Tolstoy's last major novel differs from his earlier work. While in War and Peace or Anna Karenina the characters came face to face with the imponderable issues of life--the "big questions"--those novels did not dwell exclusively on the problems of evil, salvation and the challenges of redemption in the way that Resurrection does. Resurrection presents us with an intensely introspective, guilt-ridden protagonist hunting that most elusive prize: spiritual salvation, or even its lesser consolation: a little peace of mind. The reader is treated to finely drawn characters and an intense sense of place, of social milieu, and of the dilemma of finding personal justice in a deeply unjust world. Although the work is anything but comic, it has an intensely comic passage about the problem in making reparations to people who cannot imagine that one would give up one's property to do so. If you love the complexity of Tolstoy, and you do not mind a book that looks deeply within a character, you'll love Resurrection. It is interesting to contrast the theme of personal guilt in this work with its treatment in Crime and Punishment, and this book holds particular interest if you wish to compare the worldviews of the novels of Tolstoy with those of Dostoevsky.

Tolstoy's last major novel summarizes his personal philosophy. Nekhludov finds himself approaching middle age burdened by guilt. Ten years ago, he seduced the serving girl, Maslova. Maslova's shame degenerated to prostitution. After Maslova is unjustly condemned for murder, Nekhludov decides to intervene on her behalf. He seeks to make amends for his sin and his privileged life by an idealistic binge that manages to miss the point. Through Nekhludov's quest for personal redemption, the reader learns the hypocrisy of Old Russia. Russian society, of course, symbolizes all societies in all eras that wage the eternal struggle. According to Tolstoy, the solution is not idealistic extremes, but the practice of true spiritual love. One on one with the world around us. True religion, as articulated by Christ, that transcends the limited scope of the blatant self-interest of the organized church, political parties, social engineering, and legal maneuvering.

The novel is a grim portrait of the suffering of the poor, in spirit and in fact. Readers who recall the grand historical scope of "War and Peace" and the poignant personal drama of "Anna Karenina" will be struck by the modest presentation of this book. The plot development is minimal, and mainly consists of Nekhludov's interventions on Maslova's behalf with a variety of legal, military, and political persons. This privileged structure, contrasted with the suffering of the prison inmates, leaves a deep impression. Tolstoy's goal is spiritual maturity, and not revolutionary incitement. He writes graphically and realistically of the world. This novel was banned for a time in Edwardian England. It is an eloquent albeit modest summary to Tolstoy's career as a thinker.

Tolstoy's Resurrection is an excellent book about the horrors of life during the late 19th century in Russia. Throughout the book, Tolstoy vividly describes Prince Nekhlyudov's inner soul change. Prince Nekhlyudov, a once miserly aristocrat, realizes his mistakes and tries to atone for them. Tolstoy acutely captures the misery many peasants had to endure under the regime of the malevolent and truculent judges, soldiers, governors, and officers. Although this is the first book by Tolstoy I have read, I found it overall an excellent novel. I wouldn't recommend it to someone wanting a quick read because it isn't at all a laconic book.

An introspective look at Danforth's and Thomas's reactions and activities during their personal crises during the infamous Senate confirmation process. Interesting from not only a historical and political perspective, but more so about the human reactions that they both had. Danforth, who was Thomas's Senate sponsor throughout the confirmation hearings, provides some insite about Senate machinations, his team's contemporaneous thoughts, as well as a self critical analysis of where they failed and how they succeeded. He dramatically retells how close they each came to quitting, and how they each were able to channel their faith to continue on to win a battle that ultimately in their minds had little to do with winning Thomas's confirmation to the Court, but rather more with bringing him back from the virtual death inflicted by his accusers and the cruel torture inflicted on himself! Could be a good read even if you don't like what the Justice stands for, since you might revel in his crisis. But this story shows how that how you can maintain a positive attitude through the assumption of the worst possible result. Only a naive reader would conclude that this is simply a historical recollection of the hearings.