I just finished Crime & Punishment this week. I have just been bursting at the seams to talk to people about this book, but no one around me has read it. (Sigh) Listening to your review was amazing! You hit so many of the key points, and shed light on parts of the book that I hadn’t thought about. Great review Tristan! Thank you for sharing!!

This was the best review and analysis of this book I've seen so far! Thank you, Tristan!

@tristanandtheclassics6538

3 жыл бұрын

Well knock me down with a feather! Thank you so very much for such a an honorific compliment! Coming from you, Sophia, I shall treasure this comment. Although, I think you have forgotten a review of this fine book ... namely, yours. Seriously, I loved watching your videos on this book. I will be reading Anna Karenina in the next few months and already have your reviews for that bookmarked. Keep up the great work.

@tonicalou

5 ай бұрын

I just finished reading the book and got so much in this great novel. My motivation to read this book was just to dis-tik-tok my mind (which means that I was getting addicted to quick injections of endorfine). So I decided to read a classic novel to find pleasure again in things you need to put more effort. I’m so happy to get so much satisfaction from this experience. I have been watching many reviews on you tube and I think your review is indeed the best I’ve came across! Thank you!

@Caladcholg

Ай бұрын

Yes, well done. 👏

I should say, this is my first time stumbling into your channel and I really liked your enthusiastic and comprehensive review on Crime and Punishment. I have been going and listening to several people's analysis and interpretation and loving almost all of them and I also loved your analysis. I liked your interpretation of the trio influence on Raskolnikov's mind. I personally have a mixed feeling over the epilogue of this novel, I thought that it could have been a little lengthy expounding and discussing Raskolnikov's de-theorization or redemption in a gradual and detailed manner.

@tristanandtheclassics6538

9 ай бұрын

It is a truly great book. A detailed account of Rashkolikovs "de-theorization", as you brilliantly called it, would indeed be too lengthy. Personally, I would have loved it if Dostoevsky had let the book finish with Rashkolnikov walking into the police station.

@720pchannel

6 ай бұрын

​@@tristanandtheclassics6538this is my favorite book so far (unfortunately small, I am making efforts to grow it by tons). Read it when I was 20/21, and by the end, I completely skipped the epilogue. Was thinking of reading it this past week (and will do so), but even at that age, even being tremedously unepxerienced, I always thought an epilogue was so... Superflous, unnecessary, so I totally skipped it. Funny to see how my instinct was apparently right, and how divisive the epilogue is. All in all, great content. I am extremely satisified to see someone else who revies the book without focusing on who Dolstoeiveski was. I am not a christian by any means and its my favorite book. I think most people focus way too heavlily on the author's religion and then complain about it, when he in fact was presenting something way more universal

This is one of the best discussions I've listened to on crime and punishment. You have a great way with words mate, pleasure to watch and listen to.

@tristanandtheclassics6538

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much Charlie. That means a lot!

Great discussion. I've always enjoyed this thrust of the story. Two of my good friends are just now at the article section chapter and it's very exciting to watch them go through the journey and start to piece together all the pieces. Great job breaking it down. I enjoyed the convo.

@tristanandtheclassics6538

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks so much. It's a cracking book isn't it? Did your friends enjoy it?

Thank you for taking the time to give us such a thoughtful and thorough analysis of this classic. I have benefitted greatly from your insights, and I would have missed critical ideas had I not seen this after reading the book. Kudos.

Greetings from the U.S.! Sir I have to say I LOVED this review and analysis. Crime and Punishment is maybe my favorite book. One element I loved that I don't hear alot of people talk about is how thrilling some parts of the book are. The murder, the dream sequences.. Svidrigailovs dream and demise actually gave me chills. Anyways, thank you for this review! Subscribed

I’ve read the book and enjoyed the “story” as you put it. The ideas behind the story are infinitely more interesting and I really appreciate you laying them out so clearly.

