War and Peace

Nov 22, 2008 Jessica rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: groups-of-people, kind-of-depressing, leetle-boys, love-and-other-indoor-sports, war-is-hell

So, I know you've all been on edge these past two months, and since I should be studying for the social work licensing exam tonight, it seems like the perfect time to put an end to your suspense.

After all my agonizing and the thoughtful suggestions below about whether I should mutilate my gorgeous hardcover Pevear and Volokhonsky translation in the interest of less hazardous subway toting.... Readers, I carried him. All 1272 pages. Every day, across five boroughs and three states, for nearly two...more

255 likes · like · see review

Oct 25, 2012 Nilesh Kashyap rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Recommended to Nilesh by: William Somerset Maugham

Shelves: goodreads, 1001-books, russia, translated, favourite

Not a review, and whatever is this, is incomplete due to my inability to express myself.

In childhood’s pride I said to Thee:
‘O Thou, who mad’st me of Thy breath,
Speak, Master, and reveal to me
Thine inmost laws of life and death.

‘Give me to drink each joy and pain
Which Thine eternal hand can mete,
For my insatiate soul would drain
Earth’s utmost bitter, utmost sweet.

‘Spare me no bliss, no pang of strife,
Withhold no gift or grief I crave,
The intricate lore of love and life
And mystic know

...more Not a review, and whatever is this, is incomplete due to my inability to express myself.

In childhood’s pride I said to Thee:
‘O Thou, who mad’st me of Thy breath,
Speak, Master, and reveal to me
Thine inmost laws of life and death.

‘Give me to drink each joy and pain
Which Thine eternal hand can mete,
For my insatiate soul would drain
Earth’s utmost bitter, utmost sweet.

‘Spare me no bliss, no pang of strife,
Withhold no gift or grief I crave,
The intricate lore of love and life
And mystic knowledge of the grave.’

This poem describes exactly the way I feel about War and Peace. I read this poem just to re-live the ‘War and Peace experience’ over and over again.
War and Peace experience? Huh!
Journey of Pierre Bezukhov. That is what this experience refers to, in my case.
Journey of Pierre is the way I perceive W&P, you may or may not think the same way. Many of you will find my experience to be shallow, because you found something that was deep, that perhaps went by unnoticed by me OR that was something I couldn’t connect to. It's all about how one relate to something.

A bee settling on a flower has stung a child. And the child is afraid of bees and declares that bees exist to sting people. A poet admires the bee sucking from the chalice of a flower and says it exists to suck the fragrance of flowers. A beekeeper, seeing the bee collect pollen from flowers and carry it to the hive, says that it exists to gather honey. Another beekeeper who has studied the life of the hive more closely says that the bee gathers pollen dust to feed the young bees and rear a queen, and that it exists to perpetuate its race. A botanist notices that the bee flying with the pollen of a male flower to a pistil fertilizes the latter, and sees in this the purpose of the bee's existence. Another, observing the migration of plants, notices that the bee helps in this work, and may say that in this lies the purpose of the bee. But the ultimate purpose of the bee is not exhausted by the first, the second, or any of the processes the human mind can discern. The higher the human intellect rises in the discovery of these purposes, the more obvious it becomes, that the ultimate purpose is beyond our comprehension.
All that is accessible to man is the relation of the life of the bee to other manifestations of life.

Tolstoy says this about life, but the thing is that this novel is so big that it starts to get close to being something that life itself is.
We don’t find everything in our life to be meaningful or we don’t hold onto every moment of life, only few are worth. Similarly we find in W&P a particular thing to connect to, something that we underwent in our life, something that we are undergoing now. And believe me W&P has something to offer for everyone. For me it was ‘journey of Pierre’.

What kind of journey!
I think it was a ‘round’ journey, starting from a point and returning to the same point, and thereafter make a forward journey. All so innocent and careless Pierre makes a journey, vacillating between freemasonary, philanthrophy and mysticism in his desperate search for truth. At the end of his journey he is not further in his life but at the same point, but just strong and life, much more under his control.

Because truth has been revealed to him.

Lord, Thou didst answer stern and low:
‘Child, I will hearken to thy prayer,
And thy unconquered soul shall know
All passionate rapture and despair.

‘Thou shalt drink deep of joy and fame,
And love shall burn thee like a fire,
And pain shall cleanse thee like a flame,
To purge the dross from thy desire.

‘So shall thy chastened spirit yearn
To seek from its blind prayer release,
And spent and pardoned, sue to learn
The simple secret of My peace.

‘I, bending from my sevenfold height,
Will teach thee of My quickening grace,
Life is a prism of My light,
And Death the shadow of My face.’

- The Soul's Prayer, a poem by Sarojini Naidu (less)

52 likes · like · see review

Dec 04, 2011 Jacob rated it 1 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: 2008-2009, 900-plus

December 2011

An Apology
I read War and Peace roughly three years ago, and I hated it. Then I wrote about how much I hated War and Peace, and the review lasted longer than my hatred. It was long, and angry, and occasionally funny in places...but mostly it was dumb and immature. So I deleted it, and now it’s gone--and 93 votes with it, which should tell you how difficult it was to delete. It had to go. War and Peace may be a fat old worm, but my review was starting to look a little bloated too. And...more

36 likes · like · see review

Aug 14, 2008 Joshua Trevino rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

It is difficult, in reviewing classics, to say things about them that have not been said before. It is especially difficult when those classics are part of the literary canon; and even more difficult when those classics are not mere novels, but purposeful epics. It is in this light that reviewing Leo Tolstoy’s War and Peace is a challenge. The massive book — ranging from 900 to 1,500 pages, depending upon the edition — is a cornerstone of anyone’s list of all-time great literature. Strangely, fe...more It is difficult, in reviewing classics, to say things about them that have not been said before. It is especially difficult when those classics are part of the literary canon; and even more difficult when those classics are not mere novels, but purposeful epics. It is in this light that reviewing Leo Tolstoy’s War and Peace is a challenge. The massive book — ranging from 900 to 1,500 pages, depending upon the edition — is a cornerstone of anyone’s list of all-time great literature. Strangely, few have actually read it; and few reviewers of new editions do more than assess relative merits of the latest translation.

Therefore: the one thing the reader ought to know about the new translation of War and Peace from Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky is that it is worth reading, both in itself (the book is a classic in any translation) and in this particular form (this translation is superb). As with every other review of this edition, this one must start with what is new about it: the translation.

