Take a photo of a barcode or cover
larsenc23 's review for:
War and Peace
by Leo Tolstoy
Early 19th Century epic of Russian families, primarily the Bolkonskys, the Rostovs, and the individual Pierre, as well as many other minor characters such as the Kuragin family and Denisov. The text spans from Russia's early war with Napoleon to his 1812 invasion of Russia and beyond.
The beginning is an absolute bombardment of characters and it's really overwhelming. I haven't read anything that compares to this many different characters. Pierre and gang tying a police officer to a bear kept me engaged. Didn't feel settled in until after the first 100 pages when the organization is much cleaner.
Tolstoy masterfully conveys social situations and how characters are thinking about socialization. The uniqueness of the main characters is well done. In addition, his battle scenes are impeccable. He does an excellent job of tying characters together in the end, but honestly it was somewhat predictable. When Pierre views the comet in a remarkably described scene. Tosltoy did keep me guessing and on the edge of my seat about Prince Andrey's .
Really identified with Pierre, his awkwardness and searching for meaning. His ending was very interesting and I think a lot of men can relate to his metamorphosis throughout the 1300+ pages, which isn't necessarily unique to his social status. Cannot say enough positive things about Pierre's realizations on "purpose" in life. Every Pierre passage was fascinating, the bear, the beginnings with Helene, the duel, the free masons, his journey during French occupation of Moscow. Loved the Denisov character and his rhotacism, a very charming touch. Was engaged during every Denisov scene for the w's in his dialogue. Karataev was outstanding, I struggle to remember any minor character I enjoyed as much and his ending with his dog was for me the most emotional part of the entire work. The hunting scenes with Nikolay were especially memorable.
What I did not like was the constant break from the main narrative to Tolstoy's opinions and philosophies on countless subjects. These parts are often redundant and self contradictory - Napoleon is a great man, then later he's a "stupid" one. The Russians lost the Battle of Borodino, but later he says they won it. Page 1192 - Why was it that an under-strength Russian army won the battle of Borodino against a full-strength enemy (they didn't). I don't see how the Russians "won" this battle if it didn't prevent the French from occupying Moscow and none of the facts online seem to indicate the Russians "won" Borodino in any regard. I get that the Russians "wounded" the French army at Borodino, possibly to the point of making them exit Moscow early later on, but that's hardly a victory. Tolstoy also has a very personal beef with historians to the point of mockery and belittlement. These passages were beyond distracting and ruined the mesmerizing charm of the story by breaking it up so often, almost like if you were baking a cake and stopped every five minutes to turn the oven off until it cooled and then turned it back on to reheat again - the cake would have finished much sooner and tasted much better had you simply left the oven on.
Some of Tolstoy's "breaks" are interesting, but it's far from the majority. I liked when he suggested that to a flock of sheep the sheep who is isolated and fattened by the shepherd seems like a genius but in reality that sheep is being prepared for slaughter. Ultimately I took one star off for the constant interruptions of the main narrative. I pondered why it hadn't bothered me as much in previous novels such as Moby Dick and it's because those are first person narratives and it seems like the main character's mind is wandering, whereas this is a third person narrative and it's Tolstoy consistently interrupting himself which was very frustrating. Some will say he does it to build suspense, I would argue it felt more like being constantly blue-balled.
The entire Part II of the 100 page Epilogue was worth skipping, but I read every page of it. The gem of an epilogue about the characters is book-ended by more Tolstoy opinions. I didn't like philosophy in college and I didn't enjoy it here. Ultimately about 100 pages could be cut from the main text as well as almost all of the non-character epilogue. Almost all passages with Kutuzov as the main character could have been scratched, I understand he's an integral part of the war with the French but his passages were tedious and the book is already 1358 pages with countless characters. In contrast Tolstoy's Napoleon was really well-written.
The beginning is an absolute bombardment of characters and it's really overwhelming. I haven't read anything that compares to this many different characters. Pierre and gang tying a police officer to a bear kept me engaged. Didn't feel settled in until after the first 100 pages when the organization is much cleaner.
Tolstoy masterfully conveys social situations and how characters are thinking about socialization. The uniqueness of the main characters is well done. In addition, his battle scenes are impeccable. He does an excellent job of tying characters together in the end, but honestly it was somewhat predictable. When Pierre views the comet in a remarkably described scene
Spoiler
I knew then he would marry Natasha, despite her being deeply involved with Prince Andrey at that pointSpoiler
two dalliances with deathReally identified with Pierre, his awkwardness and searching for meaning. His ending was very interesting and I think a lot of men can relate to his metamorphosis throughout the 1300+ pages, which isn't necessarily unique to his social status. Cannot say enough positive things about Pierre's realizations on "purpose" in life. Every Pierre passage was fascinating, the bear, the beginnings with Helene, the duel, the free masons, his journey during French occupation of Moscow. Loved the Denisov character and his rhotacism, a very charming touch. Was engaged during every Denisov scene for the w's in his dialogue. Karataev was outstanding, I struggle to remember any minor character I enjoyed as much and his ending with his dog was for me the most emotional part of the entire work. The hunting scenes with Nikolay were especially memorable.
What I did not like was the constant break from the main narrative to Tolstoy's opinions and philosophies on countless subjects. These parts are often redundant and self contradictory - Napoleon is a great man, then later he's a "stupid" one. The Russians lost the Battle of Borodino, but later he says they won it. Page 1192 - Why was it that an under-strength Russian army won the battle of Borodino against a full-strength enemy (they didn't). I don't see how the Russians "won" this battle if it didn't prevent the French from occupying Moscow and none of the facts online seem to indicate the Russians "won" Borodino in any regard. I get that the Russians "wounded" the French army at Borodino, possibly to the point of making them exit Moscow early later on, but that's hardly a victory. Tolstoy also has a very personal beef with historians to the point of mockery and belittlement. These passages were beyond distracting and ruined the mesmerizing charm of the story by breaking it up so often, almost like if you were baking a cake and stopped every five minutes to turn the oven off until it cooled and then turned it back on to reheat again - the cake would have finished much sooner and tasted much better had you simply left the oven on.
Some of Tolstoy's "breaks" are interesting, but it's far from the majority. I liked when he suggested that to a flock of sheep the sheep who is isolated and fattened by the shepherd seems like a genius but in reality that sheep is being prepared for slaughter. Ultimately I took one star off for the constant interruptions of the main narrative. I pondered why it hadn't bothered me as much in previous novels such as Moby Dick and it's because those are first person narratives and it seems like the main character's mind is wandering, whereas this is a third person narrative and it's Tolstoy consistently interrupting himself which was very frustrating. Some will say he does it to build suspense, I would argue it felt more like being constantly blue-balled.
The entire Part II of the 100 page Epilogue was worth skipping, but I read every page of it. The gem of an epilogue about the characters is book-ended by more Tolstoy opinions. I didn't like philosophy in college and I didn't enjoy it here. Ultimately about 100 pages could be cut from the main text as well as almost all of the non-character epilogue. Almost all passages with Kutuzov as the main character could have been scratched, I understand he's an integral part of the war with the French but his passages were tedious and the book is already 1358 pages with countless characters. In contrast Tolstoy's Napoleon was really well-written.