A study of pull and push motives in achieving redemption as seen in Dostoevsky`s Crime and Punishment.

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

A STUDY OF PULL AND PUSH MOTIVES IN ACHIEVING
REDEMPTION AS SEEN IN DOSTOEVSKY’S CRIME AND
PUNISHMENT
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree
in English Language Education

By
Yoseph Guntur Kuncorojati
Student Number: 061214067

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2013

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

A STUDY OF PULL AND PUSH MOTIVES IN ACHIEVING
REDEMPTION AS SEEN IN DOSTOEVSKY’S CRIME AND
PUNISHMENT
A SARJANA PENDIDIKAN THESIS

Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree

in English Language Education

By
Yoseph Guntur Kuncorojati
Student Number: 061214067

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2013
i

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

ii

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

iii

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

This thesis is dedicated to:

The Lord, family, friends, the dreamers, the alienated, and myself.
iv

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY
I honestly declare that this thesis, which I have written, does not contain the work
or parts of the work of other people, except those cited in the quotations and the
references, as a scientific paper should.

Yogyakarta, July 18, 2013
The Writer

Yoseph Guntur Kuncorojati
061214067

v

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN
PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertandatangan di bawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama

: Yoseph Guntur Kuncorojati

Nomor Mahasiswa : 061214067
Demi pengembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan
Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:

A STUDY OF PULL AND PUSH MOTIVES IN ACHIEVING REDEMPTION
AS SEEN IN DOSTOEVSKY’S CRIME AND PUNISHMENT
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan (bila ada). Dengan demikian saya memberikan
kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma hak untuk menyimpan,
mengalihkan dalam bentuk media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan
data, mendistribusikan secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau
media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya
maupun memberikan royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya
sebagai penulis.

Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya.
Dibuat di Yogyakarta
Pada tanggal: 4 Juli 2013
Yang menyatakan,

Yoseph Guntur Kuncorojati

vi

PLAGIAT

PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Praise be to Lord Jesus Christ for all the love and blessings I receive. He is
indeed a wise teacher and a true companion. Without his guidance, this thesis,
which has also been a means for me to discover myself, will never be finished.
I would also like to thank Drs. L. Bambang Hendarto Y., M.Hum., who
has provided me with good advice and the time for consultations. I am grateful for
his patience and dedication throughout the process of writing this thesis. My
gratitude also goes to Sanata Dharma University for providing me with the
experiences to learn. I would also express my gratitude for the dedicated lecturers,
the administrative staff, friends, and the environment of learning they have
provided.
I would also like to use this chance to express my gratitude to my father
and mother, Ir. Antonius Sumarsono and Theresia Sunarsih for all the efforts
and hardship they have gone through in raising and educating me. My gratitude

also goes to my brothers, Niklaus Wahyu Kuncorojati and Gregorius Agung
Kuncorojati for their support. I thank them all for all their love, prayers and
support.
My special gratitude goes to my best friends Pumbaa, Jember, Satrio,
Gondrong, Yoga, Becak, Duwek, Adit, Kisruh, Wiwit, Ceye, and Doni, for the
happy laughs and the bitter tears shared. Not everything we have is useful, but,
hey, life is less boring this way. Last but not least, my gratitude also goes to

vii

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

people that I cannot mention here one by one, who have given me supports and
helps in finishing my thesis. May God bless them all.

Yoseph Guntur Kuncorojati

viii

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE …………………………………………...............................

i

PAGES OF APPROVAL …………………………................................

ii

PAGE OF DEDICATION ……………………......................................

iv

STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY ……………….............

v

LEMBAR PENYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ………….…

vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………....................

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ………………………………........................

ix

ABSTRACT ……………..........................................................................

xiii

ABSTRAK ……………….………............................................................. xiv
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ………….……………...........................

1

A. Background of the Study …..……………………....................................

1

B. Problem Formulation ……………………………..................................... 5
C. Objectives of the Study ……………………………...…..........................

