Here is my take on "Lion" Tolsstoy's War and Peace: ua-cam.com/video/lDPSSYUSRb0/v-deo.html More Russian content (Dostoesvky, Turgenev etc.): ua-cam.com/play/PLyKyeehuJVIHnoH6S-8JW_ZY01yfceGKa.html
This is one of the most insightful analysis of Anna Karenina I’ve ever encountered, filled with wisdom and truth and also mixed with good humor. Really appreciate your sharing this with us!
Why Vronsky tried to kill himself was and still is an enigma to me. I think it was because he realised that he was a lesser man than her husband Alexei, who he had looked down on, but I’m not sure. I agree though that Alexi was a complex character as someone had commented, not just an epitome of hypocrisy.
I think it was just shame coupled with the stress of the pregnancy almost killing Anna. For all his faults, he does love her. Vronsky is a complex character that has both the coldness to play with women's feelings, but also love a woman deeply. If he died, maybe Anna would've returned to Karenin and their daughter would have a normal life.
Anna’s husband isn’t any nice man, Tolstoy basically wrote clearly he was coerced to marry Anna and all women repulsed him, he married her under social pressure and the main reason he didn’t want divorce is so his political career isn’t damaged as divorcing wasn’t really accepted by society. And that’s also the main reason Anna had a lover, not because Wronski is more handsome or is a soldier, but simply he needed a real person with emotion rather than a bureaucratic robot that only cared maintaining status quo.
Great video. Though I think you have missed some important points which is quite understandable since short videos are more succesful. I wll try to point out some of them in case anyone wants to know: -Alexie (Anna’s husband) has not always been very loving to Anna. He got married as if out of a duty which did not satisfy Anna’s emotinally driven soul. Also Alexie refused divorce a couple of times in order to torment Anna by making her position so unbearable. (But overall Anna was the one to blame imo) -Levin went through SO MUCH. My man was THE awkward overthinker with interest for philısophy. He grew up and overcome his shame and insecurities. And in the end with the help of belief he finally found peace. - Vronsky is not a shallow character or a typical bad boy. He was honestly in love with Anna till the very end and after her death. Yes he pushed Anna to immorality but did not force her in any way. He felt shame and responsability to Alexie, Anna, and even to society which he rebelled from. Eventhough he and Anna endleslly and mercileslly argued in last chapters he always felt sorry after. He put up with Anna’s unjustified jelousy and submitted to her wish to move to the place she wanted at the time she wanted in order to save their relationship. He also was unable to forgot or even move on after her death. So much more to add but this might be enough for now. Lovely channel, love your videos.
I fully agree with your points -- I also think the video is too quick to suggest that Tolstoy wanted to portray Anna's actions as wrong. In fact, I think he tries to stay neutral to her actions and instead explores the reasonings behind her actions - as well as the complex situation Anna finds herself in. He lets her actions develop into a tragedy because what she was trying to achieve was impossible in her society. I never got the impression that Tolstoy judged her - merely the society around her, which in fact, I think Tolstoy questions by having several characters own up to the ridiculousness of shunning women and not men for cheating. I have a sense that Tolstoy was a man of great empathy for all individuals -- without it, I can't see how he would have been able to write such a masterpiece on human psychology. While the summary is great, there are parts of the analysis which does not account for the impartial and 'observing' feature of Tolstoy's writing. He appears to me as an anthropologist of human emotions. He is not so much there to judge as to explore the emotional landscape of each of his characters and the situations leading them there / how they react differently to them. For instance, Kitty and Levin communicate way clearer about what upsets them. Whereas Vronsky and Anna never truly tell each other the issues they have (Anna's unbased jealousy and grief of basically losing her son and Vronsky feeling trapped and having his boundaries overstepped by the miserable Anna whom he still deeply loves). I also don't fully agree with 'conservative/moscow = warmth' and 'St. Petersburg/Modernism and beaucracy = coldness'. I think that is far too simple a take on the different locations and themes. When Stiva goes to St. Petersburg towards the end of the novel he feels warmth and openess and freedom compared to the stifling Moscow, which he says makes him feel a lot older and less vigorous. It really is down to the individual character and their current situation.
I liked your discussion of the trains. Trains are a symbol of modernity and technology. If the grass is always greener on the other side, trains are the medium by which we speedily rush to another pasture. They are instant gratification. So it is modernity that killed Anna.
You talk about how railways have made individuals too “eager”, messing up with their psyches - demanding things at a quicker pace. One could only wonder what the 21st century, with the IoT, AI will end up doing to us. Thank you for the analysis.
“Duty” and finding happiness in whatever life gives you. As in putting your hand to the plow. I’ve never read Tolstoy but now I’m very interested. Thank you for this presentation and it won’t matter at all that I know the ending.
I listened to this on headphones without thing the video. You had me laughing with your clever description. I can’t wait to watch it again. I’m sure it’ll be even funnier. Great work!
Amazing analysis of this epic story. Literally just finished it tonight after 5 months of reading. Quite a slog in parts but some very powerful moments. Thanks so much for making this.
Not relevant to the video, but I just realized how small this channel is, just listened to a few videos back to back thinking this is some old multi million subscriber channel. TLDR : Awesome content! I have a feeling your channel will blow up in popularity.
I started reading and got myself to the meeting in the train station but I wasn’t feeling it! Because of you I am going to restart this long read and finish. Thank you. Most of the other brilliant books that you have featured I sailed well with them even though you summary truly adds to my thoughts of the book as someone who has worked inside homes of these types of society.
There’s this thing with old novels (at least for me) where they’re hard to get into because nowadays we’re always conditioned to expect everything to be fast paced and constantly dopamine inducing back then people tended to take their time telling stories
@@Saber23 You can that again. I have now for myself like you created a conflict between the past and and the present. The past way of saying, doing, all that was so diferent to now. Now that I have the taste of the depth in which they sometimes went to say, do what needed to be said or done has made me very biased about those who wants to use a 1 minute tik tok to tell their story but the thing has picked up big time because you are right we either have lost the patience or the illusion of time or we are evolving to catch up with the speed at which we are alive😃. For all my reads now are 3 hours and up. I feel I get depth and my job can allow me to have this luxury. I will recommend what I am reading right now. This is a book by Jiddu Krishnamurti on the question of Freedom. He asks whether we are conscious of our conditioning such as religious, whether we can clean our mind of all that and start again idividually without the need of following a leader and being a disciple as both corrupt one another while doing so? He has alot of material in general to provoke ones thoughts. Give it a go but if you have then I am happy fir you. The book is “ Freedom from the known by Jiddu Krishnamurti”.
It's almost a meme: the bored wife is drawn to the excitement of some handsome, successful man giving her attention because he wants what he can't have. She leaves her husband and destroys her family and just when she thinks she has happiness and fulfillment in her grasp, her handsome lover grows bored and distant eventually moving on to someone else he can't have. This is a time-worn recipe for regret, looping over and over again in our society. Contrast with the women who figure out early that a good life, a fulfilling life isn't characterized by this excitement. It's not the sparkling, stimulating experience of a city life. It's the serene, wholesome experience of the country life. Almost every healthy woman in the West can have that latter life if she will just reach out and accept it, like Kitty, coming to her senses and accepting Levin.
