Epigraph interpretation. The tragedy of Anna in the novel "Anna Karenina" L
"Vengeance is mine and I will repay"
Tolstoy chose this phrase as an epigraph to his novel. It means "Vengeance lies upon me, and it will come from me" (I will take revenge, not you). This phrase is found in the Old Testament (Fifth Book of Moses) and in the New Testament (The Epistle to the Romans of the Apostle Paul, ch. 12, v. 19): “Do not avenge yourself, beloved, but give place to the wrath of God. For it is written: Vengeance is mine; I will repay, says the Lord.
From a moral point of view, revenge is wrong. It promotes the spread of evil. Evil breeds evil, revenge breeds greater evil. Christian tradition teaches to forgive one's enemies and not take revenge on them. Revenge brings nothing to the avenger.
At the same time, action breeds reaction, and any evil will eventually be punished. However, it is not for people to decide who is to blame for what.
In the context of the novel, this manifests itself in the following way. Nobody took revenge on Anna, her Christian husband forgave her and tried to make her feel good. And it would seem that Anna is with the one she loves, no one interferes with their happiness, she should be happy with Vronsky. But they are anxious, despite their love, they are burdened by each other, an anxious atmosphere reigns between them, they are nervous, anxious, jealous, distrustful of each other. Ultimately, this exhausts Anna, she can no longer take it, and she throws herself under the train.
Almost everyone who wrote about the novel wrote about the epigraph to Tolstoy's novel "Anna Karenina". Some believed that Tolstoy, in accordance with the epigraph, condemned Anna Karenina (R. V. Ivanov-Razumnik, M. S. Gromeka). Others argued that only God can be a judge and punish Anna for violating the universal laws of morality - for her passionate, selfish love for Vronsky (F. M. Dostoevsky, V. V. Veresaev, D. S. Merezhkovsky, N. N. Ardens , I. N. Uspensky, E. A. Maimin, F. I. Kuleshov, I. F. Eremina). There was such a point of view that Anna herself punishes herself for her sins, and the words of the epigraph do not refer to Karenina, but to secular society, which has no right to judge the heroine (B. M. Eichenbaum, E. N Kupreyanova, V. Ya. Linkov, V. V. Nabokov). B. M. Eikhenbaum, B. I. Bursov, G. M. Palisheva, T. P. Tsapko extended the influence of the ideas of the epigraph to other heroes of the novel. N. N. Gusev, M. B. Khrapchenko, E. G. Babaev, V. Z. Gornaya considered the religious significance of the biblical epigraph (as understood by Tolstoy).
For the formation of the reader's attitude, not only the epigraph is important, but also its origin; temporal, spatial, sociocultural, personological remoteness of the source.
The epigraph to his novel "Anna Karenina" L.N. Tolstoy chose words from the New Testament. The Epistle to the Romans of the Apostle Paul, ch. 12, Art. 19: “Do not avenge yourselves, beloved, but give place to the wrath of God. For it is written: Vengeance is mine; I will repay, says the Lord.
This epigraph has its own history. V.A. Zhdanov in his work “The Creative History of Anna Karenina” dwells on it in detail. He writes that the idea of introducing an epigraph was first reflected on a sheet with separate entries for the novel. Among them is the entry: "My Vengeance." In the fourth incomplete edition of the novel, an epigraph appeared: "My vengeance." Probably, from memory, Tolstoy quoted the beginning of the biblical saying: “I have vengeance and retribution” (Deuteronomy, ch. 32, art. 35). And while working on the eighth edition of the first part of the novel, Tolstoy added the epigraph: “Vengeance is mine, and I will repay,” i.e., he quoted the text of the Gospel from the Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Romans (ch. 12, article 19), but introduced the union and ( canonical text: "Vengeance is mine, I will repay"). Most likely, Tolstoy entered it out of inertia, perhaps remembering the union in the biblical text. It is hardly possible to unconditionally assert, as B. M. Eikhenbaum does, that Tolstoy originally took this biblical saying from Schopenhauer's book The World as Will and Representation. Tolstoy read the work of Schopenhauer in 1869, and the Bible, the Gospel, the Epistle of the Apostle Paul, which Tolstoy knew very well even before, were in his hands just in the seventies, when the ABC was created and printed with four Slavic books for reading , each of which included passages from the Bible and the Gospel.
So, the epigraph is a sign that refers the reader to the original text, actualizing memories and complex associations between two works in his mind. The epigraph “Vengeance is mine and I will repay” refers us, readers and researchers, to the Epistle of the Apostle Paul, which also contains a reference to the Old Testament Fifth Book of Moses. In Deuteronomy (chapter 32, verse 35) we read: "Vengeance and recompense are with me, when their foot is shaken...".
How should one understand the words of the Apostle Paul, to which L.N. Tolstoy?
