Social and philosophical origins of Raskolnikov’s rebellion (based on F. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment”) (First version)

Social and philosophical origins of Raskolnikov's rebellion

Here God lies defeated -

He fell, and he fell low.

That's why we built it

Higher 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 centuries-old moral foundations of society were collapsing. The theory of Napoleonism was widely preached. Young people thought that everything was allowed to them. “In one life - thousands of lives saved from rot and decay. One death and a hundred lives in return - but there’s arithmetic here!” Of course, in real life no one killed anyone, but only thought about it - as a joke. Dostoevsky took this theory to its zenith to see what happened. And this is what happened: an unhappy person who does not understand his mistake, a lonely person, suffering spiritually and physically. This is how Raskolnikov appears to us.

If we turn to Raskolnikov’s childhood memory (a dream), we see a kind, sensitive boy who is trying to save a dying horse. “Thank God, it’s just a dream! But what is this? Is it possible that a fever is starting inside me: such an ugly dream!” - says Raskolnikov, waking up. He can no longer imagine himself like this, for him this 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, we will probably call the time in which Raskolnikov lived. This time itself pushed for changes, protests, riots. Probably every young man then (and even now!) considered himself the savior of the world. Time is the root cause of Raskolnikov's actions.

The second reason is the city of St. Petersburg. Here is what Pushkin writes about him:

The city is lush, the city is poor,

Spirit of bondage, slender appearance,

The vault of heaven is pale green,

Boredom, cold and granite.

In Crime and Punishment, Petersburg is a vampire city. He drinks the vital juices from the people who come there. This 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 take a deep breath, but he cannot. It is interesting that throughout the entire novel, St. Petersburg only once appears before Raskolnikov with a piece of its beauty: “An inexplicable coldness blew over him from this magnificent panorama; this magnificent picture was full of a dumb and deaf spirit for him...” But the majestic view of St. Isaac's Cathedral and the Winter Palace silent for Raskolnikov, for whom Petersburg is his closet - a “closet”, a closet - a “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 talking, and in it, finally, lives an old woman who is guilty of her wealth.

Having delved into the main social causes of the rebellion, it is worth taking on the philosophical and psychological ones. Here the first thing to name, of course, is Raskolnikov’s character: proud, even vain, independent, impatient, self-confident, categorical... but you never know how many definitions you can come up with? Because of his character, Raskolnikov fell into a hole from which few can get out...

When Raskolnikov was just developing his theory, he, without even suspecting it, already considered himself a People with a capital M. Further more. Being constantly alone, all he did was think. So, he deceived himself, convinced himself of something that was not there. It is interesting that 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 ill... I wanted to cross as quickly as possible... I didn’t kill a person, but I killed the principles. I killed the principles, but didn’t cross, I stayed on this side,” “... I needed to find out then, and quickly find out whether I’m a louse, like everyone else, or a man?.. Am I a trembling creature or do I have the right...” It is also interesting that until the very end Raskolnikov considered himself the only one in the right. “Nothing, they won’t understand anything, Sonya, and they are not worthy to understand,” “... maybe I’m still a person, and not a louse, and I’m hasty in condemning myself. I’ll still fight.”

Raskolnikov's loved ones understood him better than he understood himself. “After all, he doesn’t love anyone; maybe he never will!” - says Razumikhin. “And a scoundrel, however, this Raskolnikov! He has carried a lot on himself. He can be a big scoundrel over time, when nonsense pops up, but now he wants to live too much,” says Svidrigailov. “I consider you to be one of those who at least cut out his intestines, and he will stand and look at his tormentors with a smile - if only he finds faith or God. Well, find it, and you will live," says Porfiry Petrovich. “She [Sonya] also knew his vanity, arrogance, pride and lack of faith.”

Disbelief. It is with this word that Dostoevsky wants to justify Raskolnikov’s action. This is evidenced by Sonya, “character number two,” who truly believes and lives by it, and thanks to this, has risen much higher than Raskolnikov. The name of the main character speaks about this. This is evidenced by numerous hints and “unquoted” quotations from the Holy Scriptures, 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 change and rebellion in order to keep a person afloat and not lead him astray from the “true path”!

