text stringlengths 59 1.12k |
|---|
I despise you.” He could hardly breathe. “And what if it’s only my fancy? What if I am mistaken, and through inexperience I get angry and don’t keep up my nasty part? Perhaps it’s all unintentional. All their phrases are |
the usual ones, but there is something about them…. It all might be said, but there is something. Why did he say bluntly, ‘With her’? Why did Zametov add that I spoke artfully? Why do they speak in that tone? |
Yes, the tone…. Razumihin is sitting here, why does he see nothing? That innocent blockhead never does see anything! Feverish again! Did Porfiry wink at me just now? Of course it’s nonsense! What could he wink for? Are they trying |
to upset my nerves or are they teasing me? Either it’s ill fancy or they know! Even Zametov is rude…. Is Zametov rude? Zametov has changed his mind. I foresaw he would change his mind! He is at home here, |
while it’s my first visit. Porfiry does not consider him a visitor; sits with his back to him. They’re as thick as thieves, no doubt, over me! Not a doubt they were talking about me before we came. Do they |
know about the flat? If only they’d make haste! When I said that I ran away to take a flat he let it pass…. I put that in cleverly about a flat, it may be of use afterwards…. Delirious, indeed… |
ha-ha-ha! He knows all about last night! He didn’t know of my mother’s arrival! The hag had written the date on in pencil! You are wrong, you won’t catch me! There are no facts… it’s all supposition! You produce facts! |
The flat even isn’t a fact but delirium. I know what to say to them…. Do they know about the flat? I won’t go without finding out. What did I come for? But my being angry now, maybe is a |
fact! Fool, how irritable I am! Perhaps that’s right; to play the invalid…. He is feeling me. He will try to catch me. Why did I come?” All this flashed like lightning through his mind. Porfiry Petrovitch returned quickly. He |
became suddenly more jovial. “Your party yesterday, brother, has left my head rather…. And I am out of sorts altogether,” he began in quite a different tone, laughing to Razumihin. “Was it interesting? I left you yesterday at the most |
interesting point. Who got the best of it?” “Oh, no one, of course. They got on to everlasting questions, floated off into space.” “Only fancy, Rodya, what we got on to yesterday. Whether there is such a thing as crime. |
and hurried as usual. “Listen, Rodion, and tell us your opinion, I want to hear it. I was fighting tooth and nail with them and wanted you to help me. I told them you were coming…. It began with the |
socialist doctrine. You know their doctrine; crime is a protest against the abnormality of the social organisation and nothing more, and nothing more; no other causes admitted!...” “You are wrong there,” cried Porfiry Petrovitch; he was noticeably animated and kept |
Their favourite phrase! From which it follows that, if society is normally organised, all crime will cease at once, since there will be nothing to protest against and all men will become righteous in one instant. Human nature is not |
taken into account, it is excluded, it’s not supposed to exist! They don’t recognise that humanity, developing by a historical living process, will become at last a normal society, but they believe that a social system that has come out |
of some mathematical brain is going to organise all humanity at once and make it just and sinless in an instant, quicker than any living process! That’s why they instinctively dislike history, ‘nothing but ugliness and stupidity in it,’ and |
they explain it all as stupidity! That’s why they so dislike the living process of life; they don’t want a living soul! The living soul demands life, the soul won’t obey the rules of mechanics, the soul is an object |
of suspicion, the soul is retrograde! But what they want though it smells of death and can be made of India-rubber, at least is not alive, has no will, is servile and won’t revolt! And it comes in the end |
to their reducing everything to the building of walls and the planning of rooms and passages in a phalanstery! The phalanstery is ready, indeed, but your human nature is not ready for the phalanstery—it wants life, it hasn’t completed its |
vital process, it’s too soon for the graveyard! You can’t skip over nature by logic. Logic presupposes three possibilities, but there are millions! Cut away a million, and reduce it all to the question of comfort! That’s the easiest solution |
do!” laughed Porfiry. “Can you imagine,” he turned to Raskolnikov, “six people holding forth like that last night, in one room, with punch as a preliminary! No, brother, you are wrong, environment accounts for a great deal in crime; I |
