Raskolnikov's spiritual quest, the origins of the revolt. Social and philosophical origins of the Raskolnikov revolt
Social and philosophical origins Raskolnikov's riot
Here is the defeated god lies -
He fell, and he fell low.
That's why we built
Above the pedestal.
Frank Herbert
The novel "Crime and Punishment" was written in 1866. The sixties of the nineteenth century were very turbulent not only politically, but also in the field of thinking: the age-old moral foundations of society were crumbling. The theory of Napoleonism was widely preached. The young people thought they were allowed to do anything. "In one life - thousands of lives saved from decay and decay. One death and a hundred lives in return - why, there is arithmetic!" Of course in real life no one killed anyone, but only thought about it - as a joke. Dostoevsky brought this theory to its climax to see what happened. What happened was this: an unfortunate person who does not understand his mistake, a lonely person, tormented spiritually and physically. This is how Raskolnikov appears to us.
If we turn to Raskolnikov's childhood memory (dream), we see a kind, sensitive boy who is trying to save a dying horse. "Thank God, this is only a dream! But what is it? Is it really a fever in me: such an ugly dream!" - says Raskolnikov, waking up. He can no longer imagine himself like that, for him this little boy is "a trembling creature, a louse." But what changed Raskolnikov so much? There are many reasons, but they can be reduced to several, more general ones.
The first is probably the time in which Raskolnikov lived. This time itself pushed for changes, protests, riots. Probably every young man then (and now!) Considered himself the savior of the world. Time is the root cause of Raskolnikov's actions.
The second reason is the city of Petersburg. Here is what Pushkin writes about him:
The city is lush, the city is poor,
Spirit of bondage, slender look,
The vault of heaven is pale green,
Boredom, cold and granite.
In Crime and Punishment, Petersburg is a vampire city. He drinks the juices of life from the people who come there. So it happened with Raskolnikov. When he first came to study, he was still that nice boy from childhood. But time passes, and the proudly raised head sinks lower and lower, the city begins to choke Raskolnikov, he wants to breathe deeply, but he cannot. It is interesting that for the entire novel, Petersburg only once appears before Raskolnikov with a part of its beauty: magnificent picture... "But the majestic view St. Isaac's Cathedral and Winter Palace for Raskolnikov, for whom St. Petersburg is his closet - "closet", closet - "coffin". It is Petersburg that is largely to blame for the novel. In it, Raskolnikov becomes lonely and unhappy, in it he hears the officers' conversation, in it, finally, an old woman who is to blame for her wealth lives.
Digging into the main social reasons revolt, it is worth taking on the philosophical and psychological. Here, the first is, of course, the character of Raskolnikov: proud, even vain, independent, impatient, self-confident, categorical ... but you never know you can pick up definitions? Because of his character, Raskolnikov fell into such a hole, from which few can get out ...
When Raskolnikov was just developing his theory, he, not yet suspecting, already considered himself a People with capital letter... Further more. Being in constant solitude, he only did what he thought. So, he deceived himself, convinced himself of what was not. Interestingly, at the beginning he justifies himself, like many young people, with the noble goal of helping others. But after committing the crime, Raskolnikov realizes that he killed not to help others, but for himself. "The old woman was only a disease ... I wanted to overstep as soon as possible ... I did not kill a person, but I killed the principles. I killed the principles, but I did not overstep, I stayed on this side", "... I had to find out then, and find out as soon as possible whether I am a louse, like everyone else, or a human? .. Am I a trembling creature or have the right ... "It is also interesting that Raskolnikov, until the very end, considered himself the only right. "Nothing, they won't understand anything, Sonya, and are unworthy to understand", "... maybe I'm still a man, and not a louse, and hastened to condemn myself. I will still fight."
Raskolnikov's relatives understood him better than he did himself. "After all, he does not love anyone; maybe he will never love!" - says Razumikhin. "And the rogue, however, this Raskolnikov! He dragged a lot on himself. A big rogue may be in time, when nonsense rises, and now he wants to live too much," says Svidrigailov. "I regard you as one of those who at least Cut out the guts, and he will stand and look at the torturers with a smile - if only he finds faith or God. Well, find it and you will live, "says Porfiry Petrovich. "She [Sonya] knew, moreover, his vanity, arrogance, pride and disbelief."
