see prejudice in the same berlin , they perceive it first of all as a film about the russian revolution. they know exactly what they are for the soldiers and against the sailors, and uh, such a belatrized description of the perception of such a viewer, prejudiced , has been preserved in the novel. leonov xwanger fire. he's just writing down a certain general who sits down. he knows who he is, but in the process he begins to worry about being a sailor. he is driven by some emotion. he almost cries. it's so detailed that clearly fechtwangelia understood what was going on in the cinema hall at that moment, while uh and eisenstein's talents and here is an appeal to the same colonist common values ​​that outweigh when he reminds them and uh, it is important that in the twenties uh from eisenstein and in other films also tried. in general, well, it’s not that

he called for mercy for the fallen, but rather he strove to help people directly in socially , you can recall the film’s general line about village artels. uh, in which uh still uh there was such a nep principle. it was long before the organization of collective farms. it was precisely the desire to help the peasants show how they could organize themselves in order to earn money themselves, sell, and improve their living and working conditions. and it was absolutely like that. uh, the human oriented idea is another thing while the movie was being shot. it so happened that at that moment collectivization began, the opposite, and, in general, the film. unfortunately, censorship did before, and it began to be called old new. this is a separate, long story and uh, which was traumatic in general, for eisenstein, because it was his first such serious clash with censorship. eh, when he, in general , once again wanted to show this idea of ​​\u200b\u200bself-organization of people, then, of course. such

a big clash with censorship, oh, that we can't help mentioning. this is the story of ivan the terrible, there are not only many significant e expressive shots showing this here, e, the same field-landerness. yes, for example, at the end we see this famous spectacular, but profile. uh, when uh cherkasov leans over uh, the crowd they look at you with this squint, as officers once looked with contempt at the sailors. well, this motive of oppression on the other side of such a sadistic self-affirmation from the tsar and e from einstein shoots ivan the terrible in the forties. he conceived this double empire, and he completed it just after the war, that is, in those years when e stalin e, absolutely strengthened himself in his cult, and, in general, lezviinshtein. it was the most important civic act itself. he knew that stalin would watch this film and stalin was really looking forward to this the film and show that e

formidable is also that terrible is an absolutely destructive figure, because e a person who imagines himself to be absolutely such a god on earth is a person who believes that he can decide fate on the left and on the right. this is a man who would cease to be a man, in fact, for eisenstein, this was the most important statement , which, as you know, led to the ban, the second series and the film alive and therefore ivan the terrible, of course , has also become one of the main works of art of the 20th century and one of the most courageous civil deeds in general in the history of the 20th century, perhaps, but today we are watching a movie. actually. and why is it important to look at him, why is he interesting, what is interesting to us in addition to his civic position, in addition to his position as a theorist and a teacher. it seems to me that such

a maximum cinema is cinema at its maximum, and eisenstein at this moment is thinking about how to involve the viewer entirely in emotions, and the physiology of feeling the mind and its viewer is a person who, perhaps, is not even going to watch his film, but he sits down and allows himself , often called such a director-dictator, and he did not say cinema voice, we need to go to the movie fist. what he wants to say is born in the head of the viewer, his films are a textbook for reflection. and in general, unfortunately, those, uh, calls for mercy, those calls for the solidarity that is contained in this film is absolutely non-violent. it really is. this is the desire to reflect on how historical events unfold. tires and uh, at the same time it

is executed here in such a very expressive concentrated form, because really that of the great idea of ​​the film is the revolution of the fifth year. e, brings the darkness focused on one episode, thus he became exactly like such a turned diamond, and therefore many years later the film e, does not cease to excite and be film critic was interesting for us. artyom sopin historians. natalya ryabchikova podcast from einstein 125. goodbye. all the best. girls, i wanted to welcome you to the studio for our must- read podcast. today. we will talk about tolstoy's novel

anna karenin , i would be interested to talk about the modern view of karina's plot. barbanyaga. writer e with author. e books about tolstoy, and an expert on tolstoy elina gridchina is an art critic. uh, big fan of the novel. we gathered as a women's team because i think that man a should not talk about this topic. she is very delicate. yes, we will talk today about adilter, after all, the novel is based on liester. therefore, i believe that it would be appropriate to talk about, let's say, the modern context of this situation with women. yes, we are all married or have been married. we have children. we are, so to speak, adult experienced women, and we already have some formed point of view on this novel.