can assure you of that.” “Oh, I know it does, but just tell me: a man of forty violates a child of ten; was it environment drove him to it?” “Well, strictly speaking, it did,” Porfiry observed with noteworthy gravity; |
to the Church of Ivan the Great’s being two hundred and fifty feet high, and I will prove it clearly, exactly, progressively, and even with a Liberal tendency! I undertake to! Will you bet on it?” “Done! Let’s hear, please, |
simply to make fools of them. And the things he said yesterday! And they were delighted! He can keep it up for a fortnight together. Last year he persuaded us that he was going into a monastery: he stuck to |
it for two months. Not long ago he took it into his head to declare he was going to get married, that he had everything ready for the wedding. He ordered new clothes indeed. We all began to congratulate him. |
There was no bride, nothing, all pure fantasy!” “Ah, you are wrong! I got the clothes before. It was the new clothes in fact that made me think of taking you in.” “Are you such a good dissembler?” Raskolnikov asked |
carelessly. “You wouldn’t have supposed it, eh? Wait a bit, I shall take you in, too. Ha-ha-ha! No, I’ll tell you the truth. All these questions about crime, environment, children, recall to my mind an article of yours which interested |
write an article upon a book six months ago when I left the university, but I sent it to the Weekly Review.” “But it came out in the Periodical.” “And the Weekly Review ceased to exist, so that’s why it |
you might get some money out of them for the article! What a strange person you are! You lead such a solitary life that you know nothing of matters that concern you directly. It’s a fact, I assure you.” “Bravo, |
Rodya! I knew nothing about it either!” cried Razumihin. “I’ll run to-day to the reading-room and ask for the number. Two months ago? What was the date? It doesn’t matter though, I will find it. Think of not telling us!” |
remember, the psychology of a criminal before and after the crime.” “Yes, and you maintained that the perpetration of a crime is always accompanied by illness. Very, very original, but… it was not that part of your article that interested |
me so much, but an idea at the end of the article which I regret to say you merely suggested without working it out clearly. There is, if you recollect, a suggestion that there are certain persons who can… that |
is, not precisely are able to, but have a perfect right to commit breaches of morality and crimes, and that the law is not for them.” Raskolnikov smiled at the exaggerated and intentional distortion of his idea. “What? What do |
men have to live in submission, have no right to transgress the law, because, don’t you see, they are ordinary. But extraordinary men have a right to commit any crime and to transgress the law in any way, just because |
they are extraordinary. That was your idea, if I am not mistaken?” “What do you mean? That can’t be right?” Razumihin muttered in bewilderment. Raskolnikov smiled again. He saw the point at once, and knew where they wanted to drive |
him. He decided to take up the challenge. “That wasn’t quite my contention,” he began simply and modestly. “Yet I admit that you have stated it almost correctly; perhaps, if you like, perfectly so.” (It almost gave him pleasure to |
admit this.) “The only difference is that I don’t contend that extraordinary people are always bound to commit breaches of morals, as you call it. In fact, I doubt whether such an argument could be published. I simply hinted that |
an ‘extraordinary’ man has the right… that is not an official right, but an inner right to decide in his own conscience to overstep… certain obstacles, and only in case it is essential for the practical fulfilment of his idea |
(sometimes, perhaps, of benefit to the whole of humanity). You say that my article isn’t definite; I am ready to make it as clear as I can. Perhaps I am right in thinking you want me to; very well. I |
maintain that if the discoveries of Kepler and Newton could not have been made known except by sacrificing the lives of one, a dozen, a hundred, or more men, Newton would have had the right, would indeed have been in |
duty bound… to eliminate the dozen or the hundred men for the sake of making his discoveries known to the whole of humanity. But it does not follow from that that Newton had a right to murder people right and |