Thank you Tristan, I really enjoyed the expanded understanding you provide here. I would like to thank you also for providing a link to Sophia Cleff. Isn’t it appropriate that it was storming as you recount the story.

Not my usual custom to comment on YT videos, but making an exception. Just finished C.A.P. and I must say, your analysis, while succinct, is comprehensive and insightful. Dostoyevsky's literary behemoth truly speaks to the human condition in a unique way. The underlying themes of religion really serves to anchor and contextualize other theoretical frameworks.

This is really one of the best reviews of Crime and Punishment I’ve seen on KZread after Sophia Clef’s. You really need to do an in depth review of The Brothers Karamazov too (or just more in depth reviews of classics books in general).

This book really changed something in me after I finished it, I don’t think I ever felt this way with any other story, it was so depressing at times but so hopeful and beautiful, I couldn’t have loved the ending any more than I did :) thank you for your wonderful discussion, I will be reading the Brothers Karamazov now.

Just watched your video. Extremely insightful! Many of the ideas I managed to ponder throughout the book you clearly addressed and connected to specific philosophies. Thank you!

Tristan, this is an absolutely superb analysis of the novel. I really appreciate you putting this video together

One of maybe 3 "school classics" I really enjoyed (Russian school, I mean). P.S. Svidrigaylov is named after Svidirgaylo - Lithuanian prince, who, to be a prince (he was second in line), rebelled against his brother and then switched allegiances several times between the Russians and the Teutonic knights, along with the faith (Orthodox to Catholic and back). So very much a utilitarian, although most people would just call him power-hungry, selfish, and a traitor.

@tristanandtheclassics6538

3 жыл бұрын

Whatho Mr Phantom Ed. Thanks for your comment it is much appreciated. You are spot on with the Svidrigailov/Lithuanian Prince observation. I very much did not make myself clear in the video. I was aware of the Prince and had heard something regarding his involvement in a particular battle which Dostoevsky may have incentivised him in particular. I will see if I can find the research and leave another comment. However, I hope that everybody reads your comment because it is spot on and corrects my error in the video. Thank you.😀👍

Thank you for your thoughts. I loved the book and was looking to bolster my understanding.

I had to do a dissertation about this book and your review helped me a lot ... thank you !!

I appreciate the ideas you explored that I hadn't thought of, particularly the underlying, but likely main, idea of glorifying murder in the name of an Ubermensch (Nietzsche's term), which happens with bloody war heroes, while it's criminal and intolerable, ultimately, at an individual level. The half sister of the pawnbroker is a perfect example of innocent collateral damage that's justified in taking out a so-called Baddie--something governments do all the time. I think it is an excellent challenge to the notion of sacrificing certain amounts of society for the good of other months of society. I think that's a very unquestioned "value" even today.

@kimdysinger3453

9 ай бұрын

Parts of society

im here because i just finished crying after reading the epilogue and have nobody to talk with about it

@andreluissoriano

8 күн бұрын

The curse of readers. Good thing we have booktube comments at least. :)

I have been meaning to read this book and your review and analysis is going to be an encouragement and a great help so thank you!

I just finished this book last week and feel people overlook Svidrigailov's character arch. And I think doing so prevents a complete understanding of the book. You see I think Svidrigailov represents how nihilism is fundamentally, incompatible with the human spirit/soul. This is a man who lived his life as Raskolnikov tried. He was able to take the step, commit horrendous acts, and endure it. But I think Dostoevsky is saying that nobody can endure if forever. I don't believe he wanted to rape Dunya at the end. And I believe Dunya and Svidrigailov shared something that might even be called love at one point. When they are having their conversation in the apartment, they speak to each other as close friends (Russians use second person singular for close friends) and refer to their encounters at his estate. He gave her shooting lessons and it's somewhat hinted they were close. If you read that conversation closely, it's actually pretty safe to assume that Dunya had feelings for Svidrigailov at one point. But ultimately rejects him because he is a murderer and vile man. It is this rejection that drives him to suicide. He realizes the life he has led has prevented him from having the love of someone who truly made him feel something real. Even the dream he has at the inn before he kills himself shows he's wholly incapable of meaningful relationships. The last key thing to me is him killing himself in front of an officer of the law (of some kind). Rather than face punishment for his acts, and ultimately heal through it, he escapes.

