Crime and Punishment — Fyodor Dostoevsky — Recommend with salt

 

I'm developing quite a love of Russian authors. This one was a deeply interesting story, though, in classic fashion, it drags on longer than I feel is necessary.

Refreshingly, the title describes the subject matter of the book quite well. It's a novel that explores the dynamics of crime and punishment. In many ways, it's the inverse of Victor Hugo's tale of Jean Valjean and Javert. Dostoevsky explores the mind of the criminal, the motivation in crime, the state of suffering humanity, the impact of social ties, and the relentless hand of conscience.

It's not a straightforward tale at all. Half of the quotes that could be drawn from the book are deeply cynical, reflecting stopping points on the way to greater understanding. In trying to understand how to commit a crime, the protagonist utters “When reason fails, the devil helps!” and he means it until he finishes unraveling the thought 100 pages later.


I've taken the liberty of stitching together a few quotes that roughly describes the arc of the 500 page story, in my estimation.

“Man grows used to everything, the scoundrel!” (humanity is lulled into living with misery)

“Power is given only to him who dares to stoop and take it ... one must have the courage to dare.” (to change misery, one must seize power, which requires "stooping")

“the most offensive is not their lying—one can always forgive lying—lying is a delightful thing, for it leads to truth—what is offensive is that they lie and worship their own lying…” (Is "stooping" a crime? You would think so, but I have justifications. I can't lie to myself.)

“The whole question here is: am I a monster, or a victim myself?” (In many ways both are true, which path do I choose?)

“The man who has a conscience suffers whilst acknowledging his sin. That is his punishment.” (Choosing to take responsibility for my actions is the only way out, but it comes through pain. I cannot live a lie)

You need the rich and textured lines that Dostoevsky paints to appreciate the beauty of those dots, but maybe they can serve as a taste to motivate you to undertake it.

Verdict? It's really worth reading,I'm not sure I know of any other book that explores the subject of agency and accountability so well; just buckle down for a long, at times tedious ride.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The righteous mind — Jonathan Haidt — Recommend with salt

Image
  The book in a nutshell is captured by the subheading "why good people are divided by politics and religion". The book can be roughly divided into thirds. The first half of the book is about the origins of morality. Where did it come from? Haidt touches on some philosophical works and debates and ultimately concludes that morality provides evolutionary advantages, and it supersedes reason. He uses an elephant and a rider analogy, morality, roughly equated to emotion, is the elephant. He also uses a president and press secretary metaphor, which I found helpful, reason's primary function is to rationalize the conclusions of the subconscious. I'm not sure this story fully explains morality. I think it could explain some of it, and it provides some satisfying guidance but tas far as I can tell it does not obviate the need for extra-human deliberate construction of morality. Second, he outlines what morality is and isn't. He rejects utilitarianism and deontology as to
Read more

The Sum of All Fears-- Tom Clancy

Image
The Sum of all fears  It’s classic Clancy. This one is particularly interesting in terms of the breadth of the problem and players. It’s very human and the technical details are as compelling as always. It also highlights the potential danger of MAD (mutually assured destruction) policy in a very penetrating way.  Check out my general Clancy post for a broader take on this series. Verdict Recommend
Read more

Foundation -- Isaac Asimov -- Lukewarm

Image
I read this because people I admire talked about it (Elon musk, Orson Scott Card, Ben Shapiro). It's classic science fiction in an ancient context. It was published in the 50s, 15 years before the earliest start trek, 25 years before star wars, and 35 years before Enders game, all of which are ancient history. In many ways, it belongs to the era of   Edgar Rice Burroughs'  Prince of Mars or even H.G. Well's War of the Worlds more than it does modern science fiction. That being said, there are some truly brilliant ideas explored in the text. First, the book doesn't follow a protagonist, which means no character development and no human story. Instead, Asimov overtly follows humanities' story, jumping from viewpoint to viewpoint and century to century in galactic civilization. In some ways, it reads more like a collection of short stories in Sanderson's Cosmere or perhaps even something from the MCU, but the novel still manages to drive a narrative crafted aro
Read more