6

D. Benefits of the Study …………………………………….…...................

6

E. Definition of Terms …………………………………................................ 7
1. Guilt ………………………………………………………................. 7
2. Redemption ……………………………………………………......... 7
3. Motivation …………………………………………………………... 8
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE……………… 9
A. Review of Related Theories ………………………………....................... 9
1. Character ………………………...………………………………….. 9
2. Characterization ………………………….......................................... 10
a. Personal Description ………………….……............................. 10
b. Character as seen by Others ………………..……………......... 11
c. Speech ……………………………........................................... 11
d. Past Life ……………………………….................................... 11
e. Conversation of Others ………………………........................... 11
f. Reaction ..…………………………........................................... 11
ix

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

g. Direct Comment ………………………………......................... 12
h. Thoughts …………………………………................................ 12
i. Mannerism …...………………………....................................... 12
3. Critical Approach …........…………………......................................... 12
4. Motivation ………….………………………………………………... 13
a. Guilt ........................................................................................... 14
b. Social Motives ........................................................................... 19
1) Power Motive ................................................................. 21
2) Avoidance Motive .......................................................... 23
5. Redemption ......................................................................................... 24
a. Mythos ...................................................................................... 26
b. Logos ........................................................................................ 26
B. Theoretical Framework …..……………………........................................ 28
CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY …….……………................................ 30
A. Object of the Study ..…………………….................................................

30

B. Approaches of the Study ….…………………..........................................

32

C. Method of the Study …..……………………...........................................

32

CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS …………………………….............................. 34
A. The Description of Characters ….……………...……................................ 34
1. The Description of Raskolnikov ..........................................................
a. Intelligent ..................................................................................
b. Alienated ...................................................................................
c. Impulsive ...................................................................................
d. Proud .........................................................................................
e. Idealist .......................................................................................

35
37
38
40
43
44

2. The Description of Minor Characters .................................................. 48
a. The Description of Svidrigailov ................................................ 48
b. The Description of Sonia …………………………………….. 51
B. Raskolnikov Motivation to Find Redemption …………………………... 53
a. Raskolnikov’s Redemption …………………………………... 53
x

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

b. The Internal Push for Redemption …………………………… 57
c. The External Pulls for Redemption …………….…………….. 61
1) Acceptance ……………………………………………. 62
2) A Clear Objective ……………………………………... 65
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS ………..............

70

A. Conclusions ………………………............................................................ 70
B. Suggestions ….………………………....................................................... 72
1. Suggestions for Future Researchers ………………………………… 72
2. Suggestion for Teaching Material ……………………………........... 73
REFERENCES ……………………………................................................. 75
APPENDICES …………………………….................................................. 78
APPENDIX A Summary of the Novel .…………………….......................... 79
APPENDIX B Biography of Dostoevsky ……………………….................. 83
APPENDIX C Lesson Plan to Teach Basic Reading .………........................ 88
APPENDIX D Teaching Material ……………………................................... 91
APPENDIX E Reading Text ……………………………………………….. 93

xi

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

ABSTRACT
Kuncorojati, Yoseph Guntur. (2013). A Study of Pull and Push Motives in
Achieving Redemption as Seen in Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment.
Yogyakarta: English Language Education Study Program, Department of
Language and Arts Education, Faculty of Teachers Training and Education,
Sanata Dharma University.
This thesis discusses aspects affecting individual’s motivation to redeem
his crime. The subject of the research is Raskolnikov, a main character in
Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment. The novel tells the story of the young
Raskolnikov who, due to his destitution and constricted way of thinking, robs and
kills an old pawnbroker. However, since the murder is based on premature
thoughts, Raskolnikov’s conscience is not at rest. His efforts to escape guilt leads
him to Sonia, an innocent young woman sold to prostitution, who later shows him
the path to redemption through suffering, and Svidrigailov, a depraved man, who
revels in human’s evil nature to silence his conscience.
The objective of this study is to analyze an offender’s motivation in
redeeming his crime. To provide direction for the study, two problems are
formulated. Those are: (1) How are Raskolnikov and the minor characters: Sonia,
and Svidrigailov characterized? and (2) What motivates Raskolnikov in searching
for redemption?
This study used psychological approach to gain insights of what happens
inside Raskolnikov’s psyche and library research to gather the data needed. The
primary source of the study was Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, while the
secondary sources were literary and psychological books and journals.
This study concludes that Raskolnikov is characterized as intelligent,
alienated, impulsive, proud, and idealistic, while Sonia is timid, faithful, and simple
minded, and Svidrigailov is impulsive and intelligent. Behaviour is a combination of
two forces, one being the force from within (push) and the other being the force
from outside (pull). This study concludes that, in his search for redemption,
Raskolnikov is internally motivated by his need to alleviate guilt. This becomes
his only internal motive since individual with guilt cannot fully utilize his mental
faculties while in fear. Externally, Raskolnikov is motivated by acceptance he
receives from Sonia and a clear purpose for his life.
In the last chapter of this thesis, topics suggested for future research of the
novel are provided along with the implementation of literary work as teaching
material.
Keywords: redemption, guilt, push and pull motives.
xii

