Anna Karenina

What can be said about a classic? Simply that it was beautifully written. Its fluidity of expression made me glide across page after page without effort, relishing each sentence for its uncanny ability to express. I rarely come across a book that reads itself! Anna Karenina was all that and much more. It was a book that covered not only all elements of style, but of theme and characterization as well.

Anna Karenina covers the drama around Anna's life as she steps into a world of affairs and deception. Swept off her feet by the charming Count Vronsky, Anna, a married woman, finds herself moving away from all that she has known and into the life of a social outcast. We follow her through the initial deception, later revelation and final despair. Life is not all glamor and gold in the upper sphere - something we are shown through the eyes of the various characters. Side by side to this story, we have that of Kitty, a young unsophisticated girl who, rejected by Vronsky, finds herself questioning her choices and feelings of love.......

Anna Karenina fascinated me mostly because of its realism - or so I imagine life would be in the Russian upper class. I found myself drawn into the various scandals, behaviors and accepted norms of the society. The representation of the characters and their actions was satisfyingly realistic. You were sure that it could have happened in no other way. The emotions felt by Anna, by Vronsky, Levin and Kitty were those people in similar situations have felt and never been able to put into words. When you find an author who has the ability to express those intangible thoughts and feelings, reading becomes a pleasure.

As one critic puts it, "we do not judge: we watch".

Les Miserables

Les Miserables is one of the greatest classics in French Literature. Written in the nineteenth century by Victor Hugo, it covers many of the highs and lows of the time, its instability and the miseries of the lower stratum. The time period in the novel covers the aftermath of the French Revolution and Napolean's rule. With a violent history behind it, and more bloodshed yet to come, Victor Hugo shows through one man, the shaping of a whole new society.

Jean Valjean, a young peasant condemned to 19 years in prison, finds his mind broadening after meeting Bishop Myriel despite the years of ignorance that have warped it. Faced with honesty and goodness, he is forced to review his life and begins the journey towards greatness. Where one man who has never known the light, fights against generations of darkness, others will soon follow. Jean Valjean goes through struggle after struggle in Victor Hugo's stupendous novel, finds himself thrown back, yet perseveres against all odds.

At times, the length of the novel and the long pages of history and architectural lessons forced me to skip (a lot!) of the sections, but I found the story pulling me through it all. It was amazing to read how Jean Valjean faced life, how he, an uneducated peasant with nothing except his two hands, educated and broadened his mind, his knowledge and his wisdom - not only for himself, but for others. There were set backs which made it only all the more real. This was no easy walk in the park, but a struggle against his darker self and that of others. It took great courage and strength to become the man he at last becomes.

Now I hear that the novel is being turned into a film starring Hugh Jackman as the famous hero Jean Valjean, Russel Crowe as his main antagonist Javert, Anne Hathaway as Fantine, and Amanda Seyfried as Cosette. I look forward to watching it!

The Phantom of the Opera

The opera is haunted: so learn the new owners on the eve of their becoming managers. Choosing to view it as a practical joke, Monsieurs Richard and Moncharmin refuse to take the Opera Ghost seriously. The demands of money, the reservation of Box Five - all these things seem like a way to get money out of the managers. But things reach a dangerous peak when a death occurs - orchestrated by the Phantom; or so everyone believes. Who is this mysterious phantom and how does he make his presence felt without ever being seen? Is the Opera House really haunted? or is there some mysterious figure lurking in the depths of the building?

It is young Christine Daae who first discovers the lair of the Opera Ghost. Her actions and consequent disappearance causes Raoul, her childhood friend, to investigate with the help of the mysterious Persian who seems to know all that is going on.....

Spoilers
Weird, improbable, yet oddly fascinating - that's how I found The Phantom of the Opera. The whole concept of the entire underground system of the opera seems unreal, and yet it is actual fact! The phantom, or 'Opera Ghost' is an uncanny creature who pops up here and there keeping the workers at the opera on their toes and rules like a king. His various gifts, cultivated in the face of his hideous face, allowed him to haunt the opera. His ventriloquism, his penchant for building traps and contraptions - all aided him in his mysterious home underneath the Opera House.

Poor Erik. I was more inclined to say 'Poor Christine and Raoul'; but then I didn't know Erik's story before he took to haunting the Opera. Erik wasn't the normal hero you would feel sympathy for: he was cruel, sadistic, evil and selfish, but all the while you felt his handicap and pitied him. His psychological representation was eerie and he fluctuated between despair and intense devotion. His obsession with Christine Daae leads to his downfall and also unlocks the little good left in him.

This book is a part of my New Author Challenge 2012. The Phantom of the Opera is my first book by Gaston Leroux and was a good experience. I just might pick up other books by him.

Manon Lescaut

"The memory of such women as Helen and Cleopatra has haunted men down the ages, especially when the evil of their lives and the weakness of men who have succumbed to their spell have been visited by a terrible retribution. Such a woman is Manon Lescaut, whose story has been translated into most of the languages of the western world, whose power over the unfortunate Des Grieux has inspired the operas of Auber, Puccini and Massenet."

