The drive to find reason and order is the basis for nearly all human endeavors, and such an impetus is well represented in literature. Yet, as the protagonists of Crime and Punishment and the Inferno develop in their respective narratives, they soon come to the realization that the logic that they once applied to the world may not be valid. These intellectual metamorphoses can be summed up in a quotation from La Celestina. Both Raskolnikov and Dante view their world as rational and just. This rational ideology provides the former a sense of certainty and constancy, yet the latter initially cannot reason through the chaos of his situation. However, as they progress through their stories, each character quickly recognizes the error of such beliefs and becomes pressed by forces both internal and external to modify their ideologies. For Raskolnikov, such a reformation is gradual, complete, and ultimately unsatisfying; his reformed ideology is in accord with the quotation, as from his logical mind springs disorder. Conversely, the transformation of Dante’s character is more abrupt yet more subtle, and the change itself is the reverse of that of the character paraphrased from La Celestina: rejecting the chaos of reason he finds order in the truth of the divine.
For Raskolnikov, the world is governed by certain cardinal laws that could be learned and subsequently utilized by man for his own purposes. His interpretation of these laws was obviously influenced by his isolation for the majority of his adult life--they do not translate well to the practical world. Raskolnikov developed a highly theoretical system of beliefs that he was to realize by murdering the moneylender and her sister. He hypothesized that certain men could be worthy of transcending established law and creating a new world order:
...I know...that he who is strong in mind and spirit will be [the commoners’]
master. He who dares much is right....He who dismisses with contempt what
men regard as sacred becomes their law-giver, and he who dares more than
anyone is more right than anyone....that power is given only to him who dares
to stoop and take it. (Dostoyevsky, 431)
Raskolnikov frequently uses the model of Napoléon as justification for his actions; he does in fact view himself as a modern Bonaparte throughout the early stages of the novel. Therefore, he does not believe that by killing the old woman he is committing a crime, but instead freeing himself from any hindrances to his future greatness. Yet, while such a philosophy is perfectly valid when analyzed cognitively, its application to the physical world is greatly flawed. The most damaging of all the “wilde Beasts” (La Celestina) that accost Raskolnikov is his own conscience. He had failed to include the human element in his equation, and he often acknowledges this error in the final parts of the text; the con of his reason was his exclusion of his emotions. While he rationally scrutinized every detail concerning his upcoming action--from the method of concealing his hatchet to what hat he should wear--he falsely judged his emotional control:
If only [he could] succeed in keeping [his] will and [his] reasoning faculties
unimpaired, then all the difficulties will be overcome....there was consequently
no danger of his reason or will-power being in any way affected during the
carrying out of his plan, simply because what he intended to do was ‘not a
crime’. (Dostoyevsky, 90-1)
Raskolnikov ultimately does not control his emotions during the murder and loses himself in the moment. He mechanically kills the sister of the moneylender and leaves behind the trail of physical evidence that he had planned to conceal. The death of the moneylender herself does not seem to weigh greatly upon his conscience, but the ‘accidental’ murder of her sister is of great agitation to him. Frequently assaulted by his guilt, Raskolnikov feels oppressed every time a possible path to freedom presents itself: after another man confesses to his crime, he “[felt] as though an enormous weight had pinned him to the ground, as though he had been drugged. Ever since that scene with Nikolay in Porfiry’s office he had begun to feel cramped and stifled” (Dostoyevsky, 458). There is definitely “no certainty in [the] calmes [of the world]” (La Celestina), the “calmes” in this instance being Raskolnikov’s apparent freedom. His anxiety in such moments ultimately leads to an understanding of the importance of uncertainty and disorder in the world. By the end of the text he has recognized the flaws in his ideology and consequently confesses his guilt. Conversing with Sonia, he blames his crime not on a Nietzsche-esque ‘superman’ ideal, but on the devil: “...I had no right to possess the power....I was not a Napoléon....the devil had dragged me there, and that it was only afterwards that he explained to me...that I was the same kind of louse as the rest” (Dostoyevsky, 432-3). Apparently he has completely rejected his formal ‘great-man’ ideology in favour of Christian supplication. Such a metamorphosis is somewhat unsatisfying, as Dostoyevsky’s skilful manipulation imparts in the reader a desire to witness Raskolnikov succeed in transcending from the plight of the average person. His character becomes uninspired and uninteresting, and one does not get the sense that he will ever become a ‘superman’ in the future. Perhaps the reader is left to ponder their own “Dance full of changes” (La Celestina), and modify their own rationale. Yet it cannot be ignored that when Raskolnikov finally finds peace after experiencing the chaos of his idealism, there cannot be a continuation of his story.
