This chapter presents a prototype of a court. Luzhin acts as the prosecutor, while Lebeziatnikov serves as the witness, Raskolnikov takes on the role of the lawyer
This book is starting to mess with my mind. I find myself more enraged at a man for framing a girl for petty theft than I am at a man who brutally murdered two humans. We’re really traversing all the circles of hell in this one.
Yeah, it's interesting to see what emotions about Rodion will come next. In theory, he's the most dangerous criminal here, but he's far from being the most repulsive character. Could we say that he's extraordinary? 😅
Dostoevsky is honored with a section in Theodore H. Schwartz’ book, Gray Matters, A Biography of Brain Surgery. He writes that Dostoevsky had temporal lobe epilepsy from childhood. When the neurons misfire in this part of the brain, it causes feelings of ecstasy, religiosity, connections to the infinite, and seeing religious figures including demonic ones and can lead one to commit crimes, including murder. Perhaps this explains why he wrote this book and maybe what is wrong with Rodion? (Pages 357-359)
It is unknown whether he committed any serious crimes. But I think he definitely engaged in fraud or will engage in financial fraud, and will be corrupt.
This chapter gave me a headache! The yelling, drinking, arguing, throwing objects, cheating the vulnerable, neglected orphans, It was humanity about its worst, and all this at a funeral. Now that we have been willingly led to this baseness, I need Dostoevsky to pull us back to something softer in humanity.
I agree. Katerina Ivanovna's energy predominates here: scandalous, illogical, insane. We are filled with the energy of this mad woman, who has partly lost her mind from grief, from poverty, from illness. There is definitely no harmony in this.
I've been reading the book in Italian, then going through your entries, then re-reading and annotating in English, which is so time consuming I'll have to give up on that for our next reads and just stick to one book. I know I'm behind so I tried to get to annotating these last three chapters today and found that I couldn't read them a second time, I disliked them so much the first. Dostoevsky and I are fighting again, I guess. I'll say this, I wish he stopped talking about women and let women speak for themselves, they're either a pun to make fun of progressives or martyrs to teach Rodion a lesson, and I can't stand it.
Yes, thoughtful reading does indeed consume a lot of time, albeit enjoyable time. Overall, not every chapter requires in-depth study. In my view, the first three chapters of this fifth part can be read through without extensive analysis—they don't contain anything crucial that demands detailed examination. These chapters are more atmospheric, serving primarily to advance the plot.
I concur that this chapter portrays women in an odd light. Some scholars suggest that Katerina Ivanovna was modeled after Dostoevsky's first wife. I find this hard to believe. From what I've read, his first wife wasn't nearly as hysterical as Katerina Ivanovna. Moreover, she certainly never coerced anyone into prostitution for financial gain.
I am again struck by how eloquent Raskolnikov can be when he is able to gather his thoughts and present his case. He is very bad at one-on-one dialogue: his phrases are jagged, he forgets what he needed to say and instead says things he very much did not want to say - it's like he can't maintain rapport with another. (This makes him particularly vulnerable to Porfiry's needling and probing.) But when he stands back, takes in the information and organizes it in his head, and presents it, he is eloquent. Underneath all the turmoil and confusion there is a superb analytical mind. Unfortunately he's been using that mind to construct absurd intellectual rationales for committing horrible crimes.
Yes, it's amazing how eloquently he speaks. He could have made a good lawyer. Although, when he was talking about his article during his first meeting with Porfiry, he also expressed himself quite vividly and had lengthy monologues. I think that when a topic truly captivates him, is important, and he wants to convey his thoughts - he succeeds at it. In other cases, he doesn't particularly want to talk to anyone himself.
I have been wondering not just about this chapter, but all of these four chapters in Book 5. They are quite a lengthy departure - 50-odd pages on my book - from the themes of Raskalnikov's situation. It seems to me that Dostoevsky has used these lesser characters to expound more fully on other social evils and the 'progressive' ideas of the time.
Lebezyatnikov gives us a clear picture of what would amount to a social revolution with his ideas on marriage, child care, communes etc. Even atheism, which I imagine would be pretty shocking at the time, must be at root of his disinclination to swear testimony in a court.
The general degraded position of the poverty stricken is clear, especially among the rabble at the funeral feast. Most particularly, the absolute vulnerability and insecurity of women and children really stands out.
Katerina Ivanovna has been driven to madness. Where will she go, with young children, if the landlady ejects her? Sonya must face daily danger in her 'job' although that is not alluded to. She quickly sees how her reputation can be destroyed, and when she is falsely accused by the villainous Luzhin, she looks into a crowd of "stern, mocking, hateful faces." It is ironic that she is saved by Raskalnikov, the murderer, and Lebezyatnikov, whose 'progressive' ideas don't seem to include taking notice of the real evils of poverty, degradation, hunger, drunkenness, and absolute insecurity, that surround him on a daily basis.
Indeed. Dostoevsky uses secondary characters to illuminate broader social problems and contemporary 'progressive' ideas. Lebezyatnikov embodies radical social concepts, proposing revolutionary changes in marriage, childcare, and communal living. In general, at that time, the ideas were not so much shocking as they were attractive. People wanted change, and the youth was becoming more and more radical.
The funeral feast vividly portrays the degradation of poverty, highlighting the extreme vulnerability of women and children. Katerina Ivanovna's descent into madness and Sonya's precarious situation exemplify this vulnerability.
Yes, the radical Lebeziatnikov indeed thought about the "sublime", the global, without understanding that first it was necessary to deal with actual problems. But this is how utopians think. Such was Fourier, who actually spread these sentiments.
