8-Part Film Adaptation of Tolstoy's Anna Karenina Is Free Online(openculture.com)
openculture.com
8-Part Film Adaptation of Tolstoy's Anna Karenina Is Free Online
https://www.openculture.com/2022/07/watch-an-8-part-film-adaptation-of-tolstoys-anna-karenina-free-online.html
186 comments
If you enjoy classic Russian films, many of the Soviet era are available on YouTube including Stalker, Come and See and other unusual classics.
Yes, many Mosfilm classics seems to be on YouTube. I recommend Assa https://youtu.be/VOeDP6eUgD0
Such crisp, captivating film making from beginning to end. I do think the Soviet era is sort of mis-characterized in Western portrayals. Compare the Assa and the recent Chernobyl, both depicting about the same era.
Also "Assa" seems like a Soviet mirror image of how Blood Simple depcits the USA.
Such crisp, captivating film making from beginning to end. I do think the Soviet era is sort of mis-characterized in Western portrayals. Compare the Assa and the recent Chernobyl, both depicting about the same era.
Also "Assa" seems like a Soviet mirror image of how Blood Simple depcits the USA.
Another great Mosfilm, Kin-Dza-Dza!.
Spaceships run on matchsticks while rusty bolts are required for intergalactic travel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUtZOl_QxvY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUtZOl_QxvY
It's much deeper than that... But honestly I don't think Western audience will appreciate the movie. It's such profoundly prophetic look at future of Russia after collapse of USSR.
For many non Russians I know this is the first film that comes to their mind when I ask what Russian/USSR movies they have seen.
Kindzadza is not only about particular country. It show wide set of social issues even in modern world.
I love it after stumbling upon it somehow. (Non-ex-USSR-ian here.)
‘Assa’ is about the end of the Soviet era and the coming of Perestroika youth. I haven't seen ‘Chernobyl’ yet, but I doubt I'm gonna see many Perestroika youth among the people at the plant.
There were a lot of movies in the late 80s and the early-mid 90s about the life of lower-class people in the crumbling USSR/Russia of that time: from simple depressing realistic depictions to surrealistic transgressions, simply because all these kinds of expression became permissible. ‘Assa’ is essentially a fantasy about the zeitgeist. USSR functionaries weren't forgotten of course, but their portrayals flipped upside down—there isn't a single point of view on the Soviet time, and ‘Chernobyl’ likely just has a different perspective.
I'm gonna bet, though, that execs in ‘Chernobyl’ are close-ish to Krymov of ‘Assa’, at least as I will see them.
By the way, funny thing: in a podcast by Russian cinema critics on Western films about Russia, someone remarked that no matter how much effort the crew puts into researching details, something always gives away the fictional and foreign nature of the work. In ‘Chernobyl’, one such moment is when a woman goes against a committee of bureaucrats and tells them how wrong they are. (Again, IDK what actually happens in the scene.)
There were a lot of movies in the late 80s and the early-mid 90s about the life of lower-class people in the crumbling USSR/Russia of that time: from simple depressing realistic depictions to surrealistic transgressions, simply because all these kinds of expression became permissible. ‘Assa’ is essentially a fantasy about the zeitgeist. USSR functionaries weren't forgotten of course, but their portrayals flipped upside down—there isn't a single point of view on the Soviet time, and ‘Chernobyl’ likely just has a different perspective.
I'm gonna bet, though, that execs in ‘Chernobyl’ are close-ish to Krymov of ‘Assa’, at least as I will see them.
By the way, funny thing: in a podcast by Russian cinema critics on Western films about Russia, someone remarked that no matter how much effort the crew puts into researching details, something always gives away the fictional and foreign nature of the work. In ‘Chernobyl’, one such moment is when a woman goes against a committee of bureaucrats and tells them how wrong they are. (Again, IDK what actually happens in the scene.)
>By the way, funny thing: in a podcast by Russian cinema critics on Western films about Russia, someone remarked that no matter how much effort the crew puts into researching details, something always gives away the fictional and foreign nature of the work. In ‘Chernobyl’, one such moment is when a woman goes against a committee of bureaucrats and tells them how wrong they are.
It all comes down to expecting that another society will obey one's own sensibilities.
George R. R. Martin has talked about how so many fantasy works based on medieval Europe have a scene in which the brave boy and spunky girl sassily talk back to the powerful lord. As Martin puts it, what really would have happened is that the boy would have been killed, and the girl would have been raped then killed.
It all comes down to expecting that another society will obey one's own sensibilities.
George R. R. Martin has talked about how so many fantasy works based on medieval Europe have a scene in which the brave boy and spunky girl sassily talk back to the powerful lord. As Martin puts it, what really would have happened is that the boy would have been killed, and the girl would have been raped then killed.
Tangential, but the "Most Replayed" feature on you tube makes me really not want to watch movies on there. Every-time I mouse over the scrubber a graph shows up that shows me exactly what the most rewatched section is, so for instance I immediately know there's an important scene 20 minutes into Assa.
Well thanks: I haven't paid any attention to that ‘feature’ before, but now I will inevitably notice it sometime.
Hopefully I can kill it with CSS via Stylish.
Hopefully I can kill it with CSS via Stylish.
“Something important happens at 17:81, th-“
Ugh, no spoilers, you’ve ruined the movie for me now…
Ugh, no spoilers, you’ve ruined the movie for me now…
Couldn't it plausibly just be a confusing scene, or have difficult-to-understand dialog? I can think of several things other than importance that might correlate with users re-playing a scene.
Another good one:
Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears: https://youtu.be/NTWA_7-ld_U
Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears: https://youtu.be/NTWA_7-ld_U
> Yes, many Mosfilm classics seems to be on YouTube
This seems to vary a lot. I just checked and there were several Moscfilm films available (including Stalker) but I'm pretty sure I checked this about 6 months ago and there weren't many available - some were available for rent, but not free view.
This seems to vary a lot. I just checked and there were several Moscfilm films available (including Stalker) but I'm pretty sure I checked this about 6 months ago and there weren't many available - some were available for rent, but not free view.
That's because they have 2 accounts a russian and a global english one.
Russian https://www.youtube.com/c/MosfilmRuOfficial
Global https://www.youtube.com/c/Mosfilm_eng
Usually both channels have subtitles but generally the global one is burnt-in while the russian one is selectable from the Youtube interface. Also the russian channel has much much more uploads.
And movies differ too to some extent. For example, Solaris is a single title in the global english channel (restored vesion) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8ZhQPaw4rE
Whereas it's 2 part title as it was originally back then (2 reels)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-4KydP92ss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXa6XpaxBS0
Last but not least check geoblocking https://polsy.org.uk/stuff/ytrestrict.cgi For example Solaris is geoblocked in the US, both versions
https://polsy.org.uk/stuff/ytrestrict.cgi?ytid=https%3A%2F%2...
https://polsy.org.uk/stuff/ytrestrict.cgi?ytid=https%3A%2F%2...
Russian https://www.youtube.com/c/MosfilmRuOfficial
Global https://www.youtube.com/c/Mosfilm_eng
Usually both channels have subtitles but generally the global one is burnt-in while the russian one is selectable from the Youtube interface. Also the russian channel has much much more uploads.