left and to steal every day in the market. Then, I remember, I maintain in my article that all… well, legislators and leaders of men, such as Lycurgus, Solon, Mahomet, Napoleon, and so on, were all without exception criminals, from |
the very fact that, making a new law, they transgressed the ancient one, handed down from their ancestors and held sacred by the people, and they did not stop short at bloodshed either, if that bloodshed—often of innocent persons fighting |
bravely in defence of ancient law—were of use to their cause. It’s remarkable, in fact, that the majority, indeed, of these benefactors and leaders of humanity were guilty of terrible carnage. In short, I maintain that all great men or |
even men a little out of the common, that is to say capable of giving some new word, must from their very nature be criminals—more or less, of course. Otherwise it’s hard for them to get out of the common |
rut; and to remain in the common rut is what they can’t submit to, from their very nature again, and to my mind they ought not, indeed, to submit to it. You see that there is nothing particularly new in |
all that. The same thing has been printed and read a thousand times before. As for my division of people into ordinary and extraordinary, I acknowledge that it’s somewhat arbitrary, but I don’t insist upon exact numbers. I only believe |
in my leading idea that men are in general divided by a law of nature into two categories, inferior (ordinary), that is, so to say, material that serves only to reproduce its kind, and men who have the gift or |
the talent to utter a new word. There are, of course, innumerable sub-divisions, but the distinguishing features of both categories are fairly well marked. The first category, generally speaking, are men conservative in temperament and law-abiding; they live under control |
and love to be controlled. To my thinking it is their duty to be controlled, because that’s their vocation, and there is nothing humiliating in it for them. The second category all transgress the law; they are destroyers or disposed |
to destruction according to their capacities. The crimes of these men are of course relative and varied; for the most part they seek in very varied ways the destruction of the present for the sake of the better. But if |
such a one is forced for the sake of his idea to step over a corpse or wade through blood, he can, I maintain, find within himself, in his conscience, a sanction for wading through blood—that depends on the idea |
and its dimensions, note that. It’s only in that sense I speak of their right to crime in my article (you remember it began with the legal question). There’s no need for such anxiety, however; the masses will scarcely ever |
admit this right, they punish them or hang them (more or less), and in doing so fulfil quite justly their conservative vocation. But the same masses set these criminals on a pedestal in the next generation and worship them (more |
or less). The first category is always the man of the present, the second the man of the future. The first preserve the world and people it, the second move the world and lead it to its goal. Each class |
very witty.” “Thank you. But tell me this: how do you distinguish those extraordinary people from the ordinary ones? Are there signs at their birth? I feel there ought to be more exactitude, more external definition. Excuse the natural anxiety |
of a practical law-abiding citizen, but couldn’t they adopt a special uniform, for instance, couldn’t they wear something, be branded in some way? For you know if confusion arises and a member of one category imagines that he belongs to |
category, that is among the ordinary people (as I perhaps unfortunately called them). In spite of their predisposition to obedience very many of them, through a playfulness of nature, sometimes vouchsafed even to the cow, like to imagine themselves advanced |
people, ‘destroyers,’ and to push themselves into the ‘new movement,’ and this quite sincerely. Meanwhile the really new people are very often unobserved by them, or even despised as reactionaries of grovelling tendencies. But I don’t think there is any |
considerable danger here, and you really need not be uneasy for they never go very far. Of course, they might have a thrashing sometimes for letting their fancy run away with them and to teach them their place, but no |
more; in fact, even this isn’t necessary as they castigate themselves, for they are very conscientious: some perform this service for one another and others chastise themselves with their own hands…. They will impose various public acts of penitence upon |
