This question has already been asked before by lostdog on a thread " Nikolay in War and Peace " in a "Threads in Forum" category of the sub-forum on Tolstoy, but no-one except me replied, so I decided to post it here :
Do you think she would have made a good marriage with Nikolay ?
Should she have married Dolokhov when he proposed to her ?
Last edited by olichka; 02-07-2007 at 08:28 PM.
I answered...LET'S CONTINUE thread.
At thunder and tempest, At the world's coldheartedness,
During times of heavy loss And when you're sad
The greatest art on earth Is to seem uncomplicatedly gay.
To get things clear, they have to firstly be very unclear. But if you get them too quickly, you probably got them wrong.
If you need me urgent, send me a PM
Though Dolokhov is my favorite character there (so I would prefer him getting what he wants), this pair would be a terrible mistake for both of them. Sophia is a kind of woman, for whom morality is the most important thing. Dolokhov's values are totally oposite - strength, fearless and determination. They would never understand each other. He surely couldn't share his life with a woman of such principles. And she would never see any good features of his nature, so she would always only criticise him.
I guess it's a controversial issue. However, considering how Sonya's life turned out : boring, empty life as an old maid, who's living as an appendage to other people's lives and who doesn't even receive decent gratitude for her help, she perhaps should have given Dolokhov a go.
Although he is a volatile, cruel man, he does love those that are close to him with such passionate loyalty, that he's ready to sacrifice himself for them. He's a most tender son and a good brother to a hunchback sister. So I think he would be a loyal and supportive husband, particularly considering how much he loves Sonya.
I do agree with you that because of her kindness and morality, Sonya would have disapproved of Dolokhov, but perhaps she could have also softened him ?
But I also think that she, being timid and shy, was probably also quite scared of him and overwhelmed by his sensuality and would find him difficult to live with.
But then she would have a husband, her own home, children and be able to occupy herself with their upbringing, thus leading a meaningful life.
Last edited by olichka; 02-21-2007 at 06:03 PM.
Actually I don't think she could soften him... 'Cause they would "speak different languages" and "live in different demensions". As for Dolokhov, most likely, he would be disappointed by her demands on him, and although he would still love her, he would not change himself (I don't think anybody could totally change it's values). So there would be a complete misunderstanding between them.
And by the way, she would never love such a person as Dolokhov, so their relations wouldn't be equal..
And I think he loved not her, but some kind of the image, that he had.. 'cause he couldn't have loved her morality - it's not what he values.
But generally speaking, those relations are worse for him than for her. He would have nothing to set against her morality, 'cause he is good at war, but he is no specialist in human relations; and he would love her, but she wouldn't...
Fear is the mother of morality.
-
One should die proudly when it is no longer possible to live proudly.
Friedrich Nietzsche
I read " War and Peace " a really long time ago, so I don't remember all the details ( I guess I would have to check the passages about Sonya and Dolokhov and their respective characters), but I remember Dolokhov's view on women as explained to Rostov : he considered all women venal and faithless creatures who would sell themselves out to anyone if it's convenient to them, not having met any who was pure and loyal. He further elaborated that if he ever met such woman, he would give his life and soul for her.
I guess he considered Sonya such a woman, from his observation of her devotion to Rostov and the entire Rostov family. And he was right--after all, Sonya did refuse him, out of her loyalty to Nikolay, even though he could not promise with certainty that he would marry her, nor indicated in any way that he was committed to her. (Remember, that after his return from the war, he spent a lot of time with his buddies and gave very little attention to Sonya ). As well, from his observation of her behaviour to Rostov's family, Dolokhov must have deduced that she would also be a caring and loving wife, in addition to being loyal.
The need for a faithful/loving wife is an indication of a need for love, caring and attention, thus hinting at a warmth and sensitivity ( and perhaps a possibility that she could effect positive changes in him ? Perhaps what he needed was a good, loving, prudent woman to break his habits of gambling, womanizing and his cruelty to his friends ? It's possible that those habits were acquired through lack of his own home and hearth and of a steadying and humanizing influence of a wife. Remember that his mother was old and that his sister was a hunchback, both requiring care, but not able to provide it for him ). With his readiness to give his life and soul for such a woman, it indicates that there would be reciprocity in the marriage.
