The Book Club

Book Review: Janet Evanovich's One for the Money

Title: One for the Money

Series: Stephanie Plum (Book 1, series ongoing)

Author: Janet Evanovich

Publisher: Scribner (1994)

Genre: Mystery

Sub-Genres: Bounty Hunters, Female Detectives, New Jersey, Romance

Plot Summary: Stephanie Plum is out of a job and down on her luck. Running out of appliances and furniture to pawn for breakfast money, Plum blackmails her cousin into giving her a job as a bounty hunter. Her first collar? The guy who took her virginity in high school and never called back, a cop named Morelli who allegededly shot an unarmed man. But there's something wrong in Trenton, New Jersey, and Morelli may not be as guilty as people think he is.

What I Liked: This book was such a quick read. And I mean that in a good way. It literally took only about three hours total to read, and for the most part, it was quite a joyful experience.

Plum is a great protagonist: she's engaging enough to be fun and make you want to follow her but enough of a cipher that the reader can project their emotions onto her. Combine that with a variety of local New Jersey characters, stellar descriptions of suburban hell, and Plum's grandmother rocking some hot pants, and you've got a fun adventure.

Evanovich's main mystery, and Plum's obvious attraction to Morelli, are also engaging. While the ending is much expected, there are still enough twists to be satisfying.

What I Didn't Like: At times, Evanovich comes off fairly racist and classist. It's not intentional, but rather that Evanovich was trying to protray Jersey as it is, or at least how Evanovich sees it. But with all the poor, downtrodden characters being minorities and our heroes all white, it becomes a bit much.

And this is nowhere more true than with Evanovich's horrible dialogue styling. The characters all have different voices, which is great, but they also come with these dialect inflections that are distracting and not done well. None of the writing in this book is pretty, but beyond the dialogue, it's forgivable because it still gets the job done, if done plainly.

Similar Works: More Stephanie Plum: Two for the Dough (Stephanie Plum, No. 2), Smokin' Seventeen, and Visions of Sugar Plums: A Stephanie Plum Holiday Novel.

More Janet Evanovich: Metro Girl (Alex Barnaby Series #1), Back to the Bedroom, and Full Bloom.

More Female Sleuths: Deja Dead: 10th Anniversary Edition (Temperance Brennan Novels), The Scarpetta Collection Volume I: Postmortem and Body of Evidence (Kay Scarpetta), and A is for Alibi (Kinsey Millhone Alphabet Mysteries, No. 1).

Buy It Here!: One for the Money (Stephanie Plum, No. 1)

Last Thought: A quick, fun mystery and good enough that I might read the second book.

First Line Analysis: Pride & Prejudice & Zombies

"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains."

Title: Pride & Prejudice & Zombies

Authors: Jane Austen and Seth Grahame-Smith

Publisher: Quirk Books (2009)

Genres: Horror, Humor, Literature, Romance

Sub-Genres: Jane Austen Adapation, Classics, Comedy of Errors, Mash-Ups, Regency Romance 

Character Speaking: Unnamed Narrator

Spoiler Alert!

Analysis: Now, this line is of course a twist on one of the most quoted opening lines of any book, ever (today's First Line Analysis was actually a toss up between the original and Kafka's Metamorphosis but I decided I couldn't handle all that thinking this morning).

Austen's original line read, "It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife." It is considered one of the finest forms of irony ever written, for in fact, it is, of course, a truth universally acknowledged that a single, wealthy man wants nothing more than to screw his brains out. And this is compounded by the fact that when the original line was written, you couldn't ever actually talk about this sort of thing. Thus, Austen's original line is taking a swing straight at her entire society.

In Grahame-Smith's line, we get an entirely similiar but different set-up. Grahame-Smith sets up the book's humor by inverting the classic line with something that is instantly recognizable on two fronts: Austen's quote and the popular belief in zombies screaming "Brains!" and slowly shambling towards their chosen victims. By doing this, he's providing the book's entire tone - which is violent, a bit gross, with tones of humor (mostly ironic), and a cute play off of Austen's original work.

