Anna Karenina: Wherever the hell I am in this book

Finally! Anna Karenina has arrived! And no, I'm not being sarcastic. In the book, she's finally arrived as a character. Apparently she's a friend of Vronsky's mother. It's actually weird how everyone knows each other... I mean, the story starts with Stiva, who's married to Dolly. He's friends with Levin, who loves Dolly's sister, Kitty. However, he has a rival for Kitty's heart: Vronsky. And of course, Vronsky's mother just happens to be friends with Anna, Stiva's sister. Whoever doesn't find this weird is just weird themselves. But anyways, after he meets Anna, someone dies--a worker is run over by a train. Of course, she finds this as a bad omen, just as the reader should: it seems to be a foreshadow for the rest of the book considering the book is suppose to be about adultery. And yes, I did look up the basic theme of the book before I started reading it.

Anna Karenina: The Begining

I'm not so sure what I'm going to call entries after this one, considering Anna Karenina is such a long book and a lot of the book can be considered the beginning. Yet, I really don't care all that much... Anyways, I've read Part 1 of Anna Karenina, which is chapters I through XVII or, for those people who don't know what that means, 1 through 17. While that may seem like a lot, take into mind that there are 7 parts, each with about thirty chapters each. So yes, the chapters are very short. Anyways, even after reading all these chapters, I've yet to meet this book's namesake: Anna Karenina herself. While learning about Levin, Kitty, Stephen (aka Stiva), Dolly, Vronsky, Nikolai and Konznyshev is interesting, I really just want to know about Anna Karenina. I mean, I'm already halfway through Part 1 and she still hasn't been introduced! I'm starting to question why the book is named after her at all if she comes into the story so late, for a main character that is. This in itself makes me want to read the book more, since Leo Tolstoy's writing style in interesting. I espically love the point of view. I mean, most books now days are written in limited third person or first person, simply because of psychology: modern readers are interested in knowing the psychology behind the characters and want to relate. However, at the time Leo Tolstoy was writing, readers were more interested in the third person omnicient point of view, hence he wrote in that style. Not having read anything quite like it, I read it at first just beause of this. But while I was timid at the begining because it was written in third person omnicent, now I want to read it simply because of the point of view. I'm not sure exactly why, but this point of view really appeals to me. Maybe it's because I don't have to worry about whether I have to trust the narrator or not, or maybe it's because the writer can switch characters without a hitch. Either way, I find it simply amazing and yet another good aspect about this book. Other than that, I don't think I'll have much to say until Anna Karenina herself is introduced. So tata for now!

Starting Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy

While I was looking for a new book the other day, my dad recommended this book to me. Being the teenager I am, at first I didn't even know what this famous book was. Yet, when I learned where and when it was written, I was suddenly interested. However, I didn't ask about the storyline at all and just dove right into the novel. Right away I was suspended in a dream, the first line even captivating me with it's jarring words: "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way". To me these words seemed weird words to start a book with, making me read the line a couple of times. Finally, I got past my surprise and jumped into the book, long names and all. The first character I met was Prince Stephen Arkadyevinch Oblonsky--trying saying that name five times fast! He himself is an intriguing character, brutally honest to himself and the others around him. He's certain more interesting than his wife, Dolly. She's a pitiful creature who's trying to deal with the fact that her husband was having an affair, trying to make believe that she'll leave him even when she loves him too much to do so; while she's a relatable character that probably attracts readers, I just don't like her. She's too much of a sob-story for me to like her. Anyways, getting off the topic of Dolly, it intrigues me that I haven't met Anna Karenina yet. While I'm only on page twenty since I've reread about every page I've read, she's suppose to be the main character. So why haven't I met her yet? With that question I bid you ado, for I have other homework to do.

Dropping Change of Heart

While this is an unconventional blog entry, I just have to drop the book. As I explained last time, the characters are really 2-dimensional. I mean, the characters don't grow at all! And as I've explained to my English teacher and my friend, Kristen, when I read a book I read it for the characters. That's why I just can't continue reading this book! So, Kristen, if you're reading this, you're welcome to tell me the ending because I want to know what it is but I can't stand reading this book any longer. And Ms. Bandman, I'm sorry about dropping a book. The last time I did this was when I read "The Life of Pi", which was in what, 7th grade? Anyways, I'm sorry but I just can't read a book with characters that never grow.

Change of Heart Entry # 2: Critsizing Time!

I've got to say, this book has gotten interesting. But for some reason, I don't want to talk about that. Instead, I'd rather talk about the thoughts this book provokes by using Shay. I mean, here we are, in other people's points of view (the best being Lucius in my opinion) watching Shay, a convicted murder, preform miracles in prison such as bringing a bird back to life and turning the water in the plumbing to wine. While these acts make the reader question religion, they also make Jodi Picoult seem like a bit of a showoff as a writer, proving that she can have a character do all of these amazing feats and still write a good book. This undertone leaves a bad taste for me, though not enough where I'd want to stop reading the book. However, it did make me stop reading for a while. You see, I'm one of those people who will read for hours on end until I have to do something, or I get knocked down from my cloud. These moments did just that, making me want to put down the book for a little while. After all, who likes it when an author does things like that? Well, I know that I don't. Maybe that's why the book is never in Shay's point of view (at least so far anyways), but is instead in the POV of Maggie, Lucius and other characters.

Talking about the characters, they all seem to be undeveloped, even my favorite, Lucius. Because in my opinion, Jodi Picoult seems to be describing the characters and breathing life into them, hooking the reader at first, but then shows no development or growth at all, making each chapter more boring than the last. In addition, the only character that's relatable is Maggie. I mean, most people can't relate to the cliche sob story June and Claire went through, not many people are priests questioning their faith like Michael, and I'm pretty sure that most people reading this book aren't convicted murders like Lucius (though if a convicted murder is reading this book, I'd definitely want to meet him or her). So if you can't relate to Maggie's feeling of wanting to prove herself, then you can't relate to any of the characters in this book at all. This is enough to make readers drop the book, if they can't find anything else to be interested in that is. While I myself have found an interest in Lucius (who wouldn't be interested in a gay guy who killed his lover because he was cheating on him?), that may not be the case for others and it makes me wonder what Jodi Picoult was thinking while she was developing her characters.

So there we go, those are what I consider to be the bad points of the book so far. That doesn't mean that I don't like the book, I would have dropped it if I didn't like it, and it doesn't mean that I have nothing good to say about the book, these are just some complaints about the book so far. Anyone who would like to disagree with me can go right ahead, since after all, each person has her own opinion. So for now this is Rebecca Fishman, finishing her blog entry! And wondering, besides what Jodi Picoult was thinking when she didn't develop her character, why news anchors talk in third person when "signing off".