Off course, a question still remains whether Sonya would love him. However, it would have been better for her if she had tried, for her life as an old maid turned out a lot worse than her life with Dolokhov would have. Is being a penniless old maid with no purpose or occupation in life, nor appreciation or respect from others a better fate ? Remember a scene at Nikolay's in the Epiologue where Sonya is sitting by the samovar with a bored and empty look on her face, pouring tea out for everyone like some servant ? At least, even if she didn't love Dolokhov, she'd be pouring tea out for her own family and guests in her own house.
At the very worst, even if they didn't see eye-to-eye, they could always end up leading separate lives, like so many married people at that time ( remember Boris's self-consolation that he could always see Julie as little as possible ? ). But she would have had children from the marriage, her own home and power and influence in that sphere of life. Not to mention the fact that she would have had respectability as a married woman, and being married to a war hero at that ( remember Dolokhov taking an active part in War of 1812 as a leader of a partisan group ? ). As well, he was actually a very handsome man, so what would be so tragic to be married to a man like that ? I would say that it would be a better fate than Anna Karenina's, for not only didn't she love or respect her husband, but she was married to a much older and unattractive man, by whom she was repulsed physically !
On the other hand, personally I think that Sonya refused Dolokhov because she, being shy, timid and unsexual found the prospect of being physically intimate with such a formidable and virile man quite daunting. (Compared to Dolokhov, Nikolay is very tame and straitlaced ). In this respect, according to Tolstoy, she's demonstrating a lack of life-force and energy ( as opposed to Natasha who is passionate ).
Last edited by olichka; 02-22-2007 at 08:51 PM.
As a matter of fact, Tolstoy considered Sonya's choice in life as wrong ( and I agree with him !). His description of her miserable spinsterhood as opposed to Natasha's exuberant fruitfulness proves that point. According to Tolstoy's philosophy, while there's life, there's happiness, and one should try to find happiness in any situation (although certainly not Sonya's spinsterhood ). Sonya's lifestyle in the Epilogue is actually a form of death : total absence of any joy, fulfillment or personal gains; in fact, a total waste of life !!!
From Dolohov's words, I think he would never find any happiness with Sonya or any other women, and he surely didn't see her like a woman to die for. It was his ideal, but the question is how real he was?
Olichka, I think you're little too harsh on Sonya. I really respect her decision, what do you mean by ''they could live separate lives''. What kind of family is that? She could have a nice husband, yes maybe; but she never stoped loving Nikolai and that was really nice from her. I don't see her like a servant to Rostov family, I would say it's more like act of love to them because of everything they have made for her in all those years but in the other hand, I don't understand how could she stay with them after Lady Rostov said to her to leave Nikolai??? Where was her pride??? Like she stopped to sense things around her...
Welcome Fairy Wilbury,!
I think Dolohov was too strong individual for Sonya and they would never be happy.
At thunder and tempest, At the world's coldheartedness,
During times of heavy loss And when you're sad
The greatest art on earth Is to seem uncomplicatedly gay.
To get things clear, they have to firstly be very unclear. But if you get them too quickly, you probably got them wrong.
If you need me urgent, send me a PM
Sorry, didn't mean to be harsh on Sonya. On the contrary, I just feel really bad for her. What I meant was that she could have at least fulfilled herself as a mother and a woman : after all, she's so good at fussing over Rostovs' kids, she might as well have had her own. She was an intelligent, well-educated, prudent woman and would have raised her children very well. She was also a very pretty girl, and it's too bad that her looks were for nothing ! It's just a sense of wasted potential that bothers me in this situation as well as humiliations to which she is subjected by the Rostovs.
As to performing all these duties for the Rostovs out of gratitude, that particular aspect may not be servitude, but how are the Rostovs repaying her ? Tolstoy mentions how everything she does is accepted with too little acknowledgement and gratitude. Isn't that demeaning ? Even if they did offer her a home, they can still show gratitude and appreciation, after all, she's their cousin, not their maid !
