Objective: This study aims to investigate the processes of transformation and the hypertextual relations of Atiq Rahimi’s Curse on Dostoevsky in connection with Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, while also elucidating its anthropological dimensions. The central question is how Rahimi, through rewriting a canonical text within the cultural and historical context of postwar Afghanistan, transforms both the narrative structure and characterization of the hypotext, while simultaneously redefining concepts such as crime, punishment, justice, conscience, redemption, and the human subject in a new way. The study seeks to demonstrate that Curse on Dostoevsky is not merely a narrative adaptation of a celebrated classic, but rather a critical engagement with the legacy of classical literature and an attempt to localize it within the crisis-ridden context of a society marked by war, institutional collapse, chronic violence, and a crisis of legitimacy.
Method: Methodology- This research is conducted through a descriptive-analytical method with a comparative approach. Its theoretical framework is based on two principal axes: first, Gérard Genette’s theory of hypertextuality, especially the concepts of hypotext, hypertext, transformation, and quantitative and qualitative shifts; second, N. A. Fateeva’s intertextual approach, with particular emphasis on the role of paratextual elements in guiding interpretation. In addition, the anthropological layer of the text rests on the assumption that literature reveals the mechanisms through which human beings understand the self, the other, sin, judgment, and redemption.
Results: The findings show that Rahimi preserves a clear connection to Crime and Punishment at the level of plot, yet introduces fundamental transformations at the level of deep structure. The shift of the narrative setting from Saint Petersburg to Kabul is not merely a geographical relocation, but an entry into a new semiotic sphere in which war, insecurity, and the collapse of social order overshadow every aspect of life. The motive for murder likewise changes from a theoretical and philosophical problem—namely the idea of the “superior man” or “Übermensch”—into a complex set of social, moral, religious, and honor-based pressures. From an anthropological perspective, the text demonstrates how the subject in a crisis-stricken1 world remains suspended between disintegrating norms and individual conscience, and is compelled to reconstruct meaning through its relation to the other, tradition, and violence. Moreover, the protagonist is transformed from a reflective and theory-driven subject into a destabilized individual overwhelmed by existential and environmental disorder. The bond between crime and redemption, which constitutes a central foundation in Dostoevsky’s novel, is severed in Rahimi’s world, where punishment leads not to purification and salvation, but to suspension, disorientation, and indeterminacy. The novel’s title itself, as a metatextual element, establishes a tense, self-aware, and critical relationship with the hypotext, inviting the reader to reflect on the legacy of classical literature and the possibility of rewriting it in a contemporary context.
Conclusions: Based on this analysis, Curse on Dostoevsky is more than an adaptation; it is a critical and anthropological rewriting that represents the experience of the Afghan subject within a context of crisis, violence, and the absence of a legitimate authority of judgment.