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

ABSTRAK
Kuncorojati, Yoseph Guntur. (2013). A Study of Pull and Push Motives in
Achieving Redemption as Seen in Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment.
Yogyakarta: Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Jurusan Pendidikan
Bahasa dan Seni, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sanata
Dharma.
Skripsi ini membahas aspek yang mempengaruhi motivasi individual
untuk menebus kesalahannya. Subjek penelitian adalah Raskolnikov, tokoh dalam
novel Crime and Punishment karya Dostoevsky. Novel ini bercerita tentang
Raskolnikov yang karena kemiskinan dan pola pikirnya yang sempit, membunuh
seorang pemilik rumah gadai. Namun karena tindakan tersebut adalah buah dari
pemikiran sempitnya, nurani Raskolnikov tidak tenang. Pelariannya menuntunnya
ke Sonia, gadis polos yang dijual ke pelacuran namun nantinya menuntun
Raskolnikov menebus kesalahannya, dan Svidrigailov, pria bejat yang dengan
sengaja mengikuti hawa nafsunya untuk membungkam suara hatinya.
Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah menganalisa motivasi pelanggar hukum
dalam menebus kesalahannya. Sebagai arahan untuk penelitian ini, dua pertanyaan
dibuat, yaitu (1) Seperti apakah Raskolnikov, Sonia, dan Svidrigailov
digambarkan di dalam novel? dan (2) Apakah yang memotivasi Raskolnikov
untuk menebus kesalahannya?
Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan psikologis untuk mengetahui
proses kejiwaan Raskolnikov, dan metode studi pustaka untuk mengumpulkan
data yang diperlukan. Data primer yang digunakan adalah novel Crime and
Punishment karangan Dostoevsky, sedangkan data sekunder yang digunakan
mencakup buku dan jurnal sastra dan psikologi.
Kesimpulan pertama penelitian ini adalah bahwa Raskolnikov
digambarkan sebagai seseorang yang terpelajar, terasing, impulsif, tinggi hati, dan
idealis, sedangkan Sonia sebagai seorang pemalu, setia, dan bersahaja, dan
Svidrigailov impulsif dan terpelajar. Tindakan adalah perpaduan dari dua jenis
motivasi, motivasi yang berasal dari dalam diri (push) dan motivasi yang berasal
dari luar diri (pull). Penelitian ini berkesimpulan bahwa dalam menebus
kesalahannya, Raskolnikov termotivasi dari dalam untuk menghilangkan rasa
bersalah. Hal ini menjadi satu-satunya motivasi internal karena individual yang
ketakutan dan dihantui rasa bersalah tidak dapat menggunakan kemampuan
berpikirnya dengan maksimal. Dari luar, Raskolnikov termotivasi oleh
penerimaan yang ditunjukkan oleh Sonia dan oleh tujuan hidup yang jelas.
Saran untuk penelitian lebih lanjut atas karya sastra ini dan penggunaan
karya sastra ini sebagai materi ajar dicantumkan di bab terakhir skripsi ini.
Kata kunci: penebusan dari rasa bersalah, rasa bersalah, motif push dan pull.
xiii

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter consists of the background of the study, problem formulation,
objectives of the study, benefits of the study, and definition of terms. In the
background of the study, a description as to why the particular topic and novel are
chosen is provided. In the next two sections, the problem formulation and the
objective of the study, the problems analysed are formulated and the objectives
for the study are set. The next section, the benefits of the study, lists who may be
benefited from this study, and, lastly, the terms that are used in the study are
defined in the definition of terms.
A. Background of the Study
Philosophers,

sociologists,

a nd

psychologists

widely

agree

that

punishment, which comes after a crime, should also function as a behaviour
control (Wenzel & Thielmann, 2006, p. 451). Instead of just being retributive, as
it is commonly practiced, punishment should also be able to bring changes in
behaviour to prevent future transgression. This brings forward the concept of
redemption into discussion since, as Hsieh (2001) points it out that the intended
conclusion to redemption process is the altering or deepening of one’s
commitments to rational moral principles after a moral wrong, redemption can
bring about a shift in behaviour through the self-reinstatement of the moral
principles that have just been transgressed. For redemption to occur, however, an
1

