Page 252: “Your things would not be lost in any event,” he [Porfiry Petrovich] went on calmly and coldly, “because I’ve been sitting here a long time waiting for you.”
From Part 2, Chapter 4, when Razumikhin first mentions the name to Raskolnikov, we hear with Rodya the name of Porfiry Petrovich (no last name ever is given, interestingly) at regular intervals. He is a police inspector and a lawyer. In chapter 7, Razumikhin tells Raskolnikov, "Porfiry…wants to make your acquaintance." (He repeats this, with emphasis, in chapter 6: "He wants very, very, very much to make your acquaintance."
There are other such moments, but we don't meet Porfiry until chapter 5 in Part III, when Raskolnikov enters laughing. Near the end of a long, tortuous and torturous conversation, Porfiry brings up Rodya's article "On Crime," written six months before when he left the university and began his isolation.
What do you think Porfiry's role in the drama we could call "Punishment" (since "Crime" only occupies the first hundred or so pages of the novel)? What is his attitude toward Raskolnikov? Does it change? Is he Raskolnikov's antagonist or nemesis?
By the way—it's 11:45 pm on Saturday. I beat my deadline…barely! So there's no refund, if you know what I mean.
Think and write well, and Tuesday we'll build a great discussion based on what you say here.
By the way, do you notice that Razumikhin is either related to or friends with just about everybody involved in the investigation? Any theories as to that remarkable fact?
32 comments:
Can I first just say that it is such a headache trying to reference the book to figure out how to spell every name? Anyway, I think Poorfiry represents Rashkolnikov's fixed, inescapable destiny. A destiny that Rashculnicov defined when he commited the murder. Throughout the entire encounter Petrolleumvich has a manner that is both calm and assured, with a "cold" tone as if the judge has already sentenced Rashcolnycov and there's just a few minor details that still need to be sorted out. This cold confidence in eventual punishment matches the subconscious confidence that Rashkullnicov gives away by his reluctant lingering at the murder site, as if all attempts at covering his crime was futile. His bumbling crime reveals his subconscious acceptance of his fate. Then Poor-furry comes along and one by one drops the bombs, first that they knew he worked with the pawn broker and then revealing his knowledge of Rasscholnicov's essay. The fact that Rashkilnnivoc knew all the people involved in the investigation is just another sign that Dostoevsky is showing about how the stars will always align to lead criminals to eventual justice. A justice that imposed on Rafgbkjfdhk by Pofbybua.
Hmmm, judging as the amount of blogs actually posted at 5:20 the day before the assignment due, I would say most of our class does not agree with your claim to no refund. I can guarantee there will be several absentees and quite a few 6:00 AM, hurried postings. No matter. On with the prompt.
I rather like the part Porfiry plays in “Punishment.” His comments (or rather arias, as you would describe them) provide a clarifying insight into the ideas behind the work. The mention of Raskolnikov’s article, for instance, allows the reader to understand one of the core values Raskolnikov might indeed attribute to himself. In other words, it reveals one explanation of why he committed such a heinous crime. Now here I say “one” because there is no clear-cut rhyme or reason to Raskolnikov’s actions, but rather a long list of possibilities. The introduction and prolongation of the character Porfiry Petrovich allows deeper issues to surface, as well as insight into Raskolnikov’s character.
Perhaps the most significant aspect of the appearance of Porfiry is the marvelous contrast, yet odd comparison he strikes to our protagonist, Raskolnikov. Porfiry Petrovich cannot be taken as a fool, as his experience in the police department has conditioned him to operate quite deftly through the maze of the criminal mind. Raskolnikov is fully aware, and rather alarmed, at this characteristic. It is implied that others do not find Porfiry of astounding astuteness or even great influence in his somewhat comical appearance and strangely jovial nature, but Raskolnikov sees Porfiry for the knowledgeable man he is—and it makes him rather unnerved. In a way, the interactions between Porfiry and Raskolnikov are dramatic battles of wit. Each party seems to understand the underlying craftiness of the other, and each tries to out-step the other. For example, the tense meeting in part 4 chapter 5 involves much of Raskolnikov attempting to expose Porfiry’s alleged methods of interrogation, while Porfiry laughs merrily at the blatant accusations and chats about some other topic. This adds both drama and an important character of intelligence who reveals the nature of Raskolnikov. As the novel continues, Porfiry acts more at ease with Raskolnikov—a symbol of his assuredness. Porfiry believes he has Raskolnikov all figured out, practically cornered. Thus their interactions seem less forced on his part.
I believe Porfiry acts as a nemesis to Raskolnikov. A nemesis is perons that cannot be bested or overcome, as well as acting as an agent of “retribution or punishment” (that’s straight from the dictionary, folks). In the interactions between the two, Raskolnikov often loses his head in a fit of passion, while Porfiry gets more and more comfortable. This is punishment for Raskolnikov because he cannot overcome this staunch intelligence before him. Raskolnikov quite adroitly put others, like Razumikhin and particularly Zossimov (in the bar scene), off the scent, but try as he might, he cannot sway this foolish-looking Porfiry Petrovich, and that is what kills him.