Theophylact of Bulgaria in the “Annunciation” [book 3, M., 2002, 110-111] interprets this verse as follows: “Give room to the wrath of God in relation to those who offend you. If you avenge yourself, then God will not avenge you; and if you forgive, then God will avenge more severely.
This idea is developed in more detail in the “Interpretation of the Epistle of the Holy Apostle Paul” [Creations of Theophan the Recluse, M., 1879, 239-242]: “... most of all, attention should be paid to the impulse to non-vengeance presented here, namely, committing the case to the judgment of God. There is an avenger of truth - God. He will repay if he must. The wrath of God is His righteous retribution: for God does not have anger, but there is a righteous retribution, which seems to be anger to those who are exposed to it.
Vengeance is upon me, I will repay, the Lord says - “God takes upon himself the matter of vengeance. Do not interfere in this matter, He says, as if, I myself will repay. You won't be able to do it the right way. According to you now it is necessary to take revenge, but in the best order, it is better to postpone revenge, either for a while, or at all. You can do without revenge at all: the offender himself will come to his senses and correct his untruth; and this is much better. Take revenge on him now, and he will become more hardened. I sent this slander to you for your iniquities and your sins, in order to save you from future retribution. With Me, everything is directed to ensure that good comes out of everything for everyone - not temporal, but eternal, not earthly, but heavenly, not visible, but spiritual.
Thus, we understand the words Vengeance to me and Az I will repay as a call to non-vengeance, a call not to judge your neighbor, not to respond with evil to evil, because only God has the right to avenge and repay. Vengeance is not for human judgment.
It is interesting to consider Tolstoy's epigraph from the point of view of language. To the modern reader, the pronoun ME is presented in the form of the dative case. This brings other meanings to the interpretation. However, in the Old Church Slavonic form ME corresponds to the modern Genitive case with the meaning of belonging! (cf. st / sl. Forever and ever - srya forever and ever). Those. should be read like this: vengeance is with me, coming from me = my vengeance. Thus, the words of the Lord become clear, which indicate the right of vengeance and retribution that belongs to Him.
The word vengeance goes back to the word REVENGE - related to ltsh. miju "to change", OE Ind. mḗthati, mitháti "scolds", mithás "mutually alternating", Avest. miϑa- "perverse, false", lat. mūtō, -āre "to change", mūtuus "mutual, mutual", Goth. missô adv. "each other", missa-dēÞs "crime". [Fasmer. Etymological dictionary of the Russian language]. Obviously a negative connotation.
Az - Old Slavonic pronoun of the 1st person singular, resp. modern I. In modern language it has a book coloring,
REPUT, (bookish rhetoric.). 1. what. To give, to provide, to provide (in return, as a reward for something). Give honor to someone. Give justice. Give due credit. 2. than for what. Repay. Return good for evil. [Dictionary of Ushakov].
Note that in the canonical text there is no union I.L.N. Tolstoy introduces him. For what? Thus, the author avoids exact quoting, as if bringing the sacred text closer to everyday speech: the clarity and unconditionality of the canonical “Vengeance is mine, Az I will repay” is lost. Each hero, as it were, can “try on” this saying, take the right to judge. At the same time, vengeance and retribution, thanks to the connecting union, which expresses equal relations, are placed on the same level. In the artistic world of Tolstoy, revenge and retribution seem to merge. From here, it seems to us, is the special “living life” in the novel: good does not always win immediately, everything goes well for some heroes, while others are severely punished by higher powers.
Of course, without understanding the meaning of the epigraph, it is impossible to adequately perceive the main ideas of Tolstoy's work. Everyone who wrote about the novel (and it was mainly about the fate of Anna Karenina) wrote about the epigraph "Vengeance is mine, and I will repay" to the novel "Anna Karenina", trying to unravel its essence. However, the question of the meaning of the epigraph in relation to the novel is still debatable.
Zhdanov in his work gives such a case. Nearly thirty years after finishing Anna Karenina, Tolstoy received a letter from two sixth grade girls from Vologda. They asked “in what relation to the content of the novel“ Anna Karenina ”is the epigraph:“ Vengeance is mine, and I will repay“, and expressed how they understand it: “We think this way: that a person who violates moral rules will be punished” . On the envelope of their letter dated October 29, 1906, Tolstoy wrote: "You are right."
In the original editions of the novel (in one of the earliest it was ironically titled "Well Done Baba") the heroine was drawn both physically, externally, and mentally, internally, unattractive. Her husband looked much prettier. Researchers argue whether this text is the first autograph to the novel. When preparing the text of the novel for publication in the new Complete Works of L.N. Tolstoy in 100 tons, it turned out that this was the first autograph of the novel.
