ANNA KARENINA PDF

adminComment(0)

Anna Karenina. Leo Tolstoy. Translated by Constance Garnett. This eBook is designed and published by Planet PDF. For more free. eBooks visit our Web site at. Download our free ePUB, PDF or MOBI eBooks to read on almost any device — your desktop, iPhone, iPad, Android phone or tablet, site Anna Karenina. Book: Anna Karenina. Described by William Faulkner as the best novel ever written and by Fyodor Dostoevsky as "flawless," Anna Karenina tells of the doomed love affair between the sensuous and rebellious Anna and the dashing officer, Count Vronsky. Tragedy unfolds as Anna rejects.


Anna Karenina Pdf

Author:DYAN VAWTER
Language:English, Dutch, Hindi
Country:Madagascar
Genre:Biography
Pages:537
Published (Last):10.08.2016
ISBN:913-9-56453-621-4
ePub File Size:19.82 MB
PDF File Size:20.15 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Sign up for free]
Downloads:29739
Uploaded by: MELODY

Anna Karenina by graf Leo Tolstoy. No cover available. Download; Bibrec Generated PDF (with images) Generated PDF (no images). “Anna Karenina is a perfect work of art. This novel contains a humane message that has not yet been heeded in Europe and that is much needed by the. ANNA KARENINA Leo Tolstoy Translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky Recommended for discussion by the Great.

Fyodor Vassilyevich Katavasov - Levins intellectual friend from his university days. Vasenka Veslovsky - A young, pleasant, somewhat dandyish man whom Stiva brings to visit Levin. The attentions Veslovsky lavishes on Kitty make Levin jealous. Landau - A French psychic who instructs Karenin to reject Annas plea for a divorce. Analysis of Major Characters Anna Karenina One of two main protagonists in the novel the other being Konstantin Levin , Anna is the beautiful, passionate, and educated wife of Alexei Karenin, a cold and passionless government official.

Her character is rich in complexity: she is guilty of desecrating her marriage and home, for instance, but she remains noble and admirable nonetheless. Anna is intelligent and literate, a reader of English novels and a writer of childrens books. She is elegant, always understated in her dress. Her many years with Karenin show her capable of playing the role of cultivated, beautiful, society wife and hostess with great poise and grace.

She is very nearly the ideal aristocratic Russian wife of the s. Among Anna's most prominent qualities are her passionate spirit and determination to live life on her own terms.

She is a feminist heroine of sorts. Though disgraced, she dares to face St. Petersburg high society and refuses the exile to which she has been condemned, attending the opera when she knows very well she will meet with nothing but scorn and derision.

Anna Karenina.pdf

Anna is a martyr to the old-fashioned Russian patriarchal system and its double standard for male and female adultery. Her brother, Stiva, is far looser in his morals but is never even chastised for his womanizing, whereas Anna is sentenced to social exile and suicide. Moreover, Anna is deeply devoted to her family and children, as we see when she sneaks back into her former home to visit her son on his birthday.

Annas refusal to lose Seryozha is the only reason she refuses Karenins offer of divorce, even though this divorce would give her freedom. The governing principle of Annas life is that love is stronger than anything, even duty.

She remains powerfully committed to this principle. She rejects Karenins request that she stay with him simply to maintain outward appearances of an intact marriage and family. In the later stages of her relationship with Vronsky, Anna worries most that he no longer loves her but remains with her out of duty only. Her exile from civilized society in the later part of the novel is a symbolic rejection of all the social conventions we normally accept dutifully.

She insists on following her heart alone. As a result, Anna contrasts with with the ideal of living for God and goodness that Levin embraces in the last chapter, and she appears self-centered by comparison. Even so, Annas insistence on living according to the dictates of her heart makes her a pioneer, a woman searching for autonomy and passion in a male-dominated society.

Konstantin Levin Though Anna Karenina gives the novel its name, Levin acts as the novel's co-protagonist, as central to the story as Anna herself. Many critics read Levin as a veiled self-portrait of the author: his name includes Tolstoys first name Lev in Russian , and many of the details of his courtship of Kittyincluding the missing shirt at the weddingwere taken straight from Tolstoys life.

Most notably, Levins confession of faith at the end of the novel parallels Tolstoys turning to religion after writing Anna Karenina. Independent-minded and socially awkward, Levin is a truly individual character who fits into none of the obvious classifications of Russian society. He is neither a freethinking rebel like his brother Nikolai, nor a bookish intellectual like his half-brother Sergei. He is not a socialite like Betsy, nor a bureaucrat like Karenin, nor a rogue like Veslovsky.

Levin straddles the issue of Russias fate as a western nation: he distrusts liberals who wish to westernize Russia, rejecting their analytical and abstract approach, but on the other hand he recognizes the utility of western technology and agricultural science.

In short, Levin is his own person. He follows his own vision of things, even when it is confused and foggy, rather than adopting any groups prefabricated views. Moreover, Levin prefers isolation over fitting in with a social set with which he is not wholly comfortable.

In this he resembles Anna, whose story is a counterpart to his own in its search for self-definition and individual happiness.

Despite his status as a loner, Levin is not self-centered, and he shows no signs of viewing himself as exceptional or superior.

If Tolstoy makes Levin a hero in the novel, his heroism is not in his unique achievements but in his ability to savor common human experiences. His most unforgettable experiences in the novelhis bliss at being in love, his fear for his wife in childbirthare not rare or aristocratic but shared by millions.

Anyone can feel these emotions; Levin is special simply in feeling them so deeply and openly. This commonality gives him a humanitarian breadth that no other character in the novel displays. His comfort with his peasants and his loathing of social pretension characterize him as an ordinary man, one of the Russian people despite his aristocratic lineage.

When Levin mows for an entire day alongside his peasants, we get no sense that he is deliberately slumming with the commonershe sincerely enjoys the labor. Tolstoys representation of Levins final discovery of faith, which he learns from a peasant, is equally ordinary. In this regard, Levin incarnates the simple virtues of life and Tolstoys vision of a model human being.

