This is one of the most important chapters of the novel. It contains the quintessence of half the title of the novel — namely, the very crime has taken place. And ahead are 5 more parts and and epilog
Many are fascinated by true crime stories. Dostoevsky and Truman Compote both studied true crimes and gave us famous books. Why do minds seek to live violence vicariously? Perhaps Raskolnikov did, too, but it overtook him and “vicariously” turned into “actually.” He is Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. I am still not sure of his motive. The idea of saving others with the money he gained seemed to have been lost. Going through this chapter one gruesome detail at a time was difficult.
I must have missed something here, since it's not clear to me that helping the poor was ever part of R's plan?I know he overhears that 'Robin Hood' type theory when the students are talking, but I can't see that he adopted it? From my reading it doesn't really say what he plans to do with the proceeds of the robbery, although his needs are very obvious.
I think R will view these two murders quite differently. He has already decided that killing the old woman is 'not a crime' After that murder he immediately sets about his intention of robbery.He felt in "full possession of his faculties, free from confusion or giddiness, but his hands were trembling."
Having to also murder Lizabeta is a total, unanticipated shock. "Fear gained more and more mastery over him, especially after this second quite unexpected murder." He has feelings of "loathing and horror" at what he has done. This is not a murder he can rationalise in the same way he did with the old woman. I think it will be obvious, even to him, that that murder is about not getting caught.
It's interesting that the derivation of his name points to a "split", a play on words which a reader in a translation misses. But I see how this ties in with the idea of the doppelganger that you suggest, an internal 'other' within Rodion. I think I suggested last time that in his debilitated fantasies Rodion has entered an abstract world; he is 'other' to himself. I think most of us probably have an internal 'other' but are fortunate enough not to meet circumstances in which our darker side takes over, or in which our sense of right and wrong, is severely tested.
There are lots of ideas in the text, in your suggestions, and in the chat, and I expect all this to slowly unravel and become clearer as the novel processes.
As it turns out from Raskolnikov's actions, he was not particularly eager to help the poor. Initially, he did not just want to take the old woman's money or kill her, but to exchange her life for a million others. This is a very foolish idea because the old woman is not particularly wealthy. However, this explanation helps Raskolnikov make up his mind. In fact, he has slightly different reasons; he simply wanted to test whether he could do it. The reason why he wanted this will be revealed later. Nonetheless, Rodion has some impulses to help others, such as the girl on the bench or giving money to the Marmeladovs. But like everything in him, his ideas, actions, and motivations are also under the influence of SPLIT and contradict themselves.
This chapter made me anxious! I was on edge and read the chapter so quickly wanting to know if Raskolnikov would get away from the apartment without being caught. It's been so long since I've read this book that I'd forgotten that he kills the sister too. Really interesting thinking about the real life crimes this book was pulled from and the idea of a third murder with the tie-in of his initials.
I agree! The tension in that chapter is palpable. Raskolnikov's plan and the unexpected murder of the sister complicate his escape and heighten the stakes. And the topic of a potential third death is a big topic for discussion in general. It's kind of not in the novel, but due to the editor's fault, Dostoevsky wrote about it.
Wow, this brutal climax is a tour de force of psychological suspense. Unbearable tension that left me almost as unnerved as Raskolnikov!
It's intriguing to note that the dream sequence, featuring the beaten horse a couple of chapters prior, also serves a structural function in this part of the novel. It foreshadows the murder, preparing readers for the horror, while mirroring Raskolnikov's turmoil. Here, Dostoevsky's prose becomes almost Hitchcockian in its ability to ratchet up suspense. The unexpected arrival of Lizaveta, the near-misses with potential witnesses, Raskolnikov's mounting panic... All this creates a claustrophobic atmosphere that's almost unbearable... and yet, deeply satisfying! 😭
Perhaps most revealing is how Raskolnikov's carefully laid plans crumble in the face of reality. His inability to stick to his original motive (helping the poor), instead grabbing items haphazardly... This disconnect between his idealised self-image and his actions under pressure forms a real tension here. Again, Dosto challenges us to question our own capacity for rationalisation in the heat of the action. As R said in the previous chapter: 'criminals, almost without exception, succumb at the moment of the crime to a weakening of the faculties of reason and will, which are replaced, in stark contrast, by thoughtlessness of a childish and quite extraordinary kind, at precisely the moment when reason and caution are most essential.'
For some reason, Poe's 'Tell-Tale Heart' kept coming to mind while reading this...