Спасибо. Certainly one of the most concise and modern referenced analyses. Horseman Vronsky with his ‘Ferraries’. But allow me to pose a plot point that I think many readers, and analysts miss. When the station accident occurs. Everyone shocked (although Stiva quickly talks about the theater) and Vronsky takes leave of the group. No explanation. Only when he rejoins and they are walking away does the station master approach and ask about the money Vronsky had given. Initially he doesn’t tell anyone ‘wait, I’m going to donate money for the widow’. No. For all Vronsky intends it is an altruistic gesture. Apart from the station masters appearance on scene, no one, especially Anna would know. Hence did Vronsky aid in order to impress, or was it a routine gesture of him doing the ‘right thing’ as a Count and man of means?
I wondered about that, too. I feel like Vronsky often truly had good intentions but (as the other characters) he's driven by society. So maybe his wish to impress was way more subconscious while he himself thought he acted out of pure altruism?
Thanks for this and the previous videos on Russian literature! I read WP and AK decades ago and you refreshed my memory of both. Also reminded me that I should reread both. I prefer Tolstoy to Dostoevsky, though I have underestimated crazy Uncle Fred as a story teller. So back to Crime and Punishment, also.
UA-camrs-except PewDiePie-when they talk about books have nothing insightful or interesting to say about the books, it's almost as if they didn't even read the books. But, you're so insightful and interesting -I'm grateful.
🎯 Key points for quick navigation: 00:04 *📚 Introduction to Anna Karenina* - Overview of the novel's significance and Tolstoy's perspective on it, - Introduction to major themes and characters of the novel. 02:23 *🤵👰 Relationship Dynamics* - The complexities of marriage among aristocratic couples, - Dolly and Stiva's troubled relationship, Kitty and Levin's rocky start and eventual contentment, - Anna and Karenin's cold, distant marriage contrasted with Vronsky's passionate pursuit of Anna. 07:03 *💔 Anna’s Affair* - Anna succumbing to Vronsky’s pursuit leading to an affair, - The societal repercussions of the affair and Karenin's struggle with his wife's betrayal, - Anna's pregnancy with Vronsky's child and the breakdown of her marriage. 09:53 *🛤 Levin and Kitty's Love Story* - Levin's life post-rejection, Kitty's sickness and travels, - The rekindling of Levin and Kitty's relationship, their marriage, and life in the countryside. 13:33 *💔 Anna's Downfall* - Anna's increasing isolation and descent into paranoia and drug use, - The social ostracization and internal turmoil leading to her tragic suicide. 14:57 *📖 Analysis of Themes* - Exploration of themes of family, social norms, and the pursuit of happiness in "Anna Karenina", - The contrast between rural simplicity and urban complexity, and the inevitability of social judgment, - Tolstoy's view on the illusory nature of happiness and the importance of duty over personal fulfillment. Made with HARPA AI
I just finished the USSR 4 part War and Peace and watched your lecture on it. The went to this one since I have read Anna Karenina a few years(12?) ago and plan to re read it...You have been so helpful....a welcome channel of insight and knowledge... Thank-you.
Read the book and you have Very detailed it, spoilers and such :) Love your work though. Tolstoy carefully chose everyday, imperfect characters. Telling a lesson but calling for compassion, individualism, leaving things open ended.
Thank you for this summary/analysis. It unexpectedly at the end brought associations to other heroes of mine, Hamsun and Bergson. I sense - intuitively again - there's much good teaching to be found in this video, but the narration is too fast for my liking. I would prefer it to be slowed down a bit...So I guess I have to watch and listen a second time 😊
Happiness starts with the syllable hap which in Indo European language means fortune or luck as in the word happenstance which means coincidence. So it was a coincidence that brings Anna and Vronsky together in the train station for some happiness. What do you think? By the way, Omar al Sharif acted the Arabic version of the novel in ‘The River of Love’ before going international with the only woman whom he loved and ended up marrying. Thanks.
I learnt something new today. Happiness is accidental, chance and luck so it is rare. Most of the time I want to be content. Thanks again for the wonderful comment.
Happiness is shallow and depends on external circumstances. Not worth persuing it unless one wants to remain an unmatured kid splashing "happily" with warm water on a beach till the sunset and ensuing night starts to suck away all that apparent "happiness" of the sunny day. Strangely we often dream with such nostalgia for those days of our childhood .... Perhaps this is why I call the youth the most beautiful illusion.
Tolstoy apparently wrote this novel to encourage empathy for an adulteress- in other words, while she had acted immorally, one can empathise with her difficulty in an unhappy marriage. So while I love this novel, my favourite perhaps, I don't think it fully succeeds in providing an answer to unhappy relationships. Your conclusion sounds like her boring husband, that duty trumps happiness, and I don't believe this. The novel presents several problems with their society: that it contributed to Anna's suicide, and that there is no solution presented for incompatible partners who marry, but shouldn't have.
He does an excellent job of showing the hypocrisy of men since when they cheat they are expected to be forgiven. Boys will be boys suits them very well. And since they make up the rules, backed up with fists, what else can they do but make up lies about duty and virtue to punish the woman for doing what they themselves have done for millennia. But Tolstoy was not as generous as he appears. The "bad wife" must die one way or another. She CANNOT be allowed to get away with acting like men and so he kills her off by her own hand. Bad women must be or go crazy. They CANNOT win. Luckily women have had their eyes opened since then.
My goodness you sound just like Anna. Villifying her husband. At the end, Anna committed suicide as a sort of a revenge at Vronsky. She hates the idea that Vronsky can leave her and love another woman so she clings to him too much. And at the end, it was her "boring husband" who took care of both "Anna K." (Anna's daughter) and his son. Anna's husband is complex too.
@@outofoblivionproductions4015 Well I agree. I think their's is unfixable because it's a loveless one. Anna married him because her aunt says so and that she'll have a (better) place in society. Karenin married her because he's convinced that he's doing the right thing. Then they find themselves trapped in a loveless marriage.
This is closer to a summary than a review. As I see it Vronsky and Kitty's rationship are used to explain why Anna and Karenin's relationship did not work as the same would have happened if Vronsky would have been pressured to marry this cute girl who did not defamilarize or excite him. I don't think that Anna's main attraction was her marriage. I think it was her charm and beauty. And in my view you don't fully explain Anna's suicide which is closer to a reckless accident. She does not want to die. She wants to be shaken out of her paranoia and her fear about Vronsky leaving her --- a fear that is completely groundless @ she knows it rationally. That which pushes Anna to her suicide is which pushed her to marry an evil beurocrat like Karenin. Karenin is not a nice guy! He is the epitemy of fake virtuosity. He does not care about Anna. He cares that she humiliated him...
