Crimen Y Castigo

This review may contain spoilers, so read at your own risk. This is more of my thoughts during the book rather than a traditional review. Also, I started reading this as an ebook and, halfway through, I bought a physical copy.Starting this book, I wasn't sure what to think or what I was going into, but I really wanted to read it because it's listed as a classic and most people have read it during school, something which I didn't have the option to do.My biggest annoyance with this book is the fact that most of the time, full names are used each time a character appears or speaks rather than just their first or last name. Given the fact that it takes me ages just to sound out the names, to begin with, it's fairly annoying having to repeat both first and last names every time that character appears.About halfway through this book, I came to a simple conclusion: all of the men in this story are nuts. They talk on for ages and most of it is just jumbled nonsense. They're worse than a couple of old maids gossiping at the salon lolRazumihin, for whatever reason, quickly became my favorite character. There was just something about him that drew me in, but I had to seriously rethink this the moment he met Dounia. He turned into a total neckbeard and reading it made me feel soooo uncomfortable. He definitely lost a lot of respect from me for that scene, yeesh.Now, as stated in the beginning, I started this book as an ebook on Google Play because it was free but I hate reading digital books. It's just not the same as holding a physical copy in your hands, plus headaches, ugh. I really enjoyed this book so far, so I bought a physical copy and they seem to be quite different. The PC has been edited to make more sense and, at the time, I was faced with a choice - continue on with the digital copy which I wasn't fond of, or pick up halfway through the PC and let the cards fall where they may. I suppose both are saying the exact same thing, just in different wording, yeah? I chose the PC.I can't stand Peter. He's so damn self-righteous and full of himself. I think he might even believe the bullshit that comes out of his mouth. Dounia can do so much better than this douchebag. It kinda sucks because I was actually rooting for him when he first made his appearance, and totally not just because I love his damn name. Peter Petrovich - beautiful name, ugly-ass man. He's the type that always has to have the last word and won't let anything go, he just keeps coming back for more."He failed to understand how others could not but admire him for his heroism."I won't lie. I literally laughed out loud when I read this damn line. The NERVE of this man! He has such a god complex. Even thinking about it now, I'm trying not to laugh.Now, I'm not sure if there's anything wrong with Rodia, if there is any, but I get the feeling that maybe he's depressed or feeling anxious. Then again, he's under a lot of stress so maybe it's not a disorder and it's just stress. Either way, I feel for him. I really fell for this character.And can I just mention how fucking suspicious Porfiry is?? I honestly can't tell if he's being genuine or playing cat-and-mouse with Rodia and it makes me uncomfortable. It feels like the Cheshire cat swatting at a mouse. I don't know if he suspects him or if he's just weird and I know it's stressing Rodia out because it's stressing ME out by reading it.There's a couple times when the story shifts to focus on people other than Rodia and when it does, it becomes so boring for me to read, like a chore I'm forcing myself to do that I'd rather avoid. It's strange because I feel super invested when Rodia is the center focus but the side characters, at least the ones chosen, I have no love for and I just don't care about them. By the way, Katherine is a total fucking bitch and I can't stand her. She reminds of me of Mean Girls 50 Years Later. Those poor kids, man.I actually didn't hate Svidrigailov when he first appeared. I thought he was quirky and interesting, but my god. When he started talking about his 16-year-old fiance, I felt so creeped out. The way he talked about her and knowing how young she is, it was so fucking creepy. Now I can't think about anything else when he appears. Plus, his name is used so many damn times I found myself repeating his name in my head like a random song that starts playing in your head for no reason. So thanks for that, I guess.Aaaaand his creepiness just hit the fucking roof when he tried to take advantage of Dounia! What the fuck, man. I would have been so pissed if he hurt her. His only redeeming quality is the fact that he let her go without hurting her. I mean, yeah he's being super generous with his money which is praise-worthy but that doesn't forgive the shitty way he acts and treats people. He could give away a lifetime of fortune but he'd still be a fuckin' creep."He began to undress her."Reading this line while following his storyline made me feel sick to my stomach and my mind immediately went to the worse (as it typically does). I had a feeling he was going to kill himself, but I wasn't sure if the book was going to take that turn or not, but it did. Damn.When it came to Pulcheria's death, that really struck my heart hard, I almost started crying. She was so distraught without even knowing the full extent of the situation. Maybe it was worse because she didn't know and her mind was able to run wild. That poor woman, may she rest in peace ='(So, the physical copy of this book came with an Afterword by Robin Feuer Miller and he asks a few questions that I'd like to try and answer.Q) Is this the ending to the novel that you expected?Honestly, I wasn't sure what to expect with the ending. If I had to guess, I would have leaned more toward the side that he would keep holding the secret as opposed to turning himself in.Q) Did the narrative tone of the epilogue jar you?I didn't even really notice a difference, to be honest. It just felt more... rushed and jumbled together but I guess that makes sense since the story was officially over. It was just a kind of TL;DR of what happened after he turned himself in.Q) Now that you have finished this novel, do you know why Raskolnikov committed his crimes? Has he really repented of them?I don't. I don't think anyone can know for sure without walking in his shoes. Personally, I feel like he committed the murder, not for money, but because he wanted to see if he could get away with it. I want to believe he repented because I really do love him, but the pessimist in me says he doesn't and probably never will. He doesn't regret his choice and he would probably do it again if he had the chance to rewind time.Q) Has he changed much from the character that he was at the beginning? If so, at what point did this change occur?I feel like he changed a couple of times. He seemed fairly normal and relaxed at the beginning, but he quickly started to spiral into madness with emotions running high and he became super irritable, like a grumpy old man. The smallest thing would set him off. But then, when the time came, he started to show a bit of who he really is deep down, I think - the soft, caring Rodia as he hugged his mother. I feel like this is his true self, a warm caring man that he hides heavily behind moodiness and by shoving people away. Then I feel like he became super cold during the Epilogue like he was trying to pretend he had no feelings. Finally, in the very last portion of the Epilogue, it's like he became a whole new person. Like, he WAS a new person, it was strange.Q) Why did you first decide to read this particular novel? What kept you reading it?I chose to read this book because 1, it was free and 2, it's a classic. Lots of people have mentioned/praised this book, or have been forced to read it in school. Since I never got that opportunity and it was free, I decided to give it a shot.Overall, I enjoyed this book and got really attached to the main character and his story, though I don't think it hit me as hard as it was meant to because I'm not very smart lol Most of it went over my head in terms of politics and psychology.

