What was Dostoyevsky trying to convey through this Svidrigailov

File: 1436393655616.jpg (48KB, 500x380px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x380px

>>9006491
Svidrigailov's last words to Raskolnikov were something like "I'm going America" and then he killed himself. Since killing yourself is a sin in Christianity and you go to hell if you do that, and he said he was going to America...Dosto didn't even care

>>9006491
He very obviously represents the other part Raskolnikov could have taken, the failure to accept Christ, to live a life without god and to sin and to so destroy yourself.

>>9006491
Raskolnikov, Petrovich, and Svidrigailov are three variations of the same person

>>9006577

thats deep

>>9006577
huh. never thought of it that way.

OP, see Philip Rahv's essay entitled "Dostoevsky in Crime and Punishment", where he details some of the reasons why Svidrigailov is in the novel and what he means:
1) A variation of Raskolnikov, as a previous poster noted. Raskolnikov's obsession with his idea could have been an obsession with sensuality, which is what Svidrigailov has.
2) To portray the nihilist that's given himself up to sensuality, and how revolting that is and how it leads to destruction: "In this character-type [nihilistic sensualist], sensuality becomes a flight from the vertiginous consciousness of freedom and from a kind of ennui which has gone beyond the psychological and has acquired a metaphysical status."
3) To show another attitude one could have towards Raskolnikov.
4) Necessary for the plot
5) To be a sort of mentor character who knows the world to Raskolnikov.

>>9006634
Thanks a lot for this.

>>9006577
i love this interpretation

>>9008051
>>9006577
Pls explain more

>>9006577
Wow, that's true and so obvious now that i think about it

>>9008087
it's been a while since I've read it, but I remember picking that up towards the end, realizing that all three were egoist-nihilists(even if the themselves did not acknowledge it)
>Peter Petrovich
The least obviousl nihilist of the three, a nihilist who does good for the sake of status. His sin is that he did not truly love, but went along with the motions of love; engagement with Dunia, caring for her mother, visiting Rodia, etc. These are the things a man does for the one he loves, but when done with businesslike disinterest, wearing his fiancé like an adornment, it fell apart and so did he because that was where he grounded himself: in people's perception of him.
a key passage is when he's at Rofia's and makes the speech about giving a coat to a freezing man. He said he wouldn't do it because then they would both be cold. Peter cannot suffer with others, but rather indulges in his savior complex.
>Svidrigailov
the most obvious nihilist and foil to Rodia; a nihilist who does good for the sake of his own redemption. Also doesn't truly love others,but obsesses, like with Dunia. He is an evil man, and he knows he's an evil man, and has little interest in the general opinion of him, but his opinion of himself is most important. He offers money to Dunia, whether or not she agrees to marry him. It was lucky for him that she needed money, because he needed to see himself as a good man making a positive impact on someone. Before his suicide he visits Rodia, going on about a girl he is to marry who is very poor and her family is extremely grateful, but it isn't a savior complex like with Petrovich. It's a charity. It's Svidrigailov trying to leverage his self-worth by making others happy. But in the end, an amoral man will break apart by trying to ge a good man. Svidrigailov was a wolf in sheep's clothing, trying to fit in. He was Rodia with no Sonia, no Dunia, no Razumikin, no love.
>Rodia
egotistical nihilist who does good for the sake of good. What separates Rodia from Peter and Svidrigailov is that 1. He is poor and 2. He loves and is loved. This love is conflicted by his egoism, his 'need' to fulfill his purpose of becoming a great man, a little Napoleon. "Raskolnikov" actually means "schism" and this schism is between love and nihilism. Despite his self-servient acts if murder to empower his own greatness, Rodia conflicts this action by acting out in genuine love by assisting Sonia's family with the death of her father. Dostoyevsky is showing us that genuine love begets genuine love. Rodia is reflecting the love he is shown, which conflicts with his nihilistic egoism.
The variations are
>Nihilist who does good for public status
>Nihilist who does good for personal redemption
>Nihilist who does good for the sake of good
I hope I got those names right

File: 31.jpg (120KB, 706x517px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 706x517px

>>9008797
>Peter

Чyвaк, pyccкий ITT. B oбщeм, cyть тaкoвa: Cвидpигaлoв являeтcя пepcoнaжeм c двoйcтвeнным хapaктepoм. C oднoй cтopoны oн нacильник, нo c дpyгoй, paз жepтвyeт дeньги Coнe, пpeдлaгaeт пoмoщь Pacкoльникoвy. Taким opaзoм, Дocтoeвcкий вoccoздaл втopoгo Pacкoльникoвa, кoтopый никaк нe мoжeт cмиpитьcя co cвoими пocтyпкaми, y нeгo мёpтвaя дyшa.

>>9008847
Бля чeл cпacибo, a тo эти плeбc пишyт вcякий бyллщит в cтoпицoт cимвoлoв, a coдepжaния нихyя