Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.97 AVERAGE
3.97 AVERAGE
Who has decked the heavenly firmament with its lights?
A love for A Gentleman in Moscow possessed me to read this book and then as csop (youtuber) says, it beat me into loving it. Formally it is (and this feels reductive to say, to TOLSTOY) written well with straightforward prose that is funny when it needs to be. I was reading this in Beta Way and had to stop laughing out loud when Levin started to "recount every unnecessary detail of Kitty's birth" (roughly paraphrased) to the doctor. I did have a love-hate relationship with this book because of the absolute stamina it required of me, given that it is a literal thousand pages, and sometimes I got sick of it. One can only take so much nothingness of the Russian aristocracy, but I found it best to read this in chunks as the scenes become much full the more it is read. And yes, I did start reading this in February then stop during the semester and pick it back up again now in the summer, I don't regret it. This book demands those chunks of time, personally. On to the actual review:
Vengeance is mine; I will repay
In 19th century Russia, we follow three couples: Anna and Karenin, trapped in a loveless marriage; Stiva and Dolly, a wife subjugated domestically by a useless cheating husband; and Kitty and Levin, young people discovering themselves and their faith through love. There is a plot, but for a thousand pages I cannot call it plot-driven. I felt like I was witnessing scenes from a life, no matter how mundane they might be, and I appreciated this quality at times. Tolstoy also has this prescient and exposing capability to write a human so exactly: while I'm thinking this is how I would feel If I were this character, I read the next sentence and find out Tolstoy has already written that exactly, and with all the parts I would censor for the sake of being a good person. We follow how Vronsky seduces Kitty only to leave her for Anna, who he unknowingly seduces all the way to the gates of suffering, leading to her tragic suicide. At the novel's start, we witness Anna convincing Dolly not to leave Stiva even if he is an adulterer. Stiva faces no consequences for this actions and is able to live his shallow life, while Anna, who has become an adultress, suffers so much (helplessness, powerlessness in a patriarchal society, social isolation, separation from her son). As she says, she has chosen this, but she is suffering and needs help. You cannot help but feel for her, honestly, even if it is deserved. This begs the question: when one commits wrongs and suffers as a consequence, how should one treat that suffering, especially if it caused suffering in turn? As a reward, as punishment, as an inseparable part of their life from now on?
a feeling like repulsion, and akin to what a drowning man might feel who has shaken off another man clinging to him. That man did drown.
but I don't want to profit by his misery. I too am suffering, and shall suffer; I am losing what I prized above everything--
One of the central themes is this: the double standard applied to the same wrongs of men and women, which may seem obvious now, but it was revolutionary then and the treatment Tolstoy gives to it revolutionized it to me still. The choices we make frame not only society's view of ourselves but also our own.
I particularly like the contrast between Levin's shrugging off of societal artifice and his internal freedom from it to society's damnation of Anna, who could never be free; she was judged even up to her choice of death. Even Tolstoy does not give Anna what she wants: when she dies, instead of the ostentatious displays of grief she wanted to invoke in Vronsky, we get Sergey Ivanovitch's totally irrelevant presence. I literally screamed and said I do not care about this dude! but Tolstoy does not spare Anna any indulgence.
Life had to be got through somehow till death did come
All of it had had meaning before, but now there was no reality in it.
He tried to dispel these thoughts, he tried to persuade himself that he was not living for this transient life, but for the life of eternity, and that there was love and peace in his heart. But the fact that he had in this transient, trivial life made, as it seemed to him, a few trivial mistakes tortured him as though the eternal salvation in which he believed had no existence.
Lastly, I empathize with Anna's spiral. It is one that can only be understood by someone who has lost it all, has no one on their side, and can only be saved by themselves but can no longer see the reason why one should do so. In the face of so much suffering, why live to keep suffering? In contrast, I appreciate Levin's reconciliations on the same question: despite the meaningless of life and continual suffering, one cannot help but keep living. God's existence is on unfounded ground, but if the masses are propelled to general goodness and kindness, can God not exist? Or are the masses propelled to this due to their necessary belief in God's divine wrath? A bit evangelizing towards the end but he's right: can it be helped, being alive? We live regardless.
