Boring

[Pierre Cloutier]

I am listening to an audio-book version of War & Peace. I find the novel appallingly boring and stilted. The anecdotes are pointless and go nowhere. The characters are detestable, superficial, petty russian aristocracy. The writing is stilted and mannered. <br><br>Tolstoy is skilled at depicting subtle psychological situations. Too bad I can't care about the characters. <br><br>His description of russian military officers is critical and unflattering. It is easy to see how their incompetence and lack of caring for their troops foretold the revolution.<br><br>Maybe it's great litterature, but it sure ain't great entertainment.<br><br>I'm about 20 hours into the 62-hour narration. I'm sticking with it mainly because I want to read about Napoleon & Moscow from the russian perspective. Also so I can tell friends how painless it is to listen to the book, something few people would ever sit down to do.<br><br>I enjoyed "The DaVinci Code", "The Company", "A Beautiful Mind" far more than W&P. BTW I have an arts degree, and have studied french, english, latin, spanish and greek litterature.

[guyster]

First of all, learn to spell literature! This post is totally ridiculous. When a book is thought of by thousands of experts to be one of the greatest books ever read and you say you don't think it's as good as the da vinci code, one of the trashiest novels i've ever read, don't you think maybe you should question your opinions after only having listened to a small part of it if you think it's a load of rubbish. What do you mean you don't care about the characters? What is a good book about if it's not about its characters. W&P has some of the most amazing, deep, intricate descriptions of human thought that i've ever read - it's totally fascinating and thought provoking. War and Peace is a totally amazing book - maybe some of it is lost in audiobook format - why don't you try actually reading it instead, as i'd have thought someone who's such a great scholar of literature would be more used to doing.

[Scheherazade]

Please do not personalise your arguements even if you disagree with each other's views and keep your discussions within common courtesy.

[happyjing365]

Scher is so calm and cool! I appreciate that.

[mono]

Unfortunately, I have yet to read Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace; I purchased it not long ago, and intend to read it very soon, especially after reading this thread.
Anna Karenina I can call one of the best novels I have ever read without hesitation; with War and Peace I have heard similar things - that both categorize as masterpieces.
Perhaps I will begin it very soon, then refer back to this thread. :)

[Miranda]

I haven't read War and Peace either and can't say that I have the stamina to read such a great work. Would anyone like to write a short resume (ahem if such a thing is possible) of what it is about? I think Pierrre's comments are entirely worthy in stating his opinion, backed up by his reasons for not liking the book. 20 hours of listening to something so apparently boring! Phew you deserve a medal Pierre. I would have fallen asleep in the first half hour.

Literature is as diverse as the world and people's tastes for literature thankfully are equally diverse which is what makes it so interesting. Like food, we all prefer or detest different things - but we are all entitled to express our opinion and this is what this site is about, discussing our differing opinions on literature and learning from one another. Welcome to the Literature Network Pierre. Don't be put off by your initial greeting. Most people here are friendly and fun and love discussing books and different genres of writing.

Miranda

[amuse]

i am reading it and it has taken a while (i go to school full-time and have read many other books since finishing vol. I last summer, but am nearly finished with vol. II. it is like a river - some turbulence, some ease, and not for everyone.
personally, i like it; when it's good it's very good, but if it's not to your taste, row your boat down another stream. :nod:

[guyster]

Perhaps my reply was a bit rude, but here are some points:
If you don't like a book at least write 'in my opinion' etc. Don't just generally state that the book is rubbish. 'The characters are petty' etc. Calling tolstoy's characters 'petty' is like saying War and Peace is a short book. The level of description of each character's personality and deeds is probably unparalleled in any other work of literature in the world. If you do happen to possess the extremely controversial opinion that they are superficial, you could at least back it up with some kind of evidence. Second, replying to Miranda: Why does he deserve a medal for listening to something he's not interested in for 20 hours? Surely that's just wasting time. I don't think you can really sum up war and peace either except by saying that it's an amazingly in depth look into the human spirit, the character of war and human behaviour and really a deep philosophical work. Sorry, but if you think this book is 'superficial' there must be something seriously wrong with you.

