Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (Russian: 袥械胁 袧懈泻芯谢邪械胁懈褔 孝芯谢褋褌芯泄; 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.
"Love, marriage, family,鈥攁ll lies, lies, lies." - Leo Tolstoy, The Krutzer Sonata
First, let me start this review by stating I think might just be a perfect novel. So, I love Tolstoy. , also amazes me and easily belongs on the list of Great World Novels. But 'The Kreutzer Sonata' plays like the writings of an over-indulged, philosophically-stretched, cranky, Fundamentalist older man. It is the sad, second wife to Anna Karenina*. That said, I enjoyed the structure. It is basically a man, Pozdnyshev, discussing his feelings on marriage, morality, and family on a train ride with some strangers. During this discussion he admits that in a jealous rage he once killed his wife (and was later aquited).
The story was censored briefly in 1890 (its censorship was later overturned), but that didn't stop Theodore Roosevelt calling Tolstoy a "sexual moral pervert". The novel does allude to masturbation, immorality, adultery, abortion, etc. Which is funny, because the whole premise of the book is to rage against our moral failings. In a later piece Tolstoy wrote () defending the novella, he basically explained his views:
1. Men are basically immoral perverts with the opposite sex when young. Society and families wink at their dissoluteness. 2. The poetic/romantic ideal of "falling in love" has had a detrimental impact on morality. 3. The birth of children has lost its pristine significance and the family has been degraded even in the "modern" view of marriage. 4. Children are being raised NOT to grow into moral adults, but to entertain their parents. They are seen as entertainments of the family. 5. Romatic ideas of music, art, dances, food, etc., has contributed and fanned the sexcual vices and diseases of youth. 6. The best years (youth) of our lives are spent trying to get our "freak on" (my term, not Count Tolstoy's). That period would be better spent not chasing tail, butserving one's country, science, art, or God. 7. Chasity and celibacy are to be admired and marriage and sex should be avoided. If we were really "Christian" we would not "bump uglies" (again, my term not the Count's).
It might seem like I am warping Tolstoy's argument a bit, but really I am not. I think the best response to Tolstoy came in 1908 at a celebration of Tolstoy's 80th* from G.K. Chesterton (not really a big libertine; big yes, libertine no):
"Tolstoy is not content with pitying humanity for its pains: such as poverty and prisons. He also pities humanity for its pleasures, such as music and patriotism. He weeps at the thought of hatred; but in The Kreutzer Sonata he weeps almost as much at the thought of love. He and all the humanitarians pity the joys of men." He went on to address Tolstoy directly: "What you dislike is being a man. You are at least next door to hating humanity, for you pity humanity because it is human鈥�
* There are even a couple lines that seem to borrow scenes from, or allude to, Anna Karenina: "throw myself under the cars, and thus finish everything." "I was still unaware that ninety-nine families out of every hundred live in the same hell, and that it cannot be otherwise. I had not learned this fact from others or from myself. The coincidences that are met in regular, and even in irregular life, are surprising." ** Which, if the backward math works, means Kreutzer Sonata was written/published when Tolstoy was in his early 60s.
Have you ever found yourself stuck on a plane with a veritably annoying co-passenger bent on talking to you when you would rather be left in peace? Replace 'plane' with 'train' and instead of merely being annoyed by, say, a lady who wants to chat about airplane crashes (as happened to me, once), you are dealing with a psychotic man who must tell you all about how he killed his wife because, well, she had it coming.
That is, in a nutshell, The Kreutzer Sonata. And yet, this scenario, as deeply disturbing and perplexing as it is, could be fertile ground for literary exploration. Abnormal psychology has often provided the themes for the best, deepest if darkest literature. There is the risk of ending up siding with absolute evil, though, and this is precisely what happens in this one. Imagine if Raskolnikov's self-justifications for killing the old lady were implicitly and later on, in an addendum, endorsed by the author and that his point of view was lauded throughout the text with absolutely no push-back and you may have an idea of the depths of depravity to which Kreutzer descends.
