✨✨أهلاً سأتحدث إليكم اليوم عن الجريمة والعقاب。اعتقد انني لا اخاطر كثيرا بقول إن فيودور دوستويفسكي هو احد اهم المؤلفي القرن التاسع عشر وانه سيبقى في ذاكرتنا لفترة طويلة جدا لأنه تطرق إلى موضوعات عالمية خالدة وأنه كان مراقبًا شديدًا لوقته و عصره وكان دقيقا جدا في وصف جوانب معينة من النفس البشرية。دوستويفسكي يخبرنا عن راسكولينكوف بطل القصة والرواية هو طالب جامعي سابق محطم تماما ينتمي إلى عائلة فقيرة ليس لديها ما يكفي من المال لإعانته هو شخص ذكي كان يعمل سابقا في المجلات عندما كان طالبًا Book review ✨✨أهلاً سأتحدث إليكم اليوم عن الجريمة والعقاب。اعتقد انني لا اخاطر كثيرا بقول إن فيودور دوستويفسكي هو احد اهم المؤلفي القرن التاسع عشر وانه سيبقى في ذاكرتنا لفترة طويلة جدا لأنه تطرق إلى موضوعات عالمية خالدة وأنه كان مراقبًا شديدًا لوقته و عصره وكان دقيقا جدا في وصف جوانب معينة من النفس البشرية。دوستويفسكي يخبرنا عن راسكولينكوف بطل القصة والرواية هو طالب جامعي سابق محطم تماما ينتمي إلى عائلة فقيرة ليس لديها ما يكفي من المال لإعانته هو شخص ذكي كان يعمل سابقا في المجلات عندما كان طالبًا كان يسأل نفسه كثيرا من الأسئلة حول أخلاقيات المجتمع الذي يعيش فيه لكنه يجد صعوبة كبيرة في ايجاد مكان لنفسه في العالم لسببين:أولا لأنه كانت لديه كراهية عميقة للمجتمع الذي يعيش فيه يثير اشمئزازه ولأنه شخص لديه الأنا كما انه شغوف بشخصية نابليون وتثير اعجابه كثيرا。راسكولينكوف همه الوحيد كان إيجاد ما يأكل وأن يعطي المال للعجوز الذي كان يسكن عندها ولكن راسكولينكوف اصبح يرى مدخراته تتضاءل شيئا فشيئا واصبح لا يمتلك المال وعلى ذلك الحال وفي لحظة جنون العظمة الذي يعاني منه فإذا بفكرة تخطروا على باله الا وهي قتل العجوز وسرقة ممتلكاتها。 دوستويفسكي يوضح لنا الظروف التي دفعت راسكولينكوف للقتل:العزلة،البطالة،الفقر رواية كهذه لا يمكن تلخيصها في بضعة أسطر كثير من الامور حدثت وكثير من المواضيع تتطرق اليها فيودور انتم من تكتشفونها حينما تقراون هذه الرواية 。。。more
Matilda
，
The book description is so wrong on like all levels？？？ It’s not completely random and he does feel regret？？ The regret on his conscience is the punishment the book explores for over 400 pages so I don’t get why they wrote that he doesn’t feel regret。。 Anyway there’s a lot of interesting philosophies and thoughts about humanity， crime， psychology and punishment that are still debated today， I would definitely read it again sometime
Yadhu Nandhan
，
I decided to read this book after hearing about the overwhelming reviews but at last I'm left disappointed。The psychological analysis of Raskolnikov was good but it was done only in parts byt those parts were written very well all the meetings with Porfiry were great。 Raskolnikov's perception of crime was enlighting to know， but to convey that I don't know why should one write this much。 I'm not aware of Russia's situation at that time writing in thia style may be loved there or necessary at tha I decided to read this book after hearing about the overwhelming reviews but at last I'm left disappointed。The psychological analysis of Raskolnikov was good but it was done only in parts byt those parts were written very well all the meetings with Porfiry were great。 Raskolnikov's perception of crime was enlighting to know， but to convey that I don't know why should one write this much。 I'm not aware of Russia's situation at that time writing in thia style may be loved there or necessary at that time but I'm just sharing my views which were attained at this 21st century。 Yes， I understand that establishing Raskolnikov's family situation， his situation and that of those around is important for the psychological analysis but what's written in this book is much more than what's necessary and it makes it quite unreadable at many places。 。。。more
Emma
，
I'm not sure about this rating， but I can say Crime and Punishment was pretty great。Except for when I had to take breaks and remind myself that relating with an axe murderer is not healthy， and when I got so involved in the book I started feeling all the extreme emotions of every character - actually， no， those parts were great too。 And whenever I stopped to get a break and regain my own ability to think， I did really think - about all the millions of events and topics covered in the book， of my I'm not sure about this rating， but I can say Crime and Punishment was pretty great。Except for when I had to take breaks and remind myself that relating with an axe murderer is not healthy， and when I got so involved in the book I started feeling all the extreme emotions of every character - actually， no， those parts were great too。 And whenever I stopped to get a break and regain my own ability to think， I did really think - about all the millions of events and topics covered in the book， of my overall opinion of it， of what the book meant and what morals meant and what crime meant and what punishment meant。Honestly， it was pretty exhausting， and it was probably not a good choice to read it in only three days because I now feel somewhat more insane than I did before starting。 And I need sleep。I still might bump my review down to a 4。 Doesn't mean it's not a good book， though。 。。。more
Bacon Sandwich
，
