Larissa Volokhonsky

Richard Pevear

Leo Tolstoy

DON'T MISS THE MAJOR BBC ADAPTATION STARRING JIM BROADBENT AND GILLIAN ANDERSON - JANUARY 2016 'If you've never read it, now is the moment. This translation will show that you don't read War and Peace, you live it' The Times Tolstoy's enthralling epic depicts Russia's war with Napoleon and its effects on the lives of those caught up in the conflict. He creates some of the most vital and involving characters in literature as he follows the rise and fall of families in St Petersburg and Moscow who are linked by their personal and political relationships. His heroes are the thoughtful yet impulsive Pierre Bezukhov, his ambitious friend, Prince Andrei, and the woman who becomes indispensable to both of them, the enchanting Natasha Rostov.

War and Peace

Louise Maude

Tolstoy's epic masterpiece intertwines the lives of private and public individuals during the time of the Napoleonic wars and the French invasion of Russia. In this revised and updated version of the definitive and highly acclaimed Maude translation, Tolstoy's genius and the power of his prose are made newly available to the contemporary reader.

Omar Fernandez

Millions of men perpetrated against one another such innumerable crimes, frauds, treacheries, thefts, forgeries, issues of filse money, burglaries, incendiarisms, and murders, as in whole centuries are not recorded in the annals of all the law courts of the world, but which those who committed them did not at the time regard as being crimes.

In general the trait of Speransky's mentality which struck Prince Andrei most was his absolute and unshakable belief in the power and authority of reason. Ilt was evident that the thought could never occur to him which to Prince Andrei seemed so natural, namely, that it is after all impossible to express all one thinks; and that he had never felt the doubt, 'I's not all I think and belicve nonsense?

Widely regarded as the greatest novel in any language, War and Peace is primarily concerned with the histories of five aristocratic families--particularly the Bezukhovs, the Bolkonskys, and the Rostovs--the members of which are portrayed against a vivid background of Russian social life during the war against Napoleon (1805-14). The theme of war, however, is subordinate to the story of family existence, which involves Tolstoy's optimistic belief in the life-asserting pattern of human existence. The heroine, Natasha Rostova, for example, reaches her greatest fulfilment through her marriage to Pierre Bezukhov and her motherhood. The novel also sets forth a theory of history, concluding that there is a minimum of free choice; all is ruled by an inexorable historical determinism

ella

‘Love gets in the way of death. Love is life. Every single thing I understand, I understand only because I love. Everything is – everything exists – only because I love. Everything is bound up with love, and love alone. Love is God, and dying means me, a tiny particle of love, going back to its universal and eternal source.’

When you love with human love you can change from love to hatred, but divine love cannot change. Nothing, not even death, nothing can destroy it. It is the essence of the soul.

Nothing has been discovered, Pierre said to himself again, and nothing has been invented. The only thing we can know is that we don't know anything. And that is the summit of human wisdom.

“What's bad and what's good? What should we love and what should we hate? What is life for, and what am I? What is life? What is death? What kind of force is it that directs everything?” he kept asking himself. And there were no answers to any of these questions, except one illogical response that didn't answer any of them. And that response was: “You're going to die, and it will be over and done with. You're going to die and you'll either come to know everything or stop asking.”

“You see, my dear fellow,” he said, “we are asleep until we fall in love ... we are the childwen of dust and ashes ... but once you have loved you are a god, as pure as on the first day of cweation ...”

The prince prince never directly asked himself that question knowing beforehand that he would have to answer it justly, and justice clashed not only with his feelings but with the very possibility of life.

They wept because they were friends, and because they were kind-hearted, and because they--friends from childhood- had to think about such a base thing as money, and because their youth was over . . . But those tears were pleasant to them both.

Yes, they are splendid, splendid youngsters,' chimed in the count, who always solved questions that seemed to him perplexing by deciding that everything was splendid. 