The misogyny is thick, acid, dripping from virtually every single line with a kind of desperate bravado and aggrandizing sense of injured pride that it gives one pause. Occasionally, here and there, a few nuggets of decency are littered as we are reminded that if women are essentially pigs, they are so merely because they were raised that way and if given a choice and a proper moral conduct they would overcome their swinish ways.
Unfortunately, said proper moral conduct is another piece of lunacy: chastity at all costs and if that is unattainable than being perpetually pregnant and nursing. The text goes out of its way to condemn contraception several times and this in a shortish tale.
If there is one thing that I have learned is that doctrines- and this is a doctrinal text through and through, it may be well written and in such a way as to almost camouflage its design but dig below the glittering sentence and you can see it for what it is- that hail women's 'purity' as the stuff of wonders are almost by default heavily anti-women. It follows almost logically: if a woman after having sex feels 'impure' and is 'degraded', to the point that her emotional scope is deadened (all articles of faith in this one), the ideal of womanhood that emerges as a counterpart is that of virginal girls, with sexually active women being placed in a very lower tier.
Which is not to say that Kreutzer thinks highly of men, it very obviously does not, as time and time again it reminds us how sexual urges also reduce them into becoming beasts. But it is worth mentioning that when push comes to shove and our 'hero' finally kills someone, it is the wife that gets it. Not the man that may be having an affair with her; no, violence in this one is directed with gusto and blood lust at the woman.
Because, let's be honest, she kind of had it coming. What was she wearing?
I cannot help but wonder if the high praise this one receives comes from its author more than anything else. Were it an anonymous text, would it have all this raving devotion? Maybe. Then again, maybe not.
Be it as it may, the text runs through a gamut of things that are just too terrible in that they derail one from becoming chaste and following Christ (with the laudable goal of eventually extinguishing the human race, Tolstoy the OG anti-natalist) and those include: music, the titular sonata in particular, for it is nothing but a trigger for having frenzied sex (good thing Tolstoy wasn't around when Rock'n'roll was a thing, it'd kill him dead); children, for they become nothing but pawns in the parents' sick power games once things turn sour; marriage, which is the source of all evils because it gives vent to that frenzied sex and creates more children which are in turn horrible and may even grow up to (gasp!) compose music (say it ain't so!).
I need to stress that there is a point to all this craziness. Marriage was, indeed, very often a horror show in Tolstoy's time, women were treated as cattle and put on auction in the marriage market (one of the few scenes that is truly great is the one describing those 19th century balls where young women were put on display, all decked up in their best clothes, to be more or less purchased as brides, no actual effort being put into developing them as individuals) and sexuality burdened women with so many children that health and life were compromised.
Unfortunately, Kreutzer does a good job at defining the problems but goes down in flames when it offers its demented solution. The very obvious possibility of rearranging gender roles within marriage so as to create such asymmetries, of using contraception to avoid being perpetually pregnant and of investing in the actual education of women and girls, is either completed ignored or overtly condemned, as is the case with contraception (this needs emphasizing, it is almost a litmus test: texts that oppose contraception are anti-women). Whenever anyone claims that sex should be exclusively for procreation, as is the case here, a red flag should pop up.
What is offered instead is this ideal of Christian sappiness where men and women become sexless, or as close as possible, and women are kept nursing so as not to go into 'heat', or whatever lunatic notion passes for female sexual desire. Only then will people become Christlike, producing a batch of even more Christlike people who will abstain from sex even further until we all become so Christlike that humanity comes to an end, as it really ought to happen.
And here I was, thinking that the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement was a modern idea.
I actually recommend reading this one as it has to be read to be believed. With that said, if detailed scenes of violence against women are triggering then stay far, far away from this one.