Agree except for a few details. I don't think Karenin was that evil of a man. He was deeply struggling with emotion but to me seemed to care for Anna in his way in the beginning. But yes, eventually what drove him was society's views...as it happened to nearly all characters. Karenin definitely was not the right man for Anna and had his very obvious flaws but I think Tolstoy really wanted to make clear that he is also not the cold evil machine Anna perceives him as
I think Anna was punished bc she was a woman. Oblonsky was also a father and a husband and he wasn’t rejected by society for his multiple affairs. They are siblings who both cheated but had very very different fates and the biggest player in their differentiating fates was the way society held men vs women at the time.
If I may offer a small counter point. You could argue that Levin rejects religion if you wanted, but he doesn't reject faith. He concludes that all faiths must have a singular root in goodness and even the divine and decides to live in accordance with those idiles. But he keeps his faith to himself.
After reading the book i really enjoyed the ideas of it discussed by you. After all using technology to watch great videos and educate ourselves is not that bad😃. Thanks alot❤
Today I finally finished reading Anna Karenine, a book I tried reading many times but often stopped halway through. Your analysis was really good, on point and sensible. I do think Levin's plot was often tiresome. I think his PoV was more interesting at the time but for modern audiences he can come off often as a know-it-all, or someone who think they are always right. At time I did like him and I thought he was interesting, but overall I could remove him from the story and not feel like I missed much. Anna's plot is what really made me like this novel and what really stood the test of time in this book, IMO. She's a deeply complex character, flawed in every way, and she does something that many female characters in narratives don't do because it's a taboo: she's a bad mother. She leaves Seryozha without second thoughts once she dedicates herself to Vronsky, she only remember him once her situation with Vronsky worsen. She doesn't like her daughter and is not shy to admit it and doesn't even try to be a mother to her. She claims later that she won't accept a divorce if it means leaving Seryoza to Aleksey, but I honestly saw that as her no wanting to give him a "win". In the end her desire was to just hurt people. She suicides because she wants to cause Vronsky pain. At least consciously, this desire was bigger than a desire to escape her reality. She also did not consider her children at all when making the decision to kill herself. She is, for all intents, the "villain" of the novel, albeit you can also say that society made her that way when it disallowed her from pursuing her happyness.
Thank you for your entertaining and erudite analysis on "Anna Karenina" and also Turgeniev`s "Father and Sons". What would you recommend among many different film versions of the former?
I think it wasn't true love , it was lust and deprivation Tolstoy tried to reflect how inventions have a bad effect on personal life as the situation is now . Everyone is on his phone
Thanks for this. Very well done. I especilly like your injections of bits of homour. I found this post just as I was finishing the novel. Of course it is a great piece, but if I may, I found the last part of the book being almost totally dedicated to finding God, to be a little much. And then, on top of it, throwing the find out the window and just living as is expected of us. But then, who am I to criticize the great Tolstoy. Again, great job, thank you.
That part about god, I think Tolstoy himself struggling with life. Tolstoy did throw things into his novels. For example the end of war and peace he goes into this tirade that there’s no free will and questions history and all.
@@Fiction_Beast I tend to go along with 'no free will'. I mean if you really think about it, all of your actions and thoughts are a product of your education, upbringing, likes, dislikes, experiences, etc., etc...I would even add your physical appearance...
I agree free will as most people think of the complete freedom to decide their own path in life doesn’t exist. But I believe there’s an spontaneous force in nature and within us, a kind of tension and we have the freedom to stretch that tension or ease it. For example I have a delicious pizza in front of me but I can refrain myself from eating it for some time. I guess you could say my ability to endure hunger is predetermined by nature for time of scarcity. So I believe in free will in a limited sense. When it comes to my values and beliefs, you’re right, for the most part you’re product of your culture.
Thanks, now I don't have to read the novel about unhappy women. War and Peace had some of those themes also. Had Russia a much more extensive railroad network they might not have lost WW I. In Germany they were fighting a modern industrial state while they were still in transition from an agricultural economy, hence their soldiers were sent to the front line without guns in some cases. The German military took over the entire German economy to fight and win the war. The Russians could not do that because their military leaders did not know a machine tool from a turnip.
I just rewatched the video and honestly as famous as the opening quote about happy and unhappy families is all the evidence points to it being complete and utter nonsense there are definitely constants and absolutes within unhappy families and within happy families there’s also sometimes things that are unique to each individual family and all of this put together can make a family either unhappy or happy and sometimes it’s not a constant within the family as a whole just a specific member causing trouble who can either change for the better or the worst I think this quote is only really popular because it can make people sound smart since it sounds clever, punchy and “profound” when you say it but it really doesn’t hold up against real scrutiny but hey at the end of the day you want people to relate to your novel and if saying stuff like that makes people relate then so be it I guess even if it is just confirmation bias most of the time 🤷♂️
@@Fiction_Beast correction YOU don’t care about the happy people within fiction cause you like darker and grittier novels (which I do as well) but that’s not what I’m talking about brother, I’m taking about that quote specifically being unrealistic and not being able to stand up to scrutiny based on real world evidence not about what readers specifically want or don’t want, like I said at the end of the day you you want your audience to relate to what you write and they’ll read what they want so if saying things that despite being objectively false helps them relate you should do that especially if you feel a connection with it too (and obviously Tolstoy did) once again even if it’s just their own confirmation bias that makes it relatable
I am particularly disgusted by this Vronsky character. He proclaims to "love" Anna, but has no problem with going against her wishes and continues to destroy her. He feels very sorry for himself and what Anna did to him, without considering that his childish selfishness caused it all.
I don't feel this is a truthful picture of Vronsky. You could look to the film Anna Karenina made in the '50s in Russia, where the story is told from Vronsky's point of view. There are so many layers to this novel and to each of the characters... But to see Vronsky in this exclusively negative light as you do, seems to me very much reductive and missing the point.
I disagree. Most of the characters are blinded by their wishes and feelings and therefore take the wrong path more than once. But I never saw Vronsky that way. When we meet him with Kitty we pretty much get to hear how unaware he is of the damage he causes. After all, I still think he did love Anna. He decided for her again and again, also ignoring the chance of prestige in the military while he seemed very ambitious before. Even when there was nothing to gain but more to lose through this relationship and he started to become unhappy he still did not leave her
@@clarkewegener9197 And he is right. Whenever Anna was struggling between what her emotions told her and what her reason / conscience told her, he pushed buttons that strengthened the emotional side. A true gentleman would have helped her bring harmony between emotions and reason, and certainly not pushed her for the emotional response by unloading all his emotions on her. Compare for example his behaviour with that of Darcy in Pride & Prejudice, where near the end (after learning a few necessary lessons) Darcy gives Lizzy total control of how far the relationship goes and how fast, without any pushing. In story, Kostya Levin plays a similar role, first learning to deal with his own emotions and his own path in life before renewing his pursuit of Kitty, after her initial rejection. That is what Vronsky should also have done when Anna first rejected his advances. Needless to say I consider Levin to be twice the gentleman compared to Vronsky.
