"Anna Karenin" Post 4b

Coincidentally, I recently read "Doctor Zhivago", a rather similar novel. Both books were by Russian authors and related to the time period at the end of the 19th century/the beginning of the 20th century where there was much political turmoil and readjustment of social classes in Russia. "Doctor Zhivago" was an interesting read, but I felt myself rather struggling through it. With "Anna Karenin(a)", I really don't have that sensation. It's not really the writing style; those are actually pretty comparable between the novels. It's truly the characters. Oblonsky and Levin make for extremely interesting narrators: they offer such contrasting view points, the reader can look at situations from multiple perspectives and not feel confined by the narrator. Anna is seeming a little condescending and all-knowing at the moment, especially as she talks of how boring dances have become to her with Kitty, but perhaps her affair with Vronksy will mar her perfection a little bit, in a good way.  I really enjoy Levin viewpoint: he's such an interesting character from the inside and the out. He is extremely independent, in his living in the country and pursuition of different things, yet you can feel how he is so unsure of himself despite his fits of strong conviction. You can also understand how people can be put off by him: in his need to be independent and not to conform, he doesn't afford people the respect of being courteous in most regards. It is also interesting to contrast Levin and Oblonsky in which is the "better" person: Levin with his high standards yet social awkwardness and unsure-ness, or Oblonsky with his more relaxed attitude, skill at putting others at ease, and contentedness  with himself. Oblonsky certainly seems happier, and also as if he will be in the long run, and he makes people happy along the way as well. However, Levin would never betray his wife as Oblonsky did. Who does the greater good? Or the worse damage? Is there a difference? Can one be both?