REVISITING EXISTENTIALISM IN DOSTOYEVSKY’S CRIME AND PUNISHMENT THROUGH THE STUDY OF RASKOLNIKOV’S PERSONALITY CHANGES

AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra in English Letters

By

DAVID BAYU PRAWIRO HERYANA

Student Number: 024214036

ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2007 REVISITING EXISTENTIALISM IN DOSTOYEVSKY’S CRIME AND PUNISHMENT THROUGH THE STUDY OF RASKOLNIKOV’S PERSONALITY CHANGES

AN UNDERGRADUATE THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra in English Letters

By

DAVID BAYU PRAWIRO HERYANA

Student Number: 024214036

ENGLISH LETTERS STUDY PROGRAMME DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LETTERS FACULTY OF LETTERS SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY YOGYAKARTA 2007

i

Only a life lived for other is a life worthwhile - Albert Einstein -

iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to thank my creator for the freedom that He has given to me. Without freedom I would not be what I am. I wish to thank wholeheartedly my beloved parents, Ko Charles, and Cie Pauline, for their love and support. I apologize for making them wait so long.

I do thank my advisor, Drs. Hirmawan Wijanarka, M.Hum. for spending his time to guide me finishing this thesis. His advice and suggestions give a large contribution in improving my writing. My next gratitude goes to Dewi

Widyastuti, S.Pd., M.Hum. for being my co-advisor. I really appreciate her suggestion and criticism that have improved my thesis. Special thanks are addressed to Romo Hary Susanto SJ for a short but inspiring discussion. I would also express my appreciation to all the staff in English Letters Department secretariat. Their great services ease me in accomplishing my study.

I want to give also special thanks to Thoms, Danang, and Sigit for the discussion enriching my knowledge. I would like to say thanks to WW, Leonardo, the couple Cecep-Minthul, Dimas, Parjo, Step, Téh Ria, Ajeng, Cak Diqin,

Munyux and all my friends in English Letters 2002. I thank them for the happy or sad memories they have shared with me.

Lastly, I would like to thank everyone who deserves my gratitude. I am sorry that I forgot to name them all. May God bless them.

David Bayu Prawiro Heryana

v TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE ...... i APPROVAL PAGE ...... ii ACCEPTANCE PAGE...... iii MOTTO PAGE ...... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... v TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... vi ABSTRACT ...... viii ABSTRAK ...... x

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ...... 1 A. Background of the Study ...... 1 B. Problem Formulation ...... 5 C. Objectives of the Study ...... 5 D. Definition of Terms ...... 5

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL REVIEW...... 7 A. Review on Related Studies ...... 7 B. Review on Related Theories ...... 10 1. Theory of Character and Characterization ...... 10 2. Theory on Character Developmen ...... 13 3. Theory of Personality Changes ...... 14 4. The Relation between Literature and Philosophy ...... 16 5. Existentialism and Attempted Definitions ...... 17 6. Sartrean Existentialism ...... 18 C. Theoretical Framework ...... 21

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY ...... 23 A. Object of the Study ...... 23 B. Approach of the Study ...... 24 C. Method of the Study...... 24

CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS ...... 27 A. The Character of Raskolnikov before the Murder ...... 27 B. Raskolnikov’s Personality Changes after the Murder...... 37 C. Existentialism Reflected in Raskolnikov ...... 47

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION ...... 57

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 60

vi APPENDIX...... 63 Summary of Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment ...... 63

vii ABSTRACT

DAVID BAYU PRAWIRO HERYANA (2007). Revisiting Existentialism in Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment through the Study of Raskolnikov’s Personality Changes. Yogyakarta: Department of English Letters, Faculty of Letters, Sanata Dharma University.

In Crime and Punishment Dostoyevsky drowns into the psychological combat that might be undergone by a criminal. Raskolnikov, the major character of the novel, tries to find his existence through his action of murdering an old woman pawnbroker. The murder is based on an assumption that the pawnbroker carries out poverty. Such action can be seen as a free act. A free act can be a manifestation of a man’s freedom. On the contrary, it might also be an antithesis of his freedom. The writer attempts to examine Raskolnikov and his freedom from the point of view of existentialism, mainly existentialism by Jean-Paul Sartre. This study is led to accomplish three objectives. The first objective is to gain a description of the character Raskolnikov before he commits the murder. The second objective is to see the personality changes he undergoes after the murder. The last objective rises to observe the character from the point of view of existentialism. In accomplishing the analysis the writer uses library research method. Most of the data needed are collected from several books and essays. Theories on character are employed to answer the first problem. Then, theories on personality changes from the domain of Psychology are essential to examine the personality development that happens to Raskolnikov. Lastly, the writer applies philosophy of existentialism in studying Raskolnikov’s personality journey. In the beginning of the story Raskolnikov is described as a smart and proud man who lives in poverty. These two contradictory facts make him feel that his life is meaningless. Based on empirical theory of the concept of man, he tries to look for his existence by murdering a pawnbroker. He has an obsession to be an extraordinary man. In fact, Raskolnikov experiences a psychological punishment as the consequence of his act. His pride is slowly falling down. Nonetheless, due to the love given by the people who care for him, he is able to rise up from the agony and repent his sin. The murder done by Raskolnikov is obviously an antithesis of his freedom. He does not realize that he has been enslaved by his own obsession. As an impact, Raskolnikov happens to be in despair because he feels that he has failed. An existential act is reflected precisely in his personality change from being proud to being humble and his will to live.

viii ABSTRAK

DAVID BAYU PRAWIRO HERYANA (2007). Revisiting Existentialism in Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment through the Study of Raskolnikov’s Personality Changes. Yogyakarta: Jurusan Sastra Inggris, Fakultas Sastra, Universitas Sanata Dharma.

Dalam novel Crime and Punishment Dostoyevsky menyelam ke dalam pertarungan psikologis yang mungkin dialami seorang kriminal. Raskolnikov, tokoh utama dalam novel tersebut berusaha menemukan eksistensinya dalam tindakannya membunuh seorang wanita tukang gadai. Pembunuhan ini didasari anggapan bahwa tukang gadai tersebut menyebabkan kemiskinan terus berjalan. Tindakan Raskolnikov ini dapat dilihat sebagai sebuah tindakan bebas. Tindakan bebas dapat menjadi perwujudan dari kebebasan manusia. Di sisi lain, tindakan tersebut juga bisa menjadi pengkhianatan atas kebebasannya. Penulis mencoba melihat tokoh Raskolnikov dan kebebasannya dengan kacamata eksistensialisme, utamanya eksistensialisme Jean-Paul Sartre. Studi ini diarahkan untuk menjawab tiga permasalahan. Permasalahan pertama ditujukan untuk mendapatkan gambaran tentang karakter Raskolnikov sebelum dia melakukan pembunuhan. Permasalahan kedua adalah untuk melihat perubahan watak yang dialaminya setelah pembunuhan. Permasalahan terakhir muncul guna mencermati karakter Raskolnikov dari sudut pandang eksistensialisme. Dalam menyelesaikan analisis, penulis menggunakan metode kepustakaan. Sebagian besar data yang diperlukan didapat dari beberapa buku maupun esar- esai. Teori karakter digunakan untuk menjawab permasalahan pertama. Selanjutnya, teori perubahan watak/kepribadian dari ranah Psikologi berguna untuk mengamati perkembangan watak yang terjadi. Terakhir, penulis menggunakan filsafat eksistensialisme dalam mencermati perjalanan pribadi Raskolnikov. Pada awal cerita Raskolnikov digambarkan sebagai pria cerdas dan tinggi hati yang hidup dalam kemiskinan. Dua fakta kontradiktif ini membuat ia merasa hidupnya tak bermakna. Dengan dasar teori empiris tentang konsep manusia, ia berusaha mencari eksistensinya dengan membunuh seorang tukang gadai. Ia memiliki obsesi untuk menjadi extraordinary man (kategori manusia yang mempunyai hak untuk melanggar norma-norma lama demi dunia yang lebih baik). Faktanya, Raskolnikov mengalami hukuman psikologis sebagai konsekuensi dari tindakannya. Perlahan-lahan keangkuhannya runtuh hingga ia berniat bunuh diri. Namun, berkat perhatian dari orang-orang yang mencintainya, ia mampu bangkit dari keterpurukan dan bersedia mengakui kesalahannya. Pembunuhan yang dilakukan Raskolnikov jelas merupakan pengkhianatan atas kebebasannya. Secara tidak sadar ia telah diperbudak oleh obsesinya. Sebagai akibat, ia menjadi terpuruk karena merasa gagal. Tindakan eksistensial justru tercermin pada perubahan wataknya dari tinggi hati menjadi rendah hati dan kemauannya untuk terus menjalani kehidupan.

ix CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study

Freedom may be believed as the most important right possessed by human being. In the Bible, which some consider as one of the eldest works of literature, the freedom of human being is shown in the beginning part of the Old Testament

(Genesis). Eve’s act of eating the fruit of knowledge and Adam’s act of following his companion are clear illustrations of man’s freedom. Although God has forbidden them to eat that fruit, yet God does not prevent their action, which later on is known as man’s original sin. Only then God gives punishment by expelling them from Eden.

The concept of freedom has been developing together with human population and its civilization. The idea of freedom in today’s people’s mind is different from yesterdays. From time to time human being is always trying to gain the most adequate form of freedom. For an individual, as stated by Hary Susanto,

SJ in his essay “Memeluk Agama, Menemukan Kebebasan” included in Sesudah

Filsafat, life is a process into a freedom. This process is often defined as

“history”. In this sense, history of human being might be called history of freedom

(2006: 301, my own translation).

Unfortunately, freedom is often misinterpreted and abused. Total freedom becomes boundless and oppressing. Some people are unaware of other’s freedom.

History has noted many form of freedom abuse. The world has once witnessed a

1 2

holocaust done by Nazi to build a new order led by the race of Aryan Superman. It seems that Hitler has successfully spread Nietzsche’s doctrine. By following the idea of Nietzsche’s “Superman”, he has unintentionally raised existentialism movement. The victims of the holocaust (Jews) are then wondering where God is, and questioning why He does not save them as He has done for Israel. They lose something to rely on so that they decide not to rely on anything but themselves.

This is the principle of existentialism.

As an anthropological philosophy, existentialism places man, as an individual, as its center. He is free to think and do whatever he wants. In his relationship with others and the universe, he acts as a subject who is free to decide what is true and what is false. This is what we call subjectivity.

Existentialism emphasizes not only freedom to think, but also freedom to act. Existentialists say that man must act individually, and everyone must act differently. It means that human behavior should be original from himself, not by social influences (Rentz, 1995: 296). Still according to Rentz, the society norms are useless. Existential ethics tend to place individual above the law. It is a belief that living human being is a higher value than any abstract idea, even the idea of good (1995: 296).

Speaking of existentialism, we must refer to philosophers such as

Heidegger, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, or Sartre. However, it is important to notice that there is a Russian writer whose works are frequently claimed as existential.

He is Fyodor Mikhailovic Dostoyevsky. 3

There is no reason to say that Dostoyevsky is an existentialist. He never claims neither himself as existentialist nor his works as existential writings.

