"What is Raskolnikov's internal inconsistency?" (based on the novel by F. M

In the novel "Crime and Punishment" F.M. Dostoevsky created the image of a person who is critical of reality and wants to play a significant role in society. Rodion Raskolnikov's thoughts about "little" people who do not try to defend themselves, and about opposite personalities who are able to defend their human rights, led to the creation of the theory "about creatures trembling and having the right." Raskolnikov nurtured this idea for a long time and did not dare to put it into practice. Its essence is that for good purposes, a crime, even murder, can be justified. Rodion assumed some kind of justice that would compensate for the evil done in the name of goodness: wouldn’t the murder of an unnecessary, “malicious old woman” be “smoothed out” by “thousands of good deeds?” And most importantly, Raskolnikov had to check whether he himself was a strong personality.

Reflections on this issue were “warmed up” by a conversation between a student and an officer overheard in a tavern about an old pawnbroker and her sister Lizaveta. The student said that he wanted to kill and rob this mischievous old woman in order to help those in need, but he confessed his inability to kill. The student's statements corresponded to Rodion's internal monologues. Gloomy thoughts also arose as a result of his own disorder: there was nothing to pay for education, he dropped out of school, he owed money for an apartment. It was not always possible to earn money for food, since the payment for lessons is low, and “you can’t teach children without boots.” His cramped closet, like a closet, caused melancholy and irritation, and I had to spend most of the day in it. And the area where Raskolnikov rented a room was a slum with drinking establishments, dust, stuffiness in the streets.

An important role was played by acquaintance with the Marmeladov family, who lived in poverty. Katerina Ivanovna was sick, three small children were starving, Marmeladov himself could not feed everyone and drank from grief, and his daughter Sonya “went on a yellow ticket”, sacrificing herself to save people close to her. Raskolnikov is outraged by this situation in society, when some make self-sacrifice, while others accept this sacrifice.
Raskolnikov's state of mind was also influenced by a letter from his mother, in which she reported on the latest events in their lives. Rodion perceives the decision of Sister Dunya to marry Luzhin (by calculation) as a sacrifice for him: “Sonechka, Sonechka Marmeladova, eternal Sonechka. ... I don’t want this sacrifice ... I won’t accept it!

In the future, he understands that it is impossible to escape from the Luzhin and Svidrigailovs, the victims will continue. Svidrigailov is another representative of the "strong" who live by their own laws. And then the conclusion appears: “We must decide. Or give up life altogether! This means that if the theory is rejected, then life, according to Raskolnikov, is not needed, since this is tantamount to a denial of "any right to act, live and love."

The symbolic dream that Raskolnikov had shortly before the murder evokes new thoughts: “Is it really a fever ... starting? God! really... I'll really take an ax, start hitting on the head, steal and tremble... hide, covered in blood... Lord! show me my way." At first, the picture of the cruel murder of a horse by a peasant (in a dream) horrified Rodion Raskolnikov: he does not want to be a murderer, in bloody clothes, with blood on his hands. But the thought arises in him: “Why did he have such an ugly dream right now?” It is not necessary to identify a greedy old woman with a poor horse, rather, on the contrary. And if so, it means that the old woman does not deserve either compassion or pity, since she does not bring benefits, she only harms people. In accordance with his theory, Rodion believes that not out of the need to kill and not because of cruelty in his heart, he will commit a crime, but in order to prove to himself the correctness of his conclusions. He wants to be convinced of his own importance, that he belongs to the chosen people, ready to administer justice in the struggle for justice. And this dream was of particular importance for the inflamed psyche of a person who had been thinking about the planned experiment for a month. Raskolnikov even went to the "trial".

The whole idea of ​​the murder came down to testing his own strength: whether he could do something that not everyone has the right to do, a thing that only strong personalities are capable of. In other words, can he, Rodion Raskolnikov, belong to the chosen people? That is why later he did not use the stolen things and money. Pride and pride were strongly developed feelings in Raskolnikov, he did not even want the help of a friend to accept or use the money of his mother, sister. And someone else, taken after the murder, he also did not need.

