About to attempt War and Peace

[Razeus]

I received the love Pevear translated paperback version for Christmas and one of my goals this is year is to read it. I've got 3 other books I want to get through before I start it (Invisible Man, The Corrections and The Great Gatsby), and I'd imagine it would take me the whole year to finish it.

Any suggestions. Should I go at it real hard for 1-2 weeks, read another unrelated book to break things up, then go back at it again for another 2 weeks. Or should I stick with it until the last word is read?

[First thoughts]

It's really not that difficult a book to read, it's only the length which often puts people off. There may seem to be quite a few characters at first, but a few hundred pages in you'll start to realise who the most important ones are. If you take a break before this, you might get a false impression of how difficult it is, but really, once you get 300/400 pages in, it's all easier from there.

If you're the sort of person who likes to take breaks while reading, then by all means read something else for a while, but i'd recommend not to do this until you're settled into the story, and maybe remind yourself of all the charcaters before you go back to it.

Enjoy. It's an excellent book.

[Ecurb]

War and Peace starts slowly. The long section about the Free Masons can be offputting. Once you get a couple of hundred pages into it, though, it's a page turner. You won't be able to put it down!

[dfloyd]

and I had little trouble with it. Somewhere I latched onto a listing of characters and the families they belonged to. This helped a lot since I did not read it straight through but read several other books while completing the novel. I also used the internet requently to familiarize myself with the battles of Napoleon. It is a much easier read than some other long novels I have read such as Les Miserables. I enjoyed it all except the ending pages ( after the novel story telling is complete) which delved into Tolstoy's personal philosophy.

To tell the truth, I had an easier time reading War and Peace than Franzen's Corrections. Not because Franzen is a harder read, but because he is boring. I managed to finish Corrections, but I don't think I would read another of his novels. He is a mediocre writer, more attuned to writing magazine articles.

[TheChilly]

Spent a while on "War and Peace". Long, but a very engaging read.

[mal4mac]

I borrowed Pevear & V from the library last month for a re-read of War & Peace in a different translation, and read it in about two weeks - not going hard at it but just reading it when I felt like it - admittedly that meant most of my spare time, it's so good I didn't really want to do anything else!

It's better than Gatsby, which seems very narrow, shallow and provincial by comparison. If you want a 'great American' comparison try 'Moby Dick', which I'm reading at the moment. That bears comparison for philosophical depth and grandeur (not as a love story though :) W&P is *much* better that the Corrections (not worth reading IMHO. I'm ashamed to mention it in the same breath - like comparing caviar to a crab stick.)

So why put W&P off? Why read something inferior when you can read the best?

Pevear lists all the essential characters at the beginning of the book in neat family trees. Read the introduction and that tree of names. Don't try memorising the tree! Those Russian names, and variations, are tough. Just glance back to the tree if you find yourself wondering, "Who is that again?" I actually didn't need to glance back often, Tolstoy presents the characters so vividly that you will quickly be reminded who they are by the context.

By the way I've criticised Pevear & V in the past as I preferred the Maudes' translation of his shorter novels in a side by side reading. But I thought I'd give P&V another chance by reading W&P in one gulp, without side by side comparison. I liked it a lot more than I thought I would. In fact, I like it just as much as the Maudes'. Maybe Tolstoy is so good that he just shines through any decent translation? I did glance back at the Maudes' when I found P&V getting a bit convoluted (not often!) and found the Maudes' to be a bit sticky at those points as well. My first full read through was of the Maudes' translation. I wouldn't like to recommend one above the other - as you have P&V, why not press ahead with that? I can't see how anyone would fail to enjoy it.

