The greatest obstacle in literary criticism is the inability of the reader to know with certainty the mind of the author. For all we know, the author’s intentions could have been completely opposite to the general analysis. For that reason, conflicting opinions abound and controversy rages over topics that the author probably never intended as such. In his Crime and Punishment, Fyodor Dostoevsky added an epilogue to conclude the novel. In the previous chapter, Raskolnikov, the protagonist, confesses and the police arrest him for murder. Many critics believe that this is a proper ending and that the epilogue is completely unnecessary, while others hold that the epilogue is much needed, as it hints at Raskolnikov’s redemption and resurrection. Crime and Punishment is a Christian novel, with religious undertones and overtones throughout, such as Sonya’s reading of the Lazarus story, which parallels Raskolnikov’s own story. However, the novel also loosely follows the structure and content of Greek tragedy, and this coexistence of the Christian themes of redemption and resurrection and the tragic themes of Oedipus Rex creates a complex work that cannot be considered from a single perspective. perspective. The epilogue is extremely necessary for the conclusion of Crime and Punishment, as it allows for further development of Raskolnikov’s character and gives him another dimension. He’s not just the demented, ax-crazed killer whose guilt and depravity eat away at him until he confesses. This is how it seems at the end of the final chapter. But with the addition of the epilogue, Rodion Raskolnikov begins the path of resurrection, which he did not seem to be inclined to earlier in the novel. Without the epilogue, Raskolnikov would remain a less complex character, unable to repent.
Many critics reject the epilogue because they cannot accept the moral regeneration it promises. According to Lev Shestov, Raskolnikov’s only crime was to believe that he was incapable of breaking the law, and that his tragedy was not his guilt and madness, but the “impossibility of starting a new and different life” (71- 72). The entire novel moves toward a conversion or resurrection, most notably and evidently by the appearance of the biblical story of Lazarus, read by the prostitute Sonia, which is based on Mary Magdalene. Dostoevsky did not choose Lazarus at random. He chose Lazarus because the story is a subtle reminder of Raskolnikov’s opportunity for redemption, to be reborn after repenting of his sins. This theme of the resurrection is prominent throughout the novel, and to ignore this theme is to ignore much of Dostoevsky’s meaning. Yes, this is a novel about the inner psyche of a sociopath and an exploration of guilt, but it’s also about realizing and repenting of sins.
Edward Wasiolek makes a more valid argument that he believes that Dostoevsky has not provided his readers with any evidence that Raskolnikov has sufficient spiritual awareness to contradict his theories put forward in his essay “On Crime” or to follow the spiritual direction of Raskolnikov. Sonya. This is a valid point, and would be correct, were it not for the abundance of examples of Raskolnikov starting the conversion. He is not reborn spontaneously, as Wasiolek would have us believe, but after an accumulation of experiences that have influenced him to do so. For example, every time Raskolnikov helps the Marmelodovs, he does so out of brief but real sympathy. It’s true that he regrets his charity almost instantly, but that unthinking compassion suggests that he doesn’t feel the self-proclaimed superiority in his heart. That resides only in his mind. As such, his later interactions with Sonya foster this tendency to recognize himself as a man on the same plane of existence as those he once considered inferior. Raskolnikov progresses slowly, letting compassion creep into his mind at times, beginning his conversion, his resurrection. As he realizes his own humanity, he becomes more aware of his guilt. This indicates that he is not completely gone, that he may recover from the madness that possessed him. Robert Louis Jackson notes that Raskolnikov’s behavior passes through two distinct phases: first he shows great sympathy and compassion for those in need and immediately, without thinking, takes steps to alleviate their suffering, and then he feels disgust at having betrayed his intellectual principles. , which does not allow sympathy towards those inferior and unworthy beings. However, that first natural inclination to help those in need betrays Raskolnikov’s humanity. His sense of compassion “endows his actions with a magnanimity that goes against the wickedness of their plot and the cruelty of his crime” (Matual, 28).
Furthermore, Raskolnikov was never a cold-blooded killer. His mind was convinced of his superiority, but as he watched the murder, he felt disgust, revulsion. He looked for any excuse to give up the task, but when what he perceived as a sign from the universe told him that he should kill Alyona Ivanovna, he was filled with disgust at the prospect of taking someone’s life. He never lost his doubts, nor the disgust of the act, and it continued to eat away at him until he confessed at the end of the novel. Raskolnikov’s compassion for the poor and downtrodden, his revulsion at murder, and his memories of childhood innocence and piety provide a basis for his resurrection in the epilogue. Acts of compassion “represent only the potential for rebirth,” and “something more powerful is required to rouse him from his spiritual torpor and lead him toward the events of the epilogue” (Matual, 30). To finish the novel after the confession is to leave Raskolnikov without finishing his story. His transformation was just beginning, and only through his experiences in the Siberian prison can he continue the conversion. Only after a long period of defiance in prison does Raskolnikov give in to the human side of him and respond to Sonya’s love. He pulls the bible out from under his pillow and reads again about Lazarus, the one who is reborn as him. Here Raskolnikov finally accepts his time in prison as his catharsis, redeems himself and proceeds to a new life. Raskolnikov is not just an evil and heartless person. His disgust at his crime, his compassion for others, and his confession all hinted at possible redemption. With the confession, he is just beginning the path of conversion, and the epilogue is entirely necessary to see if he accepts the consequences of his actions and is reborn or if he rejects them and falls back into madness and depravity.
