You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.97 AVERAGE
3.97 AVERAGE
challenging
dark
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
hopeful
inspiring
reflective
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I found a kindred spirit in this work
Content Warnings
Moderate: Suicide
Being shelved as one of the books that have changed the trajectory of my life
challenging
dark
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I do not have the mental capacity for Tolstoy. Nor do I know enough about Russians.
I probably would have liked this better if I actually read it instead of listening to the audiobook. It was hard for me to pay attention and missed a lot.
"Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."
Anna Karenina had been languishing on my to-read list since I was bewitched by Greta Garbo's performance in the 1927 film Love- thank God for TCM obsessed grandparents, am I right? My friends and family know I'm a sucker for books turned into movies so when the 2012 film was announced, I was casually reminded of this and got the "Have you read it yet?" treatment until I picked up a copy at my local thrift store and away to my bookshelf it went... for the next several years. What can I say?
I decided my bookshelf was out of control and it was time to cull the herd beginning with my copy of Anna Karenina. I could feel the judgment emanating from the shelf and I decided no better time than the present to read it and four months later, here we are. It was a roller coaster from start to finish and I'm ready to talk because I got a bone to pick with this book.
Countess Anna Karenina
For me, it was almost eerie- knowing Anna's fate from the movies- to start out the novel with Anna held in such high regard. I knew the fall from grace was coming; it was a matter of suspense as to how bad it would be.
Anna starts out a well-cultured Saint Petersburg society woman who has done her duty to God and to her husband and given him a son, Seryozha. It feels disingenuous to call her a paragon of virtue but Stiva and so many others held her in such high regard all the same. She's intelligent, literate, read English literature, is always impeccably dressed, and has the manners to match. She is so poised, so elegant that it is nigh impossible for her not to be a credit to her husband's name. How could such a woman fall from grace so hard? Passion.
Anna is proof positive that unbridled passion can consume a person's life. The feminist in me applauds her for finding her agency but at the same time, it is still difficult to know that discovering that agency and the freedom to explore her needs ultimately lead to her undoing. It was hard knowing only an inkling of the woman she would become. She loses her son, the lifestyle she is accustomed to, even her sanity toward the end chasing after that passion she had from the first night she danced with Vronsky. It killed me how she seemed so desperate to pull him in with her love but at the same time, detested his apathy and everything about him enough to distance herself from their daughter. She was still so attached to Seryozha and her old life and friends that she resents and maintains a neglectful distance from her own child and that made me so angry that at times it was difficult to pity her. I think she was a neglectful, terrible woman at times but I felt for her getting in over her head and it got to me reading how she felt her only way out was by throwing herself under the train. Even if she knew how society would respond to her adultery and her stubborn persistence to remain in society despite the rejection, it was saddening to read how she felt that was her only way out. It felt like the moral of the story Tolstoy was trying to drive home, in more modern terms, went something along the lines of...
Count Vronsky
Let me go right ahead and say I HATED Vronsky. Dude was, is, and always will be a chode to me. And I haven't loathed a character this intensely since King Joffrey. This guy I might hate MORE than Joffrey. And that's saying something.
My biggest faults- yes, faults plural- is that he, a man of privilege, has the whole world handed to him but he's as shallow as they come, has the attention span of a gnat, and oh my gosh, is this kid the definition of a fuckboy! I'll be honest, I'm following Sparknotes because this character, whew, boy... from the jump, every time Vronsky opened his mouth, he had me hot.
Here's my problem with the entitled little shit. I loathe that he's perceived with even a modicum of innocence, that he's suffering from success when he is just as at fault as Anna for the affair. Suffering from success, my ass.
But that's not what this novel is about, is it? Tolstoy keeps contrasting Stiva's and Vronsky's experiences in society as men after an affair with Anna's experience as a woman and I get the consequences were different in the author's day and age and society but god, I hate how easy he got off. Granted that Anna knew what she was getting into and knew that the reaction from her circle would be intense, I feel like Bronsky does not get an appropriate share of the blame nor does he quite get or even care outside of pitying himself. Yeah, Anna comes on strong and she gets real paranoid toward the end but he always makes it about him, even in mourning her death.
Konstantin Levin
Levin was a character I had an on-again, off-again love-hate relationship with throughout the novel. Levin was a refreshing presence early on in the novels, someone I could relate to across cultures and time as someone who doesn't quite fit neatly into any one particular box in society. He prides himself on his independence in thought and politics but he doesn't quite reach the ends of the spectrum his brothers do. He strongly rejects the westernization that we see in high Russian society but he dedicates himself to education on the merits of Western technology and agriculture and adapting them to his own farm and Russian agricultural practices at large. He marches to the beat of his own drum. His range of emotion was challenging at times as was Anna's but where Anna struggled to fit in and find her place in a society that rejected women in her position, Levin felt out of his depth and wanted no part in that world. He was in his depth among the peasant and the laborer and seemed to feel most like himself on his farm and far away from city life.
