Reviews with content warning for Rape - Crime e Castigo

This review includes spoilers, read at your own risk.

• • • •

In Depth Discussion/The Review

The book is hard to read sometimes and the translations have a huge variety. I read P&V translation and I think it was quite good.

Don't understand how Raskolnikov is so insane and no one seems to notice it. Also when Raskolnikov is right about to say something that makes him immediately be known as the killer they all seem to not hear it, or misinterpret it or anything, but suspect him

Zamyotov was so close to find out who the murderer was but decided otherwise only 'cause Raskolnikov seemed to be too mad? How can one be too mad to commit a crime? The reasoning is so absurd!

Razumihin was also odd sometimes. I get it that he is a nice person, but come on saying how a killer would act and not. How would he know? Is he a killer? No. So why does he act like he knows how one would behave?

Also can someone explain to me why Raskolnikov is so similar to the author who wrote him? Like both have anxiety and if I remember correctly Dostoevsky was in prison too, even though I can't recall for what. Reading this story makes me feel uncanny in so many ways. As if Dostoevsky's psyche is exactly this one character he wrote; Raskolnikov. Or I just imagining things, but it still feels so odd that they both are so alike.

Part 4, chapter 4 was the best. Why? Raskolnikov has his breaking point there and tries to reject any interacion, including family and friends so that he can be alone as he is at the verge of confessing his crime and I think doesn't want to see his families reaction in case they find out the truth. It's so emotional and does the book title all its honour.

Not only was Raskolnikov bad, but also good. That made him the perfect character for this book. As bad is capable of doing good. There are grey-areas that most people forget. Great character!

Character review

Raskolnikov tries to make himself confess but in a way of making others guess it and report him to the police. I think therefore he has some kind of mental fight between right and wrong, which is also what the book is about. I like the way how Raskolnikov tries to confess and that makes me take back the theory of him having a split personality disorder, as he seems to rather have a personal conflict than him possessing multiple personalities (especially as he CAN remember the things he did when he was acting differently).

I kinda get it that Raskolnikov doesn't want his sister to marry Luzhin, but in all seriousness, you can't say 'either him or me', as this is a narcissistic trait. He made the conflict only bigger instead of explaining his reasoning for all this fuss. No wonder everyone thinks he is raving. I would think the same!

Ok stop talking about the main character lets get over Dunya since we already talked about her. She's the sister of the protagonist and she is way more reasonable and polite. She has her weird manners too I must say and sometimes makes stupid decisions like wanting her brother still to attend the evening with Luzhin even though she knows it would end in a catastrophe. But she is way sweeter and softer and more empathic. Honestly, I could say this about any character as Rodion literally murdered two people and is mentally ill.
I also like the way how she respects herself and says she only marries Luzhin if he respects and values her. Rodion might think she lies, but I think that's not the case and her little speech about it was amazing.

I hated the fact that Sonya was a prostitute. I know she had no choice, but I still dislike such jobs and when Raskolnikov also saw a liking to her, I was kinda disappointed. Sorry but why does he need to like such a girl? It's such a shame.
Before someone hates me; She has a kind and innocent soul, I just dislike the job and would have wished it would have turned out differently.
Lastly, why is Sonya religious if she has such a profession? Like it makes no sense and no wonder Sonya once thought of ending it all.

Porfiry is literally the only smart character in this book. Suspecting Raskolnikov (the actual killer!) to have done it, based on some article perhaps, but he did his research. He isn't like the rest saying he is too mad or extraordinary. 'Cause that's exactly what a killer is and Porfiry noticed it too. A smart one indeed!
Some might say he is manipulative but I would rather call it a strategy to make someone confess. If you manipulate someone you would make one confess without them being guilty, but Porfiry rather uses strategy to get inside the mind and brain of the murderer and make him confess willingly by playing tricks. He is smart. I love that about him.
His apology speech about trying to make Raskolnikov admit his crime was quite professional and I liked it. (and I know it was just another trick, so brilliant)

Lebezyatnikov was the kind character. Pure soul. Protect him.

Near the end of the book Raskolnikov is thinking of killing Svidrigailov and even tells him. Like what?! Hold your horses!

Svidrigailov is the worst. How could Dostoevsky write such a cruel and evil character? What was he thinking? But his writing was good as I truly hate that character now. Also why the ... is he engaged to a 15 year old?!!

I like that Dunya and Razumihin married, seems better than the other man before.

• • • •

Rating

How it works: Only everything that is lower than 9 gets reduced from the final rating. Depending on how strong it inflicted the overall enjoyment of reading it effects differently.

