Gary Inbinder's Blog - Posts Tagged "tolstoy"
Anna Karenina on the Brain
The ads have wormed their way into my consciousness; I’ve got a bad case of Anna Karenina on the Brain. I’m bewitched by images of pouty Keira Knightley in furs, fireworks, ballrooms filled with beautiful aristocrats in late 19th century finery, and snow. Having written a historical novel set in 19th century Russia, I’m particularly susceptible to the semiotics of the current marketing blitz. I need a mind-purge; this post is my attempt at a cathartic.
I’ve read the novel twice (in English translation); the first time in High School, the second in college. Several years ago I read Henri Troyat’s excellent biography of the author, now out of print. And I’ve seen several screen adaptations of Anna K.; the 1948 Vivien Leigh version remains my favorite.
The novel has retained its popularity since its first publication as a magazine serial (1875-1877). Simply put, it’s a compelling story with engaging, psychologically complex characters, told by one of the great masters of late 19th century realism. But its success is also due to associations in the popular imagination created by clever marketing and word of mouth. If I were writing a jacket blurb I might call it, “A tragic romance set amid the opulence and decadence of an empire in decline.” But that’s not quite what Tolstoy wrote.
A real life event gave Tolstoy the idea for his story; the mistress of a neighboring wealthy landowner committed suicide by throwing herself in front of a locomotive. As I recall, Tolstoy viewed her mangled body in a railway shed. At the time, the author was undergoing a mental crisis and spiritual transformation that led him to renounce Orthodox Christianity and embrace a new theology based on pacifism, communal living, simplicity, and vegetarianism.
Toward the end of his life, Tolstoy became a cult leader, spiritual guru to millions of followers worldwide. This transformation put him at odds with his long-suffering wife and children. For those interested in the author’s final days, I highly recommend "The Last Station," a very well made and historically accurate movie with excellent performances by Christopher Plummer as Tolstoy, Helen Mirren as his wife, and Paul Giamatti as Tolstoy’s Machiavellian disciple, Vladimir Chertkov. I reference Tolstoy’s unorthodoxy (The Russian Orthodox Church excommunicated him in 1901) to put the novel in its proper context.
Much of the novel is a didactic piece about the emptiness of materialism, the hypocrisy and prejudices of society, the vanity of human wishes, and the failure of orthodox morality and religion. Tolstoy barely disguised his dislike of Vronsky, and he wasn’t completely enamored of Anna, either. I recall reading that Tolstoy made Anna more sympathetic after someone he trusted told him he had made her too unlikeable.
The real hero of the novel is Constantine Levin, the author’s stand-in (the name Levin is based on Tolstoy’s first name, Lev). Levin marries Anna’s sister-in-law’s younger sister, Kitty, after she’s jilted by the unworthy Vronsky. The Levin/Kitty relationship is based on Tolstoy’s marriage, at least in its early stages. And one of the most touching, and well-written scenes in the novel, focuses on the death of Levin’s ne’er-do-well brother, another relationship taken from the author’s life.
Tolstoy might have written a novel called “Constantine Levin,” but I don’t think that would have been a worldwide best-seller, not to mention a Hollywood perennial. Imagine a video trailer featuring the balding, bearded, slightly paunchy fellow harvesting wheat with the peasants, singing folk songs, and sitting down in the refectory to a yummy lunch of mush, greens, and well water.
Thankfully, at the time he wrote Anna K., Tolstoy the unorthodox saint had not yet overtaken and subsumed Tolstoy the great storyteller. Theology and ideology notwithstanding, the author created an unforgettable portrait of a beautiful, privileged young woman trapped in a loveless marriage, ripe for an affair with a handsome lover. Tolstoy did not make her cold fish husband, Karenin, a stage villain. Rather, he’s portrayed as an honest albeit ambitious, hard-working bureaucrat who places his civic duty over his private life; and he’s a slave to conventional morality. When he punishes Anna by refusing a divorce and taking sole custody of their son, he really believes he’s acting out of moral conviction and righteousness. Vronsky is a social type Tolstoy despised (I believe he was based on a detested rival) but he adheres to an aristocratic code of honor, and he does love Anna, at least up to a point and in his fashion.
