Scan barcode
cheesebagel's review against another edition
5.0
Anna Karenina was the first of Tolstoy's novels (and only the second of his total works -- I read "The Death of Ivan Ilyich" for a short fiction class in undergrad) that I've read and man, the hype is well-deserved. I absolutely adored this book, which I was not expecting.
Usually I find it slightly more difficult to motivate myself to read a classic novel, only because it’s a slower read and takes more concentration, but afterwards I generally admire the story and even reread it. This novel was, I think, the first (with maaaaaybe the exception of Dracula) where I could hardly put it down and then, when I wasn’t reading, would think about it constantly. I have no idea how Tolstoy managed to write a book with such a slow plot and so many chapters about dull subjects, like farming and economics, that was simultaneously an absolute pleasure to read. This is where I should mention that I read a fantastic translation of this book. I picked it totally randomly — it was literally just the copy that I’d had in my house since high school — but the cover is plastered with praise for the edition, translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (published by Penguin Classics). I obviously can’t compare it to other translations because I haven’t read any others, but it does seem to me that these translators succeeded in conveying the elegance and skill in Tolstoy’s prose, purely based on how lovely and musical even the parts about farming were.
I read several of the 1 star reviews on Goodreads because I was curious to see what the main criticism of this book was. For the most part, it seems like people either didn’t finish it at all and just rated it anyway, or complained primarily about the pace and said it was ‘boring.’ I don’t condemn them for this opinion at all, honestly. I think you need to be a certain type of reader to enjoy plotless fiction and it turns out I am one such reader. But I do think this book was much more of a character study than anything else. I was surprised how little of the book was written from Anna’s perspective given that she’s the titular character. I suppose it’s only named after her because it’s her transgression that’s the focal point of the story. The book has several important characters from whose points of view we come to understand their anxieties and innermost thoughts. I found them all endearing and richly imagined. Each one appealed to me for a different reason and they genuinely felt like real people, which, in my opinion, is a mark of a talented writer. I loved the way Tolstoy characterized Anna, even if it was a bit idealized… but I think the point is for everyone to be in love with her so…
I rated this 5 stars first, because I loved it, but also I think because it surprised me so much for all the aforementioned reasons. There were, however, a couple of things that I didn’t like even though they didn’t compromise my rating. For one, the timing of the book was confusing. Especially at the beginning, I struggled to figure out how much time had passed between one event and the next. I think, roughly, the book spans about 3 years, but this really wasn’t clear to me until the very end. What saddened me the most, though, is that, for some reason, Tolstoy wrote so little about the two most important events of the novel. ** I’m about to spoil the end here so skip down if you don’t want to know what happens. ** The transition between Anna and Vronsky meeting and suddenly being helplessly in love was far to rapid for my taste. For an 800 page book, you would think that the escalation of the love affair would not be brushed over, which makes me think it was intentional although I cannot understand why. It was the same with Anna’s suicide and the aftermath. There are barely a few paragraphs written about how her death impacted the members of society with whom she was close and, again, I’m confused as to why it was done this way because to me that seems like the most important part. Why would Tolstoy write such a tragic ending for her and then neglect to explore the impact? I can’t even begin to comprehend.
I’m going to wrap this up because I want to start reading my next book, but in sum, I would recommend this book quite highly if only because of how much I enjoyed it. It’s certainly not for everyone, but if you favour elegant prose over a quick plot, you’d probably like it. It took me a little while to read, but I carried it around with me everywhere if only to read a few pages at a time because it was so ensnaring. I’m definitely going to read War and Peace in the future in the hopes that it’s just as good.
https://thebookmartian.wordpress.com/2021/06/10/anna-karenina-by-liev-tolstoy-review/
Usually I find it slightly more difficult to motivate myself to read a classic novel, only because it’s a slower read and takes more concentration, but afterwards I generally admire the story and even reread it. This novel was, I think, the first (with maaaaaybe the exception of Dracula) where I could hardly put it down and then, when I wasn’t reading, would think about it constantly. I have no idea how Tolstoy managed to write a book with such a slow plot and so many chapters about dull subjects, like farming and economics, that was simultaneously an absolute pleasure to read. This is where I should mention that I read a fantastic translation of this book. I picked it totally randomly — it was literally just the copy that I’d had in my house since high school — but the cover is plastered with praise for the edition, translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (published by Penguin Classics). I obviously can’t compare it to other translations because I haven’t read any others, but it does seem to me that these translators succeeded in conveying the elegance and skill in Tolstoy’s prose, purely based on how lovely and musical even the parts about farming were.
