Crime and Punishment - My name is Raskolnikov :: Dostoevsky Crime and Punishment

Wrongdoing and Punishment - My name is Raskolnikovâ â â â â â â â Clearly Raskolnikov didn't slaughter Alyona. Nikolai did. He admitted, isn't that right? Of course, sure, I recognize what you're stating: Raskolnikov admitted as well. In any case, clearly his admission was not a genuine admission. Raskolnikov had seen Nikolai's actual admission, and was moved to the point that he chose he'd prefer to have a go at admitting as well. Also, one must not neglect the Christ imagery in the novel. Raskolnikov is the conspicuous Christ-figure; he's poor, he's liberal, he's schizophrenic. Everything includes. Raskolnikov is Christ's subsequent manifestation yet no one understands it's Him. Sort of miserable. One ought not neglect Raskolnikov's boss man hypothesis. Nikolai, then again, is the filth of the earth. He's a minor character, and minor characters consistently submit murders in books. What else do they need to do? One ought not just gander at the brain science of the characters in the novel, yet of the creator also. Dostoevsky wouldn't compose an an ecdote about some abhorrent killer. No. Dostoevsky was a decent Christian author. C&P is a handbook for turning into a Christian, not some homicide brain research spine chiller. Raskolnikov gives heaps of explanations behind the homicide, and it is clear from the sheer number of reasons that he gives that Raskolnikov is guiltless. He can't make up a sensible rationale! Nobody is tricked. I sure wasn't. Raskolnikov is most likely a destroyed character. He is disturbed in light of the fact that he can't get any work, so he chooses to confess to a homicide he thinks nothing about to make sure he can get some hard work in Siberia. Gracious, sure, he need back to the loft and addressed where the body was. Sure he could relate the whole homicide in practical detail. These are only incidents, much the same as his gathering with Marmeladov. C&P was frequently censured for its abuse of fortuitous event. Maybe the most befuddling scene in that it leads numerous unwary perusers off track is simply the real depiction of the homicide. This obviously was only a fantasy. Dostoevsky was exceptionally attached to dream imagery and utilized it frequently in C&P. Â So it is currently self-evident, I am certain, that Raskolnikov didn't slaughter Alyona, and that Nikolai did. Be that as it may, for what reason did Nikolai execute Alyona? All things considered, Nikolai was an early existentialist. He just executed her for its adventure. Superior to going out to see the films.