Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky
Translated by David McDuff
My re-read of Dostoevsky’s great novel seems in some ways to have taken me a disproportionate amount of time; at 656 pages, it’s considerably shorter than “War and Peace” and yet has taken me several weeks to read. I’m not sure why; I absolutely *love* the book and *love* Dostoevsky, yet I’ve found myself having to pause between chapters just to catch my breath and absorb the brilliance of it. Whether I can convey that brilliance is another matter; trying to corral my thoughts is often difficult when it’s a big and important book I’ve read, but I shall share my feelings anyway.

An apt cover image, as Raskolnikov is described as being good-looking – which he certainly isn’t in some of the adaptations I’ve seen about…
The plot of the book is pretty well-known and appears fairly simplistic: Rodion Raskolnikov, an impoverished ex-student, murders a money-lender and her sister with an axe. His motives are perhaps unclear; does he undertake the act for money, or because he considers himself a Napoleon, someone apart from the ordinary run of the mill person, who is above the law and normal morality? However, he’s pursued by a dogged detective and more importantly, by his conscience, and the reader follows his emotional and spiritual journey to its final resolution.
Into this premise, Dostoyevsky introduces a rich tapestry of characters and a deep exploration of humanity and its motivations. Raskolnikov’s mother and his sister Dunya make an early appearance; the Marmeladov family, including Sonya the daughter, are pivotal to the story; then there is Raskolnikov’s friend Razumikhin, a solid and reliable, if slightly over-excitable fellow student. More sinister is Svidrigailov, a lecherous sensualist from the Raskolnikov family past, who may or may not have been responsible for the death of his wife Marfa Petrovna. Also on the nasty side is Pyotr Petrovich Luzhin, a rather stuffy man in pursuit of Dunya as a wife, so that he can have a poor and grateful woman attending to his every whim. And then there is the remarkable Porfiry Petrovich, the detective in charge of investigating the murder; an unsettling and unpredictable character, there’s most definitely a touch of the Columbo about him.
Have you ever watched a moth near a candle-flame? Well, that’s the way he’ll be with me, hovering, circling around me like a moth at a lighted candle; he’ll lose his taste for freedom, he’ll start to think, get tangled in his thoughts, ensnare himself all round as though in some net or other, worry himself to death!
All of these characters are on journeys of their own and bring their own issues to the story as a counterpoint to what is happening to Raskolnikov. And the whole structure gives Dostoevsky the opportunity to explore sophisticated moral issues: is the life of a nasty old money-lender worth anything when the money she grasps and hoards could help those in extreme poverty? Is it morally wrong for someone to take the decision as to who should live and who should die? Is Sonya any less of a person for having to prostitute herself to try and feed her family? Are the nihilistic philosophies circulating St. Petersburg helpful or damaging? And is the only route to redemption through suffering?
That’s just a snapshot of the kind of issues Dostoevsky’s looking at in “Crime and Punishment”, which might seem off putting. However, no-one can discuss a moral quandary in such an entertaining and absorbing way as Dosty does. His subjects are serious and yet his book is filled with those wonderful characters, humour, philosophy, tragedy and pathos, as well as a particularly clear-eyed view of the lot of many Russians of his time. In particular, he seems to have quite a sophisticated understanding of the difficulties women faced; Sonya, because of her particular caste, has no option but to become a prostitute; Dunya’s only way out of poverty is a suitable marriage, and she is vulnerable to lechers like Svidrigailov – the latter attempts to compromise her reputation on more than one occasion, and the last time he does is a critical point in the book.
In fact, the book is not just about one crime – it’s actually littered with them. Svidrigailov’s behaviour towards Marfa Petrovna and Dunya is vile; the plight of Marmeladov and the evils of drink are a constant theme; Sonya’s being reduced to prostitution to avoid starvation is equally criminal; and Dunya’s constant harassment is yet another aspect of the messed up structure of Russian society. Money and poverty seem to be at the root of everything, and there are scenes of the suffering of animals and children which would slot comfortably into a Dickens novel; Dostoevsky seems to have share a sense of outrage with the latter over the plight of the vulnerable.
The blood that’s on everyone’s hands …that flows and has always flowed through the world like a waterfall, that is poured like champagne and for the sake of which men are crowned in the Capitol and then called the benefactors of mankind. Well just take a look and see what’s really what! I wanted to do good to people and I’d have done hundreds, thousands of good deeds, instead of this one stupid action, which wasn’t even stupid, really, but just clumsy…
Central to the book, though, is Raskolnikov’s battle: not only with Porfiry Petrovich, but more importantly with himself. Although it’s sometimes surprising how much of the book is *not* about Raskolnikov – there are whole sequences in which he doesn’t appear or is on the sidelines – we always return to his dilemma. He seems often in a state of feverishness, trance, illness; and it’s often unclear how much his alienation from society in general has contributed to the actions he took. There is regular reference to an article he’s had published where he argued that a Napoleon among men is not bound by the same restrictions as others and is allowed to act in ways that ordinary men cannot; and whether his illness has pushed him into taking the actions he does is perhaps ambiguous. The murder becomes almost incidental – it is Raskolnikov’s mental and spiritual state which takes centre stage. The journey into his soul and his psyche is a dark one, but there is redemption in the end.
