This is my second time reading this novel, and what I remember about it, chiefly, was that Karenin was a horrible husband and Anna was entitled to love and passion. So it surprised me, this time around, to meet Karenin in Part 1 and think he wasn’t such a bad husband, after all. He didn’t seem so bad when he met her at the train station after her return from Moscow. Anna stayed in that first day and enjoyed being with her son and seemed quite content with her whole life. Karenin makes it clear that he trusts her completely and will always be faithful to her. When she tells him about her brother’s affair, he says he doesn’t “consider it possible to excuse a man like that, even though he is your brother.” He kissed her hand before going off to read and she describes him as “a good man, nonetheless – honest, kindhearted, and remarkable in his own profession.”

Yet when she goes to bed that night, “all her fire seemed altogether extinguised, or hidden somewhere far away.”

It surprised me too, to see how hard Anna tried, or seemed to at least, to avoid succumbing to Vronsky’s attentions. I was also kind of surprised that Anna fell so quickly for him after his declarations that “you are all of my life. For myself you and I are one.” She had had declarations of affection and love from other men. She had even told Karenin about them. Yet she had never fallen in love with them. Was Vronsky just more persistent than the others… or was there really a soulful connection right from the beginning? I wonder about that on my second reading, 20 years older and a mother myself now. I think when I was younger, I just accepted that they were soulmates and this was meant to be. I think this time I might be more critical of Anna.

I am definitely more sympathetic to Karenin, even though he is remote and cold. I don’t like him any more than I did the first time around. I just feel sorry for him, because I think, now, that he really does love Anna but is too repressed to show emotions.

And what’s with the separate beds in the same bedroom, like I Love Lucy? Even the night he first broached the subject with her, he goes to sleep in his separate bed while she is “eager” for him to say more. But he falls asleep. I wonder how they even have a son in the first place.

Tolstoy’s handling of their first sexual encounter was surprising. After they’ve waited A YEAR to finally sleep together, instead of a rapturous, joyous experience, the feel like murderers. The entire passage is the antithesis of erotica. “sinful, guilty, a murderer, deprived of life, horrifying, repulsive, shame, horror” “That body had to be cut in pieces and hidden away; the murderer had to make use of what he had gained by the murder.” Her face is “pathetic.” She speaks with “frigid despair.”

The problem with that scenario is that it makes me wonder how they could have faced each other again at all. And this is how Tolstoy convinces us that they really must be soulmates to suffer as they do. Even here, Anna wonders why this is so difficult for her when plenty of the other women have ‘lovers’ and aren’t bothered by it. Vronsky’s friends and family don’t mind that he’s having an affair with Anna until it crosses the line of ‘an acceptable affair’ and becomes something more intense.

Once again, in a society where such hypocritical behavior is the norm, Karenin, with his lofty morals, looks like a good husband. Except that those morals prevent passion, and Anna is a beautiful, sensual woman in an immoral society.


If you’ve read ahead, please don’t discuss events after Parts 1 & 2.

If you are behind, don’t worry. You post or comment whenever you are ready. This is a guilt-free reading group. Reading should be about enjoyment, not guilt.

I finished the reading this morning, and will probably post tonight.

Let’s use this post as a place to have a general discussion in the comments. Everyone is welcome to post their own posts. If you have trouble signing in as an administrator, let me know. My e-mail: raehan at agogandaghast dot com.

Initial themes that come to mind: Petersburg vs. Moscow culture; Old Russia vs. new; Tolstoy’s portrayal of the nobility; pretence vs. reality; Does Tolstoy believe it’s possible to be good?; religion; nihilism; pietism; marriage. Then there are the characters. Is anybody likeable in this book? Does Tolstoy like anybody in this book?

We have different translations, I wonder how that will affect our reading. I have a modern translation that is very rich and alive. The translators are Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky. They’ve won a few awards for the translations. I hope all of you also have enjoyable translations.

We can start with general impressions and then take the reading on theme by theme.

If I remember correctly, these are the folks that have expressed interest in participating in addition to Catherine and me: Stephanie, Kyla, Jen, Kismet, Babette, Tamara….and Moreena, right? Forgive me if I’ve left you off. Please let me know and I’ll add you. Also, latecomers are always welcome. Join in, all.

Tonight I’ll check my comments to make sure I haven’t left anyone out, and then I’ll send out a group e-mail, inviting you to register as administrators. I also want to put all participants on the blogroll and also put the reading schedule on the sidebar.

I’m on schedule to post my comments on Parts 1 & 2 on Wednesday and hope you all are too! Some of you have registered with, so you’ll be able to post. For everyone else, please feel free to comment… and email me if you want to get in on posting before the next deadline.

Happy Reading….