Anyone who was slow-reading 'War and Peace' last year will know that I kept rabbiting on about it being cinematic and/or visual, so it’s not surprised that that's what we've picked up on this month.
The race is a thrilling piece of writing - edge of the seat stuff. We get traces of both arrogance and vulnerability from Vronsky. And then to see it from Anna's point of view is perfect - we focus on the tension rather than the race. It did get me wondering if Tolstoy was one of the first to play around with chronology in that way (writers would probably use reported speech to introduce new information from the past rather than just presenting it, wouldn't they?).
And Anna dropping the bomb about her pregnancy in the middle of all that. You'd expect that to be the main focus - lesser writers would do that - but LT shows how Vronsky still focuses on the race. Yes, it's not his best response.
The Anna/Karenin dynamic made me think of Masha/Kulygin in 'Three Sisters' - Chekhov shows the husband gradually coming to see what is going on and being quite understanding, eventually trying to find a way to keep the marriage going. Personally, I'm not convinced that Masha wouldn't fall for the next Vershinin that comes along, but Kulygin does try.
And, of course, all the contrasts: Dolly and Oblonsky (unfaithful husband, wronged wife); Anna and Karenin (wronged husband, unfaithful wife); Kitty and Levin (the couple who should be together, but aren't. Yet?)
Great thoughts - thanks Bren! On the playing around with chronology point, I agree - it definitely feels like Tolstoy is edging towards the chronological games played by later modernists such as Woolf and Proust, quite different from the social realist novels of Hugo or Dickens. But I have to include a shout out for Laurence Sterne (my hero) who was playing around with time, plot and everything else in Tristram Shandy, more than 100 years beforehand!
I was put off 'Tristram Shandy' by someone's description of it as "impenetrable". Maybe I should try again - if Tolstoy, Hillary Mantel and Dickens will give me some dpate time.
OMG. When we moved from one state to another I ranted that we could had not ONE but TWO copies of all things TRISTAM SHANDY!!! It was emblematic of our inability to downsize. We still have them. I should probably drag one out and read it.
Tolstoy played with chronology as well in War and Peace, but not as brilliantly as here, I think. In last year’s discussions of W&P, we readers were often questioning, wait, was this before, or after, that other thing that happened. Here in Anna it is more deftly done.
You are so right that lesser writers would have carried that pregnancy thread way longer. It really is masterful how he shifts the focus fully - and carries us along with it.
So many things to discuss in this installment, both big and small. My highlights below, some raised by Henry in the video.
I enjoyed the drawn out interactions between Levin and Oblonaky, with Levin waiting until a forest at night to ask about Kitty and can’t even bring himself to use her name “why don’t you tell me whether your sister-in-law is married”. I thought the Point of View entering into Laksa was novel, with the horse observing the two men and talking about them in reproachful terms.
The juxtaposition of Society’s view on the affair between Vronsky and Anna: “most of the young men envied him just on account of what was most trying in the affair” compared to “they already prepared lumps of mud to pelt her with in due time”. Probably not changed in modern times.
The device of Anna’s son acting as a ‘compass’ and highlighting the path of their affair brought it home: “[he] showed them their degree of divergence from what they knew”.
The point where Anna tells Vronsky she is pregnant has her inner voice interspersed with the dialogue gave this part life - her reticence to ruin his happy mood, uncertainty on whether he would understand the magnitude. This then surfaces in her trembling hand, which causes Vronsky to press her for what is troubling her. Incredibly deft writing that makes the scene real.
The death of Frou-Frou is poignant - “the worst kind of misfortune- irretrievable and caused by his own fault”. Effective foreshadowing that is woven into the plot.
Wonderful observations John – and I agree, there's so much to say! I'm really enjoying taking it slowly and savouring each section. I'd forgotten that moment from the point of view of Laksa - that is great!
The death of Frou Frou was so tough. And so necessary. Especially his reaction to it. He's so slow to see that damage he's caused - the damage he has caused (poor Kitty) - and the damage he will cause.
I entered the novel predisposed to liking Anna and Vronsky, rooting for doomed lovers through any array of misbehaviors.
Vronsky is louche and entitled -- but fine -- he's the lover in a love story. I've looked past his faults just as I looked past Lorelei Lee's mindless racism. Different people, different times. They're flawed, but I want to believe in their better natures.