me, please, are there many people who have the right to kill others, these extraordinary people? I am ready to bow down to them, of course, but you must admit it’s alarming if there are a great many of them, |
eh?” “Oh, you needn’t worry about that either,” Raskolnikov went on in the same tone. “People with new ideas, people with the faintest capacity for saying something new, are extremely few in number, extraordinarily so in fact. One thing only |
is clear, that the appearance of all these grades and sub-divisions of men must follow with unfailing regularity some law of nature. That law, of course, is unknown at present, but I am convinced that it exists, and one day |
may become known. The vast mass of mankind is mere material, and only exists in order by some great effort, by some mysterious process, by means of some crossing of races and stocks, to bring into the world at last |
perhaps one man out of a thousand with a spark of independence. One in ten thousand perhaps—I speak roughly, approximately—is born with some independence, and with still greater independence one in a hundred thousand. The man of genius is one |
of millions, and the great geniuses, the crown of humanity, appear on earth perhaps one in many thousand millions. In fact I have not peeped into the retort in which all this takes place. But there certainly is and must |
be a definite law, it cannot be a matter of chance.” “Why, are you both joking?” Razumihin cried at last. “There you sit, making fun of one another. Are you serious, Rodya?” Raskolnikov raised his pale and almost mournful face |
and made no reply. And the unconcealed, persistent, nervous, and discourteous sarcasm of Porfiry seemed strange to Razumihin beside that quiet and mournful face. “Well, brother, if you are really serious… You are right, of course, in saying that it’s |
not new, that it’s like what we’ve read and heard a thousand times already; but what is really original in all this, and is exclusively your own, to my horror, is that you sanction bloodshed in the name of conscience, |
and, excuse my saying so, with such fanaticism…. That, I take it, is the point of your article. But that sanction of bloodshed by conscience is to my mind… more terrible than the official, legal sanction of bloodshed….” “You are |
my anxiety as to the two grades getting mixed, but… there are various practical possibilities that make me uneasy! What if some man or youth imagines that he is a Lycurgus or Mahomet—a future one of course—and suppose he begins |
to remove all obstacles…. He has some great enterprise before him and needs money for it… and tries to get it… do you see?” Zametov gave a sudden guffaw in his corner. Raskolnikov did not even raise his eyes to |
“that’s not my fault. So it is and so it always will be. He said just now (he nodded at Razumihin) that I sanction bloodshed. Society is too well protected by prisons, banishment, criminal investigators, penal servitude. There’s no need |
all even for the blood they’ve shed?” “Why the word ought? It’s not a matter of permission or prohibition. He will suffer if he is sorry for his victim. Pain and suffering are always inevitable for a large intelligence and |
a deep heart. The really great men must, I think, have great sadness on earth,” he added dreamily, not in the tone of the conversation. He raised his eyes, looked earnestly at them all, smiled, and took his cap. He |
was too quiet by comparison with his manner at his entrance, and he felt this. Everyone got up. “Well, you may abuse me, be angry with me if you like,” Porfiry Petrovitch began again, “but I can’t resist. Allow me |
one little question (I know I am troubling you). There is just one little notion I want to express, simply that I may not forget it.” “Very good, tell me your little notion,” Raskolnikov stood waiting, pale and grave before |
For instance, to rob and murder?” And again he winked with his left eye, and laughed noiselessly just as before. “If I did I certainly should not tell you,” Raskolnikov answered with defiant and haughty contempt. “No, I was only |
nor any personage of that kind, and not being one of them I cannot tell you how I should act.” “Oh, come, don’t we all think ourselves Napoleons now in Russia?” Porfiry Petrovitch said with alarming familiarity. Something peculiar betrayed |
itself in the very intonation of his voice. “Perhaps it was one of these future Napoleons who did for Alyona Ivanovna last week?” Zametov blurted out from the corner. Raskolnikov did not speak, but looked firmly and intently at Porfiry. |
Razumihin was scowling gloomily. He seemed before this to be noticing something. He looked angrily around. There was a minute of gloomy silence. Raskolnikov turned to go. “Are you going already?” Porfiry said amiably, holding out his hand with excessive |