[lil_fairyjess]

I haven't read Tolstoy's works, although I own both Anna Karenina and War and Peace.That's rather foolish to admit! Seriously though, I am a little put out by them. It isn't the size that is the problem, I am just confounded by what state of mind I have to be in to start reading it.... I have heard Tolstoy isn't exactly light reading.

[amuse]

well...you could open the book and start from there. then if you aren't in the right state of mind when you begin, you'll have an idea as to which state might be best to read it in later.

[Miranda]

Yes, your reply was rude Guyster. unnecessarily so. It is clear that Pierre was expressing his opinion and the words 'in my opinion' are just like your rudeness - unnecessary. Pierre did not state the book was rubbish and in fact compliments Tolstoy 'Tolstoy is skilled at depicting subtle psychological situations.' And yes, I think that Pierre does deserve a medal for listening to something that he finds so appallingly boring and stilted - but you are entitled to think differently. No, I don't think that he was wasting his time because having listened he is more educated and is able to comment properly on War and Peace whereas I being ignorant of its content can't offer an opinion on it.

Pierre does not say that the book is superficial - he says that he finds the characters superficial - not the same thing at all. Maybe you should read Pierre's post again and see what he really says? But he seems not to be replying so perhaps he has left the board having encountered such rudeness. This is a friendly place Guyster, no need for it. Nor is there need to say that there is something wrong with someone if they happen to think that War and Peace is superficial. Everyone is entitled to express an opinion without being insulted for doing so.

Miranda.


Perhaps my reply was a bit rude, but here are some points:
If you don't like a book at least write 'in my opinion' etc. Don't just generally state that the book is rubbish. 'The characters are petty' etc. Calling tolstoy's characters 'petty' is like saying War and Peace is a short book. The level of description of each character's personality and deeds is probably unparalleled in any other work of literature in the world. If you do happen to possess the extremely controversial opinion that they are superficial, you could at least back it up with some kind of evidence. Second, replying to Miranda: Why does he deserve a medal for listening to something he's not interested in for 20 hours? Surely that's just wasting time. I don't think you can really sum up war and peace either except by saying that it's an amazingly in depth look into the human spirit, the character of war and human behaviour and really a deep philosophical work. Sorry, but if you think this book is 'superficial' there must be something seriously wrong with you.

[amuse]

he did, however, find it appallingly boring and stilted, eh? i quote. at any rate, there are no doubt persons who find cezanne and dali boring and stilted; art has many admirers and detractors.


also, i have noticed a lot of book-related posts are from 5-24-2005 - it's possible that he wrote his comment some time earlier and it was uploaded from the main site on that day. Pierre Cloutier's name is in a different font from registered members, his number of posts are non-applicable, and it is my guess that he wasn't a regular member on the forums to begin with.

[mono]

also, i have noticed a lot of book-related posts are from 5-24-2005 - it's possible that he wrote his comment some time earlier and it was uploaded from the main site on that day.
How glad I feel for not being the only person who noticed. Strange how so many 'guests' appeared that day, but have not appeared since the time, nor have we had any other guests. :confused:

[Koa]

Well I think the guests just get here from the online version of the text so that's why they don't reappear to the forum. That doesnt explain why all on the same day... Maybe the comments where moved here on that day from a different version of the comments part on the online text page...

I'd like to mention that I suppose that Pierre guy who started the thread is probably French and therefore he spelt literature with 2 t as in French... which is actually not a real disturbing mistake since it's hardly noticeable...

To me it's a strange idea to listen to a book instead of reading it, but he must have his reasons to do that... Though I think it gives a different perception to the text. I'd certainly get more distracted while listening...

I have mixed feelings towards W&P. I didn't hate it, I actually enjoyed it in some moments, but at the same time I found it heavy in many moments, and I really didn't like the characters that everybody praises so much. Pierre and Andrey were good characters, quite full and effective, but I detested Natasha. A really irritating one. Also, I think some characters like Maria and Sonia could have been developed much better. I don't question the value of this work, but I still can't decipher it and classify it with certainty... While on the other hand I think Anna Karenina was a perfect novel, especially in the characterization.