But I will not read Vronsky the same after "Vronsky kicked [Frou-Frou] in the stomach with his heel." Whether he's spurring on an animal that's mortally wounded or punishing her for her mortality, neither motive is acceptable. (And using the word "motive" is more generous than I wish to be. I don't believe he even has a motive in that moment. It's just the natural reaction of a louche, entitled scoundrel.)
I won't get over this moment, even knowing it's a fictional act created by a genius. I won't give over to Vronsky -- even in his most sympathetic moments -- in the next almost-year of spending time with him. Kicking an animal in agony, in the last moments of her life. No.
I'm with you on that Alan, that moment also changed my perception of him. It's one thing to be selfish and mindless, but for his instinctive reaction to his horse getting injured to be to kick at her... for me it points to some deeper character flaw in him that is likely to have some broader impacts on the people around him eventually. That scene was so visceral too, it made me nauseous reading it.
That's exactly the right way to put it: "It points to some deeper character flaw in him." I'm certain that was Tolstoy's intent. What I'm not certain about is if Tolstoy intends for me to hate him long, long beyond this moment.
I agree, Alan. The scene of Vronsky kicking Frou-Frou jolted me hard and changed my perspective of Vronsky. I didn’t think he had much depth before and now I see his immediate physical attack on a living being that was first the avenue to his competitive desire and then the destruction of his goal, at this own fault. This does not bode well for his relationship with Anna.
I wonder, as Henry mentions, whether this is a little bit of foreshadowing. He breaks the horse’s back and then his first instinct is to kick like it’s her fault instead of first realizing his own fault in the matter. Is this what he will do to Anna? Break her and then instinctively kick her when she has fallen? Not stopping to think of his own culpability?
What I'm most struck by so far is how Tolstoy writes about human psychology in a way that feels so modern and current to the way we talk about it now. There were two moments in this part that really underlined this for me.
The first is seeing Seryozha's perspective and impact on the affair. He can't really understand what's happening and he ends up feeling like whatever it is, it's his fault ("If I don't understand, I'm to blame, or else I'm stupid, or a bad boy"). And on the flip side, his presence around Anna and Vronsky is acting as their conscience looking back at them, and is pretty much the only thing making them truly feel bad about what they're doing. "This child (...) was the compass which showed them the degree of their departure from what they knew but did not want to know." The end of that sentence speaks volumes about how much self-deceit they've had to do to carry on the affair this long.
The second moment is when we get some insight into Karenin's denial of what is happening between Anna and Vronsky. Obviously he's aware that something is going on and he's tried talking to her about it, but since that discussion went nowhere, he just continues to be flippant and mocking in his interactions with Anna as if whatever she's doing isn't bothering him. Tolstoy tells us that his reaction is due to the fact that he can't face how bad things are and "(...) in his soul he closed, locked and sealed the drawer in which he kept his feelings for his family." Up until that point, Karenin read as pretty cold and detached but in this moment you can really tell that he does feel a lot, he's just unequipped to deal with his emotions.
I'm just really surprised that Tolstoy is so astute regarding the human mind and I can't wait to see what other pieces of wisdom he drops as everything continues to evolve.
Yes! Tolstoy is able to reveal and uncover what is in the human heart. It's almost as if Tolstoy pulls a curtain back from Karenin's character. Karenin is as trapped as Anna. He does have a heart. When I was younger I couldn't see this. I was so wrapped up in Anna and Vronsky.
This is my first time to read AK, but I’m guessing the last lines in this section will turn out to contain some major irony: “…My husband! Ah, yes…Well, thank heavens everything is over with him.” 600+ more pages suggest it won’t be quite that easy.
Great comments here - not much to add apart from being very moved by the naivety of Levin in that first paragraph (XII) - speaking as someone in my 50s and now understanding fully that certain events in one’s life echo louder and louder as one gets older this really made me think about @bookishnh comment: “I have found this the one that most rewards rereading at different ages and stages of life” because, if I’d have read this at 20, I wouldn’t have understood the great truth of what is actually going to happen in respect of this rejection and which is described in the next paragraph. I’m not sure I would have quite believed it. But, instead, here I am, in 2025, wincing at that universal truth.
Thank you for this Royston. I went back to reread those two paragraphs and discovered I had marked two sentences that struck me (in my 70s) as so insightful and true: “In his past, as in any man’s past, there were actions he recognized as bad, for which his conscience ought to have tormented him; yet the memory of the bad actions tormented him far less than these insignificant but shameful memories. These wounds never healed.”