As a result of the "execution" of himself after the murder, Raskolnikov comes to the conclusion that the cruel reprisal against the old pawnbroker is useless. Nothing has changed in the lives of individuals or in society for the better, but this “experiment” personally brought him suffering, illness, pangs of conscience. Who got better? And did he feel like "Napoleon"? Nothing like this. And the old woman, who he dreamed of, laughs at him, and it is impossible to kill her, just as it is impossible to change Svidrigailov, his way of life, habits. In a dream, he dreamed of Raskolnikov in the guise of a tradesman, and then appeared in Rodion's apartment with his proposals. This also has its own symbolism: in a dream, Raskolnikov follows Svidrigailov, who beckoned him to follow him, that is, this is a hint of the criminality of the plans of both. Indeed, what is the better act of Raskolnikov in comparison with the deeds of the person who is unpleasant to him? After all, he, like Svidrigailov, did not take into account the feelings and desires of other people, although they did not deserve respect. Later, already in reality, Svidrigailov tells Rodion that there is some similarity between them. Rodion does not like this, and this fact causes him new thoughts. Is it possible to live with thoughts of a sin committed? Does Svidrigailov succeed? After all, he also has visions: for example, according to his stories, a dead wife comes to him.

Conscience continued to torment Raskolnikov and tormented him more in the presence of relatives who came to him. Rodion loved, even idolized his mother and sister. Dunya, in his understanding, can repeat Sonya's fate if she marries for convenience, sells herself to help her brother. But after all, Raskolnikov, according to his theory, just protested against the disenfranchised, unfair position of people in society by the murder of the old money-lender. At the same time, there was some discrepancy, a discrepancy between principles and beliefs: if he is not a “trembling creature”, if he belongs to the chosen, strong personalities, then who are his mother and sister? Should he really despise them if they are to be assigned to another category, the opposite?

All these questions were not resolved in the painful mind of Raskolnikov, he had to think a lot in order to draw any conclusion. Later, Sonya Marmeladova, who was sure of the need to come to the realization of guilt and the inevitability of punishment for the crime committed, would help him to make this conclusion. Evil is evil, a person has no right to sentence anyone to death by his court. And the Christian principle "Thou shalt not kill" remains the main thing in the life of mankind.

Reviews

Zoya, it was interesting for me to read about the comparison of Svidrigailov and Raskolnikov.
In the series, these episodes were not missed. I forgot the book, maybe.
That's why I watched the movie with such interest. For me, it was a surprise
murder of Svidrigailov. Why do you think he hung himself?
Sincerely. Elena.

Content:

In world literature, Dostoevsky is credited with discovering the inexhaustibility and multidimensionality of the human soul. The writer showed the possibility of combining low and high, insignificant and great, vile and noble in one person. Man is a mystery, especially the Russian man. “Russian people in general are broad people ... wide, like their land, and extremely prone to fanatical, to disorderly; but it’s a misfortune to be broad without much genius,” says Svidrigailov. In the words of Arkady Ivanovich lies the key to understanding the character of Raskolnikov. The very name of the hero indicates the duality, the internal ambiguity of the image. BUT
now let's listen to the characterization that Razumikhin gives to Rodion Romanovich: “I have known Rodion for a year and a half: gloomy, gloomy, arrogant and proud; lately ... a hypochondriac is also suspicious ... Sometimes, however, not a hypochondriac at all, but simply cold and
insensitive to the point of inhumanity, right, as if in him two opposite characters, are alternately replaced ... terribly highly values ​​himself and, it seems, not without some right to
then".
The tormenting internal struggle does not subside for a minute in Raskolnikov. Rodion Romanovich is tormented not by the primitive question - to kill or not to kill, but by the all-encompassing problem: "Is a person a scoundrel, the whole race in general, that is, the human race." Marmeladov's story about the greatness of Sonya's sacrifice, his mother's letter about the fate of Dunechka, the dream about Savraska - all this flows into the general stream of consciousness of the hero.
Meeting with Lizaveta, memories of a recent conversation in a tavern of a student and
officer about the murder of an old pawnbroker, Raskolnikov is brought to a fatal
decision.
Dostoevsky's attention is focused on understanding the root causes of Raskolnikov's crime.
The words "kill" and "rob" can lead the reader down the wrong path.
The fact is that Raskolnikov does not kill at all in order to rob.
And not at all because he lives in poverty, because "the environment is stuck." Couldn't he, without waiting for money from his mother and sister, provide himself financially, as he did
Razumikhin? According to Dostoevsky, man is initially free and makes his own
choice. This fully applies to Raskolnikov. Murder is the result
free choice. However, the path to "blood in conscience" is quite complicated and lengthy.
Raskolnikov's crime includes the creation of an arithmetic theory of the "right to
blood". The internal tragedy and inconsistency of the image lies
precisely in the creation of this logically almost invulnerable theory. The very same "great idea"
is a response to the crisis state of the world. Raskolnikov is by no means a phenomenon
unique. Many people express similar thoughts in the novel: a student in a tavern,
Svidrigailov, even Luzhin...
The hero sets out the main provisions of his inhuman theory in confessions to Sonya, in conversations with Porfiry Petrovich, and before that, with hints, in a newspaper article. Rodion Romanovich comments: “... an extraordinary person has the right ... to allow his conscience to step over ... over other obstacles, and only if the execution of his idea (sometimes saving for all mankind) requires it ... People, according to the law of nature, are divided, in general , into two categories: the lowest (ordinary) ... and actually people ... ”Raskolnikov, as we see, justifies his idea with a reference to the benefit of all mankind, calculated arithmetically. But can the happiness of all mankind be based on blood, on crime? However,
the reasoning of the hero, who dreams of "freedom and power ... over all trembling creatures," is not devoid of selfishness. “Here’s what: I wanted to become Napoleon, because ...
and killed, ”admits
Raskolnikov. “You departed from God, and God struck you, betrayed you to the devil!” - with fear
Sonya says.
The moral and psychological consequences of a crime are directly opposite to those
expected by Raskolnikov. Elementary human ties are falling apart. Hero
confesses to himself: “Mother, sister, how I loved them! Why do I hate them now? Yes, I hate them, I hate them physically, I can’t stand them next to me ... ”At the same time, Rodion Romanovich decisively overestimates the scale of his own personality:“ The old woman is nonsense! .. The old woman was only a disease ... I wanted to cross as soon as possible ... I didn’t kill a person, I killed the principle! I killed the principle, but I didn’t cross over, I stayed on this side ... Eh, aesthetically I’m a louse, and nothing else! It should be noted that Raskolnikov does not renounce theory in general, he only denies himself the right to kill, only removes himself from the category of "extraordinary people."
The individualistic theory is the source of the hero's constant suffering, the source of the ongoing inner struggle. There is no consistent logical refutation of Raskolnikov's "idea-feeling" in the novel. And is it possible? And yet, Raskolnikov's theory has a number of vulnerabilities: how to distinguish between ordinary and extraordinary people; What will happen if everyone thinks they are Napoleons? The inconsistency of the theory is also revealed in contact with the "real
reality." The future cannot be predicted arithmetically.
The same “arithmetic” that an unfamiliar student spoke about in a tavern suffers a complete collapse. In Raskolnikov's dream about the murder of an old woman, the blows of the ax do not reach the goal. “He ... quietly released the ax from the noose and hit the old woman on the crown of the head, once and twice. But it’s strange: she didn’t even move from the blows, like a wooden one ... The old woman sat and laughed ... ”Raskolnikov’s impotence, not subject to the will of those around him, is expressed by complex figurative symbolism. The world is far from unraveled, it cannot be unraveled, the usual cause-and-effect relationships are absent. "A huge, round, copper-red moon looked straight out the window." “It’s been such a silence since the month,” thought Raskolnikov, “he must be guessing a riddle now.” Thus, the theory is not refuted, but, as it were, is forced out of the consciousness and subconsciousness of the hero. The essence of Raskolnikov's spiritual resurrection is to gain through suffering "living life", love, faith in God. A cautious dream about a pestilence marks the way out of the darkness of the labyrinth. The gap between the hero and ordinary convicts is shrinking,
horizons of the hero's personality.
Let's sum up some results. The inner tragedy of Raskolnikov is connected with the separation of the hero from people and with the creation of the inhuman theory of "blood according to conscience." In his actions, a person is free and independent of social circumstances. The ongoing internal struggle indicates that in Rodion Romanovich, at the same time, a martyr's dream of saving people from suffering and an egoistic confidence in their own right to "step over other obstacles" in order to "become a Napoleon" coexist. At the end of the novel, Raskolnikov comes to spiritual resurrection not as a result of renunciation of the idea, but through suffering, faith and love. The gospel parable of the resurrection of Lazarus is bizarrely refracted in the fate of Sonya and
Raskolnikov. “They were resurrected by love, the heart of one included endless
sources of life of another's heart. In the epilogue, the writer leaves the characters on the threshold of a new,
unknown life. Before Raskolnikov opens the prospect of an infinite
spiritual development. This shows the faith of the humanist writer in man - even in
killer! - the belief that humanity has not yet said its main word. All
ahead!