Esta incompleto el audiolibro y no lo advierte en ninguna parte

Muy bueno!!! Recomendable , mucha pasion en la lectura! Y clara

Excelente narración, se agradece. Muy buena historia crimen y castigo

I first read this book fifteen years ago as a high school student. I was gripped by the mystery of it--not knowing what would happen to the narrator who, it is fairly clear from page one, is thinking of doing something horrible, and wondering throughout whether he would get caught. I was also swept up in the idea that a novel could be not just a story, but a philosophy: an exposition, through characters' perspectives, of what is true about life, faith, and politics. My classmates found Marmeladov's drunken ramblings on suffering as a vehicle for salvation dry, dull, and depressing; I was coming into the beginnings of my independent religious consciousness, and latched on to the idea that faith could be a personal and individual thing. I had always disliked how easily authors and directors made me root for the bad guy, and I found myself so smitten with the possibility that we are each villains in our own ways, and can be redeemed to do the right thing in the end. In short, I fell in love with this book, which quickly garnered the distinction as my favourite of all time, not only as an important novel, but as a moving and compelling story.The acclaim in which I held this book for so long made me a bit tentative about going back to it fifteen years later, but I am so glad for having done so. I can be more open now about the writing style in comparison with other great works I have read since; it is, without a doubt, a nineteenth century text, and one whose reading requires a great deal of investment--not work, per se, but close attention. And yet, the deeper meanings of the novel stand out in even sharper relief to me than they did on the first go. I find myself taking the perspective of each of the characters, not just Raskolnikov, and marvelling at how well Dostoevsky brings each of them to life with a psychology and a spirituality that is uniquely and realistically their own. I find myself more critical of the themes of the novel in view of my own understanding of Christian truth, yet more desperate than ever to piece together how and when, for Raskolnikov, his actions and his understanding combine into a coherent whole. And I find myself more appreciative than ever that the author does not gloss over the evil realities of life, but instead explores the heights of Christian redemption through the depths of the harshest sins, and does not permit his characters to slip painlessly into a happy ending, but demands, as God does of us, that they persevere for years in a growing understanding of His truth. This is the Christian fiction I wish more Christians could be bothered to aim for--not the heartfelt world of Amish farms, well-behaved children, and sexually pure courtships, but the far more compelling world of real people with real problems, getting life wrong, falling into the depths of despair, finding faith, and continuing to live in spite of their pain (not without it) simply because of some faint understanding in the bottom of their consciousness that there is one more reason out there not to give up hope. It is the fiction that would birth the C.S. Lewis and the Flannery O'Connor, as well as inspire a multitude of non-Christian authors who, in spite of not sharing the author's or the main character's views, would sense the significance of allowing their characters to be shaped by events and not simply molded by predestined happy endings. It is a book that seems to touch on my own psychology and heart more as I grow older and more experienced with disappointment and struggle. And though the mystery faded considerably after the first read, it is, because of all these things, still my all-time favourite book.