At last he moved up to Abbé Morio. The conversation seemed interesting, and he stood still waiting for an opportunity of expressing his own ideas, as young people are fond of doing.

Both were talking too eagerly and too naturally, which was why Anna Pavlovna disapproved.

He spoke with such self-confidence that his hearers could not be sure whether what he said was very witty or very stupid.

Lukas

All we can know is that we know nothing. And that’s the height of human wisdom.

Nominated as one of America’s best-loved novels by PBS’s The Great American Read Often called the greatest novel ever written, War and Peace is at once an epic of the Napoleonic Wars, a philosophical study, and a celebration of the Russian spirit. Tolstoy’s genius is seen clearly in the multitude of characters in this massive chronicle—all of them fully realized and equally memorable. Out of this complex narrative emerges a profound examination of the individual’s place in the historical process, one that makes it clear why Thomas Mann praised Tolstoy for his Homeric powers and placed War and Peace in the same category as the Iliad: “To read him . . . is to find one’ s way home . . . to everything within us that is fundamental and sane.”

Translated by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky

Ilse

I don't understand it; I don't in the least understand why men can't live without wars. How is it that we women don't want anything of the kind, don't need it?Tolstoy's epic masterpiece intertwines the lives of private and public individuals during the time of the Napoleonic wars and the French invasion of Russia. The fortunes of the Rostovs and the Bolkonskys, of Pierre, Natasha, and Andrei, are intimately connected with the national history that is played out in parallel with their lives. Balls and soir�es alternate with councils of war and the machinations of statesmen and generals, scenes of violent battles with everyday human passions in a work whose extraordinary imaginative power has never been surpassed. The prodigious cast of characters, both great and small, seem to act and move as if connected by threads of destiny as the novel relentlessly questions ideas of free will, fate, and providence. Yet Tolstoy's portrayal of marital relations and scenes of domesticity is as truthful and poignant as the grand themes that underlie them. In this definitive and highly acclaimed Maude translation, Tolstoy's genius and the power of his prose are made newly available to the contemporary reader. In addition this edition includes a new introduction by Amy Mandelker, revised and expanded notes, lists of fictional and historical characters, a chronology of historical events, five maps, and Tolstoy's essay 'Some Words about War and Peace'.

Leonie

Erik Craigo

Tolstoy’s single rich heirs on a moral quest for the truth are my Roman Empire even though the more I age the more I tend to be somewhat critical of their final (conservative) conclusions, but hey still important to read about their lives. 

Ines Camacho Rodrigues Dias Ferreira

eileen sheats

I went into this book thinking that the message would be something along the lines of, Peace is a popularity contest, love triangles, gossip, & rich people talking about where to get lunch but War is brutal, changes everything, & so so serious. Actually, Tolstoy wants you to know that War is a popularity contest, gossip, & rich people talking about where to get lunch (not so much the love triangles back in 1812). 

A lot of the reviews on this site seem pretty dismissive of Tolstoy’s philosophical rants & suggest that the reader simply skip them - I must say those are some of the parts I enjoyed most. The epilogue broaches on a melange of Nietzsche’s Will to Power & Marxism but like, artsy. It’s honestly quite fascinating. I almost wish I had read the epilogue & the Tolstoy’s afterward before the actual book(s), & I came out of it with the feeling that I’ll need to reread it.

Maybe in another decade. Anyway, this definitely comes recommended from yours truly.

THE ACCLAIMED TRANSLATION BY RICHARD PEVEAR AND LARISSA VOLOKHONSKY 'If you've never read it, now is the moment. This translation will show that you don't read War and Peace, you live it' The Times From sophisticated Moscow soirees to breathless troika rides through the snow, from the bloody front line at Austerlitz to a wife's death in childbirth, Tolstoy conjures a broad panorama of rich, messy, beautiful and debased human life. We follow the fates of open-hearted, impulsive Pierre Bezukhov, his melancholy friend Prince Andrei and the enchanting Natasha Rostov, as history and fiction are combined in one of the wisest and most enthralling novels ever written. 'A joy to reada The sense of actually being in the skin of these people is phenomenally, brilliantly rendered by this translation' Simon Schama The Vintage Classic Russians Series- Published for the 100th anniversary of the 1917 Russian Revolution, these are must-have, beautifully designed editions of six epic masterpieces that have survived controversy, censorship and suppression to influence decades of thought and artistic expression.