However, through his early work, Notes from the Underground, he may be called the father of existentialism. In Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Satre,

Kaufmann regards that work as a “best overture of existentialism” (1969: 14).

Without disrespecting Dostoyevsky’s other works, this thesis chooses

Crime and Punishment as the object to analyze. While nowadays the world is facing a super power country doing an invasion to another country, which even kills its own soldier, in the name of democracy and human rights, Dostoyevsky has painted it on a smaller scale more than a hundred years ago. The subject of the novel is a young man named Raskolnikov, who commits a murder for the sake of the others. He considers the crime as a heroic act based on his own theory of

“extraordinary man”. The story then focuses on the psychological combat in his mind whether or not he will admit to the police that he is the murderer. Through the psychological combat, Dostoyevsky presents the value of humanity. In the introduction of the English translation version, the translator David Margarshack, writes that the theme of the story, as said by the narrator, is that the man will die not because of the crime he has committed, but because he has destroyed what is best in him and what still entitles him to be called a human being (1958: 11). The philosophical aspect is touched by the theory of “extraordinary man” professed by the main character. This topic becomes the mostly–discussed aspect of the novel.

It is understandable since such philosophy then is popularized as “Superman 4

philosophy” by, as mentioned before, a famous German philosopher, Friedrich

Wilhelm Nietzsche.

Nietzsche once said, “Dostoevsky was the only psychologist from whom I had anything to learn” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fyodor_Dostoevsky). It is interesting to see an existentialist, who is famous with his theory ‘the death of

God’, has learnt from a Christian. Dostoyevsky surely is a really great writer. In

Raskolnikov, he at his best has gone to the depth of man’s psychological combat.

Peter McDuff points out in his introduction to the Penguin Classic edition that

“Dostoyevsky has created a man who is singular yet universal. He (Raskolnikov) is someone with whom we can sympathize, empathize, and pity, even if we cannot relate to his action. He is a character we will remember forever, and whose story will echo throughout history” (http://www.readinggroupguides.com/guides2/crime andpunishment.asp).

It is a bit contradictive to find out that when Boyce Gibson in his book The

Religion of Dostoyevsky discusses Christianity in Crime and Punishment, some studies suggest that Raskolnikov reflects atheistic existentialism. Unfortunately, those studies on existentialism occasionally get stuck in differing freedom and free act. It is these facts that make the writer choose study on Raskolnikov to analyze how he reflects existentialism. Furthermore, it can be noticed whether or not it is still important to give the theistic-atheistic label to existentialism. 5

B. Problem Formulation

These research questions below are formulated in order to guide and limit the subjects that will be discussed.

1. What are the characteristics of Raskolnikov before the murder?

2. How does Raskolnikov’s personality change after the murder?

3. In what way do Raskolnikov’s characteristics express existentialism?

C. Objectives of the Study

The study aims to answer the research questions stated before. Therefore, there will be three objectives of the study. Firstly, this study is trying to figure out the depiction of the Raskolnikov’s characteristics before his crime. Secondly, this study aims to observe how Raskolnikov’s personality changes after he has committed the crime. Lastly, the analysis focuses on seeing how far this main character in the novel represents existentialism.

D. Definition of Terms

Some words will be defined to guide the readers in understanding this thesis. The writer gets definition of the specific terms mostly from books which are considered well - qualified.

1. Existentialism

In his writing “Existentialism is a Humanism”, taken from Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre by Walter Kaufmann (1969), Jean-Paul Sartre explains some basic aspects of existentialism. The very starting points of existentialism are “existence precedes essence” and human subjectivity (1969:

290). Those two points mean that men do not have fixed natures that limit or determine their choices, but rather it is their choices that bring whatever nature they have into being. It is a doctrine which makes human life possible and, in addition, declares that every truth and every action implies a human setting and a human subjectivity. As an atheist existentialist, Sartre adds that existentialism is nothing else than an attempt to draw all the consequences of a coherent atheistic position (1969: 310).

2. Personality Change

According to Hurlock (1974: 108), personality change is the personality pattern which can change in some areas and remain persistent in other as well.

Furthermore, the change itself is not synonymous with improvement but can be either for better or worse. Therefore, a personality change of people can be seen as the way to adjust the world.

In Concise Encyclopedia of Psychology (1987: 669), personality changes are defined simply as the changes in personality. Those might be the effect of7 aging, psychological trauma, education, and altered circumstances. The changes can be seen when human behavior is governed by the lowest unfulfilled need, changes in job, family, or social condition that will alter fundamental motive structure. CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL REVIEW

A. Review of Related Studies

Born in 1821, Fyodor Mikhailovic Dostoyevsky is one of the greatest

Russian novelists together with Maxim Gorky and Leo Tolstoy. Besides a novelist, he is also known as a short-story writer, journalist, and editor who is widely regarded as one of the influential writers of modern literature. Although he has spent his study at Military Engineering School, he is more interested in literature. He has been imprisoned for being a member of radical socialist organization. His first post-imprisonment writing, The House of the Dead (1860) is influenced by his experience in a labor camp. His most highly regarded are

Notes from the Underground (1864), Crime and Punishment (1866), The Gambler

(1866), The Idiot (1868), The Devils (1872), and The Brother Karamazov (1880).

Among above, Crime and Punishment is the best-known work that is often- discussed by the critics.

The novel tells about a young man who is in bad financial condition; murders an old lady and robs her stuffs. The psychological combat inside his mind becomes the main focus of the whole story. The background of the story is a reflection of Dostoyevsky’s real experience. By the time he started doing this novel, Dostoyevsky was depressed and in a serious financial straits. The important idea of the novel, that is a murderer’s confession, can also be found in

7 8

Dostoyevsky’s real experience during his prison time in Siberia.

(http://www.readinggroupguides.com/guides2/crime_and_punishment.asp).

The murderer, namely Raskolnikov, is the main character of the story. He is the character who is mostly-studied by the experts and researchers. In

Masterpiece World of Literature, Frank Northen Magill states that Crime and

Punishment is a novel that expands upon philosophical problem embodied in the main character, Raskolnikov. He also says that the idea of existentialism appears in Raskolnikov’s consideration whether or not he will commit suicide after the murder as his redemption (1989: 154).

Another critic who also concerns about philosophical issue in the novel is

William Barrett. His analysis on Raskolnikov comes into a hypothesis that

Dostoyevsky has expressed the idea of “superman philosophy” before Nietzsche.

In Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy, Barrett says:

The hero, Raskolnikov, is the alienated intellectual-alienated at once from the collective body of mankind and from his own being. Hungry and solitary, he spins out of the bowels of his own reason a Nietzchean theory (before Nietzsche) of the superman who through his own superior daring and strength rises above all ordinary moral codes (1962: 137).

Besides the “superman philosophy”, Dostoyevsky is one step forward than

Nietzsche in revealing the theory of will to power. Barrett states that “The will to power – the demoniacal will to power – was thus discovered by Dostoyevsky before Nietzsche made it his theme” (1962: 137).

An anonymous essay also focuses on Raskolnikov in its comment on

Crime and Punishment, and Dostoyevsky as the author. The novel is said as giving irresistible questions: Who among us is innocent? If we all have done a 9

crime, what punishment do we deserve? These questions then lead to an idea, which is written in the introduction of the novel, that:

…true punishment is not the sentence imposed on him by the court of law, but that imposed on him by his own actions: the psychological and spiritual hell he has created for himself; the necessary sentence of isolation from his friends and family; the extreme wavering between wanting to confess his crime, and desperately hoping to get away with it (http://www.readinggroupguides.com/guides2/crime_and_punishment.asp)

As for Dostoyevsky, the essayist says that he has created a character

(Raskolnikov) who can draw various emotions from the readers. “Dostoyevsky has created a man who is singular yet universal. He is someone with whom we can sympathize, empathize, and pity, even if we cannot relate to his actions”

(http://www.readinggroupguides.com/guides2/crime_and_punishment.asp). In his closing, the essayist claims Raskolnikov as a character the readers will remember.

Most of the studies that have been done by the critics and researchers are discussing the philosophical and psychological issues drawn from the character

Raskolnikov. The discussion on its philosophical issue is about nothing but existentialism. This thesis will neither strongly support nor strictly argue the opinion which says that the main character of the novel, Raskolnikov, shows the idea of existentialism. The writer would like to suggest an alternative perspective on Raskolnikov’s freedom and free act for a better understanding of existentialism. This understanding is reflected from Raskolnikovs’s awareness of himself, people around him, and his freedom. 10

B. Review of Related Theories

As the study is dealing with the characters and existentialism, it will be necessary to understand about characters and characterization in literary work and also about existentialism.

1. Theory of Characters and Characterization

According to Murphy (1972: 161-173), there are nine ways that an author can apply to present the characterization of characters in a literary work. They are: a. Personal description

The author can describe a character’s appearance and clothes. The readers will get only a visible look of a character. b. Characters as seen by another

The author can describe a character through the eyes and opinions of other characters. The readers get, as it were, a reflected image. c. Speech

The author describes a character by giving readers an insight into the characteristics through what he says. Here the readers are able to analyze a character from the sentences he uses. d. Past life

The author can provide a clue to events that help to shape a person’s characteristics by giving the readers the character’s past life. This is quite helpful to analyze the motives that a character has when he has a particular characteristic or does something special. 11

e. Conversation of others

The author can also provide a clue to a person’s characteristics through the conversation of other people and what they say about him. Readers will learn that what others say about a character may reveal some of his characteristics. f. Reactions

The author can describe a person’s characteristics by showing how a character responds to various situations and events. The reaction may give a clue to what characteristics a character has. g. Direct comment

The author may describe a person’s characteristics by directly giving readers comments on the character. This is somehow the best way for the readers to find out any characteristics because they know what exactly the author wants to reveal. h. Thoughts

The author gives readers direct knowledge of what a person is thinking about.

Here the author is able to do what people cannot do in a real life. He can tell readers what different people are thinking of. In a literary work, it is acceptable.

The readers then are in a privileged position; they have a secret listening device plugged in to the inmost thoughts of a character in a novel. i. Mannerism

The author can characterize a character through the mannerisms, habits or idiosyncrasies. It may tell readers something about his characteristics.

Abrams says that

Characters are the persons presented in a dramatic or narrative work, who are interpreted by the readers as being endowed with moral and 12

dispositional qualities that are expressed in what they say – the dialogue – and by what they do – the action. The grounds in a character’s temperament and moral nature for his speech and actions constitute his motivation (1981: 20).

The quotation means that characters in literary works are understood by readers as persons whose behavior and individuality are observed through their speeches and actions. Later, their dialogues and actions can serve as clues to their motivations for committing some particular events. This is what is expected for the readers to recognize when they read literary works. They do not only enjoy the aesthetic value of the stories but also identify the reasons for any events.

Harvey classifies characters into three categories. The most important is clearly the protagonist. The character has fully established motivation and history and engages readers’ responses more fully and steadily, in a way more complex though not necessarily more vivid than other characters. The character evokes readers’ beliefs, sympathies, and revulsions, exists as an individual case, and demands special consideration. The second is known as the “background” character. This character may almost be completely mysterious, voices rather than individualized characters. It means that the “background” characters are less important and appear simply to support the protagonists (1965: 56).