Alexei Karenin A government official with little personality of his own, Karenin maintains the faade of a cultivated and rational man. He keeps up with contemporary poetry, reads books on Roman history for leisure, and makes appearances at all the right parties.

He is civil to everyone and makes no waves. But he remains a bland bureaucrat whose personality has disappeared under years of devotion to his duties. Though he reads poetry, he rarely has a poetic thought; he reads history but never reflects on it meaningfully. He does not enjoy himself or spark conversations at parties but merely makes himself seen and then leaves.

Karenins entire existence consists of professional obligations, with little room for personal whim or passion. When first made aware of Annas liaison with Vronsky, Karenin briefly entertains thoughts of challenging Vronsky to a duel but quickly abandons the idea when he imagines a pistol pointed his direction.

This cowardice indicates his general resistance to a life of fervent emotion and grand passions. Karenins limp dispassion colors his home life and serves as the backdrop to Annas rebellious search for love at any price. He viewed his betrothal to Anna, for instance, as an act of duty like everything else in his life: it was time to marry, so he chose an appropriate girl, who happened to be Anna.

He never gives any indications of appreciating Annas uniqueness or valuing the ways in which she differs from other women. His appreciation of her is only for her role as wife and mother. Similarly, Karenins fatherly interaction with Seryozha is cold and official, focused on educational progress and never on Seryozhas perceptions or emotions.

Karenin wishes to raise a responsible child, as he surely was himself. It is Karenins obedience to duty, his pigeonholing of all persons and experiences as either appropriate or inappropriate, that Anna rejects.

When Anna leaves, she does not simply dump Karenin the man but also the conventionalism that Karenin believes in and represents.

Karenins slide into occultism and stagnation at the end of the novel suggests indirectly how much he needed Anna, and how much she was the life behind his faade. Alexei Vronsky The novel depicts Vronsky as a handsome, wealthy, and charming man who is as willing as Anna is to abandon social standing and professional status in pursuit of love. His commitment to his hospital-building project also shows a Romantic passion for carrying out an individual vision of good.

But the novel also shows Vronsky's many realistic faults and imperfections. His thinning hair, his error in judgment in the horse race, his thwarted ambitions of military glory all remind us that Vronsky is not a Romantic hero but a man like any other.

He does not symbolize escape from social pressures, for he suffers from these pressures himself. He may be an exceptional man, but he is only a man. This limitation in Vronsky provides Annas greatest disappointment in the novel: she yearns for a total escape into a love affair of unbounded passion, only to discover that Vronsky's passion has its limits. Tolstoy gives Vronsky the same first name as Karenin, suggesting that Annas longing for another Alexei leads her to a disappointing repetition of her first relationship.

Vronskys devotion to Anna appears to wane in the later chapters of the novel, but much of this appearance stems from Anna's paranoid fears that he has fallen out of love with her.

On the contrary, no indisputable evidence indicates that Vronsky loves Anna any less at the end. Certainly he cares for her more than ever: he outfits his country home luxuriously and elegantly, largely it seems in an attempt to make Anna happy. His commissioning of Annas portrait and his prominent display of it in their home suggests that he is still enraptured by her. Vronsky occasionally feels the pang of thwarted ambition, especially after meeting his school chum who is now highly successful, but at no point does he hold Anna responsible for his failures.

He accommodates her whims and endures her paranoid fits with patience. These actions may be mere solicitude or duty, as Anna calls iton Vronskys part, rather than true love.

But since the novel rarely shows us Vronskys thoughts as he shows us Annas, we simply cannot know for sure. Stiva Oblonsky Stiva sets the novel in motion, not only in terms of plotas the domestic upheaval caused by his affair with the family's governess brings Anna to Moscow, and thus to Vronskybut also in terms of theme.

Stiva embodies the notion that life is meant to be lived and enjoyed, not repressed by duties. He lives for the moment, thinking about responsibility only later, as his constant financial problems remind us. His dazed reaction to being chastised for adultery is not so much regret at his wrongdoing but rather regret at being caught. Indeed, even after Dolly forgives Stiva, he does not stop carrying on with other women. He does not feel any duty toward his wife and family that constrains his freedom.

Despite Stiva's actions, the novel does not portray him as exceptionally villainous. On the contrary, he represents an ordinary man in 19th century Russia. He is kind and jovial and genuinely loves his wife and family, yet he feels entitled to have sex with whomever he pleases.

This apparent paradox in his character highlights the patriarchal nature of Russian society at the time. Stiva is essentially free to enjoy himself, while his wife is expected to endure his affairs in good-natured silence. Stiva nonetheless hides his affairs because he recognizes that he has a duty to be faithful to his wife, however lightly heand societymay regard that duty.

Stiva's affair with his family's governess sets the stage for Annas much more dramatic struggle between private passion and social obligation. Like Anna, Stiva seeks out love and satisfaction in any way that is personally meaningful for him. But the similarity ends there. Stiva is far shallower than his sister, and lacks her emotional self-reflection and passionate intensity.

His love affairs are trifles to him, whereas Annas becomes a matter of life and death to her. Stiva is not a dynamic character in the novelhe does not change. He is never punished for his sins and never improves his behavior. In short, Stivas constancy brings into relief the extraordinary changesmoral, spiritual, and psychologicalthat Anna undergoes. Social Change in Nineteenth-Century Russia Tolstoy sets his tale of adultery and self-discovery against the backdrop of the huge historical changes sweeping through Russia during the late nineteenth century, making the historical aspects of the novel just as important as the personal and psychological aspects.

In the Russia of Anna Karenina, a battle rages between the old patriarchal values sustaining the landowning aristocracy and the new, liberaloften called libre penseur, or freethinking, in the novel values of the Westernizers. The old-timer conservatives believe in traditions like serfdom and authoritarian government, while the Westernizing liberals believe in technology, rationalism, and democracy.