She gets no respect from Princess Marya who's at times hostile towards her and even from her former close friend Natasha :discussing her, they compare her " pityingly " to a fruitless raspberry bloom ! Isn't that demeaning ?
As to it being really poetic that she still loves Nikolay, it certainly is that, but you yourself have said that staying with the family after they forbade her to marry Nikolay just shows total lack of pride. And particularly to be there and be a witness to the fruits of his relationship with Marya ( Tolstoy does mention Sonya casting glances at the pregnant Marya ) is total self-abnegation and self-humiliation. I should think that being married to Dolokhov would be a lot more dignified. You're right that she seems to have lost a capacity for sensitivity which just proves once again that she wasn't really living !
Perhaps she did make a good decision if she didn't care for him, and perhaps he would have been too strong a personality for her, but then she should not have stayed on in the Rostov family... Maybe becoming a nun would have been a much more dignified, respectable alternative...( Moving in with some other bunch of relatives would put her in a humiliating position of another kind, I think ).
Also, some questions : how do you know that he didn't consider her a woman " to die for " ? After all, she is a very pretty and graceful girl, and Tolstoy does describe Dolokhov as ogling her in such an ardent manner, that not only Sonya, but the countess and even Natasha turn beet-red ? He was certainly vindictive towards Nikolay, making him lose all that money.
With regard to their leading separate lives : sure, it's not much of a family, but a lot of people at that time had similar arrangements, with women devoting themselves entirely to their children. Look at Dolly from " Anna K. "---sure, it's not ideal, and actually quite bitter, but at least she has a life of her own. So does Anna Karenina for that matter. Besides, what kind of family does Sonya have, anyways---a surrogate one ? in love with someone else's husband ?
Anyways, I think that staying loyal to a married Nikolay, however romantic and poetic it may be, is not worth the sacrifice of a much fuller, even if an imperfect life. It only looks good in the novels.
Last edited by olichka; 02-22-2007 at 08:14 PM.
OK, no need to apologizeSorry, didn't mean to be harsh on Sonya. On the contrary, I just feel really bad for her.
I also think that they treated her very badly, surely she deserved more, but the question is did she wanted or needed anything more? Normally, everybody would, but it looks like she didn't...I don't like that Marya, I think she treated her badly because she was aware that Nikolai probably cares for Sonya then for her. After all, he married her only because of money!As to performing all these duties for the Rostovs out of gratitude, that particular aspect may not be servitude, but how are the Rostovs repaying her ? Tolstoy mentions how everything she does is accepted with too little acknowledgement and gratitude. Isn't that demeaning ? Even if they did offer her a home, they can still show gratitude and appreciation, after all, she's their cousin, not their maid !
I agree with you, she should leave Rostov family, if not with Dolohov, then alone, maybe somebody else would appear in her life, monastery isn't the only option.Perhaps she did make a good decision if she didn't care for him, and perhaps he would have been too strong a personality for her, but then she should not have stayed on in the Rostov family... Maybe becoming a nun would have been a much more dignified, respectable alternative...( Moving in with some other bunch of relatives would put her in a humiliating position of another kind, I think ).
I think she was too normal and simple for him, maybe I'm wrong...Also, some questions : how do you know that he didn't consider her a woman " to die for " ? After all, she is a very pretty and graceful girl, and Tolstoy does describe Dolokhov as ogling her in such an ardent manner, that not only Sonya, but the countess and even Natasha turn beet-red ? He was certainly vindictive towards Nikolay, making him lose all that money.
Yes, but Dolly and Anna loved their husbands in the moment of marriage, Dolly would never leave Stiva if only he had been faithful. I think it's better to be alone then to be with anybody...With regard to their leading separate lives : sure, it's not much of a family, but a lot of people at that time had similar arrangements, with women devoting themselves entirely to their children. Look at Dolly from " Anna K. "---sure, it's not ideal, and actually quite bitter, but at least she has a life of her own. So does Anna Karenina for that matter. Besides, what kind of family does Sonya have, anyways---a surrogate one ? in love with someone else's husband ?
It seems to me more like a miss of self-respect then a great love.Anyways, I think that staying loyal to a married Nikolay, however romantic and poetic it may be, is not worth the sacrifice of a much fuller, even if an imperfect life. It only looks good in the novels.
