Melissa’s Comments (group member since Jan 02, 2020)

Melissa’s comments from the #ClassicsCommunity 2021 Reading Challenge group.

there's some really interesting points being made here !!

I need to read more. I am at tje beginning of part 4 and haven't read for 2 days and will pick it up again this afternoon (I find its all aboit the habit of picking it up haha, especially as I'm readong alongside my normal books).

and surely officers can't have been as clueless or reliant on soldier positive psychology ...

Yeah, I agree that I was also a little surprised by him prioritising strangers opinions over that of his own family. Though, you are right in connecting this to his youth (his lack of empathy to his wife also seemed relatively immature). It felt like he wanted to be a superhero soldier and still held naive views about what war was in a way...
Does anyone know how old he is meant to be ?

I wonder whether Tolstoy was exaggerating the lack of knowledge within the army in certain points. The tone did seem very satirical throughout

because it does seem rather stereotypical. However, he also has shallow male characters and strong female characters, making me think its a human explorarion and not a gender one.

it is still early days of the war and it'll be interesting to see how Tolstoy develops the psychology of soldiers as they get more real life experience (will he represent PTSD for example).

Prince Andrew is a fascinating character I agree! His wife does seem pretty shallow and I think that she just bores him. Though,I am on the fence as to whether Tolstoy is being sexist within her representation

Yes, I think his want of being the hero of war can be seen as being either mature or immature really. I guess that time will tell whether his want of being the saviour has any substance ! His mindset will definitely be an interesting one to watch grow !
In part two, it seems that a big theme is the idea that young men are almost excited by the prospect of war (this grows in book also) and it seen as a growth of their masculinity. However,

interesting you would comment on prince Andrew being infantile, have you got to the end of book 3?xx

yeah, it is satisfying when all of the characters click together!!

Fair enough. what did you prefer ?

Even the war bits are more intriguing in the third section!! It feels like all the characters and their connections have clicked in my mind and I have a better understanding of what Tolstoy was doing.
Isn't his characterisation amazing?
Also, how he represents his views, philosophies etc through the characters (in such clever ways) is phenomenal x

What are people's thoughts?

sorry, yeah, we are !! I just had a messenger thing is all lol

how have people found part 2?

i didn't enjoy nearly as much as part 1 but now about halfway thorough part 3 and really enjoying it!!

I am very intrigued by the relationshop between Princess Mary and her father and the complexities behind it. Also, the allusions behind Helene and Pierre being like the characters of Helen and Paris in the Greek myth Helen of Troy! (even the names being explicitly mentioned)

I have created an event to discuss part 2 of this book if anyone is interested!

just let me know !

Neele,
yes, it is good that we can all talk about bookish related things. its good to get peoples' thoughts and knowledge; then link to get a better understanding of literature in general.
I too am interested in learning why people are reading the book in English
also, what edition have you got?

Timar_Krisztina,
It is very much like legislation in its subverted form. How Tolstoy speaks in this section is both wry and funny.
Yet, it is also cutting, like he is trying to show a point about how the military runs. He is using his own war experience with research into this war and then combining them both to create a historical account which also entwines his analysis of his own experiences.

I'm about halfway through the second section at the moment. I have to agree with you, that he gives as much detail and significance to all members of the army, in terms of both what they're doing and also what they're thinking as well. It is almost as though Tolstoy is giving everybody their own growth trajectory and they are seen as a whole both within themselves and how they interact with each other.

I agree with the Bagration statement and analysis of how certain people are meant to lead the army. in fact, there's a few incidences where this hierarchal structure has been mocked so far in the section:
At the beginning there is a section where those in charge don't know what to do so just make the soldiers act ceremoniously.
There is also the fact that their uniforms have to look smart and scrubbed but their shoes aren't workable.
Another that stands out, is when there was a theft of a purse and higher authorities were more bothered about the impact a soldiers confrontation had on the organisational structure.

That is interesting about the military history context!! I do feel that there is a definite theme of confusion through the section and the inability to determine whether something is good or bad or working.

What are your thoughts about this secrion compared to the first?

Hello, Ashley,

I thought that I would give my ideas about why Tolstoy goes into so much detail about the teenagers at the beginning of the novel.
Firstly, it was a book to represent the development, actuality and after effects of war to Russia. Not just those fighting but those who were alive at the time, the teenagers will grow with the war and we as readers shall see the psychological impact.
Secondly, it is a book with sections on war and peace.
Thirdly, his historical philosophy was that historians shouldn't just think of the 'big names' but about the forces that shaped them and the events that allowed them to take power. He believed this because he saw seemingly insignificant people as affecting history. As such, the soldiers were affected by the women in their lives and therefore they were important in the whole experience of Russia at that time.

Also, I was interested to learn that when Tolstoy set out to write the novel it was supposed to be about Napolean's 1812 campaign in Russia. However, after doing (literally years) of research (scrolling archives, visiting battlefields and analysing letters etc) he found that he could not discuss that tone without first describing the build up and latterly exploring the repercussions. As such, maybe the maturation of the characters is a mirror image of the maturation of the war. as readers we shall see them grow.

Anyway, that's my take on it.

same as me

yeah, it seems that mismatched marriages have ill impacts on men and women.

I agree about Andrew's wife not being for when she's being either deep or shallow.
she seems more comparable with antolexx

also, I wonder whether Boris is aware that Pierre will become heir to a fortune when his father dies this and this provokes him to state that he isn't interested in his money. on top of this, his mother has been asking for many favours in this section (such as for money and for boris's army position) and maybe his pride dictated that he had to show pierre that he isn't the same.

I am most interested in the development of pierre and Princess Mary. the former because I'm interested in his personality and character arc after his status has changed so much; the latter because she seems to have a more authentic self and is stronger than she appears x

hello, neele

these are fantastic summaries! I found them informative and they definitely triggered some memories. haha.

i agree that pierre does seem very unaware of what is going on. I get the impression that he lives very much inside his own head (he likes to discuss philosophical quandries often) and oftentimes is confused and overwhelmed by the outer world.

I find all of the different viewpoints on war very interesting and its amusing how little has changed: the world is always made up of such varying opinions but when it comes down to it people have to get on with it. in this case, regardless of whether they agree with war or not all of the male characters will go to war.

I find the representation of women contradictory. on the one hand, Tolstoy very much stereotypes them and makes them silly and mocks that (eg lise) whilst also using them as important givers of information throughout the text. such as, Anna p is almost like the hostess of the book (as she is the party) because it is through her that we meet the main characters of that section. also, at the end of book one a lot of important information is shown through Mary's and Julia's letters to each other.

haha, I get what you mean and I agree.

I have just finished lannie and am currently by my shelf deciding my next read ...