The idea of the plot of the novel is connected with the plot of Pushkin's "Eugene Onegin": "Obviously, "Anna Karenina" begins with what "Eugene Onegin" ends with. Tolstoy believed that in general the story should begin with the fact that the hero got married or the heroine got married<…>. In the harmonious world of Pushkin, the balance of marriage is preserved. In the confused world of Tolstoy's novel, it collapses. Yet even in Anna Karenina, epic triumphs over tragedy. The search for the meaning of life, which haunts Levin, lies, however, not only outside love, but even the family, although Leo Tolstoy was inspired in this novel by “family thought” .
The novel rests on "couplings", like "War and Peace". The action continues after the death of the main character.
The main character, Anna Karenina, is a delicate and conscientious nature, she is connected with her lover Count Vronsky by a real, strong feeling. Anna's husband, a high-ranking official Karenin, seems to be soulless and callous, although at certain moments he is capable of high, truly Christian, kind feelings. “Karenon” in Greek (from Homer) “head”, from December 1870 Tolstoy studied Greek. According to Tolstoy's confession to his son Sergei, the surname "Karenin" is derived from this word. “Isn’t it because he gave such a surname to Anna’s husband that Karenin is a head man, that in him reason prevails over the heart, that is, feeling?”
Tolstoy creates circumstances that seem to justify Anna. The writer tells in the novel about the connections of another secular lady, Betsy Tverskoy. She does not advertise these connections, does not flaunt them, and enjoys a high reputation and respect in society. Anna, on the other hand, is open and honest, she does not hide her relationship with Vronsky and seeks to achieve a divorce from her husband. Nevertheless, Tolstoy judges Anna on behalf of God himself. The retribution for cheating on her husband is the suicide of the heroine. Her death is a manifestation of divine judgment: As an epigraph to the novel, Tolstoy chose the words of God from the biblical book of Deuteronomy in the Church Slavonic translation: “Vengeance is mine, and I will repay.”
Anna commits suicide, but it is not divine retribution - the meaning of Anna's divine punishment is not revealed by Tolstoy. (In addition, according to Tolstoy, not only Anna deserves the highest judgment, but also other characters who have committed a sin - first of all, Vronsky.) Anna's guilt for Tolstoy is in evading the destiny of his wife and mother. Communication with Vronsky is not only a violation of marital duty. It leads to the destruction of the Karenin family: their son Seryozha is now growing up without a mother, and Anna and her husband fight each other for their son. Anna's love for Vronsky is not a high feeling, in which a spiritual principle prevails over physical attraction, but a blind and destructive passion. Her symbol is a furious blizzard, during which Anna and Vronsky explain. According to B. M. Eikhenbaum, “the interpretation of passion as an elemental force, as a“ fatal duel ”, and the image of a woman dying in this duel, are the main motives of Anna Karenina prepared by Tyutchev’s lyrics”
Anna deliberately goes against the divine law that protects the family. This is her fault for the author.
Later, Tolstoy wrote about the biblical saying - the epigraph to Anna Karenina: “People do a lot of bad things to themselves and to each other only because weak, sinful people have taken upon themselves the right to punish other people. “Vengeance is mine, and I will repay.” Only God punishes, and then only through the person himself. According to A. A. Fet, “Tolstoy points to“ I will repay ”not as a rod of a squeamish mentor, but as a punitive force of things. Tolstoy rejects harsh moralism, the desire to judge one’s neighbor - only callous and sanctimonious-pious natures like a countess are capable of this Lydia Ivanovna, who turned Karenin against Anna. “The epigraph of the novel, so categorical in its direct, original meaning, opens up to the reader with another possible meaning: “Vengeance is mine, and I will repay.” Only God has the right to punish, and people do not have the right to judge. This is not only a different meaning, but also the opposite of the original. In the novel, the pathos of unresolved is increasingly revealed. Depths, truths - and therefore unresolved.
<…>In “Anna Karenina” there is no one exclusive and unconditional truth - in it many truths coexist and simultaneously collide with each other, ”E. A. Maimin interprets the epigraph in this way.
But another interpretation is possible. According to Christ, "from everyone to whom much is given, much will be required." Anna was given more than those who are not faithful to Betsy Tverskaya or Steve Oblonsky. She is spiritually richer and thinner than them. And more severely exacted from her. Such an interpretation corresponds to the meaning of the epigraph to the text of the first completed edition of the novel: "One and the same business of marriage is fun for some, the wisest thing in the world for others." For Anna, marriage is not fun, and the more difficult is her sin.
In Tolstoy's novel, three storylines are connected - the stories of three families. These three stories are both similar and different at the same time. Anna chooses love, ruining her family. Dolly, the wife of her brother Stiva Oblonsky, for the sake of the happiness and well-being of her children, reconciles with her husband who cheated on her. Konstantin Levin, by marrying Dolly's young and charming sister, Kitty Shcherbatskaya, seeks to create a truly spiritual and pure marriage in which husband and wife become one, similarly feeling and thinking being. On this path, temptations and difficulties lie in wait for him. Levin loses understanding of his wife: Kitty is alien to his desire for simplification, rapprochement with the people.