What explains the internal inconsistency of Rodion Raskolnikov?

Show full text

All people are inherently contradictory: in each of us, such qualities as mercy and cruelty, kindness and heartlessness coexist. F.M. Dostoevsky, a world-famous writer-psychologist, in his work “Crime and Punishment” created the image of a controversial hero, in whom there is simultaneously good nature and misanthropy, the ability to compassion and selfishness ... Let us turn to the analysis of the novel in order to understand what explains the internal inconsistency character.

Already the name of the hero indicates his internal split, separation, lack of integrity. The exposition presents a portrait of the former student Raskolnikov: this is a young man of pleasant appearance, with delicate features. He was dressed in rags, in which a decent person would be ashamed to go out into the street, on his head was an old red hat, full of holes and frayed. Raskolnikov was not worried about how others see him. His modest dwelling resembled a coffin: it is a small miserable closet with low ceilings. The author pays great attention to the interior and landscape in order to show the reader in what an irritable state, "similar to hypochondria", was the protagonist. He was crushed by poverty, was in spiritual exhaustion.

An internal struggle took place in the hero’s soul: the environment, selfishness, social injustice and partly poverty strangled a generous, educated person in him. Raskolnikov becomes obsessed with the "Napoleonic" theory that there are "extraordinary" people who have the right to sacrifice other people's lives for the common good. But killing in the name of helping humanity cannot be justified: the scales will definitely tip to one side.

Following the theory, the student wonders who he himself is: "having the right" or "a trembling creature." To answer him, Raskolnikov decides to kill an old pawnbroker who, being a "louse" herself, decides the fate of many people who turn to her. The theory is doomed to fail. Let us recall the psychological state of the hero before and after the murder. The struggle in his soul brought him to a frenzy, a feverish state. His whole being was opposed to theory. To show this, the author uses various elements of psychologism: a system of twins (the characters Svidrigailov and Luzhin represent an extreme form of self-affirmation), speech characteristics (internal

Criteria

• 2 of 3 K1 Depth of understanding of the topic and persuasiveness of arguments
• 2 of 2 K2 Level of theoretical and literary knowledge
• 3 of 3 K3 The validity of attracting the text of the work
• 2 of 3 K4 Compositional integrity and logical presentation
• 3 out of 3 K5 Following the rules of speech
• TOTAL: 12 out of 14

"What is Raskolnikov's internal inconsistency?" (based on the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment")

In world literature, Dostoevsky has the honor of describing the inexhaustibility and multidimensionality of the human soul. The writer showed the possibility of combining low and high, vile and noble in one person. A person is a mystery, especially the name of the hero indicates duality, the internal ambiguity of the image. Russian person. This is the key to understanding Raskolnikov's character. Herself

The painful internal struggle does not subside for a minute in Raskolnikov's soul. He is tormented not by the primitive question - to kill or not to kill, but by the all-encompassing problem: "Is a man a scoundrel, the whole race in general, that is, the human race."

Dostoevsky's attention is focused on understanding the root causes of Raskolnikov's crime. The point is that Raskolnikov does not kill at all because he lives in poverty. Couldn't he, without waiting for money from his mother and sister, provide himself financially, as Razumikhin did? According to Dostoevsky, man is initially free and makes his own choice. This fully applies to Raskolnikov. Murder is the result of free choice. However, the path to "blood in conscience" is quite complicated and lengthy.

Raskolnikov's crime includes the creation of an arithmetic theory of the "right to blood". The internal tragedy and inconsistency of the image lies precisely in the creation of this logically almost invulnerable theory. The “great idea” itself is a response to the crisis state of the world.

The hero sets out the main provisions of his inhuman theory in confessions to Sonya and in conversations with Porfiry Petrovich. Raskolnikov substantiates his idea with a reference to the benefit of all mankind, calculated arithmetically. But can the happiness of all mankind be based on blood?

The moral consequences of the crime are directly opposite to those expected by Raskolnikov. Elementary human ties are falling apart. The hero asks himself: “Mother, sister, how I loved them! Why do I hate them now? At the same time, Rodion Romanovich decisively overestimates the scale of his own personality: However, he does not renounce theory in general, he only denies himself the right to kill, only removes himself from the category of "extraordinary people."

The individualistic theory is the source of the hero's constant suffering, the source of the ongoing inner struggle. There is no consistent, logical refutation of Raskolnikov's "idea-feeling" in the novel. And is it possible? And yet Raskolnikov's theory has a number of vulnerabilities, for example, how to distinguish between "ordinary" and "extraordinary" people? The inconsistency of the theory is also revealed in contact with reality.