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
2
offender must first recognize the error of his action. This recognition manifests in
the form of personal guilt.
Guilt alone, however, is not enough to incite redemption. Aside from the
personal aspect of redemption, guilt, Smith (2003) also points out the social
aspects of redemption, which are forgiveness and re-acceptance into the society (p.
923). O’Hara and Yarn (2002) further cautions that offenders “will lose hope and
motivation to redeem themselves if the possibility to forgiveness and redemption
are not available to them” (as cited in Smith, 2003, p. 923). For those reasons,
attention should then be given to both personal and social aspects of redemption if
a change in behaviour is what is expected from a punishment.
Straying a little from the present line of reasoning, Petri (1979) defines
motivation as the concept used to describe “the forces acting on or within an
organism to initiate or direct behaviour” (p. 4). In Britannica Encyclopædia
(2010), Petri further explains that motives can be generally classified, into
“pushes” and “pulls” (“Motivation”). Push motives are internal changes that cause
specific behaviour, while pull motives represent the external goals that influence
one's behaviour. In reality, rarely are pushes and pulls treated as separated force
since behaviours are determined by the combination of the two. If, for example,
one feels pain, the intrinsic reaction to surface would be to avoid the source of
pain. However, this intrinsic reaction is still a subject to external influence. If the
source of pain is a person one already hates, for example, one can easily keep
away from the person. However, if the source of pain is a person one holds dear,
one may, for example, attribute the pain to the specific action that causes the pain

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
3
instead of the person who does it, and thus one is able to distance his/herself from
the source of pain yet may still retain contact with the person.
The importance of bringing up the concept of motivation within the
current discussion is that the feeling guilt itself represents an internal push, while
the possibility of forgiveness and re-acceptance into society represent the external
pulls. Psychologists agree that the feeling guilt itself is a negative emotion, so that
an individual with guilt will attempt to alleviate the feeling by creating defence
mechanisms or postponements. These postponements of guilt range from the
positive attempt to repair the damage done, to the negative self-destructive or selfsabotaging behaviour (Baumeister, Stillwell, & Heatherton, 1994, p. 262). Yet, as
previously discussed, these postponements can be directed to the more positive
results providing there are external pulls, which are forgiveness and re-acceptance
into society, to the already present internal push guilt. Hopefully, when an
understanding of how pushes and pulls motives work together to generate
redemption is reached, there would be better chance for the emergence of a better
approach to help transgressors in achieving redemption.
In the novel Crime and Punishment written by Fyodor Mikhailovich
Dostoevsky, such pushes and pulls compelling an individual in a search for
redemption are clearly depicted. Having experienced the guilt of murder, the main
character is then set to find redemption. The story takes place in St. Petersburg,
the capital city of Russia, in the summer of 1865. Rodion Romanovich
Raskolnikov, a depressed young man who, due to his destitute and reclusive
personality, plans to murder and robs an old pawnbroker, Alyona Ivanovna. A

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
4
theory is used to rationalize and justify the murder. In an essay that he has
published before, Raskolnikov argues that men can be categorized into two
classes: ordinary men and geniuses or “extraordinary-men”. While ordinary men
must obey the law, “extraordinary-men” have an inner right to decide in their own
conscience to overstep even the law for the fulfilment of their idea or for the wellbeing of others. Raskolnikov himself has had the idea that he is one of the
“extraordinary men” and is determined to prove it. Furthermore, Alyona is
considered by many a cruel pawnbroker who likes to torture her sister Lizaveta
and thus, by murdering her, Raskolnikov will do the society a service. During the
execution of the plan, however, not only does Raskolnikov murder Alyona but
also Lizaveta. Though Raskolnikov is successful in murdering the pawnbroker, it
is neither pride nor satisfaction that comes afterwards, but fears and anxieties.
The story then revolves around Raskolnikov’s attempts to find answers to
his anxiety. His mother’s visit with her sister, Dounia, in order to ask for
Raskolnikov’s approval for Dounia’s marriage with a certain Luzhin only adds
tensions to his already exhausted mind. Not to mention his encounter with
Dounia’s former master, Svidrigailov, who almost brings him to a dire end of his
search of redemption. Raskolnikov’s search finally leads him to the innocent
Sonia, who readily accepts him and shows him the way to redemption. After
months of denying his conscience while evading the police’s capture,
Raskolnikov surrenders himself in to the police and is sent to a prison in Siberia
for eight years. His showing certain changes in his characteristics and views

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
5
during the imprisonment signifies the redemption achieved, and his being ready to
welcome his freedom as a new man.
The novel Crime and Punishment is one of Dostoevsky’s masterpieces.
Though written more than a century ago, the universal themes it brings are still
relevant for today’s readers; alienation, redemption, guilt, sufferings, human
existence etc. Particular themes, such as redemption and guilt, interest the
researcher the most. To face and overcome sufferings to find peace after one’s
past mistakes and follies is among the virtues that make a human whole, and
Dostoevsky has beautifully depicted it in the novel Crime and Punishment.
B. Problem Formulation
This study aims to develop a better understanding of the novel by
analysing how pushes and pulls motives work together to lead the main character
to redemption. This study limits its research to two minor characters, namely
Svidrigailov and Sonia since the two represent both extremities for Raskolnikov’s
postponements of guilt; Svidrigailov represents the self-destructive end, while
Sonia represents the redemptive end. Based on the brief description presented, the
following questions serve as problem formulation to guide the study.
1. How are Raskolnikov and the minor characters: Svidrigailov and Sonia,
characterized?
2. What motivates Raskolnikov in searching for redemption?

