Crime and Punishment (Mass Market Paperback)

I am not a Dostoevsky newbie. Previously I read "The Brothers Karamozov" as well as "Notes From Underground", and both demanded my full attention to grasp what Dostoevsky was trying to put across. He's a very thoughtful writer, and a self-styled philosopher as well. Many times through "The Brothers Karamazov", he would go for page after page, thinking out loud about whatever subject came up, be it infidelity, God, friendships, gambling, social classes, you name it. The same can be said for this novel, although I was getting confused throughout "Crime and Punishment", so confused in fact that I had to put this book down, and will not likely return to it.

The story is not confusing, really. We follow Raskolnikov, a nearly-useless beggarman while he tries to live his pathetic life in 19th century Russia. Dostoevsky paints a bleak picture of the country at that time, with most people being filthy, drunken, poets and "intellectuals" eeking out a living by begging and mooching off everyone in sight. Raskolnikov (rascal?) is no different, and spends much of his time leeching off relatives and pawning off anything of value to the local pawnbroker. Shortly into the book, he murders said pawnbroker and we follow the wretch as his inner torments get the better of him over time. No, that's not a spoiler; it's right there on the back cover glurge, silly. A simple concept for a book, something we're all familiar with in one form or another, and the way his conscience affects him after the murder should lead to a satisfying novel. Instead, all I got was confusion. I was able to follow the action, but too much of my time was spent piecing together what I THOUGHT was happening, rather than being taken for the ride the writer intends.

Asking myself why I was confused, I picked up "Brothers" again and opened the book randomly. Reading ten or so long-winded pages of that monsterous work, I was NOT confused. So what was my problem with "Crime"? Was the book written earlier, when Dostoevsky was a lesser writer? No, that can't be it since I read "Notes" with no problem, and it had been written many years before "Crime".

Then it dawned on me. Translation! Each of these three in my collection have been written by a different translator. In this case the translator is a person named Constance Garnett. Looking into other books in my "unread" pile, I noticed that Ms. Garnett's translations are considered "definitive". I gulped. Could it be that this nonsensical style is what Dostoevsky really intends to put in front of his readers? Was my version of "The Brothers Karamazov" NOT translated as it was intended? How, then, to reconcile the fact that I LOVED the novel?

I don't read Russian. I am personally incapable of translating a novel from ANY language into English. Maybe I am completely off base. But this novel, as translated by Ms. Garnett, is nearly UNREADABLE. It makes very little sense. These characters behave like lunatics, and can't seem to express their thoughts in anything resembling coherency. Razumihin, Raskolnikov's best friend and essentially a 19th century "beatnik", is incomprehensible in everything he does. Was this intentional? I don't think so, as the characters who interact with him only find him a "little" strange. I couldn't understand what Raskolnikov was trying to accomplish, WHY he thought the way he did, nor HOW he was able to pull the wool over everyone's eyes without even trying. This CANNOT be how Dostoevsky imagined his work would be read. He styles himself a deep thinker; not a clown. And Ms. Garnett makes him a clown though this very poor translation. Grammatically, it is as atrocious as anything I've ever read as well.

A new reader to Dostoevsky would probably be pushed toward reading "Crime and Punishment", as it is his most famous work and considered to be his first important novel. But when presented with this sloppy and unreadable script, it's likely to turn them off for good. I know I would have been. It is a crime, no pun intended, for his most important work to be translated as ham-handed as this. Is it possible that poorly-translated Dostoevsky paved the way for other Russians like Tolstoy to steal the center stage of Russian literature? I think that IS possible, and that is an unforgivable crime as well.

If anyone should know of a different English translation of this novel, please let me know. I am unable to finish it in it's present form. In my opinion, Garnett is a very poor translator, and this novel is in dire need of a new, readable translation. New readers to Dostoevsky should steer clear. Buy "The Brothers Karamazov" instead.

CAVEAT EMPTOR. You have been warned. A better, more modern translator might be: Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky.

And as they say in Russian: "If you don't believe it, take it as a fairy tale" (translated).

Thematically, the piece is very melodious, bits and pieces coming together slowly. Metaphor and imagery are used extensively to show a dark side of life in the late 1800s Russia. Symbolism is rich but story line lacks any great coherence.

But enough of that, What is it? You might ask... Well, simply put, Crime and Punishment is a story about a man on a mission of redemption through his acts and the way he treats people. Rodya is truly sorry for the things he's done but at the same time isn't very remorseful of the deaths. It's a hard read, no doubt, but is it worth it? I should say, if you like thriller novels and don't think you'd have a hard time with this one, go for it! Dostoevsky very readily set about to write a story with his biblical-bashing background and did indeed manage to pull it off again. His characters are very proud and very emotional, and even though its and older piece, its worthy of a little more scrutiny.