P&V have a detailed alphabetical appendix at the back that helps with historical context, if you want it. I would argue that this is hardly needed at all to enjoy the novel - just remember that the battles, the Russian general (and Napoleon) are real characters, but Tolstoy's main characters are fictional (but often heavily based on people in Tolstoy's circle - old Rostov is heavily based on his maternal grandfather, for instance. Tolstoy seems to be an amalgam of the three main characters, with Natasha being an amalgam of his (young) wife and his sisters. Too big to be one character in his novel, but no one big enough to be his heroine? )

[kasie]

If you haven't read a Russian novel before, you may find the names confusing - each character has a given or Christian name, a patronymic or father's name and a surname, as well as familiar or endearing names or a nickname. As mal4mac has said, you may find it useful to study the family tree at the beginning of your edition - or you may find it even more useful to make your own as you go along: use a piece of card as a book mark and jot down the name of each character as he/she appears, adding the other names as they occur and reminders of their relationship to other characters. My copy of W & P still has the bookmark/character list I made when I first read it rather a long time ago.

I wouldn't plan to read it episodically - keep going or you may lose the thread of the narration but if you find yourself overwhelmed by the scale of the story, by all means take a break and return to it refreshed. Above all, enjoy it.

[Razeus]

Ya, if I keep putting it off, I'll never get to it. It's already March and I've had the book since Christmas. Since tomorrow is my b-day, I think that's a good time to start and see how long it takes me. Might have to print out the Sparknotes to help me stay on track with the story. So I think I'll make this my main book with the other 2 as my backup books.

[Paulclem]

I'm reading it at the moment, and I'm about a third of the way through. It's a great story.

In preparation for reading it, I read about Napoleon's 1813 Russian campaign. I like the cross reference with history, (I read a bit about Austerlitz as well), and the part I'm at now has had Napoleon and the Czar meeting - which I hadn't formerly know about. Of course it's not necessary to read around, but it helps with the context, and adds an interesting historical dimension.

The other interesting thing about War and Peace is that it was used to bolster Russian patriotism in WW2 - particularly during the Stalingrad campaign. Tolstoy's take on the Russian spirit - which I've yet to come to as napoleon invades Russia - was used for propaganda purposes. It makes the historical period covered, and the life of the novel after, rather interesting.

[keilj]

Even some fans of War and Peace admit that it has hundreds of pages of unnecessary descriptions in it. Padding a story like this is my number 1 pet peeve about writing - so I doubt I'll ever try to slog through War and Peace

[Paulclem]

Even some fans of War and Peace admit that it has hundreds of pages of unnecessary descriptions in it. Padding a story like this is my number 1 pet peeve about writing - so I doubt I'll ever try to slog through War and Peace

Never say never mate. I never thought I'd read it, and now at the greybeard's age of 47, I decided to give it a go. It's good.

[Ecurb]

Even some fans of War and Peace admit that it has hundreds of pages of unnecessary descriptions in it. Padding a story like this is my number 1 pet peeve about writing - so I doubt I'll ever try to slog through War and Peace

A few people descry the chapters of philosophy in War and Peace. I love them, though. Tolstoy may not have been a great philosopher -- but his theories of history are so well supported by the (fictional) actions of the novel is impossible not to accept them while reading the book.

One more piece of advice -- don't forget the epilogues. One is a philosophy of history. The other is a visit to the surviving characters some years later. It demonstrates Tolstoy's genius at understanding and depicting character and his intuitive grasp of what is really important (hint -- it isn't the Napoleonic Wars).

[Paulclem]

I'm reading it for my interest in the Napoleonic Wars.

[Ecurb]

I'm reading it for my interest in the Napoleonic Wars.

One argument about War and Peace is: Which is better, the war parts or the peace parts? Since they are both very, very great, it's a tough question to answer. Have you gotten to Austerlitz yet?

Tolstoy was obviously very interested in the Napoleonic Wars and writes about them very well. However, the transient political and military ambitions of nations, leaders, and soldiers are (acc. Tolstoy) less important than Love and Family, which transcend the moment. Anna Karennina (in Tolstoy's other great novel) is doomed by renouncing her family and abandonning her son.

War and Peace is the tale of two families -- the Bolkonskis and the Rostovs -- and the story of orphan Pierre's quest for a family. The family dynamics are the most moving and intriguing thing in the novel (although, of course, the military campaigns affect those dynamics). Nonetheless, Tolstoy's anti-Great-Man theory of history is also fascinating, and incontrovertable given the accuracy of the battle descriptions in the novel.

[stlukesguild]

Even some fans of War and Peace admit that it has hundreds of pages of unnecessary descriptions in it. Padding a story like this is my number 1 pet peeve about writing - so I doubt I'll ever try to slog through War and Peace

What is unnecessary? Who decides what is or is not unnecessary padding? I suppose if one reads like a high-school student with a goal of focusing upon the narrative and getting through to the end, then yes, any novel that goes into great depth is unnecessarily padded. The goal of reading, to my mind however, isn't rushing forth to the end... but rather it is about enjoying the experience (perhaps not unlike life itself). There are no unnecessary descriptions and padding involved in War and Peace from my perspective. Yes, War and Peace is a great sprawling novel... and yes it is laden with description of historical events... but that is part of what makes it what it is... a great novel that contrast the sprawling events of history with those of a group of individual characters. The mere suggestion that the novel is "padded"... especially by someone who hasn't even bothered to read the book... reminds me of the comic scene in the film, Amadeus, when the Emperor suggests that Mozart's latest opera is great... but it has too many notes. "Simply cut a few, and it'll be perfect".:sosp:

[mortalterror]

I think you could tighten up the writing in War and Peace and drop as much as 400 pages. There's actually a lot less padding in Anna Karenina, which in some ways is a better novel.

[Paulclem]

One argument about War and Peace is: Which is better, the war parts or the peace parts? Since they are both very, very great, it's a tough question to answer. Have you gotten to Austerlitz yet?

Tolstoy was obviously very interested in the Napoleonic Wars and writes about them very well. However, the transient political and military ambitions of nations, leaders, and soldiers are (acc. Tolstoy) less important than Love and Family, which transcend the moment. Anna Karennina (in Tolstoy's other great novel) is doomed by renouncing her family and abandonning her son.

War and Peace is the tale of two families -- the Bolkonskis and the Rostovs -- and the story of orphan Pierre's quest for a family. The family dynamics are the most moving and intriguing thing in the novel (although, of course, the military campaigns affect those dynamics). Nonetheless, Tolstoy's anti-Great-Man theory of history is also fascinating, and incontrovertable given the accuracy of the battle descriptions in the novel.

The family dynamic is clearly invested with much emphasis in War and Peace. I've also read Anna Karenina, which is a superior book in terms of its writing, but is less interesting from my perspective.

I'm past Austerlitz, and I found the account well written. As I said previously, a little reading around adds to the historical context. I think I read that Tolstoy had served in the army - was it in the Crimea? - and I think it shows in the authentic detail.

[Alexander III]

The family dynamic is clearly invested with much emphasis in War and Peace. I've also read Anna Karenina, which is a superior book in terms of its writing, but is less interesting from my perspective.

I'm past Austerlitz, and I found the account well written. As I said previously, a little reading around adds to the historical context. I think I read that Tolstoy had served in the army - was it in the Crimea? - and I think it shows in the authentic detail.

Yea he served as an officer, he was stationed in the southern Caucasus region, and he also directly participated in the siege of Sevastopol. From his experience in the military he wrote the novella The Cossacks and the short stories Sevastopol Sketches.

[mal4mac]

I'm reading it at the moment, and I'm about a third of the way through. It's a great story.

In preparation for reading it, I read about Napoleon's 1813 Russian campaign. I like the cross reference with history, (I read a bit about Austerlitz as well), and the part I'm at now has had Napoleon and the Czar meeting - which I hadn't formerly know about. Of course it's not necessary to read around, but it helps with the context, and adds an interesting historical dimension.