And movies differ too to some extent. For example, Solaris is a single title in the global english channel (restored vesion) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8ZhQPaw4rE
Whereas it's 2 part title as it was originally back then (2 reels)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-4KydP92ss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXa6XpaxBS0
Last but not least check geoblocking https://polsy.org.uk/stuff/ytrestrict.cgi For example Solaris is geoblocked in the US, both versions
https://polsy.org.uk/stuff/ytrestrict.cgi?ytid=https%3A%2F%2...
https://polsy.org.uk/stuff/ytrestrict.cgi?ytid=https%3A%2F%2...
[deleted]
Another great resource is rutracker.org, which has active torrents of media dating all the way back to shortly after the turn of the century.
If somebody is looking for a wonderful series, 17 Moments of Spring (Семнадцать мгновений весны) is an amazing series about the end of WW2 and the international tug-of-war largely between the USSR and USA to determine the fate of Germany, from the perspective of an individual who inside of Germany at the time. One of the few series I've watched multiple times.
If somebody is looking for a wonderful series, 17 Moments of Spring (Семнадцать мгновений весны) is an amazing series about the end of WW2 and the international tug-of-war largely between the USSR and USA to determine the fate of Germany, from the perspective of an individual who inside of Germany at the time. One of the few series I've watched multiple times.
How historically accurate do you think it is?
Enough to spark a historical curiosity, certainly not enough to sate it. The broad strokes storyline is accurate, and most of the main characters (excepting the protagonist) are also generally historically accurate. It also has some interesting allusions to characters like Müller who disappeared at the end of the war and remains the highest ranking Nazi whose fate was never determined. However the storyline and details of such are fiction.
The real beauty of the show is simply in the people and the dialog and discussions. It hits on issues that are timeless in such a concise and elegant way. This [2] is one of my favorite dialogues/scenes from the series. And it's that which makes it such a great series. The pacing is excellent, the story is great, and all of that. But the series just provides such amazing dialogues, even absent all context, over and over.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_M%C3%BCller_(Gestapo)
[2] - https://youtu.be/SfSW14ZVn8o?list=PLA6274B0CEF58CEB0&t=294
The real beauty of the show is simply in the people and the dialog and discussions. It hits on issues that are timeless in such a concise and elegant way. This [2] is one of my favorite dialogues/scenes from the series. And it's that which makes it such a great series. The pacing is excellent, the story is great, and all of that. But the series just provides such amazing dialogues, even absent all context, over and over.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_M%C3%BCller_(Gestapo)
[2] - https://youtu.be/SfSW14ZVn8o?list=PLA6274B0CEF58CEB0&t=294
I thought a lot of the Soviet classics got taken down when Youtube deleted a bunch of Russian accounts earlier this year. Am I imagining things?
$1000 reward to anyone who can get my eyes on the uncut Andrei Rublev.
Criterion has both the The Passion According to Andrei clocking at 3:25:55 and Andrei Rublev at 3:03:12, this last being the closest to Tarkovsky’s preferred version.
I haven't heard of Andrei Rublev being cut. Which part was cut?
"I made some cuts myself. In the first version the film was 3 hours 20 minutes long. In the second — 3 hours 15 minutes. I shortened the final version to 3 hours 6 minutes. I am convinced the latest version is the best, the most successful."
It's the pre-cut original version shown to the CCCP we'll never see. Had they approved it first pass we would have had a wildly different movie.
It's the pre-cut original version shown to the CCCP we'll never see. Had they approved it first pass we would have had a wildly different movie.
I’m not sure why you’re not crediting the uncut original 1966 version of the film titled as The Passion According to Andrei which is available in The Criterion Collection released in 2018 in both DVD and Blu-Ray. It is also available in The Criterion Channel. Are you saying that The Passion is not the pre-cut version and if so, can you provide a reference?
I hear a lot how people find it difficult to slog through anna karenina because of its length and numerous characters.
They cannot see how such a book could be one of the greatest of all time.
I think the analogy to music may be like: Beethoven’s 9th Symphony is one of the greatest of all time. But it’s a really long and complex piece lasting over an hour. It can be hard to pay attention to the entire piece.
That said, the recommendation for reading Anna Karenina would be to read it fast or watch a good tv series on it. War and piece 2016 tv series was excellent for example.
They cannot see how such a book could be one of the greatest of all time.
I think the analogy to music may be like: Beethoven’s 9th Symphony is one of the greatest of all time. But it’s a really long and complex piece lasting over an hour. It can be hard to pay attention to the entire piece.
That said, the recommendation for reading Anna Karenina would be to read it fast or watch a good tv series on it. War and piece 2016 tv series was excellent for example.
I find AK pretty easy going, and I've read it 3x, each time a different translation. War & Peace OTOH is impenetrable. I tried to build a habit of 10 pages each day. I lasted 8 days. Brothers Karamazov was similar. The most I got was 100 pages in during a 10-hour flight with no wifi, then put it down, probably forever.
Very interesting! I as well really enjoyed AK, but I also extremely enjoyed The Brothers Karamazov, even more than Anna Karenina. It's probably my favorite Russian classic! I too gave up on War and Peace however about 200-300 pages into the story.
I find timing plays a big part of my enjoyment of tougher classic novels. If I'm extremely busy or don't have time to dedicate to reading in decent chunks (an hour or more per day) then I find it hard to maintain motivation to read dense novels.
I somehow got through Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow but don't recommend anyone do that, I was just too stubborn to let it get the better of me :)
I find timing plays a big part of my enjoyment of tougher classic novels. If I'm extremely busy or don't have time to dedicate to reading in decent chunks (an hour or more per day) then I find it hard to maintain motivation to read dense novels.
I somehow got through Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow but don't recommend anyone do that, I was just too stubborn to let it get the better of me :)
I have read the first book of War and Peace a long time ago and had a fairly similar experience to you. I never got to reading the second one because I didn’t have the time to do so at the time. I remember it as long but easy reading however. War and Peace definitely is entertaining.
> I somehow got through Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow but don't recommend anyone do that, I was just too stubborn to let it get the better of me
Strangely I think everyone should do that. It’s an insanely fun book once you have accepted you are not supposed to get everything. Pynchon is probably my favourite author all things considered. Still I think starting with Inherent Vice, The Crying of Lot 49 or Vineland is probably a good idea.
> I somehow got through Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow but don't recommend anyone do that, I was just too stubborn to let it get the better of me
Strangely I think everyone should do that. It’s an insanely fun book once you have accepted you are not supposed to get everything. Pynchon is probably my favourite author all things considered. Still I think starting with Inherent Vice, The Crying of Lot 49 or Vineland is probably a good idea.
These comments are very interesting to me. I first read War and Peace in abridged format in English as a high school assignment, and loved it enough to follow up immediately with unabridged in Russian (am a native speaker). Found it enthralling.
On the other hand I recently gave Gravity's Rainbow a go right after slogging through David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest, and just couldn't do it. The premise seems interesting/odd enough, but I found the writing impossible to follow. I'm sure listening to it as an audiobook didn't help, but this was the first book I gave up on after 15 years of audiobooks. At some point I just thought to myself, why am I subjecting myself to something I neither comprehend nor enjoy...
