Epilogue from War and Peace

[DystopianGypsy]

Hi, everyone!:smile5:

At the moment, I'm reading War and Peace. I've heard mixed reactions, but what I've found is that, despite its length and a huge list of characters, it isn't hard to read. I'm enjoying it.
The problem, however, is the epilogue. I've skipped ahead to see what I'm in for, and it looks boringly daunting.

Apart from just powering through it, do you guys have any thoughts, ideas, or advice? Taking notes? Using cliff notes to aide my understanding? Or should I just skim through it and take away from it whatever strikes a chord in me?

Thanks, everyone!!!

[mal4mac]

I just read it at the same pace as the rest of the novel, realising it was Tolstoy in philosophical/historical mode, so didn't expect the easy aesthetic pleasures of the best of the novel. Just dive in, it isn't that daunting/boring, it's not Kant...

[mtpspur]

I read it over roughly a two month period and found the ending unsatisfying. I was reading at a leisurely streayd pace and the two scenes I liked THE MOST was the mowing grass scene and Andrei's death scene. I felt often that Tolstoy would write beautifully on some passages and give SHORT shrift to others. Frankly I thought he was spread too thin. I disliked Pierre and never ever felt sorry for him. Natasha bored me to tears --never understood why men adored her. I liked Mary best but Nikolai falling for her never rang true and poor Sonya was a witless victim. I am glad I read the book but failed to be enthralled with it. However on the advice of two very dear friends I read Anna Karenina and LOVED it--the story was tighter and Tolstoy seems to know what he wished to say -but again the ending left too many characters hanging. I wanted to KNOW what the final fates were and not just a foreboding. War and Peace--too much scope--not enough focus--Anna---almost perfect. Just saying--one grumpy dinosaur's opinion.

[mal4mac]

I found all the characters fascinating. I wanted more of them, but didn't really think that was spreading things too thin. With a title like War & Peace he was obviously going for the widest of scopes, and why not, we shouldn't just have pure "character" novels should we? I'm re-reading Anna K at the moment and loving it again. It is tighter, but loses the panoramic vistas of W&P. Levin & Kitty are a bit like Pierre & Natasha, can you really love the former and not the latter? I don't think you should expect the endings neatly tied up, these novels are like the world, and you don't get neatly tied up endings in the world.

[Calidore]

I read it over roughly a two month period and found the ending unsatisfying. I was reading at a leisurely streayd pace and the two scenes I liked THE MOST was the mowing grass scene and Andrei's death scene. I felt often that Tolstoy would write beautifully on some passages and give SHORT shrift to others. Frankly I thought he was spread too thin. I disliked Pierre and never ever felt sorry for him. Natasha bored me to tears --never understood why men adored her. I liked Mary best but Nikolai falling for her never rang true and poor Sonya was a witless victim. I am glad I read the book but failed to be enthralled with it. However on the advice of two very dear friends I read Anna Karenina and LOVED it--the story was tighter and Tolstoy seems to know what he wished to say -but again the ending left too many characters hanging. I wanted to KNOW what the final fates were and not just a foreboding. War and Peace--too much scope--not enough focus--Anna---almost perfect. Just saying--one grumpy dinosaur's opinion.

I'm currently reading W & P and finding it a total slog. I've also got Anna Karenina and was going to ask the forum at some point if that's any better. Thanks for an answer in advance!

[Ecurb]

War and Peace starts slowly; Anna Karennina starts with a BANG. They are equally great, although I prefer War and Peace because it isn't as depressing.

[mtpspur]

I can agree with the endings not being neatly tied up. However as a reader one is accustomed to having a complete story wrapped up or at worst leave oyu hanging with Scarlett O'Hara doing a Little Orphan Annie and dreaming of tomorrow. I came at War and Peace from a few different angles. One -was reading it to please a Russian friend I chat with online and show a bit of respect for her nation's heritage. Two--I had heard for years and years that this was one of the greatest works ever with a fascinating romantic angle. Three--retired military so was expecting at least something on the level of Bernard Cornwell's Sharper series re the War sections. My overall feeling upon completing the epic was that Tolstoy never made the War come alive and the Peace was boring. I didn't necessarily need a day by day history but it just seemed to be glossed over. There are many great sections well written and way too many passed over and given short shrift. Pierre was dull and boring from beginning to end. Natasha to my mind was a spoiled 16 year old who never matured. The nominal villain doesn't even do revenge very well. The book just seems to end. I am very glad I read Anna--Tolstoy still ends the book abruptly and I couldn't help but think in modern times Anna would have had a happier fate--divorce, alimony, full custody etc. The miracle -to me- was Vronsky was FAITHFUL as her lover--being somewhat aware f real life and observing life in its convoluted ways I found this astonishing especially after Anna starts going crazy--most guys would have bailed then. A tighter story --W & P--too big to handle and characters I had an awful time caring about--Mary became my favorite mostly because of her faith and her patience with her father. One small minor note--was never quite sure how these people were financing themselves or staying afloat--some huge figures seemed to be tossed around very casually. Just observations. At my age came to the book too late to be awed by it. As I often say just because I dislike Hemingway does NOT mean Hemingway isn't a great writer--so too for Tolstoy.

[mal4mac]

Vronsky was FAITHFUL as her lover--being somewhat aware f real life and observing life in its convoluted ways I found this astonishing especially after Anna starts going crazy--most guys would have bailed then.

I think he was still in love with Anna, felt much responsibility for her awkward position, and being a decent chap I think he would have stuck by her. And was Anna really that crazy? Worried about Vronsky's decline in passion, she was getting a bit overly possessive, and read too much into Vronsky's change in attitude. That, combined with her rejection by friends and society, made her suicide believable.


One small minor note--was never quite sure how these people were financing themselves or staying afloat--some huge figures seemed to be tossed around very casually.

Being British, and suffering from a Royal Family, that didn't have me wondering at all! "These people" are princes, counts, and what have you, so you can assume they have endless amounts of inherited wealth. It surprised me when one of them... Anna's brother... started to run out of money. At one point, he muses about having to seek a job position from a Jew, when he is descended from the "robber-viking" founder of Russia, some time in the first millennium. This really highlighted the badly-founded, unquestioned "sense of entitlement" that "these people" have. (Only wonderful Levin really doubts it...) I'm surprised the serfs didn't revolt :)

[Calidore]

"The peasants are revolting!"
"You're not kidding."

[wordeater]

"War and Peace" is one of my favorite novels - I read the book twice - but I agree that the epilogue is too long. It's the lenghth of another novel. I read it much faster than the rest of the book, turning it into "War and Pace".

The first part of the epilogue is the what-happened-after; the second is the philosophical, but he already explained the main point of his philosophy during the novel itself.

[WoodMarc]

The winding up of the story in the epilogue was a terrible disappointment to me, I don't buy any of it, none of it rings true.

Which is a shame as I love the rest of the book — odd as I don't really read novels on the whole. I picked it up when I was twenty, and have probably read it ten times since then.

As for the second part of the epilogue, like the rest of the philosophising I say skim it the first time, then skip it thereafter!