The last is called intermediate figures, which has at least two kinds of characters. The first, called the Ficelle, is the character who while more fully delineated and individualized than any background character exists in the novel primarily to serve some particular function. Another type of intermediate creation is the Card, the character who is a “character.” Most Cards are not the nominal heroes of the novels that contain them. Few novels make the Card a protagonist, 13

and these few, although they may be very good, do not approach real greatness.

The distinguishing feature of the Card is his relative changelessness, combined with a peculiar kind of freedom. These categories – protagonist, background,

Card, Ficelle – are, of course, only approximate.

2. Theory of Character Development

According to Harvey (1965: 56), the protagonists, who are the most important characters in a novel, most of the time change as the story progresses.

They experience the change through many things, including conflicts with which they deal in the story. They are actually what the novel exists for; it exists to reveal them. Forster and Perrine also explain about character development in their books. In Aspects of the Novel and Related Writings, Forster suggests that character development is the metamorphosis of a character starting from the beginning until the end of a story. A character is developing if he is experiencing a change in aspects of disposition, personality, or outlook. He is not the same person who appears at the beginning of the story, which means that he has achieved new characteristics. The changing depends on the events which occur in the story (1974: 54). According to Perrine, the changing of the characters should meet the following three conditions.

1) The changing must be within the possibilities of the characters who make it.

The characters in the story should not change suddenly. The author should

present the changing of the characters step by step. The characters must begin

the changing with smaller changes. 14

2) The changing must be sufficiently motivated by circumstances in which the

character finds himself. The character should have strong motivations or

reason in doing their actions.

3) The changing must be allowed sufficient time for a change of its magnitude

believably to take place. The characters need enough time for a change

(Perrine, 1974: 71).

3. Theory of Personality Changes

In Personality Development, Hurlock cites Allport’s definition of personality, which explains that personality is “the dynamic organization within the individual of those psycho-physical systems that is determined his characteristics behavior and thought” (1974: 137). Personality is determined by some factors, such as physical, intellectual, emotional, social, sex, education, and family.

Change in personality is divided into three major aspects. However, those three are not in a counter-relationship. Meaning to say, one change of personality may be examined from all aspects. Later on, each aspect will be divided into two antonymous categories. First, the changes are into the better or into the worse. The latter usually happens at puberty and middle age.

Second, the changes are qualitative or quantitative. In qualitative changes, the present traits are reinforced, strengthened, or weakened. An already-present trait, usually an undesirable one is replaced by another trait, usually a desirable one. In quantitative, the changes may produce the impression that the person has 15

changed his personality patterns. This impression is correct in the sense that here have been shifts in the traits.

The last aspect is the period of time. One may experience rapid or slow personality changes. Normally, personality changes are slow and steady. Too rapid changes can be seen as dangerous signals. Rapid personality changes indicate an abnormal condition of the person. It may be caused by a physical illness such as brain injury, or mental illness such as schizophrenia (1974: 120).

Personality changes do not occur on their own harmony. Usually they are the result of multiple revisions in the thoughts feelings related to the person’s concept of self. A change in the self concept will bring out a change in the entire personality pattern. This change is getting more difficult to happen as the person grows older. Changing one’s self-concept requires tremendous self-insight. It means that a person should be able and willing to recognize himself as he actually is, not as he would like to be or as others perceive (1974: 128).

It is very hard for a person to see himself as he actually is. There are at least three obstacles on doing it. They are intellectual, emotion, and environment.

Hurlock (1974: 128-129) mentions some conditions that may facilitate changes in one’s self-concept. He points out what he considers as the most important as follows. a. The use of introspection to see oneself as one actually is b. As analysis of why one thinks of oneself in a particular way. c. A critical examination of one’s behavior to see if it creating an unfavorable

impression on the others. 16

d. An objective comparison of oneself with others to see if one is inferior,

superior, or equal. e. Self-disclosure to those for whom one has respect and confidence as a way of

gaining new self-insight. f. Reading books that emphasize what contributes to success in life. g. Avoiding trying to model one’s personality after the personality of an ideal. h. Changing one’s aspiration when they are unrealistically high for one’s

potentials. i. Changing from an environment that fosters an unfavorable self-concept or, if

this is possible, ignoring the unfavorable aspects of the environment. j. Patient practice in trying to see oneself according to the new self-concept until

on becomes accustomed to it, likes it, and accepts it.

4. The Relation between Literature and Philosophy

The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy tells that both philosophy and literature produce understanding. Philosophy produces understanding of reality/fact while literature produces the understanding of feeling. A literary text may contain philosophical interest and value. The philosopher may identify, examine, and evaluate the philosophical content of the literary text. Literature and philosophy are essentially the same in matters of contents and references, the difference occurs in the physical form. What philosophy expresses in the form of argument is expressed by literature in lyrics, dramatic, or even narrative form

(1999: 678). 17

In Literature Considered as Philosophy the French Example, Knight explains the relationship between literature and philosophy by stating,

Philosophy and literature have acted upon another in the past, but they never lost their identity in one another. Writers who were not philosophers wrote about philosophy, what they wrote was not in itself philosophy in the strict sense of word (1962: 175).

The explanation above wants to say that although an author is not a philosopher, he/she might convey philosophical thoughts or values in his/her work.

In many literary works, the idea of existentialism mostly can be found through the presentation of the characters. The existential fiction frequently strikes through all aspects of morality to get at certain basic truths about man and his behavior (Karl and Leo, 1963: 19). They present an example that is Proust’s

“Filial Sentiments of a Parricide” in which the author tells its readers that beneath the seeming joy of life, there is the dying person; and often to seek the truth of things may lead to murder or suicide (1963: 21).

5. Existentialism and Attempted Definitions

Many philosophers such as Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre, Kierkegaard,

Pascal, and so on, have made interpretation of human existence. Indeed, existentialism is not easily definable. In The New Dictionary of Existentialism

(Nauman, 1972: 46), it is stated that existentialism represents a revolt against traditional philosophy. Meaning to say, it denies that truth can be ever synonymous with reason. Existentialism conducts a general examination of existence, its emotions, asserting that existence must be the primary category through which such concepts as essence must be achieved. 18

Troisfontaines in What is Existentialism? (1968: 5) clearly states that existentialism is a movement. He defines the movement as a philosophy of subjectivity, or selfhood, whose fundamental doctrine proclaims man’s freedom in the accomplishment of his destiny, and whose principal method is consequently that of description, or phenomenology.

Existentialism is different from other philosophical movements because it is based on social conditions of human life. Collins states that:

Existentialism, perhaps more than other philosophical movements, is usually evaluated on cultural and social grounds. Both its supporters and its opponents point to the general condition of society as an explanation of its appearance and rapid spread in Europe (1952: 1).

Even though it is impossible to define existentialism for there are many existentialists with their own concerns, Dr. T. Michel, as cited by Louis Leahy SJ in his book Aliran-Aliran Besar Atheisme, states that all existentialists put their major interest on phatos existentiae, which means individual suffering as a result of an unknowable, chaotic, and seemingly empty universe. Existentialism, then, believes that the suffering individual must create meaning in such empty universe

(1985: 58, my own translation). In his effort to create the meaning, a man is anxious to understand his being.

6. Sartrean Existentialism

The most emphasized aspect of Sartre’s existentialism is freedom.

Human freedom, as the very first condition of acting and choosing, is one basic theme of existentialism that cannot be separated from the term responsibility. As stated by Sartre in his book Existentialism and Humanism,“thus the first effect of 19

existentialism is that puts every man possesses of himself as he is, and places the entire responsibility for his existence squarely upon his own shoulders” (1960:

29). Sartre’s opinion on freedom is described in his essay about Cartesian freedom in which he provides a discourse based on the thought of a French philosopher,

René Descartes, about the freedom of thinking. On one hand, Sartre seems to agree with Descartes on the differentiation of freedom and power. On the other hand, Sartre somehow criticizes Cartesian freedom which he thinks is passive and not productive. Sartre thinks that people should be able to say no to themselves, which is called self-deception.

The self-deception means being deceptive towards any form of essence. A man should not possess essence. With essence, a man cannot be free. According to Sartre, a man is free. To make it more emphasized, a man is freedom.

Therefore, it can be stated that freedom is the base of essence. In life, existence precedes essence. It means that “man first of all exists, encounter himself, surges up in the world—and defines himself afterwards” (Sartre, 1969: 290).

The explanation on the essence is the central theme of Sartre’s most famous thought of the phenomenology of Being, which is widely explained in his magnum opus, Being and Nothingness; An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology

(1976). He divides Being (Sartre’s term) into two modes, being-in-itself (ětre en- soi) and being-for-itself (ětre pour-soi). The former category includes things like trees, tables, rocks, and other inanimate object, which have specific roles and functions for particular purposes. A man is different from those things, which makes him included in the latter category, being-for-itself. It is restated that a man 20

has no essence which makes his existence. It is free existence which helps a man form his essence. It then can be concluded that a man is free and completely responsible to himself. This does not mean he is responsible only to his own individual, but rather to all human being, for in doing an action there is a consideration whether or not the other will do the same as he is about to do.

“Existentialism is a Humanism”, this is the title of Sartre’s brief exposition with which he responds the reproaches from the Communists, Christians, and so on. Sartre himself recognizes the difficulty when dealing with the phenomenon.

The difficulty occurs because in fact there are two groups of existentialists. On one hand, there is theistic existentialism represented by Jaspers and Gabriel

Marcel, while on the other hand there is atheistic existentialism represented by

Heidegger and Sartre. Furthermore, Sartre describes his rejection towards God as follows.

…if God does not exist there is at least one being whose existence comes before its essence, a being which exists before it can be defined by any conception of it (1969: 290).

Sartre again refuses any form of conception of man. He disagrees that God makes man according to a procedure. By applying an analogy, Sartre states that man is no ready-found function like a paper-knife. This is to say that a man is not created with certain function.

Besides in that brief exposition, Sartre also describes his perspective on

God in his essay on Cartesian freedom, compiled in Literary and Philosophical

Essays. Although he frankly declares himself as an atheist, his opinion on

Descartes’ God is very interesting. Sartre excitedly discusses the idea of free God 21

according to Descartes. Sartre considers Descartes’ God as the freest God of all conceptions of God ever suggested by man. This assumption is deducted from

Descartes’ statement that “God’s freedom is no more entire than of man and that one is in the image of other” (1970: 193). The creative God is free and not only a subject to principles. Moreover, Sartre says that “He is not disposed by His perfection to decide what is the best; rather, that which He has decided is, as a result of his decision itself, absolutely Good” (1970: 195).

According to Sartre, man is condemned to be free. There are no moral values as the branch of humanity in dealing with freedom and responsibility.

Good and bad values depend on man himself not on the universal values of humanity. If a man sees his action is good, it is so because he chooses and considers his action good. On the contrary, if man sees his action is bad, it is so because he chooses and considers it bad (Sartre, 1960: 47), which is Sartre’s explanation on a man’s subjectivity and truth.

Being free does not mean to be able to do what one wants, but rather to be able to choose what one wishes. This is the nature of freedom as being the very first condition of action. Therefore, a success is not important in freedom. It creates a clear distinction between freedom and power. Man is said to have total freedom even though he has limited power. In the essay on Cartesian freedom,

Sartre describes the position of existentialism in facing the phenomenon of power.

