I dont think Raskolnikov ever repented genuinely for killing a person. He only repented for committing a deed which he did not have the potential to deal with. What he gives away in the end is his pride and ego. He comes down to the ground and completely accepts that he is just an ordinary person.
In highschool I remember being a student who couldn’t care less for English class and wouldn’t have any thought of opening a book. It’s only now I’m here wishing I could be in a classroom again like this and take in these extremely interesting notes on a book I now love and revere. Thank you for the recording of the lecture
I came here because I wanted a deeper analysis of the book and when he read his excerpt, I realized that I had read the book of his translation. Thank you so much.
I was dying for participating whenever this noble and charismatic teacher asked any question. I would have killed an old lady with an ax to be there listening to him face to face as if it were a dream, and I was riding a horse that would then be mutilated into pieces just as my dreams.
The novel seems to focus a lot on undeserved love and self-worth. Raskolnikov has its biggest breakdowns when he is faced with the contradiction of him being a low level murderous thug and his self-imagined image of a benevolent philosopher king. The book is a masterpiece at presenting the liminality of those two explosively contradictory images.
Watching this just after finishing the book was so good. I love how the professor went on invoking ideas from the minds of the students and his interpretation of the story. I too believed Svidrigailov to be of a good character, but I was amazed to hear the interpretation of his haunted soul. Loved this.