That was absolutely amazing. Thank you Tristan. You should make a review on Notes from the Underground, it touches on lots of the themes in Crime and Punishment.

This was a great discussion! I've read the book once, a few years ago, but I want to read it again because I think I will get much more from it now. And you've given me a lot to think about with this. Thank you! Also, I actually kind of like the Wordsworth covers for Dostoevsky, I think they show more of the unsettling side of the stories. Most of the Wordsworth covers aren't great though.

@tristanandtheclassics6538

2 жыл бұрын

It's definitely a book that deserves reading again. Hope you enjoy it again. As for the cover, I must admit it's growing on me.

Hello Tristan! Great review. I just finished Crime and Punishment a few days ago, and WOW! I was blown away by the book! As you said, it is a very rich book with never a dull moment. If read for the story alone, it'd be a great one to enjoy indeed. I had not watched your review because I wanted to read the book first, have a few days to sort and distill my thoughts and then come to your review, which I found very good and helpful. I came to the book having a very good idea that the thought experiment had to have a comparison, a standard against which the experiment would bounce off. So, I expected it. It was brilliant the way Dostoyevsky knit all of it together. In the end, among the things I took away, similar to what you offered in your review, is Sofya's (Sonya) comment about Raskolnikov having walked away from God. There are consequences from abandoning the tried and true standard in Sofya's estimation, as one may end up given up to evil and horrible consequences. Dostoyevsky plays good and evil so well off of each other, but in the end the reader is able to see the ramifications of choosing the selfish and prideful acts/actions. I do think that the epilogue rounds things up, especially the unexpected ending: it is redolent of the raising of Lazarus. After the oppressive psychological anguish of the main character, the end lightens the heart with much needed hope! PS: for anyone who is interested in reading the book, I found that the newest translation by Oliver Ready and published by Penguin Classic is really good. :)

Nice work. Enjoyed your insights.

Ok...I just finished this novel yesterday...First, your discussion is very worthwhile but I think you have the order of some events in the plot out of order (but that's ok). Second, for English speakers, the Russian names can get a little confusing. What helped me read the story was to go to the Wikipedia page for C&P and print out the list of characters. This list has the formal names, the familiar names, and nicknames, and helps keep the characters straight. Here is my analysis of the murder, for what it's worth: People who can "break the rules" successfully do so _within their conscience._ I think Napoleon didn't break faith with his conscience even though his actions caused the death of thousands. Raskolnikov was weakened by his self-imposed privation, hunger, poverty. He wasn't a born murderer, but in his weakened state he _broke faith with his conscience_ when he committed murder and _that_ was his crime, or enabled him to do the crime. Just my 2 cents. Yeah - the best parts of the book are Raskolnikov's interactions with his friends, family, the police, and other acquaintances. On a strictly personal basis, Porfiry Petrovich is my favorite character.

A really well put and fun video. Great job.

I read the book with your image as my representation of Marmeladov.. 😅and the actir Adrien Brody as Raskolnikov.. Thank you for the review Sir it helps a lot to better understand the book..❤

Very thorough

C& P is my fav & What a profound review you have done !

Hi Tristan, I’ve been going on a tear with your reviews and videos lately! I decided to comment on this one because I’ve actually read crime and punishment. I haven’t, admittedly, read too many 19th century books yet. Excellent review! I do get quite caught up with the murder of livazetta; it’s entirely glazed over in my opinion; and I guess you’re right in the assessment that she is deemed collateral damage, however, what if the murder of this innocent is what in fact sent raskolnikov over the edge? Would we even have a book if she weren’t murdered? Obviously her murder serves as a great addition to the plot but it still leaves me with this feeling I can’t quite itch. Part of me just thinks that the repercussions of livazetta murder weren’t explored all that deeply. But perhaps that was the point… Thank you so much for the passion you instill within the etherwebs. You’ve gained a book loving admirer

@SarcasticSplendor

Ай бұрын

The author creatively manages to evoke profound emotions in the reader's heart. At a crucial point in the book, the narrator catches the reader off guard by revealing that Raskolnikov seems oblivious to the fact that he committed two murders.The author's revelation prompts a realization within the reader, redirecting focus not only to the murder of the old woman but also to Lizaveta's. Perhaps the author intends to allude to society's indifference towards the deaths of ordinary people. Furthermore, Lizaveta's murder intensifies Raskolnikov's panic and adds chaos to the situation, as it was an unexpected additional crime in his meticulously planned scenario. It is perplexing that throughout the book, Raskolnikov never expresses remorse for Lizaveta's death. Even in his dreams after the crime, only the old woman appears, not Lizaveta. How he subconsciously distances himself from her death is baffling. Consciously, he may attempt to avoid thinking about her to shield himself from the overwhelming realization of the enormity of his actions, instead focusing on the perceived "positive" aspects of his failed project. Regarding the old lady, he expresses zero regret, even stating that he would repeat his actions if given the chance. This lack of remorse persists long after the crime.

Any thoughts on the various translations? I’m on the Katz translation and it hits differently to when I read the Wordsworth edition 20 years or more ago

Great analysis!

Every time I watch the Hitchcock movie Rope (based on a play by the same name) I get the sense it is inspired by Crime and Punishment. The idea that an intellectual elite should be allowed to murder “lessers”.

@SophiaClef

3 жыл бұрын

I need to watch this movie! Hitchcock loved Crime and Punishment, but didn't want to adapt it for the screen only because it's so complex it would become a 6 to 10 hour movie.

@tristanandtheclassics6538

3 жыл бұрын

I didn't know about this movie either. I will have to look it out. Thanks.

Crime in punishment is quite possible the best novel ever written with the exception maybe of the brothers Karamazov

Great review. Thank you so much, you are the best ❤

@tristanandtheclassics6538

9 ай бұрын

Thank you Socrates! That's so kind of you.

Thank you! I started listening to the audiobook, but stopped because it was quite depressing. From the sound of it, much of the book is quite depressing, but the question that I got from your review is: do the ends justify the means?

New subscriber here. I love your channel so much!

Just completed the book

Wonderful.

This is a wonderful analysis. I'm very sympathetic to the philosophical argument you lay out here. I have to say, though, that I'm about half way through the book and having a tough time engaging with it as a novel. I realize this is a horribly presumptuous thing to say about such a classic, but it doesn't strike me as particularly well-constructed or well-written. I realize that fiction is not real life and stories have a logic of their own, but there's just so much about this one that doesn't make sense. In the 48 hours that Raskolnikov is in his fever delirium, Razumikhin manages to visit the police station, become best chums with the dandy clerk there, track Raskolnikov down, find a new flat across town, move into it, and plan and invite everyone to a house-warming party the following evening, all while nursing Raskolnikov back to health? Characters are constantly being jerked around by the author like puppets on a string. And then the writing. Oh, my. One of my pet peeves is the adverb "suddenly," which is almost always the sign of a poor writer trying to drum up excitement. ("Then suddenly this happens! And suddenly this...") I got so infuriated with it here that I did a search in my Kindle edition. It's used 497 times -- i.e., more than once per page. I've been reading the Oxford Classics translation by Nicola Pasternak Slater, and I thought the translation might be the issue. Nope. The David McDuff translation used "suddenly" more than 500 times. So, it seems this is going on in the original Russian. Expand your vocabulary, Fyodor -- please, for the love of God. Oh, well. Sorry to be That Guy, but I'd rather listen to you talk about this book than read it. The only Russian novel that's ever been able to capture my interest is Anna Karenina.