On the other hand I recently gave Gravity's Rainbow a go right after slogging through David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest, and just couldn't do it. The premise seems interesting/odd enough, but I found the writing impossible to follow. I'm sure listening to it as an audiobook didn't help, but this was the first book I gave up on after 15 years of audiobooks. At some point I just thought to myself, why am I subjecting myself to something I neither comprehend nor enjoy...
I can’t help you with the Infinite Jest comparaison. I have only read short stories by Foster Wallace, didn’t really like his style and had no interest in the themes explored in Infinite Jest so I am probably never going to try reading it.
I really like Pynchon style however. I think he perfectly nails the mix of serious and zany. Vineland is a good example. On the one hand, it’s a fairly serious book about the end of the counterculture and what the election of Nixon meant for the American dream but on the other hand it’s also a book in which a community of living-dead has its own radio station, one hundred pages in the middle of it concerns a woman training to be a lethal ninja and perfecting a delayed assassination technique and Godzilla makes a cameo and despite all of that the whole things feel coherent and properly jointed. I also really enjoy the rhythm of Pynchon sentences. I can definitely see why it wouldn’t work as an audiobook however. It’s writing you definitely have to read at your own pace.
I really like Pynchon style however. I think he perfectly nails the mix of serious and zany. Vineland is a good example. On the one hand, it’s a fairly serious book about the end of the counterculture and what the election of Nixon meant for the American dream but on the other hand it’s also a book in which a community of living-dead has its own radio station, one hundred pages in the middle of it concerns a woman training to be a lethal ninja and perfecting a delayed assassination technique and Godzilla makes a cameo and despite all of that the whole things feel coherent and properly jointed. I also really enjoy the rhythm of Pynchon sentences. I can definitely see why it wouldn’t work as an audiobook however. It’s writing you definitely have to read at your own pace.
I can imagine reading them in original Russian would add another level to the experience.
Interestingly enough, I devoured Infinite Jest and loved the entire novel. Gravity's Rainbow was simply too confusing to me and I think I would have done better had I used a reading guide to support me through the novel.
Interestingly enough, I devoured Infinite Jest and loved the entire novel. Gravity's Rainbow was simply too confusing to me and I think I would have done better had I used a reading guide to support me through the novel.
https://pynchonwiki.com/ has page-by-page annotations to all of Pynchon's novels.
A similar website exists for Infinite Jest: https://infinitejest.wallacewiki.com/david-foster-wallace/in...
I think it is almost impossible to read Gravity's Rainbow exactly once. Either you give up halfway through it, or you finish it and re-read it. It makes more sense, I think, when re-reading it.
A similar website exists for Infinite Jest: https://infinitejest.wallacewiki.com/david-foster-wallace/in...
I think it is almost impossible to read Gravity's Rainbow exactly once. Either you give up halfway through it, or you finish it and re-read it. It makes more sense, I think, when re-reading it.
Youth and timing! I dropped out of college after my 3rd semester. I read widely and kept seeing W&P cited as the greatest piece of literature ever. I read it and liked it -- in two weeks, which was about 100 pages a day. I read it during breakfasts, dinners, coffee breaks and lunch at work, and then at bedtime until 2 in the morning. So, I was able to concentrate on it and enjoy it; being young, I could slough off the lack of sleep.
I read AK next and it was great. A customer at work saw me carrying AK and suggested I read BK, so I did. I too found BK to be my favorite of FD's novels. I also read most of his other novels, except I only got part-way through The Idiot. When I returned to school, I took a Russian Literature course, for which I reread W&P, AK, BK, and Crime and Punishment (instead of using the Cliff's Notes).
(My professor pointed out the humor at the end of AK, something I had failed to see in two readings: the narrator is talking to what's-his-name, who has a horrific toothache and therefore doesn't really care that the most beautiful woman in Russia ... oops, no spoiler here! It was kind of funny when he explained it and he was a zillion times more knowledgeable than me about FD and FD's writings.)
Again, I had youth on my side and, as you noted is important, I had the time to concentrate on the books. Decades later, a few years ago, I finally read The Idiot all the way through -- it was a long slog; it being a weird story anyway didn't help.
I read AK next and it was great. A customer at work saw me carrying AK and suggested I read BK, so I did. I too found BK to be my favorite of FD's novels. I also read most of his other novels, except I only got part-way through The Idiot. When I returned to school, I took a Russian Literature course, for which I reread W&P, AK, BK, and Crime and Punishment (instead of using the Cliff's Notes).
(My professor pointed out the humor at the end of AK, something I had failed to see in two readings: the narrator is talking to what's-his-name, who has a horrific toothache and therefore doesn't really care that the most beautiful woman in Russia ... oops, no spoiler here! It was kind of funny when he explained it and he was a zillion times more knowledgeable than me about FD and FD's writings.)
Again, I had youth on my side and, as you noted is important, I had the time to concentrate on the books. Decades later, a few years ago, I finally read The Idiot all the way through -- it was a long slog; it being a weird story anyway didn't help.
Just as another data point, I managed to finish and kind of enjoy Gravity's Rainbow, accepting that I just couldn't understand everything and just go along for the (rocket) ride. Only after finishing it I read some notes and interpretations online.
But I tried several times reading or listening to The Brothers Karamazov and I didn't manage to finish it, I felt out of touch with the characters, their little lives and foibles weren't interesting, the tone felt dry and didactic, and there was no "fun" mystery to keep me hooked.
This was weird because I did manage to finish and ultimately like Crime & Punishment several years earlier.
However like you said, this was back before I had my current job. I wouldn't be able to read any of them today, I think, I'd lose motivation.
But I tried several times reading or listening to The Brothers Karamazov and I didn't manage to finish it, I felt out of touch with the characters, their little lives and foibles weren't interesting, the tone felt dry and didactic, and there was no "fun" mystery to keep me hooked.
This was weird because I did manage to finish and ultimately like Crime & Punishment several years earlier.
However like you said, this was back before I had my current job. I wouldn't be able to read any of them today, I think, I'd lose motivation.
That is interesting because I found War and Peace the easiest to go through.
Though it might be because I actually found his materialistic approach to history very interesting and his views an leadership extremely valuable. So I am one of the few that actually enjoyed all the rambling about how much Napoleon sucked.
It is one of the few books that made a lasting impression on my worldview. I wish more management type people would read it. It just so exhausting to work with people that see leadership as some ego trip. A good leader's job is to simply enable the people to do their job.
Funny enough I don't remember much about the actual characters. Really need to read it again some other time. AK was a bit more difficult for me as it is more story-driven and a bit more subtle with it themes.
Though it might be because I actually found his materialistic approach to history very interesting and his views an leadership extremely valuable. So I am one of the few that actually enjoyed all the rambling about how much Napoleon sucked.
It is one of the few books that made a lasting impression on my worldview. I wish more management type people would read it. It just so exhausting to work with people that see leadership as some ego trip. A good leader's job is to simply enable the people to do their job.
Funny enough I don't remember much about the actual characters. Really need to read it again some other time. AK was a bit more difficult for me as it is more story-driven and a bit more subtle with it themes.
War and Peace is only as long as Lord of the Rings, after all. It's odd to me that people will read something like ASOIF and then punt on that.
> It just so exhausting to work with people that see leadership as some ego trip.
I think that my biggest surprised on reading a book by a Russian count was that he was a strong opponent of the Great Man theory of history.
> It just so exhausting to work with people that see leadership as some ego trip.
I think that my biggest surprised on reading a book by a Russian count was that he was a strong opponent of the Great Man theory of history.
>War and Peace is only as long as Lord of the Rings, after all. It's odd to me that people will read something like ASOIF and then punt on that.
I read the first four ASOIAF books in two weeks (before the TV show). I read the fifth one in two days straight after buying the ebook at midnight on release day.
I have repeatedly failed to read more than a few dozen pages of LotR.
I read the first four ASOIAF books in two weeks (before the TV show). I read the fifth one in two days straight after buying the ebook at midnight on release day.
I have repeatedly failed to read more than a few dozen pages of LotR.
The beginning of LotR is rather slow, and specially the Old Forest section is a slog. Almost made me give up on the book.
After they reach Bree, the entire thing was a breeze for me
After they reach Bree, the entire thing was a breeze for me
Yes, exactly this!
I enjoyed much more the "essay-like" parts than the actual novel, and they stuck with me unlike the rest of the details of War and Peace.
I enjoyed much more the "essay-like" parts than the actual novel, and they stuck with me unlike the rest of the details of War and Peace.
You should keep going with Brothers Karamazov. The first 150 pages are mind-numbingly boring. But starting at around page 151, it does indeed become one of the best, if not the absolute best book ever written.
Yeah feel free to skip past the debates on orthodox theology, but don't miss the grand inquisitor.
Difficult to slog through Anna Karenina because of its length and number of characters???
Have any of those critics tried reading a George R.R. Martin novel from the past 25 years or so?
Have any of those critics tried reading a George R.R. Martin novel from the past 25 years or so?
AK is not difficult to read, IMHO. I say that as someone not particularly persistent about "difficult" books: I couldn't get through either War and Peace or The Brothers Karamazov, or many other "classics".
Whereas I've read AK three times.
Whereas I've read AK three times.
Are there any long books that don't have lots of characters?
Beethoven's 9th is overwrought trash, so not following the comparison to one of the greatest novels ever written?
Browsing open culture I realised there is enough free content to last several life times … why do you think people still pay for content like books, music, movies if the classics are good and free? Is it a marketing problem ?
I think that it is partially a matter of relevance. For instance, there are vast newspaper and magazine archives which are free to read, but they don't have the same relevance as (eg) the latest New York Times articles. (Not that they are without value by any means, but reading them serves a different purpose).
Perhaps a better example would be someone in the 60's choosing to listen to an old Andrew Sisters record, or purchase a new Bob Dylan LP. The Andrew Sisters (as fun and lovely as their music is) would not speak to that present moment in the same way that Bob Dylan would.
Many aspects of art and culture are timeless, but many are not. There will always be a demand for new works to respond to the current day.
Perhaps a better example would be someone in the 60's choosing to listen to an old Andrew Sisters record, or purchase a new Bob Dylan LP. The Andrew Sisters (as fun and lovely as their music is) would not speak to that present moment in the same way that Bob Dylan would.
Many aspects of art and culture are timeless, but many are not. There will always be a demand for new works to respond to the current day.
I’m totally binging now on this TV series, it’s great so far!
not sure who you interact with regularly, but the vast majority of people are not interested in watching classic film
The classics generally aren't as good. There are exceptions (e.g. Star Wars) but old films generally have terrible pacing. Film making skills have not stood still.
The only thing that hasn't got better is speech clarity which is often terrible in modern films.
The only thing that hasn't got better is speech clarity which is often terrible in modern films.
I watched Battleship Potemkin the other day. Sure, some of it is a bit pokey compared to modern films, but the editing doesn't drag and there aren't many films in history with better shot composition.
Honest question; how do you force yourself to get through a book like Anna Karenina? I have sincerely tried multiple times to get into it, and haven't been able to make it more than 30 or so pages.
I'm generally a fairly well-read guy, so I would like to knock this classic out, but I am not sure how.
I'm generally a fairly well-read guy, so I would like to knock this classic out, but I am not sure how.
I read Anna Karenina and also War and Peace at a time in my youth between work and school where I had the time to just relax with friends and just read a lot of novels. Only in retrospect do you realize how precious those times are.
War and Peace was hard to start because of all the characters, but I got lost in it and it was really worth it. You don't have to pay a lot of attention to the chapters on the meaning of history unless it interests you. Anna Karenina I felt like I dived right into because it was a "smaller" story focused on really well defined characters. But I don't feel like it gripped me all the way through as much as War and Peace.
With books like that-- if you have the time to really sink into them-- you feel like you know the characters as people in the way you know your friends. They are like people you have known. The closest modern book to that I think is A Suitable Boy.
But if it isn't for you in terms of your time or your interest you shouldn't feel bad about it.
War and Peace was hard to start because of all the characters, but I got lost in it and it was really worth it. You don't have to pay a lot of attention to the chapters on the meaning of history unless it interests you. Anna Karenina I felt like I dived right into because it was a "smaller" story focused on really well defined characters. But I don't feel like it gripped me all the way through as much as War and Peace.
With books like that-- if you have the time to really sink into them-- you feel like you know the characters as people in the way you know your friends. They are like people you have known. The closest modern book to that I think is A Suitable Boy.
But if it isn't for you in terms of your time or your interest you shouldn't feel bad about it.
Exactly this, there were periods in high school and college were for whatever reason I had full days of nothing to do. I also didn't have a smartphone so wasting time online was less tempting.
There were the perfect openings for laying down and just read until you forget to eat. In the end, there was some sort of sorrow of having to leave the characters behind.
It is very hard to get such openings today.
There were the perfect openings for laying down and just read until you forget to eat. In the end, there was some sort of sorrow of having to leave the characters behind.
It is very hard to get such openings today.
> how do you force yourself to get through a book like Anna Karenina?
Don't force yourself to read a book you don't enjoy. Life is too short. There are so many books out there.
As many 19th century novels, the plot takes some time to get underway, but I was gripped by the characters and the language from the start. Perhaps you should think of it like a TV show which take a few episodes to establish the characters and universe, before the story gets underway.
Don't force yourself to read a book you don't enjoy. Life is too short. There are so many books out there.
As many 19th century novels, the plot takes some time to get underway, but I was gripped by the characters and the language from the start. Perhaps you should think of it like a TV show which take a few episodes to establish the characters and universe, before the story gets underway.
Force myself? That's the last thing I have to do. I can't start reading it again, because I know I won't be able to put it down. But I do look forward to a third pass through the book at some point. And another reading or two of War and Peace.
Start with some easy Tolstoy, like Kholstomer, The Story of a Horse, or Master and Man. If you don't like those, maybe you're just not a Tolstoy reader. No problem there.
http://www.lrgaf.org/training/kholstomer.htm
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/986/986-h/986-h.htm (Master and Man)
I love 19th-century English literature, especially Hardy, and the same goes for the Russians Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, and the Ukrainian/Russian Gogol, so maybe it's a patience for carefully described settings/characters, carefully developed plots, and a willingness to be dragged, slowly, methodically, and for me, magically into another world and time. Not sure. It's possible certain books only suit certain temperaments. Tolstoy, I'm almost certain, appeals to those who've wrestled with religious belief or doubt for decades, whether they've moved towards or away from belief. He himself scared the Russian elite greatly because of his strong desire to live a truly Christian life, and his apparent willingness to do so. A truly Christian life terrifies most folks, religious or not. Don't assume I'm in sympathy with Tolstoy on this topic. But his sincerity clearly bled through into his writing, and gives it a power few other authors exhibit.
There may be authors on a par with Tolstoy, but I'm hard pressed to come up with one I consider better. War and Peace? Best book I've ever read.
Start with some easy Tolstoy, like Kholstomer, The Story of a Horse, or Master and Man. If you don't like those, maybe you're just not a Tolstoy reader. No problem there.
http://www.lrgaf.org/training/kholstomer.htm
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/986/986-h/986-h.htm (Master and Man)
I love 19th-century English literature, especially Hardy, and the same goes for the Russians Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, and the Ukrainian/Russian Gogol, so maybe it's a patience for carefully described settings/characters, carefully developed plots, and a willingness to be dragged, slowly, methodically, and for me, magically into another world and time. Not sure. It's possible certain books only suit certain temperaments. Tolstoy, I'm almost certain, appeals to those who've wrestled with religious belief or doubt for decades, whether they've moved towards or away from belief. He himself scared the Russian elite greatly because of his strong desire to live a truly Christian life, and his apparent willingness to do so. A truly Christian life terrifies most folks, religious or not. Don't assume I'm in sympathy with Tolstoy on this topic. But his sincerity clearly bled through into his writing, and gives it a power few other authors exhibit.
There may be authors on a par with Tolstoy, but I'm hard pressed to come up with one I consider better. War and Peace? Best book I've ever read.
I think it's worth reconsidering why you wish to read this book if you do not enjoy it.
The classics are not a homework assignment to be suffered through.
The classics are not a homework assignment to be suffered through.
A desire for intellectual growth is a very good reason. If other minds that I find interesting tend to mention a particular book a lot, I want in. I want to get it, to understand it, to have what they're having. This drive has led me to learn and enjoy many things that I would have missed out on if I hadn't persevered past the "I don't get this" phase (in literature, programming, science, anything). The notion that people should only read things they already 'enjoy' is modern anti-intellectual bullshit. Some things take effort before the reward. It's perfectly sensible for someone with a thirst for growth to ask for tips on how to get into something that smart people, in their estimation, seem to enjoy. And when they do ask for help, they should be encouraged.
>> so I would like to knock this classic out, but I am not sure how.
First of all, this sounds like wanting to "having had read" a book to check a box rather than the desire for the intellectual growth that comes from reading it.
> If other minds that I find interesting tend to mention a particular book a lot, I want in. I want to get it, to understand it, to have what they're having.
That isn't a book chosen for intellectual growth, that's a book chosen out of mimetic desire.
> The notion that people should only read things they already 'enjoy' is modern anti-intellectual bullshit. Perhaps enjoy was not the best word for me to use.
My point being, there are more classic books and books which other intellectuals reccomend than there is time in the world to read. Rather than keep banging ones head against the wall because this particular book does work out, they may be better served by trying a different book (one of the other 1,000s).
First of all, this sounds like wanting to "having had read" a book to check a box rather than the desire for the intellectual growth that comes from reading it.
> If other minds that I find interesting tend to mention a particular book a lot, I want in. I want to get it, to understand it, to have what they're having.
That isn't a book chosen for intellectual growth, that's a book chosen out of mimetic desire.
> The notion that people should only read things they already 'enjoy' is modern anti-intellectual bullshit. Perhaps enjoy was not the best word for me to use.
My point being, there are more classic books and books which other intellectuals reccomend than there is time in the world to read. Rather than keep banging ones head against the wall because this particular book does work out, they may be better served by trying a different book (one of the other 1,000s).
> My point being, there are more classic books and books which other intellectuals reccomend than there is time in the world to read.
This point was not at all clear from your parent comment, which was easy to interpret as “if it’s hard, why try?”.
You’ve clarified that this was not your point, but I understand why someone would interpret the original comment as anti-intellectual.
This point was not at all clear from your parent comment, which was easy to interpret as “if it’s hard, why try?”.
You’ve clarified that this was not your point, but I understand why someone would interpret the original comment as anti-intellectual.
That almost is what my original comment was, and I still stand by the original one.
But rather than “if it’s hard, why try?”, what I meant by it is "you've tried several times and still don't like it. Why is it that you're trying in the first place".
It is not anti-intellectual to say that one should stop reading a book they don't enjoy and don't have a good reason to get through. There are many other books which will qualify as an intellectual pursuit that the person could enjoy.
But rather than “if it’s hard, why try?”, what I meant by it is "you've tried several times and still don't like it. Why is it that you're trying in the first place".
It is not anti-intellectual to say that one should stop reading a book they don't enjoy and don't have a good reason to get through. There are many other books which will qualify as an intellectual pursuit that the person could enjoy.
But in order for this to be acceptable advice (IMO), it has to include the 2nd part, which is that not trying doesn't mean you abandon the pursuit of what you originally had in mind when you picked up the book, assuming you still have the same underlying goal.
Pulling this momentarily into the technical domain, there are hundreds of ways to learn about computing, and the underlying concepts that make it all work.
If one day, I decide I want to learn how operating systems work, there are a myriad of resources I can choose from.
I might choose one, and discover that something about it just doesn't help me learn the subject matter. Perhaps it's too dense, or assumes knowledge that I don't yet have, or is just not written very well.
My end goal is still to learn about operating systems. I can abandon this goal entirely (which is how one might read that original comment, and I think it's fair to ask whether it's imperative that I learn about operating systems), or I can find other resources that help me achieve the same goal, possibly through a very different learning process.
All I'm saying is: "If it's hard, why try?"
Is very different from: "If it's hard, consider looking for another starting point"
To the point that the 2nd sentence takes on an entirely different meaning and leads to a very different conclusion than the 1st.
> It is not anti-intellectual to say that one should stop reading a book they don't enjoy and don't have a good reason to get through
I agree with this statement, but this is not what the original comment stated. The original comment made no distinction about "a good reason to get through" the material.
I'd go a step further and say that if you don't have a good reason to get through the material, and you don't enjoy it, it's actively harmful to spend the time. At that point, you might as well fire up your favorite video game or Netflix series, which will at least give you some momentary enjoyment.
But even then, some uncertainty emerges when deciding which things are important to get through. It is often not easy to make that judgement without understanding the material, which you cannot do without getting through it. And so we look to others who we respect, who found profound meaning, and trust that there's something there.
I think the most important thing is forming some idea of what you hope to achieve (a new understanding of things, or some insight into a particular phenomena, or personal growth, etc), and then making decisions about which steps you take next based on whether or not you're achieving that goal.