War and Peace (Vintage Classic Russians Series)

“Pierre was right when he said that one must believe in the possibility of happiness in order to be happy, and I now believe in it. Let the dead bury the dead, but while I'm alive, I must live and be happy.”

--------------------

What an absolute treat.
Classical Russian literature is known to be powerful and beautiful, and it is no wonder that Tolstoy is among the first authors to be named when it comes to talking about the best of the genre.

War and Peace is an unarguably great book, masterfully written, and rich with layers of cadence, depth, emotion, and texture.
The story starts in the beautifully decorated, gleaming tea salons of the rich aristocracy in Russia, and rolls effortlessly over vast fields rippling with a chilly breeze before a hunt, on to the damp cottages where war councils meet. 
It is of course a tale of war and peace, where war is mocked through the incompetency of the great and the peace is tumultuous at best, carrying with it all the highs of love, innocence, and loyalty, and the lows of violence, betrayal, and dishonesty. It is unexpectedly layered with superficial actions and complex emotions, trivial grandeur and crucial cataclysms that grip the reader in the heart, masterfully framed within the everyday lives of aristocrats, mothers, soldiers, and peasants.

My only critique would be the widely dreaded second epilogue: it was a long and repetitious reiteration of the themes already explored in the story, forced together with topics not touched on at all, but is added to the tail-end of Tolstoy's opinions for the pure luxury of airing one's opinions in front of a captured audience. If it could be edited down to 3 chapters, it would be much more concise, focused, and intellectually stimulating. Just saying.

Also, here is how I imagine Tolstoy started writing this book:
Tolstoy: I am going to write a book about war that is so real. So human. So moving...
*proceeds to slam dunk on everything about war, rips into historical figures, and goes into an existential crisis about man's free will*

So, I guess what I am saying is, this was a great book.
4.5/5

Sercan Y.

Görkemli bir başyapıt... Piyer, kutuzov, nataşa, andrey ve tabiki napolyon gibi unutulmaz karakterlere sahip bir başyapıt..herkesin okuma deneyimi farklı olacaktır muhakkak ama benim açımdan okunması zor ama bir o kadar büyüleyici bir kitap "Savaş ve Barış"..Ömrüm izin verirse bir kez daha okumak isteyeceğim nadir kitaplardan..

John Nettles

The payoff just wasn't there for this 1,200 page trudge fest. There were a few memorable scenes and I enjoyed the history lesson, much less so the characters and philosophizing. Perhaps one day I'll get enrichment from having read the book, but for now I just don't feel like investing any more effort to figure out what I was supposed to walk away with from all this.

Unknown

** spoiler alert **
           My first impression of this book was that it was not for me. The book left me feeling unsatisfied, because I had fully expected epic and grandiose.

To me, Tolstoy’s War and Peace is unbearably dull. I attribute this to translation (although I'm not convinced). Despite the large and diverse cast of characters, it seems he himself could not track their development and abandoned it altogether. There is one common trait among all the characters, no matter their name or gender alone: fickleness.

I am particularly disturbed by Tolstoy's portrayal of Napoleon, the novel's antagonist, in a clearly biased light. Characters seem generic, uninteresting, and not special if one looks beyond the famed historical events (the core of the work).

Nothing in this novel is original or hasn't already been done, or better, since published. There is no need to read this book. Put your time to better use by reading something else.

WAR AND PEACE

Wynter

June 24, 2017:

"Было морозно и ясно. Над грязными, полутемными улицами, над черными крышами стояло темное звездное небо. Пьер, только глядя на небо, не чувствовал оскорбительной низости всего земного в сравнении с высотою, на которой находилась его душа. При въезде на Арбатскую площадь огромное пространство звездного темного неба открылось глазам Пьера. Почти в середине этого неба над Пречистенским бульваром, окруженная, обсыпанная со всех сторон звездами, но отличаясь от всех близостью к земле, белым светом и длинным, поднятым кверху хвостом, стояла огромная яркая комета 1812-го года, та самая комета, которая предвещала, как говорили, всякие ужасы и конец света. Но в Пьере светлая звезда эта с длинным лучистым хвостом не возбуждала никакого страшного чувства. Напротив, Пьер радостно, мокрыми от слез глазами смотрел на эту светлую звезду, которая как будто, с невыразимой быстротой пролетев неизмеримые пространства по параболической линии, вдруг, как вонзившаяся стрела в землю, влепилась тут в одно избранное ею место на черном небе и остановилась, энергично подняв кверху хвост, светясь и играя своим белым светом между бесчисленными другими мерцающими звездами. Пьеру казалось, что эта звезда вполне отвечала тому, что было в его расцветшей к новой жизни, размягченной и ободренной душе."

What an incredible passage to conclude the first two volumes of the greatest novel ever written! So many interpretations can be formulated from the contrasting feelings of dread by the general public and Pierre's sudden inspiration upon seeing the comet of 1812. What is to happen next? We know that superstitious feeling of doom is to be proven correct soon, when Napoleon invades Russia once again in near future. But what is to come for Pierre? 

Natasha, Natasha.... I really disliked her character at first because of her endless childishness, but it is her naïveté and tendency to follow her every changing mood with reckless abandon that gets her in a lot of trouble. Now I just feel very sorry for her, and I'm anxious to see how her destiny unfolds. Part V of Volume 2 is an incredible piece of melodrama done right. I'm so in love with Tolstoy's writing.

September 4, 2017:

I finally finished War and Peace!! That's an incredible feeling of accomplishment. Volumes 3 and 4 definitely contained many more war segments, compared to the previous two. Sometimes it was trying to get through them, but once in a while a brilliant scene would emerge and capture my attention once more (ie. Pierre as a French captive). I loved how Tolstoy brought one of the most famous Russian generals, Kutuzov, to life through his field strategy and defiant nature.

I'm a bit disappointed about Natasha's marriage in the end. (view spoiler) Contrary to popular opinion, I disliked Pierre very much. He was awkward and, frankly speaking, stupid, easily manipulated by all around him, and unable to think for himself. It was much more interesting to see the love triangle between Princess Maria, Nikolai, and Sonya unfold.

The epilogue was the most painful part, of course. Tolstoy just endlessly rambled on about his philosophical ideas, and it felt like it would never end.

However, all the human drama, so wonderfully and realistically captured in this book, made it absolutely worthwhile to persevere through the slow bits. 4.5 stars overall.

anna near

It was a soap opera. And not even an enjoyable one like Anna Karenina. 
Anyways, if they ever make a mock reality tv show I'll watch it, but otherwise I will be avoiding War and Peace in all forms of media.

Arun Khanna

What is War and Peace about? Is it a novel? An epic? Is it another military history book? Is it about war? Peace? Philosophy? The answer to all these questions is of course, yes. Tolstoy’s magnum opus covers all these topics and more. This is a massive tome: 1200+ pages, 500 different characters, and almost 600,000 words.
At its heart, Tolstoy's book describes the making of Russia into what it was when Tolstoy was writing. What happens when a society so enamored by the French that it has adapted its language, culture and attitudes is forced to go to war?
‘But how are we ever going to be able to fight the French, Prince!’ said Count Rostopchin. ‘How can we take arms against our teachers and our idols? Look at our young men, look at our ladies. The French are our gods, and Paris is our Paradise.’ He began to raise his voice so that everyone could hear. ‘Our fashions are French, our ideas are French, our feelings are French!