（Pevear and Volokhonsky Translation）Raskolnikov kills an old woman and her sister with an axe。 He had justified the crime by saying she was a louse， a pawnbroker that everyone hated， even her own sister， and that humanity was better off without her。 Later in the book we learn of an article he wrote when he was enrolled as a student， about great men like Napoleon， who were allowed to break the rules of society， while the normal folks had to follow the rules; “all of them to a man were criminals， （Pevear and Volokhonsky Translation）Raskolnikov kills an old woman and her sister with an axe。 He had justified the crime by saying she was a louse， a pawnbroker that everyone hated， even her own sister， and that humanity was better off without her。 Later in the book we learn of an article he wrote when he was enrolled as a student， about great men like Napoleon， who were allowed to break the rules of society， while the normal folks had to follow the rules; “all of them to a man were criminals， from the fact alone that in giving a new law they thereby violated the old one， held sacred by society and passed down from their fathers， and they certainly did not stop at shedding blood either， if it happened that blood。。。 could help them。” “People are divided， a lower。。。 serving solely for the reproduction of their own kind; and。。。 those who have the gift or talent of speaking a new word in their environment。。。 people of the first。。。 are by nature conservative。。。 and like being obedient。。。 they even must be obedient， because that is their purpose， and for them there is decidedly nothing humiliating in it。 Those of the second category all transgress the law。。。 he can， in my opinion， allow himself to step over blood—depending， however， on the idea and its scale—make note of that。” This passage begs the question， who gets to be “chosen”， and what are they trying to accomplish。 Furthermore， it points out the cruelty in belittling those things that “normal” people value。 And， later， the author points out that maybe people should do more living and less proselytizing， more “air”。 “The first category is always master of the present; the second—master of the future。 The first preserves the world and increases it numerically; the second moves the world and leads it towards a goal。 Both the one and the other have a perfectly equal right to exist。” And there is even a law that keeps the potential destroyers at bay， “In spite of their innate tendency to obedience， by some playfulness of nature that is not denied even to cows， quite a few of them like to imagine themselves progressive people。。。 they quite often fail to notice the really new ones， and even despise them as backward。。。 there isn’t even any need for someone to whip them; they’ll whip themselves， because they’re so well behaved。。。” Thus， the “radicals” are not really so radical， even though they like to think they buck obedience in their zeal for progress， and most people will not go around killing other people because they envision themselves the anointed （Raskolnikov reassures Porfiry）。 “Generally， there are remarkably few people born who have a new thought， who are capable， if only slightly， of saying anything new—strangely few， in fact。。。 Men of genius—one in millions”， people with “broader independence。” Until the end， Raskolnikov maintains that he committed no “crime，” and that his weakness was that he allowed it to get to him; thus， the author suggests that perhaps some actions are inherently criminal， against humanity， and cannot be justified for the greater good; our nature does not allow it。 “I decidedly do not understand why hurling bombs at people， according to all the rules of siege warfare， is a more respectable form。 Fear of aesthetics is the first sign of powerlessness！ Never， never have I been more clearly aware of it than now， and now more than ever I fail to understand my crime！” he says in the final chapter。 “。。。should Luzhin live and commit abominations， or should Katerina Ivanova die？” poses Raskolnikov， to which responds Sonya， “Why do you ask about what cannot be？” These are not hypothetical questions which we should even entertain。 “Why do you ask what cannot be asked？ Why such empty questions？。。。 who put me here to judge who is to live and who is not to live？” She said it is providence to decide this。 Thus， this is one of Dostoevsky’s main points。 Raskolnikov could not rest until he had confessed。 He later says， “Then I learned， Sonya， that if one waits for everyone to become smarter， it will take too long。。。 and then I also learned that it will never happen， that people will never change， and no one can remake them， and it’s not worth the effort！。。。 it’s their law。。。 a law。。。 he who dares much will be right in their eyes he who can spit on what is greatest will be their lawgiver。。。 thus it has been until now， and thus it will always be。” Then Raskolnikov reveals， “power is given only to the one who dares to reach down and take it。。。 one only has to dare！。。。 