Raskolnikov, in the novel, is deliberately unpleasant to everyone. In his behavior, the emphasis is placed on moments that outrage moral feelings. Angrily resisting the humanity in himself, he tries to strangle it, tormenting himself and his loved ones. We do not accept a hero in this absolute, devastating hostility to the world. The author sympathizes more with him, an impatient thinker and philosopher who does not get to the root of the contradictions that lie before him, than with Ivan with his thoroughly thought-out theory.
Healthy lunch delivery to the Moscow office.
Raskolnikov finds himself in a dead end, but Dostoevsky finds a way out of the situation, and the article that had previously provided evidence to the meticulous Porfiry Petrovich helps him in this. And this newspaper article turned into a guarantee of the enormous literary talent of the hero that his mother raves about. This is also stated by Svidrigailov: “It can be a big scam when nonsense comes out,” and by the official Porokh, who originally notes that many writers at the beginning commit extravagant acts. During the course of the novel, Raskolnikov communicates with Porfiry Petrovich, who represents the ideas of earthly justice, retribution, but not truth. This devil tempter also appears in “The Brothers Karamazov” in the form of the devil Ivan
Idols, idols of Raskolnikov are great geniuses, arbiters of the destinies of mankind. To become one of them, the hero must take upon himself all human sins and thus overcome them. His crime, paradoxically in Dostoevsky's ethics, is connected with the greatest sacrifice. Here begins Dostoevsky’s primary theme of Christ the criminal, which tormented the author all his life. The old pawnbroker really fell victim not to a murderer, but to a principle. Raskolnikov committed a crime because he is a man. Did Dostoevsky test the hero’s strength because he saw himself in a convicted murderer? Would you like to make sure whether he, the author, could commit a crime?
F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment” is socio-psychological. In it, the author raises important social issues that worried people of that time. The originality of this novel by Dostoevsky lies in the fact that it shows psychology...
“Short, about eighteen, thin, but quite pretty blonde, with wonderful blue eyes" Daughter of Marmeladov. To help her starving family, she began to engage in prostitution. First we learn about her from Marmeladov’s story. At first...
F. M. Dostoevsky - “ great artist ideas" (M. M. Bakhtin). The idea determines the personality of his heroes, who “do not need millions, but need to resolve the idea.” The novel “Crime and Punishment” is a debunking of the theory of Rodion Raskolnikov, a condemnation of the principle...
F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment” was published in 1866. This is a novel about modern Russia, which lived through an era of profound social changes and moral upheavals, a novel about a modern hero who took into his chest all the suffering...
“What am I guilty of before them?.. They themselves harass millions of people, and even consider them to be virtues” - with these words you can begin a lesson about Raskolnikov’s “doubles”. Raskolnikov’s theory, proving whether he is a “trembling creature” or has the right, assumed...
F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment” is one of the greatest philosophical and psychological novels. The author told us about moral upheavals and daring that cannot but excite a reader of any era. The writer's focus is on a terrible...
Municipal educational institution
secondary educational school with in-depth study of subjects
artistic and aesthetic cycle No. 23
Project
Subject : "What is the inconsistency of the rebellion of Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov" .
Performed:
Student of class 10 "B"
Barannik Vitalina Igorevna
Supervisor:
Myachina Lyudmila Veniaminovna
Content
Part 1
Introduction:
Relevance
Object and subject of research
Goal, hypothesis, tasks
Part 2
Basic information about the events in the novel
The hero's life before the crime
Crime
Punishment
The main reasons for the actions of the protagonist
Social reasons
Philosophical rationale
Psychological origins
Consideration of the character of the main character
Part 3
Conclusion
Application
Part 1
Introduction
On the one hand, the main character of the novel can be called kind, loving, noble man. He was ready to give everything “for his friends.” However, on the other hand, in his actions we see a manifestation of pride and pride. But what was R.R. Raskolnikov really like and what was the true side of his soul?
R. Raskolnikov, main character novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment", not only the compositional, but also the spiritual center of the entire work. Rodion Romanovich has a very contradictory and mysterious nature, so the main question that you think about when reading the novel is what explains this internal duality of the hero?
The author of the novel, with the help of the image of Raskolnikov, reveals to the reader the truth - in each of us there is something good, and something bad, something vile and noble. This side of human nature has always been and will always be, so the relevance of this problem is very great in the modern world.
Hypothesis
The revolt of R. R. Raskolnikov is a protest against violence against man, against the masters of life.
Target
Determine what is the inconsistency of the rebellion of the main character of the work.
Tasks
Find out the essence of Raskolnikov's theory
Find out what the inconsistency of rebellion is
Part 2
Raskolnikov's riot
Raskolnikov's idea grows out of the depths of the historical disappointment experienced by the younger generation after the collapse of the revolutionary situation of the 60s, due to the crisis of utopian theories. His violent rebellion simultaneously inherits the force of social negation of the sixties, and falls away from their movement in its concentrated individualism. All the threads of the narrative converge on Raskolnikov. He absorbs everything around him (grief, misfortune and injustice). We see how human tragedies, disasters - both very distant (the girl on the boulevard), and those that seriously enter his life (the Marmeladov family), and those closest to him (the story of Dunya) - charge the hero with protest and fill him with determination. Throughout the first part of the novel, the writer makes it clear: for Raskolnikov, the problem is not in improving his own “extreme” circumstances. . For Raskolnikov, to obediently accept fate as it is means to renounce all right to act, live and love. The main character does not have that egocentric concentration that completely forms Luzhin’s personality in the novel. Raskolnikov is one of those people who, first of all, do not take from others, but give to them. However, he is ready to do this without asking - dictatorially, against the will of the other person. The energy of goodness is ready to turn into self-will, “violence of goodness.”
The possibility of shifting responsibility to the external “law of circumstances” comes into conflict with the requirement of proud individual independence. Raskolnikov, in general, does not hide in this loophole, does not accept the justification of his action as a general social abnormality that placed him in a hopeless situation. He understands that he must answer for everything he has done himself - “take upon himself” the blood he shed. Raskolnikov’s crime has not one motive, but a complex tangle of motives. This, of course, is partly social revolt and a kind of social revenge, an attempt to get out of the destined circle of life, robbed and narrowed by the inexorable force of social injustice. The deep reason for Raskolnikov’s crime, of course, is a “disordered”, “dislocated” eyelid.
How does Raskolnikov's experiment withstand his personality?
The hero’s first reaction to a murder that has already been committed is a reaction of nature, of the heart, a morally true reaction. And that painful feeling of separation from people that flares up in him immediately after the murder is also the voice of inner truth. Very important in this sense is the large, multi-valued episode on the bridge, where Raskolnikov first receives a blow with a whip, then alms and finds himself (for the only time in the novel) face to face with the “magnificent panorama” of the capital. The murder put him not only against the official law, the criminal code, which has paragraphs and clauses, but also against another, deeper unwritten law of human society.
Raskolnikov’s “Resurrection” in the epilogue is the result of human interaction between almost all the heroes of the novel. Sonya Marmeladova plays a special role here; Sonya Marmeladova is placed in the most important place. She wants from Raskolnikov something very simple and terribly difficult: to step over pride, turn to people for forgiveness and accept this forgiveness. But the author shows the inability of the people to understand the inner impulse of the hero, since people who happen to be in the square perceive his actions as a strange trick of a drunken man.
What gives rise to Raskolnikov's rebellion
desire to get rich
pathological desire for violence
bitterness against society and its morals
desire to attract attention
The inconsistency of the idea of a hero
Do good for society, but with the help of murder
Surrender to the police without going to jail
A mentally developed personality with an inhumane decision
Conscientious, but with pride
The hero opposes the masters of life, commits a rebellion that makes him a real criminal.
Dostoevsky in his novel depicts the clash of theory with the logic of life. According to the writer, the living process of life, that is, the logic of life, always refutes and makes untenable any theory - both the most advanced, revolutionary, and the most criminal. This means you can’t live life according to theory. And therefore the main philosophical thought the novel is not revealed in the system
logical proofs and refutations, but as a collision of a person obsessed with an extremely criminal theory with life processes that refute this theory.
Raskolnikov and Napoleon
« Raskolnikov, VdifferencefromNapoleon, thoughtjustifyspilledthemblood..." (V.L. Kirpotin)
Raskolnikov dreams of managing people, directing his energies to transforming the world for the better. He sees in Napoleon's actions a justification for his way of achieving this transformation. “Toulon” comes for both Napoleon and the hero. For Raskolnikov, this is the murder of an old woman, that is, the hero’s self-test: will he withstand the idea of law? strong personality on the blood, whether he is a chosen, exceptional person, Napoleon. If he couldn’t stand it, he’s not.
