Boring

[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!

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! 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]

Oh, dear, Boris239!!!

You read it in three days???

You must be very motivated!!!

Allow me to be so bold:

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!

[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".