Dear Esteemed Readers, I would just like to warn you, before you look at these paragraphs, that I did more of a compare and contrast essay between Sonya and other women in Crime and Punishment (which should be underlined), rather than using the passage comparison structure. I would also like to say that these are two of the latter paragraphs of my essay, so in context where they are preceded by a paragraph about Sonya's economic class and judgement by society, it makes more sense. Well, all disclaimers aside I thank you! from, Sam Astorga P.S. Here are the actual two paragraphs: Pulcheria and her daughter, Dunya, two non-working women, must also be considered because they represent a majority of the jobless women of 19th Russia century who were dependent on men. Initially, the two women come to St. Petersburg in order for Dunya to proceed with a marriage with Luzhin. When Raskolnikov, Dunya’s brother, questions her about economic motives for the marriage, because Luzhin has not the greatest character, Dunya responds with “such a marriage is not vile, as you say! And if you were right, and I had really made up my mind to do something vile, isn’t it merciless on your part to talk to me that way...If I ruin anyone, it will only be myself”(233). The repetition of the word vile, shows Dunya’s true feelings regarding the marriage, that she is not satisfied with Luzhin, but this situation is ironic because she hates the marriage yet she is still adheres to this ideal of self-martyrdom. This situation proves that Dunya’s economic status forces her to be subservient to others. Like Dunya, Pulcheria is also jobless; however, one of the most fascinating instances of Pulcheria’s status is when she talks to Raskolnikov about his article, titled On Crime: “I just gasped when I saw it: fool that I am, I thought myself, this is what he’s busy with, this solution to it all!” (512). In this passage, Pulcheria claims not to understand Raskolnikov’s article, but still lauds how good it was nonetheless. Although Pulcheria is literate, this quote serves to show that women of the time could not comprehend the scholarly articles as men could; therefore she is subservient to men like Raskolnikov even in literature. Unlike Pulcheria and Dunya, Sonya is not only able to read, but she courts Raskolnikov at the end of the book; therefore, Sonya achieves more success than other women of Crime and Punishment. When Dostoyevsky describes Raskolnikov and Sonya reading the bible together he says that “She was approaching the word about the greatest, the unheard-of miracle, and a feeling of great triumph took hold of her. There was an iron ring to her voice; joy and triumph sounded in it and strengthen it. The lines became confused on the page before her because her sight was dimmed, but she knew by heart what she was reading” (327). Opposite to Pulcheria’s experience with literary knowledge, Sonya is able to read with Raskolnikov, a published student, and she has as noted by Raskolnikov “the iron ring to her voice”. The contrast between Pulcheria’s level of literary understanding and Sonya’s fluency highlights class difference between the two women, thereby proving that Sonya better off than most other women of Russian society. Not only is Sonya equal to Raskolnikov in reading, but when Raskolnikov is in a Siberian prison, Sonya follows him, and not only lends him money so that he could have luxuries like tea in prison but stuck by his side through his hard times. In fact, she “gave him her hand as timidly as ever. She always gave her hand timidly; sometimes did not even give it at all fearing he might push it away” (549). The symbol of Sonya’s hand is her offer of matrimony towards Raskolnikov, and the phrases “timidly as ever” and “fearing that he might push it away” frames Sonya as the one vying for Raskolnikov’s affection, something that men often did at that time to women. Sonya’s deviation from typical courting fashion of Russian society proves that she is on equal footing as any man.
This is my second paragraph, which doesn't REALLY make a lot of sense without the connections made in the first paragraph... But I believe it to be the weaker of the two, so here it is:
The two passages [the student thesis and the dream], while similar in the existence of “special individuals” but diverge in respect to the methods and personalities of the “chosen ones,” represent Raskolnikov's, and therefore Dostoevsky's, growing affinity towards philosophical flexibility and aversion to philosophical rigidity. Raskolnikov's article paints the “extraordinary man” as an individual who “...are destroyers or inclined to destroy... for the destruction of the present in the name of the better... if such a one needs, for the sake of his idea, to step over a dead body, over blood... depending, however, on the idea and its scale” (Dostoevsky 261). In this explanation, Raskolnikov places heavy emphasis on the existence of an idea within the extraordinary man's mind. This idea, this novel concept, is the sole object that allows him the label of an “extraordinary” individual. Therefore, Raskolnikov believes that all actions taken to further the idea can and should be taken. In this model, Raskolnikov promotes absolute devotion to a single concept or philosophy. He says that, because one has a powerful and revelational belief, one is destined to move the world forwards. However, many scenes in the novel revolve around the inevitable failure of rigid philosophical outlooks. For example, Luzhin, who represents pure capitalism, ends up failing in his attempt to frame Sonya. Additionally, Raskolnikov himself fails when trying to put his theory to the test. This eventual realization, which originates from his subconscious rather than his rationality, is finally revealed when he dreams that “[the] few people in the world [that] could be saved... were pure and chosen, destined to begin a new generation of people and a new life, to renew and purify the earth; but no one had seen these people anywhere, no one had heard their words or voices” (Dostoevsky 547). Through this dream, we can observe Raskolnikov's flip from one extreme to the other. The passage above makes use of the word “pure” twice; Dostoevsky uses “pure” to mark the difference between these “chosen ones” and the “extraordinary men.” We are meant to compare the plague survivors, who are pure and clean, to those mentioned in Raskolnikov's thesis, whose minds are clutched by a single, all-consuming thought or ideology. Of special importance is the plague mentioned in the dream. The illness is described as one that makes its victims absolutely unshakeable in their convictions. Yet their rigidity is what eventually leads to their demise: their convictions causes the complete breakdown of society and the destruction of all who were infected. As one who previously applauded fierce convictions, Raskolnikov has now become a proponent for the opposite. He now contends that only those whose minds are not clouded by the infection of absolute certainty can survive. Those that are possessed by a single idea, those he previously lauded as “extraordinary men,” are doomed to eliminate one another. Dostoevsky's aversion to rigidity is further accentuated by the same examples presented previously, where characters such as Luzhin and Raskolnikov fail in their unyielding adherence to their convictions.