One of those steps might be choosing to stop struggling through a particular book. Or one of those steps might be deciding the original goal isn't worth the effort. But I do think that choosing purely based on enjoyment or difficulty will lead to never growing.
Growth usually comes via the hardest stuff, and if growth is important to you, a different decision making framework is required.
Pulling this momentarily into the technical domain, there are hundreds of ways to learn about computing, and the underlying concepts that make it all work.
If one day, I decide I want to learn how operating systems work, there are a myriad of resources I can choose from.
I might choose one, and discover that something about it just doesn't help me learn the subject matter. Perhaps it's too dense, or assumes knowledge that I don't yet have, or is just not written very well.
My end goal is still to learn about operating systems. I can abandon this goal entirely (which is how one might read that original comment, and I think it's fair to ask whether it's imperative that I learn about operating systems), or I can find other resources that help me achieve the same goal, possibly through a very different learning process.
All I'm saying is: "If it's hard, why try?"
Is very different from: "If it's hard, consider looking for another starting point"
To the point that the 2nd sentence takes on an entirely different meaning and leads to a very different conclusion than the 1st.
> It is not anti-intellectual to say that one should stop reading a book they don't enjoy and don't have a good reason to get through
I agree with this statement, but this is not what the original comment stated. The original comment made no distinction about "a good reason to get through" the material.
I'd go a step further and say that if you don't have a good reason to get through the material, and you don't enjoy it, it's actively harmful to spend the time. At that point, you might as well fire up your favorite video game or Netflix series, which will at least give you some momentary enjoyment.
But even then, some uncertainty emerges when deciding which things are important to get through. It is often not easy to make that judgement without understanding the material, which you cannot do without getting through it. And so we look to others who we respect, who found profound meaning, and trust that there's something there.
I think the most important thing is forming some idea of what you hope to achieve (a new understanding of things, or some insight into a particular phenomena, or personal growth, etc), and then making decisions about which steps you take next based on whether or not you're achieving that goal.
One of those steps might be choosing to stop struggling through a particular book. Or one of those steps might be deciding the original goal isn't worth the effort. But I do think that choosing purely based on enjoyment or difficulty will lead to never growing.
Growth usually comes via the hardest stuff, and if growth is important to you, a different decision making framework is required.
> All I'm saying is: "If it's hard, why try?"
> Is very different from: "If it's hard, consider looking for another starting point"
Yes, but I never claimed the first. I said "I think it's worth reconsidering why you wish to read this book if you do not enjoy it."
My point being that the original comment sounded more like wishing to check a box of having read a classic book rather than wanting to approach the book for what was in it and growing from the experience: > I'm generally a fairly well-read guy, so I would like to knock this classic out, but I am not sure how.
> I'd go a step further and say that if you don't have a good reason to get through the material, and you don't enjoy it, it's actively harmful to spend the time.
Yes I broadly agree with that.
> And so we look to others who we respect, who found profound meaning, and trust that there's something there.
There being something there for others does not mean that we will get the same thing out of it, or even anything at all if we're not in the right place for it. Doubly so if we did not pick the book because we wanted to get out of it what those others have said they got out of it.
Yes, but I never claimed the first. I said "I think it's worth reconsidering why you wish to read this book if you do not enjoy it."
My point being that the original comment sounded more like wishing to check a box of having read a classic book rather than wanting to approach the book for what was in it and growing from the experience: > I'm generally a fairly well-read guy, so I would like to knock this classic out, but I am not sure how.
> I'd go a step further and say that if you don't have a good reason to get through the material, and you don't enjoy it, it's actively harmful to spend the time.
Yes I broadly agree with that.
> And so we look to others who we respect, who found profound meaning, and trust that there's something there.
There being something there for others does not mean that we will get the same thing out of it, or even anything at all if we're not in the right place for it. Doubly so if we did not pick the book because we wanted to get out of it what those others have said they got out of it.
> There being something there for others does not mean that we will get the same thing out of it, or even anything at all if we're not in the right place for it.
Sure, but it's reasonable to want to try, especially for a novel considered by some to be "the greatest work of literature ever written". That seems worthy of investigation at least. Giving up when things get tough is a pretty problematic approach if you want to grow. Whether my objection matters admittedly depends on whether the goal is to learn/grow, but I think there's a good case to be made that it is.
> My point being that the original comment sounded more like wishing to check a box of having read a classic book rather than wanting to approach the book for what was in it and growing from the experience
But the point of being well-read isn't just to complete a checklist. I think you are reading very deeply into something and drawing a potentially unwarranted conclusion.
Everyone I know who reads avidly, and who many would consider well-read, who are even aware of the existence of Anna Karenina read not for the sake of it, but to improve themselves, their knowledge and understanding of the world around them, etc.
I think that's where our differences in this thread are coming from. I'm assuming the whole point is the acquisition of knowledge/understanding, and you seem to be assuming a different motivation, although I'm not entirely sure what that motivation is (I don't think "checking a box just for the sake of it" is a warranted conclusion in context, and "checking a box" is just a rhetorical device to help us understand that this person has a gap in their reading that they haven't succeeded in filling yet). Perhaps they primarily value good literature, in which case having a list makes quite a lot of sense.
If someone expressed the same frustration about the Greek myths, a potentially more productive response would be to point someone to Stephen Fry's Mythos, Heroes and Troy, which he wrote exactly for the reason that this comment thread exists: some people find the original material difficult to get through, but the underlying message was important enough to re-tell.
In the case of Anna Karenina, perhaps exploring the various translations that exist and choosing one vs. the other would be the ideal next step.
Sure, but it's reasonable to want to try, especially for a novel considered by some to be "the greatest work of literature ever written". That seems worthy of investigation at least. Giving up when things get tough is a pretty problematic approach if you want to grow. Whether my objection matters admittedly depends on whether the goal is to learn/grow, but I think there's a good case to be made that it is.
> My point being that the original comment sounded more like wishing to check a box of having read a classic book rather than wanting to approach the book for what was in it and growing from the experience
But the point of being well-read isn't just to complete a checklist. I think you are reading very deeply into something and drawing a potentially unwarranted conclusion.
Everyone I know who reads avidly, and who many would consider well-read, who are even aware of the existence of Anna Karenina read not for the sake of it, but to improve themselves, their knowledge and understanding of the world around them, etc.
I think that's where our differences in this thread are coming from. I'm assuming the whole point is the acquisition of knowledge/understanding, and you seem to be assuming a different motivation, although I'm not entirely sure what that motivation is (I don't think "checking a box just for the sake of it" is a warranted conclusion in context, and "checking a box" is just a rhetorical device to help us understand that this person has a gap in their reading that they haven't succeeded in filling yet). Perhaps they primarily value good literature, in which case having a list makes quite a lot of sense.
If someone expressed the same frustration about the Greek myths, a potentially more productive response would be to point someone to Stephen Fry's Mythos, Heroes and Troy, which he wrote exactly for the reason that this comment thread exists: some people find the original material difficult to get through, but the underlying message was important enough to re-tell.
In the case of Anna Karenina, perhaps exploring the various translations that exist and choosing one vs. the other would be the ideal next step.
> Giving up when things get tough is a pretty problematic approach if you want to grow.