This misses a number of important themes, most importantly Faith. Also, I do not find the theme of "duty" as prevalent as you make it. Tolstoy does show the value of honest labour and finding satisfaction in a job well done, and how manual labour can help one quiet one's soul. The only reference of "duty" I found is the duty of aristocrats towards the common people, "noblesse oblige". Also, I do not agree with your conclusion on not escaping "society". Instead, the novel contrasts the city life, with its complex and demanding society, with rural life. Also, he points out some types of people who have escaped the demands of society, i.e. wealthy widows and single men who can live as they please with whom they please. You make the novel sound quite preachy. Instead, the novel contrasts different lifestyles and lets people draw their own conclusions.
I also find it interesting that Anna’s closest people are men - her husband, her son, her brother, and her lover. And this kind of shows that they hold all the power over her life. But, in the end, she gives birth to a baby girl, a future woman. And maybe this future woman will live in a different society and have more power over her life. Like a new, more modern version of Anna. The mother dies, but what will be the fate of the daughter?
Where to look for happiness? For me... 1. I want Kota back -- NOW! 2. ALL charges WILL be dropped. 3. All articles concerning me will be deleted from the internet. 4. My licensure WILL be reinstated. 5. ALL hacker and their local connections WILL be prosecuted. ARE WE CLEAR?!
Recently, a woman in Bangalore met a similar fate as anna, when she found that the man she lived with after leaving her husband, kid and religion, was having another affair and was going to marry. She committed suicide. Perhaps going on with institution of family and marriage are better for women but may not guarantee happiness or adventure lifelong.
your channel is a gem. As you're obviously enjoying Russian literature I highly recommend you the forgotten last masterpiece among the great Russian classics: Dark Alleys by Ivan Bunin. An enchanting cycle of thematically related short stories written in a beautiful and most elegant Russian (I'm a Russian native speaker). Now there are also great English translations available. You'll enjoy it. I'd love to see you reviewing it.
Russian authors are the best, always consistent in plot, character development and story. They always send an interesting message (American authors are the worst) Love from Poland, brother.
When the eternal immortal atomic soul is trapped in a cat body ( Samsara - transmigration of the soul into the womb of a female), she can only " Meow" ; as the soul/ living force trapped in a dog body can only "woof, Woof". 🙏♥️
Material body is mortal and temporary. Individual unique soul is immortal, spiritual and eternal. The soul cannot be destroyed (killed, burned, COVID virus, suicide, euthanasia)
Write about this question: which is more important your own happiness or your duty to your family? Anna pursued her own happiness. It ended badly for her.
Anna Karinena's character portrays the classic symptoms of a woman with Borderline personality disorder. Fear of abandonment results in conflict and bad behaviour that in turn, manifests the very thing she fears, to her own tragic demise.
@@thomasche Then I'll be more factual to say "characteristics" instead of symptoms, which doesn't really change anything. It's not implied on all behaviour but this one specifically exhibits prolonged, consistent signs, ending with paranoia, social stigma and suicide. Your statememt " we all know (or will) experience what she went through" is a sweeping generalization or a sweeping statement. First of all, who's "we"?? You can't pin that on all individuals in a modern day setting; it comes across as an emotional rollercoaster. It wasn't easy for women at that time period, especially for a woman of that (emotional) personality type, guaranteed to end in disaster. An emotionally needy woman who fell prey to a fantasy and got burned.
Also I don’t think Anna being shamed more then Vronsky is really a double standard sure Vronsky was a dick but he didn’t straight up abandon his family for the sake of some delusional fantasy he had like Anna did
Here is my take on "Lion" Tolsstoy's War and Peace: ua-cam.com/video/lDPSSYUSRb0/v-deo.html
More Russian content (Dostoesvky, Turgenev etc.): ua-cam.com/play/PLyKyeehuJVIHnoH6S-8JW_ZY01yfceGKa.html
O0op09ooo00
I read this 5 years ago and it remains my favorite novel... I miss my pre-pandemic brain and my ability to focus 😢
Reading helps to recapture it though.
@@Fiction_BeastReally😢
I too lost my focus after pandemic
@@gayathridevi4069me too, but it’s worse than lack of focus.
@@gayathridevi4069 how come pandemic did that to you?
This is one of the most insightful analysis of Anna Karenina I’ve ever encountered, filled with wisdom and truth and also mixed with good humor. Really appreciate your sharing this with us!
Thanks a lot!
Why Vronsky tried to kill himself was and still is an enigma to me. I think it was because he realised that he was a lesser man than her husband Alexei, who he had looked down on, but I’m not sure. I agree though that Alexi was a complex character as someone had commented, not just an epitome of hypocrisy.
I think it was just shame coupled with the stress of the pregnancy almost killing Anna. For all his faults, he does love her. Vronsky is a complex character that has both the coldness to play with women's feelings, but also love a woman deeply. If he died, maybe Anna would've returned to Karenin and their daughter would have a normal life.
@@kingkefa7130 Thank you for the kind reply. I may have to read it again:)
Anna’s husband isn’t any nice man, Tolstoy basically wrote clearly he was coerced to marry Anna and all women repulsed him, he married her under social pressure and the main reason he didn’t want divorce is so his political career isn’t damaged as divorcing wasn’t really accepted by society. And that’s also the main reason Anna had a lover, not because Wronski is more handsome or is a soldier, but simply he needed a real person with emotion rather than a bureaucratic robot that only cared maintaining status quo.
Great video. Though I think you have missed some important points which is quite understandable since short videos are more succesful. I wll try to point out some of them in case anyone wants to know:
-Alexie (Anna’s husband) has not always been very loving to Anna. He got married as if out of a duty which did not satisfy Anna’s emotinally driven soul. Also Alexie refused divorce a couple of times in order to torment Anna by making her position so unbearable. (But overall Anna was the one to blame imo)
-Levin went through SO MUCH. My man was THE awkward overthinker with interest for philısophy. He grew up and overcome his shame and insecurities. And in the end with the help of belief he finally found peace.
- Vronsky is not a shallow character or a typical bad boy. He was honestly in love with Anna till the very end and after her death. Yes he pushed Anna to immorality but did not force her in any way. He felt shame and responsability to Alexie, Anna, and even to society which he rebelled from. Eventhough he and Anna endleslly and mercileslly argued in last chapters he always felt sorry after. He put up with Anna’s unjustified jelousy and submitted to her wish to move to the place she wanted at the time she wanted in order to save their relationship. He also was unable to forgot or even move on after her death.
So much more to add but this might be enough for now.
Lovely channel, love your videos.
