/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11843120]

I don't get it

[Anonymous No.11843501]

>>11843120
What’s there not to get? It’s literally about committing crime and being punished for it. As far as the criminal psyche is concerned and the emotional turmoil leading to it, no one could have diagnosed it better than Dostoevsky. (From the little I know) Crime and Punishment is a rough experience for any reader.

[Anonymous No.11843508]

>>11843501
>reading a book is a rough experience

[Anonymous No.11843517]

You can literally ignore everything but the title and still have a rudimentary understanding of the plot. Did you read the book all the way through?

[Anonymous No.11843524]

>>11843501
>>11843508
notes from the underground was much harder for me to read than c&p because I related too hard to underground man's social interactions

[Anonymous No.11843526]

>>11843508
not that anon, it's been for me some times

[Anonymous No.11843549]

>>11843501
>>11843517
OP here, I think I went into reading it with high expectations. I understand the book, I just feel like there's something deeper I'm missing

[Anonymous No.11843554]

>>11843549
there is

[Anonymous No.11843555]

>>11843120
Anglos/non orthodox usually don't understand Dostoevsky.

[Anonymous No.11843576]

>>11843120

Great until the end.

>prostitute with a Bible saves protagonist

Yeah, uh, that's going in my cringe compilation.

[Anonymous No.11843601]

>>11843549
I went into reading it with great expectations, and between the two of them they were too long to finish.

[Anonymous No.11843606]

>>11843576
>reference to bible appears in literary work
>quick, turn off brain to avoid christian corruption

[Anonymous No.11843608]

>>11843576
That ending was set up from the beginning with Marmeladov's drunken story that he tells to Rodya.

[Anonymous No.11843616]

>>11843576
The Bible only served as a modem for Raskolnikov’s interaction with faith, I think. Do you not see how death row prisoners or long timers take to religion at the fag end of their life? I doubt if there was any Christian propaganda involved.

[Anonymous No.11843618]

>>11843555
Elaborate pls

[Anonymous No.11843624]

>>11843554
how does the nihilist speech at the end tie into the main guy's views on the divide between superior people and inferior people? why was the investigator such an ass at the beginning? was the solution to the main guy's torment simply to love other people, apparently, at the end?

[Anonymous No.11843633]

how can anyone take Dosto seriously when a major theme in his books is "atheists can't be moral"? that is an absolute pleb tier belief

[Anonymous No.11843634]

>>11843606
>>11843616

It's much more the "prostitute with heart of gold" trope that I'm offended by. Couple it with the saving words of Jesus Christ Our Lord and it's just too much. That, plus of course Dosty was a conservative Christian so it does smell of propaganda if you venture outside the text.

I would've preferred if Raskolnikov's spiritual fate were left more open-ended.

[Anonymous No.11843637]

>>11843549
I think you should curb your expectations while reading any kind of book. I only realised much later that it spoils the plot. It’s alright if you did not find it quite... penetrating.

[Anonymous No.11843639]

>>11843120
watch Taxi Driver

[Anonymous No.11843653]

ITT: underage children who never learned to analyze a text

[Anonymous No.11843656]

>>11843624
And more importantly, is the street fight against the nihilists at the end of Big Lebowski a reference to this timeless literary event?

[Anonymous No.11843657]

>>11843624
What saved Rodya is the central theme of the novel, forgiveness. Marmeladov states that even after all of his horrible actions (losing his job due to his alcohol abuse, selling his uniform for money to buy booze, etc...) he was still forgiven, "Come! I have already forgiven you once . . . I have forgiven you once . . . And now, too, your many sins are forgiven, for you have loved much". To elaborate on the novel's central theme, the type of forgiveness Dostoevsky is getting at is God's mercy, something unending and redemptive.

[Anonymous No.11843662]

>>11843634
Raskolnikov could not have repented the way he did without an extreme religious intervention. A Free-spirit would have driven him insane. The gruesome murder (not normal asphyxiation, mind you) is proportionately placed with the religious salvation later which made it all the more better.

But you could be right about the conversation Christian Dosty. Who knows.

[Anonymous No.11843663]

>>11843634
>It's much more the "prostitute with heart of gold" trope that I'm offended by
eh, that's fair

[Anonymous No.11843667]

>>11843662
Conservative. God!

[Anonymous No.11843672]

>>11843601
Based

[Anonymous No.11843683]

>>11843634
>I would've preferred if Dostoevsky had my exact ideology, there's nothing I love reading more than drivel that reaffirms my beliefs

[Anonymous No.11843697]

>>11843683
This is a strangely common theme on this board. The most common defense is that they don't read literature that opposes their ideology because they are "firm in their beliefs, not limp wristed postmodernists".

[Anonymous No.11843761]

>>11843697

Not at all. If a work of art begins to feel like propaganda it leaves a bad taste in the reader's mouth. How much artistic merit is there to a Chick tract? Or state-produced books? There's obviously a point where art can feel "pushy" or just plain corny. Crime & Punishment is a masterful work of psychology but the end feels inauthentic, more a product of Dostoevsky's personal feelings than the natural outcome of a brutal and uncompromising story.

