Did anyone else absolutely loathe Anna?

[Birdbath]

It's not so much that I loathed Anna, it was that I grew to really love Levin and Kitty. I was very apathetic about how things ended for Anna (or how she ended them for herself).

[Eileen]

I listened to the audio book. There was so much that an editor today would just cut out. Tolstoy wrote the book over four years, in a serial format for a magazine. He probably needed the income, but you could easily cut out 150 pages, at least.

I did not like Anna or her brother, either. A couple of selfish, spoiled narcissists, as far as I could tell. Kitty and Levin were definitely more likable, and I even liked Karenin and Vronsky more than Anna or Stepan.

Anna and Vronsky made an interesting contrast to Levin and Kitty. Neither of them had easy lives, but Kitty and Levin managed to live their lives with honesty and honorably. Anna and Vronsky, not so much.

I haven't seen the new movie yet, but its on the list.

[Eileen]

Joy wrote: "Eileen wrote: "I listened to the audio book. There was so much that an editor today would just cut out. Tolstoy wrote the book over four years, in a serial format for a magazine. He probably nee..."

I'm not sure I blame Tolstoy for dragging it out so long. It had to be his meal ticket for a long time. Writers are generally not known for their enormous incomes!

[Malini]

J. wrote: "I absolutely sympathize with Anna. As D. has mentioned above, she was a character created by Tolstoy to preach his moral code. He wanted to show people that 'immoral' women are unlovable, treachero..."

Yes, I agree. And I'd add that generally, (not always), it's usually those serving in the ranks of the self righteous morality police that hate on characters like Anna. How can someone hate someone so foolish...? I felt a lot of compassion for her.

[Malini]

Jennifer wrote: "I don't like or dislike Anna. I've been building in my mind a list of characters like her..

Anna Karenina
Tess of D'Uberville
Madame Bovary
Revolutionary Road (April Wheeler)
to name a few.

As..."

Scarlett O'Hara is a great contrast- she was willful, vindictive, and *victimized others*, whereas, it can be argued, Anna, Tess, Emma, and the like were more victims of their own immature and emotional excesses and were subsequently exploited and discarded by the men in their lives... And Tess... she was the most tragic victim of them all. Hardy's books are so heavy- it made me hurt to read his novels.

[Eileen]

Malini wrote: "Jennifer wrote: "I don't like or dislike Anna. I've been building in my mind a list of characters like her..

Anna Karenina
Tess of D'Uberville
Madame Bovary
Revolutionary Road (April Wheeler)
to ..."

Tess was a sympathetic character. She was very young, even at the book's end, and much more of a victim. Anna and Emma were all about what they wanted, without regard for those around them. To some degree, their situations were due to the expectations of women in those times. But at the same time, I know women today who could easily be described as Anna or Emma. College educated, good income women with jobs, who have made some really remarkably stupid choices in life. I think most of us have.

It is not just about self righteous morality police hating on characters like Anna and Emma. There are people out there, male and female, who make selfish, self-centered choices in life that cause huge amounts of pain to those around them. There are also people who have that choice, and don't make it. But those people don't cause much drama and books aren't written about them!

Out of curiosity, can anyone think of books written about the male versions of Emma or Anna? None come to mind, but maybe I haven't had enough caffeine yet.

[Tall]

I disagree that Anna didn't regard those around her. I think part of what Tolstoy was trying to show was the irony in the fact that Anna was honest -- she finally realized the sham of her marriage and of her existence, and ran from it. She was painfully aware, however, of the cost to herself, and to others, of that honest approach to her life. She suffered because she knew that she could not win, no matter what she did, because she really had no choice. Levin represented the inner conflict felt by Tolstoy himself -- the conflict of a wealthy man who nonetheless wanted to be one of the people -- a man who controlled serfs all the while hating the fact that he did so. Levin had his own inner conflicts, and can be seen as dealing with them in a positive way. But he was a man, and had more choices in that society than a woman did. Anna is the other side of that coin. She is not evil, or uncaring, although her choices doomed her. Levin made better choices, although he was in a better position to do so. To dismiss Anna as being uncaring is to miss the point of this great novel, in my view.

[Charlotte]

Jacqueline wrote: "I'm sorry, but I can not abide women who let themselves be pushed around so much by society and the moralists of the day. Tess of the D'Ubervilles, is another, and The French Lieutenant's Woman......"