In a way, this is why this book is so smart. Grahame-Smith is twisting the same conventions that Austen used, the sense of funny irony that still delivers a gut punch. Austen wasn't funny without purpose, though, and provided a lot more insight into her culture than Grahame-Smith's zombies can. I do not, however, blame the zombies, as science fiction and fantasy can provide some great insights into the human condition that more literary work cannot (prejudice, especially racism, is actually amazingly covered by fantasy and sci-fi). Instead, I think it's more a facet of Grahame-Smith being a 21st century man, and Austen being a woman of her time.

Austen's job was to take apart her own world, which she seemed to do with zealous glee. Grahame-Smith's job was to entertain, plain and simple. And both succeeded. It is a testament to Grahame-Smith's skill, though, that I bought the book on the first line alone. I read it and knew it was going to be a fun adventure.

As a writer, it's that sort of first line that every book needs and so rarely gets: one that delivers the entire premise and theme of the book, wrapped in a moment that captures the readers' imagination. Insanely difficult to do, but Austen did it here with a line that still speaks to us generations later. All Grahame-Smith had to do was inject his own humor into the line to make a great parody. If that doesn't show the genius of the original line, I don't know what does. 

Buy It Here!: Pride and Prejudice and Zombies: The Classic Regency Romance - Now with Ultraviolent Zombie Mayhem!

Character Analysis: The Storytelling and Lies of Wuthering Heights' Nelly Dean

Character: Ellen Dean, also known as Nelly or Mrs. Dean

From: Wuthering Heights

Created by: Emily Bronte

Portrayed in Film/TV by: Flora Robson (1939 movie), Christine Lindsay (1948 TV movie), Jean Anderson (1962 TV movie), Anne Stallybrass (1967 TV series), Judy Cornwell (1970 film), Pat Heywood (1978 TV series), Janet McTeer (1992 film), Polly Hemingway (1998 TV movie), Sarah Lancashire (2009 TV series) - pictured at right

Character History: Ellen Dean, commonly called Nelly, was the daughter of a servant at Wuthering Heights, a manor in Yorkshire, English in the nineteenth century, and was raised as a playmate of the manor's owner's children, Hindley and Catherine Earnshaw. Nelly is witness to the orphan Heathcliff's arrival at the manor, Hindley's abuse of the boy after inheriting the estate, and Catherine and Heathcliff falling in love. Becoming of age, Nelly becomes Catherine and Hindley's servant.

Hindley's wife Frances dies of consumption, leading to the rapid deteriotation of Hindley himself and forcing Nelly to become foster parent to Hareton, their young infant son. When Catherine moves to Thrushcross Grange, marrying Edgar Linton instead of Heathcliff, Nelly goes with Catherine to Thrushcross. Catherine dies in childbirth, leaving Nelly once again the foster parent, this time to the younger Catherine, named for her now-dead mother.

Nelly remains at Thrushcross Grange long enough to see Healthcliff return and enact his revenge on Hareton and the younger Catherine for their parents' failings. Nelly recounts all this horror to a renter at Thrushcross Grange, Mr. Lockwood, who wants to know the story of the mysterious Heathcliff, his landlord. Heathcliff manages, as the years pass and despite Nelly trying to protect her, to marry the younger Catherine to his own son, Linton, thus giving Heathcliff control of both Thrushcross and Wuthering Heights when Linton dies soon after.

Despite being apparently angry with Heathcliff, Nelly nonetheless returns to Wuthering Heights, the home of her childhood, when Heathcliff asks her to. She eventually finds Heathcliff dead in his own chambers, thus allowing the younger Catherine to marry Hareton, who had fallen in love while both were under Heathcliff's abusive control.

Personality: Above all else, Nelly is a gossip, not afraid of telling stories and injecting herself into everyone else's business. It is unknown, though, how much of a liar Nelly is. Inconsistencies in her story lead many to believe that she has a higher opinion of herself than others do. Nelly is a decent housekeeper and does have a knack for taking care of children, especially those very young. Despite her meddling, she is not a very good manipulator, as things very rarely go her way.

