Vronsky's Finances

[Elif Batuman]

If it's true that Vronsky "reneged on the deal" with his brother, this 
casts a really interesting light on Part 7 Ch 24-25, in which Anna and
Vronsky *almost* escape to the country and live happily ever after, except
that Vronsky has to stay in Petersburg  to collect "a power of attorney and
some money" from his mother.
(In this chapter Vronsky also mentions selling a horse, Gambetta - and in
the passage you cite, back in Part 3, one of his solutions was to start
selling his horses.  But it does seem clear that they couldn't have been
living all this time on the proceeds from a few horses.)

This episode with the money and power of attorney triggers the most
vituperative argument between Anna and Vronsky, and leads directly to
Anna's suicide.  There is a particular logic to this if their whole romance
was financed by a broken promise.

It's also interesting that, in Part 5, Varya disappoints her brother-in-law,
Vronsky, by refusing to socialize with Anna.
If Vronsky betrayed Varya by taking back the gift he gave her, and giving it
to Anna, then there is a certain symmetry in Varya's refusal to befriend
Anna.

On 2/13/06, Adrian Wanner <ajw3 at psu.edu> wrote:
> Dear SEELANGERS,
> I am currently teaching Anna Karenina.  Today my students asked me a
> question that had me somewhat stomped.  In Part 3, Chapter XIX, we
> learn that Vronsky lives on straightened financial means, mainly
> because the income from his father's fortune was unequally divided
> between him and his brother.  In addition his mother has cut off her
> allowance because she is angry with him over his liaison with Anna.
> However, in the second half of the novel Vronky is obviously flush
> with money.  Where does it come from?
> I can only think of one explanation: he reneged on the inheritance
> deal with his brother and is now claiming 50% of the income from his
> father's fortune.  This is something that before he had explicitly
> rejected. Tolstoy tells us that "he had only to recall his brother's
> wife, recall how that dear, sweet Varya reminded him at every chance
> that she remembered his generosity and appreciated it, to understand
> the impossibility of taking back what had been given.  It was as
> impossible as stealing, lying, or striking a woman"
> (Pevear-Volokhonsky translation, p.304).
> If Vronsky did indeed "betray" his brother and sister-in-law and his
> own honor code, Tolstoy never tells us so.  In fact, his brother
> doesn't seem to be particularly mad at him.
> Does anyone have a better explanation?
> Thanks,
> Adrian Wanner
> --
> *****************************************************************
> Adrian J. Wanner
> Head, Department of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures
> Professor of Russian and Comparative Literature
> The Pennsylvania State University
> 313 Burrowes Building
> University Park, PA 16802
>
> Tel. (814) 865-5481
> Fax  (814) 863-8882
>
> http://german.la.psu.edu
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
>   options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
>                     http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------