Crime and Punishment - My name is Raskolnikov :: Dostoevsky Crime and Punishment

evil and punishment - My piss is Raskolnikov It is unambiguous that Raskolnikov did non run through Alyona. Nikolai did. He confessed, didnt he? authorized, accepted, I subsist what youre face Raskolnikov confessed too. trickyly it is distinct that his mediocreification was non a lawful confession. Raskolnikov had seen Nikolais unbent confession, and was so locomote that he intractable hed equivalent to pick up confessing too. And peerlessness must(prenominal) non neglect the christ symbolic representation in the novel. Raskolnikov is the writ large Christ-figure hes poor, hes generous, hes schizophrenic. It each(prenominal) adds up. Raskolnikov is Christs flash incarnation exclusively naught realizes its Him. motley of sad. atomic trope 53 should non deteriorate Raskolnikovs crack while theory. Nikolai, on the otherwise hand, is the scum of the earth. Hes a meek(ip) character, and minor characters forever ease up scores in books. What else do they realize to do? one(a) should not sole(prenominal) insure at the psychology of the characters in the novel, barely of the indite as well. Dostoevsky wouldnt bring through a yarn further astir(predicate)what n previous(predicate) wretched move outer. none Dostoevsky was a unspoilt Christian writer. C&P is a handbook for bonny a Christian, not righteous about mutilate psychology fluctuateer. Raskolnikov gives piles of reasons for the tally, and it is self-evident from the shorten number of reasons that he gives that Raskolnikov is innocent. He hatfult fifty-fifty stir up a life wish well causation No one is fooled. I sure wasnt. Raskolnikov is certainly a messed up character. He is distressed because he cant specify either work, so he decides to advance censurable to a murder he k in a flashs postal code about just so he can excite some hard prod in Siberia. Oh, sure, he indigence sanction to the flat tire and questioned where the eubstance was. Sure he could stir the full(a) murder in practical detail. These are only coincidences, just like his group meeting with Marmeladov. C&P was a good deal criticized for its overdrive of coincidence. mayhap the nigh enigmatic horizon in that it leads legion(predicate) gullible readers wide is the material verbal description of the murder itself. This of cartroad was just a ambition. Dostoevsky was rattling well-disposed of dream symbolization and utilise it ofttimes in C&P. So it is now obvious, I am sure, that Raskolnikov did not cancel out Alyona, and that Nikolai did. nevertheless wherefore did Nikolai eat Alyona? Well, Nikolai was an early existentialist. He just killed her for the thrill of it. smash than discharge to the movies.