Despite having taken so long to read “Crime and Punishment”, I finished the last hundred pages or so in a breathless burst of reading which had a really strong emotional impact on me. I first read the book decades ago and I have to say that I most definitely got more out of this time round. For a start, I appreciate the structure his work more deeply; there’s a staginess about Dostoevsky’s books which is very appealing, as the events unfold almost as a series of set pieces. There’s a surprising amount of dark humour and the slapstick quality of a manic black comedy as Raskolnikov staggers from one dramatic situation to another, the pressures on him from outside and within gradually building up.
I also saw parallels with Dostoevsky’s other work which I wouldn’t have picked up back then, as C&P was my first read of his work. In particular, there is a strong bond between Raskolnikov and the Underground Man from “Notes from the Underground”, not least in the constant reference both of them make to their spite. One particular section, where Raskolnikov is venting his spleen to Sonya about the awfulness of his life and how he crawled away to his dark little room like a spider, could have been lifted straight from “Notes…” and there were many other parts which resonated in the same way.
‘Sonya, I have a spiteful heart, take note of that: that may explain a lot of things. I came here because I’m full of spite. There are some that would not have. But I’m a coward and…. a villain!’
Lest this should all sound too dark and gloomy – let’s face it, deep arguments about the value of a single life are not for everyone – I should say that though the book is complex I found it eminently readable and absolutely gripping. Even in the depths of despair and depravity, there is an exuberance about Dostoevsky’s characters which makes you love them and want to follow them. The chapters towards the end of the book which dealt with the final fate of Svidrigailov were completely involving and moving, and I felt were some of Dostoevsky’s best writing.
My version of “Crime and Punishment” is the Penguin Classics edition translated by David McDuff (who also translated “The Brothers Karamazov” which I read in 2013) and I found it to be an excellent rendition. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I was struggling with a different rendering but this one was perfect for me and it ‘sounds’ like I expect a Dostoevsky book to read. McDuff also provides excellent notes and introduction, and he perceptively opines in the latter that critical reaction to “Crime and Punishment” says as much about the commentator as the book itself. Certainly, a quick look online reveals any number of theories about this work, but for my money it’s a brilliant, multi-layered novel which tells a gripping story while providing social comment, exploring morality and shining a strong light on the Russian society of the time. I imagine I’ll be thinking about the issues “Crime and Punishment” raises for some time and I’m so glad I chose to revisit this book with this particular translation.
Oct 27, 2017 @ 11:24:46
I read this for the first time a few years away and was swept along by its brilliance. I had it with me on a flight to the US and, for the first time ever on a long flight, didn’t want it to end because I still had part of the book to finish. I’ve earmarked it for a re-read because I’m sure there were so many dimensions I missed.
Oct 28, 2017 @ 09:29:51
That’s indeed a tribute to its power! And yes – it most definitely deserves multiple readings.
Oct 27, 2017 @ 11:54:48
I’ve had this in mind to read next year, and you have definitely inspired me. Thank you!
Oct 28, 2017 @ 09:28:58
Thanks Jane! I’m so glad I revisited it myself, particular as I’ve read so much of Dostoevsky’s work in the interim.
Oct 27, 2017 @ 12:04:10
Interesting observations! Dostoevsky had indeed read Dickens and they must have been kindred spirits in some ways, both having an eye for the weak and the poor suffering, as you say. Perhaps an idea for a blog post? 😉
Oct 28, 2017 @ 09:28:18
Thank you! Yes, I can definitely see parallels there – the plight of the poor characters in C&P was often heartbreaking.
Oct 27, 2017 @ 12:47:04
Like you I read this some years ago, so much of the detail I’ve forgotten. It’s hard to keep up with the unread TBR pile, but it’s definitely one to re-read some time. I did return to The Idiot not so long ago, and as you suggest, responded to it differently from the way I did when much younger.
Oct 28, 2017 @ 09:22:48
It’s hard, isn’t it – there are so many new books calling but so many it would be wonderful to re-read. A delicate balance.
Oct 27, 2017 @ 15:20:35
Your use of the word ‘exuberance’ (as well as your thoughtful observations and curiosity) really makes me want to reread this one as well. Your continued exploration of the major and lesser-known Russian writers has really changed my thinking about them; I’ve read them out of a sense of duty but I wonder if, now, should I return to them by choice rather than obligation, if I mightn’t be as passionate about them as you are. Just yesterday, picking up a Gallant from the Gs, I paused at the shelf of Dostoyevsky novels to pet a couple of them before reminding myself of the ominous size of the current stack and returning them (a little reluctantly).
Oct 27, 2017 @ 15:28:48
I read this a very long time ago and absolutely loved it. I’m slightly embarrassed to admit that I read it following a fantastic 1979 BBC production of it with John Hurt in it. He was superb as Raskolnikov so I picked up the book. Time for a re-read!
Oct 28, 2017 @ 09:22:18
No need to be embarrassed about John Hurt – he’s the sort of actor that should be Raskolnikov!
