Crime and Punishment should be a comedy series

(Questionably) Great Author Dostoevsky wrote in perhaps his most famous and treasured novel, Crime and Punishment: “The really great men must, I think, have great sadness on Earth.” His great sadness, I would posit, is the reputation Crime and Punishment has earned as an unreadable mass of words no ordinary man could conquer.

Okay, maybe I exaggerate, but there’s no denying that Dostoevsky’s master work, while compelling and emotional to those who regard it as his best work and a staple of literature, also has a reputation of being dry. We can attribute it's tendency to scare casual readers away with its brevity, philosophical waxing and complicated Russian names that mostly start with the letter R for some reason.

Example of common complaints about the book taken from Reddit

If you’re a casual reader intimidated by this behemoth of a classic, fear not, I have a solution that will perhaps become my magnum opus in years to come. An idea derived completely separate from The Old Globe’s production ‘Crime and Punishment, A Comedy’ that I found while researching for this article (though I do want to give credit), I present to you:

Crime and Punishment And Also Laughter Because I Think It Should Be A Comedy Series.

What is Crime and Punishment?

First off, if you haven’t read Crime and Punishment, the book revolves around a poor student Raskolnikov, who murders an elderly pawnbroker under the theory that extraordinary men of the world have a right to commit any crime if they have something of worth to offer humanity. After committing the murder he becomes incredibly paranoid and suspicious, hiding his involvement in the crime extremely poorly due to guilt that eventually leads to him confessing and being sent to jail.

A guide on how not to act after murdering someone to some, or an insightful and thought-provoking novel that dissects the human nature and morality itself to others, Crime and Punishment discusses themes of guilt and redemption, morality and justice, isolation, suffering, and the idea of the “extraordinary” man.

It mainly does this through Raskolnikov’s mental state and philosophical monologues, as well as his relationship with other characters such as his love interest Sonya. She not only sticks by him, representing the theme of redemption, but also helps Raskolnikov understand that his detachment from society and superiority complex are what alienated him and contributed to his downfall.

So why turn it into a comedy series of all things? After all, there are other ways to make a book more accessible. Shakespeare has adaptations like No Fear Shakespeare that simplify difficult texts, Frankenstein has a graphic novel, and Les Misérables gets a whole stinking musical. I have two reasons for choosing comedy as the medium: 

One, because I think the whole book is actually rather funny and the characters often act in theatrical ways since they represent a specific theme or foil Dostoevsky wanted to portray, thus making them perfect for over-the-top comedic characters.

Two, because I believe comedy is a great medium for adapting a classic. It’s definitely an essential tool used in most if not all modern adaptations; it makes complex ideas easier to digest, and appeals to a wider audience while honouring and showing the timelessness of the themes that have made these stories a classic in the first place.

Key elements I would change

In case you were worried, I’m not here to sell you a manuscript or break down the entire book chapter by chapter. Instead, I will highlight a few key aspects of the book that I think have the most comedic potential, with a few ideas on how it can be adapted while still holding true to the original purpose of these features.

The dynamic duo

Razumikhin and Raskolnikov’s relationship is one aspect I would highlight for its comedic dynamic.

Because the characters are meant to portray the broader themes Dostoevsky wanted to highlight , they often act theatrically and have very dramatic dialogue. This is especially true for Raskolnikov, since his characterisation, internal struggle and descent into madness is pretty much the bulk of the book.

 Razumikhin is meant to be Raskolnikov’s foil– a cheerful, trusting and kind man who although is as poor or even poorer than Raskolnikov, living through good means rather than killing an old woman. (A potential career path for even the unemployed graduate students of modern day?) He represents an alternative to nihilism, an alternative path Raskolnikov could’ve gone down.

His cheerful nature and eagerness to see the best in other people also makes for an amusing dynamic between them, as Raskolnikov acts extremely paranoid and suspicious around Razumikhin, he unknowingly misses the clues of his friend being the very murderer the city is looking for dangling in front of his face… Every. Single. Time.

Some scenes that could show this well are the ones where Razumikhin visits Raskolnikov after the murder to look after him, as he misinterprets Raskolnikov’s paranoia and guilt for an illness. A good example would be the one in part 2 chapter 3, where Razumikhin tells Raskolnikov about the murder and mistakes Raskolnikov’s flinching and fist clenching and weird breathing and pale face for good old-fashioned cold induced anxiety. I imagine their dynamic to look something like this:

Crime and the city?

Another element ripe for comedy is the investigation itself.

Porfiry Petrovich, the magistrate in charge of the murder case, is already written with a certain slyness that can easily be played up for laughs. In the novel, he engages in long-winded psychological battles with Raskolnikov, subtly implying he suspects him without outright saying it. The way he toys with Raskolnikov, setting verbal traps and watching him squirm, has a cat-and-mouse energy that could translate well into a comedic format.

Imagine a version where Porfiry is completely aware from the start that Raskolnikov is the murderer but just keeps pushing him into a corner for his own amusement. He keeps dropping hints like, "Funny how the murderer left behind so much money. Almost like he wasn’t doing it for profit. Almost like he had, I don’t know, a philosophy about crime or something….."

Meanwhile, Raskolnikov, sweating profusely, delivers increasingly unhinged philosophical monologues about morality and justice, as Porfiry nods along, all while taking detailed notes in a tiny book titled Reasons Raskolnikov Is Definitely The Murderer.

It’s all about the people, baby.

 Even though the book is famous for its intense psychological exploration, the world of Crime and Punishment is also filled with ridiculous people who would fit right into a satirical adaptation. After all, what is a comedy without its extensive and loveable crew of insane, weird, quirky misfits?

Character list (and visual summary) taken from r/Dostoevsky, credits to reddit user u/Reader_in_Life

There’s Raskolnikov’s landlady, who is so overdramatic about his rent that you’d think he committed murder just to get away from her (which, in fairness, might be partially true).

There’s Luzhin, a man so cartoonishly terrible that he tries to frame an innocent woman for theft just to make himself look better.

There’s also Marmeladov, Sonya’s drunken father, who delivers long, tragic monologues about his suffering that would be gut-wrenching if he wasn’t the one responsible for all of his own misfortunes.

Crime and Punishment and Concluding this article.

Of course, adapting Crime and Punishment into a comedy isn’t about stripping away its deeper meaning, it’s about presenting those themes in a way that feels accessible and fresh. In fact, even without a comedic modern day adaptation, these characters and ways of exploring the themes can still be appreciated for their comedic undertones in the original text.

At its core, the novel is about guilt, redemption, and the internal battle between self-justification and conscience. These are themes that still resonate today, and comedy, with its ability to make difficult subjects more approachable, can serve as the perfect vessel.

Many forms of media have already shown how to toe the line between philosophical and comedic, such as The Good Place, where moral philosophy gets explored through humour.

While I can’t promise this adaptation will ever see the light of day (of course you can always go catch the Old Globe’s production and report back to me), I can say that imagining Crime and Punishment as a comedy has made me appreciate the book even more. It proves that classics don’t have to be intimidating, and that even a story about axe murder and existential dread can have its fair share of laughter.

If you’ve never read Crime and Punishment, I hope I’ve convinced you to give it a try. And if you have, I hope I’ve shown you a new lens to look at the extremely long, yet ultimately poignant book that everyone should take a crack at.