At thunder and tempest, At the world's coldheartedness,
During times of heavy loss And when you're sad
The greatest art on earth Is to seem uncomplicatedly gay.
To get things clear, they have to firstly be very unclear. But if you get them too quickly, you probably got them wrong.
If you need me urgent, send me a PM
That is the very true.. He does not need a woman with high morality and down-to-earth attitude to life. He needs ethereal creature, who would love him with all her heart, whom he would consider as hurtable, but beautiful woman. He has to see that this woman needs his defense and admires him for his strong character, his manhood, his bravery, but never tries to blame him for "cruelity".Originally Posted by bazarov
that is his attitude for life:
"I don't care a straw about anyone but those I love; but those I love, I love so that I would give my life for them, and the others I'd throttle if they stood in my way."
That's not bad or wrong and he is worth a woman who would understand and string along that. Sonya would never understand that, so she would try to change him, if they had lived together.. That won't bring him hapiness, 'cause there will be no understanding between them.
Fear is the mother of morality.
-
One should die proudly when it is no longer possible to live proudly.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Well said!
At thunder and tempest, At the world's coldheartedness,
During times of heavy loss And when you're sad
The greatest art on earth Is to seem uncomplicatedly gay.
To get things clear, they have to firstly be very unclear. But if you get them too quickly, you probably got them wrong.
If you need me urgent, send me a PM
As much fun as conjecture can be (hence the vast web of fanfiction based on many a cult classic) I think this thread is innappropriate for this particular novel.
I've read war and peace in its entirety several times and I frequently return to bits and pieces of it when I am between books or merely nostalgic. One of the most important themes in W&P is that there is no point in trying to divine the path a person may have followed had they made a difdferent choice. On the contrary, Tolstoy reiterates the inevitability of all that has happened and the utter irrelevence of contemplating "what-ifs"
Furthermore, it is natural for every character to behave as they do. There are no inconsistencies in any character in War and Peace, I suspect resulting from a deep understanding of human nature on the part of Tolstoy as well as much observation of men and women in his society.
Thus I don't think this question is worth discussing.
Also, the idea that Tolstoy intended that Sonya's life was wasted because she was not married is categorically untrue. He does clearly emphasize the sanctity of family love, but his definition of family includes not merely traditional nuclear families, but the "family" created by the web of love and loyalty developed through all the characters' respective relationships. (ie the lack of familial feeling demonstrative in the Kuragins' blood and marital relationships versus the fraternal love between the unrelated parties, Pierre and Prince Andre) To say that "Tolstoy clearly believed she chose the wrong path" is simply not well supported.
I agreewith Mrs. Robinson's post wholeheartedly!!!
For one, Tolstoy is very good at describing how his characters's destiny is determined partially by their choices, and partially by circumstances they find themselves in...
If one pays close attention to the existentialist contemplation at the tail end of the epilogue, where Tolstoy talks of existance of free will, and how free it really is, one will find that this is applicable not only to politics and to history, but to his characters lives too.
The other thought that comes to mind is about the value of Sonya's exisatance as described in the book. In the extended family such as theirs Sonya's value is similar to those of the Daugterov in the army. Does what she is told, takes care of things, much like a small but invaluable cog in the machine. Instead of the "war machine" the machine she supports is the family.
Unfortunately, for Dughterov and for Sonya, and as it is demonstrated in this thread too, most people tend to focus on the glitzy and main roles. Value and a necessity of existance of supporting roles is grossly undervalued.
In the book there's a number of lives that, perhaps didn't achieve their full potential, in the traditional sense, but in no way were their lives lost or insignificant.
You make a good point. However, why is Tolstoy then describing Sonya sitting with a bored look by the samovar ? Why is he saying that her help is received with too little gratitude ? Why are Natasha and Marya pitiying her, comparing her to a fruitless raspberry blossom ?
Also, who else are you referring to when saying their life didn't reach their full potential, but, nevertheless, their lives weren't lost ? Is Prince Andrey one of those people ?
I'd like some to hear some insights from you with regard to this character's unrealized potential and the reasons for it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote