Read this many years ago. It took me about two years to read and I have very fond memories of that time. It became my friend after a while, A testament to reading slowly.

Second read: 2024

This time it only took me 11 months and I enjoyed every minute. I listened to the Thandiwe Newton audio and she was superb. She reminded me of Lily James as Natasha.

I wish I could just be a fly on the wall forever at Natasha and Pierre’s house.

I could have done without the second epilogue in favor of more Bolkonskys.

Love

That was the one thing I thought was missing from Leo Tolstoy's title, War and Peace. I was wrong. Love is in the title, you just have to look for it.

Certainly there is love in peace. It is the time of children, serenity, growth. The mother peacefully raising her children. The farmer lovingly tending his fields. The elderly passing their final days in comfort surrounded by family.

But there is love in war as well. The love for one's country. Such is a person's violent attachment to their motherland that they will die for it. To give up your own life so another should live, that is love indeed.

What is this preoccupation with love? Well, the Leo Tolstoy I've read is incomplete without this aspect within his writing. I knew this book would be about war, specifically Russia's involvement in the Napoleonic Wars, but I didn't right off see where the love would come in. It arrived in spades. There are peace-loving characters and there are those who are uber patriotic. Then there is man's love for the good he sees in another man's actions. And then there is the love that weds a couple for life.

Tolstoy's genius as a writer lies in his ability to dash his pen across all this with the same level of integrity regardless of whether his subject is a gallant officer in love with death or the daisy-fresh, springy step of a blossoming girl smitten by good looks and dash. Tolstoy transcends himself to become these hearty or hapless creatures. Then he marries them to our soul. Over these seemingly effortless hundreds upon hundreds of pages, these characters become family to us. We love them like brothers. We root for them. We are annoyed by them. We hate a few of them, but after all, they are family and therefore we must abide by them at least to a certain degree.

And when you step back from the book and see your attachment to these characters, it amazes you…and then it disheartens you, for you realize they are nothing but Tolstoy's puppets used in a grand way so that he may slash and burn the icon of his hatred, Napoleon Bonaparte.

Tolstoy seethes with loathing for this man. In large spurts through out, he devotes half the book to lampooning the man and his military deeds, and then as if that weren't enough, he piles on an average-sized book's worth of epilogue on essentially the same topic. In an effort to portray fairness, he also fillets his own. The Russian military leaders of the day come in for their share of condemnation. At times Tolstoy pours so much vitriol upon his own that you have to stop to recall who "the enemy" is.

Why is this a 5 star book? After all, it's not perfect, being neither fully a novel nor a military treatise, but rather both and not always successfully joined. For all its many pages, there was only a small handful of moments where I felt my heart fly or crash. Perhaps it is the vast scope of it all and the effortless way in which it is carried off. So much happens. Tolstoy gives us many rare experiences, puts us in battle after battle - whether it's upon the field amidst cannon and rifle fire, within the home during a dangerous pregnancy, or between an embattled couple bereft of love. Each of these scenes rings true, ringing to their own tune and yet all combining into one beautiful symphony.


PS: Here's my video review of this book: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gfPf...

Tolstroy's epic masterpiece intertwines the lives of private and public individuals during the time of the Napoleonic wars and the French Invasion of Russia.

I had always wanted to read this epic Novel by Tolstroy's but was completely put off by the sheer size of the book at 1350 pages. I am not a lover of books over 500 pages and this was certainly going to be a challenge for me.

I have planned a trip to Russia this year and this was the encouragement I needed to finally pick up this novel, also the fact that the BBC had filmed a new adaptation of the novel which had aired in January and it was getting great reviews. So I approached the masterpiece by ordering a hard copy as I wasn't sure I could handle this one on Kindle. I also taped the complete BBC Series and decided I would watch the first episode to get the characters, names and places firmly set in my head and then read the book as a side read over a three month period(finished it in 6 weeks)

I finally finished this masterpiece last night and really did enjoy the read. Today( Mother's day) I sat down and watched several hours of Television Series and really enjoyed so much having completed the book.

