Crime and Punishment – Raskolnikov and Schizophrenia
Not every inheritance endures
Introduction
Crime and Punishment (1866), by Fyodor Dostoevsky, is a classic novel known for its deep investigation into the human psyche. In this essay, we propose a clinical–literary reading of its protagonist, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, through the lens of schizophrenia. Although the medical term “schizophrenia” was only coined in the early 20th century—long after the novel’s publication—Raskolnikov’s behaviors are not merely a product of creative invention. Their resemblance to psychiatric conditions, especially schizophrenia, invites reflection, likely arising from the author’s observations of patients in asylums.
Dostoevsky’s intense interest in mental health—evident in his letters, readings of scientific journals, visits to asylums, and personal correspondences—coupled with his genius, made him a keen clinical observer. So astute, in fact, that his literary description anticipated aspects of what would later be called schizophrenia, giving the character a suggestive name: Raskolnikov (“Divided Man,” in Russian). Bleuler would later describe the illness 40 years afterwards, naming it schizophrenia (from the Greek, “split mind”). The semantic similarity is striking.
This analysis thus seeks to bridge literature and psychiatry by exploring how Dostoevsky, in a pioneering manner, portrayed psychopathological elements drawn from his own observations in a fictional character. In this work, the reading of the character may suggest an implicit diagnosis that Dostoevsky might have reached phenomenologically.
The convergence of terminology, clinical presentation, routine in psychiatric hospitals, and the author’s intelligence and interest lend this hypothesis considerable strength. Based on textual, personal, and idiosyncratic evidence, this reading presents itself as a highly plausible interpretation.
It is far more plausible that Dostoevsky’s observations profoundly influenced the creation of Raskolnikov. Consider:
• Dostoevsky’s Documented Interest: Textual and biographical evidence reveal the author’s genuine fascination with the human psyche, including its pathological manifestations. Visits to psychiatric institutions, the reading of scientific articles, and related correspondences suggest an active pursuit of knowledge in this area.
• Depth of Description: The richness of detail in depicting Raskolnikov’s mental state goes beyond mere creative invention. The symptoms described in the novel strikingly parallel the symptomatology of schizophrenia, even though the term was not in use at the time.
• The Analogy with Bleuler: The semantic overlap between “Raskolnikov” (divided man) and “schizophrenia” (split mind) strongly suggests that Dostoevsky was, intuitively, describing something of clinical relevance.
• Historical Context: Although schizophrenia was not yet formally defined, there was growing interest in understanding madness and mental illness in the 19th century. It is reasonable to assume that Dostoevsky was immersed in this intellectual context.
• The Author’s Genius: Dostoevsky is widely recognized for his ability to probe the depths of the human psyche. It would be unlikely for him to disregard his own research and observations when creating such a complex character.
Our aim is not to anachronistically label Raskolnikov, but rather to recognize, albeit belatedly, the cognitive and ethical skills with which the author drew on real individuals in mental institutions to construct the character’s human and biological foundation.
The conjunction of fiction and clinical insight enriches both literary criticism and our understanding of the human experience of mental illness, highlighting Dostoevsky’s visionary approach to character construction. After all, the ultimate goal of academic criticism should serve the author, the reader, and the work itself.
Raskolnikov is not merely a character. He is a man—or perhaps more than one. A chorus of anonymous, real, and tormented voices. The history and intentions of the author intertwine to serve as a concrete and intuitive reference. Not merely a metalinguistic one.
Schizophrenia: A Clinical Perspective
Schizophrenia is a chronic psychiatric disorder characterized by a variety of symptoms that affect thought, perception, emotions, and behavior. Clinically, its symptoms are usually divided into positive, negative, and cognitive categories.
Positive symptoms include delusions (false beliefs, often of persecution or grandeur) and hallucinations (sensory perceptions without an external stimulus, such as hearing voices that do not exist). Negative symptoms refer to the reduction or loss of normal functions, such as social isolation, affective flattening (a reduction in emotional expressiveness), and lack of motivation. Disorganized symptoms encompass confused thoughts, incoherent speech, and strange or inappropriate behaviors.
From a medical standpoint, schizophrenia typically manifests in late adolescence or early adulthood, a period in which Raskolnikov appears in Crime and Punishment. Modern diagnostic criteria (such as those in the DSM-5 of the American Psychiatric Association) require the presence of at least two main symptoms persisting over a significant period, causing impairment in social or occupational functioning. Although Dostoevsky did not possess this formal knowledge, the richness of behavioral details he attributes to Raskolnikov allows for a striking comparison with this clinical picture.
