In the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment" the main character is Rodion Raskolnikov, and as one of minor characters Investigator Porfiry Petrovich, leading the case of robbery and murder committed by Raskolnikov, speaks.

The first meeting between the heroes takes place in Porfiry Petrovich’s apartment, while Rodion is very nervous: “Thoughts were spinning like a whirlwind in Raskolnikov’s head. He was terribly annoyed,” and Porfiry Petrovich himself, in turn, behaves completely calmly and at ease. The investigator also mentions Rodion’s article “On the Crime...”, which immediately makes it clear to Raskolnikov that he is suspected of a crime and is trying to extract a confession from him, because in his article he expresses his theory about “ordinary” and “extraordinary” people, the essence of which is the fact that someone must only obey, and someone is even allowed to perform actions similar to the actions of the main character. After the meeting itself, Raskolnikov calms down and realizes that his guilt has still not been proven.

The second clash takes place in the office where Porfiry Petrovich works. An interrogation is underway. The investigator is putting pressure on Rodion in every possible way, he is sure that it is main character committed this crime and is trying to bring it to light clean water. At the same time, Raskolnikov literally boils with anger and calls everything that is happening torment: “in one word: if you please, either ask me, or let me go, right now... and if you ask, then it’s not otherwise than in form, sir! Otherwise I won’t allow it...” Such a reaction only further convinces Porfiry Petrovich that he is right about the person being interrogated, but unexpectedly both are confused by the painter Mikola, who ran into the office and was next to the apartment of the old pawnbroker during the murder of her and her sister. He takes all the blame on himself.

The third and final meeting takes place in Raskolnikov’s own apartment. This time the investigator no longer has any doubts about who committed this crime, but Rodion does not admit to what he did:

“It wasn’t me who killed,” Raskolnikov whispered, like frightened little children when they are captured at the scene of a crime.

No, it’s you, Rodion Romanych...”

Porfiry Petrovich tries to convince the main character to confess and guarantees that he will help mitigate the punishment. He gives him time to think and leaves.

As a result, we can say that investigator Porfiry Petrovich appears to us as a reasonable, intelligent and knowledgeable person, since he carefully watched his interlocutor, asked leading questions, put pressure on the main character in every possible way and, as a result of everything, realized that Raskolnikov was the criminal. In turn, Rodion is shown driven into a corner. He realizes that he is pressed against the wall and tries to fight back, but it is all in vain. Raskolnikov was afraid of exposure, because he believed that his theory about “ powerful of the world this" and "trembling creatures" is true, he wanted to prove to himself that he belongs to the first, and could not accept his wrongness and his defeat.

Along with the article “Essay on the topic “Three meetings of Raskolnikov with Porfiry Petrovich” read:

Class: 10

Lesson topic: Linguistic and poetic analysis of the episode “The Third Meeting of Raskolnikov with Porfiry Petrovich” based on the novel by F. M. Dostoevsky “Crime and Punishment” part 4, chapter 2

Target: find a linguistic key this episode; find out the meaning of the episode in the idea of ​​the novel.

During the classes

I. introduction teachers

The central episodes of the novel, revealing the hero’s struggle with his “nature,” capable of compassion and sensitive to the misfortunes of people, are Raskolnikov’s meetings with Porfiry Petrovich. The first meeting outlines the nature and theme of the struggle, as well as the main characters of the tragedy. The second meeting - the intrigue reaches its highest point and tension: Raskolnikov, who had fallen into despondency, perked up again after Mikolka’s unexpected confession and visit to the tradesman.

It concludes with Raskolnikov’s bold statement: “Now we will still fight.”

II. Conversation with the class. Analysis of the third meeting (Part 4, Chapter 2)

What key words (phrases) would you like to highlight in this episode? Give reasons for your answer (Since the assignment was homework, students write down words - keys - on the board from their workbooks and explain their meaning in the text).

Psychology – character – proud

Facts Suffering – Ideas

Theory – killed life – air – suffocated

With what feeling does Raskolnikov greet the investigator? (wary, with anxiety, because Porfiry Petrovich’s visit is unexpected)

For what purpose did Porfiry Petrovich come? (this time P.P. does not hide his true intention to prove Raskolnikov’s guilt and explain himself to him)

How does this characterize Porfiry Petrovich himself? (he not only calculated Raskolnikov’s nature, his psychology, but also guesses his torment and suffering. This is not a cold-blooded accuser, but a person who feels and sympathizes.)