I read several of the 1 star reviews on Goodreads because I was curious to see what the main criticism of this book was. For the most part, it seems like people either didn’t finish it at all and just rated it anyway, or complained primarily about the pace and said it was ‘boring.’ I don’t condemn them for this opinion at all, honestly. I think you need to be a certain type of reader to enjoy plotless fiction and it turns out I am one such reader. But I do think this book was much more of a character study than anything else. I was surprised how little of the book was written from Anna’s perspective given that she’s the titular character. I suppose it’s only named after her because it’s her transgression that’s the focal point of the story. The book has several important characters from whose points of view we come to understand their anxieties and innermost thoughts. I found them all endearing and richly imagined. Each one appealed to me for a different reason and they genuinely felt like real people, which, in my opinion, is a mark of a talented writer. I loved the way Tolstoy characterized Anna, even if it was a bit idealized… but I think the point is for everyone to be in love with her so…
I rated this 5 stars first, because I loved it, but also I think because it surprised me so much for all the aforementioned reasons. There were, however, a couple of things that I didn’t like even though they didn’t compromise my rating. For one, the timing of the book was confusing. Especially at the beginning, I struggled to figure out how much time had passed between one event and the next. I think, roughly, the book spans about 3 years, but this really wasn’t clear to me until the very end. What saddened me the most, though, is that, for some reason, Tolstoy wrote so little about the two most important events of the novel. ** I’m about to spoil the end here so skip down if you don’t want to know what happens. ** The transition between Anna and Vronsky meeting and suddenly being helplessly in love was far to rapid for my taste. For an 800 page book, you would think that the escalation of the love affair would not be brushed over, which makes me think it was intentional although I cannot understand why. It was the same with Anna’s suicide and the aftermath. There are barely a few paragraphs written about how her death impacted the members of society with whom she was close and, again, I’m confused as to why it was done this way because to me that seems like the most important part. Why would Tolstoy write such a tragic ending for her and then neglect to explore the impact? I can’t even begin to comprehend.
I’m going to wrap this up because I want to start reading my next book, but in sum, I would recommend this book quite highly if only because of how much I enjoyed it. It’s certainly not for everyone, but if you favour elegant prose over a quick plot, you’d probably like it. It took me a little while to read, but I carried it around with me everywhere if only to read a few pages at a time because it was so ensnaring. I’m definitely going to read War and Peace in the future in the hopes that it’s just as good.
https://thebookmartian.wordpress.com/2021/06/10/anna-karenina-by-liev-tolstoy-review/
peppersgirl2010's review against another edition
1.0
I knew this was going to be depressing but seriously?! I read all of those pages and skimmed through all those Russian names for that ending?! Ugh!!! I hate this book...now I'm going to go eat ice cream and cry...
internetnomads's review against another edition
3.0
My only criticism of this excellent book is that I wish it was about 150 pages shorter. That Tolstoy, he do go on a bit, don't he?
mudder17's review against another edition
4.0
4-4.5
This was my first foray into Russian literature and I'm glad I started with this one. The Russian names were challenging for me, but Maggie Gyllenhaal is a wonderful reader and between her and the translation, I felt this book was very accessible. I think I might have gotten even more out of it if I had been reading it with someone and able to discuss it. Although this is called Anna Karenina, Kitty and Levin is what made the story for me. I loved Levin and his questioning of everything, and when he made socially awkward mistakes, I so felt for him because it was so relatable for me. Watching him come to grips with his own faith was inspiring and made me love him all the more. Poor Anna--I just watched her spiral downhill and felt so bad for her. In another time, things could have been so different. While I don't condone her affair, the fact is that she entered into a loveless marriage with a man who was 20 years older. I'd like to think that if she were living today, she could have legally and much more easily have obtained a divorce as well as access to her son. It was frustrating that there was such a double standard with men and women at the time, so that Vronsky could continue going out with friends, but she was basically isolated from everyone except for him. And he couldn't see it and only saw how much he gave up for her. Anyway, I did very much enjoy this book and will have to think about which classic tome I want to tackle next!
This was my first foray into Russian literature and I'm glad I started with this one. The Russian names were challenging for me, but Maggie Gyllenhaal is a wonderful reader and between her and the translation, I felt this book was very accessible. I think I might have gotten even more out of it if I had been reading it with someone and able to discuss it. Although this is called Anna Karenina, Kitty and Levin is what made the story for me. I loved Levin and his questioning of everything, and when he made socially awkward mistakes, I so felt for him because it was so relatable for me. Watching him come to grips with his own faith was inspiring and made me love him all the more. Poor Anna--I just watched her spiral downhill and felt so bad for her. In another time, things could have been so different. While I don't condone her affair, the fact is that she entered into a loveless marriage with a man who was 20 years older. I'd like to think that if she were living today, she could have legally and much more easily have obtained a divorce as well as access to her son. It was frustrating that there was such a double standard with men and women at the time, so that Vronsky could continue going out with friends, but she was basically isolated from everyone except for him. And he couldn't see it and only saw how much he gave up for her. Anyway, I did very much enjoy this book and will have to think about which classic tome I want to tackle next!
hakchunni's review against another edition
4.5
It's actually so long it's a little hard to get through i'm ngl but it is appropriately hyped
joanybaloney's review against another edition
3.0
This beast of a book packs a wallop. As in, if you hit somebody on the head with it, you may be liable for homicide. Other than its sheer size, the sheer amount of detail and conversation contained in this book is impressive. Long books can be good and bad.
The good? We follow various characters around, most of them upper middle-class to the aristocracy of Russia. We have Stefan Oblonsky, a jolly, likable adulterer, and his put-upon wife, Dolly, who is the elder sister of Kitty, a young, slightly naive debutante, who is torn between Vronsky, a polished colonel, and Levin, a robust farmer. There are also various other friends and family - a cast of characters so long, I kept instinctively trying to flip to the back of my copy to see if there was a Cast of Characters, like in any of the books in A Song of Ice and Fire.
These characters develop. We get to know their innermost selves, their penchants, their daily lives, their relationships, their shortcomings and triumphs, and their political views. The latter is what marked this book down a star because while I initially found the discussion somewhat interesting, as being revealing of the time and place of the book's setting, eventually I found my head jerking and drooping in that odd, uncomfortable, drowsy trying-to-fall-asleep-when-I-am-not-prone head bob.
There are also quite a few discussions on farming and the relationship between the peasants, landowners, and the land. Similarly, these were interesting . . . until Levin all but destroyed any notion I had of ever reading about a farmer again. Seriously, Levin. You talk and think a lot. Still, through Levin's philosophical, political, and social musings, we see an interesting picture of a man who likes to argue and have intelligent conversation, but is not quite good at either capturing his own opinion or expressing it eloquently and clearly. I can sympathize here, never having been good at the verbal art. And Levin's musings on religion, morality, and philosophy towards the latter half of the book I found fascinating, as while modern books these days tend to avoid discussion of religion whatsoever, since apparently any notion of religious doctrine or discussion in a fictional book is anathema to today's tolerant coexist-er, I liked seeing the struggle of a man attempting to improve upon himself - not purely because of his religious beliefs, in his case - and fail, only to struggle, down to the very depths of his heart and soul.
The domestic details and discussions were also very interesting. Tolstoy almost evoked Jane Austen to me in certain places, what with the attention he gave to society, relationships, and the link between the two.