Archetypes: Nelly's main archetype is that of the Unreliable Narrator, wherein the reader is not sure when to trust her story and when to not. She is also The Maid, a common type of gossipy character in books set before the twentieth century. Nelly could also be considered a Plot Device, for though she injects herself into the narrative and crafts the storytelling mode, her character is not central to the plot or character development.

Other Versions: While Nelly has appeared in several adaptions and parodies of Wuthering Heights, her character remains mostly the same. Wuthering Heights has been adapted many times into film and TV programs, operas, plays, musicals, a role-playing game, parodies, and genre-splicers (including the obvious Heathcliff as a vampire). It has also inspired songs.

Main Analysis: Wuthering Heights is known most for its dark hero Heathcliff (or villain, depending on how romantic you think he is), its gothic manors, and its use of the unreliable narrator. It's the character of Nelly Dean, in fact, that transforms this book from a simple tortured romance and revenge drama into a masterpiece.

A brief summary: Mr. Lockwood, who narrates the opening of the book, arrives at Thrushcross Grange and encounters the manor's housekeeper, Nelly. Nelly, bored, a gossip, and starved for attention, decides to tell him all about the manor, its twin manor Wuthering Heights, and their sordid pasts. Nelly interjects herself into the tortured story of Heathcliff, Catherine, and their children, providing both insight and possible lies.

For most scholars, it's Nelly's character that remains the most interesting. Since the story is not told plainly, as Nelly officially interjects her thoughts into the narrative at times and she also unofficially registers her opinions on all matters of her employers' behavior, Nelly's version of the tale can't really be trusted. While she describes herself as being there for most of the major events, whether or she actually was is open for debate, for the majority of the characters she describes, like Catherine herself, are already dead and her stories can't be confirmed.

It's also believed, and supported by the text, that Nelly elevates her status in the story. She believes herself to have been raised as Catherine and her brother's equals, almost like another sister, and does not see herself as Catherine's servant. Instead, Nelly sees herself as Catherine's friend, and even, closest confidant. It's to Nelly that Catherine delivers her rather epic speech about why she must marrry Edgar and not Heathcliff, who she loves. Or, at least, that's the way Nelly tells it.

Some scholars have even go so far as to suggest that Nelly, while she tells Lockwood the tale, is actually recounting her crimes. She, as a master manipulator, is actually the villain of the piece, making sure that she is the one who cares for the children, as much as she's allowed, and in the end, is the surviving parental figure. Through her gossip, it could be easily seen that she helps to promote the strife that causes so many untimely deaths and Nelly does profit from each of these deaths in some way.

But I'm not willing to buy that Nelly Dean is in fact evil. Instead, I'm much willing to suspect that she is a liar and wants to paint herself as the all-knowing and benevolent caretaker. And it's for this reason that not a single thing she tells Mr. Lockwood should be trusted. In the end, that's what makes the unreliable narrator so interesting: what to trust and what not to trust is almost up the reader - just like it is in the real world (see Nick Carraway in The Great Gatsby).

In fiction, the idea that a character is telling the truth is almost always taken for granted. In life, however, people lie all the time, for reasons that are so complicated that they can never truly be pulled apart. In a way, Bronte is trying to circumvent the narrative form by detailing an aspect of human nature (gossip, lying, inflating one sense of self) that is all too common but truly difficult to capture in story form, since the reader has been trained to trust what the characters and narrators tell them. In general, when we encounter a liar in fiction, they're either heart of gold scoundrels or the villains.

But Nelly Dean is either. Instead, she's just a maid trying to sell a story to a passerby. There's no evil, though, just a story around a fire meant to entertain. So who knows what's true and what's not? For Nelly (and in general, the reader), it's more about how the story's told.

