Q&A 1 part

Thank you to everyone who is interested in the novel and asks questions. Together, we dive into understanding the book and the context around it.

The first Q&A is about the first part of the novel, as well as just any related topics that are of interest. I think that 5 questions is an optimal number; we won't make these Q&As too long in the future either. Thank you to everyone who is interested in the novel and asks questions. Together, we dive into understanding the book and the context around it.

Subscribe to the group to continue reading with us. Also, share the posts if you can. It gives us the strength to continue.

Christina

: I would like to know more about the school system of the time. How did the poor people get enough education to go to university? And how did Dostoevsky train to become a writer?

Since the beginning of the 19th century, education in the Russian Empire was conditionally free. Any free (non-serf) boy could enroll in a school. There were no elementary schools in the modern understanding of the term, so only those who could receive sufficient education at home, from tutors, could enroll. There were parish schools for lower classes with a one-year education, consisting of the very basics of writing, arithmetic, and of course Bible studies. Gymnasiums lasted 4 years, and universities 5-7 years.

In the middle of the 19th century, zemstvo schools began to appear, where basic education could be provided. However, not everyone attended these schools. Compulsory universal education in Russia was introduced only in 1921.

Serfs could only begin to attend school after the abolition of serfdom in 1861, and at the same time, the first women's schools appeared. The curriculum of first-class women's schools included: the Law of God, the Russian language, grammar and literature, arithmetic and concepts of measurement, general and Russian geography, history, basics of natural science and physics, penmanship, and needlework. But mostly they were taught how to become good wives and instill a love for religion. Education there lasted from 3 to 9 years.

Raskolnikov

Raskolnikov most likely attended a zemstvo school in his province, where he learned literacy. He managed to enroll in the University of St. Petersburg. Being a student was an honor and a rarity, as only the wealthy or gifted could become one. Raskolnikov definitely couldn't have been stupid. And since he came from a poor family, this meant a lot of self-education.

Why did he drop out of the university? Even though education was free, an administrative fee had to be paid. Even this Raskolnikov couldn't afford. He needed to pay 25 rubles every six months. Those who didn't pay this fee within two months had to leave. According to the text, Raskolnikov studied for half a year, and in January, he was unable to pay for the second half of the year.

Education of Dostoevsky

• Until the age of 13, Fyodor, like his brothers, was homeschooled. Visiting teachers taught the older children Russian and French languages, literature, and mathematics, while their father taught them Latin.

• In 1834, Fyodor (13 years old) and his older brother Mikhail enrolled in Leonty Chermak's boarding school – an expensive educational institution for children of the nobility. The education there was very good and strict. The teacher of the Russian language, the remarkable educator N.I. Bilevich had a huge influence on the young Fyodor Dostoevsky. Thanks to him, Dostoevsky first began to think about his calling as a writer. At that time, Dostoevsky voraciously read poetry and novels and was full of dreams and lofty aspirations.

• In 1837, Dostoevsky's mother died. His father passed away two years later under unclear circumstances in Darovoye, either from a stroke or at the hands of his own peasants.

• After their mother's death, brothers Mikhail and Fyodor went to the capital to prepare for admission to the Engineering School. They spent a year at the preparatory boarding school of K.F. Kostomarov. In 1838, Fyodor was accepted into the school, but Mikhail was not, and the brothers had to part ways. Their lively correspondence from that time has been preserved, showing that neither of them was inspired by mathematics and engineering sciences, but dreamed exclusively of literature. Nevertheless, Fyodor graduated from the school in 1843 (at the age of 22) and even joined the capital's engineering team, but soon left military service and decided to devote himself entirely to Russian literature.

• The youthful literary efforts that Fyodor Dostoevsky wrote about to his brother have not been preserved, but it is clear that Dostoevsky began writing his first works while still studying at the Engineering School. After retiring, Dostoevsky was engaged in translations, and in 1845 (at the age of 24) he completed his first novel "Poor Folk," which was a success with the public. However, his second novel "The Double" did not achieve success at that time. "Crime and Punishment," on the other hand, was written when he was 44-45 years old. This was his first major novel.

