Sure ya do slavefucker

never let up

also Tolstoy wasn't a crazy stalker who was "addicted" to weed

Tolstoy sucks.

From the Wikipedia article on Anna Karenina: "Fyodor Dostoyevsky declared it "flawless as a work of art." His opinion was shared by Vladimir Nabokov, who especially admired "the flawless magic of Tolstoy's style," and by William Faulkner, who described the novel as "the best ever written."

>I deeply wonder, who is more likely to be right, the writers listed above, or a few resentful virgins on a forum?

/thread.

>listening to a hack like Dostoevsky
>listening to a pedophile
sure looks like you're a fuckin' pleb.

I rest my case.

>slavefucker
What's the problem? Personally speaking, I'd gladly be his little slave bitch boy.

>raping slaves
It's not rape. Slaves are mine to use as I please. Stop being a beta faggot.

all these fuckers can't see what's right in front of their pedophile eyes.

it's also incredibly disgusting to see how many people are willing to be edgy about a man who fucked slaves, many of them children.

Stop ruining Tolstoy for me you cunts.

no. he's trash.

When Tolstoy was thirty two, on September 23rd 1862, following a hurried courtship, he married Sophia Andreevna Behrs, then a girl of sixteen, whom he brutally raped on their wedding night. More cruelly, he compelled this inexperienced young girl to read his diaries, with all their sordid details of his exploits as a frequenter of brothels and sexual exploiter of gypsies, serfs, female servants, and the wives of his colleagues. The diaries, which covered a period of 20 years, also include the account of his contraction and treatment of gonorrhoea.

Harold Bloom thinks Tolstoy is on the same level as Homer.

>When Tolstoy compares himself to Homer we are persuaded, as no other post-Homeric writer could persuade us. Whether as prophet or as moralist, Tolstoy remains both an epic figure and a creator of epic .... he must be read in the company of Homer, the Yahwist, Dante, and Shakespeare, as perhaps the only writer since the Renaissance who can challenge them.

-- Harold Bloom, The Western Canon

Also see pic related from his book Genius.

how quaint. Tolstoy is still a heap of dogshit.

>I cannot separate the man from the work

People in general are shit. Good luck no longer receiving gratification from any art ever again.

equating a person who might shit on themselves in the subway or might throw a rock through someone's window to someone who raped slaves on the regular and raped gonorrhea into a little girl seems a little rich. some people are utter trash, and it fouls the highly moralistic bullshit he feeds to people in his poisoned work. but you go ahead and idolize a serial rapist cuz he right gude.

> thirty two
34
> sixteen
18

Don't tell me it's not intentional, bud.

> raped on their wedding night
Everyone knows that your wife is your property, and no rape is possible after wedding.

> he compelled this inexperienced young girl to read his diaries
Before wedding, as a form of being sincere. (And share the responsibility for the rushed wedding with totally surprised girl, I suppose. Heh.)

Moreover, it was not generally possible to say "Give me this woman!" in Tolstoy's times, no matter what kind of aristocrat you were. He met and seduced women (or was seduced by them) on occasions sanctioned by society, and it was no more (and no less) wrong than what happens in modern day night clubs.

Actually, Tolstoy's diaries give an honest picture of sexual frustration of young adults and several ways they release it in an oppressive society with a religious facade, and therefore they should be easily understood (at least in that little part) by your average imageboard poster.

>it's all right guys, raping your wife is fine!
stopped there, vile pleb. I don't read the trash works of rapists.

...

I don't understand your culture well enough to get the joke.

> raped gonorrhea into a little girl

No, he raped the fetus into some girl, OK, but it was a daughter of Eve who raped gonorrhea into him.

Oh I didn't realize you weren't part of acivilized country where women weren't chattel. I did detect a bit of ESL in your sentence structure. Anyway, I doubt there's anything that could be said to someone with such an insurmountable barrier as the gap between civilization and the third world to convince them that they are acting inhumanely towards a woman by treating them as slaves without rights. The picture is commonly used to ridicule two types, atheists, and edgelords. Some have even tried to turn it towards white knights. In this instance you would be considered an edgelord, if not for your handicap of barely being a human.

The Kreutzer Sonata is right on everything and is a redpill.

another display of your inhumanity! i will leave you to your devices.