The other interesting thing about War and Peace is that it was used to bolster Russian patriotism in WW2 - particularly during the Stalingrad campaign. Tolstoy's take on the Russian spirit - which I've yet to come to as napoleon invades Russia - was used for propaganda purposes. It makes the historical period covered, and the life of the novel after, rather interesting.

Yes Tolstoy's novels were used in various ways to bolster Russian patriotism by the Stalinists, they mass-produced W&P but banned his later religious works. Tolstoy's account of the Russian spirit is tremendous - I wonder if Churchill was inspired by Tolstoy? "We'll never surrender..." indeed!

I just read Bartlett's new biography of Tolstoy - it was in the library. It drags a bit here and there but the first few chapters are great to read *after* war and peace. She relates Tolstoy's family + friends to characters in W&P. The last chapter provides (too much!) detail on Tolstoy's appropriation by the Bolsheviks.

The philosophical & historical asides in W&P do go on for a long time, so if you expect, and demand, an "exciting novel" all the way through, you will be disappointed. The novelistic aspects are *very* exciting, so the asides can seem a bit stodgy by comparison, unless you reset your mind. Be prepared to read some historical and philosophical bread, before you get onto the next chunk of novelistic jam. Keep reminding yourself that any intelligent person should, surely, learn *something* about the grand course of the Napoleonic wars, and the philosophy of causality and chance. Tolstoy makes these subjects go down a lot easier than most authors... and the novelistic jam tastes all the better spread on a slice of lightly toasted, organic wholewheat...

[fb0252]

i read W and P my early 20s. Would be interesting to try it again with more complete knowledge of 19th century intellectual history and events than age 21 affords. How does Hegelian philosophy of history, right and left Hegelianism, subsequent twistings of Hegel by Marx to remove the "spirit" as the moving force in history as opposed to human interactions and economics, liberalism, socialism, Das Kapital and the Communist Mannifesto, Feurbach and his anthromorphic view of religion, the German-French wars of 1871 etc. tie in with War and Peace and Tolstoy's thought process? there's also an interesting vid series on Napolean on u tube. all that i remember is W and P as one of the memorable 10 or 20 books that i've read. Builds in momentum to the end. doubt you'll put it down, once u start.

[Paulclem]

Yea he served as an officer, he was stationed in the southern Caucasus region, and he also directly participated in the siege of Sevastopol. From his experience in the military he wrote the novella The Cossacks and the short stories Sevastopol Sketches.

Thanks. I thought I remembered something like that.

[Paulclem]

Yes Tolstoy's novels were used in various ways to bolster Russian patriotism by the Stalinists, they mass-produced W&P but banned his later religious works. Tolstoy's account of the Russian spirit is tremendous - I wonder if Churchill was inspired by Tolstoy? "We'll never surrender..." indeed!

I just read Bartlett's new biography of Tolstoy - it was in the library. It drags a bit here and there but the first few chapters are great to read *after* war and peace. She relates Tolstoy's family + friends to characters in W&P. The last chapter provides (too much!) detail on Tolstoy's appropriation by the Bolsheviks.

The philosophical & historical asides in W&P do go on for a long time, so if you expect, and demand, an "exciting novel" all the way through, you will be disappointed. The novelistic aspects are *very* exciting, so the asides can seem a bit stodgy by comparison, unless you reset your mind. Be prepared to read some historical and philosophical bread, before you get onto the next chunk of novelistic jam. Keep reminding yourself that any intelligent person should, surely, learn *something* about the grand course of the Napoleonic wars, and the philosophy of causality and chance. Tolstoy makes these subjects go down a lot easier than most authors... and the novelistic jam tastes all the better spread on a slice of lightly toasted, organic wholewheat...

Great - I'll take the wholewheat with...strawberry. :lol:

[bohn]

I finished W&P a couple of months ago..

I wouldn't worry about 'how' to read it.. I would just start reading.