Russian literature -- 19th century -- History and criticism
Nearly every critic, at least nearly every English critic,[8] in
dealing with _Anna Karenina_, has found fault with the author for the
character of Vronsky. Anna Karenina, they say, could never have fallen
in love with such an ordinary commonplace man. Vronsky, one critic
has said (in a brilliant article), is only a glorified “Steerforth.”
The answer to this is that if you go to St. Petersburg or to London,
or to any other town you like to mention, you will find that the men
with whom the Anna Kareninas of this world fall in love are precisely
the Vronskys, and no one else, for the simple reason that Vronsky is a
man. He is not a hero, and he is not a villain; he is not what people
call “interesting,” but a man, as masculine as Anna is feminine, with
many good qualities and many limitations, but above all things alive.
Nearly every novelist, with the exception of Fielding, ends, in spite
of himself, by placing his hero either above or beneath the standard
of real life. There are many Vronskys to-day in St. Petersburg, and
for the matter of that, _mutatis mutandis_, in London. But no novelist
except Tolstoy has ever had the power to put this simple thing, an
ordinary man, into a book. Put one of Meredith’s heroes next to
Vronsky, and Meredith’s hero will appear like a figure dressed up for
a fancy-dress ball. Put one of Bourget’s heroes next to him, with all
his psychological documents attached to him, and, in spite of all the
analysis in the world, side by side with Tolstoy’s human being he will
seem but a plaster-cast. Yet, all the time, in _Anna Karenina_ we
feel, as in _War and Peace_, that the author is still unsatisfied and
hungry, searching for something he has not yet found; and once again,
this time in still sharper outline and more living colours, he paints
an ideal of simplicity which is taking us towards Ivan Durak in the
character of Levin. Into this character, too, we feel that Tolstoy
has put a great deal of himself; and that Levin, if he is not Tolstoy
himself, is what Tolstoy would like to be. But the loneliness and the
void that are round Tolstoy’s mind are not yet filled; and in that
loneliness and in that void we are sharply conscious of the brooding
presence of despair, and the power of darkness.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account