well, let me first mention that anatolinin's novel is considered a prose standard , the pinnacle of literature and russian literature . william fawkner, considered this novel a masterpiece and , uh, named it three times as the best musical novel, call the three best novels. he said anna karenina three times. we also know that nabokov was a big fan of this novel. and i also know that this novel. in a sense, a mystery, because we are up to we still don't understand. why and here is the theme of adelter female infidelity, so to speak, the fall of a woman in society, huh? why is it the benchmark of the most widely read film adaptation of the novel so far? e, here is the pinnacle of literary art elina, please tell me about nabokov's lectures. i know that you are a big fan of these lectures, yes, i know them well, in general, a sideways fan, in

principle, is still very large, of course, if i they asked, i would name anna karenina and other shores. well, they don't ask me as a faulkner. i do not know why. oh so, and if we talk about lectures. nabokov has wonderful vladimir vladimirovich lectures on russian literature. and in general something amazing. by the way, i am anna karenina. i read these lectures many times, and these lectures, probably twice, and in my youth completely . having read both roman and, in fact, i absolutely agreed with the opinion on my forehead - which he expresses in these lectures. well, literally, and then i hmm, you can say we quarreled. what an opinion, what a definite opinion, what nabokov's opinion. and how about karenina a character, let's say, as a woman, that she is the brightest, kindest, purest, a character in russian literature. nabokov somehow explained. why is this novel standard and what did tolstoy manage to catch, well, let's say, he explains, rather roman and e. well, since i

'm still a little angry at nabokov, i'll say they praise anna karenina, not noticing some obvious things that, it seems to me, lev nikolayevich obviously pokes at us as a writer. thank you very much for this, you would argue with nabokov that she is the purest you are 40 years old, and you are a psycho -treated adult with children . nothing annoys you after a certain stage in life. and in principle, you do not even condemn anyone. well, let's say that's my opinion, but to her as a person has changed. by the way, i heard that this novel is wonderful because it can be re-read. it changes and changes every time, maybe that's what it's all about. when is this story that its interesting to reread? katya, are you an expert? uh, according to tolstoy, you are an accomplice, let's call it that yes books uh about anna karriya anna karenina story of anna karenina. and tell me, please, how is there any parallel with the biography of tolstoy in e. this story of anna

karenina, we will now talk a little about this and then briefly describe the plot, what is the main line going on. yes, the indigenous novel is simply anna karenina - it is known that there are two frames and therefore, if we are talking about the history of konstantin levin, then we understand, in fact, that there are a lot of tolstoyan lines. it is present there, if we are talking about the history of anna karenina, then in this karenin's line, rather tolstoy acted as an artist who, of course, took prototypes from life, but to say that such a situation happened in his life or he was somehow personally acquainted with it, but, probably not, but this novel went . well, several lines, yes , which happened in reality there with his relatives and acquaintances, including, uh, with his sister maria nikolaevna yes, uh, her family history. she married her relative valerian tolstoy, who cheated on her with everyone, including there with, er,

servants with young ladies. and it is even known that when they opened the attic, otherwise they found the corpses of small children, that is, a nightmare, but this is not very similar to the story, yes, but the point is that in her life, but there was a story of male infidelity from this nightmare. she fled abroad, where it already happened to her, in fact her love story, where she fell in love with this man. well, not so much, almost not enough water, yes , the frenchman is behind me and gave birth to a daughter from him not by marriage, and this one is the story, but a daughter born out of wedlock and difficulties. her introduction to the world, but from what happened then, and this is vanya karenina it can be seen this line. oh, and lime in the case of anna pirogov herself, the girl who lived next door, but was the housekeeper, and bibikov's landowner was his mistress. and

so, when she was of noble origin in a noble woman, no, no, and when he decided to marry, he was a widower with children, and he decided to marry a second time. and then actually she was superfluous in this situation. and here she is, and hmm rushed into the thin one. yes, and rushed under the train wrote a note, but that you will suffer, realizing your guilt. tolstoy came to honor the memory of a dead woman. well , it happened not just before his eyes, but here nearby. and when it became known that there was a woman on the rails, he went to the anatomy. the writer went to anatolyevich to look at the theater. he wanted to see all the details; he was generally very interested in death, as for the announcement. he was always very, well, curious about the matter, and so it was interesting for them to look, of course, at the body of a woman torn apart by hmm oh, trains. yes