The two main protagonists in our story, Andrey Bolkonsky and Pierre Bezukhov both begin the story in fact admiring Napoleon for completely different reasons. Andrey, so irritated by life in high society with all its gossip and meandering nonsense, is attracted by Bonaparte achieving glory and having influence. Pierre, on the other hand, is a fairly naive idealist who is attracted to Bonaparte's French revolutionary credentials.

Both of these characters have some of the richest character arcs in world literature, with Andrey flirting between depressive epicureanism (in the truest sense) and finding love in the figure of Natasha while Pierre attempts to find happiness in freemasonry and a community where he can use his idealistic impulses for good. This is what I believe the book is fundamentally about: how should we live our lives? Tolstoy offers many particular different answers to this question, and yet none of them seemed particularly convincing to me.

There are many criticisms I do have of this book, however. I do think the appendixes for the most part can and probably should be skipped. I personally disagree with Tolstoy's theory of historical determinism and am closer to the dialectical approach of Marx when he says, "men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past." Tolstoy has an understandable hatred of Napoleon and his hero-worship, however, his diatribes do get stale and repetitive. I honestly think Tolstoy could have used a good editor to fine-tune the book.

In addition, I do think Tolstoy's sole focus on the happenings of aristocratic society is problematic, especially given his theory of history. The only discussion of peasants happens on a superficial level, peasants all seem classified into two types: the superstitious rabble-rousers (see the serfs who kept Marie hostage) and the idea of the archetypal good, noble Russian peasant (see Platon Karataev or the peasants encounter by Nikolai at the end). Especially given the time period Tolstoy wrote War and Peace (this was around the time the serfs were abandoned) and Tolstoy’s own relatively progressive views, I’m honestly surprised by their treatment throughout the book. In addition, his treatment of women deserves significant scrutiny.

However, despite these criticisms, I honestly think this book deserves its position in the pantheon of Great Books. Tolstoy has a way of writing his characters in a way that makes them seem more real than real life. Reading this book was a deeply emotional experience for me and it was impossible for this not to seep into my daily life (especially Pierre's journey). I honestly cannot recommend this book enough.

Aboobacker Sidheeq M

Romaissa Bellarbi 

Nelson Zagalo

Lido em 4 volumes, em 2016.

https://virtual-illusion.blogspot.pt/...

Vivian

War and Peace (Wordsworth Classics) (Wordsworth Classics)

laila

The way War and Peace is, it's not a novel, it's not completely historical, it's not entirely an essay or a work of philosophy- it's all these things. War and Peace cannot in no way be clearly defined as one genre, but that structure -the form that war and peace is- it takes on so many different contradictory topics [wealth and poverty, fame and obscurity, power and subordination, strength and weakness, health and disease, culture and ignorance, work and leisure, repletion and hunger, virtue and vice, freedom and captivity, etc.] that every time you turn it around and look at it you'll see something different, and I think that's exactly Tolstoy's point. We bounce back and forth between war and having that tumultuous dreadful feeling of pain and suffering in day-to-day life and "peace", those soft, wholesome moments each character experiences.

Rare edition with unique illustrations and elegant classic cream paper. Epic historical novel by Leo Tolstoy, originally published as Voyna i mir in 1865-69. This panoramic study of early 19th-century Russian society, noted for its mastery of realistic detail and variety of psychological analysis, is generally regarded as one of the world's greatest novels. War and Peace is primarily concerned with the histories of five aristocratic families--particularly the Bezukhovs, the Bolkonskys, and the Rostovs--the members of which are portrayed against a vivid background of Russian social life during the war against Napoleon (1805-14). The theme of war, however, is subordinate to the story of family existence, which involves Tolstoy's optimistic belief in the life-asserting pattern of human existence. The novel also sets forth a theory of history, concluding that there is a minimum of free choice; all is ruled by an inexorable historical determinism. Includes unique illustrations.

