I dont think Raskolnikov ever repented genuinely for killing a person. He only repented for committing a deed which he did not have the potential to deal with. What he gives away in the end is his pride and ego. He comes down to the ground and completely accepts that he is just an ordinary person.
Bhuvanesh N I felt the same way. And I’ve re-read the last few pages in an attempt to find even a slight clue that he truly repents. While serving his time in Siberia, Raskolnikov mentions something along the lines of how he does not feel bad for the old woman. This made me feel uneasy because I felt that the book would have an “unhappy ending”. But the fact that he accepted himself as an ordinary man and let go of his pride (which crushed his soul so much that he was kneeling and sobbing in front of Sonia) was in so many ways, just as impactful; because a. it wasn’t that he was inherently bad that made him commit the crime because he clearly has empathy and goes out of his way to help others and b. in coming to terms with his normalcy, he can set aside his hyper rational thoughts and theories and lead the rest of his life without isolating himself and in doing so, he is less likely to commit further atrocities.
I got the impression that he didn't change his mind on the theory, just that didn't have the right to the commit it. I.e. if somebody else *worthy.. exceptional* commited the act, they would have the moral right to do so. It might be a cliche, but I think at the end what really woke him up and brought him back to reality was the idea he could leave his own rationalisations aside and live according to somebody else's traditions and believes. Live *for* somebody else.
The point of Raskolnikov's redemption isn't being sorry for the crime. The point of his redemption is that he's a criminal but people are still able to forgive him. And that moves him so much he completely changes his outlook on life. He still belies that his murder was rational and justifiable, but he also knows that's not enough to live his life. Love and acceptance of the society is the real foundation of the human society, not reason.
In highschool I remember being a student who couldn’t care less for English class and wouldn’t have any thought of opening a book. It’s only now I’m here wishing I could be in a classroom again like this and take in these extremely interesting notes on a book I now love and revere. Thank you for the recording of the lecture
In highschool there was an infinite number of far more interesting things happening all around you in every peer group. 90% of that is gone the second your grade is graduated and the rest of it is gone within 5 years
Finished the book early last evening ...woke up in the night thinking about it...(as i have done for the past two weeks) and now at 2.51am, I just finished watching this video!
I particularly love the part where he indulges himself in the sheer entertainment of being expected to believe that a student is curious and that it is not a fashion of speech. That's a great professor.
"Dostojewski deserves so much respect" ??The man is respected from Atheists,Communists,Right wingers..the man is considered one of the greatest minds ever.
Dostojevskij was opposed to socialism, atheism and (quickly summarized) anything progressive. The crowds of people that really praise him are the christians and conservatives.
@@sanderallstar6765 Dostoyevsky was, his entire life, opposed to serfdom and he detested the landed Russian aristocracy. He was opposed to socialism because it worshiped the state and and he was opposed to capitalism because it worshiped Mammon (money). He was looking for a new kind of human community that he hoped would grow out of the Russian Orthodox Church, but he even had doubts about that. He was well-known for not getting along with Orthodox priests and he rarely went to church. In one of his last letters, he told a friend that in his next novel, which would be a continuation of The Brothers Karamazov, his saintly Alyosha would leave the church, become an anarchist, and attempt to assassinate the Tsar. Dostoyevsky a conservative? No. Dostoyevsky a liberal? No. He was looking for something new which he saw as rooted in Christ. We have only scratched the surface in really understanding Dostoyevsky.
I came here because I wanted a deeper analysis of the book and when he read his excerpt, I realized that I had read the book of his translation. Thank you so much.
I definitely like the title : Crime Punishment and Penance. Loved the professor. Anytime I need psychological depth I go back to School. Professors are so refreshing!! Thank you.
I don’t think he’s saying that. It’s simply that we approach and receive/interpret great works of art differently at different stages of our life. Everyone should re-read the great works of literature(Shakespeare, Dostoevsky, etc) every 6-7 years from the age of 18 to the end of their life. They’ll discover new insights every time.. Hell, Read Hamlet, Lear, Macbeth, etc once a month from 18 to 80 and you’ll make a few thousand discoveries in them by 80..🎭🎼🙏
@@MarlboroughBlenheim1 Agreed. It seems that most of the students are genuinely interested in the novel. Obviously, Professor Katz has a much deeper understanding of the novel, but it is clear that the students appreciate his understanding and want to know more. As an English teacher, I would be more than happy with this engagement!
I understood once I realized this was a high school class and not college. It's a lot to ask for high school students to read and comprehend this entire novel. I mean, we only had to read things like Of Mice and Men or Lord of the Flies
Seems just the opposite to me. The students clearly did read the book, as evidenced by the array of questions they ask. Pretty impressive for high school, in my view.
Marmeladov always has been my favourite character, ever since I first read/listened to this novel, and the teacher's fav scene is also probably mine. I wonder what the many mentions of horse carriages stand for in this play though.
I read CP when I was 14, my dad's college paperback. I devoured it. I was going through my 80s slasher film phase and the book grabbed me. I would then start to read other russian novelists and find 19th century Russia identical to 21st century America. There's a passage in Dostoevsky's The Idiot where a woman screams at her son's deadbeat friends, "you think breaking into someone's home and mugging are a form of political protest!" Something like that. Shocking how today's left in the west is mimicking Russia's elites from 150 years ago.