😮🎉
I fully agree with your points -- I also think the video is too quick to suggest that Tolstoy wanted to portray Anna's actions as wrong. In fact, I think he tries to stay neutral to her actions and instead explores the reasonings behind her actions - as well as the complex situation Anna finds herself in. He lets her actions develop into a tragedy because what she was trying to achieve was impossible in her society. I never got the impression that Tolstoy judged her - merely the society around her, which in fact, I think Tolstoy questions by having several characters own up to the ridiculousness of shunning women and not men for cheating. I have a sense that Tolstoy was a man of great empathy for all individuals -- without it, I can't see how he would have been able to write such a masterpiece on human psychology.
While the summary is great, there are parts of the analysis which does not account for the impartial and 'observing' feature of Tolstoy's writing. He appears to me as an anthropologist of human emotions. He is not so much there to judge as to explore the emotional landscape of each of his characters and the situations leading them there / how they react differently to them. For instance, Kitty and Levin communicate way clearer about what upsets them. Whereas Vronsky and Anna never truly tell each other the issues they have (Anna's unbased jealousy and grief of basically losing her son and Vronsky feeling trapped and having his boundaries overstepped by the miserable Anna whom he still deeply loves).
I also don't fully agree with 'conservative/moscow = warmth' and 'St. Petersburg/Modernism and beaucracy = coldness'. I think that is far too simple a take on the different locations and themes. When Stiva goes to St. Petersburg towards the end of the novel he feels warmth and openess and freedom compared to the stifling Moscow, which he says makes him feel a lot older and less vigorous. It really is down to the individual character and their current situation.
@@HappyNesquikCompletely agree with your point.
The scene of Anna visiting Sergey late at night haunted me for many years. I absolutely love this book and analysis. Excellent job.
I thought it was early morning.
@@cathalmcdonough5247I think it was early morning and isn’t his name Seryozha?
@@rpm8865 It is morning. Seryozha is his nickname, his name is Sergei.
@@rpm8865Serezha is his nickname. His legal name is Sergey Alexeyvich (probably butchered the spelling)
@@rpm8865I heard this name in a movie. They probably changed the name of his son in a movie.
I liked your discussion of the trains. Trains are a symbol of modernity and technology. If the grass is always greener on the other side, trains are the medium by which we speedily rush to another pasture. They are instant gratification. So it is modernity that killed Anna.
I really liked this idea as well.
Thank you for illustrating the stories of the four couples. Tolstroy no doubt is an icon when it comes to storytelling. ❤❤❤
You talk about how railways have made individuals too “eager”, messing up with their psyches - demanding things at a quicker pace. One could only wonder what the 21st century, with the IoT, AI will end up doing to us. Thank you for the analysis.
“Duty” and finding happiness in whatever life gives you. As in putting your hand to the plow. I’ve never read Tolstoy but now I’m very interested. Thank you for this presentation and it won’t matter at all that I know the ending.
I listened to this on headphones without thing the video. You had me laughing with your clever description. I can’t wait to watch it again. I’m sure it’ll be even funnier. Great work!
Yay! Thank you!
I agree, very charming. Thank you for this!
The way you've crisply analysed the periphery and the plot of novel is worth a thunderous applaud . Thank you!!! ♥️
Thank you!
"unfortunately, nice men finish last" ahahahaha. This is the best summary of Anna Karenina EVER.
Amazing analysis of this epic story. Literally just finished it tonight after 5 months of reading. Quite a slog in parts but some very powerful moments. Thanks so much for making this.
You are so good at making things brief and to the point 👏
Really appreciate it.
That’s so cool you did a video on this. I am currently reading it and already halfway through it.
That's awesome!
Whole life summed up in the video...Hats off to Fiction Beast for Summing the novel for lazy lad like me😁😁😁
Not relevant to the video, but I just realized how small this channel is, just listened to a few videos back to back thinking this is some old multi million subscriber channel. TLDR : Awesome content! I have a feeling your channel will blow up in popularity.
I appreciate that!
thank you very much for the deep analysis, you helped to think from another angle!
Excellent commentary! You really helped me answer a lot of questions about Tolstoy’s aims with this novel.
I started reading and got myself to the meeting in the train station but I wasn’t feeling it! Because of you I am going to restart this long read and finish. Thank you. Most of the other brilliant books that you have featured I sailed well with them even though you summary truly adds to my thoughts of the book as someone who has worked inside homes of these types of society.
There’s this thing with old novels (at least for me) where they’re hard to get into because nowadays we’re always conditioned to expect everything to be fast paced and constantly dopamine inducing back then people tended to take their time telling stories
@@Saber23 You can that again. I have now for myself like you created a conflict between the past and and the present. The past way of saying, doing, all that was so diferent to now. Now that I have the taste of the depth in which they sometimes went to say, do what needed to be said or done has made me very biased about those who wants to use a 1 minute tik tok to tell their story but the thing has picked up big time because you are right we either have lost the patience or the illusion of time or we are evolving to catch up with the speed at which we are alive😃. For all my reads now are 3 hours and up. I feel I get depth and my job can allow me to have this luxury. I will recommend what I am reading right now. This is a book by Jiddu Krishnamurti on the question of Freedom. He asks whether we are conscious of our conditioning such as religious, whether we can clean our mind of all that and start again idividually without the need of following a leader and being a disciple as both corrupt one another while doing so? He has alot of material in general to provoke ones thoughts. Give it a go but if you have then I am happy fir you. The book is “ Freedom from the known by Jiddu Krishnamurti”.
It's almost a meme: the bored wife is drawn to the excitement of some handsome, successful man giving her attention because he wants what he can't have. She leaves her husband and destroys her family and just when she thinks she has happiness and fulfillment in her grasp, her handsome lover grows bored and distant eventually moving on to someone else he can't have. This is a time-worn recipe for regret, looping over and over again in our society. Contrast with the women who figure out early that a good life, a fulfilling life isn't characterized by this excitement. It's not the sparkling, stimulating experience of a city life. It's the serene, wholesome experience of the country life. Almost every healthy woman in the West can have that latter life if she will just reach out and accept it, like Kitty, coming to her senses and accepting Levin.
It’s more about realizing that fulfilment comes from sticking to your values. Only then will success feel rewarding, and hardship endurable.
The best analysis and summery and explanation ever watched. Well done!!
Very well said. Thank you for putting so much effort in what you do.
Спасибо. Certainly one of the most concise and modern referenced analyses. Horseman Vronsky with his ‘Ferraries’. But allow me to pose a plot point that I think many readers, and analysts miss. When the station accident occurs. Everyone shocked (although Stiva quickly talks about the theater) and Vronsky takes leave of the group. No explanation. Only when he rejoins and they are walking away does the station master approach and ask about the money Vronsky had given. Initially he doesn’t tell anyone ‘wait, I’m going to donate money for the widow’. No. For all Vronsky intends it is an altruistic gesture. Apart from the station masters appearance on scene, no one, especially Anna would know. Hence did Vronsky aid in order to impress, or was it a routine gesture of him doing the ‘right thing’ as a Count and man of means?
I wondered about that, too. I feel like Vronsky often truly had good intentions but (as the other characters) he's driven by society. So maybe his wish to impress was way more subconscious while he himself thought he acted out of pure altruism?