The husband-and-wife team of Pevear and Volokhonsky have built a long and successful career on translating Russian works into English. (I still recommend their translation of Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov, which kept me company in my Army days, as the best around.) They are ideally suited to the task, not merely by virtue of their marital compatibility — a translating team spends nearly as much time together as a married couple, and probably communicates better — but by virtue of their birth. Volokhonsky, as might be guessed, is a native Russophone, and Pevear’s first language is English. In a column in the New York Times on October 14th, 2007, Pevear described the method of their collaboration:

---We work separately at first. Larissa produces a complete draft, following the original almost word by word, with many marginal comments and observations. From that, plus the original Russian, I make my own complete draft. Then we work closely together to arrive at a third draft, on which we make our “final” revisions.---

This is, of course, the idealized process. The actual work of conveying literature, with its poetry and rhetoric more or less intact, from one language to another is necessarily slow and inexact. Douglas Hofstadter, the author and professor of computer and cognitive science at Indiana University at Bloomington, addressed this problem at length in his book Le Ton beau de Marot. In this, a rather simple little poem by the 16th-century French poet Clément Marot — "A une damoyselle malade," or "To an ill girl" — is shown to have a surprising number of possible translations from French into English, with none of them quite right. There are dozens of variations in Hofstadter’s book. The necessary tradeoffs, even in Marot’s simple verse, are swiftly evident. Literal accuracy, or rhetorical beauty? Rhyme structure, or metric consistency? Cultural fidelity, or cultural comprehensibility? These are the issues with which translators must contend. The perverse, like Vladimir Nabokov in translating his rigid and un-lovely Eugene Onegin, simply give the reader their ideal of literal exactitude. The more well meaning will often give the reader their idea of comprehensibility in both the rhetorical and cultural spheres. Thus, Constance Garnett, who translated the great works of 19th-century Russian literature into Edwardian-era English, not only rendered prose as would an English novelist of her era: she also “translated” cultural concepts into familiar objects of reference for her intended readers. As a pseudonymous Amazon reviewer of the Pevear/Volokhonsky translation of War and Peace notes, in previous translations, “we often get ‘holy images,’ attended ‘Mass,’ ‘the Virgin Mary,’ etc., instead of ‘icon,’ ‘attended Liturgy,’ or ‘the Theotokos.’” It is pleasing to report that though the occasional clunky passage survives in its over twelve hundred pages, Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky have done well by War and Peace. And well they should have: as Pevear notes, in translating, they each read the massive work five times.

Beyond the translation, there is the great work itself, which presumes to take on the very topics of its title. The grand sweep of its epic, to say nothing of the welter of Russian names and perhaps-unfamiliar places, is daunting to many readers. (Who knows where Mozhaisk is, or why it matters?) They should not feel ashamed of this: the very first sentence of the book presupposes a grasp of European politics and Russian society circa 1805, and the inferences and references never let up. It is a peculiarly Russian work, of course — the French invasion of 1812 was to Tolstoy’s generation what the Civil War was to our grandfathers’ — but it is nonetheless comprehensible to Europeans grounded in their own history. For an American, War and Peace is something else: not an artifact of our own heritage, but a work we read to sustain and deepen our connection to the West at large. Its themes of sacrifice, patriotism, and humanity are universal.

Leo Tolstoy was not, it must be said, the master of the human condition that many of the other literary greats were — Shakespeare, for example, or even his contemporary Dostoevsky — and this shows through even in the superlative Pevear/Volokhonsky translation. In life, the great author was keenly interested in developing his own thesis of Christianity, which veered into that curious territory where extreme altruism and profound selfishness intersect. A rare Russian aristocrat who cared for his peasants, he treated his devoted wife with often shocking neglect; he was excommunicated from the Orthodox Church; and he ended up dying at a train station while essentially running away from home as an old man. War and Peace, with its long internal essays on history, fate, and morality, gives us a glimpse into the mind of this troubled and brilliant figure, as his plot and his characters bend to his ideas of life and meaning.

Tolstoy was a contemporary of the men whom the philosopher Karl Popper called the historicists — that is, those who believed in the superiority of historical “laws” and inevitability to God-given free will and volition — and he shared much of their thesis. He did not, as some of them did, deny the possibility or relevance of human goodness and choice; but he did believe that those choices only affected a limited context, and mostly concerned one’s internal state toward himself and God. War and Peace, then, is to a large extent a historical exposition on why the individual does not matter to history, even as he does matter to his Creator. A central character of the work, Pierre Bezukhov, undergoes a transformation throughout from dissolute if well-meaning youth, to solid paterfamilias with an assured sense of God and self — and the transformative event is a death march in French captivity, in which he realizes that all is for naught in this world. Similarly, the wartime mistakes of the Russian generalissimo Kutuzov are excused as historical inevitabilities which Kutuzov had the wisdom to accept.

Tolstoy’s view here is wholly alien to the American character, and its relation to the Christian view is dubious (certainly the Orthodox Church saw little good in it). It does not follow from this that the Christian should not read it. To the contrary, it is a work so very rich, despite its flaws, that it is endlessly rewarding to those who persevere and allow themselves to become happily entangled in its endless narrative. Is it the best Russian novel? Is it the best Tolstoy novel? Is it the best 19th-century novel? It is none of these things: Tolstoy himself wrote better novels, Anna Karenina chief among them; Zola’s La Debacle is a far superior exposition of battle; and nearly everything is shorter. But we ought to read War and Peace nonetheless. We read it because, like Everest, it is there; we read it to join Prince Andrei on the field at Austerlitz; we read it to enter the mind of the young Natasha, insane with what she believes is love; and we read it because in it, as in all great art, we find something of ourselves.

(less)

62 likes · like · see review

Sep 23, 2012 Chiara Pagliochini rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: letteratura-russa

"Si dice: le disgrazie, le sofferenze…” esclamò Pierre. “Ma se adesso, in questo stesso istante, mi domandassero: vorresti esser rimasto quello che eri prima della prigionia, oppure di nuovo, da principio, passare attraverso tutte queste cose… com’è vero Dio, un’altra volta la prigionia e la carne di cavallo! Noi crediamo che, non appena qualcosa ci sbalza fuori dalla solita carreggiata, tutto sia perduto: e, invece, soltanto allora incomincia il nuovo, il buono. Fin quando c’è vita, c’è anche f...more

20 likes · like · see review

May 05, 2011 Cait rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: classics, 1001, owned, war, bloom-canon, floor-joist, covers-i-love, historical-fiction, read-in-2011, russia, cold-weather-reading, bookish-big-reads, favorites

I am no longer afraid of the big ass Russian novel.* Who knew it would be so readable? The most difficult thing about it was keeping all of the characters straight, but even that was only in the beginning. By the end of the book, the characters were so fully drawn that I couldn't believe that I'd once had to rely on a cheat sheet remember who they were or what relation they had to one another.

I'm kind of peeved that I can't give this book 5 stars**. Overall, I thought it was fantastic. I even li...more

52 likes · like · see review

Aug 13, 2009 Whitaker rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: canon, would-kill-if-thrown, russia, 2009-read

When I was growing up, the conventional wisdom was that War and Peace was the sine qua non of difficult books: the scope, the length, OMG the length! Conquering this Everest was The Test of whether you were a Man/Reader.

I have now read it. Thump chest and make Tarzan yell.

Actually, you know chump, big deal. The mountain really wasn't so large after all.

There are love affairs, there is a war, peace eventually returns to ~~the Shire~~ Russia. Sorry, got confused there for a minute with Lord of the...more

89 likes · like · see review

Mar 24, 2013 Kelly rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: fiction, great-and-terrible-men, owned, grand-opera, russians, international-affairs, the-continent, worlds-lost-dead-and-dying, 19th-century, philosophy-theory-criticism, cultural-meetings

Oh wow. Yeah, this review might take awhile! Wow.

9 likes · like · see review

May 10, 2011 Robert rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: russian

This book is so difficult to review; it's so vast and varied and my responses to it are vastly varied. If this turns into a sprawling mess, then it is only a dim and distorted image of the book itself, which is flawed, too.

