In Crime and Punishment, by Fyodor Dostoevsky, no one’s identity comes into more question than the main character, Raskolnikov. Not only does Raskolnikov question who he is, but the reader is confused on the merit of Raskolnikov. I found it difficult to characterize Raskolnikov. His identity was neither good nor evil.

Even though Raskolnikov murders two people, I found myself sympathizing with him; I wanted him to succeed in getting away with the murder. Why does this happen? Why does Raskolnikov’s thoughts and actions throughout the novel prevent the a characterization of him as evil? Don’t people’s actions determine their identities?

Dostoevsky’s character seems to show that the thoughts of a person have much more of an effect on a person’s identity than their actions. It seems that thoughts can betray someone’s true identity. Raskolnikov never seems to be a bad person, however, his extreme rationalism forced him to commit a terrible act? Was this the result of Raskonikov’s poverty or some flaw within his being?

Raskolnikov’s transformation to salvation at the end of the novel seems to denote that a transformation of identity has occurred. Did Raskolnikov’s thoughts cause this transformation? Or was it the result of values that had always been present within Raskonikov, but masked by his rationalism? Or can one’s identity be changed by another person? Does Sonia’s influence on Raskolnikov within the novel cause the transformation of identity?

In the Shakespeare play, King Lear, characters such as Kent and Edgar change their identities. Kent disguises himself in order to continue serving Lear, while Edgar disguises himself in order to save his life. The changing of appearance and mannerisms definitely change the two character’s physical identity, but what about their inner identity. Do Edgar and Kent truly change who they are or are they hold the same identity throughout the play?

Lear loses his mind during the play. Although he has the same physical identity it is clear his mind is not the same as it was at the beginning. Does this mean Edgar, who changed his identity to a beggar and later a peasant, held onto more of his identity than Lear because he purposefully changed his identity? Does one lose more of their identity when their mental or physical identity is changed?

Personally I believe Lear lost more of his identity because it was hard for other characters to even converse with him as they once had. Lear never returned fully to his previous mental health where as both Edgar and Kent were able to return to their original physical identities.

The intangible identity seems more important to form and not lose in this play than the tangible identity? What else can cause the destruction of the intangible identity than the extreme pain Lear experienced in the play?

The character of Oedipus in Sophocles' play "Oedipus Rex" is in a constant search for his true identity. He forms his identity as a hero that came from a distant land to save the city of Thebes from the Sphinx. He believes himself to be the son of the King and Queen of Isthmus. Throughout the play Oedipus discovers more and more that he is not who he thought himself to be. Oedipus becomes angry when people will not tell him information about his true identity. When a messenger does not answer Oedipus' questions Oedipus' tells the messenger,

"You are a dead man if i have to ask again."

Oedipus' deep desire to find his legal identity is very similar to the character of Jason Bourne in the Bourne movie series. Oedipus continues to search deeper and deeper until he discovers he is the son of King and Queen of Thebes. He realizes he has killed his father and married his mother. The discovery of his true genetic identity lead to the downfall of Oedipus.

In the born series Jason finds his freedom and solitude in the discovery of his legal identity. Oedipus, in contrast, gouges out his eyes and banishes himself from Thebes.

What drives people to know true or genetic identities and what causes the different reactions upon discovering their identities.

As a senior in high school, college essays take up a vast amount of time. Every college wants the same information in an essay: demonstrate who you are, what is your identity? I have been forced this year to really look at who I am and who I have become throughout the years. I have discovered a perception of my identity and it is distressing to see myself differently, whether others point out a flaw in my perception or I find myself reverting to old habits.

The detailed look into my identity began to beg the question: amidst all of the fast paced, often chaotic society, where identities can be changed at the push of a key board, how do we as individuals and people shape our identities?

In The Magus, by John Fowles, Nicholas is presented with many different identities formed by Mr. Conchis and his associates. Nicholas, or the reader for that matter, only discovers identities that are considered as deception. The “true” identities of this group are never revealed, however the reader paints a picture of who he believes them to be based on their deceptive actions.

The idea of a person not knowing their true, legal identity is played all over pop culture in movies such as the Bourne series. In these movies Jason Bourne loses the memory of his identity and begins a 3 movie long quest in which he discovers his legal identity. However, is his legal identity more important than his actions and what those portray?

Identity is a universal wonder that is constantly under scrutiny from not only others, but ourselves. There is a difference between who people want to be and who people become. How do people form who they become?