“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 novels remain the same: where is the border between fas and nefas (permissible and unlawful).

In preparing this work, materials from the site http://www.studentu.ru were used

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Subject: Philosophical and social origins of the theory of Rodion Raskolnikov.

Target: Lesson-analysis of the image of Rodion Raskolnikov in the light of modern psychological concepts.

Motto-conclusion of the lesson:“It is important to realize that it was the human idea that killed, but faith that resurrected.”

“In the beginning was the Word.”

Bible.

„ It's not long before we can predict

How will our word respond...

And we are given sympathy

How grace is given to us.”

F. Tyutchev

During the classes

Geniuses do not have a single random word, not a single extra comma. Behind everything they have hidden the author's intention and deep meaning. This lesson is dedicated to unraveling these ideas.

І. Reading and analysis I paragraph. Chapter 1 novel through questions.

Did the hero of the novel “rent an apartment from tenants”?

Why not at the owners' home? Why is Raskolnikov, a man crushed by poverty, not burdened by his “plight”? Why doesn’t he strive to improve his own affairs?

Is he, in essence, afraid of the mistress? What caused his cowardly state? (The hero is closed, lives in his own world, returning to reality causes him subconscious fear).

ІІ. Work with text.

Assignment: find and write down a description of Raskolnikov’s appearance, his portrait, the room where he lives; determine the main character traits of the hero (prove by factor from the novel or evidence of another character).

Filling out the summary table.

Life Psychology

Material

State Poorly dressed; down, crushed by poverty

Got sloppy; room -

wardrobe, coffin, closet,

cabin, kennel

Traits Conscientiousness: reluctance„ Mad vanity”

character meetings with the creditor. „ Constricted position

Compassion, desire to help. It stopped weighing on him"

Fire episode, relation to

Marmeladov and others.

Soulful „ Aboutordinary rubbish „ Irritable and

state which he never cares about" tense”, Seems like

for hypochondria.

Consequence "ugly life" "ugly

dream ”

Monomania

Working with a dictionary

Monomania . Mono-one. Mania (Greek - madness, infatuation) is a mental disorder in which the patient has obsessive ideas; observed in various mental illnesses - manic-depressive psychosis, schizophrenia. In difficult cases, it suggests an excessive desire for something.

Hypochondria - fear for your health.

Summary: Raskolnikov's monomania is a passion for an obsession.

Result: Painful and anxious state of mind (hypochondria).

III . Reading an excerpt from part 3, chapter V. (retelling of “one thought” by Porfiry Petrovich and its explanation by Raskolnikov).

Analysis by questions:

What idea is Raskolnikov pursuing?

What is it based on? Where is the concentration of philosophy that led the hero to “Ugly dream”?

Why does Raskolnikov agree that “It was presented almost correctly, even, if you like, completely correctly”?

What philosophical ideas resonate with Raskolnikov’s views set forth in his article?

Which political figure does Raskolnikov consider his ideal? Which literary heroes share the same opinion?

Murder of a pawnbroker - Raskolnikov's Toulon or Waterloo?

What are the similarities and differences between the destinies of Julien Sorel ( “Red and Black” by Stendhal) and R. Raskolnikov? What is their crime?

And what punishment will befall them?

Who and in what work raised the topic of Napoleonism for the first time in Russian literature?

Raskolnikov talks about the destruction of the present in the name of the future. A motive of dissatisfaction with reality arises.

Let's remember and compare.

Hamlet: To be or not to be?

Faust: Who told me to give up my dreams?

Raskolnikov: Or give up life completely?! Obediently accept fate as it is.

Here we can see the flow and interpenetration of motives for dissatisfaction with life:

Suicides → revenge → transformation

Raskolnikov studied at the university, but soon dropped out of school. He says he doesn't want to be “a teacher or official, with a salary of a thousand rubles.”