, i wonder that she does not give such an ugly death. let's put it this way, although nabokov writes anna karenina's suicide about beauty. well camon well, i don't know, there's no beauty in suicide at all. let's speak the truth. let's talk about the plot, that is, anna is a married woman with a child of 26 years old. yes, she meets a guards officer of the raven e, fall in love with him 23. yes, he is actually not much, when she says a boy, she rather refers to him, because she is already a married woman with a thunder and her husband is much older than her. well, how much the husband is rich, 46. well, she's 26, well, 20 years old. this is the difference husband works. e in the government and anna here is her e, so to speak, love her gulter. she, uh, decides. uh, let's say open to society, she does not hide it in this way, she slaps

the public in her act, uh, which we can call an act. this e desire your love. uh, officially a to declare peace, do i understand this correctly, that you can correct at that time in that era that tolstoy describes the kindred epoch yes, that is, which he recreates and the real epoch and it is approximately the same, yes existed dulter everywhere, right and left, but high society understood that a there are certain rules for which you cannot . tell me what the rule is, then society met in salons. yes, that is , in fact, somehow stupid, yes, living rooms. some kind of dinners, yes, which everyone gave, well, from the salon , that's where a with a man and a woman could not remain alone in front of our eyes. well, people, yes, that is, they should not have seen that someone was sitting in the corner and talking together or left. in the next room communicates together it immediately gave rise to a wave of rumors and was indecent.

therefore, if there was communication between yes , men and women in restaurants, there were numbers. yes, and there are other places where this did not happen in front of people, respectively , lovers did not come to the theater together, sitting down. in the next lie. yes, it was a refusal to come with growth, in my opinion, the opera yes, then he wants to. well, he doesn’t go, he goes, but she wants to be present with her man in secular public places, but this is impossible, because in front of society she is on another person. in general, society despised. well, she became a couple and in fact, yes, they stopped accepting her after she opened. yes, this novel. uh , they looked at her with vronsky whispering, that is, she actually turned into such a persona non grata, but she turned into her voluntary, that is, she was warned. i understand correctly that it will be so even her husband warned him and applied these in this

situation. the princess of disaster, tverskaya , tells her the same thing. although the disaster, there itself to put it mildly, good. basically, she lives. in the light. she grandexa complies with the rules of altera as yes, as they are called the soviet rule of the soviet denter. but no, what do you think, now we have a rule, we can carry out such a parallel life. isn’t everything the same, but imagine yours, let’s say, a well-known media company, if we are talking about the light of that time, these are media faces, and you a can correct a person and he, and suddenly you start to openly get caught by the paparazzi on photo together, and with some young. well, let, well, okay, not a mulatto. well who can replace guards showman? yeah i don't know a young musician, yeah, anyone who's a young rapper a young rapper is fine. oh great. and

your husband tells you, my baby, of course, i understand everything, but i have already seen rural chronicles several times. yes, he brings me a soviet chronicle. we all know. well, first of all, don't make her a grown man laugh. i am your husband. i provide you with a child, and then karenina, as i understand it, thinks about the child, this flashes several times in the book. you know what will happen to him, he thinks about the banna. a naturally, if anna's reputation is, of course, a ruin, then this will affect the fate of the child and use it. and there is such an absolutely wonderful passage. i think all modern times are the same, you can say, huh? he says i will uh give her a divorce at the very beginning when he thinks. this is what will happen, he will leave her, then the next and then the next our lesson will go, he cares and thinks, in general, karenin loves. it. maybe i think he does. just imagine. why, uh, the husband of correction asks his wife, which he provides for everyone and gives her the opportunity to hang out in the world and be just a beauty dress up dress up raise