I think he had natural sparks of generosity and valued charity as a virtue - hence why he did it surreptitiously
Thanks for this and the previous videos on Russian literature! I read WP and AK decades ago and you refreshed my memory of both. Also reminded me that I should reread both.
I prefer Tolstoy to Dostoevsky, though I have underestimated crazy Uncle Fred as a story teller. So back to Crime and Punishment, also.
They are great novels, so it is always nice to go back to them from time to time. Glad you enjoyed it.
thank you for this incredible video! great to remember one of my favourite books
Awesome. I’m really glad you enjoyed it.
Excellent summation. Thank you.
I think having Anna Karenina as required reading is a good thing!
Thanks for the video.
What a wonderful review of my favorite novel!
Thanks so much!
UA-camrs-except PewDiePie-when they talk about books have nothing insightful or interesting to say about the books, it's almost as if they didn't even read the books. But, you're so insightful and interesting -I'm grateful.
Thank you!
Man become generous when they meet a beautiful lady , that's for sure and certain. 😁
Even birds share their resources when there’s a chance of mating. It’s deep in our dna
🎯 Key points for quick navigation:
00:04 *📚 Introduction to Anna Karenina*
- Overview of the novel's significance and Tolstoy's perspective on it,
- Introduction to major themes and characters of the novel.
02:23 *🤵👰 Relationship Dynamics*
- The complexities of marriage among aristocratic couples,
- Dolly and Stiva's troubled relationship, Kitty and Levin's rocky start and eventual contentment,
- Anna and Karenin's cold, distant marriage contrasted with Vronsky's passionate pursuit of Anna.
07:03 *💔 Anna’s Affair*
- Anna succumbing to Vronsky’s pursuit leading to an affair,
- The societal repercussions of the affair and Karenin's struggle with his wife's betrayal,
- Anna's pregnancy with Vronsky's child and the breakdown of her marriage.
09:53 *🛤 Levin and Kitty's Love Story*
- Levin's life post-rejection, Kitty's sickness and travels,
- The rekindling of Levin and Kitty's relationship, their marriage, and life in the countryside.
13:33 *💔 Anna's Downfall*
- Anna's increasing isolation and descent into paranoia and drug use,
- The social ostracization and internal turmoil leading to her tragic suicide.
14:57 *📖 Analysis of Themes*
- Exploration of themes of family, social norms, and the pursuit of happiness in "Anna Karenina",
- The contrast between rural simplicity and urban complexity, and the inevitability of social judgment,
- Tolstoy's view on the illusory nature of happiness and the importance of duty over personal fulfillment.
Made with HARPA AI
I just finished the USSR 4 part War and Peace and watched your lecture on it. The went to this one since I have read Anna Karenina a few years(12?) ago and plan to re read it...You have been so helpful....a welcome channel of insight and knowledge... Thank-you.
Read the book and you have Very detailed it, spoilers and such :) Love your work though.
Tolstoy carefully chose everyday, imperfect characters. Telling a lesson but calling for compassion, individualism, leaving things open ended.
Oh thank you!
Thank you for this summary/analysis. It unexpectedly at the end brought associations to other heroes of mine, Hamsun and Bergson.
I sense - intuitively again - there's much good teaching to be found in this video, but the narration is too fast for my liking. I would prefer it to be slowed down a bit...So I guess I have to watch and listen a second time 😊
Big thanks for sharing your insights.
Happiness starts with the syllable hap which in Indo European language means fortune or luck as in the word happenstance which means coincidence. So it was a coincidence that brings Anna and Vronsky together in the train station for some happiness. What do you think?
By the way, Omar al Sharif acted the Arabic version of the novel in ‘The River of Love’ before going international with the only woman whom he loved and ended up marrying. Thanks.
I learnt something new today. Happiness is accidental, chance and luck so it is rare. Most of the time I want to be content. Thanks again for the wonderful comment.
Happiness is shallow and depends on external circumstances. Not worth persuing it unless one wants to remain an unmatured kid splashing "happily" with warm water on a beach till the sunset and ensuing night starts to suck away all that apparent "happiness" of the sunny day. Strangely we often dream with such nostalgia for those days of our childhood .... Perhaps this is why I call the youth the most beautiful illusion.
Interesting. The Latin word “Felix” also combines happy-lucky as a single idea.
Tolstoy apparently wrote this novel to encourage empathy for an adulteress- in other words, while she had acted immorally, one can empathise with her difficulty in an unhappy marriage. So while I love this novel, my favourite perhaps, I don't think it fully succeeds in providing an answer to unhappy relationships. Your conclusion sounds like her boring husband, that duty trumps happiness, and I don't believe this. The novel presents several problems with their society: that it contributed to Anna's suicide, and that there is no solution presented for incompatible partners who marry, but shouldn't have.
Fair enough.
He does an excellent job of showing the hypocrisy of men since when they cheat they are expected to be forgiven. Boys will be boys suits them very well. And since they make up the rules, backed up with fists, what else can they do but make up lies about duty and virtue to punish the woman for doing what they themselves have done for millennia.
But Tolstoy was not as generous as he appears. The "bad wife" must die one way or another. She CANNOT be allowed to get away with acting like men and so he kills her off by her own hand. Bad women must be or go crazy. They CANNOT win.
Luckily women have had their eyes opened since then.
My goodness you sound just like Anna. Villifying her husband. At the end, Anna committed suicide as a sort of a revenge at Vronsky. She hates the idea that Vronsky can leave her and love another woman so she clings to him too much. And at the end, it was her "boring husband" who took care of both "Anna K." (Anna's daughter) and his son. Anna's husband is complex too.
@@queenberuthiel5469 Not all marriages are God's will, or real marriages- this is why many are annulled. But in those times, it was not done.
@@outofoblivionproductions4015
Well I agree. I think their's is unfixable because it's a loveless one. Anna married him because her aunt says so and that she'll have a (better) place in society. Karenin married her because he's convinced that he's doing the right thing. Then they find themselves trapped in a loveless marriage.
Excellent precis' - well done Fiction Beast.
Thank you!
We are never free from our society. - nice ending
Great video as usual.And i think opening lines of anna Karenina might be the most famous opening line after the Mobydick.
Good call!
This is closer to a summary than a review. As I see it Vronsky and Kitty's rationship are used to explain why Anna and Karenin's relationship did not work as the same would have happened if Vronsky would have been pressured to marry this cute girl who did not defamilarize or excite him. I don't think that Anna's main attraction was her marriage. I think it was her charm and beauty. And in my view you don't fully explain Anna's suicide which is closer to a reckless accident. She does not want to die. She wants to be shaken out of her paranoia and her fear about Vronsky leaving her --- a fear that is completely groundless @ she knows it rationally. That which pushes Anna to her suicide is which pushed her to marry an evil beurocrat like Karenin. Karenin is not a nice guy! He is the epitemy of fake virtuosity. He does not care about Anna. He cares that she humiliated him...