We see this clash in Levins difficulty with his peasants, who, refusing to accept the Western agricultural innovations he tries to introduce, believe that the old Russian ways of farming are the best. We also see the confusion of these changing times in the question of the zemstvo, or village council, in which Levin tries to participate as a proponent of democracy but which he finally abandons on the grounds that they are useless. The guests at Stivas dinner party raise the question of womens rightsclearly a hot topic of the day, and one that shows the influence of Western social progress on Russia.

That Dolly and Anna suffer in their marriages, however, does not bode well for the future of feminism in the world of the novel. Courtship procedures are equally uncertain in the world of Anna Karenina. The Russian tradition of arranged marriages is going out of fashion, but Princess Shcherbatskaya is horrified at the prospect of allowing Kitty to choose her own mate. The narrator goes so far as to say plainly that no one knows how young people are to get married in Russia in the s.

Taken together, all this confusion created by fading traditions creates an atmosphere of both instability and new potential, as if humans have to decide again how to live. It is only in such a changing atmosphere that Levins philosophical questionings are possible. The Blessings of Family Life Anna Karenina is in many ways a recognizable throwback to the genre of family novels popular in Russia several decades earlier, which were out of fashion by the s. The Russian family novel portrayed the benefits and comforts of family togetherness and domestic bliss, often in a very idealized way.

In the radically changing social climate of s Russia, many social progressives attacked the institution of the family, calling it a backward and outmoded limitation on individual freedom. They claimed that the family often exploited children as cheap labor.

Anna Kareninajoins in this family debate. The first sentence of the novel, concerning the happiness and unhappiness of families, underscores the centrality of this idea. While the novel takes a pro-family position in general, it is nonetheless candid about the difficulties of family life.

The notion that a family limits the freedom of the individual is evident in Stivas dazed realization in the first pages of the novel that he cannot do whatever he pleases. This limitation of freedom is also evident in Levins surprise at the fact that he cannot go off to visit his dying brother on a whim but must confer with his wife first and respond to her insistence that she accompany him.

Yet despite these restrictions on personal liberty, and despite the quarrels that plague every family represented in Anna Karenina, the novel portrays family life as a source of comfort, happiness, and philosophical transcendence. Anna destroys a family and dies in misery, whereas Levin creates a family and concludes the novel happily. Annas life ultimately loses meaning, whereas Levins attains it, as the last paragraph of the novel announces.

Ultimately, Tolstoy leaves us with the conclusion that faith, happiness, and family life go hand in hand. The Philosophical Value of Farming Readers of Anna Karenina are sometimes puzzled and frustrated by the extensive sections of the novel devoted to Levins agricultural interests. We are treated to long passages describing the process of mowing, we hear much about peasant attitudes toward wooden and iron plows, and we are subjected to Levins sociological theorizing about why European agricultural reforms do not work in Russia.

Yet this focus on agriculture and farming fulfills an important function in the novel and has a long literary tradition behind it. The idyll, a genre of literature dating from ancient times, portrays farmers and shepherds as more fulfilled and happy than their urban counterparts, showing closeness to the soil as a mark of the good life. Farmers understand growth and potential, and are aware of the delicate balance between personal labor and trust in the forces of nature.

In Anna Karenina, Tolstoy updates the idyll by making his spokesman in the novel, Levin, a devoted farmer as well as an impassioned philosopherand the only character in the novel who achieves a clear vision of faith and happiness.

For Levin, farming is a way of moving beyond oneself, pursuing something larger than ones own private desiresa pursuit that he sees as the cornerstone of all faith and happiness. His days spent mowing the fields bring him into closer contact with the Russian peasantssymbols of the native Russian spiritthan anyone else achieves. Other characters who harp on the virtues of peasants, such as Sergei, rarely interact with them. Levins connections with farmers thus show him rooted in his nation and culture more so than Europeanized aristocrats like Anna.

He is in closer touch with the truths of existence. It is no accident that Levin finally finds faith by listening to his peasant Fyodor, a farmer. Nor is it accidental that Levins statement of the meaning of life in the novels last paragraph recalls agriculture. Levin concludes that the value of life is in the goodness he puts into itjust as, we might say, the value of a farm lies in the good seeds and labor that the farmer puts into it.

Ultimately, Levin reaches an idea of faith based on growth and cultivation. Motifs Motifs are recurring structures, contrasts, or literary devices that can help to develop and inform the texts major themes.

Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy

The Interior Monologue Though Tolstoy has a reputation for being a simple and straightforward writer, he was in fact a great stylistic innovator. He pioneered the use of a device that is now commonplace in novels but was radically new in the nineteenth centurythe interior monologue.

The interior monologue is the authors portrayal of a characters thoughts and feelings directly, not merely in paraphrase or summary but as if directly issuing from the characters mind. Earlier writers such as Shakespeare had used the monologue in drama, writing scenes in which characters speak to the audience directly in asides or soliloquies.

They were already making ready their handfuls of mud to fling at her when the right moment arrived. The greater number of the middle-aged people and certain great personages were displeased at the prospect of the impending scandal in society.

Anna's brother Stepan Arkadyich Oblonsky Stiva and his friend Konstantin Levin, who later becomes his brother-in-law, also have great significances. They embodies two very different personalities exhibiting the contrast between the two styles in the old aristocracy in Russia at the time. Oblonsky is a well regarded government official but at the same time becomes very irresponsible with his financial situation continuing to borrow money to maintain a high living standard.

While he indulges himself with fancy dinners, his family are struggling and have to endure the inconveniences with their summer country house which is in dire need of visible repairs. On top of this, he is also an unfaithful husband and caused social humiliation on his family. As a contrast, Levin is a character that represents Tolstoy values and ideas.

He enjoys a straightforward austere life in the country coexisting with the peasants. Being a member of the aristocracy that owns land, he decides to stay far from what he considers a frivolous city life. Levin is also intellectually engaged, writing a book on agriculture with the particular problems the peasants and land owners face in Russia.

He is an idealist that dreams of a non-violent revolution among the following lines. The whole system of culture, the chief element in the condition of the people, must be completely transformed. Instead of poverty, general prosperity, and content; instead of hostility, harmony and unity of interests.

