Am I Willing to Stand Up for My Beliefs?

At some point in a person’s life they will have to ask themselves, “What do I believe?” and “Am I willing to stand up for my beliefs?” To believe something privately is one thing, but it is another thing to take a public stand regarding one’s belief, especially if there is a large element of risk involved once those beliefs are made known.

In 1905, Lev Tolstoy (1828-1910), author of such works as “War and Peace” and “Anna Karenina” wrote an editorial piece entitled “Bethink Yourselves” regarding the Russo-Japanese War. This piece was banned in Russia on the grounds that it was declared ‘unpatriotic’ by the Czar’s government; however, it was published in ‘The London Times’. As a public figure, he felt the need to speak out. He wrote, “"Again war. Again sufferings, necessary to nobody, utterly uncalled for; again fraud, again the universal stupefaction and brutalization of men "Men who are separated from each other by thousands of miles, hundreds of thousands of such men (on the one hand—Buddhists, whose law forbids the killing not only of men but of animals ; on the other hand—Christians, professing the law" of brotherhood and love), like wild beasts on land and on sea are seeking out each other in order to kill, torture, and mutilate each other in the most cruel way. What can this be? Is it a dream or a reality? Something is taking place which should not, cannot be; one longs to believe that it is a dream and to awake from it. But no, it is not a dream, it is a dreadful reality!"“ 1

The Russo-Japanese War was part of the backdrop of the 2017 film, “Anna Karenina: Vronsky’s Story” directed by Russian director Karen Shakhnazarov (b. 1952). Alexei Vronsky, Anna Karenina’s lover, is reflecting upon his relationship with Anna thirty years after Anna’s death at the Saint Petersburg train station. Vronsky and Anna’s relationship was largely a war between them (which did not end well), Vronsky spent the rest of his life running from one war to another after Anna died, and the Russo-Japanese War certainly was not a rousing success for the Russian government since the 1905 Revolution followed as a result.

Karen Shakhnazarov is aware of all of this; however, he still chose to publicly support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 by signing a letter to that effect. He is not alone in his support of the war, in fact, 511 artists signed a letter in 2014 supporting Russia’s invasion of Crimea and the Donbas Region of Ukraine. However, the questions still remain, “Why do I really believe?” and “Can I genuinely stand up for my beliefs?”

In 2005, Russian director Vladimir Bortko (b. 1946) directed a ten part mini-series for Russia-1, the premier government owned television station, entitled “The Master and Margarita” based upon the classic novel of the same name by author Mikhail Bulgakov (1891-1940).

This novel is filled with satire regarding the Soviet government of the 1930s. In fact, the publication of the novel was banned in the Soviet Union until it was published in serial form in 1966. Mikhail Bulgakov, a writer and medical doctor, had serious health issues and petitioned Joseph Stalin’s government for permission to move to Paris, France with the rest of his family in order to receive the medical attention he needed. This request was denied and Bulgakov ended up dying in Moscow at the age of 48.

The mini-series “The Master and Margarita” remained very faithful to Bulgakov’s novel since it was done over ten episodes and could go into much more depth than a 90 minute or so film in the movie theater.

Another extremely satiric piece about the Soviet Union by Mikhail Bulgakov was made into a television movie by Vladimir Bortko in 1988. The novella and film are entitled “Heart of a Dog”, the story of a stray dog who is transformed into a man by a surgeon simply to see if it is possible to transform a dog by implanting human testes and a pituitary gland into a dog. The dog, who is given the name Poligraf Poligrafovich Sharikov, after becoming human, appears to be representative of the most base attitudes of Soviet society in the 1920s. This novella was written in 1925, but not officially released in the Soviet Union until 1987.

Vladimir Bortko knew what this novel and novella were about. He saw how they satirized the dictatorial Russian government of their day; however, he still chose to sign the letter in support of Russia’s 2014 invasion of Crimea and the Donbas Region. From where is this disconnect coming? These are not the actions of the Master, but of Berlioz, the head of Massolit, who published only those pieces which the government found acceptable.