As for Razumikhin’s realtion: perhaps the author is casually stating that every man has some association to reason—however distant—and is therefore alike. It is only in the application that differs.
One thing that struck me about Porfiry during his conversation with Raskolnikov is how dispassionate he is; he doesn’t even sound excited or smug when he begins to poke at Raskolnikov’s weak spots. Neither does he, like Raskolnikov says, “even care to stand on ceremony” (254) and try to conceal his suspicion from Raskolnikov. Porfiry’s casual attitude offends Raskolnikov because it gives him nothing to fight back against. During their meeting, Raskolnikov is obviously agitated; everything Porfiry says or does seem to prick his conscience. Porfiry, however, always has a comeback for Raskolnikov. Porfiry is not emotionally affected by Raskolnikov because he deals with truth, whereas Raskolnikov has only logic and intelligence—but not truth—on his side. I think Porfiry represents, like Trevor said, the inescapable, but I think the inescapable is not just destiny (Raskolnikov’s arrest and his physical punishment) but also truth (the moral repugnance of the murder which Raskolnikov keeps denying to himself with his theory—something backed by his logic but not his nature). The truth stands unaffected no matter how Raskolnikov wields his logic and his theory. It simply cannot be agitated. Raskolnikov’s powerlessness in front of Porfiry echoes what Razumikhin says in his diatribe against socialism: “You can’t overleap nature with logic alone”.
Btw, I thought it was pretty hard to spell the names at first… but after repeating R-A-S-K-O-L-N-I-K-O-V and P-O-R-F-I-R-Y about ten times each in one paragraph, I think I’ll get through at least the first round of Dostoevskian Spelling Bee.
Looking up the definition of "antagonist" online gives
- a person who is opposed to, struggles against, or competes with another; opponent; adversary.
- the adversary of the hero or protagonist of a drama or other literary work
while "nemesis" is defined as
- something that a person cannot conquer
- an opponent or rival whom a person cannot best or overcome.
- an agent or act of retribution or punishment.
Origin:
< L < Gk némesis lit., a dealing out, verbid of némein to dispense (justice)
Porfiry, therefore, would be considered Raskolnikov's nemesis, someone he "cannot best", someone who "dispenses justice", rather than someone who merely plays as the protagonist's opponent.
I also like Trevor and Kathy's idea of Porfiry symbolizing the inescapable truth. He deals out justice and represents it, driving Raskolnikov into acceptance of that truth and confession. He is not physically forceful nor physically threatening, and gives Raskolnikov the opportunity to give in to the truth himself, with his knowledge of the mind.
Porfiry’s role in the novel is to enact the physical punishment of Raskolnikov’s crime. While tortured mentally over the repercussions of his actions, it does not seem that Raskolnikov would suffer material pain without the arrival of the patient, calculating Porfiry as no one else seems to seriously suspect him of the murder. Because the recent murder does not resemble any of the cases that Porfiry covered in his legal practice, except for the exception of the rare and intriguing case of the hallucinating man who falsely implicated himself as a murderer, the detective seems to enjoy the psychological pursuit of his worthy adversary. As the interviews between the two wear on, the competition in this meeting of minds increases. Raskolnikov’s frustration builds as he finds he cannot outsmart his opponent and grows ever more desperate to escape the clutches of the impending law. Meanwhile Porfiry merely needs to maintain his psychological game of cat and mouse, watching Raskolnikov’s aggravation mount with no outlet but to confess his crime. Because Raskolnikov will never be able to outmaneuver Porfiry and escape the law, by Grace’s definition the latter is our protagonist’s nemesis.
Porfiry Petrovich seems more like the primary antagonist of Raskolnikov’s “punishment” period. Although not shown until Part III, his presence is felt throughout the first half of the novel. There always is the chance that Porfiry would discover that Raskolnikov is indeed the murderer and the fact stays around Raskolnikov for the majority of the novel. Porfiry understands criminal psychology very thoroughly and examines Raskolnikov’s actions throughout his investigation talks with him. To Raskolnikov, Porfiry represents the impending punishment that he will receive if he is discovered to be the criminal behind the murders. In a sense, the “punishment” could be considered as his guilt and alienation from society. Raskolnikov falls deeper into guilt and is constantly frightened by the prospect of confession or discovery. Perhaps Porfiry reminds Raskolnikov of the crime that he has committed, although he continuously tries to justify his act with logic. Porfiry is the character that ultimately brings Raskolnikov to his punishment. An expert with mind games, he realizes that Raskolnikov is indeed the killer and puts Raskolnikov through torturous mental sessions. It is seen that Porfiry is always in complete control and almost knows exactly what to say in reply with everything Raskolnikov addresses. His dominance and shrewd intuition over Raskolnikov further pushes the inevitable ‘punishment’ of Raskolnikov. However, Porfiry is not the average investigator, as he understands early on that Raskolnikov is the murderer, however, he does not arrest him right away and instead conducts a series of conversations with Raskolnikov instead. In a way, it seems that Porfiry is trying to help Raskolnikov recover and find redemption, perhaps to have him deal with his inner turmoil. Initially, Porfiry acts calm and practical, without the interference of emotions. A foil to Raskolnikov, Porfiry continuously pries at Raskolnikov whereas Raskolnikov is constantly indecisive and unstable. However, near the end of the novel, Porfiry gives more time for Raskolnikov to confess for a lessening of the sentence, being more considerate of the emotional state of Raskolnikov. He seems to wish to rehabilitate Raskolnikov, as his main goal wasn’t just to capture the criminal, but more of helping the guilt-ridden psych of the criminal. Porfiry is also more of a nemesis than an antagonist, as he plays as a foil to Raskolnikov but is not necessarily his worst enemy. Arguably, Raskolnikov’s worst enemy is himself- his indecisiveness and his impulsive actions, semi-delirious mind.