Why is there a comma in this last sentence?

(Dostoevsky’s “extra” signs carry a semantic load. Here the hero’s disagreement with such a fate is emphasized)

Does Rodion have the opportunity to prove himself, or, like Marmeladov and his daughter and wife, does he have nowhere else to go?

(After the answer options, we read Raskolnikov’s own answer in Part 5, V: “Did you know that maybe I could…”)

Was it by chance that he compared himself to a spider? Who else in the novel looks like a spider?

Shakespeare "Macbeth"

Blood was shed even when the law

I have not yet ruled the wild ancient world;

And later chilling our ears

Murders were committed. But it happened

The skull will be split, the person will die -

And then it all ends. Now dead

On whose brow there are twenty mortal wounds,

He rises from the coffin, driving us away from our place.

And this is worse than murder.

A. Pushkin „ Boris G O dunov

Ah, I feel: nothing can us

In the midst of worldly sorrows, to calm;

Nothing, nothing...only conscience.

So, the healthy one will triumph.

Over malice, over dark slander.

But if there is only one spot in it,

One thing, it started up by accident,

Then - trouble! Like a pestilence

The soul will burn, the heart will fill with poison,

Reproach hits your ears like a hammer,

And everything feels nauseous and my head is spinning,

And the boys have bloody eyes...

And I’m glad to run, but there’s nowhere...terrible!

Yes, pitiful is the one whose conscience is unclean.

Or: “…genius and villainy”

Two things are incompatible. Isn’t it true?”

Arithmetic of Raskolnikov's crime.

In the beginning it was

Word (article by Raskolnikov, written six months before the crime was committed)

Calculation (“arithmetic” of murder).

Case - murder of an old woman.

Unforeseen matter (Murder of Lizaveta)

Random criminal (Mikolka takes the blame for Raskolnikov).

Murder (mother finds out about her son's crime, goes crazy and dies)

Result: general deadly epidemic

Small Apocalypse → big apocalypse

Lesson summary: A person does not have so many truths, but they are added every time anew and at an incredibly expensive price, but they are necessary and saving, like bread, like water, like air. These truths are contained in the moral laws of humanity: “Thou shalt not kill!”, “Love your neighbor,” “Treat others the way you would like to be treated.”

Art is not a court of law. But he has his own power, his own authority : Find conscience in a person and leave him alone with it. He has only one punishment, but the highest: the terrible judgment of conscience.

Irina Ratushinskaya:

Under the free eternal vaults,

Barefoot on dusty roads,

With nakedly burning candles

People are looking for a good God

So that He will regret and understand

Through murder, delirium and deception,

So that He puts his palms

On the temple, like an evil wound,

To see screaming faces

Darkness of souls and eyes without light,

To save a fugitive from pursuit,

To give bread to the hungry...

Maybe God is a cross in the palm of your hand?

Maybe God is the dark sky?

How to find the way to it?

How can hope measure pain?

People are looking for a good God

May God grant them to find and check.

F. M. Dostoevsky focuses on the terrible reality of Russia in the mid-19th century, with its poverty, lawlessness, oppression, suppression, corruption of the individual, suffocating from the consciousness of his powerlessness and rebellious. Such a hero in the novel “Crime and Punishment” is Rakolnikov.

The great writer prophetically foresaw the emergence of rebellious ideas that would explode old ideas and norms of human behavior. This was the idea that Raskolnikov endured in long agony. His task is to rise above the world, to achieve “power over the entire human anthill.” “Am I a trembling creature” or “do I have the right” - such is the painful dilemma facing the hero. The murder of the old pawnbroker becomes a way to resolve all contradictions.

What are the social origins of this way of thinking? Dostoevsky, introducing his hero, immediately, on the first page, talks about his social status. The young man comes out not from the room, but from the closet, which the author later compares with a closet, chest, fob, describes its squalor, emphasizing the extreme poverty of its occupant: “he was crushed by poverty,” as he writes Dostoevsky.