1812 napoleon invades Russia in an order to expand his ever-growing Empire. Three Russian families of Nobility The Rostovs, The Bolkonskys and the Bezukonskys become intertwined and an immense story of War, Romance, Riches, betrayals, jealously and hatred make this story so compelling.

This is not an easy read by any means as it is a challenge, with all the war descriptions and long descriptive passages and at time dialogs that tends to go on and on and yet its story and characters are amazing and I found myself engrossed and loved picking up the book and getting back to the characters.

This is not a book I would recommend friends to read, but if like myself you want a challenge and this is on your TBR List then I would encourage you to read it over a period of time and I think you will be surprised at how readable and enjoyable it really is.

I have to applaud the BBC Series which was extremely well adapted to screen and very close to the actual book except for the accents!

When I first finished this book, four years ago, I did not even dare dream that I would attempt to re-read it within the next decade. At the time, the very fact that I had reached the end of this paragon of endlessness tantalized my imagination. I felt like a miniature Napoleon: like I had accomplished something worthy to be remembered until the end of history—that, when I died, it would be said at my funeral, “He finished War and Peace.”

But, really: it isn’t exactly difficult to finish War and Peace—the story is entertaining, the characters are (for the most part) likable, and the prose is straightforward—it’s just a commitment. You are committing yourself to the task of growing attached to figments of a dead man’s imagination; you are committing yourself to living through the lives of dozens of fictitious people. And, most of all, you are committing yourself to the disappointment of the novel’s inevitable end—to being inexorably severed from these men and women and children, who had become so extraordinarily lifelike that saying goodbye is not only difficult, but heartbreaking.

So great an impression did Pierre, Nicolas, Natasha, and Prince Andrew make on my imagination that, during these four intervening years, I longed for them as I did old childhood friends. It finally got to the point that I could not put off a re-read any longer; that a grand reunion was in order. But I did not want to experience the book in the same exact way I did the first time through. Not only would that be less interesting, but getting through a 1,400-page novel would require an awful lot of time that I wouldn’t be able to dedicate to new books. So I resolved that, this time, I would listen to an audiobook. And, let me tell you: there are few greater feelings than going on a three-hour walk through a forest listening to War and Peace.

As a work of fiction, one of the most striking aspects of War and Peace is its realism. This is what I mean. In most novels, when a door slams on page 32, or when a woman sneezes on page 64, you can be sure that this apparently unimportant action will come to play a crucial role down the line. This is stock-in-trade for writers of fiction—it produces an enjoyable effect on readers by controverting their expectations. Door slams or sneezes are usually trivial and ignorable; but in fiction, precisely the reverse—which is why fiction is more exciting than people-watching.

Tolstoy, however, will have none of this. The world he creates in War and Peace is startlingly real. In fact, the only expectation he controverts is that the novel will be novelistic. Unlike Joyce, who breaks conventions by pushing them to extremes, Tolstoy breaks conventions by abandoning them in favor of observation. So when a woman sneezes, she has an allergy or a cold—that is all. When a door slams, it might reveal that the person who slammed it is in a bad mood—but nothing more. No more improbable coincidences happen in this book than happen in daily life.

No character accomplishes anything heroic or superhuman. Instead of the protagonist, with dreams of glory, rushing into battle and slaying dozens of enemies, in this book, the protagonist rushes into battle only to get a mild wound and run away, confused. Instead of the protagonist, searching for the ultimate meaning of life and having a grand epiphany, in this book, the protagonist searches for the ultimate meaning of life, continually fails, and ultimately gives up. Instead of the protagonist, falling into love forever and ever, in this book, the protagonist has faint and irresolute romantic feelings, and merely does the best he can. Such is life, and such is War and Peace.