Disbelief. It is with this word that Dostoevsky wants to justify Raskolnikov's act. This is evidenced by Sonya, "character number two," a true believer and living by this, who has risen due to this much higher than Raskolnikov. This is evidenced by the name of the main character. This is evidenced by numerous hints and "unquoted" quotes from Holy Scripture, hidden gospel images. After all, God means not just belief in something supernatural, but also the presence of minimal moral principles. And this is so necessary in an era of changes and riots in order to keep a person afloat, not to lead him astray!
"If a creature has already become someone, it will die, but will not turn into its own opposite", "there is no sharp line between people and gods: people become gods, and gods turn into people" - these lines were written much later, and this proves that no matter what time we live, the themes for the novels remain the same: where is the border between fas and nefas (permissible and unlawful).
Writings on literature: Social and philosophical origins of the revolt of Rodion Raskolnikov
FM Dostoevsky once said that the works of NV Gogol "crush the mind with the deepest unbearable questions, evoke the most restless thoughts in the Russian mind." We can rightfully attribute these words to the works of Dostoevsky himself, which are permeated with restless and disturbing thoughts. Crime and Punishment is a novel about Russia going through an era of deep social and moral upheavals. This is a novel about a hero who contains all the suffering, pain and wounds of his time in his chest.
"Hero of our time" - Rodion Raskolnikov - a young man endowed by nature with intelligence, the ability to compassion, and therefore so acutely perceiving the suffering and pain of others, painfully reacting to manifestations of human injustice and meanness. Wandering around Petersburg, Rodion sees terrible scenes of despair, humiliation, devastation and anger of people, the torment of those who, by a reality based on the power of money, are doomed to poverty, drunkenness and, ultimately, death. The hero of the novel is ready to become a certain sense an avenger for the disadvantaged and humiliated.
From a letter to his mother, Rodion learns about Svidrigailov's harassment against his sister and about Dunya's decision to marry Luzhin in order only to save him and his mother from poverty and shame. Raskolnikov is deeply outraged by the existing order of things, in which life is bought at the cost of crime, moral death and which contradicts his dreams of the perfection and harmony of the world. And he is not able to accept the sacrifices of his dearly beloved mother and sister. The salvation of people dear to him becomes another motive for the impending crime.
In addition, he himself, like his family, is crushed by poverty, but does not want to put up with it and intends to overcome poverty. First of all, not for his own sake, but for the sake of his loved ones and other disadvantaged people.
Raskolnikov's sensitive and vulnerable soul is overwhelmed with living pain for a person, he is deeply wounded by the horror and absurdity of the surrounding reality, therefore a rebellion is ripening in his soul, and therefore his idea is born. And therefore he suffers, rushes about the St. Petersburg streets, leads some kind of feverish, "abnormal" life: Lately matured and concentrated, taking the form of a terrible, wild and fantastic question that tormented his heart and mind, irresistibly demanding a solution. " For a long time already arose in his brain the idea that in the name of an idea, in the name of justice, in the name of progress, murder can be allowed and even justified, “blood according to conscience,” as the hero of the novel calls it. And the visit to the usurer, in whom he, almost dying of hunger, was forced to pawn a ring - a gift from his sister, only sharpened this conviction. The old woman, profiting from someone else's grief, aroused in his soul an irresistible hatred and disgust. A conversation between a student and an officer about this "stupid, insignificant, evil ... and harmful to everyone" pawnbroker, which he accidentally heard in the tavern, finally confirmed him in the idea that on the general scale the life of this old woman was nothing compared to thousands of other lives. And her money "doomed to the monastery" can save many perishing, dying of hunger and vice. "To kill such a harmful old woman is to resist evil and restore justice!" - decides Raskolnikov.
For Rodion, Luzhin is the personification of social evil - a successful, greedy and cynical businessman, spoiled by the power of money, embodying vulgarity and selfishness, and
The rich man Svidrigailov, a lecher who pursues defenseless victims (including Raskolnikov's sister).
Pushes Raskolnikov to a crime and his desire to solve an ethical problem: is it possible, by breaking the law, to come to happiness? It turns out not. After committing a crime, suffering, torment, torment appear. Where is there to think about universal happiness, if personal happiness is not achieved. He says to his sister: "... if only I had killed because I was hungry ... then I would now ... be happy!"
