My teacher talked about this book any critics about it ?
>>13283872I was a bit underwhelmedA friend of mine had been talking about it a lot in a way that made me expect too much, in terms of 'philosophy'It is still a nice read, and interesting enough, only not convincing at allWhat I like is how Tolstoy speaks in the afterword. Not that I agree, but it always deserves respect when someone says, "ok you're all getting married and having sex but IT IS BAD and I won't say that it's alright just because everybody disagrees with me, IT IS BAD".
>>13283872>—Elizabeth HardwickI hate when publishers do this. Yeah I was a bit iffy on that Tolstoy dude until some bitch existing irrelevantly under that name let me know, from her own mouth, that he’s worth my time. If you’re going to treat it like Hollywood tripe with the overenthusiastic quotes you might at least use the praise of other Greats. But better not at all.
>>13283872This novella is extremely b—d and r——d. Don't read this if you are of the c—e and b——d persuasion.
The Goodreads reviews are A+. As for the book itself I see it more as an exhortation to love your brothers than anything else. I remember he says at one point that sex would be acceptable if there was no suffering in the world and everyone was being taken care of.
>>13283908she's good lad ive read a collection
>>13283894>It is still a nice read, and interesting enough, only not convincing at allThis is Tolstoy in a nutshell.
>>13284425>mansplainingWhy do people consistently prefer made-up words like this? Use actual words like condescending or patronizing instead.
>>13283872>>13283872Go listen to the Kreutzer Sonata. It'll be a better way to spend your time.