Also frighteningly realistic are the personalities of the characters in this book. Tolstoy has an incredible understanding of the human animal. Every character—minor characters included—is round and organic. There are no (or almost no) caricatures in this book. Every character has their quirks, their foibles, their defects, and their strengths. What’s more, Tolstoy portrays the process of aging with remarkable veracity. In War and Peace, characters grow and mature, yet the same essential cores of their personalities remain. This ability to convincingly depict this sameness-within-difference almost strikes me as preternatural: how could a single man be able to bend his imagination towards princes, serfs, housewives, and courtesans with such uniform effectiveness?

The first time I read this book, I was able to appreciate both the hugeness of plot and the fidelity of character; but I was not able to appreciate Tolstoy’s ruminations on the nature of history. This time, however—after reading my fair share of philosophy—I was better able to come to grips with Tolstoy’s views on history and human behavior. (For any interested, Isaiah Berlin’s famous book, The Fox and the Hedgehog, is an excellent essay on this aspect of the novel.)

Tolstoy’s view of history is not so much a theory as an anti-theory. His position is that any and all theories made to account for human behavior have failed and will fail miserably, since there are simply too many variable for the human mind to comprehend. Theories along the line of Hegel and Marx, which shoehorn history into rigid theoretical molds, are contemptible in his eyes. And even the more conventional histories, along the lines of Herodotus or Gibbon, come under fire by Tolstoy, since implicit in these accounts are certain theories about the nature of divinity (in older histories) or power (in modern histories) that are untenable. For example, to give Napoleon credit for the exploits of the French during that time assumes that Napoleon could somehow control things that were clearly impossible to control (such as the men’s willingness to obey him, the strength of the French army, the political situation in France, and innumerable other factors outside of his or anyone else’s grasp).

The only possible solution, in Tolstoy's eyes, is to give a complete description of all human activity during the time period under investigation—something that War and Peace comes alarmingly close to, but obviously falls short of. So one can see how Tolstoy’s theoretical position—that history is outside of human ability to explain—gels perfectly with his writing style, which sticks to the facts and the facts alone.

I will bring this review to a close by merely advising you to go out and read this book. And do it soon. The sooner you read War and Peace, the sooner you’ll be able to re-read it.

All the stars in the sky are nowhere near enough stars I could give this book!
✨
Give me every word from every language in the world, and I still won't be able to express my everlasting love for the words of Leo Tolstoy!

I don't even know where to begin with reviewing a book like War and Peace. But in an effort to condense my experience with it into a single sentence, here we go: I didn't like it. I wanted to like it, I tried to like it, I was in fact sure I was going to like it, but even giving this novel the unenthusiastic three stars would be disingenuous.

If you made a Venn diagram of things that interest me in a novel and things that interest Leo Tolstoy, there would be nothing the middle. On my side at the top of the list you've got: characters. On Tolstoy's side you've got: Russian history.

Maybe it was naive for me to expect less war in a book where War comprises half the title, but my expectations going into this were all wrong. I'd been familiar with the musical Natasha, Pierre, and the Great Comet of 1812, which was adapted from the 70 page segment of War and Peace which focuses on the affair between Natasha and Anatole Kuragin. Already having some affection for these characters, I dove into War and Peace with a list of questions that weren't apparent to me from the musical alone: What exactly was Helene's role in the affair? What were the circumstances of Anatole's first marriage? Did Anatole ever love Natasha, or was he always out to use her? Unfortunately, such details turned out to be beside the point entirely.

I've never quite read a novel like this, where the plight of the characters always seemed secondary. Here is a list of things that got more narrative attention than the main characters: Napoleon, military strategy, Tolstoy's personal philosophical musings, heavy criticism of the Great Man Theory... and if all that interests you, you will love War and Peace. But as someone who isn't so interested in war, who needs something more quotidienne to drive a story than Big Philosophical Ideas, this ended up being a long slog for me.

I don't mean to imply that there's no character development at all in this 1,358 page behemoth. Pierre and Andrey notably struggle with finding their place in the world, each adopting different philosophies at different points in their lives, constantly striving to be good men. But their personal journeys weren't quite enough to really pull me into this story, especially when I didn't find either of them particularly interesting to begin with. Characters who I found much more intriguing - Helene, Anatole, Natasha, Sonya - were only ever paper thin.