Good job identifying the false (to a point) equivalency that I made; yes, some people are worse than others. The truth of my general statement still stands, however, and most importantly, the futility of conflating, to the point of being coterminous, the maker and the work. Learning how to uncouple the two to a degree is something that most teenagers figure out on their own.

Did you, at any point in your life, ever enjoy listening to a Michael Jackson song? If not, we can keep going until hit on just the right depraved/flawed creator. You see where I'm going with this.

More to the point: I don't take /your/ moralfaggotry, specifically, seriously, at all. Not for one second. And why? /Because you're posting here, of all places/. You're consenting to continue to use this forum. If you were really serious about your moralfaggotry, you would discontinue using this website, of all sites, immediately. But of course you're not, which is exactly what enables you to continue posting here.

Are "edgelords" fans of Michael Jackson? I am also a fan, but I don't wear a hat that looks like his.

Before you start talking about children again: we had those "Michael Jackson & Kids" photobooks sold freely on press stands, and I haven't seen naked MJ and naked kid on the same photo in any of them. Individually, yes. Together, never. Please don't slander the dead person.

ah but i am an embattled paragon of my rectitude.
this to me is a battlefield, not a place for pleasure, for the pleasure of reading the filth and trash of mongrels such as yourself, tirelessly justifying art at the expense of child rape, or what have you. I have happily deprived myself of any art that does not meet my standards of righteousness in their core, the artist. no man is separate from his creation, not even god's creations are separate from him. there are some sins i see as relatively harmless to an extent, that i am willing to forgive, and potentially enjoy their works, however, to believe somehow that if i refuse to read the work of a serial rapist, and defy all who love him, and attempt to transform their perceptions of his vile filth, that i am somehow limiting myself, gimping myself of the utmost pleasure of life, then you are gravely mistaken. i truly enjoy doing my best to lay low the idolatry of rapists.

you, uh, i don't think you're able to understand english well enough to have a conversation on this matter. I'm sorry.

Seeing your posts lacking capital letters, I suppose you have all the reasons to be sorry for not understanding English well enough, too.

capitalization is not entirely necessary, the fact that i can convey my point fairly concisely (if a bit pompously) even without capitalization is evidence of at least an intermediate level of understanding and application. your post in question is fairly bizarre, it's very strangely formed and difficult to decipher, though i understand, it seems as though you misunderstood who you were speaking to, as well as your inability to make a reasonable point in relation to what we're discussing.

This thread is a perfect example of the autistic contrarianism of Veeky Forums's userbase.

You should really read both of their diaries, if only for their span of forty years together.

thanks for your addition, faggot.

You're quite welcome.

>being against child and slave rape is contrarian

a man after my own heart. fight on fellow paladin.

Just wanted to say that despite all of your complaints and mincing faggotry, Tolstoy still sucks.

He was a good writer, actually.

you still think this is about the writing itself.
anyway, that anna karenina drivel was a melodramatic soap opera with a religious moral message on par with "roasties btfo" when he was such a slave to his reproductive organs that he literally raped his serfs. the only thing good about his writing is that it can be contained in a book and avoided quite easily.

Tolstoy sucks.

only cucks think tolstoy sucks

only cucks think that people who think tolstoy sucks are cucks.

only cucks are as autistic as you

only a cuck would say that.

He looks really manly.

his rapist virility overfloweth from the constant exposure to the virginal blood of innocents.

Faulkner read the Garnett translation and not P&V.

Pretty embarrassing way to think.
How do you feel about AK?

right? unabashedly relying completely on others to make up his mind for him. what a pinhead.

go to bed, knut

whaddhesayontolstoy?

I read and loved Anna Karenina before I knew what any of those three authors thought about it, but why would I merely give my own opinion when it is clear it alone won't be valued by any of the obscenely dismissive moralisers on this thread?

Both times I read Anna Karenina I was several times moved to tears by nothing more than the purity and benevolence of Tolstoy's descriptions. I do not believe that a truly nasty man would be capable of writing in such a powerfully humane way. But let's say he was not a good man because he could not control his libido (which is what you have been saying), would that really diminish the clear beauty of his works?

None of us are completely virtuous all of the time, many of us become kinder precisely because we have inner guilt and repent for past misdeeds.