In short, a bloodless revolution, but a revolution of the greatest magnitude, beginning in the little circle of our district, then the province, then Russia, the whole world.

I assure you I have reckoned it all out," he said, "and the forest is fetching a very good price.. Pretending to be at home in the country, he uses a different outfit, appearing in a pair of expensive new boots and an exotic hat.

He saw it now as he looked at Stepan Arkadyevitch, radiant in his rags, graceful, well-fed, and joyous, a typical Russian nobleman. And he made up his mind that next time he went shooting he would certainly adopt the same get- up. I also did not include here Tolstoy's brilliant accounts of an election, the discussion of the music played in a concert, the interesting conversations over some sumptuous dinners, and much more.

Vronsky occasionally feels the pang of thwarted ambition, especially after meeting his school chum who is now highly successful, but at no point does he hold Anna responsible for his failures. He accommodates her whims and endures her paranoid fits with patience.

These actions may be mere solicitude or duty, as Anna calls iton Vronskys part, rather than true love. But since the novel rarely shows us Vronskys thoughts as he shows us Annas, we simply cannot know for sure. Stiva Oblonsky Stiva sets the novel in motion, not only in terms of plotas the domestic upheaval caused by his affair with the family's governess brings Anna to Moscow, and thus to Vronskybut also in terms of theme.

Stiva embodies the notion that life is meant to be lived and enjoyed, not repressed by duties. He lives for the moment, thinking about responsibility only later, as his constant financial problems remind us. His dazed reaction to being chastised for adultery is not so much regret at his wrongdoing but rather regret at being caught. Indeed, even after Dolly forgives Stiva, he does not stop carrying on with other women.

Anna Karenina by graf Leo Tolstoy

He does not feel any duty toward his wife and family that constrains his freedom. Despite Stiva's actions, the novel does not portray him as exceptionally villainous. On the contrary, he represents an ordinary man in 19th century Russia.

He is kind and jovial and genuinely loves his wife and family, yet he feels entitled to have sex with whomever he. This apparent paradox in his character highlights the patriarchal nature of Russian society at the time. Stiva is essentially free to enjoy himself, while his wife is expected to endure his affairs in good-natured silence.

Stiva nonetheless hides his affairs because he recognizes that he has a duty to be faithful to his wife, however lightly heand societymay regard that duty. Stiva's affair with his family's governess sets the stage for Annas much more dramatic struggle between private passion and social obligation. Like Anna, Stiva seeks out love and satisfaction in any way that is personally meaningful for him.

But the similarity ends there. Stiva is far shallower than his sister, and lacks her emotional self-reflection and passionate intensity.

His love affairs are trifles to him, whereas Annas becomes a matter of life and death to her. Stiva is not a dynamic character in the novelhe does not change. He is never punished for his sins and never improves his behavior. In short, Stivas constancy brings into relief the extraordinary changesmoral, spiritual, and psychologicalthat Anna undergoes.

Social Change in Nineteenth-Century Russia. Tolstoy sets his tale of adultery and self-discovery against the backdrop of the huge historical changes sweeping through Russia during the late nineteenth century, making the historical aspects of the novel just as important as the personal and psychological aspects. In the Russia of Anna Karenina, a battle rages between the old patriarchal values sustaining the landowning aristocracy and the new, liberaloften called libre penseur, or freethinking, in the novel values of the Westernizers.

The old-timer conservatives believe in traditions like serfdom and authoritarian government, while the Westernizing liberals believe in technology, rationalism, and democracy. We see this clash in Levins difficulty with his peasants, who, refusing to accept the Western agricultural innovations he tries to introduce, believe that the old Russian ways of farming are the best.

We also see the confusion of these changing times in the question of the zemstvo, or village council, in which Levin tries to participate as a proponent of democracy but which he finally abandons on the grounds that they are useless. The guests at Stivas dinner party raise the question of womens rightsclearly a hot topic of the day, and one that shows the influence of Western social progress on Russia. That Dolly and Anna suffer in their marriages, however, does not bode well for the future of feminism in the world of the novel.

Courtship procedures are equally uncertain in the world of Anna Karenina. The Russian tradition of arranged marriages is going out of fashion, but Princess Shcherbatskaya is horrified at the prospect of allowing Kitty to choose her own mate. The narrator goes so far as to say plainly that no one knows how young people are to get married in Russia in the s. Taken together, all this confusion created by fading traditions creates an atmosphere of both instability and new potential, as if humans have to decide again how to live.

It is only in such a changing atmosphere that Levins philosophical questionings are possible. The Blessings of Family Life. Anna Karenina is in many ways a recognizable throwback to the genre of family novels popular in Russia several decades earlier, which were out of fashion by the s.

The Russian family novel portrayed the benefits and comforts of family togetherness and domestic bliss, often in a very idealized way. In the radically changing social climate of s Russia, many social progressives attacked the institution of the family, calling it a backward and outmoded limitation on individual freedom. They claimed that the family often exploited children as cheap labor.

Anna Kareninajoins in this family debate. The first sentence of the novel, concerning the happiness and unhappiness of families, underscores the centrality of this idea. While the novel takes a pro-family position in general, it is nonetheless candid about the difficulties of family life. The notion that a family limits the freedom of the individual is evident in Stivas dazed realization in the first pages of the novel that he cannot do whatever he pleases.

This limitation of freedom is also evident in Levins surprise at the fact that he cannot. Yet despite these restrictions on personal liberty, and despite the quarrels that plague every family represented in Anna Karenina, the novel portrays family life as a source of comfort, happiness, and philosophical transcendence.

Anna destroys a family and dies in misery, whereas Levin creates a family and concludes the novel happily. Annas life ultimately loses meaning, whereas Levins attains it, as the last paragraph of the novel announces. Ultimately, Tolstoy leaves us with the conclusion that faith, happiness, and family life go hand in hand. The Philosophical Value of Farming. Readers of Anna Karenina are sometimes puzzled and frustrated by the extensive sections of the novel devoted to Levins agricultural interests.