Mar 13, 2022 @ 23:04:09
I don’t remember that BBC serial. Perhaps it might have been past my bedtime, but I’m sure it must have been brilliant if it starred John Hurt.
Mar 14, 2022 @ 11:47:10
I remember it vaguely, enough to know that Hurt was of course fab as Raskolnikov!
Mar 14, 2022 @ 17:20:51
I’ve noticed the series is available on Amazon:https://www.amazon.co.uk/Crime-Punishment-Multi-Region-John-Hurt/dp/B073ZYD2YF/ref=rvi_1/259-0494421-3120443?pd_rd_w=0APTc&pf_rd_p=febd3956-4d60-4288-b8f2-cb468eb6674d&pf_rd_r=SNAXCBQA8M89JA6VBN00&pd_rd_r=fd5b60fe-b9f7-45a1-a85c-0579ab9f9920&pd_rd_wg=wmKjE&pd_rd_i=B073ZYD2YF&psc=1
Mar 14, 2022 @ 19:33:11
Excellent! I may have to invest…
Mar 14, 2022 @ 17:23:33
Ignore the ratings. As usual, Amazon has lumped a load of different DVD reviews together.
Mar 14, 2022 @ 19:32:59
Amazon is usually a train wreck…
Oct 27, 2017 @ 17:32:38
Wonderful review. I am hoping to re-read Crime and Punishment before the end of the year. I last read it aeons ago, I think I must have been eighteen, and I remember it being a remarkable book but I’m sure I would get infinitely more from it now. The only other Dostoevsky I’ve read is Underground, and I wasn’t a great fan, but I’d like to re-read C&P and then perhaps expand to more of his novels next year. Your passion for the book is inspiring. I definitely need to read it again. Thanks 🙂
Oct 28, 2017 @ 09:21:48
Thank you! Yes, I was perhaps too young to get everything out of the bookf irst time round – so glad I revisited it now. “Underground” is perhaps a more concentrated, difficult read – maybe try “The Gambler”, one of my favourites!
Oct 28, 2017 @ 11:53:26
Thanks for the recommendation 🙂
Oct 28, 2017 @ 00:35:36
I read this a very long time ago during a brief Russian binge that really only saw me reading Dostoevsky, Tolstoy and a couple of Turgenev’s but though I remember very little about it now I remember it as being compelling and fairly multi-layered. I am sure I would see far more in it now, though I just can’t imagine having time to re-read it now.
Oct 28, 2017 @ 09:20:02
I think it’s definitely a book that warrants revisiting and also one you get more out of being a maturer reader!!
Oct 28, 2017 @ 02:10:42
I have been meaning to reread Dostoevsky, and your review, especially your sharing of your thoughts and feelings, do make me want to go back to C&P. I have the Pevear and Volokhonsky (book sale!) and the old Constance Garnett. Something tells me I’ll go with Garnett…
Oct 28, 2017 @ 09:19:37
I would go with the Garnett too – as you know, I don’t get on so well with P/V… 🙂
Oct 28, 2017 @ 19:30:09
Oh how you remind me I really should renew acquaintance. Devoured Dostoeivsky in late teens and early twenties. A lifetime ago.
Oct 28, 2017 @ 19:50:29
It seems like that for me since I first read him. But I never get tired of his writing – I think I will always go back to Dostoevsky…
Oct 28, 2017 @ 20:14:12
One of my favourite books – reading this makes me want to read it again. My plans for next year, which usually formulate around now though don’t always materialise, involve reading more of the great Russian writers.
Oct 28, 2017 @ 20:28:50
Yeah, it really is something special! As for plans – I made hardly any this year and even these have been a struggle at times. I think I’ll make none at all for 2018…. 😉
Oct 29, 2017 @ 10:26:07
I’ll have to read him again too because I loved him as a teenager, and he somehow has stuck in my memory as a “teenager’s author” because of his neurotic characters and his lack of humour (I think this perhaps says a lot about what I think of teenagers :-)), in contrast to Dickens whom I’ve always found hugely funny.
Oct 29, 2017 @ 10:38:57
TBH I think I got much more from reading him at my advanced age than I did back then (although I *am* glad I read him when I was younger too). And I find him surprisingly funny – there’s some really darkly humorous slapstick in places.
Oct 29, 2017 @ 13:46:09
You’ve really inspired me to read this, and I’ll look out for this translation. Definitely on the list for 2018!
Oct 29, 2017 @ 14:45:41
Yay! It’s marvellous – hope you enjoy!
Nov 09, 2017 @ 16:05:14
It’s a shameful confession, but I utterly bounced off this when I tried reading it (admittedly as a teenager). I found Raskolnikov unbearably annoying – just hand yourself in if you feel so bad! I kept shouting internally. I was perhaps not the audience for a lengthy exploration of conscience…
Nov 09, 2017 @ 16:15:35
🙂 It would be dull if we all liked the same book! But I can imagine the experience of reading this as a teenager would be very different to coming to it later. I was in my mid-20s first time but my response was definitely very different to this one. Plus you can’t help having sympathy with Raskolnikov which I found ramped up the tension!
Jan 01, 2018 @ 06:57:01