The origins of Raskolnikov’s rebellion are told in symbolic form by a dream about a slaughtered horse, which he sees before committing a crime. Firstly, this protest against murder, senseless cruelty, sympathy for the pain of others. All this testifies to the subtle, vulnerable soul of the hero. Secondly, the dream is perceived as a battle of existing orders. Life is unfair, motherfucker, cruel, its owner-riders drive the unfortunate downtrodden nags.

The author directly correlates Raskolnikov’s philosophy with the activities of Napoleon. It was in him that some of the youth of the early 20th century found an example of a bright personality who rose from the bottom to the heights of power. “I wanted...to become Napoleon,” Raskolnikov says to Sonya. Napoleon is close to Raskolnikov in his ability to walk over the corpses of his fellow tribesmen for the sake of self-affirmation. In addition, Raskolnikov’s philosophy has a closer source. The strong nature of the hero, with youthful impatience, rushed to the extreme of officialdom, because it was necessary “now, and quickly” to decide “at least on something.” Raskolnikov's mind reveals the ugly structure of human relationships, and at the same time all other aspects of life. He is ready to consider the entire human race “scoundrels” and perform his actions based on this.

Yes, this is nihilism, but not even on Bazarov’s scale, but in its most extreme development, phagic nihilism. In officialdom, Raskolnikov goes to the last point - to the decision to commit an act in action, and not in words, official of this life.

An idea, false at its core, is debunked from the inside - through the despair of the unfortunate. Raskolnikov understands that nothing can be changed by crime. The novel is written in such a way that all events not only amaze the reader, but also convince them with their great and phagic truth.