a child. he says, i ask you to educate. there is a time for the governess to be washed and fed. she just tells him, hello seriously. choose outfits from paris yes , which cost a fortune. i ask you about one thing, so that she doesn’t laugh at me and at you in the world, so that it doesn’t get into the newspapers. it seems to me that anna's act indicates that she despised these secular rules. in general, this is the structure of society hypocritical. yes, everyone really changes everyone meets at the hotel on the waters, but this is by no means. and husbands and families agree with this, but it should be, uh, scales to her, despising this color, stop striving for it, and stop deceiving her husband for two. in my opinion, divorce him, as karenin suggests that she marry bronsky, who also proposes this to her. by the way, bronsky talks about what she does when she goes to the opera. we cannot return to the light. and by the way, she also

has a wonderful one that takes her to the country. he says to a dacha in a village outside the city, he wrote that, and not both of her men and her husband or lover. they say anna don't do it, please, right. this says and vronsky both offer her some options. how can this situation? and to be honest? let's deal with her. she doesn't. this is, perhaps, a manifestation of her character. what do you think elina is a man, when he is attracted to a woman, he thinks about it. intelligent, it doesn't matter to him, do you think it was important to tolstoy that anna should be smart. does she have to be smart to like? but no, but it’s not important for readers, the reader can draw his own conclusions , is she stupid or smart , let’s say, and it seems to me that she’s just a narrow-minded woman, and quite charming, but if we talk about my opinion, that is, you think that she uh, making this move, let's say, announcing

his romance by starting. uh, invite your lover home, yes, and going out with him into the house. she didn't expect it to have such consequences. she did not think about the consequences, because for a long time she was gets out of hand. well, why did she need it. and you know, it seems to me that this is an absolutely wonderful novel and step-by-step instructions. how to communicate, how to consider, a narcissist or a manipulator? that is, you consider anna an artistambulator, everything is written there in black and white, i can’t refuse tolstoy in white. well, i always have a counter question. and who among us is not a manipulator , we understand that anna destroys the lives of people around her, this is objective. she ruined the life of karenin she ruined the life, perhaps she ruined vronsky's life for her son seryozha, because at the end of the novel we understand that he is broken, both men have lost their careers, son. uh, lost his mother had a psychological trauma there. that is, i understand

that anna, uh, has a bad effect on her environment. and this is probably her biggest sin. but uh, can we say that she is uh, committing uh, a conscious crime, that is, it is her manipulativeness that we are directed? i would not say that she does it, directly consciously. that is, she wants to destroy everything life. so i think that at some point she just saw what she only wants and she got to submit to this desire to leave. construction and all the people who are around it will be so, yes, just so, but is it about love, listen, but there is a certain paradigm, heroic. yes. eh, a heroic hero destroys such a certain myth. um, well, another world doesn't make a good enough world. yes, that is, his some kind of revolutionary act. or can we change the world around

, we can say that anna wants to change the world to change the hypocritical rules of society or not? no, i think it's on purpose, but he doesn't want to. so what's more, unless you change , unless she builds new and good ones , listen to the question. i wanted to talk about something, and it's very good. you led me to this question. and can we say that leo tolstoy is a moralist and, er, a fallen woman dies under the wheels of a train precisely because she deserved it. well, at least he positioned himself that way, do you think, so tolstoy condemned anna if in life, and tolstoy would communicate with a woman who acted, he would have condemned her. i'm sure of this. i, too, but here he acts as the author of the novel, respectively, this is his heroine and they are in love with her and fall in love with reading.

i didn’t think that he was directly in love with her, but he was fascinated in a certain sense expressed by the energy that this woman has, and i don’t think that he wrote from condemning her as a woman, but the version of the novel was called well done women . the first back that everyone already knows. is he young there? yes, do not forget that tolstoy is generally peculiar to irony. yes, for some reason, all the time about this forget. you were a very limited person. yes, incredible. read more e letters that they had in yasnaya polyana such a post, semey where everyone wrote some of his letters, joke notes, everything they could, read something lev nikolayevich wrote. yes, you will see, e, how many there really are here is the irony yes, which is under this condemnation, that you will not understand seriously he or he laughs at this. that's why i think he didn't judge. it is, but he knew her path was leading her there. this is wholly

human. it seems to me that the clarity of this position and presents us with tolstoy as moralists, because that's for sure, if a person follows the path of violation there, for example, i do not know marriage vows and the rules of society. he necessarily goes to the death of the aglaya, but we are all. um, actually, we are all social animals, we are social people. we live in a society. we live by certain rules. and as soon as we start to break them all, without offering. nothing new in return is carried away by the crowd behind your bright ideas, then, in principle, you turn out to be true. a very disastrous situation by the way, do not forget that she was a marfinist during the time of tolstoy and anna karenina’s own morphe was the only anesthetic, and therefore e did not yet understand how it affects, i must say in russian they have a conflict at this moment. he is against it. that is, he understands that this is not very adequate , let's say. so she was already using morphy as a sleeping pill, as a means to calm down and why was she worried about how

her relationship with the russian developed after they fled to italy difficult why because anna demanded proof of love, and-and men, and so, who sacrificed their careers, yes, and in. so to speak, fit into this strange revolutionary situation. he, he went to meet her. so he stayed with her. he did not leave his leg to run away to get a divorce, he takes responsibility, that is, a good man, by the way, behaves. in this case, very grateful during the book, but nonetheless at the end of them. uh, it feels like love. eh, she's gone. is there such a feeling or is it some kind of anna's fantasy? i think so. anna created this feeling in her relationship, because she, well, for the first time. yes , i experienced some strong feelings and passion, when i didn’t

think of a man here for copper, which, probably, the problem is that i no longer had a choice. that is, she saw this bronsky and gave herself to him, as if everything. yes, all of my passion. although if there were any options, by the way , i think this is an interesting idea, because i also had the feeling of a root-bath, that she is very energetic, let's say. so there is something to say, the world has something to say do? she has energy for some changes around and this energy is too much for karenin, but he absolutely does not absorb it. eh, these are how then her potential and which intelligence, as katya said, who, who got in the way, to that, she gave all her accumulated and possibly. by the way, because, well, she could not work to express herself in any other way. she expresses herself. ah, on the subject of love. or say in life i will say. yes, i couldn't work. and leo tolstoy, by the way, was very respectful of married women. and there is

such a landing, he has a whale. what levin gives me to rest and somehow behave in general. well, in some way. femininity at the beginning of marriage, because what a big job she has ahead of her. and the liars, by the way, show themselves to be a wonderful talented host when they leave the city, but in general, they will give with this little girl. first of all, she has children. well, at least a daughter from a beloved man . god, what a charm, little, baby. secondly, there is a house, and vronsky is fond of architecture, they subscribe to magazines, and she was there to read something to him to retell there is a household, and there is an upbringing that will pick up there is a school. in the end, or hospitals. you can find yourself there, but instead it's not terribly annoying, what vronsky spends on this time you say, but that part of e history, when a woman has already lost her reputation, she lost her son. and i'm telling you to start at the beginning of the novel. she carries with her a huge energy charge and thinks to whom it would be realized economically

and really think to whom to hand it over. she perfectly realizes shines in the light in petersburg, she already seems to me a recognized beauty, and we see. it is easy, but it breaks the grinding in the cookie completely, as it seems to me, well , in the most cruel way, knowing, tell me about this situation. well, they didn’t specifically tell me that she was dancing dancing. look at the whole situation built in general of this novel, that leo tolstoy m-m is very convincing. er, let's just say a convincing typing there, but also when you read it for the first time. i remember well, a and even the second one, and you believe everything she says and only after some definition i have so, yes a certain time. after reading, you pay attention to what is acceptable. she says god i love chrysanthemums so much, if you knew i love chrysanthemums. i would surround everything with chrysanthemum as soon as she is given a chrysanthemum. she was carrying them , throws them out, she sneezes from allergies. and that is , it happens to her. she tramples on these chrysanthemums, but at the same time, god, i love chrysanthemums so much , i can’t live without them, what a pity that i don’t have them. but uh, throw off such