I think this and the rest of our disagreements is how we view the original comment, and the kind of motivations we ascribe to the original comment.
I'm biased, perhaps unfairly, in that the people I've met who talk about books this way do so with the goal of being able to say that they've read X, that they can show themselves as the kind of person who has reads books like X.
Again perhaps unfair to the original comment given that I don't know where they're coming from.
Because we are the rest we are mostly in agreement about. I am the last person to argue that one should give up when and things get difficult.
But not all roads to the acquisition of knowledge lead to this book, or any one specific book.
I think this and the rest of our disagreements is how we view the original comment, and the kind of motivations we ascribe to the original comment.
I'm biased, perhaps unfairly, in that the people I've met who talk about books this way do so with the goal of being able to say that they've read X, that they can show themselves as the kind of person who has reads books like X.
Again perhaps unfair to the original comment given that I don't know where they're coming from.
Because we are the rest we are mostly in agreement about. I am the last person to argue that one should give up when and things get difficult.
But not all roads to the acquisition of knowledge lead to this book, or any one specific book.
Maybe it’s just good luck, but I haven’t encountered the type you describe so that just didn’t compute for me.
And I agree that not all roads lead there. My position was founded entirely on the stated desire to read this book, and the implied desire to learn from it.
And I agree that not all roads lead there. My position was founded entirely on the stated desire to read this book, and the implied desire to learn from it.
If Shakespeare interests you, that’s fine. If you find him tedious, leave him. Shakespeare hasn’t yet written for you. The day will come when Shakespeare will be right for you and you will be worthy of Shakespeare, but in the meantime there’s no need to hurry things. -- Jorge Luis Borges.
Maybe in your country. In mine we had to suffer through all this stuff before we got old enough for it to be a meaningful reading.
> we had to suffer through all this stuff before we got old enough for it to be a meaningful reading.
Maybe that time would have been better spent on books you found meaningful at the time and to come back to this one when you would find it meaningful.
Maybe that time would have been better spent on books you found meaningful at the time and to come back to this one when you would find it meaningful.
Of course, this is exactly what I mean.
Ahh! I see what you were referring to "the classics are not a homework".
This is a national meme in Russia. War and Peace is mandatory reading in schools, but it's always only 3-4 students in class who really read it. Most students just skim through ("read diagonally", as we say), use summary or watch the movie.
War and Peace is fairly interesting, in the sense the battle scenes really detailed and action packed, even more than can be shown in movies.
In principle, I understand how this book can fail to connect with some people. I’ve encountered many “great” books that I just couldn’t read. But Anna Karenina is so damn good that it’s hard to fathom others see it differently. The writing and character development are exquisite. I can reread it endlessly, or start randomly at any page. It’s always a pleasure.
This happens to me, too, on occasion. You might want to try an audio book version. This helps in a couple of ways. The narration might change narrator for different characters or change their voice and the name pronunciation is probably much better for languages one does not speak. This also gives you a basis for the character in your mind and frees up your imagination for the text not related to character voice and emotion. I still find some books with a larger number of characters or particularly different cultures/settings requiring multiple re listens at the start for me to be able to see what is described in my mind's eye, versus my brain being immediately receptive to other books from the beginning. It does require a certain amount of concentration to comprehend and not just hear like background music that is available when I am walking or riding a bicycle or cooking, sometimes when I am driving.
I've read it three times and it didn't take any forcing. Whereas other long Russian classic novels: not so much.
I don't know if this is a "tip" or not, but what I found easy about AK was the descriptions of people's inner lives, and how much insight Tolstoy has on the human condition. He was a very religious man, but the characters don't so much think about Christianity as live it (or try to).
Anna's feelings about Karenin's stuffiness, and their inability to connect, are SO modern. You see how they treat their son, and contrast it with the way "modern" parents try to raise their kids. Vronsky's behavior with his fellow soldiers is a beautiful picture of male bonding before there was such a term.
Writers are exhorted to "show, don't tell" and Tolstoy doesn't tell you Anna felt guilty, he shows you.
I don't know if this is a "tip" or not, but what I found easy about AK was the descriptions of people's inner lives, and how much insight Tolstoy has on the human condition. He was a very religious man, but the characters don't so much think about Christianity as live it (or try to).
Anna's feelings about Karenin's stuffiness, and their inability to connect, are SO modern. You see how they treat their son, and contrast it with the way "modern" parents try to raise their kids. Vronsky's behavior with his fellow soldiers is a beautiful picture of male bonding before there was such a term.
Writers are exhorted to "show, don't tell" and Tolstoy doesn't tell you Anna felt guilty, he shows you.
Anna Karenia is still on my list, but here's what I did for Jane Austen and the Tale of Genji: Just read one chapter a night. My old AP Lit teacher gave me that advice, said you need to treat these books like a soap opera, because they're written with the same idea in mind.
As someone who had this book as mandatory reading in high school, along with many other books I would call dense, I would say the secret ingredient is to go fast. With regular books, I take breaks to ponder the ideas multiple times per chapter. If I know I have to go through 800+ pages, I decide to read 100 pages a day, and just brute force it through. After you've gone through the whole thing, there's plenty of time to go back and revisit the themes you found more interesting, I know other students also made heavy use of notes and sticky notes to grok the thing.
It may seem so boring at first because it is so real. The depth of insight into the characters and culture is what makes it so moving as the plot picks up.
Another perspective shift that makes it more enjoyable: it's a time machine. I wouldn't care for that level of detail in a modern American context or even a fantasy, but a distinct culture nearly 200 years ago? Sign me up.
Then again, if you don't dig it no shame in moving on. There are more books than there is time to read them.
Another perspective shift that makes it more enjoyable: it's a time machine. I wouldn't care for that level of detail in a modern American context or even a fantasy, but a distinct culture nearly 200 years ago? Sign me up.
Then again, if you don't dig it no shame in moving on. There are more books than there is time to read them.
first, i'd just read The Death of Ivan Ilyich which is much much shorter.
after reading that if you feel like reading tolstoy is something you want to do a whole lot more of, then pick up Anna Karenina or War and Peace. I've read both, because i enjoy reading Tolstoy, but i would not recommend reading them if you do not enjoy the process. there are plenty of other great literary works out there (and most of them are shorter).
after reading that if you feel like reading tolstoy is something you want to do a whole lot more of, then pick up Anna Karenina or War and Peace. I've read both, because i enjoy reading Tolstoy, but i would not recommend reading them if you do not enjoy the process. there are plenty of other great literary works out there (and most of them are shorter).
I focused on the individual characters I liked. Levin is a personal favorite and as you get further along you get a little more of him. Read each character story as a vignette and don't worry about connecting the dots of the whole book until later -- or until it comes up again. Interestingly, it's the same method I use for Gabriel Garcia Marquez.
There is a contrasting beauty of prose in Marquez, though, in spite of war being a common theme. Maybe because of environment: 19-century Russia seems raw and cold, whereas Marquez's Latin America is warm and colorful, and of course magic realism adds another level of aesthetics.
This is how I got through it - I read it in 1990 while riding the bus to and from a summer job. I had nothing else to do to kill the time. I don't remember it being a terribly boring story. So, to get through it - get off the Internet, and all devices since they're just time wasters much like Anna Karenina.