In an infinity of time, and in infinity of matter, in infinite space, a bubble, a bubble organism, separates itself, and that bubble maintain itself awhile and then burst, and that bubble is--I!
Some other quotes:
>And so Liberalism had become a habit of Stepan Arkadyevtich's, and he liked his newspaper, as he did his cigar after dinner, for the slight fog it diffused in his brain.
I'm so happy that I've become positively hateful; I've forgotten everything.
Forgive me not according to my unworthiness, but according to Thy lovingkindness.
All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow.
God has made me so that I must love and live.
He considered the Russian peasant as occupying a stage of development intermediate between the ape and the man, and at the same time in the local assemblies no one was readier to shake hands with the peasants and listen to the opinions.
Because a just idea cannot but be fruitful.
in spite of his excess in pleasure he looked as fresh as a big glossy green Dutch cucumber.
Our love, if it could be stronger, will be strengthened by there being something terrible in it.
now one-half of his abilities is devoted to deceiving himself, and the other to justifying the deceit.
And the full chorus of the unseen choir rose up, filling the whole church, from the windows to the vaulted roof, with broad waves of melody.
the unity of the impression being essential to art.
"But that's not work, like the work of a peasant or a learned profession." "Granted, but it's work in the sense that his activity produces a result--the railways. But of course you think the railways are useless." "No., that's another question; I am prepared to admit that they're useful. But all profit that is out of proportion to the labor expended is dishonest."
the first glass sticks in the throat, the second flies down like a hawk, but after the third they're like tiny little birds.
A love for A Gentleman in Moscow possessed me to read this book and then as csop (youtuber) says, it beat me into loving it. Formally it is (and this feels reductive to say, to TOLSTOY) written well with straightforward prose that is funny when it needs to be. I was reading this in Beta Way and had to stop laughing out loud when Levin started to "recount every unnecessary detail of Kitty's birth" (roughly paraphrased) to the doctor. I did have a love-hate relationship with this book because of the absolute stamina it required of me, given that it is a literal thousand pages, and sometimes I got sick of it. One can only take so much nothingness of the Russian aristocracy, but I found it best to read this in chunks as the scenes become much full the more it is read. And yes, I did start reading this in February then stop during the semester and pick it back up again now in the summer, I don't regret it. This book demands those chunks of time, personally. On to the actual review:
Vengeance is mine; I will repay
In 19th century Russia, we follow three couples: Anna and Karenin, trapped in a loveless marriage; Stiva and Dolly, a wife subjugated domestically by a useless cheating husband; and Kitty and Levin, young people discovering themselves and their faith through love. There is a plot, but for a thousand pages I cannot call it plot-driven. I felt like I was witnessing scenes from a life, no matter how mundane they might be, and I appreciated this quality at times. Tolstoy also has this prescient and exposing capability to write a human so exactly: while I'm thinking this is how I would feel If I were this character, I read the next sentence and find out Tolstoy has already written that exactly, and with all the parts I would censor for the sake of being a good person. We follow how Vronsky seduces Kitty only to leave her for Anna, who he unknowingly seduces all the way to the gates of suffering, leading to her tragic suicide. At the novel's start, we witness Anna convincing Dolly not to leave Stiva even if he is an adulterer. Stiva faces no consequences for this actions and is able to live his shallow life, while Anna, who has become an adultress, suffers so much (helplessness, powerlessness in a patriarchal society, social isolation, separation from her son). As she says, she has chosen this, but she is suffering and needs help. You cannot help but feel for her, honestly, even if it is deserved. This begs the question: when one commits wrongs and suffers as a consequence, how should one treat that suffering, especially if it caused suffering in turn? As a reward, as punishment, as an inseparable part of their life from now on?
a feeling like repulsion, and akin to what a drowning man might feel who has shaken off another man clinging to him. That man did drown.
but I don't want to profit by his misery. I too am suffering, and shall suffer; I am losing what I prized above everything--
One of the central themes is this: the double standard applied to the same wrongs of men and women, which may seem obvious now, but it was revolutionary then and the treatment Tolstoy gives to it revolutionized it to me still. The choices we make frame not only society's view of ourselves but also our own.