Similar Characters: Unreliable Narrators: Nick Carraway in The Great Gatsby

Gossipy Maids: Dorota from Gossip Girl

Bronte Sister Female Servant Plot Devices: Mrs. Alice Fairfax from Jane Eyre

Works with Nelly Dean: Wuthering Heights (Norton Critical Editions)

Book Review: Melanie Rawn's Skybowl, Final Book of the Dragon Prince Series

Title: Skybowl

Series: Book Three of Three of Dragon Star, sequel trilogy to Dragon Prince

Author: Melanie Rawn

Publisher: DAW (1994)

Genre: Fantasy

Sub-Genres: Adventure, Epic Romance, High Fantasy, Royal Studies, Sword & Sorcery, War Stories

Plot Summary: Intruders from faraway lands are plotting against the High Prince Pol and all his friends and family in retaliation for a centuries old feud. The High Princess Meiglan has been captured, and the Lord of Goddess Keep, and Pol's cousin, Andry has arrived to help but was too late to do more than argue about the use of their immense powers. Pol, wishing nothing less than to achieve his father's dream of peace without bloodshed, must use everyone around him, and all the Sunrunner and sorcery gifts he has, to save his wife and his lands.

What I Liked: There's nothing worse than a long series that ends with a whimper. Perhaps the series doesn't really go as the reader has hoped, so you feel lead astray by the writer, or the epic final battle just isn't epic enough, or the pieces of the puzzle that's been so carefully laid out just don't fit. Luckily, the sixth and final book of Rawn's epic pretty much works on all the big counts.

While her writing is fairly pedantic and basic, she still makes up for it with twists and turns and great, passionate love stories. Even having read the book once before, I couldn't remember how the final battle turned out - and whether not Pol saved his wife from certain doom. For someone who has read so much that few books can offer true surprises (according to some literary critics, there's only 20 real plots out there), I'd say that's a complete win. And to make matters even better, Rawn manages to have you wondering if saving the High Princess is even the right move in the end - the whole debate of saving one soul versus everyone else's.

What I Didn't Like: While this series has done a good job of providing some great climatic fights, the epic brawl doesn't ever actually happen in this book. There's a few strokes of horrible violence, a battle of wills that's fairly confusing for the reader, and the final victory, as it were, is declared. It might last twenty pages, but it's not really a fight in the end. For a series that has some great ending moments, this one simmers to a close instead of going out with a bang.

Part of the problem is just how many character Rawn has to include. It's never more apparent then in the ending of the series, where all the surviving characters come together to give everyone their riding off into the sunset moment. While Rawn stirs clear of giving our heroes a definite happy ending (it wouldn't make sense in her world and gives the book a depth a cookie cutter ending wouldn't have), she does tie things up a bit too nicely. Given the amount of characters, you almost want somebody to end up miserable. Especially when you can't remember who half of them are.

Similar Works: The Rest of the Dragon Prince Series: Dragon Prince, The Star Scroll, Sunrunner's Fire, Stronghold, and The Dragon Token.

Fantasy Series with Dragons: The Dragonriders of Pern , Rain Wilds Chronicles, The Symphony of Ages.

Other Melanie Rawn Books: Exiles, Fire Raiser, and Spellbinder: A Love Story With Magical Interruptions.

Buy It Here!: Skybowl (Dragon Star, Book 3)

Last Thought: A fitting end for a great series but one that displays all the same problems as the preceding books.

Great Quotes: Gustave Flaubert's Madame Bovary

 

"Before her marriage she had thought that she had love within her grasp but since the happiness which she had expected this love to bring her hadn't come, she supposed she must have been mistaken. And Emma tried to imagine just what was meant, in life, by the words 'bliss,' 'passion,' and 'rapture' -- words that had seemed so beautiful to her in books."

