Crime and Punishment: Character Analysis

Having finished reading the book recently, I feel the need to jot down all my thoughts on it, so I can move onto other books and do a detail dump. I start today with the characters.

To those who enjoy reading books without spoilers, feel free to leave at this time. Here begins the analysis.

RASKOLNIKOV

The main character of the book, from whose perspective we see the events. From the very beginning of the book, we see the seeds of his idea begin to form, then followed through. Although he is a murderer seven chapters in, Raskolnikov is the closest thing the book has to a protagonist. Therefore, we are expected as the audience to sympathize with him. And that we do. The book masterfully allows the reader to feel the frenzy racing through Raskolnikov's head, his inner turmoils, his rationalizations. Indeed, it is almost scary how easy it is to sympathize with him.

A notable trait of his is the polarization of what he does. It is established early on that Raskolnikov is an extremely charitable man, to the point of foolishness. He continually dumps out his wallet to complete strangers. At the same time, he is capable of commuting an atrocity to the degree of murder. As much as these two traits seem different, however, they are, in reality, the same. Both are impulsive acts, and no matter what he preaches, Raskolnikov's actions are never self-profitable. When he receives payment, he squanders it on people who he views as less fortunate than himself. When he murders the pawnbroker, he feels no need to spend the money he gained, but rather to hide it away, untouched. Both show the same spontaneous action on Raskolnikov's part that does not allow for self-gain. Indeed, his whole rationalization was that by murdering the old woman, he would be helping society as a whole.

Related to his selflessness, Raskolnikov shows an intense care for his family. Upon meeting Luzhin for the first time, he received a much less welcome greeting than even the one that is normally expected from the elder brother. He is shouted down as a narcissistic manipulator, which of course was entirely true. Raskolnikov constantly channels the delirium granted by his fever to shout down anyone who comes near his family. This same protection is what drove him to attempt to leave his family without notifying them of why. To his dear mother, he was a ray of goodness, and he had to let that image stand.

Another important thing to understand about Raskolnikov is the way he is brought to confession. In the interest of time, that will wait for a future post. Time to move on to other characters.

RAZUMIHIN

Razumihin is the poor best friend who's out of the loop. Early in the book, his main role was to be there for Raskolnikov to faint in front of. At this time, his character isn't very fleshed out, although we can see that he is trying to help as best he can. This limited role is filled rather well, however, as he is shown to be in great indignation when Porfiry so much as suggests Raskolnikov could possibly be guilty.

As we are introduced to Dounia, Razumihin's role starts to shift into a new one: a love interest. However, this role isn't filled in the traditional sense. Razumihin isn't rich, nor is he powerful, nor in any way very remarkable. This is in stark contrast to the other gentlemen who fall for Dounia. The other unique facet concerning the way Razumihin fills this role is how he is introduced into it. He is not some character that comes out if nowhere on a white stallion to join the family, but rather, he replaces the list brother. But as a brother that happens to be marry-able.

Dounia

The younger sister of Raskolnikov. She is portrayed as being a good woman being chased by bad men, the sort of girl who, despite (or perhaps because of) her good nature, is sought over by the most vile of fellows. Her dealings with the courtship of Luzhin show that although she holds a certain deal of self respect, she is also very passive, and willing to endure hardships for the sake of her family.

Despite being family, Dounia does not act as Raskolnikov's confidante. Indeed, he seems perpetually irritated by her presence. Despite his seeming stand offishness, however, Raskolnikov is very fast to point out Luzhin for the scumbag he is, for which his sister seems grateful. Dounia, though kept in the background, does much in ways of moving the plot. Her character shows a tragic tendency of those who esteem themselves powerful: the desire to rule. She was the target of both Luzhin and Svidrigaïlov specifically because she was poor.

The moment that Dounia's character becomes the most powerful is shortly before the end of the book. When cornered by Svidrigaïlov, we see her less passive side. Although she is armed then, it is her own attitude that becomes her most powerful weapon.

LUZHIN

Although his role is comparatively minor, Luzhin is still noteworthy. This guy was the scumbag who was paired off to marry Dounia. He is shown to be extremely narcissistic, feeling his own title to be the most important part of his marriage.

He is also shown to be petty. When he slips the money into Sonia's pocket, it is an attempt to humiliate both her and the Raskolnikovs. This provides a nice foil to Raskolnikov's actions of charity. While Raskolnikov was so base as to murder an old woman, Luzhin was a gentleman in high standing. While Raskolnikov's actions are almost always done in an earnest effort to help those around him, Luzhin's efforts were a deceitful play for self-gain.

PORFIRY

This story's Inspector Javert, with one major difference: He's right. The similarities are astonishing. Porfiry's sole task becomes driving Raskolnikov to confession, despite not having proper proof that it was he who committed the crime. Going by a single newspaper editorial, Porfiry makes a bold accusation at Raskolnikov, then spends the rest of the book trying to do it.

Interesting to note is that in all their encounters, Porfiry's text is regularly interrupted with his own laughter. Porfiry's style of interview is playing mind games, something a great number of characters in this book do. Raskolnikov, of course, is anticipating this. The scary part is that Porfiry is really freaking good at his job. Raskolnikov finds himself outmatched at every turn.

Also of importance is that although he chooses to turn himself in, Raskolnikov refuses to confess to Porfiry. In this allegory, Porfiry represents forced repentance. It is something to be avoided. This route of forced confession would have led to the same end, but the emotional coming of age would be lost.

SONIA

Raskolnikov's morality pet. Although presented as being impossibly pure, she works as a prostitute. This, perhaps, is what draws Raskolnikov to her. He sees another destitute soul, and together they ask healing. Although the book focuses on the crime and punishment of Raskolnikov, it can just as easily be applied to Sonia.

Sonia is perhaps the closest thing this book has to a love interest for Raskolnikov. Again, this role is filled in an unusual way. Although there are no confessions of love, no public hand-holding or scenes that our mommies don't want us to see, there is a very obvious hint of love. Not the "you have a six-pack, let's make out" kind, but a deeper, emotional connection. Sonia fills the role Raskolnikov's family could not, pushes him toward confession, and does not shun him for what he does.

This is all the more noteworthy when we remember that one of the women Raskolnikov murdered was Sonia's friend, Lizaveta. Almost with impossible altruism, she forgives him, and gives him Lizavita's old cross. In a way, he is redeemed by taking up the burden of his cross, which could only be bestowed by Sonia.

SVIDRIGAÏLOV

A character that is scarily similar to Raskolnikov, and the closest thing the book has to an antagonist. The most obvious similarity is the weight of their crimes. Between the two of them, although they are enemies, they find somebody who understands what it is like living with the guilt of having killed someone. A more subtle common trait is their shared extreme charity. Additionally, Svidrigaïlov is, like Raskolnikov, visited upon by nightmares.

Interesting to note is that these actions seem to come almost in reverse for Raskolnikov as they do for Svidrigaïlov. Raskolnikov is first shown as being charitable, receiving his first of many messed up dreams, then eventually murder. Svidrigaïlov starts out a murderer, then is haunted by nightmares, then finishes with charity. Raskolnikov's journey ends in redemption, Svidrigaïlov's in disgrace.

That went way longer than intended.

Peace out, readers.