This book is starting to mess with my mind. I find myself more enraged at a man for framing a girl for petty theft than I am at a man who brutally murdered two humans. We’re really traversing all the circles of hell in this one.
Yeah, it's interesting to see what emotions about Rodion will come next. In theory, he's the most dangerous criminal here, but he's far from being the most repulsive character. Could we say that he's extraordinary? 😅
Dostoevsky is honored with a section in Theodore H. Schwartz’ book, Gray Matters, A Biography of Brain Surgery. He writes that Dostoevsky had temporal lobe epilepsy from childhood. When the neurons misfire in this part of the brain, it causes feelings of ecstasy, religiosity, connections to the infinite, and seeing religious figures including demonic ones and can lead one to commit crimes, including murder. Perhaps this explains why he wrote this book and maybe what is wrong with Rodion? (Pages 357-359)
Luzhin is just so icky. He may not have committed serious crimes, yet, but I could see him doing so down the road.
It is unknown whether he committed any serious crimes. But I think he definitely engaged in fraud or will engage in financial fraud, and will be corrupt.
This chapter gave me a headache! The yelling, drinking, arguing, throwing objects, cheating the vulnerable, neglected orphans, It was humanity about its worst, and all this at a funeral. Now that we have been willingly led to this baseness, I need Dostoevsky to pull us back to something softer in humanity.
I agree. Katerina Ivanovna's energy predominates here: scandalous, illogical, insane. We are filled with the energy of this mad woman, who has partly lost her mind from grief, from poverty, from illness. There is definitely no harmony in this.
I've been reading the book in Italian, then going through your entries, then re-reading and annotating in English, which is so time consuming I'll have to give up on that for our next reads and just stick to one book. I know I'm behind so I tried to get to annotating these last three chapters today and found that I couldn't read them a second time, I disliked them so much the first. Dostoevsky and I are fighting again, I guess. I'll say this, I wish he stopped talking about women and let women speak for themselves, they're either a pun to make fun of progressives or martyrs to teach Rodion a lesson, and I can't stand it.
Yes, thoughtful reading does indeed consume a lot of time, albeit enjoyable time. Overall, not every chapter requires in-depth study. In my view, the first three chapters of this fifth part can be read through without extensive analysis—they don't contain anything crucial that demands detailed examination. These chapters are more atmospheric, serving primarily to advance the plot.
I concur that this chapter portrays women in an odd light. Some scholars suggest that Katerina Ivanovna was modeled after Dostoevsky's first wife. I find this hard to believe. From what I've read, his first wife wasn't nearly as hysterical as Katerina Ivanovna. Moreover, she certainly never coerced anyone into prostitution for financial gain.
I am again struck by how eloquent Raskolnikov can be when he is able to gather his thoughts and present his case. He is very bad at one-on-one dialogue: his phrases are jagged, he forgets what he needed to say and instead says things he very much did not want to say - it's like he can't maintain rapport with another. (This makes him particularly vulnerable to Porfiry's needling and probing.) But when he stands back, takes in the information and organizes it in his head, and presents it, he is eloquent. Underneath all the turmoil and confusion there is a superb analytical mind. Unfortunately he's been using that mind to construct absurd intellectual rationales for committing horrible crimes.
Yes, it's amazing how eloquently he speaks. He could have made a good lawyer. Although, when he was talking about his article during his first meeting with Porfiry, he also expressed himself quite vividly and had lengthy monologues. I think that when a topic truly captivates him, is important, and he wants to convey his thoughts - he succeeds at it. In other cases, he doesn't particularly want to talk to anyone himself.
I have been wondering not just about this chapter, but all of these four chapters in Book 5. They are quite a lengthy departure - 50-odd pages on my book - from the themes of Raskalnikov's situation. It seems to me that Dostoevsky has used these lesser characters to expound more fully on other social evils and the 'progressive' ideas of the time.
Lebezyatnikov gives us a clear picture of what would amount to a social revolution with his ideas on marriage, child care, communes etc. Even atheism, which I imagine would be pretty shocking at the time, must be at root of his disinclination to swear testimony in a court.
The general degraded position of the poverty stricken is clear, especially among the rabble at the funeral feast. Most particularly, the absolute vulnerability and insecurity of women and children really stands out.
Katerina Ivanovna has been driven to madness. Where will she go, with young children, if the landlady ejects her? Sonya must face daily danger in her 'job' although that is not alluded to. She quickly sees how her reputation can be destroyed, and when she is falsely accused by the villainous Luzhin, she looks into a crowd of "stern, mocking, hateful faces." It is ironic that she is saved by Raskalnikov, the murderer, and Lebezyatnikov, whose 'progressive' ideas don't seem to include taking notice of the real evils of poverty, degradation, hunger, drunkenness, and absolute insecurity, that surround him on a daily basis.
Indeed. Dostoevsky uses secondary characters to illuminate broader social problems and contemporary 'progressive' ideas. Lebezyatnikov embodies radical social concepts, proposing revolutionary changes in marriage, childcare, and communal living. In general, at that time, the ideas were not so much shocking as they were attractive. People wanted change, and the youth was becoming more and more radical.
The funeral feast vividly portrays the degradation of poverty, highlighting the extreme vulnerability of women and children. Katerina Ivanovna's descent into madness and Sonya's precarious situation exemplify this vulnerability.
Yes, the radical Lebeziatnikov indeed thought about the "sublime", the global, without understanding that first it was necessary to deal with actual problems. But this is how utopians think. Such was Fourier, who actually spread these sentiments.