The question of judgment and sympathies in Anna Karenina is one that seems to become more complicated each time I read the novel. The basic problem with locating the voice of judgment is that throughout the novel, there are places where we feel less than comfortable with the seemingly straightforward, at times even didactic presentation of Anna and Vronsky's fall into sin alongside Levin's constant moral struggle. As Anna's story unfolds in its episodic manner within the context of the rest of the novel, Tolstoy seems to be trying to make the fact of her guilt more and more clear to us; at the same time though, we have more and more difficulty in tracing out the specific locus of that guilt. In a novel as consummately constructed as this one is, we are tempted to look for places where the undercurrents of the text, the places where the text takes on its own life and force, run against, or at least complicate, the discernment of authorial judgment. By closely examining Tolstoy's treatment of Anna's moral crisis as compared with his handling of Levin, we might attempt to unravel the book's rather layered and complex system of condemnation.
The novel's epigraph sets a certain tone for us before we even begin reading; the biblically inflected "Vengeance is mine; I will repay," plants in our heads the idea that wrong will be done and punishment exacted. Indeed, we come across a wrong in the very first lines of the opening chapter, in Stepan Arkadyich's dalliance with the French governess, which has thrown the Oblonsky house into "confusion."(1) Tolstoy's descriptions of Stepan Arkadyich as a pleasant, honest, well-liked bon vivant seem at times to drip with contempt. He is "lazy and mischievous"(14), his life...
... middle of paper ...
...he end, perhaps because Tolstoy was a better writer than he was true moralist, I'm not sure that Tolstoy ever reconciled the novel's judgment of Anna with his own sympathy and love for her. The result is a novel divided, uneasy with the Œvengefulness' of its own condemnation, perhaps proud of its over-riding message of living for truth and "the good"(817) in life, but ultimately unable to fully convince us that it gravitates toward its own confused and forced moral center.
Works Cited and Consulted
Cherneshevsky, Nikolai. "The Anthropological Principle in Philosophy" in Edie, Scanlan and Zeldin, eds., Russian Philosophy Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1965.
Tolstoy, Leo. Anna Karenina, trans. Constance Garnett New York: The Modern Library, 1993.
Turgenev, Ivan. Sketches From a Hunter's Album, trans. Richard Freeborn London: Penguin Books, 1990.
Napoleon Bonaparte ruled in France from 1789 to 1815. Napoleon came to power in 1789 and immediately became a powerful figure in the French government. However, some thought Napoleon was such a great leader. The Napoleonic Empire started to grow France’s territories. Some might have believed that Napoleon was too eager with his rule, while losing and failing to succeed against the power of England, in an attempt to blockade their trade, and of Russia, where he led his army to a defeat and retreat back to France. Even in his success over Spain, the battle still costed Napoleon and his army in men and resources. Napoleon was mostly viewed as a powerful and militaristic leader in some aspects, but others saw him as a coward and terrible leader in other ways.
Svidrigailov is one of the most unfathomable characters in Crime and Punishment. As the novel goes on, Svidrigailov’s pursuit of Dunya progresses into sheer harassment. After eavesdropping on Raskolnikov’s confession to Sonya, he uses his newly acquired information to lure Dunya into his room. Svidrigailov proceeds to promise help to Raskolnikov if she will give him her hand in marriage. He then threatens to rape her when she tries to run away. Right when Svidrigailov appears to be purely evil, he surprises us all when his rational side kicks in and allows Dunya to leave. Although he may seem to be the cold-hearted villain of the book, his good deeds cannot go unnoticed. It cannot be forgotten that he is willing to give Dunya the three thousand rubbles in his wife’s will and offers ten thousand rubbles to help Dunya because he thinks her marriage will be a disadvantage to her in the end. Once Katerina Ivanonva dies, Svidrigailov also promises to pay for the funeral arrangements and to provide for the children, who will be sent to an orphanage. Although...
...truly is through an act of violence. Gradually, like Marmeladov, she realizes that on judgment day, the first shall be last and the last shall be first. O’Connor and Dostoevsky developed two pieces of literature that inevitably awaken their readers. All their readers must face their own pride and prejudice both in relating with the characters’ feelings and admitting their own feeling of superiority over these flawed characters. Both of these brilliant writers effectively strike their readers with their shared idea that it is only by the grace of God that anyone can be saved.
Napoleon was a military general that participated in multiple war victories. His interests included history, law, and mathematics. His strengths as a leader benefitted in planning financial, legal, and military plans. His aspiring attitude made him believe he was destined to be the savior of France (Coffin & Stacey, 494). He favored a republic over a constitutional monarchy. When Napoleon came to power, he immediately consolidated personal power by overthrowing the five-man Directory and created a Republic. Napoleon used his status and power during the Revolution to bring out and surface Revolution ideals and help his people. Napoleon’s role in European history was the savior of the French Revolution due to the fact he accomplished most objectives that the people hoped for. Goals of the French Revolution included overthrowing the old regime of an absolute monarch, write a basic and worthy constitution, and give more rights to the third estate and limit the first and second estates power in the Estates-General.
...he destitution and demoralization of the citizens of Petrograd. Andrei, the character with the most honor and virtue, still finds ruin because of his affiliation with the immoral politic. All morality is beaten out of the characters with the most potential for it by the dire circumstances of their lives. An excellent, emotionally moving story, this novel leaves no doubt as to the author's feelings about the path of destruction down which socialism leads.
