I finished this last night, but didn't write a review then because I needed some time to think over the entire book and decide exactly what I wanted to say about it.

I'm going to start with a quick plot summary, because before I read this I didn't really know what Anna Karenina was actually about. So, in brief: Oblonsky has cheated on his wife Dolly but he convinces his sister Anna to talk to her and they don't get divorced; meanwhile Oblonsky's friend Levin is in love with Dolly's sister Kitty but she wants to marry Vronsky who is in love with Anna who is already married to Karenin but goes ahead and has an affair with Vronsky anyway so he rejects Kitty but it's okay because she marries Levin anyway and Levin has these two brothers and one is a drug addict and the other is a stuffy author and they don't do much but they're around a lot and then Anna leaves her husband but he won't give her a divorce and won't let her keep their son so she's very depressed about that and Dolly is the only one who will talk to her even though Oblonsky also works hard to convince Karenin to divorce Anna.

Everyone got that? It really could not be simpler.

Okay, on to the review part: I'm giving this book three stars because it seemed like the fairest rating, considering that some parts of this book deserved a five-star rating and some parts deserved one star. Everything with Anna and Vronsky was really interesting and amazing - I loved Anna so much, and I really wanted to be friends with her. She was lovely. Unfortunately, she and her lovah had to compete with Kitty and Levin, the other important couple of the story. And good god are they boring. Levin owns a farm, which means we get chapters upon chapters of nothing but him babbling on about farming techniques and how nobody does the job right and what he wants to do to improve his farm.
Also, the book should have ended right after Anna killed herself, or at least ended by talking about how Vronsky was dealing with it. But that doesn't happen. In the last thirty-some pages of the book, Anna throws herself under a train, and for the rest of the book we get a little mention of how Vronsky has volunteered to fight in some war, but the rest of it is all about Levin and his farm and local politics and his spiritual crisis and OH MY GOD I DON'T CARE. Once I had read two chapters about Levin after Anna's death, I flipped through the rest of the book, saw that he was the sole focus of the rest of the story, and almost stopped reading. I could have, too, and I wouldn't have missed anything important.

Tolstoy's Infamous Melodrama

My wife says Anna Karenina is the worst novel she has ever read. I wouldn't go quite that far. Since I've joined Goodreads, I've reviewed one novel that's as bad as Anna Karenina and two that are worse. I've also read many novels that are as good or better and numerous novels that are far superior to Anna Karenina.

I believe a good editor could trim off about 500 pages and turn Anna Karenina into an adequate novel.

In Tolstoy's Anna Karenina, three couples are compared. Tolstoy uses these couples to illustrate three possible outcomes of love and marriage. He seems to be suggesting it's better to be slow and steady than hot and bothered.

Themes: 1. One can not break social norms without paying a price. On the other hand, following social norms is also costly.
2. Inequality in marriage is due to the fact that the infidelities committed by husbands and the wives are punished unequally both by the law and public opinion. (See the first page of chapter 13 in Part Four.)
3. Think well of all people, and try to reconcile and soften their differences. (See the first page of chapter 13 in Part Four.)
4. Argument convinces no one. (See the second page of chapter 13 in Part Four.)
5. It's not good to jump to conclusions that might prove to be false.

Anna Karenina has convinced me that the golden age of literature isn't in some bygone era, it's in the here and now.

I can say I really enjoyed this story. It was a captivating story about the parallel lives centered roughly on four people. The first is a down-to-earth, even naive, and relatively quite man (Konstantin Levin) who gets rejected by the young woman ('Kitty') he deeply loves.

Levin grows as a character, moves back out into the country, and eventually finds himself together with Kitty in the end. They are happy and content with how life has turned out.

The second is a beautiful woman (Anna Karenina) who has a rich and lavish lifestyle, has an affair with a "Mr. Wonderful" Count Vronsky, gets him, and then it all ends tragically.

It was wordy, lengthy, and full of human emotion and spirit yet I enjoyed this story from start to finish. My first Tolstoy attempt and I'm sure I'll read more. I would recommend it to anyone who wants a rich story. Thanks!

"Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

This opening sentence sums up the main theme of this great work: family relationships. Tolstoy has chosen three families to work on the different aspects of this theme. The first family is that of Anna and the second family is that of Levin and Kitty. The third and a little less prominent than the other two is the family of Dolly and Stepan.