Kay Jamieson

** spoiler alert **
           It took me 4 years to get through this book! Whew! I re-read the first “book” (its broken up into 15 books.) about 6 times. I’m more proud of myself than I should be for finishing this.

My super fast summary: There’s a War, and Napoleon was there. There are many terrible relationship matches. The characters you want to be together marry other people. People are sad and struggling. War ends, spouses die, people who belong together are finally together. There are a lot of moral questions. It’s super brilliant, but maybe needs some editing. (Seriously, your epilogue shouldn’t be 102 pages long. I’m looking at you Tolstoy.)

Cams Campbell

I read this in Russian as part of my undergraduate degree at St Andrews. I was the only final honours student who was doing single Russian, so I had pretty much to take all the modules that were on the course, including the dissertation module. My subject was a comparison of Tolstoy's novel with the 1969 movie version directed by Sergei Bondarchuk. Looking back on that period some 12 years later, it stands as one of the most useful and interesting things I did at uni.

Joelle Kern

I feel so accomplished after finishing this behemouth of a book and enjoyed my experience reading it overall. It wasn't a particularly challenging read besides the length and dealing with some lengthy rambling and was a rather comforting read. I will say though, it did not live up to its epic reputation. It was just... good. Fantastic sections mixed with decent story-telling and repetitive philosiphizing. On the whole, I'm really glad I read it.


This smattering of thoughts from another review summed up my thoughts and made me laugh out loud:

What's War and Peace about?
This is 1,200 pages that feels like 1,345,678,908 pages. Nominally, it's about Russia's wars with Napoleonic France from 1804 to 1813. If that seems like a big subject, don’t worry, Tolstoy has given himself plenty of space with which to work. It follows dozens of characters in and out of the decades, as they live and die, love and hate, and generally stun the modern reader with their obtuseness.

You're coasting along. The story is moving forward. Napoleon has crossed the Danube. There is drama. Finally, people are going to stop with the internal monologues and start shooting each other! I might actually like this!

And then, with an almost audible screech, like the brakes a train, Tolstoy brings the whole thing to a shuddering halt with a pedantic digression on the topic of History (with a capital H) and free will and military tactics and Napoleon's intelligence.

These digressions do several things. First, and most importantly, they seriously disrupt the narrative. All rhythm and timing is thrown off. You lose sight of the characters for hundreds of pages. Instead of wondering what happens next, you start to wonder things like where am I? 

Second, the essays are Tolstoy at his stupidest. He believes that people have no control; that History is a force all its own, and that we act according to History's push and pull. Tolstoy says, in effect, that Napoleon is stupid, but that his enemies were stupider, but that doesn't matter, because they were all doing what they had to do, because History made them. This is all very...much a waste of time. 

Tolstoy also has a real axe to grind with Napoleon and he doesn’t hesitate to inflate his word count letting you know about it. 

Yet, there were moments when I loved this novel. Every once in awhile, War and Peace comes alive in that classic way; after plodding through a turgid essay, you’ll suddenly come upon a passage that's drawn so vividly you will remember it forever. There is the battle of Austerlitz, which is impeccably researched and thrillingly told. There is Prince Andrei, wounded on the field of Austerlitz, staring up at "the infinite sky," realizing that he's never really looked at it before. There is Pierre, realizing he is in love with Natasha as he gazes at the stars and glimpses the comet of 1812. There is Napoleon suffering a cold on the eve of Borodino. There is Andrei watching a cannon ball land at his feet, its fuse hissing... There is Petya, the young adjutant, who rides to his doom chasing the French during their retreat.

The good, though, is surrounded by the bad or the boring. The flyleaf of the book said that Pierre, Natasha, and Andrei were three of the most dynamic characters in literature. I don't think so. 