My main problem was the titular character herself. I understand, to the best of my ability, and appreciate the struggle she goes through throughout the book. I am enthusiastic that Tolstoy, at that time and place, understood the unfairness of Anna having to choose between child and lover, that a woman who enters into an affair is locked out of "high" society whereas a man in the same position (see Anna's brother) is not. However, Anna in the latter half of the book, was miserable and uglyjealous. This depiction of jealousy is realistic, as there are people out there who become so overcome and transformed by their misery and jealousy that they wish for no happiness on Earth, but her actions and wicked thoughts towards Kitty, her triumph in swaying Levin, her purported love for her son, whom she did not choose over her lover, her inability to love her infant daughter - I could not understand this woman. This woman, who was depicted as being charming, friendly, admirable in the beginning half of the book, that she fell to such depths - that frightened me. And therein I admired Tolstoy's skill in how Anna's transformation took place. Still, it doesn't mean I delighted in reading it. I wanted to tear out those pages, figuratively give her a slap in the face. Of course, I've wanted to slap every character in the face at some point, so there you have it: Tolstoy can write realistic characters.
Still, you should read Anna Karenina. Truly, a book ahead of its time, in how women are depicted, if you can manage to get through the constant discussions of politics, land, society, and Tolstoy's not-so-subtle views.
The good? We follow various characters around, most of them upper middle-class to the aristocracy of Russia. We have Stefan Oblonsky, a jolly, likable adulterer, and his put-upon wife, Dolly, who is the elder sister of Kitty, a young, slightly naive debutante, who is torn between Vronsky, a polished colonel, and Levin, a robust farmer. There are also various other friends and family - a cast of characters so long, I kept instinctively trying to flip to the back of my copy to see if there was a Cast of Characters, like in any of the books in A Song of Ice and Fire.
These characters develop. We get to know their innermost selves, their penchants, their daily lives, their relationships, their shortcomings and triumphs, and their political views. The latter is what marked this book down a star because while I initially found the discussion somewhat interesting, as being revealing of the time and place of the book's setting, eventually I found my head jerking and drooping in that odd, uncomfortable, drowsy trying-to-fall-asleep-when-I-am-not-prone head bob.
There are also quite a few discussions on farming and the relationship between the peasants, landowners, and the land. Similarly, these were interesting . . . until Levin all but destroyed any notion I had of ever reading about a farmer again. Seriously, Levin. You talk and think a lot. Still, through Levin's philosophical, political, and social musings, we see an interesting picture of a man who likes to argue and have intelligent conversation, but is not quite good at either capturing his own opinion or expressing it eloquently and clearly. I can sympathize here, never having been good at the verbal art. And Levin's musings on religion, morality, and philosophy towards the latter half of the book I found fascinating, as while modern books these days tend to avoid discussion of religion whatsoever, since apparently any notion of religious doctrine or discussion in a fictional book is anathema to today's tolerant coexist-er, I liked seeing the struggle of a man attempting to improve upon himself - not purely because of his religious beliefs, in his case - and fail, only to struggle, down to the very depths of his heart and soul.
The domestic details and discussions were also very interesting. Tolstoy almost evoked Jane Austen to me in certain places, what with the attention he gave to society, relationships, and the link between the two.
My main problem was the titular character herself. I understand, to the best of my ability, and appreciate the struggle she goes through throughout the book. I am enthusiastic that Tolstoy, at that time and place, understood the unfairness of Anna having to choose between child and lover, that a woman who enters into an affair is locked out of "high" society whereas a man in the same position (see Anna's brother) is not. However, Anna in the latter half of the book, was miserable and uglyjealous. This depiction of jealousy is realistic, as there are people out there who become so overcome and transformed by their misery and jealousy that they wish for no happiness on Earth, but her actions and wicked thoughts towards Kitty, her triumph in swaying Levin, her purported love for her son, whom she did not choose over her lover, her inability to love her infant daughter - I could not understand this woman. This woman, who was depicted as being charming, friendly, admirable in the beginning half of the book, that she fell to such depths - that frightened me. And therein I admired Tolstoy's skill in how Anna's transformation took place. Still, it doesn't mean I delighted in reading it. I wanted to tear out those pages, figuratively give her a slap in the face. Of course, I've wanted to slap every character in the face at some point, so there you have it: Tolstoy can write realistic characters.