Raskolnikov's impotence, the insubordination of those around him to the will, is expressed by complex figurative symbolism. The world has not yet been unraveled, it cannot be unraveled, the usual cause-and-effect relationships are absent. Thus, the theory is not refuted, but, as it were, forced out of the subconscious of the hero. The essence of Raskolnikov's spiritual resurrection is to gain through suffering "living life", love, faith in God. A cautious dream about a pestilence marks the way out of the darkness of the labyrinth. The gap between the hero and ordinary convicts is shrinking, and the horizons of the hero's personality are expanding.

Let's sum up some results. Raskolnikov's inner tragedy is connected with his separation from people and with the creation of the inhuman theory of "blood according to conscience." In his actions, a person is independent of social circumstances. The ongoing internal struggle indicates that the hero simultaneously coexists a martyr's dream to save people from suffering and an egoistic confidence in their own right to "step over other obstacles" in order to "become a Napoleon". At the end of the novel, Raskolnikov comes to spiritual resurrection not as a result of renunciation of the idea, but through suffering, faith and love. In the epilogue, the writer leaves the characters on the threshold of a new life. Before Raskolnikov opens the prospect of endless spiritual development. This manifests the faith of the humanist writer in man, the faith that mankind has not yet said its main word. Everything ahead!

First, let us recall what is typical for the 60s in Russia. The fundamental ideas of populism, which were first formulated by A.I. Herzen and further developed by N.G. Chernyshevsky, since the beginning of the 60s, almost all Russian revolutionaries have been adopted. The main of these ideas are as follows: Russia can and must, for the good of its people, pass over to socialism, bypassing capitalism (as if jumping over it until it has established itself on Russian soil) and relying in this on the peasant community as the germ of socialism; for this it is necessary not only to abolish serfdom, but also to transfer all the land to the peasants with the unconditional abolition of landownership, overthrow the autocracy and put in power the chosen ones of the people themselves.

After the Russian revolutionaries saw that the peasant reform of 1861 turned out to be half-hearted, they became disillusioned with the reforms and considered that a revolution by the forces of the peasantry was a more reliable means of achieving the goal, and it was they, the Narodniks, who had to raise the peasants to the revolution. The truth is, how to prepare a peasant revolution, the opinions of the populists differed. While the peasants were revolting, and since the spring of 1861 student unrest, unprecedented in Russia, began, the populists considered it possible to create a broad anti-government front that would be able to rely on the will of the people and topple the government. For the sake of this, they turned with proclamations to the “lordly peasants”, “educated classes”, “to the younger generation”, “to the officers”. Contemporaries even called the beginning of the 60s "the era of proclamations." At a time when free speech was punished as a state crime, each proclamation became an event. Meanwhile, in 1861-1862. they appeared one after another, printed in underground printing houses or abroad, containing a wide range of ideas, and distributed in huge circulations for that time - in thousands of copies. So, the proclamation "Young Russia" was sent by mail, scattered at Moscow University and right on the streets, boulevards, at the entrances of houses. "Great Russian" offered the educated classes to organize an anti-government campaign demanding a constitution. The proclamation "To the Young Generation" demanded a complete renewal of the country, up to the introduction of a republic, preferably by peaceful means, but with the proviso: if it is impossible otherwise, we willingly call on the revolution to help the people. "Young Russia" unreservedly advocated a revolution, bloody and inexorable - a revolution that should radically change everything, everything without exception, namely: to destroy the autocracy (by exterminating "the entire house of the Romanovs" without exception) and landownership, to secularize church and monastery property, even liquidate marriage and the family, which alone, according to Young Russia, could liberate women in the coming social and democratic Russian republic. "Young Russia" not only embittered the tsarist government, but also shocked the revolutionaries.

The novel by F. M. Dostoevsky “Crime and Punishment” shows the character of a representative of the Raznochinskaya youth of the 60s of the XIX century. Raskolnikov is a poor Petersburg student. But his spiritual world is in a complex way correlated in the novel not only with the spiritual world of his contemporary generation, but also with historical images of the past, partly named (Napoleon, Mohammed, Schiller's heroes), and partly not named in the novel (Pushkin's Hermann, Boris Godunov, Pretender ; Balzac's Rastignac, etc.). This allowed the author to expand and deepen the image of the protagonist to the maximum, to give it the desired philosophical scale.