Porfiry appears to be the embodiment of Raskolnikov's worst fears; that somebody may know of the crime he has committed, and that his actions are not justified by his utlilitarian beliefs (that by killing Alyona carried more benefit than allowing her to live). Raskolnikov's fear of someone knowing the truth is apparent throughout the entire conversation where he is able to look through Porfiry's odd appearance and demeanor and see that he is prodding at his conscience and it drives Raskolnikov to the brink of madness. Porfiry is successful at prodding Raskolnikov's conscience especially well during the discussion of the article "On Crime" which references a belief that some people are above committing crime on some moral ground because the crime is in some way justified. This conversation leads Raskolnikov to suspect that in this case he didn't measure up to this "superman" and is morally guilty of his crime. This inner battle within his guilty conscience represents Raskolnikov's true "punishment" that ultimately leads to his confession, easing his tormented mind.
I'm happy that others have looked up the definition of nemesis because it makes it very clear that Porfiry is indeed a nemesis to Raskolnikov.
I believe Porfiry's role in punishment is aiding Raskolnikov's paranoia. Porfiry does a fantastic job in not letting Raskolnikov know of his decision that Raskolnikov is the murderer. He perfectly suggests his idea and even confuses the storyline when he goes back on it. He does such a great job with his "investigation"; we as reader's don't even realize every contact he has with Raskolnikov is an investigation, and that he has known from the beginning who the murderer is. Like the readers, Raskolnikov is confused by Porfiry's words and actions that it just makes his paranoia worse. On another note, his paranoia is obsessing over the idea that everyone knows he is the murderer, which in this case, isn't necessarily paranoia because Porfiry does know he is the murderer. Porfiry confuses Raskolnikov even more by his attitude. First he is cold when later he almost seems friendly, but that is just a trick before letting Raskolnikov in on what he believes.
I would say Porfiry is Raskolnikov's nemesis. An antagonist is someone who struggles or competes with the protagonist. In Raskolnikov's eyes, he does compete with Porfiry. However, Porfiry knows the truth all along, which means he is never competing, he has already won. This exemplifies a nemesis, which is an opponent that cannot be conquered.
As far as Razumikhin being related to or friends with everyone in the novel... I am still thinking about this one. This is not the reason I would give but having him as a known character to all binds everyone together in a very interesting way that gives the novel something more. I think him being a common character also makes us as readers think more... think about who's good, who's bad, and what is true. On another note, it may highlight his good character. He is a nice guy and knows a lot of people. Knowing everyone isn't just but is used to explain Razumikhin's character.
Andddd, Trevor's post is my favorite.
Rodya desires to commit the perfect crime. Porfiry is both a barrier and a means for Rodya to test his ability. Porfiry contains a sharp wit which he uses to “play cat and mouse”, as Rodya perceives his conversation with Porfiry (254). In this case, Raskolnikov’s superstition is not unfounded. Raskolnikov’s thoughts upon meeting Porfiry, enclosed with brackets and interspersed in the first part of the conversation, indicate furtiveness and nervousness.
Porfiry desires to catch the criminal but he also is self-important. He marinates Raskolnikov and Razumikhin with “undisguised, intrusive, annoying, and impolite sarcasm” (263). However, Rodya gains satisfaction from evading Porfiry’s traps: “he was now in full possession of the trap and was triumphant” (267).
Porfiry is part of Raskolnikov’s punishment in that he cannot escape the crime’s consequences. Porfiry is Raskolnikov’s adversary. His specific role in the case is just as coincidental as the circumstances that allowed Rodya to commit the crime. A nemesis has divine origin, and is a form of retribution. Rodya’s legal punishment is not divine; it is the necessary outcome of his crime. However, the most significant aspects of Rodya’s punishment are vastly internal. The murder changes him, causes him to withdraw, and empowers the “cold” Rodya. He sympathizes and elaborates on his morally despicable theory of human superiority more than he ever did before the crime.