So, what is War and Peace all about? One could easily answer, "Everything" since it has "the Seven Ages of Man", as pointed out in the essay at the end of this edition. War, Peace, happiness, suffering, morality, immorality and on and on. But I think it has two over-arching pu...more This book is so difficult to review; it's so vast and varied and my responses to it are vastly varied. If this turns into a sprawling mess, then it is only a dim and distorted image of the book itself, which is flawed, too.

So, what is War and Peace all about? One could easily answer, "Everything" since it has "the Seven Ages of Man", as pointed out in the essay at the end of this edition. War, Peace, happiness, suffering, morality, immorality and on and on. But I think it has two over-arching purposes. The first and most imposing of these is Tolstoy expressing the feeling, "I hate Bonaparte." Many of the many characters in this book have obvious flaws and do some bad things but Tolstoy seems very forgiving of them - he seems to be saying, they are only human, what can you expect? But there is one sin he comes down on with a vengeance and no sign of understanding; being in any way positive about Bonaparte. This is the unforgivable crime. Being Bonaparte is the only worse crime. Bonaparte is scorned, villified and reduced to a posturing, ranting, boasting, self-deluding victim of History. Tolstoy's theory of history, (that it is entirely Providential and not caused by the actions of an elite) seems designed to allow Bonaparte's alleged Genius to be, like a flag above a fort, shot at until reduced to tatters. This has an unfortunate side-effect; it applies equally well to every other senior military or political figure. This is a problem because Tolstoy has real respect for Kutuzov, the Russian commander and he wriggles within the constraints of his own theory, trying to praise his Russian hero. And this is what underlies the Bonaparte-hating; Patriotism. In the same way as British national identity was reforged in opposition to Nazism and it was universally OK to hate Germany, so Russian identity was melted down in the period 1805-1812 and reforged afterwards in oppostion to the 2nd Empire. (In fact, this process happened in Britain as a result of the Napoleonic wars, too; Trafalger, Waterloo, Nelson, Wellington.) Tolstoy's great work came out expressing this rather negative (anti-French culture) position rather than a positive (pro-Russian culture) one, except in so far as he supports the efforts of the Russian populace to expel the invaders.

The second theme is, like the first, built on Tolstoy's axiomatic Christianity: History is a result of Providence is replaced by suffering is the way to salvation. (view spoiler)

Simon Schama said that this is a book "you don't just read, you live." Whatever he meant by that, I found it true in the sense that the book is so vast and changing that one develops a changing response to it as the pages turn. At first I was delighted by it, despite nearly drowning under a deluge of characters with similar titles, sometimes the same first names and often a complex set of relationships with everyone else. Frequent use of the character list at the back got me through that and the problem fades with familiarity. The typical life of the aristocracy is shown from all angles before it is shaken up by war, which shows other traits amongst the young officers taken from Moscow and Petersburg and shown an altogether different world of arbitrary death and destruction, seemingly out of the control of everybody. When peace is restored things slow down and I began to feel the length of the book when 1811 rolled round. From excitement and delight to impatience. Finally: 1812. Here amazing set pieces are diluted by the seemingly endless waffling about the nature of history, detracting greatly from my enjoyment and, by the end, levaing me feeling rather irritated and disappointed. A great novel ruined by an authorial rant. I still can't decide how to rate this book; I'm so glad I read it but it has so many flaws, from characters that are given a great deal of attention only to be dropped because the real protagonists are their children to essays on the nature of power. I'm reminded of Neal Stephenson's Quicksilver - there's a pauper's War and Peace for you. I'm also reminded of Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath: A scene is often set in general terms, a sweeping overview of events, such as the retreat from Smolensk befor it is retold from the perseptive of one or more main characters. Steinbeck did the same thing, for example the scene of the jalopie merchant followed by the purchase of a model T by the migrating protagonists.

Tolstoy's writing is astonishingly vivid and many scenes are very memorable - they are what I will keep: Natasha dancing or singing, Pierre not able to even move an amunition box in the midst of battle, to name but two.(less)

16 likes · like · see review

Feb 02, 2013 Martha rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: own-books, my-favorites, five-star

THE END. Oh, no, I never want it to end. I want it to go on forever!

Ok, so here goes. I am going to attempt a review of War and Peace in my simpleton language. But, I am so adamant about the greatness of this book that I want everyone to read it before finishing life.

"HURRAH", I finally finished War and Peace (for the second time), but THIS time I really read it and thoroughly enjoyed every word. I think when I read it at 25 it was the “challenge” aspect and didn’t really appreciate all the nuan...more THE END. Oh, no, I never want it to end. I want it to go on forever!

Ok, so here goes. I am going to attempt a review of War and Peace in my simpleton language. But, I am so adamant about the greatness of this book that I want everyone to read it before finishing life.

"HURRAH", I finally finished War and Peace (for the second time), but THIS time I really read it and thoroughly enjoyed every word. I think when I read it at 25 it was the “challenge” aspect and didn’t really appreciate all the nuances, philosophies of Tolstoy, etc. because I was too young. At my age now, death is more prominent on my mind, and I appreciate his philosophizing much more.

Tolstoy’s writing is so easy to follow. His words just flow from story to story and bring you in close to each person and each family. I felt such warm feelings for Nicholas, Princess Mary, Natasha, Andrew and of course Pierre. My war hero was General Kutuzov. Kutuzov, depicted by Tolstoy, is a man who “adapts to the flow of events and thinks on his feet”. From Tolstoy’s descriptions of Kutuzov, I saw this wise, fatherly image in front of me, a thoughtful and intelligent man.

Ah, the war scenes – what emotions Tolstoy brings out in you at each battle. You are right there on the ground looking up at the brilliant blue sky (his landscape descriptions are superb) and you feel the emotions and fear from each scene. The blood, the cold, the fog, the hoar frost on the ground is so clear in your mind. He is a genius.

Tolstoy brings religion into many aspects of this tome, but in a way to make you think, not to convert. He gives you bits of what everyone feels and ponders about God and it works your mind. Yes, that is exactly what this book did for me. It made my mind work; really contemplate life. I was left with such good feelings that it made an impact on my philosophy of life.

Tolstoy used many analogies throughout that were excellent. One analogy towards the end of the book was about a soldier and how this man represented the cog in the wheel. You are left with immense respect for the soldier. Tolstoy’s writing is very persuasive. He persuaded me to admire Kutuzov, to understand war in general and to rethink the philosophy of life.

The only reason it took me so long to read this book is because of the normal interruptions of life. It is such an easy read most people should finish it within a few months easily. I’ve heard some say following the families is difficult. The families are listed at the beginning of the book and I referenced them as a new one was introduced, and it wasn’t bad at all. And, believe me, after getting to know each and every one of the characters, you will become attached and never forget them.

War and Peace is number one on my list as the best book ever written, and will never leave that position. I recommend this to EVERYONE!

HURRAH!

(less)

9 likes · like · see review

Dec 14, 2010 A.J. Howard rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: 1001-books, finished-in-2010, bookshelf-fiction, six-stars

Wow....

I should probably just leave it at that. I know that my review of War and Peace is just about the antithesis of necessary. By raving about this book, I'm saying something equivalent to "Michael Jordan was a good basketball player" or "Richard Nixon had a decent amount of issues." This book is not only on the short list of best novels ever, it was there a century before my birth. But, hey, this thing is a beast, and it feels like a real accomplishment finishing it, so I'm going safely depo...more

18 likes · like · see review

May 24, 2008 Silvana rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: romance, classics, own, top-20

EPIC. That’s the most suitable word to describe this book. The amount of pages are enough to make most people runaway, methinks. The essence, however, with the details, the characterization, the plots, the parlance (with occasional French); this book has everything needed for a great literature.

The story is Russia during the Napoleonic War. The novel has two main plots. First, the historical description on the military (and diplomatic) effort conducted during the invasion of Napoleon to Russian...more EPIC. That’s the most suitable word to describe this book. The amount of pages are enough to make most people runaway, methinks. The essence, however, with the details, the characterization, the plots, the parlance (with occasional French); this book has everything needed for a great literature.

The story is Russia during the Napoleonic War. The novel has two main plots. First, the historical description on the military (and diplomatic) effort conducted during the invasion of Napoleon to Russian soil, representing the titular “war”. The details presented by Tolstoy were incredibly vivid, comprising of battle tactics, debates between generals/marshalls, the heroic acts, the troops movement, all the wonderful (and not so wonderful) things coming from a war; all will bring the reader into the front line, feeling what the soldiers feel at famous events like the battles of Austerlitz and Borodino, and of course the occupation of Moscow. Napoleon himself was one of the main characters and a lengthy analysis was given for his actions. Hence, a very enlightening reading.

Representing the titular “peace”, the second plot was about the lives of four families, most importantly the Rostovs and the Bolkonskis and how they, as part of the high society in Russia then, coped with the war situation. Romance, misery, and most importantly, both their internal and external struggles to face with the people surrounding them, I think I’ve never read an epic novel with this kind of personal touch before.

The readers will find themselves associated or symphatized with one of the characters. The noble one, the vivacious one, the idealist one, the pragmatist one, the nationalist one, the seductive one… just name it. Colorful and memorable characters, period.

Furthermore, this is not just a story-telling novel. Tolstoy has included some of his (philosophical) thoughts here. Do not hesitate to ponder them all. His analysis on historical events was extensive and has its own unique logical reasoning.

Was Napoleon a genius commander? Were his victories inevitable? Was the abandonment of Moscow the right call made by General Kutuzov? Back to basic, what is power? What force produces the movement of nations? Tolstoy had his own answers. Combination of all forces, no event can singularly affect another, no such thing as an isolated cause and effect, so says this maestro.

I applaud Tolstoy for this work of art. It took me almost years to "really" read this novel and to get a firm hold on its essence. I think I came into a moment of silence after finishing the last page. Not easy to describe what I felt at that time, now I can only say that I feel blessed to have such an epic ‘experience’ and will be glad if I can share it with everyone.(less)

21 likes · like · see review

Jan 02, 2011 Alex rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: 2010, particularly-drunk-reviews, reading-through-history

So, I read this. It took a couple minutes.

Some of it is the same old stuff I remember from Anna Karenina: huge numbers of rich people screwing each other over. But the other stuff - I guess that's the "War" stuff, although it's mostly all war, one way or another - the stuff about Napoleon surprised me because I don't think Tolstoy saw this as "historical fiction." I think he saw it as some fiction parts, and some history parts, and during the history parts he really meant for you to almost swit...more So, I read this. It took a couple minutes.

Some of it is the same old stuff I remember from Anna Karenina: huge numbers of rich people screwing each other over. But the other stuff - I guess that's the "War" stuff, although it's mostly all war, one way or another - the stuff about Napoleon surprised me because I don't think Tolstoy saw this as "historical fiction." I think he saw it as some fiction parts, and some history parts, and during the history parts he really meant for you to almost switch gears entirely. He did original research: interviewed veterans, visited battlefields. He wrote an enormous novel, interspersed with an enormous history book. Neat, right? It's like a mashup. A really, really long mashup. Holy shit! It's like when Danger Mouse released that album-length mashup of the Beatles' White album (representing history) and Jay-Z's Black album (representing rich people screwing each other)!

Now you know exactly like War & Peace is like. I'm so much awesomer than Sparknotes.

I didn't like this as well as I liked Anna Karenina. Maybe it's because I read AK first, so Tolstoy's tricks - the sprawling casts, the terrifying knowledge of human nature - aren't new to me anymore. Or, maybe it's because W&P is too fucking long. You know this was supposed to be the first of a trilogy? Ha, Tolstoy was such an asshole. And that 40 pages at the end...whew. That's some Ayn-Rand-near-the-end-of-Atlas-Shrugged BS right there (my wife's point, not mine), and you know how I feel about Atlas Shrugged.

That said, though, saying "I liked Anna Karenina better" is like saying "I liked having sex with whats-her-name from Weeds better." The bar is high. War & Peace is a very good book. And I liked the historical stuff, even if it's pretty clear that all that high-minded talk about history's drift could have been summed up as "I totally hate Napoleon."

Translation(s) Review
I read the Briggs and Pevear & Volokhonsky translations alternately. Just swapped back and forth at random. I don't recommend it. They spell names slightly differently, and Briggs has Denisov speak like Barbara Walters for some reason, so the switch is confusing. But here's my verdict: they're both fine. I give the edge to Pevear & Volokhonsky, but only if you don't mind some French; it feels like a lot, but it's only 2%. I do think Briggs can be a bit clunky - and I now know, from P&V's amusingly catty intro, that Briggs wussed out on a bit of Tolstoy's weird tendency to repeat words like six times in a paragraph. (But Briggs' afterword, by Figes, is better.) Really, you're good either way.(less)

21 likes · like · see review

Feb 23, 2011 Matt rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: The type of person who cares whether a person has read <i>War and Peace</i>

Whatever else I am, I am the type of person who reads classic novels out of a sense of obligation. Also, I must admit, out of a sense of vanity. My ego, after all, is as fragile as a goldfish and requires the constant attention of a newborn baby. Every once in awhile, it needs a little boost, and the intellectual challenge of Dostoevsky or Dickens can really work wonders.

Now, I’ve been told that forcing myself to read books I don’t necessarily like is a fruitless waste of time (and that the rev...more

49 likes · like · see review

Mar 26, 2010 Evan rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: world-literature-top-100-list-poll, epic, russian-soviet-etc

So, I've slam dunked War and Peace...
…And now the bragging rights are mine.

Even so, just how much do I want to linger over this dead corpse: Tolstoy’s challenge to all those who, rather than climb mountains, would subject themselves to the masochistic come-on presented by the daunting, daring, formidable, teasing charms of an overwritten, repetitive 1,350 to 1600-plus-page fictionalized historical opus?

Not much really.

But, some thoughts do bear being made - after some background.

Just a hair over...more

9 likes · like · see review

Sep 20, 2011 Marvin marked it as to-read · review of another edition

Written for the Celebrity Death Match Review Tournament

The bout is held at the house of Natalya "Natasha" Ilyinichna Rostova. Mrs. Beeton arrives with a present of clotted cream.

"How thoughtful" says The Countess Rostova. "I have prepared tea for your arrival"

"Why, Thank you, Countess", Mrs. Beeton sits on a comfortable chair as the Countess' maid pours tea.

"Please. Call me Natasha"

"This is a very cozy place, Natasha." sniffs Mrs. Beeton. "Are these scones"

"Why yes, Mrs, Beeton. I have read you...more

11 likes · like · see review

May 05, 2008 Matthew rated it 1 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I sincerely doubt that I will ever read this book again, or ever feel any desire to. I can certainly see how and why it has secured its place as part of the canon, but I did not find the characters and their lives compelling enough to overcome the annoyance I felt with Tolstoy's personal vision of history and life in general.

There were moments when I came to care about what was going on in the book. I sympathized with Prince Andrey's broken heart and Pierre's search for meaning and I was genuin...more I sincerely doubt that I will ever read this book again, or ever feel any desire to. I can certainly see how and why it has secured its place as part of the canon, but I did not find the characters and their lives compelling enough to overcome the annoyance I felt with Tolstoy's personal vision of history and life in general.

There were moments when I came to care about what was going on in the book. I sympathized with Prince Andrey's broken heart and Pierre's search for meaning and I was genuinely interested in what choice Nikolay would make in regards to Sonya and Marya... some of the time. Prince Andrey recedes into the background in the latter half of the book, only to reappear briefly so that he can die a sudden, anticlimactic and boring death. Pierre meanders so aimlessly between various ideas and goals that I could only become frustrated with him and Nikolay is at times such a flat lifeless character that I could not care at all about him one way or the other. War and Peace is so large that no story line ever comes to fruition and instead of being a truly complex epic it seemed to me that it was only the raw material from which several great books could have been made.

Without any genuine interest in the characters I could only hope that War and Peace would be, in some way, intellectually interesting but I found it even more deficient in this regard. Tolstoy does not believe in free will, great men, the usefulness of rational thought, or military science. I know these things because Tolstoy uses these ideas like a cudgel, beating the reader about the head and shoulders. He does not trust in the reader enough to allow them to draw the ideas from the story and so makes numerous digressions to explain the same opinion as he just explained some fifty pages ago, using almost the same words, as often as not. Worse yet, the second epiloge is devoted exclusively to reiterating them one final time, using only the barest semblance of a rational argument, which is hardly surprising since he has already told us time and again that it is impossible to change any ones mind using words, and the only knowledge that matters is that which comes from ones gut and mystical revelation.

In final summation, the only other book that has ever produced such a visceral exhasperation in me is Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Perhaps, as with Atlas Shrugged, time will change my opinion of War and Peace, but I am not hopeful(less)

19 likes · like · see review

Apr 13, 2009 Jamie B. rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Recommended to Jamie by: So far, I've only been advised against it.

Since high school, I have made references to War and Peace based on general assumptions: its length, dullness, how long it would surely take one to read it, and the degree to which the reading of it would make one want to kill oneself.

First off, I never wanted to kill myself, though it did lull me to sleep unintentionally during many a 3 a.m. subway ride. Now, what I didn't expect: it's sorta good. Like Salinger, Tolstoy uses irony to lovingly expose the flaws of his characters in a way that oft...more Since high school, I have made references to War and Peace based on general assumptions: its length, dullness, how long it would surely take one to read it, and the degree to which the reading of it would make one want to kill oneself.

First off, I never wanted to kill myself, though it did lull me to sleep unintentionally during many a 3 a.m. subway ride. Now, what I didn't expect: it's sorta good. Like Salinger, Tolstoy uses irony to lovingly expose the flaws of his characters in a way that often made me laugh out loud (and believe me, I didn't expect War and Peace to be laugh-out-loud funny). Unlike Ayn Rand, even his greatly flawed characters can become his heroes. Like Dan Brown, Tolstoy starts a section with an exciting event (usually the prospect of courtship) and then leads you through the less-exciting stuff while you're still awaiting the romantic conclusion. Unlike Louisa May Alcott, the sad parts were so well executed and unexpected that they actually made me produce tears. Like Jane Austen, the scenes of the nineteenth century societal elite are enchanting, but more interesting than Austen, as they are set in St. Petersburg rather than Great Britain and also discuss politics, and not just who's going with whom. And finally, like D. H. Lawrence, Tolstoy sneaks in his own philosophies enough so you're intrigued...and then beats you over the head with them.

Is it the best novel of all time? Yes, I think it probably is. The construction is truly genius: Tolstoy takes an intricate and enchanting love story, sets it amidst the Napoleanic invasion of Russia, and inserts every political essay he's ever dreamed up to justify why Napolean sucks. In the end, his lovestruck Russian everymans emerge as the heroes more triumphantly than in any other work.

Now just because it's history's greatest novel does not mean it's the most entertaining. A lot of the book is just as you imagine it to be: downright boring. Judged by today's standards, I wonder if War and Peace could even get published in 2008. But judged by the standards of literary time, it packs a hefty punch.

I'm glad to have read it and am excited to NetFlix both the Audrey Hepburn and Anthony Hopkins movies, and maybe one day I'll catch the opera at the Met. Surely these adaptations highlight the loveablenesses of the characters and tiptoe quietly over the detailed accounts of the alliances of European generals in Austria. These former mentioned sections are what will stick with me over the years. (Oh, and how frightfully undeserving Napolean is of the title "military genius." Got it, Tolstoy--no really, you've made that abundantly clear.)

Should you read it? I hate to say it, but I kind of think you should. It's really long and took me a year (interspersed with a few month-long hiatuses to read quicker works), but the best feature regarding its readability is that its chapters are usually three pages long. So it's really easy to be like, "Hey, I can read two chapters right now and then do something else." Then again, you will have to read two chapters and then do something else 180.5 times. It's your call.

*Added way later: I've now NetFlixed the 1956 movie with Audrey Hepburn, who shines, divinely cast, as the mercurial-turned-refined Natasha. The men, however, are another story: Henry Fonda is a mess as Pierre, and Mel Ferrer cannot garner viewer sympathy because he is stoic and wearing way too much make-up. Here's why Fonda is a mess: basically, the director decided that Pierre, the classless bastard, should show his lack of rearing by donning an American dialect, while everyone else's in the film is British (or, in Hepburn's case, vaguely Dutch). No matter that they are all supposed to be speaking Russian. It's cool; no really: Pierre can speak American. And I get the choice, but it just comes off as "Oops, somebody forgot to hire a dialect coach for Fonda." And it also comes off as this ensemble cast of actors acting their hearts out to make this 1800's period piece shine, and here Fonda is, loud and proud in 1956. He calls her Nuh-TASH-uh, for God's sakes. That's "-tash" rhyming with "sash," "ash," "cash," and other nasal Bostonian vowels. But Audrey is adorable, and we are afforded a dash of eye-candy in the casting of Jeremy Brett (Freddy in My Fair Lady) as the underutilized brother Nicholai. That's "dash" rhyming with the "-tash" in "Nuh-TASH-uh."