Strange that I loved both Anna and Tess, and felt them to be victims of the times in which they lived. We can tend to forget that these historical women did not live in today's world and could not respond in the way that we now think appropriate. They made bad decisions, and I wished I could make them do their lives differently. However, I still was very sympathetic with them. I surely didn't want Tess to kill anyone, and Anna's suicide disappointed me and I kept hoping they would find another way to deal with life.

[Eileen]

Tall wrote: "I disagree that Anna didn't regard those around her. I think part of what Tolstoy was trying to show was the irony in the fact that Anna was honest -- she finally realized the sham of her marriage ..."

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this. You say that "she suffered because she knew she could not win". That is probably correct, but it makes "winning" the ultimate goal, not living an honorable life in which one makes a commitment (which Anna appears to have done) and does not leave her husband.

The only complaint that Anna had in her book about her husband was his ears were too big! He didn't beat her, cheat on her, lie to her, fail to provide for her. He loved her. But she met Vronsky, a hot young dude whose ears were apparently not so big, and decided her commitment didn't count anymore.

Maybe she was being honest in deciding to leave her husband for Vronsky. And she did suffer for the loss of her son (no such feeling for the discarded husband, however, or even her daughter with Vronsky).

I've seen a few people make choices like Anna's and they have rarely ended up well for them, or those around them.

[Linda]

Eileen wrote: "Tall wrote: "I disagree that Anna didn't regard those around her. I think part of what Tolstoy was trying to show was the irony in the fact that Anna was honest -- she finally realized the sham of ..."

[Linda]

Eileen wrote: "Tall wrote: "I disagree that Anna didn't regard those around her. I think part of what Tolstoy was trying to show was the irony in the fact that Anna was honest -- she finally realized the sham of ..."

[Linda]

@Eileen, You have captured the analysis of Anna perfectly! And her "sister of likeness" would be, in my thoughts, Emma Bovary.

Perhaps, the "lesson" or "moral fiber" is to proceed with caution when male/female appears with too much glitter and too much supposed passion. It reminded me that passion fades - love endures. Anna and Emma suffered deeply when the men that they they thought they were love in with failed to live up to their expectation. There is much wisdom to be gained from marriages built on common ground that grow in love daily rather than those that ignite a spark of passion only to find that once the passion diminishes, the "object of love" is found very much in the lacking column.

Linda

[Naseem]

Anna is a kind person but make a wrong decision. She is trap into a love that she never felt before. I will say that Tolstoy trying to make us realize how to perceived the right love by showing the love Levin had for Kitty.

[Bu]

Knightley is a horrendous actress and I can't stand her on any of the classical roles she's done (Pride & Prejudice for God's sake!!)...
But if you're talking about Karenina, the character, well, you must situate the novel in its social context before judging the woman :)

[Malini]

Eileen wrote: "Malini wrote: "Jennifer wrote: "I don't like or dislike Anna. I've been building in my mind a list of characters like her..

Anna Karenina
Tess of D'Uberville
Madame Bovary
Revolutionary Road (Apr..."

Eileen wrote: "Malini wrote: "Jennifer wrote: "I don't like or dislike Anna. I've been building in my mind a list of characters like her..

Anna Karenina
Tess of D'Uberville
Madame Bovary
Revolutionary Road (Apr..."

"Out of curiosity, can anyone think of books written about the male versions of Emma or Anna? None come to mind, but maybe I haven't had enough caffeine yet."

Talented Mr Ripley? Anne Rice's Lestat? Dan Woolf's character in the film Closer? Alfie? Great question

I agree with some of your points mentioned, that yes, Tess was an extremely sympathetic character. But you may only be making concessions for people that spew so much vitriol against characters like Anna and Emma... not necessarily arguing for it. I never found Anna or Emma worthy of hatred. (Kitty and Levin on the other hand? They were such boring and provencal characters. And such "goody two shoes"). I found both Anna and Emma to be sympathetic. If they only had a bit of Scarlett's fire they wouldn't find themselves so victimized...

Interesting that Scarlett was written by a woman and Emma and Anna were both written by men.

[Malini]

Tall wrote: "I disagree that Anna didn't regard those around her. I think part of what Tolstoy was trying to show was the irony in the fact that Anna was honest -- she finally realized the sham of her marriage ..."

Very well put

[Eileen]

Malini wrote: "Eileen wrote: "Malini wrote: "Jennifer wrote: "I don't like or dislike Anna. I've been building in my mind a list of characters like her..

Anna Karenina
Tess of D'Uberville
Madame Bovary
Revoluti..."