Where Levin defied expectation for me was his character. The flaws we saw highlighted so plentifully in other characters and in society were fewer and weren't quite as pronounced with Levin. He is in the world but not of it, if that makes sense. He shows incredible humanity in his experience, growing on me to the point I could tolerate him by the time he found faith.
Prince Stepan Arkadyevitch Oblonsky
Oh, Stiva. If you hadn't boinked the French nanny and left a paper trail, perhaps your sister wouldn't have had to come from Saint Petersburg to convince Dolly to stay and we wouldn't be in this mess. But then again, we wouldn't have a novel if you didn't, would we?
If Levin was an allegory for the author, Oblonsky felt like quite the indictment on patriarchal 19th-century Russian society at large and the experience of the society man- sow your oats as you will and as long as you do your duty as the head of the family, your wife should know her place and remain quiet to your philandering husband's ways. Is it right? My 21st-century American sensibilities say no but I feel like Tolstoy was trying to pick at the double standard throughout the plot by comparing what happens as a consequence of Stiva's adultery versus what happens as a result of Anna's adultery. Stiva doesn't regret what he did for a second, only that he was caught with his pants down whereas Anna starts with no regret and that regret waxes and wanes over time. Both characters try to placate their partners for a time but with Stiva, those attempts never seem to backfire on him quite like they do Anna.
Count Karenin
I keep scrapping what I think about this guy because he's not terrible but he's not great either. If Stiva tried harder and kept it in his pants, he might be this guy. But I can't past how condescending and frigid and self-righteous he is to everybody. No wonder Anna fell for the first jerk to show her a little attention because this guy would make even me miserable. His change of heart while Anna lay ill after giving birth to Vronsky's daughter came a little too late to save his marriage but I had hoped he might redeem himself devoting himself to the well-being of the children but he became just as frigid and distant and void of a personality as before if not worse because of his spineless obedience to Countess Lidia Ivanovna. He became unmoored without Anna's gregarious nature to keep him in check and likewise did Anna become unmoored with the passion she sought in Vronsky but without that grounding, logical presence she had in Karenin. I feel for the children Anna left behind, knowing that they'll likely grow up without that balance and will live with Karenin's rigid, pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps mentality.
Will I read the novel again? It drew on so long I don't expect that I will. Do I value the experience I had by stepping out of my comfort zone and reading a classic novel that's been on my shelf for forever? Absolutely. It earned these three stars.
Anna Karenina had been languishing on my to-read list since I was bewitched by Greta Garbo's performance in the 1927 film Love- thank God for TCM obsessed grandparents, am I right? My friends and family know I'm a sucker for books turned into movies so when the 2012 film was announced, I was casually reminded of this and got the "Have you read it yet?" treatment until I picked up a copy at my local thrift store and away to my bookshelf it went... for the next several years. What can I say?
I decided my bookshelf was out of control and it was time to cull the herd beginning with my copy of Anna Karenina. I could feel the judgment emanating from the shelf and I decided no better time than the present to read it and four months later, here we are. It was a roller coaster from start to finish and I'm ready to talk because I got a bone to pick with this book.
Countess Anna Karenina
For me, it was almost eerie- knowing Anna's fate from the movies- to start out the novel with Anna held in such high regard. I knew the fall from grace was coming; it was a matter of suspense as to how bad it would be.
Anna starts out a well-cultured Saint Petersburg society woman who has done her duty to God and to her husband and given him a son, Seryozha. It feels disingenuous to call her a paragon of virtue but Stiva and so many others held her in such high regard all the same. She's intelligent, literate, read English literature, is always impeccably dressed, and has the manners to match. She is so poised, so elegant that it is nigh impossible for her not to be a credit to her husband's name. How could such a woman fall from grace so hard? Passion.
Anna is proof positive that unbridled passion can consume a person's life. The feminist in me applauds her for finding her agency but at the same time, it is still difficult to know that discovering that agency and the freedom to explore her needs ultimately lead to her undoing. It was hard knowing only an inkling of the woman she would become. She loses her son, the lifestyle she is accustomed to, even her sanity toward the end chasing after that passion she had from the first night she danced with Vronsky. It killed me how she seemed so desperate to pull him in with her love but at the same time, detested his apathy and everything about him enough to distance herself from their daughter. She was still so attached to Seryozha and her old life and friends that she resents and maintains a neglectful distance from her own child and that made me so angry that at times it was difficult to pity her. I think she was a neglectful, terrible woman at times but I felt for her getting in over her head and it got to me reading how she felt her only way out was by throwing herself under the train. Even if she knew how society would respond to her adultery and her stubborn persistence to remain in society despite the rejection, it was saddening to read how she felt that was her only way out. It felt like the moral of the story Tolstoy was trying to drive home, in more modern terms, went something along the lines of...