Here we perceive the negative aspect of freedom. For if I do not have power to perform such and such an action, I must always try to conquer myself rather than fortune and to change my desires rather than the order of the world (1970: 184). 22

C. Theoretical Framework

This part will give an overview on the contribution of the theories and their application in the analysis in order to solve the problems of the study. The theory of character and characterization is considered suitable as the means to answer the first and second questions. By applying the theory, the writer will be able to describe the characteristics of the major character, Raskolnikov, both before and after he commits the murder.

The theory of character development and personality change will give an essential contribution in solving the second research question. It is useful to figure out the personality change happens on Raskolnikov. The theory of personality change will provide more information so that the problems can be appropriately solved.

The philosophy of existentialism and existential ideas mainly by Sartre will be very important especially in answering the third question. Since existentialism is not what one has but what one is, the findings on Raskolnikov‘s characteristics before the murder and the change/s after the murder, may be best analyzed using the philosophy of existentialism. In other words, in answering the third problem, the philosophy will be used in the process of observing the connection between the preceding findings to the idea of existentialism. CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

A. Object of the Study

The object of this study is the best-known novel ever written by a famous

Russian writer Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky entitled Crime and Punishment.

First published as Prestupleniye i Nakazaniye in 1866, the novel became

Dostoyevsky’s successful work. It became world wide-read when the English translation version was published in 1958 by Penguin Book Ltd. The novel has

559 pages, and consists of six parts with several chapters in each part. Part one and two are in seven chapters. Part three and four have six chapters in each of them. The fifth part consists of five chapters. The last is in eight chapters. The story is closed by an epilog.

Crime and Punishment tells about a young man named Raskolnikov who murders two old women. One is well-planned, and the other is spontaneously. He does not consider his act as a crime because he thinks that the old woman, whom he murders intentionally, deserves to be killed. Moreover, Raskolnikov expresses the theory of extraordinary man, which says that some men have a right to step over the law for a better world, as an excuse of his act. The story ends with

Raskolnikov’s imprisonment after he confesses his crime. The psychological combat whether he should confess or not is the novel’s basic theme.

The novel presents more than twenty characters. The main character is

Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, the murderer. This is the character on which most of the analysis focuses. Like in almost all novels, the author constructs the

23 24

basic theme of his work through the major character. Raskolnikov’s personality and its change/s will be analyzed using Sartrean existentialism to find out how far his thoughts and acts reflect the themes of existentialism. Dimitri Prokovitch

Razumikhin, Raskolnikov’s best friend, and Sofya Semyonovna, Raskolnikov’s girlfriend, are two most important minor characters.

B. Approach of the Study

The use of appropriate approach/es in analyzing the work is essential in order to have a fair analysis on the topic. The approach/es then, will lead the study into a vivid conclusion. Considering the topic of the study, which conveys the philosophy of existentialism, the writer applies moral-philosophical approach with the intention of achieving a balance analysis. Moral philosophical approach is an approach that is employed to figure out what moral teaching or what philosophical issue probing in literary work. The proponent of this approach tends to interpret literature within a context of the philosophical thought of a period or group

(Guerin, et al, 1999: 29). This approach is considered appropriate since the writer intends to analyze how far the philosophy of existentialism is reflected by the main character of the novel.

C. Method of the Study

The method that the writer uses in this study is library research. In library research, the study is done by reading and collecting data and information from certain books and other writings that support the subject matter of the research. 25

However, to get more and more information about the work, the author, and any information related to existentialism, the writer has browsed many websites. Some data are taken by considering their relevance, validity, accuracy, and appropriateness.

The primary data of the study is the novel itself. Then, some books discussing intrinsic elements in literary work, especially character, are used as secondary data to get best understanding of the topic. The theory on character and characterization is taken from Abrams’ book A Glossary of Literary Terms

(1981), Murphy’s book Understanding Unseen (1972), and Harvey’s book

Character and the Novel (1965). The theory on character development is taken from Forster’s book Aspects of the Novel (1974) and Perrine’s Literature:

Structure, Sound and Sense (1974). In getting the understanding about personality changes, the writer uses Personality Development (1974) by Elizabeth B. Hurlock.

The writer uses Klarer’s book An Introduction to Literary Studies (1999) and A Handbook of Critical Approach to Literature (1999)-written by Guerin,

Labor, Morgan, Reesman, and Willingham-to gain basic understanding of moral- philosophical approach. Three books by Jean-Paul Sartre are used as the sources to obtain good understanding and better knowledge about existentialism. They are

Existentialism and Humanism (1960), Literature and Philosophical Essays

(1970), and Being and Nothingness (1976). Other books that are very useful in getting more information about existentialism are Kaufmann’s book

Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre (1969), Barret’s Irrational Man: A

Study in Existentialism Philosophy (1962), and The Encyclopedia of Ethics 26

(1995). Those sources help the writer get better understanding of the subject matters and composing the writing.

There were some steps that the writer has done in doing the research. The first step was reading the novel until getting best understanding of the story. The second step was formulating the problem to guide the study. The next step was collecting the supporting sources for the research. Then, the writer answered the research questions using the knowledge that was gained from the sources. The first question was answered by observing the major character in the story. Theory of character development and personality changes were employed in solving the second problem. Then, the writer examined the characteristics of that character and his personality change/s using philosophy of existentialism. The last step was writing down the thesis systematically. CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS

In this chapter, the writer will try to find the answers for the three problems formulated in the problem formulation. Therefore, the writer will make an analysis firstly on the characteristics of Raskolnikov before he commits the murder, secondly on the personality changes he undergoes after the murder, and the last on how Raskolnikov’s characteristics are seen from the point of view of existentialism.

A. The Characteristics of Raskolnikov before the Murder

This part discusses the character Raskolnikov before he commits the murder. The writer will give the description of his physical appearance and his personality. It is considered important to separate Raskolnikov before and after the murder to see that Raskolnikov does not undergo personality changes instantly and how a psychological combat is involved on the changing process.

Studying Raskolnikov will remind us of one of our friends, someone we meet on the street, our neighbor, or even the reflection of ourselves. In other words, he is a character who is extremely close to the real life. He is neither a super hero nor a villain. Besides being a part of a history, Raskolnikov also lives a history. Meaning to say, his life is a history which he creates through every action he takes. Therefore, he should be noticed from several perspectives just like when studying history.

27 28

Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, Russian: Родион Романович

Раскольников (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_and_Punishment) shortly called Roddy by his beloved family and friends, is the major character from whose perspective the story is primarily told. He is a young man with a quite handsome face, beautiful dark eyes, and dark brown hair. He has an over medium height, slim, and well-built body. Most women will be attracted to him. It seems that, physically, Raskolnikov is one of those “blessed” persons. However, his social condition is a contradiction.

He was a student, now fallen out, who is living in abject poverty in Saint

Petersburg. He lives in a little room at the top of a house in Carpenter Lane. The room is so small that it looks more like a cupboard than a living room. The condition of the flat where he sleeps – he spends most of his time sleeping on the sofa – is as disastrous as his economic condition. His friend, Razumikhin, even calls it a ship’s cabin when he first visits Raskolnikov, “’What a ship’s cabin!’ he cried, entering…” (p. 137). Living in an awful economic condition makes him owe the landlady the rent so that he always sneaks around everytime he is about to go out to avoid her. This terrible condition ruins his social life.

Everytime he goes out, Raskolnikov rarely has some exact destination or reason. He never pays attention to everyone he meets on the street. Instead of having a conversation with other people, he prefers talking to himself. He prefers a world of his own than of reality. In that soliloquies, many thoughts struggle in his mind. However, he always fails to concentrate on a certain idea. He recognizes this habit as a ‘disease’ and at the same time extacy. 29

“However, I’m talking too much. It’s because I talk too much that I do nothing. Still I daresay the opposite is probably true too. I talk too much because I do nothing. It is during the last month that I got into the habit of talking to myself. Lying about all day long in that beastly hole and thinking – thinking of all sorts of absurd things” (p. 20).

This habit not only makes Raskolnikov addicted, but it is also considered as somekind of work. He mentions this when he has a conversation with his landlady’s kind maidservant, Nastasya.

“Well, why is it you do nothing now?” “But I am doing something…” Raskolnikov said reluctantly and sternly. “Are you now? Well, what is it?” “Working…?” “What kind of work?” “I am thinking,” he replied seriously, after a short pause (p. 46).

Raskolnikov’s habit of talking to himself creates bad impacts to the relationship with other people. He is a person who is not used to crowds. He refuses to get involved in any kind of society. Such behaviour has been his characteristic since he was at the university, where he only had few fellow student. He feels more comfortable when left alone, and irritated when being approached. Actually, Raskolnikov was a single hard worker, which made him respectable, but not likeable. One thing that makes him feel that it is not necessary to make friend with other students in the university is his being superciliously proud. Some of his fellow-students felt that they had been underestimated.

Some of his fellow-students had the impression that he looked on them all as though they were children, from above, as though he were miles ahead of them in general development, knowledge, and convictions, and as though their own convictions and interests were beneath him (p. 69). 30

Raskolnikov only makes friends with those whom he considers to be clever as he is. Razumikhin is one of those few. For some reason, Raskolnikov becomes friend with Razumikhin. He wants a kind of mutual relationship.

“Well, listen. I came to you because I don’t know anyone except you who could help me to – to start fresh – and because you’re better than any of them – I mean cleverer – and because you could advise me what to do” (p. 130).

However, they are not really friends. It is only a matter that Raskolnikov is more communicative and frank with him. Razumikhin himself indeed is an extraordinarily cheerful communicative young fellow so that it seems impossible to be on any but friendly terms with him. As friends, their relationship is far from what is called a friendship. One day they had run across each other on the street, but Raskolnikov avoided his fellow by turning away and crossing to the other side. Even though Razumikhin saw him, he passed him by as he did not want to annoy a friend. It is pretty clear that Razumikhin is really aware of such behaviour of Raskolnikov. He shares his ideas about Raskolnikov when talking to

Raskolnikov’s mother.

“And what can I tell you? I’ve known Roddy for a year and a half: he’s a morose, gloomy, proud, stuck up. More recently (and perhaps for a long time) he’s been rather suspicious and moody” (p. 232).

The quotation above gives description about Raskolnikov’s general characteristics. Then, Razumikhin continues telling about the characteristics which are specifically related to social life.

“He’s terribly uncommunicative sometimes: always busy, everybody’s always in his way, but actually he just lies about and does nothing. He isn’t sarcastic, but that’s not because he lacks of wit, but because he doesn’t want to waste time on such trivialities. He never seems to listen 31

what you are telling him; he never shows any interest in whatever people happen to be interested in at any given moment” (p. 232).

As a friend, Razumikhin considers Raskolnikov as a kind of person who is difficult to be made a close friend.

Raskolnikov is indeed a clever student. Even Marmeladov, a drunkard ex- civil servant appearing when Raskolnikov suddenly has strange desire for a companion, dare says that Raskolnikov is an educated young man in their first meet.

“For though, if I may say so, you don’t look like a person of consequence, my experience of life tells me that you’re a man of education and one, moreover, who is not used to drink” (p. 29).