Good point about the male perspective on women like Emma and Anna. I haven't read any of the books you mentioned - Talented Mr. Ripley, etc., so I can't comment on them.

Still, Scarlett is not a great example. So she wasn't victimized, but she did victimize others - her 2nd husband Frank, her sister Suellen, among others. Rhett was the only one strong enough and smart enough to see her for what she was and not let himself become one of her victims.

[Mr.garfield]

Tall wrote: "I saw Karenin as a person who used his religion to make him look good, not sincere at all. He had no warmth or depth of feeling, except where his social status or appearances were concerned."

I am the opposite. I think Karenin's feeling for Anna, whether it's love or sympathy or responsibility, and his forgiveness was sincere. He just used religion to explain that kind of feeling, like how in the end even Levin had to turn to God and Religion to explain his "goodness".

But I don't think Karenin was much of a religious person in the beginning of the book. He just turned to religious because he couldn't handle the stress of the wrecked life which Anna left him. And I like him better before he became so attached with religion and that countess Lydia Ivanovna.

[Lily]

I found Anna hard to like because I felt what she did was wrong but I thought maybe Lev Tolstoy intended it that way, for the reader to see her in the same light as society would look down upon her, but that's just my thoughts. Im no expert.

[Eileen]

Lily wrote: "I found Anna hard to like because I felt what she did was wrong but I thought maybe Lev Tolstoy intended it that way, for the reader to see her in the same light as society would look down upon her..."

It isn't just "society" looking down on her, though. There are ways to live one's life that are honest and honorable, if sometimes difficult. Anna did not choose those ways. She chose to live a self-indulgent life that ended up hurting everyone who cared for her. What really brought that home to me was how she felt so little affection for her daughter with Vronsky. Why couldn't she love that small child that she had in her passionate affair with him? Just because she couldn't have her son with her?

Perhaps Tolstoy did that to emphasize Anna's essential narcissism. If he'd shown her loving the child, that would have redeemed her somewhat. But given how the story was told, Anna was not a likable character.

[Fliss]

If Anna was a real person I would be tempted to wring her neck. However, we have to put into perspective the times that the book is set in.
If the book had been written only a few years ago we would be wondering why the author had created a character like Anna who seemed like a whinger who made bad life decisions as women these days are brought up to be independent (well, most anyway).
However, the book was written in the 19th century where it was pretty much unheard of for a woman to be strong-willed and independent. So it is important to remember where and when the book was set.

[Evan]

I audibly cheered when she died.

[Eileen]

Fliss wrote: "If Anna was a real person I would be tempted to wring her neck. However, we have to put into perspective the times that the book is set in.
If the book had been written only a few years ago we wou..."

Anna's choices were more limited than what might be available today, but she still had some. Heck, I still see women making the same bad choices now. I find nothing likable or admirable in their behavior, or in Anna's.

[C.P.]

On the whole, I am not a big fan of Anna’s, but it might be worth remembering that she probably married, while little more than a teenager, an older man of steady but unexciting disposition in a match that met the expectations of her society but was never presented in terms of romance or passion—elements of life that were not supposed to appeal to her as a Victorian woman. Under those circumstances, it is perhaps not surprising that her first experience of intense physical attraction turned her head....

Note also that in those days European (and North American) divorce law gave custody of children to husbands, as a rule. That puts Anna in a predicament she would not have faced sixty or seventy years later.

[Ngoc]

When Anna died in the end, I cried. She was so blind to the goodness in the world and while everyone here is right in pointing out that she made bad decisions, ultimately she had no one. Women, during the time period, and especially in Tolstoy's works are often neglected as strong intelligent characters. She was shallow and self-centered but only AFTER she falls in love. Before meeting Vronsky she was in a loveless marriage and faithful while women in her circles were having affairs. The biggest fault that Anna had, was following her heart and being shameless about it.

I can see why she isn't the most likeable character but that is why I gravitated towards her. She is the ultimate tragic hero, so close to happiness but always just a hair shy: when she falls in love, when she thinks she is going to die with forgiveness, when she leaves Russia with Vronsky...Happiness was never possible for her because she had to choose. Imagine that. Choosing between being with your child and your lover and then realizing your life is now completely devoted to your lover, while he can still make appearances in public. I liked Anna's character because, even though Tolstoy wrote her to be a misguided character, we can still feel sympathetic to her.

[Fliss]

Eileen wrote: "Fliss wrote: "If Anna was a real person I would be tempted to wring her neck. However, we have to put into perspective the times that the book is set in.
If the book had been written only a few ye..."