We are treated to long passages describing the process of mowing, we hear much about peasant attitudes toward wooden and iron plows, and we are subjected to Levins sociological theorizing about why European agricultural reforms do not work in Russia. Yet this focus on agriculture and farming fulfills an important function in the novel and has a long literary tradition behind it.

The idyll, a genre of literature dating from ancient times, portrays farmers and shepherds as more fulfilled and happy than their urban counterparts, showing closeness to the soil as a mark of the good life.

Farmers understand growth and potential, and are aware of the delicate balance between personal labor and trust in the forces of nature. In Anna Karenina, Tolstoy updates the idyll by making his spokesman in the novel, Levin, a devoted farmer as well as an impassioned philosopherand the only character in the novel who achieves a clear vision of faith and happiness. For Levin, farming is a way of moving beyond oneself, pursuing something larger than ones own private desiresa pursuit that he sees as the cornerstone of all faith and happiness.

His days spent mowing the fields bring him into closer contact with the Russian peasantssymbols of the native Russian spiritthan anyone else achieves. Other characters who harp on the virtues of peasants, such as Sergei, rarely interact with them. Levins connections with farmers thus show him rooted in his nation and culture more so than Europeanized aristocrats like Anna. He is in closer touch with the truths of existence. It is no accident that Levin finally finds faith by listening to his peasant Fyodor, a farmer.

Nor is it accidental that Levins statement of the meaning of life in the novels last paragraph recalls agriculture. Levin concludes that the value of life is in the goodness he puts into itjust as, we might say, the value of a farm lies in the good seeds and labor that the farmer puts into it. Ultimately, Levin reaches an idea of faith based on growth and cultivation. Motifs Motifs are recurring structures, contrasts, or literary devices that can help to develop and inform the texts major themes.

The Interior Monologue. Though Tolstoy has a reputation for being a simple and straightforward writer, he was in fact a great stylistic innovator. He pioneered the use of a device that is now commonplace in novels but was radically new in the nineteenth centurythe interior monologue. The interior monologue is the authors portrayal of a characters thoughts and feelings directly, not merely.

Earlier writers such as Shakespeare had used the monologue in drama, writing scenes in which characters speak to the audience directly in asides or soliloquies. In narrative fiction, however, writers had rarely exploited the interior monologue for extended passages the way Tolstoy does in Anna Karenina. The interior monologue gives the reader great empathy with the character.

When we accompany someones thoughts, perceptions, and emotions step by step through an experience, we inevitably come to understand his or her motivations more intimately. I n Anna Karenina, Tolstoy gives us access to Levins interior monologue at certain key moments in his life: But Tolstoy uses the device of interior monologue far more extensively and movingly in his portrayal of Annas last moments, on her ride to the station where she dies at the end of Part Seven.

Ekaterina Alexandrovna Shcherbatskaya (Kitty) - A beautiful young woman who is courted

Without access to her thoughts, we would have a much flimsier understanding of what drives Anna to suicide. Without it, her death would be just another casualty on the long list of women in Russian literature who kill themselves over love.

Reading Annas monologue, however, we see the liveliness and even humor that make her such a vivid individual in the novel, as when she interrupts her gloomy meditations to comment on the ridiculous name of the hairstylist Twitkin. We also see the extent to which Anna has become a burden to herselfshe dreams of getting rid of Vronsky and of myself.

The interior monologue shows us her suicide not as a glamorous clich but as a simple and heartbreaking attempt to rid herself of the very self she once attempted to liberate. Anna Karenina is best known as a novel about adultery: Annas betrayal of her husband is the central event of its main plotline.

There was a surge of interest in the topic of adultery in the mid-nineteenth century, as evidenced by works such as Nathaniel Hawthornes The Scarlet Letter and Gustave Flauberts Madame Bovary Although the guilty party in these works is always a woman who meets a bad end as a result of her wrongdoing, the nineteenth-century adultery novel is actually less religiously moralizing than we might expect. Anna Karenina is a case in point.

Although the novel is loaded with biblical quotations issuing from the mouths of characters and from its own epigraph, its moral atmosphere is not overwhelmingly Christian. Indeed, many of the novels devout Christian characters, such as Madame Stahl and Lydia Ivanovna, are repellent and hypocritical. Tolstoy rarely mentions the church in the novel, and even occasionally gently mocks it, as when Levin rolls his eyes at the confession he must undergo to get married. The religious stigma on adultery is certainly present but it is not all that strong.

The more important condemnation of adultery in Anna Karenina comes not from the church but from conventional society: Karenins chief objection to Annas involvement with Vronsky is not that adultery is a sin, or even that it causes him emotional anguish, but rather that society will react negatively.

Karenin thinks of propriety and decency, looking good to the neighbors, over anything else. It is for this reason that he is so willing to overlook Annas affair as long as she does not seek a separation or divorce. He does not care so much about the fact that his wife loves another man; he cares only that she continue to appear to be a good wife.

This restrictive power of social.

You might also like: HEIDI BY JOHANNA SPYRI PDF

As such, adultery in Anna Karenina is a side effect of the stifling forces of society, making the novel a work of social criticism as much as a story of marital betrayal. The idea of Christian forgiveness recurs regularly in Anna Karenina and is clearly one of Tolstoys main topics of exploration in the novel.

If the central action of the plot is a sin, then forgiveness is the potential resolution. And if Anna is a sinner, then our attitude toward her and toward the novel depends on whether and how much we can forgive her. Tolstoy establishes forgiveness as a noble ideal when Dolly exclaims to Anna, who is helping the Oblonskys through their marital difficulties, If you forgive, its completely, completely.

This ideal form of pardon amounts to a total erasure of the sin as if it hadnt happened, as Anna puts it. Yet Tolstoy does not mindlessly accept forgiveness as a noble Christian virtue, but instead forces us to consider whether forgiveness is possible and effective. The very epigraph to the novel Vengeance is mine; I will repayvalues vengeance, the opposite of forgiveness. This opening thought haunts the entire novel, suggesting that perhaps forgiveness is not the ultimate virtue after all.