The idea of the novel “Crime and Punishment” arose in an era of great change, when a social turning point occurred in society and new worldviews emerged. Many people were faced with a choice: the new situation required significant changes in spiritual guidelines, since the hero of the time became a business person, and not a spiritually rich one.
The main character of the novel, former student Rodion Raskolnikov, is in search of an answer to the philosophical and moral question about personal freedom, about its “sovereignty” and, at the same time, about the internal boundaries of this freedom. Driving force search becomes the idea he cultivated about a strong personality who has the right to make history at his own discretion.
Raskolnikov's idea grows out of the depths of the historical disappointment experienced by the younger generation after the collapse of the revolutionary situation of the 60s, due to the crisis of utopian theories. His violent rebellion simultaneously inherits the force of social negation of the sixties, and falls away from their movement in its concentrated individualism.
All the threads of the narrative converge on Raskolnikov. He absorbs everything around him (grief, misfortune and injustice): this is precisely the meaning of the first part of “Crime and Punishment”. We see how human tragedies, disasters - both very distant (the girl on the boulevard), and those that seriously enter his life (the Marmeladov family), and those closest to him (the story of Dunya) - charge the hero with protest and fill him with determination. This is happening to him not only now: the ability to absorb the pain of another being into his soul, to feel it as his own living grief, Dostoevsky discovers in the hero from childhood (Raskolnikov’s famous dream of a slaughtered horse, stunning every reader). Throughout the first part of the novel, the writer makes it clear: for Raskolnikov, the problem is not in improving his own “extreme” circumstances.
Of course, Raskolnikov is not one of the many who are able to “pull his way somehow where it should be.” But this is not enough: he does not humble himself not only for himself, but also for others - for the already humble and broken. For Raskolnikov, to obediently accept fate as it is means to renounce all right to act, live and love.
The main character does not have that egocentric concentration that completely forms Luzhin’s personality in the novel. Raskolnikov is one of those people who, first of all, do not take from others, but give to them. To feel strong man, he must feel that someone needs him, is waiting for his protection, that he has someone to give himself to (remember the surge of happiness that he experienced after Polechka’s gratitude). Raskolnikov has this ability to bring fire to others. However, he is ready to do this without asking - dictatorially, against the will of the other person. The energy of goodness is ready to turn into self-will, “violence of goodness.”
More than once in the novel it is said that crime is a protest against the abnormality of the social structure - and that’s all, and nothing more. This idea slightly affected Raskolnikov: it is not for nothing that he “absently” answers Razumikhin that the question of crime is “an ordinary social question,” and even earlier, on the same basis, he reassures himself that “what he has conceived is not a crime...”. And the conversation in the tavern, overheard by him (the student’s opinion), develops the same idea: eliminating a louse like Alena Ivanovna is not a crime, but, as it were, correcting a wrong modern move of things.
But this opportunity to shift responsibility to the external “law of circumstances” comes into conflict with the requirement of proud individual independence. Raskolnikova, in general, does not hide in this loophole, does not accept the justification of her action as a general social abnormality, which placed him in a hopeless situation. He understands that he must answer for everything he has done himself - “take upon himself” the blood he shed.
Raskolnikov’s crime has not one motive, but a complex tangle of motives. This, of course, is partly a social rebellion and a kind of social revenge, an attempt to get out of the destined circle of life, robbed and narrowed by the inexorable force of social injustice. But not only. The deep reason for Raskolnikov’s crime, of course, is a “disordered”, “dislocated” eyelid.
In a brief and rigid scheme, the given conditions of the experiment of Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov are the position that in the world of absolute evil reigning around, there is a crowd, a herd of unreasonable “trembling creatures (both the perpetrators and victims of this evil), which dutifully drags out the yoke of any laws. And there are (in units in millions) the rulers of life, geniuses who establish laws: from time to time they overthrow the old ones and dictate others to humanity. They are the heroes of their time. (Raskolnikov himself, of course, aspires to the role of such a hero with a secret, painful hope.) The genius breaks through the circle of established life with the pressure of personal self-affirmation, which is based on freeing oneself not only from the unfit norms of social life, but from the weight of the norms collectively assumed by people , in general: “if he needs, for his idea, to step over even a corpse, through blood, then within himself, in conscience, he can give himself permission to step over the blood.” The experimental material for Raskolnikov is his own life and personality.