I think the "go fast" guy is right. The problem with really old classics is that they have been imitated a lot. I had the same issue with "War & Peace" - I felt like I have read the book a 1000 times before. I find Chekov and Bulgakov to be far more interesting. Their work is shorter and hits harder.
Sholokov and Solzhenitsyn do continue the style and approach of Tolstoy, I think.
What do you recommend by Chekov?
Just about anything. Go to Project Gutenberg, pick a book of plays, or short stories, and just start reading. Be forewarned, though. Chekov doesn't do endings (for the most part) and he made no apologies for his lack of endings. You'll find out with a minimal investment of time whether or not you like his style. I do, despite the paucity of endings.
Endings are hard. I suspect one of the things that has enhanced Tom Hanks' acting career is making sure most of the stuff he did had a good solid ending, not a quick fade -- consider Saving Private Ryan, and Castaway. Killer endings. Tolstoy, unlike Chekov, does great endings.
Endings are hard. I suspect one of the things that has enhanced Tom Hanks' acting career is making sure most of the stuff he did had a good solid ending, not a quick fade -- consider Saving Private Ryan, and Castaway. Killer endings. Tolstoy, unlike Chekov, does great endings.
Thanks. I think this is something that attracts me to his writing - real life rarely has endings.
Ward No. 6
Wow. That was a very good read, and it had an ending -- precisely your point, I imagine. Thanks!
Really glad you enjoyed it!
It's a great read that sucks you in. I couldn't put it down and finished it over a vacation.
Couldn’t agree more, I read it last year and it’s as good as everyone says it is. That said, I did read a lot of Russian literature during that period so the constant names/nicknames didn’t bother me.
Levin's monologue at the end might be my favorite part of any book.
Also war and peace is truly amazing in the same vein
Also war and peace is truly amazing in the same vein
If you didn't enjoy it, first try with a different translation or read something else, life is short and there are plenty of good books. Personally I really liked Anna Karenina and read it twice. War and Peace on the other hand, I had to force myself to finish it.
You might try "Notes from Underground" by Dostoevsky first, which is much shorter, just to get a taste of his characters and writing style. If you like that, go on to "Crime and Punishment", and then read "The Brothers Karamazov" last.
I saw a dust jacket quote that said something like, "Dostoevsky writes about the unconscious as though it were conscious". When I started reading his books, I felt like he naturally reveals his character's psychology through dialogue (both inner and intrapersonal). They are surprisingly relatable. They have quirks and insecurities, can be hot-headed one minute and fearful the next. "Do you know what it means to demand when you are only in a position to implore?" asks one protagonist. They struggle with big questions, their motivations are laid bare, and they endear empathy as would a self-destructive family member. Dostoevsky may not write inspired literature, but he has something important to say, and he says it from his uniquely Russian soul.
I saw a dust jacket quote that said something like, "Dostoevsky writes about the unconscious as though it were conscious". When I started reading his books, I felt like he naturally reveals his character's psychology through dialogue (both inner and intrapersonal). They are surprisingly relatable. They have quirks and insecurities, can be hot-headed one minute and fearful the next. "Do you know what it means to demand when you are only in a position to implore?" asks one protagonist. They struggle with big questions, their motivations are laid bare, and they endear empathy as would a self-destructive family member. Dostoevsky may not write inspired literature, but he has something important to say, and he says it from his uniquely Russian soul.
Well, I mean, "reading something else" has been what I've opted to do thus far, hence why I've only gotten about 30 pages in, but I've found that sometimes when I force myself to actually one of these "certified classics" I end up feeling glad I did. That's how I felt about Crime and Punishment, for example.
crime and punishment is what got me hooked on russian literature. i would try some of dostoyevsky's other works before moving on to tolstoy. just finished karenina this year but enjoyed the idiot and karamazov more.
Highly recommend the 2016 tv series of war and peace starting Paul Dano.
Sometimes the movie can be better than the book, especially if the book is a dense classic.
Sometimes the movie can be better than the book, especially if the book is a dense classic.
Thanks, I saw it and it was good, but I read the book a few years before that.
Don't know, I actually didn't have too much trouble getting through Anna Karenina, and it remains one of my favorite novels. Saying this as someone who has tried and failed many times to finish other classics such as One Hundred Years Of Solitude.
Within a few pages I knew it was great and honestly was sad that it couldn't have lasted longer. If you're not enjoying it, just stop, it's meant to be enjoyed like a nice whisky or something. No point forcing yourself.
I listened to it as an audiobook over the course of a week or two, and it was pretty bearable. I know there is some debate about whether that counts as "reading" the book, but on something like this I consider it close enough.
An audiobook and a character name cross-reference can be instrumental in getting through some of these massive Russian tomes. I was definitely confused by War and Peace (I think it was) until I realized that there was one character with fifteen various names and not fifteen different characters.
Massive tomes work well as audiobooks: expert reader paces the content well, forcing you to carry through the bogged-down parts.
Anecdote: War And Peace was so massive it broke my audiobook reader app. 400 pages in it just quit progressing.
Anecdote: War And Peace was so massive it broke my audiobook reader app. 400 pages in it just quit progressing.
It all starts with the attitude. If you just want to "knock this classic out" then you set yourself up for a failure from the beginning. I can read classics only for enjoyment of the language and images.
Maybe try audio. I really like the version narrated by David Horovich.
Some classics just aren’t worth the work if they’re that much of a slog. There’s a reason I never finished watching Gone the Wind but had no issue reading Crime and Punishment.
I got to the intermission in Gone with the Wind, said "great, that movie can be over now" and never looked back.
I found Anna Karenina effortless, and I don't usually enjoy fiction. Perhaps it's just not the right book for you.
I found it quite readable, easier to get through than War and Peace. Has to be a good translation though.
What translation do you recommend?
I just have the newest Penguin Classics version, translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky. Not sure if it’s the best one, but I found it good. I’ve just tried reading some Russian Classics from public domain translations and sometimes they are a lot harder to read.
> The uploader has not made this video available in your country
In Russia, that is. Har har har.
Not sure what's going on here and who blocked whom, but when people propose boycotting this vid due to its provenance, I have trouble even counting the layers of irony. There are at least two, but then it gets confusing.
In Russia, that is. Har har har.
Not sure what's going on here and who blocked whom, but when people propose boycotting this vid due to its provenance, I have trouble even counting the layers of irony. There are at least two, but then it gets confusing.
No Such Thing As A Fish has ruined Anna Karenina for me.
Android Karenina did it for me.
Why?
What's the license? That doesn't seem to be mentioned in the article.
hdjjhhvvhga(8)
I refuse to watch propaganda garbage made by the Russian fascist who is enthusiastically cheerleading the genocide of Ukrainians (1). If you are interested in Anna Karenina - do yourself a favor and just read Tolstoy. It's a fantastic book by one of my favorite writers (although War and Peace appeals more to me).
1. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10785295/Russian-TV...
1. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10785295/Russian-TV...
It behooves one to know their opponent. The mere act of viewing the media does not "support" the film-maker or the regime, assuming you're not paying for it.