We live in a world of opposites. Right or left, black or white, to be or not to be… opposing decisions that shape our lives. However antithetical the decision may seem, there is always a compromise. A ‘grey zone’ on the spectrum, where things are vague and mixing. Most of life truly happens in this middle, choosing one side indefinitely feels a bit impractical. ??? MORE
In the novel Crime and Punishment, every character is morally ambiguous. If you put every character on a scale from evil to saintly, they would land somewhere in the middle. Raskolnikov, the central character, murdered Lizaveta and the Pawnbroker. Upon first glance he seems on the evil end of the scale. However, he is guilt-ridden tries atone for his sins by helping others. Raskolnikov eventually turns himself in, seeking salvation from his guilt. Where does that leave him? Any other character follows the same pattern. Sonia is portrayed as saintly and demure character, but is a prostitute. Svidrigailov, however gross, gives away his money to help the Marmeladov family. One redeeming action doesn’t always forgive the multitude of sins but, it evens out the playing field and blurs the line. A character that seems wholly good or evil, is neither. …show more content…
In Primo Levi’s book, The Drowned and the Saved, he warns people of oversimplifying things for the sake of making the more pleasant. Just summarizing the entirety of World War II into ‘good versus evil’ or ‘America versus Nazis’ is dangerous to our society. (Aull) The longer we perceive the just the two opposites, the less we understand about any issue. For example, when looking at the Holocaust, breaking it down to Germany (evil) versus Jewish people (good) is detrimental to our view of world history. There are so many questions left unanswered and too many lives lost to disrespect it’s complexity by understating
In the novel Crime and Punishment, every character is morally ambiguous. If you put every character on a scale from evil to saintly, they would land somewhere in the middle. Raskolnikov, the central character, murdered Lizaveta and the Pawnbroker. Upon first glance he seems on the evil end of the scale. However, he is guilt-ridden tries atone for his sins by helping others. Raskolnikov eventually turns himself in, seeking salvation from his guilt. Where does that leave him? Any other character follows the same pattern. Sonia is portrayed as saintly and demure character, but is a prostitute. Svidrigailov, however gross, gives away his money to help the Marmeladov family. One redeeming action doesn’t always forgive the multitude of sins but, it evens out the playing field and blurs the line. A character that seems wholly good or evil, is neither. …show more content…
In Primo Levi’s book, The Drowned and the Saved, he warns people of oversimplifying things for the sake of making the more pleasant. Just summarizing the entirety of World War II into ‘good versus evil’ or ‘America versus Nazis’ is dangerous to our society. (Aull) The longer we perceive the just the two opposites, the less we understand about any issue. For example, when looking at the Holocaust, breaking it down to Germany (evil) versus Jewish people (good) is detrimental to our view of world history. There are so many questions left unanswered and too many lives lost to disrespect it’s complexity by understating