Let's pay attention to the name of the main character - Raskolnikov. She is extremely versatile. First, she points to schismatics who did not obey the decisions of church councils and deviated from the path of the Orthodox Church, i.e. opposed their opinion to the conciliar one. Secondly, it points to a split in the very essence of the hero, who is truly a tragic hero - for he, having rebelled against society and God, still cannot reject, as worthless, the values ​​associated with God and society. It is precisely a split, a crack that forms in Raskolnikov's value system, but the system does not crumble from this.

Raskolnikov’s friend Razumikhin also speaks of the inconsistency of Raskolnikov’s character: “ For a year and a half I have known Rodion: gloomy, gloomy, arrogant and proud; lately (and perhaps much earlier) hypochondriacal hypochondriac. Magnanimous and proud. He does not like to express his feelings and will sooner do cruelty than the heart will express in words. Sometimes, in other matters, he is not a hypochondriac at all, but simply cold and insensitive to the point of inhumanity, really, as if in him two opposite characters are alternately replaced. Terribly taciturn sometimes! He has no time for everything, everyone interferes with him, but he himself lies, does nothing. Not mocking, and not because there was not enough wit, but as if he did not have enough time for such trifles. Doesn't listen to what they say. Never interested in what everyone is interested in at the moment. He values ​​himself terribly highly and, it seems, not without some right to do so..

The inconsistency, duality of Raskolnikov is his weakness as an ideologist, this is what destroys him. Raskolnikov's actions are contradictory, now he is alone, in an hour he is already different. He sincerely regrets the deceived girl on the boulevard, gives the last pennies to the Marmeladovs, saves two babies from a burning house. Even his dreams are like a continuation of the struggle of the two sides of his being for and against the crime: in one he tries to save a horse from death, in the other he kills again. The second positive side of the hero does not allow him to die completely.

Raskolnikov is also dual, like the image of St. Petersburg in the novel. “He is remarkably good-looking, with beautiful dark eyes, dark blond, taller than average, thin and slender”; dreamer, romantic, high and proud spirit, noble and strong personality. But this man has his own Sennaya, his own dirty underground - the thought of murder and robbery.

Raskolnikov is a new type of hero of the time. The hero is given on the eve of a mental explosion.

The theme of punishment in the interpretation of Dostoevsky. The moral state of Raskolnikov. Dostoevsky's psychological skill in depicting the hero's mental struggle. The ideological and artistic function of Raskolnikov's symbolic dreams.

Punishment in the novel is manifested through Raskolnikov's moral state, alienation and dreams.

Punishment is the suffering that falls to the lot of Raskolnikov, which nature itself inevitably imposes on those who rebel against it, against a new life, no matter how small and unmanifested it may seem.

Let's start with the moral state of the protagonist. Dostoevsky does not skimp on characterizing Raskolnikov's abnormal state: fever, stupefaction, heavy oblivion, a feeling that he is going crazy. Punishment begins immediately after the murder. The central part of the novel is mainly occupied with the depiction of seizures and that mental pain in which the awakening of conscience is manifested. One by one, Dostoevsky describes the change of the same feelings: “Fear seized him more and more, especially after this second, completely unexpected murder”, “... some absent-mindedness, as if even thoughtfulness, began to gradually take possession of him: for minutes he seemed to forget ...”, “his head seemed to start again spinning," "he was lying on his back on the sofa, still dumbfounded from recent oblivion," "a terrible cold seized him; but the cold was also from a fever that had long since begun with him in a dream. , “... sleep and delirium again seized him at once. He forgot himself”, “again the unbearable chill froze him”, “... his heart was pounding so that it even hurt”, “he felt a terrible disorder in everything. He was afraid of not being able to control himself. He tried to cling to something and think about something completely extraneous, but he did not succeed, "" his thoughts, already sick and incoherent, began to interfere more and more ... " , “suddenly his lips trembled, his eyes lit up with rage ...”, “sometimes he was seized by a painfully painful anxiety, degenerating even into panic fear.”

Loneliness and alienation took hold of his heart: “… before that, his heart suddenly emptied. A gloomy feeling of painful, endless solitude and alienation suddenly consciously affected his soul.. Having committed a crime, Raskolnikov tore himself away from living and healthy people, and now every touch of life painfully affects him. He cannot see his friend or his relatives, as they annoy him, this is torture for him (“... he stood as if dead; an unbearable sudden consciousness hit him like thunder. And his arms did not rise to hug them: they could not ... He took a step, swayed and collapsed to the floor in a faint”).