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
6
C. Objectives of the Study
In accordance with the formulated problems, this study thus has two
objectives. The first is to analyse how the author characterizes Raskolnikov,
Svidrigailov and Sonia. Once the characteristics of each character have been
defined, the next objective is then to analyse how these characteristics create
pushes and pulls to motivate Raskolnikov to find redemption.
D. Benefits of the Study
Throughout this study, it is hoped that readers in general may find help in
understanding the novel. Since readers may not realize all the qualities this novel
possesses in their first reading, an illustration is therefore needed before or after
the reading so that readers will have more appreciation towards the novel.
Secondly, readers may also find from this study new ideas and reflections to
enrich the already possessed knowledge of human life and its values, especially
regarding the feeling of guilt and how one can deal or help others coping with the
feeling.
For the more specific reader, that is to say the students of English
Language Education Study Program (ELESP) of Sanata Dharma University, this
study provides new insights for possible learning-teaching materials. A set of
learning-teaching materials developed from excerpts of the novel Crime and
Punishment are given to provide alternatives in English learning activities. This
study also aims to provide suggestions on researchable topics for further research

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
7
that may prove useful in the future. As for the researcher himself, this study serves
as the accumulation of knowledge gathered during the undergraduate years.
E. Definition of Terms
There are three terms that are in need of clear definition before further
going into the study. Those terms are guilt, redemption, and motivation. In
defining the term redemption, views and opinions from practical theology school
are employed to provide a more complete understanding.
1. Guilt
In concurrence with the definition of guilt provided by Berndsen, van der
Plight, Doosje, and Manstead (2004), the term guilt is defined as a negative selfconscious emotion and is assumed to occur when actual behaviour is causing
harm to others and is inconsistent with the values one believes about how one
should behave (p. 56). The term guilt, however, should not be confused with
regret, since the feeling guilt is believed to be the result of interpersonal harm
(harm caused to others) while the feeling regret is the result of intrapersonal harm
(harm caused to self).
2. Redemption
The definition for the term redemption used in this study is based on the
definition provided by the practical theology school, by which the term is defined
as the reunion of mythos and logos (Pierce, 2007, p. 133). The practical theology
school acknowledges the existence of mythos and logos just as the psychology

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
8
school acknowledges the existence of superego, ego, and id. The concept of
mythos is nearly synonymous with the concept of superego, although it may also
include id’s desire, while logos is understood as human mind or ego. Hence,
guilt’s being the result of logos’ failure to comply with mythos’ existence. In
practical theology’s view, logos, or human mind, serves the purpose of giving
meaning to and acknowledging the mythos, or roughly defined as moral values
comprised in consciousness. The failure of acknowledging mythos will create a
division between mythos and logos in the form of anxiety. Therefore, the term
redemption here is defined as the reunion of mythos and logos.
3. Motivation
This study conforms to the definition of the term motivation as proposed
by Petri (1979). This study defines motivation as “the forces acting on or within
an organism to initiate or direct behaviour” (p. 4). It is differentiated into internal
push that refers to the motivation from the internal change, and external pulls that
refers to the external goals. Behaviours are the result of the combination of these
two forces.

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
This chapter consists of two sections, and primarily serves to present
theories used in this study and their significance in facilitating the study. The first
section, the review of the related theories, presents all the theories that are
employed in the study. This section presents the theory of character and
characterization, the theory of critical approaches, the theory of social motivation,
the theory of guilt, and the theory of redemption. The second section, the
theoretical framework, presents the framework in which the previously mentioned
theories are organized and employed to answer the research problems.
A. Review of Related Theories
The theories that are used in this study are grouped into two categories, the
theories of literature and the theories of psychology. Theories of literature consist
of the theories of character, the theory of characterization, and the theory of
literary approach. The theories of psychology are grouped into the theories of
motivation and the theories of redemption.
1. Character
According to Abrams (1999), characters are the persons represented in a
work of literature, who are personified by the reader through inferences from what
the they say and their distinctive ways of saying it and from what they do (p. 32).
A character may retain his/her characteristics throughout a story or develop them
gradually or radically due to the events occurred throughout the story. Either way,
9

