Crime and Punishment: Part 3, Chapter 5 Summary & Analysis

Raskolnikov and Razumikhin enter Porfiry’s office laughing, lending, in Raskolnikov’s mind, a “natural” air to his behavior. Razumikhin introduces Raskolnikov and Zamyotov enters—Raskolnikov begins losing his “natural” air and grows nervous. Raskolnikov informs Porfiry of his story: that he was merely a customer of the pawnbroker’s who now seeks to find his stolen goods. Porfiry tells Raskolnikov to make a statement to the police; Raskolnikov fears that Porfiry knows he is the murderer.

Porfiry reveals that he has been waiting for Raskolnikov; two pawned items with his name on them were recovered from the apartment. Raskolnikov is the only pawner not yet to have visited. Raskolnikov grows pale and claims he was in a delirium yesterday—but not a complete delirium—and he stumbles in describing his condition. He asks Zamyotov to corroborate, based on their conversation yesterday: Zamyotov believes Raskolnikov spoke “intelligently . . . but he was irritable.”

Raskolnikov fears that Porfiry has learned, also, of his visit to the pawnbroker’s apartment after the murder. The conversation turns to Razumikhin’s argument with Porfiry from the previous day’s party. Razumikhin begins criticizing a supposed “socialist” view of crime, which blames criminality on the perpetrator’s environment. Porfiry argues that environment is responsible for some amount of all crimes. He then references an article written, semi-anonymously, by Raskolnikov on the nature of crime. Raskolnikov remembers having written it, but did not know it was recently published.

The article describes the psychology of a person committing a crime, and derives from Raskolnikov’s studies as a law student. Porfiry is struck in particular by the end, which argues, for some extraordinary individuals, ordinary laws do not apply and indeed these laws must be broken. Raskolnikov attempts to clarify his statement, saying that “Great Men,” as determined by society, often break the laws of their time in the formation of new laws, or a new morality. He cites Napoleon as an example.

Porfiry asks whether Raskolnikov believes in God, the New Testament, and in particular the story of Lazarus, who is raised from the dead by Jesus in the Book of John. Porfiry goes on to ask how one might know if a person is ordinary or extraordinary, and what happens if a person is misidentified. Raskolnikov replies that a person who is ordinary but pretends be extraordinary will eventually be found out, before he has caused too much trouble. Raskolnikov also states that the truly extraordinary are extremely rare.

Raskolnikov also separates suffering and guilt from the ability to commit a crime, arguing that even great individuals, who are “permitted” by society to overstep the bounds of the law, will feel some pang of conscience for the harm they do. The question is whether they can overcome this pang and be convinced of the eventual rightness of their actions.

Razumikhin asks whether Raskolnikov considers himself an extraordinary person permitted to commit crimes—only half seriously. Raskolnikov says that, if he were, he wouldn’t announce it publically—he adds that he does not believe he is a Napoleon.

Porfiry has a final question for Raskolnikov before the latter leaves: he asks if Raskolnikov saw the painters on the day of his visit to the pawnbroker. Carefully weighing his words to avoid "the trap," a nervous Raskolnikov admits he was there on the day of the murder but claims not to have seen the painters. Razumikhin, however, steps in and asks Porfiry what he's getting at, since the painters were there on the day of the murder and Raskolnikov only visited the pawnbroker three days before that to pawn the watch. Porfiry says that he's mixed up the details, and Razumikhin warns him to be more careful. Then, Porfiry quickly escorts Raskolnikov and Razumikhin out of the office.