Similar essays

| Views: 11356
| Views: 580

The years of creating the novel “Crime and Punishment” (1865-1866) were very difficult for Dostoevsky: shortly before that, his wife, brother and close friend and collaborator A. Grigoriev died. The writer was suddenly surrounded not only by complete loneliness, but also by ten thousand promissory notes and five thousand “on my word of honor.” Dostoevsky was on the verge of despair. “Oh, my friend, I would gladly go back to hard labor for the same number of years, just to pay off my debts and feel free again,” he wrote in March 1865 to A.E. Wrangel.
Dostoevsky lived at that time in that part of St. Petersburg where petty 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 painful questions of existence as 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 are introduced to Raskolnikov’s home: “His closet was under the very roof of a tall 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 cramp the soul and mind!” This is not a random phrase in the novel.
But Raskolnikov was “pressed” not only by low ceilings, life pressed on him from all sides: he was so poor that he had to leave the university, so poor that another, “even an ordinary person would be ashamed to go out into the street in such rags during the day”, as he was he is dressed. Raskolnikov had long owed the landlady for the closet he occupied, and therefore every time he experienced “some kind of painful and cowardly feeling” when he passed by the landlady’s kitchen. He has already pawned a ring - a gift from his sister; next in line - a silver watch - the last memory of his father. His mother sends him money from a meager pension so that he has the opportunity to 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 happens in the hero's soul.
But we need 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 him, pursued him and took shape in an idea. As a result of painful reflections, the hero comes to the conclusion that “one tiny crime” can be made up for by “thousands of good deeds.” It would seem that this is simple arithmetic, a correct calculation. On the scales is placed, on the one hand, the death of a “stupid and evil old woman,” sucking the blood of the poor, profiting from their poverty, and on the other hand, thousands of lives saved “from rot and decay.” And such a crime seems to Raskolnikov not a crime at all, but a triumph of justice.
The hero hatched his idea for a long time and painfully. Not so much for himself, for his youth desecrated by poverty, he suffered in his soul, but for the plight of his mother and sister, for the drunken and dishonored girl on Konnogvardeisky Boulevard, for the martyrdom of Sonechka, for the tragedy of the Marmeladov family, for the general need, the hopeless and hopeless meaninglessness of life, which needed to be changed somehow. And, as a possible option, 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 can be justified in conscience.
The hero himself explains his thought this way: “People, according to the law of nature, are generally divided into two categories: into the lowest (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 the gift or talent to say a new word in one’s midst.” And if, for example, a person from the second category, in order to fulfill his idea (perhaps “saving for all mankind”) needs to “step over even a corpse, through blood, then within himself, 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 anyone he wants, those he meets and those who cross him, or to steal every day at the market.” According to the author of the theory, only what interferes with the implementation of a great idea can be eliminated. And only in this case the crime cannot be regarded as a crime, since it is committed not for selfish purposes, not for profit, but for the good of humanity.
But, having divided people into two categories, it can be interesting to find out for yourself which category you yourself belong to. And so Raskolnikov decides to kill the old pawnbroker in order to use her money to do good to people, save loved ones, and finally arrange his own destiny. But this is not the real reason for the crime. The hero has the courage to discard secondary excuses and get to the final truth: “I didn’t kill to help my mother - nonsense!” he says to Sonya. “I didn’t kill so that, having received the means and power, I could become a benefactor of humanity.” Nonsense! I just killed, I killed for myself, for myself alone... I needed to find out then, and find out quickly, whether I was a louse, like everyone else, or a man? Will I be able to cross or not! Do I dare to bend down and take it or not? Am I a trembling creature or do I have the right..."
Raskolnikov needs his experiment to test his ability to commit a crime, to find out what 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 everyone else. , since it would never even occur to a “lord” or a “being of a higher order” to ask such a question.
Being a gentle and kind man, experiencing in his heart all the suffering of humanity, Raskolnikov felt even before the crime that he was not capable of killing, that he would not endure such a murder. He felt sick and terrified just from the thought that he would hit him on the head with an ax, sliding in sticky and warm blood... At times he was even ready to renounce his idea, it was so painful for him: “Even if not no doubt about all these calculations, be it all... clear as day, fair as arithmetic. God! After all, I still won’t make up my mind! I can’t stand it, I can’t stand it!... Lord! - he prayed, “show me my path, and I will renounce this damned... dream of mine!”
But the “dream” had already entered and lived too deeply in him to get rid of it so easily. It was no longer he who controlled her, but she led him along like a sleepwalker. And the crime was accomplished: the old woman was killed, her sister Lizaveta, quiet and unresponsive, whose death was completely not part of Raskolnikov’s plans, was killed innocently. But she became an involuntary witness, and therefore could destroy the hero’s calculations and intentions. If there were other witnesses here, they could share Lizaveta’s fate. For the sake of the idea, Raskolnikov was ready to make other sacrifices. This is eloquently evidenced by the scene in which the hero, “clutching an ax in his hand,” stood outside the door when Koch inopportunely appears in front of it...
Dostoevsky shows how one crime inevitably leads to another, requiring more and more blood to carry out a deed supposedly undertaken with a good intention.
The entire month from the murder to the confession passes for the hero in constant tension, in mental anguish that never stops for a minute. Raskolnikov experiences a state of endless isolation from people, it covers his heart with a “dead cold”, and this “terrible feeling” becomes a new attempt, retribution for the crime.
An attempt to live and act not in accordance with the heart and conscience, but according to a theory developed by reason, leads the hero to a tragic split. He plays the role of a “lord” and at the same time realizes that this role is not for him. He plots and commits murder when his whole person rebels against it. And therefore he had the right to later say to Sonya: “I killed myself, not the old woman! And then, all at once, he killed himself forever!”
The murder of a “consumptive, stupid and evil old woman”, whose life seems no more expensive than the life of 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 it is impossible to forcibly eliminate any life without damaging your own heart, without unpredictable tragic consequences.
If with his idea of solving “blood according to conscience” Raskolnikov takes a step towards moral catastrophe, then his human essence, his kind and sympathetic soul, which could not bear the terrible experiment, rejects his theory. The author leads the hero and the reader to the idea that no well-intentioned 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 that we learn from Dostoevsky’s novel.