Suffering in Crime and Punishment Essays - English-language Films

Suffering in Crime and Punishment Essays - English-language Films Suffering in Crime and Punishment In the novel Crime and Punishment, by Fyodor Dostoevsky, suffering is an integral part of every characters role. However, the message that Dostoevsky wants to present with the main character, Raskolnikov, is not one of the Christian idea of salvation through suffering. Rather, it appears to me, as if the author never lets his main character suffer mentally throughout the novel, in relation to the crime, that is. His only pain seems to be physical sicknes. Raskolnikov commits a premeditated murder in a state of delirium. He ends up committing a second murder, which he never ever wanted to be responsible for. He kills Lizaveta, an exceedingly innocent person. But does the author ever remind us of the murder at any time in the novel again? Not in the physical sense of the crime itself. The reader doesnt hear about how heavily the murders are weighing on his heart, or how he is tormented by visions of the crime. He doesnt feel the least bit guilty about having committed the crime, only his prides hurt. He doesnt mention the idea of the pain that might arise from recurrent visions of the crime. Raskolnikov never again recalls the massive amounts of blood everywhere, the look on Lizavetas face when he brings down the axe on her head. These things clearly show that the crime isnt what might cause him suffering, or pain, it is something else. After Raskolnikov is sent off to Siberia, he doesnt feel remorseful. His feelings havent changed about his crime, he feels bad at not being able to living up to his own ideas of greatness. He grows depressed only when he learns of his mothers death. Raskolnikov still hasnt found any reason to feel remorse for his crimes. He takes Siberia as his punishment, because of how annoying it is to go through all these formalities, and ridicularities that it entails. Yet, he actually feels more comfortable in Siberia than in his home in St. Petersburg. Its more comfortable, and has better living conditions than his own home. But he isnt free to do whatever he likes. But this does not contradict what Ive said before. He doesnt view Siberia as suffering, but he does view it as punishment, because he would rather not have to go through seven years in his prison cell. His theory of the extraordinary, and the ordinary is something he has to follow and adhere to . His necessity to suffer is a part of his necessity to fulfill his unknown criteria to be extraordinary. His suffering, if any, is purely superficial. The idea of suffering has to be heartfelt and well-specified. Raskolnikovs suffering is never spoken about, mainly because there is none. Even Raskolnikov views his turning himself in as a blunder, because he couldnt take the heat. It is obvious that Raskolnikov never seems to be in a pit of despair from all the suffering he has to face from the effect of the murder. One might argue that Raskolnikovs illnesses arise from his guilt and remorse for the crimes, but that doesnt appear possible. Since the character never cites the murder for his sickness. In fact, Raskolnikov fell immediately sick after committing the murder. How could he struck by guilt five seconds after committing the murder when he hasnt even had a chance to see what events have just occurred? There is not a single instance when Raskolnikov, or the author for that matter, ever cite the dramatic effect of the murders on Raskolnikovs conscience for his terrible illness. NOTHING in the novel would even imply that he feels remorse about committing the murders, it is just a silly idea that has been implanted in peoples minds and the seed has spread too rapidly, without analization.It is incredibly obvious that all the so-called pain and suffering that Raskolnikov feels is untrue, silly, and backed by no support. It would be incredulously moronic to attempt to view it from another point of understanding. People are entitled to their own opinions but the beliefs of the at error majority should not overbear the beliefs of the correct minority. Acceptance of a theory without analysis of it