For a clever student like him, it is not so hard to get a job. Once Raskolnikov gave lessons to children. However, his pride makes him quit from that work. He thinks that teaching children does not give him enough money to have a decent life. For him, it is better to be idle than having a job that is worth only few coppers. As an unemployed, he makes a living from the money sent by his mother.

Raskolnikov’s mother, Pulcheria Alexandrovna Raskolnikov, who is already a widow, lives with her daughter Avdotya “Dunya” Romanovna

Raskolnikov in Ryazan province. She is a kind of mother who is willing to sacrifice everything for a son’s happiness. In her letter to Roddy, she tells about

Dunya’s plan of marriage with Peter Luzhin, a practical businessman. The marriage itself is arranged for the sake of Raskolnikov. It is expected that later

Peter Luzhin can give a job to Roddy. It is clear here that Raskolnikov is the backbone of the family. It is also clearly written in the letter. 32

“You know how much I love you, dear. You are all we have in the world, Dunya and I; you are our only hope of a better and brighter future” (p. 48).

She even repeats those words at the end of the letter. Besides a beloved mother,

Raskolnikov also has a sister who really loves him, even more than herself, as the mother has written in her letter, “Love her as she loves you, and remember she loves you very much, much more than herself” (p. 57). It is also reflected through her sacrifice by agreeing to get married to a quite practical old (he is about forty- five) man, with whom she has not fallen in love yet. Raskolnikov himself, however, wonders why his sister is eager to make that sacrifice for he knows very well what kind of woman Dunya is. He understands Dunya as a woman who will not sell herself.

“…but I know all the same that my sister would rather work as a Negro slave for an American plantation-owner or as a Lett serf for Baltic German landowner than debase her spirit and her moral feelings by a marriage to a man she does not respect and with whom she has nothing in common – for her own advantage! And even if Mr Luzhin had been made of pure gold or had been a diamond of the purest water, she would never have agreed to become his legal concubine!” (p. 61).

The marriage itself is the most essential part of the letter on which Raskolnikov puts a great concern. For this matter, he has made up his mind to refuse. His refusal can be seen from two different points of view. On one hand, it may represent Raskolnikov’s pride, which means that he does not want to have a better life because of someone’s help. In his soliloquies, he talks to himself as though

Dunya and his mother stood before him.

“And who asked you to think about me, anyway? I don’t want your sacrifice, Dunya! I don’t want it, mother! It shall not be, so long as I live! It shall not! It shall not be! I won’t have it!” (p. 62). 33

On the other hand, it shows that Raskolnikov loves his sister from the very deep of his heart. He does not want Dunya to suffer for the rest of her life being a wife of a busy and practical businessman. He can hardly imagine what kind of miserable life her sister will deal with.

The paragraph above may describe how deep Raskolnkov’s mother and sister love Roddy. Raskolnikov’s love to his family can be seen even at the very moment he receives the letter from Nastasya. Soon as he is left alone with the letter, he raises it to his lips and kisses it. Tears moisten his face almost all the time he reads the letter. This description shows Raskolnikov’s deep longing to his family although he is ashamed to show it before the other people. He used to have a happy family. In the letter, his mother reminds him of the moment Roddy grew in a happy and religious family. It was a long time ago when his father was still alive.

“Do you still say your prayers, Roddy, as you used to, and do you believe in the goodness and the mercy of our Creator and our Redeemer?” “Remember, dear, how as a child, while your father was still with us, you used to lisp your prayers on my knees and how happy we all are then?” (p. 57).

As a human being Raskolnikov has undergone personality development.

He is no longer the same person his mother last saw three years before before moving to Petersburg, not to mention the child she has described on the letter.

With such economic condition that he has, it is rather difficult to be nice to everybody. As explained before, he is a kind of person who is more comfortable if left alone. A favor might become a terror for him. It is obviously seen from his refusal on the job offered by Razumikhin when Raskolnikov, for a spontaneous 34

reason, delivers himself to his clever friend. He indeed goes to Razumkhin with a hope that his friend may offer him a job. However, also with spontaneous reason, he refuses it by saying that he does not need help anymore. This indicates that he is not only proud but also wishy washy.

There are many facts showing that Raskolnikov has unstable thoughts. It is difficult for him to focus or concentrate on a certain point. The plan about the murder can be a good example. He at once has an idea of murdering an old woman pawnbroker named Alyona Ivanovna. This idea first occurs in his mind right after he sees the old woman in order to pawn his father’s old silver watch and a little gold ring with three red stones given by his sister. It is then justified by the same idea uttered by a student while Raskolnikov has his meal in a little restaurant. He even does a rehearsal for the murder by once again visiting the pawnbroker in order to observe the forthcoming victim and crime scene.

However, it comes to his mind for several times a thought that the murder should not be done; a thought that he is completely unable to do such thing.

“No! It’s impossible! It’s absurd!” he added firmly. “And how could such a horrible idea have occurred to me?” (p. 26). “I knew very well that I wouldn’t be able to carry it out…I knew very well that I shouldn’t be able to go through with it” (p. 78).

Those thoughts show Raskolnikov’s sense of humanity, but then, the idea of murder torments him again promptly for he cannot control his thoughts very well.

Whether or not he realizes it, that idea has become an obsession for him. This obsession really confines his freedom of thinking.

He thought of nothing, and indeed he was quite incapable of thinking; but he suddenly felt with all his being that he no longer possessed any freedom 35

of reasoning or of will, and that everything was suddenly and irrecoverably settled (p. 81).

From intellectual aspect, that obsessive-compulsive symptomp is closely related to Raskolnikov’s characteristic of being a free thinker. As a law student he has written an article entitled On Crime, in which he shares his idea on the nature of crime. He also invents a theory of “extraordinary man”, which may suggest

Nietzsche’s Ubermensch theory. According to this theory, there are two sub- divisions of human being. The first is ordinary man, whose fates are preserving the world and increasing its numbers; the second is the extraordinary one, whose duty is leading the world to its goal. Thus, in leading the world to its goal, those who are included in the second category have a right to step over the ancient environment or transgress the law.

“I simply hinted that the ‘ extraordinary’ man has a right – not an officially sanctioned right, of course – to permit his conscience to step over certain obstacles, but only if it is absolutely necessary for the fulfilment of his idea on which quite possibly the welfare of all mankind may depend” (p. 276).

In other words, a crime might be justified if it is done by the extraordinary and for the goodness. Roddy mentiones Newton, Mahomet, Napoleon, and so on, as the example of extraordinary men. Having such thought, there is a possibility for him of questioning whether or not he belongs to the second category. From the psychological point of view, the murder becomes an experiment to answer his anxiety.

The murder itself, at last, is committed due to the ‘disease’ that

Raskolnikov suffers from for a whole month until the crime. Early after he pawns the watch and the ring, Raskolnikov becomes so superstitious. He considers every 36

coincidence happens to him during that month as a sign. The first coincidence that he assumes to be a sign is the moment he unintentionally hears, but then listens to, the conversation between the student and an army officer. The student says that he would gladly murder the damned old woman and rob her of all she has.

Raskolnikov really puts a great interest in the student’s idea of saving thousands of lives by one death. A month after this coincidence, Raskolnikov puts the plan into actual action. It is not without any reason that the murder is done at some particular time. He decides to conduct his plan at about seven in the evening due to the coincidence happened the day before. It is unintentional when Raskolnikov sees Alyona’s half-sister, Lisaveta, and listens to her conversation with a street- trader. From eavesdropping, he has got information that Lisaveta makes an appointment to come again the following day, so that the moneylender would be left alone in her flat. Since he is superstitious, Roddy considers this as a hint.

Though Raskolnikov has planned a murder, he is not a natural-born criminal. As noticed before, he does not completely lose his sense of humanity.

There are still held by him the characteristics that are supposed to be possesed by a person who grew in a happy and religious family. He is indeed a believer. When he is in the perplexity of his plan, he asks for guidances from his God whether or not he should carry out the murder.

He felt that he had already cast off the terrible burden that had so long been weighing upon him, and all of sudden he felt greatly relieved and at peace with himself. “O Lord”, he prayed, “show me the way and I shall give up this – this damnable dream of mine” (p. 79).

Another good nature that Raskolnikov has is kind-hearted. There is no doubt that he is actually a helpful man. It is reflected through his deed giving his 37

money to Marmeladov’s family. Realizing how poor the Marmeladovs are after visiting their flat, he puts his money unobserved on the windowsill. Other evidence that shows his helpful nature is the moment he fights against a man in an effort to help a girl. He also gives twenty copecks to a policeman to help the girl get home. Those two facts show Roddy’s kindness. However, he often questions the reason for what he has done as though he was not aware of himself.

“What the hell did I do that for?” he thought. “They have Sonia to look after them, and I want the money for myself” (p. 44) “And what the hell made me interfere? Who am I to help her? Have I any right to help anyone? Let them devour each other alive for all I care. What business is it of mine? And what right had I to give away the twenty copecks?” (p. 68).

We may also see from the quotation that Raskolnikov has a deep curiousity on self-concept.

All the descriptions above give a portrait of Raskolnikov, an idle clever ex-student who is living in poverty in Petersburg. He is a naturally kind-hearted, but rather too proud of himself. To live in poverty is a kind of humiliation for a proud man like him. Such burden together with his being superstitious bring

Raskolnikov to a nihilistic act of murdering. The description of Raskolnikov’s condition after the murder will be discussed in the next part.

B. Raskolnikov’s Personality Changes after the Murder

This second part of the analysis will provide the description of personality changes experienced by Raskolnikov after he commits the murder. It is in this phase that a psychological combat of Raskolnikov, which is the longest phase of the novel, arises. The changing process that takes a long time obviously matches 38

the theory suggested by Elizabeth Hurlock. Moreover, we will see some factors that take part on those changes.

The murder brings an immediate effect to Raskolnikov. He undergoes a kind of disharmony especially because he kills not only the pawnbroker, but also her step-sister, Lisaveta for she unexpectedly catches him in the act. This condition results in the imbalance both physically and psychologically. He falls into delirium and completely loses his self-control. Many thoughts torment his mind, and yet he still cannot concentrate on a single one. A thought that perhaps he leaves traces keeps haunting him. There is no doubt that Raskolnikov has become paranoid.

This paranoia is clearly noticed when there is a summons from the police station. He is wondering what the summons is about. He is afraid that it is for the murder he has committed. The interesting thing is that at this early moment he already has a strange thought of making a confession, “If they ask me, I shall probably tell them” (p. 112). This thought just disappears by the time he knows that the summons is about his promise to pay the rent to his landlady. Such thought occurs to him again, but soon it vanishes after hearing that the police has suspected someone but him. It appears that Raskolnikov has no gut to tell the truth.

Being paranoid, Raskolnikov keeps feeling worried, even with his fellows.

There is some anxiety that the people around him have known the whole thing but just pretending. Suffering from his illness, he often falls into delirium.

Raskolnikov is afraid that he has told the secret when he is raving. All the total 39

confusion makes him hard to make up his mind. Cowardice just emerges inside him, which makes him want to runaway, even yet he does not know where to.