Speaking out against the government, especially one which encourages imprisoning opponents, is a risky undertaking. Actress Liya Akhedzhakova (b. 1938), who starred In such films as “Office Romance” and “The Irony of Fate” is an outspoken critic of contemporary Russian culture and the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. In April 2023. Russian- and English-language independent news website, Meduza, reported that Vitaly Borodin, head of the Federal Security and Anti-Corruption Project, is asking Russia’s Prosecutor General to launch a criminal case against Akhedzhakova. He claims, Akhedzhakova has criticized “the state organs’ and the president’s decisions and policies with regard to the war by Russia in Ukraine. Akhedzhakova denies the allegations. This is tantamount to being declared a ‘foreign agent’, as what done in the Soviet Union during the time of Joseph Stalin.

Silence does not automatically imply consent. There are many artists who never signed any letter in support of war and who never made their personal feelings known. However, to produce such works based upon “Anna Karenina” using war as backdrop or the writings of Mikhail Bulgakov and then stand in support of the actions of a dictatorial government seems extremely hypocritical. It seems as though the same level of fear present during the time of Joseph Stalin is still alive in Russia today. Who would imagine that a well known Russian citizen would be declared a “foreign agent” in 2022 for expressing his opinion regarding an act undertaken by his government?

End Note

1. “Tolstoy on the Russo-Japanese War”: https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1827&context=ocj

War and No Peace: Anna and Vronsky

 From 1927 until 2014 there have been several adaptations of Lev Tolstoy's novel, “Anna Karenina” presented on the silver screen. In each case the story is presented exclusively from Anna's standpoint; however, the 2017 Russian film, “Anna Karenina: Vronsky's Story” was something different.

The director, Karen Shakhnazarov (b. 1952), introduced us to this timeless classic from the standpoint of Anna's lover, Alexei Vronsky. The film begins with the audience meeting Vronsky in a medical field hospital in Manchuria, China in 1904, thirty years after Anna's death, where Vronsky is a patient. He is being interviewed by Anna's son, Sergei, from her marriage to Alexei Karenin. Sergei is a medical doctor and director of his hospital. He has few memories of his mother and wants to know from Vronsky what she was like and what type of relationship they had. Vronsky tells Sergei the story about how he met Anna and what impact their relationship had on Anna's social standing in Saint Petersburg society as a result.

In many of the film adaptations, Anna's husband, who is twenty years old than her, is presented as a mean spirited, almost spiteful, man who uses their son as a weapon to torture Anna by denying her the right to see Sergei. In this film, Alexei Karenin, a government ministry official in Czarist Russia, is presented a caring husband who is obsessed with order and maintaining a proper public appearance, while, at the same time, not forgetting that he is a Orthodox Christian. His wife's betrayal with Vronsky is painful and, initially, he even begins to hate her and wishes that she would die while giving birth to Vronsky's child; however, he eventually forgives both of them and tries to return to some semblance of a 'normal' life. However, he is actually quite conflicted. He states that he forgave both of them; however, his actions indicate otherwise. It is suggested to him, more than once, that he should grant Anna a divorce and let her move on with her life with Vronsky; however, he refuses to respond to her letters when she rights to him with such a request. Karenin is approached a final time about granting Anna a divorce and he promises a response; however, she takes her own life before any response is given.

Vronsky is presented as a handsome career military officer who is more concerned with his social standing and career advancement than his relationship with Anna. His mother, Countess Vronskaya, is eager to marry him off to one young woman or another; however, she is opposed to his relationship to Anna based upon the negative impact it will have on his military career advancement. According to the novel, Vronsky had been engaged to Anna's niece, Kitty Oblonskaya; however there is no mention of that relationship in this film. He presents himself throughout his various conversations with Anna's son as a loving, career, compassionate partner who was willing to give up everything for Anna; however, his actions did not align with his words.

At one point, Anna decided to go to the opera is Saint Petersburg. Vronsky discouraged her from going several times stating she did not need to prove anything; however, she decided to go anyway. Upon her arrival, one of female patrons in a neighboring box, the wife of a military officer, made a public announcement that she cannot sit in the same theater with a woman like Anna walked out of the box for the evening. The men at the theater were rather cordial; however, the women despised her. Vronsky initially stated that he did not want to go to the opera; however, he eventually changed his mind and, following intermission, Anna returned to her seat. Vronsky arrived just prior to the end of intermission and refused to sit with her our of concern for what the other patrons might think and/or say. This betrayal was the beginning of the end for Anna.

Anna's son asked Vronsky if he truly loved Anna. He responded that he had strong feelings for her and even attempted suicide after Anna nearly died following the birth of their daughter. However, Sergei asked the same question a second time since he did not receive a direct answer. The next time the question was asked Vronsky changed the subject and started talking about a clay pipe which he had recently purchased. His inability to affirmatively answer this question spoke volumes about his feelings regarding Anna.

Anna was portrayed as a woman in a loveless marriage to a much older man who believed that she had finally found happiness with a dashing young military officer. She willingly sacrificed everything for this relationship, including any contact with her son. She was treated like an outcast by Saint Petersburg society and was even willing to accept this indignity as long as she had Vronsky's love and support to rely upon. However, she was, in fact, treated like a bird in a gilded cage. Vronsky's home in Saint Petersburg and summer home in a village near the city were almost like palaces; however, they were still cages to Anna. He would be gone for several days at a time and she had no outlets for communication or creativity, so she was left alone with her thoughts and this drove her to the point of madness. When she expressed this to Vronsky he tried to say something which would appear supportive; however, he would simply disappear again to Saint Petersburg or elsewhere since he had no issues regarding social standing and wanted to make sure that was being seen by all of the right people.

Vronsky appeared to believe that once a divorce was granted by Karenin and he could finally marry Anna that everything would be fine and they could simply begin their life together in society as if nothing had happened previously. However, Anna began to realize, over time, that Vronsky really did not need her and that the heartache from her sacrifice amounted to nothing in regard to their relationship. Even she had married Vronsky, nothing would change. She became convinced that he really does not love her, so why marry him? Prior to Anna's demise she got into an argument with Vronsky and he left their home. Anna sent a message to him asking that he return as quickly as possible; however, her servant returned with the unread message. She was told that Vronsky went to visit his mother, even though he had already received money from her, and Anna became convinced that he had gone their to meet one of the young women that his mother was trying to get him to marry.

At this point Anna is hopeless and decides to head to the train station where she will ultimately take her own life. The audience never sees what took place at the station; however, the music and speed of the carriage on its way to the station portray the strong sense of desperation which Anna was feeling at that moment. Earlier she had stated that if she died that Vronsky would be stuck with only her memory and this would torture him for the rest of his life. Her words were proven to be true and Vronsky chose not to leave the army hospital even after it was being attacked by the Japanese army because of strong feeling that Anna was “always with him”.  The audience returns to the same train station at the end of film to watch a young Alexei Vronsky walk into the smoke and disappear as though he was walking into the light of Heaven.

The director chose to combine the publicist story "During the Japanese War" and the literary cycle "Stories about the Japanese War" by Vikenty Veresaev (1867-1945). This gave a context for why Vronsky had re-entered the military after so many years and it also provided a reflective atmosphere for the film since the film is constantly switching between Vronsky's time with Anna and his time in the Russo-Japanese War.  Most of the novel of "Anna Karenina" is about a war between either Anna and her husband or Anna and Vronsky.  In fact, at one point Anna states in the film that she wanted to obtain 'victory' in regard to her relationship with Vronsky.  This is not a word traditionally used to describe a loving relationship.

If Vronsky was expecting Anna to be a 'trophy wife', it is easy to understand why he was frustrated in regard to their relationship. A trophy wife is a pejorative term meaning a wife who is regarded as a status symbol for her husband. The term usually refers to a woman who is younger than her husband; however, Vronsky is actually three years younger than Anna according to the novel. It goes against Anna's character to simply be someone whom he could take to parties and engage in polite conversation, but had no real interests and nothing of any substance to contribution to any conversation.

There have been approximately thirty different adaptations of “Anna Karenina” on the silver screen produced by various countries including Russia, the United States, Great Britain, India, and Argentina; however, “Anna Karenina: Vronsky's Story” was something unique because of the fact that it was told from Vronsky's point of view thirty years after Anna's death at the train station. It is likely there will be other adaptations in the future and, perhaps, one of them might present this story from the viewpoint of Sergei Karenin, Anna's son, or her husband, Alexei. These adaptations might also help to give fresh insight into this timeless classic.