The visage speaks. Anna Karenina’s epiphany
https://doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2026-5-13-30
Abstract
The paper examines descriptions of the main heroine’s physical appearance in L. Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina through the prism of E. Levinas’s philosophy. The starting point of the study is defined by Anna’s question, “Can one ever tell anyone what one is feeling?” The author analyzes the relationship between the visual and the verbal in a depiction of inner experience. Levinas’s belief that the epiphany of the face is a whole language in itself presents a possibility to demonstrate how an unspoken feeling becomes visibly present and is transformed into a medium for ethical meaning. The analysis focuses on scenes where the characters’ facial expressions offer insights into what cannot be put into words. In this context, mimetic representation appears as a distinct mode of constitution of meaning, in which the face functions as an ethical appeal and a call to responsibility. Therefore, Tolstoy’s poetics of the face is interpreted as a space for encountering the Other, where the aesthetic dimension is inseparable from the ethical one, which in turn offers a new perspective for the exploration of the interaction between mimesis, language, and responsibility in Tolstoy’s artistic world.
About the Author
Z. HajnádyHungary
Zoltán Hajnády, Doctor of Philology
Egyetem tér 1, Debrecen, 4010, Hungary
References
1. Alaverdyan, K. (2015). The problem of communication in L. Tolstoy’s novel “Anna Karenina.” In: Russian language and literature in the space of world culture: Proceedings of the XIII MAPRYAL Congress (Granada, Spain, 13-20 Sept. 2015). Vol. 6. St. Petersburg: MAPRYAL, pp. 19-24. (In Russ.)
2. Bely, A. (1910). Symbolism. Moscow: Musaget. (In Russ.)
3. Berdyaev, N. (1991). Self-knowledge. An essay in autobiography. Moscow: Kniga. (In Russ.)
4. Blanchot, M. (1946). Le Paradoxe d’Aytré. Les Temps modernes, 9, pp. 1576-1593. (In French.)
5. Fagenblat, M. and Cools, A., eds. (2021). Levinas and literature: New directions. Berlin; Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2021.
6. Levinas, E. (2000). Selected writings. Totality and infinity. Translated by I. Vdovina, B. Dubin et al. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Universitetskaya kniga. (In Russ.)
7. Mandelker, A. (1993). Framing Anna Karenina: Tolstoy, the woman question, and the Victorian novel. Columbus: Ohio State U. P.
8. Pomorska, K. (1982). Tolstoy — contra semiosis. International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics, 25-26, pp. 383-390.
9. Shankman, S. (2021). The posteriority of the anterior: Levinas, Tolstoy, and responsibility for the Other. In: M. Maguire and T. Langen, eds., Reading backwards: An advance retrospective on Russian literature. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers, pp. 159-187.
10. Shchukina, N. (2022). Konstantin Levin and artist Mikhaylov in the labyrinth of linkages in Tolstoy’s “Anna Karenina.” Art Logos, 4, pp. 53-69. (In Russ.)
11. Wasson, R. (1974). From priest to Prometheus: Culture and criticism in the Post-modernist period. Journal of Modern Literature, 3, pp. 1188-1202.
12. Weir, J. (2008). Anna incommunicada: Language and consciousness in “Anna Karenina.” The Slavic and East European Journal, 52(2), pp. 347-364.
13. Yakobson, P. (1958). Psychology of feelings. Moscow: Uchpedgiz. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Hajnády Z. The visage speaks. Anna Karenina’s epiphany. Voprosy literatury. 2026;(5):13-30. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2026-5-13-30
JATS XML






