How do you understand Porfiry’s words “... there is an idea in suffering”? (Porfiry Petrovich bets on living soul Raskolnikov, he is right when he asserts, “But you don’t believe your theory anymore.” Raskolnikov’s human nature cannot withstand the painful feeling of criminality)

The keywords you cited were: the air was suffocating. Why?

The third meeting is directly related to the previous one, in which Raskolnikov began choke without a way out, in cramped conditions. In general, this word appears very often throughout the novel. Raskolnikov is suffocating on the street of St. Petersburg, where there is stench and dust, suffocating in a cramped, tiny closet, suffocating from fear and horror from a bad dream, suffocating during interrogation. This suffocation is not accidental. And it is not only a manifestation of Raskolnikov’s physical nature. Thismoral suffocation. It is no coincidence that Porfiry Petrovich advises Raskolnikov"change the air". “Now all you need is air, air, air.” “It’s nasty and difficult on the run, but you, first of all, need life and...air corresponding, well, is the air there yours? "

So the word air includes the meaning of liberation from inhuman theory, from the ideological dead end into which Raskolnikov drove himself;air is a cleansing of conscience, it is life. That is why the word air can be considered a word - a concept, a key, the main word not only in this episode, but also in the novel.

III. Summarizing.

Raskolnikov’s three meetings with Porfiry Petrovich are psychological duels in which Raskolnikov’s theory is logically refuted. The third and final meeting is her downfall. And although Raskolnikov stubbornly denies the crime (“But I didn’t confess to you anything”), the investigator is sure that he will “come forward” and confess.

The novel affirms the idea that it is unnatural to violate the principle of humanity. In Raskolnikov’s internal struggle, “nature” takes over, and he has no choice but to “turn himself in.” This is the significance of this episode in the idea of ​​the novel.

On the topic: methodological developments, presentations and notes

Development this lesson helps to acquire knowledge in the field comprehensive analysis literary text and identifying its features. Tenth graders learn to establish connections between an episode, individual...

Motives for the crime of Rodion Raskolnikov (based on the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky “Crime and Punishment”)

Workshop lesson. Helps to understand the complexity and inconsistency of the image of Rodion Raskolnikov, the motives of his crime. The lesson is a study of the author's text, the result of thoughtful...

Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky - piFedor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky is an extremely individual writer. He has his own, very different from other classics of Russian literature from...

There is no material evidence against Raskolnikov. Great importance acquires the moral side of his crime. A terrible truth is revealed to him - his crime was meaningless: “I didn’t cross, I stayed on the other side. Therefore, I had no right to allow myself to take this step.” The hero calls himself an “aesthetic louse” because even before the crime he set boundaries for himself: for real people there are no such boundaries.

Meetings with Porfiry Petrovich are very important - he is an intelligent, subtle psychologist. His role in the novel is to constantly make fun of Raskolnikov. This form of interrogation confuses Raskolnikov and convinces him that Raskolnikov is the murderer.

The first time Raskolnikov came to Porfiry Petrovich laughing. “Porfiry Petrovich was dressed at home, in a dressing gown, very clean underwear and worn out shoes. He was a man of about thirty-five, shorter than average height, plump and even with a paunch, shaven, without a mustache or sideburns, with tightly cropped hair on a large round head, somehow especially convexly rounded at the back of the head...” Raskolnikov is sure that the investigator knows everything about him. He doesn’t dissuade him. They argue about the essence and causes of the crimes, the investigator mentions Raskolnikov’s article on this topic.

The second meeting takes place on the initiative of Raskolnikov himself. Although “the worst thing for him was to meet this man again: he hated him beyond measure, endlessly, and was even afraid of somehow revealing himself with his hatred.” In the conversation, Porfiry Petrovich hints to Raskolnikov that he is a suspect. “Have you seen a butterfly in front of a candle? Well, so he will all be, everything will be around me, like circling around a candle; freedom will not be nice, it will begin to think, get confused, entangle itself all around, as if in a net, worry itself to death!”

The investigator drops his mask only at the last moment when he comes to Raskolnikov’s apartment. The place of the investigator in the novel is constant ridicule of the main character, despite the seriousness of the attitude towards him. The investigator has compassion for Raskolnikov and loves him in his own way. But he is also a provocateur who must provoke Rodion to confess. Raskolnikov just can’t tell when Porfiry Petrovich is serious and when he’s playing the fool.

