Contentment in Any Station: Understanding the Middle State in Robinson Crusoe

While some praise Dostoevsky for his brilliance in writing Crime and Punishment declaring it as his “greatest artistic triumph,” there exist few who consider it a pleasant or delightful read.^[1] Instead, some might call his work unnerving, extreme, or even, as one scholar declares it, a “tormented creation.”^[2] For many, creating such an experience might appear cruel. However, this paper will argue that Dostoevsky does not cruelly subject the reader to meaningless pain but rather utilizes such suffering for a redemptive and formative end. In Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky conceives of suffering in a dualistic manner where there exist both negative and positive forms of suffering. Although most of the characters experience varying degrees of suffering, Dostoevsky portrays two forms most clearly through Raskolnikov and Sonya. Thus, this paper will first examine the novel’s portrayal of different kinds of suffering through Raskolnikov and Sonya and following this display how Dostoevsky applies this theme to the reader.

Most prominently, Dostoevsky depicts through Raskolnikov a purposeless suffering resulting from both a rationalist pride, some awareness and rejection of true faith, and the tension which results from simultaneously sustaining these two concepts. Throughout the novel, Raskolnikov refers to his reasoning that in the world there exists two categories of people, namely, the ‘ordinary’ and the ‘extraordinary.’ While the ordinary must strictly obey the moral law and have no right to transgress it, the extraordinary ones possess the right to “allow their conscience to…step over certain obstacles,” that is, the moral law.^[3] Later in Part 5, he admits to Sonya that his act of murder was an attempt to discover whether he could dare to “step over, or not!”^[4] However, he becomes shamefully disillusioned as he agonizes over his failure to achieve such moral superiority.⁵ His time in Siberia clearly displays this as he falls sick from wounded pride, considering his crime as no crime at all, instead naming it a “simple blunder.”^[5] At this point, he does not repent from his crime but rather suffers from his incompetence at being extraordinary. In his “A Catalogue of Suffering in the Works of Dostoevsky,” Richard Chapple equates the condition of being average with personal crisis declaring how “most of the resultant suffering stems from futile efforts to transcend one’s mediocrity.”^[6]Thus, because of his rationalistic desire to become extraordinary, a measure of Raskolnikov’s suffering arises from his attempting to be what he is not and with shame realizing that he falls short.

While the thought of failing to achieve such moral superiority torments him, it also divorces the very thing which would help him, that is, an ability to receive true faith. Because of this, Raskolnikov’s suffering also results from a lack of faith. In Part One, the moral indignation of the child in his dream and his own response to it upon waking reveal the presence of his conscience as he experiences horror at his actions. He cries, “‘But what’s wrong? Am I coming down with a fever? Such a hideous dream!’ His whole body was as if broken: his soul was dark and troubled.”^[7] Both his inner and outer torment reveal some awareness of transgressing the moral law. However, soon after undergoing such guilty anguish he turns not to a faith outside himself but to his own reasoning. He replaces a faith and a sincere love for others with his moral reasoning which has become his “faith and law.”^[8] During Raskolnikov’s excruciating confession to Sonya, he repeats his desire to become extraordinary declaring, “He who can spit on what is greatest will be their lawgiver, and he who dares the most will be the lightest of all!”^[9] He asserts later, “I wanted to dare, and I killed…I just wanted to dare, Sonya, that’s the whole reason!”^[10] In response, rather than deny this motive as she does others, Sonya recognizes his anguish and cries, “You deserted God, and God has stricken you.”^[11] She calls him a blasphemer and repeatedly cries how he understands nothing. In these lines, Sonya reveals how his suffering flows from a stricken conscience but also a rejection of faith.

Finally, Raskolnikov suffers from the conflict between these two ideas. On the one hand, he strives to obtain moral ascendancy but maintains a painful recognition of his powerlessness to achieve it. On the other, he cannot totally harden his heart by abandoning his awareness of moral realities but continues to reject God, despairing because of it. While these certainly cause him to suffer immensely, the tension of both together is unendurable. He cannot escape either and exists trapped in an endless, Sisyphean striving for what he cannot achieve. Thus, he suffers from his failure to be extraordinary, conscience-stricken morality, and the tension that is created between maintaining these two.

…her foundation of faith enables her to not just endure her own trials but also enter the pain of another’s suffering which in turn leads to redemption.

However, Raskolnikov’s suffering is not the only kind in the novel. After Sonya realizes Raskolnikov’s culpability, she laments his torments yet in a seemingly contradictory move presents suffering as the solution.^[12] Here, Dostoevsky presents an alternative to Raskolnikov’s pain. Rather than a purposeless and prideful suffering, Sonya’s form is a redemptive and formative suffering in which a person shares in another’s pain out of love. Sonya’s suffering is characteristically Christian, keeping her from total despair and enabling her to participate in another’s pain. In Chapter Four of Part Four, Raskolnikov meets with Sonya and attempts to understand how she has “been able to endure so far” without going mad.^[13] He discovers her dependence upon God and demands she read the story of Lazurus to him. To Raskolnikov, such a vulnerable dependence is unreasonable and absurd, and he returns to his principles of pursuing “freedom and power.”^[14] However, Sonya views God as the Giver of everything and despite her own feelings of helplessness she is able to suffer with hope.^[15]