Rodya is close to the people involved in the investigation because his crime was personal. The murder wasn’t random, the victim was his personal pawnbroker, and so it affected his direct community which linked back to him. Dostoevsky also may have included this degree of acquaintance to show how all crimes boomerang back as punishment (nearly immediately). Retribution, external or internal, is channeled by those close to the criminal. Tuhrevuor Hoadsoun’s (sorry, I couldn’t be bothered to look up how to spell it) description of the inevitability of justice is appropriate, but I would qualify that both “warm” and “cold” Rodya are both conscious and subconscious. So, it is the honorable, compassionate Rodya that wants to be caught.
P.S. I love how Katie Stanley writes. Just assume that was what I was trying to say. I have to go through dozens of revisions to discover such precise language – which I certainly didn’t do here.
I agree with Austin in the fact that though Raskolnikov's punishment is part mental anguish Porfiry helps enforce his physically punishment. Porfiry also adds to Raskolnikov's mental anguish. Through the battle of their minds Raskolnikov goes crazy. Thinking and rethinking about each thing he says. If he should say it, if it gives him away and so on. Anyone would go crazy from Porfiry's interviews. In Ap psychology we learned that people will begin to believe someone just from someone asking them over and over again. Even the way police phrase a question can persuade someone to say something that may not be true. I think Porfiry is trying to get into Raskolnikov's mind and is successful in that.
I think Porfiry attitude towards Raskolnikov is more one of scientific interest. Such as a patient for a psychological study. AT points I think he cares for him but as Raskolnikov becomes more aggressive and defensive Porfiry just wants to break him down.
I agree with those that have said Porfiry is Raskolnikov's nemesis. He is trying to beat him and win the battle of the minds.
Hahaha, it's not the spelling that gets me, it's totally the pronunciation. Russian always is so confusing with the way letters are paired together. I tried Dr. Zhivago once and gave up after getting too caught up in how to say the names in my head instead of focusing on the story. Perhaps we should give them nicknames. Rasky, Mikin,.. But I digress.
What struck me about the passage (the battle of wits between Porfiry and Raskolnikav) was at the very beginning, Razumihkin specifically says that “he likes to mislead people, or rather to baffle them…” (speaking of Porfiry). Raskolnikav knows that this man enjoys mind games, and yet, he still is completely unraveled by him, at least mentally, not enough to actually reveal himself. Porfiry, in my mind, stands as the perfect opponent to Raskolnikav. He knows the truth, but he can’t prove it yet. He doesn’t need to be subtle, because the true game lies in being blatantly obvious. Raskolnikav is forced to keep up a difficult charade to hide the complete terror the situation instills. In a way, I think Porfiry also personifies Raskolnikav’s guilt, he can’t hide from it anymore than he can conceal the truth from Porfiry, no matter how much he lies to himself or to the outside world. What I also found interesting was that, personally reading the section, I expected Raskolnikav to come out on top like he did with Zametov. In a way, he does, he doesn’t technically reveal anything, he sees through the traps Porfiry lays, and argues quite successfully. Yet, somehow, as he leaves the house, the reader distinctly gets the impression that Porfiry has “one up’d him” as the modern day teenager would put it, and Raskolnikav knows it. He is punished by the fact that he can’t escape this man and the thought eats at him.
I agree with the above bloggers that indeed Porfiry Petrovich's must be Raskolnikov’s nemesis. Porfiry’s sneaky questions corner in on the truth that Raskolnikov is just barely hiding. He is testing Raskolnikov’s “it must be destiny” way of thinking for how his act of murder occurred. Porfiry can see right through Raskolnikov- his calm and cool presence makes Raskolnikov’s “hardly with it, on the edge of bursting, guilty” demeanor even more visible. It is true punishment to be questioned into madness and to come to realization of a truly horrid act, when all the while he (poor Raskolnikov) has over and over again let himself think that "that" was merely fate. Seeing that the nemesis definition: an agent or act of retribution or punishment, labeling Porfiry as nemesis to Raskolnikov really fits.
As for Razumikhin his innocence and friendliness contrast Raskolnikov’s guiltiness. The fact that he befriends or has already befriended just about everyone gives the reader (or at least me) the feeling that Raskolnikov and Razumikhin are almost opposites. Razumikhin is acquainted with almost everyone and yet Raskolnikov can hardly speak to anyone without his thinking turning into mush. Raskolnikov carries so much guilt he comes off as crazy when he’s only trying to blend in. It almost just adds to the tension that Raskolnikov has and to the reader since the reader has been with him through every skewed thought and action. In Razumikhin there is truth, innocence, and good and he passes that along in his conversations.
