The question of judgment and sympathies in Anna Karenina is one that, every time I read the novel, seems to become more complicated and full of obfuscation. The fundamental problem in locating the voice of judgment is that throughout the novel there are points where we are uncomfortable with the seemingly simple, at times even didactic, presentation of Anna and Vronsky's fall into sin along with the constant moral struggle by Levin. While Anna's story unfolds episodically in the context of the rest of the novel, Tolstoy seems to try to make the fact of her guilt ever clearer to us; at the same time, however, we have more and more difficulty in tracing the specific place of that fault. In a novel as expertly constructed as this one, we are tempted to look for the places where the undercurrents of the text, the places where the text takes on a life and force of its own, clash with, or at least complicate, the author's discernment. judgment. By closely examining Tolstoy's treatment of Anna's moral crisis compared to his treatment of Levin, we might attempt to unravel the book's rather layered and complex system of condemnation. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The novel's epigraph sets a certain tone for us before we even begin reading; the biblical inflection, "Vengeance is mine; I will repay," plants the idea in our heads that evil will be done and punishment will be imposed. In fact, already in the first lines of the initial chapter, in Stepan Arkad'ic's relationship with the French governess, we find an error that threw the Oblonsky house into "confusion". , the well-liked bon vivants sometimes seem to drip with contempt. He is "lazy and spiteful"(14), his life "wasteful"(14), and "the dispensers of worldly goods, in the form of assignments, leases, concessions and the like, were all his friends and could not pass for one of they; ...Oblonskij did not have to make any special efforts to get a profitable position, all he had to do was not to refuse, not to envy, not to argue, not to be offended, which, thanks to his natural kindness, he never did anyway ."(14)Stiva is basically a completely harmless, even likable character, but at the same time he makes us very aware that he is one of the moral weaklings of the novel. There is something very resonant in the “stupid smile” (3) that Stiva gives Dolly as she confronts him with the evidence of his philandering: he is made to seem constitutionally incapable of an adequate response. With an irony almost too obvious to call irony, Anna enters this scene in the role of restorer of her brother's family harmony. But before he even gets off the train from Moscow, before his name even appears in the text, the seduction has begun. From the moment Vronsky lays eyes on her, the narrator makes it abundantly clear that the attraction and flirtation are, at least on Anna's part, genuine and involuntary. When she looks again at Vronsky who has stepped aside to let her out of the carriage, Tolstoy, through Vronsky, notices "the restrained animation that played on her face and fluttered between her shining eyes and the barely perceptible smile that curved her lips red. It was as if a surplus of something overflowed so much in his being that it expressed itself beyond his will, now in the brightness of his gaze, now in his smile. He deliberately extinguished the light in his eyes, but against his will she shone in a barely perceptible smile."(61)It is significant that our introduction to Anna is through Vronsky. Vronsky's response to her is instantaneous, and the reader shares his gaze as he "follows her with his eyesuntil her graceful figure disappears"; made one instinctively feel Anna's strength of attraction. If Anna can be said to cast a spell, Tolstoy makes sure the reader falls under it as does Vronsky. She continues to exude an almost magical charm through her her impressions of members of the Oblonsky family. In her first conversation with Dolly she is presented as full of genuine empathy and compassion for her sister-in-law Kitty is soon "in love with her, as girls are capable of falling in love with older married women". 71) Does admiration come from every corner? The narrative itself seems to be in love with her. Peace is restored in the family in difficulty, ("God is merciful",(71) Anna significantly writes to her brother inviting him home for dinner), in time for the grand ball, during which Anna's charm, at its height, becomes almost sinister. Our view of her during this scene is that of Kitty, who is obviously very threatened by Anna as soon as men, particularly. Vronsky, they enter the scene. Although his spell is still presented as natural and naive, there is now "something terrible and cruel" in it (83). However, the moments between Anna and Vronsky as they fall in love, at the ball and then later on the station platform, are among the most thrilling in the novel. There are certainly shades of judgment about Anna's narcissism; Kitty describes her as "demonic" (83), and when Anna unexpectedly sees Vronsky through the snow on the platform, even though she has apparently told herself that she would "never allow herself to even think about him" (102), she is "overwhelmed from a feeling of joyful pride,” (102) when he sees the admiration on his face, the euphoria and sexual excitement that shines through the writing of these two are unmistakable and absolutely engaging. Their relationship becomes desirable for the reader , because the passages in which they are together, at the beginning of their relationship, are so charged We can safely assume that there was no such intensity or narcissism in Stepan Arkadyich's relationship with the French governess, as we know he can perceive that quality of feelings. Levin's love for Kitty are presented very differently. Far from being fatal or inevitable, Levin's love for Kitty is now overlooked, has passed beyond her older sisters, and has now passed to her. Nor is it an impetuous love. Vronsky follows Anna the day after the ball on a whim, simply to be where she is; Levin spends much of the novel alone, rejected by Kitty, but thinking of her. When he sees her again, his love therefore appears firm, measured and true, in contrast to the uncertainty that afflicts Anna and Vronsky's mutual love. All the obvious signs of the book (we might even say that there is also a "protest" they have an overabundance of them), point to Levin as the moral center of the book. He is too naive to succeed in society. He is a “worker of the land,” an occupation to which Tolstoy clearly attributes a kind of Edenic (if perhaps slightly condescending) value. He places great value on family. He is not looking for love like that of Vronsky and Anna; almost like an extension of his feeling for the land and the territory, Levin does not seek a great passion, but a family life. Perhaps most significantly, he is always working on himself, questioning himself, probing himself, earnestly gathering information from the world and measuring it against himself, constantly struggling to reach the truth about himself and the world around him.2 In terms, however, of "the pleasure of the text," Levin is something of a reader's disappointment. The sections dealing with him are nowhere near as engaging or infectious as the sections dealing with Anna and Vronsky (with the possible caveat that towards the end of the book the scenes between Anna and Vronsky.