This introduction was enough to get me interested in Manon Lescaut. I wanted to read what type of woman it was that could be compared to the greats Helen and Cleopatra. I was somewhat disappointed. Although the book is not entirely boring, I found nothing entrancing in Manon Lescaut and the devoted worship with which Des Grieux pursued her and put up with every unfaithfulness wearied me.

Des Grieux is in love with a fickle creature; a woman he worships desperately but whom he cannot see for what she really is. I was (sometimes) moved to pity because of his indefatigable attraction to Manon, an attraction that costs him much more than just money, but the story shown through his eyes bored me with its constant repetition. Once, twice, thrice he falls for her charm and her beauty! I couldn't stand such blindness. The book vividly shows how the obsession of love can get hold of a man and degrade him beyond his imagination. That is what Des Grieux goes through. He can't break free - hence his constant relapse. Manon is like a drug to him. Although short in length, the novel seemed overly long and I was glad when I had finished it!

I read the English translation of the novel by L. W. Tancock. The style and the whole atmosphere reminded me of The Three Musketeers (which is also a French novel). While reading, I saw how Des Grieux and all his acquaintances viewed love in that time; all the evils committed when the hero was under its spell are pardonable apparently! It was obviously the normal way of thinking that thefts, murder and assault could happen and be easily pardoned when one is in love!

One thing I will say is that despite his constancy and the affection Des Grieux showed Manon, and the inconstancy and unfaithfulness she returned him, I liked her much better than him. She wasn't so annoying!

Manon Lescaut was my second pick for My Blind Date With a Book Feature, and it was a bigger disappointment than the first (see HERE). I didn't enjoy the story, the characters, or the writing style. I would rate this number 1. Hated it. No second date possible. Abbe Prevost tired me out, and at this moment, I don't intend to read another book by him. Let's see what the future says.

The Three Musketeers

D'Artagnan, a young Gascon youth, sets out from his village with the hope of joining the regiment of the King's Musketeers. As soon as he arrives in Paris he gets into trouble, first entangling himself in one, then two and finally three duels, all in one day! And with men from the very regiment of Musketeers he had hoped to join! But his adventures don't stop there; before long, he becomes involved with the affairs of the Queen, Anne of Austria, herself and must enlist the help of his fellow Musketeers Athos, Porthos and Aramis. Together, the four friends journey through France escaping from the nets of the Cardinal and his dangerous spy, Milady, while all the time fighting duels at the slightest provocation.

I love the summary given at the back of the Wordsworth edition. It describes the book perfectly,

"One of the most celebrated and popular historical romances ever written. The Three Musketeers tells the story of the early adventures of the young Gascon gentleman. D'Artagnan, and his three friends from the regiment of the King's Musketeers - Athos, Porthos and Aramis.


Under the watchful eye of their patron M. de Treville, the four defend the honor of the regiment against the guards of the Cardinal Richelieu, and the honor of the queen against the machinations of the Cardinal himself as the power struggles of seventeenth-century France are vividly played out in the background.


But their most dangerous encounter is with the Cardinal's spy, Milady, one of literature's most memorable female villains, and Alexandre Dumas employs all his fast-paced narrative skills to bring this enthralling novel to a breathtakingly gripping and dramatic conclusion."

The characterization in this novel - especially of Milady and Athos - was so good that I actually wanted to meet the characters! The movie on The Three Musketeers does not do justice to either character. Milady reaches depths of evil and horror which aren't shown in the film. All we see is an ambitious young woman who despite what she does, loved someone once and wasn't truly evil. But in the novel, the description of Milady and the suppressed animal within, how she is able to ensnare anyone while putting on an act, her ability to sense every weakness in man - all are so wonderfully drawn. As for Athos, he is shown as the true nobleman that he is, and his quiet way of handling even the most alarming of situations makes him particularly attractive while at the same time remaining mysteriously charming. Though not the hero of the novel, he is the most important character and the leader of the Musketeers; Keith Wren, in his introduction to The Three Musketeers sums it up when he writes,

"For Dumas - and for us - it is the three musketeers - Athos, Porthos, Aramis - who represent the fantasy of eternal youth, a refusal to compromise with the greyness of the modern world, the glorification of the undying spirit of adventure."

I keep forgetting that The Three Musketeers is historical fiction. The Cardinal Richelieu, King Louis XIII and Queen Anne were actual historical figures, as was the Duke of Buckingham and his murderer, Felton. Alexandre Dumas has fashioned a unique story with these real live characters. It was rumored that the Duke was in love with the Queen of France (this is also mentioned in The King's General), and in this novel the flirtation was embellished, with Queen Anne and the Duke having many secret meetings. The various love triangles in this novel make for a lot of intrigues, a lot of duels, and most of all, a lot of jealousy!