Why do you not like Anna?

[bazarov]

johann cruyff wrote:

There is,IMO,a special kind of people who are never happy with their life.Never happy with what they have,who they have,especially in contrast to all those who haven't got anything.Those are the people who will always put blame on people surrounding them and look for reasons for their own discontent in the actions of others.Those are the self-centered,egocentric people who will stop at nothing in pursue of their own abstract happiness without looking back at those whose lives they have destroyed in the process.That's Anna Karenina.That's why I hate her.

Why would Anna be happy with her life? Why would anyone be happy with his life? From our perspective sometimes someone should be happy, but that doesn't necessarily means he or she is happy. Yes, Anna had husband, son and she was rich but she wasn't happy. Materialism is not happiness. You know the story about the peasant and his shirt? Same with Anna.

Anna never put blame on anyone. She just wanted some happiness she couldn't find in her marriage. If you remember, Anna said to Dolly: ''Ne želim nikome ništa dokazivati, želim samo normalno živjeti. Ne nanosim nikome zlo osim samoj sebi. Na to imam pravo, nije li tako? '' I really like that quote, so I still remember it. Society blamed her, she didn't blame no one. Actions of others - remember Stiva's actions. He act like Anna, but no one ever even got an idea to think about him, and Anna was excluded from society.

Anna's road to happiness - it's normal for every human to look for his happiness, and it's normal to be slightly egocentric in that. You're probably pointing on Vronsky or Karenin because I think her death maybe great impact on their lives. In order to make them happy, Anna also had to be happy; because if you want to make someone happy, you also have to be happy and Anna wasn't. And in situation where she supposed to choose who's happiness she want more; her choice was completely normal: she had chosen her! I don't find anything wrong in that, every normal human would be probably do the same.

[johann cruyff]

First of all,suicide is quite possibly the most egocentric thing you can do: I don't care how miserable you are,as long as you have someone,anyone,who cares about you,even in cold manner a la Karenin,you don't kill yourself.If you have two children,why not let them fulfill your life?You don't kill yourself.Anna could be viewed as an egocentric monster,placing herself before her children,a man(well,two men) who love her(sorry,loved her,but that's her fault,and her fault only),her family.I guess the only way I could condone suicide is if the person has no one,and I mean no one in this world.Yes,then the world becomes a cold,ruthless,scary place - one in which I,too,would hate to find myself in.

But that's not the position she found herself in.I seriously can't find a good quality in this character - she was the only guilty party - and even her suicide is just icing on the cake - yes,I've destroyed several lives already,mostly because I don't appreciate that which most others don't have,but hey,why should I face any consequences?I'll just kill myself - what an easy way to escape.As for the rest of them - screw them!(I think this word best describes what I'm looking to say )

And I don't agree that we should,or can,place our own,totally individual happiness before everything and everyone.My spiritual world,yes,that's my business,and I have the right to act according to my preferences,but if that happiness transcends my personal world and affects at least a dozen other people so directly - I have no right to act the way Anna Karenina acted.

That about sums it up,if you're not convinced,please bear in mind that the arguments of both of us would probably sound a lot better in our native language(s).

[bazarov]

I agree that suicide doesn't solve anything but that's Russian realism, you just have to die!

His cold love was one thing that was destroying her life so I don't think she had to care for him, actually she would be much better without his love. I agree that she had Anna and Seryozha, but actually she didn't have them, at least not in normal way. Seryozha was taken away from her and little Anna was remembering her how here life once was. Vronski also - he was showing love on very strange way. Whenever she needed him, he just ran away with his buddies ( he was also under influence of those macho things and leaving although he did regret in his head, but that's not enough). I think that we have to realize that all that situation left some impact on her, she just couldn't stay normal!


I didn't mean out happiness should be in front of everything and everyone ( yes, I would like to use native language now ), but also everyone shouldn't be in front of our happiness. Yes, child-parent or husband-wife OK, but that's it! (glupi engleski !) Look, I think that we have to try live in some normal relations with our environment, but some things should never be questioned because of nothing and nobody. If they are, goodbye everyone!

[johann cruyff]

I agree that suicide doesn't solve anything but that's Russian realism, you just have to die!

Have you read Steppenwolf?If so,do you remember that little book that Heller finds,the one about lonely Wolves and suicide?That's where it is best described - that kind of suicide I can understand.So,I'd say,you don't have to die in Russian realism,and if you do,well,it's your fault.

BTW,I'm much more well versed in modern literature,that's my cup of tea,so yeah,you could probably take me down in discussions like these.See you when you look to talk about Kafka,Hesse,Camus,Sartre etc.

[bazarov]

So,I'd say,you don't have to die in Russian realism,and if you do,well,it's your fault.

BTW,I'm much more well versed in modern literature,that's my cup of tea,so yeah,you could probably take me down in discussions like these.See you when you look to talk about Kafka,Hesse,Camus,Sartre etc.

I meant that in Russian realism everyone dies, mostly from their own hands and so did Anna.

Well, I read Camus and Kafka and I am always ready to discuss, but Hesse and Sartre are not my area. At least, not now.

[johann cruyff]

I meant that in Russian realism everyone dies, mostly from their own hands and so did Anna.

I know what you meant.Yes,they mostly die in realism,but their suicide comes as a consequence of their own actions.Hence,it's their fault.In modern literature,however,their impending death doesn't come as an act of redemption,but as a reaction to the surroundings.

[Etienne]

Do you think people who kill themselves are in a normal state of mind? Depression is a mental sickness, and I don't think any of us are in measure to judge suicide. Also, I believe that our own life is the supreme thing of which we should be completely free about.

"If you have two children,why not let them fulfill your life?You don't kill yourself.Anna could be viewed as an egocentric monster,placing herself before her children,a man(well,two men) who love her(sorry,loved her,but that's her fault,and her fault only),her family."

And if someone simply decides to leave the men/women who love them, is that being an egocentric monster?

[Gladys]

Vronski also - he was showing love on very strange way. Whenever she needed him, he just ran away with his buddies (he was also under influence of those macho things and leaving although he did regret in his head, but that's not enough).

To say that Vronsky ‘just ran away’ seems less than fair. His sustained devotion to Anna was remarkable in the circumstances but all of us need room to move. With her claustrophobic love, Anna would have distanced anyone. Vronsky was fighting for Anna’s sanity and his own…both losing battles in the end.

If Vronsky living with Anna is blameless, I agree that drug addled Anna’s behaviour deteriorates terribly. In her defence, her social situation is worse than Vronsky’s, although the plight of a young, rich, married couple with a healthy daughter, well respected in the local community, is hardly Spartan. But is johann cruyff right to condemn her for leaving cold Karenin? Should she, a young woman, have simply made the best of a loveless relationship…for Seryozha sake? Did she marry too young to understand? And did she indeed place her ‘own, totally individual happiness before everything’? A more interesting question: would she have been happier in the long term had she stayed with Karenin?

Levin sought fulfilment through labour: his writing, farming, affinity with the peasantry, family life and the ultimately, the sacred. Having found romance wanting, Kitty flirted with philanthropy before looking beyond. Anna and Vronsky’s quest for happiness through romantic love was double edged. Vronsky conscientiously looked for pastimes complementary to his life with Anna, until an increasingly self-centred Anna suicided. Did Anna fare worse with Karenin?

Also a lover of Kafka, Camus and Kierkegaard, I tend to see suicide as a whim of the moment, with consequences for those left behind.

[johann cruyff]

Do you think people who kill themselves are in a normal state of mind? Depression is a mental sickness, and I don't think any of us are in measure to judge suicide. Also, I believe that our own life is the supreme thing of which we should be completely free about.

Of course not.But I firmly believe that the act of suicide in modern literature can be somewhat justified,as opposed to what Anna K. did,which was just selfish and egoistic.

And if someone simply decides to leave the men/women who love them, is that being an egocentric monster?

Obviously,love is a two-way street,and someone shouldn't be forced to spend their life with someone who they have no interest in.However,this Karenin situation was far different,given the background of it.(years together,a child,love that at least existed)With that in mind,yes,I do think her leaving him was egocentric.

[Etienne]

Of course not.But I firmly believe that the act of suicide in modern literature can be somewhat justified,as opposed to what Anna K. did,which was just selfish and egoistic.

Hmm? I don't see your point here.

Obviously,love is a two-way street,and someone shouldn't be forced to spend their life with someone who they have no interest in.However,this Karenin situation was far different,given the background of it.(years together,a child,love that at least existed)With that in mind,yes,I do think her leaving him was egocentric.

Well let's agree to disagree then...