The main and most significant in the work is the theory developed by the hero. Since the world that he sees around him is terrible, ugly, and it is impossible and unnatural to accept it, to come to terms with its laws, and he does not believe in the possibility of curing the diseases of his “troubled” tragic time, the only way is to rise above this “anthill” ... "Ordinary" people "live in obedience" and "must be obedient." This is unnecessary, accepting any order of things. "Extraordinary" people - the destroyers of this order - break the law. Rodion wants to rise above the customs and morals of the world around him, to prove that "it is not a trembling creature," but "has the right." To become above the world for Rodion Raskolnikov means to become a human being, to find true freedom, and only truly "extraordinary" people, the only ones worthy of being called people, are capable of this. All the burden of rejection, rebellion of a "proud man", an extraordinary personality, Raskolnikov places on one of himself, on his personal energy and will. Either obedience and submission or rebellion - the third, in his opinion, is not given.
Thus, Raskolnikov wants to transcend not only moral and social, but also physical laws that fettered human nature. But besides the main theory, the hero of the novel also built a second, more noble, softening harshness of the first. He decided that he would use the money stolen from the pawnbroker to help other people, save "hundreds of young lives" from death and debauchery. But he is tormented by the question: is he capable of being a real person who has the right to break, is he personally capable of a crime-riot? Will he be able to overstep the murder, even for the sake of a great good goal?
Such are in general outline social and philosophical origins of the revolt of the protagonist of the novel by FM Dostoevsky, who, according to the author, "realizes and judges the world and man - this is the charm of his personality." But the crime committed by the hero of the novel became the very experiment that immediately showed the inconsistency of his theory of crime, showed that Rodion Raskolnikov would “never repeat the murder again” “going the same way”.
The hero of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky's novel "Crime and Punishment" calls his crime a "riot", and our task is to figure out: what, in fact, is Rodion Raskolnikov rebelling against?
The novel begins with a picture of the terrible poverty of the hero himself and the majority of the population of St. Petersburg. The sixties of the nineteenth century is the time of maturation of Russian capitalism, so to speak, "the period of the initial accumulation of capital." Economic situation the country as a whole improved due to the reforms, but the position of the lower strata of society became appalling. Before Raskolnikov are pictures of life in the poorest areas of the city, dirt, prostitution, alcoholism ... Latest topic Dostoevsky even wanted to devote a separate novel, its name "The Drunken" is mentioned in the drafts. It was from this idea that the Marmeladov line grew. So, one of the reasons for Raskolnikov's rebellion is, of course, in his social status. Normal person without prejudice to himself, he is not able to endure such a life for a long time, especially if he is sensitive and sees the constant suffering of others.
There is another aspect to all this. During periods of economic turmoil, the interests of most people are focused on making money in order to live. There is neither strength nor time left for the development of spirituality - to feed the family. As a result, moral principles are gradually erased from consciousness, the line between good and evil is erased, and crime is growing.
Here we come to the philosophical origins of the Raskolnikov revolt. The justification for it was the theory that all people are divided into two categories. The first is the majority of people, the "material", the herd, which should not have its own will, but only completely obey the representatives of the second category. The latter, sovereigns, rulers possessing true freedom, can even allow themselves to shed blood "according to their conscience." They have the right to reshape laws, change the world, they are great and, shedding blood, are considered not criminals, but benefactors.
The theory is not new. All revolutions, all terrorist acts were based on it. The latter, which came into vogue just in the sixties of the nineteenth century, were an illustration of allowing oneself blood "according to conscience." Raskolnikov revolts against suffering - this can be understood and forgiven. But his theory is not only a rebellion of pity against pain, but also a rebellion of incredible pride against all divine and human laws, it is a rebellion against the existence of a trait that separates Good and Evil. Raskolnikov sets himself up as an example of Napoleon, a man, of course, a great, but who cannot be called a special benefactor. Such theories stem from a tremendous lust for power, but as Dostoevsky shows us, they are untenable. The author refutes Raskolnikov's theory both logically and morally. The logical refutation is the arguments of Porfiry Petrovich, and the moral one is Sonya Marmeladova.