Anna's suicide - it is very important that this is the suicide of a woman who thinks that her lover has lost interest in her, and not a "philosophical" decision to commit suicide - it is difficult to call it an "output of strength and energy." But nevertheless, in the main comparison of the novel and the treatise is justified.
The story of Levin's marriage to Kitty, their marriage, and Levin's spiritual quest is autobiographical. (The surname should be pronounced “Levin”, Tolstoy was called “Lev Nikolaevich” in the home circle, in accordance with the Russian, and not the Church Slavonic pronunciation norm. It largely reproduces episodes of the marriage and family life of Lev Nikolaevich and Sofya Andreevna. So, Levin’s explanation with Kitty by means of the first letters written in small letters in words - exactly corresponds to the explanation of Tolstoy with Sofya Andreevna, described in the diary of the writer's wife... They have easily recognizable prototypes and other characters of the novel, for example, the prototype of Levin's brother is the writer's brother Dmitry Nikolayevich.
A distinctive artistic feature of the novel is the repetition of situations and images that play the role of predictions and foreshadowings. Anna and Vronsky meet at the railway station. At the moment of the first meeting, when Anna accepted the first sign of attention from a new acquaintance, the train coupler was crushed by the train. An explanation of Vronsky and Anna also takes place at the railway station. Vronsky's cooling off towards Anna leads her to commit suicide: Anna throws herself under a train. The image of the railway is correlated in the novel with the motives of passion, mortal threat, cold and soulless metal. Anna's death and Vronsky's guilt are foreseen in the horse racing scene, when Vronsky, due to his awkwardness, breaks the back of the beautiful mare Frou-Frou. The death of the horse, as it were, portends the fate of Anna. Anna's dreams are symbolic, in which she sees a man working with iron. His image echoes the images of railway employees and is fanned by threat and death. Metal and the railway are endowed with a frightening meaning in the novel.
A blizzard, a whirlwind, during which Vronsky and Anna meet on the platform, is symbolic. This is a sign of the elements, fatal and unbridled passion. The dream in which Anna hears a voice predicting death in childbirth is also full of deep meaning: Anna dies in childbirth, but not when she gives birth to a daughter, but when, in love for Vronsky, she herself is born to a new life: birth does not take place, she does not love her daughter could, the lover ceases to understand her.
In Anna Karenina, Tolstoy uses the technique of an internal monologue, describing chaotic, arbitrarily changing observations, impressions of the world around him and the thoughts of the heroine (Anna, who is going to the station after a quarrel with Vronsky).
12. Epigraph to "Anna Karenina"
"Anna Karenina" bears an epigraph that surprises everyone: "Vengeance is mine, and I will repay." This epigraph was discussed a lot, it was interpreted many times; Tolstoy did not give his final interpretation.
The epigraph is often born in order not only to color the reader's emotions with his own emotions, but also to leave him in the country of the energy of delusion.
Tolstoy did not know what he would write.
The novel began to be published before it was completed.
The novel lived and changed. Anna Karenina was changing; the attitude of the author to what he creates has changed.
This woman is small at first. She is beautiful, but beautiful in the usual way. There is a landowner looking for a way in life, but there is no breadth of the future novel. The work was started for the rest. Tolstoy wanted to write about the ordinary and speak in ordinary words. This is what he failed to do. He came to the work after the successes of "War and Peace"; but "War and Peace" began with a failure, with the story "The Decembrists".
We know it worked out.
The novel became great. But this is a different work, with a different title, with different characters.
There is a Central Asian legend about how a great poet, who lived very poorly, ended his epic (I forgot the name); when he died, a funeral procession left from one gate, and a magnificent procession from the Shah with congratulations and gifts passed through the other gate.
It's like a story about glory, about late-coming glory.
Fine, but false; or, let's say, it is true, but there is another, another is just as true: the poet leaves the gate already out of glory. He goes to seek refuge from what is called fame, and fame is printed on a sheet of, say, a newspaper; but in the time of Homer there were no newspapers, and there was no glory.
The name "Anna Karenina" appears and a note that this novel is made on separate sheets, it is, as it were, an appendix. It appears in four versions.
The title "Anna Karenina" and the epigraph appear: "Vengeance is mine, and I will repay."
This is an incorrect quote. Such a quote cannot be found in the Bible.
But there seems to be a similar thought: “Vengeance is mine, I will repay” (“Epistle to the Romans”, 12.19).
In the novel, when Anna Karenina dies, there, on the railway platform, next to which the rails pass, this is how the emphasized death is indicated.
The old woman Vronskaya, about whom it is written in the novel that she was very depraved, a woman who knew no barriers in quiet depravity, the countess says about Anna: “... and then she still didn’t feel sorry for him, but purposely killed him completely ... women without religion.
Anna Karenina ruined her son's career and even quarreled with his mother and died somehow on purpose.