how is it that no man before now has dared or dares yet， while passing by all this absurdity， quite simply to take the whole thing by the tail and whisk it off to the devil。 I。。。 I wanted to dare， and I killed。。。 I just wanted to dare， Sonya， that’s the whole reason！” This reveals Raskolnikov’s nihilism， at least on the surface， calling it all “absurdity” and he just wanted to grab power。 Raskolnikov drove him to the crime after learning that his sister had committed to marry Lezhin， a rich man， to the end of supporting Raskolnikov; indeed， she and his mother seemed to put all their hopes for life in Raskolnikov himself， greatly angering to him; “。。。 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！。。。 So long as these beloved beings of ours are happy。。。 convince ourselves that it's necessary， truly necessary， for a good purpose。” Of others， “Oh， yes， of course， his happiness can be arranged。。。” speaks to the human desire to make others happy， to run other people’s lives for them， instead of their own。 They also see what they want to see， and dismiss his rudeness as attributable to “his great illness” and not his actual disdain （at the time） for the two of them。 Raskolnikov’s mom is someone who does not want to live her own life， tiptoeing about， regarding Razumikhin as “our Providence” and asking， “How should I be with him？” of her own son。 In her motherly denial she says to her son， “if you wanted， you could get everything for yourself at once， with your mind and talent。 It means that for the time being you don’t want to， and are occupied with far more important matters。” In the Epilogue， it says， “she would bring the conversation around to her son， his article， how he had helped the student。。。” her son was her whole life。 Later Raskolnikov says to Razumikihin， “can’t you see that I don’t want your good deeds？ And who wants to do good deeds for someone who。。。 spits on them？。。。 who only feels seriously burdened by them？” Previously， “He [Raskolnikov] had entirely given up attending to his daily affairs and did not want to attend to them。” He later thinks after determining he can try to overcome his life， “Strength， what’s needed in strength; without strength you get nowhere， and strength is acquired by strength—that's something they don’t know。。。 Pride and self-confidence were growing in him every moment。。。 what special thing was it， however， that had so turned him around？ He himself did not know。。。” but he had felt all of this after a scene where he was helping the orphaned girls and gave the family all of his money （20 roubles， later frivolously wasted on a funeral dinner）， which gave him the feeling of life， being needed。 The money he gave also points out that in “helping” someone， you cannot determine what they will do with the help – as with money and friends or family。 Different people attach different values to different things; some people are very bad at planning for the future。 “。。。many poor people turn themselves inside out and spend every last kopeck of their savings， only so as to be ‘no worse than others’ and ‘not to be condemned’ somehow by these others。 It is quite probable that Katerina Ivanova wished。。。 to show。。。 that she had even been brought up for an altogether different lot。。。 such paroxysms of pride and vanity sometimes visit the poorest and most downtrodden people， and at times turn into an irksome and irrepressible need in them。” Raskolnikov had met Melamadov in a bar， a drunk former official， who was unable to care for his family due to his drunkenness; “destitution is a vice。。。 in poverty you may still preserve the nobility of your inborn feelings。。。 in destitution I am the first to insult myself。 Hence the drinking！” He said， “Man gets accustomed to everything， the scoundrel！” He has completely lost all hope， watches his family suffer and his daughter forced to prostitution， yet， does nothing。 His daugher Sonya of teenage years supported his adopted children and wife via prostitution。 He was later killed in the street， inviting much fanfare for the funeral， and the interaction of Sonya， Raskolnikov， Luzhin （who was staying in the same house as the Melamadov family as he was in town to court Dunya）， and Semyonovich Semyonovich， a prototypical progressive friend of Luzhin。 Of understanding and helping other people， Razumikhin， Rakolnikov’s best friend， spoke of Zamyotov the police officer， “You won’t set a person right by pushing him away。。。 you progressive dimwits， you really don’t understand anything！ You disparage man and damage yourselves。。。” Razumikin says Zamyotov is a “good man， only in his own way” but the progressives are always there to accuse everyone of every last wrong thing in human nature， to the point where they are not even showing a love of humanity or a desire to help。 “will there be many good people left？” after the progressives are done。 Later Razumikhin states， “Practicality is acquired with effort， it doesn’t fall from the sky for free。 And we lost the habit of any activity about two hundred years ago。。。 There may be some ideas wandering around。。。 