Reader response example - 1 views

• 
  #1 Susan Bistrican on 27 Jul 11

   

  Use my reader response journal entry as an example for your own.
  
  Reading Response Journal: Crime and Punishment
  Though dense, depressing, and exploding with detail and description, Crime and Punishment was a very enjoyable read for me. I had previously read this book in high school so I had insight on the book, but reading it a second time made me more appreciative of the work as a whole. Dostoevsky creates an intriguing story through third-person omniscient and stream-of-consciousness narration which allows the reader to delve deep into Raskolnikov's dark and harrowing psyche. Though Raskolnikov commits two heinous and brutal homicides, the reader is still able to connect with his mentality because it is relevant to anyone who has ever done or thought anything that is considered unsavory to society-this essentially includes everyone!
  Dostoevsky conveys the joylessness and destitution of Russia before the revolution through his characters' immense suffering. Raskolnikov, as the protagonist, serves as the epitome of the generally bleak mentality at that time. He is a poor and desperate former university student who has fallen into a hole of depression and hopelessness. He suffers with the notion of superiority and whether or not he is an extraordinary man. This inevitably leads to the murder of the pawnbroker and Lizaveta. The crime, however, is not the sole focus of the book. The manifestation of mental anguish and suffering through it serves as the main climax-the punishment.
  The human conscience and the definition of insanity in relation to those who are seemingly sane also struck me as an important theme in regard to the novel's purpose:
  "…we are certainly all not infrequently like madmen, but with the slight difference that the deranged are somewhat madder, for we must draw a line. A normal man, it is true, hardly exists. Among dozens-perhaps hundreds of thousands-hardly one is to be met with" (185).
  This quote occurs when Raskolnikov presents his opinion to Zossimov right before he admits to his mother that he had given the money she had sent him to Katerina Ivanovna. The notion of what is and what is not a madman is significant because it is easy to judge a person and label them as one thing or another for their actions. What really makes one mad-or immoral? Are not we all immoral from time to time whether it through murdering a person or merely telling a petty lie? One cannot gauge how severe a "crime" is and place it on a hierarchy of immorality without considering the fact that everyone falls short and has the capability inside of them to do ill against humanity. Who is to judge Raskolnikov without evaluating what they have possibly done wrong in the eyes of society themselves?
  Another theme that stood out for me was the prevailing power of love. Love is treated like a god or religion in this novel regardless of the mention of the Christianity. Raskolnikov rejects God from the beginning and does not ever accept the Christian religion, but he does indefinitely come to salvation and redemption. Love, in all forms, whether it is romantic with Sonia, plutonic with Razumikhin, or familial with his mother and his sister, proves to pluck Raskolnikov from his state of desperation and bring him to life. Raskolnikov seems annoyed and utterly detests their attempts to "save" him, but in the end he cannot resist their love and eventually surrenders unto it.
  More notable is his interaction with Sonia. Their love is odd and would not seem logical to those who possess the conventional notion of a love that is flowery, perfect, and unmarred. Raskolnikov even utters to Sonia himself, after he confesses to the murders, "You are a strange girl, Sonia-you kiss me and hug me when I tell you about that…You don't think what you are doing" (334). This love feels illogical even to Raskolnikov. Sonia then cries out to him that "There is no one-no one in the whole world now as unhappy as you!" (334-335). There exists an understanding between suffering and the love that comes to be because of it.
  Redemption thus occurs though their exchange of misfortunes and they begin to love each other for their shared unhappiness. It is in this moment when Raskolnikov begins to experience true remorse and salvation. He is able to feel again and this is apparent through the two tears he sheds with Sonia. She penetrates the being of this seemingly monstrous man and unlocks his heart allowing him to heal. She serves as a symbol for salvation and it is noted at the end that he may never have fully confessed to the authorities had she not been there to encourage him. He also finds reason to live and trudge through his sentence in Siberia because she follows him and supports him over the duration. He finally accepts her love fully at the end when he breaks down at her feet one day when she visits him. She recognizes this as the instance where he has finally learned to accept her love fully and is able to offer her infinite love in return. They are both still in a wretched state-sickly, pale, wan. This moment, however, transcends their current situation and they live for the day that they will unite fully with each other. It is recognized that they have had to endure tremendous suffering before they could be awarded with happiness (448). This happens to be my personal philosophy as well.
  Conclusively, I find it hard not to fall in love with Raskolnikov as Sonia did. I do not think the ending is overly Romantic or "story-book" as it was brought up in class. I feel that it fits perfectly. Any other fate for Raskolnikov would have ruined the novel and its theme of the function of the conscience and redemption through love and suffering. On a different note, he compares with Emma's character in Madame Bovary in the sense that they are heightened portrayals of the human mind and its inner workings. I still stand by the notion that Emma exists in all of us and I am adding Raskolnikov to that list as well! The human mind is unfathomable and can never be fully understood or explained. The murders were symbols for any immoral or ill a person can commit. Just like Raskolnikov, we as humans succumb to crimes as victims and perpetrators. We cannot deny our inevitable role as imperfect beings capable of evil in this world.