Furthermore, the many facets of the novel and the intertwined stories point directly to the epilogue. Numerical motifs predominate, which are left unfinished at the end of the novel, but with the inclusion of the epilogue, they are masterfully concluded. For example, the number nine recurs throughout the novel with respect to time. Crime and Punishment covers three nine-month periods: “1) from the genesis of the crime to its commission, 2) from the confession to the trial and the trip to Siberia, and 3) from the beginning of Raskolnikov’s exile to the moment in which who hugs Sonia and begins a new life for him [… ] It takes nine months for the crime to ‘hatch’, nine months for the punishment to begin, and another nine months for Raskolnikov to be reborn in the epilogue” (Matual 32). Clearly, Dostoevsky was thinking of the period of birth, as each segment nine months results in something being born. First, Raskolnikov’s terrible plot is carried out, brought to completion and born, so to speak. Second, Raskolnikov confesses and begins his transformation, resulting in his release to Siberia, where his final cycle begins. After nine months, he is reborn, allowing Sonya into his life and repenting his sins, feeling true regret for the atrocities he committed. Raskolnikov’s mind is born first, resulting in the murders .His body is born second, upon his release to Siberia.His heart and soul are born last, reuniting his body, mind, and soul, and concluding his resurrection.If Crime and Punishment had ended c With Raskolnikov’s confession, there would be a complete and utter lack of closure. Unc would remain certain about his conversion and the consequences of his actions. Sometimes leaving the reader in doubt at the end of a novel is a useful and pleasant conclusion, but not in doubt as to the fundamental questions of the novel. Dostoevsky masterfully concluded Crime and Punishment by answering all those questions, and yet leaves the reader wondering what form Raskolnikov’s new life with Sonya would take.
Another point to consider is the structure of Crime and Punishment. It parallels the Greek tragedy, and it also parallels the story of Lazarus. Curiously, the concept of destiny, which has a pagan connotation, and the concept of the will of God are not at odds with each other. They coexist, leaving the reader to interpret the events as he wishes, perhaps considering divine intervention, perhaps considering coincidences. Depending on the vision that the reader takes, the interpretations can vary. For example, considering Christianity and the story of Lazarus, the novel is quite unfinished without the inclusion of the epilogue. Raskolnikov’s true transformation would be left in doubt, and the parallels between Lazarus and Raskolnikov would end abruptly. Dostoevsky included Lazarus for a reason, for he would never leave the conclusion of Raskolnikov’s story incomplete. He planned for the epilogue to conclude this story and conflated the fates of Lazarus and Raskolnikov. Pagan destiny is similar to the belief in predestination in that God already knows what will happen. Even from a pagan perspective, the epilogue is necessary to reveal Raskolnikov’s transformation and new life, and ultimately his fate.
Although the epilogue to Crime and Punishment strikes many critics as clumsy and unnecessary, it is an important component and essential conclusion to the novel. The objections raised are not well founded, since Raskolnikov did not attain repentance and redemption spontaneously, but he had the potential to do so throughout his lifetime. In reality, the presence of good and compassion within him gives his character depth and another level of complexity, making every decision that much more difficult. Because her mind and his heart are at odds, each surfaces at different points in the novel, expressing disgust, disgust, or contempt for one another. This drives him crazy and eventually his compassion overcomes his superiority and leads him to confess. The epilogue gives Raskolnikov another dimension, his capacity for good, as he repents of his sins and becomes a new man. The epilogue is inevitable, the buildup of all the previous events culminating in Raskolnikov’s transformation.
Works Cited
Dostoevsky, Fyodor. Crime and Punishment. New York: Bantam Dell, a division of Random House, Inc., 1866.
Jackson, Robert Louis. “Philosophical Pros and Cons in Part One of Crime and Punishment”, Twentieth-Century Interpretations of Crime and Punishment. Eaglewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1974. p. 27
Matua, David. “In Defense of the Epilogue of Crime and Punishment”. EBSCO Publications, 2002. 26-34.
Shestov, Lev. Dostoevsky I Nitshe. Berlin: Skify, 1923. 71-72.
Wasioleck, Edward. “On the Structure of Crime and Punishment”. PMLA 74, 1959: 135.