[ Story 8 / 10 ]

[ Characters 10 / 10 ]

[ Triggering 2 / 10 ]

[ Topic/Genre 8 / 10 ]

[ Writing style 7 / 10 ]

[ Grammatic and spelling 10 / 10 ]

[ Ending 10 / 10 ]

Final Rating

4/5

• • • •

Final thoughts/Questions

Classics of this sort (philosophy, etc.) aren't my taste as I found out with this book. It was hard sometimes to read and the long dialogues were something new to me, which I needed to adapt myself into. Definitely recommending it for people who like such kind of books, but if you are new into this type of genre and topics, you might consider a shorter book of Dostoevsky.

Started the book: 23. June 2024
Finished the book: 25. June 2024
Wrote the review: 25. June 2024

Content Warnings

gvstyris's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark emotional reflective tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? Yes
Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.25

I have a lot of research to do after that marathon, but man Sonya and Dunya have my heart 🫶🏻

Also, Oliver Ready is a real one for his notes 😅

Content Warnings

artemy_se's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark reflective sad tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.75

And what shows that I am utterly a louse,’ [...] ‘is that I am perhaps viler and more loathsome than the louse I killed, and I felt beforehand that I should tell myself so after killing her.

As soon as I started reading this story, I knew I was gonna love it. The writing was masterful in my eyes and never made me bored even though the story was dragging. The changes of point of view were a choice that was for the most part a success. The characters are so realistic and I was immediately moved by the empathy pouring from every page, which is refreshing.

This book made me remember why I LOVE reading classics because you can analyse every page and to this day, it's so accessible and doesn't come off as pretentious in any way.

Unfortunately I wanted to love this book more, but I was definitely taken aback from the writing of the female characters, the portrayal of the prisoners, the love story that I hated but more importantly I was disappointed by the lack of development from main character even though all the self awareness that he has. The choices for the ending were kind of disappointing for me...

Even then, this is a masterful piece of work that I loved reading and definitely made me yearn to read another work from this Dostoevsky soon!

Content Warnings

jadejoro's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark reflective sad slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? A mix
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

1.0

Quite easily the worst book I've ever read, and I was an English major.

The premise of the novel is simple -- Raskolnikov, our protagonist, sets out to test whether he is one of the chosen few society deems as "above morality", one who can commit grave sins and still be forgiven or, possibly, even praised for their practical approach to making improvements to and for "humanity." It's not an original thought, but to Raskolnikov, who seems to have less self-awareness than a newborn, the only way he can ascertain whether he is such a person is to commit murder.

The murder itself is one of the only entertaining portions of the story, and is almost entirely responsible for the one star I'm giving the book. Dostoyevsky does an excellent job depicting the panic and irrationality Raskolnikov feels as his meticulously planned murder spirals into an accidental double homicide. But to anyone with any exposure to history, philosophy, ethics, or even religion Raskolnikov's question is immediately answered. He is not one of the chosen.

Honestly, this could've been answered before the murder with a few minutes of self-reflection over a pint of beer, but instead Raskolnikov commits his murders, then drags us torturously along for pages upon pages of monologues. Internal monologues, monologue to friends, monologues to family, monologues from friends and family! After the murder all the action in Crime and Punishment consists of talking, walking, and walking while talking. Additional plots are thrown in involving more murder, rape, suicide, and poverty; seemingly everyone Raskolnikov knows is suffering, victims of terrible choices both their own and of others. None of them, however, lack the words to describe their misery.

I don't know if my translation choice or simple misogyny is to blame, but the women especially seem to be fountains of useless, pointless words. Our protagonist seems to view them almost entirely as means to an end, belittling or ignoring their plights unless he can spin them to his advantage in his game of not being caught for the murders. Raskolnikov truly cares for no one but himself, so between his empathy and the women's suffering, it seems the only way to get through the story is to dull all emotions within yourself.

Twisted in among all the side stories of Russian misery is, for me, what ruins the book. After reading page after page of Raskolnikov's ruminations on how to avoid facing punishment (both internal and external) for his crimes, we find out that practically every character in the story already knows (or at least believes) he is the murderer. This includes the main detective investigating the murders! But instead of Raskolnikov facing justice, he is protected. Every other character, including the detective, tries to guide Raskolnikov on what steps he can take to lessen his punishment. Raskolnikov argues for a few more chapter-long monologues, but eventually caves in the end, getting an incredibly light sentence to Siberia. To top it all off, three other characters move to Siberia with him and help him serve his sentence with minimal suffering.

In the interest of fairness, there are some mildly engaging themes and analogies mixed in with the agonizing monologue festival. "Who defines crime and morality", "Does intent matter more or less than result", and "To what level are we responsible for who and what we become" dance in and through each character's plot, but none of the questions asked or answers supplied feel new or original. Clearly I say this with the perspective of a modern audience, but I've held much more in depth explorations of these and similar questions over some Lunchables.

Too summarize, Crime and Punishment is the story of a man who thinks he's special. After brutally testing his theory on women who had done him no harm, the special man is protected from the punishment he deserves. Throw in three dozen monologues about moral questions you probably explored in middle school, and that's Dostoyevsky's work in a nutshell.

Content Warnings