Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy

by Leo Tolstoy

Anna Karenina is one of the most famous novels of all time. It was first published in 1877 and tells the story of Anna Karenina, a young woman from high society who falls in love with a soldier, and the romance between a young couple, Levin and Kitty. The novel offers an interesting glimpse into the religion and social situation of 19th-century Russia. Although the novel is not an autobiography, there are a number of interesting parallels between Tolstoi and the character Levin. About Leo Tolstoy. Count Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy was born in Russia in 1828. He is regarded not only as one of the most famous Russian writers of the past few centuries, but also one of the greatest authors of all time. His work has had an incredible influence on literature. Two of his most famous works are War and Peace and Anna Karenina , two novels which are often regarded as the embodiment of realist fiction. Moreover, he was not only a novelist – he also wrote several plays and a great number of philosophical essays. He had many revolutionary ideas on nonviolent resistance, which went on to influence such famous historical figures as Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.

1436 pages, Kindle Edition

Published March 24, 2023

About the author

Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (Russian: Лев Николаевич Толстой; most appropriately used Liev Tolstoy; commonly Leo Tolstoy in Anglophone countries) was a Russian writer who primarily wrote novels and short stories. Later in life, he also wrote plays and essays. His two most famous works, the novels War and Peace and Anna Karenina, are acknowledged as two of the greatest novels of all time and a pinnacle of realist fiction. Many consider Tolstoy to have been one of the world's greatest novelists. Tolstoy is equally known for his complicated and paradoxical persona and for his extreme moralistic and ascetic views, which he adopted after a moral crisis and spiritual awakening in the 1870s, after which he also became noted as a moral thinker and social reformer.

His literal interpretation of the ethical teachings of Jesus, centering on the Sermon on the Mount, caused him in later life to become a fervent Christian anarchist and anarcho-pacifist. His ideas on nonviolent resistance, expressed in such works as The Kingdom of God Is Within You, were to have a profound impact on such pivotal twentieth-century figures as Mohandas Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr.

See also:
French → Léon Tolstoï
Spanish → León Tolstói

Reviews

[Allan MacDonell]

I’ve been wanting to have read Anna Karenina since stumbling into a novel about a lady concierge who falls in love with a Japanese man of independent means and is killed in a Parisian vehicular accident moments from the end of the book. Leo Tolstoy’s 800-page masterwork centered on an adulterous high-society liaison leading to heartbreak and havoc in a host of passion-fueled Russian characters all around took up two 22-hour flights to and from Bali, three weeks in country and one week back home. The action is devastating. The philosophical arguments and internal rejection of love and certainty and the clinging to loathing and doubt lead to a graphic suicide as Anna Karenina’s gruesome centerpiece, leaving about 100 pages to restore a higher understanding of humanity’s redemption tempered with petty faults and irritations. Satisfaction all around.

[Pat Palmer]

I found this book very interesting in a lot of ways. The times in Russia were well documented. The author wrote detailed descriptions of the class system, politics and religion. The characters were interesting, and diverse. I just found it long-winded, and I was glad that I chose an audible version to read.

[heidi shirley]

pffff increíble
simple y espléndidamente Tolstoy

[Laura Jayne]

I made my own cup of coffee and settled down at my desk to finish this book, the sweet taste of caramel toffee lingering on my tongue as I turned the last page of what can only be called a masterpiece.
When I decided to finally read 'Anna Karenina', almost three weeks ago now... I was somewhat daunted. Not by its length, not by the translation, but by the weight of the story. I didn't actually know much about the book, but I had heard it referred to as heavy.
I faced no difficulty in the actual process of reading 'Anna Karenina' - despite the lengthy list of characters at the beginning of Volume I and Volume II - but I would be lying if I said that I remained unaffected by the weight of the story. I did tear up at times. I did suspend my disbelief, treating the characters and their situations as though they were real.
...Which leads me to discuss something that really impressed me: the sheer skill with which Tolstoy delves into flawed humanity. It is staggering at first, accustomed as I am to inherently good or evil characters in books, but it is something which I really admire. Initially, I didn't like any of the characters, nor could I connect to them. Their immoral actions, their selfishness, their lack of consideration or respect, etc... All of these things shocked me and repelled me. Until...
Until Tolstoy made me cry for them, made me feel for them. He evoked my sympathy for characters that I felt disconnected or detached from.
Anna's infidelity was wrong. Yet her situation tugged at my heartstrings, despite it being brought about by her own actions. Karenin's position as a wronged husband did not diminish my indignation at his vindictive, uncaring treatment of her (SPOILER: I was sitting in a coffee shop and my jaw actually dropped when I read that he hoped for her death).
I realised that Tolstoy isn't trying to validate, justify, or glorify their immorality - he's digging into and reflecting the complexity of flawed humanity. None of us can say we're perfect. We aren't and we never will be. Tolstoy reminds us that we're all messy, conflicted. We're our own worst enemies - and let's not get started on just how much heartache we can cause others in the process. We are so wrapped up in our own lives, it's easy to drive the train full speed ahead to self-destruction, to demise.
(I don't typically like to give much away for prospective readers, so SPOILER ALERT for this next bit.)
In particular, Tolstoy proves his exceptional skill in the later scenes between Anna and Vronsky. Perhaps fuelled or exacerbated by her use of morphia and opium as a coping mechanism, Anna descends into paranoia. Tolstoy forces us to read her interactions with Vronsky from her point of view - but doesn't leave it there. He does something truly ground-breaking: He gives the narrative an incredible cinematic depth - before cinema was even a thing! He switches it, replaying the interactions from Vronsky's point of view, adding a brilliant layer of dramatic irony, emphasising the misunderstandings that fracture not only their relationship but Anna's mind.
While these dual perspective scenes are impressive, Tolstoy takes it further by somehow taking us into Anna's mental state - a truly jarring, unsettling, yet at some points resonant experience (which makes it all the more disturbing), culminating in a shocking end that quite literally forced me to stare into space, processing it. I must also add that his depiction of Anna's ongoing internal struggle was handled with a startling degree of realism - another thing to admire.
However, Tolstoy doesn't leave us in complete despair. Contrary to the start of the novel, in which immorality and superficiality are very much front and centre, he leaves us with a beautiful reflection on spirituality - namely, Levin's journey and resolutions. He takes us through an absolute storm (literally and figuratively), and leaves us on the peaceful shores.
There are still some questions, unresolved and niggling, but that is just yet another way in which Tolstoy reflects life. It goes on and the future remains uncertain to us all.