Dostoevsky, with his novel Crime and Punishment, shows that a rebellion against evil, resulting in a crime, cannot lead to anything good, and before trying to correct the world, a person must correct himself.
The years of the creation of the novel "Crime and Punishment" (1865-1866) were very difficult for Dostoevsky: not long before that his wife, brother and close friend and employee A. Grigoriev. The writer was suddenly surrounded not only by complete loneliness, but also ten thousand promissory notes and five thousand "on my word of honor." Dostoevsky was on the verge of despair. “O my friend, I would gladly go back to hard labor for the same number of years, just to pay my debts and feel free again,” he wrote in March 1865 to A.Ye. Wrangel.
At that time Dostoevsky lived in that part of Petersburg where minor officials, artisans and students usually settled. And therefore it is no coincidence that it was here that the image of Rodion Raskolnikov appeared before him, crushed by poverty and the painful questions of being a former student. The author visited him on the same street and in the same house where he lived. And literally from the first lines we get to know Raskolnikov's dwelling: "His little room was under the very roof of a high five-story building and looked more like a closet than an apartment." Later, in a confessional impulse, the hero will say: "Do you know, Sonya, that low ceilings and cramped rooms squeeze the soul and mind!" This is not a random phrase in the novel.
But Raskolnikov was "crowded" not only by low ceilings, life was pressing from all sides: he was so poor that he had to leave the university, so poor that another, "even a familiar person would be ashamed to go out into the street in such rags during the day" he is dressed. Raskolnikov owed the hostess a long time ago for the little room he occupied, and therefore each time he felt "some painful and cowardly sensation" when he walked past the master's kitchen. He has already laid the ring - a gift from his sister, next in line - a silver watch - the last memory of his father. A mother from a meager pension sends him money so that he can complete his studies, for the same reason his sister is going to marry a vile man ... "For some time he was in an irritable and tense state, similar to hypochondria," the author reveals that what is happening in the soul of the hero.
But it is necessary to make a reservation: Raskolnikov is in a state of mental depression not only because of his plight. The fact is that recently a certain thought began to hatch in his head, which no longer left him, tormented, pursued and took shape into an idea. As a result of painful reflections, the hero comes to the conclusion that “one tiny criminality” can be obliterated by “thousands of good deeds”. It would seem that here simple arithmetic, correct calculation. On the scale is put, on the one hand, the death of a "stupid and evil old woman", sucking blood from the poor, profiting from their poverty, and on the other hand, thousands of lives saved "from decay and decay." And such a crime appears to Raskolnikov not as a crime at all, but as a triumph of justice.
For a long time and painfully the hero was hatching his idea. Not so much for himself, for his youth outraged by poverty, he suffered in soul, but for plight mothers and sisters, for a drunken and dishonored girl on Konnogvardeisky Boulevard, for Sonechka's martyrdom, for the tragedy of the Marmeladov family, for universal need, the hopeless and hopeless absurdity of life that needed to be somehow changed. And How possible variant, as a response to the absurd state of affairs, Raskolnikov's theory is born, according to which, in the name of justice and progress, blood according to conscience can be justified.
The hero himself explains his thought in the following way: “People, according to the law of nature, are generally divided into two categories: into the lower (ordinary), that is, so to speak, into material that serves solely for the generation of their own kind, and actually into people, that is, having a gift or talent to say a new word in his midst ”. And if, for example, a person from the second category needs to “step over a corpse, through blood,” in order to fulfill his idea (possibly “saving for all mankind”), then, in his conscience, he can ... give himself permission step over the blood. " But Raskolnikov immediately makes a reservation: "From this, however, it does not at all follow that Newton has the right to kill whoever he pleases, counter and transverse, or to steal every day at the bazaar." According to the author of the theory, it is possible to eliminate only that which interferes with the embodiment of a great idea. And only in this case, the crime cannot be regarded as a crime, since it is committed not with a selfish purpose, not for the sake of profit, but for the good of humanity.