Count Vronsky
Let me go right ahead and say I HATED Vronsky. Dude was, is, and always will be a chode to me. And I haven't loathed a character this intensely since King Joffrey. This guy I might hate MORE than Joffrey. And that's saying something.
My biggest faults- yes, faults plural- is that he, a man of privilege, has the whole world handed to him but he's as shallow as they come, has the attention span of a gnat, and oh my gosh, is this kid the definition of a fuckboy! I'll be honest, I'm following Sparknotes because this character, whew, boy... from the jump, every time Vronsky opened his mouth, he had me hot.
Here's my problem with the entitled little shit. I loathe that he's perceived with even a modicum of innocence, that he's suffering from success when he is just as at fault as Anna for the affair. Suffering from success, my ass.
But that's not what this novel is about, is it? Tolstoy keeps contrasting Stiva's and Vronsky's experiences in society as men after an affair with Anna's experience as a woman and I get the consequences were different in the author's day and age and society but god, I hate how easy he got off. Granted that Anna knew what she was getting into and knew that the reaction from her circle would be intense, I feel like Bronsky does not get an appropriate share of the blame nor does he quite get or even care outside of pitying himself. Yeah, Anna comes on strong and she gets real paranoid toward the end but he always makes it about him, even in mourning her death.
Konstantin Levin
Levin was a character I had an on-again, off-again love-hate relationship with throughout the novel. Levin was a refreshing presence early on in the novels, someone I could relate to across cultures and time as someone who doesn't quite fit neatly into any one particular box in society. He prides himself on his independence in thought and politics but he doesn't quite reach the ends of the spectrum his brothers do. He strongly rejects the westernization that we see in high Russian society but he dedicates himself to education on the merits of Western technology and agriculture and adapting them to his own farm and Russian agricultural practices at large. He marches to the beat of his own drum. His range of emotion was challenging at times as was Anna's but where Anna struggled to fit in and find her place in a society that rejected women in her position, Levin felt out of his depth and wanted no part in that world. He was in his depth among the peasant and the laborer and seemed to feel most like himself on his farm and far away from city life.
Where Levin defied expectation for me was his character. The flaws we saw highlighted so plentifully in other characters and in society were fewer and weren't quite as pronounced with Levin. He is in the world but not of it, if that makes sense. He shows incredible humanity in his experience, growing on me to the point I could tolerate him by the time he found faith.
Prince Stepan Arkadyevitch Oblonsky
Oh, Stiva. If you hadn't boinked the French nanny and left a paper trail, perhaps your sister wouldn't have had to come from Saint Petersburg to convince Dolly to stay and we wouldn't be in this mess. But then again, we wouldn't have a novel if you didn't, would we?
If Levin was an allegory for the author, Oblonsky felt like quite the indictment on patriarchal 19th-century Russian society at large and the experience of the society man- sow your oats as you will and as long as you do your duty as the head of the family, your wife should know her place and remain quiet to your philandering husband's ways. Is it right? My 21st-century American sensibilities say no but I feel like Tolstoy was trying to pick at the double standard throughout the plot by comparing what happens as a consequence of Stiva's adultery versus what happens as a result of Anna's adultery. Stiva doesn't regret what he did for a second, only that he was caught with his pants down whereas Anna starts with no regret and that regret waxes and wanes over time. Both characters try to placate their partners for a time but with Stiva, those attempts never seem to backfire on him quite like they do Anna.
Count Karenin
I keep scrapping what I think about this guy because he's not terrible but he's not great either. If Stiva tried harder and kept it in his pants, he might be this guy. But I can't past how condescending and frigid and self-righteous he is to everybody. No wonder Anna fell for the first jerk to show her a little attention because this guy would make even me miserable. His change of heart while Anna lay ill after giving birth to Vronsky's daughter came a little too late to save his marriage but I had hoped he might redeem himself devoting himself to the well-being of the children but he became just as frigid and distant and void of a personality as before if not worse because of his spineless obedience to Countess Lidia Ivanovna. He became unmoored without Anna's gregarious nature to keep him in check and likewise did Anna become unmoored with the passion she sought in Vronsky but without that grounding, logical presence she had in Karenin. I feel for the children Anna left behind, knowing that they'll likely grow up without that balance and will live with Karenin's rigid, pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps mentality.
Will I read the novel again? It drew on so long I don't expect that I will. Do I value the experience I had by stepping out of my comfort zone and reading a classic novel that's been on my shelf for forever? Absolutely. It earned these three stars.
emotional
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
A very readable classic in terms of prose and I did enjoy it (aside for Levin’s long rumination on farming). Wouldn’t read it again but I’m happy I did.