Amazing ❤

@tristanandtheclassics6538

6 ай бұрын

Thank you! Cheers!

Are you sat in Raskolnikov’s garret?

@tristanandtheclassics6538

9 ай бұрын

😂 Yes, I really wanted to immerse myself into the book to give the best review I could.

@CRichmond

9 ай бұрын

@@tristanandtheclassics6538 your dedicated is recognised and it is appreciated, as is your review. I do have concerns however, over the health of that plant - it appears to have outgrown its lovely home under the eaves.

Marvelous, Tristan.

i loveee ur insights!!

@tristanandtheclassics6538

2 жыл бұрын

And I loooove your comment Isabella.😃❤ Thank you for being so positive and encouraging .

have finished the book today and i disagree with the common opinion of reviews that seem to assume that raskolnikows way of thinking and the murder was generally shown as wrong and christian morals are right in the end. its way more complex imo and the book does not give an answer to what is right or wrong. just that no ideology comes in a pure form and gives a pure solution but that there are consequences to each choice and way of living and judging.

@SarcasticSplendor

Ай бұрын

I share the same view with you on this and the epilogue itself needs more careful, thorough debate.

Thus conscience does make cowards of us all. Raskolnikov’s mistake is in presuming that, because he could identify his theory, he thought he could also identify himself as one of its objects. Also, I don’t think I agree about the epilogue. I think it’s necessary to more fully develop Sophia, and to show the tenuous nature of repentance, and what Doestoevsky saw as the essential healing role of suffering. The themes you talked about are wrapped up in his confession, but I think there is more to be done. (And if it was focused only on those themes, the book could have been much shorter.)

@tristanandtheclassics6538

3 жыл бұрын

Hi Duffy, loved this comment. I am so sorry for my late response, life gets quite hectic. Great quote about conscience. I totally get your point about the epilogue, it does develop Sophia more. My issue with the epilogue is that it moralises too overtly. Dostoevsky does in the epilogue what he refrains from doing throughout the rest of the book, for me. He imprints his own moral resolution on Rashkolnikov whereas the original ending leaves the reader confronted with a prophetic image of the future leaving them to resolve Rashkolnikov's philosophy. It is wonderful how many approaches we can take to works like these. I did enjoy the epilogue and agreed with Dostoevsky's conclusions though.

@duffypratt

3 жыл бұрын

Tristan and the Classics Yes, I basically agree with this. For a while I loved Dostoevsky, and then rebelled against it, thinking that it veered too close to philosophy and wasn’t “novelistic” enough. When I recently reread C&P, I was surprised at how much I enjoyed it. He is heavy handed with his moralizing, but he is so good at getting into the characters that he sometimes defeats himself. Whatever he insists about Raskolnikov at the end, it’s pretty clear that Raskolnikov, at best, is a reluctant convert. Personally, I think he rejects what Dostoevsky is preaching.

@SarcasticSplendor

Ай бұрын

No. You essentially perceive that as a mistake simply because he failed which is not legitimate since you can fail at something without having made any remarkable mistake. Thinks just turned out the way he had never expected.

Book cover could be abstract commentary on Raz detaching from his humanity

I’ll return when I finish the book i shall start tomorrow.

❤❤❤

@tristanandtheclassics6538

3 ай бұрын

❤️❤️❤️

In several of dostoyevsky novels u deal whit the concept of transcendence, ...transcendent man. But does this remind u on something that happened in the 20th century. Where there are man that belived they can transgress all laws and morals.