Raskolnikov: Profile of a Conflicted Character
Raskolnikov is presented in the novel as a former student living in extreme poverty in St. Petersburg. Intelligent and proud, he develops a theory about “extraordinary” individuals who might have the moral right to transgress laws in the name of a greater good. Because of this idea and, supposedly, his desperate financial situation, Raskolnikov ends up committing a double murder: he kills an old moneylender and, inadvertently, her sister. From that point on, Dostoevsky plunges us into the tormented mind of the character, showing him oscillating between the cold rationalization of his act and the torturous guilt that consumes him.
Throughout the narrative, various behaviors and ideas exhibited by Raskolnikov arouse astonishment. Even before the crime, he lived reclusively in his rented room, avoiding social contact and abandoning his studies—behaviors suggestive of isolation and apathy. After the crime, these traits intensify and new signs of disturbance emerge: Raskolnikov experiences fevers and fainting spells, has vivid dreams and distressing nightmares, speaks in a frequently confused and fragmented manner, and demonstrates a constant fear of being pursued or discovered. His friend Razumikhin describes him at one point as having “two opposing natures alternating in dominance,” perceiving in Raskolnikov a form of extreme duality. This observation suggests that the protagonist struggles internally between a calculating side and a compassionate side, reinforcing the impression of a deep internal division.
Another notable aspect is Raskolnikov’s abrupt mood swings and shifts in will. At one moment, he is dejected and inert, refusing to eat or interact; at another, he acts with agitation, impulsively venturing out and even seeking conversation with strangers to, paradoxically, hint at his guilt. This behavioral instability confounds those around him and us, the readers, painting the portrait of a mind in shambles—simultaneously lucid and delirious, cold and feverish.
A Writer-Scientist
Fyodor Dostoevsky is often remembered as one of the greatest psychologists in literature. His ability to dissect the human soul in his writings earned him an almost clinical reputation.
Decades before psychiatry formally defined schizophrenia, Dostoevsky had already explored themes of personality splitting and delusions in characters such as the one in the short story The Double (1846). This meticulous attention to pathological mental states is powerfully evident in Crime and Punishment. By narrating Raskolnikov’s psychological journey, Dostoevsky acts, metaphorically, as a “scientist” observing a clinical case—recording symptoms and emotional fluctuations with impressive realism.
It is worth highlighting the respect and empathy with which Dostoevsky portrays psychologically troubled individuals. During his exile in Siberia, the writer lived among prisoners exhibiting marginal or erratic behaviors, and this experience deepened his understanding of the suffering human psyche. In his works, the so-called “mad” or tormented are never portrayed as one-dimensional caricatures; rather, Dostoevsky bestows upon them humanity and dignity. This almost therapeutic stance reveals an author attuned to the suffering of others and committed to giving voice to those who, in real life, might otherwise be ignored or silenced. Thus, in addition to being a brilliant novelist, Dostoevsky demonstrates himself as a keen observer of the mind, honoring the complexity and value of those who inspired him.
Symptoms of Schizophrenia in Raskolnikov
Below is a table comparing classic symptoms of schizophrenia with behaviors observed in Raskolnikov throughout the novel.
Clinical Symptom
Raskolnikov’s Behavior
Delusions of grandeur and persecution
Believes he is destined for an extraordinary act (the “extraordinary man” theory) and, after the crime, becomes obsessively distrustful of everyone around him, interpreting others’ gestures as indications of suspicion directed towards him.
Hallucinations (visual/auditory)
Experiences unfounded perceptions: for example, he believes he hears someone call him “murderer” on the street and follows the voice without finding anyone; he has vivid dreams that border on hallucination (such as the nightmare involving a beaten mare) and moments of fever during which he struggles to distinguish fantasy from reality.
Social isolation and apathy
Both before and after the crime, he isolates himself in his rented room, avoids contact even with his mother and sister, loses interest in activities he once valued (such as his studies), and shows indifference toward his own appearance and health.
Disorganized thought and speech
In conversation, he frequently shifts topics abruptly, leaves sentences unfinished, or utters incoherent phrases that alarm his interlocutors (for example, laughing or rambling inappropriately in the presence of the investigating judge, Porfiry Petrovich).
Emotional ambivalence
Alternates between moments of cold calculation and bursts of emotion and compassion (as when he assists Marmeladov and his family). This coexistence of opposing impulses reflects an internal division similar to the “dual nature” noted by Razumikhin.
The topics abobe descri es that many of Raskolnikov’s behaviors can be interpreted as symptoms that, in modern clinical terms, are associated with schizophrenia. Of course, while Raskolnikov, as a literary character, also embodies moral and philosophical dilemmas that transcend a medical diagnosis, the correspondences are striking—indicating how Dostoevsky anticipated clinical descriptions that would only be formally recognized decades later.