Yet the soul of the criminal awakens and protests against the violence committed against her. For example, about the death of Marmeladov, he is happy to take care of others. Also, the scene between him and the girl Paula, whom he asks to pray for him.

After a conversation with Zametov “He came out trembling from some kind of wild hysterical sensation, in which, meanwhile, there was a part of unbearable pleasure - however, gloomy, terribly tired. His face was contorted, as if after some kind of seizure. His fatigue increased rapidly. His forces were excited and now suddenly came, with the first shock, with the first irritating sensation, and just as quickly weakened as the sensation weakened..

Dostoevsky masterfully describes Raskolnikov's inner monologues. Among the incoherent thoughts of the half-delirious Raskolnikov, his soul breaks through:

“Poor Lizaveta! Why did she turn up here! .. It is strange, however, why I hardly think about her, as if I didn’t kill her ... Lizaveta! Sonya! poor, meek, with meek eyes... Darlings! Why don't they cry. Why don't they moan. They give everything ... they look meekly and quietly ... Sonya, Sonya! Quiet Sonya! ..”, “But why do they themselves love me so much if I’m not worth it!”, “Do I love her, or what? After all, no, no? ... And I dared to hope so for myself, so dream of myself, I am a beggar, an insignificant me, a scoundrel, a scoundrel!

Raskolnikov's dreams are deeply symbolic. Dostoevsky writes: “Dreams in a diseased state are often distinguished by their extraordinary convexity, brightness and extreme resemblance to reality. Sometimes a monstrous picture is formed, but the situation and the whole process of the whole representation are so probable at the same time and with such subtle, unexpected, but artistic details corresponding to the whole completeness of the picture, that they cannot be invented in reality by the same dreamer, be he the same artist, like Pushkin or Turgenev. Such dreams, painful dreams, are always remembered for a long time and make a strong impression on the upset and already excited human body..

Raskolnikov's first dream about his childhood. Here you can apply a multi-level interpretation of sleep.

First level - historical. The episode with the beating of a horse in Raskolnikov's dream is traditionally considered an allusion to Nekrasov's poem "On the Weather". It turns out that Dostoevsky was amazed by the fact depicted in Nekrasov's poem to such an extent that he considered it necessary to duplicate what Nekrasov said in his novel.

Dostoevsky, of course, saw such scenes in reality, but if he considered it necessary to “reference” so clearly to a work of art, then, apparently, not because he was amazed at the fact reflected in it, but because he saw the work itself as some kind of new a fact of life that really struck him.

This new fact consisted, firstly, in the purpose for which facts were chosen from reality and collected by those who had to incite their readers in a certain way; secondly, in the ratio of what is actually happening and perceived by a person who is tuned in a certain way. The “Nekrasov’s” perception of a horse trying to push an unbearable cart (“Nekrasov’s” - in quotation marks, because this is the perception of Nekrasov’s readers, and not the poet himself), a horse, as if personifying the suffering and misfortune of this world, its injustice and ruthlessness, moreover - the very existence of this horse, weak and downtrodden - all these are the facts of Raskolnikov's dream. The poor Savraska, harnessed to a huge cart, into which a crowd of drunks got into, is only Raskolnikov's idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe state of the world. Here is what actually exists: “... one drunkard, who, for no one knows why and where, was being transported at that time along the street in a huge cart pulled by a huge draft horse ...”. This cart on the first pages of "Crime and Punishment" seemed to be riding out of Raskolnikov's dream.

Thus, only the size of the cart is adequately perceived, but not the load and not the strength of the horse harnessed to this cart, that is, the challenge to God is thrown on the basis of non-existent injustices, for everyone is given a burden according to their strength and no one is given more than he can bear .

An analogue of a horse from a dream is Katerina Ivanovna in the novel, falling under the weight of her unrealistic troubles and worries, which are very great, but bearable (especially since God does not take his hand away, and when the edge comes, there is always an assistant: Sonya, Raskolnikov, Svidrigailov), and under the burden of troubles and worries that she romantically imagined for herself, and it is precisely from these troubles, insults and sorrows that exist almost only in her inflamed brain that she eventually dies - like a "driven horse." Katerina Ivanovna exclaims to herself: "They left the nag!". And indeed, she kicks, fighting off the horror of life with her last strength, like a horse from Raskolnikov's dream. (“... such a staring mare, and still kicking! ... She all settles with her whole back, but jumps up and pulls, pulls with all her might in different directions ... ", but these blows, hitting the living people around her, are often as crushing as the blows of the horses' hooves that crushed Marmeladov's chest (for example, her act with Sonya).