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
10
there need to be plausibility that the readers must perceive regarding the
character’s being unchanged or changed. Henkle (1977) further differentiates
characters on the basis of importance into either a major or minor character. A
major character is the centre and important character of a story, he/she plays
important roles in shaping and making up the story, and appears as the focus of
attention from the beginning until the end of the story. A minor character appears
only in certain settings, providing the background for the major character, his/her
role is less important than that of a major character (p. 94).
2. Characterization
Characters in works of literature are created through the means of
characterization. Characterization is how the author conveys both the physical
appearance and the characteristics of a character to the readers, or, how the author
makes the character known to the readers. Murphy (1972) proposes nine methods
of characterization (pp. 161-173):
a. Personal description
This method of characterization is usually used to provide readers with a
character’s physical description rather than his/her psychological description. In
this method, an author describes the character’s visual appearance, such as the
height, the weight, the physical build, the facial construction, etc. to the readers.
These are done to conjure the physical image of the character in the readers’
imagination.

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
11
b. Character as seen by others
An author may describe a character through the other characters’ point of
view. These other characters may reveal their opinions or thoughts about a
particular character and, thus, provide the readers with the needed information to
determine the characteristics of that particular character.
c. Speech
Characteristics can be reflected from what a character says. Therefore, an
author may describe a character through his or her speech. Through a character’s
dialogues with others or his or her monologue, an author is enabled to provide
hints to the character’s characteristics.
d. Past life
Author may describe characters through their past life. This is usually
done by referring explanations on an action or behaviour to the characters’ past
experiences. The author may also plainly inform the readers of a certain event in
the characters’ past life and let the readers make connections.
e. Conversation of others
Similar to real life situation, gossips are source of information. Thus, an
author may describe a character through conversations between other characters.
People do talk about others and this will serve as clues to the characteristics of the
person being talked.

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
12
f. Reaction
This method of characterization is about what a character does in a
specific event of the story. An author may describe what a character does as his or
her reaction toward various situations or events in the story so that readers may
take hints from the reaction as to guess the character’s personalities.
g. Direct comment
This is the less sophisticated method of characterization. In characterizing,
an author may simply give comments on a character’s characteristics directly.
This way, the readers may easily grasp the characteristics of the character being
commented on.
h. Thoughts
An author may give the readers direct knowledge of what is in a
character’s mind to enable the readers to easily understand the mental process of
the character. This method offers the possibility of intimacy by revealing to the
readers a character’s deepest desire or wish that is hidden during dialogues or
interactions with other characters.
i.

Mannerism
This method differs from the method of characterization through reaction

in that this method is about what a character does as his or her habit. An author
may depict a character’s characteristics through his or her habit and manner. By
understanding a character’s habit and mannerism, readers will be able to find
more information about the qualities the character possesses.

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
13
3. Critical Approach
Rohrberger and Woods (1971) distinguish five approaches that are usually
employed to provide a standpoint through which a work of literature is
interpreted. Those approaches are the formalist approach, the biographical
approach, the sociocultural-historical approach, the mythopoeic approach, and the
psychological approach (p. 6-15).
The formalist approach regards a literary work as a world of its own, and
thus believes that every answer to the questions related to the work can be found
within the work itself. The biographical approach considers a work of literature as
the reflection of the author’s life, and thus the biography of the author is required
to understand the world within the work. The sociocultural-historical approach
differs from the mythopoeic approach in that it takes the social, cultural, and
historical events during which the literary work is produced into account, while
the mythopoeic approach gives more weight to the prevailing beliefs reflected in
myths and folk-rites. Lastly, the psychological approach explores a work of
literature using psychological theories to explain man’s capacity for creation and
the complexity of his thoughts, motivation and behaviours.
Considering that the psychological theories could accommodate the study
by providing scientific basis for the analysis of motivation, this study thus deemed
that the Psychological Approach was the appropriate approach. By employing the
set of concepts and intellectual assumptions derived from psychological theories,
the reasons underlying the behaviour of the characters can be thoroughly
explored.

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
14
4. Motivation
Desires, wishes, wants, needs, yearnings, hungers, loves, hates, and fears
are what to be believed as the driving force for human behaviours. Together, they
are what are known today as motivation. The word motivation derives from the
Latin term motivus (a moving cause), and thus Petri (1979) defines it as “the
concept used to describe the forces acting on or within an organism to initiate or
direct behaviour” (p. 4). In Britannica Encyclopædia, motives can be generally
classified, among any other classifications, into “pushes” and “pulls”
(“Motivation”). Push motives are internal changes that cause specific behaviour,
while pull motives represent the external goals that influence one’s behaviour. In
reality, pushes and pulls are not treated as separated force since behaviours are
determined by the combination of the two.
There are currently more than thirty schools of psychology, and each
school proposes different concept to understand human behaviour. Since this
study aims to find an understanding of how pushes and pulls motives work
together in an individual to bring about redemption, this study took an ecclesiastic
approach by employing the theories of guilt from the school of Psychoanalysis
and the theories from the school of Social Psychology.
a. Guilt
In trying to understand how human mind works, Freud proposes a division
of human mind into three distinctive constructs, namely id or the unconscious
pleasure-seeking impulse, ego or the conscious realistic mind, and superego or the