Sau "c芒teva motive pentru a-牛i ucide nevasta, explicate de 卯nsu艧i uciga艧ul". Tolstoi a fost impardonabil de sincer pentru secolul s膬u, a葯a c膬 ajunge s膬 ofenseze cu Sonata Kreutzer nu doar critica vremii sau pe pudibonzii ultraortodoc艧i ru艧i, dar mai presus de toate, propria-i so牛ie. Pe scurt, protagonistul Pozdn卯葯ev relateaz膬 naratorului, pe parcursul unei c膬l膬torii cu trenul, cum anume iubirea intens膬 pentru so葲ia lui ajunge s膬 se transforme 卯ntr-o ur膬 visceral膬 艧i cum sf芒r葯e葯te, 卯n cele din urm膬, s膬 o omoare f膬r膬 regrete. Profund ne卯mp膬cat 艧i chinuit, Pozdn卯葯ev este achitat pentru odioasa fapt膬, dar este urm膬rit p芒n膬 la cap膬t de autoinculpare 艧i peniten牛膬. Sf芒r艧e艧te prin a-艧i valoriza so牛ia ucis膬 imediat ce ea trece la cele ve艧nice, dar mai ales pe m膬sur膬 ce 卯艧i evoc膬 艧i 卯艧i 卯n牛elege fiecare temei prostesc al geloziei care l-a 卯mpins la crim膬: 鈥濧dev膬rul e c膬, fiind eliberat膬 de sarcin膬 艧i al膬ptare s-a trezit 卯n ea cochet膬ria adormit膬. 艦i odat膬 cu asta s-a trezit 艧i 卯n mine o teribil膬 gelozie, care din acea clip膬 m-a torturat f膬r膬 卯ncetare 艧i care-i tortureaz膬 pe to牛i b膬rba牛ii ce duc aceea艧i via牛膬 dezgust膬toare 卯n c膬snicie, cum o duceam 艧i eu.鈥� Autoflagel芒ndu-se f膬r膬 mil膬 卯n introspec牛ii 艧i retrospectii psihanalitice, 卯艧i descoper膬 sursa geloziei 卯ntr-o imagine viciat膬 ce o avea asupra femeilor, dob芒ndit膬 卯nc膬 din vremea tinere牛ii sale 卯necate 卯n desfr芒u: 鈥炩€ufeream cumplit. Nu 卯ntr-un spital de sifilitici a艧 duce eu tinerii ca s膬 le treac膬 pofta de femei, ci 卯n sufletul meu, ca s膬 vad膬 demonii care-l sf芒艧iau!鈥� Nu e de mirare c膬, la vremea ei, aceast膬 scriere a st芒rnit un imens scandal 艧i a ajuns s膬 fie interzis膬 din Rusia 葯i p芒n膬 卯n America. Nu a fost pu葲in lucru s膬 卯ndr膬zne葯ti s膬 fii at芒t de lipsit de ipocrizie 葯i formalism 卯n secolul al XIX-lea, a葯 ad膬uga eu.
Another book borrowed from my parents' collection. This collection brings together four of Tolstoy's late stories. The first three (The Kreutzer Sonata, The Devil and The Forged Coupon) are arguably novellas, and the collection is completed by After the Ball, a short essay (Postface to the Kreutzer Sonata) and an alternate ending for The Devil.
All of these stories have a strict religious and moral underpinning, and all explore the consequences of various forms of temptation. This makes them read very much as period pieces - Tolstoy's views on the importance of chastity would be much less popular today, but taken together they are still enjoyable and at times (particularly in the first half of The Forged Coupon) entertaining.
Nu 葯tiu dac膬 acum 22 de ani sau cam a葯a ceva, c芒nd am citit prima dat膬 Sonata Kreutzer, mi-am dat seama ce monstru puritan e so葲ul uciga葯. Cred c膬 eram mult mai radical膬 la v芒rsta aia fraged膬 葯i am v膬zut doar c膬 a fost 卯nnebunit de gelozie. Sunt in continuare fascinat膬 de aten葲ia cu care Tolstoi sondeaz膬 psihologia uman膬 葯i de frumuse葲ea literar膬 a stilului s膬u, dar m膬 卯ngroze葯te fanatismul lui (religios 葯i moral).
Mai mult mi-a pl膬cut nuvela Fericirea vie葲ii de familie, reuseste s膬 rezolve f膬ra radicalisme criza conjugal膬 葯i o face foarte conving膬tor.
Doi husari nu am putut parcurge, m-au plictisit teribil ocupa葲iile "b膬rb膬te葯ti" ale protagoni葯tilor (jocuri de noroc, b膬utura, dame).
脠 un racconto lungo, scritto in modo magistrale e giocato su un climax ascendente che ne rende veloce e bramosa la fruizione. Si vuole infatti conoscere la motivazione che induce un uomo ad uccidere la moglie, fatto che ci viene anticipato dall鈥檜xoricida dichiarato, durante un tragitto in treno condiviso col narratore, ben presto scalzato dal suo ruolo dal monologo- confessione che terr脿 scena fino all鈥檈pilogo. Non che l鈥檃ssassino sia impunito, o meglio lo 猫, perch茅 pur avendo confessato all鈥檃utorit脿 giudiziaria 猫 stato assolto in virt霉 dell鈥檃dulterio compiuto dalla moglie, e questa sia dunque la storia di un fuggiasco, no, affatto, 猫 per貌 la storia di un uomo che deve comunque convivere con l鈥檌rreversibilit脿 del gesto compiuto a causa della gelosia, ossessionante al punto tale da rendere, per noi lettori, dubbiosa perfino la condotta fedifraga della moglie. L鈥檌ntero scritto nasce dall鈥檌ntento dichiarato, dopo le prime richieste di delucidazione da parte dei suoi lettori, contenuto nella postfazione che segue il testo: fare una critica ai costumi sessuali della sua epoca, all鈥檌stituto del matrimonio, al fine di argomentare la tesi, secondo lui convincente, che l鈥檃tto sessuale tra gli umani sia da disdegnare, e che sia da preferirgli una sobria castit脿. Lascia alquanto perplessi; la lettura della postfazione l鈥檋o interrotta quando la posizione mi 猫 parsa fine a se stessa e insostenibile, affacciandosi poi Freud alla mente per una frazione di secondo, ho preferito fermarmi con un atteggiamento simile a quello che si ha quando si 猫 di fronte ad ogni genere di estremismo. Il tutto poi si intuiva gi脿 in modo chiaro attraverso la maglia narrativa, quando si parla di eccessi sessuali in giovent霉, del rapporto sessuale di coppia, delle dinamiche del disamore collassate in odio reciproco a causa della convivenza brutale alla quale il matrimonio costringe. I figli, frutto di questa unione sessuale, si badi bene non d鈥檃more, un ulteriore tormento. Lo scritto appartiene alla fase finale della produzione del nostro e si inserisce nella biografia dell鈥檃utore, abbandon貌 in vecchiaia la moglie e la famiglia, e nel nascente tolstojsmo. Lascia di stucco. Un debole epilogo, questo s矛 pi霉 riconducibile all鈥檈tica cristiana del perdono, lo rende appena pi霉 digeribile dopo aver nel frattempo dimenticato le pagine dedicate alla musica che mi sono parse anch鈥檈sse stucchevoli, tendenziose e funzionali ad una tesi non convincente. Credo nell鈥檃more tra uomo e donna, resistente a qualsiasi matrimonio. Di questi tempi per貌 penso che le sue argomentazioni possano risultare gradite a tanti e condivisibili, resta il fatto, a scanso di equivoci, che non c鈥櫭� giustificazione alcuna dell鈥檃tto violento rappresentato. La lettura 猫 almeno utile per approcciarsi alla Sonata a Kreutzer di Beethoven, magistrale, eppure anch鈥檈ssa anticonformista e poco gradita ai contemporanei, faceva dialogare violino e pianoforte come mai si era sentito prima. Se il racconto 猫 una nota stonata, la sonata proprio no. Ascoltatela.
Just brilliant on all accounts. From the idealistic, rural love of Family Happiness to the psychologically terrifying Kreutzer Sonata and the painful disillusionment of Father Sergius, it's just enthralling reading. Literature at its best. Typical with Tolstoy, expect beautifully written passages, philosophy and a deep understanding of human nature.