Tolstoy's novel, step by step, releases the woman whom he considered the first guilty in the Shcherbatsky family. Tolstoy, as it were, loved - he did not love anyone - this Tolstoy chose Lisa in the Bers family, it was well-intentioned, then Sonya, it was flattering - he considered himself an old man.
In the family novel, Tolstoy loves Anna Karenina.
So from a previously abandoned religion, a person independently finds a red corner that is no longer associated with religion.
He is relieved by fatigue.
In his novel, he creates Anna Karenina with difficulty; it seemed to him at first that there was something of Stiva Oblonsky in her, that she was too "com-il-fo," that she knew how to "forget" in vain.
In his novel, the writer wanted to fall in love with Kitty, the youngest daughter of Senator Shcherbatsky. In choosing between Anna Karenina and Kitty, Tolstoy chose Kitty, in life, not in a dream, and in this he seemed to agree with Vronsky.
Although Vronsky was just having fun. He played in love, and she swallowed him up.
Tolstoy chose Kitty, but loves Anna Karenina.
He justifies the woman.
He expanded her world.
Although, perhaps, he wanted to protect the world from himself with a woman.
And we must repeat: Alexei Maksimovich Gorky said: strange, she dies beautiful, she walked around Rome, but she did not see Rome. He does not have a line about Rome, as if she had not seen him.
Kitty is a good mother; she will have a lot of children; she is glad that she is making a nest for a future life; and she makes jam at Levin's house, but in her own way, in her mother's way.
In order not to upset her husband with such first news, Kitty did not think at the wedding, her husband thought for her; but she smiled.
Sofya Andreevna was pleased with the appearance of the novel, its success; the heroes of The Kreutzer Sonata and, perhaps, The Death of Ivan Ilyich were grieved for him, because the curtains that Ivan Ilyich hung in his apartment are exactly the same and hung exactly the way, with a pickup, as L. N. himself hung them Tolstoy in the house he built; like the ladder he made; did everything for Kitty, nice house. Moderately rich, but Tolstoy could build better.
And in this modest house, he found a low, albeit wide room, in which he wrote a book of disappointments on a very small table, fenced with bars so that the sheets would not fall.
Mikhoels said that Tolstoy rejected Shakespeare, but repeated the story of King Lear.
There was a big family, and the boys wanted to live separately, in their own way, and the girls wanted to get married; and, people who shared the fruits of great labor, they were even embarrassed, they even pitied their father; but everything was so ordinary.
Sofya Andreevna, an intelligent woman, led her six sons into the narrow corridor of ordinary life. She is sure that it is impossible to live differently; but she is kind.
She was giving Aleksey Maksimovich coffee to drink when he wandered up to her as a semi-tramp, who had not yet written anything.
She is the spirit of life.
She is the vengeance that belongs to the old world. He takes revenge for the fact that you wanted to defeat him alone.
Putting on his armor, taking his horse, a man is thirsty for his opponent to punish him, as he punished many.
* * *He managed to resurrect Katyusha Maslova. He examined at least ten books of noble genealogies, looking for the names of those who had left home, were lost.
Alexei, a man of God, left the house of his relatives and then came to them so that they would not recognize him.
And lived under the stairs.
He lived as a beggar in his ancestral home, in a dream he dreamed of the cry of his mother, who thought that he was gone.
More than he did, no one could do.
But all this was not enough for him.
And he showed the world, a new light, given not in retelling; he was an avid hunter, a hard worker, he gave birth to people, and we call them "types", and sent them into the world so that they, in their plurality, would see the world and tell it what it is.
He himself never changed the world. He was aware of the world as unsettled, and, as it seems, this is his task; he populated it with his children, created by him, not born, and there is no contradiction here with the line you just read.
We will say that he was unhappy, although any happy poet, I think, every winner would change with him and take his grief for his vision.
He taught me to see the world in a new way. He moved people away from the ordinary: from religion, from war, from greed, from the city; he did not make them happy, but he made them see.
"I will repay."
This was his revenge for their resistance.
But, turning the world, he could not get out of his rut.
The novel "Anna Karenina" (1873-1877), in contrast to the epic novel "War and Peace", dedicated to the depiction of the "heroic" era in the life of Russia, in the problems of "Anna Karenina" the "family thought" turned out to be in the foreground. The novel became a real "family epic": Tolstoy believed that it was in the family that one should look for the knot of modern social and moral problems. The family in his image is a sensitive barometer, reflecting the changes in public morality caused by the change in the entire post-reform way of life. Love and marriage, according to Tolstoy, cannot be considered only as a source of sensual pleasure. The most important thing is the moral obligations to the family and loved ones. The love of Anna Karenina and Vronsky is based only on the need for pleasure, and therefore leads to the spiritual separation of the characters, making them unhappy. But if Anna did not understand the requirements of the moral law, she would not have felt guilty either. There would be no tragedy. The tragedy of Anna's fate is predetermined not only by the callousness of the person whom she married not for love, the cruelty and hypocrisy of the world, the frivolity of Vronsky, but also by the very nature of her feelings. Anna in Tolstoy is an outstanding nature, spiritually rich, endowed with a lively moral sense. Love for Vronsky prompts her to realize herself more clearly than before, as a person, sharpens her critical instinct in relation to the world around her and to herself. And the main reason for her death is not so much the hypocrisy of the secular environment or an obstacle to obtaining a divorce, but the destructive effect of passion on her own soul, the inability to reconcile feelings for Vronsky and attachment to her son, and more broadly, the inability to find oneself in a world where "everything is not true." all lies, all deceit, all evil. The conflict between the pleasure obtained at the cost of the destruction of the family, and the duty to the son turned out to be insoluble. We are faced with a situation of moral choice.