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
15
evaluating conscience (as cited in Tucker-Lad, 2004, p. 373). Seen in the light of
this proposal, the feeling guilt is then understood to occur when ego’s behaviours,
in an attempt to satisfy the need for pleasure of id, fail to comply with the
normative values set by the superego or the conscience.
The feeling guilt derives from fear though it differs in term that the
presence of guilt implies the existence of strong values or beliefs that should have
not been broken in the first place. The feeling of fear is considered to be having
the most effect on human cognitive system since “the connection from the
emotional system (where the fear is localized) to the cognitive system are stronger
than those in the opposite direction” (Bar-Tal, 2001, p. 603). Therefore, when one
is in fear, rationality and logic will be overcome.
At the same time, there is empirical evidence that fear also has general
effect on cognitive processing. Fear tends to cause adherence to known situations
and avoidance of risk, uncertainty, and novel situations, and to cause cognitive
freezing, which prevents openness to new ideas (Bar-Tal, 2001, p. 604). When in
fear, however, individuals will sometimes tend to cope by initiating a fight, even
when there is little or nothing to be achieved by doing so. Since guilt is rooted in
fear, therefore, individuals with guilt will sometimes show the behaviours of those
with fear.
This study relies on the understanding of guilt compiled from several
sources. Despite of its importance in social life, there were few researches done on
the subject of guilt and thus its theoretical development is hindered (Baumeister,
Stillwell, & Heatherton , 1994; O’Connor, Berry, Weiss, Bush, & Sampson, 1997;

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
16
Etxebarría, 2000). Furthermore, psychologists, among who is Freud, and large
social groups hold a belief the feeling guilt is culturally conditioned, causing
negative effects to individuals and serving no other function than for social
control. Etxebarría (2000) further hints at the tendency to replace guilt with a
rational judgment on actions since the feeling is seen as “something with which
people would be better off without” (p. 101).
The reasons for the early rejection of the importance of guilt were partly
that Freud considered that men were “aggressive, and not gentle creatures who
want to be loved, (but rather) homo homini lupus” (as cited in Carveth, 1999, p.
9). However, it has to be understood that rejecting the instinctive capability of
men to love, will reduce man to selfish individualist, seeking companies of other
men just so that he can further his own agenda. Besides, in a newer research by
Zahn-Waxier and Kochanska in 1990, the capacity for guilt is understood to be
innate and universal, though the modes of expression are learned (as cited in
Baumeister, Stillwell, & Heatherton, 1994, p.246). Therefore, to feel guilty is as
normal as to feel happy or sad, though how the feeling guilt is expressed varies
between individuals.
Nevertheless, there are still psychologists who still maintain Freud’s point
of view. Young-Eisendrath (1998) observes that it has been psychology’s ideal
lately to promote self fulfilment, self expression, self esteem, self discovery, self
love, and self acceptance. And since the feeling guilt is usually conceived as “an
obstacle to the realization of individual potential, it must be overcome if
individuals are to attain a maximal degree of happiness and contentment in their

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
17
lives” (as cited in Gant, 2005, p. 60). This ideal may lead to the justification of
using antidepressant medicine to repress the feeling of guilt since guilt is
considered a disease hindering individuals in pursuing their happiness while it is
actually just a symptom of internal conflict. Freud himself was a user and
proponent of cocaine before cocaine was declared to be dangerously addictive
substance.
Guilt is defined as a negative self-conscious emotion and is assumed to
occur when actual behaviour is causing harm to others and is inconsistent with the
values one believes about how one should behave. In a more recent study, Harre
& Parrott (1996) add that guilt is the result of transgressing some rule from
authority (as cited in Strongman, 2003, p. 233). To feel guilty, however, one has
to accept the authority.
Since the feeling guilt is a negative emotion, an individual will try to
alleviate the feeling by creating defence mechanisms or postponements. These
postponements of guilt range from the positive attempt to repair the damage done
to the negative self-destructive or self-sabotaging behaviour (Baumeister,
Stillwell, & Heatherton 1994, p. 262). Kleinke (1978) proposes four methods of
guilt postponements (p. 91-95):
1) Compensation
The burden of guilt for causing harm to others can be reduced by
providing compensation for the harm done. The value of the compensation made
has to be considered as sufficient, however, since if it is not, the feeling guilt will