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">Use my reader response journal entry as an example for your own. <br /> <br /> Reading Response Journal: Crime and Punishment <br /> Though dense, depressing, and exploding with detail and description, Crime and Punishment was a very enjoyable read for me. I had previously read this book in high school so I had insight on the book, but reading it a second time made me more appreciative of the work as a whole. Dostoevsky creates an intriguing story through third-person omniscient and stream-of-consciousness narration which allows the reader to delve deep into Raskolnikov's dark and harrowing psyche. Though Raskolnikov commits two heinous and brutal homicides, the reader is still able to connect with his mentality because it is relevant to anyone who has ever done or thought anything that is considered unsavory to society-this essentially includes everyone! <br /> Dostoevsky conveys the joylessness and destitution of Russia before the revolution through his characters' immense suffering. Raskolnikov, as the protagonist, serves as the epitome of the generally bleak mentality at that time. He is a poor and desperate former university student who has fallen into a hole of depression and hopelessness. He suffers with the notion of superiority and whether or not he is an extraordinary man. This inevitably leads to the murder of the pawnbroker and Lizaveta. The crime, however, is not the sole focus of the book. The manifestation of mental anguish and suffering through it serves as the main climax-the punishment. <br /> The human conscience and the definition of insanity in relation to those who are seemingly sane also struck me as an important theme in regard to the novel's purpose: <br /> "…we are certainly all not infrequently like madmen, but with the slight difference that the deranged are somewhat madder, for we must draw a line. A normal man, it is true, hardly exists. Among dozens-perhaps hundreds of thousands-hardly one is to be met with" (185). <br /> This quote occurs when Raskolnikov presents his opinion to Zossimov right before he admits to his mother that he had given the money she had sent him to Katerina Ivanovna. The notion of what is and what is not a madman is significant because it is easy to judge a person and label them as one thing or another for their actions. What really makes one mad-or immoral? Are not we all immoral from time to time whether it through murdering a person or merely telling a petty lie? One cannot gauge how severe a "crime" is and place it on a hierarchy of immorality without considering the fact that everyone falls short and has the capability inside of them to do ill against humanity. Who is to judge Raskolnikov without evaluating what they have possibly done wrong in the eyes of society themselves? <br /> Another theme that stood out for me was the prevailing power of love. Love is treated like a god or religion in this novel regardless of the mention of the Christianity. Raskolnikov rejects God from the beginning and does not ever accept the Christian religion, but he does indefinitely come to salvation and redemption. Love, in all forms, whether it is romantic with Sonia, plutonic with Razumikhin, or familial with his mother and his sister, proves to pluck Raskolnikov from his state of desperation and bring him to life. Raskolnikov seems annoyed and utterly detests their attempts to "save" him, but in the end he cannot resist their love and eventually surrenders unto it. <br /> More notable is his interaction with Sonia. Their love is odd and would not seem logical to those who possess the conventional notion of a love that is flowery, perfect, and unmarred. Raskolnikov even utters to Sonia himself, after he confesses to the murders, "You are a strange girl, Sonia-you kiss me and hug me when I tell you about that…You don't think what you are doing" (334). This love feels illogical even to Raskolnikov. Sonia then cries out to him that "There is no one-no one in the whole world now as unhappy as you!" (334-335). There exists an understanding between suffering and the love that comes to be because of it. <br /> Redemption thus occurs though their exchange of misfortunes and they begin to love each other for their shared unhappiness. It is in this moment when Raskolnikov begins to experience true remorse and salvation. He is able to feel again and this is apparent through the two tears he sheds with Sonia. She penetrates the being of this seemingly monstrous man and unlocks his heart allowing him to heal. She serves as a symbol for salvation and it is noted at the end that he may never have fully confessed to the authorities had she not been there to encourage him. He also finds reason to live and trudge through his sentence in Siberia because she follows him and supports him over the duration. He finally accepts her love fully at the end when he breaks down at her feet one day when she visits him. She recognizes this as the instance where he has finally learned to accept her love fully and is able to offer her infinite love in return. They are both still in a wretched state-sickly, pale, wan. This moment, however, transcends their current situation and they live for the day that they will unite fully with each other. It is recognized that they have had to endure tremendous suffering before they could be awarded with happiness (448). This happens to be my personal philosophy as well. <br /> Conclusively, I find it hard not to fall in love with Raskolnikov as Sonia did. I do not think the ending is overly Romantic or "story-book" as it was brought up in class. I feel that it fits perfectly. Any other fate for Raskolnikov would have ruined the novel and its theme of the function of the conscience and redemption through love and suffering. On a different note, he compares with Emma's character in Madame Bovary in the sense that they are heightened portrayals of the human mind and its inner workings. I still stand by the notion that Emma exists in all of us and I am adding Raskolnikov to that list as well! The human mind is unfathomable and can never be fully understood or explained. The murders were symbols for any immoral or ill a person can commit. Just like Raskolnikov, we as humans succumb to crimes as victims and perpetrators. We cannot deny our inevitable role as imperfect beings capable of evil in this world.</div>

  ...

  Cancel

To Top