Dunya in Crime and Punishment: Role & Quotes | nickchinlund.info
This leads Raskolnikov back to thoughts about his own failures and also allows him to make the obvious connection between Dunya's situation. Among the reasons Raskolnikov gives Sonya for having murdered the . I worked on my relationship with my mother in therapy, trying to find ways to . In her letter, Pulkheria at once assures him that she and Dunya are fine. Get everything you need to know about Family in Crime and Punishment. Relationships between family members, and the formation of families through Razumikhin, from the first, is taken by Dunya and offers to protect her and her mother.
He attempts to live only for the mind, as for him the body carries associations with the abject, as is illustrated in the filthy, subservient and objectified positions of the female characters. He refuses all association or identification with the body by denying it food, rest and the benefits of decent clothing. He was so wretchedly dressed that anybody else, however used to them, might have hesitated to go out in daylight in such rags.
Raskolnikov denies the inscription of his surroundings, of which femininity is an undeniable part, on himself. Describing this relationship and dependence of the body image on its exteriors she elaborates: While Grosz continues with a discussion of physical objects such as clothing or jewelry that affect the body image, I suggest that a constant exposure to the victimized female body has the same effect. Thus for Raskolnikov, the constant contact with street waifs results in a similar incorporation into his body image.
I suggest that his voice is equally influenced by the nameless, voiceless female waifs who pepper the novel. Their stories, or his invention of their likely histories, are just as much a part of his persona as are the stories of those women with whom he has an intimate relation. The fact that his encounters with young victimized girls plague his thoughts and his wanderings supports the central role they play in his thinking. He constantly notices and responds to the situations of women.
While Straus successfully argues a new form of masculinity within which a specifically gendered experience is obscured or even effaced, I read an interdependence of masculine and feminine binaries.
Associative Structure and the Streets of St. This perceptive accounting of events both expands and contracts time as it is illustrated through experience rather than chronology, a narrative technique that preceded later stream-of-consciousness writings Frank Raskolnikov, for example, needs several encounters to be present in his experience in order for them to make sense and for him to realize their significance.
The narrative explores experiences and encounters by following each one out on its tangent, then returns to the starting point again before following the next. The starting point for Raskolnikov is always the streets of St. He regains consciousness only to find himself still on the street and faced with the first wandering waif. As such his constant return to the streets could indicate a compulsion to repetition as he seeks to resolve the break or schism between his conscious and unconscious experiences.
Raskolnikov returns to the streets following each encounter and each dream episode, allowing an association of the anonymous with his personal experience. This unknown or undiscovered reality parallels the dreams that haunt several characters as they lend themselves to the rationalization of the dreamer Peace Raskolnikov continues establishing connections between his personal emotional state, the experience of the city, the lives that surround him, and the characters with whom he interacts.
These experiences and connections can be imagined not only as the mosaic Anderson describes but also as a web: It is these everyday occurrences that reveal the concerns and personal conflicts Raskolnikov struggles with, of which the dramatic and violent act of murder is only a symptom. Within this subtext the psychological discussion comes forward since Raskolnikov remains in denial of the associations his mind readily establishes between himself, his misery, and that of others.
The reader is then able to address individual questions such as the relationship of Raskolnikov to the waifs who reappear in vignettes throughout the novel. The pauses occurring as Raskolnikov invents their histories and speculates their futures argue the significance of these marginal characters. While Marsh asserts the constant description of the female from the point of view of the external, male gaze, she does not discuss the projection of the male self that this objectification creates 3.
I assert however, that this is merely a denial of qualities intrinsic to our humanity—qualities that are not necessarily gender-specific such as empathy or spirituality. This denial also allows for the female object to be exploited, abused, and dismissed. Throughout the course of the novel it is apparent that Raskolnikov is only able to find himself, or to complete himself through an association with the female characters of this book, be it the anonymous waifs, Sonya, or his sister.
The harshness of reality is embodied in their labors and suffering, as these women are the reality of the realist novel.