[bazarov]

I know what you meant.Yes,they mostly die in realism,but their suicide comes as a consequence of their own actions.Hence,it's their fault.In modern literature,however,their impending death doesn't come as an act of redemption,but as a reaction to the surroundings.

I think society made greater influence on Anna's death then in Mersault's case, for example so; so I don't think you can blame her for everything. If society had acted normal to her ( not normal from today's perception; I would consider it as something like they did to Stiva), I think nothing serious would happen.

To say that Vronsky ‘just ran away’ seems less than fair. His sustained devotion to Anna was remarkable in the circumstances but all of us need room to move. With her claustrophobic love, Anna would have distanced anyone. Vronsky was fighting for Anna’s sanity and his own…both losing battles in the end.

But there are some situations when ''room to move''isn't priority. When she said please stay, I need you; he ran away with his buddies. That's not fair!

But is johann cruyff right to condemn her for leaving cold Karenin? Should she, a young woman, have simply made the best of a loveless relationship…for Seryozha sake? Did she marry too young to understand? And did she indeed place her ‘own, totally individual happiness before everything’? A more interesting question: would she have been happier in the long term had she stayed with Karenin?

Mother should leave any personal interests when child is an a question and in this point I agree with johanncruyff.

No, I think things would been even worse if she stayed with him, escalation was just a question of time.

Also, we shouldn't compare Anna with Levin because he was too too idealized.

Obviously,love is a two-way street,and someone shouldn't be forced to spend their life with someone who they have no interest in.However,this Karenin situation was far different,given the background of it.(years together,a child,love that at least existed)With that in mind,yes,I do think her leaving him was egocentric.

Only Seryozha is important, other things like love and friendship come and go. She should realize that.

[Gladys]

No, I think things would been even worse if she stayed with him, escalation was just a question of time.

Had the gracious and noble Anna - as she surely was before meeting Vronsky - stayed faithful to Karenin, would she have been driven to drugs, despair and suicide? I think not. In the beginning she had friends, relatives and a beloved son; she was a woman of remarkable poise and dignity. However unpalatable to our romantic notions a cold marriage may be, a virtuous Anna would have survived more or less intact until husband Karenin died. I find this paradox fascinating.

Alternatively, if Anna, like brother Stiva and the odd duchess, had merely indulged in a passing affairs, all may have been well, since her marriage was already cold. Her downfall seems to have been an everlasting and heartfelt commitment out of wedlock. In a sense, she is punished for loyalty and integrity, were it not for Seryozha. But can we, in part, blame Karenin here? He could have released the child, for whom he cared little.

[PoeticPassions]

johann cruyff wrote:



Anna never put blame on anyone. She just wanted some happiness she couldn't find in her marriage. If you remember, Anna said to Dolly: ''Ne želim nikome ništa dokazivati, želim samo normalno živjeti. Ne nanosim nikome zlo osim samoj sebi. Na to imam pravo, nije li tako? '' I really like that quote, so I still remember it. Society blamed her, she didn't blame no one. Actions of others - remember Stiva's actions. He act like Anna, but no one ever even got an idea to think about him, and Anna was excluded from society.

interesting... why do you quote Tolstoy's work in Bosnian? "I do not wish to prove anything to anyone, I wish only to live normally...."

just wondering

[johann cruyff]

interesting... why do you quote Tolstoy's work in Bosnian? "I do not wish to prove anything to anyone, I wish only to live normally...."

just wondering

Because both bazarov and myself speak Croatian and Bosnian,respectively,as our native languages.

[bazarov]

But can we, in part, blame Karenin here? He could have released the child, for whom he cared little.

No, we cannot blame Karenin. Why? What did he do? She had an affair, what was shocking for those times, she embarrassed him and then he would suppose to give her a child? His only child and a son? No way! He didn't cared little, it's in male's nature that he shows feelings lesser then females. It was his son and he loved him same like Anna did.
What situation would we have if Anna did get Seryozha? Affair, divorce and a child? So Anna gets everything and it's impossible for her or anyone to come out of situation like that as a winner. We could wish Anna's happiness but that would be not real. And this is realism... Sorry Anna.

interesting... why do you quote Tolstoy's work in Bosnian? "I do not wish to prove anything to anyone, I wish only to live normally...."

just wondering

Because I started this thread like a debate with johanncruyff ( of course, everyone else is also welcomed) and I knew he will understand me, and I don't like to quote wrong and I am too lazy to search it in english translation, and Croatian is closer to Russian original.