Critic Babaev E.G. . - Anna is close to Levin precisely by this feeling of guilt, which indicates her deep moral nature. She was looking for moral support and did not find it. "All lies, all lies, all evil." Not only her passions ruined her. Enmity, disunity, the brute and domineering force of public opinion, the inability to realize the desire for independence and independence lead Anna to disaster. Anna belongs to a certain time, a certain circle, namely, a high society aristocratic circle. And her tragedy in the novel is depicted in full accordance with the laws, customs and mores of this environment and era. Anna ironically and sensibly judges her own environment: "... it was a circle of old, ugly, virtuous and pious women and smart, learned, ambitious men." However, about the piety of Lydia Ivanovna, carried away by spiritualistic phenomena and "communication with spirits", she was of the same skeptical opinion as about the scholarship of Karenin, who read an article in the latest issue of the newspaper about the ancient "Eugyubian inscriptions", to which he, in fact, did not there was no business. Betsy Tverskoy gets away with everything and she remains a high society lady, because she is fluent in the art of pretense and hypocrisy, which was completely alien to Anna Karenina. It was not Anna who judged, but she was judged and condemned, not forgiving her precisely sincerity and spiritual purity. On the side of her persecutors were such powerful forces as law, religion, public opinion. Anna's "rebellion" met with a decisive rebuff from Karenin, Lidia Ivanovna and the "forces of evil" - public opinion. The hatred that Anna feels for Karenin, calling him "an evil ministerial machine", was only a manifestation of her impotence and loneliness in the face of the powerful traditions of the environment and time. The "indissolubility of marriage", consecrated by law and the church, placed Anna in unbearably difficult conditions, when her heart split between love for Vronsky and love for her son. She found herself "put up at the pillory" just at the time when the painful work of self-consciousness was going on in her soul. Tolstoy's socio-historical view of Anna's tragedy was insightful and sharp. He saw that his heroine could not stand the struggle with her environment, with the whole avalanche of disasters that had befallen her. That's why he wanted to make her "pathetic, but not guilty." Exceptional in Anna's fate was not only the violation of the law "in the name of the struggle for a truly human existence", but also the consciousness of her guilt before those close to her, before herself, before life. Thanks to this consciousness, Anna becomes the heroine of Tolstoy's artistic world with its high ideal of moral self-consciousness.
The meaning of the tragedy is expressed by the epigraph "Vengeance is mine, and I will repay." F.M. Dostoevsky explained the epigraph as follows: we are talking about Anna's lack of jurisdiction over the human court. The supreme judge for Anna Karenina is not the "empty light", but the son of Seryozha: "he understood, he loved, he judged her."
The writer's intention to show a woman who has lost herself, but not guilty, is emphasized by the epigraph to the novel: "Vengeance is mine and I will repay." The meaning of the epigraph is that God can judge a person, his life and actions, but not people.
in the epigraph "Vengeance is mine, and Az I will repay" 10 to Tolstoy's novel "Anna Karenina" was written by everyone who wrote about the novel (and it was mainly about the fate of Anna Karenina), since without understanding the meaning of the epigraph, it is impossible to adequately perceive the main ideas of this works of Tolstoy.
When the seventh part of Anna Karenina appeared in print, readers and critics remembered the epigraph to the novel. Many thought that Tolstoy condemned and punished his heroine, following this biblical saying. In the future, critics tended not only to this accusatory point of view, but also adhered to another, justifying position, which Tolstoy takes regarding his heroine. Thus, criticism saw in the epigraph a reflection of Tolstoy's position in relation to Anna Karenina and decided the question: who is the author for her - a brilliant prosecutor or a brilliant lawyer?
The character world of Anna Karenina
ANNA KARENINA - the heroine of the novel by L.N. Tolstoy "Anna Karenina" (1873-1877); one of the most popular female images of Russian classical literature. Tolstoy wanted to write a novel about a woman from high society who "lost herself", around whom many male types easily grouped, awakening the writer's creative imagination. A.K. there were also prototypes, including the sister of Tolstoy's close friend M.A. Dyakova-Sukhotina, who survived the divorce proceedings and had a second family. Contemporaries found many other prototypes, some of the circumstances of life and death of which correlated with the storyline of the heroine of the novel, in particular, the history of the relationship between the actress M.G. Savina and N.F. Sazonov is mentioned.