I particularly like the contrast between Levin's shrugging off of societal artifice and his internal freedom from it to society's damnation of Anna, who could never be free; she was judged even up to her choice of death. Even Tolstoy does not give Anna what she wants: when she dies, instead of the ostentatious displays of grief she wanted to invoke in Vronsky, we get Sergey Ivanovitch's totally irrelevant presence. I literally screamed and said I do not care about this dude! but Tolstoy does not spare Anna any indulgence.
Life had to be got through somehow till death did come
All of it had had meaning before, but now there was no reality in it.
He tried to dispel these thoughts, he tried to persuade himself that he was not living for this transient life, but for the life of eternity, and that there was love and peace in his heart. But the fact that he had in this transient, trivial life made, as it seemed to him, a few trivial mistakes tortured him as though the eternal salvation in which he believed had no existence.
Lastly, I empathize with Anna's spiral. It is one that can only be understood by someone who has lost it all, has no one on their side, and can only be saved by themselves but can no longer see the reason why one should do so. In the face of so much suffering, why live to keep suffering? In contrast, I appreciate Levin's reconciliations on the same question: despite the meaningless of life and continual suffering, one cannot help but keep living. God's existence is on unfounded ground, but if the masses are propelled to general goodness and kindness, can God not exist? Or are the masses propelled to this due to their necessary belief in God's divine wrath? A bit evangelizing towards the end but he's right: can it be helped, being alive? We live regardless.
In an infinity of time, and in infinity of matter, in infinite space, a bubble, a bubble organism, separates itself, and that bubble maintain itself awhile and then burst, and that bubble is--I!
Some other quotes:
>And so Liberalism had become a habit of Stepan Arkadyevtich's, and he liked his newspaper, as he did his cigar after dinner, for the slight fog it diffused in his brain.
I'm so happy that I've become positively hateful; I've forgotten everything.
Forgive me not according to my unworthiness, but according to Thy lovingkindness.
All the variety, all the charm, all the beauty of life is made up of light and shadow.
God has made me so that I must love and live.
He considered the Russian peasant as occupying a stage of development intermediate between the ape and the man, and at the same time in the local assemblies no one was readier to shake hands with the peasants and listen to the opinions.
Because a just idea cannot but be fruitful.
in spite of his excess in pleasure he looked as fresh as a big glossy green Dutch cucumber.
Our love, if it could be stronger, will be strengthened by there being something terrible in it.
now one-half of his abilities is devoted to deceiving himself, and the other to justifying the deceit.
And the full chorus of the unseen choir rose up, filling the whole church, from the windows to the vaulted roof, with broad waves of melody.
the unity of the impression being essential to art.
"But that's not work, like the work of a peasant or a learned profession." "Granted, but it's work in the sense that his activity produces a result--the railways. But of course you think the railways are useless." "No., that's another question; I am prepared to admit that they're useful. But all profit that is out of proportion to the labor expended is dishonest."
the first glass sticks in the throat, the second flies down like a hawk, but after the third they're like tiny little birds.
challenging
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
OMFG! I can't believe it - I actually, FINALLY made it through "Anna Karenina" -- though only with the help of audio recordings (thank you, LibriVox.org!!) The last chapter -- with all the cooing over that annoying baby, and Levin going on and on about his spiritual angst (just man up, already, Konstantin Dmitrich!) -- about did me in. But I made it, I did.
So, what kind of star rating do you give to an acknowledged masterpiece? To be sure, the characters, character development, and detailed depiction of life at the time among the Russian upper class, are all brilliant, so I deeply appreciate the work. Enjoy it? Not so much - or at least not when the focus is on Levin/Tolstoy. Two full chapters on scything wheat? Really? And an entire final book in which the impact of Anna's death and the fate of Vronsky, the baby Anna, Seryozha, et al. is scarcely mentioned? Call me a philistine, but I'm giving it 3 stars (well, 3-1/2).