Super interesting! I did know about Poe’s influence on poets like Baudelaire, but didn’t realise Dosto was also a fan of his tales. But I’m not surprised: you can feel the influence of Poe’s feverish prose on Dostoevsky’s own style, especially in a chapter like this. I suspect the police procedurals (the three Auguste Dupin stories) also had a deep influence on him!
Most likely yes, but unfortunately no such notes as those about "The Tell-Tale Heart" have survived from Dostoevsky. But if he liked Poe, I'm sure he wanted to read all of his work.
In the journal "Time", which Dostoevsky ran with his brother, two of Poe's stories were published: "The Tell-Tale Heart" and "The Black Cat". Fyodor Dostoevsky personally wrote a preface to this 1861 publication, praising Poe for the "exceptional external or psychological situation" of his characters, his powerful imagination, and his ability to convince readers of nearly incredible events. Joan Grossman notes that Dostoevsky's characterization contains "the deepest judgments about Poe's artistic method that had been expressed in any language up to that time". Dostoevsky can be considered the first to publicly recognize Poe's genius.
Indeed, there are many parallels between Poe's work and Dostoevsky's novel. Numerous plot and artistic similarities are evident. Raskolnikov, like Poe's protagonists, meticulously plans his crime, even counting the exact number of steps from his home to the old woman's house. Two days before the murder, Raskolnikov conducts a "dress rehearsal" – reminiscent of Poe's hero, who went through seven such "rehearsals". Just before the murder, Raskolnikov hears his own heartbeat and fears it might alert his victim. Dostoevsky highlights both Raskolnikov's "refinement of senses" and his hidden pride in his own foresight and cunning: "This minute was etched in him forever – he could not understand where he got so much cunning from". These are just a few of the many parallels.
I'm still keeping track of my favorite themes here, light and dark, blood and cleanliness. Concepts that should be opposites but get all tangled up. just like Raskolnikov's name and actions. This guy really went in expecting to keep calm and collected.
And what a chapter!!!! I’m not sure why I was shocked by how graphic the murder was. In my mind, literature has been become more graphic, but Dostoevsky can hold his own. I can only imagine what he witnessed first-hand.
My favorite part of your notes was the description of the crimes on which Dostoevsky modeled Rodion’s murders. This was fascinating!
First of all, I'll never look at Batman the same way... thanks. 🤣 The background cases are interesting, and explains why the axe, but not WHY the axe, especially if he used the blunt side. It's big and unwieldy, and took a lot of risk to conceal. It makes a get-away equally awkward. I suppose if you had to smash a door it would be useful. But for someone who has clearly spent time thinking about all these details, he surely must have a reason. I missed if he took his pledge with him or left it behind? Would it have his name on it?
Why didn't he take a knife? Or what weapon would have been more logical?
Raskolnikov could only use what was easy to find. An axe, as we understood, was in every yard. And deadly, unlike a stone or a street board.
But the axe also has its meanings in Russian culture. On March 1, 1861, the slogan "Call Rus’ to the axe!" appeared for the first time in A. I. Herzen's magazine "The Bell." Since then, the image of the axe has become a symbol of the "new generation" of Russian intelligentsia and its mission in Russia: to cleanse the country from serfdom, autocracy, the tsar, the church; a symbol of the persistent desire to change the social order through radical reforms. But at the same time, also a symbol of detachment from the soil.
Regarding the pledges. Surprisingly, Raskolnikov didn’t even think about or didn’t look for his watch and ring. He grabbed something, but it turns out that after the murder, he lost interest in the second part of the plan: to take as much money as possible for millions of poor people. He wanted to feed them...
Ah, symbolic flair! Perhaps that’s why I’m not a criminal mastermind—too practical! 🤷🏼♂️ I suppose once the sister returns all plans are out the window, so to speak.
Well, Raskolnikov is not a mastermind either. He was frankly lucky in many ways 👹
Before the appearance of Lizaveta, he didn't find much. He should have gone to the rich part of Petersburg, there was more to find from the aristocrats.
In response to your question about character pages, I feel like I’m keeping people straight for now; however, if we have a large number of characters yet to meet, it would be helpful to separate them out.
To answer your question about the separate pages for each character, yes, that would be good if you have time, thank you.
For later Q&A. I am very curious as to why Batman was chosen to represent the killer in the comic. Batman is a hero in the English speaking world, it's really strange to see him in this role.
Raskolnikov clearly isn't in the right state of mind. He is fidgety and has overlooked many things. Dostoevsky definitely wanted to show that Raskolnikov's fate is driven more by chance than by his own planning. He added a touch of devilishness to the novel 👹. The contrast between light and dark, blood and cleanliness mirrors Raskolnikov's internal conflict and the duality of his character.
