Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.97 AVERAGE
3.97 AVERAGE
challenging
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
challenging
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
BRILLIANT BOOK and omg after months of semi reading and ditching it for lighter books and coming back to it I’ve finally made it and as a book I’ve started cuz it’s what I’ve heard most English majors cite as their favorite book and I was like I mean I gots to read it now it was so worth and made even MORE worth by reading the literary criticism out there and this is why I love reading famous books bc of the criticism available
Lovers’ meeting. The initial first blush of romance, the promise of the future to come?
But Tolstoy is not one to give us unequivocally happy endings, and so we watch Anna’s (tragic/deserved; up to a reader I suppose) moral agonising and suffering, the decidedly unromantic difficult conversations and jealousies, trapped by social confines, the future slipping away until finally, Anna has nothing to resort to but her own death. We are made to - perhaps sympathise is a strong word here for some - but approach the affair from the perspective of Karenin, unemotional though he may seem.
We have the juxtaposition of serial adulterer Oblonsky and his self-imposed ignorant wife Dolly (a model of how male philandering often has a blind eye turned to it, all but accepted in society). As a reader, we don’t really take Oblonsky seriously; affable, he does not intend to harm purely because he cannot conceive being a) found out and b) punished in any material way. What a contrast his sister Anna is! Obsessive to the extreme, her need to be loved and her feeling that her life afterwards is a punishment, to have Vronksy under her control and need her as much as she needs him, yet aware she is also driving him away by this same desperation. In this respect its a novel of contrasts - Stepan Oblonsky requiring his sister to plead to his wife to prevent his marriage falling apart due to his infidelities and succeeding, living a bitter lie (for Dolly) vs Anna requiring Stepan to plead to Karenin for her marriage due to her infidelity and failing, living a bitter truth. The falseness of Anna and Vrosnky’s life in the country, a form of playacting vs the reality of married life with Levin and Kitty.
I sympathise with Anna - how could we not? Even if we dislike her actions, Tolstoy asks us to refrain from judging her harshly, and it's a testament to the skill of his writing that I think a majority of readers do not. After all, its all too tragically laid out: the loveless marriage she feels trapped in, her eagerness to stay with her child and that therefore preventing her obtaining a divorce in the short period of time when Karenin was willing to offer one on equal terms. And indeed we see the level of control Karenin has always and is still able to exert over her. It’s purely because Anna isn’t able to simply ‘shut her mind off’ and live uncaring as Vronsky’s mistress that she has these (sensible? paranoid?) worries: is Vronsky likely to leave her - she has no claim over him as they aren’t married, what if he is simply pitying her, and, further supported by the frequent arguments she instigates almost to prove this right, the hatred she begins to see in his eyes. Not to mention the child she now has with him. Because she feels her powerlessness, she lashes out, attributing to others her own unhappiness.
Levin represents the more introspective portions of the novel, as we watch him come to terms with a rejected proposal, the feeling he has nothing to live for, the turns he takes believing things will bring meaning to his life (his farming, his position in society, his morality and soul, and even finally marriage itself) before realising none of this can have the impact he desires, in what is a little heavy-handed 'big spiritual resolution' which is so common to Tolstoy and classics of the time.
I definitely feel it should’ve ended after Anna’s death. I’m not sure what the epilogue showing Kozynshev, Vronsky, and Oblonsky really tell us. That their follies and life's little problems continue? I would’ve liked a last look in at Karenin to see how his new 'mentality' and spiritualism took the news. Overall a really strong classic that I'm glad I read, with a very readable translation (though I would've preferred the feminisation of last names for women common to other English translations simply because I'm more used to reading it).
But Tolstoy is not one to give us unequivocally happy endings, and so we watch Anna’s (tragic/deserved; up to a reader I suppose) moral agonising and suffering, the decidedly unromantic difficult conversations and jealousies, trapped by social confines, the future slipping away until finally, Anna has nothing to resort to but her own death. We are made to - perhaps sympathise is a strong word here for some - but approach the affair from the perspective of Karenin, unemotional though he may seem.
We have the juxtaposition of serial adulterer Oblonsky and his self-imposed ignorant wife Dolly (a model of how male philandering often has a blind eye turned to it, all but accepted in society). As a reader, we don’t really take Oblonsky seriously; affable, he does not intend to harm purely because he cannot conceive being a) found out and b) punished in any material way. What a contrast his sister Anna is! Obsessive to the extreme, her need to be loved and her feeling that her life afterwards is a punishment, to have Vronksy under her control and need her as much as she needs him, yet aware she is also driving him away by this same desperation. In this respect its a novel of contrasts - Stepan Oblonsky requiring his sister to plead to his wife to prevent his marriage falling apart due to his infidelities and succeeding, living a bitter lie (for Dolly) vs Anna requiring Stepan to plead to Karenin for her marriage due to her infidelity and failing, living a bitter truth. The falseness of Anna and Vrosnky’s life in the country, a form of playacting vs the reality of married life with Levin and Kitty.
I sympathise with Anna - how could we not? Even if we dislike her actions, Tolstoy asks us to refrain from judging her harshly, and it's a testament to the skill of his writing that I think a majority of readers do not. After all, its all too tragically laid out: the loveless marriage she feels trapped in, her eagerness to stay with her child and that therefore preventing her obtaining a divorce in the short period of time when Karenin was willing to offer one on equal terms. And indeed we see the level of control Karenin has always and is still able to exert over her. It’s purely because Anna isn’t able to simply ‘shut her mind off’ and live uncaring as Vronsky’s mistress that she has these (sensible? paranoid?) worries: is Vronsky likely to leave her - she has no claim over him as they aren’t married, what if he is simply pitying her, and, further supported by the frequent arguments she instigates almost to prove this right, the hatred she begins to see in his eyes. Not to mention the child she now has with him. Because she feels her powerlessness, she lashes out, attributing to others her own unhappiness.
Levin represents the more introspective portions of the novel, as we watch him come to terms with a rejected proposal, the feeling he has nothing to live for, the turns he takes believing things will bring meaning to his life (his farming, his position in society, his morality and soul, and even finally marriage itself) before realising none of this can have the impact he desires, in what is a little heavy-handed 'big spiritual resolution' which is so common to Tolstoy and classics of the time.
I definitely feel it should’ve ended after Anna’s death. I’m not sure what the epilogue showing Kozynshev, Vronsky, and Oblonsky really tell us. That their follies and life's little problems continue? I would’ve liked a last look in at Karenin to see how his new 'mentality' and spiritualism took the news. Overall a really strong classic that I'm glad I read, with a very readable translation (though I would've preferred the feminisation of last names for women common to other English translations simply because I'm more used to reading it).
challenging
dark
emotional
slow-paced
I took off .25 because bro yaps a bit too much about farming and elections but that’s to be expected in a classic. Besides that, the plot was engaging the entire time, i loved all the characters even though I had conflicting feelings about the namesake of the book
خب، خانم سودابه مبشر (مترجم) باعث شدند که ارتباطم با داستان را در خیلی جاها، صرفا بخاطر غلطهای ویراستاری، از دست بدهم. با این وجود، اعتراف میکنم تولستوی خوب میداند چطور به شخصیتها جان ببخشد، به طوری که شخصیتها زنده شوند. آنقدر از جزئیات زندگی شخصیتها باخبر میشویم که سخت است باور کنیم واقعی نیستند! که البته انتظاری جز این از رمانهای طولانی نیست.
کمی از عدم مسئولیتپذیری آنا دلخور میشوم. کمی هم از کلهشقیهای لوین. و این دقیقا همان علتیست که باعث میشود با شخصیتها ارتباط برقرار کنم. اینکه آلکسی پایبند قانون و در طلب گرفتن حقّ خود است و عین حال به آنا اهمیت میدهد، برایم بسیار خواندنیست.
هنوز مطمئن نیستم که سراغ جلد دوم بروم یا نه، چون کمی از این مثلثهای عشقی خسته شدهام!
پینوشت: من کتاب آنا کارنینا، جلد ۱ را از انتشارات آتیسا با ترجمه سودابه مبشر خواندم و باید بگویم که ویراستاری این انتشارات نمیتوانست از این بدتر باشد! غلطهای ویراستاری تنهایم نمیگذاشتند و از ترجمه هم اصلا راضی نبودم. این ناشر را به هیچ وجه پیشنهاد نمیکنم.
کمی از عدم مسئولیتپذیری آنا دلخور میشوم. کمی هم از کلهشقیهای لوین. و این دقیقا همان علتیست که باعث میشود با شخصیتها ارتباط برقرار کنم. اینکه آلکسی پایبند قانون و در طلب گرفتن حقّ خود است و عین حال به آنا اهمیت میدهد، برایم بسیار خواندنیست.
هنوز مطمئن نیستم که سراغ جلد دوم بروم یا نه، چون کمی از این مثلثهای عشقی خسته شدهام!
پینوشت: من کتاب آنا کارنینا، جلد ۱ را از انتشارات آتیسا با ترجمه سودابه مبشر خواندم و باید بگویم که ویراستاری این انتشارات نمیتوانست از این بدتر باشد! غلطهای ویراستاری تنهایم نمیگذاشتند و از ترجمه هم اصلا راضی نبودم. این ناشر را به هیچ وجه پیشنهاد نمیکنم.
virhe sivujen järjestyksessä sinetöi keskenjättämisen, jota harkitsin jo sadan sivun kohdalla.
The story was fine, albeit long and repetitive.
What I really hated was the audiobook narrator. Maggie Gyllenhaal's narration was so unpleasant for me, that it literally took me almost an entire year to get through the audiobook. Every character sounded exactly the same, there was absolutely no emotion to anything that was going on, and I couldn't concentrate at all.
Anyways, I'm glad I read the book because I've wanted to read it for a long time, but the narration really took away my enjoyment.
I will say that Anna and Vronsky are annoying; the only moments they truly love each other are when they're having the affair. The rest of the time they're either resentful or bored of each other.
What I really hated was the audiobook narrator. Maggie Gyllenhaal's narration was so unpleasant for me, that it literally took me almost an entire year to get through the audiobook. Every character sounded exactly the same, there was absolutely no emotion to anything that was going on, and I couldn't concentrate at all.
Spoiler
When Anna committed suicide I didn't even realize it until a few chapters later because the moment it happened, the narration was exactly the same. No urgency, no tone shift... my mind wandered and I missed that aspect entirely.Anyways, I'm glad I read the book because I've wanted to read it for a long time, but the narration really took away my enjoyment.
I will say that Anna and Vronsky are annoying; the only moments they truly love each other are when they're having the affair. The rest of the time they're either resentful or bored of each other.
Oh you know, just your average piece of realist fiction that captures the entire Russian society. Anna is a victimized socialite who is complicite in her own victimization, but you feel obliged to rescue her--you know she won't rescue herself. Because of her gender, she has no value, and sees no value in her own daughter but is torn between attaching herself to her lover and her son. You rather wish she would stop with the possessive love thing, but having no other means of having value or influence in the world, she's stuck. Poor dear.
Meanwhile, Levin's trying to figure out faith and life and comes to the conclusion you just do the best you can for as much good as you can. His best scene is with the peasants. Who he is against educating because they won't use it--they don't live in a democracy clearly--and there's a great line about him missing the joy at the birth of his son by being overwhelmed with fear of what might happen to this kid.
Meanwhile, Levin's trying to figure out faith and life and comes to the conclusion you just do the best you can for as much good as you can. His best scene is with the peasants. Who he is against educating because they won't use it--they don't live in a democracy clearly--and there's a great line about him missing the joy at the birth of his son by being overwhelmed with fear of what might happen to this kid.
This took me a very long time to read. Some of it was interesting and enjoyable, but some of it was quite heavy going. I found Levin and Kitty much more engaging to read about than Anna and Vronsky. Levin felt like such a rich character with complex thoughts and emotions, but I struggled to really believe in Anna’s thoughts and behaviour.