Anna's story, for which the book is well known and loved, occupies a greater part of the book. Anna is young. Having married a man nearly twenty years elder to her at a very young age, Anna is not exposed to the feelings of love and passion a woman would feel for a man. Alexey, an ambitious man who treats her wife to every material comfort, fails to give Anna the care, attention, and love which she needed. Anna's later reference to her husband as "he is not a man but a machine..."shows how unfeeling he has been towards her. The comforter and saviour of her life was his son, Seryozha, for whom she had devoted her life while being a dutiful wife. But the fateful meeting with Count Vronsky changes her path of life. Anna's realization of what is missing in her life coupled with the newborn feelings of love and passion for Vronsky takes her through a destructive and tragic path.

The widespread view on Anna's story is that of a woman's infidelity in carrying out an adulterous affair. While this view is correct, there is more to it than that of mere adultery. The relationship between the threesome is complex. Anna is bound by duty and honour to her husband while she passionately loves Vronsky. She is torn between wronging her husband and her desire to live happily with the man she loves. Moreover, Anna is worried about the consequences that her action would have on her relationship with her precious son. Her son and Vronsky are the love of her life but one excludes the other. For this reason, she refuses a divorce thus willingly demoting her to a humiliating position by living as an "immoral woman" in the eyes of the society. Her self-sacrifice of character simply to retain her relationship with her son is to be admired and pitied. And though at times, Anna was infuriating, the story is written in such a way that it was difficult to blame her. This is why Anna has become a tragic heroine.

Vronsky and Alexey (either could be seen as the villain in this tragic story according to the personal views of the reader) on the other hand are both victims in their own right. Both are to be sympathized, perhaps Vronsky a little more than Alexey, as he gave up all his life ambitions for his love for Anna.

In contrast to Anna's tragic story, a "happy" conventional family is provided by Levin and Kitty. Despite the differences of character, temperament, views, and beliefs Levin and Kitty manage to carry on a successful and loving marriage. The family relationship between Levin and Kitty is modeled on Tolstoy's own convictions on marriage.

The relationship between Dolly and Stepan comes between these two extremes. In the light of Stepan's infidelity and his expensive way of living, Dolly and her children suffer considerably. Dolly would like to walk out of the marriage. But her children, convention, and her religious beliefs all contribute to her indecision on the course of action. A vain belief that her husband's conduct is not "infidelity of the heart" keeps her going on with her "sham" marriage.

The book consists of two separate yet interconnected plots: One is the plot woven around Anna and the other is the plot woven around Levin. Former, with its complex emotions, social conventions coupled with women's position legally and socially, provides for the excitement and life of the entire work. The latter, more or less modeled on Tolstoy's life, provides for the political, philosophical, social, and religious views of the author as well as an insight into the author's life struggles. I liked both plots. Each has complemented the other to produce a complete work in every sense. And the characters which were modeled by Tolstoy's observance of the society were felt real. There were no characters that one could call artificial.

Above all what is most striking is the beautiful writing of Tolstoy. His use of metaphors is very clever and marvelous. Reading the book was like eating a rich and thick layered piece of cake. No matter how many layers are peeled, its taste does not diminish.

Words would not do justice to say how much I loved this work. It is one brilliant and marvelous piece of work. A work can be a great classic, but to become a masterpiece, the author has to steer it above common ground. And Tolstoy has achieved this end quite brilliantly.

I društvo je tako uređeno: što više radnici budu radili, sve će se više bogatiti trgovci i spahije, a oni će ostajati tegleća marva.

Ana Karenjina je mučenje i zlo. Osjećaj dosade i razdražljivosti koji kolaju tokom romana su bili skoro nepodnošljivi. U toku pisanja ovog romana Tolstoj se posvetio pedagoškom radu, a pored toga i pisanjem nekih sižea. U jednom pismu kada se obraća Strahovu 1875. godine, Tolstoj piše sljedeće: ,,Sad se laćam dosadne i trivijalne Ane Karenjine i samo molim boga da mi da snage da je se što prije riješim, kako bih upraznio mjesto - slobodno vrijeme mi je vrlo potrebno - ne za pedagoške, već za druge poslove, koji me više okupiraju. Ja volim i pedagoški rad, ali hoću da prisilim sebe da se više njime ne bavim.” Od samog početka znao sam da ovaj roman neće ići u tom pravcu da mi se svidi. Jednostavno svaka stranica je bila isprazna, i ako bih mogao da opišem roman u jednoj riječi onda bi to bila ispraznost. Ni u jednom od likova nisam vidio ništa što bi me potaklo da se udubim u razmišljanje (osim kasnije Ljevina koji je inače piščev alter ego). Svaki od njih je bio gord, besmisleno odsutan, a kada Tolstoj počne kroz njih da filozofira, jednostavno sam morao da sklapam oči, smirim se, a onda nastavim čitanje. Njihova prenemaganja, dijalozi na ivici histerije, apsurdni poduhvati koje čine, sve mi je to samo otežavalo čitanje. Tačno je da Tolstoj piše rečenice koje se prosto brzo čitaju, ali one samo u nekoj mjeri olakšavaju stvar.