The end of the novel is (like Anna Karenina) a huge anti-climatic letdown.

As we approach the final pages, things fall off a cliff. There is no slow decline into mediocrity; no, it happens at the turn of the page. It’s like Tolstoy suddenly stopped taking steroids.

Then come the Epilogues. We will never know the fates of the dozens of characters we've followed for the previous thousand pages. Tolstoy leaves their destinies to the imagination so that he can rant. It’s a stupefying literary decision.

Fraser Simons

Don’t @ me! 


Bit of a trudge for me. Mostly owing to the strange narrative interjections with prescriptive historical context… about history. And then I just can’t stand military/war fiction in general, so I knew this wouldn’t be a favourite. I honestly think Anna Karenina is better constructed and a masterclass on introducing themes back-to-back, building a network of connective tissue with a lot of payoff without the prescriptive methods of narrative interjections. Fiction is self generated and when authors use that to tell readers what’s right—even when they’re certainly aligned with my own ideology re: politics and nationalism and history—it generates a cognitive dissonance that really bothers me.

On top of this, description was really centered on generalities and I prefer specificity. On one hand, there’s insights that bring you into a scene, such as noting a woman being beautiful for having disproportionate lips or friends that meet after a time taking a while to find their footing for a bit. On the other it dumbs things down fairly often, reducing people to bland generalities, always always, again, around attractiveness. Something that is so subjective and pointless. 

When we get that Downton Abbey vibe and I start caring about these rich people, the voice is compelling. Anytime I care about rich people, the author is a wizard. But it became too infrequent and the interjections more intrusive. 

It absolutely has some fantastic stuff to say on history and war and power and gender dynamics (from time to time)… but it also isn’t really anything new. If I hadn’t read about these subjects. Especially if I were in high school or early 20s, I think this could be a eye opening read. I love books that trick you into learning. But it became something of a dead horse being written. Points were being made after a scene that made the point already. It’s so explicit it is grating. Over time, it does feel like it’s beating a dead horse.

I feel so accomplished after finishing this behemouth of a book and enjoyed my experience reading it overall. It wasn't a particularly challenging read besides the length and dealing with some lengthy rambling and was a rather comforting read. I will say though, it did not live up to its epic reputation. It was just... good. Fantastic sections mixed with decent story-telling and repetitive philosiphizing. On the whole, I'm really glad I read it.


This smattering of thoughts from another review summed up my thoughts and made me laugh out loud:

What's War and Peace about?
This is 1,200 pages that feels like 1,345,678,908 pages. Nominally, it's about Russia's wars with Napoleonic France from 1804 to 1813. If that seems like a big subject, don’t worry, Tolstoy has given himself plenty of space with which to work. It follows dozens of characters in and out of the decades, as they live and die, love and hate, and generally stun the modern reader with their obtuseness.

You're coasting along. The story is moving forward. Napoleon has crossed the Danube. There is drama. Finally, people are going to stop with the internal monologues and start shooting each other! I might actually like this!

And then, with an almost audible screech, like the brakes a train, Tolstoy brings the whole thing to a shuddering halt with a pedantic digression on the topic of History (with a capital H) and free will and military tactics and Napoleon's intelligence.

These digressions do several things. First, and most importantly, they seriously disrupt the narrative. All rhythm and timing is thrown offYou lose sight of the characters for hundreds of pages. Instead of wondering what happens next, you start to wonder things like where am I? 

Second, the essays are Tolstoy at his stupidest. He believes that people have no control; that History is a force all its own, and that we act according to History's push and pull. Tolstoy says, in effect, that Napoleon is stupid, but that his enemies were stupider, but that doesn't matter, because they were all doing what they had to do, because History made them. This is all very...much a waste of time. 

Tolstoy also has a real axe to grind with Napoleon and he doesn’t hesitate to inflate his word count letting you know about it. 