When Porfiry is first described on page 250, his face is said to be “rather cheerful and even mocking.” I think that Porfiry’s role is to mock Raskolnikov’s guilt. On the next page Rodya believes that Porfiry “looked at him with obvious mockery, narrowing his eyes and as if winking at him.” Throughout their first meeting Porfiry treats Rodya in a degrading manner and replies to his explanations in a way that shows he does not believe him and openly questions his statements as false. Raskolnikov seems extremely nervous and is afraid that somebody knows of his crime that will lead to his punishment which is somewhat ironic because through this nervousness and fear Raskolnikov punishes himself. Porfiry does not admit his suspicions right away but rather asks Rodya to elucidate his essay “On Crime” which describes what could be the thinking behind the crime he committed and could be used as a character reference to prove his guilt. I agree with what Kathy said, that Raskolnikov’s goal is to use his intelligence lie his way out of suspicion while Porfiry has truth on his side. Porfiry is no doubt the nemesis because we know the truth conquers in the end which shows that they are not an equally matched antagonist and protagonist.
Porfiry is such a shrewd character. His role in the drama, even before he physically appears before the reader, is to toy and torment Rashkolnikov’s guilty mind. Porfiry attacks Rashkolnikov in a very passive aggressive manner, and drops subtle hints that only a person with a guilty conscious would respond violently to. Unfortunately for Rashkolnikov, Porfiry’s techniques work brilliantly. From simple comments from Porfiry such as “you are the only [pawner] who has not been so good as to pay us a visit,” Rashkolnikov’s mind goes crazy: “I’m feverish again!.... Did Porfiry wink at me just now, or not? Must be nonsense; why would he wink? Do they want to irritate my nerves, or are they taunting me? Either it’s all a mirage or they know!” Whether or not Porfiry truly suspects Rashkolnikov for his crime, the mere presence of Porfiry puts Rashkolnikov’s mind in agony. The “Punishment” begins the moment Rashkolnikov commits his unexpected second “Crime” because his inherently kind nature (as we discussed last class) does not allow him to leave unscathed. However, Porfiry twists the knife that has already penetrated Rashkolnikov chest, magnifying the psychological torture he endures. Porfiry treats Rashkolnikov mockingly, almost as if he were playing a fun game – a psychological one. And the only way to win the game is by playing with Rodya’s mind to the point that he confesses. Rashkolnikov is like a mouse who has its tail pinned down by a cat’s paws. He can desperately try to run, but no matter who hard he tries, he is still pinned down by Porfiry. By going by the definitions that Grace provided, Porfiry is a nemesis. Despite Rashkolnikov’s desperate attempts outsmart the curve balls thrown at him, it seems like they only satisfy Porfiry. Unfortunately for Rash., Porfiry is who Rodya can cannot best or overcome.
Indeed, Porfiry MUST be Rodya's nemesis, as he is the guy trying to solve the murder of the "louse". He spouts witty, and seemingly meaningless smal talk, but there is a genius at work. He is a master of deception, and he gets Rodya to leak more than he knows. Here Doestoyevsky's great psychology comes into play; Porfiry not only analyzies Rodya's words, but also his body language, facial movements and overall tone.
Porfiry seems to have a deep interest in Rodya, and even though Rodya knows he is investigating the widow's mureder, Porfiry does a great job in drawing information out of Rodya but suddenly speaking about his article. Porfiry seems to find a motive in the essay, which makes sense as it was written right before Rodya goes into isolation and really mulls over the whole idea more deeply than he did in the essay.
Porfiry is a cat, in terms of "Curiosity" and in the wonderful verbal duel that happens between our two leading men. He says something in one attitude, and then will express the complete opposite of that sentiment the next moment. Rodya is caught by this clever snare of Porfiry's, who seems to know that Rodya will rise to the intellectual challenge.
What is unusual is Porfiry seems to admire Rodya. He wants to do justice of course as that is his duty to Mother Russia, but he also
enjoys the jousting that takes place between them, and gets a thrill out of knowing that Rodya has killed, and he has Rodya in his clutches, just to let him go again for the moment before pouncing once again. I like Porfiry.
“Inescapable destiny”—that just about said it all. Porfiry has a shrewd understanding of criminal psychology and knows from the start that Raskolnikov is guilty—very “frank” (I think was the word he used). He knows Raskolnikov’s mental stage at every stage since he first met him, to his confession and knows just what buttons to push—basically driving Raskolnikov crazy.
Porfiry is Raskolnikov’s nemesis, as Grace’s definition clarified: he’s the inescapable truth. It’s almost like his presence can always be felt even when he’s not there. He’s not an antagonist because his goal isn’t to destroy Raskolnikov but to help him see himself. If Porfiry was a detective rather than an attorney, he would’ve immediately arrested Raskolnikov, because his goal would have been to just lock him up. But because he likes Raskolnikov and wants to see him rehabilitate, he wants Raskolnikov to willingly confess so that his sentence won’t be as severe.
I like Grace's definition of nemesis as a person one cannot best. I think there is some truth to that in this instance. I believe Porfiry is an idealist that thinks big picture but also can be a minutea man. A normal officer of the law would have swiftly strike down on Rodya with the hand of justice and wasted his intelligence. As Mr. Duncan has stated previously that Doestoevsky is considered as one of the first psychologists and that mentality shines through the interrogation tactics utilized by Porfiry. He wants full confession and acknowledgement of the crime commited from Raskolnikov as he sees that as the only path to ultimate redemption and rehabilitation. Porfiry is nationalist that wants mold and cultivate thoughtful men that are filled with ideas and make sure thier thoughts are to the betterment of social conditions. He sees Rodya as a misguided man that has great potential.