>child fucker who raped slaves is incapable of writing about a couple of kids sharing fucking cake
you're a naive fucker, arencha, you know that some evil people are highly manipulative, right? hell, that's not even an emotionally fulfilling scene. man i'm disappointed in you.
"none of us are completely virtuous all the time"
how well you pare down RAPING SLAVES. you fucking people are fine with all the horrendous deeds of mankind as long as you're far enough away that you can insulate yourselves from the truth.
>oh here let me show you what Nabokov the child fucker thinks about this slave fucker
the fucking irony, friend. the fucking irony.

He writes women as if they were dogs. Pure instinct

Maude?

Hey fellows. I read resurrection and liked it, especially for the prose. Is Anna Karenina just a long ass soap opera or

also,
>control his libido
jumping jack on a cracker christ.
if your mother were raped right now, would you be capable of reading a book written by the predator, shrugging dismissively with a "well, he just couldn't control his libido, but look how clearly he expresses children sharing cake!" I fucking doubt it, bub. I genuinely doubt you would be able to separate yourself from the reality of the situation. That the art is utterly tainted by the acts of the creator, because it is never somehow individual as art from its creator. Art is an expression, a communication, it's something that would not and can not exist without the intent of the creator. Anyfuckingway, no you'll wave away all this cuz Mr Rapist made you a little weepy when you read his story.

Could you give me your sources please? I can't find any evidence that suggests Tolstoy fucked children or that he raped his serfs (I know one of his serfs bore him a child but I've never read that he was a rapist).

I knew you wouldn't appreciate the passage, for if you were capable of appreciating it you would not have posted this fatuous thread in the first place.

If you think any writer can write as well as Tolstoy did you're delusional.

No that's the P&V version, I haven't read Maude yet but I will.

i don't really give a shit if tolstoy raped slaves or not, he was a good writer

From his own wife's diary, as well as several articles if you're willing to do a bit of googling. it's not a contested claim about Tolstoy abusing women regularly.
adifferentvoice.wordpress.com/tag/tolstoy/
“I could only hear … his breath, hasty, frequent, passionate. Conquered by his power and intensity, I was obedient and loving, although crushed by the agonising physical pain and unbearable humiliation. And again, again, all night, the same attempts, the same sufferings.

First of all, though I do not find sickly sentimentality somehow appealing especially from the pen of a rapist, it does not mean I cannot appreciate the finer emotions one might have in life. Though, I don't really see any need to defend myself from someone who seems to care very little about the true message and morality behind the works. You, like many others, are bound by your love for aesthetics. I do not find Tolstoy's writing nearly as beautiful as say, Herman Melville's. I'm dreadfully sorry that it has to come down to an opinion on style, when I have truly made no comments on his ability as a writer, merely that he writes soap operas with morals that he himself doesn't even agree with, or live by. Nothing in that convinces me to weep at his literature, perhaps weep over the suffering he caused as a monster, but not his rendition of a dimestore harlequin romance.

here's the real truth of the matter. people are willing to trade rape for art. it's that simple.

You also said he was a pedophile, do you have any credible sources for that claim? I will read the blog post and reply properly later when I have more spare time.

Great artists are sometimes shitty people, John Lennon and Salvador Dali being two examples. Grow up, and try to understand why people are the way they are rather than simply judging, condemning and dismissing them. Only love can destroy hate, after all.

Melville is amazing, but is he superior to Tolstoy? Maybe in English he is, but Tolstoy is undeniably more influential across the world, and he is widely considered Russia's greatest writer in the same way that Shakespeare is considered England's. If his writing did not have irreplaceable value it would not have survived as long as it has.

yes yes, i'll let the idolater of a rapist chide me and tell me to grow up as soon as the moon starts shooting apples at the sun.

you're just like all the others, willing to trade a rape for a book. I don't live well near your type, and such refined disgust as mine will be reserved for your existence and for those like you. I must say as well that you completely ignore arguments and offer nothing of worth that has not been said again and again in opposition to me. You can't even address the idea of art's inability to be separate from its creator.
Go on, weep for your cakes. Don't weep for the rapes though, that would be far too human.

also, i must say, the naive platitude
>Only love can destroy hate, after all.
is utter bullshit that only shows that I'm not the one that needs to grow up. One day you might do so, and see the grim landscape of reality, and I do hope you're prepared.