“Oh, I remember now: I must run! I must run away quickly! I must! I must run! Yes, but where? And where are my clothes? No boots! They’ve taken them away! Hidden them! I see. Ah, here’s my overcoat! They’ve missed that! And, thank God, here’s the money on the table. The promissory note, too….I’ll take the money and go” (146).

Besides being suspicious, the psychological burden he carries worsens his attitude towards people near him who always do him favour. Raskolnikov becomes more indifferent – which truly is his characteristic due to his pride – to others. Razumikhin once again becomes a victim of this negative behavior. His care for Raskolnikov when he is mentally ill is considered as a terror.

“Look here, Razumikhin,” Raskolnikov began quietly and to all appearances very calmly. “Can’t you see that I don’t want any favours from you? And-I can’t understand why you should want to offer favours on people who – who don’t care a damn about them. I mean, people who really find it difficult to accept favours. Why did you bother to find me when I first fell ill? Perhaps I’d have been glad to die” (186).

From the quotation above, a portrait of a proud man is obviously shown: a man who rejects others’ help although he really needs it.

Raskolnikov himself indeed realizes that this disharmony happens to him promptly just at the same night of the murder. It even occurs to his head, a thought that such disharmony is a punishment for him, “What if it is already beginning, if my punishment is already beginning?” (p. 109). Not only does Raskolnikov feel the suffering, but he also wants to bring it to an end. It is just that he does not know the way.

All he knew was that that this must be brought to an end to-day, once and for all, now! And that he would never return home unless he did end it, 40

because he did not want to go on living like that. How end it? In what way end it? He had not the faintest idea (p. 174).

For several times, the desire to end the terror comes in his mind. However, carrying the entire burden, he cannot think clearly to achieve the solution. Just like what happens when he is obsessed with the murder, his thought is again strangled.

His mind gets even more imprisoned because for this time Raskolnikov deals not only with himself, but also the surrounding.

As mentioned before, Raskolnikov does not want to keep on living in fear.

What he needs, like everyman needs, is freedom. It is this desire of freedom that makes him keep himself away from others even his own family, who has arrived in Petersburg. In fact, he remains feeling extremely worried and anxious. In loneliness, the terror comes as a nightmare. One night, a dream about his act of murdering wakes him up from a heavy slumber.

Suffering from restless thoughts, Raskolnikov once has a will to commit suicide. Each time he comes to the Little Neva, he keeps thinking of drowning himself. He believes that ending his life will automatically end all the terror. The moment where Raskolnikov wants to commit suicide is indeed not vividly described in the novel. Nonetheless, it can be interpreted from his farewell to his family.

He seemed to smile, and yet it was not exactly a smile, either. “Well, you never can tell. Perhaps this is the last time we’ll see each other,” he added, unexpectedly (p. 328).

In the end, he does not do that. On one hand, it can be understood to be his confusion on what should be done. On the other hand, this indicates that there is a will to live. 41

In the first part of the analysis, it is said that Raskolnikov has a kind heart that is reflected from his deed helping the Marmeladovs. This nature comes out again when an accident happens to his fellow, Mr. Marmeladov. He offers sincere helps; bringing him to the family, paying the doctor, and giving his entire money to the widow Mrs. Marmeladov. It is in this moment that Raskolnikov first meets

Sonia Marmeladov, the widow’s stepdaughter, who later on gives a huge influence to Raskolnikov’s view towards many things. Having done such goodness, Raskolnikov feels the energy of freedom.

He went downstairs slowly, without hurrying, in a fever, but without being conscious of it, full of a new, great and exhilarating sensation of tremendous energy and will to live which suddenly surged up within him. It was a sensation not unlike that of a man condemned to death who is quite unexpectedly pardoned (p. 206).

In other words, that kind of action has become a remedy for the crime. This sensation proves to bring bad impact to his mind. With such energy inside,

Raskolnikov feels sure that he already gets back his life, which for a long time has been haunted by fear, “My life hasn’t come to and end with the death of the old women!” (p. 208). Such assumption confines his awareness of his mistakes.

Besides, Raskolnikov happens to be imperceptive. He considers strength to be the one he really needs to overcome his fear, “What I want is strength – strength! You can’t get anything without strength …” (p. 208). In fact, as the time goes, he again suffers from great agony both physically and psychologically.

The incapability of releasing himself from constant anxiety that keeps attacking him is influenced by Raskolnikov’s opinion on his crime. Using the basic theory of extraordinary man, he claims his crime to be justified since it is 42

done for the sake of many people. Therefore, he may regard himself as having done a heroic act. He also calls the old woman a louse who is completely unworthy. Quotation below may illustrate how he hates his victim.

“The old woman was only an illness – I was in a great hurry to step over – I didn’t kill a human being – I killed a principle! Yes, I killed a principle all right, but I did not step over – I remained on this side (p. 291).

By considering Raskolnikov’s hatred to the late pawnbroker, it can be concluded that he still undergoes the disharmony.

All the agonies from which Raskolnikov suffers affect not only his relationship with others, but also his ‘relationship’ with God. Although the writer has never mentioned that Raskolnikov is a very religious person, at least he still holds a faith. Because of many absurdities he has seen, he changes from a believer into a skeptic. The skeptical thought is uttered when he is indirectly tormenting

Sonia by supposing that Mrs. Marmeladov will go mad and die soon.

“God – God would never allow such a horrible thing!” “But he lets it happen to others.” “No, no! God will protect her!” she repeated, beside herself. “But what if there is no God?” Raskolnikov replied with a sort of gleeful malice, and he laughed and looked at her (p. 336).

Before Sonia, Raskolnikov feels superior. He feels sorry for Sonia’s sacrifice as being a prostitute to earn money for the Marmeladovs. For him, her sacrifice is useless looking at the fact that Mr. Marmeladov has died and the widow is driven to madness by that incident. According to Raskolnikov’s idealism, an ideal sacrifice should result in a significant change.

That superior feeling in fact brings out some positive effects in

Raskolnikov’s journey to freedom. It is to Sonia that he first confesses that he is 43

the murderer of the two sisters. Such phenomenon is very commonly done by almost every man. After a man has done a mistake, he has the bravery to reveal it only to a person he considers to have also done a mistake. It is more natural if one is inferior to the other. Psychologically, the person is not really oppressed because there is some awareness of other people who feel more suffered. It is the reason why Raskolnikov chooses Sonia as the one to whom he will tell his secret. Up to this moment, we are still facing the proud Raskolnikov.

Small transformation starts taking place when what he has imagined becomes reality. Mrs. Marmeladov, who has really turned mad, dies in her madness because of tuberculosis. Her children are automatically orphans. The fact that Sonia is still strong and loyal to her faith touches Raskolnikov. When he confesses his sin, Sonia puts great cares on him and does not blame it on him.

Sonia is willing to follow him even if he will be imprisoned in Siberia. However,

Raskolnikov refuses to confess before the law. Applying his monomania of theory of extraordinary man, he once again claims his crime to be justified. On one hand, he admits that he is not a Napoleon, and he has killed only for his own sake “…I wanted to murder, Sonia, to murder without casuistry, to murder for my own satisfaction, for myself alone” (p. 432). On the other hand, he keeps insisting that it is not compulsory for him to make a confession in front of people.

“Don’t be a child, Sonia,” he said quietly. “How am I guilty before them? Why should I go? What will I say to them? Why, the whole thing’s an illusion. They themselves are destroying people by the million and consider it a good thing. They’re swindlers and blackguards, Sonia, I won’t go” (p.434). 44

According to Raskolnikov, everyone makes mistakes, and, by doing so, there is no need to judge anyone else. He persists to refuse to go to prison, which shows that he is not ready yet to accept suffering. However, due to Sonia’s persuasion and care, Raskolnikov eventually gives up. At this moment, he realizes Sonia’s great love for him, which makes his feeling distressed that someone like him should be loved so much.

The confession to Sonia results in a significant change on Raskolnikov’s attitude. His awareness of Sonia’s great care and love changes his point of view towards people who he has formerly considered as terror. He begins to recognize the care given by Razumikhin as sincerity. To Dunya, he talks about his opinion on his late fellow student. He wants to be the matchmaker for his sister and

Razumikhin.

“Dunya,” Raskolnikov stopped her, getting up and walking up to her. “Razumikhin is a very good man.” Dunya coloured a little. “He’s a practical, hard-working, honest man, capable of great devotion and love. Good-bye, Dunya” (p. 439).

He is not even ashamed to tell it to Razumikhin by himself. He hopes that

Razumikhin will be able to take care of his family supposing that he is imprisoned.

“Of course she does! Now, whenever I may go and no matter what happens to me, you ought to stay with them and look after them. I, as it were, hand them over to your care, Razumikhin. I’m telling you this because I know how much you love her and because I’m quite convinced that you’re a decent fellow” (p. 455).

From the explanation above, it can be seen that Raskolnikov starts appreciating others’ kindness for him. This nice behavior is also shown to Dunya and his 45

beloved mother. There is a regret that he has not acted as a brother to his sister and a son to his mother. He is no longer ashamed to express his love. This moment reminds the mother about Roddy in his childhood.

In the end, Roddy admits his failure and weakness. After conducting what he thinks is necessary, trusting Razumikhin to take care of his family and saying farewell to his mother and sister, he decides to give himself up to the police, even though he does not know for sure why he is doing it. He just thinks that there is a burden inside of him that should be unchained. The decision is marked with his visiting Sonia for a cross she has once offered him. He has promised that when he is ready to suffer, he will wear the cross. In the beginning, he is not sincere and only pretends to be ready for the remedy. Sonia, nevertheless, succeeds again crushing his pride.

But he felt touched; his heart bled as he looked at her. “Why,” he thought, “why is she so upset? What am I to her? Why is she crying? Why is she taking leave of me like my mother or Dunya? My future nurse!” (p. 534).

Through Sonia’s love, Roddy realizes that he cannot stand on his own; that he has to have someone to hold on to.

Raskolnikov is sentenced eight years in Siberia for his crime. In prison, his life is not automatically renewed. He still cannot understand the fact that his being imprisoned is the consequence for his crime. He suffers from illness which is not caused by virus, bacteria, or injury, but rather by his own pride, “…his pride had been deeply hurt; he fell ill from wounded pride” (p. 551). What remains absurd for him is his blind decision of self-surrender. An anxiety of future life settles deeply in his mind. 46

And what did it matter that in another eight years he would be only thirty- two, and that he could start life afresh? What had he to live for? What would his aim in life be? To live in order to exist? (p. 552).

If only Raskolnikov could feel a repentance of his crime, he would completely gain freedom in prison. It will be completely difficult for a prisoner to feel free while he does not consider himself to be guilty.

The most significant change occurs when Sonia, who fulfils her promise to follow Raskolnikov to Siberia, suffers from an illness. In Siberia, Sonia always spends sometime visiting Raskolnikov and then reports his condition to Dunya and Razumikhin. The proud Raskolnikov turns into the humble when he realizes that Sonia has done self-sacrifice for him. At last, he descends himself, admitting that he loves her and really needs her by his side.