[papayahed]

I have mixed feelings towards W&P. I didn't hate it, I actually enjoyed it in some moments, but at the same time I found it heavy in many moments, and I really didn't like the characters that everybody praises so much. Pierre and Andrey were good characters, quite full and effective, but I detested Natasha. A really irritating one. Also, I think some characters like Maria and Sonia could have been developed much better. I don't question the value of this work, but I still can't decipher it and classify it with certainty...

My thoughts exactly.

[Valjean]

If you cannot read classical literature, what can you possibly contribute to a discussion of classical literature? Also, I would be ashamed to admit that I had spent so many of my college days studying literature and still could only handle "books" that had (by coincidence, i'm sure) been recently made into movies.

By the way, the Russians refused to stop trading with England, so Napoleon was coming to kill them; they got scared, lit Moscow on fire, then ran. There, that just saved hours of painfully attempting to read.

[Patrix17]

I enjoyed W&P for the depth of the characters. I have read it, all of the way through and can't wait to read more of his works! I'm not sure that 20/62 of the way through I completely understood what the book was about, so as a word of encouragement to Pierre, keep at it and maybe you will find some value (or values) in this great work of literature!

[beowulflee]

Maybe it's great litterature, but it sure ain't great entertainment.

You got that right, this sure ain't an action film set in 3000 AD with cyber ninjas and giant explosions. But meh... what can you expect from a guy with a bread that big?


I'm about 20 hours into the 62-hour narration. I'm sticking with it mainly because I want to read about Napoleon & Moscow from the russian perspective.

Or, since you find it so apallingly boring you can stop listening to it and try something else.


I enjoyed "The DaVinci Code", "The Company", "A Beautiful Mind" far more than W&P.

It's kind of strange comparing those books to this one, since the authors have completely different objectives set in mind. But then again, idiots constantly compare books and movies, so whatever.


BTW I have an arts degree, and have studied french, english, latin, spanish and greek litterature.

I'm guessing you're trying somehow to make your opinion look "educated", but alas... your opinion is no better nor worse than the next idiot.

[Charles Darnay]

I like several before me, and possibly many after me have come across this fun little debate and found it qutie enjoyable. I don't mean to belittle anyone's opinions by saying that - I too feel passionatly about the criticism of "literature" - ah, the hypocrasy in my saying that - but than again Atwood is not literature.

Anyways, I have not read War and Peace, but I do intend to, after Anna Karinena (forgive me if I misspelled that). However, in this debate I have to say that I have to take a middle ground. I agree that Pierre is entitled to his opinion, but when dealing with a forum of readers who I have noticed do tend to lead towards the classsics, he was bound to get some harsh responses while insulting what has been called one of the greatest works of all time. But literature is an acquired taste - classic lit anyways. My opinion is that it all comes down to what music you listen to. Those who listen to classical music tend to appreciate War and Peace and lenghty detailed works that that more than those who do not. This is not a gneral rule, it is just something I have observed in my life.

[Kafka]

I just have to agree with Pierre Cloutier so much! :thumbs_up

I'm studying Arts now.

No offence to Tolstoy, I love his novel "Resurrection", but this novel is just the most boring novel I have ever read and constantly sent me waves of suicidal impulses when I was reading it. I only read it because I had ALWAYS been interested in Russia and this turns me off so much! :(

I guess it has a lot to do with my personalities, too.

I hated his descriptions of life of Russian high society who complains about their rich people's problems! :mad: I guess this is because I'm always interested at the little people, instead of the noble.

I just think this novel does not really need 1444 pages.

Miranda - To cut a long long LONG story short, it is about Russian families before, during and after the war.

[Boris239]

I think that parts of "War and Peace" are indeed a bit boring but it is certainly worth reading. There are a really a lot of interesting ideas- you won't accept some of them, of course, but just thinking about them gives you something. For example- the role of a man a person in history or this whole idea of Tulon- is it worth to sacrifice somebody's lives to become famous, is it really a sign of a strong person, etc.
BTW I'm proud to say that when I was reading it the first time- I've read it in 3 days. Although I have to admit that I haven't done much else except eating and sleeping these 3 days.