Many are fascinated by true crime stories. Dostoevsky and Truman Compote both studied true crimes and gave us famous books. Why do minds seek to live violence vicariously? Perhaps Raskolnikov did, too, but it overtook him and “vicariously” turned into “actually.” He is Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. I am still not sure of his motive. The idea of saving others with the money he gained seemed to have been lost. Going through this chapter one gruesome detail at a time was difficult.
Yes, Rodion clearly lost the idea that he needed to save millions of people from poverty. He only took the wallet and some things. Crazy 😅
I must have missed something here, since it's not clear to me that helping the poor was ever part of R's plan?I know he overhears that 'Robin Hood' type theory when the students are talking, but I can't see that he adopted it? From my reading it doesn't really say what he plans to do with the proceeds of the robbery, although his needs are very obvious.
I think R will view these two murders quite differently. He has already decided that killing the old woman is 'not a crime' After that murder he immediately sets about his intention of robbery.He felt in "full possession of his faculties, free from confusion or giddiness, but his hands were trembling."
Having to also murder Lizabeta is a total, unanticipated shock. "Fear gained more and more mastery over him, especially after this second quite unexpected murder." He has feelings of "loathing and horror" at what he has done. This is not a murder he can rationalise in the same way he did with the old woman. I think it will be obvious, even to him, that that murder is about not getting caught.
It's interesting that the derivation of his name points to a "split", a play on words which a reader in a translation misses. But I see how this ties in with the idea of the doppelganger that you suggest, an internal 'other' within Rodion. I think I suggested last time that in his debilitated fantasies Rodion has entered an abstract world; he is 'other' to himself. I think most of us probably have an internal 'other' but are fortunate enough not to meet circumstances in which our darker side takes over, or in which our sense of right and wrong, is severely tested.
There are lots of ideas in the text, in your suggestions, and in the chat, and I expect all this to slowly unravel and become clearer as the novel processes.
As it turns out from Raskolnikov's actions, he was not particularly eager to help the poor. Initially, he did not just want to take the old woman's money or kill her, but to exchange her life for a million others. This is a very foolish idea because the old woman is not particularly wealthy. However, this explanation helps Raskolnikov make up his mind. In fact, he has slightly different reasons; he simply wanted to test whether he could do it. The reason why he wanted this will be revealed later. Nonetheless, Rodion has some impulses to help others, such as the girl on the bench or giving money to the Marmeladovs. But like everything in him, his ideas, actions, and motivations are also under the influence of SPLIT and contradict themselves.
This chapter made me anxious! I was on edge and read the chapter so quickly wanting to know if Raskolnikov would get away from the apartment without being caught. It's been so long since I've read this book that I'd forgotten that he kills the sister too. Really interesting thinking about the real life crimes this book was pulled from and the idea of a third murder with the tie-in of his initials.
I agree! The tension in that chapter is palpable. Raskolnikov's plan and the unexpected murder of the sister complicate his escape and heighten the stakes. And the topic of a potential third death is a big topic for discussion in general. It's kind of not in the novel, but due to the editor's fault, Dostoevsky wrote about it.
Wow, this brutal climax is a tour de force of psychological suspense. Unbearable tension that left me almost as unnerved as Raskolnikov!
It's intriguing to note that the dream sequence, featuring the beaten horse a couple of chapters prior, also serves a structural function in this part of the novel. It foreshadows the murder, preparing readers for the horror, while mirroring Raskolnikov's turmoil. Here, Dostoevsky's prose becomes almost Hitchcockian in its ability to ratchet up suspense. The unexpected arrival of Lizaveta, the near-misses with potential witnesses, Raskolnikov's mounting panic... All this creates a claustrophobic atmosphere that's almost unbearable... and yet, deeply satisfying! 😭
Perhaps most revealing is how Raskolnikov's carefully laid plans crumble in the face of reality. His inability to stick to his original motive (helping the poor), instead grabbing items haphazardly... This disconnect between his idealised self-image and his actions under pressure forms a real tension here. Again, Dosto challenges us to question our own capacity for rationalisation in the heat of the action. As R said in the previous chapter: 'criminals, almost without exception, succumb at the moment of the crime to a weakening of the faculties of reason and will, which are replaced, in stark contrast, by thoughtlessness of a childish and quite extraordinary kind, at precisely the moment when reason and caution are most essential.'
For some reason, Poe's 'Tell-Tale Heart' kept coming to mind while reading this...
Super interesting! I did know about Poe’s influence on poets like Baudelaire, but didn’t realise Dosto was also a fan of his tales. But I’m not surprised: you can feel the influence of Poe’s feverish prose on Dostoevsky’s own style, especially in a chapter like this. I suspect the police procedurals (the three Auguste Dupin stories) also had a deep influence on him!