How it happened he did not know, but suddenly something seemed to seized him and throw him at her feet. He embraced her knees and wept. At first she was terribly frightened, and her face was covered by a deathly pallor. She jumped to her feet and, trembling all over, looked at him. But at once and at the same moment she understood everything. Her eyes shone with intense happiness; she understood, and she had no doubts at all about it, that he loved her, loved her infinitely, and that the moment she had waited for so long had come at last (p. 557).

Raskolnikov has learnt a new concept of living, which is living for others. A sensation of resurrection overcomes him and renews his being.

We have seen that Raskolnikov, as many other protagonists, undergoes changes as the story progresses. Personality changes that happen to him are not instant, nor they are radical changes. These changes take place step by step beginning with the smaller changes. Both internal and external factors are getting involved in changing Raskolnikov’s personality. His entire personality pattern changes when he already achieves a new self-concept. 47

C. Existentialism Reflected in Raskolnikov

From the two previous discussions, we have seen almost a whole picture of Raskolnikov from the beginning until the end of the story. As the protagonist,

Raskolnikov has undergone a journey of all mankind, a journey of freedom. As stated earlier in the introduction, freedom is the most important right possessed by human being. Extremely speaking, a human being is freedom. Discussing freedom, we must refer to a philosophical school named existentialism. In this part, the writer will observe the characteristics of Raskolnikov using Sartrean existentialism since Sartre’s view on freedom is the most extreme.

Sartre firmly states that existentialism is a humanism. Thus, it posits freedom as the only essence of human being. In Crime and Punishment, the murder committed by Raskolnikov can be best representation of freedom of doing. From this point of view, it is clearly seen that a man is free to do what he wants to do. The act of murdering is, of course, considered as a crime according to legal law. Religious teaching calls it as sin. In the eye of morality, such action will be classified as wrong. To such phenomena, existentialists will recall freedom, with which a human being is condemned, as a response.

An act, according to Sartre, should be intentional. A careless smoker who has caused the explosion of a powder magazine through negligence has not acted.

Thus, the murder done by Raskolnikov should be considered as an action since he really intends to kill the old woman. Nonetheless, it does not entail that the doer must foresee all the consequences of his act. In fact, Raskolnikov is completely blind of the disharmony happening to him after he commits the murder. Such 48

consequence is beyond his expectation. This is to say that the doer only foresees the consequences as far as his intention.

Discussing action, we should inevitably draw our concern to motive for there is always a motive behind every action. In the case of Raskolnikov’s act, we are even dealing with two motives. The first is the environment including the social and economic condition. In the first part of the analysis, we have seen an awful economic condition in which Raskolnikov has been living since he has left the university. The situation is getting worse when he realizes that his family puts a great hope on him. All these burdens create a disappointment with the world.

Such disappointment is a phenomenon, on which all the existentialists put their major interest.

Raskolnikov’s disappointment with his world is reflected through his indifference to the society and his behavior of alienating himself. In the very beginning of the analysis, the writer has mentioned that Raskolnikov has a tendency to talk to himself rather than to have a conversation with others. In his mind, he has a belief, which is also the first principle of existentialism, that

“everything is in a man’s own hands” (p. 20). Sartre states in Existentialism is a

Humanism (1969: 291) that “man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself”. There entails a consequence for a man to create meaning in life by himself since he is a free agent. Raskolnikov is indeed anxious of the significance of his being. The quotation below may give an illustration how he still finds his being to be meaningless. 49

“However, I’m talking too much. It’s because I talk too much that I do nothing. Still I daresay the opposite is probably true too. I talk too much because I do nothing (p.20).

Here we might see Raskolnikov as a suffering individual.

It has been several months that Raskolnikov lives in debt to his landlady.

He earns living using the money sent by his mother which is not enough for his needs. As the backbone of his family, Raskolnikov does not want his mother and sister to be disappointed. Then he plans to murder a woman pawnbroker and rob her articles so that his mother does not have to send him money. This can be seen as Raskolnikov’s way to show his existence. Why should this old pawnbroker? To answer this question we must recall Raskolnikov’s view on his victim.

“The old hag is all rubbish!” he thought heatedly and impetuously. “The old woman is most probably a mistake. She doesn’t matter! The old woman was only an illness” (p. 291).

This description again proves Raskolnikov’s disappointment with the environment. What he means by an illness is perhaps related to capitalism, an ideology by which today’s world economy is constructed. For Raskolnikov, such terrible environment should be changed. The murder is the manifestation of his will to modify the shape of the world. He claims the crime to be justified since it is done for the sake of many people. For this claim Raskolnikov refers to his theory of extraordinary man, in which he also conveys his opinion on the nature of crime. As aforementioned, he divides human being into two categories; the ordinary and the extraordinary. This implies that man is free not only to act, but also to think. The problem rises when Raskolnikov becomes anxious to test 50

whether or not he belongs to the second category. This is the second motive which the writer identifies as psychological motive.

According to Raskolnikov’s theory, the extraordinary men have a right to step over the ancient norms if necessary for the goodness of all humankind. They have a duty to lead the world into its goal. Meaning to say, they are placed above the law. As for the ordinary, it is their nature to be conservative, respectable, and docile, even though they have the same right to exist in the world.

“The first category is always the master of the present; the second category the master of the future. The first preserves the world and increases its number; the second moves the world and leads it to its goal” (p. 278).

Looking at the nature of the second category, it suggests one tendency of existentialism, which is to place individual above the law. The existentialists believe that “a living human being is higher value than any abstract idea even the idea of the good” (Rentz, 1995: 296). However, if we examine the whole theory thoroughly, it can be noticed as a denial to another principle of existentialism. The classification of human being into two different categories with their own duties obviously betrays the hypothesis which says that existence precedes essence. This hypothesis indicates that a man has no essence which constructs his existence so that he can fill his life as he chooses. In his theory, Raskolnikov claims that a man is born with a duty. Thus, he should fulfill his duty in order to exist. Both the ordinary and extraordinary are not free. While the former has to be docile, the latter has to lead the world into its goal.

By saying that the extraordinary man has an exceptional right to step over the law which is not possessed by the ordinary one, Raskolnikov has betrayed the 51

principle of human freedom. In his essay on Cartesian freedom, Sartre explains his opinion about the equality of freedom for all human beings.

“It is evident that, precisely because this entire freedom is not a matter of degree, it belongs equally to every man. Or rather, – for freedom is not a quality among other qualities – it is evident that every man is a freedom” (p. 183).

Comparing the statement above with theory of extraordinary man will result in a finding that Raskolnikov fails in obeying the nature of human freedom. His theory tends to posit the ordinary man inferior to the extraordinary. In other words, extraordinary man has more freedom than the ordinary one, while Sartre firmly declares that freedom is equal for all men.

Up to this level, we have just discussed the surface of the psychological motive. A deeper observation needs to be held on Raskolnikov’s obsessive- compulsive. Actually there is nothing wrong when Raskolnikov proposes the presence of great men such as Newton, Mahomet, Napoleon, and so on, as a premise of his extraordinary man theory. He places those men into the second category based on their existences. Thus, their essence comes after their existence.

The problem rises when he is obsessed to prove that he also belongs to the category in which Napoleon is included. Since it is the right to transgress the law that separates extraordinary man from the ordinary one, the only way to test whether or not he is an extraordinary man is by breaking the law. While holding such obsession, he meets Alyona Ivanovna, the pawnbroker. Raskolnikov then thinks that the pawnbroker only gives nothing but problems to the society so that her death will bring benefit for many people. However, instead of being a benefactor of the others, Raskolnikov commits the murder for only himself. 52

“I wanted to murder, Sonia, to murder without casuistry, to murder for my own satisfaction, for myself alone. I didn’t want to tell a lie about it. I did not commit this murder to become the benefactor of humanity by gaining wealth and power – that, too, is nonsense” (p. 432).

Raskolnikov has betrayed not only one principle of freedom, but also his own words.

The murder is indeed a manifestation of Raskolnikov’s freedom to act.

However, the essence of freedom is far beyond its expression. According to

Sartre, freedom should appear in the very first condition of action. This is to say that a man is free not only to act, but even not to act. In fact, Raskolnikov does not undergo such condition. His mind is already conquered by the anxiety to test whether or not he is an extraordinary man. As aforementioned, murdering the pawnbroker has become his only choice in doing so. He realizes this after the murder has been done, “All I could do was to kill! And it seems I couldn’t even do that!” (p. 291). The fact that he undergoes a disharmony soon after committing the murder makes Raskolnikov think that his action has failed. This experience of disharmony proves that he is not an extraordinary man.

Besides the discussions on freedom and existence, Raskolnikov’s obsessive-compulsive also offers a discourse on the modes of being. Sartre divides modes of being into two types. The first is being-in-itself, meaning being as what it is. The characteristic of this mode of being is to be passive. This category includes things like trees, tables, and rocks, which have specific roles and functions for particular purposes. The second type is being-for-itself, which is the negation of the first type. Since a man has consciousness that differentiates him from those things, he should refuse the being-in-itself. In being-for-itself, a 53

man can make a life of himself. Having been monomaniac to his own theory,

Raskolnikov does not stand in the position of being free. Instead of making a life of himself, he happens to be trapped on imitating Napoleon, whom he considers as an extraordinary man. He forgets that Napoleon does not conquer a nation in order to fulfill his duty. Napoleon has no tendency to prove that he is an extraordinary man.

It has been mentioned in the discussion of the first motive that the murder is Raskolnikov’s way to show his existence. It implies an assumption that he still considers his life meaningless. Thus, he wants to escape from such a condition by the for-itself. What is inconsistent in Raskolnikov’s act is that he has a determination in the way he creates the existence. The for-itself cannot be determined to particular being. In contrast, it is the presence of the for-itself which causes the existence of this being. In doing the murder, Raskolnikov has an expectation that his act will lead into a conclusion that he is an extraordinary man.

It is this determination which makes him suffer after the murder has been committed. The murder itself is indeed success in the sense that the pawnbroker is taken down. However, Raskolnikov considers it has failed on account of the agony he has undergone. For Sartre, a success is not important in relation to freedom, due to the nature of freedom.

In addition it is necessary to point out to “common sense” that the formula “to be free” does not mean “to obtain what one has wished” but rather “by oneself to determine oneself to wish” (in the broad sense of choosing). In other words success is not important to freedom (p. 459).

It is therefore the consequence of his own determination that Raskolnikov completely loses his pride. All the agonies from which he suffers prove that he is 54

just ordinary man (according to the theory constructed by himself). In parallel, finding that he cannot be Napoleon brings him into a greater agony. Interestingly, it is this same agony that leads Raskolnikov into a new self. This is what the writer is going to discuss in the next paragraph.

In the second part of the analysis the writer has described the disharmony undergone by Raskolnikov; how he is haunted by fear, how he is self-alienated, and so on. These sufferings indeed play a significant role in changing his understanding of self-concept, which then results in personality changes. Finding that living in such disharmony is miserable, Raskolnikov wants to escape from that condition. One way to end the terror once coming to his mind is to drown himself to the river. However, he cancels it. He realizes that it is not the best solution for his problem. In this situation, Raskolnikov can be seen as having an existential decision. For existentialists, death is the only limit of freedom. Thus, committing suicide means terminating our own freedom.