[Kafka]

:alien: Oh, dear, Boris239!!! :alien:

:alien: You read it in three days??? :alien:

:thumbs_up You must be very motivated!!! :thumbs_up

Allow me to be so bold: :confused:

1) How many pages is your edition?
2) Are you Russian?
3) What language did you read it in?
4) What kept you going whilst you were reading this novel?

Thank you! :thumbs_up

[Boris239]

1) I have a full edition
2) Yes, I am Russian
3) I've read it in Russian
4) I had absolutely noting to do, so I just kept reading

[Kafka]

Boris, I admire you very much!

[xiaoding]

I found War and Peace, as a novel, to be a complete failure. It's not a novel. It is, however, one of the most amazing things I have ever read, not so much for it's plot, but for the asides Tolstoy makes, and his observations on human nature. After reading it, I finally understand women, and that's saying something.

[Boris239]

I found War and Peace, as a novel, to be a complete failure. It's not a novel. It is, however, one of the most amazing things I have ever read, not so much for it's plot, but for the asides Tolstoy makes, and his observations on human nature. After reading it, I finally understand women, and that's saying something.


I've read "War and Peace" two times and still clueless about women :(

[Sarka]

I'm going to try not to be vicious and criticizing here. Okay. The whole point of The Da Vinci Code is to be thrilling. Obviously, you want to be thrilled. Okay. Fine. Just don't slam War & Peace just 'coz it's not thrilling. I mean, I can understand that it's kinda fun to slam a book that everybody else (or a lot of people) calls "the greatest novel in the world" (And So On), but maybe from one standpoint, it actually is a really good book. Just like, from another standpoint, The Da Vinci Code is.
The characters are supposed to be realistic examples of humanity. Not likeable, realistic.
Just don't deliberately get people all mad because it's fun.
Not that it isn't fun.
But it's sufficient to say that you're not into that kind of narrative rather than just outright saying that it's crap, and then going "and look at me, I'm a this-that-the-other-literature (with 1 t, by the way) major, so obviously I'm right." Spare me the credential bragging. Seriously. Just because some of us can read and write and do a little math, that doesn't mean [they] deserve to conquer the universe.
(End Of Rant.)

[blank_frackis]

I think a big problem with War and Peace is that it attracts a lot of people who genuinely have no interest in reading the book. When something has been praised to the extent that War and Peace has it's natural that you'll get this sort of person interested, they read the book for the sake of reading it, it's like visiting Paris or going sky-diving, some people do it because they want to have done it, as opposed to doing it because they are genuinely interested in it.

[grace86]

Wow, I didn't know this thread was here and how heated it was. Well, I must say I admire Boris, for one, because I am reading Anna Karenina and it has taken me almost two months (full time student full time work) and I have not yet finished it. But personally, I like the way Tolstoy writes and will probably attempt War and Peace in the near future in the near future. You know, thick literature like that is not for everyone. Maybe Pierre didn't like it, but that's no reason to bash it. I can't read Jane Austen, but I am not going to say she was a hideous writer. Don't like it, try writing something yourself for a change.

[Asa Adams]

I am listening to an audio-book version of War & Peace. I find the novel appallingly boring and stilted. The anecdotes are pointless and go nowhere. The characters are detestable, superficial, petty russian aristocracy. The writing is stilted and mannered. <br><br>Tolstoy is skilled at depicting subtle psychological situations. Too bad I can't care about the characters. <br><br>His description of russian military officers is critical and unflattering. It is easy to see how their incompetence and lack of caring for their troops foretold the revolution.<br><br>Maybe it's great litterature, but it sure ain't great entertainment.<br><br>I'm about 20 hours into the 62-hour narration. I'm sticking with it mainly because I want to read about Napoleon & Moscow from the russian perspective. Also so I can tell friends how painless it is to listen to the book, something few people would ever sit down to do.<br><br>I enjoyed "The DaVinci Code", "The Company", "A Beautiful Mind" far more than W&P. BTW I have an arts degree, and have studied french, english, latin, spanish and greek litterature.