Mislio sam da će se roman završiti sa smrću dotične, i da bi onda to bilo to. Međutim, malo sam se prevario. I to mučenje je trajalo do smrti Ane Karenjine. A onda potpuno nešto novo. Ne znam da li je tu vladala ona narodna: ,,Dok jednom ne smrkne, drugom ne svane,” ali zaista je sve od tada krenulo uzlaznom putanjom. Iskreno ne zato što sam ja priželjkivao njenu smrt, ali eto ona se desila, i sve kreće u drugačijem smjeru. Kao da je ona bila čvor tog zla koji je jurcao na sve strane i kada se on otpustio i zlo je sa njim nestalo. Tolstoj izdiže Ljevinovog brata, Sergija Aleksandroviča i kroz njegov pogled strukturalno jasno sagledava društveno-politička zbivanja. Ljevina polako utapa u neku čamotinju i s njim vodi borbu. Sve postaje elegantno, polemički i polako pisac pušta smislene tonove. Odjednom mi svi likovi postaju dragi, čak ih u jednu ruku i žalim. Đavo je prisutan svuda i neki jednostavno nisu mogli da se istrgnu iz njegovih kandži. Tolstoj filozof odjednom dobija nekog elana, počinje da bude odmjeren, tako fino sažet da sam uživao u svakoj rečenici, pa za divno čudo nakon završetka knjige sam poželio da još malo nešto kaže. A, ono što je posebno okupiralo moju pažnju jeste njegov osvrt na rat i oslobođenje jednovjeraca prije svega Crnogoraca i Srba od Turaka. Evo šta Tolstoj ima da kaže o ratu: ,,Rat je, s jedne strane, tako životinjska, surova i užasna stvar, da nijedan čovjek, već da i ne kažem hrišćanin, ne može lično primiti na svoju odgovornost početak rata, to može samo vlada, koja ima za to potrebu, i koja dolazi u položaj da vodi rat. S druge strane, i na osnovu nauke i na osnovu zdravog razuma, u državnim poslovima, osobito u poslovima rata, građani se odriču svoje lične volje.” Eto, da sam knjigu ostavio prije njenog konačnog svršetka, zaista bih propustio divne posljednje stranice ove knjige.

I first read Anna Karenina in my youth, and at that time, it didn’t make a significant impact on me. However, rereading it now, I’ve come to appreciate the immense scale of Tolstoy's prose, the depth of his ideas, and the way he mirrors and reflects his characters against one another. What once seemed like a simple tragic love story has transformed into a profound exploration of human nature, society, and morality.

I now see the novel less as Anna’s story and more as a reflection of Tolstoy himself, particularly through the character of Levin. While Anna remains a central figure, she feels like a secondary character in the broader narrative. Levin, on the other hand, serves as Tolstoy’s voice, through whom he explores his deepest philosophical and spiritual concerns.

Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina:"Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

Tolstoy draws us into the tragedy by looking down in disdain at boring, happy families (the Brady family always comes to my mind) and sells his book by deciding that unhappy families provide more variety and thus entertainment, however tragic. From the start, we know that things will end badly, so later when we are introduced to Anna and Vronsky, we are more fascinated by the details on how things will unravel than being surprised at the outcome. The phrase itself is perfectly balanced and stands alone in a separate paragraph - as if he was giving us the moral from the outset. A perfect start to one of the most technically perfect novels of all time - as a matter of fact, Tolstoy considered this to be his true first novel (he considered War and Peace (also an extraordinary read) to be more than just a novel).