Yes women had some choices in the 19th century and of course some women these days make bad choices but my point was that we need to put the times in perspective. If Anna Karenina had been written in the 21st century we would be reading about a completely different character compared to the 19th century one.

[C.P.]

Joy wrote: "I would like to thank all of the interesting points made by everyone in this discussion. I was inspired to take them all into consideration when I wrote this review of "Anna Karenina" here on my bl..."

What a nice post! Thank you for sharing it.

[Julie]

Jacqueline wrote: "I'm sorry, but I can not abide women who let themselves be pushed around so much by society and the moralists of the day. Tess of the D'Ubervilles, is another, and The French Lieutenant's Woman......"

I think you're judging Anna by today's societal standards. The book I'm reading right now, How to Create the Perfect Wife, by Wendy Moore, does a good job of laying it out. Women were owned by their fathers until the time they were married when they became the property of their husband. The only way for a woman to be emancipated was to be widowed, or to inherit her own money (rare). I'm fascinated by women such as George Sand, who did nothing but buck the system and do her utmost to change society through her writing.

[Jane]

If I remember correctly, I got aggravated with Anna, and the book. I didn't finish it, which is unusal for me as I like to keep plugging away at it. I guess I just didn't get it.

[Tall]

Malini wrote: "Tall wrote: "I disagree that Anna didn't regard those around her. I think part of what Tolstoy was trying to show was the irony in the fact that Anna was honest -- she finally realized the sham of ..."

Thanks!

[[deleted user]]

She did not even know what she wanted.
At first, after her death, I was irritated that Tolstoy didn't say anything about it, and only Vronsky, and not even Oblonsky or Serezha suffered ! But then, I thought that maybe it was for the best, and it shows that maybe, just maybe, she wasn't that important, as well as for the society as for her entourage.

[Tall]

I caution those of you who are eager to dismiss Anna as an unimportant character to remember what the title of this book is. Why did Tolstoy call it "Anna Karenina"? It's a question I often ask myself, since it as often feels like Levin's story, as well. Think about what both stories are trying to say -- about the contrasts between the two characters -- and how they are alike. And the choices each had in his/her life. I wouldn't dismiss Anna so easily -- but I also don't judge her as harshly, either.

[Tall]

Mr.garfield wrote: "Tall wrote: "I saw Karenin as a person who used his religion to make him look good, not sincere at all. He had no warmth or depth of feeling, except where his social status or appearances were conc..."

Interesting! I always just saw him as a hypocrite, who used religion to make himself look good. However, I haven't read this book in a few years. I think I will read it again, and look at this perspective, try to be a bit more sympathetic to Karenin. I do love the book and have read it twice. I really wouldn't mind reading it again!

[Cathy]

I liked everyone in the book more than Anna. What made this such a great book.?

[Summerrose]

I loved Anna.... But I read it when I was a sixteen-year old drama queen. Maybe I should go back to it and see how my POV might have changed in the last 50 years.

[David]

I didn't hate Anna until she tried to make Levin love her just to see if she could. That action revealed the depth of her depravity.

[Aathira]

Anna didn't have a choice. She could no longer live with Karenin. He was a workaholic and 20 YEARS older than her.
It's true that she made some pretty wrong decisions.
Doesn't mean you have to hate her.

She loved Seryozha more than anything.
And she lost half of her when she left him.

She didn't deserve to be treated like that by Vronsky.
I hate Vronsky most in Anna Karenina.

[Eileen]

I don't recall Vronsky treating Anna badly. And Anna only decided she didn't want to live with Karenin anymore because she started her affair with Vronsky.

Yes, she probably did love her son. Her son by the husband she decided she didn't want anymore. Her daughter by Vronsky, on the other hand, she ignored. It was as though whatever she couldn't have, she wanted, and whatever she had, she didn't want.

She just seemed very childish and selfish to me.

[Aathira]

Vronsky feared that he would lose all his freedom when Anna walks into his life. (He should have thought about that before.) So, he tried not to let Anna take claim of his life completely. He kept on living in the same way. Just like when he was a bachelor rather than adjusting to their new life. He wouldn't even tell Anna where he went or is planning to go the next day. And Anna felt as if he was avoiding her.

And that's not fair. Anna didn't deserve that. She left everything she had for him even her status in the society, and he should have cared a little more.

And it was stupid of Anna to suicide to make Vronsky realize how much she meant to him.

It's true that Anna couldn't love Annie like she loved Seryozha

Anna would have left Karenin anyway.
All that kept her from doing that was her love for Seryozha.