In essence, the hero prefers an energetic “one-act” solution to the laborious process of separating good from evil - a process that a person not only learns, but also experiences throughout his life and with his whole life, and not with just his mind - an energetic “one-act” solution: to stand on the other side of good and evil. By performing this action, he (following his theory) intends to find out whether he personally belongs to the highest human rank.
How does his nature, his personality, withstand Raskolnikov’s experiment? His first reaction to a murder that has already been committed is the reaction of nature, the heart, a morally true reaction. And that painful feeling of separation from people that flares up in him immediately after the murder is also the voice of inner truth. Very important in this sense is the large, multi-valued episode on the bridge, where Raskolnikov first receives a blow with a whip, then alms and finds himself (for the only time in the novel) face to face with the “magnificent panorama” of the capital. The murder put him not only against the official law, the criminal code, which has paragraphs and paragraphs, but also against another, deeper unwritten law of human society.
Raskolnikov goes off on his crime alone; he can return to life only together with others, thanks to them. Raskolnikov’s “Resurrection” in the epilogue is the result of human interaction between almost all the heroes of the novel. Sonya Marmeladova plays a special role here; Sonya Marmeladova is placed in the most important place. She wants from Raskolnikov something very simple and terribly difficult: to step over pride, turn to people for forgiveness and accept this forgiveness. But the author shows the people’s inability to understand the hero’s inner impulse, since people who happen to be in the square perceive his actions as a strange prank of a drunken man.
Still, there is strength for resurrection in Rodion. The fact that the whole program was based on the desire for the good of people allowed him, in the end, to be able to accept their help. The hidden, distorted, but present in him, the humanistic principle and the persistence of Sonya, who builds a bridge to him from living people, imperceptibly move towards each other in order to unite and give the hero a sudden insight already in the epilogue.
Individualistic rebellion of Raskolnikov (Option: The image of Raskolnikov in the novel “Crime and Punishment”)
It's not hard to despise people
It is impossible to despise your own court...
A. S. Pushkin
F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment” is one of those works whose relevance does not decrease over time. At the center of this novel is the question of possible ways of development human personality in harsh living conditions. The main content of Crime and Punishment is the history of the crime and its moral consequences for the main character. Psychological analysis the state of the criminal cannot be considered separately from philosophical theory Raskolnikov, which is largely a product of the environment from which he came.
Raskolnikov is a student forced to leave his studies due to lack of funds. His mother, the widow of a provincial official, lives after the death of her husband on a modest pension, most of which she sends to her son so that he can somehow exist. Raskolnikov's sister Dunya is forced to take a job as a governess for a family of wealthy landowners. She is subjected to insults and humiliation there, but continues to work because she considers it her duty to help her mother and brother.
Raskolnikov is very poor. He lives in a cramped closet, similar to a coffin, on the fifth floor of an apartment building in St. Petersburg, not far from Sennaya Square. Being himself in terrible poverty, he also sees every day the life of the poorest strata of St. Petersburg. This is the drunken official Marmeladov, and his wife Katerina Ivanovna, dying of consumption, and many other poor people of this gloomy city. The life of the disadvantaged people of St. Petersburg is no different from the life of the same “humiliated and insulted” poor people in the provinces. This is the fate of Raskolnikov’s sister and mother, who live in poverty as a result of social injustice. The protagonist's awareness of his position as an outcast in society and the closeness of his fate to the fate of other powerless people leads Raskolnikov to the social motives of his crime.
The novel depicts the main shopping district of modern St. Petersburg - Sennaya Square and the gloomy streets and alleys surrounding it. Through the eyes of the main character, we see the life of boulevards, eateries, taverns. The heavy atmosphere of a murderous city, a city that is an accomplice to murder, puts pressure on the psyche, traumatizes the soul of the person living in it, and contributes to the development in his head of various fantastic ideas and illusions, no less nightmarish than life itself.
Raskolnikov realizes that not only he himself, but also thousands of other people are inevitably doomed to poverty, lack of rights and early death. But he is a smart person and therefore cannot simply come to terms with the existing state of affairs. And this gives rise to constant work of thought in him, striving to find a way out of the current unfair situation.