Look it seems to be a favorite novel among so many great novelists - Nabokov, Faulkner, Kundra, Joyce even Dostoevsky but I happen to be more in agreement with Rebecca West when she says, "And plainly Anna Karenina was written simply to convince Tolstoy that there was nothing in this expensive and troublesome business of adultery"

If you read novels to be somewhere and sometime else (and don't mind that place to be boring) this will work for you. It is a perfect chronicle of its times. The trouble is I happened to be a very sensual reader. You see I am a book-izer and date a lot of books at the same time, and take different books to dinner and bed on the same day. Whenever I see a book anywhere I start imagining myself in bed with it and can't help running my hand on its body. And above all, there must be very good reasons if the relationship is to last more than a few days. Unfortunately, this one happens to feel like a long, stale marriage.

Marriage! I guess that is the real theme of the book rather than adultery. The subject has occupied minds of people for so long that there aren't too many new jokes I can make about it, I mean the best ones like how in case of a murder, the victim's spouse is the foremost suspect are already taken. Moreover, I don't fully understand the concept of marriage - this once I was about to congratulate this newlywed couple but I was just trying to imagine their life after marriage before the chance to do so occurred and ended up saying "condolences". That because "May your souls rest in peace" seemed like hoping for too much. The reason being that I think of 'being alive' to mean to let you feel all sorts of things. Now once a person gets married, (S)he is expected not to feel attracted, fall in love, etc outside marriage. And so to that extent the person is dead. And of course, there are all the sacrifices you are supposed to make for your children, etc (a lot of people are into that too!) which won't let a person enjoy his/her life fully.

Now, it is just the kind of thing that if it wasn't for the sake of habit, people would have given up long ago. I still think they will do so someday. If you trust a person, you don't need to bound them, right? With love, my understanding is far worse - I mean if someone loves his/her spouse and wants the later to be happy, shouldn't they be more like "Go on, darling, have some fun!" instead of jealously guarding them? That, by the way, is Levin's (Anna's antagonist) method - to ask his wife not to meet men with whom she happened to laugh.

n  
"Love one another, but make not a bond of love:
Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls...
Sing and dance together and be joyous, but let each one of you be alone,
Even as the strings of a lute are alone though they quiver with the same music."
- Kahlil Gibran.
n

Still, because of some sort of barbaric instinct the heart wants to hold on to the person, it is invested in, to possess them like objects so as to be sure of their presence in one's life. It seeks promises, unbreakable oaths, until-death-or-divorce-do-us-aparts, more and more bounds - anything to save one from the fear of losing beloved. And where this need for security over each other's possession is mutual, a marriage takes place. Except, of course, all such promises are useless, no one can control his/her feelings by choice, and so no one should ask the other or promise such a thing. In fact, everything people do to gain security (or whatever form) only feeds the feeling of insecurity.

Only insecure and untrusting people seek promises and

"We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

Where you presume on security is where you set yourself to fail. All things given in love are gifts and no prices should be asked in return. Karein, Anna's husband realizes this at some point in the story and is able to fight back the famous agony of a cheated husband at least for a while. (If only I was to have a cookie for each book with adultery and jealous spouses in it I have read, I would have .... you know, diabetes. There should be some kind of restriction on each, like the no-mention-of-Hitler-in-debates rule, like a book with adultery in it doesn't win Nobel prizes or something .... but then Marquez wouldn't have won his prize, you know what, scratch that.)

Anyways, Tolstoy's argument against infidelity doesn't seem true to me. Anna didn't suffer because she cheated on her husband. She suffered because of three different reasons at different points.

First, because she had a conscience which is always a burden. How can feeling guilty about anything that can ever serve a purpose is beyond me. Guilt is a monster that like that Greek vulture which constantly fed on the heart (of Prometheus) without ever improving the victim's lot, and conscience is nothing except a set up to create a feeling of guilt among people. And to think there are people who feed this concept to their children! Terrorists never felt guilty of their actions, pregnant teenagers often do. A better world could be created if people teach compassion to their children.

Secondly, people, she is surrounded by. Many would say those were wrong times, times are not wrong, people are. Vronsky wants her, other people think of her as fallen women, the stupid divorce law ... you get the picture.