Yet, there were moments when I loved this novel. Every once in awhile, War and Peace comes alive in that classic way; after plodding through a turgid essay, you’ll suddenly come upon a passage that's drawn so vividly you will remember it forever. There is the battle of Austerlitz, which is impeccably researched (so much so that a narrative history I read on the subject actually cites to Tolstoy) and thrillingly told, especially the fight of Captain Tushin's battery. There is Prince Andrei, wounded on the field of Austerlitz, staring up at "the infinite sky," realizing that he's never really looked at it before. There is Pierre, realizing he is in love with Natasha as he gazes at the stars and glimpses the comet of 1812. There is Napoleon suffering a cold on the eve of Borodino. There is Andrei watching a cannon ball land at his feet, its fuse hissing... There is Petya, the young adjutant, who rides to his doom chasing the French during their retreat.

The good, though, is surrounded by the bad or the boring. The flyleaf of the book said that Pierre, Natasha, and Andrei were three of the most dynamic characters in literature. I don't think so. 

The end of the novel is (like Anna Karenina) a huge anti-climatic letdown.

As we approach the final pages, Tolstoy gives us a description of the battle of Borodino. It is a masterpiece of military fiction. The research and verisimilitude. The vividness. Pierre's confrontation with the Frenchman in the redoubt. Afterwards, though, things fall of a cliff. There is no slow decline into mediocrity; no, it happens at the turn of the page. It’s like Tolstoy suddenly stopped taking steroids.

In an unseemly rush, Tolstoy has Napoleon move into Moscow, Moscow burns, Napoleon retreats. All of this occurs indirectly, through digression-filled essays on History. The characters recede into the background; all narrative vitality disappears. There are only a couple exceptions: one scene of the city burning, followed by one (admittedly powerful) scene of the French executing supposed arsons. During the French retreat, there is not a single visceral moment depicting their hard, frozen march. Instead we get Tolstoy nattering on about Napoleon’s stupidity.

Then come the Epilogues. We will never know the fates of the dozens of characters we've followed for the previous thousand pages. Tolstoy leaves their destinies to the imagination so that he can rant. It’s a stupefying literary decision.

Hailed as one of the greatest novels of all time, Tolstoy's epic unfolds during the Napoleonic invasion of Russia and encompasses episodes of romance and historical scope as well as insightful social observation.

War and Peace (Penguin Classics)

Isabelle Reads

i read all 1392 pages of this at the tender age of eleven.
still the greatest accomplishment of my entire bookish life.

Savaş ve Barış

Irem

Bu kadar yıl önce yazılmış, bir kaç nesil tarafından okunmuş ve en iyi kitaplar arasındaki yeri hiç değişmemiş bir kitap hakkında yorum yazmak biraz zor açıkcası. Beni en çok şaşırtan (aynı zamanda bunca zamandır gözümün korkup kaçmama sebep olan konu şey olarak) bu kadar uzun ve çok karakterli bir kitabın okurken okuyucuyu bu kadar içinde tutması ve uzun zaman akıldan çıkmayacak şekilde akla kazınması. Evet sayısız karakter dahil oluyor, ilk başladığımda karakterleri karıştırdığım için çokça geriye dönmem gerekti. Ancak kitap ilerledikçe karakterlerden işlevini tamamlayanlar geride kalıyor, yeni karakterler geliyor ve bu mükemmel bir dengede oluyor. Ne giden karakterlerle ilgili aklınızda soru işareti kalıyor ne de yeni karakterin gerekliliğini sorguluyorsunuz. Kitap "Savaş ve Barış" temalı olsa da aslında Tolstoy her konuda yazıyor. Hem Rusya'nın ahlaki ve sosyal çevreler ile aşk-aile konularını ele alırken adeta toplumun ayrıntılı bir panaromasını ortaya koyuyor hem de Napolyon savaşlarının tarihi detaylarını okuyorsunuz. Muazzam bir kitap.

War and Peace

Reviews

Highlights