While the minutiae of Dante’s elementary ideology are not described explicitly, the details concerning his philosophical transformation are apparent. He is introduced in the text as having gone “astray/ from the straight road and [waking up] to find [himself]/ alone in a dark wood” (Dante, p. 1286, 1-3). Feeling inspired when he sees the light of the sun, which he interprets as a sign of hope, he attempts to escape from this wood by climbing over the first hill that he sees; such to him is the most logical solution to his entrapment. This easy resolution is not attainable, however, as Dante’s progress is arrested by three beasts representing the vices of worldliness. Driven back to the darkness of ignorance, the figure of Virgil appears to guide him down through the slope of Hell. Initially reacting to his isolation by relying on his rationality to guide him from the wood demonstrates one of the principal elements of Dante’s ideology: his faith in human logic. Taken in its obviously Christian context, such was contrary to divine truth and constitutes the primary deficiency of all humanity and can be traced to the fall of Adam and Eve. The wood itself could represent this error inherent in mortal life. Dante’s descent through the underworld is an attempt for his reason to bring him closer to that divine truth. Yet, while his initial confidence in logic hindered his progress, such logic was unguided and unbounded. By introducing Virgil as a guide, Dante’s reason becomes refined to see only what must be seen in order to acknowledge sin. Through logic Dante is to transcend logical thought and achieve divine grace. This paradox remains incomprehensible to him until he encounters the various sinners in hell. Through a gradual and labyrinthine process of acquaintance and cognizance of their sins, Dante realizes that all the sinners have been condemned for subjecting themselves to the same vices that originally led him “from the True Way” (1286, 12). They are then subject to the unearthly logic of hell and punished according to their crimes. Therefore, in accordance with this logic, for his faith in logic Dante is ‘punished’ by being led through hell by the personification of reason. In this instance the punishment allows the criminal the freedom to sublimate himself and change his philosophy to conform to the will of the condemner; Dante is the only ‘sinner’ in the text allowed this freedom. The souls are withheld from the divine light of truth because of their inability to see beyond reason, and they are therefore damned to an eternity without hope. Indeed, the poet seems to suggest that there is not even a place for hope in the world, which the pilgrim had originally relied on, as it must literally be abandoned before journeying towards spiritual enlightenment. Dante has in fact abandoned any thoughts of hope for the journey through hell: he shows no desire or excitement toward the prospect of exiting from the underworld. Alternately, he demonstrates a resignation to the journey itself; he has learned that there is no reason for either despair or hope as his ordeal is governed entirely by divine reason. Thus Dante becomes more sure of his path and more certain of his future. He no longer wanders lost in the “valley of evil/ whose maze had sapped [his] very heart with fear” (1287, 13-14) as he had before his journey, but “without thought of rest/...climb[s] the dark” (1423, 139-40) certain that he is on the path to enlightenment. Dante’s philosophical transformation, therefore, is opposite to that suggested by the quotation from La Celestina. While he once looked at the world rationally and found only chaos, he rejected human logic in favour of divine reason and found the world to indeed be “governed by order and ruled by reason” (La Celestina).
The common belief shared by both Raskolnikov and Dante at the end of their respective texts is a faith in divine order. Initially, each of them subscribed to human logic and reason yet ultimately found such an outlook erroneous. While Dante became liberated and enlightened by such a realization and ultimately found salvation, it seems as though Raskolnikov lost his soul during his metamorphosis. Certainly his appeal is diminished in the eyes of the reader. Originally observing the world in a rational manner, he was driven into a state of chaos. Yet upon rejecting his logic and accepting divine will, he became insipid and lifeless. Conversely, Dante became rejuvenated by his subjugation to the machinations of the divine, and consequently remains an interesting character. Such shifts in the ideologies and consequent salvation or damnation of these two disparate characters are both Pro or Con.
Bibliography
Alighieri, Dante. Inferno. Trans. John Ciardi. The Norton Anthology of World Masterpieces.
Gen. Ed. Maynard Mack. 6th ed. Vol. 1. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1992.
1286-1423.
Dostoyevsky, Fyodor. Crime and Punishment. Trans. David Magarshack. London: Penguin
Books, 1951.
No comments:
Post a Comment