and you know, another point i must make, the mere idea of resisting a potential gain of a beautiful piece of art, the gain of an incredible achievement, to resist it for the love of a fellow human being, to resist the idea that somehow in the course of this art's creation, there was the necessary sacrifice of a person's livelihood, their innocence, a sacrifice of their dignity and mental wellbeing, to say no to this gain, in an attempt to protect and love my fellow man is far more poignant and meaningful than your bullshit "let's appreciate the art while we can, even when it's leaning on that pile of dead bodies". That's not love. That's willful and decadent ignorance.

you're a fruit and a pompous tool

you sure did sway me, friend.

you can't convince someone who doesn't want to be convinced

and yet i still try because i do genuinely care about showing people the truth.

Jesus, your Melville boner really shows in your prose.

well thanks for the compliment! I haven't read Melville in well over a year and wasn't attempting to mimic him in any way. Perhaps you're reading too far into my style of writing in an attempt to attack me in some way. I don't really know, or care. Thanks again though, Melville huh?

One of the common themes among these authors in the 19th and 20th century is that they struggle with the meaningless of life.
They try to frame it as being because of some kind of logical argument while the truth is it's all completely arbitrary and what is really going is that it's just their particular lives that happen to be meaningless because they are, as Christianity puts it, damned to hell.

I recently read Moby Dick (loved it) and reading your post reminded me of something Ishmael would write. Take that as you will.

Yeah, I really did love moby dick too. Hope melville wasn't a rapist. That'd suck. anyway, i'll take it in a positive light, sorry if i was defensive, i've been arguing in this thread since its inception, so i have to be ready. I don't think I deserve it though, to be honest. Anyhow, I genuinely do think what I say in this thread, I do think I am held hypocritical at my own words, and understand the irony of accusing and judging Tolstoy, (though at a much less extreme of hypocrisy). I don't make these comments lightly, though some of them made with a cynical and satirical bite. I do really think the mere acts of some completely poison the very act of art as communication. Especially such charged works as Tolstoy's, it all just seems too unfortunate to read it. I don't particularly care for his work anyway, so it's not much of a loss for me, I prefer Gogol and Turgenev by far. I'm looking forward to reading some Chekhov soon, I expect great things. I must turn in, I do hope someone takes up the mantle of justice I have held so valiantly from sunset til the cock's call, perhaps some will, plenty, as I know, won't. It won't make my words any less true, I feel. Goodnight, all.

Nope, it's because you're a simpleton who can't handle nuance. If you really were such a kind lover of humanity you would be able to understand that people are more complicated than good and evil, that many kind people have also been cruel in their lives and regret it. If your discourse has proved anything, it is that you are resentful and unforgiving of humanity, and for that reason I suspect you a lot more capable of cruelty than those who can forgive.

>X famous person was a shitty person in real life
>Oh no now I can never enjoy anything their tainted hands have touched again!
ITT: Rowling fans try to justify their inability to read W&P.

>melville
bloated and biblical, also boring

In Tolstoy's ideal world, he would have raped those kids after they finished the cake.
>If you think any writer can write as well as Tolstoy did you're delusional.
He was a bad writer and I doubt you can even read Russian, so why the hell do you think you have a right to an opinion? You're reading Tolstoy through a fucking translator, not Tolstoy.
>john lennon and salvador dali are great artists
Okay, back to /b/ please.

Art is not separate from its creator, to think otherwise is pure naivety. It's an enlightenment meme: the idea that one can be objective and distant from their work.
>nuance
Child rape is not nuanced.

I sincerely doubt he has ever regretted an action, and I sincerely doubt he is forgiven.

Tolstoy's even worse.

Was Tolstoy really a "rapist" or are these fags just making this up? I'm not seeing any sources.

Where is your evidence that he raped children?

we'll he didn't rape me so I will continue enjoying his work thanks. I'm callous like that

There's absolutely no evidence whatsoever that he was a pedophile/child rapist. He may have raped his wife at the beginning of their relationship but this cannot be confirmed with any certainty.

It's a really strange lie to be pushing. I'm not finding any mention of it on the Web either.

Your claims are worth nothing if you can't back them up.