Oh lordy, I'd say everyone involved in these stories really needs to chill out and get laid, but they'd be so devastated with shock that I'll refrain. First, Michael Katz has done a very cool thing here: he's put together Lev Tolstoy's novella The Kreutzer Sonata with Tolstoy's wife Sofiya's direct response Whose Fault?, along with her Song without Words and their son's response Chopin's Prelude. Yes, this is a family who has its arguments via novellas, counter novellas, and pretty bad, but terribly sincere and earnest, short stories. There are also a number of letters, diary entries, etc. pertaining to the publication of The Kreutzer Sonata included in The Kreutzer Sonata Variations. In its era (the 1890s), Tolstoy's original novella was utterly scandalous, was banned from publication in Russia until Sofiya begged the Tsar personally to allow it to be published, banned in a couple of states in the US, and generally caused a real literary ruckus (and at least one young man to castrate himself). Having them all in one collection is inspired, and anyone interested in sex, crazy Christians, crazy Russians, really dysfunctional families, or the debate over attachment vs free-range parenting, etc. ought to read it.
That said....good grief! Tolstoy is a nut (please keep in mind that Anna Karenina is arguably the best novel ever written, and I loved it, and liked War and Peace well enough, so Tolstoy being a nut should be understood in the context of my general fandom). Allow me to sum up the various plots here. TKS: sleazebag lustmonkey of a man marries woman young enough not to know better, is a total asshole to her for a decade or so, then murders her because she dares hang out with a guy who doesn't treat her like shit. Whose Fault: sleazebag lustmonkey of a man marries a woman young enough not to know better who is ever so shocked by (the spiritual impurity of) sex; he's a total asshole to her for a decade or so, then murders her because she dares hang out with a guy who doesn't treat her like shit and makes her think, just maybe, that being touched by a guy who isn't a total prick might be ok (though still fundamentally something nice girls just don't do). Song without Words: Ridiculous woman (married to a lovely guy) suffering grief past the point of credibility at her mother's death becomes obsessed with the musical outpourings of gay composer, only to accidentally fall in love with him, go crazy at the inevitable fact he can't love her back, and sinks into madness. This novella is a bit of the odd man out here鈥攖he husband isn't a slime; he's really quite nice鈥攂ut it makes sense in the context of the larger work and relationship of the Tolstoys. Sofiya suffered enormous grief at the death of a young son, and she argues in her reflections (also here) that she was saved by the music of a friend and her resulting passion for music鈥攐r, since this is the 19th century, should I say Passion? Lev Tolstoy was bitterly jealous of her relationship with the man, even though she swore up and down that she remained pure throughout (and purity, folks, it鈥檚 all about purity). Since jealousy and purity are the obsessive themes of both the primary novellas, it makes sense to include this one. Meanwhile, the son's short addition to the family battle over the evils of sex vis-脿-vis the human (well, male) desire for this evil thing, has a plot involving a young poor man who decides that the only solution to being a moral person is to get married young鈥攖o avoid turning into an evil lustmonkey like the men in his parents' stories. Then he can have a good Christian marriage, only having sex to reproduce, and have a moral relationship with his equally young wife.
So here's the deal: Tolstoy really means to argue, and frankly, I think his Afterward is critical to understanding what he means to argue, that men are inherently lustmonkeys who simply will go to bordellos, f$#@ any woman who moves, etc., and women...oh, where do I begin with his view of women? The highest calling of a woman is to raise her children (fine and dandy; Sofiya makes a neat little argument for attachment parenting in her version), and clearly no good woman would ever, ever like sex...but to win and retain one of these lustmonkey men, a young woman has to compromise her purity and get all sexed up, then...god forbid...when she is married with children, in order to keep him from straying, which of course he will do because he just can't help himself, she may even need to (close your eyes here if you are easily shocked!) have sex with him even while pregnant or nursing a baby. Oh dear god, the immorality of that! Since sex cannot ever be imagined as anything other than morally wrong when it isn鈥檛 for procreation, and nice girls obviously hate sex, having sex while pregnant or nursing is clearly horrendous. The one thing worse is when a woman is driven to keep her lustmonkey鈥r, sorry, husband...by having sex but using birth control. And women like prostitutes who have sex with no commitment and using birth control? The only thing worse is the men who use them. Pretty much, the spiritual purity of a woman is compromised the minute she gets near one of these men, and man's lusty nature makes it very, very hard for him to be a good person.