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
18
not be alleviated. An offender may also offer to punish him/herself to compensate
for the loss, though it is somewhat less likely due to a too great personal cost.
Individuals with guilt are also more eager to seek restitution if the chance
presents itself. In a research in which the participants were made to believe that
they had ruined an experiment, researchers found that these participants would be
willing to help the researchers in another experiment when asked to. Another
finding emerged is that the urge to make compensation is stronger when the guilty
participants do not have to come face to face with the victim for fear of being
taken advantage of. It is quite common, therefore, to find offenders with guilt
agreeing to help others unrelated to the person they originally harmed, since the
offenders are motivated to reduce their guilt.
2) Derogation
If there is no opportunity to make compensation, individuals with guilt
will be motivated to find another method of postponements. In a study of juvenile
delinquents, researchers observed that the juveniles commonly justified their
delinquencies by labelling their victims as deserving what they got. This blaming
the victim method may derive from the tendency to view the world as just, in
which people deserving are rewarded and undeserving people are punished. A
variation to this method of postponement is to convince the self that the harm is
only minor.
3) Denial of Responsibility

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
19
The third way of guilt postponement is to deny the responsibility of the
offender’s action. This method is commonly found in war criminals explaining
their behaviours by saying that they were “only following orders”. By denying the
responsibility of behaviours and somewhat put the blame on situations or others,
the feeling of guilt may be alleviated. This explains why individuals committing
an offense in a group feel less guilt than individual committing the deed alone,
because they are able to distribute the responsibility to others.
4) Accepting Victim’s Reaction
The fourth way in which the feeling guilt may be reduced is by accepting
the victim’s reaction. The reactions range from forgiveness to retaliation.
Whatever the victim’s reaction will be, the offenders need to feel that they are
doing it out of their own free will when accepting it. If the victim’s forgiveness is
not accepted, then the offenders will still be haunted by guilt. If retaliation or
punishment is not accepted out of free will, offenders may hold grudges and may
retaliate back.
b. Social Motives
Social motives are motives that are apparent in an individual’s
interpersonal interaction. In Motivation and Emotion, Murray (1964) suggests that
social motives are innate motives, meaning that an individual is born with the
basic social motive for affection, as opposed to the Freudian belief that social
motives derive from hunger-reduction associated with the breast-feeding on
babies (p. 88). He points it out to the certain “extremely important” experiment

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
20
conducted by Harry F. Harlow and associates that tried to discover the origin of
social motives (p. 87-90). In the experiment, an infant monkey was raised in
isolation. Inside the cage, there were two surrogate mothers; one was made from
soft cloth material while the other was made of wire mesh with a bottle of milk
attached at its “breast”. Harlow then observed that the baby monkey became
attached to the cloth mother, the baby would cling to it and grew angry if the
mother was taken. The baby monkey still went to the wire mother for milk, but it
would quickly return to the cloth mother afterward. Additionally, in the presence
of threat or danger, baby monkey would run and clung to the cloth mother instead
of the wire mother. In other experiment, a baby monkey was raised with only the
wire mother. Harlow then observed that the attachment that occurred between a
baby monkey and the cloth mother did not occur. Furthermore, when facing a
threat, the baby monkey did run, but would stand still or rocking back and forth,
showing signs of autism. Therefore, Harlow concluded that the motive for
attachment, that became the basis for social motives, was a primary motive and
not derived from the reduction of hunger.
In a follow-up experiment, Harlow raised three groups of baby monkeys;
the first group was raised in perfect isolation, the second was provided with a
cloth mother, and the third was permitted contacts with other baby monkeys and
human caretakers. When finally the baby monkeys became mothers themselves,
Harlow then observed their behaviours toward their babies. Mothers from the
third group showed greater ability for compassion for their babies, they would
protect their babies if there were attempts to separate them. On the other hand,

PLAGIAT
PLAGIATMERUPAKAN
MERUPAKANTINDAKAN
TINDAKANTIDAK
TIDAKTERPUJI
TERPUJI
21
mothers from the first group refused any attempt their babies made to make
contact. When approached by their babies, the mothers became aggressive.
Mothers from the second group were somewhere in between, they would allow
their babies attempts to make contact, but showed apathy when their babies were
taken by the researchers. The result of these experiments shows that human
innately needs others, and that the denial of this desire will result in aggressive
behaviours.
In trying to explain human behaviours within the scope of interpersonal
experience, David McClelland (1985) proposes several motives under his social
motives systems. Those motives are achievement motive, power motive,
affiliation motive, and avoida