Thirdly, in the last parts, when she feels jealous lover Vronsky. It is not a self-induced fear of being cheated as often seen in people who cheat themselves - like Macbeth's fear who being usurper himself constantly fears being usurped, but rather the same old insecurity we just talked about. She has given away her son for him. We tax our loved ones for sacrifices we make them for them. It was too great a sacrifice for Vronsky to redeem in any way except by becoming a homely for her which he couldn't.

The novel has a misnomer. It should have been better named Levin, the author stand-in gets more attention than Anna Karenina. We read several boring chapters in which he gives his theories for agriculture, peasant education, etc which, though it might make the book more realistic, also makes it much larger and boring than it need be (something similar to what deviations and jokes do to this review). There are several beautiful moments in this novel but they are lost in the sea of monotonous realism, a combination that doesn't work with a sensual reader like me. The third star is almost entirely due to the last chapters of Anna's life. If it wasn't for that, I would have thought that it is Stockholm syndrome associated with large books that make people love this one.

nothing could have prepared me for this, i am a complete trainwreck (pun intended)

Everyone has their crazy reasons for reading a book. I was never really planning to read "Anna Karenina" in my lifetime at all. Alas, I saw a trailer of the 2012 film recently and it was breathtaking! Something about Keira Knightley is art. Something I cannot pinpoint as a mere mortal, but she always has the knack to make me believe that characters could live and breathe beyond the books. So why didn't I watch the full movie? For the stupid reason that I can't sit still just being a passive audience for more than 30 minutes nowadays, but I can spend scandalous amounts of time engaged in a book. And for the unexplainable reason that Keira Knightley made me read it!

This took me a while to finish. For one, the tome is as thick as a door-stop. Second, the plot is like a Russian nesting doll but in reverse, every layer of "Anna Karenina" reveals a bigger story than the last. Although the movie posters might make it look like some kind of Harlequin-style bodice-busting romp, don't be fooled. This ain't a feel-good rom-com. This isn't even a brooding psychosexual melodrama with a happy ending. This is a novel that tackles the romantic and the political. It addresses the philosophies that govern nations and families. It's an unhappy novel with an unhappy ending.

So if you are a sensible reader (or a lazy one) more prudent with your selections, why should you pick up this book? Well it would actually be easier for me to dissuade you to read "Anna Karenina". Why shouldn't you read Leo Tolstoy's masterpiece? You shouldn't read this if you're looking for a novel to make you feel passionately about a fictional love affair and then set down the novel and sigh "Ah! The Beatles were right, all you need is love!" Because if you're looking for that, please pick up something else. This novel will break your heart. It will make you question every adage about the warm and fuzzy power of love.  Love brings to Anna, pitch-black despair, social ostracization, the loss of dignity and sense of self, and, ultimately the desire to throw herself under a dang train!  If all you want is 24/7 kisses and sighs, go find something with Fabio on the cover. Because while the novel delivers what is one of the greatest love stories, in my opinion, ever written, it also delivers a bunch of other equally masterful plot lines about politics, society, labor issues and religion. This isn't a novel that's just about two people's heartbreak. It's about the turmoil and frustrations that plague an entire nation.

If you are still interested after all that, I guarantee you will treasure this read. Why should you read "Anna Karenina"? Well, read this novel if you want to know what kind of scope and power a novel can have. It is abound with people with varying struggles and convictions, and with presence as strong as the primary characters. This novel is as massive as the country of Russia. Its depiction of society and politics is as intricate as St. Basil's Cathedral, and its insight into human nature is as piercing as a winter in Siberia. This is something a movie just can't encompass. Happy reading!

(Book 840 From 1001 Books) - Анна Каренина = Anna Karenina = Anna Karenin, Leo Tolstoy

Anna Karenina is a novel by the Russian writer Leo Tolstoy, published in serial installments from 1873 to 1877 in the periodical The Russian Messenger.

A complex novel in eight parts, with more than a dozen major characters, it is spread over more than 800 pages (depending on the translation and publisher), typically contained in two volumes.

It deals with themes of betrayal, faith, family, marriage, Imperial Russian society, desire, and rural vs. city life.

The plot centers on an extramarital affair between Anna and dashing cavalry officer Count Alexei Kirillovich Vronsky that scandalizes the social circles of Saint Petersburg and forces the young lovers to flee to Italy in a search for happiness. After they return to Russia, their lives further unravel.