Well, except Lev in TKS essentially sets the murder out as the woman's fault鈥攁 man's desperate need for sex means that he can鈥檛 help but ignore a woman鈥檚 actual personality and interests鈥攚hen she talks, he鈥檚 way too busy imagining her naked to listen to what she says鈥攁nd ultimately, the very existence and presence of women compromises a man鈥檚 only chance at a real spiritual existence. Women separate men from God, and cannot be forgiven for this evil (Tolstoy鈥檚 husband in TKS says that in the future we will lament that women were allowed out in public or to show any skin at all). Don't get me wrong鈥擳olstoy is f@#*$ng brilliant, and he's got bits in here that are just inspired. His comments on coming out balls; his description of the difficulty of marriage when the children are little, men constantly undressing women in their minds, etc. are so clever, it's amazing. There are nuggets of what appear to be truths about marriage that cross time and space.
But taken as a whole, this is crazy land. One might naively think, 鈥渂ut isn鈥檛 the solution to these marriages actually having people marry someone they actually love?鈥� No, according to Tolstoy鈥攍ove is just a pretty story women tell themselves and men lie about to get women in the sack. It鈥檚 not real.
Tolstoy was apparently quite the lusty gentleman, but he wanted to be pure and spiritual and strive for the model of Jesus. The whole kit and kaboodle here is about his quest to be a good Christian and to teach others how to be a good Christian. Ultimately, he concludes that the only solution to this whole dilemma of lustmonkey men and poor women spiritually compromised by a man鈥檚 lust and the need to keep him home is that no one ever has sex again. Yeah, really. That鈥檚 the solution. I'm not kidding. That was his conclusion.
Sex is inherently evil because it is inherently self-serving, not serving God, so if we want to model ourselves after Christ, we should just not do it. Ever again. If you are thinking, "but, wouldn't humanity die out if no one had sex..." Yeah, he got that. That was ok if everyone lived like Jesus because that was obviously the point of life. Purity. Everyone had to be pure. A good Christian must avoid sex, even procreative sex: if a couple has children, then they must focus on raising the children (or she must, and he must complain about it because it cuts into his ready access to sex), which is inherently self-directed, not focused on God, and thus impure. So there is no such thing as a Christian marriage unless, basically, you agree not to have sex and love each other as brother and sister.
Sofiya wrote her own novella to counter Tolstoy鈥檚鈥攁rguing that the jerk of a husband was responsible for the wife finding companionship elsewhere (in neither novella had she actually had sex with the guy), but I'm not sure if the difference between their perspectives really makes a difference鈥攕he argues that she wanted to have her say after TKS humiliated her in public, but since everyone felt sorry for her after it was published, I don't think anyone was blaming her for the state of their marriage (since everyone assumed the book reflected it). Basically, though, she too seems to completely believe that nice girls don't like sex, and sees no way out of this problem. She says in her later reflections that no woman is remotely interested in sex when she has young children鈥攊t鈥檚 only in her 30s that she starts to be interested. These people need a sexual revolution, stat! Sex in her story, too, is something impure, something forced on an innocent girl who is only interested in art and poetry and a meaningful spiritual existence by a base and low man who has no appreciation for purity and all of that stuff.
Their son thinks he's taken the radical tack by disagreeing with his father that sex and marriage are always bad, but his solution is to marry as quickly as possible, so the inevitable desire of a man to stray will be tamed by having a wife as young as possible鈥攕aving him from all the bordellos and from the risk of meeting women who, god forbid, are base and low and might like sex themselves (which, of course, simply destroys whatever innocence might still exist in the man). He argues that procreation is a legitimate reason for sex after all, so Christian marriage is possible (not that sex is legitimate for other reasons).
Ok, so I had to rant. Tolstoy would argue vociferously that people just justify having sex because they want to, and they鈥檒l justify their lusts anyway they can to get what they want, but we shouldn鈥檛 confuse that with doing the right thing: sex separates you from God; it is always self-centered, not God-centered, so man must fight his baser instincts constantly, and that means no sex. I confess, I鈥檓 not all that concerned with living a pure Christian life鈥擨鈥檓 more concerned about the obnoxious murdering lout of a character treating his wife like crap and the implicit argument that men are so obsessed with sex that we really can鈥檛 expect anything else of them; I鈥檓 concerned with the good girls don鈥檛 like sex thing. I just can鈥檛 get around thinking that no matter how much he wants to dress this up as a route to spiritual purity and being a good Christian, it鈥檚 pretty much misogynistic balderdash. Thus endeth my rant.
