Paulclem
04-07-2011, 06:36 PM
It took me a good few weeks to read War and peace, but it is a book well worth the effort. I did take the time to read around a little. I read 1812 – an account of Napoleon’s invasion of Russia, and his retreat from Moscow. I also read Anthony Beevor’s Stalingrad last year, on a separate reading tack, which mentioned the soviet use of War and Peace to inspire the troops. It all conspired to give a bit more insight into the book, and helped to place the story within the historical account. It was also interesting to read about the ongoing influence of War and Peace. In short, a little extra effort pays off, though I think it easily stands on its own.
My initial interest in W&P lay with the historical account of the war and Tolstoy’s rendering of it. He doesn’t disappoint. It feels authentic, and is clearly based upon Tolstoy’s own war experience which included the siege of Sebastopol in the Crimea. He also took the time to visit the site of Borodino, and to view the various aspects of the battlefield as Napoleon and Kutuzov, the two opposing generals would have done.
The noise and chaos of Austerlitz, and the bravery of Borodino are rendered through the various characters. My only criticism is that the depiction of the ordinary soldiers displays a similar degree of detachment as his portraits of the servants, serfs and peasants in other parts of the book. He clearly respects them, as is shown from accounts of his life, and even saw an honesty in the physical labour they undertake. The gun crew observed by Pierre at Borodino could also be the workers on Tolstoy’s estate. Yet they are separate from his own experience, and he never really explores their motivations in the same way he does with the aristocratic members. He is much more comfortable with Rostov charging the French cavalry and exploring the feelings he has when cited for bravery.
I was less interested in the Peace, or social aspects of the book, though this did grow on me as it progressed. The characters of the aristocracy are well drawn, though I think he relies too heavily on blushes as physical manifestations of sincerity, and the portrayal of French sophistication as synonymous with deceit and inconstancy. It is a theme he explores more in Anna Karenina. This melodramatic element in his characters seems to represent Tolstoy’s own perceived social awkwardness. it’s as if he is trying to expound the virtues of this mindset, which does become a little repetitive. It is seen most obviously in Pierre, the unworldly heir to a fortune, whose experiences with the common folk whilst in captivity and the suffering he endures with them enables him to come to terms with his own character and the mess he has made of his married and social life. Perhaps this was Tolstoy’s explanation in his own maturity.
Natasha too seems to embody these qualities, though I find her transformations from Prince Andrew’s doting love, to inconstant eloper to dutiful but domineering wife the least convincing. Of the female characters, Princess Mary is a rock of consistency, whilst the aging Countess Rostov is well portrayed in her dotage.
In conclusion, War and Peace is a long, but very well written book. I’m keen to see a film interpretation of the novel, though this has clearly presented filmmakers with a difficult sequence. The more I find out about Tolstoy, the more inclined to read more of his other works such as Resurrection. I enjoyed War and Peace more than Anna Karenina for the variety of perspectives it covers, and Tolstoy’s clear enthusiasm for the Russian spirit in times of crisis. His portrayal of the war and the inclusion of characters such as the Russian peasant soldiers Tikhon and Platon Karataev mean that I have not only improved my awareness of 19th century Russia, but I have read one of the great Russian novels.
My initial interest in W&P lay with the historical account of the war and Tolstoy’s rendering of it. He doesn’t disappoint. It feels authentic, and is clearly based upon Tolstoy’s own war experience which included the siege of Sebastopol in the Crimea. He also took the time to visit the site of Borodino, and to view the various aspects of the battlefield as Napoleon and Kutuzov, the two opposing generals would have done.
The noise and chaos of Austerlitz, and the bravery of Borodino are rendered through the various characters. My only criticism is that the depiction of the ordinary soldiers displays a similar degree of detachment as his portraits of the servants, serfs and peasants in other parts of the book. He clearly respects them, as is shown from accounts of his life, and even saw an honesty in the physical labour they undertake. The gun crew observed by Pierre at Borodino could also be the workers on Tolstoy’s estate. Yet they are separate from his own experience, and he never really explores their motivations in the same way he does with the aristocratic members. He is much more comfortable with Rostov charging the French cavalry and exploring the feelings he has when cited for bravery.
I was less interested in the Peace, or social aspects of the book, though this did grow on me as it progressed. The characters of the aristocracy are well drawn, though I think he relies too heavily on blushes as physical manifestations of sincerity, and the portrayal of French sophistication as synonymous with deceit and inconstancy. It is a theme he explores more in Anna Karenina. This melodramatic element in his characters seems to represent Tolstoy’s own perceived social awkwardness. it’s as if he is trying to expound the virtues of this mindset, which does become a little repetitive. It is seen most obviously in Pierre, the unworldly heir to a fortune, whose experiences with the common folk whilst in captivity and the suffering he endures with them enables him to come to terms with his own character and the mess he has made of his married and social life. Perhaps this was Tolstoy’s explanation in his own maturity.
Natasha too seems to embody these qualities, though I find her transformations from Prince Andrew’s doting love, to inconstant eloper to dutiful but domineering wife the least convincing. Of the female characters, Princess Mary is a rock of consistency, whilst the aging Countess Rostov is well portrayed in her dotage.
In conclusion, War and Peace is a long, but very well written book. I’m keen to see a film interpretation of the novel, though this has clearly presented filmmakers with a difficult sequence. The more I find out about Tolstoy, the more inclined to read more of his other works such as Resurrection. I enjoyed War and Peace more than Anna Karenina for the variety of perspectives it covers, and Tolstoy’s clear enthusiasm for the Russian spirit in times of crisis. His portrayal of the war and the inclusion of characters such as the Russian peasant soldiers Tikhon and Platon Karataev mean that I have not only improved my awareness of 19th century Russia, but I have read one of the great Russian novels.