In the first part of the novel, the heroine appears as an exemplary mother and wife, a respected society lady and even a conciliator of troubles in the Oblonsky family. Anna Arkadyevna's life was most filled with love for her son, although she somewhat exaggeratedly emphasized her role as a loving mother. Only Dolly Oblonskaya sensitively caught something false in the whole warehouse of the Karenins' family life, although the attitude of A.K. her husband was built on unconditional respect.
After meeting with Vronsky, without giving vent to the emerging feeling, A.K. she realizes in herself not only the awakened thirst for life and love, the desire to please, but also some power beyond her control, which, regardless of her will, controls her actions, pushing her closer to Vronsky and creating a feeling of being protected by the “impenetrable armor of lies”. Kitty Shcherbatskaya, carried away by Vronsky, during the fatal ball for her sees a “devilish gleam” in the eyes of A.K. and feels in her "something alien, demonic and charming." It should be noted that, unlike Karenin, Dolly, Kitty, A.K. not at all religious. The truthful, sincere A.K., who hates all falsehood and falsehood, has a reputation in the world as a fair and morally impeccable woman, herself gets entangled in a false and false relationship with her husband and the world.
Under the influence of the meeting with Vronsky, A.K.'s relations change dramatically. with everyone around her: she cannot tolerate the falsity of secular relations, the falsity of relationships in her family, but the spirit of deceit and lies that exists against her will drags her further and further to the fall. Having become close to Vronsky, A.K. recognizes himself as a criminal. After the generosity repeatedly shown by her husband towards her, especially after the forgiveness received during the postpartum illness, A.K. more and more begins to hate him, painfully feeling his guilt and realizing the moral superiority of her husband.
Neither the little daughter, nor the trip with Vronsky to Italy, nor life on his estate give her the peace she desires, but only bring awareness of the depth of her misfortune (as in a secret meeting with her son) and humiliation (scandalously humiliating episode in the theatre). Most of all, A.K. feels from the impossibility of bringing together his son and Vronsky. The deepening spiritual discord, the ambiguity of the social position, cannot be compensated either by the environment artificially created by Vronsky, or by luxury, or by reading, or by intellectual interests, or by the habit of sedative drugs with morphine. A.K. she constantly feels her complete dependence on the will and love of Vronsky, which irritates her, makes her suspicious, and sometimes induces coquetry that is unusual for her. Gradually A.K. comes to complete despair, thoughts of death, with which she wants to punish Vronsky, remaining for everyone not guilty, but pitiful. The life story of A.K. reveals the inviolability of the "family thought" in the work: the impossibility of achieving one's own happiness at the expense of the misfortune of others and forgetting one's duty and moral law.
OBLONSKY is the central character in Leo Tolstoy's novel "Anna Karenina" (1873-1877). The prototype of this image was a descendant of a well-born noble family, an official and landowner Vasily Stepanovich Perfilyev, an old friend of Tolstoy. The writer was involved in his fate, had a clear idea of his personality, mental warehouse, his "virtues and sins" and "light hobbies". Tolstoy also used the letters of Perfilyev's wife, Praskovya Feodorovna, and the manuscript of her story "A Strange Case" about the "catastrophe" that happened in her family - her husband's betrayal with "a sweet, fallen creature." Like Perfiliev, O. does not feel any guilt, finding no reason to "repent that he, a thirty-four-year-old, handsome amorous man, was not in love with his wife." His rule: “Keep the shrine at home. Don't tie your hands." O. served in one presence and was “completely indifferent to the business he was doing”; "neither science, nor art, nor politics interested him, he firmly held those views on all these subjects that the majority held." The image of O. in the novel does not have a definite sign: both positive and negative principles are an organic property of his nature. O. is impeccably honest, he never deceives anyone except his wife, he never lies to anyone. “He treated all people equally and equally, no matter what state and rank they were.” At the same time, O. is complacent and benevolent, full of love of life, joyful perception of being. O. is an epicurean, a gourmet, striving for pleasures and "easy entertainment." Tolstoy emphasizes that O. always has "shining eyes" - even at the farewell to Vronsky two months after the funeral of his sister Anna, bitterly mourned by him.