I think War and Peace also suffered for the unintentional contrast with Victor Hugo's Les Misérables that I couldn't quite get out of my head. (This was the initial reason I was sure I was going to love War and Peace - my only other experience with a monster-length nineteenth century novel resulted in me finding my favorite book of all time.) I can't help but to see these two novels and their musical counterparts as inversions of one another. Les Mis condenses the contents of the novel into a two and a half hour long musical, cutting it down to the absolute essential characters and events. And while it does a good job, reading the book only enriches the experience and gives you a fuller picture. Natasha, Pierre, and the Great Comet of 1812 extrapolates from a very small section of War and Peace - it takes characters who weren't very well developed to begin with, and gives them new depth and new life.

If I ever read this again (which I don't intend to, but, never say never!) it will have to be with the intention of furthering my understanding of the Napoleonic Wars. This, in my opinion, is the height of what War and Peace has to offer. It's a seminal text where military history is concerned. But I wanted more of a story.

I'm glad I can say I've read War and Peace... but the relief I felt at turning the final page isn't like anything one should feel while reading a much-loved novel.

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

n  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.’n

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.

n  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.n

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.

n  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.’n

n  - The Soul's Prayer, a poem by Sarojini Naidun

Just finished my second reading of War and Peace. Couldn't have loved it better. Maturity and knowledge of the times certainly helped my enjoyment. It didn't feel as long as it actually is. I loved all Tolstoy's meticulously created characters.

I hope to write more soon.

Not to be missed!

_____
I read Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace a long, long time ago. However, I still remember how I enjoyed this epic, even if I might have been too young and lacked the knowledge about Russian history that would have allowed me to enjoy it even more. Anyway, it inspired me to keep reading, just for that I am grateful for Tolstoy.

If I didn't have so many unread masterpieces in my to-read list, I would revisit it. Highly recommended.

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!

we* did it girls

*we = me and my multiple existential crises

Το «Πόλεμος και Ειρήνη» θεωρείται ένα απο τα σπουδαιότερα έργα που γράφτηκε ποτέ και αυτό αποδεικνύεται περίτρανα.
Ήταν το ωραιότερο δώρο που έκανα στον εαυτό μου μπαίνοντας αναγνωστικά σε ένα απειρομέγιστο έργο τέχνης.
Είναι μια τεράστια περιπλανώμενη λογοτεχνική περιπέτεια με τη βοήθεια και την υποστήριξη της μοναδικής γραφής του Τολστόι.

Σας παρουσιάζω το «Πόλεμος και Ειρήνη» ως ένα τεράστιο ήρεμο τέρας που μαγεύει με ξόρκια επικών ποιημάτων, ιστορικών χρονικών και φιλοσοφικών αποκλίσεων τις αλήθειες της ζωής και του θανάτου.

Είναι μια πνευματική οδύσσεια, μια σύμβαση που υπογράφτηκε σαν καλλιτεχνική πεζογραφία και
η μορφή της υπαγορεύτηκε μόνο απο το αντικείμενο της.
Η γοητεία της πεζογραφίας έγκειται στο γεγονός πως ο Τολστόι μιλάει με κομψότητα, με τρυφερή μα όχι μελοδραματική λεπτότητα, με εξουσίες περιγραφής πέρα απο κάθε σύγκριση.
Παρόλο που ο όγκος του βιβλίου ειναι τεράστιος η τεχνική του διαλόγου είναι μικρής εμβέλειας. Οι περιγραφές του Τολστόι δεν αφορούν το τοπίο, το επίκεντρο των περιγραφικών δυνάμεων του είναι η χειρονομία, η εμφάνιση του κάθε προσώπου, οι συλλογιστικές εμβαθύνσεις των ηρώων, που τόσο φυσικά δένονται με τον αναγνώστη και γίνονται υπαρκτά πρόσωπα στην ζωή καθενός απο εμάς.
Το κοινωνικό πλαίσιο του γεγονότος τον απασχολεί άμεσα στην αρτιότητα της γραφής του και αυτό του χαρίζει την λεπτότητα που λείπει, που χάνεται, μέσα σε σύγχρονους συγγραφικούς κόσμους που βρίθουν απο διαλόγους και δράση.

