What a pain in the arse this book is! First of all, there are new characters to recognize, understand, and draw conclusions about. Not only that, but they don't come across they way I had originally expected them to.
Luzhin, as much as he lived up to being the ass he is, still turned out a lot different than I imagined. He was more interested in impressing a group of strangers with his powers of deduction, than he was establishing his social superiority (which, I suppose, is because he was extremely comfortable with the latter). He was also a bit of a dandy (did I read him wrong?), and more of a loser than I expected (living with a friend while he waits for his new home to be ready?). I expected someone a lot stronger, more distant, and Heathcliff-like. Boy was I off! By the way, fellas and ladies, did anyone else hear the voice of our dear friend Ayn Rand when Luzkin and Razumikhin discussed societal progress (or "The Progressive Cause") in Chapter 5?
As far as Razumikhin goes, what an impossible character to get a solid grip on. On one hand, he's this brilliant student that - according to Raskolnikov - the whole school reveres -, and on the other hand, he's a bit of a smoothie, and a dunderhead. He's obviously much smarter than Luzkin, but he allows himself to be strangely emotional over Raskolnikov, to the point of being abused! If he wasn't so "interested" in the landlady, I'd think he was hot for our "hero". In any case, he's too blind to see the many clues our boy has given him, yet he is respected enough to host a party that boasts quite a few of the local big shots!
A final character that seems to be more Shakespearean - and less "Angela's Ashes" - than I originally expected is Nastasya. Am I the only one who thinks that she's figured out the crime (maybe she went through the room when he was out, or washed some of the blood off his clothes while he slept), based on how forcefully she was repeating - right to Raskolnikov's face - how Lizaveta was killed too? Nastasya was NOT pleased with the 2nd killing, at all. There's a real interesting character at work here, and, as I mentioned, she reminds me of MANY of the great Shakespeare women (see: Portia: The Merchant of Venice, Mistresses Ford and Page: The Merry Wives of Windsor, Hippolyta: A Midsummer Night's Dream, and Maria: Twelfth Night). Interesting that they're all from the comedies...
Now that I'm done with this look back at a few key characters, here's a few more thoughts:
The scene at the Police Station was one of the best in the novel; I'm happy to read it again in the near future.
I'm really annoyed with the way Raskolnikov has handled the ill-gotten booty. Sure, he's a lot better off sitting on it for awhile - which was discuss during the rewarding bar conversation he has with Zametov in Chapter 6 (one of my favorites) -, but it's annoying to me that he'd be so careless with something he paid dearly for. Heck, it's not like he can take it back, so he might as well figure out something to do with it (the money). My motto is: If you've done the crime, you might as well enjoy the spoils!
The in and out of fever thing is a valuable addition to the plot. His illness allows him so much freedom! He can, and does, turn from people (mostly towards his wall) whenever he feels the urge. He can say fantastic - albeit it humorously and dangerously true - things, and totally get away with it. He can insult, predict, faint, ramble, and sweat with the best of them. In fact, his illness gives him a bit of an alibi. Even though he passed out after the crime, he must have been building up the illness long enough to cast doubt (just not in Nastaya's eyes).
I am whole-heartedly enjoying listening to Raskolnikov "solve" the crime for people. I love every moment that the murder is mentioned. What kind of idiot goes back to the crime scene? I never would have gotten away with HALF the stuff I pulled in college (I was quite the prankster) if I adopted ONE-THIRD of this guy's doltish behaviors.
The doctor is an interesting character. I smell "Hack".
I have a footnote in Chapter 5! On page 145 of my book, Luzhin and Razumikhin are discussing "progress" and Razumikhin says "We've grown used to having everything ready-made, to walking on crutches, to having our food chewed for us. Then the great hour struck,* and every man showed himself in his true colors." The "great hour" he's referring to is the emancipation of the serfs in 1861. It's funny, but this sounds a lot like America, 2007 to me. We are told we cannot take responsibility for ourselves any more. Our students cannot be trusted to select healthy foods for themselves. I must wear my seatbelt or I shall suffer a fine. It's Big Tobacco's fault that a person who smoked 2 packs of cigarettes a day for 30 years suffers from cancer. And on, and on, and on... Is our "Great Hour" coming?
The street music girl (act of charity # 2 or 3 for our boy?). Name a character in a novel SHE reminds you of! I'll bet it's written by: a. Dickens b. Dickens, or c. Dickens
How much is FIVE COPECKS in the late 1800's?
Here's a great line from Chapter 6: "She was young and not repulsive. The only one of the group." Isn't this what we're all hoping for, when out picking up chicks?
OH! So there's this great moment (Chapter 6) when he talks about standing in one spot forever, if you had to pick one spot. Do you guys remember this part? I thought this was a really cool question, and I plan on figuring it out soon. What is the one spot, the one view, that I'd like to enjoy, for all eternity (if I had to pick just one)? It'd have to be a place I'd been before, and not some fantasy nonsense. You ever have that conversation when you were younger? You know, the one that asks: "If you could date anyone, in the history of the world, who would you date?" Someone always picked Helen of Troy! I never got that. I'd never met her. What is she had really horrible body odor? I pick a girl I already knew (Kim Henderson, maybe).