Basically, it's brilliant and you should totally rent it.(less)

16 likes · like · see review

Mar 21, 2008 Katie rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

The edition I read, 1300 pages, is Oxford “World’s Classics.” Now I know why… War and Peace has to be one of the most amazing books I have read. Where to begin. I guess the thing I enjoyed the most about it, and what impressed me the most, was Tolstoy’s depth of insight and perception of human nature, spanning social classes, men, women, and children. By the end you feel that you know the characters so well that you could recognize them in a crowd on the street. And there isn’t just one or two m...more The edition I read, 1300 pages, is Oxford “World’s Classics.” Now I know why… War and Peace has to be one of the most amazing books I have read. Where to begin. I guess the thing I enjoyed the most about it, and what impressed me the most, was Tolstoy’s depth of insight and perception of human nature, spanning social classes, men, women, and children. By the end you feel that you know the characters so well that you could recognize them in a crowd on the street. And there isn’t just one or two main characters that this applies to. There are whole families of main characters, but I didn’t feel challenged in keeping track of them. They are so believable, you just get to know them in spite of yourself. They start out as social acquaintences among the wealthy Russian gentry, and you follow them through battles, illnesses, romances, military hospitals, war captivity, death, debt, and life-changing perspective shifts. You have the experience of the War of 1812 right along with them, with things gradually getting worse and more intense, looking back and thinking, I never thought things would come to this. But here we are. I am still me, but I have grown and changed, and these others - I can remember a time before I met them but I know them so well now that I can’t remember how it felt to not know them.
This is my criteria for an excellent, compelling book: Through the telling of a story, the author imparts to the reader the same feelings and experiences that the characters are having. By reading the book you live out in a partial, but convincing and moving way, the same thoughts, emotions, and discoveries that the story describes. This is a subtle, hard-to-pin down quality. Something in the pacing, the way and timing in which information is revealed or concealed… Obviously it comes with the author’s skill in describing people and events. Choice of words, to evoke the right imagery that really resonates with the reader. That’s the magic of good writing - you don’t have to work to imagine. The visuals spring unbidden to your mind, as if they couldn’t be any other way. A few brief external words later, you have envisioned internal truths.

Many of the descriptions and characters resonated with me in an “ah, yes. This I know. True, that.” kind of a way. But other things, like the descriptions of the characters’ experiences in battle, taught me a lot of new things about what it must be like to be a man, a soldier, a soldier in combat. These kinds of things are timeless, I think. A socialite in the early 1800’s, a young army officer in the early 1800’s - we are not so different in these modern days. Human nature still rings true, when it is truly captured in words, and so masterfully as Leo Tolstoy has done in War and Peace.

I would recommend it to anyone.

——

One tiny note: You have to be patient with Tolstoy. He kind of goes off on his ideas about the philosophy of history, especially in the later portion of the book. I found it interesting, but maybe repeated a few too many times… (less)

24 likes · like · see review

Apr 12, 2013 Fionnuala rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

It feels like I just spent a long rainy month in Russia in the early nineteenth century. Kapli kapali, drops dripped, endlessly.
However, in spite of the weather and the frequent long passages on military history where Tolstoy analyses the pontlessness of all military ambition and which make you wonder how there ever could have been another war in the world, I truly enjoyed this trip around Russia. I met some wonderful characters full of excitable passions and overflowing emotions (the Rostovs),...more

6 likes · like · see review

Jul 25, 2011 Kelanth, numquam risit ubi dracones vivunt rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: narrativa, classico

Se immaginiamo il petto di un ipotetico lettore, pieno di medaglie per ogni libro letto, il lettore che ha letto Guerra e Pace, dovrebbe avere la massima onorificenza al merito. La sua "patacca" dovrebbe occupare almeno 1/4 di petto. Lo dico mentre mi congratulo con me stesso per aver avuto il coraggio di affrontare una simile lettura e per averla anche portata a termine, impresa ardua aggiungerei, leggendo anche prefazione, postfazione e biografia approfondita dell'autore.
Perchè dico questo? Pe...more Se immaginiamo il petto di un ipotetico lettore, pieno di medaglie per ogni libro letto, il lettore che ha letto Guerra e Pace, dovrebbe avere la massima onorificenza al merito. La sua "patacca" dovrebbe occupare almeno 1/4 di petto. Lo dico mentre mi congratulo con me stesso per aver avuto il coraggio di affrontare una simile lettura e per averla anche portata a termine, impresa ardua aggiungerei, leggendo anche prefazione, postfazione e biografia approfondita dell'autore.
Perchè dico questo? Perchè a mio ricordo non ho mai letto un libro così complesso come Guerra e Pace, complesso e di difficile "digestione", se mi si permette un accostamento culinario a volte mi sembrava di aver mangiato una teglia di melanzane alla parmigiana e poi essermi andato a fare un bagno in acqua fredda: sul momento ti sembra di stare bene e refrigerato, ma poi lo stomaco ti presenta il conto.
Non per nulla, per due notti, dopo essermi sparato quasi cinquecento pagine in un giorno ho avuto gli incubi.
Sarebbe oltremodo indecoroso cercare da umile lettore quale sono, fare una recensione ad un libro come questo. Non ho le basi, ne la coltura, per permettermi di scrivere null'altro che le mie sensazioni.
A tratti brioso, a tratti pesante come un macigno, con Tolstoy in cattedra a somministrare pensieri e filosofie di un tempo che non c'è più.
Le parti dove leggiamo delle vicende di queste due famiglie russe con le loro vicissitudini, felicità e tragedie con la guerra in sottofondo sono quello che di bello c'è nel libro, tutto il resto è di una noia sconvolgente e mi permetto di dirlo da appassionato di storia quale sono. Non si possono veramente leggere, così come le credenze, gli stili di vita, la base di quello che era la vita nella Russia del 1800: un'overdose di monotonia, tedio, grigiore, insofferenza e fastidio; ovviamente giudicati con gli occhi di un lettore del 2011.
Fosse stato tutto concentrato in due libri forse poteva anche andare, ma duemila pagine di questo sono davvero un piatto pesante.
Tutto questo lo dico ovviamente senza sminuire quello che è un classico della letteratura mondiale e che ogni lettore che si degni di questo aggettivo, dovrebbe tenere quel quarto di petto libero per appuntarsi la medaglia di Guerra e Pace, perchè dopo tutte queste mie parole non potrei comunque astenermi dal consigliarlo per la lettura; sono i libri che fanno parte della coscienza mondiale della letteratura.
Probabilmente avrei apprezzato di più tale opera se fossi stato un lettore più attento, più preparato, più colto, ma in ogni caso non rinnego la lettura di queste pagine che faranno parte per sempre del mio bagaglio personale.
Una lettura difficile, impegnativa, a tratti davvero dura, ma in qualche maniera appagante e scintillante come la mia ipotetica medaglia al valore.

http://kelanthsblog.blogspot.com/(less)

4 likes · like · see review

Apr 06, 2011 Emma Rj rated it 1 of 5 stars

Shelves: audio, classic, paid

This book is bloated old piece of crap. How this even got published in the first place is beyond me, much less how it has been considered a 'classic' for years.

I had read that this was 1400 pages of Tolstoy giving his readers a dry, boring recount of the French invasion of Russia but I didn't believe it. I wish I had believed it. Not only is War and Peace a sleep-inducing lecture on way too many perspectives of this war, it also comes complete with Tolstoy's never-ending butt-in chapters that he...more

14 likes · like · see review

Jun 30, 2008 Gregg rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: Matt

Shelves: historical-fiction, classics, russian_lit

Already, I'm hankering to reread this sucker. Twenty or so subplots: impossible to summarize here (for me, anyway). But I look at the book this way: Carl Sagan once wrote an essay arguing that looking at a grain of salt could open up answers to questions about the universe. That's what Tolstoy did here. He used Napoleon's conquest of Russia to examine questions that still resound today: How much can we actually control the events around us, how great are "great" men in history (not very, accordi...more

7 likes · like · see review

Dec 21, 2007 Kimley rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: 19th-century, russian-lit

Writing a review of War and Peace seems somewhat silly - what the hell can I add??? But, while it's still fresh in my mind, here are some general impressions...