All the way up till the end, i appreciated your opinion. but droping creds like that made me disregard your thoughts and think of you as pompus and unintelligent "scholar".

[bazarov]

I am listening to an audio-book version of War & Peace. I find the novel appallingly boring and stilted. The anecdotes are pointless and go nowhere. The characters are detestable, superficial, petty russian aristocracy. The writing is stilted and mannered. <br><br>Tolstoy is skilled at depicting subtle psychological situations. Too bad I can't care about the characters. <br><br>His description of russian military officers is critical and unflattering. It is easy to see how their incompetence and lack of caring for their troops foretold the revolution.<br><br>Maybe it's great litterature, but it sure ain't great entertainment.<br><br>I'm about 20 hours into the 62-hour narration. I'm sticking with it mainly because I want to read about Napoleon & Moscow from the russian perspective. Also so I can tell friends how painless it is to listen to the book, something few people would ever sit down to do.<br><br>I enjoyed "The DaVinci Code", "The Company", "A Beautiful Mind" far more than W&P. BTW I have an arts degree, and have studied french, english, latin, spanish and greek litterature.
Someone who likes Da Vinci code should not even talk about Tolstoy :mad: ...Audio-book :confused: Yes, HC Andersen, I was 4 years old, I loved those fairy tales...Your degree should make you much smarter, instead of showing signs of arrogancy. Shame on your teachers who let you pass.

[conniekat8]

1)
3) I've read it in Russian



oooh, I'm so jealous!

As for the rest of the discussion....
When I was in Highschool, War and Peace and Anna karenjina were reqired reading, and yes, I read them.
Now about 20 years later, I'm almost finished with War and Peace, and Anna Karenina is next...
Life experience and maturity (especially emotional maturity) will certainly contribute to seeing the work in a different light, and with different level of enjoyment and entertainment.

The older I get (and I'm not all that old, not even 40 yet) the more I understand the phrase "Youth is wasted on the young"

[bazarov]

oooh, I'm so jealous!
Boris is Russian.
oooh, I'm so jealous!:lol: :lol:

[Melisande]

War and Peace is one of the best books I've ever read, but I wasn't able to get into it when I was younger. I too thought it was boring - then. Little by little, my tastes turned away from popular fiction and literature to mostly literature. Some of you will know what I mean.

I now prefer extremely good writing. Reading Tolstoy out loud is dicey (I'm doing it right now, but I have spent a decade or more practicing my dramatic reading skills - hiring some announcer type voice or actor to "read" War and Peace would be a difficult project to make successful). Some parts read well out loud, some parts need to be gazed at and savored with the eye. If a person isn't into the actual written word - but needs their literature read out loud to them - that's a different action than reading a book.

That being said, though, even as a reader (rather than a listener), War and Peace did not appeal to me when I was in my twenties and thirties. I would have liked it in my middle thirties, but I had already developed a bias against it - mainly because people said things like the original post on this thread.

Now, I find it one of the most absorbing, intelligent books I've ever read, and it so skillfully mixes romance, history and character study, it's amazing. Of course, now I'm interested in European history, alternate military history, critiques of history itself, and so on - and find those interests essential to this read. The love stories are lovely, but is the overall historic scope of the book that makes it fascinating. I see nothing being written about our current time - or the wars of our past century - that even comes close.

Tolstoy's anti-war stance is profound and there may never be a better one.

[cidkid]

I'm only 23, just read it for the first time, and whether I liked it or not, I'd never be fool enough to denounce any book I'd only read a third of, especially on a forum specifically in place for people who have read the book! To me, and I'm going to assume most here, in modest silence, simply calling it boring makes it sound like it's just over your poor head, and that together with your strange method of "reading", as well as the contradicting insistance of informing us both of your distaste for high class affairs as well as your supposedly high class education, just doesn't lend any credit to you or why you even think you're a person who should voice an opinion in these regards. Thanks for wasting my time.