LEVIN is a provincial landowner, belonging to a good noble family, living on his estate, not an employee, seriously passionate about farming. Behind the outwardly measured life and everyday worries, the hard work of the hero’s thoughts, deep intellectual inquiries and moral quests are hidden. L. is distinguished by sincerity, poise, a serious and benevolent attitude towards people, fidelity to duty, and directness. From the very beginning of the novel, he appears as a hero with a well-established character, but an evolving inner world. Readers get acquainted with L. in a difficult period of his life, when he, having arrived in Moscow to propose to Kitty Shcherbatskaya, is refused and leaves home, trying to regain his peace of mind. The choice of Kitty was determined for L. not only by a feeling for her, but also by his attitude towards the Shcherbatsky family, in the curtain he saw an example of an old, educated and honest nobility, which was very important for the hero, since his ideas about true aristocracy were based on the recognition of rights honor, dignity and independence, in contrast to the modern admiration for wealth and success. L. painfully worried about the fate of the Russian nobility and the obvious process of its impoverishment, about which he talks a lot and with interest with Oblonsky and his landlord neighbors. L. does not see any real benefit from those forms of management that they are trying to bring in from the West; negatively relates to the activities of zemstvo institutions, sees no point in the comedy of noble elections, as, indeed, in many achievements of civilization, considering them evil. Permanent life in the countryside, observation of the work and life of the people, the desire to get closer to the peasants and serious farming develop in L. a number of original views on the changes taking place around him, it is not for nothing that he gives a capacious and accurate definition of the post-reform state of society and the features of its economic life , saying that "everything turned upside down" and "only fits." However, L. seeks to contribute to how "everything will fit." Management methods and reflections on the peculiarities of the national way of life lead him to an independent and original conviction of the need to take into account in agriculture not only agronomic innovations and technical achievements, but also the traditional national warehouse of the worker as the main participant in the whole process. L. seriously thinks about the fact that with the correct formulation of the case on the basis of his conclusions, it will be possible to transform life, first in the estate, then in the county, province, and, finally, in all of Russia. In addition to economic and intellectual interests, the hero relentlessly faces problems of a different kind. In connection with his marriage to Kitty and the need to confess before the wedding, L. thinks about his attitude towards God, not finding sincere faith in his soul. The most important events turn to the circle of moral and religious questions and reflections on the meaning of life, on the mystery of the birth and death of L.: the death of a brother, and then the wife's pregnancy and the birth of a son. Not finding faith in himself, L. at the same time notices that in the most serious moments of his life he prays to God for the salvation and well-being of his loved ones, as was the case during Kitty's birth and during a thunderstorm that caught her with her little son in the forest. At the same time, L. cannot satisfy the recognition of finiteness, and, consequently, some kind of meaninglessness of human existence, if it is based only on biological laws. The persistence of these thoughts, the desire to find the enduring goal of life, sometimes bring L., a happy husband, father, a successful landowner, to desperate moral torments and even thoughts of suicide. L. seeks answers to his questions in the works of scientists and philosophers, in observations of the lives of other people. Serious moral support, an impulse for searching in a new, religious and moral direction, is the remark he heard about the peasant Fokanych, who "lives for God", "remembers the soul." The search for moral laws and the foundations of human life makes L. related to Anna Karenina, whose fate depends on the attitude to the moral foundations of life. The search for the hero does not end at the end of the novel, leaving the image as if open.
Levin tries to live by his conscience. It is open to people, to the world. He is saved by Fokanych, who advises him to live in truth, to live like a god; God's judgment, not the mind. But Levin is not the ideal of family life. The recipe for family happiness is just emerging
VRONSKY is self-confident (“He looked at people as if they were things”) and at heart ambitious, does not feel the need for family life, does not love and does not respect his mother, is busy only with the affairs of the regiment, a society of cheerful rake friends and accessible women , military career, thoroughbred horses; according to the free to immorality rules of his single high-society circle and the guards environment, it is quite possible to captivate a girl from a good family and not marry her. His cheerful officer cynicism makes the naive Kitty unhappy, she follows the foolish advice of a vain mother and the deceptive voice of girlish vanity (Vronsky is one of the best suitors in Russia) and makes a mistake, which life then corrects for a long and difficult time. The scene of the ball, beginning with the happiness and triumph of Kitty's “pink” (meaning the color of her tulle dress), and ending with the complete “demonic” triumph of Anna, who put on a magnificent black dress, is remarkable: “There was something terrible and cruel in her charms.” But not only Vronsky's sudden betrayal strikes Kitty, she is "crushed" (Tolstoy's exact expression) by despair and remorse, by one thought: "Yesterday she refused the man whom she may have loved, and she refused because she believed in another." She is taken away to be treated for a non-existent disease in European waters she does not need (compare this with the illness and treatment of Natasha Rostova). Sister Dolly helps her cope with mental anguish by “morally rolling up her sleeves” (a wonderful expression of the moralist Tolstoy).
Vronsky lives according to secular patterns. He fell in love with Anna not for the sake of love, but for the satisfaction of his vanity. Anna saw through Vronsky. He is not ready to be responsible for Anna. Vronsky's silent betrayal ruins her. He died spiritually when Anna died. Vronsky realized that it was he who ruined her. The minute Karenin forgave Anna was yet another exposure of Vronsky.