It was too depressing/confusing for me when I first read it; I might just need to read it again.

Veel minder gegrepen door de lectuur dan 24 jaar geleden. Wel sterk verhaal met hoogtepunten (droom in I 5, ruzie in IV 2, zelfmoord in VI 6 en slotscene), maar soms teveel nevenplots en te pathetische sc?nes. Indrukwekkend blijft de psychologie van de karaktertekeningen.

Excelente Lector !!! El Mejor de todos ?

It took me a long time to read Crime and Punishment. Partly because I was moving away from home at the time, and partly because it's quite intense, and thoughtful, and, well, psychological. I found it interesting how realistic parts of it were, in terms of how people act: Dostoyevsky knew what he was writing about, certainly. At the same time, the people are quite strange -- the investigator, always talking and spilling out his thoughts; the main character, always talking to himself; Mrs Marmeladov with her strange delusions... They all seem a little bit larger than life. It certainly gives them a life of their own, anyway.

In terms of the writing, the repetitions of things and the stating of the obvious and the sameness to the eccentricity of the characters somewhat bored me. Large chunks of it are just Raskolnikov dithering around and being delirious.

I can see why this is considered a great book, but I can't quite give it a whole-hearted "it was amazing" rating. It's something I might read again to ponder over some more.

Read and pieced together 3 different versions totaling about 621 pages (see wikipedia for explanations of why so many versions) Russian writing at its best. Written after Dostoevsky returned from Siberian gulag; although this is not what the book is about. The book attempts to both solidify and crumble notions that one has about philosophy and the nature of sin. Great read! 621 pages

The crime scene is amazing, suspenseful and thrilling. There are a few other scenes that rise to that level, but the interminable speeches and declamations are what made this a real slog for me. Also showing Raskolnikov is a moody bitch could have been more concise.

For a long time, I have looked along shelves at the book store, looking for books to read, and every time, I skipped over the Classics section. Compared to the books of today, the Classics seemed like they would be more of a chore than a fun way to escape from reality. But one day, I decided to take the plunge into this pool of literary greatness. The first book I picked up was Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky. I wasn't sure what I was getting into when I read the very first page, but now, I understand why books like Crime and Punishment are called the Classics. There is a depth and complexity in Crime and Punishment that I haven't yet encountered. It may be from my limited exposure to such novels, but it still is something worth noting. Dostoevsky delves deep into the mind of man and takes us on a journey through love and hate, joy and despair, through this tale of a young man and his tormented life.It's not enough to look at Crime and Punishment as just a novel that follows the same basic pattern that has been followed for centuries. This is a book that is much deeper than that. The book follows the life of a ex-student named Raskolonikov (Some characters refer to him as different names, but this is the most common), a young man who lives in St. Petersburg, Russia. He lives in completely deplorable conditions: he barley lives on a few coins in a very small attic and flirts on the edge of sanity. In this state, Raskolonikov is not the usual protagonist and in fact, he may be the perfect definition of an antihero. Sometimes, however, I found myself lost as the story went on. The story would be centered around a single thought or idea and change radically in a manner of paragraphs. Other times, the same idea would get stuck and persist through whole passages, leaving a very long and, in some instances, a very tedious workload. The transition from thoughts to spoken word can be a bit hard to discern, though it could be just a problem of the translation. Some passages I really enjoyed, but others just dragged on for a long time. Crime and Punishment is one of those books that you shouldn't spend too log of time reading. It's not that it's short or something that is easy to read, but with the different characters and other factors, it's easy to forget where you are, who the characters are, and how that scene fits into the running plot if you leave it untouched for too long. But for the reasons stated above, it can get hard to keep rolling through the book. I sometimes found myself rereading certain passages to understand what was going on, only to become lost in the grand scheme of things.Crime and Punishment is one of the books you should read at least once. Dostoevsky covers the base ideas of man in a thoughtful and interesting way. This book was a wake-up call to the type of literature that I still need to read. But, parts of the book just seemed too drawn out and longer than what it should have been. It is a very dense book and almost every line seemed to have some sort of significance, promoting a close analyzation of almost everything. I enjoyed Crime and Punishment and, while not everyone will necessarily like it, recommend others to try and read it at least once.