Ως θεματικό μυθιστόρημα θεωρώ πως η πρόθεση του Τολστόι δεν είναι να τεκμηριώσει τους Ναπολεόντειους πολέμους, αν και σε αυτό το σκληρό και τραχύ πλαίσιο εξελίσσεται χρονικά το βιβλίο.
Διαβάζοντας την ερωτεύσιμη φλυαρία του που αναλύει την ιστορία, δέχεσαι με μεγάλη ευχαρίστηση να σου αποκαλύψει τα πολιτιστικά θέματα που επιδιώκει να τονίσει, την κουλτούρα της ρωσικής αριστοκρατίας εκείνη την χρονική αιωνιότητα, την εποχή της μεταβατικής ειρήνης και του επαναστατημένου πολέμου.
Το αληθινό μεγαλείο του βιβλίου βρίσκεται στην φιλοσοφία και τα λόγια του Τολστόι.
Ήταν ένας παράξενος και ασυνήθιστος σοφός.

Ουσιαστικά διαβάζοντας τον βιώνεις κάθε ανθρώπινο συναίσθημα.
Έζησα μαζί με τους χαρακτήρες, τους συμπόνεσα, τους θαύμασα και αγάπησα κάποιους που αρχικά είχα αντιπαθήσει.
Απλώθηκε η ψυχή μου και γεύτηκε το άρωμα των καιρών. Πόνεσε η καρδιά μου με την μεταλλική πνοή
του πολέμου στο πεδίο της μάχης.
Γνώρισα τις πληγές του θανάτου και άκουσα τα τελευταία λόγια των ετοιμοθάνατων που στολίζονταν με όνειρα και χρώματα τα χαράματα του πόνου ξημερώνοντας μάταιες ελπίδες.
Χάιδεψα καθαρόαιμα άλογα, αγνόησα την έπαρση του Ναπολέοντα και οργίστηκα με τον Τσάρο και τις δολοπλοκίες των αυλικών και των αξιωματούχων.

Μουρμούρισα αρώματα και τραγούδια μπαίνοντας στα σαλόνια των αρχοντικών και άκουσα μυστικά και ψέμματα όταν κάθισα δίπλα στην ελίτ της υψηλής κοινωνίας που κατέκρινε τους ματωμένους στρατιώτες φορώντας άψογα πεντακάθαρα και πανάκριβα κοστούμια.
Άγγιξα το μετάξι απο τις τουαλέτες υψηλής ραπτικής κάθε πριγκίπισσας που απαντούσε στο αδύνατο και αμφισβητούσε με χάρη το σκληρά πραγματικό.

Μέθυσα με τους μουζίκους σε σκοτεινά καταγώγια και με έπληξε το φάσμα των συναισθήματων και των εμπειριών που εκπροσωπούνται επάξια σε αυτό το πάνθεον των ηρώων, που εμφανίζονται πότε στον πόλεμο και πότε στην ειρήνη.
Οι έννοιες του πατριωτισμού, της απιστίας, της ίντριγκας, της ευσέβειας, της ματαιοδοξίας, της αθωότητας, της περηφάνειας, της αγανάκτησης, του γνήσιου πόνου, της αγάπης και της αμφιβολίας μαζί με σοφία, γενναιότητα και αγνή εγγύτητα συναισθημάτων εξηπηρετούν με αφθονία τις ιδιότητες των χαρακτήρων αυτού του επικού έργου.

Στο τέλος, το βιβλίο αυτό κερδίζει εύκολα τη φήμη του, χάρη στην ασύγκριτη ικανότητα να κατασκευάζει άτυπες εντυπώσεις, σκέψεις οριακά γραφικές και λυρικές μέσα απο μια απτή πεζογραφία.
Οι αποκαλύψεις και τα φιλοσοφικά συμπεράσματα του συγγραφέα αν δεν είναι διαχρονικά τότε σίγουρα η διορατικότητα και η ανθρώπινη αποκάλυψη στο πλαίσιο ιστορίας, ελευθερίας, αναγκαιότητας, γεγονότος και αιτίας είναι καθολικές.