He says terrible things, gives terrible hints, but he makes them in a humorous tone, form, and the form, more than the hints, hurts Rodion. Porfiry Petrovich is called upon to belittle the idea in the eyes of Raskolnikov, to prosaically debunk it. The investigator's laughter turns the giant Raskolnikov into a comedian. Rodion rebels against this humiliation and gets caught.

Porfiry is a mystery for the hero, a magnet to which he is drawn and repelled. The investigator opposes his will to Raskolnikov's will. Porfiry Petrovich’s face and his “hee-hee,” mixed with compassion, are intolerable for the “Napoleon” from Stolyarny Lane.

And only when the investigator comes to Raskolnikov’s apartment, he does not laugh, does not giggle, and with this he takes off his mask and finishes off Raskolnikov.

Dostoevsky outlined the main content of the novel as follows: “A young man, expelled from university students, a bourgeois by birth and living in extreme poverty, due to frivolity, due to unsteadiness in concepts, succumbing to some strange “unfinished” ideas that were floating in the air, decided to go out at once from his bad situation. He decided to kill one old woman, a titular councilor who gave money for interest. The old woman is stupid, deaf, sick, greedy, takes Jewish interest, is evil and eats up someone else's life, torturing her younger sister as her worker. “She’s no good,” “what does she live for?” “Is it useful to anyone?” etc. - These questions are confusing young man. He decides to kill her, rob her, in order to make his mother, who lives in the district, happy, to save his sister, who lives as a companion with some landowners, from the voluptuous claims of the head of this landowner family - claims that threaten her death, to finish the course, to go abroad and then throughout your life be honest, firm, unswerving in the fulfillment of your “humane duty to humanity,” which, of course, will “make up for the crime.”

Based on these “unfinished ideas” floating in the air, Raskolnikov creates his own rather coherent theory. He sets out its foundations as follows: “...People, according to the law of nature, are generally divided into two categories: into the lowest (ordinary), that is, so to speak, into material that serves solely for the generation of their own kind, and actually into people, then there are those who have the gift or talent to say a new word in their midst. The divisions here are, of course, endless, but distinctive features Both categories are quite sharp: the first category, that is, the material, generally speaking, people are by nature conservative, decorous, live in obedience and love to be obedient. In my opinion, they are obliged to be obedient, because this is their purpose, and there is absolutely nothing humiliating for them. The second category, everyone breaks the law, destroyers, or is inclined to do so, judging by their abilities. The crimes of these people, of course, are relative and varied; for the most part they demand, in very diverse statements, the destruction of the present in the name of the better. But if he needs, for his idea, to step over even a corpse, through blood, then within himself, in conscience, he can, in my opinion, give himself permission to step over blood - depending, however, on the idea and size her, mind you. It is only in this sense that I speak in my article about their right to commit a crime... However, there is nothing to worry about much: the masses almost never recognize this right for them, execute them and hang them (more or less)... The first category is always - master of the present, the second category is master of the future. The first preserve the world and increase it numerically; the latter move the world and lead it to the goal. Both have exactly the same right to exist.”

However, when confronted with living life, the theory of two classes of people begins to collapse. Exhausted by the fear of exposure, Raskolnikov reconsiders, if not the theory itself, then his place in it: “... He suddenly felt with disgust how weak he was, how physically weak. "I should have known this
- he thought with a bitter smile, - and how dare I, knowing myself, anticipating myself, take an ax and get bloody. I should have known in advance... Eh! But I knew in advance!..” he whispered in despair. Sometimes he would stop motionless before some thought: “No, those people are not made like that; a real ruler, to whom everything is permitted, destroys Toulon, carries out a massacre in Paris, forgets the army in Egypt, wastes half a million people in the Moscow campaign and gets away with a pun in Vilna; and after death, idols are placed for him, and therefore everything is resolved. No, on these people, it’s clear that it’s not a body, but bronze!”

One sudden extraneous thought suddenly almost made him laugh: “Napoleon, the pyramids, Waterloo - and the skinny nasty receptionist, the old woman, the pawnbroker, with the red clothes under the bed - well, what is it like for Porfirya Petrovich to even digest this!.. Where can they digest it! .. Aesthetics will get in the way: “would Napoleon crawl under the bed of the “old lady”! Eh, rubbish!..”