Shakespeare, William. “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar.” Elements of Literature: Kylene Beers. Austin: Holt, 2009. 842-963. Print.
...er this simple condemnation of Ivan, Tolstoy forces us, unwittingly, to view the world through a similarly closed mindset. This allows the reader to feel the visceral results of this mindset. We enter the chapter confronted by the specter of a dead man, but never have to confront the idea of death because the deluge of empirical details numbs our emotions. We are like Pyotr Ivanovich whose emotions are "chilled" at the funeral by the quotidian task of fixing a broken ottoman (42). But we are also allowed to see how apparently innocuous this attitude is from the inside - there is no immediately apparent harm done by the narrator's perspective in the first chapter. By allowing the reader to feel this, Tolstoy shows the reader that this is frequently an unidentified problem that we all fall into, and not one that we should easily ignore in ourselves.
A ruler's reputation comes from the change that he inflicts upon his subjects, territory, and surrounding lands. Napoleon Bonaparte rose into power during the French Revolution, causing drastic changes not only to France, but to the rest of Europe as well. His domestic and foreign policies were not always successful, but his ability to rule was undeniable. From his rising in power and reform of France, up until his military defeat in Russia, Napoleon succeeded in gaining a considerate amount of power and control.
Some believe that Napoleon is a selfish tyrant but really, he is a hero to many people of his country. Napoleon has helped his own people and brought peace back to France. He was known for his knowledge and respected everyone’s customs. There is also a painting of Napoleon riding a horse to show he was very heroic. If Napoleon was to be a tyrant, he would not have done so much for his empire.
Of the two protagonists of the novel, Anna Karenin and Constantine Levin, Levin is the one I admire most. Directly depicted as an honest, moral man, Levin is well liked among people he meets and does not try to escape to a fantasy world as Anna did. The novel goes in-depth by indirectly depicting him to be a philosophical thinker and an atheist, who is torn apart by his beliefs. The manner Tolstoy describes Levin is appealing, for I admire all of the qualities he possesses and that is why I chose him for my character of study. By using both direct and indirect characterizations, Tolstoy aimed to depict Levin as the role model for Russians in the eighteenth century.
The rise of Napoleon Bonaparte is a magnificent illustration of skillful character meeting with overwhelming opportunities to form a supreme leader. His ambition was led primarily by impulse, not a set of ideals or connection to any structure. The vacillating government of France throughout the Revolution provided opportunities which had not previously been available. The opportunities available during the Revolution were mainly in the military. This favored Napoleon because he was mentally able and willing to put in the extra effort to win essential battles. Since childhood, Napoleon had a strong ambitious character that flourished into mathematical skills to help him succeed in seizing opportunities that arose. What he lacked however, was significant ideology. Any choice Napoleon made that involved France, the church, or social class was strictly aimed to gain influence. As a result, France was a mere vessel of power he manipulated to pursue his true goal: supreme power. Napoleon Bonaparte embodied the characteristics of a true opportunist that gained enormous amount of power for himself during the Revolution by translating military success into political matter with little to no regard to the losses of others.
Napoleon came at a time when society was struggling to gain equality in education and religion. He fulfilled that void in society and gained respect in the process. He was a military expert from experience and from
Shakespeare has a very clever way of writing tragedies by always using the same five acts; exposition, complication, climax, resolution and catastrophe. From the background information, to the rising action, followed by the climactic act, which is attempted to be resolved, and results in the catastrophe. The format is an interesting technique that keeps the reader indulged. Julius Caesar was just one of the many tragic plays that William Shakespeare wrote using this technique.
Perhaps one of the most striking scenes in Anna Karenina is that of Kitty and Levin’s silent declarations of love to each other, etched out cryptically in chalk on a card table, with each understanding innately the exact words the other was saying (362). With the relationship between Kitty and Levin serving as Tolstoy’s model for a strong and successful love, it appears odd that such a relationship should be founded on silence, and in such sharp contrast to the chatter of Society surrounding the couple at the party. How then are we to understand the significance of conversation in the novel, if the most sincere relationships and understandings are not founded upon dialogue, but on unspoken knowledge? Entire subplots and themes are conveyed through conversations between the characters—the peasant problem and farm management, religion, marriage and faithfulness. Everyone is trying to grasp what a good life is, but the ideas expressed in conversation, however, appear quite often to contradict both the inner monologue of the characters and their actions, or fall pathetically short of expressing the power of the feelings of characters. For most of the characters, neither Society banter nor intellectual discourse does justice to their real passions, and even personal exchanges are steeped in insincerity. Unless they find a means to express their passions some other way, they are doomed to a life of dissatisfaction at best, or a tragic end at worst.
In the novel Anna Karenina , Tolstoy leads the reader through Anna Arkadyevna Karenin's life and all the people who surround her. The reader follows Anna as she sorts out a fight between her brother Stepan and his wife Dolly. Next the reader finds themselves trailing Anna as she dances away from a Moscow ball with Count Vronsky's heart. The path this novel takes then forks as the reader begins to follow Levin and his pursuit of the young and beautiful Kitty who was once a friend of Anna's before Vronsky. The story bounces back and forth between these two characters as Anna plunges into an affair with Vronsky that produces an illegitimate child, and Levin marries his true love Kitty. Anna then finds herself in a divorce resulting from her affair while Levin and Kitty are expecting their first child. The reader follows Anna and Levin through marriage, divorce, childbirth, death, heartbreak and utter happiness. In the novel Anna Karenina , the narrator gives the reader a view of various characters true natures through indirect characterization.