So, what kind of star rating do you give to an acknowledged masterpiece? To be sure, the characters, character development, and detailed depiction of life at the time among the Russian upper class, are all brilliant, so I deeply appreciate the work. Enjoy it? Not so much - or at least not when the focus is on Levin/Tolstoy. Two full chapters on scything wheat? Really? And an entire final book in which the impact of Anna's death and the fate of Vronsky, the baby Anna, Seryozha, et al. is scarcely mentioned? Call me a philistine, but I'm giving it 3 stars (well, 3-1/2).
I love Russian literature ugh!!!!!
"I shall go on in the same way, losing my temper with Ivan the coachman, falling into angry discussions, expressing my opinions tactlessly; there will be still the same wall between the holy of holies of my soul and other people, even my wife; I shall still go on scolding her for my own terror, and being remorseful for it; I shall still be as unable to understand with my reason why I pray, and I shall still go on praying; but my life now, my whole life apart from anything that can happen to me, every minute of it is no more meaningless, as it was before, but it has the positive meaning of goodness, which I have the power to put into it."
WHICH I HAVE THE POWER TO PUT INTO IT!
Such a good ending. I loooove Levin so much. Now I want to read a bunch of analysis articles about this.
"I shall go on in the same way, losing my temper with Ivan the coachman, falling into angry discussions, expressing my opinions tactlessly; there will be still the same wall between the holy of holies of my soul and other people, even my wife; I shall still go on scolding her for my own terror, and being remorseful for it; I shall still be as unable to understand with my reason why I pray, and I shall still go on praying; but my life now, my whole life apart from anything that can happen to me, every minute of it is no more meaningless, as it was before, but it has the positive meaning of goodness, which I have the power to put into it."
WHICH I HAVE THE POWER TO PUT INTO IT!
Such a good ending. I loooove Levin so much. Now I want to read a bunch of analysis articles about this.
emotional
funny
reflective
sad
slow-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
“Respect was invented to cover the empty place where love should be.”
Considered one of the greatest novels of all time, Tolstoy's Anna Karenina follows a corner of society during the love affair of the title character. We follow Anna as she is weighed down by society forcing her to choose between the things in her life she loves. She is surrounded by her husband Karenin, a man who shuns all warmth; her brother Stiva, a carefree man with connections to everyone; Stiva's sister-in-law Kitty, an ingenue trying to find herself; Levin, the man in love with Kitty and Stiva's best friend; and Count Vronsky, the charming younger man Anna falls for.
This book was so rewarding to read. It's one of the world's most beloved classics, it's long and episodic, and it covers lots of people and time at a point of cultural shifting. I would like to note that I read the Garnett translation, and while it's not the translation that the most popular versions of quotes are pulled from, I really enjoyed it and would highly recommend it. This copy was stunning as well, and easy to read out of. The only thing I would have wanted more from it was maybe some more resources for historical context, etc.
What were the things I really liked about this book? Anna and her plotline is my favorite part by far. Her crime is loving and wanting love, uncompromisingly seeking truth and a life based on genuine emotions. She is a creature of grand emotions, feeling the highest highs or the lowest lows and few things in between. She is wrought by guilt as her desire for truth leads her to follow her heart in loving Vronsky, because she is not allowed to have a truthful life with him while also maintaining a relationship with her son. She is shunned by Russian society for her choices, but to her, she cannot see them as choices but as the most survivable path. She doesn't always do the most "right" thing - nobody in this book does - but I find her to be a visceral and admirable character. She suffers, but I don't think she is necessarily punished by the narrative; she cannot be supported by the society she is in, but we as a reader do not see her as the guilty party.
I was nervous when reading a classic written by a man that the female characters may not be well-realized or respected through the lens of the narrative, but that was not the case. While Levin, who is Tolstoy's most autobiographical character, is certainly the most main of the main characters, the female characters are respected and well-rounded. Some of the comments about women also seemed rather feminist to me, for the time it was written.