Marvelous review, this is monkey 🐒 of a book to interpret. Everyone should watch this video! It's awesome 👍👍😂

@thefont4345

3 жыл бұрын

Oh, and I owe you a 💖 you tube swallowed your comment on the Australia Day vid, the portion that came through on my notifications was awesome 👍😄

@tristanandtheclassics6538

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks. You are a gem. Everyone should read the book too.😀

@tristanandtheclassics6538

3 жыл бұрын

Ahhh so that's what happens. I get emails saying someone has left a comment and then I go to my channel and ... poof! No comment. As an Englishman, this is a terrible thing. I can cope with being hated and despised, but the thought that somebody may think me impolite is awful. In the scheme of things, it ranks as follows. 1. Doing something embarrassing. 2. Dying. 3. Being called impolite. 😂😂😂

15:00

They did not want to give Maritaina status..throughout his life in France ...because of his skin color..and thick feature's....they predudice him for he had to work twice or more as hard then anyone else in educational system but didn't complain.

Maritaina was only trying to work out in a graduating process what could be worked with in it's system's...a way out...of inhumanity on civilized term's...either way with Royals and what they feared what changes could take place...or cornered into deplomacy

Christianity doesn’t believe Jesus was altruistic. The reason for Jesus dying on the cross was “for the joy set before Him” and to carry out His purpose and achieve His position next to God.

@Laocoon283

9 ай бұрын

Of course they do. It's almost impossible for a christian to speak about Jesus without mentioning that "He died for our sins". It was a sacrafice: an act of altruism. Whoever told you otherwise is projecting their own conservative values onto the text.

@OverOnTheWildSide

9 ай бұрын

@@Laocoon283 it IS the text that says it. Read my comment again. An act done as duty can still benefit others. Altruism doesn’t exist because doing good benefits the doer, altruism is the concept of doing good out of selflessness. Jesus first sought to fulfill his purpose and that purpose also benefited others. Benefits of Jesus death: sit at the right hand of God; rule the world as judge; be exalted in heaven… how is that not to His own benefit?

The reading is excellent except for taking philosophy into Cold War politicking…every empire has had their untermensches

Funny enough he was also not that tall...

Spoiler is not good.

I can imagine Dovskyetsky coming across quit a few of these narssistic...types while at University himself....I myself met these types...when I ventured across from USA...into my trials in foreign country which I had to adapt to quickly...and with no family to depend on back home in a sa...as I was sent to shelters and unfortunately lost my father at 3yes of age...but yes..these young males full of themselves and there morals is amazing...but not nessaraily arrogant...the arrogant ones insist there Alexander the Great in Hero worship.... nevertheless we know this guy was stuck on emulating Nepolean... probably was more of a Romantic..view of himself as a Revolutionary....after all at root of Nepolean himself ...was after all Meritainia.... unfortunately Nepolean...was a jerk unlike Maritaina he imagined he could represent and was after all ...."a material snob"

It's sad isn't it?

If you look at the occupation of ISERAL now.... deplomacy is always last think on there mind...as they accepted arms for occupation....

@Yesica1993

5 ай бұрын

There's no occupation there. Take your deranged nonsense elsewhere.

I disagree with ur idealistic reading of America. Remember Dickens’ Martin Chuzzlewitt and when one travels to America believing as u do about it, they end up being threatened by disease from the claim of the American Dream, which u have to be asleep to believe

@tristanandtheclassics6538

11 ай бұрын

I take your point. Xavier. The attitude that I am referring to regarding America is more to do with how America was viewed by the Russian characters of the novel. Svidrigailov makes use of the word America in a colloquial way that would be recognised by Dostoevsky's readers. Hope that makes my position a tad clearer.😃👍

@xaviercrain7336

11 ай бұрын

@@tristanandtheclassics6538 possibly but your reading is injected with more than just a reading of the novel…

@Laocoon283

9 ай бұрын

The reality of what one may find in America has nothing to do with the ideal image of it they hold in their mind. Desperate people anthropomorphize their hopes and dreams in all sorts of ways. In the text America was certainly the fantasy of escaping all his problems and starting anew.

Raskolnikoff’s reasoning is exactly how abortion is justified.

Why is that your face?