The book centers itself upon Rodion Romanovych Raskolnikov, an impoverished student in St. Petersburg (edit: after writing this post, I looked at the Wikipedia page for C+P and discovered that the wording of the last sentence was almost identical, entirely accidentally) who kills and robs a rich old lady so as to have the funds required to finish school and start doing good deeds to make up for his crime. He then is faced with all of the trauma and emotions that come with a murder, eventually being brought down by the efforts of the investigator Porfiry Petrovich. Raskolnikov has a theory that he continually outlines throughout the book of the difference between the normal masses and great men, who can "step over" the lines of traditional morality in order to achieve greatness - in particular he names Napoleon Bonaparte as his example of greatness. He kills in an attempt to prove his theory, but immediately after the crime finds himself in an emotional turmoil, losing perspective and making what he would call "amateur" mistakes. The book is divided into 6 parts, as the book was serialized in a Russian publication upon its release in 1866. However, unlike many of the serialized works I've read, the plot was much more thought out and connected between the parts, as opposed to hacked together. This was because this was the first of Dostoevsky's great novels, completed after his stay in the Russian "gulag" prison system. An interesting aside is that while Dostoevsky's own theory - or rather Raskolnikov's - is rather revolutionary, he mocks the stirrings of revolution that will eventually become the Russian Revolution.
The book is the definitive example of a psychological thriller. The angle of seeing the book through the murderer's eyes is an interesting perspective that allows us to experience all of the emotions that Raskolnikov does. He goes through actual physical symptoms to angry tirades to debilitating depression in rapid episodes that show the full spectrum of the insanity he himself caused. His long walks through the streets of St. Petersburg and terror-filled dreams and strange encounters all add to these feelings. However, one thing is shockingly missing. Not one bit of imagery is used in the book. No symbolism or extended metaphors. The book hits home precisely because it is exactly what it wants to be. When they want to show terror they show you a terror, not a rubber duck that is supposed to symbolize it. There is no deeper meanings to the colour of the clothing, or even any mention of it. This is perfectly exemplified with his dialogues with Porfiry Petrovich, who is a charmingly calculating investigator, interested in a new field of thinking called "psychology". It is the dialogue, the discussion of the elephant in the room that really brings the book to life. This is such a refreshing change, especially to someone from a theatre background. The words are what matters, and the people.
When I finished reading this book, I had the buzzing feeling again. It was a challenging read, one that was perfectly suited to long nights up in residence. But I didn't know if I could give it a 10/10. While I enjoyed it immensely, it wasn't as challenging as Ulysses, or ground-breaking as Don Quixote, or as close to my own life as On The Road. But neither was it the more "very good" of books like One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest. The decision wasn't made until about a week later, when I came home from a long weekend home. I had quoted, considered quoting or had the urge to bring up Crime and Punishment dozens of times. It is a book that stays with you, that affects your way of thinking, that sticks. Because of that, I am going to give it my fourth:
10/10
No comments:
Post a Comment