Husky Poodle Cross Breed

mediocrity and greatness in "Crime and Punishment"

Raskolnikov is an original character: a student who has temporarily left his studies for lack of money, a determining factor that drives him to the crime, is a giovante intelligent, cerebral and prone to speculation. This its tendency, which slowly leads him first to isolation, then the aging of the crime and then, once this task, delirium is classified by the community as folly. In fact, the murder is only a possibility that arises from the exercise of thought, the product of logic, in fact, Raskolnikov is the author of an essay that explores the motivations underlying the crime or political interest, which places it among the precursors of criminal psychology. There is no physical description of this twenty, but only to its inner workings, of his discomfort and how he directs his actions.
Raskolnikov's character develops in the mind of the author of a series of autobiographical circumstances: the experience of imprisonment experienced by Dostoevsky, the obsession with money and debts, the critique of Nietzsche and the philosophy of the superman; here there is no superman, but the portrait of a failure that flounders and sinks in the crime committed and that until the end of the novel is hoping in vain to be the prototype of such a superior being. However, the ordinary bourgeois Raskolnikov is not made of flesh like the others, but pulse and nerves do not have Zola as a murderess who acts prompted by an illness, a feeling of anger or any other passion, we do not like Maupassant a pervert who does evil deeds prompted by desires and immoral by the deviation of his mind, but a logical crime, born of a rational mind, the son of a utilitarian argument that vile action that can bring benefits to many is always justified. We did not then nor flesh, nor sensuality, murder the old usurer no allure and its reasoning does not convince us, partly because the vision of the protagonist fails completely piety, in part because they do not need the money robbed his victim and not redeemed by his plight member and economic as it had planned. Yet we tifiamo for him, until the last hope that he does not cheat because his act was unnecessary because he had never been entirely convinced of his actions and repent even after having done the deed. While he himself goes to the home of his victim keeps asking what he is doing, as if the killing was a "test" that would less but could not avoid, as if it had been ordered by others. In this universe is not logical Raskolnikov comes to terms with his conscience and that, continually repressed, the nightmare is realized, so that we seem to be catapulted into the hallucinatory world of Shakespeare and Macbeth. The dream is the dimension in which the guilty soul finds its outlet, as proof of this gradual collapse that we see and that inevitably leads to catastrophe unites our protagonist to another character in the novel, but also the most enigmatic abject: Svidrigailov. As in the course of an illness that struck the two men, murderers of innocent people, both living with the remorse of conscience, but Svidrigailov although we do not know fully the blame for which he is prone to nightmares, as there is a description in the novel task of his crimes, we can safely assume that it is murder and give credit to the words of Raskolnikov, that the fault approaches the man himself. In comparing the two but there is a difference, committed suicide by shooting himself because Svidrigailov perspective of the protagonist and he "won" the remorse of conscience, acting as a superior being, capable of withstanding the weight of bulky assassination. This superman dies as a respectable person, and what should be the hero of the novel can not bear imposing the force of his conscience that rebels against his will, forcing him to confess his crime and to bear its penalty, forced labor in Siberia. According to his logic, he succumbs to the common morality, and this elevates him in the "chain of being" at the level of titanic Svidrigailov. No coincidence that Raskolnikov is called weak and cowardly, mediocre in the middle of the most mediocre of men who will not leave any mark on the history and whose lives will not be remembered.

Beatrice Eleanor