Great observation, Royston. I went back and reread that paragraph. It is funny how things hit differently at different times in life. Poor Levin. I guess it takes some time on the earth to realize not every hurt can be pulled out like a tooth.
What can I say… this part had a lot of jaw droppers for me. I was taken aback by the news of the pregnancy, Frou Frou and Anna finally sharing how she felt about Karenin- that was ruthless. It’s almost like Karenin subconsciously knew this was coming because he always liked to have a third person present with Anna. I feel for him. There isn’t much he can do. Anna and Vronsky are hopeless.
I loved the contrast between Levin’s wisdom and Oblonsky’s foolishness during the negotiations over selling the wood to Ryabinin. I am afraid I would be more of an Oblinsky in that transaction.
I really love Levin’s character. His common sense and down to earth nature really contrast with most of the others. I know we haven’t seen a lot of Kitty yet, but my feeling ATM is that she really doesn’t deserve this man
My guess is Oblonsky isn’t foolish, he’s too entitled and couldn’t be bothered to have the trees counted. He would never have to do it himself either. But the “meanness” of it bothers him, he doesn’t want to be seen as counting his pennies-or copecks - as the case is.
This slow-reading is fantastic because it allows you the enjoy, understand, and go so much deeper into the novel. There are so many metaphors and foreshadowing in this installment: Vronsky feeling so attracted to beauty and danger both with the horse races and with his love affair, and so many dramas happening; Anna knowing that her relationship with Vronsky is dangerous but cannot help enjoy the beauty and passion of her love for him....and meanwhile the child is observing and, without wanting it, judging them and reminding them of the harm they may cause. There are so many fantastic quotes, like: "They were already gathering their little lumps of mud to sling at her when the time came". And finally, I wanted to comment on the double standard of morality and society, where we as readers also fall, or at least I feel it this way: I don't support the affair, but cannot help feeling the intensity of their love contrasting with the superficiality of the society including Karenin. Looking forward to the next installment, and thanks so much Henry for your video and comments.
Thanks, Henry, love listening to you! My romantic heart shuddered reading this, I’m always looking for a happy ending. At this point I want to shake Anna. Love the parts about Levin and his farm I’m definitely team #Levin! 😄
This installment was packed full of happenings that delighted and/or amazed me. I wholeheartedly agree that Tolstoy’s loving description of spring’s arrival in the countryside and Levin’s core affinity with the land is masterful. The colors, the sounds, the movement … gorgeous and uplifting as we see the new year of growth arrive, and it tells me a lot about Levin’s character that he sees and hears all of this. And then the tension and psychological analysis of Anna, Vronsky, and Karenin (Marie-Luc Lemay, I think you’re exactly right about the currency of Tolstoy’s writing on this)—oh my god, this series of chapters built up the drama page after page to the fiery moment in the carriage that ends the installment. These chapters hooked me in completely and I can’t wait to see Levin again.
I have been out of town at a wedding and am so late to this discussion. Everyone has covered Anna and Vronsky so thoroughly I have nothing to add - except that I agree the horse race was masterful. Karenin obsessed with watching Anna, who was watching Vronsky, while the heedless rider himself focused on his rivals even to the exclusion of his own horse. It said so much about all three of them.
It took me a long time to get through this section. I just couldn't keep going during the race. Tolstoy made me fall in love with Frou Frou. He so lovingly describes all of her beautiful aspects. The foreshadowing is ominous. Vronsky gets so many warnings but ignores them. His English trainer, friends, the two letters he keeps shoving in his pocket. We know he will come to grief on the race day. I wish Eisenstein had filmed the race scene. I can hear the horses' hoofs.
Anyone who was slow-reading 'War and Peace' last year will know that I kept rabbiting on about it being cinematic and/or visual, so it’s not surprised that that's what we've picked up on this month.
The race is a thrilling piece of writing - edge of the seat stuff. We get traces of both arrogance and vulnerability from Vronsky. And then to see it from Anna's point of view is perfect - we focus on the tension rather than the race. It did get me wondering if Tolstoy was one of the first to play around with chronology in that way (writers would probably use reported speech to introduce new information from the past rather than just presenting it, wouldn't they?).
And Anna dropping the bomb about her pregnancy in the middle of all that. You'd expect that to be the main focus - lesser writers would do that - but LT shows how Vronsky still focuses on the race. Yes, it's not his best response.
The Anna/Karenin dynamic made me think of Masha/Kulygin in 'Three Sisters' - Chekhov shows the husband gradually coming to see what is going on and being quite understanding, eventually trying to find a way to keep the marriage going. Personally, I'm not convinced that Masha wouldn't fall for the next Vershinin that comes along, but Kulygin does try.
And, of course, all the contrasts: Dolly and Oblonsky (unfaithful husband, wronged wife); Anna and Karenin (wronged husband, unfaithful wife); Kitty and Levin (the couple who should be together, but aren't. Yet?)
I may race through the next few chapters...
Great thoughts - thanks Bren! On the playing around with chronology point, I agree - it definitely feels like Tolstoy is edging towards the chronological games played by later modernists such as Woolf and Proust, quite different from the social realist novels of Hugo or Dickens. But I have to include a shout out for Laurence Sterne (my hero) who was playing around with time, plot and everything else in Tristram Shandy, more than 100 years beforehand!
I was put off 'Tristram Shandy' by someone's description of it as "impenetrable". Maybe I should try again - if Tolstoy, Hillary Mantel and Dickens will give me some dpate time.
It’s my favourite novel! But it can be a Marmite book . . .
Your favorite! That settles it. It’s been on my bookshelf for years—it just jumped the line.
I hope you enjoy it!
Hmmmmm. Maybe I should give it a go. I may have a spot in my diary in 2027 at this rate.
OMG. When we moved from one state to another I ranted that we could had not ONE but TWO copies of all things TRISTAM SHANDY!!! It was emblematic of our inability to downsize. We still have them. I should probably drag one out and read it.
Tolstoy played with chronology as well in War and Peace, but not as brilliantly as here, I think. In last year’s discussions of W&P, we readers were often questioning, wait, was this before, or after, that other thing that happened. Here in Anna it is more deftly done.
Yes, you're right. In 'War and Peace' it seemed designed to confuse us, but here it broadens our understanding. He's damned clever either way.
You are so right that lesser writers would have carried that pregnancy thread way longer. It really is masterful how he shifts the focus fully - and carries us along with it.
So many things to discuss in this installment, both big and small. My highlights below, some raised by Henry in the video.
I enjoyed the drawn out interactions between Levin and Oblonaky, with Levin waiting until a forest at night to ask about Kitty and can’t even bring himself to use her name “why don’t you tell me whether your sister-in-law is married”. I thought the Point of View entering into Laksa was novel, with the horse observing the two men and talking about them in reproachful terms.
The juxtaposition of Society’s view on the affair between Vronsky and Anna: “most of the young men envied him just on account of what was most trying in the affair” compared to “they already prepared lumps of mud to pelt her with in due time”. Probably not changed in modern times.
The device of Anna’s son acting as a ‘compass’ and highlighting the path of their affair brought it home: “[he] showed them their degree of divergence from what they knew”.
The point where Anna tells Vronsky she is pregnant has her inner voice interspersed with the dialogue gave this part life - her reticence to ruin his happy mood, uncertainty on whether he would understand the magnitude. This then surfaces in her trembling hand, which causes Vronsky to press her for what is troubling her. Incredibly deft writing that makes the scene real.
The death of Frou-Frou is poignant - “the worst kind of misfortune- irretrievable and caused by his own fault”. Effective foreshadowing that is woven into the plot.
I could go on and on - amazing writing!
Wonderful observations John – and I agree, there's so much to say! I'm really enjoying taking it slowly and savouring each section. I'd forgotten that moment from the point of view of Laksa - that is great!
The death of Frou Frou was so tough. And so necessary. Especially his reaction to it. He's so slow to see that damage he's caused - the damage he has caused (poor Kitty) - and the damage he will cause.
I entered the novel predisposed to liking Anna and Vronsky, rooting for doomed lovers through any array of misbehaviors.
Vronsky is louche and entitled -- but fine -- he's the lover in a love story. I've looked past his faults just as I looked past Lorelei Lee's mindless racism. Different people, different times. They're flawed, but I want to believe in their better natures.
But I will not read Vronsky the same after "Vronsky kicked [Frou-Frou] in the stomach with his heel." Whether he's spurring on an animal that's mortally wounded or punishing her for her mortality, neither motive is acceptable. (And using the word "motive" is more generous than I wish to be. I don't believe he even has a motive in that moment. It's just the natural reaction of a louche, entitled scoundrel.)
I won't get over this moment, even knowing it's a fictional act created by a genius. I won't give over to Vronsky -- even in his most sympathetic moments -- in the next almost-year of spending time with him. Kicking an animal in agony, in the last moments of her life. No.
It’s a flash of cruelty, isn’t it? Which we haven’t really seen before . . .
I'm with you on that Alan, that moment also changed my perception of him. It's one thing to be selfish and mindless, but for his instinctive reaction to his horse getting injured to be to kick at her... for me it points to some deeper character flaw in him that is likely to have some broader impacts on the people around him eventually. That scene was so visceral too, it made me nauseous reading it.
That's exactly the right way to put it: "It points to some deeper character flaw in him." I'm certain that was Tolstoy's intent. What I'm not certain about is if Tolstoy intends for me to hate him long, long beyond this moment.
I agree, Alan. The scene of Vronsky kicking Frou-Frou jolted me hard and changed my perspective of Vronsky. I didn’t think he had much depth before and now I see his immediate physical attack on a living being that was first the avenue to his competitive desire and then the destruction of his goal, at this own fault. This does not bode well for his relationship with Anna.
I wonder, as Henry mentions, whether this is a little bit of foreshadowing. He breaks the horse’s back and then his first instinct is to kick like it’s her fault instead of first realizing his own fault in the matter. Is this what he will do to Anna? Break her and then instinctively kick her when she has fallen? Not stopping to think of his own culpability?
This is Tolstoy's genius, to create this vivid scene full of moments that will keep you guessing for 600 more pages!
I agree, Alan. That did it for me, too. Then the walking away. He's the worst. (Poor Kitty got off easy, I think).
What I'm most struck by so far is how Tolstoy writes about human psychology in a way that feels so modern and current to the way we talk about it now. There were two moments in this part that really underlined this for me.
The first is seeing Seryozha's perspective and impact on the affair. He can't really understand what's happening and he ends up feeling like whatever it is, it's his fault ("If I don't understand, I'm to blame, or else I'm stupid, or a bad boy"). And on the flip side, his presence around Anna and Vronsky is acting as their conscience looking back at them, and is pretty much the only thing making them truly feel bad about what they're doing. "This child (...) was the compass which showed them the degree of their departure from what they knew but did not want to know." The end of that sentence speaks volumes about how much self-deceit they've had to do to carry on the affair this long.
The second moment is when we get some insight into Karenin's denial of what is happening between Anna and Vronsky. Obviously he's aware that something is going on and he's tried talking to her about it, but since that discussion went nowhere, he just continues to be flippant and mocking in his interactions with Anna as if whatever she's doing isn't bothering him. Tolstoy tells us that his reaction is due to the fact that he can't face how bad things are and "(...) in his soul he closed, locked and sealed the drawer in which he kept his feelings for his family." Up until that point, Karenin read as pretty cold and detached but in this moment you can really tell that he does feel a lot, he's just unequipped to deal with his emotions.
I'm just really surprised that Tolstoy is so astute regarding the human mind and I can't wait to see what other pieces of wisdom he drops as everything continues to evolve.
Absolutely! His psychology is note perfect - and he gives us just the right amount of it.
Yes! Tolstoy is able to reveal and uncover what is in the human heart. It's almost as if Tolstoy pulls a curtain back from Karenin's character. Karenin is as trapped as Anna. He does have a heart. When I was younger I couldn't see this. I was so wrapped up in Anna and Vronsky.
This is my first time to read AK, but I’m guessing the last lines in this section will turn out to contain some major irony: “…My husband! Ah, yes…Well, thank heavens everything is over with him.” 600+ more pages suggest it won’t be quite that easy.
Yeah. Not so fast, Anna K.
Yes! What a great line to end the instalment on!
Great comments here - not much to add apart from being very moved by the naivety of Levin in that first paragraph (XII) - speaking as someone in my 50s and now understanding fully that certain events in one’s life echo louder and louder as one gets older this really made me think about @bookishnh comment: “I have found this the one that most rewards rereading at different ages and stages of life” because, if I’d have read this at 20, I wouldn’t have understood the great truth of what is actually going to happen in respect of this rejection and which is described in the next paragraph. I’m not sure I would have quite believed it. But, instead, here I am, in 2025, wincing at that universal truth.
Lovely observation, Royston!
Thank you for this Royston. I went back to reread those two paragraphs and discovered I had marked two sentences that struck me (in my 70s) as so insightful and true: “In his past, as in any man’s past, there were actions he recognized as bad, for which his conscience ought to have tormented him; yet the memory of the bad actions tormented him far less than these insignificant but shameful memories. These wounds never healed.”
Oh my Brian, that’s exactly it
Great observation, Royston. I went back and reread that paragraph. It is funny how things hit differently at different times in life. Poor Levin. I guess it takes some time on the earth to realize not every hurt can be pulled out like a tooth.
Thank you Henry and everyone who has commented here for enriching my reading experience.
The description of spring arriving is glorious. I read that chapter several times. The writing of the horse race is breathtaking.
What can I say… this part had a lot of jaw droppers for me. I was taken aback by the news of the pregnancy, Frou Frou and Anna finally sharing how she felt about Karenin- that was ruthless. It’s almost like Karenin subconsciously knew this was coming because he always liked to have a third person present with Anna. I feel for him. There isn’t much he can do. Anna and Vronsky are hopeless.
I loved the contrast between Levin’s wisdom and Oblonsky’s foolishness during the negotiations over selling the wood to Ryabinin. I am afraid I would be more of an Oblinsky in that transaction.
I really love Levin’s character. His common sense and down to earth nature really contrast with most of the others. I know we haven’t seen a lot of Kitty yet, but my feeling ATM is that she really doesn’t deserve this man
I agree!
My guess is Oblonsky isn’t foolish, he’s too entitled and couldn’t be bothered to have the trees counted. He would never have to do it himself either. But the “meanness” of it bothers him, he doesn’t want to be seen as counting his pennies-or copecks - as the case is.
It is one of the most extraordinary scenes ever written.
This slow-reading is fantastic because it allows you the enjoy, understand, and go so much deeper into the novel. There are so many metaphors and foreshadowing in this installment: Vronsky feeling so attracted to beauty and danger both with the horse races and with his love affair, and so many dramas happening; Anna knowing that her relationship with Vronsky is dangerous but cannot help enjoy the beauty and passion of her love for him....and meanwhile the child is observing and, without wanting it, judging them and reminding them of the harm they may cause. There are so many fantastic quotes, like: "They were already gathering their little lumps of mud to sling at her when the time came". And finally, I wanted to comment on the double standard of morality and society, where we as readers also fall, or at least I feel it this way: I don't support the affair, but cannot help feeling the intensity of their love contrasting with the superficiality of the society including Karenin. Looking forward to the next installment, and thanks so much Henry for your video and comments.
Great observations Claudia!
Thanks, Henry, love listening to you! My romantic heart shuddered reading this, I’m always looking for a happy ending. At this point I want to shake Anna. Love the parts about Levin and his farm I’m definitely team #Levin! 😄
I too, love the bits about Levin and his plans for the season, I am anxious when the workers are so irresponsible but I feel I understand this too.
This installment was packed full of happenings that delighted and/or amazed me. I wholeheartedly agree that Tolstoy’s loving description of spring’s arrival in the countryside and Levin’s core affinity with the land is masterful. The colors, the sounds, the movement … gorgeous and uplifting as we see the new year of growth arrive, and it tells me a lot about Levin’s character that he sees and hears all of this. And then the tension and psychological analysis of Anna, Vronsky, and Karenin (Marie-Luc Lemay, I think you’re exactly right about the currency of Tolstoy’s writing on this)—oh my god, this series of chapters built up the drama page after page to the fiery moment in the carriage that ends the installment. These chapters hooked me in completely and I can’t wait to see Levin again.
I have been out of town at a wedding and am so late to this discussion. Everyone has covered Anna and Vronsky so thoroughly I have nothing to add - except that I agree the horse race was masterful. Karenin obsessed with watching Anna, who was watching Vronsky, while the heedless rider himself focused on his rivals even to the exclusion of his own horse. It said so much about all three of them.
It took me a long time to get through this section. I just couldn't keep going during the race. Tolstoy made me fall in love with Frou Frou. He so lovingly describes all of her beautiful aspects. The foreshadowing is ominous. Vronsky gets so many warnings but ignores them. His English trainer, friends, the two letters he keeps shoving in his pocket. We know he will come to grief on the race day. I wish Eisenstein had filmed the race scene. I can hear the horses' hoofs.