THIS IS JULIET! ThiS paragraph is more of my introduction as of right now, but my other paragraphs don't make much sense without the opening info and contrast!!
Napoleon: The political leader of France, the legal reformer, the commander. Among other things, Napoleon was one of the most powerful men during his time, and he used these powers to spread his French Revolution ideas all throughout Europe, including Russia. He was not the perfect man or always the most liked man, some even called him a criminal, but nonetheless he was an extraordinary man. He had so much power that he didn’t know what to do with it. As Dostoevsky describes it in Crime and Punishment, Napoleon was a type of man “that in giving a new law [he] thereby violated the old one, held sacred by society… and [he] certainly did not stop at shedding blood either” (Pg 260). Napoleon was a man who wasn’t afraid to cross the boundaries, and though many consider him evil, Russian novelists saw him as a figure that everyone strives to be, for humans have an inner desire for power. In both Eugene Onegin and Crime and Punishment, Russian novelists Fyodor Dostoevsky and Alexander Pushkin allude to Napoleon’s reign to portray different images of power and lawlessness that their characters try to embrace but ultimately fail.
Dear Esteemed Readers,
ReplyDeleteI would just like to warn you, before you look at these paragraphs, that I did more of a compare and contrast essay between Sonya and other women in Crime and Punishment (which should be underlined), rather than using the passage comparison structure. I would also like to say that these are two of the latter paragraphs of my essay, so in context where they are preceded by a paragraph about Sonya's economic class and judgement by society, it makes more sense. Well, all disclaimers aside I thank you!
from,
Sam Astorga
P.S. Here are the actual two paragraphs:
Pulcheria and her daughter, Dunya, two non-working women, must also be considered because they represent a majority of the jobless women of 19th Russia century who were dependent on men. Initially, the two women come to St. Petersburg in order for Dunya to proceed with a marriage with Luzhin. When Raskolnikov, Dunya’s brother, questions her about economic motives for the marriage, because Luzhin has not the greatest character, Dunya responds with “such a marriage is not vile, as you say! And if you were right, and I had really made up my mind to do something vile, isn’t it merciless on your part to talk to me that way...If I ruin anyone, it will only be myself”(233). The repetition of the word vile, shows Dunya’s true feelings regarding the marriage, that she is not satisfied with Luzhin, but this situation is ironic because she hates the marriage yet she is still adheres to this ideal of self-martyrdom. This situation proves that Dunya’s economic status forces her to be subservient to others. Like Dunya, Pulcheria is also jobless; however, one of the most fascinating instances of Pulcheria’s status is when she talks to Raskolnikov about his article, titled On Crime: “I just gasped when I saw it: fool that I am, I thought myself, this is what he’s busy with, this solution to it all!” (512). In this passage, Pulcheria claims not to understand Raskolnikov’s article, but still lauds how good it was nonetheless. Although Pulcheria is literate, this quote serves to show that women of the time could not comprehend the scholarly articles as men could; therefore she is subservient to men like Raskolnikov even in literature.
Unlike Pulcheria and Dunya, Sonya is not only able to read, but she courts Raskolnikov at the end of the book; therefore, Sonya achieves more success than other women of Crime and Punishment. When Dostoyevsky describes Raskolnikov and Sonya reading the bible together he says that “She was approaching the word about the greatest, the unheard-of miracle, and a feeling of great triumph took hold of her. There was an iron ring to her voice; joy and triumph sounded in it and strengthen it. The lines became confused on the page before her because her sight was dimmed, but she knew by heart what she was reading” (327). Opposite to Pulcheria’s experience with literary knowledge, Sonya is able to read with Raskolnikov, a published student, and she has as noted by Raskolnikov “the iron ring to her voice”. The contrast between Pulcheria’s level of literary understanding and Sonya’s fluency highlights class difference between the two women, thereby proving that Sonya better off than most other women of Russian society. Not only is Sonya equal to Raskolnikov in reading, but when Raskolnikov is in a Siberian prison, Sonya follows him, and not only lends him money so that he could have luxuries like tea in prison but stuck by his side through his hard times. In fact, she “gave him her hand as timidly as ever. She always gave her hand timidly; sometimes did not even give it at all fearing he might push it away” (549). The symbol of Sonya’s hand is her offer of matrimony towards Raskolnikov, and the phrases “timidly as ever” and “fearing that he might push it away” frames Sonya as the one vying for Raskolnikov’s affection, something that men often did at that time to women. Sonya’s deviation from typical courting fashion of Russian society proves that she is on equal footing as any man.
This is my second paragraph, which doesn't REALLY make a lot of sense without the connections made in the first paragraph... But I believe it to be the weaker of the two, so here it is:
ReplyDeleteThe two passages [the student thesis and the dream], while similar in the existence of “special individuals” but diverge in respect to the methods and personalities of the “chosen ones,” represent Raskolnikov's, and therefore Dostoevsky's, growing affinity towards philosophical flexibility and aversion to philosophical rigidity. Raskolnikov's article paints the “extraordinary man” as an individual who “...are destroyers or inclined to destroy... for the destruction of the present in the name of the better... if such a one needs, for the sake of his idea, to step over a dead body, over blood... depending, however, on the idea and its scale” (Dostoevsky 261). In this explanation, Raskolnikov places heavy emphasis on the existence of an idea within the extraordinary man's mind. This idea, this novel concept, is the sole object that allows him the label of an “extraordinary” individual. Therefore, Raskolnikov believes that all actions taken to further the idea can and should be taken. In this model, Raskolnikov promotes absolute devotion to a single concept or philosophy. He says that, because one has a powerful and revelational belief, one is destined to move the world forwards. However, many scenes in the novel revolve around the inevitable failure of rigid philosophical outlooks. For example, Luzhin, who represents pure capitalism, ends up failing in his attempt to frame Sonya. Additionally, Raskolnikov himself fails when trying to put his theory to the test. This eventual realization, which originates from his subconscious rather than his rationality, is finally revealed when he dreams that “[the] few people in the world [that] could be saved... were pure and chosen, destined to begin a new generation of people and a new life, to renew and purify the earth; but no one had seen these people anywhere, no one had heard their words or voices” (Dostoevsky 547). Through this dream, we can observe Raskolnikov's flip from one extreme to the other. The passage above makes use of the word “pure” twice; Dostoevsky uses “pure” to mark the difference between these “chosen ones” and the “extraordinary men.” We are meant to compare the plague survivors, who are pure and clean, to those mentioned in Raskolnikov's thesis, whose minds are clutched by a single, all-consuming thought or ideology. Of special importance is the plague mentioned in the dream. The illness is described as one that makes its victims absolutely unshakeable in their convictions. Yet their rigidity is what eventually leads to their demise: their convictions causes the complete breakdown of society and the destruction of all who were infected. As one who previously applauded fierce convictions, Raskolnikov has now become a proponent for the opposite. He now contends that only those whose minds are not clouded by the infection of absolute certainty can survive. Those that are possessed by a single idea, those he previously lauded as “extraordinary men,” are doomed to eliminate one another. Dostoevsky's aversion to rigidity is further accentuated by the same examples presented previously, where characters such as Luzhin and Raskolnikov fail in their unyielding adherence to their convictions.
THIS IS JULIET!
ReplyDeleteThiS paragraph is more of my introduction as of right now, but my other paragraphs don't make much sense without the opening info and contrast!!
Napoleon: The political leader of France, the legal reformer, the commander. Among other things, Napoleon was one of the most powerful men during his time, and he used these powers to spread his French Revolution ideas all throughout Europe, including Russia. He was not the perfect man or always the most liked man, some even called him a criminal, but nonetheless he was an extraordinary man. He had so much power that he didn’t know what to do with it. As Dostoevsky describes it in Crime and Punishment, Napoleon was a type of man “that in giving a new law [he] thereby violated the old one, held sacred by society… and [he] certainly did not stop at shedding blood either” (Pg 260). Napoleon was a man who wasn’t afraid to cross the boundaries, and though many consider him evil, Russian novelists saw him as a figure that everyone strives to be, for humans have an inner desire for power. In both Eugene Onegin and Crime and Punishment, Russian novelists Fyodor Dostoevsky and Alexander Pushkin allude to Napoleon’s reign to portray different images of power and lawlessness that their characters try to embrace but ultimately fail.