This Hotsun is one oomny malchick the way he gets all sarky re the rooshian names in the old C&P. After a few guffs I had a strange urge to take a schlaga to his gulliver. But I’m a sammy chelloveck—forgive & forget is what I say. I pony his skolliwoll. Just a veck looking to impress his droogs and maybe a devotchka or two by having some fun with the zvook of slovos he hasn’t viddied before. I can pony that, even if he gets a little gloopy.
Look at the time! Need to catch some spatchka. Think I’ll itty along now. Nochy-nochy, T-Rex!
oh boy here we go actually trying to do a blog. that 70's show can wait :(
I'll go ahead and say that Mr. Porfiry Petrovich represents the innevitable concequences to Rashkolnikov crimes, actions. He is an embodiment of a nemesis, the punishement to the crime, as Rashkolnikov cannot escape him nor beat him. he can also represent justice as a cold and effective thing seeing how disspasionate he is towards Rashkolnikov.
Rashkolnikov is then the an antagonist, as he is not a perfect main character given his devious actions. so hey mr. duncan it's kinda like you and me!
I also think that Porfiry is the embodiment of Raskolnikov's "punishment" but not because he is a lawman but rather because he further brings out Raskolnikov's inner feelings of guilt. Raskolnikov cannot help but unravel when Porfiry questions him because he is aware of his guilt and is very suspicious of others, especially those who are suspicious of him. Their conversation in chapter 5 is a tense, back and forth war of words, with Porfiry attempting to interrogate Raskolnikov about his whereabouts while Raskolnikov deflects the attention back to Porfiry instead. Though he is cautious of what he says, Raskolnikov's defensive and obtrusive retaliation only works to increase Porfiry's suspicions. I agree that Porfiry's interest in Raskolnikov was purely curiosity at first but as he sees Raskolnikov's deteriorating state of mind when he speaks with him, his interest has grown into suspicion.
I agree with Sarah that Porfiry punishes Raskolnikov by heightening his already-high level of paranoia. Porfiry makes Raskolnikov feel threatened by alternately ignoring his bull and cutting through his confused alibis. This makes Raskolnikov’s racing thoughts become even more confused, causing him to let pieces of the truth slip out.
As several others have stated, I think that Porfiry is Raskolnikov’s nemesis, but not his antagonist—he has more than enough reason to arrest Raskolnikov early on, and there would probably be no inquiries or questions as to his imprisonment. However, he chooses not to, because he truly wants Raskolnikov to confess, leading him to face himself and what he has done. This shows that he does not wish to just lock Raskolnikov up and declare that justice has been done. To Porfiry, this guilt and self-knowledge is the ultimate punishment, and is the punishment that Raskolnikov deserves.
I think more annoying than the spelling or pronunciation is the fact that I have the hardest time typing their names without making a mistake (or have to slow down considerably while I’m typing them to prevent a mistake). The letters don’t mesh the way I’m used to in English.
--------
After looking up the word nemesis, which means somebody who cannot be overcome or bested, Porfiry fits into that description cleanly. The policeman always seems to have the upper hand against Raskolnikov; he always acts calm and cool, not matter how excited or frustrated Raskolnikov seems. Porfiry always has an argument or rebuttal against Raskolnikov. Porfiry obviously enjoys toying with Raskolnikov psychologically. Every time the two encounter, Porfiry always seems amused at Raskolnikov. He is not in a rush to prove that Raskolnikov is the murderer, because he enjoys playing mind games with his unfortunate victim. Although Raskolnikov does match Porfiry’s skill in wit, he does not have Porfiry’s ability to remain cool and calm in the situation; Raskolnikov lashes out but if you think about, it’d be hard to remain cool and calm in Raskolnikov’s shoes. He just killed two people.
Razumikhin seems to be a lot more outgoing and friendly with everyone than Raskolnikov. In some ways, they are similar: the two are both penniless and have to drop out of school. Razumikhin might be what Raskolnikov could be if certain turns of events didn’t happen the way they did. But that’s just like saying I would be somebody else I if I did this or that. Anyhow, ignore my almost midnight musings. Razumikhin is a foil to Raskolnikov. While Razumikhin is always kind and generous, Raskolnikov is secretive and brooding. Razumikhin’s personality accentuates and makes Raskonikov’s stronger.