and there is a desire for the good， albeit a childish one。。。 but still there's no practicality。。。” This in an argument with Pyotr Petrovich， who argues， “passions testify to the enthusiasm for the cause。。。 useful new ideas have been spread。。。 many harmful prejudices have been eradicated and derided。。。” In a way， this argument is about the political process， the conflict of visions， conservative vs。 Liberal， evolution vs。 Revolution; both are needed in a society， as Peterson points out。 Later in an argument about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps vs。 Wanting to get rich quickly without effort， Raskolnikov interrupts and states that “。。。the consequences of what you’ve just been preaching， and it will turn out that one can go around putting a knife in people。” -- as he had done。 What is thus the right balance for a society， between infantilization， “having our food chewed for us”， and being able to accomplish without being driven to desperation。 Razumikhin later said of the progressives， “。。。with them one is always a ‘victim of the environment’--and nothing else！ Their favorite phrase！ Hence directly that if society itself is normally set up， all crimes will at once disappear， because there will be no reason for protesting and everyone will instantly become righteous。 Nature isn’t taken into account。。。 nature is not supposed to be！ With them it’s not mankind developing all along in a historical living way that will finally turn by itself into a normal society， but on the contrary， a social system， coming out of some mathematical head， will at once organize the whole of mankind and instantly make it righteous and sinless， sooner than any living process。。。 that’s why they have such an instinctive dislike of history: ‘there’s nothing in it but outrage and stupidity’--and everything is explained by stupidity alone！ That’s why they so dislike the living process of life; there’s no need for the living soul！ The living soul will demand life， the living soul won’t listen to mechanics， the living soul is suspicious， the living soul is retrograde！。。。 And it turns out in the end that they’ve reduced everything to mere brickwork and the layout of corridors and rooms in a phalanstery。。。 your nature isn’t ready for the phalanstery， it wants life， it hasn’t completed the life process yet。。。 you can’t overleap nature with logic alone！ Logic will presuppose three cases， when there are a million of them！ Cut away the whole million， and reduce everything to the one question of comfort！ The easiest solution to the problem！ Enticingly clear， and there’s no need to think！。。。 The whole of life’s mystery can fit on two printed pages！” Sonya stayed in a separate place due to being a prostitute， where she roomed next to Svidrigailov， a lecherous man who had lusted after Dunya， leading to his wife setting him up with Luzhin。 “Why should I give up women， if I’m so fond of them？ At least it’s an occupation。” In retort to Reskolnikov， “Well， call it depravity if you wish！ You and your depravity！。。。 there’s at least something permanent， even based on nature， and not subject to fantasy。。。 something that abides in the blood like a perpetually burning coal， eternally inflaming， which for a long time， even with age， one may not be able to extinguish so easily。” It is later learned his wife， Marfa Petrofka， died， and it was suspected it was her husband。 Regarding his wife， “I had enough swinishness in my soul， and honesty of a sort， to announce to her straight off that I could not be completely faithful to her。 This admission drove her into a frenzy。。。” He tried not to dote on Dunya， but Marfa herself loved her much， “And will you believe that Marfa Petrovna at first even went so far as to be angry with me for my constant silence about your sister， for being so indifferent to hear ceaseless and enamored reports。。。 I don’t understand what she wanted！” In the end， Svidrigailov wound up not being a terrible guy， helping Sonya and the orphaned children with money; he blew his brains out due to the meaninglessness of his life， having been a professional skirtchaser and marryer of money， needing no actual profession。 He said， “The healthy man， naturally， has no call to see [ghosts]， because the healthy man is the most earthly of men。。。 as soon as a man gets sick。。。 the possibility of another world at once begins to make itself known。。。” Svidrigailov said of Roskilnakov being surprised at their chance meeting， “Even if they secretly believe in miracles， they won’t admit it！ And now you say it ‘may’ only be chance。 They’re all such little cowards here when it comes to their own opinion， you can’t imagine， Rodion Romanych！” This passage reveals how little people trust themselves， and how much people who are not “believers” do not want to “believe” in anything remotely divine。 “And when a girl’s heart is moved to pity， that is， of course， most dangerous for her。 She’s sure to want to ‘save’ him then， to bring him to reason， to resurrect him， to call him to nobler aims， to regenerate him into a new life and new activity” Svidrigailov said of him and Dunya。 