politeness. “Very, very glad of your acquaintance. As for your request, have no uneasiness, write just as I told you, or, better still, come to me there yourself in a day or two… to-morrow, indeed. I shall be there at |
eleven o’clock for certain. We’ll arrange it all; we’ll have a talk. As one of the last to be there, you might perhaps be able to tell us something,” he added with a most good-natured expression. “You want to cross-examine |
know very well,” he turned to Raskolnikov, “that the fellow is innocent, but what is one to do? We had to trouble Dmitri too…. This is the point, this is all: when you went up the stairs it was past |
though ransacking his memory, while at the same instant he was racking every nerve, almost swooning with anxiety to conjecture as quickly as possible where the trap lay and not to overlook anything. “No, I didn’t see them, and I |
remember it clearly. Some porters were carrying out a sofa and they squeezed me against the wall. But painters… no, I don’t remember that there were any painters, and I don’t think that there was a flat open anywhere, no, |
there wasn’t.” “What do you mean?” Razumihin shouted suddenly, as though he had reflected and realised. “Why, it was on the day of the murder the painters were at work, and he was there three days before? What are you |
had seen them between seven and eight at the flat, so I fancied you could perhaps have told us something…. I quite muddled it.” “Then you should be more careful,” Razumihin observed grimly. The last words were uttered in the |
passage. Porfiry Petrovitch saw them to the door with excessive politeness. They went out into the street gloomy and sullen, and for some steps they did not say a word. Raskolnikov drew a deep breath. |
Johannes Brahms was the son of a double-bass player in the Hamburg orchestra. Brahms’s talent was recognized very early. The famous violinist, Joachim, soon introduced Brahms to Robert Schumann who, together with his wife Clara played a major role in establishing Brahms as a major composer. Brahms spent most of his life in Vienna, where he was generally considered the Beethoven’s successor. Brahms’s compositions |
Science -- Asher et al. 307 (5712): 1091: We describe several fossils referable to Gomphos elkema from deposits close to the Paleocene-Eocene boundary at Tsagan Khushu, Mongolia. Gomphos shares a |
suite of cranioskeletal characters with extant rabbits, hares, and pikas but retains a primitive dentition and jaw compared to its modern relatives. Phylogenetic analysis supports the position of Gomphos as |
a stem lagomorph and excludes Cretaceous taxa from the crown radiation of placental mammals. Our results support the hypothesis that rodents and lagomorphs radiated during the Cenozoic and diverged from |
other placental mammals close to the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary. Lagomorphs are rabbits, hares, and pikas. This might be referred to as a "missing link" of the rodents. Why do we care? |
Photo Courtesy of Steve Dewey, Utah State University, bugwood.org Thermopsis montana Nutt. Scientific Name Synonyms: Life Span: Perennial Growth Characteristics: Mountain goldenpea is an erect forb, growing up to 2 feet in height and spreading by rhizomes. It blooms between May and August, depending on the elevations. Flowers: Pea-like lemon-yellow |
colored flowers in a raceme. Flowers are ½ to ¾ inch long. There are five to fifty flowers which make up the inflorescence. The flower spikes arise from the leaf axils Fruits/Seeds: The seedpods are long, thin, blue/green and covered with downy hairy. They project vertically from the stem. The |
pods grow quickly in the late spring and early summer, and mature in late summer. There are two to five seeds per pod. Leaves: Leaves are alternate, palmate, with 3 leaflets, which are oval in shape. Stems: Multiple stems up to 2 feet tall. Mountain goldenpea is found in montane |
and subalpine zones. It is common in woodlands and meadows. Soils: Sandy, well-drained soils. Associated Species: Aspen, lupine, snowberry. Uses and Management: Mountain goldenpea is poisonous to cattle. The principle toxin has not been isolated, but is thought to be similar to quinolizidine alkaloids found in Lupines. The toxin causes |
acute muscle degeneration – cattle become weak, ataxic, and unable to stand. Animals die from hunger and thirst. Mountain Glodenpea will remain toxic in hay, especially if seed pods are present. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.