To answer questions about
War and Peace,
please sign up.
Jen
This answer contains spoilers…
(view spoiler)
Sam
Hi there. I know this answer may be too late, but I want to try, because I had a similar thought. After finishing the book, I thought - if I made a film of this book, I definitely wouldn't put the second epilogue into it.
On the one hand, it admirably avoids the cliche of "they lived happily ever after" - ending the main characters' love stories on a romantic high, untainted by the real demands of marriage and family. Instead, we visit the characters seven years after the end of the novel, and are given a snapshot of their lives as married couples with children, and see how their relationships have evolved with time. There is something very modern about this, as with many things that Tolstoy did - so far, so good.
I have two main concerns with the second epilogue, and I will try to explain them without giving anything away, in case you haven't read it yet.
From a literary perspective, I felt a bit robbed by the scenes presented. I had such strong impressions of the characters from spending so much time with them in the main part of the novel, and when it ended, I had my own ideas about how their relationships would progress and grow. I was happy to use my imagination for this, and didn't really want it to be spelled out. I continued to read out of respect for the author - he had created the characters with such care over a thousand pages, so if he wanted to tell me what happened "next", who was I to argue? But the picture he presented was so at odds with my imaginings, and (to my mind) at odds with the trajectory of the characters themselves (especially Natasha), that I couldn't help feeling disappointed.
Secondly, the picture presented is very difficult for those with modern sensibilities. Normally I could forgive a hundred year + novel for this fault. But I had spent the previous 1000 pages being so impressed by Tolstoy's "objectivity" - his ability to step outside the norms and conventions of society, government, history etc. - that I expected more from him. I suppose, did I really expect him to be a feminist as well as everything else? :) Of course not, but I somehow expected him to use his amazing powers of insight upon the female characters, in the same way as he had approached other topics of the book. This does not happen, and for a modern woman, the outcome is......unsatisfactory.
So in summary: I don't think reading the epilogue is essential to understanding or enjoying the novel. However, if you are a completist, you may not be able to resist. And if you don't read it, you won't be able to debate its value with other readers! So yes, read it. But then be prepared to discount it. When I remember the characters, I won't be thinking about the second epilogue. And I might even spend some time imagining my own version.
On the one hand, it admirably avoids the cliche of "they lived happily ever after" - ending the main characters' love stories on a romantic high, untainted by the real demands of marriage and family. Instead, we visit the characters seven years after the end of the novel, and are given a snapshot of their lives as married couples with children, and see how their relationships have evolved with time. There is something very modern about this, as with many things that Tolstoy did - so far, so good.
I have two main concerns with the second epilogue, and I will try to explain them without giving anything away, in case you haven't read it yet.
From a literary perspective, I felt a bit robbed by the scenes presented. I had such strong impressions of the characters from spending so much time with them in the main part of the novel, and when it ended, I had my own ideas about how their relationships would progress and grow. I was happy to use my imagination for this, and didn't really want it to be spelled out. I continued to read out of respect for the author - he had created the characters with such care over a thousand pages, so if he wanted to tell me what happened "next", who was I to argue? But the picture he presented was so at odds with my imaginings, and (to my mind) at odds with the trajectory of the characters themselves (especially Natasha), that I couldn't help feeling disappointed.
Secondly, the picture presented is very difficult for those with modern sensibilities. Normally I could forgive a hundred year + novel for this fault. But I had spent the previous 1000 pages being so impressed by Tolstoy's "objectivity" - his ability to step outside the norms and conventions of society, government, history etc. - that I expected more from him. I suppose, did I really expect him to be a feminist as well as everything else? :) Of course not, but I somehow expected him to use his amazing powers of insight upon the female characters, in the same way as he had approached other topics of the book. This does not happen, and for a modern woman, the outcome is......unsatisfactory.
So in summary: I don't think reading the epilogue is essential to understanding or enjoying the novel. However, if you are a completist, you may not be able to resist. And if you don't read it, you won't be able to debate its value with other readers! So yes, read it. But then be prepared to discount it. When I remember the characters, I won't be thinking about the second epilogue. And I might even spend some time imagining my own version.
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more