Still, you should read Anna Karenina. Truly, a book ahead of its time, in how women are depicted, if you can manage to get through the constant discussions of politics, land, society, and Tolstoy's not-so-subtle views.
authorguy's review against another edition
4.0
Yes, it's a classic but to me the novel has been overpraised. I've read this book and War And Peace. With both books Tolstoy writes an overall classic and at times gripping story but then ruins the story in the last couple of chapters. he indulges his penchant for going off on a tangent where he raises the mask of the narrator and exposes the writer and his opinions. With W&P, the last couple of chapters descended into a ong and boring political discourse. It was like Leo saying 'It's my book and I'll say what I want." With Anna Karenina, it was Leo behind the paper-thin mask of Levin discussing HIS religious viewpoint as to the nature of God and faith and the inherent goodness of faith in God, with faith separated from reason as the nature of goodness in the world. As an agnostic heavily leaning toward atheism, I didn't buy it.
But the description of how Anna descended into depression which ultimately led to her suicide--and the vindictiveness with which she planned her suicide to make Vronsky pay for his imagined affairs and slights to her (although he was a bit self-centered, wasn't he?) read like a contemporary psychological textbook on the nature of depression and suicide.
But as with W&P, Anna Karenina could have benefited from a strong and ruthless editor cutting the fat and unnecessary plot side trips that just served to make the novel--in my opinion--unwieldy. I'm sure both novels cut have been cut by a few hundred pages which would only have improved them both. But, I got thr0ugh both of them and may even re-read them someday.
But I will close this review by saying, as a novelist myself, I've been greatly influenced by Tolstoy's writing. His genius is in writing scenes with characters that you can imagine happening in real life. The dialogue is how real people in those situations talk, the bits of business he gives his characters to do in scenes you can clearly imagine people dong in real life. I'm writing this without the benefit of the book in my hand, though. I might come back and edit this review with an example from the book. But overall, I highly recommend reading this novel if you're into reading the great classic tomes of fiction.
But the description of how Anna descended into depression which ultimately led to her suicide--and the vindictiveness with which she planned her suicide to make Vronsky pay for his imagined affairs and slights to her (although he was a bit self-centered, wasn't he?) read like a contemporary psychological textbook on the nature of depression and suicide.
But as with W&P, Anna Karenina could have benefited from a strong and ruthless editor cutting the fat and unnecessary plot side trips that just served to make the novel--in my opinion--unwieldy. I'm sure both novels cut have been cut by a few hundred pages which would only have improved them both. But, I got thr0ugh both of them and may even re-read them someday.
But I will close this review by saying, as a novelist myself, I've been greatly influenced by Tolstoy's writing. His genius is in writing scenes with characters that you can imagine happening in real life. The dialogue is how real people in those situations talk, the bits of business he gives his characters to do in scenes you can clearly imagine people dong in real life. I'm writing this without the benefit of the book in my hand, though. I might come back and edit this review with an example from the book. But overall, I highly recommend reading this novel if you're into reading the great classic tomes of fiction.
hailslayton's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
emotional
funny
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
3.5
Manic Pixie Train Girl
meekkee's review against another edition
3.0
Not gonna lie, it was difficult to get through many of the philosophy heavy-parts -- of which there were many. If what makes a book a classic though is how it stays with you long after you've read it, then this is definitely worthy of the name. The one problem is that the mood of most of this book was fairly heavy and pessimistic of human nature and romance. While having that cloud hovering around me the rest of the day had me thinking deeper thoughts than I'm usually accustomed to, it was kind of a bummer. Love lasts as long as beauty does, and sometimes not even until then. Society, poverty, human insecurities and selfishness, anything can get in the way of a happy ending off the beaten path. This book just about kicked the idea of happily ever after out of the park, if it had not been for the story of Levin and the resolution of his story at the end of the book.