Finally, finally, finally I can say I have read Anna Karenina. All 817 pages of Anna Karenina, and that’s 817 pages without any pictures at all!
I considered writing a theme paper about the novel for this blog entry, and even letting Dave grade it, as the foremost English teacher in the family. But there are so many themes in this book that writing said paper might end up being as long as the actual novel, and none of you would be all that interested, having never read it for yourself. In fact, I concluded that since I am fairly certain I’m the only one who has read this book, I can say whatever I want about it and none of you will know the difference.
So, Anna Karenina is a novel about robots who learn to love…. No wait, that’s
Android Karenina! That’s not a lame joke, that’s an actual book written by the same author who wrote
Sense and Sensibility and Seamonsters, and
Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. Have you seen these books? I have no idea what they are about, but the cover art (skeletons in 19th century dress) really freaks me out.
Back to the point, Anna Karenina’s main theme is Happiness. Tolstoy examines the relationships between work, love, society and family; and how each may create or hinder happiness. At the time Tolstoy was searching for meaning in his own life and it comes through in the novel. The most famous quote from the book is its first line:
“Happy families are all alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” Halfway through the novel I was convinced that Tolstoy was trying to convey that whatever you think will make you happy, will actually make you miserable. Three quarters through the book, I was convinced. The novel follows three families, all related to each other. It opens with the Oblonskys. The husband, Stiva, is having multiple affairs and his wife, Dolly, finds out. She doesn’t feel as though she can forgive him, but she also cannot leave him because of her children. Instead she grows to despise him. Dolly’s sister, Kitty, is unmarried at the start of the novel. Stiva’s friend Levin is in love with her and proposes, but Kitty is infatuated with a young officer, Vronsky, and hopes he will propose, so she refuses Levin. Later Levin (whose character opposes Anna’s in almost every measure) does marry Kitty once she realizes Vronsky never had any intention of proposing. Meanwhile, Stiva’s sister, Anna Karenina is married with a young son. Vronsky meets her and immediately falls in love. He and Anna begin an affair, she leaves her husband, he takes her son, society rejects her for her actions, she has a daughter with Vronsky that she cannot love, Vronsky becomes distant and she ends up {SPOILER ALERT} killing herself. The end.
Was that summary too confusing? I tried to keep it as short as possible.
Tolstoy’s goal was “to present this woman [Anna] as not guilty, but merely pitiful.” I can’t say that he succeeded, at least looking through the lens of modern day. Anna Karenina is unlikable as a character. While at rare times the reader may feel a bit of sympathy for her, for the most part she acts selfishly. Even though she is only trying to pursue her own happiness she ends up hurting those around her. I know she was stuck in an unhappy marriage with a cold man, but to forsake her son for her lover is low. She becomes so unhappy living out of wedlock with Vronsky, rejected by society, estranged from her son, and consumed with the thought that she might lose Vronsky that she kills herself, both to escape her fate and to punish him for a perceived lack of attention. I struggled to feel empathy.
Meanwhile, Levin (or Koysta, Demitri, Konstantine….everyone in Russia has 17 different names) becomes our protagonist. It is also interesting to note that Levin’s character is written as a semi autobiographical portrayal of Tolstoy’s own beliefs. He lives a simple country life on his estate, doing honest work (farming) rather than holding a superfluous post in the city for which he is overpaid. He loves Kitty and eventually wins her love in return. He wants to do what is right and moral in regards to the peasants who work his land. And although he is agnostic at the start of the novel, he does wish to know the meaning of his life and what it is that he is living for. In end, although he is happy in marriage, work, and has a baby son, he contemplates killing himself. What? These Russians are miserable, and the Bolshevik revolution hasn’t even happened yet… hold on Levin, it’s going to get worse! Rather than kill himself though, Levin finally has an epiphany and finds purpose in living for God and achieves happiness and fulfillment.
Am I glad I read this book? Going into it, I thought it was a love story about the strong and beautiful Anna Karenina. Turns out, she isn’t strong or particularly beautiful, and this ain’t no love story. It’s more of an examination of happiness, living for God, and a commentary on the debate over the role of peasants in society. Before I answer I’d like to share Tolstoy’s own thoughts on his masterpiece. Tolstoy wrote Anna Karenina in installments (published in the Russian Messenger) from 1874-1877. His eager start to the novel began to slow towards the end of this time, due mainly to the changes going on in his personal life. Tolstoy was saddened by the loss of several relatives (three of them children), and became more and more occupied with providing an education for the peasants that worked his land. He also underwent a spiritual epiphany at this time and renounced the Russian Orthodox Church. He eventually gave up all his property and possessions, became a vegetarian, and practiced celibacy. Anna’s story of aristocracy and the over indulgence of society was of little interest to him. In November 1875, Tolstoy wrote to a friend, “My God, if only someone would finish Anna Karenina for me. Unbearably repulsive.”
While I won’t go as far as Tolstoy, am I glad I read this book? No, not really. Portions were entertaining, and it certainly started off well; but somewhere in the middle it became somewhat muddled and began to stall. Towards the end it became clear that there would be few, if any, resolutions to the questions brought up, and that Tolstoy did not intend to tie up all of the loose ends. Tolstoy left his novel true to real life, complete with messy story lines that aren’t completely resolved and characters who never learn anything.
In related news, I did hear that a play adaptation of Dostoyevsky’s “The Demons” is coming to New York this summer, if anyone’s interested. It’s 12 hours long and completely in Italian.
17 down; 13 to go