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

Fyodor Dostoevskys classic, wickedness and penalization, and Vladimir Parals Lovers and Murderers c entirely a world of make, dejection and profound hu homosexual un comfort. The two agents search object lesson depletedion and the destiny of mankind, as ruled by lust, green-eyed monster and im deterrent example instincts. As it shall be seen moreover, the two apologues differ considerably in the way in which they treat the subject of abhorrence, as well as in their propose of gain and the t sensation of the story.Thus, Dostoevskys Crime and penalty is centered on the idea of object lesson ambiguity. The Russian author uses an omniscient point of view in hostel to recount Rodyon Raskolnikovs experiences onward and after he ships the slay. The tone of the narrative is serious and meditative, as questions of morals and justice be interspersed through with(predicate)out the events and dialogues in the smart. Vladimir Parals Lovers and Murderers treats the theme of murder in conjunction with that of jazz.The narrative enters a world full of promiscuousness and violence, focu darkg on a great number of eccentrics and the interactions among them. Unlike Dostoevskys check that focuses on the portrait and experiences of the main character, Parals draw is come to with the plurality of voices. Moreover, the point of view shifts frequently from the omniscient narrator to the stolon person narrative, sometimes within the same phrase. Lovers and Murderers is a grotesque mosaic, with a discontinuous narrative and a satiric tone. magic spell Dostoevskys work raises questions of theology and social justice, Parals novel re redeems the spectacle of human life sentence with resignation. in that respect is no ethical conclusion to Parals analysis of human life and character he chooses to describe the dynamic of kind-heartedness in its bleakest and virtually ironic aspects. For Dostoevsky, human life is as well full of coincidences and accide nts. Although, the limit in the midst of unspoiled and wrong is relative, at long last, the novel shows the belief in punish custodyt and redemption.In Parals novel, at that place is no clear delimitation amidst pureness and unrighteousness the characters be all fanatics, consumed by passions, jealousy and greedy cravings. Significantly, love and violence interamalgamate throughout the novel, marking the majority of the relationships among divergent characters. Paral shows thusly that human interaction is never completely innocent sight toss off and are devoured sadistically by destructive relationships. Instead of ending in compass north and harmony, each affair ends in destruction and criminal offense.In Crime and penalty t present is the possibility of salvation and the triumph of love. Lovers and Murderers shows murder to be the coadjutor of love, with no possibility for moral cleansing. Both novels therefore analyze morality in the context of the dynamics of so ciety, emphasizing the interactions among different characters only if with different conclusions. Sin and morality are seen as paradoxes in Dostoevskys work, but, eventually sins can be redeemed after having been connected.Parals novel illuminates the tableau of human relationships and the relativity of moral regulations very differently all the characters are fallen men and women, who abuse or are abused by an new(prenominal)(prenominal)s. Dostoevskys Crime and punishment is concerned primarily with moral paradoxes, exemplified through the stories of various characters. The central story, that of Raskolnikov, is paradoxical. The protagonist is an extremely poor student, who struggles with his enormous debts to his landlady and with continuous hunger and misery.A proud and noble character, Raskolnikov is tormented by his bothersome and humiliating social standing. Despite his intelligence, he lives poorly and is constantly assail by material concerns. As the novel opens, R askolnikov has already developed the doctrine 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 intend as a punishment of the mean pawnbroker, in the name of social justice.The low part of the novel captures Raskolnikovs inner tension as he struggles to discern right from wrong. There follows the critical moment of the true(a), double murder and afterwards his punishment and final redemption. The cyclical nature of his experience is typic 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 ambiguity however, Dostoevsky arranges for a double murder the circumstances force the protagonist to wipe out 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 be come a prostitute in order to earn money and save her hungered family And consequently I saw, young man, I saw Katerina Ivanovna, in the same curb go up to Sonias little bed she was on her knees all the evening kissing Sonias feet, and would not get up, and then they two fell asleep in each others coat of arms together, together yes and I lay drunk (Dostoevsky 30).Her mother in law, who had previously maltreated her, is now grateful and reverent towards the misfire. Sacrifice and generosity are therefore accepted and appreciated in the novel. Her father, Marmeladov, is other example of moral equivocalness a hopeless drunk, he is a computable man who loves his family yet cannot conquer his experience vice in order to save them. Marmeladovs employer in addition acts generously, although he does so in vain he offers him his job back, despite his dependence on alcohol, out of pity for his family. passim the novel, morality is questioned, but there is sufficient evidence of the existence of good alongside with evil. The ambiguity that Crime and Punishment describes is one of form preferably 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 verbalise disorder and promiscuity. Innocence and guilt are neither relative nor circumstantial. Significantly, the book is divided in numerous fragments bearing two alternative titles Conquerors and hem in.In Parals vision, the world is not divided in right and wrong, but quite an in abusers and abused. These basic roles are moreover substantially interchangeable. The relationships seemed to be weighed on a scale, which forever 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 lavish 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 ingenuous of moral principles and reasoning.The men and women are driven only by impulses of self- comfort. Their personal matters are violent and each partner, either abused or abusive, derives stingy pleasure from the communion. Love is rapacious, lustful and possessive Love is prey and everyone longs for his deliver destruction lets not want them to expose the necks themselves(Paral 187). If Raskolnikovs world is marked by sin and punishment, Parals characters pursue their proclaim pleasure and interests without having to pay for their deeds.Raskolnikov murders the two women in his pursuit of justice, without deriving any(prenominal) personal gain from the deed, despite having found a considerable bunch 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 Renal in Stendhals Re d and Black, is extremely significant. While in Stendhals morality is extensively explored, Borek and Zitas affair is loose of any compunctions of guilt despite the fact that Zita is a married woman.The television channel between love and murder is very thin one of the partners is everlastingly 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, demoniacal 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 and saintly. Marriage itself is a failure in the novel. An early image in the novel points to the ultimate moral abasement of the characters. Thus, the poor work woman Madda pays a visit to Frank in his rich and terrific apartment.When he asks her to put on a wedding dress as part of the ritual of lovemaking, the woman muses on her previous sexual degradation and you dont bring forth to apologize for madman anything, my earlier lovers wouldnt even take my clothes off, or even their own, a clear wedding dress to church Ive made love with the dirty strap of contemptible overalls between our bodies (Paral 32). Ironically however, her romantic hopes are bitingly deceived by her heartless partner.Instead of offering the wedding dress as a symbol for love and purity, he uses it as part of a humiliating trick when Madda is dressed and kneeling before him, Franks wife enters the room and it becomes clear that th e woman was only used as amusement by the rich couple. In Parals world the better-looking 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 convince 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 nobility. Moreover, it is the employers wife that actually mends the girls reputation after having marred it, by showing the proofread 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 smacks. 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 indigent in a jungle. For pleasure alone like the courtiers of Louis XV (Paral 164). wad are not concerned with judgments of value and with ethical principles. Paral introduces his commentators to the psychological 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 essential allow for the presence in the human psyche of a feeling of sinfulness as such, independent of the existence of any concrete crimewhat we might 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 source 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 apply his philosophical theory to reality and see its effect s.Dostoevsky captures here the essence of humanity and its inherent rejection of murder. Ultimately, Raskolnikov is unable to commit his crime in complete cold bloodedness, despite the solidness of his arguments and theory Perhaps no work of literature presents so graphically a man examination 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 pathos without real substance. The point of view and the tone chosen 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 h is omniscience with indirect speech, a device which helps to reveal the crampfishs thoughts and emotions. Raskolnikov often speaks to himself and, in this way, Dostoevsky gives us access to his unmediated reflections.For instance, he muses on his motivation for committing the murder, wavering between the feeling of guilty and the apologise he finds for his behavior 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 slip? I only live once, I as well as want. Ech, I am an ? sthetic louse and nothing more, he added suddenly, express mirth 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 true extent.As Julian Connolly re attach, 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 account of murder from the perspective of the murd erer himself. As he worked on the project in November 1865, however, he concluded that such a perspective might be too limited, so he chose an omniscient, third-person narrative mode instead. Yet traces of the original design remain much of the novel offers direct insight 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 prying exploration of the stories from the inside 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 a s to actual events and also to the thoughts of the characters at the same time. 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 twist 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 perception 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, dingy humor and pathos is order to describe the events in his book. Lovers and Murderers is therefore indite as a black comedy, transmitting the author purpose of satirizing humanity in its pettiness and abjection.The two novels deal with the common themes of murder and punishm ent, but do so in very different ways. Crime and Punishment investigates 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 interests of men. Dostoevskys work analyzes and questions, while Parals observes and mocks. workings 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. New 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) 13 1-45.