For a reason yet he does not understand, Raskolnikov promises to Sonia that he will tell her who kills Lisaveta. In fact, he considers it is important to make a confession. For a long time he has realized that his suffering needs an immediate solution. Finally he finds someone to whom he is willing to confess. However, he does not think that he should make a confession to the police. He keeps insisting that he has done no crime since the one he kills is an unworthy person whose death will bring benefit to many others.

“Crime? What crime?” he exclaimed in a kind of sudden frenzy. “That I killed a nasty, harmful, wicked louse, an old hag of a money-lender, a woman who was of no use to anybody, for whose murder a score of sins 55

should be forgiven, a woman who made the life of the poor a hell on earth – do you call that a crime?” (p. 529).

The quotation above clearly shows Raskolnikov’s arrogance. It is this arrogance which then becomes the obstacle of his purification.

Nonetheless, again without a certain reason, Raskolnikov decides to confess to the police, “I’m going now to give myself up. But I don’t know why

I’m doing it” (p. 529). Here we see the confession is not an obligation, but rather a choice. Existentialism puts everyman in possession of himself as he is and places the entire responsibility of his existence upon his own shoulders. What

Raskolnikov has undergone might best be an illustration of this statement. Instead of to the law or morality, he is responsible rather to himself.

The people around who always take care of Raskolnikov have a great influence in changing the way he sees himself. In existentialism, the presence of the Other (the writer uses Sartre’s term) may affect one’s being. By the time a man is the subject of his life, he is also an object for the Other. Through his family and fellows, Raskolnikov sees himself that is not in the possession of himself. He is always wondering why they keep loving him although he behaves indifferently.

“But why do they love me so much, if I’m not worthy of such love? Oh, if only I were alone and no one loved me and I, too, had never loved anyone! There would have been nothing of all this!” (p. 531 - 532).

In Sonia, Raskolnikov finds a tremendous love. She keeps her promise to accompany him when he is imprisoned in Siberia. It seems that she lives for him.

Raskolnikov is indeed touched by her sacrifice. He finally descends himself and shows that he also loves her. Sonia’s faith and love have a great contribution in transforming the proud Raskolnikov into the humble. Embracing a new self- 56

concept, he feels being renewed. Here, he has achieved the high existential act where he succeeds in releasing himself from the disharmony and creating a new self without any determination.

Is it then still necessary to classify the philosophy of existentialism that is reflected in Raskolnikov’s personality changes into theistic or atheistic? It cannot be denied that Dostoyevsky puts several symbols of Christianity in Crime and

Punishment, such as the cross which offered to Raskolnikov. Sonia’s love can also be seen as a major value of Christianity. However, Raskolnikov gets himself purified without having the same conviction as Sonia does. In “Existentialism Is a

Humanism”, Sartre (1969: 311) says that existentialism is not atheistic in the sense that it would struggle to prove the non-existence of God. Its concern is more on the consequence of God’s existence, that men will completely lose their controls of themselves. Nevertheless, a good theistic doctrine will not suppress man’s desire to be a creative creature. In the essay titled “Terang Yang

Tersembunyi dalam Kegelapan”, included in Sesudah Filasfat, Sindhunata (2006:

8, my own translation) cites an essay about creation written by Joseph A. Tetlow

SJ. A creation does not mean that God just creates everything all at once and neither is a starting point to become something. Instead, the creation is done continuously and dynamically. CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION

From the analysis that has been done, the writer will try to draw a vivid conclusion. The conclusion is deduced from the findings of the study on each research questions.

Through Raskolnikov, Dostoyevsky has illustrated a man’s journey to gain freedom and understanding of his existence. He also has gone into the deepest part of psychological combat that a murderer might have. Raskolnikov, the protagonist of the story, is depicted as a clever dropped out-student who finds his life to be meaningless. He lives apart from his family in a country named Petersburg. His life is far from decent. As an unemployment, he cannot earn a living properly.

Having an awful economic condition, Raskolnikov blames the environment. His being indifferent to the others reflects the disappointment toward the society. He is described as a proud man who finds it difficult to join the crowds.

Finding his life to be meaningless, Raskolnikov wants to show his existence by murdering the old woman pawnbroker. He considers this action as a heroic act because he thinks that the pawnbroker’s death will bring benefit to many people. A murder is a crime according to legal law. However, existentialism throws away any norm constructed by human being. It proposes freedom as the only endowment with which a man is condemned. The murder itself becomes an obsession for Raskolnikov. He uses it as an experiment to test whether or not he is an extraordinary man, a category of human being who has a right to step over the

57 58

law. The murder becomes the only way to answer his anxiety. This anxiety has confined his freedom.

The murder happens due to Raskolnikov’s arrogance. It is shown by his ambition to be included into the category of extraordinary man. By doing so, actually he has overlapped his own theory. He steps over the law in order to test whether or not he is an extraordinary man. However, he states in his theory that it is only the extraordinary man who has the right to transgress the law. It can be concluded that Raskolnikov claims himself to be an extraordinary man. From the point of view of existentialism, the murder can be seen as a manifestation of man’s freedom to act. Nonetheless, at the same time it is a treachery of the essence of freedom.

The agonies from which Raskolnikov suffers after committing the murder prove that he is just an ordinary man. The agonies then bring a domino effect to him. He becomes more indifferent, even to his beloved mother and sister.

However, Raskolnikov gradually undergoes a process of personality changes. The love which the others give to him is the most important factor in his transformation. He learns a new concept of living, that is living for others. The failure of his experiment makes him realize that he cannot be anything but himself. It is this change on self-concept, as Hurlock said, that results in the changes on the entire personality pattern.

As for the murder, Raskolnikov regrets that he should have done such useless experiment. He feels sorry for having done that silly thing. However, he refuses to admit that the murder is a crime. In fact, Dostoyevsky seems to 59

emphasize more on the inner punishment than the legal one. It can be seen as a representation of existentialism tendency which places a man above the law.

The psychological combat that occurs to Raskolnikov’s mind dominates the whole story. It takes a long time for Raskolnikov to get himself purified, which is signed by his repentance. Here the writer sees that Raskolnikov has undergone a series of phenomena which usually happen to a person who has done a sin. Soon after Raskolnikov commits the murder, he experiences a kind of disharmony. His life is completely haunted by fear. In the second phase, he is sorry for the mistake he has done. In this level, a sinner usually wonders why he/she should have done such sin. The final stage is the emergence of repentance.

Raskolnikov at last admits that he has done a mistake. His remorse reflects the fall of his pride that has occupied him for a long period. The proud Raskolnikov transforms into the humble one. This process of transformation conveys the nature of humanity, which always continuously modifies the heart of a man, from being self-centered into being self-sacrificing. Raskolnikov reaches a high existential act in the moment of purification where he succeeds liberating himself from his pride. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abrams, M.H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1981.

Audi, Robert. ed. Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Barret, William. Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy. New York: Doubleday Anchor Book, 1962.

Collins, James. The Existentialists: A Critical Study. Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1952.

Corsini, Raymond. J. ed. Concise Encyclopedia of Psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1987.

Gibson, A Boyce. The Religion of Dostoyevsky. Philadelphia: Westmenster Press, 1973.

Dostoyevsky, Fyodor Mikhailovic. Crime and Punishment, Translated and Introduction by David Magarshack. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, Ltd., 1958.

Forster, E.M. Aspects of the Novel and Related Writings. London: Edward Arnold, 1974.

Guerin, Wilfred L. et al. A Handbook of Critical Approach to Literature. New York: Harper and Row Publisher, 1999.

Harvey, W.J. Character and the Novel. New York: Cornell University Press, 1965.

Hurlock, Elizabeth B. Personality Development. New York: Mc Graw-Hill Book Company, 1974.

Karl, Frederick R. and Leo Hamalian. “Introduction.” The Existential Imagination. eds. Frederick R. K and Leo H. Greenwich: Fawcett Publications, Inc., 1963.

Kaufmann, Walter. “Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre”. Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre. ed. Walter Kaufmann. New York: Meridian Book, 1969. pp. 11-51.

Klarer, Mario. An Introduction to Literary Studies. New York: Routledge, 1999.

60 61

Knight, Everett W. Literature Considered as Philosophy the French Example. New York: Collier Book, 1957.

Magil, Frank M. Masterpiece World of Literature. New York: Harper and Row Publisher, 1989.

Murphy, M.J. Understanding Unseens: an Introduction to English Poetry and the English Novel for Overseas Students. London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1972.

Nauman, St. Elmo. ed. The New Dictionary of Existentialism. Secaucus: The Citadel Press, 1972.

Perrine, Laurence. Literature: Structure, Sound and Sense. New York: Hartcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1974.

Rentz, P. A. “Existentialism”. The Encyclopedia of Ethics. ed. J.K. Roth. Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publisher, 1995.

Sartre, Jean-Paul. Existentialism and Humanism, Translated and Introduction by Philip Mairet. London: Mathuen & Co. Ltd., 1960.

Sartre, Jean-Paul. Existentialism is a Humanism. 1946. Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre. ed. Walter Kaufmann. New York: Meridian Book, 1969. pp. 287-311.

Sartre, Jean-Paul. “Cartesian Freedom”. Literary and Philosophical Essays. tran. Annette Michelson. New York: Collier Book, 1970.

Sartre, Jean-Paul. Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. tran. Hazel E. Barnes. Bristol: J.W. Arrowsmith Ltd., 1976.

Sindhunata, G. P. “Terang Yang Tersembunyi dalam Kegelapan”. in Sesudah Filsafat. eds. I. Wibowo and Herry Priyono. Yogyakarta: Kanisius, 2006. pp. 1-28

Susanto, Hary. “Memeluk Agama, Menemukan Kebebasan: Mercia Eliade tentang Manusia Arkhais”. in Sesudah Filsafat. eds. I. Wibowo and Herry Priyono. Yogyakarta: Kanisius, 2006. pp. 301-333.

Troisfontaines, Roger. What Is Existentialism?. New York: Magi Books, Inc., 1968. VanSpanckeren, Kathryn. Outline Of American Literature. _. The United States Information Agency, 1994. 62

(1 May 2006)

(29 January 2007)

(29 January 2007) APPENDIX

Summary of Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment

Set in St. Petersburg, the novel first introduces Rodion Romanovich

Raskolnikov as the protagonist, from whose point of view the story is mostly told.

The novel consists of six chapters, and ends with an epilogue. The first chapter describes Raskolnikov’s characteristics and the problems he holds. He is depicted as a clever dropped out-student who lives in abject poverty. Since he is the only man in the family, his mother and sister put a great hope on him. He then kills a pawnbroker in order to rob the money. The murder itself proves to have dual motive. He is obsessed to prove that he is an extraordinary man, as Napoleon.

The second until the sixth chapters are dominated by the disharmony from which Raskolnikov suffer. The disharmony is a kind of psychological punishment for his crime. Initially, he insists that what he has done is not a crime, and refuses to confess before the law. His high pride increases his indifference to others.

However, his pride finally falls down since the suffering goes worse. In such suffering, Raskolnikov feels there is no use to stay alive. An idea of committing suicide once comes to his mind. In the end, which is in the epilogue, Raskolnikov succeeds in obtaining his new self, which is signed by his repentance. The endless love from the people who care for him plays an important role in transforming

Raskolnikov, from being proud to being humble.

63