Furthermore, her foundation of faith enables her to not just endure her own trials but also enter the pain of another’s suffering which in turn leads to redemption. Despite Raskolnikov’s disregard for holy fools, Sonya does not abandon him. In their next conversation, he privately confesses his crime and in desperation asks that she not leave him. Sonya answers, “No, no, never, not anywhere…I’ll follow you, I’ll go wherever you go!”^[16] Here, Sonya devotes her life to sharing the suffering of Raskolnikov, believing in the hope of his conversion. Other than reading Scripture at Raskolnikov’s command, she does not engage in other attempts at conversion other than coming alongside him and refusing to turn away. Finally, in last pages of the novel, Raskolnikov weeps and embraces Sonya’s knees. The narrator declares, “In those pale, sick faces there already shone the dawn of renewed future, of a complete resurrection into a new life. They were resurrected by love, the heart of each held infinite sources of life for the heart of the other.” By loving Raskolnikov and sharing in his suffering, Sonya carries him to a place where he is capable of change, though it takes the whole novel. Notably, her theology of suffering echoes that of Scripture which declares,

Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone think he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself.^[17]

In Crime and Punishment, Sonya restores the transgressor through bearing his burdens with him.^[18] Thus, suffering for Sonya means engaging in brotherly love as one shares in the suffering of another, and it possesses a redemptive end both for herself and the fellow sufferer.

From these two forms of suffering, it is clear which Dostoevsky considers exemplary. However, Sonya’s suffering is not one which he simply calls the reader to imitate. By encountering the novel, Dostoevsky experientially teaches the reader how to engage in a suffering like Sonya’s by tethering the reader to Raskolnikov. To do so, Dostoevsky draws the reader into the mind of a splintered murderer by closely integrating Raskolnikov’s thought process with the narrative. For instance, in conversation with Raskolnikov, Razumikin claims to understand the reasoning behind his speaking of “rings and chains in your delirium.”^[19] In response, Raskolnikov first states in his head:

(“So! The idea really spread among them! Here’s a man who would go to the cross for me, yet he’s so glad it’s become clear why I talked about rings in my delirium! It really got settled in them all!…”)

“And will we find him?” he asked aloud.^[20]

Here, Raskolnikov’s introspection moves the narrative forward and Dostoevsky forces the reader to suffer his mental commentary. Thus, Dostoevsky ties the reader to Raskolnikov and causes him to bear the mental anxiety and suspicion as well.

Moreover, the reader must suffer the hard work of distinguishing Raskolnikov’s views and interpretations from actual reality. For example, Dostoevsky expresses Raskolnikov’s inner turmoil in his mind games with Porfiry where the reader feels the intensity of the anxiety:

But what if it only seems so to me? What if it’s a mirage, what if I’m completely mistaken, get angry on account of my own inexperience, and fail to keep up my vile role? Maybe it’s all intentional? Their words are all ordinary, but there’s something in them…
All this can always be said, and yet there is something. Why did he come out with that ‘she’? Why did Zametov add that I spoke cunningly? Why do they all speak in such a tone? Yes…that tone…^[21]

Through this act of suffering in brotherly love, the reader is taught the way to redemption and healing.

During these occasions, Dostoevsky does not grant the reader the grace of receiving alternate viewpoints. For the reader, this creates difficulties in discerning what might truly be the case outside of Raskolnikov’s head. At other times, Raskolnikov will affirm a certain idea only to deny it later or vice versa. In a conversation with Svidrigailov, he explicitly denies belief “in a future life.”^[22] However, Svidrigailov outlines his shocking view of eternity as a bathhouse covered in spiders. Horrified at this description, Raskolnikov cries, “surely, surely you can imagine something more just and comforting than that!”^[23] Here, he betrays a belief, albeit a suppressed one, in a better future after death. Once trapped in the murderer’s mind, the tension of Raskolnikov’s moral ambiguity and split personality builds throughout the novel and causes the reader to not only endure the mental and emotional anguish alongside him. Moreover, he causes the reader to do the hard work of separating himself from Raskolnikov’s torment enough to acknowledge the reality of what is happening.

While Dostoevsky subjects his reader to endure suffering by trapping him in the mind of Raskolnikov, it is not a purposeless or prideful suffering like Raskolnikov’s. Instead, he attempts to engage the reader in a Sonyan form of suffering where the trial becomes an exercise of brotherly love. Like Sonya’s, the reader’s suffering has a formative end: Sonya’s suffering leads to a conversion, and by remaining with Raskolnikov, enables his ability to receive new life. By continuing to read, the reader learns how to endure to the end with a fellow sufferer. Notably, it seems Dostoevsky could have concluded the book in a very different manner. For instance, he could have excluded the Epilogue or have Raskolnikov commit suicide. However, doing so would have made the suffering of the reader a purposeless, condemning suffering. Instead, by including the Epilogue he grants the reader relief and an understanding of how suffering leads to conversion. Through this act of suffering in brotherly love, the reader is taught the way to redemption and healing. Thus, fatiguing the reader in such a manner is not a cruel torture but a purposeful and formative exercise in brotherly love.

Because of the close tethering of the reader to Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment, the reader engages in an arduous experience to say the least. However, Dostoevsky does not torture the reader with no purpose or formation. Instead, he causes the reader to endure a Sonyan suffering with a redemptive and formative end. By doing so, he teaches what he considers a clear requirement for every Christian, namely, the bearing of one another’s burdens. By causing the reader to endure the anguish of Raskolnikov, he trains the reader in such a calling. Thus, Crime and Punishment is a painfully formative novel but one in which the Christian learns that suffering produces hope.

In Light of the Greatest Book

Sonyan Suffering: How Dostoevsky Teaches His Reader

…her foundation of faith enables her to not just endure her own trials but also enter the pain of another’s suffering which in turn leads to redemption.

Through this act of suffering in brotherly love, the reader is taught the way to redemption and healing.

< RETURN TO