One of the buildings that housed the engineering school is the Mikhailovsky (Engineering) Castle. Emperor Paul I was murdered there in 1801.

---

Paula Duvall

: Raskolnikov walks aimlessly through his mind and the streets of St. P’s. Is there significance to this? Some great thinkers believed walking was where they had their best ideas. Soldiers home in England after WWII walked endlessly to escape their very troubled minds. Is Raskolnikov looking for an exit or looking for a place to arrive at? (I realize he was too poor for a horse or carriage, but still….)

Raskolnikov does not wander around the city aimlessly very often. According to the novel's plot, we know of only one such instance. Prior to that, he spent a month in his room, then purposefully went to the old woman and even counted his steps. But after he read his mother's letter, he simply ran out into the street and wandered around the city.

Dostoevsky never believed that walks around St. Petersburg were therapeutic. It should be noted that the city itself is a separate character in his work, depicted in yellow tones and driving people insane. It would seem that Raskolnikov’s wandering is more like a desire to escape the maddening city. That is why he ends up in the north—in the park, in nature. This is no longer the city. And it is there that his mind clears, he starts to think more rationally - he understands that murder is horrible, that he can not do it. And as soon as he returns to the city proper, the crime becomes inevitable for him.

Overall, this is an interesting perspective on whether walks help Raskolnikov. But he doesn't really have a home either, just this small room where people constantly come, like Nastasya, for example, and don't even let him sleep properly. In this case, the street might’ve seemed calmer and safer.

And by the way, in chapter 6, when Raskolnikov goes to the old woman, he thinks about how nice it would be if the city had more fountains and parks.

And now he suddenly wondered why it was that in all great cities, people chose—not out of bare necessity, but through some sort of special inclination—to settle and live in those particular parts of the city where there were no gardens, no fountains, just dirt and smells and squalor of every kind.

The city as an enemy and a disgrace because of the consequences of the madness of life structure - are the ideas of the Fourierists, who wanted to build harmonious communities. In this system of ideas, the European-type city was perceived by Dostoevsky as a sign of crisis, in them the dead-end of the path of Western civilization is expressed. And it is precisely this point of view that largely underlies the construction of the image of Petersburg in the novel. Dostoevsky believed that Petersburg was an anti-Christian city, in which it was impossible to live.

---

Heather Weaver

: I had never heard the term “white night” before. I know Alaska experiences similar daylight shifts, but we don’t have anything like that in my neck of the woods. Is there a period of time in Petersburg that the days never reach full sunlight? If so, what’s that like?

Here you can watch a video of the sky during the white night in St. Petersburg.

A bit of astronomy. White nights are a natural phenomenon where evening twilight almost immediately transitions into morning twilight. During this period, natural light is maintained even during the night hours. White nights can be observed in both northern and southern latitudes near the polar circles.

Three types of twilight — civil, nautical, and astronomical (Photo: Astronomy Magazine)

A full astronomical night occurs when the Sun drops below 18° relative to the horizon. During the period of white nights, this simply does not happen—civil and nautical twilight follow one another and then repeat in reverse order. The star does not set below 9° relative to the horizon.

White nights occur everywhere along the parallel of approximately 60 degrees. In Alaska, they are sure to be in the city of Juneau. Among other major cities are Stockholm and Oslo. But in St. Petersburg, this phenomenon has become a calling card since its founding by Peter the Great.

At the height of this magical time, an amazing event happens - the sun does not dip below the horizon for 19 hours, and when it finally hides closer to midnight, the city is enveloped in a fairy-tale atmosphere of pink twilight. There is a shift in space and time. It begins to seem that night will never come. The gray, stone city suddenly becomes colorful. The magic of this time cannot leave anyone indifferent. Many artists, writers, poets, and filmmakers have been captivated by this enchanting, magical phenomenon. Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky interpreted it in his own way in the novella "White Nights."