Gustave Flabuert, Madame Bovary

TV Review & Adaption Analysis: True Blood

Title: True Blood

Form: TV series

Adapted From: the Sookie Stackhouse novels by Charlaine Harris (originally called The Southern Vampire Mysteries)

Starring: Anna Paquin (Sookie Stackhouse), Stephen Moyer (Bill Compton), Sam Trammell (Sam Merlotte), Ryan Kwanten (Jason Stackhouse), Rutina Wesley (Tara Thorton), Chris Bauer (Andy Bellefleur), Nelsan Ellis (Lafayette Reynolds), Jim Parrack (Hoyt Fortenberry), Carrie Preston (Arlene Fowler), Alexander Skarsgaard (Eric Northman), Todd Lowe (Terry Bellefleur), Deborah Ann Woll (Jessica Hamby), Kristin Bauer (Pam De Beaufort)

Created by: Alan Ball

Appearing: Currently on HBO, fourth season premiere 6/26/11

TV Review: Say what you will about True Blood, but you can't deny that there's really nothing else on TV like it. There might be other vampires, but none of them match this show's lust for violence, messed up characters, and lots and lots of sex. And don't forget the utter nakedness.

And while that doesn't always mean the show rocks every episode, it does mean that nearly every episode is crazy and ususally fun.

The main strength of the show is its well-rounded cast. While the stars of the series might be Paquin, Moyer, and Skarsgaard, its scene-stealers like Bauer, Woll, and Ellis that make the series great. In fact, I'd say that if the show focused only on Sookie and her two main vamps, the show would be dismally boring.

The main weakness of the show, unfortunately, is also its unwieldly cast. There are so god-damn many of them. Even for an hour drama, this series tips the scales of cast members. And in the fourth season premiere, we got at least four new major characters (only two of which, Portia Bellefleur and Marnie, were ever part of the books). If you think that starring list up there is bad, realize those are only the characters who have appeared in nearly every single episode.

Also a problem is that with a cast this big, is that it's hard to make the series gel. Seasons 1 did this with a well plottedmurder mystery - someone in the cast was a killer, but we didn't know who, so the whole of Bon Temps, the fictional southern town of the series, was locked in a manhunt. Seasons 2 and 3 had Big Bads, but only a handful of the characters were truly affected by them and our heroes, as it were, didn't come together to defeat them, either. It's a plot problem that's not helping this series.

But, in the end, I'll still watch. The premiere of the fourth season was a bit slow, but started with a nice time jump, allowing Sookie and several of the characters to start over. The surprise gay wasn't that surprising, and as mentioned, there are too many new characters in already packed cast, but there were some other nice twists, like Bill's new role. I also enjoyed the Jessica-Hoyt scenes, but that's mostly for the on-screen chemistry of Woll and Parrack.

Adaption Analysis: When adapting this series, which is written in the first person from Sookie's perspective, meaning the reader only gets Sookie's thoughts on any given situation, Ball had some big decisions to make - how does he expand Bon Temps to make the other characters just as lively as Sookie herself?

In the end, I think he did his job too well. The other characters have somehow eclipsed Sookie and her storyline, to the point that now, several of the important plot points don't come from Sookie - and many fans watch the show for the characters who aren't her.

The first season followed the books rather closely, plot and character-wise. We get an introduction to Pam and Eric in mid-season (only minor characters in the first book but major characters in the rest of the series). The only significant changes come from the brand new character of baby vampire Jessica (killed and raised by Bill as punishment for his murder of another vampire - a different punishment than the book's) and the family relations between Tara and Lafayette. In the books, the two characters have nothing to do with the other - Lafayette is a very minor character (who only survives until the second book) and Tara isn't really described as being black. The biggest plot change is that of V, vampire blood, which becomes a major storyline for the series but one that was never really developed in the books.

But it's in the second season when Ball really starts to change things - which is also where the creators start having issues getting all the characters on the same page. In shows like Buffy, the cast was large but they all came together at the end to defeat the Big Bad. On True Blood, sometimes the minor characters don't even know the Big Bad exists. Like in Season 2, Sookie doesn't even meet Maryann, a minor villain from the second book who was elevated to Big Bad status for the TV show, until mid-season.

In season 3, the big bad is Russell Edgington, a completely different character than the version from the books. Other minor character roles also shift, mainly to keep the interesting characters around. Lafayette, for example, isn't killed, and Sam's family is dramatically altered and expanded.

In the fourth season, there's been a radical departure from the series, with Claudine and the fairies taking on new powers and a brand new role - the first major departure from the books for Sookie's family history. Sookie's bloodline and powers are also slightly altered, as those are only now being explored in the books (there's 11 of them now, the most recent one pictured at left).