But, having divided people into two categories, it is curious to find out for yourself which category you yourself belong to. And so Raskolnikov decides to kill the old woman-pawnbroker in order to do good to people with her money, to save loved ones, to finally arrange his fate. But the real reason crime is not that. The hero has the courage to drop secondary excuses and get to the last truth“Not to help my mother, I killed - nonsense!” He says to Sonya. “I didn’t kill so that, having received the means and power, I could become a benefactor of mankind. Nonsense! I just killed, killed for myself, for myself alone ... I needed to find out then, and quickly find out if I was a louse, like everyone else, or a human? Will I be able to step over or will I not be able to! Do I dare to bend over and take it or not? Am I a trembling creature or have the right ... "
Raskolnikov needs his experiment to test his ability to commit a crime, to find out which category of people he belongs to, but at the same time he realizes that the very formulation of the question suggests that he is just as "ordinary" as all the others , since the "lord" or "being of a higher order" would never have thought to ask such a question.
Being a gentle and kind man, experiencing in his heart all the sufferings of humanity, Raskolnikov, even before the crime, felt that he was not capable of killing, that he could not bear such a murder. He was sick and horrified just by the thought that he would hit him on the head with an ax, slide in sticky and warm blood ... At times he was even ready to renounce his idea, it was so painfully given to him: “Let it be, even if not no doubt about all these calculations, be it all ... as clear as day, as fair as arithmetic. God! After all, I still won't make up my mind! I can’t bear it, I won’t bear it! ... Lord! - he begged, - show me my way, and I renounce this accursed ... my dream! "
But the "dream" had already penetrated too deeply and lived in him to get rid of it so easily. It was no longer he who controlled her, but she led him like a lunatic. And the crime was accomplished: the old woman was killed, her sister Lizaveta was killed innocently, quiet and unrequited, whose death was not at all part of Raskolnikov's plans. But she became an unwitting witness, therefore, she could destroy the calculations and intentions of the hero. If there were other witnesses here, they could share the fate of Lizaveta. For the sake of the idea, Raskolnikov was ready for other sacrifices. This is eloquently indicated by the scene in which the hero, "clutching the ax in his hand," stood outside the door, when Koch appears inopportunely in front of her ...
Dostoevsky shows how one crime inevitably leads to another, demanding more and more blood to carry out a deed undertaken as if with a well-intentioned purpose.
The whole month, from murder to confession, passes for the hero in constant tension, in continuous mental anguish. Raskolnikov is experiencing a state of endless isolation from people, it engulfs his heart with "dead cold", and this "terrible sensation" becomes a new attempt, payment for the crime.
An attempt to live and act not in harmony with the heart and conscience, but according to the theory developed by reason, leads the hero to a tragic split. He plays the role of "master" and at the same time realizes that this role is not for him. He plots and commits murder when his whole appearance revolts against it. And therefore he had the right to say later to Sonya: “I killed myself, not the old woman! Here, so all at once, and slapped himself forever! "
The murder of a "consumptive, stupid and wicked old woman" whose life seems to be dearer than life a louse or a cockroach, nevertheless reveals to the hero the truth that all people are connected by invisible threads, that every human being is an unconditional value and that you cannot forcibly eliminate any life without damage to your own heart, without unpredictable tragic consequences.
If Raskolnikov makes a step towards moral catastrophe with his idea of a “blood according to conscience” decision, then his human essence, his kind and sympathetic soul, which could not bear the terrible experiment, rejects his theory. The author brings the hero and the reader to the idea that no well-meaning goals, no great idea, even if it is “saving for all mankind”, can justify any, even the most “tiny” crime. You cannot make humanity happy through violence - this is the main moral lesson which we take out from Dostoevsky's novel.
Here is the defeated god lies -
He fell, and he fell low.
That's why we built
Above the pedestal.
Frank Herbert
The novel Crime and Punishment was written in 1866. The sixties of the nineteenth century were very turbulent not only politically, but also in the field of thinking: the age-old moral foundations of society were crumbling. The theory of Napoleonism was widely preached. The young people thought they were allowed to do anything. “In one life - thousands of lives saved from decay and decay. One death and a hundred lives in return - why, there is arithmetic! ". Of course, in real life, no one killed anyone, but only thought about it - as a joke. Dostoevsky brought this theory to its climax to see what happened. What happened was this: an unfortunate person who does not understand his mistake, a lonely person, tormented spiritually and physically. This is how Raskolnikov appears to us.