Although Porfiry appears to be Raskolnilkov’s "nemesis", I think he is quite the opposite. Yes, he is the antagonist of Raskolnilkov, his presence felt to Rodya even when he is nowhere to be found. But I feel a nemesis has a negative connotation, and in order to be a nemesis, Porfiry would have to wish the worst upon Raskolnilkov. But this is clearly unfounded in Porfiry, for, as Mohammed says, Porfiry “sees Rodya as a misguided man that has great potential.”, opposed to viewing Rodya as a vermin of society, as a Nemesis would. As any good antagonist, Porfiry challenges Rodya’s ideas and values in their discussion about “On Crime”. This very discussion leads Raskolnilkov to believe Porfiry suspects him as a murderer, and this paranoia is essentially Rodya’s personal “punishment” to the “crime” he committed. Porfiry utilizes his knowledge of the criminal psyche to create this reaction in Raskolnilkov. He is painfully aware of Rodya’s delicate mental state. Later Porfiry shows this awareness in part four, when verbalizes his worry over Raskolnilkov’s mental state, exclaiming how the deliriuom of Rodya can drive men to “jump out the window or off a bell-tower”, telling Rodya he is “delirious”.
All the same Porfiry is a man of the law and wants justice. But I do not hink Profiry is withour his own faults—he sees Rasknolnilkov all too humanely to be considered an nemesis. He is Raskolnilkov’s antagonist, for making Rodya truly face himself.
Porfiry and Raskolnikov’s relationship is analogous to a psychological cat and mouse. Porfiry is one of the shrewdest characters in the book. When everyone else thinks Raskolnikov is sick because he’s poor and depressed, Porfiry knows he committed the murder. Porfiry plays mind games with Raskolnikov in an attempt to corner him in his own mind. Though I think that after some time Porfiry respects Raskolnikov and is thus befriends him in a sense. Porfiry knows that Raskolnikov isn’t really cut out for murder and that the act was more ideological.
I don’t see Porfiry as Raskolnikov’s nemesis. I think Raskolnikov is his own nemesis. The battle he’s fighting is an inward one. Porfiry didn’t even have enough evidence to arrest him anyway, so Raskolnikov didn’t really have any reason to fear him. Yet Raskolnikov was still afraid and plagued, but I believe this stems from his inner-self and conscience more than from Porfiry. Porfiry only serves to amplify Rashkolnikov’s own psychological torment.
Porfiry's attitude changes once he gets to know Raskolnikov. Once Porfiry figures out that Raskolnikov doesn’t suceed as a “true murderer”, his attitude toward him changes. He becomes more sympathetic in a sense, and I believe it’s actually Raskolnikov himself that acts as his true antagonist.
After reading the other responses, I understand that using the definitions Grace posted (something that a person cannot conquer), several people see Porfiry as a nemesis; but I don’t think it’s Porfiry that Raskolvikov cannot overcome. It’s his own guilt. Porfiry just arouses it and magnifies it as Ariel mentioned. And Porfiry is not punishing him, it’s Raskolvikov’s own guilt that is weighing him down and tormenting him.
Porfiry Petrovich is key character in that he is Raskolnikov’s psychological opponent and represents his impending punishment. While Porfiry proves to be a shrewd adversary that Raskolnikov cannot “best or overcome,” I don’t feel like they are absolute enemies. As Emelia pointed out, Porfiry seems to be deeply intrigued by Raskolnikov. As Mr. Duncan noted in the prompt, Porfiry is mentioned several times throughout parts two and three—mostly by Razumikhin—long before we actually meet him. In this way, Porfiry is sort of lurking over Raskolnikov as a representation of truth and the law, the unavoidable fact that there are highly capable people out there piecing together what happened to Alyona and Lizaveta Ivanovna. However, there isn’t actually that much direct conflict between Porfiry and Raskolnikov, and we don’t see him all that much.
From the moment of his entrance into Porfiry’s house in part III chapter V, Raskolnikov grows extremely uneasy, and his paranoia and suspicion are heightened as he thinks that Porfiry is toying with him. Because a ton of people have already discussed how Porfiry’s psychological manipulation of Raskolnikov makes him an inescapable nemesis, I am going to take a slightly different approach. I think that Porfiry can also be seen as Raskolnikov’s primary antagonist.
Porfiry’s role as a cunning examiner who seems to have entirely figured Raskolnikov out serves to intensify Raskolnikov’s internal turmoil over whether or not to confess. Ever since he committed the crime, he has nearly gone to the police station and confessed several times, as well as just about blurting it out to Zomyotov and Razumikhin. Raskolnikov has trouble controlling himself and wants to evade Porfiry’s suspicion, but at times he is strongly compelled to confess. Porfiry’s presence (direct or indirect) seems to aggravate his internal discord. To me this makes Porfiry more of an antagonist; he is an opposing force to our protagonist but also exacerbates his opposition within his own mind, where his schismatic personalities are at combat.
Sorry it's a bit disorganized. I'm rather tired.