Such hatred in these disturbing stories. Although I first read this collection years ago at the request of a "friend," I can't put the book on my "re-read" shelf. I retained no memories of the stories themselves nor of the reason that person cherished them (at the time I didn't want to reflect on/contain either thing).
I had to hunt down the "Epilogue to The Kreutzer Sonata" online to confirm my assumption that the novella reflected Tolstoy's own later views on sexuality and love (yes, it does. And poor Sofia!). I just don't understand why this is one of Tolstoy's most read stories.Tolstoy scholar R. F. Christian on the appeal of the novella: "Few other novelists could have made compelling reading out of sentiments and arguments which are irritating and manifestly unjust. Few other novelists could have given pathos and poignancy to the ending of a story whose limits appear to be laid down by the advice proffered in its opening chapters: 'Do not trust your horse in the field, or your wife in the house'."
And here, in a summation which couldn't be said better, is Nabokov onThe Death of Ivan Ilych: "Ivan lived a bad life and since the bad life is nothing but the death of the soul, then Ivan lived a living death; and since beyond death is God's living light, then Ivan died into a new life 鈥� Life with a capital L."
Tolstoy wrote both the novella "The Kreutzer Sonata" and the short story "The Devil" in 1889 during the period when his marriage was floundering. Marital happiness, he seems to say in the first of these, is illusory and sure to crash on the shoals of sexuality. A "madman" rants on page after page about the impurity of marriage, or "long-term prostitution" as he calls it. Marital life alternates, the madman says, between bouts of sexual indulgence and mutual hate. The only hope, he seems to say, is for a man and woman to live as brother and sister in a spiritual union that precludes "bestial indulgence." Very Schopenhauerian . . . except that so few people will actually do this that we needn't fear humanity will perish! While Tolstoy was surely losing faith in his own marriage at this time, I am uncomfortable with the common critical gesture of turning this madman, who after all is a murderer, into a simple spokesperson for Tolstoy's own views (although I grant there must be some of this!). "The Devil" for me is a more powerful story. It concerns a young landowner who just wants to put his own "healthy" pre-marital affair with a young peasant woman behind and lead a happy life with his new wife. But it is not so simple. The enticements of the past have a way of coming back--and "The Devil" becomes a classic study of male obsession and self-destructiveness.
This was my first little bit of Tolstoy that I鈥檝e read. I鈥檓 a HUGE fan of Dostoevsky and I knew I would love all kinds of Russian literature, so I was quite excited to get into this. Each of the three stories was better than the last:
鈼ow Much Land Does A Man Need 鈼he Death of Ivan Illych 鈼he Kreutzer Sonata (favorite!!) All were very impressive and brought their point across nicely. The day I finished it, I eyed my copy of War and Peace for a while, wondering when I should pick it up and hoping it would be very soon. I still am.
Recommended, most definitely, but not for everyone. The Kreutzer Sonata talks of a man who stabbed his wife to death, much due to jealousy; also underlying is the way beauty deceives and how easily we lie to ourselves. How Much Land Does a Man Need deals with greed and uses Satan to personify it鈥ery accurate if I do say so myself. And The Death of Ivan Illych is about the life of a man who was ordinary, thought he was extraordinary, and when he died realized the truth about himself. There are a lot of struggles with hatred in these stories, which makes them more intense than I鈥檇 expected. Absolutely worth reading.
Some people, like the Ancient Mariner, are so possessed and haunted by their tale that they have to recount it to all and sundry. The protagonist of The Kreutzer Sonata finds himself in a similar predicament (although he is somewhat less sympathetic a character than the Mariner) and regales an innocent victim with the whole unsavoury story - in detail, punctuated by his views on human nature and ending with an explosion of passion. Even if you take a wild dislike to the narrator of the tale, which would be understandable, Tolstoy's novella remains a masterpiece on how jealousy develops.