Read and pieced together 3 different versions totaling about 621 pages (see wikipedia for explanations of why so many versions) Russian writing at its best. Written after Dostoevsky returned from Siberian gulag; although this is not what the book is about. The book attempts to both solidify and crumble notions that one has about philosophy and the nature of sin. Great read! 621 pages

This book is not what I expected it be. It is sad but very comical. In fact, some time it is so sad that it is comical. But it's realism is not marred by cartoonish antics. The writing is operatic but supremely smart and witty. There are monologues upon monologues, but these monologues are page turners, building to wonderful observations upon life, some I most certainly did not believe our present day have in common with Russian society in the 1860s. Most importantly, even though this book is completely popular and is said to be THE book, it is still quite unpredictable as far as plot lines go. And the writing is wonderfully digestible. And even more, what a wonderfully horrible slash smart slash kind slash petty slash stubborn slash generous main character. There is no denying that we all identify with Raskolnikov at one point in the book.

Muy bien leído, me ha gustado mucho su voz y entonación.

Excelente narración me mantuvo interesada y entretenida muy además de que su levites es muy amena e interpretativa

The Fifth Floor. Julie Oleszek. 2015. This first person narrative of a young woman’s recovery from anorexia in a mental hospital is interesting it is but not as good as I remember I Never Promised You a Rose Garden or Girl Interrupted being. It was a freebie or almost freebie on Kindle and an okay read if you like this kind of book.

Buen libro buena trama, un clásico imperdible muy bien narrado

Excelente obra hace meditar mucho entre el bien ey el mar

Muy buena la narración... Pero otra vez le cortan al final.
Van dos audiolibros de este sello y es lo mismo, omiten el final.
Alguna razón en específico?
PD omiten matar que el protagonista es enviado 8 años a Siberia

"Crime and Punishment" is not about either, but about the space between. Little time is spent dwelling on motive before the title's crime occurs. It must be murder, to drive the story to be told, but in order to render maximum sympathy for Rodia the motive remains obscured and his efforts clumsy without personal gain. The majority of the story by far is focussed upon what comes after. Mortal paranoia works against Rodia and he contemplates every form of escape: confession, being accused of his crime at last, or achieving the absolute certainty of avoiding justice. It is difficult to watch him thrust away anyone who would help him, be they friends or family. Guilt drives loneliness; with whom can he share his agony before madness descends? As his straitened circumstances progress, he cannot accept being close with anyone besides those who would regard him as a benefactor, and seeks some form of kinship among society's lowest strata. When Rodia's motive becomes more clear, half the story is already done and the reader is no longer likely to pass summary judgement. By then we know his good side through how well-regarded he is by those who have known him best, and how protective he is of others even as he scorns them at the same time. It is impossible to hope that he will get away with murder, but it is something to hope that he will find the error in his thinking that led him astray. The question then is whether corporal punishment is required to see this realization through, or can a criminal arrive at redemption independently? Dostoevsky spent time as a political prisoner and had ample time to consider the purpose and impact of criminal justice upon society and those it punished. Reading into this novel the result of those musings, it seems to me he could not satisfy himself as to the answer and shared the mystery in this way we all may profit from.

