crime and punishment(罪与罚)-第86章
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
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 has an equal right to exist。 In
fact； all have equal rights with me… and vive la guerre eternelle…
till the New Jerusalem； of course！〃
〃Then you believe in the New Jerusalem； do you？〃
〃I do；〃 Raskolnikov answered firmly； as he said these words and
during the whole preceding tirade he kept his eyes on one spot on
the carpet。
〃And。。。 and do you believe in God？ Excuse my curiosity。〃
〃I do；〃 repeated Raskolnikov； raising his eyes to Porfiry。
〃And。。。 do you believe in Lazarus' rising from the dead？〃
〃I。。。 I do。 Why do you ask all this？〃
〃You believe it literally？〃
〃Literally。〃
〃You don't say so。。。。 I asked from curiosity。 Excuse me。 But let
us go back to the question； they are not always executed。 Some； on the
contrary。。。〃
〃Triumph in their lifetime？ Oh； yes； some attain their ends in
this life； and then。。。〃
〃They begin executing other people？〃
〃If it's necessary； indeed； for the most part they do。 Your remark
is 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 the other； begins to 'eliminate obstacles；' as you so
happily expressed it； then。。。〃
〃Oh； that very often happens！ That remark is wittier than the
other。〃
〃Thank you。〃
〃No reason to； but take note that the mistake can only arise in
the first 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； fo