Second level - moral. It is revealed when comparing the names of Mikolka from the dream and Nikolai (Mikolai) the dyer. Raskolnikov throws his fists at the killer Mikolka to punish him ( “... suddenly jumps up and in a frenzy rushes with his fists at Mikolka”. The dyer Nikolka will take upon himself the sin and guilt of the murderer Raskolnikov, defending him with his unexpected testimony at the most terrible moment for him from the torture of Porfiry Petrovich and from a forced confession ( "I ... the murderer ... Alena Ivanovna and their sister, Lizaveta Ivanovna, I ... killed ... with an ax"). At this level, Dostoevsky's cherished thought is revealed that everyone is to blame for everyone, that there is only one true attitude towards the sin of one's neighbor - this is to take his sin upon himself, take his crime and guilt upon himself - at least for a while, bear his burden in order to he did not fall in despair from an unbearable burden, but he saw a helping hand and the way of resurrection.

Third level - allegorical. Here the thought of the second level unfolds and is supplemented: not only everyone is to blame for everyone, but everyone is to blame for everyone. Torturer and victim can change places at any moment. In Raskolnikov's dream, young, well-fed, drunk, cheerful people kill a staring horse - in the novel reality, the drunk and exhausted Marmeladov dies under the hooves of young, strong, well-fed, well-groomed horses. Moreover, his death is no less terrible than the death of a horse: “The whole chest was mangled, crumpled and torn; several ribs on the right side are broken. On the left side, at the very heart, there was an ominous, large, yellowish-black spot, a cruel blow with a hoof ... the crushed one was captured in a wheel and dragged, twirling, about thirty steps along the pavement ” .

Fourth level (most important for understanding the meaning of the novel) is symbolic, and it is at this level that Raskolnikov's dreams are interconnected in a system. Waking up after a dream about killing a horse, Raskolnikov speaks as if he identifies himself with those who killed, but trembles at the same time as if all the blows that fell on the unfortunate horse hit him.

Perhaps the resolution of this contradiction is in the following words of Raskolnikov: “Yes, what am I! he continued, raising himself up again and as if in deep amazement, “after all, I knew that I would not be able to bear it, so why have I been torturing myself until now? After all, yesterday, yesterday, when I went to do this ... test, after all, yesterday I completely understood that I could not stand it ... Why am I now? What am I still doubting?. He, indeed, is both a “horse” and a killer-Mikolka, demanding that the horse harnessed to an unbearable cart “leaps”. The symbol of the rider on a horse is the most famous Christian symbol of the spirit that controls the flesh. This is his spirit, willful and daring, trying to force his nature, his flesh to do what it cannot, what disgusts it, against which it rebels. He will say this: “After all, from one thought in reality I was sick and horrified ...”. It is about this that Porfiry Petrovich will later tell Raskolnikov: “He, let’s say, will lie, that is, a person with something, a special case, something incognito, and he will lie perfectly, in the most cunning manner; here, it seems, would be a triumph, and enjoy the fruits of your wit, and he clap! Yes, in the most interesting, in the most scandalous place, and he will faint. Let's say it's a sickness, stuffiness also sometimes happens in rooms, but all the same, sir! Still got the idea! He lied incomparably, but he didn’t manage to calculate on nature ”\u003e.

The second time he sees a dream in which he kills his victim a second time. This happens after a tradesman calls him a "murderer". The end of the dream is an allusion to Pushkin's "Boris Godunov" ("He rushed to run, but the whole hallway is already full of people, the doors on the stairs are wide open, and on the landing, and on the stairs and down there - all the people, head with head, everyone is looking - but everyone is hiding and waiting, they are silent! ..”). This allusion emphasizes the motive of the hero's imposture.

Another dream that Rodion Raskolnikov has in the epilogue of the novel is a nightmare describing the apocalyptic state of the world, where the coming of the Antichrist seems to be distributed to all of humanity - everyone becomes the Antichrist, a preacher of his own truth, truth for his own sake. “He dreamed in his illness that the whole world was condemned to the sacrifice of some terrible, unheard of and unprecedented pestilence coming from the depths of Asia to Europe. All were to perish, except for a few, a very select few.".