The meeting with Marmeladov makes a very big impression on Raskolnikov. The confession of a drunken official, his story about the fate of his wife and children, especially Sonya, who was forced to go “on a yellow ticket” in order to feed her family, pushed Raskolnikov to a crime that had long been brewing in his head, assured him of the need to fight against the “masters of life.” ”, such as Alena Ivanovna, the old money-lender, Luzhin and Svidrigailov.
But Raskolnikov’s own suffering and the grief of other poor people are not the main reasons for his crime. “If only I had killed because I was hungry, then I would be happy now,” he says with bitterness and pain. The roots of Raskolnikov’s crime are not in the desire to improve his financial situation. The whole point here is in the theory he created - an “idea” that he considers it his duty to test. Reflecting on the causes of inequality and injustice, Raskolnikov comes to the conclusion that differences between people have always existed. Moreover, all people, in his opinion, are divided into two categories - ordinary people and outstanding ones. While most people always silently submit to the existing order, “extraordinary” people appear from time to time in the history of mankind: Mohammed, Lycurgus, Napoleon. They do not stop at violence and crime in order to impose their will on humanity. Cursed by their contemporaries, such outstanding personalities, in the opinion of the protagonist, will then be justified by the descendants, who recognize them as heroes.
From this theory, which Raskolnikov outlined in a newspaper article a year before the murder, the philosophical motives for his crime emerge. “Am I a louse, like everyone else, or a man?.. Am I a trembling creature or do I have the right?” - this is the main question that tormented Dostoevsky’s hero for many years.
Raskolnikov does not want to obey and endure. He must prove to himself and those around him that, like other “extraordinary” people, he is not a “trembling creature”, but has the right to transgress both the criminal and moral laws. This conclusion leads Raskolnikov to commit a crime.
Raskolnikov decided that the old pawnbroker would be suitable “material” for testing his theory. She poisons the lives of all poor people and even her own sister. She's vile and disgusting. If she dies, then, according to the hero, it will only become easier for everyone.
Raskolnikov manages to carry out the planned murder. But the tragic “experiment” led him to a different result than the one he expected. From his own experience and from the example of other people, Raskolnikov is convinced step by step that the morality of “extraordinary” people is beyond his control. And the point here is not the hero’s weakness, as it seemed to him at first. He understands that the actions of these very “extraordinary” people, in essence, are no different from the norms of behavior of the “masters of life” that Raskolnikov seeks to fight.
Before committing the murder, it seemed to the hero that he had thought through and calculated all the circumstances of the crime. But it turns out that life is always more complicated than any theoretical constructions. Instead of one old woman, Raskolnikov is forced to kill her younger sister, who returned at the wrong time, the meek and downtrodden Lizaveta, who did no harm to anyone, and suffered no less than all the poor people around the hero.
But the hero was even more mistaken in himself, thinking that the crime would not in any way affect his attitude towards the outside world. Raskolnikov believed that public opinion was indifferent to him, that he was responsible for his actions only to himself. But he is surprised to discover in himself a feeling of disconnection from people, since by his action he placed himself outside the generally accepted rules and laws. He thought of killing a useless and disgusting old woman, but “he killed himself.” That is why, after a long struggle with himself, he understands the impracticability of his theory and, on Sonya’s advice, puts himself in the hands of justice.
Dostoevsky's hero rebels against the existing order of life. He tries to destroy it and dreams of the role of liberator of humanity, but his rebellion is individualistic in its very essence. He wants, first of all, to establish himself, to defend his right to be involved with “extraordinary” people.
Dostoevsky offers Raskolnikov a way out of the spiritual crisis. The author sees the salvation of humanity not in individualistic self-affirmation, but in the desire for moral purity and peace of mind. Sonya Marmeladova is the ideal of these aspirations. She listens with horror to the reasoning of Raskolnikov, who is trying to justify the murder of the moneylender. Sonya urges him to abandon the terrible idea of a “superman” and repent before people, thereby atone for his guilt. Raskolnikov reaches out to this open and bright soul, and only Sonya’s love and support help him take the path of moral purification, F. M. Dostoevsky exposes Raskolnikov’s untenable, inhumane theory. According to the author, there are no good crimes, all crimes are inhumane. The humanist writer condemned the theory of a strong personality, since it leads to human suffering. Dostoevsky saw the moral revival of the individual in the acquisition of unity with people. After all, human brotherhood is the most important norm of life, for it contains spiritual communication, sensitivity, compassion, and love.