I like the way how on the one hand I think Raskolnikov should pay for his crime while on the other hand I find myself thinking 'No! No! Don't be so stupid!' when he's on the verge of revealing his guilt. I don't want him to be caught. Yes, Dostojevski is playing nicely with his readers. Raskolnikov is not even likeable and yet I identify with him. What also struck me in this chapter is the way he spells out how important life is to us, how we cling to it (the Hugo bit), whereas he himself murdered two women who wanted to live just as much - but he doesn't mention that. So far he hasn't really been thinking about what happened (or at least not that we readers know). Could this be a start?
It feels like his guilt is written all over his face. It is interesting how Dostoevsky plays with us and makes us feel sympathy towards a man who is, lets face it, a murderer. What is it that makes us sympathise with him? And then there's the fate angle. The author makes us feel that, for Raskolnikov, he had no choice but to go through with it. He decided he wasn't going to commit the crime after he'd had that dream about the horse, but then he gets back to the locus and immediately overhears the conversation between the street trader and Lizaveta. Does he feel like he's a pawn in someone else's chess game?
I like the way how on the one hand I think Raskolnikov should pay for his crime while on the other hand I find myself thinking 'No! No! Don't be so stupid!' when he's on the verge of revealing his guilt. I don't want him to be caught. Yes, Dostojevski is playing nicely with his readers. Raskolnikov is not even likeable and yet I identify with him. What also struck me in this chapter is the way he spells out how important life is to us, how we cling to it (the Hugo bit), whereas he himself murdered two women who wanted to live just as much - but he doesn't mention that. So far he hasn't really been thinking about what happened (or at least not that we readers know). Could this be a start?
It feels like his guilt is written all over his face. It is interesting how Dostoevsky plays with us and makes us feel sympathy towards a man who is, lets face it, a murderer. What is it that makes us sympathise with him? And then there's the fate angle. The author makes us feel that, for Raskolnikov, he had no choice but to go through with it. He decided he wasn't going to commit the crime after he'd had that dream about the horse, but then he gets back to the locus and immediately overhears the conversation between the street trader and Lizaveta. Does he feel like he's a pawn in someone else's chess game?