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

A comparability between Fyodor Dostoevskys abuse and Punishment and Vladimir Parals EssayFyodor Dostoevskys classic, Crime and Punishment, and Vladimir Parals comers and Murderers hunt a area of murder, dejection and profound valet unhappiness. The both authors explore example abjection and the passel of mankind, as ruled by lust, jealousy and immoral instincts. As it sh all in all be seen however, the two romances differ substantially in the way in which they treat the subject of curse, as well as in their shoot of view and the t adept of the chronicle.Thus, Dostoevskys Crime and Punishment is centered on the idea of moral equivocalness. The Russian author uses an omniscient point of view in secern to recount Rodyon Raskolnikovs experiences before and afterwards he commits the murder. The t cardinal of the narrative is serious and meditative, as questions of morality and justice are interspersed throughout the events and dialogues in the novel. Vladimir Parals Lo vers and Murderers treats the theme of murder in conjunction with that of love.The narrative enters a world full of promiscuousness and vehemence, focu blazeg on a great number of constitutions and the interactions among them. Unlike Dostoevskys book that focuses on the portraying and experiences of the main character, Parals work is concerned with the plurality of voices. Moreover, the point of view shifts frequently from the omniscient vote counter to the commencement exercise person narrative, sometimes wi well-favored the same phrase. Lovers and Murderers is a marvelous mosaic, with a discontinuous narrative and a satiric tone.While Dostoevskys work raises questions of morality and social justice, Parals novel represents the spectacle of merciful life with resignation. There is no ethical conclusion to Parals analysis of human life and character he chooses to describe the dynamic of humanity in its bleakest and most ironic aspects. For Dostoevsky, human life is excessi vely full of coincidences and accidents. Although, the limit between right and wrong is relative, at last, the novel emphasizes the belief in punishment and redemption.In Parals novel, at that place is no clear delimitation between innocence and delinquency feelings the characters are all fanatics, consumed by passions, jealousy and greedy cravings. Significantly, love and violence intermingle throughout the novel, marking the majority of the relationships among contrasting characters. Paral shows at that placefore that human interaction is never completely sincere people devour and are devoured sadistically by destructive relationships. Instead of ending in union and harmony, each affair ends in destruction and crime.In Crime and Punishment there is the possibility of salvation and the triumph of love. Lovers and Murderers shows murder to be the companion of love, with no possibility for moral cleansing. Both novels therefore analyze morality in the context of the dynamics o f society, emphasise the interactions among different characters just when with different conclusions. Sin and morality are seen as paradoxes in Dostoevskys work, but, ultimately sins can be redeemed after having been committed.Parals novel illuminates the tableau of human relationships and the relativity of moral principles very differently all the characters are fallen men and women, who abuse or are step by differents. 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 exceedingly poor student, who struggles with his enormous debts to his landlady and with constant hunger and misery.A proud and noble character, Raskolnikov is torment by his unjust and humble social standing. Despite his intelligence, he lives poorly and is constantly besieged by material concerns. As the novel opens, Raskolnikov has already develo ped 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 cozy tension as he struggles to discern right from wrong. There follows the critical moment of the actual, geminate murder and afterwards his punishment and final redemption. The cyclical nature of his experience is symbolic 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 kill Lizaveta as well, the pawnbrokers innocent babe.The novel offers yet other instances of moral ambiguity, such as the saintly and innocent Sonia who is forced to become a prostitute in order t o earn money and save her hungered family And therefore I saw, young man, I saw Katerina Ivanovna, in the same silence 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 both fell asleep in each others 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 girl. forfeiture and benevolence are therefore accepted 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 conquer his own unrighteousness in order to save them. Marmeladovs employer in like manner 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.Throughout the novel, morality is questioned, but there is sufficient evidence of the existence of good alongside wi th evil. The ambiguity that Crime and Punishment describes is one of hammer rather 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. Innocence and guilt are incomplete relative nor circumstantial. Significantly, the book is divided in legion(predicate) 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 elementary 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 charr but he is eventually rejected by the same woman that seemed totally dependent on him. The world of the inhabitants of construction 2000 is devoid of moral principles and reasoning.The men and women are driven only by impulses of self-gratification. Their affairs are tempestuous and each partner, either abused or inglorious, 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 marked by sin and punishment, Parals characters pursue their own pleasure and interests without having to pay for their deeds.Raskolnikov murders the two women in his pursuit of justice, without deriving any in the flesh(predicate) gain from the deed, despite having found a considerable mess in the ladies flat. In Parals novel, murder is only perpetrated as a crime of passion. In the outcome of Borek and Zita, murder is even gratuitous. The comparison between their story and that of Julien Sorel and Madame de Renal 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 attractive thoughts he develops murderous ones, without being able to discern between the two categories anymore I complete I was standing there like a receiver, 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 variance (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 scene in the novel points to the ultimate moral degradation of the characters. Thus, the poor working woman Madda pays a visit to domestic dog in his rich and sumptuous apartment.When he asks her to put on a spousals dress as part of the ritual of lovemaking, the woman muses on her previous sexual degradation and you dont pretend to apologize for madman anything, my earlier lovers wouldnt even take my clothes off, or even their own, a white wedding dress to church Ive made love with the dirty strap of abject overalls between our bodies (Paral 32). Ironically however, her romantic hopes are bitterly 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 the woman was only used as amusement by the rich couple. In Pa rals world the beautiful dreams disintegrate very fast. Lovers and Murderers shows that moral choices and principles have to be settled among people and thus no figure or action is definitely pure.Raskolnikov acts in the name of a higher principles, which he sees as arrogant 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 sidesplitting (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 generosit y and nobility. Moreover, it is the employers wife that actually mends the girls reputation after having marred it, by cover the proof of her innocence to the world. There is no redemption and generosity in Parals novel.The characters act upon their personalized 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 revalue and with ethical principles. Paral introduces his readers 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 posture. 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, nonsymbiotic 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 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 apply his philosophical theory to reality and see its effects.Dostoevsky captures here the shopping centre of humanity and its inher ent 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 his omniscience with indirect speech, a device which helps to re veal the heros thoughts and emotions. Raskolnikov often speaks to himself and, in this way, Dostoevsky gives us annoy to his unmediated reflections.For instance, he muses on his motivation for committing the murder, wavering between the feeling of guilty and the excuse 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 withal want. Ech, I am an ? sthetic louse and nothing more, he added suddenly, laughing like a (Dostoevsky 389). Raskolnikov is so 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 account of murder from the perspective of the murderer 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 origination 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 risible 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 as 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 structure and its grotesqueness. The characters interior monologues moreover show them to be egoistic 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, black humor and pathos is order to describe the events in his book. Lovers and Murderers is therefore write 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 punishment, but do so in very different ways. Crime and Punishment investigates ethica l, 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. Works CitedAlfred L. Bem, criminality 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. unused 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.