Agree except for a few details. I don't think Karenin was that evil of a man. He was deeply struggling with emotion but to me seemed to care for Anna in his way in the beginning. But yes, eventually what drove him was society's views...as it happened to nearly all characters. Karenin definitely was not the right man for Anna and had his very obvious flaws but I think Tolstoy really wanted to make clear that he is also not the cold evil machine Anna perceives him as
I think Anna was punished bc she was a woman. Oblonsky was also a father and a husband and he wasn’t rejected by society for his multiple affairs. They are siblings who both cheated but had very very different fates and the biggest player in their differentiating fates was the way society held men vs women at the time.
Ah! my favourite novel
What a wonderful and ironic review!!
Btw what was the background music?
i think Tchaikovsky
If I may offer a small counter point. You could argue that Levin rejects religion if you wanted, but he doesn't reject faith. He concludes that all faiths must have a singular root in goodness and even the divine and decides to live in accordance with those idiles. But he keeps his faith to himself.
Great review. But Vronsky, I think, goes to Serbia, not Bulgaria.
After reading the book i really enjoyed the ideas of it discussed by you. After all using technology to watch great videos and educate ourselves is not that bad😃.
Thanks alot❤
Today I finally finished reading Anna Karenine, a book I tried reading many times but often stopped halway through.
Your analysis was really good, on point and sensible.
I do think Levin's plot was often tiresome. I think his PoV was more interesting at the time but for modern audiences he can come off often as a know-it-all, or someone who think they are always right. At time I did like him and I thought he was interesting, but overall I could remove him from the story and not feel like I missed much.
Anna's plot is what really made me like this novel and what really stood the test of time in this book, IMO. She's a deeply complex character, flawed in every way, and she does something that many female characters in narratives don't do because it's a taboo: she's a bad mother.
She leaves Seryozha without second thoughts once she dedicates herself to Vronsky, she only remember him once her situation with Vronsky worsen. She doesn't like her daughter and is not shy to admit it and doesn't even try to be a mother to her. She claims later that she won't accept a divorce if it means leaving Seryoza to Aleksey, but I honestly saw that as her no wanting to give him a "win".
In the end her desire was to just hurt people. She suicides because she wants to cause Vronsky pain. At least consciously, this desire was bigger than a desire to escape her reality. She also did not consider her children at all when making the decision to kill herself.
She is, for all intents, the "villain" of the novel, albeit you can also say that society made her that way when it disallowed her from pursuing her happyness.
Thank you for your entertaining and erudite analysis on "Anna Karenina" and also Turgeniev`s "Father and Sons". What would you recommend among many different film versions of the former?
This is wonderful, keep it up❤❤❤
Yeah I've never read this book but I had a really long weird detailed dream about it.
A good summary. Thanks.
Great video, love the book a lot, interesting take on the philosophy behind the book! Also, not bad take on russkiy yazik! 🔥🔥🔥
Glad you enjoyed it! Sposibo Bolshoi!
Delightful analysis
Thank you so much.
I think it wasn't true love , it was lust and deprivation
Tolstoy tried to reflect how inventions have a bad effect on personal life as the situation is now .
Everyone is on his phone
I agree.
11:28 no double standard! Vronsky was single and she was married mom so she gets a different consequence!! this should not be surprising!
Great vid! Anna is great novel but War and Piece is greatest novel ever written IMO (it's nearly perfect)
Awesome. I have reviewed War and Peace here.
@@Fiction_Beast Thank you my friend I will check it out and subscribe
You're a legend among men
thanks a lot
I just watched the Anna Karenina 2012 movie and wow it was great but they really did rush and water down the original book so much in my opinion
thanks for this... it really helped
Awesome.
this was awesome thanks
You’re welcome. Cheers.
excellent explanation
Thank you.👍💕
Welcome 😊
Thanks for this. Very well done. I especilly like your injections of bits of homour. I found this post just as I was finishing the novel. Of course it is a great piece, but if I may, I found the last part of the book being almost totally dedicated to finding God, to be a little much. And then, on top of it, throwing the find out the window and just living as is expected of us. But then, who am I to criticize the great Tolstoy. Again, great job, thank you.
That part about god, I think Tolstoy himself struggling with life. Tolstoy did throw things into his novels. For example the end of war and peace he goes into this tirade that there’s no free will and questions history and all.
@@Fiction_Beast I tend to go along with 'no free will'. I mean if you really think about it, all of your actions and thoughts are a product of your education, upbringing, likes, dislikes, experiences, etc., etc...I would even add your physical appearance...
I agree free will as most people think of the complete freedom to decide their own path in life doesn’t exist. But I believe there’s an spontaneous force in nature and within us, a kind of tension and we have the freedom to stretch that tension or ease it. For example I have a delicious pizza in front of me but I can refrain myself from eating it for some time. I guess you could say my ability to endure hunger is predetermined by nature for time of scarcity. So I believe in free will in a limited sense. When it comes to my values and beliefs, you’re right, for the most part you’re product of your culture.
Thanks, now I don't have to read the novel about unhappy women. War and Peace had some of those themes also. Had Russia a much more extensive railroad network they might not have lost WW I. In Germany they were fighting a modern industrial state while they were still in transition from an agricultural economy, hence their soldiers were sent to the front line without guns in some cases. The German military took over the entire German economy to fight and win the war. The Russians could not do that because their military leaders did not know a machine tool from a turnip.
Tolstoy is really hard to read. I read war and peace and 3/4 of the way I had no Idea what I was reading.
I think I was about 7 months pregnant
I just rewatched the video and honestly as famous as the opening quote about happy and unhappy families is all the evidence points to it being complete and utter nonsense there are definitely constants and absolutes within unhappy families and within happy families there’s also sometimes things that are unique to each individual family and all of this put together can make a family either unhappy or happy and sometimes it’s not a constant within the family as a whole just a specific member causing trouble who can either change for the better or the worst I think this quote is only really popular because it can make people sound smart since it sounds clever, punchy and “profound” when you say it but it really doesn’t hold up against real scrutiny but hey at the end of the day you want people to relate to your novel and if saying stuff like that makes people relate then so be it I guess even if it is just confirmation bias most of the time 🤷♂️
In storytelling nobody cares about happy people. Greatest tales about unhappy people. Tolstoy shows his wisdom.
@@Fiction_Beast correction YOU don’t care about the happy people within fiction cause you like darker and grittier novels (which I do as well) but that’s not what I’m talking about brother, I’m taking about that quote specifically being unrealistic and not being able to stand up to scrutiny based on real world evidence not about what readers specifically want or don’t want, like I said at the end of the day you you want your audience to relate to what you write and they’ll read what they want so if saying things that despite being objectively false helps them relate you should do that especially if you feel a connection with it too (and obviously Tolstoy did) once again even if it’s just their own confirmation bias that makes it relatable
You need to learn to use periods.