This is a must read classic. It explores the mind of the kind-hearted Raskolnikov and his psychological journey to hell amidst poverty and corruption. I found this book riveting and difficult to put down. Dostoevsky describes the emotions of his characters in such way, it makes the reader actually feel what the characters are going through. This is Dostoevsky's greatest masterpiece and definitely a book everyone should read.

me encantara leer este libro

There is not much more I can say about this book that hasn't been said by hundreds of people throughout the years. On a personal note, I found this book to be outstanding and can easily see why it is considered one of the classics of literature. The way Dostoevsky gets into the mind of his character is as good writing as I have ever seen. The torment, guilt, hope, wonder, and range of dozens of emotions of the main character really hit home to the reader. I think everyone could connect in some way to the ideas in this story and although it is a slow read that takes some time, I think it is worth it for any avid reader.

Amazing, phenomenal, and well deserved to be called a masterpiece. For some reason, I had in my head that it would be about the Crime, of course, and then being in prison, with long pondering about guilt, remorse, etc. - and very dry. But I was completely wrong. It was exciting, suspenseful, with intriguing sub-plots and many layers to be uncovered. Wonderful, and I highly recommend it!

I first read this book in high school and was mesmerized. When my book club was considering reading some classics, I recommended it, and I find that I still love the book. It is a classic psychological thriller.

Un señor usa la culpa para torturar a otro señor.

A man, living in depressing poverty in a city full of small, horrible tragedies, commits a terrible crime for reasons that seem simple but probably aren't, then spends a long time in a complicated internal conflict between worrying that he'll be caught and wanting to confess. It became clear to me pretty quickly just why this is considered such a classic. Dostoevsky writes with an incredibly subtle, nuanced, and realistic view of human psychology, complete with an understanding of all the ways in which people lie to themselves, justify their own actions, and fail to entirely understand their own motivations. That's pretty impressive stuff, and by a hundred pages or so in, I was enjoying this book much more than I expected to -- if "enjoying" is quite the right word for a novel so full of awful stuff -- and even finding a sort of bleak humor in just how utterly incompetent the protagonist seemed to be at both criminality and penitence. There's also some wonderfully vivid characters. I think Pyotr Petrovich Luzhin is perhaps my new favorite most hate-able character in all of literature.It did begin to drag for me somewhere in the middle, though. I know it's silly to wish for this kind of novel to be a little bit shorter and pithier, but I found myself kind of wishing it, anyway. And I wasn't entirely satisfied with the note it ends on, but I think that's because Dostoevsky and I have different religious views, not because it isn't well-written. Still, I do now understand just why this Dostoevsky fellow is still considered so much worth reading. And maybe one of these days I will finally get around to The Brothers Karamazov.

Fantastic book, really up my alley. I loved the psychological and philosophical ramblings. I loved any and all dialog between Raskolnikov and Porfiry, and Raskolnikov and Sonya. The cat and mouse game between Porfiry and Rodya was particularly compelling. Some of the monologues and dialogues could drag a bit at times, and this book took me a long time to get through (almost a month). As much as I enjoyed it, I have to say that I am glad I'm finished with it. Raskolnikov's dark psyche was getting to me after a bit and making me broody.

Favorite quote (Spoilers):

Can't you see that I must have known that if I'd already started asking myself the question, "Do I have a right to power?", then it already meant I didn't. Or that if I asked, "Is a human being a louse?", then man was certainly no louse for me, only for someone to whom the question never occurs, and who sets off without asking questions.. And if I'd already tormented myself for so many days wondering, "Would Napoleon have gone or wouldn't he?", then I obviously knew that I was no Napoleon.. I endured all the agony of this empty talk, Sonya, all of it, and now I just wanted to shake it off. I wanted to kill without casuistry, Sonya, to kill for myself, for myself alone! I didn't want to lie about it, not even to myself! It wasn't to help mother that I killed - nonsense! It wasn't to acquire funds and power that I killed, so as to make myself a benefactor of humanity. Nonsense! I just killed. I killed for myself, for myself alone; and whether I'd become anyone's benefactor or spend my entire lite as a spider, catching Everyone in my web and sucking out their vital juices, shouldn't have mattered to me one jot at that moment!...

Raskolnikov's crime is a form of rebellion against the depraved society in which he lives: his nihilism is justified by his own ego. He compares himself to Napoleon more than once, making me wonder if Dostoevsky read Nietzsche's theories of der ubermensch.

The criminal's redemption at the feet of Sonya, former prostitute with a heart of gold, feels a little bit tacked on.