a situation, she comes to reconcile, by the way, here is her brother, but also, in general, morally the quality of which left the wife, but did not leave climbing shifts with the maid. yes, there some one wrote curiously that leo tolstoy he often emphasizes this sibling, that here is a brother and sister from us satan. look, she 's reconciled with his wife. you say that says that she is a good bright person. she reconciled, reconciled her shares , they ask, and you would have forgiven anna's betrayal and immediately no, well, her first movement. it was written by leo tolstoy, and then she remembered that the world says it. well, yes. well, yes. you are also a moralist. yeah, well, in general probably yes, i think. what well, how can i say. you can love, you need to love, but you can’t lie to be hypocritical, you can change your life and you need

to change your life, you can’t. in doing so, destroy the lives of others and in tactile dirt. on the contrary, she tries to be all the time. uh straight from morning to night. she says what is convenient for her and when it is convenient for her when it comes to divorce. it’s not from her that you can’t get a word, and knees are asking from her. say what you want from her. he says voronsky should get a divorce, we should get married. you have a child, but she all the time, yulia is good, women are the most strict judge. right now i'm watching lina look at her and probably hard and incredibly incredibly hard and hmm kind of trying. that is, you remove yourself from it. here she is a figure that does something, something terrible to do, and so on. and try it. well, understand, at least the reviews that go and read or not on the book the true story by anna karenina, they mostly do not like negative women. korea, they are aggressive towards, indeed, moreover, people, well, women in age, who have experienced some kind of

life experience, have already understood that this is not an ancient shroud. well, it may already be such that some such maternal overbearing is already being born, that i know how to live, and i will speak. yes, i'll tell you how not to. here you do done badly and so on, then the man inside became roman, he was 44 years old. he was a mature man and mature, but at the same time still single, and even he did not treat her as hard as women treat her, after all, he is a young man and at the same time, he already a mature person, that is, patterns. i read the book and see that it is enough with his own eyes. you think, of course, let's uh, talk about the situation where a modern woman goes through a divorce. look. elina you divorced with two children similar to the root, no, i mean, not the situation. and in

the sense, then, well, yes, in general, yes, in general, there was such an experience. tell you. uh, as far as i know, this divorce was loud enough in the context of a dramatic environment, yes, dramatic. please tell us about how you lived it, maybe the origins of your relations with karenina lie. although maybe yes. you know, i do not think that the crime against karenin is in durter, and not in passion and not in love. if you can call it love, and i think the crime is that she manipulates people does not give them anything. and let's say, when i was going through a divorce, perhaps the most painful thing was that very moment when you cannot negotiate with a person. you offer these different times to yourself to the detriment of any of these and just expect a direct answer and direct action. but i think each of us it doesn't matter in a divorce, places in such a situation have come across once you get absolutely. this is the famous formula given double message, double message right? well, yes. well, you didn't guess. and you did wrong.

you went there and in general, of course, well, my situation doesn’t closely resemble a gift, but, nevertheless, you understand that we don’t touch the reasons at all. i just want to talk to you about whether your life has changed, you've uh gone through a divorce and we're talking about a modern context. kitty's story thank god that's all so it happened, so to speak, reading karenin's novel. you have the feeling that she describes the situation. this is what it could be like today, or do you feel the difference in times , these are the rules, of course, now there is a divorce. it's not at all it's not becoming a guy. you don't have to pass. oh my god what is it called. yes, make a decision through the church jesus. yes, explain why you are divorcing, yes, as a rule, this is adultery. there is a moment when, in fact, anna da started, and kari ready to take on the sirening was ready to take over this blow and tell the synod to get a divorce that for any it would seem that

she has all the cards in her hands there is a man who is ready. yes, take responsibility. notice, really, cool, yes, questions in general. well, you know come, yes, knees are perfectly fine. they both take care of her. can i contribute a large say. so historical can be here the fact is that the process of divorce in the xix century, it is more complicated than everything. today it's really harder in the event that a hmm adultery yeah accused anna she can't marry anymore legally and, accordingly, children cannot continue to live with her. that is, if indeed the situation is revealed, as it is. she loses the opportunity to marry bronninsky officially. and this is very important officially. so he can’t, respectively, keep the earring for himself, but the option that, under well , which steve persuades karenin and he agrees to this situation, when karenin takes the blame, respectively, he cannot

marry, but he agrees, and he can no longer in addition, imagine giving a ten-year-old child to be brought up by a woman, who cheated on you and lives in general with some strange man. well, stop it, he could look at this of a completely different quality . anna took advantage of such a generous offer from karenin; here i have such what she suits in that she is not a smart woman. well, wait, what is the mind? so she really didn’t want him to look noble on his knees, because everyone understood that he didn’t cheat on her and anyway she didn’t want to set her husband up like that, because she didn’t want to look stupid in this situation. that there she would like to know how heroin she is yes, and then she will come. yes, he still say, like a noble man. yes and what is already obtained? i'll cut off my mother's nose. let's try to answer the question. why did roman abadiultere become the pinnacle of world literature?