The main character of Crime and Punishment already understands that he is by no means Napoleon, that, unlike his idol, who calmly sacrificed the lives of tens of thousands of people, he is not able to cope with his feelings after the murder of one “nasty old woman.” Raskolnikov feels that his crime, unlike the bloody deeds of Napoleon,
- shameful, unaesthetic. Later, in the novel “Demons,” Dostoevsky developed the theme of an “ugly crime” - there it is committed by Stavrogin, a character related to Svidrigailov in “Crime and Punishment.” Raskolnikov is trying to determine where he made the mistake: “The old lady is nonsense! - he thought hotly and impetuously, - the old woman is probably a mistake, that’s not the point! The old woman was only sick... I wanted to get over it as quickly as possible... I didn’t kill a person, I killed a principle! I killed the principle, but I didn’t cross, I stayed on this side... All I managed to do was kill. And he didn’t even manage to do that, it turns out.”

In Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment” there were only three meetings, three so-called duels between Raskolnikov, the main character of the novel, and Porfiry Petrovich - the shadow, the conscience of the student, who, in fact, did not even try to catch him red-handed.

And here we can give the most obvious example in order to verify the correctness of the above statement. Throughout the entire novel, Dostoevsky never shows us exactly how and what exactly the investigator does. He exists as a sacred figure who must get to the bottom of the truth. At the same time, not taking a single step in this direction.

All meetings had more psychological meaning, which really helped Porfiry understand and be convinced of Raskolnikov’s guilt. The first occurred in the investigator’s apartment after the murder of the old woman. The student came to see for himself, to find out that the authorities had nothing on him. By his actions, he certainly sowed doubt in the heart of an experienced detective, but doubt is not proof of guilt. The meeting, like the conversation between the heroes, ends in nothing. Raskolnikov beats around the bush, fusses, and cannot directly ask the question that interests him. Porfiry is sincerely perplexed at what this young man forgot in his thoughts.

The second meeting takes place directly in the office. By this point, the heroes had changed both their views, some mechanisms, and the springs of their characters. Porfiry realizes that catching the criminal is almost impossible. There are no leads, no evidence. Of course there are suspects in his mind, but it will take more than unfounded accusations to take them into custody and bring them to trial.

Raskolnikov is already beginning to doubt his superman hypothesis. He is not confident in his own actions, and guilt like a hungry beast tears him from the inside. Of course, he still swaggers, and assures himself that all great people at first did not believe that they were truly great. But even the intonation of his voice reveals personal experiences and motives.

During the conversation, Raskolnikov opens up with the investigator. The idea of ​​a man-god rolls off his tongue, and when he hears it, he does not dare stop. Porfiry is surprised by the turn, but skillfully maintains the conversation, asking the right, leading questions. At the end of the meeting, he already realizes that it was the student who killed all these people, and what served as the motive for his actions.

The third meeting takes place at Raskolnikov’s apartment. Porfiry invites him to surrender, promising to intercede for him with higher officials. By this point, not a trace remained of the once great theory. Raskolnikov is weak, weak in spirit. He has real breakdowns that he doesn’t even want to hide. Yielding to the investigator’s persuasion, he confesses to his crime.

The rest is simple. Raskolnikov is sent to hard labor, but since he is no longer going to conduct any experiments on himself, he is happy. He turned out to be weak, but it was precisely this weakness that saved him from imminent madness. A little more and he would have lost his mind. This follows from the final dialogue between the student and the investigator.

Can these meetings be called fights? No, it’s unlikely. Rather, it is a test of faith, which the student conveniently fails. There is another opinion, they say, even in this situation, when he supposedly believes in false gods, a Russian person is able to see the truth and abandon ideas that are alien to him.

But this is a topic for a completely different story.

Several interesting essays

• Characteristics and image of the Governor in the comedy The Inspector General essay

  N.V. Gogol’s magnificent work “The Inspector General” told people about many important images that are important in our time. One of the leading images of the work is the policeman Anton Antonovich Skvoznik-Dmukhanovsky.

• Essay based on Repin's painting Barge Haulers on the Volga (description)

  “Barge Haulers on the Volga” is the author’s most popular creation, famous for its deep and sad meaning, which each person sees, albeit in one direction, but in his own way.

• Analysis of Bunin's story Clean Monday essay

  1944 World War II is having a detrimental effect on families, love, and feelings in general like never before. Bunin, being on the territory modern Russia, understands perfectly the feelings of all soldiers

• Analysis of Prishvin's story Guys and Ducklings

  M. Prishvin always treated nature with love and respect. The stories of this writer are imbued with a caring attitude towards all living things on the planet. The story "Guys and Ducklings" is no exception.