I think the adaption has been incredibly smart in its departures. The show would not have survived, especially with its emphasis on sex and violence, with the narrow view of only Sookie to work with. There simply can't be that much sex when you focus on a single character (which is why you won't ever see a straight adaption of Laurell K. Hamilton's Anita Blake series or Jacqueline Carey's Kushiel series). But in the expanded world of Bon Temps, Ball manages to make some very smart changes with complex characters that only expand Sookie's world, instead of just filling it with redudant characters.

True Blood is now showing its fourth season on HBO. Previous seasons are available on DVD, iTunes, and other outlets.

Great Quotes: Moulin Rouge!

 

 

"The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return."

Christian (Ewan McGregor) in Moulin Rouge

Book Review: Jacqueline Carey's Naamah's Curse

Title: Naamah's Curse

Series: Naamah trilogy (book 2); Terre d'Ange series (book 8)

Author: Jacqueline Carey

Publisher: Grand Central Publishing (2010)

Genres: Fantasy, Romance

Sub-Genres: Altered History, Erotica, Globe-trotting Adventure, Religious Studies

Plot Summary: Moirin, descended from the royal lines of Alba and Terre d'Ange, is traveling across Ch'in and into Tartar territory, tracking her beloved Bao, a stick-fighter who died and lived again and who now shares half of Moirin's divine spark. But Bao has gotten himself entangled in Tatar politics, and Moirin pays the price. Once free, she must once again track down her stick-fighter and along the way, she just might change the world.

What I Liked: The Terre d'Ange books are always filled with adventure, intrigue, and lots of sex. This book is no different. The best part has to be Carey's takes on religion and different cultures. Carey subscribes to the basic tenet that people are generally good, no matter who they are, and it's only when power and greed gets in the way do they do horrible things happen. Over and over again, Carey delivers this message, while touching upon Chinese, Mongolian, Russian, and Indian cultures and religions.

I also like the fact that Carey is further expanding the world of Terre d'Ange, bringing in new countries and furthering how her gods (angels that descended from heaven when a new god, Elua, was born from the blood of Christ and the tears of Mary Magdelene) fit in her world. Here, she takes on the Hindu caste system and the orthodoxy of the Russian Christian church, pushing at but still managing to respect each set of beliefs. While it might go on too long, the religious thread is what holds this trilogy's middle book together.

What I Didn't Like: Oh, I love these books. There's not a question here. But Moirin is no Phedre, star of the first trilogy, or even the damaged Prince Imriel, star of the second trilogy. While an interesting character, she simply doesn't have that spark that Phedre had that made her so impressively unique.

Also, I'm not sure this middle book was fully developed. Carey spends a lot of time covering old ground, telling the stories fromthe first book in the trilogy and even name-dropping Phedre and Imriel far too much. That space should have been used to further explore the other cultures that Moirin visits, because that's what made this book different from the other Terre d'Ange books.

I'm hoping that the final book in the trilogy, which will bring us back to Terre d'Ange, will be stronger than this outing. This book felt too much like a stopgap between the beginning of the story and the ending of a story. In other words, it felt way too much like the second book of a trilogy and not enough like a book that can stand on its own.

Similar Books: Other Terre d'Ange Books: First Moirin Book: Naamah's Kiss, First Phedre Book: Kushiel's Dart, and First Imriel Book: Kushiel's Scion.

Other Jacqueline Carey Books: Santa Olivia and The Sundering.

Other Fantasy with Powerful Female Leads: The Black Jewels: Trilogy: Daughter of the Blood / Heir to the Shadows / Queen of the Darkness, Grave Witch (Alex Craft, Book 1), and Hit List (Anita Blake, Vampire Hunter, Book 20).

Buy It Here!: Naamah's Curse

Last Thought: A meandering entry in a great series that still manages to world-build but doesn't stand by itself.

Character Analysis: Did Anna Karenina Deserve to Die?

Character: Anna Karenina

From: Anna Karenina

Created by: Leo Tolstoy

Portrayed in Other Media by: Betty Nansen (1915 film), Greta Garbo (1935 film), Ingrid Bergman (1944 radio), Vivien Leigh (1948 film), Marlene Dietrich (1949 radio), Jacqueline Bisset (1985 TV movie), Sophie Marceau (1997 film), Kelly Kaduce (1997 opera), Keira Knightley (2012 film)

Character History: Anna Karenina was a young woman in 19th century Russia, a member of the elite ruling class. At a young age, she married Alexei Karenin, a prominent statesmen who was twenty years her senior. While she did not love him, she loved what he could give her and she enjoyed his company, filled with what she viewed as intelligence. After the birth of their son Seryozha and Alexei's rise to power, Anna became removed from Alexei's daily life and devoted herself to their son.

One day, while journeying to St. Petersburg to visit her brother Stiva and his wife, the Princess Darya (nicknamed Dolly), Anna met Count Vronsky, a wealthy, vibrant military man, at the train station when a railroad worker is killed by a train. Vronsky is taken by her beauty and poise. Anna does her work of convincing Dolly not to divorce Stiva for his infidelities in their marriage, as they are both still quite happy and in love despite his cheating.

Anna meets Vronsky again at a ball, and she becomes aware of his infatuation for her. Unloved by her husband, Anna is moved by him. When returning to Moscow, she forces herself into Vronsky's path, by befriending his cousin Princess Betsy, and when the two finally meet again alone, they become lovers.

During a horse chase in which Vronsky is competing, Karenin realizes what everyone else around him already knows: his wife is cheating on him with the Count. He asks Anna to do what is right for their son: namely, never see Vronsky again, and Karenin will forgive her.

But Anna is pregnant, and after giving birth to what is surely Vronsky's daughter Annie, she nearly dies. Karenin, realizing that he had been cold and distant to Anna and how he might be partially to blame for their love affair, forgives Vronsky. Vronsky, in horror at his breach of honor, tries to commit suicide by a gunshot through the chest but fails. Anna too survives but Karenin refuses to grant the divorce the lovers want.

Vronsky, deciding to escape back into the army, is preparing to leave after he recovers. Anna comes to him, and they decide to run away to Europe, instead. They take their daughter, nicknamed Annie, but they are forced to leave Seryozha, which breaks Anna' s heart. Karenin tells their son that Anna is dead.

Anna and Vronsky, after a period of boredom with their lives and missing home, return to Russian society, but Anna is mortifed by the rejection she feels from her former friends. Anna manages to meet Seryozha in secret, and the boy confesses he never believed his mother was dead. Anna and Vronsky retire to his St. Petersburg estate, even though Vronsky has become estranged from his family due to his affair with Anna.

While Anna entertains some of the more liberal members of society, she stills feels that her life was been destroyed, though by her actions, by Karenin, or by Vronsky, she is not sure. She becomes increasingly jealous of Vronsky, begins to drug herself, and does not love Annie the way she loves Seryozha. Vronsky becomes popular in the political world, even while Karenin suffers a fall from grace. Anna devotes herself to charming Vronsky's new friends and to being the patron of an orphaned girl.

When Vronsky becomes so involved with his newly refound freedom, Anna becomes even more isolated. Anna, now paranoid, sends Vronsky a telegram to come home. When he fails to do so, she chases after him, and being unable to locate him, throws herself onto the tracks of a coming train. She is killed. Since she and Karenin were never divorced, Karenin reclaims Annie to raise as his own, while Vronsky leaves his new found political career to re-enter the army.

Personality: Anna begins the book as a vibrant and beautiful young woman who is married to a man she doesn't really love but at least respects. It is not until she falls passionately in love with Vronsky does her world unravel, including her own mind. She loves her son but cannot love her daughter in the same way. Towards the end of her life, she becomes increasingly paranoid and thoughts of suicide invade her daily thoughts. She was smart and a little brave but could not handle the stress of losing her place in society. She was most afraid of being alone.

Archetypes:  Anna is best suited to the archetypes of the Adulterer, and for her stunning beauty and her later games of making men fall in love with her, the Seductress. Her and Vronsky's relationship can best be described as The Dangerous Love, where the danger only adds to the passion of the romance. Thanks to the times she lives in, she could also be the Sinner, for while she has some faith, she cannot stop herself from falling in love with Vronsky and sinning against God with him. She could also be a Bad Mother, depending on your view, since she abandons her son and cannot bring herself to love her daughter as much as her other child.

Other Versions: Anna Karenina has been adapted into several other forms, all at least loosely based on the original text. Since the novel is considered one of the most representative of its era and a classic in its own right, it has been adapted onto film and TV screens, into ballets, operas, and stageplays, and had spin-offs written by other people inspired by the original work. It has also been alluded to hundreds of times by other works, especially Anna's death.

Main Analysis: In older stories, and we're talking old-old stories, the purpose was to teach a lesson. These didactic narratives eventually became teaching tools for children, and we tend to think that modern literature avoids this lesson-teaching ideal. But in reality, narratives (even popcorn lit) carry themes, the adult version of lesson-teaching. So what is Tolstoy trying to tell his readers when Anna throws herself in front of that train?

The question to be asked first, though, is whether Tolstoy is condemning Anna by this suicide (suicide still being a sin), or if his planned death for her was a release from a terrible life (as it could have been in pre-Christian or Eastern cultures). If it's the first, then Tolstoy is trying to make us sad or for us to condemn Anna ourselves for her wanton ways. If it's the second, then Tolstoy is saying that Anna did not deserve this fate and will be better off in the next world.

Anna's life was indeed awful by the time she died. Her husband had sundered her relationship with the son she loved, she was suffering from what many people would call postpartum depressive (she found little joy with her new daughter), and her growing dependence on drugs for sleep was seemingly driving her paranoia. By modern standards, Anna was suffering from severe depression.

But, still, Tolstoy does seem to suggest that Anna's hell is at least partially her creation, and partially the creation of Karenin and the society around her. Karenin marries Anna, even when he is sure she doesn't actually love him - and it's not even clear if Karenin even loves her. Like most things in his life, it was all about doing the right thing, in the eyes of society.

At the other end of the spectrum, Anna has lost her societal standing by taking up with Vronsky in lust. And while he makes her desperately happy, society still slowly destroys her, to the point that Vronsky becomes her enemy. Her jealousy and loneliness warp her mind, and Vronsky, now himself taken up by that same society, doesn't realize the danger until it is too late. While he knew something had to be done, he simply didn't know what to do to fix it, or at least, couldn't juggle his new life with his love for Anna.

In this view, Tolstoy is not condemning Anna. The only problem is, though, that Anna leaves behind two children. While Vronsky survives Anna's death, he is a shell of his former shelf (and Tolstoy hints in my opinion that he probably won't survive that army excursion) and Karenin loses his societal status and prestige. Only her brother Stiva seems to go on without her, returning to his extramarital affairs to ease the pain.

In this view, Anna's death is selfless, since Anna might give her children a better chance at life in society if the black mark that is theirmother is gone. Annie might actually be married if she is seen in polite society as not the bastard daughter but Karenin's rightful child. Seryozha, too, might do better without her, despite his love for his mother.

Anna's death is more a warning against the power of society on us than on the powers of love. Anna is not destroyed by her love for Vronsky (though jealousy is often seen as a flipside of extreme passion), but rather by the life society forces her into. If Karenin had granted Anna the divorce, Anna might not have succumbed to her paranoia. And while it might be partially due to his own self-interest, it was definitely mostly society that held Kareninback. Thus, society's influence wrecked not only Anna's chance at happiness, since her marriage to Karenin, proper and right in the eyes of society, was simply never happy.

Similar Characters: Lovers' Death by Suicide: Romeo and Juliet

Cheating Women: Madame Bovary

Women with Postpartum Depression: Brooke Shields in Down Came the Rain: My Journey Through Postpartum Depression

Buy It Here!: Anna Karenina