Most likely yes, but unfortunately no such notes as those about "The Tell-Tale Heart" have survived from Dostoevsky. But if he liked Poe, I'm sure he wanted to read all of his work.
It's no coincidence that Poe was mentioned.
In the journal "Time", which Dostoevsky ran with his brother, two of Poe's stories were published: "The Tell-Tale Heart" and "The Black Cat". Fyodor Dostoevsky personally wrote a preface to this 1861 publication, praising Poe for the "exceptional external or psychological situation" of his characters, his powerful imagination, and his ability to convince readers of nearly incredible events. Joan Grossman notes that Dostoevsky's characterization contains "the deepest judgments about Poe's artistic method that had been expressed in any language up to that time". Dostoevsky can be considered the first to publicly recognize Poe's genius.
Indeed, there are many parallels between Poe's work and Dostoevsky's novel. Numerous plot and artistic similarities are evident. Raskolnikov, like Poe's protagonists, meticulously plans his crime, even counting the exact number of steps from his home to the old woman's house. Two days before the murder, Raskolnikov conducts a "dress rehearsal" – reminiscent of Poe's hero, who went through seven such "rehearsals". Just before the murder, Raskolnikov hears his own heartbeat and fears it might alert his victim. Dostoevsky highlights both Raskolnikov's "refinement of senses" and his hidden pride in his own foresight and cunning: "This minute was etched in him forever – he could not understand where he got so much cunning from". These are just a few of the many parallels.
I'm still keeping track of my favorite themes here, light and dark, blood and cleanliness. Concepts that should be opposites but get all tangled up. just like Raskolnikov's name and actions. This guy really went in expecting to keep calm and collected.
And what a chapter!!!! I’m not sure why I was shocked by how graphic the murder was. In my mind, literature has been become more graphic, but Dostoevsky can hold his own. I can only imagine what he witnessed first-hand.
My favorite part of your notes was the description of the crimes on which Dostoevsky modeled Rodion’s murders. This was fascinating!
First of all, I'll never look at Batman the same way... thanks. 🤣 The background cases are interesting, and explains why the axe, but not WHY the axe, especially if he used the blunt side. It's big and unwieldy, and took a lot of risk to conceal. It makes a get-away equally awkward. I suppose if you had to smash a door it would be useful. But for someone who has clearly spent time thinking about all these details, he surely must have a reason. I missed if he took his pledge with him or left it behind? Would it have his name on it?
Batman has transformed! 😂
Why didn't he take a knife? Or what weapon would have been more logical?
Raskolnikov could only use what was easy to find. An axe, as we understood, was in every yard. And deadly, unlike a stone or a street board.
But the axe also has its meanings in Russian culture. On March 1, 1861, the slogan "Call Rus’ to the axe!" appeared for the first time in A. I. Herzen's magazine "The Bell." Since then, the image of the axe has become a symbol of the "new generation" of Russian intelligentsia and its mission in Russia: to cleanse the country from serfdom, autocracy, the tsar, the church; a symbol of the persistent desire to change the social order through radical reforms. But at the same time, also a symbol of detachment from the soil.
Regarding the pledges. Surprisingly, Raskolnikov didn’t even think about or didn’t look for his watch and ring. He grabbed something, but it turns out that after the murder, he lost interest in the second part of the plan: to take as much money as possible for millions of poor people. He wanted to feed them...
Ah, symbolic flair! Perhaps that’s why I’m not a criminal mastermind—too practical! 🤷🏼♂️ I suppose once the sister returns all plans are out the window, so to speak.
Well, Raskolnikov is not a mastermind either. He was frankly lucky in many ways 👹
Before the appearance of Lizaveta, he didn't find much. He should have gone to the rich part of Petersburg, there was more to find from the aristocrats.
Not Batman!
In response to your question about character pages, I feel like I’m keeping people straight for now; however, if we have a large number of characters yet to meet, it would be helpful to separate them out.
To answer your question about the separate pages for each character, yes, that would be good if you have time, thank you.
For later Q&A. I am very curious as to why Batman was chosen to represent the killer in the comic. Batman is a hero in the English speaking world, it's really strange to see him in this role.
Raskolnikov clearly isn't in the right state of mind. He is fidgety and has overlooked many things. Dostoevsky definitely wanted to show that Raskolnikov's fate is driven more by chance than by his own planning. He added a touch of devilishness to the novel 👹. The contrast between light and dark, blood and cleanliness mirrors Raskolnikov's internal conflict and the duality of his character.