If we turn to Raskolnikov's childhood memory (dream), we see a kind, sensitive boy who is trying to save a dying horse. “Thank God, this is only a dream! But what is it? Could it be that a fever is beginning in me: such an ugly dream! " - says Raskolnikov, waking up. He can no longer imagine himself like that, for him this little boy is "a trembling creature, a louse." But what changed Raskolnikov so much? There are many reasons, but they can be reduced to several, more general ones.
The first is probably the time in which Raskolnikov lived. This time itself pushed for changes, protests, riots. Probably every young man then (and now!) Considered himself the savior of the world. Time is the root cause of Raskolnikov's actions.
The second reason is the city of Petersburg. Here is what Pushkin writes about him:
The city is lush, the city is poor,
Spirit of bondage, slender look,
The vault of heaven is pale green,
Boredom, cold and granite.
In Crime and Punishment, Petersburg is a vampire city. He drinks the juices of life from the people who come there. So it happened with Raskolnikov. When he first came to study, he was still that nice boy from childhood. But time passes, and the proudly raised head sinks lower and lower, the city begins to choke Raskolnikov, he wants to breathe deeply, but he cannot. It is interesting that during the entire novel St. Petersburg only once appears before Raskolnikov with a part of its beauty: “An inexplicable cold was blowing on him from this magnificent panorama; for him this magnificent picture was full of a dumb and deaf spirit ... "But the majestic view of St. Isaac's Cathedral and the Winter Palace is not for Raskolnikov, for whom St. Petersburg is his closet -" closet ", closet -" coffin ". It is Petersburg that is largely to blame for the novel. In it, Raskolnikov becomes lonely and unhappy, in it he hears the officers' conversation, in it, finally, an old woman who is to blame for her wealth lives.
After digging into the main social causes of the rebellion, it is worth tackling the philosophical and psychological ones. Here, the first is, of course, the character of Raskolnikov: proud, even vain, independent, impatient, self-confident, categorical ... but you never know you can pick up definitions? Because of his character, Raskolnikov fell into such a hole, from which few can get out ...
When Raskolnikov was just developing his theory, he, not yet suspecting, already considered himself a People with a capital letter. Further more. Being in constant solitude, he only did what he thought. So, he deceived himself, convinced himself of what was not. Interestingly, at the beginning he justifies himself, like many young people, with the noble goal of helping others. But after committing the crime, Raskolnikov realizes that he killed not to help others, but for himself. “The old woman was only a disease ... I wanted to cross as soon as possible ... I did not kill a person, but I killed principles. I killed the principles, but I didn't overstep, I stayed on this side ”,“… I had to find out then, and quickly find out if I was a louse, like everyone else, or a human? .. Am I a trembling creature or have the right ... “It is also interesting that Raskolnikov, until the very end, considered himself the only right. "Nothing, they won't understand anything, Sonya, and they are unworthy to understand", "... maybe I am still a man, and not a louse, and hastened to condemn myself. I will still fight."
Raskolnikov's relatives understood him better than he did himself. “After all, he does not love anyone; maybe he will never love! " - says Razumikhin. “And the rogue, however, this Raskolnikov! I dragged a lot on myself. A big rogue can be in time, when nonsense will rise up, and now he really wants to live too much ", - says Svidrigailov." I regard you as one of those who at least cut out the guts, and he will stand and look at the tormentors with a smile, - if only the faith il God finds. Well, find it and you will live, ”says Porfiry Petrovich. "She [Sonya] knew, moreover, his vanity, arrogance, pride and unbelief."
Disbelief. It is with this word that Dostoevsky wants to justify Raskolnikov's act. This is evidenced by Sonya, "character number two," a true believer and living by this, who has risen due to this much higher than Raskolnikov. This is evidenced by the name of the main character. This is evidenced by numerous allusions and "unquoted" quotations from Holy Scripture, hidden Gospel images. After all, God means not just belief in something supernatural, but also the presence of minimal moral principles. And this is so necessary in an era of changes and revolts in order to keep a person afloat, not to lead him astray!
“If a creature has already become someone, it will die, but will not turn into its own opposite”, “there is no sharp line between people and gods: people become gods, and gods turn into people” - these lines were written much later, and this proves that no matter what time we live, the themes for the novels remain the same: where is the border between fas and nefas (permissible and unlawful).
In the preparation of this work were used materials from the site