Clinical Symptom
Raskolnikov’s Behavior
Delusions of grandeur and persecution
Believes he is destined for an extraordinary act (the “extraordinary man” theory) and, after the crime, becomes obsessively distrustful of everyone around him, interpreting others’ gestures as indications of suspicion directed towards him.
Hallucinations (visual/auditory)
Experiences unfounded perceptions: for example, he believes he hears someone call him “murderer” on the street and follows the voice without finding anyone; he has vivid dreams that border on hallucination (such as the nightmare involving a beaten mare) and moments of fever during which he struggles to distinguish fantasy from reality.
Social isolation and apathy
Both before and after the crime, he isolates himself in his rented room, avoids contact even with his mother and sister, loses interest in activities he once valued (such as his studies), and shows indifference toward his own appearance and health.
Disorganized thought and speech
In conversation, he frequently shifts topics abruptly, leaves sentences unfinished, or utters incoherent phrases that alarm his interlocutors (for example, laughing or rambling inappropriately in the presence of the investigating judge, Porfiry Petrovich).
Emotional ambivalence
Alternates between moments of cold calculation and bursts of emotion and compassion (as when he assists Marmeladov and his family). This coexistence of opposing impulses reflects an internal division similar to the “dual nature” noted by Razumikhin.
Discussion
Analyzing Raskolnikov from the perspective of schizophrenia raises intriguing reflections. On one hand, it allows us to understand the incoherence of his behaviors and the agitation of his mind after the crime as something beyond mere “moral guilt”—possibly a psychotic collapse under extreme stress. This clinical–literary reading does not diminish the character’s philosophical dimension (his crisis of conscience, his internal debate over right and wrong); rather, it adds layers of meaning. The guilt and fear, amplified to pathological levels, might have precipitated a psychotic break, illuminating the fine line between an ethical conflict and a mental disorder. Books are not hospitals, and we should not assume that those without a visible label are healthy, nor that authors entirely disregard the possibility that souls can suffer.
On the other hand, it is important to consider that not all of Raskolnikov’s peculiar behaviors can be explained solely by psychopathology. Social factors (extreme poverty, academic isolation, lack of emotional support) and intellectual influences (the impact of radical ideologies of the time) also shape his actions. Reading Raskolnikov as a “case” of schizophrenia is a concrete metaphor that enriches our interpretation, but it does not exhaust the character’s complexity. He is simultaneously a literary symbol (of the man divided between arrogance and redemption) and an object of psychological study. This duality is precisely what makes Crime and Punishment such a rich work: it allows for multiple, complementary layers of interpretation.
Conclusion
The clinical–literary reading of Crime and Punishment through the lens of schizophrenia not only reveals the degree of precision with which Dostoevsky anticipated psychopathological phenomena that would only be formally described decades later, but also invites a reconsideration of the epistemological relationship between literature and medicine. Raskolnikov, in this context, can be seen not merely as an “inspired character,” but almost as a literary case study derived from the attentive listening and acute observation of an author who, even without medical training, captured the symptomatic structure of the disorder with remarkable phenomenological fidelity.
The character was constructed based on the interaction with individuals who, in offering their very souls to the author, inspired his creative reconstruction. In light of this, this perspective seeks to honor the complexity of the work and the potential human sources that inspired it.
In crafting Raskolnikov, Dostoevsky not only documented a clinical picture; he restored humanity to those marginalized by society—whether deemed insane or criminal. This act of restoration is, in itself, an ethical, clinical, and literary gesture of rare greatness. It is for this reason that Raskolnikov resists reductionist analysis: he is simultaneously a case and a symbol; a fragmented subject and a historical mirror; a young Russian and an archetype of modern man.
Thus, Crime and Punishment is not merely a novel about guilt and redemption—it is also an unintentional treatise on psychopathology.
Contemporary criticism, therefore, should not only recognize the value of this attentive listening but also reclaim the ethical commitment it implies: to view the psychotic, the delinquent, and the wayward not as mere objects of diagnosis or judgment. The psychological, psychiatric, and biological approaches are equally important facets of the work, and incorporating them does not detract from the work, the author, or the reader. If oversimplified interpretations obscure sophisticated ones, no bibliographic reference will be provided for that reduction.
Anchored in phenomenological description and biographical context, this reading offers a perspective that complements approaches focused primarily on narrative or philosophical structure. In this work, no one is greater than Dostoevsky.
For this reason, he named his character Rodion Romanovitch—a name that carries the heritage of noble ruination, derived from the Romanov lineage and echoing the island of Rhodes: a land of fallen colossi. His theory of the extraordinary man is that colossus—and he, its ruin.
And not every inheritance endures.