The birth of each new day begins at dawn. This is the time when nature comes to life. Some people have already woken up and gone for a morning jog, but there are also those who work at night and every time can watch all the beauty of the dawn.

Before starting to analyze the very episode of Rodion Raskolnikov’s last meeting with Porfiry Petrovich, the scene of “revealing the cards,” it seems necessary to me to give some features of Rodion as a person capable or incapable of murder, heartless or with a living soul, with an empty or busy head.

Dostoevsky created the image of Raskolnikov, no different from the average young student. This is usually strong personalities in the prime of their strength, who think they can do anything. But Fyodor Mikhailovich created a work not about human happiness, not about love... He created a work about human suffering, about human actions. Isn't it an important topic? Nothing is permanent in our life: the body ages, things disappear, the world changes... But there is one constant in our lives. In my opinion, these are the actions that we do. Actions remain even after our stay on earth. How long the memory of an act will exist depends only on its magnitude and globality. A good deed can make us and someone else happy, remain in our memory, leave an imprint on our personality... A bad deed can harm others, cause negative feelings in them and ourselves, it can change us. So, Rodion was just that same average student, or rather a former student. “The student is smart, talented, kind and generous in his own way...” But Raskolnikov was driven “to despair by poverty, the plight of his mother and sister...” he was unlucky to be one of many beggars. Rodion cannot get out of this dirty hole. And, as a result of this despair, terrible theories and ideas come to his mind... He becomes embittered towards the world around him. All of him positive feelings"fall asleep" and he reveals his dark side of personality. This opened up the opportunity to commit a bad Deed. It made it possible for the thoughts of murder to develop in his head.

But Rodion is not a murderer. He cannot adapt his heart and mind to killing people. (how, for example, other characters in Dostoevsky’s work could adapt, further possible developments of his dark side of personality). He can't get rid of the feeling of guilt. This feeling has tormented him since the incident itself and, probably, will torment him until the end of his days. His soul suddenly awakens after seeing the consequences of his crime.

Porfiry Petrovich is an experienced investigator who, probably, in just a few gestures and habits can see a criminal in a person, immediately recognizes a criminal in Raskolnikov, but not a real one. He sees that this criminal is suffering, the criminal is sorry, the criminal wants to return everything back... The investigator begins to “prick” Raskolnikov. He sympathizes with Rodion, wishes him well, but he is also a provocateur who must extract confessions from the suspect.

Porfiry Petrovich meets with Rodion three times and only drops his mask on the last one. When he comes to Raskolnikov’s apartment, he does not laugh, does not giggle, and with this he takes off his mask and finishes off Raskolnikov. The investigator openly accuses him and invites him to confess, although he cannot be arrested due to lack of evidence. He is sure that everything will work out for Raskolnikov over time, that he “needs to change the air a long time ago,” that he simply needs to suffer - this will heal him. Saying goodbye, Porfiry Petrovich advises Raskolnikov, if he decides to commit suicide, to leave a “short but detailed note” in two lines, since this “will be more noble, sir.” Exhausted by the fear of exposure, Raskolnikov reconsiders, if not his theory itself, then his place in it, and with disgust he suddenly feels how weak he is, physically weakened. “I should have known this,” he thought with a bitter smile, “and how dare I, knowing myself, foreseeing myself, take an ax and get bloody?.. I should have known in advance... Eh! But I’m “I knew in advance!..” he whispered in despair.” Reading Dostoevsky, we continue to be amazed at the power of his artistic insight. What is the extraordinary appeal of this writer’s work? Every line of his books is dedicated to a person. At the center of his work is man and the eternal questions of human existence, questions of good and evil, to which he tries to answer. Dostoevsky saw the main task of his work as looking for man in man. The works of the humanist writer, a man who thought, suffered and was tormented, are permeated with pain and compassion for the “humiliated and insulted.”

Raskolnikov cannot stand it for the third time and confesses to Porfiry Petrovich of the crime. He feels sorry for Raskolnikov, he invites him to confess everything publicly in order to cleanse his soul and abolish his punishment. He partially succeeded: the punishment was abolished until only eight years of hard labor, and besides, his whole soul was cleansed: after being sent to hard labor, his conscience no longer tormented him, he left “dirty Petersburg” and fell in love with Sonya.

Rodion Raskolnikov Dostoevsky murder