[Birdbath]

@David

Did Anna conciously try to make Levin love her or was it subconcious? I'm asking because I don't remember that happening and if true, either subconciously or conciously, reveals a deep flaw in Anna's character (although deeper if concious).

[Christie]

Birdbath wrote: "@David

Did Anna conciously try to make Levin love her or was it subconcious? I'm asking because I don't remember that happening and if true, either subconciously or conciously, reveals a deep flaw..."

I didn't pick up on Anna trying to make Levin love her either. I took that section as she was just trying to be the charming hostess of that era and that she was excited to have someone from society still talk to her after being snubbed by others.

[C.P.]

Yes, I had the same impression as Christie. I see Anna as having a high need for approval, especially from men. I think she flirted with Levin because he was there, rather than because she meant something serious by it.

My two cents.

[Suprita]

Jacqueline wrote: "I'm sorry, but I can not abide women who let themselves be pushed around so much by society and the moralists of the day. Tess of the D'Ubervilles, is another, and The French Lieutenant's Woman......"

He just reflected the personality of a woman in society, how usually society does behave. You cant take that POV as of author's. If disagree, pls read War & Peace where he has characterized many different characters of women.

[Mari]

Of course Tolstoy hate women, why wouldn't you hate her. He did. He has a madonna and whore complex showing us what a good girl should be like in Kitty, and what a bad girl is like in Anna. Personally I hate his views on women, sex, and religion to pieces.

[Inna]

Mari, I totally agree.

[[deleted user]]

I haven't really started reading the book yet, but I know what happens and based on what I've heard I really just don't know.

Anna seems like someone I would dislike, even hate, because she becomes so selfish.

That being said, I do admire her confidence and the fact that she loves her children. But I wouldn't do what she did, and I still find her selfish for doing what she did to her family anyway.

Anna is such a good representation of how no one person can possibly have only one characteristic, but how they can be stereotyped as such. :D

[Tawni]

Yes I absolutely loathed her by the end. I have never been so irate after finishing a book. Ever. It is such a gigantic book and took so long to read. I wanted to throw it out the window. I've never reacted this way before.
She wasn't likeable very long and she just got worse and worse. She infuriated me. She knew what the consequences of her actions would be when she did them but her behavior did not reflect that. Crazy and selfish.

[Lynsey]

I personally found Anna to be tiresome about midway through the book. "Blah blah blah, I miss my son, blah blah blah, I don't love my baby, blah blah blah, my man's gonna leave me lonely, boo hoo hoo." That basically sums of her stream-of-consciousness from the time she left Karenin to her end. I could sympathize with her situation, especially since she had no power over her husband's actions as he was being manipulated by others, but she was so dishonest and insecure. Her one redeeming quality COULD have been her love for her son, but I couldn't really believe even that. Basically, she was never really happy with what she had. A person like that deserves no pity.

[Tweedledum]

I think it's hard to imagine the isolation, loneliness and sense of being trapped Anna has. She is cruel to Karenin who seems amazingly tolerant for a man of his time and place but what opportunity did she, or any other women of that time have to discover who she is... Or What she wants before being trapped in a loveless marriage. Women in those times were not expected to have such feelings , such independence. I weep for her. If only she could have been reconciled to the escape Karenin offered.

What horrifies me now is that after women have fought so hard for emancipation and freedom countless numbers are being trafficked and abused all over the world and if anything the offensive by some men against women seems to have intensified. This I think makes Anna Karenina resonate anew.

[Asmaa]

Actually I loved Anna so much. I understood every single emotion she has experienced. Since she got married when she was 18 years old, and it was not out of love, I find it quite reasonable to fall in love and do what you call "stupid mistakes". I do not think these were stupid mistakes. She simply chose to live, after having such a boring life with her so very kind, yet cold, husband. At home they had no discussions about anything except Karenin's work and excellence. There was no room for spontaneity- their relationship was so formal.
On the other hand, there was Vronsky, who offered her all the craziness and passion that made her experience so many emotions in a very short time. Vronsky actually brought her back to life after being dead for so long.
About her loathe towards Karenin when she recovered, i think it was expected; she was sure her death was imminent, so she just wanted him to forgive her because she knew how much she hurt him, and how generous he was towards her. But after realizing what love actually is, she couldn't live with him again; how could she?
After all, I do agree that Anna was selfish and rude; but a passionate and charming woman like her cannot at all have an ordinary life, and that's why she could not settle for the life offered by Karenin.