Ο επίλογος με κούρασε πολύ. Αποτελείται απο έναν επίπονο μονόλογο του Τολστόι για τις ιδέες της ιστορίας, της ιστορικής βιογραφίας και τις θεωρίες σύμφωνα με τις οποίες θα πρέπει να γράφονται οι ιστορίες πολέμου.

Ο Τολστόι θεωρούσε υπερεκτιμημένο τον Ναπολέοντα ως στρατηγό και προσπάθησε επίσης να αποκαταστήσει τη δυσμενή μεταχείριση που επέβαλλαν οι ιστορικοί στον αρχιστράτηγο Κουτούζοβ του ρωσικού στρατού, επισημαίνοντας τη σοφία και την προνοητικότητα του όταν αρνήθηκε να προχωρήσει σε μάχες κατά την υποχώρηση των Γάλλων απο τη Ρωσία.

Ακόμα, στον επίλογο επιχειρηματολογεί σχετικά με την φιλοσοφία την θρησκευτική πίστη και τη νομολογία.

Εν κατακλείδι, θεωρώ πως σκοπός του μυθιστορήματος είναι ένα μήνυμα που διαδόθηκε σε δυο επίπεδα, τον άνθρωπο, - και την ανθρωπότητα στο σύνολο της.
Στο ανθρώπινο επίπεδο το καλό επικρατεί του κακού και το κερδίζει μέσα απο κάθε αντιξοότητα.

Στο επίπεδο της ανθρωπότητας αναλύεται η επιδεξιότητα του πολέμου εκθέτοντας εμπεριστατωμένα την τελική ανάλυση πως ο πόλεμος δεν πετυχαίνει κανέναν άλλο σκοπό πέρα απο την καταστροφή κάθε είδους, τον πόνο κάθε μορφής και τον παγειωμένο ρόλο του θανάτου.

⭐️

First of all, just let me say it.

n  Even though this novel is written in the 19th century, the century of literary realism, no novel should be this long and you can’t convince me otherwise.n

The reader loses focus and interest in the plot after 700 pages and just wants to be done with the book. Or at least that was my case.

✔️n  Things Tolstoy is good atn:

1)Characterisation - particularly the characterization of his male characters because he is shit in writing female characters and we all know that. His ideal female character is the one who’s only goal is to be, and I quote, “a fruitful female”(this phrase was in the first epilogue while talking about Natasha’s character change or rather how he literally made her only defining traits be a wife and mother. Like c’mon, that’s not the purpose of every single woman. Natasha was the most developed and likable character here, and he damn right destroyed her in that epilogue. Also, Vera isn’t appreciated enough, Tolstoy made wrote her to be unlikeable but to me, she was a boss lady.

The male characters were done well. Especially Andrei. I loved his character with all my heart because he is so flawed and so(ironically because this is a realist novel) real. You cannot tell me that Andrei Bolkonsky didn’t carry the first two books on his back, because he damn right just did. Think about the sky scene in Austerlitz; his whole realization later at Borodino, and the in-between contemplation and falling in love with Natasha. There are so many quotable passages that came from this character.

n  n    ” But each man lives in his own way: you lived for yourself and you say with that you almost ruined your life, and knew happiness only when you began to live for others. But I experienced the opposite. I used to live for glory. (What is glory? The same as love for others, the desire to do something for them, the desire for their praise.) So I lived for others and ruined my life—and not almost, but completely. And I’ve been at peace since I began living for myself alone.”n  n

Rostov’s character development was my second favorite. And not gonna lie, I loved reading all the army parts with Rostov in them because Denisov was always there and he is a precious man. End of story.

