Ms. Ana Sirabionian

1

Macarr

Marla Macarr

Ms. Ana Sirabionian

AP English Literature

10 December 2011

A Punishment’s End

Though it is well known that Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment is a literary masterpiece, one seldom questions why. Throughout the course of the novel, readers can’t help but acknowledge an innate understanding that what they are reading is nothing ordinary, but extraordinary. And still, at the end of the novel, with its objectionable ending – which many readers find lacking – it is still impossible to win a dispute that states that Dostoevsky’s narrative is anything but a masterpiece. However, some would argue that what earned a lasting response from readers was the story’s happy ending – “happy” being used loosely. The ending of Crime and Punishment, found in the Epilogue, isn’t happy in the traditional sense of the word, though a semblance of happiness can be found in the conclusion of the protagonist’s moral development. The main character, Rodion Romanovitch Raskolnikov, suffers through a spiritual reassessment and moral reconciliation after confessing to murder and serving a sentence in Siberia. Though he is afflicted by an ongoing “punishment” throughout the novel, Raskolnikov’s time in Siberia serves to break his alienation and offer religious redemption.

From the beginning of the story, it is made evident that Raskolnikov is very much so consciously alienated from society. At first, it was his feeling of superiority brought on by his “arrogant” and “proud” nature that served as a barrier between him and the world (Part III, Chapter II). Later, guilt and paranoia compelled him to distance himself, more and more, from those around him. What propelled this need to isolate him from society was his theory of the nature of man – “in his article all men [were] divided into ‘ordinary’ and ‘extraordinary,’” and the extraordinary – being of a superior breed of man, had certain unalienable rights, like freedom from common law (Part II, Chapter V). This theory only fueled his arrogant nature. Why would someone who is extraordinary bother associating with the ordinary? By thinking that he was extraordinary, and in turn thinking less of those around him, he was dehumanizing the “ordinary,” which was why killing the pawnbroker was warranted. When one is dehumanized, and no longer strictly thought of as human, it is easier to justify crimes done against him. Raskolnikov continuously justified his crime by stating that “it wasn’t a human being [he] killed, it was a principle” (Part III, Chapter VI). Therefore, his alienation was first brought on by his arrogance, and then fortified by his theory.

Raskolnikov’s tendency to isolate himself from society manifested itself into an obsessive compulsion after committing his crime. Two sides, one guilt-ridden, and one stubbornly steadfast in its belief of the extraordinary, were warring with each other. He constantly pushed the people who were trying to help him away, like Sonya, Dunya, and Razumikhin out of paranoia that his part in the murder would be revealed. Even when he first went to prison, his character was still alienated from others because of the relentless hold his theory had on his psyche. He was still not repentant of his crime. It wasn’t until he dreamed of a virus plaguing the world that he was graced with something of an epiphany. The dream acted as a tool to strip him of his feelings of superiority and reveal the error in his idea that any one man can possess “truth” (Epilogue). Once he discarded his theory he was able to break the long chain of self-inflicted alienation.

His freedom from alienation is in direct correlation with his religious redemption – as the bridge from immorality to morality for Raskolnikov was Sonya. With shifting moods that fluctuated from demanding to be close to Sonya, and then respectively distant from Sonya, Raskolnikov was never able to solidify a relationship with her. After his dream, that freed him from the alienation brought on by his theory, he realized he loved Sonya. During the months that she had willingly stayed in Siberia to be near him, he had treated her with frequent rudeness. Though, in a rare moment of affection at end of the novel, he collapsed at her feet in a weeping fit and for the first time, demonstrated an instance of happiness. Sonya’s willingness to care for Raskalnikov, despite his displays of disdain for her, demonstrated her self-sacrificing nature. Because of this, one might go so far as to say that she acted as a martyr – as the biblical Jesus did – and by enduring Raskolnikov’s coarse behavior and staying by him through his “punishment,” she offered him redemptionthrough her own suffering. Her love for him made his “sick pale face bright with the dawn of a new future, of a full resurrection into a new life.”

Just like Raskolnikov’s alienation is in direct correlation with his religious redemption, the theme of religious redemption is closely paired with that of reintegration into society – the opposite of alienation. The cross that Sonya gave to Raskolnikov not only symbolizes his awakening religious faith, but his and Sonya’s suffering. Throughout Christendom, the cross symbolizes Jesus’ self-sacrifice for the sins of humanity. Since he denies any faith or feeling of sin when accepting the cross, it doesn’t necessarily symbolize that he has achieved redemption, but that he has begun on the path toward recognition of the sins that he committed – murdering Alyona the pawnbroaker, and her sister. As Sonya begs him to take the cross, exclaiming, “we will go to suffer together, and together we will bear our cross,” she is offering a way for Raskolnikov to reconnect with people around him (Part V, Chapter IV). Faith in God therefore becomes a channel for him to bond with Sonya.

Though some might question Dostoevsky’s choice in ending the novel somewhat abruptly and leaving the reader puzzling over what lies ahead in the protagonist’s future, solace can be found in the fact that the author described exactly what he sought to do; describe a “crime” and its “punishment.” With this in mind, it is far easier to appreciate Crime and Punishment’s happy ending that fortifies the most important themes of the novel – alienation and religious redemption. And while most will brush off the lunacy of murder as a social experiment, they can still wonder at how they were able to sympathize with a murderer, which is perhaps why the novel is such a lasting story.

Works Cited

Dostoyevsky, Fyodor. Crime and Punishment. Maine, USA: Dover Publications, 2001. Print.