Fedor Dostoevsky, through his novel, uses realistic situations and dialogue to portray the raw emotion of man. By reading both the dialogue and the inner thoughts of the characters, we can understand how human emotion can completely take control over one's way of thinking. Many quotes throughout the story reveal cases where all logic is discarded and emotion is dominant--three of which I believe to be important will be further discussed.
Raskolnikov, the protagonist, has an acquaintance who was a former government official, but lost his position and fell into the depths of poverty. With no choices left, the daughter of this former official goes into prosititution, and the family despair. However, with time, the family stops looking for another solution to their poverty, and begin to rely on the income gained from this prostitution, which they so much loathed before. As Raskolnikov looks upon this situation, he frowns, commenting that "they wept at first, but now they are used to it. Men are scoundrels; they can get used to anything" (25). This statement is definitely relatable with everyday life, how, no matter how immoral something may be, mankind can somehow convince themselves that it's a natural thing to do and that it's "normal". The point that I believe Dostoevsky is trying to convey is that, in a situation where one is given a choice of committing an immoral act to survive, or to search for another solution, one would naturally commit the act. The reason is that one feels desperation, and the more one searches for another solution and fails, the more desperate one gets. After a period of time, this desperation grows to the point where it fosters delusions, and man will naturally believe that they had no choice but to commit the act, and that it was justified. When the harsh reality is introduced into this delusion however, one will only fall farther. This ties in nicely with the story, because in the novel, Raskolnikov has been pondering over a thought for months on end. This act was to murder a pawnbroker, and to steal her money. Because of the poverty that Raskolnikov faces, and the fact that he has found no other solution to this poverty, I think that the author is foreshadowing that he will eventually commit the act due to desperation and end the life of the pawnbroker.
Later on in the story, Raskolnikov receives a letter from his mother, basically saying that his sister would be marrying a rich man for the sole reason of securing his future and giving him business connections. However, found in the letter were many hints of the personality of this rich person, Luzhin. With a bit of interpretation, one can immediately see that Luzhin is an extremely materialistic man, and treats people like tools. Luzhin himself stated that he "ought not to be under any sort of obligation to his wife, and it was much better if she looked upon him as her benefactor" (33). This line definitely reveals his personality, and I think that the author is trying to relate Luzhin with the people of modern day; how people are beginning to only see the numbers and the benefits from things, and not the actual thing itself. We are becoming a race that relies heavily on math, computers, and other numerical things; as a result, we are beginning to treat others in the same fashion as we do with these things and our feelings, in contrast, are deteriorating. Dostoevsky seems to be hinting at the natural emotion of man, greed, and how it is constantly integrating itself more and more into our lives. He is somewhat saying that the evolution of our technology is the devolution of our humanity. Raskolnikov picks up on the personality of Luzhin, and I believe that, enraged at this, he will definitely try to do something to stop the marriage.
As stated before, a letter from Raskolnikov's mother was sent, and in the letter, the mother and sister insist that Luzhin was a good man inside; completely turning a blind eye to his speech and thought which largely hint at a sense of materialism. Raskolnikov then comments on his family's behaviour, that "up to the very last moment they see people through rose-coloured spectacles; up to the very last moment they hope for good and not evil; and even if they have some misgivings that there is a reverse side to the medal, they refuse to admit them even to themselves ... ; they wave the truth away with both hands until the very moment when the over-idealized person appears in his true colours and cocks a snook at them" (40). The meaning of the line is quite self-explanatory, and once again shows both the desperation and the greed of man. As stated before, when given a situation where there is one solution presented, and no other solutions are visible, one would naturally choose the presented solution, no matter how immoral or how fake it may seem. In this case, the mother and the sister act gullible and ignorant due to the desperation of their situation. Deep down inside, they know that Luzhin is in fact a terrible person, but they cling onto the faint hope, the delusion that he will save them from their troubles. Instead, their desperation will only lead them deeper into problems, and they will have no one to blame but themselves.
Dostoevsky, throughout the story, focuses less on its plot, and is more intent on showing the raw emotion of man and the harsh reality of life. Instead of providing the readers with a fairy-tale like story, he provides us with relatable characters and gives us a more general view on mankind. While the quotes discussed are related to the story itself, I feel that they are more intended to give the readers a better understanding on the reality of man and how he thinks.
Hi Francis,
ReplyDeleteYour novel definitely seems to be very compelling and I am amazed at how the author brilliantly portrays to his readers the innate characteristics of man. The author seems to highlight this through many examples, but the one that stood out me the most was the protagonist's sister marrying an unscrupulous man who does not care about her at all. He appears to be utterly avaricious – an innate trait in man – and married the protagonist’s sister to skyrocket his own fortunes while the sister appears to be inexperienced and way too simplistic in her view of human beings as she can not see that her fiancée is only marrying her for the sole reason of getting business connections. What I see coming on maybe later in the story is the sister's relationship with the materialistic man shattered as avarice can destroy relationships as well as cause a person's downfall. The author may show the materialistic man's downfall to exhibit to his readers how important it is to be selfless and kind instead of materialistic and avaricious. Can you see this happening? Another great point you stated was in your first paragraph where you said the protagonist's acquaintance was ashamed of sending her daughter to prostitution at first but is now accustomed to it. I think this ties in really nicely with our discussion last week about deindividuation. While at first they viewed prostitution as immoral and deviant, they soon became accustomed to this because of diffused responsibility as well as what you stated above about delusions. They are under the illusion that they are not responsible for their actions and there is nothing else they can resort to even though there may be many other solutions available.
Johnathan
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your interpretation that the novel focuses on the dilemma between logic and emotion. However, the novel seems to create a broader generalization regarding the concept of human behaviour and resistance against influences through its continued revolution around the recurring theme of choice and decision. The characters must decide over participation in prostitution, potentially harmful acts, and poor treatment of others. The reference to “a reverse side to the medal” emphasizes an already established contrast between decisions made in complete accordance to will through employment of careful thought structures and decisions made in accordance to external factors through catering to emotions, wishes or others. By pointing out the flaws to the latter class of motivation, Dostoevsky comments on the importance of comprehensive analysis prior to action in ambiguous areas. This may also reflect the attitude of Dostoevsky towards the ideals of communist Russia, where individuals irrationally act according to the opinions of others, without any sense of individualism. Even as such, Dostoevsky mocks the notion of morality by downplaying the existence of a certain emotion that prevents poor decisions, demonstrating that emotions often cause danger. Instead, Dostoevsky claims that thought is the pointer that leads to good choices.
ReplyDelete