Thursday, October 31, 2013
Roundup Post #1 for November 1: Maddy
Up until the end of chapter 5, Raskolnikov has remained a passive
character, only thinking for himself in a state of near-unconsciousness
or while he is not doing anything per se, and only taking action (e.g.
killing the two women) in a state of mechanical mental passivity. During
his feeble state in Part 2, while his various friends and other
miscellaneous characters tend to him, it seems Raskolnikov is restricted
by his medical predicament to his peers. When his future brother-in-law
appears, Raskolnikov attempts to engage with him and manages to start
an argument with some sort of lucidity and coherence, but ultimately
finishes it in the same form of dialogue we have seen before. Towards
the end, though, Raskolnikov successfully offends Pyotr Petrovich and
kicks out his friends spitefully, feigning illness once again. It is
here that Raskolnikov, for the first time in the novel, takes agency,
and leaves his apartment. While he ends up wandering around for the
first part, when he sees Zamyatov, he purposefully engages, manages to
argue with Zamyatov, and take control of his actions. In fact his
magnanimity only increases, and as we reach the climax of part 2, it
seems the battle he was fighting toward the beginning of part 2 is
finally won over, as Raskolnikov renounces money, and gives his time and
money to the family of the drunkard we met in part 1, Marmaledov. This
represents his finding his place in nihilism, making his philosophy
concrete. He is able to argue his place, take action, and interact with
the rest of humanity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is Sam.
ReplyDeleteI actually think that Raskolnikov is not finding his place in Nihilism, because if he was truly embracing Nihilism, he would not only transcend/ignore the constructs of society, but he would also go past those who are following society's norms. Although he is responsible for his own actions in part II, the responsibility he takes is only to argue with people who are in the very cogs of society, rather than just moving on. So Raskolinkov is moving on past his passivity in chapters 1 and 2, but I don't think he is moving in the right direction.
I'm skeptical that Raskolnikov's conversation with Luhzin and subsequent stroll are any more expressions of agency than his actions in Part I of the novel. His dislike for Luhzin, the reason for his confrontational manner, had already begin in Part I, and seems to stem from his same dislike of being the object of compassion. His decision to leave the apartment is exemplary of the "compulsion to act" which I've previously argued to be so disempowering, as evidenced by Raskolnikov's first time jumping out of bed looking for tasks to complete and inability to find any. It seems to be that Raskolnikov's general nihilist worldview and particular neuroses remain largely intact.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Raskolnikov has changed charachter and gained more confidence, but I'm not sure about a Nihilistic change. Throughout chapter 6, everytime Raskolnikov spoke or shared his thoughts, he managed to speak in full sentences and coherent thoughts, no matter how crazy he ultimately sounded. But, he still gives genorously (ie the street singer) and seems to ignore some social convention. Because of that, I think he experiences more of oa horizontal nihilistic change than a forward/backward change. He doesn't progress, but more change how he interprets the world while still keeping with his basic values of before.
ReplyDeleteWhile Raskolnikov has demonstrated a reduced level of passivity, I would not go so far as to claim that he has succeeded in achieving nihilism or meeting a "goal" of some sort. In previous chapters, Raskolnikov shows urges to engage in conversation with others (especially in the situation in which he meets Marmeladov). What is interesting to note, however, is that Raskolnikov does imply to Zamyatov that he was the murder, but he, as always, "comes to his senses" (165). We've seen this rapid flipping of sense versus rationality before, and it seems that Raskolnikov is still in conflict with himself, who turns out to be his own worst enemy at this point.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Raskolnikov has been acting passively throughout the book, but I disagree with the statement "that Raskolnikov, [when leaving the apartment and afterwards], takes agency." I believe that Raskolnikov is still completely passive in the street; he hands out his money to nearly every person he meets in the street! Additionally, he still doesn't have full control of his senses as seen in his exchange with Zamyotov. He "reveals" his guilt in the crime, but directly after snaps back to his senses. Upon meeting Razumihkin, however, the readers realize exactly how passive Raskolnikov has been. Razzy sums it up perfectly: "There isn't a sign of independent life in you!" (Page 167) Raskolnikov is still not acting as an individual and, therefore, is not expressing the agency, or conscious choice to have a lack thereof, that is inherently necessary in nihilism.
ReplyDeleteI think that Raskolnikov has actually taken action several times over the course of the novel as he struggles with the battle between reason and sense. In moments such as when he tried to help the disheveled girl on the street, he has a clear purpose and is able to successfully take action. The murder and the walk he takes after he has been ill are both done mechanically, and with out any true purpose. Rather than reaching a goal, Raskolnikov is further loosing any concept of what his motives were in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Raskolnikov makes large bounds in ending what you refer to as his "passivity." Whilst away, he is able to make decisions and follow through with them without doubting himself seconds later. However, it's hard to know the reasoning behind this change; this is purely a theory, but I wonder if being stuck in his apartment with Razumikhin forced him out of his usual process of "programming" his actions in his apartment before carrying them out. Because he had no time alone to think, he moved on to being able to make decisions without the prior planning.
ReplyDelete(Also, I think you read ahead, the part with Marmaledov is in chapter 7)
I agree with you that some sort of change has happened to Raskolnikov; however, I don't believe he has succeeded in reaching his nihilistic final state though. His nihilistic confidence has grown and is no longer masked by sickness, but when he retreats, he shows that he's not at the point where he can really maintain his nihilism. He is still at conflict between reason and sense, and the conflict causes him to digress back, visiting Alyona's apartment and losing his confidence.
ReplyDelete--gabo
I definitely believe that while Raskolikov is taking more considerable action in Part 2, this isn't the first time he has acted this way. As the book goes on, and especially after the murders, Raskolnikov seems to have an even more newfound confidence that he puts to use. He has conversations on the side of the street with random strangers (on his way to meeting with Zamyotov), truly gives his own opinions, and stands up for himself when he feels it to be necessary. I think his passivity is long gone, and while he does buzz out of society sometimes, he still has the ability to act when something angers or works him up.
ReplyDeleteI concur with Henry's comment. I also agree that Raskolnikov has been a truly passive character throughout the book up until this point, and, while he does show a different side to himself when he leaves the apartment to wander on his own, I do not believe he has reached a true state of nihilism. If he were a true nihilist, he would not create a scene in the street or in the restaurant, or have such a heated exchange with Razumikhin. He would ignore all others around him and just not care.
ReplyDeleteFor the majority of the what we have read of the novel, Raskolnikov displayed unique passivity in the sense move in and out nihilism and passion. We see towards the end of part 1 that Raskolnikov trying to ultimately defend a young drunk girl while she is being approached with sexual intensions. In which case we could confirm his empathy for others, however he reverts back to his disillusioned self and allows for things to continue on. Most recently in the novel we also see a small spurt of his emotions while he contends to his sister's fiancé, Luzhin. He, although hypocritically, nervously points out the flaws in Luzhin's intentions for his sister, claiming that he is unable to relate to someone of her class. But overall, Raskolnikov did commit two horrific murders, and while he apparently had been in a state of mental mechanic, in which he seemingly was separated from reality.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe Raskolnikov has truly embraced nihilism. He still looks to receive society's judgement and, since his actions are dictated by society, he also dictated by that which he looks to reject. He has some instances of agency but overall reacts against society.
ReplyDeleteI think that in arguing with Zamyotov Raskolnikov does not find his place in nihilism, but rather overcomes the nihilistic ideas that he was struggling with earlier that made him feel so sick. He has now become an actively engaged person, and one is not comfortable wasting away the rest of his life riddled with guilt.
ReplyDelete