That is why many writers and poets have described this phenomenon, attributing some mystical meanings to it. Also, during this time, many festivals take place.

---

Glenys Murnane

: 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.

This is a parody and is also an interesting example of how American and Russian cultures can intertwine and create new interpretations: both of Raskolnikov's stories and Batman's.

It is the work of American artist Robert Sikoryak, who has an entire series of such works. What would famous comics like Batman, Superman, Peanuts be like if they were written by different writers? This is an example of what Batman would be like if Dostoevsky had written it. He also has Garfield mixed with Faust. A funny collaboration. But it's hard to say why the artist specifically chose Batman. My vision: this character has two entities within him, after a traumatic event. A doppelganger of sorts, as we discussed previously with Raskolnikov. But here it is much more literal than with Raskolnikov, of course.

You can read an article about this comic https://sundayguardianlive.com/books/387-raskolnikov-rises-batman-makes-everything-better

---

Heather Weaver

: Do you have any insights on Rakolnikov’s Egyptian oasis waking fantasy?

“He kept seeing visions, and always very strange ones. Mostly he imagined being somewhere in Africa, in Egypt, by an oasis.—The caravan is resting, the camels lying quietly, there’s a circle of palm trees around them, and everyone is eating their midday meal. He himself keeps drinking water, straight from a brook that flows and gurgles along just beside him. And it’s so cool, and the beautiful, beautiful water, so blue and cold, is flowing over the brightly coloured stones and the clean sand with its specks of shining gold…”

It might be a reference to the Revelation of John the Theologian (the vision of the New Jerusalem): "And he said to me [the Lord]: It is done! I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end; to the thirsty I will give freely from the spring of the water of life...". This strongly echoes Raskolnikov's vision just before the murder, when he sees a spring with an oasis from which he drinks. Interestingly, in the copy of the New Testament that belonged to the writer and was given to him by the wives of the Decembrists, this passage is accompanied by a pencil note.

But it is also commonly believed that Dostoevsky recalls the famous poems of Lermontov and Pushkin, which everyone knew well in those times.

M. Lermontov. Three Palm Trees (A Tale of the East)

This is a story about three palm trees in the Arabian desert. They stood and complained to God about their worthless existence, as they were of no use to anything or anyone. But they did not realize that their large branches were shielding a small stream nearby from the sun. Then people came to the palms, rested under their branches, and by evening cut them down to make a fire because they were cold. The palms turned into a heap of ashes. And now there are no longer three palms standing in the desert, and they no longer shield the stream from the sun, and it has dried up.

The plot function of the vision is twofold: the oasis and the stream, in contrast to the stench of St. Petersburg, give a sense of how Raskolnikov longs for a pure life; on the other hand, through a hidden association with the travelers who cut down the palms, the vision paradoxically predicts a tragedy.

Lines from "Imitations of the Quran" by A. S. Pushkin:

And towards the desert palm he hastened,
And eagerly refreshed with cold stream
The burning tongue and eyes...

The work consists of nine separate poems, each reinterprets some episode from the life of Muhammad or a chapter of the Quran. However, all parts are interconnected by a common meaning and motifs. The central theme is true faith and blind adherence to religious dogmas. The possibility of mentioning Pushkin specifically is reinforced by the fact that it is in "Imitations of the Quran" that the image of the "trembling creature" originates, which is repeatedly mentioned in the novel by Raskolnikov and which is so significant for our protagonist’s ideology.

The two poems are united not only by the external situation (desert, oasis, palms, stream, etc.): but they also have the same beginning. However, the endings of Pushkin and Lermontov’s pieces are significantly different. In "The Three Palms," the ending is catastrophic—the palms are punished for pride and complaining against God, while the finale of Pushkin's poem is "Holy ecstasies filled his chest / And with God, he continues his journey."

One of these endings resonates with the novel, but let's not spoil too much for now.