So, will I see the new "Anna Karenina"? I suppose so, but not because I expect to gain any further insight into a familiar, old classic. Rather, I’m still bewitched by images of pouty Keira Knightley in furs, fireworks, ballrooms filled with beautiful aristocrats in late 19th century finery, and snow. Score one for Hollywood and the advertisers.
I’ve read the novel twice (in English translation); the first time in High School, the second in college. Several years ago I read Henri Troyat’s excellent biography of the author, now out of print. And I’ve seen several screen adaptations of Anna K.; the 1948 Vivien Leigh version remains my favorite.
The novel has retained its popularity since its first publication as a magazine serial (1875-1877). Simply put, it’s a compelling story with engaging, psychologically complex characters, told by one of the great masters of late 19th century realism. But its success is also due to associations in the popular imagination created by clever marketing and word of mouth. If I were writing a jacket blurb I might call it, “A tragic romance set amid the opulence and decadence of an empire in decline.” But that’s not quite what Tolstoy wrote.
A real life event gave Tolstoy the idea for his story; the mistress of a neighboring wealthy landowner committed suicide by throwing herself in front of a locomotive. As I recall, Tolstoy viewed her mangled body in a railway shed. At the time, the author was undergoing a mental crisis and spiritual transformation that led him to renounce Orthodox Christianity and embrace a new theology based on pacifism, communal living, simplicity, and vegetarianism.
Toward the end of his life, Tolstoy became a cult leader, spiritual guru to millions of followers worldwide. This transformation put him at odds with his long-suffering wife and children. For those interested in the author’s final days, I highly recommend "The Last Station," a very well made and historically accurate movie with excellent performances by Christopher Plummer as Tolstoy, Helen Mirren as his wife, and Paul Giamatti as Tolstoy’s Machiavellian disciple, Vladimir Chertkov. I reference Tolstoy’s unorthodoxy (The Russian Orthodox Church excommunicated him in 1901) to put the novel in its proper context.
Much of the novel is a didactic piece about the emptiness of materialism, the hypocrisy and prejudices of society, the vanity of human wishes, and the failure of orthodox morality and religion. Tolstoy barely disguised his dislike of Vronsky, and he wasn’t completely enamored of Anna, either. I recall reading that Tolstoy made Anna more sympathetic after someone he trusted told him he had made her too unlikeable.
The real hero of the novel is Constantine Levin, the author’s stand-in (the name Levin is based on Tolstoy’s first name, Lev). Levin marries Anna’s sister-in-law’s younger sister, Kitty, after she’s jilted by the unworthy Vronsky. The Levin/Kitty relationship is based on Tolstoy’s marriage, at least in its early stages. And one of the most touching, and well-written scenes in the novel, focuses on the death of Levin’s ne’er-do-well brother, another relationship taken from the author’s life.
Tolstoy might have written a novel called “Constantine Levin,” but I don’t think that would have been a worldwide best-seller, not to mention a Hollywood perennial. Imagine a video trailer featuring the balding, bearded, slightly paunchy fellow harvesting wheat with the peasants, singing folk songs, and sitting down in the refectory to a yummy lunch of mush, greens, and well water.
Thankfully, at the time he wrote Anna K., Tolstoy the unorthodox saint had not yet overtaken and subsumed Tolstoy the great storyteller. Theology and ideology notwithstanding, the author created an unforgettable portrait of a beautiful, privileged young woman trapped in a loveless marriage, ripe for an affair with a handsome lover. Tolstoy did not make her cold fish husband, Karenin, a stage villain. Rather, he’s portrayed as an honest albeit ambitious, hard-working bureaucrat who places his civic duty over his private life; and he’s a slave to conventional morality. When he punishes Anna by refusing a divorce and taking sole custody of their son, he really believes he’s acting out of moral conviction and righteousness. Vronsky is a social type Tolstoy despised (I believe he was based on a detested rival) but he adheres to an aristocratic code of honor, and he does love Anna, at least up to a point and in his fashion.
So, will I see the new "Anna Karenina"? I suppose so, but not because I expect to gain any further insight into a familiar, old classic. Rather, I’m still bewitched by images of pouty Keira Knightley in furs, fireworks, ballrooms filled with beautiful aristocrats in late 19th century finery, and snow. Score one for Hollywood and the advertisers.