Pierre got my nerves from volume 2 up until the ending of volume 4, where his existentialism goes straight to desperate nativity and I hated reading from his perspective. Thank god he went through character development while being imprisoned because I couldn’t take more chapters of him being so unsure of everything. Even though I know (trust me, I did the whole analysis of this book for college) that Pierre is Tolstoy’s ideal man at the end, but damn, guess I am just not into his ideals.

2)Depicting the Russian society and all its classes – in a tune with the literary movement. Where every character is representing a certain type of person of 19th century Russia.

3)The first part of the Military strategy was pure gold. I am talking about the Austerlitz battle and the whole 1805-1806 period. After the third book the quality decreased.

❌n  What Tolstoy is bad at:n

1)Forcing his own ideology on the reader through every single character.
Tell me I am not the only one who thought that Natasha’s ending(marrying Pierre and losing all of her personality because she has kids and a husband), Andrei’s ending and Rostov marrying Maria were  all shitty and not in tune with their characters at all? Because frankly, I am over his one and only formula and approach to life in both Anna Karenina and in this book.

Not to mention the second epilogue and all of the chapters where he was questioning what/who makes history and why historians are not objective/correct, while at the same time he isn’t objective (not going to get into the Kutuzov glorification and downgrading Napoleon – I am not saying I disagree with his opinions, but that’s just his opinion, not objective history).

2)Keeping it short. In other words, just because he had a lot of inspiration to write and wrote 1400 pages doesn’t automatically make it a great novel. What I am saying is Dostoyevsky did it better and his lengthiest novel The Brothers Karamazov was literally 800 pages but all were good. Unlike this book, there is no way that an average person can keep their focus on this book for more than 4-5 hours a day.

3)This brings me to problem number 3 and that is that the first two books were very good, the prime of his writing, while volume 3 is overly descriptive even for Tolstoy, and I struggled to get through that one the most. He literally threw all of his other literary devices away so that he could over-describe the biggest battle and the French retreat – it’s supposed to be a dynamic part but it felt so stagnant that I was praying for it to be over soon.

4)n  I am forever going to be mad at Tolstoy for destroying Natasha Rostov.n

n  n    My God, my God, the same faces, the same conversations, papa holding his cup in the same way and blowing in exactly the same way!” thought Natasha, horrified at the feeling of revulsion rising in her against the whole household for being always the same.n  n

Here’s another paragraph of me raving about Andrei as a character and his character development, I mean he went from this:

n  And then, if you’re not wounded, killed, or deceived ten times over—well, then what?” “Well, then…” Prince Andrei answers himself, “I don’t know what will happen then, I don’t want to know and I can’t know; but if I want this, want glory, want to be known to people, want to be loved by them, it’s not my fault that I want it, that it’s the only thing I want, the only thing I live for. Yes, the only thing! I’ll never tell it to anyone, but my God! what am I to do if I love nothing except glory, except people’s love? Death, wounds, loss of family, nothing frightens me. And however near and dear many people are to me—my father, my sister, my wife—the dearest people to me—but, however terrible and unnatural it seems, I’d give them all now for a moment of glory, of triumph over people, for love from people I don’t know and will never know, for the love of these people here…n

To this:

n  Prince Andrei understood that it had been said about him, and that it was Napoleon speaking. He heard the man who had said these words being addressed as sire. But he heard these words as if he was hearing the buzzing of a fly. He not only was not interested, he did not even notice, and at once forgot them. He had a burning in his head; he felt that he was losing blood, and he saw above him that distant, lofty, and eternal sky. He knew that it was Napoleon—his hero—but at that moment, Napoleon seemed to him such a small, insignificant man compared with what was now happening between his soul and this lofty, infinite sky with clouds racing across it. To him it was all completely the same at that moment who was standing over him or what he said about him…n

Was this one of those consistently good novels? No.
But is it a unique mixture of philosophy, historical fiction, social novel, and deeply character-driven? Yes.
For that reason, I would recommend it to people, especially the first two volumes so good luck to any potential future readers because reading this book is a whole emotional journey.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I did it. After two weeks, I managed to finish this titan of a book. You have no idea how much relief I feel. Review to come.