Moreover, the characters attitudes toward forgiveness are sometimes compromised. Dolly ends up forgiving Stiva, but we wonder whether her pardon amounts to her simply shutting her eyes to reality, as we know that Stiva continues his womanizing with unabated enthusiasm afterward. In Dollys case, forgiveness looks like gullibility or resignation.

Forgiveness is even more dubious in other instances. When the seemingly dying Anna begs Karenins forgiveness and he grants it, both are sincere.

But the forgiveness has little effect once Anna recovers: Anna continues to love Vronsky and loathe Karenin as much as ever, and though Karenin is more amenable to the idea of divorce, his treatment of Anna does not change much. Through these events, the novel suggests that forgiveness is an ongoing process that may grow or diminish in intensity.

It is not a one-time event, after which all disturbances in a relationship disappear permanently as though they had never existed. Though Karenin forgives Anna, for instance, their emotions remain the same as before. Finally, at the end of the novel, Anna beg forgiveness of God just before killing herself.

The co-protagonists of the novel, Anna and Levin, each encounter death numerous times. Shortly after we first meet Levin, he talks to a philosopher about death, asking if he believes existence ends when the body dies. Anna has only just entered the story when a man throws himself under a train. Later, Levin witnesses the slow, painful death of his brother Nikolai, an event that makes death disturbingly real to Levin where before it had only been an abstraction.

Then Anna nearly dies in childbirth, temporarily resolving her problems with Vronsky and Alexei Karenin. As she becomes increasingly desperate later in the novel, she begins thinking of death as the only solution to her troubles, until finally she throws herself under a train. Levin, too, considers suicide. Although happy otherwise, he despairs that he cannot know the meaning of his existence, and he comes so close to suicide that he fears having a rope or rifle nearby because he might kill himself.

These examples suggest that, for Anna, death specifically suicideserves as a means of escape from her problems. For Levin, on the other. Symbols Symbols are objects, characters, figures, or colors used to represent abstract ideas or concepts.

The many references to trains in Anna Karenina all carry a negative meaning. Tolstoy sometimes has a character use the French word train, as when Anna complains about Vronskys workload by saying Du train que cela vaat the rate his work is goingshe will never see him at all in a few years. In this phrase, the word denotes a fast rate of increase of something harmful, which is exactly how Tolstoy viewed the expansion of the railroads. Literal references to trains are no less negative.

Anna first makes her ill-fated acquaintance with Vronsky in a train station, and she sees the death of a railway worker after this meeting as a bad omen. The omen is fulfilled when Anna throws herself under the train near the end of the novel, literally making the railway her killer.

The metaphor of transportationand the transports of lovefor a quick change of scenery is a clear one. Just as trains carry people away to new places, Anna herself is carried away by her train-station passion for Vronsky, which derails her family life, her social life, and ultimately her physical life as well. Vronskys Racehorse.

On a literal level, Frou-Frou is the beautiful, pricey horse that Vronsky downloads and then accidentally destroys at the officers race. On a figurative level, Frou-Frou is a clear symbol of Anna, or of Vronskys relationship with herboth of which are ultimately destroyed. FrouFrou appears in the novel soon after Vronskys affair with Anna becomes serious and dangerous for their social reputations. Vronsky meets Anna just before the race, and his conversation with her makes him nervous and unsettled, impairing his performance.

This link connects Anna with Frou-Frou still more deeply, showing how Vronskys liaison with Anna endangers him. The horse race is dangerous as well, as we find out when several officers and horses are injured during the run. Vronsky attempts to ride out both dangersthe horse race and the affairwith his characteristic coolness and poise, and he manages to do so successfully for a time.

But his ability to stay on top of the situation is ultimately compromised by the fatal error he makes in sitting incorrectly on Frou-Frous saddle, ending with a literal downfall for both man and horse.

The symbol of the racehorse implies much about the power dynamic between Anna and Vronsky.

The horse is vulnerable and completely under Vronskys control, just as in an adulterous affair in s Russian society it is the woman who runs the greater risk of being harmed. For Vronsky and the other officer riders, the race is a form of entertainment in which they choose to participate. But there is a deeper force leading both Anna and Frou-Frou into the race, and the stakes are much higher for them than for Vronskythe race is a matter of life and death for both woman and horse.

Ultimately, the horses death is a needless result of someone elses mistake, just as Annas death seems unfair, a tragic waste of a beautiful life. Levins courtship of and marriage to Kitty is of paramount importance to Anna Karenina. The novel frames the marriage as a stubborn individualists acceptance of and commitment to another human being, with all the philosophical and religious meaning such a connection carries for him. Levin is something of an outcast throughout the early part of the novel.

His views alienate him from noblemen and peasantry alike. He is frustrated by Russian culture but unable to feel comfortable with European ways. He is socially awkward and suffers from an inferiority complex, as we see in his self-doubts in proposing to Kitty. Devastated by Kittys rejection of his marriage proposal, Levin retreats to his country estate and renounces all dreams of family life. We wonder whether he will remain an eccentric isolationist for the rest of his days, without family or nearby friends, laboring over a theory of Russian agriculture that no one will read, as no one reads his brother Sergeis magnum opus.

When the flame of Levins and Kittys love suddenly resites, leading with lightning speed to a marriage, it represents more than a mere betrothal.

Rather, the marriage is an affirmation of Levins connection with others and his participation in something larger than himselfthe cornerstone of the religious faith he attains after marriage. Levin starts thinking about faith when he is forced to go to confession in order to obtain a marriage license.

Although he is cynical toward religious dogma, the questions the priest asks him set in motion a chain of thoughts that leads him through a crisis and then to spiritual regeneration. Similarly, Levins final affirmation of faith on the last page of the novel is a direct result of his near-loss of the family that marriage has made possible.

It is no accident that faith and marriage enter Levins life almost simultaneously, for they are both affirmations that ones self is not the center of ones existence. Part One, Chapters Summary All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. Stiva Oblonsky has been unfaithful to his wife, Dolly, with their childrens former governess. Stiva is distraught but not overly remorseful. Dolly, meanwhile, is devastated and refuses to leave her rooms.