I was dying for participating whenever this noble and charismatic teacher asked any question. I would have killed an old lady with an ax to be there listening to him face to face as if it were a dream, and I was riding a horse that would then be mutilated into pieces just as my dreams.
well he's studied Russian like a mad dog, considering the fact he translates such book. Maybe he's a native speaker bia his parents, anyhow the point remains.
michael kats the legend himself! mans has his book on indigo now reading this book currently on page 85, its kind of a hard read its been day 8. harder than the hunger games thts for sure.
so far from wat i c is tht raskinolkov is very poor and is in a alot of pressure so tht y hes all crazy. ye they even say tht is it the crime tht causes the mental illness or the illness tht causes the crime(i think it can b both)? thts y he wants to kill the lady cuz the dude is psycopathic and sociopathic from his time in st.petersburg, he mustve been fine when he was with his mother and sister back in his home town. idk bout the whole "superior man idea" yet cuz im only on page 84 but so far it just seems tht hes like bilpolar cuz first he said he was gonna commit the crime. then he said he wasnt cuz he had a dream about him being a child and seeing a horse get beaten to death and also said even if with an absolute assurance tht the plan was gonna go all well and he will b unscathed from the crime he wouldnt do it; he saw lizaveta who from tht he knew was going to b somewhere where her half sis(ivanova old woman) where he thought would b alone at tht time becuz of her lizaveta going somewhere, and now from knowing this he once again wants to commit this crime. seems like hes bipolar to a fault, hes desperate, and is sick and weak from his conditions.
When characters switch from good and bad isn't it partly because Dostoevsky believes in the idea that most people have a duplicitous nature? A duplicitous nature such as in his second book, The Double?
Pride, the Fall and Hell. (That pessimistic title would make the Epilogue even more surprising and seemingly added as an afterthought, so that the light will shine all the brighter in the darkness)
It is now widely accepted that the 5 novel's dostoyevsky wrote (not his early work tho) are good candidates for greatest work of literature in worlds history
Hell, could anyone explain the significance of when Raskolnikov goes to visit Sonya and forces her to read out the story of Lazarus from The Bible. I’m confused by Sonya and Raskolnikov’s reactions to this.
It’s interesting about this phenomenon that some find the redemptive ending as ringing false. I suspect that those raised as Christians, and especially Catholics, would find it much more plausible than atheists or agnostics, who would be more likely to blanche or bristle at the ending. Not saying one or the other is the “right or correct” response, just more proof that amongst we humans “where you stand depends on where you sit”….🙏🎭
Am very affected by the needless death of Elizabeth, in such a gruesome manner, for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. More so, by Raskalinikof's attitude. And not once does Raskalinikof care or regret that. Hence, it is my view that Raskalinikov remains an unrepentant and dangerous man even when released after his sentence.
Rask keeps seeking to be rejected for who he is -- he thinks his true self is unworthy of familial love are general acceptance. He thrives on needing to be seen as hated, an outcast, a pariaih. When his love interest says she "knows" it means she knows who and what he is by nature and accepts him anyway, not just that she knows he killed the old woman.
Yep other people around the world definitely don’t read this at 16. Maybe in university. Too depressing and thematically heavy. Just giving you some perspective Victor Krum
High school professors translating novels? My teachers in Kentucky can hardly speak English. I think this goes to show how education is totally subjective throughout the country. Probably why the south is still stereotypically stupid, as well.
the south is not stereotypically stupid it is neither more intelligent or stupid than the north what it is typically is a victim of hypocrisy where the focus is on the south historically using slavery and never on the north historically using child labour which was not illegal in USA until 1938. Manufacturing used child labour agricultural used slavery no intellectual difference and no ethical one.
shona graham : your eloquence almost had me convinced... Then I used rational thought. The south is stereotyped as stupid, that is a fact, though not necessarily correct. Child labor is not morally the same as slave labor, even though both are reprehensible, because the children were paid and, presumably, worked of their own (or parents) consent. Not everything is a race issue!
Fantastic to watch shame that the student on the right keeps moving pleating her hair etc it’s just so rude when they have such a good professor infront of them
One of the students who did not do her reading assignment. As a former teacher, I recognize those type of students immediately. They never raise their hand and are doing something that can be distracting to the teacher.
@@mizcracun чувствую, как ты радуешь своё эго этими словами. Это просто жалко. Я понимаю, не всем быть Достоевскими, но какой же кринж я испытываю каждый раз от каждого подобного сообщения от моего дебильного соотечественника.
“The definition of an anti Semite is one who hates Jews MORE THEN IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.” I think Prof Katz said this. Strikes me as anti Semitic. Implies that if someone hates Jews only the “necessary” amount - they are NOT anti Semite. What are your thoughts on this. Just curious
If this offends you you know absolutely nothing about Jewish culture whatsoever and should therefore just shut up. There's a fat girl with blue hair out there who would love for you to take up her cause instead.
Are you saying that academics should only analyse books that represent their exact social strata? How exact? Should we have "working class fiction" classes and "middle class fiction" classes? Or are you talking sanctimonious knee-jerk horseshit?
42 minutes in, brainwashed student makes the story all about the “patriarchy” so she can solidify her opinions about said patriarchy and set the stage for her current and future victimhood…and the professor goes all in with her on it. How can I read one of the greatest books ever written and reduce it down to my oppression complex which is in league with the current social narrative, score points with my professor, and show my fellow students how totally smart I am when I didn’t really read the book because I just read a feminist hit piece about it from my favorite blogger?
I think the translation was perfect. Total waste of $$$. Will never read it because I have read the book at least 7 times. I actually hate people who think they are intellectuals and act like they need to interpret for me.I have my own brain thank you very much! I can interpret just fine.Not a higher level conversation like J Peterson.
If I'm not wrong he has a PhD in Russian lit from Oxford Uni. If anything, he's more of an expert than Peterson. And he's speaking to high schoolers, so I think that would explain his approach.
Yes you may be right but so many young people are so early miss lead never forming their own conclusions. This is why American will be run by socialist.