What's up with the suicide girl? Brown, nasty water.
I'm not a fan of Raskolnikov's flippancy (sp?) with his mother's heavily mortgaged rubles. What is this, a Holden Caulfield connection?
Marmeladov's death was both unexpected and brilliant (another episode with horses!). Is our Robin Hood on his way? How much more blood will find it's way on our hero's clothes? Will the little girl - ala Nancy in Sin City - grow up to be a romantic interest for our boy? What will happen to the gaudy Sofya, now that the family has a few rubles to spend? Will she make her way to the Salinas Valley, in search of Kate and a new house of ill repute (that one was for you Lydia - read East of Eden you guys!)?
Stay tuned for next week's blog...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Holy crap! You sure had a lot to say about Part Two. I’ll try to hit it point-by-point.
I agree that Luzhin was a dandy (perfect description!), but that was actually the way I had pictured him: superficial, arrogant, didactic, superior, more interested in impressing the students (who, presumably would care more about his intellectual prowess than his social position, thus explaining why he addressed them as he did – he knows his audience, at least). His speech to the others in Chapter Five was distinctly Ayn Rand – I remember thinking it, too. ‘Love yourself before all men,’ he says, plus all that economic stuff about coats. Now, my question is, since Luzhin, a character Dostoevsky seems to despise, says this, does it mean that Dostoevsky himself does not support this concept? We’re talking about Russia here, after all, and Dostoevsky was ostensibly a Party guy.
I think you’re being hard on Razumihin, unless I’m misreading the guy. I like him. He seems very down-to-earth and approachable. Intellectual but not aloof. I see his treatment of Raskolnikov as incredibly loyal and supportive. After all, Raskolnikov is feverish, incoherent, and starved. Razumihin does everything he can to help his buddy out and is very willing to cut him some slack – just what every good friend does. Overall, he just seems very comfortable with himself. He takes others at face value, too, which I find to be admirable.
I like Nastasya, but I think she’s more in the dark even than Razumihin about Raskolnikov’s involvement in the crime. Her comments seem only to be off-hand, not calculated to elicit a response (as Zossimov’s were). I don’t think she saw the blood, though she did make a comment about ‘the blood’ at the end of Chapter Two. I think her comment was intended as a literary “near-miss,” like many of Dostoevsky’s comments throughout the book so far. He wants us to think Raskolnikov has been busted when in reality no one suspects him of anything. I think she meant merely that his fever was getting the better of him. On the other hand, it would be easy for the reader (and the pensive Raskolnikov) to interpret her comment metaphorically – which is undoubtedly how Dostoevsky wants us to read it.
I totally agree with you about the fever schtick, especially about the alibi part. Razumihin alludes to the fact that Raskolnikov has been sick for a while when he says, ‘the fever has been coming on for a month.’
I have no idea how much a copeck is, though I’ve been wondering it myself. I often try to ‘convert’ monetary amounts into today’s dollars when I read older works, especially foreign ones. I’ve been interpreting a copeck as being the equivalent of a dime. I know one hundred copecks equals one rouble, so a rouble would then equal $10. That would mean that Raskolnikov’s clothes cost just under $100. Seems like a lot of money for someone like him, but he does get a complete outfit. Then again, he gives Duclida 15 copecks ($1.50), and she’s thrilled. A copeck is probably something between a dime and a quarter. It’s easier for me to do the math if I think of it as a dime, so there you go. There’s my thinking on this issue. (I gotta get a life!)
I liked that part with Duclida. If the best thing he could say about her was that she was “not repulsive,” then I’m not surprised he didn’t try to get his groove on with her. “You should have seen this chick I was riding the pony with last night, Razumihin!” “Was she hot?” “Well, … she wasn’t repulsive.” Resounding praise, indeed!
I remember the part about standing in one spot, but I think he was talking about something else. He said it in connection to a criminal facing an impending death. The way I read it, the question was a choice: Instead of being executed, would you rather have to stand in one place (on a couple square feet of cliff overlooking the ocean was the example, I think) for the rest of your life and not do anything except stand there? For me, it was a question of mere existence versus death, of the value of simply staying alive even if your life had no meaning. It roughly equates to a “living will” of sorts. Raskolnikov answers an emphatic yes!
I think Raskolnikov is less likely to end up with the little girl than with Sonia. He already put a down payment for several nights’ of “companionship” with her. Bet he cashes in.
"Raz" is bizarre. He seems very bright, but also slippery (which maybe ties in with your comment that he's hard to get a solid grip on). He does take people at face value, as Mark said, which is an admirable and also funny quality for someone who seems to be well respected and intelligent. I think, in the end, you have to like him because he's savvy and charismatic. He knows how to work a room, so to speak. But, that type of person can also be annoying.
I'm not on board with Nastasya, but I'll get into that later. I'm headed up to Providence tonight...
Post a Comment