In the current landscape of Sweden, easy-to-read literature demand is surging. But the opinions of its shape and form are being questioned: is this type of literature in reality easier to understand, or is the removed content in fact making it less comprehensive? The study’s purpose is to analyze easy-to-read literature’s ability to manage complex motives, and if it changes the reading experience from the original. To attempt that, the study uses a comparative analysis of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and punishment and its easy-to-read adaptation, written by Johan Werkmäster. To understand how Werkmäster’s adaptation manages complex motives, the comparative analysis uses three motives from Professor George Strem, who argues that Crime and punishment is built on suffering, humility and the ideal of the Superman. To answer whether the easy-to-read version changes the reading experience or not, the study uses Professor Rita Felski’s terminology of chock and Anna Nordenstam and Christina Olin-Scheller’s identification.   The analysis shows that the easy-to-read version of Crime and punishment maintains the main story but excludes the ideal of the Superman, which alters the understanding of suffering and humility. As a consequence this also means Felski’s chock is replaced by Nordenstam and Olin-Scheller’s identification, showing that the reading experience is indeed changed.    The conclusion is that the changes in the adaptation cause problems regarding the reader’s ability to understand Raskolnikov. The result also leads to question what the most important factor is when reading easy-to-read literature. Whereas the authors and publishers argue that literacy and motivation is essential to the target audience, Felski and Nordenstam and Olin-Scheller claim that the reading experience is more important. This shows the need of more science in this area to create a consensus of what easy-to-read literature should be, and how it best helps the readers develop their reading ability.