I have to confess that while I enjoyed the first half of this book, I was thinking 4 stars and certainly not "greatest novel ever written" but once I got to the third volume, Leo's crazy stew really started to simmer up nicely for me. I still don't think it's the greatest novel ever written but then again, I don't think I could say what n...more

9 likes · like · see review

Sep 13, 2007 Seth rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: everyone

an amazing, amazing book. can't say i've read much tolstoy before this, but after plowing through the 1300-odd pages, it's clear why he's considered one of the best novelists in the history of novels. the scope is so broad that it's no easy task to critique it, but: i've found his view on the philosophy of history lingering, spilling over into my daily thoughts in the weeks since i finished it. the thought that the overarching movements of history are not formed by great men, battles, works of a...more

5 likes · like · see review

May 22, 2007 Eric rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: People with stamina.

Good books have an incredible ability to evoke the past. Memories of my favorite books are sometimes not so much of the stories themselves, although those recollections can be strong, but of that period in my life when I was reading them. For me, the most evocative books tend to be works of fiction. They also tend to be books that leave me with a sense of accomplishment once I have gobbled them up. Among my most vivid book memories are the memories surrounding Leo Tolstoy’s War and Peace.
As viv...more Good books have an incredible ability to evoke the past. Memories of my favorite books are sometimes not so much of the stories themselves, although those recollections can be strong, but of that period in my life when I was reading them. For me, the most evocative books tend to be works of fiction. They also tend to be books that leave me with a sense of accomplishment once I have gobbled them up. Among my most vivid book memories are the memories surrounding Leo Tolstoy’s War and Peace.
As vividly as I remember my visualizations of Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow in Tolstoy’s work I, remember that I was reading those passages when the leaves were turning in autumn 2004. I remember the uncertainty of the time; I was applying to PhD programs, was earning my living as a barista, and was drinking more beer than usual. I had yet to apply for teaching positions. Since I was sans car, the Milwaukee County Transit System was my transportation and therefore a dear friend. It afforded me plenty of time for pleasure-reading to and from work.
War and Peace resonated with me at that time because I had just completed my MA thesis on, coincidentally, representations of war in literature and film. As uncertain as the Russian future was on the eve of Borodino, so to was my future unsure. I was feeling both over-educated for teaching (Who would hire a first-year teacher with an MA?) and under-qualified to attend the types of PhD programs that I was applying to. The latter worry was of no consequence since I did not earn a spot at Madison, Berkeley, Yale, and the like. Still, despite the swirl of uncertainty that was my life, the book steadied me. It filled the cracks. It occupied my down time. The book’s winter chill, Romanticism, Freemason intrigue, and cast of colorful individuals served as the perfect foil to a service industry destiny that I so feared.
Indeed, by realizing what makes the book truly great, I began to feel a bit better about my life. This book radiates greatness, I think, because Leo Tolstoy offers not just an intricate snapshot of Napoleonic Europe, but he also gifts the reader with his philosophy of history. The entire closing chapter of his work neither extends plot lines, nor brings them to a close. Instead he explains, in great detail, how history’s pages turn.
In short, history is not a story driven by the great names or queen bees of the past. The drones and the worker bees assemble history just as they assembled the pyramids, fought in Great War trenches, and Lowell, Massachusetts textile mills. The slightest change in the actions of the drones can alter the march of history in profound ways. I felt like Leo was giving me a bit of a pep talk. He at least helped me understand that even if being a drone is at times burdened by quotidian drudgery, I am still party to the possibility of greatness. The text of life is unwritten and there is no way to know how large my character will loom.

(less)

4 likes · like · see review

May 02, 2012 Peter Meredith rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Confession time: I'm not really in the process of reading this book. I just want people to think that I'm smart. This should show you just how shallow I am. I'm so shallow I should be reading Twilight...and who knows maybe I am. BUT, although I'm shallow, I still have enough brains to know that by putting War and Peace on my Currently Reading list everyone will think I'm far smarter than I really am! Suckers! 5 stars for providing me cover and another five stars for propping up my couch when the...more

7 likes · like · see review

Oct 07, 2010 Polly rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: polly, polly-s-best-books

I was surprised not to be quickly enthralled with War and Peace because I remember loving Anna Karenina so much. It probably took me 170 pages to be hooked on this, but that is the equivalent of 25-50 in a regular-length book. When Tolstoy described the inner dialogue of one character's first experience in battle, I was mesmerized by how realistic the soldier's disillusionment and disorientation seemed. The vivid characters in this book are incredibly real and fascinating. They gain insight, mak...more I was surprised not to be quickly enthralled with War and Peace because I remember loving Anna Karenina so much. It probably took me 170 pages to be hooked on this, but that is the equivalent of 25-50 in a regular-length book. When Tolstoy described the inner dialogue of one character's first experience in battle, I was mesmerized by how realistic the soldier's disillusionment and disorientation seemed. The vivid characters in this book are incredibly real and fascinating. They gain insight, make resolutions, lose their way, gain fresh insight to try again, are sometimes destroyed by their weaknesses, and sometimes put it all together and find happiness.

I am struck by how Tolstoy seems able to understand the inner thoughts and motivations of so many different kinds of people. With ordinary writers, I often feel a distance from the characters and the plot, and am aware of what I think the author is trying to do, or what the author wants me to feel. With Tolstoy, I am completely absorbed in this other world which seems as real as my own. He must have had a brilliant mind and an understanding heart to have such a grasp on human psychology, besides the extended sections of scholarly review of history and his commentary on why nations go to war, why certain personalities assume power, and the gap between what really happened and how it is remembered.

Some of my favorite quotes:

This quote has an uncanny resemblance to discussion I have heard since September 11, 2001 but is describing life in 1812:
"One has but to admit some menace to public tranquility and every sort of action is justified. All the horrors of terrorism were based only on anxiety for public tranquility."

On flattery:
"...and flattered him with that delicate flattery that goes hand in hand with conceit, and consists in a tacit assumption that ones companion and oneself are the only people capable of understanding all the folly of the rest of the world and the sagacity and profundity of their own ideas."

On optimism:
"...as usually happens when a man is in a pleasant state of mind, everything went well and easily."

On self-absorption:
"It had not occurred to him that such an agreeable pastime for him could be anything but agreeable to anyone else."

On fooling ourselves:
"She had in fact seen nothing then but had mentioned the first thing that came into her head, but what she had invented then seemed to her now as real as any other recollection."

This makes me think I may be part Russian:
"...that vague and exclusively Russian feeling of contempt for everything conventional, artificial, human, for everything that is regarded by the majority of men as the highest good in the world...he suddenly felt that wealth and power and life, all that men build up and guard with such effort, is only worth anything through the joy with which it can all be cast away."(less)

3 likes · like · see review

May 12, 2012 Emily May rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: classics, 2012, 1001-read, fave-classics

So... I did it. I finally convinced myself to read War and Peace, partly because it's just something everyone wants to say they've done, and partly because one always needs a good excuse to procrastinate during the exam period when I should have been studying. And, you know what, I really enjoyed most of it. The novel is far less taxing than I imagined, I don't know if that's because the English translation goes easy on us non-Russians or because Tolstoy wrote it in a quite light-hearted fashion...more
So... I did it. I finally convinced myself to read War and Peace, partly because it's just something everyone wants to say they've done, and partly because one always needs a good excuse to procrastinate during the exam period when I should have been studying. And, you know what, I really enjoyed most of it. The novel is far less taxing than I imagined, I don't know if that's because the English translation goes easy on us non-Russians or because Tolstoy wrote it in a quite light-hearted fashion. I suspect I shall never find that out for myself.

Personally, I think a much better title for this book would be War and People. Because, though an in-depth look at history during the time Napoleon had ambitions to take over Europe, this is first and foremost about humanity and Tolstoy observes humanity and all its weirdness with a sense of humour and occasionally sadness. I don't like to make too many predictions about the older authors, some people will tell you that Bram Stoker was a feminist and William Shakespeare was a humanist, I think these are quite melodramatic conclusions to make about authors who lived in societies where they would struggle to be that.

However, Tolstoy may or may not consider himself liberal, forward-thinking, a humanist, and I wouldn't state that he is any of those things. But I think his perception of the human condition in the nineteenth century shows he is somewhat before his time in his ability to see almost every character as flawed, confusing but ultimately human. He manages to construct a comphrehensive view of humanity and Russian culture at the time in question, complete with betrayals and scandals and affairs. But though the characters may place blame on one another - like calling Natasha a hussy - Tolstoy appears to remain impartial. Those who stray from the conservative path of the nineteenth century do not do so without reason.

Another reason that War and People is a much better title for this book is because there is very little peace going on in here. There are times when the battles aren't raging, of course, but there is always something equally dramatic happening within the social world of Russian high society. People falling in and out of love, people having affairs, wealthy aristocrats dying and leaving their fortune to illegitimate sons. It seems to me that there's a constant war going on in this book, just sometimes it isn't on the battlefield.

And oddly enough, it was the real wars in War and Peace that interested me least of all. They were probably the reason this book got four stars instead of five - and because goodreads rating system is about personal enjoyment rather than literary merit. I felt much more entertained by the soap opera that was the lives of the Russian nobles than by the tedious and repetitive battle scenes. There were guns and canons and horses - riveting. But thankfully, like I said, Tolstoy's masterpiece is more about people than anything else and this is the reason that I saw this book through and enjoyed the journey.(less)

33 likes · like · see review

Oct 13, 2012 Michelle rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Since this is the 3rd time I’ve read War and Peace, I think I have some good advice for how to maximize your appreciation of it, besides being 30 years older the 3rd time.
It is a historical novel, but I think the first two times that I read it, I did so without comprehending the historical parts and only retained the plot narrative as it pertained to the characters. However to appreciate it for its full breadth, I would recommend the following:

First: know some history about Napoleon, at a minimu...more Since this is the 3rd time I’ve read War and Peace, I think I have some good advice for how to maximize your appreciation of it, besides being 30 years older the 3rd time.
It is a historical novel, but I think the first two times that I read it, I did so without comprehending the historical parts and only retained the plot narrative as it pertained to the characters. However to appreciate it for its full breadth, I would recommend the following:

First: know some history about Napoleon, at a minimum, know he was from Corsica, from a big family, know about Toulon, and know about the Napoleonic wars from 1805 through 1812. Spend two or three hours on the “cliff notes“ version of his life. Then another hour on 1805. The best way to learn about the French invasion of Russia in 1812, (referred to in Russia as the Patriotic War) is to read “DEFEAT, Napoleon’s Russian Campaign” by Philippe de Segur, which was written by one of Napoleon’s aides during that war, but was written ten+ years afterwards. A must read.

Second, know some Russian history, specifically between the years 1800-1812. Know that Emperor Alexander was only 24 when he became emperor, by essentially a Russian version of a coup d’état. The inner circle detested his father Emperor Paul, son of Catherine the Great, so they murdered him making Alexander the Emperor. The Russians (at the time) had a thing for their dynasty, the Romanovs, and whenever they didn’t like the emperor they just went down the line to another one, sometimes a wife (Catherine the Great) or brother, not always the son. This also helps to explain their fierce devotion to the emperor by all classes of society. The Devil you know is better than the devil you don't. Plus he.she is Russian (well, except for Catherine the Great)

Third, know that you are not reading a novel in the normal use of the word. Even at the time it was written, people were confused. It has a basic plot about the lives of four Russian families, and their dramas. It also follows some of the male members of these families as they go to war, in 1805 and later on up to 1812. These male members happen to observe many historical figures such as Napoleon, Alexander, General Kutuzov and of course happen to be where critical historical turning points occurred. In short, the book presents both the home front and the war front. But even beyond this, Tolstoy writes a lot about history, the philosophy of history, how historians make mistakes and made mistakes in their interpretations of the events described in the book. He also philosophizes about war, why men make war, and presents the point of view that in some cases, maybe all cases, war is inevitable; being the confluence of four or five circumstances beyond any one person’s control. Then he’ll write a passage suggesting that Napoleon isn’t necessarily responsible for the destruction because he wasn’t the one pulling the triggers. That passage reminded me of Buffy Sainte Marie’s famous song Universal Soldier. It’s interesting to note that Tolstoy became a pacifist later in life. I wonder how many theses and dissertations were written about the correlation between the massive research he must have done on these wars that cost hundreds of thousands of lives, and this later philosophy of his.

Fourth the translation. When I read it during class at UC Berkeley in 1978, the translator was Constance Garnett. I don’t remember who the translator was the second time, probably the same. The 3rd time the translator was Maude but ¾ of the way through I switched to Pevear and Volokhonsky which came out in 2007. I also continued to read some passages by Maude. In short, I recommend you just read Pevear and Volokhonsky. They translate the French for you, which Maude does not, and also it is just easier to read. They also maintain they are truer to the original Russian, and give examples in the preface, comparing their translation with two or three others. I was sold.
If you do this, your first read of War and Peace will be as satisfying as my third.
(less)

9 likes · like · see review

topics	posts	views	last activity
War and Peace Lit...: What translation is everybody planning to read?	2	15	May 22, 2013 09:46am
Russian Lit 101	5	54	May 10, 2013 07:21pm
Stephen King Fans: War and Peace Start Date March 15 2013	25	84	Apr 16, 2013 05:54am
Classics Without ...: Russian Lit 101	3	41	Apr 15, 2013 04:08am
2015 BBC miniseries.	8	49	Apr 14, 2013 03:22pm
worst book endings!	5	92	Mar 29, 2013 11:35pm

title link	preview: War and Peace
avg rating	preview: War and Peace Goodreads rating: 4.05 (79001 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/220858.War_and_Peace?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1327934655l/220858.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/220858.War_and_Peace?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy[/url]

War and Peace

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (410)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Leo Tolstoy

Books by Leo Tolstoy

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About War and Peace

Quotes from War and Peace