He later says to Dunya， “You’ve obviously forgotten how in the heat of propaganda you were already inclining and melting。。。” which she denies。 Had Dunya been born in an earlier time， “She would undoubtedly have been among those who suffered martyrdom， and would have smiled。。。 she would have chosen it on purpose。。。 demands to endure some torment for someone without delay， and if she doesn’t get this torment， she may perhaps jump out the window。” Thus， as with Porfiry and the painter and suffering， some people want to be martyrs。 Svidrigailov says the best way to win someone over is flattery， being much better than candor， “There’s nothing in the world more difficult than candor， and nothing easier than flattery。 If there is only the hundredth part of a false note in candor， there is immediately a dissonance， and then--scandal。 But with flattery， even if everything is false down to the last little note， it is still agreeable and is listened to not without pleasure。。。 and however crude the flattery may be， at least half of it is sure to seem true。。。” Roskolnikov boils the scoundrel down to the heart of the matter， saying， “In short， it’s this monstrous difference in age and development that arouses your sensuality！ Can you really get married like that？” to which comes an affirmative reply about hoodwinking oneself in life。 Even Svidrigailov can see of the progressives， “The people are drinking， the educated youth are burning themselves up in idleness， in unrealizable dreams and fancies， crippling themselves with theories。。。” This is not life， not air。 He also well explains the motivations of Roskilikov for killing， “A single evil and a hundred good deeds！ Of course， it’s also offensive for a young man of merit and measureless vanity to know that if he had， for example， a mere three thousand or so， his whole career， the whole future in terms of his life’s purpose， would shape itself differently—and yet the three thousand aren't there。 Add to that the vexations of hunger， cramped quarters， rag， and a lively sense of the beauty of his social position， as well as that of his sister and mother。 But above all vanity， pride and vanity。。。 he seems to have imagined that he， too， was a man of genius。。。 he suffered greatly， and suffers still， from the thought that though he knew how to devise the theory， he was unable to step over without hesitation and therefore is not a man of genius。 Now that， for a vain young man， is truly humiliating。” Dunya is mad that Svidrigailo denies him remorse of conscience， which he clearly has， if at least on a subconscious level， from the level to which he is perturbed。 This begs the question what excessive vanity could drive people to do， if their social position suffered greatly enough。 “It’s disastrous to be broad without special genius。。。 we have no especially sacred traditions， except for what someone somehow pieces together from old books。。。 But they are mostly scholars and， you know， they're all dunces in their way。。。 I myself am an idler and I keep to that。” Thus， for everyone in society to try and become a Renaissance man， so to speak， to try to look into the depths of existence， is perhaps a dangerous thing。。。？ Before he goes off to kill himself， he says to Sofya， “Why do you so rashly take such contracts and obligations upon yourself， Sofya Semyonovna？It was Katerina Ivanova who was left owing to the German woman， not you; so just spit on the German woman。 You can’t survive in the world that way。” “Dostoevsky’s uniqueness lay not in the exposure of social injustice， but in the exploration of the complex and contradictory impulses which made up human nature” -Preface。 Continued: https://underconsumed。substack。com/p/。。。 。。。more
Andy Gomez
，
Una lectura difícil y abrumadora， aún así me encantó
Mia
，
BOIII THIS TOOK ME SO LONG but the writing was good ig🙂🥀🖤⛓‼️
lili
，
About 3。5 starsFor a story with a pacing like this， I prefer it to be told in the first person。 I understand though with the subject matter and Dostoyevsky's own interests why it was told in third person。 Still I was a bit surprised when I reached the end and wanted more。。。because of the crafting of the characters and their psychologies About 3。5 starsFor a story with a pacing like this， I prefer it to be told in the first person。 I understand though with the subject matter and Dostoyevsky's own interests why it was told in third person。 Still I was a bit surprised when I reached the end and wanted more。。。because of the crafting of the characters and their psychologies 。。。more
Nat
，
Raskolnikov was gay。 End of discussion
Reference
google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Crime and Punishment
hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Crime and Punishment&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft
The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Crime and Punishment&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0