To understand Porfiry’s role in Raskovnikov’s “punishment,” it seems imperative to understand his character. Porf’s goal is the betterment of Russia, and that the intellectuals are the ones who can best lead them to improve the homeland. He is perhaps the only character as smart as Rasko, and his thought process can be just as disorganized. “[Rasko]’ll keep on making circles around me, narrowing the radius more and more, and—whop! He’ll fly right into my mouth, and I’ll swallow him, sir, and that will be most agreeable, heh, heh, heh!” (V, 4), tells the reader many things. Firstly, that Prof thinks that Rasko is the murderer and will lose his sanity. Also, Prof’s though-process is quite irregular and erratic, similar to Rasko’s. Porf is clearly intelligent based on the conversation he shared with Rasko when they met at the former’s abode. Rasko was clearly nervous about the observing power of Porf’s. Though he is at first curious as to whether or not Rasko committed the crime, he quickly comes to the correct conclusion and changes his treatment of Rasko. However, rather than arrest Rasko himself, Porf asks that Rasko, “… fulfill the demands of justice. I know that you don’t believe it, but indeed, life will bring you through” (VI, 2); in other words, he asks Rasko, as an intellectual to do the truly just thing and confess himself. Though indirectly responsible for Rasko’s mania and insanity (the punishments for his crime), I believe Porf is a better fit for the redemptive themes of the novel, as Porf desires Rasko to spill the truth for the betterment of Russia. Though Pofiry is never conquered, I feel that he is a better fit for antagonist, as he does indeed match will and wits with Rasko, our “hero.”
The creation of Porfiry demonstrates Dostoevsky inside into the human mind. Simply put, he has some mad AP Psych skills. Porfiry perfectly plays Raskolnikov’s mind, amplifying his guilt with every subtle comment. What I find most interesting is that Porfiry seems to know Raskolnikov is the murderer. Taking the perspective of Porfiry with his limited information, it seems like quite a shot in the dark to focus such effort into obtaining a confession from Raskolnikov. I think the Dostoevsky gets away without clarifying why Porfiry has more insight than anyone else by playing upon the fact that the reader obviously knows that Raskolnikov is the killer. The reader perceives every fainting episode/sickness as an unconscious admission of guilt so it’s easy for the reader to imagine that someone else (within the story) senses the same.
Like Bryn, I don’t think Porfiry is truly a nemesis of Raskolnikov. Of course in the superficial sense, Porfiry is looking for the murderer and that’s Raskolnikov, but on a deeper level, Porfiry acts only to magnify the internal struggle of Rodka. The fact that Porfiry is physically seen sporadically yet felt unceasingly leads to the conclusion that the idea of inevitable judgment (that I think Porfiry stands for) is self-imposed by Rodka. In this interpretation, the true antagonist of Rodka is his conscious (maybe it’s also the protagonist in a way)
One aspect which I would interesting about Porfiry is his clever character. The role Dostoyevsky gives Porfiry is a very mischief one. The key purpose of him is to play with Rashkolnikov’s guilty mind. This quality makes Porfiry a nemesis. The punishment begins when Rashkolnikov commits this unexpected second Crime because his kind nature does not allow him. When Porfiry twists the knife that has already damaged Rashkolnikov’s chest, it magnifies the psychological torture he already endures. Porfiry reminds me of the Joker from Batman because of the physiological games Porfiry plays with Rashkolnikov. He becomes nervous and afraid that somebody knows of his crimes which lead to his punishment.
I agree with Mohammed, with his statement , “Porfiry is nationalist that wants mold and cultivate thoughtful men that are filled with ideas and make sure their thoughts are to the betterment of social conditions. He sees Rodya as a misguided man that has great potential.” Porfiry is a nationalist and a nemesis.
On a first note, I feel that if Porfiry was a true "nemesis" of Raskolnikov he would see that Raskolnikov was institutionalized the moment he felt Rasko was guilty. Instead, it seems like Porfiry gives Rasko time to confess. Generally, if the guilty person in questions confesses they may receive a lightened sentence. With this in mind, Porfiry seems to want what is best for Raskolnikov. It's like Porfiry sees something in him, as an ex-student, and wants to help better Raskolnikov.
As opposed to playing the part of the traditional cop or detective, Porfiry allows Raskolnikov time to confess. Although many before me have said that Porfiry is playing psychological games with Rasko, I think that the pyschological torture that Raskolnikov faces in an inward one. He feels guilt and is plagued by his actions and Porfiry with his clever insinuations like, "So I have heard, sir. I've even heard you were greastly upset by something..." (p. 252) and the possible wink, only allows Rasko to feel further torchered. Interesting, two pages later, Porfiry talks about Rasko's article and that it "maintain[s] that the very act of carrying out a crime is always accompanied by illness." With a guilty conscience, all of the little things that Porfiry says plague Rasko greatly.
I do understand how some people believe that Porfiry is a nemesis of Rasko. In a way, Porfiry is making these gentle insinuations to get a reaction out of Raskolnikov, but I don't think he wants to psychologically torture Rasko, he just wants to drive him to confess.
I think that the fact that Razumikhim is related to or friends with almost every character was a clever and interesting addition to the novel by Dostoevsky. If I wasn't plagued with tiredness, I would tackle this little devil.
So it says that there is 31 comments, when there were only 29 earlier? I know I posted two but deleted one of them, how come I can't see either? :( I'm too exhausted to re-type up my post tonight, hopefully I can make amends with a tissue box or something. This is frustrating :(
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
You can also follow any responses to all entry through the RSS Comments feed.