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 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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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).
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 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
I'm generally a fairly well-read guy, so I would like to knock this classic out, but I am not sure how.