[Júlia]

Tolstoy’s writing is undeniably beautiful. His ability to humanize each character and render their inner worlds with such psychological precision is remarkable—you don’t just observe them, you understand how they think, how they justify themselves, and how they unravel. It literally feels as tho you personally know the characters and how they feel regarding any circumstance they are placed in.

That said, I found Anna herself deeply insufferable. Her jealousy, while rooted in insecurity and isolation, felt incredibly disproportionate and increasingly detached from reality in the majority of instances. What begins as emotional vulnerability evolves into a pattern of suspicion, manipulation, and self-victimization that ultimately becomes deeply exhausting to follow. Her relationship with Vronsky, especially once they begin living together, is defined by a constant cycle of accusation and emotional volatility. Minor moments are interpreted as betrayals, and her fear of abandonment manifests in ways that paradoxically push him further away. Basically she is incredibly toxic and manipulative.
Anna also comes across as profoundly self-destructive. Rather than confronting her circumstances with clarity, she seems to purposely intensify them, repeatedly escalating conflict and reinforcing her own sense of victimhood. While Tolstoy clearly intends for us to witness her psychological decline, the experience of inhabiting her perspective can feel more frustrating than sympathetic. Every time she would say something once her romance with Vronsky started I wanted to close the book.
In contrast, I found Levin and Kitty’s storyline far more compelling—arguably the emotional core of the novel in my view. Their relationship feels grounded, sincere, and ultimately truthful in a way that Anna and Vronsky’s does not. Where Anna and Vronsky are driven by passion that borders on obsession making it feel like it’s based on lust rather than love, Levin and Kitty represent something steadier: a love that grows through uncertainty, self-reflection, and mutual understanding, it feels genuine and romantic.
Anna and Vronsky’s relationship, by comparison, often feels closer to infatuation than enduring love. They enter a situation they are unprepared to sustain and, instead of resolving it, continue to entrench themselves more deeply in it. The result is not just tragedy, but a kind of inevitability born from their inability to step back or change course.
I didn’t particularly admire Vronsky, but within this dynamic, he often seems caught in a relationship that becomes increasingly difficult to navigate. What begins as passion ultimately deteriorates into something strained, unstable, and unsustainable.

Overall then, while the book writting was immaculate, the fact that a significant part of the story was based on this main character who I could not stand at all made the book a harder read. I do not think I’d like to ever reread the book merely based on having to endure Anna again. However, I can definitely see how it is considered a classic and a must read, the writting was amazing and his ability to build characters was very impressive.

[Alexandra Carneiro]

Depois é mais de uma década, voltei ao livro que sabia que tinha gostado muito. Não me recordava do centro da história e não li a resenha. A vida tem as suas curiosidades e o livro passou 10 anos na mesinha de cabeceira verta, naquela onde a história a que voltei agora fez todo o sentido. Não há duvida que as nossas experiências de vida determinam a forma como interpretamos as histórias e as mensagens de cada livro. Um livro a que vale sempre a pena voltar.

—

English translation:
So, more than a decade later, I returned to a book I knew I had loved. I didn't remember the core of the story and hadn't read the summary. Life has its curiosities, and the book spent 10 years on the nightstand — the one where the story I've now returned to made complete sense. There's no doubt our life experiences shape how we interpret the stories and messages of each book. A book always worth returning to.

[Camila]

Easier to read than Dostoevsky, but very, very long — and thus slow at times.

It was interesting to follow two different, realistic life paths set in old Russia. I especially appreciated the philosophical and psychological insights, as well as the novel’s exploration of Russian society and its political landscape.

[Panayiota]

It's one of the best novels I've ever read. Pamuk was right.
I specifically enjoyed Levin's character, the character building in general, and the philosophical ending.