@@DF-ss5ep I would if I cared enough but I’m not being graded on UA-cam comments lol
@@Saber23 I'm grading you 5/10 until you improve your punctuation for the reader.
I am particularly disgusted by this Vronsky character. He proclaims to "love" Anna, but has no problem with going against her wishes and continues to destroy her. He feels very sorry for himself and what Anna did to him, without considering that his childish selfishness caused it all.
I don't feel this is a truthful picture of Vronsky. You could look to the film Anna Karenina made in the '50s in Russia, where the story is told from Vronsky's point of view. There are so many layers to this novel and to each of the characters... But to see Vronsky in this exclusively negative light as you do, seems to me very much reductive and missing the point.
I disagree. Most of the characters are blinded by their wishes and feelings and therefore take the wrong path more than once. But I never saw Vronsky that way. When we meet him with Kitty we pretty much get to hear how unaware he is of the damage he causes. After all, I still think he did love Anna. He decided for her again and again, also ignoring the chance of prestige in the military while he seemed very ambitious before. Even when there was nothing to gain but more to lose through this relationship and he started to become unhappy he still did not leave her
Vronsky admits over and over that he caused Anna’s position.
@@clarkewegener9197 And he is right. Whenever Anna was struggling between what her emotions told her and what her reason / conscience told her, he pushed buttons that strengthened the emotional side.
A true gentleman would have helped her bring harmony between emotions and reason, and certainly not pushed her for the emotional response by unloading all his emotions on her.
Compare for example his behaviour with that of Darcy in Pride & Prejudice, where near the end (after learning a few necessary lessons) Darcy gives Lizzy total control of how far the relationship goes and how fast, without any pushing.
In story, Kostya Levin plays a similar role, first learning to deal with his own emotions and his own path in life before renewing his pursuit of Kitty, after her initial rejection. That is what Vronsky should also have done when Anna first rejected his advances. Needless to say I consider Levin to be twice the gentleman compared to Vronsky.
This misses a number of important themes, most importantly Faith. Also, I do not find the theme of "duty" as prevalent as you make it. Tolstoy does show the value of honest labour and finding satisfaction in a job well done, and how manual labour can help one quiet one's soul. The only reference of "duty" I found is the duty of aristocrats towards the common people, "noblesse oblige".
Also, I do not agree with your conclusion on not escaping "society". Instead, the novel contrasts the city life, with its complex and demanding society, with rural life. Also, he points out some types of people who have escaped the demands of society, i.e. wealthy widows and single men who can live as they please with whom they please.
You make the novel sound quite preachy. Instead, the novel contrasts different lifestyles and lets people draw their own conclusions.
Thankyou
i only saw the movie, but didnt understand exactly... did vronsky cheat on anne? or was it all in her mind?
I also find it interesting that Anna’s closest people are men - her husband, her son, her brother, and her lover. And this kind of shows that they hold all the power over her life. But, in the end, she gives birth to a baby girl, a future woman. And maybe this future woman will live in a different society and have more power over her life. Like a new, more modern version of Anna. The mother dies, but what will be the fate of the daughter?
Where to look for happiness? For me...
1. I want Kota back -- NOW!
2. ALL charges WILL be dropped.
3. All articles concerning me will be deleted from the internet.
4. My licensure WILL be reinstated.
5. ALL hacker and their local connections WILL be prosecuted.
ARE WE CLEAR?!
What is the music in the background? Sounds so familiar to me 😊
Tchaikovsky? It’s been a while.
This reminds me of Madame Bovery.
Recently, a woman in Bangalore met a similar fate as anna, when she found that the man she lived with after leaving her husband, kid and religion, was having another affair and was going to marry. She committed suicide. Perhaps going on with institution of family and marriage are better for women but may not guarantee happiness or adventure lifelong.
your channel is a gem. As you're obviously enjoying Russian literature I highly recommend you the forgotten last masterpiece among the great Russian classics: Dark Alleys by Ivan Bunin. An enchanting cycle of thematically related short stories written in a beautiful and most elegant Russian (I'm a Russian native speaker). Now there are also great English translations available. You'll enjoy it. I'd love to see you reviewing it.
Sposibo bolshoi!
I'll check it out! Really appreciate it.
Russian authors are the best, always consistent in plot, character development and story. They always send an interesting message (American authors are the worst) Love from Poland, brother.
For how long was Levin gone from the moment he was rejected by Kitty until he returned to Kitty and asked for her love a second time?
I don’t remember precisely. It’s been a while I read it.
I think it was one year (or maybe half a year)
didnt expect the cat sound
When the eternal immortal atomic soul is trapped in a cat body ( Samsara - transmigration of the soul into the womb of a female), she can only " Meow" ; as the soul/ living force trapped in a
dog body can only "woof, Woof". 🙏♥️
Material body is mortal and temporary. Individual unique soul is immortal, spiritual and eternal. The soul cannot be destroyed (killed, burned, COVID virus, suicide, euthanasia)
Здравствуй! Люблю твои видео!
Thank you!
Yeah then la miserables was so sad 3/4 of the way I couldn't finish it.
I was like 8 months pregnant.
Pregnancy makes reading hard lol
Best ❤️
Read it quite a while ago
Sylvia Plath "The bell jar" review please.
Vronsky went to SERBIA, not Bulgaria.
Expecting analysis of Dostoevsky's The idiot. Kind request.
you got it. Perhaps in a few weeks.
How can Anna karanina be connected in real life?(I've an assignment on this:(
Write about this question: which is more important your own happiness or your duty to your family? Anna pursued her own happiness. It ended badly for her.
Fire
👍
7 more rounds to go. i cracked at that one :)
Are you boxing with Anna?
Anna Karinena's character portrays the classic symptoms of a woman with Borderline personality disorder. Fear of abandonment results in conflict and bad behaviour that in turn, manifests the very thing she fears, to her own tragic demise.
I disagree. Don't put "symptoms" on all behavior. We all know (or will) experience what she went through.
@@thomasche Then I'll be more factual to say "characteristics" instead of symptoms, which doesn't really change anything. It's not implied on all behaviour but this one specifically exhibits prolonged, consistent signs, ending with paranoia, social stigma and suicide.
Your statememt " we all know (or will) experience what she went through" is a sweeping generalization or a sweeping statement. First of all, who's "we"?? You can't pin that on all individuals in a modern day setting; it comes across as an emotional rollercoaster. It wasn't easy for women at that time period, especially for a woman of that (emotional) personality type, guaranteed to end in disaster. An emotionally needy woman who fell prey to a fantasy and got burned.
Also I don’t think Anna being shamed more then Vronsky is really a double standard sure Vronsky was a dick but he didn’t straight up abandon his family for the sake of some delusional fantasy he had like Anna did
6:15
Women want a man who reject other women
8:30
Nice guys finish last
❤️💐
❤️
Computer nerds can be romantic and adventurous 😒
La miserables was better.
And I'm from Texas I can't pronounce it.
I was wrong. It wasnt 1700s.
1800s. I hate 1800s
Meow.
😀