The servants advise Stiva to apologize repeatedly, predicting that Dolly will calm down. Stiva finally visits Dolly, begging her to remember their nine years of marriage.

Dolly is inconsolable, telling her husband he is disgusting and a total stranger to her. Stiva goes to his office. His job is respectable and comfortable, thanks to his charm and good connections. He receives a surprise visit from an old friend, Konstantin Levin, who lives in the country. Stiva introduces Levin to his business partners, saying that Levin is active in the zemstvo, his village administrative board.

Levin reveals that he has quit his post on the board, and tells Stiva that he has an important matter to discuss. They arrange to meet for dinner.

Stiva guesses the matter has something to do with his sister-in-law, Kitty Shcherbatskaya, with whom he knows Levin is in love.

While in Moscow, Levin stays with his half-brother, Koznyshev, whose philosophical mindset sometimes perplexes Levin. The brothers discuss Levins plan to visit their estranged and sickly third brother, Nikolai, who is back in Moscow with a girlfriend. Koznyshev advises Levin not to go, saying Levin cannot help Nikolai, who wishes to be left alone. Levin goes to the skating rink at the Zoological Gardens, where he is sure he will find the charming Kitty.

She is at the rink, as expected. Levin and Kitty enjoy one anothers company together on the ice until Levin confesses that he feels more confident whenever Kitty, a less accomplished skater, leans on him for support. Kittys mood suddenly darkens, and she sends Levin away. Levin grows upset and goes off glumly to his dinner with Stiva. Over the luxurious meal, Levin confesses to Stiva his passionate love for Kitty.

Stiva encourages Levin to be hopeful but warns him of a rival for her affections, an officer named Alexei Vronsky. Stiva then discusses his own problematic infatuation with his childrens governess. Levin gently chastises Stiva for his behavior, but Stiva laughingly calls Levin a moralist. Kittys mother, Princess Shcherbatskaya, weighs the relative merits of Vronsky and Levin as suitors.

She is disconcerted by Levins awkwardness and generally favors Vronsky. But the Princess is also aware that young Russian noblewomen of the new generation prefer to choose their husbands for themselves rather than submit to their parents arrangements. That evening, Levin calls at Kittys home and finds her alone.

Kitty is aware that she feels. She considers avoiding Levin entirely but then bravely meets him and declines his marriage proposal. Princess Shcherbatskaya is relieved to see that no engagement has been declared. Vronsky arrives, and the devastated Levin is impressed with this rival suitor. That night, Kitty cannot sleep, haunted by Levins face.

Kittys father has learned about the rebuffed proposal and is upset, as he prefers Levin to Vronsky. The next morning, Vronsky goes to the train station to meet his mother arriving from St. There he meets Stiva, who has come to meet his sister, Anna Karenina. Vronsky tells Stiva he has met Levin, whom he finds nice but somewhat awkward. Stiva defends Levin, hinting that Levin might have proposed to Kitty.

Vronsky states that Kitty can find a better match. Meanwhile the train arrives, and Vronsky awaits his mother. Analysis Although Anna Karenina is renowned as a study of romantic passion, the novel shows us the dark and discouraging side of romance from the first page. Tolstoys novel begins when the honeymoon is already over. Deception and disappointment mar the marriage of Stiva and Dolly, two attractive, rich, cultured, sensitive, and likable people. We expect them to be the ideal happy couple, but they are miserable, and the source of the problem is their marriage.

In fact, the opening of the novel, with its threat of a marital breakup casts a dark shadow over all the love and romance in Anna Karenina. This dark shadow extends over many romantic moments in the novel. For example, Levin's and Kittys turn at the skating rink ends with Kitty rebuffing Levins advances, killing any sense of romance in the scene. From these early scenes of Stiva and Dolly and Levin and Kitty, love seems doomed from the start. Stiva is a crucial character because he is, in many ways, an advance introduction to his sister, Anna Karenina.

His adultery opens the novel; her later adultery is the novels main focus. Moreover, they share personality traits and moral attitudes.

For one thing, there is an inexplicable aura of innocence around Stiva. He has made mistakes but is far from a villain. Because Tolstoy presents Stiva as such an affable and sincere character, it is nearly impossible even for the most moralistic of us to condemn Stiva wholeheartedly, even if we disapprove of his adulterous liaisons. Despite his lack of restraint, he is not a bad man, and is even quite charming.

His flaw is not willful cruelty or meanness but simply his amorous nature, as Tolstoy euphemistically puts it. Stiva likes sexual adventure, and in his mind it is not wrong. He regrets not having hidden the affair more thoroughly but does not regret the affair itself, which brought him pleasure, as he openly admits. The question of a right to sexual pleasure is further examined later, in his sister Annas situation.

Though Anna Karenina is on the surface a novel about romantic love and courtship, it is actually far more wide-ranging in its focus, delving into public and social topics such as technology, agriculture, and administration.

Tolstoys explorations of social themes strike many readers as annoying interruptions of the love story, but in fact the novels social concerns and its love theme often reinforce each other. The train, for example, is a symbol of modernization and European efficiency. But it is also recurrently associated with Anna and her transport of passion upon meeting Vronsky. Anna appears in the novel near a train, and thrillingly meditates on Vronsky as she rides the train to St.

Perhaps most important, a train is involved in Annas final fate at the end of the novel. The train, like Annas. The novels social themes intersect with its romantic themes again in the discussion of the Shcherbatskys confusion about Kittys courtship.

It is no longer possible for Russian parents to arrange marriages, but at the same time, children like Kitty cannot choose for themselves. The result is that no one knows how to proceed, and the risks seem huge.

Modernization may improve the quality of Russian life, but it also disrupts the fabric of Russian society and courtship. Part One, Chapters Summary It was as if a surplus of something so overflowed her being that it expressed itself beyond her will, now in the brightness of her glance, now in her smile. See Important Quotations Explained Vronsky waits for his mother at the train station.

