A Comparison between Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment and Vladimir Paral’s Essay

Fyodor Dostoevskys classic, shame and Punish custodyt, and Vladimir Parals livers and Murderers describe a earthly concern of death penalty, dejection and profound tender unhappiness. The two authors explore honorable debase manpowert and the destiny of mankind, as ruled by lust, jealousy and immoral instincts. As it sh alone be seen however, the two newfangleds differ considerably in the way in which they treat the subject of wickedness, as well as in their vizor of realise and the tone of the recital.Thus, Dostoevskys Crime and Punishment is centered on the root word of moral equivocalness. The Russian author uses an omniscient denominate of view in order to recount Rodyon Raskolnikovs experiences before and after he commits the murder. The tone of the narrative is serious and meditative, as questions of piety and justice atomic human activity 18 interspersed throughout the eveningts and dialogues in the fiction. Vladimir Parals Lovers and Murderers treats the theme of murder in fraternity with that of whap.The narrative enters a creative activity full of promiscuity and force, focusing on a great number of char momenters and the interactions among them. Un c ar Dostoevskys book that focuses on the portrait and experiences of the primary(prenominal) character, Parals work is concerned with the plurality of voices. Moreover, the point of view shifts frequently from the omniscient narrator to the first mortal narrative, sometimes within the equal phrase. Lovers and Murderers is a grotesque mosaic, with a discontinuous narrative and a satiric tone. trance Dostoevskys work raises questions of morality and friendly justice, Parals novel represents the spectacle of human life with resignation. in that location is no ethical conclusion to Parals analysis of human life and character he chooses to describe the dynamic of universe in its bleakest and most ironic aspects. For Dostoevsky, human life is overly full of coincidences and acc idents. Although, the limit amidst even off and misuse is relative, ultimately, the novel emphasizes the belief in penalisation and redemption.In Parals novel, there is no clear delimitation between innocence and viciousness the characters are all fanatics, consumed by passions, jealousy and greedy cravings. Significantly, be intimate and wildness blend in throughout the novel, marking the majority of the relationships among different characters. Paral shows therefore that human interaction is never comp permitely innocent people devour and are devoured sadisti anticipatey by destructive relationships. Instead of ending in union and harmony, each issue ends in destruction and crime.In Crime and Punishment there is the opening move of salvation and the triumph of love. Lovers and Murderers shows murder to be the companion of love, with no supposition for moral cleansing. Both novels therefore analyze morality in the mise en scene of the dynamics of society, emphasizing t he interactions among different characters unless with different conclusions. Sin and morality are seen as paradoxes in Dostoevskys work, tho, ultimately sins can be redeemed after having been committed.Parals novel illuminates the t commensurateau of human relationships and the relativity theory of moral principles rattling differently all the characters are fallen men and women, who abuse or are abused by others. Dostoevskys Crime and Punishment is concerned primarily with moral paradoxes, exemplified through the stories of various characters. The exchange story, that of Raskolnikov, is paradoxical. The protagonist is an extremely poor student, who struggles with his enormous debts to his landlady and with constant hunger and misery.A proud and noble character, Raskolnikov is tormented by his unjust and humiliating favorable standing. Despite his intelligence, he lives poorly and is constantly besieged by bodily concerns. As the novel opens, Raskolnikov has already develope d the philosophy that would lead him to murder he muses that there are superior men who should be able to punish others for their sins. Interestingly therefore, the murder is intended as a punishment of the mean pawnbroker, in the name of social justice.The first part of the novel captures Raskolnikovs intragroup tension as he struggles to discern right from wrong. There come afters the critical blink of an eye of the actual, icon murder and afterwards his punishment and final redemption. The cyclical nature of his experience is signic Dostoevsky points here to the paradoxes of morality. Raskolnikovs act of murder is in itself meant as a punishment and may seem right in its context. To enhance the equivocalness however, Dostoevsky arranges for a double murder the circumstances force the protagonist to despatch Lizaveta as well, the pawnbrokers innocent sister.The novel offers yet other instances of moral ambiguity, such as the saintly and innocent Sonia who is forced to beco me a prostitute in order to earn money and save her hungered family And then I saw, immature man, I saw Katerina Ivanovna, in the same silence go up to Sonias little bed she was on her knees all the evening snuggling Sonias feet, and would not get up, and then they both fell drowsy in each others arms together, together yes and I lay drunk (Dostoevsky 30).Her mother in law, who had previously maltreated her, is today grateful and reverent towards the girl. Sacrifice and generosity are therefore veritable and appreciated in the novel. Her father, Marmeladov, is another example of moral equivocalness a hopeless drunk, he is a good man who loves his family yet cannot chasten his witness vice in order to save them. Marmeladovs employer also acts givingly, although he does so in vain he offers him his job back, contempt his dependence on alcohol, out of pity for his family.Throughout the novel, morality is questioned, plainly there is sufficient evidence of the existence of go od alongside with evil. The ambiguity that Crime and Punishment describes is one of form quite than substance. In Parals Lovers and Murderers morality is permanently mixed with sin. Women and men, coming from the dregs of society as well as from its highest ranks, live in utter disorder and promiscuity. ingenuousness and guilt are neither relative nor circumstantial. Significantly, the book is divided in numerous fragments bearing two alternative titles Conquerors and Besieged.In Parals vision, the world is not divided in right and wrong, but rather in abusers and abused. These basic roles are moreover easily interchangeable. The relationships seemed to be weighed on a scale, which always tips in favor of one of the partners. The relationship between Alex Serafin and Dasa is a relevant example Alex conquers and even enslaves the rich woman but he is eventually rejected by the same woman that seemed totally dependent on him. The world of the inhabitants of building 2000 is devoid o f moral principles and originatoring.The men and women are driven whole by impulses of self-gratification. Their affairs are red-faced and each partner, either abused or abusive, derives selfish pleasure from the communion. Love is rapacious, lustful and possessive Love is prey and everyone longs for his own destruction lets not want them to expose the necks themselves(Paral 187). If Raskolnikovs world is label by sin and punishment, Parals characters pursue their own pleasure and interests without having to fall in for their deeds.Raskolnikov murders the two women in his pursuit of justice, without deriving any personalised win from the deed, despite having found a considerable fortune in the ladies flat. In Parals novel, murder is only perpetrated as a crime of passion. In the case of Borek and Zita, murder is even gratuitous. The comparison between their story and that of Julien Sorel and Madame de nephritic in Stendhals Red and Black, is extremely significant. While in Stendhals morality is extensively explored, Borek and Zitas affair is devoid of any compunctions of guilt despite the fact that Zita is a married woman.The line between love and murder is very thin one of the partners is always the hunter who chases his victim. The moment when Borek finally conquers Zita and possesses her body is very relevant. The man feels that, instead of loving thoughts he develops murderous ones, without being able to discern between the two categories anymore I realized I was standing there like a murderer, insane because as a murderer I could not act otherwise, even though I had come as a lover, like a murderer or a lover, insane because I no longer saw any difference (Paral 188).If Crime and Punishment discusses moral ambiguity, Lovers and Murderers comments on the ambiguity of love and murder. Sexuality is always mixed with sadism and violence in Parals novel, so as to emphasize the fact that love is in fact abusive and possessive rather than disciplined a nd saintly. matrimony itself is a failure in the novel. An early scene in the novel points to the ultimate moral degradation of the characters. Thus, the poor working woman Madda pays a visit to Frank in his rich and sumptuous apartment.When he asks her to rate on a wedding fleece as part of the rite of lovemaking, the woman muses on her previous sexual degradation and you dont have to apologize for madman anything, my earlier lovers wouldnt even reward my clothes off, or even their own, a white wedding dress to church Ive made love with the dirty strap of base overalls between our bodies (Paral 32). Ironically however, her romantic hopes are bitterly deceived by her hardhearted partner.Instead of offering the wedding dress as a symbol for love and purity, he uses it as part of a humiliating clowning when Madda is dressed and kneeling before him, Franks wife enters the elbow room and it becomes clear that the woman was only used as amusement by the rich couple. In Parals wo rld the beautiful dreams disintegrate very fast. Lovers and Murderers shows that moral choices and principles have to be settled among people and thus no intention or action is definitely pure.Raskolnikov acts in the name of a higher principles, which he sees as commanding I didnt kill a human being, but a principle I killed the principle, but I didnt overstep, I stopped on this side. I was only capable of killing (Dostoevsky 389). Raving with a guilty conscience, Raskolnikov tries to incite himself of the moral justifications of his deed. He didnt kill another human being, his violence was directed solely against an erroneous principle. Besides Raskolnikov, the novel abounds in generous characters.For instance, Dounia, Raskolnikovs sister is willing to sacrifice her own happiness in a marriage she does not desire, in order to help her family. When the same Dounia is accused of trying to attract her employer and make him commit adultery, she escapes by her own generosity and nobili ty. Moreover, it is the employers wife that actually mends the girls news report after having marred it, by showing the proof of her innocence to the world. There is no redemption and generosity in Parals novel.The characters act upon their personal interests, without considering each others feelings. The life that the characters lead is the life of a jungle, where there are no rules other than personal survival and gratification They live only for the fulfillment of their eternal appetites like animals running free in a jungle. For pleasure alone like the courtiers of Louis XV (Paral 164). People are not concerned with judgments of value and with ethical principles. Paral introduces his readers to the mental jungle of humanity, where people follow only their instincts.In Crime and Punishment, on the other hand, Dostoevsky explores sin and crime from a religious and ethical perspective. As critic Alfred Bem notes, Dostoevsky proceeds from the idea of a feeling of the original sin present in all minds To understand Dostoevskys thought one must allow for the straw man in the human psyche of a feeling of sinfulness as such, independent of the existence of any concrete crimewhat we dexterity call the feeling of original sin. We can assume, then, that the feeling of sin, of guilt can be present in the psyche unaccompanied by any consciousness of crime (Bem 59).Hence comes the moral ambiguity of the characters however saintly in their morality and character, they can succumb to sin because the seed is already planted in the human psyche. Parals world is also dominated by sinfulness, but, in this case, the characters lose their nobility. They are all fallen, abject people, who live by their instincts rather than by principles. Moreover, Raskolnikov performs an experiment more than an actual murder. He wants to contribute his philosophical theory to reality and see its effects.Dostoevsky captures here the essence of humanity and its inherent rejection of murde r. Ultimately, Raskolnikov is unable to commit his crime in complete icy bloodedness, despite the solidness of his arguments and theory Perhaps no work of literary productions presents so graphically a man testing and living, psychologically and even physiologically, a theory. Raskolnikovs theory, it will be remembered, is that crime is accompanied by sickness, by a loss of willpower and self-control, unless it is committed for sufficient reason by an extraordinary man, in which case it is no crime. (Shaw 142).It is not so with Parals murderers they virtually live in a jungle, where, besides instincts and passions, there is only ruth without real substance. The point of view and the tone elect by the two authors are also relevant. Raskolnikovs story is told objectively, from an omniscient perspective. This narrative technique does not obscure the characters inner turmoil, however. Dostoevsky pairs his omniscience with indirect speech, a device which helps to reveal the heros tho ughts and emotions. Raskolnikov lots speaks to himself and, in this way, Dostoevsky gives us access to his unmediated reflections.For instance, he muses on his motif for committing the murder, wavering between the feeling of guilty and the excuse he finds for his conduct I am putting my little brick into the happiness of all and so my heart is at peace. Ha-ha Why have you let me slipperiness? I only live once, I too want. Ech, I am an ? sthetic louse and nothing more, he added suddenly, laughing like a (Dostoevsky 389). Raskolnikov is indeed a criminal and an aesthete at the same time. While his crime is horrendous, his purpose gives it meaning to a certain extent.As Julian Connolly remarks, the way in which Dostoevsky decided to use the point of view in the novel is very significant Dostoyevsky had originally intended to write an sexual conquest of murder from the perspective of the murderer himself. As he worked on the get wind in November 1865, however, he concluded that suc h a perspective might be too limited, so he chose an omniscient, third-person narrative mode instead. in so far traces of the original design remain much of the novel offers direct brain wave into Raskolnikovs impressions and experiences. (Connolly 144). Thus, the authors decision to mingle omniscience and first person narrative shows that he was preoccupied to investigate the moral dimension of his characters as well as the psychological one. His technique ultimately merges psychology with philosophy. In Parals case, the frequent shifts of viewpoint, allow for a curious exploration of the stories from the interior and outside simultaneously. Moreover, Parals story is told fragmentarily, with an alternation of voices and points of view.The narrative shifts from the author to an interior monologue of one of the characters without warning, in the course of the same phrase. This provides readers with marks as to actual events and also to the thoughts of the characters at the same t ime. The novel features a great number of different narrative voices, as each of the characters introduced is also given a monologue. This technique enhances the novels mosaic structure and its grotesqueness. The characters interior monologues moreover show them to be egoistical and impulsive.Most of their speeches are delirious and self-centered. The tones of the two works also differ and influence the readers cognition of the stories. Dostoevskys tone is serious and restrained, focusing on the events, the psychology of the main character and the numerous implications of the experiences described. Paral, on the other hand, uses irony, black humor and pathos is order to describe the events in his book. Lovers and Murderers is therefore written as a black comedy, transmitting the author purpose of satirizing humanity in its triviality and abjection.The two novels deal with the common themes of murder and punishment, but do so in very different ways. Crime and Punishment investigate s ethical, religious and psychological consequences of a crime, with an emphasis of humans liability to sin and moral ambiguity in the context of a society. Lovers and Murderers, on the other hand, emphasizes the human world as a grotesque spectacle, driven by the uncontrolled instincts and petty larceny interests of men. Dostoevskys work analyzes and questions, while Parals observes and mocks. Works CitedAlfred L. Bem, Guilt in Crime and Punishment. Readings on Fyodor Dostoyevsky. Ed. Tamara Johnson. Trans. Robert Louis Jackson. San Diego Greenhaven Press, 1998. 58 64. Connolly, Julian. An Overview of Crime and Punishment. Exploring Novels. Gale, 1998. Dostoevsky, Fyodor. Crime and Punishment. innovative York Vintage Classics, 2008. Paral, Vladimir. Lovers and Murderers. Trans. Craig Stephen Stevens. New York Catbird Press, 2002. Shaw, J. Thomas. Raskolnikovs Dreams. Slavic and East European Journal 17, no. 2 (1973) 131-45.