>>11843697

>The most common defense is that they don't read literature that opposes their ideology because they are "firm in their beliefs, not limp wristed postmodernists".

I've never heard anyone say that.

[Anonymous No.11843767]

>>11843761

first response was meant for >>11843683

[Anonymous No.11843785]

>>11843508
t. beta reader

[Anonymous No.11843818]

There's a crime. There's a punishment. In more ways than one. Figuratively and literally.

What's not to get?

[Anonymous No.11843820]

>>11843633
god you are such a goddamn retard, you don’t even understand what Dostoyevsky is trying to say and yet you still have the need to put yourself above it. Read TBK or Demons and think a little while reading.

[Anonymous No.11843855]

>>11843820
I read TBK over the summer, it is legitimately Jordan Peterson level of religious thinking

the line "without god, all things are permitted" is used several times, but instead of trying to support that point of view, it is just axiomatically asserted, almost like the author was trying to convince himself of his of BS

of course the atheist committed the crime, those atheists rejected god, so they must be bad people. seriously, how is this garbage given any credibility?

[Anonymous No.11843868]

>>11843855
So you didn't read it.

[Anonymous No.11843870]

>>11843855
>demanding philosophical argumentation in a work of fiction

kill yourself maybe?

[Anonymous No.11843877]

>>11843868
I did read it
>>11843870
what do you expect to get out of stories?

[Anonymous No.11843890]

>>11843653
I seriously never learned how to analyze a text how do I start analyzing

[Anonymous No.11843892]

>>11843877
wait, do you read fiction for speculative purposes???

[Anonymous No.11843896]

>>11843892
I read fiction largely for interesting themes being explored in an engaging way. TBK failed to do this

[Anonymous No.11843899]

>>11843877
>the line "without god, all things are permitted" is used several times, but instead of trying to support that point of view, it is just axiomatically asserted
It's almost like there are 800 pages of text outside this one line that might, just maybe, discuss some of these things.

[Anonymous No.11843907]

>>11843896
okay, okay I'll add that The Grand Inquisitor was interesting

[Anonymous No.11843913]

>>11843899
yeah, a whole lot of people deciding things very firmly and then instantly changing their minds

[Anonymous No.11843931]

>>11843913
>>11843907
So you're just a brainlet, that's ok.

[Anonymous No.11843943]

>>11843931
>you don't like what I like
>you must be dumb
I think we all know who the brainlet is

[Anonymous No.11843951]

>>11843818
This. The book has a dual nature.

Rodya commits the factual crime by axe-murdering that biddy. But he commits a deeper crime by betraying God's moral law, by letting seep into his heart the dark anti-social philosophies he uses to justify and rationalize murder.

Raskolnikov is duly punished as well. ( The theme of doubles appears often enough in Dostoevsky's work, including one of his lesser known early works The Double.) Not only is he sentenced to hard time in Siberia, but he is also faced with the unendurable agony of Christian guilt and redemption and rebirth through Christ, symbolized by the Mother Mary like figure of the humble yet morally pure prostitute Sonia.

[Anonymous No.11843993]

>>11843943
Lad, you're the one who can't see past the plot.

[Anonymous No.11844051]

>>11843855
> one of the greatest works of literature ever
> how is this garbage given any credibility?

brainlet

[Anonymous No.11844066]

>>11844058
> 4chan anon thinks his opinion counts for anything...

brainlet

[Anonymous No.11844067]

>>11843855
>"without god, all things are permitted"
They are. Without an absolute moral truth we are nothing but individuals floating in the absurd acting to our will.

[Anonymous No.11844087]

>>11844067

I know, it kicks ass

[Anonymous No.11844099]

>>11843120
A guy kills an old creditor to reinforce his edgy ideology of moral superiority. His punishment is his own moral struggle with it. Dostoevsky writes about Russian lowlife and how good people struggle in it. The title is a bit misleading though. Like Kafka's Metamorphosis, which leads you to believe that it's about Gregor's blatant metamorphosis, while it's actually his sister's subtle one.

[Anonymous No.11844120]

>>11844067
if you convince someone that a thing is an absolute moral truth, they become capable of anything, including great evil

we are products of evolution in a social environment. this means we have built in social cohesion ethics, couple that with our ability to reason and we have a real moral code. everything is just a proposed moral code, even if those proposing it claim it is more than that. there is no objective absolute moral, just claims

[Anonymous No.11844166]

>>11844120
>if you convince someone that a thing is an absolute moral truth, they become capable of anything, including great evil
so? you still would have a system with consistency and a firm ground for morals
>we are products of evolution in a social environment. this means we have built in social cohesion ethics, couple that with our ability to reason and we have a real moral code.
This dies under the burden of abstraction, there’s no weight to it.

[Anonymous No.11844172]

he could have easily gotten away with it if he didnt keep basically confessing to everyone he met, like dude just shut up

[Anonymous No.11844194]

>>11843855
>>11844067
It's the opposite, without God, nothing is permitted.

[Anonymous No.11844210]

>>11843508
Yup, the absolute state of the modern man.