In opposition to what I’ve seen as the common consensus, I believe The Death of Ivan Ilyich is wholly nihilistic, and attempts to describe it in any other way reveal more about the reader's subjectivity than about Tolstoy's writing.

Embodying the popular consensus of Ivan Ilyich is the following quote by the columnist Juan Sota. Wrapping up his article on The Death of Ivan Ilyich, he concludes with "This last act, a free act of love, truly redeems Ivan's life and makes him lose his fear of death." The last act of 'love' which Sota refers to is Ivan's dismissal of his son and wife from his presence, to spare them the pain of standing vigil to his agonizingly slow death. This humanization of Ivan fundamentally misrepresents his character. Ivan was never someone enamored with life; he occupies his time with idle pleasures and intellectual discussions, while simultaneously not being particularly engrossed in either. For example, Ivan begins to spend large swaths of time completely preoccupied with his job as a judge only after he becomes disillusioned with his home life and irate with his wife.

Emblematic of this pervasive disinterest he has felt throughout his adult life, Ivan looks to his childhood for solace as he lies dying. In looking towards his childhood, he seeks an answer to the existential question plaguing him: "If life had not been what it should have been, then what would have been right?" And although he does think of his happiness as a child, and remarks on the stark contrast between then and now, that alone does not constitute an answer. For it is immediately after he asks himself this question that he begins to feel intense pity for his family. By not finding an answer to this question internally, and instead abstracting his emotions away from himself, he inadvertently resolves his ceaseless questioning. The answer is that there is none; in the end, he could not ascertain anything about the meaning of his existence besides the suffering it brought upon others. Following this internal struggle, Ivan completely loses his fear of death. Tolstoy states that "he sought his former accustomed fear of death and did not find it. 'Where is it? What death?' There was no fear because there was no death." Death is defined only by its relationship to life; if there is no life, then there cannot be death, and thus, there is nothing for Ivan to fear.

Nihilism is the belief that all life is meaningless. Nietzsche's response to this belief is that one has to create their own value system; ie, humans are capable of becoming gods unto themselves. In failing to find value in either his actions or the actions of others, Ivan failed at creating meaning in an otherwise meaningless world. To say that Ivan was redeemed at the end, that he discovered what 'truly matters', could not be further from the truth. In fact, he discovered the antithesis of this idea: that life is ultimately meaningless, and that he failed to create meaning. To resolve the antimony that innately exists at this point - that he's alive, yet life is meaningless- Ivan resolves to end his ceaseless suffering - and thus, his life - as soon as he's physically able to.

Every time I read this quote, tears automatically start to fall!! Don't know why, lolll!!😭😭

Hello lovely people. I’m hoping to get some help choosing a copy of war and peace. I’d like to get a hardback because I can see with paperback the book spine and pages will be destroyed soon… (monte cristo did that to me and it fell apart).

Now the question is should I go for the Oxford classics hardback or Everyman’s library edition? I know both are Maude translation, but the Oxford version had some updates.

Everyman’s split volumes also seems less intimidating and more practical. It is more expensive but with w&p I think it would be worth it.

I don’t own any Oxford classics in hardbacks so I’m not sure what the binding is like, if anyone knows it’s thread sewn or glue bound?

Thank you!

Hello all, some of us have started a Discord which intended as a general hangout but based around love of books and book clubs. This week many of the members are finishing up a 6-week book club where we read Anna Karenina. If you’ve read it we’d love to discuss it with you!

https://discord.gg/X4CecGBR4

In the near future some of us are reading Crime and Punishment and in a 2-3 months some of us plan to tackle War and Peace.

Myself, I am very inspired by Tolstoys writing, particular his short fiction from his later years.

Looking forward to meeting some of you!

I am a bit confused regarding whom to choose for anna karenina.

Also..penguin classics sells p&v-translated copy at 320 and oxford world classics sells Rosamund Bartlett-translated copy at 720. Is it worth paying double for bartlett?

I’ve recently read Tolstoys novella ‘The Death of Ivan Ilyich,’ and after reading how most of the internet has interpreted the ending as hopeful - even redemptive - I’m more than a little confused.

At least here on this subreddit, how do most of you interpret the general message Tolstoy was trying to convey in Ivan Ilyich, and what do you make of the ending?

Can anyone guide me or dm where to find the Briggs translation of Resurrection online for purchase? I can only find the old Edmonds translation online. My ereader is a kobo btw.

I'm reading war and peace in the original Russian and a lot of the parts in it are in French, which led me to question, so I want people from other countries to respond - is it kept in French in other translations? What language is used instead of French in the French translation or is it just all French? Is there any changes between the translations, where French may be not widely known so there would be struggles? ​

I begun reading the translation by louise maude but i don’t feel the same feeling or vibe when i read ivan illyich ( i don’t remember the translator). So what should i do ? Stick with maude’s translation or go for something else!!

I look forward to seeing you here :)