well, conditionally, yes, we will rely here on the authorities. i think there are a few things here. the first is, firstly, not only ball novels. that is, we take this line as the main one, but in fact, if you didn’t have so many in this novel interesting diverse characters each that develop somehow touches themselves. everyone has their own stories and in it we did not read any manifestations of life, then, well, this novel was not a bestseller. in my opinion. just a dulter line would not have given such an effect. and as for why this topic is here, yes it becomes? it seems to me outrageous roman territory, and at the same time it is the pinnacle of art. why do you say that, because alter is, let's say, forbidden love, right? that is, this is not open, not official love, forbidden as you know, yes, love is one of the brightest feelings and a person begins to manifest himself

in different ways and experiences very sharp emotions precisely because it is such a bomb in itself the concept of forbidden love, secret love. it's impossible there. yes, and it contains great energy in the situation itself and in those emotions that a person lives and the very feeling of love. this is euphoria and this is suffering. this is a lot of everything , therefore a lot, but for some reason it is anna karenina, e, who is considered a model of a very accurately and a lot, but it shows what happens to the person inside. i think this is psychology. it seems to me that this novel, in principle, is not even about love at all. but it seems to me that this is a novel of pride. interesting a. i think this is a romance of pride. everyone in this novel, he goes a long way and fights with his pride as best he can, in fact, and alexei karenina meets.

as a matter of fact, face to face with his pride, and uh, and kitty in general, the brightest. here you are truly brightening up the character, let's return to the base of the plot, someone does not go through this path and it leads him to the destruction of the whole world, because someone not about someone copes with certain, like too much potential that was used by the wrong one, but a great potential, but let's say, as it seems to me, not on the side good, tell me, do you think, uh, the charm of this novel is its mystery, its miracle, what is it? i think it's lovely if the heroine is a narcissist, do you think i really repeat myself, this is the path of a narcissist and a manipulator that each of us has encountered, or you can recognize yourself this a mirror, including a rather tough daffodil velikolets. and the destruction of the personality , the destruction of the personality, impunity, first , the destruction of the personality, and it was very rightly said. yes, she wants and she wants it to be brought to her, but this does not happen in life. and

this is where it ends? i'm just an old owl, and the oldest of you. and so, if we talk about love, and it is in this novel, but this is not the love of anna karenina, then i immediately recall the message of paul the apostle paul to the corinthians, love is long-suffering, love, mercy does not depend, does not envy, does not seek its own unthinking evil, and does not rejoice in unrighteousness , they will rejoice in the truth. and now i have a question, if we are talking about love anna high-calorie where in these words? she arkadyevna i don’t have an answer i also want to tell you about how i see why this novel still attracts attention interesting from my point of view hmm tolstoy as a moralist hmm wanted to make a story about what, uh, how bad it is to be your woman against communication. uh, and do some bullshit and end up with all the bad girls and gets its own punishment. yes, he painted

her, so to speak, as a bad mother and so on. that is, we can understand that a girl is a bad, bad, very girl, but it seems to me that e strength is a romance in that tolstoy, e, he still loves it like a man. fascinated by this sexual force that brings destruction with it. here, as a goddess, potassium , you understand that if this is a simple woman , they meet with such a woman and come from several women who give birth to children. they are a good mother tolstoy admires, of course, but his soul yearns for such women, both she and i believe that this is a wonderful portrait of a femme fatale, based on such a paradox of the author. well, of course, otherwise such a magnificent romance of a girl would not have happened. thank you for coming to me. this was a must-read podcast. i had art critics visiting. lina grinchina and writer ekaterina barbanyaga. i am the director of the writer, most importantly batnikov's presenter.