Biography of Olympe de Gouges, French Activist

Biography of Olympe de Gouges, French Activist Olympe de Gouges (born Marie Gouze; May 7, 1748–November 3, 1793) was a French writer and activist who promoted womens rights and the abolition of slavery. Her most famous work was the Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female Citizen, the publication of which resulted in Gouges being tried and convicted of treason. She was executed in 1783 during the Reign of Terror. Fast Facts: Olympe de Gouges Known For: Gouges was a French activist who fought for womens rights; she wrote the Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female CitizenAlso Known As: Marie GouzeBorn: May 7, 1748 in Montauban, FranceDied: November 3, 1793 in Paris, FrancePublished Works: Letter to the People, or Project for a Patriotic Fund (1788), Patriotic Remarks (1789), Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female Citizen (1791)Spouse: Louis Aubry (m.  1765-1766)Children: Pierre Aubry de GougesNotable Quote: Woman is born free and lives equal to man in her rights. Social distinctions can be based only on the common utility. Early Life Olympe de Gouges was born on May 7, 1748, in southwestern France. At the age of 16, she was married against her wishes to a man named Louis Aubry, who died a year later. De Gouges moved to Paris in 1770, where she started a theater company and became involved in the growing abolitionist movement. Plays After joining the theater community in Paris, Gouges began writing her own plays, many of which dealt explicitly with issues such as slavery, male-female relations, childrens rights, and unemployment. Gouges was critical of French colonialism and used her work to draw attention to social ills. Her work, however, was often met with hostile criticism and ridicule from the male-dominated literary establishment. Some critics even questioned whether she was the true author of the works to which shed signed her name. Activism From 1789- beginning with the French Revolution and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen- until 1944, French women were not allowed to vote, meaning they did not have the full rights of citizenship. This was the case even though women were active in the French Revolution, and many assumed that such rights were theirs by virtue of their participation in that historic liberation struggle. Gouges, a playwright of some note at the time of the Revolution, spoke for not only herself but many of the women of France when in 1791 she wrote and published the Declaration of the Rights of Woman and of the Citizen. Modeled after the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen by the National Assembly, Gouges declaration echoed the same language and extended it to women. As many feminists have done since then, Gouges both asserted womans capability to reason and make moral decisions and pointed to the feminine virtues of emotion and feeling. A woman was not simply the same as a man; she was his equal partner. The French version of the titles of the two declarations makes this mirroring a bit clearer. In French, Gouges manifesto was the Dà ©claration des Droits de la Femme et de la Citoyenne―not just woman contrasted with man, but citoyenne contrasted with citoyen. Unfortunately, Gouges assumed too much. She assumed she had the right to even act as a member of the public and to assert the rights of women by authoring such a declaration. She violated boundaries that most of the revolutionary leaders wanted to preserve. Among the most controversial ideas in Gouges Declaration was the assertion that women, as citizens, had the right to free speech, and therefore had the right to reveal the identity of the fathers of their children―a right that women of the time were not assumed to have. She assumed a right of children born out of legitimate marriage to full equality to those born in marriage: this called into question the assumption that only men had the freedom to satisfy their sexual desire outside of marriage, and that such freedom on the part of men could be exercised without fear of corresponding responsibility. It also called into question the assumption that only women were agents of reproduction―men, Gouges proposal implied, were also part of the reproduction of society, and not just political, rational citizens. If men were seen sharing the reproduction role, perhaps women should be members of the political and public sphere of society. Death For refusing to be silent on the rights of women―and for associating with the wrong side, the Girondists, and criticizing the Jacobins, as the Revolution became embroiled in new conflicts―Olympe de Gouges was arrested in July 1793, four years after the Revolution began. She was sent to the guillotine in November of that year and was beheaded. A contemporary report of her death said: Olympe de Gouges, born with an exalted imagination, mistook her delirium for an inspiration of nature. She wanted to be a man of state. She took up the projects of the perfidious people who want to divide France. It seems the law has punished this conspirator for having forgotten the virtues that belong to her sex. In the midst of a revolution to extend rights to more men, Olympe de Gouges had the audacity to argue that women, too, should benefit. Her contemporaries were clear that her punishment was, in part, for forgetting her proper place and violating the boundaries set for women. Legacy Gouges ideas continued to influence women in France and abroad after her death. Her essay Declaration of the Rights of Woman was reprinted by like-minded radicals, inspiring Mary Wollstonecrafts Vindication of the Rights of Woman in 1792. Americans were inspired by Gouges as well; during the 1848 Womens Rights Convention at Seneca Falls, activists produced the Declaration of Sentiments, an expression of female empowerment that borrowed from Gouges style. Sources Duby, Georges, et al.  Emerging Feminism from Revolution to World War. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1995.Roessler, Shirley Elson.  Out of the Shadows: Women and Politics in the French Revolution, 1789-95. Peter Lang, 2009.Scott, Joan Wallach.  Only Paradoxes to Offer: French Feminists and the Rights of Man. Harvard University Press, 2004.