Thread #25216449
IF BANDITISM WAS WRONG, THIS BOOK WOULD BE UNECESSARY Anonymous 04/17/26(Fri)23:30:00 No.25216449 [Reply]▶
File: capture d ecrain.png (251.2 KB)
251.2 KB PNG
For 15 years, I pretended that I had read this book. Now that I am done with it, and acknowledged how much of a clusterfuck circle of hell St. Petersburg is, I have realized all the midwits who pretend to have read this like Peterson are just wrong.
How can Raskolnikov be wrong if:
>stealing from an usurer parasite landlord wrong
>a young girl prostituting herself to pay bills for her empoverished family and alcoholic father is okay
>alcoholic father being run over / throwing himself in front of horses is okay
>children begging for money on a bridge in St. Petersburg is okay
>creepy socialist funding a commune solely so he can pass free love policies is okay
>rich people leveraging their wealth so poor women prostitute themselves as concubines (19th century Russia's sugar babies) is okay
Raskolnikov only lost because he was caught, and he was caught because he confessed, first to Sonia, then to the cops.
The only bad thing Raskolnikov did was killing the landlord's sister, and the whole thing seems like an editor intervened because he was scared that Raskolnikov stating the obvious, that some men can do whatever evil they want, would be too dangerous in tsarist Russia.
St. Petersburg is so hellish that I refuse to accept the message of the book. Raskolnikov did nothing wrong.
3 RepliesView Thread
Showing all 3 replies.>>
>>
>>25216449
Dostoevsky was an orthodox chuddite. Of course, it is incredible hard to believe in god if you live in Russia, much less 19th century Russia. The evidence of his absence is all around you.
So, his books reflect his struggle with accepting god/rejecting nihilism (as he sees it). He has Raskolnikov confess because to do otherwise would mean that nihilism actually wins. Of course he still wrote the book, and certainly part of him feared that Raskolnikov would not feel guilty at all.
>>
>>25216502
>Of course he still wrote the book, and certainly part of him feared that Raskolnikov would not feel guilty at all.
Besides the Sonya scenes, which feel genuinely heartfelt, only to be subverted because a cop was watching him, I believe Raskolnikov should not have confessed. To anyone. He did nothing wrong, and the world around him was even worse.
I am so disgusted. St. Petersburg was hell.
>>25216496
I just hate this. Nietzsche probably never read this book, or else he'd have called it a triumph of slave mentality.
Raskolnikov's own sister was going to become a concubine to a rich guy because his family needed money. There were little children begging on the street for the empoverished parents. Sonya was prostituting herself for her family not to starve. This is so disgusting.
I'll stand by the statement the only mistake he commited was being caught.