Before she appears, Vronsky sees a woman with gentle, shining gray eyes whose face becomes animated at the sight of him. This is Anna Karenina, whom Stiva has come to the station to meet. Anna and Vronsky briefly exchange glances. Vronskys mother appears and introduces Vronsky to Anna. As they are leaving the station, a worker is run over by a train and killedwhether it is suicide or an accident is unclear.

Anna gloomily views the death as a bad omen. Stiva takes Anna to his home, where Dolly, devastated by grief over her husbands adultery, wishes to see no one. But Anna, having heard about the betrayal, insists on seeing Dolly and meets her warmly and compassionately. She does not attempt to console Dolly but is deeply sympathetic.

She tells Dolly that Stiva is suffering and that he is capable of total repentance. Dolly feels much better. Later that day, Kitty arrives at the Oblonsky residence, and Anna receives her warmly.

Anna hears about Kittys interest in Vronsky, and says she met Vronsky at the station and liked him. At teatime, Dolly emerges from her rooms, and Kitty and Anna understand that Dolly and Stiva have been reconciled. They discuss the upcoming ball, and Kitty urges Anna to wear a lilaccolored dress.

Later, Vronsky stops by the Oblonsky household and seems ashamed when he sees Anna. At the ball held not long afterward, Vronsky dances the first dance with Kitty, who looks radiant. Anna appears, dressed not in lilac but in black, which Kitty immediately realizes is Annas best color. Kitty is puzzled by Annas refusal to respond when Vronsky bows to her. Kitty dances many waltzes with Vronsky but later finds Anna and Vronsky dancing together. Anna looks elated and triumphant.

For the final mazurka, Kitty turns away her suitors, expecting Vronsky to ask her to dance. She is stunned to see that Vronsky has spurned her to dance the last dance with Anna. Meanwhile, Levin gloomily reflects on his life after Kittys rejection.

He decides to pay a visit to his brother Nikolai. Upon arriving, Levin finds his sickly brother much thinner than he remembered. Nikolai introduces Levin to his companion, Marya Nikolaevna, whom he saved from a whorehouse. Over dinner, Nikolai speaks at length about his socialist views. Marya privately tells Levin that Nikolai drinks too much.

Levin leaves, having made Mary promise to write to him in case of need. Levin returns to his country estate, grateful for the blessings of his peaceful existence. At the Oblonskys, Anna and Dolly dine together by themselves. Anna is unwell, and Kitty.

Anna expresses her amazement at having danced with Vronsky. She is confident that Vronsky will still pursue Kitty, but Dolly is not so sure. Anna leaves for St. Petersburg, relieved to escape Vronsky. On the train she is tormented by selfdoubt, unsure of who she is.

As the train pauses at a station, Anna glimpses Vronsky on the platform and feels a joyful pride. He has followed her from Moscow. Arriving in St. Petersburg, Anna meets her husband, Karenin, at the station. Vronsky watches them together and can see that Anna does not love Karenin. Anna introduces the two men, and Vronsky asks if he may call at the Karenin home.

At home, Annas son, Seryozha, runs up to greet her, and Anna feels a sudden pang of disappointment in her son. She speaks to her morally upright friend Lydia Ivanovna and feels secure that nothing scandalous has happened in her relations with Vronsky. Anna dismisses her anxieties. While in St. Petersburg, Vronsky socializes with his colleague Petritsky, to whom he has lent his apartment, and Petritskys lady friend, Baroness Shilton. They lightheartedly chat before Vronsky leaves to make appearances at various places where he hopes to encounter Anna.

Analysis In his depiction of Annas appearance at the train station during her first meeting with Vronsky, Tolstoy emphasizes Annas spiritual rather than physical attributes.

This method of characterizing her is important, for it reinforces the intellectual and philosophical aspect of this novel of ideas. While Anna and Vronsky are clearly attracted to each other, their mutual interest is more abstract than bodily, more about attractiveness of personality and manner than about sexual fantasy.

Though Annas figure is ravishing, Vronsky is drawn primarily to her gentle and tender eyes. Her eyes are not a sultry brown or coquettish blue but rather a subtle gray, the same color as the eyes of Athena, Greek goddess of wisdomhardly a symbol of unbridled passion. Although Tolstoy may also have had in mind Shakespeares writing, in which gray eyes represent the paragon of female beauty.

At the ball, Anna appears not in the archetypal red of a femme fatale but rather in a stunning but tasteful black dress. These clues tell us from the very beginning that although Tolstoy may harshly condemn adultery on an abstract level, he does not portray Anna as a passion-crazed vixenas popular novels of the time often represented the straying wife.

Annas appearance also reinforces the importance of family life in the novel. Anna is not a vamp who thwarts old-fashioned Russian family values or shows hostility to domestic harmony. On the contrary, her initial appearance in Moscowand in the novelis prompted by her desire to see a family stay together.

Annas mission to reconcile her brother and his wife is successful; she brings a couple on the verge of separation back together. Anna is also naturally motherly: Moreover, Anna is clearly devoted to her own eight-year-old son, Seryozha, from whom she is apart for the first time in his life when she goes to Moscow.

Even more important, Anna has no bone to pick with societys expectations of propriety. She does not willfully flout public norms of behavior. When she finds herself dancing with Vronsky, she is startled by her own actions.

The parallel structure of Annas and Levins story linesone of Tolstoys strokes of genius in. On the most obvious level, their stories begin on very different notes: Anna finds love with Vronsky just at the moment when Levin loses love with Kitty.

Annas decision to act on her feelings brings her thrills and excitement, whereas Levins decision brings him dejection and depression. These contrasts, however, only point out how similar the two characters are.Through these events, the novel suggests that forgiveness is an ongoing process that may grow or diminish in intensity.

He urges her to leave her husband and live with him instead. That evening. There happened to him at that instant what does happen to people when they are unexpectedly caught in something very disgraceful. Vronsky is passionate and caring toward Anna but clearly disappointed when their affair forces him to give up his dreams of career advancement.

NATHALIE from Henderson
Look over my other articles. I have a variety of hobbies, like do it yourself. I fancy kookily.
>