Degeneration and the Female Victim  The women who fall victim to poverty and find themselves on the street are often either completely disregarded or scorned by passers-by who blame the women for allowing fate to lead them to the streets. Not surprisingly, the rise of modernity with its subsequent urban overcrowding and increased poverty led to philosophical and scientific investigations of the same.
The breakdown on social and cultural levels was thought to cause individual decay, both moral and physical, often leading such to extremes in the individual as madness and even suicide. The reader must then evaluate female condemnation as a matter of context. Most of the women are represented playing roles, as their lives have been reduced to their assignments accordingly.
Necessity has created a space of dichotomous characters who, while pious, are whores, while well-meaning are murderers, and while desperate are ridiculous. His attention is always drawn to female figures on the street, to Dunya, to Sonya, to the likely fate of little Polenka.
Such a repetition of figures and their accompanying histories are not to be read as elements that remain separate from Rodion Romanovich. He is deeply affected by them as indicated by both the pauses taken to describe them and by the various emotionally charged fainting spells that follow each episode. While he is an observer of the city around him, he is also, and more importantly, a part and product of it.
Hunger, delirium and fever do more than just highlight the significance and importance of the body with its functions and needs, but infantilize him. As victim, Raskolnikov relies constantly upon the charity and care-taking of his mother and sister, Nastasha, and even his landlady. In an almost motherly role, his friend Razumikhin feeds him, dresses him and tries to provide him with opportunities.
His sister has accepted a proposal of marriage in order to save herself and their mother from abject poverty. Raskolnikov receives this news with a confused emotional response of anger, hatred, resentment and sadness. When he cries, it is not for their fate, but for his own and at his own failures: Almost all the time that Raskolnikov was reading this letter his face was wet with tears, but when he came to the end it was pale and convulsively distorted and a bitter angry smile played over his lips.
Dostoevsky 33 The confusion of emotions is clear in this passage as he both smiles and cries, is angry and devastated. This letter forces him into a reality he had been in denial of: The history of Dunya and their mother can be reduced to the situation of thousands of women in and around the city trying to earn their keep and failing. With a good employer, she may have had a more desirable situation than the factory worker, one that shielded her against the shock of urban life.
- Raskolnikova: Rodion Romanovich’s Struggle with the Woman Within
To begin with, she seemed to be very young, no more than a girl, and she was walking through the blazing heat bare-headed and without gloves or parasol, waving her arms about queerly. Her dress was of a thin silken material, but it also looked rather odd; it was not properly fastened, and near the waist at the back, at the top of the skirt, there was a tear, and a great piece of material was hanging loose. A shawl had been flung round her bare neck and hung crooked and lopsided.
He came up with her close to the bench; she went up to it and let herself fall into a corner of it, resting her head against the back and closing her eyes as if overcome with weariness. Looking closely at her, Raskolnikov realized at once that she was quite drunk. It was a strange, sad sight; he even thought he must be mistaken.
Before him he saw the small face of a very young girl, of sixteen, or perhaps only fifteen or so, small, pretty, fair-haired; but the face looked swollen and inflamed. The girl seemed to have little understanding of her surroundings; she crossed one leg over the other, displaying more of it than was seemly, and to all appearances hardly realized that she was in the street.
Dostoevsky This young girl has been seduced and raped. She tried to save herself from the pursuits of her previous employer, Svidrigailov, and instead has found herself agreeing to marriage in order to avoid poverty. The downward spiral that begins with the violation this wandering girl has just survived is not an exclusively female fate; Marmeladov serves as a counterpoint to all of the young women as he too cannot escape the cycle into which he has fallen.
The description of her costume suggests the evils of capitalism and its associated impiety. This costume also foreshadows the religious epiphany to come as Tucker notes its astounding similarity to the description in Revelation This ostentatious costume carries its own message of sin and debauchery, compounding the message of use, abuse, and substitution that its condition implies.
At the genesis of his need to commit his crime however is the need for enough money to get through his studies. She wears clothing inherited from her also anonymous predecessor. She is reduced to the position of a monkey, an animal attached to the organ grinder for the amusement of the passers-by. The young girl with the organ grinder is experiencing just one of the many phases of the desperation that her life will lead to.
He felt someone standing beside him, on his right, and looked up; it was a tall woman wearing a kerchief on her head, with a long, yellow, hollow-cheeked face and red-rimmed, sunken eyes. Luzhin at that moment, he would have felt like murdering him" I, iv. This is clearly a displacement of his rage toward his mother and sister. There are many evidences of Raskolnikov's rage toward his family. In order to insure that her precious son will "be rich, respected, honoured," and "may even die famous," Pulkheria Alexandrovna is ready to carry her "conscience.
Raskolnikov feels that "Sonechka's fate is no whit worse" than Dunya's would be if she married Luzhin; indeed, Dunya's may be "even worse, fouler, more despicable" because with Sonya "it is a question simply of dying of hunger. Under the guise of unselfish love, they subject him to unbearable guilt by proposing to destroy themselves ostensibly for his sake but really to further their own ambitions. Their love is like hate. O how I hate them all!
Pulkheria Alexandrovna and Raskolnikov, My Mother and Me -- Bernard J. Paris
It is quite possible that he displaces his rage toward his mother onto Alyona, just as he displaces it onto Luzhin. As a loving son, he usually represses his resentment toward his mother and is mystified when it erupts, but he immediately feels "an irresistible dislike" of the moneylender, who arouses no filial taboos I, vi, In killing her, he may be symbolically killing Pulkheria. During a spell of near-delirium when he is in the grip of despair and self-hate, he exclaims to himself, "Oh, nothing, nothing will make me forgive that old witch!
This is followed immediately by thoughts of his mother and sister: What makes me hate them now? Yes, I hate them, hate them physically; I cannot bear them near me.
He later tells Sonya, "I killed myself, not that old creature! There and then I murdered myself at one blow" V, iv, He hates his mother and Alyona because both, in somewhat different ways, have led him to murder himself. In murdering Alyona, he is not only symbolically killing his mother but is showing her what she has done to him and punishing her for it. By murdering Alyona, he kills himself or at least his "future" and thereby kills Pulkheria Alexandrovna as well.
Though only forty-three, she dies not long after. Raskolnikov's crime is an act that he does for his mother, at his mother, and to his mother. He knew in advance that he could not carry it off and what the consequences would be both for himself and Pulkheria. He had almost killed his mother once before, when he became engaged to his landlady's plain, sickly daughter.
No, he would have trampled coolly over every obstacle. But surely, surely he loves us? He does love her, but he hates her as well and has a need to torment her, as this episode shows. She presents herself as an easy victim, much as Alyona had done, by her readiness to die of grief. Pulkheria Alexandrovna would have been crushed had her son made a marriage so out of keeping with her conception of his worth.
Not only Raskolnikov's murder of Alyona but also the conflicting side of his personality is influenced by his relationship with his mother and the values and example of his family. Pulkheria's letter reinforces his ambition by reminding him that he is their only hope and trust, but it also urges him to pray to God, to "believe in the mercy of our Creator and Redeemer.
She wants her son to be a great man but also a good Christian. Raskolnikov's childhood was steeped in religious feeling. Once or twice a year his pious family visited the cemetery where his grandmother was buried, paying for a requiem in the old stone church: Raskolnikov could not remember his brother, but "every time they visited the cemetery he devoutly and reverently crossed himself before the little grave and bowed down and kissed it" I, v, He was a sensitive boy who disliked the village tavern, pressing closer to his father when they passed it, and who felt so sorry for horses when he saw them being beaten that his mother took him away from the window.
Raskolnikov grew up in an atmosphere in which generosity and self-sacrifice were glorified. Indeed, in Dunya and his mother he has examples of women who are heedless of their own well-being and seem only to live for other people. Dunya even tries to save Svidrigaylov, who astutely tells Raskolnikov that "she is the kind of person who hungers and thirsts to be tortured for somebody, and if she does not achieve her martyrdom she is quite capable of jumping out of a window" VI, iv, Raskolnikov admires Dunya, though he hates being the object of her sacrifice, and he is drawn to martyrs like Sonya, who turn the other cheek and seem to love others more than themselves.
He is a very compassionate person who is compulsively generous and is given to taking burdens on himself. Like his mother and sister, he glorifies sacrifice and derives a masochistic satisfaction from suffering for others. Pulkheria is extremely proud of this side of her son, which she has done much to cultivate.
In her deranged state, she brags not only about his article, but also about his having helped a fellow student and his father while he himself was in poverty and saved two children from a fire, burning his hands in the process. She wants him to be a great man, to be sure, but also to be a very good one. When he apologizes for having given twenty-five roubles for Marmeladov's funeral, she says, "Don't go on Rodya.
I am sure that everything you do is right! That I cannot bear" III, iii, And when he does not come to see her, she rationalizes his neglect: This reminds me of my mother who, as she grew old and ill, told me her troubles every Sunday, but often ended by saying, "Now, don't worry about me, Bernard. You need a clear head for your writing. There is a similar conflict in Pulkheria between the need for a loving, dutiful son and one with impressive achievements.
Pulkheria tries to balance her needs by telling Raskolnikov that he "mustn't spoil" her, that she'll know he loves her even if he can't visit: She then bursts into tears. Raskolnikov knows how important it is for his mother that he be both great and good, and he strives desperately to reconcile these imperatives, which he has internalized. It seems that if he is good he cannot be great and that if he is to be great he cannot be good. No course of action is satisfactory. If he follows his mother's injunction to remember his religious upbringing, not only will he fail to achieve greatness, but he will be unable to lift himself out of poverty in time to save her and his sister from sacrificing themselves.
He feels that he must commit the crime in order to do his duty toward his mother and prevent Dunya's immoral marriage. If he commits the crime, however, he will be a sinner in the eyes of his family and will be separated from them by guilt. His mother would be destroyed should she learn of what he had done.
He would be violating his own humane and conscientious feelings, moreover, and would loathe himself intensely. He will be damned if he commits the murder and damned if he does not. Pulkheria is afraid that her son has been corrupted by the fashionable modern unbelief, and Dostoevsky wants us to see that as Raskolnikov's problem. Porfiry diagnoses him as a contemporary intellectual with a one sided-development who has been led astray by abstract reasoning. Believing that he can govern his life by reason alone, he justifies his crime in utilitarian terms, as a matter of simple arithmetic.
From a thematic point of view, Raskolnikov illustrates how modern unbelief leads to crime. He gets into trouble because he has left the religious environment of his native village and has come to St. Petersburg, a hotbed of atheistic humanism. But why is Raskolnikov so receptive to modern ideas, and why do they lead to such an extreme result in him? Dostoevsky does not raise such questions, since they would not serve his ideological purpose, but as a great psychological novelist he provides so much information about Raskolnikov's character, motives, and background that I cannot help asking them.
Dostoevsky's psychological realism subverts his thematic intentions, for when we understand Raskolnikov as an imagined human being, he escapes his illustrative role. Just after his plan has begun to take form in his mind, Raskolnikov overhears a conversation in a public house that has "an extraordinary influence on the subsequent development of the matter.
What is the life of that stupid, spiteful, consumptive old woman weighed against the common good?
Dunya in Crime and Punishment: Role & Quotes
No more that the life of a louse or a cockroach--less, indeed, because she is actively harmful. She battens on other people's lives, she is evil. Otherwise there could never be one great man" I, vi, The conversation ends with the student saying that "of course" he would not kill the old woman himself.
What most impresses Raskolnikov, I think, is the idea that unless we get rid of our prejudices there can "never be one great man. Dostoevsky suggests that these ideas are responsible for the increase in crime and derangement in contemporary society, but in the case of his protagonist he shows them leading to crime when combined with his individual psychology. Atheistic humanism seems to provide Raskolnikov with a way out of his psychological impasse, enabling him to dismiss the conscientious scruples that block his path to greatness and at the same time satisfy his moral needs by seeing himself as a benefactor of mankind.
According to the ethical calculus articulated by the student, he will be doing far more good than harm by killing the noxious old moneylender. The trouble is that murdering the old woman still feels wrong. Raskolnikov tries to explain this feeling as a residue of conventional prejudices, traditional ideas that a truly enlightened man should be able to transcend. He divides the world into ordinary people who are governed by such prejudices and extraordinary ones who, realizing that there is no God, become their own law-givers and are able to step over the old arbitrary barriers without experiencing guilt.
Murdering the old woman will not only give him the means to launch his career but will signify that he is a great man--if he can do it without conscientious qualms, without feeling that it is a crime.
It becomes the means of proving to himself that he is the superior being he needs to be if he is to fulfill his mother's expectations, to actualize his idealized image of himself, and to escape self-contempt. After the murder, Raskolnikov finds himself behaving in just the ways he had predicted for the ordinary man. He feels guilty, goes to pieces, gives himself away, and seeks punishment. He hates himself for what he has done and hates himself for hating himself, since that shows he is not the Napoleonic figure he had aspired to be.
He oscillates between impulses to make peace with his conscientious side by confessing and efforts to hold onto his claims to be an extraordinary man by denying that he has committed a crime.
He has committed a blunder, perhaps, or a criminal offense, but not a violation of moral law, the existence of which he must deny. Raskolnikov can give up neither his need to be good nor his need to be great, and since there seems to be no way in which he can reconcile these needs, he is driven to the verge of madness. Raskolnikov's psychological conflicts continue after he goes to prison and eventually make him physically ill.
In a dream he has during his illness he finds a way out of the bind into which first his mother's contradictory demands and then his own inner conflicts have put him.
In his dream the whole world is condemned to fall victim to the pestilence of unbelief, a pestilence in which people regard themselves as "the sole repository of truth" and are unable to agree on "what was evil and what good. All are "destined to perish, except a chosen few, a very few," who, founding "a new race of men and a new life" will "renew and cleanse the earth. But he soon finds himself "seized and cast" at Sonya's feet.
Raskolnikov's dream shows him how to reformulate his search for glory in such a way that he can be both great and good. In his article, ordinary men were believers while extraordinary men were those who saw that the traditional morality had no foundation and that each person was a law unto himself.
In his dream he envisions the consequences of the spread of his atheistic beliefs. Here ordinary men are unbelievers while the "chosen handful of the pure" are presumably those who have preserved religious truth. Having worked out the solution to his problem unconsciously, he finds himself embracing Sonya and her beliefs, thus becoming one of the chosen few. He no longer has to violate the traditional morality in order to be great, since he can become great by being one of the handful who prepare the way for the renewal and cleansing of the earth by upholding the teachings of Christianity.
Had she lived long enough to see Raskolnikov's vision for himself fulfilled, his mother would have been proud. While my understanding of my relationship with my mother sensitized me to Raskolnikov's problems, it was my analysis of another aspect of my experience that influenced my interpretation of his solution. As I have already indicated, in graduate school I was in some ways a more innocuous version of Raskolnikov.
Influenced by my mother, I had a dream of being one of the first, if not the very first, among our men of learning. Like many of my fellow students, I felt that my talents should exempt me from the expectations governing ordinary mortals. Some of them stole books and records on the grounds that these things should be in the hands of those who could properly appreciate them.
I did not do that, but I felt that most other people were considerably less important than I was, and I neglected or exploited them accordingly. In my mind, I was doing my parents and my wife a favor by allowing them to finance my education, since that would give meaning to their lives. My dream of glory came crashing when, for reasons I came to understand in therapy, I went blank during my doctoral oral and had to retake two fields.
What happened after that has certain parallels with Raskolnikov's "conversion. This pressure made the dissertation almost impossible to write, and I frequently despaired of completing it.
Confronted with the prospect of a humiliating failure, I became a convert to George Eliot's Religion of Humanity, in which the emphasis was on giving value to our lives by living for others rather than for our own selfish objectives.
Like Dorothea in Middlemarch, I was looking for something that "would reconcile self-despair with the rapturous consciousness of life beyond self" Prelude, 3. My importance to others, rather than ambitious triumph, became the meaning of life, and I sought to be a good husband, father, and friend. My dissertation developed a proselytizing tone, as I preached my new gospel.
George Eliot had the answer to the value problems of modern man, and I was proclaiming her truth to the world. Even if I did not complete the dissertation, I would exemplify her teachings by my life.Suç ve Ceza"RASKOLNİKOV" Teaser-3
I was still trying to work eighty hours a week, I might note, and was largely deluding myself. I somehow finished the dissertation, which was very well received, and promptly lost my enthusiasm for George Eliot's beliefs. In this book, Horney describes three defensive strategies--moving toward, against, and away from people--and the constellation of character traits, behaviors, and beliefs that accompanies each solution.
The aggressive solution moving against describes me in graduate school and Raskolnikov before his conversion. The compliant solution moving toward describes Raskolnikov and me after our conversions.
Sonya exemplifies an extreme form of the compliant solution, and George Eliot glorifies compliant attitudes, values, and character traits. Often, both the aggressive and compliant solutions co-exist in the same person, with one being predominant and the other subordinate.
Since they are so opposed to each other, the individual is torn by inner conflicts. Raskolnikov's mother and mine wanted contradictory things of us, fostering both sets of trends.
If our predominant strategy fails, we may embrace our subordinate solution. Thus when I could not write my dissertation, I adopted George Eliot's philosophy of living for others. Raskolnikov oscillates between the two solutions all through the novel, but after he goes to prison he realizes at some level that his aggressive solution cannot work, he has a dream that shows him another path to glory, and he embraces the compliant Sonya and her beliefs.
The enthusiastic reception of my dissertation made me feel that my aggressive solution could work, and I resumed my ambitious course. Hence my loss of enthusiasm for Eliot's Religion of Humanity. When I asked earlier why Raskolnikov was so receptive to modern ideas, I said that although Dostoevsky does not raise this question, he presents Raskolnikov in such psychological detail that I cannot help asking it.
I would not ask this question in the absence of psychological detail, since there would be no way of answering it, but the question really comes from my understanding of my own experience, which has predisposed me to assume a psychological basis for beliefs. Self-analysis can be a valuable critical tool. I do not think that I could have come to my understanding of Raskolnikov's relationship with his mother, of his conversion at the end, and of the connection between his beliefs and his psychology without having analyzed similar phenomena in myself.
There are dangers, of course, in understanding literature through our own experience, since we might engage in naive identification and fail to discriminate between the characters and ourselves.
One of the values of literature, after all, is that it gives us a sense of what it is like to be other people confronting a different set of circumstances and living in a different world. Our ability to engage with what is different, however, inevitably depends on finding some point of likeness.
The more facets of ourselves we are aware of, the more kinds of other people to which we can respond. The knowledge we derive from self-analysis should discourage naive identification, since it involves distance from raw experience and a critical perspective.
We need a point of likeness for entry, but the greater our self-awareness, the more conscious we will also be of difference. Ideally, we want to be close enough to the characters to be able to enter into their experience and to have enough psychic distance to keep them separate from ourselves. Although there are parallels between Pulkheria and Raskolnikov, my mother and me, there are many dissimilarities as well, and I have tried not to conflate the two relationships.
Using my understanding of my relationship with my mother as a starting point, I have tried to do justice to the specific ways in which Pulkheria Alexandrovna and Raskolnikov drive each other crazy. To make it easier for readers to find the quoted passages in other translations or in other editions of this translation, I shall include part and chapter as well as page numbers in the text.
There is a serious printing error, corrected in the following issue, that garbles several pages of the text. These two essays analyze Raskolnikov's character structure and inner conflicts in terms of the psychoanalytic theories of Karen Horney and are complementary to the present discussion.