Crime and Punishment: Comparison of The Novel and The Film Adaptation

Fyodor Dostoevsky once stated, 'Nothing is more seductive for man than his freedom of conscience but nothing is a greater cause of suffering.' Thus, being nothing or accomplishing nothing in life insinuating that failure is inevitable. A particular example of this is in Dostoevsky's novel Crime and Punishment; in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment there are some differences to Michael Darlow 1979 movie adaptation but the similarities are strikingly evident. During the exploration of the similarities and differences of the novel and 1979 movie adaptation of Crime and Punishment, three overlapping themes will be observed. The first theme that will be examined is the setting and ways in which the book and movie are similar and different. Secondly, the theories behind the protagonist's mindset will be explored and how these show and develop throughout the book and movie. Lastly, the protagonist's actions in the way in which it affects the human mind will be seen.

The setting of any piece of work provides a base for any story, including the characters that populate it; In Crime and Punishment, Fyodor Dostoevsky paints the picture of the St. Petersburg expansion and how it plays into the everyday lives of all the characters. The similarities of the setting in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment and Michael Darlow 1979 movie adaptation can be viewed widely to the point where there's barely any differences. Connections that arise in both the novel Crime and Punishment and the film adaptation include the period (the 1860s) in which the St. Petersburg expansion occurs, how the characters live, and take part in their everyday lives and the contrast between the rich and poor with light and darkness. In the novel, Fyodor Dostoevsky paints the picture of the city with the quote “The heat in the street was terrible: and the airlessness, the bustle and the plaster, scaffolding, bricks, and dust all about him, and that special Petersburg stench, so familiar to all who are unable to get out of town in Summer all worked painfully upon the young man’s already overwrought nerves.... Owing to the proximity of the HayMarket, the number of establishments of bad character, crowded in these streets and alleys in the heart of Petersburg.” The 1979 movie by Micheal Darlow demonstrates a view of a dirty, polluted city going through construction and modernization with drunks fighting, begging kids, and prostitutes all over the streets. The differences in the setting can be seen minorly within the book and movie as both the book and movie are very detailed in the same way, this difference can be seen between the contrast between rich and poor. In the novel Fyodor Dostoevsky demonstrates the poor with the lack of good clothing, starvation, and irritability and the rich with lots of well ended clothing, intellectual academics and with lots of food. At the beginning of the novel the protagonist Raskolnikov is described as so badly dressed that even a man accustomed to shabbiness would not want his clothing and that he is so poor he's been starving and shrinking for three weeks. While in the movie Micheal Darlow demonstrates the poor with lacking lights gloomed by darkness, living in small and impoverished places and having nothing, the rich had windows filled with beautiful lights coming in huge big rooms, filled with wealth and anything they wished. Although there are some differences in setting the similarities overtake how closely the novel and movie match, as the only main difference from the book and movie, is that the movie played with light and shadow to demonstrate differences between those people and places that are rich and those that are poor.

The central characters in the story are in two philosophical categories. The first group declares that people are trapped within the laws and traditions of society, existing only to continue to follow and teach these traditions, values, and morals to further generations; While the second group extraordinary, have the moral right to break the law if their transgression is for the betterment of humanity in which any actions can be taken. Throughout the novel and the movie, both Fyodor Dostoevsky and Michael Darlow fight the theory of the extraordinary man complex with the protagonist Raskolnikov and his loyal friend Razumikhin. At the beginning of the story, Raskolnikov is contemplating whether he should kill the pawnbroker or not and decides to do so for the benefit of society as she was taking the poor's only possessions and taxing them on the money she lends. Later throughout the story in both the novel and movie Raskolnikov had written an article 2 months earlier that states 'extraordinary individuals can overcome certain..... obstacles but only if the reason he does so, for instance, the salvation of mankind.' Razumikhin was horrified to see what Raskolnikov believed in, Razumikhin said 'What? What on Earth? A right to crime?'(Dostoevsky Prt 3, Ch 5, Pg 213) Thus showing Raskolnikov believed he was one of those extraordinary men and thought he does not have to abide by the laws as he would be doing a favor, while Razumikhin was horrified by his friend's thought and fought no on has the right to take another person life. Raskolnikov then further explains his ideas in which he compares himself to Napoleon and how great he was; Raskolnikov said 'I asked myself one day this question- what if Napoleon, for instance, had happened to be in my place, and if he had not had Toulon nor Egypt nor the passage of Mont Blanc to begin his career with, but instead of all those picturesque and monumental things, there had simply been some ridiculous old hag, a pawnbroker, who had to be murdered too to get money from her trunk…. He would have strangled her in a minute without thinking about it!'. Not only does the novel and movie go into these two theories but also the human's psychological makeup and how the protagonist's actions affect him mentally.

Lastly, a person can tell a lot about someone in the way in which that person thinks and reacts to complex situations. Fyodor Dostoevsky and Michael Darlow dive into the human mind by examining the psychological, emotional, and mental status of the protagonist Raskolnikov and how his double ax murder affects him. Fyodor Dostoevsky and Michael Darlow adventure through Raskolnikov psyche similarly for the most part but different in some ways, the character of Raskolnikov goes through a great change throughout the story. Fyodor Dostoevsky allows the reader to see into Raskolnikov's mind in three ways, firstly through his dreams and subconscious, secondly using symbols of redemption and sin, and lastly through the narrator telling the reader what's on Raskolnikov mind or what's he thinking. Michael Darlow, on the other hand, gives the viewer Raskolnikov's mind in the form of his dreams, symbols of sin and religion, Raskolnikov telling people how he feels by just blurting it out, and Raskolnikov having intellectual arguments with the police and his friend saying how he would do the crimes. After Raskolnikov has committed the double murder he had lain astonished on his sofa for days partly in and out of sleep and dreaming, suddenly recalls everything seized by panic and remembers his clothes have bloodstains on him and tries to rip them off to hide them but slips back into sleep. While Raskolnikov is in his deep sleep he dreams of the landlady being beaten by the police and coming up to his floor and immediately wakes up which enables him to hide all the blood-stained clothes before people enter his room. Thus showing Raskolnikov was worried about what he did and was afraid of being caught for the crime and knew what he did was wrong. As the story progresses he later realizes how wrong his actions were and that he must confess and seek redemption for his transgressions and the cross becomes a major symbol as his love for Sonia brings him back to humanity. Sonia says to Raskolnikov ' “We will go to suffer together. and together we will bear our cross!”.The cross does have a larger purpose because it plays an important role in allowing Raskolnikov to accept the fact that he needs to deal with his guilt. The cross shows as an opening to the road of redemption for Raskolnikov and leads to what occurs in the ending of the story.

In conclusion, Michael Darlow's movie adaptation is broadly similar to Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel Crime and Punishment. Fyodor Dostoevsky drawing from personal experience brims the novel, with a continuous stream of characters that typify the redeeming aspects of salvation and redemption through suffering. In Crime and Punishment, Dostoevsky attempts to portray the complexity of Raskolnikov's mental evolution and the main conflict rages on throughout the whole story, and in the end, Raskolnikov's good side wins over. All in all, Michael Darlow created a good movie that still gets across Dostoevsky's message without changing many of the themes or parts of the story in which there are more similarities than differences.