Each of the characters we follow have their own purposes to the story, and none are without merit. We see several characters through trial and error try to find their raison d'être and the morals they can allow themselves to live by. Kitty tries living for performing good deeds; Karenin tries living strictly on logic. Levin has several moral debates, from his questions on religion, to how he runs his farm and what that means for society at a whole as the caste distances shrink, to his dealings with his loved ones, the wife who he wants to protect and his brother who is an outcast in society. Each of the characters also has their own foils within the story, and as such we see - and they the characters see - how their differing characters traits bring out the best and worst of them all.
The most challenging part of this book for me was the episodic nature. I was aware going into this that it was published serially, but if I wasn't, I still would have been able to guess as such. Some chapters felt less important to the overarching narrative than others did, and because of that I was less driven to pay attention to them. The chapters on farming were particularly dry to me. Compared to chapters where characters are pouring their hearts out through internal or external monologues, the stakes seemed less concrete.
Overall, this is a classic that I prepared a long time for, I read for a long time, I actively turned over for a long time, and will be on my mind for a long time. It's not a brand new classic of all time, but it's one that I'd love to tear apart again more than once. 4.5 stars.
Considered one of the greatest novels of all time, Tolstoy's Anna Karenina follows a corner of society during the love affair of the title character. We follow Anna as she is weighed down by society forcing her to choose between the things in her life she loves. She is surrounded by her husband Karenin, a man who shuns all warmth; her brother Stiva, a carefree man with connections to everyone; Stiva's sister-in-law Kitty, an ingenue trying to find herself; Levin, the man in love with Kitty and Stiva's best friend; and Count Vronsky, the charming younger man Anna falls for.
This book was so rewarding to read. It's one of the world's most beloved classics, it's long and episodic, and it covers lots of people and time at a point of cultural shifting. I would like to note that I read the Garnett translation, and while it's not the translation that the most popular versions of quotes are pulled from, I really enjoyed it and would highly recommend it. This copy was stunning as well, and easy to read out of. The only thing I would have wanted more from it was maybe some more resources for historical context, etc.
What were the things I really liked about this book? Anna and her plotline is my favorite part by far. Her crime is loving and wanting love, uncompromisingly seeking truth and a life based on genuine emotions. She is a creature of grand emotions, feeling the highest highs or the lowest lows and few things in between. She is wrought by guilt as her desire for truth leads her to follow her heart in loving Vronsky, because she is not allowed to have a truthful life with him while also maintaining a relationship with her son. She is shunned by Russian society for her choices, but to her, she cannot see them as choices but as the most survivable path. She doesn't always do the most "right" thing - nobody in this book does - but I find her to be a visceral and admirable character. She suffers, but I don't think she is necessarily punished by the narrative; she cannot be supported by the society she is in, but we as a reader do not see her as the guilty party.
I was nervous when reading a classic written by a man that the female characters may not be well-realized or respected through the lens of the narrative, but that was not the case. While Levin, who is Tolstoy's most autobiographical character, is certainly the most main of the main characters, the female characters are respected and well-rounded. Some of the comments about women also seemed rather feminist to me, for the time it was written.
Each of the characters we follow have their own purposes to the story, and none are without merit. We see several characters through trial and error try to find their raison d'être and the morals they can allow themselves to live by. Kitty tries living for performing good deeds; Karenin tries living strictly on logic. Levin has several moral debates, from his questions on religion, to how he runs his farm and what that means for society at a whole as the caste distances shrink, to his dealings with his loved ones, the wife who he wants to protect and his brother who is an outcast in society. Each of the characters also has their own foils within the story, and as such we see - and they the characters see - how their differing characters traits bring out the best and worst of them all.
The most challenging part of this book for me was the episodic nature. I was aware going into this that it was published serially, but if I wasn't, I still would have been able to guess as such. Some chapters felt less important to the overarching narrative than others did, and because of that I was less driven to pay attention to them. The chapters on farming were particularly dry to me. Compared to chapters where characters are pouring their hearts out through internal or external monologues, the stakes seemed less concrete.
Overall, this is a classic that I prepared a long time for, I read for a long time, I actively turned over for a long time, and will be on my mind for a long time. It's not a brand new classic of all time, but it's one that I'd love to tear apart again more than once. 4.5 stars.
challenging
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated