“Who are the elite?” does not quite seem like the right question after reading Crime and Punishment by Dostoevsky, but then again, is there any specific question that does fit this difficult novel? I don’t think that there is a definitive answer to any question asked about this novel, but rather a discussion about topics that aren’t thought about or discussed on a daily basis: extraordinary vs. ordinary, sacrifice, religion, justice and questions defining these broad topics.

A question seems not the right answer, but a mere extension of the books juxtaposition of so many universal topics. To look at each character individually creates an understanding of Dostoevsky’s intention to describe the alienation of each character against society in communist Russia. No one is truly elite in almost any sense. Monetarily, Svidrigailov (who ends up committing suicide) is not elite. Intelligence-wise, Raskolnikov (who ends up in prison for his crime) could not be considered to be such a leading citizen. Luzhin (a classy yet self-absorbed person) loses his fiancé for being such. Although each of these characters seems to have justice come upon them in their “punishment”, each does not understand the reason for being so. Dostoevsky uses religious elements within this book to allude to the justice of each crime not only through earthly justice but also divine justice; giving the reader a universal truth that justice will ultimately be served.

Does Being Happy Make you Elite?

Although it is easy to assume King Lear is the character with the most power, does he really have anything under his control? He can barely keep himself sane. Regan and Goneril seem to not have themselves in order either, believing that they can lie, steal, and cheat their way into power. In this case, could the elite be those who are happy?

They say “money can’t buy you happiness”. But these days, money can buy you Botox to make it look like a person is smiling, nice cars, and other luxurious items, just why can’t money buy happiness? Shakespeare’s play King

Lear seems to answer this question nicely with each of his characters. Regan and Goneril die displeased and doomed with all the power they can have. They had control over kingdoms, access to men (Edmund), and servants to do away with their father, and yet they still died angry and wanting more.

On the other hand, Lear and Gloucester come to terms with what they have done and understand their failings and misfortunes. Eventually finding the truth and happiness in their devout children, both die rather peacefully and almost in harmony with their fate. Shakespeare uses death as the great equalizer in this play, illuminating the differences between power and happiness, only to have the former taken away. So for those of us that are happy, should we feel elite?

Oedipus the Elite?

The elite are many times the ones with the power. In the case of Oedipus by Sophocles, Oedipus’ title, wealth, and consequent threat of power allows for the fated Oedipus to consider his oracle as false. As King and savior of Thebes, his pride only adds to his idea of being elite. When the “blind seer” Teiresias is pressed for Oedipus’ oracle, Oedipus lashes out because of the outrageous prophesy that is already set in motion, “Kingly position, everywhere admired! What savage envy is stored up against these…if for this power Kreon desires in secret to destroy me!” (366-372). Oedipus believes that his power and title can save him from his own fate, as an elite he is able to control circumstances around him, thus more quickly leading to his demise.

Oedipus’ demise is a tragedy. In many tragedies, the elite have farther to fall and a harder hit when they fall. Oedipus demonstrates this perfectly when he realizes that he has sealed his fate by fleeing from his “family” and into murdering his father and marrying his mother. Guilty of regicide and incest among other assertions, Oedipus’ “elite” status allows for a false sense of control over his fate. The farther he falls, and the harder he hits, makes everything about Oedipus so much more tragic, “No mortal eyes but looked on him with envy, yet in the end ruin swept over him” (1472-1473). The chorus states the rejection of Oedipus at the end of the play, while readers and play-goers alike breathe a sigh of relief that as mostly commoners, the fall is not so far. Do we, as readers, relate to Oedipus’ tragic fall as much as we should? Oedipus is believed to be elite, so can only true tragedy happen to the elite?

Sophocles. Oedipus. London: Nick Hern, 2001. Print.

Who Are the Elite?

Democracy, we must spread it. Capitalism, we must enforce it. Freedoms, we must preach them. Rarely do we, as Americans, believe that we should change to fit others ways. In a culture where we BELIEVE to be superior, who truly are the elite?

Elitists can be traced throughout history, starting with the beginning of time; from arrogant kings and Jews in the Bible, to well-known philosophers and wars, elitists have tried, and many times succeeded, in changing others ways. Americans specifically have had numerous attempts to spread varying beliefs. The Manifest Destiny in the 19^th century gave reason to expand across the continent of North America, but who says we have stopped? Expansion may not be continental, but surely we continue to conquer the minds and beliefs of other people.

Continue on now to the problems facing us today. Not only do we enforce our beliefs onto other countries and cultures, we ensure their immediate success with power and threats. What happens after that is not our problem, because until recently, the façade of perfection was one aspect that many people believed. Even now that our flaws are blatant and glaring we still believe that with our power and “money” we will come out on top. Our government is of the opinion that money and resources are infinite, therefore conveying a false sense of superiority.

The Price family in The Poisonwood Bible believed that not only was their religion superior, but their thoughts were as well. Reverend Price, a Baptist minister, and his family attempted to convert many Congolese people during the 1960’s. Not only did the Congolese reject many teachings, they also rejected many ways of western thinking. Questions such as why majority rules, and how come sharing is not a virtue for Americans were brought up through the people of the village of Kilanga. The author, Barbara Kingsolver slightly satirized the western beliefs by illustrating the hardships the family suffered through by using American customs and beliefs in a war-torn, dusty village in the Congo.

Who was right? Are elitists who we think they are? This word must either change definition over time, or the people must change their beliefs on this word. This cannot be simple.