Characters: Princess Ekaterina "Kitty" Aleksandrovna Shcherbatskaya, Anna Arkadyevna Karenina, Count Aleksei Kirillovich Vronsky, Konstantin "Kostya" Dmitrievitch Levin, Prince Stepan "Stiva" Arkadyevitch Oblonsky.

عنوا�� چاپ شده در ایران: «آنا کارنینا» نویسنده: لئو ن تولستوی (نیلوفر) ادبیات روسیه؛ انتشاراتیها: (ساحل، نیلوفر، کلبه سفید، سمیر، گوتنبرگ)؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش روز بیست و چهارم ماه فوریه سال 1985میلادی

عنوان: آنا کارنینا؛ نویسنده: لئو ن تولستوی؛ مترجم: محمدعلی شیرازی؛ تهران، ساحل، 1348، در 346ص؛ موضوع داستانهای نویسندگان روسیه - سده 19م

عنوان: آنا کارنینا؛ نویسنده: تولستوی؛ مترجم: سروش حبیبی؛ تهران، نیلوفر، 1378، در 1024ص، در 2جلد، شابک 9644481127؛

عنوان: آنا کارنینا؛ نویسنده: تولستوی؛ مترجم: فرناز آشتیانی؛ تهران، کلبه سفید، 1383، در 496ص، شابک 9649360166؛

عنوان: آنا کارنینا؛ نویسنده: تولستوی؛ مترجم: قازار سیمونیان؛ تهران، سمیر، گوتنبرگ، چاپ چهارم 1388، در 864ص، شابک 9789646552364؛

بیش از نیمی از داستان، درباره ی «آنا کارنینا»ست؛ باقی درباره ی فردی به نام «لوین» است، البته که این دو شخصیت، در داستان رابطه ی دورادوری با هم دارند؛ به‌ عبارتی، «آنا کارِنینا»، خواهرِ دوستِ «لوین» است؛ در طولِ داستان، این دو شخصیت، تنها یکبار، و آنهم در اواخرِ داستان، با هم رودررو می‌شوند؛ پس، رمان تنها به زندگی «آنا کارِنینا» اشاره ندارد، و در آن، به زندگی و افکار شخصیت‌های دیگرِ داستان نیز، توجه شده‌ است؛ «آنا»، نام این زن است، و «کارِنین»، نام همسرِ ایشانست، و او به‌ مناسبت نام شوهرش، «آنا کارِنینا (مؤنثِ «کارِنین»)» نامیده می‌شود؛ «تولستوی» در نگارش این داستان، کوشیده، برخی افکار خود را، در قالب دیالوگ‌های متن، به خوانشگر بباوراند، تا او را به اندیشیدن وادارد؛

در قسمت‌هایی از داستان، «تولستوی»، درباره ی شیوه‌ های بهبود کشاورزی، یا آموزش نیز، سخن گفته؛ که نشان‌ دهنده ی اطلاعات ژرف نویسنده، در این زمینه‌ نیز هست؛ البته بیان این اطلاعات و افکار، گاهی باعت شده، داستان از موضوع اصلی دور، و برای خوانشگر خسته‌ کننده شود؛ داستان از آنجا آغاز می‌شود که زن و شوهری به نام‌های: «استپان آرکادیچ»، و «داریا الکساندرونا»؛ با هم اختلافی خانوادگی دارند.؛ «آنا کارِنینا»، خواهر «استپان آرکادیچ» است، و از «سن‌ پترزبورگ» به خانه ی برادرش ــ که در «مسکو» است ــ می‌آید؛ و اختلاف زن و شوهر را به سامان می‌کند؛ حضور آنا در «مسکو»، باعث به وجود آمدن ماجراهای اصلیِ داستان می‌شود...؛

فضای اشرافیِ آن روزگار، بر داستان حاکم است؛ زمانیکه پرنس‌ها و کنت‌ها، دارای مقامی والا در جامعه بودند؛ در کل، این داستان، روندی نرم، و دلنشین دارد؛ و به باور دیگران، فضای خشک داستان «جنگ و صلح»، بر «آنا کارنینا» حاکم نیست؛ این داستان، که درون‌مایه‌ ای عاشقانه ـ اجتماعی دارد، شاید پس از «جنگ و صلح»، بزرگ‌ترین اثر «تولستوی» بزرگ، به شمار است، تولستوی خود این اثر خویش را برتر میشمارند

تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 02/06/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 06/05/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی

OMG