War and Peace
I must admit I gave up on 'War and Peace' many times. I started reading it, got mired in the number of characters with unfamiliar names, was put off by the clunky English of the translation and confused by the sheer proliferation of Princes. To me, a Prince is the son of a King but apparently the Russian word which was translated into 'Prince' by an uninspired translator means merely the son of a member of the nobility. In any case, I started several times and got distracted by another faster moving book and by the time I got back I realized that I had lost track of the characters (who had not yet done anything to distinguish themselves) and would have to start all over again.
I asked my friend, Rajesh Behl, whether it was actually worth persisting. He said 'yes, it's worth it.' Perhaps I still would not have focused on it long enough if it had not been for a break from work of nearly 6 months during which I moved from India to the US and waited for the various steps of licensing and credentialing required to work here. I had time enough to read.
Tolstoy is in no hurry to make progress. He wants to explain everything. He tells us what a character was doing with his hands. He tells us what the character was thinking. He tells us what he was feeling. You have to enjoy the process of reading. This is not a book in which your objective should be to reach the end. The objective is to simply enjoy what is going on in that sentence and that passage.
There are no heroes in the book. Each character is carefully developed. We are told what they're thinking. We know why they do what they do. The motivations are human. People are normal people with normal motivations. And yet, many of them behave better than we would in their place. Modern 'literature', movies and so on would have you think that changes in human society are caused by the actions and abilities of 'great men' like Napoleon and Alexander. Tolstoy elegantly demonstrates how little control individuals have over the paroxysms that society undergoes from time to time.
There are no heroes in the war either. Perhaps the closest thing to a hero is Kutuzov, unwillingly thrust into leading an army into a war he wants nothing to do with but also realizes that he may be best suited to lead. He confines himself, at considerable damage to his reputation, to avoiding the foolish schemes cooked up by the more pro-active and politically connected advisors and generals and tries to let the war take it's own course, aware that he can do little to change it but also aware that Russia will inevitably win the war. He does all he can to avoid death and destruction, not only to his own army and the civilians affected by the war but also to the French, whom he recognizes are not in any way different except that they are fighting a war they care little for in a foreign land.
Each character is carefully crafted and we understand their motivations as being natural consequences of their circumstances. We see the resilience of the human spirit as they recover from tragedy and failure and resume their lives, eventually finding a measure of happiness. The last few chapters of the story itself are an illustration of how happiness can be found in contentment with one's circumstances. There is no simplistic 'good vs evil' narrative here.
Of course, he then goes off on a lengthy philosophical discussion of the nature of free-will and the extent to which our actions are controlled by our circumstances. That's interesting in itself but perhaps somewhat repetitive and he gives an innumerable number of examples to try and explain what he means beyond any doubt.
I wish I could read it in the original Russian. The book is a communion with a great mind.
I asked my friend, Rajesh Behl, whether it was actually worth persisting. He said 'yes, it's worth it.' Perhaps I still would not have focused on it long enough if it had not been for a break from work of nearly 6 months during which I moved from India to the US and waited for the various steps of licensing and credentialing required to work here. I had time enough to read.
Tolstoy is in no hurry to make progress. He wants to explain everything. He tells us what a character was doing with his hands. He tells us what the character was thinking. He tells us what he was feeling. You have to enjoy the process of reading. This is not a book in which your objective should be to reach the end. The objective is to simply enjoy what is going on in that sentence and that passage.
There are no heroes in the book. Each character is carefully developed. We are told what they're thinking. We know why they do what they do. The motivations are human. People are normal people with normal motivations. And yet, many of them behave better than we would in their place. Modern 'literature', movies and so on would have you think that changes in human society are caused by the actions and abilities of 'great men' like Napoleon and Alexander. Tolstoy elegantly demonstrates how little control individuals have over the paroxysms that society undergoes from time to time.
There are no heroes in the war either. Perhaps the closest thing to a hero is Kutuzov, unwillingly thrust into leading an army into a war he wants nothing to do with but also realizes that he may be best suited to lead. He confines himself, at considerable damage to his reputation, to avoiding the foolish schemes cooked up by the more pro-active and politically connected advisors and generals and tries to let the war take it's own course, aware that he can do little to change it but also aware that Russia will inevitably win the war. He does all he can to avoid death and destruction, not only to his own army and the civilians affected by the war but also to the French, whom he recognizes are not in any way different except that they are fighting a war they care little for in a foreign land.
Each character is carefully crafted and we understand their motivations as being natural consequences of their circumstances. We see the resilience of the human spirit as they recover from tragedy and failure and resume their lives, eventually finding a measure of happiness. The last few chapters of the story itself are an illustration of how happiness can be found in contentment with one's circumstances. There is no simplistic 'good vs evil' narrative here.
Of course, he then goes off on a lengthy philosophical discussion of the nature of free-will and the extent to which our actions are controlled by our circumstances. That's interesting in itself but perhaps somewhat repetitive and he gives an innumerable number of examples to try and explain what he means beyond any doubt.
I wish I could read it in the original Russian. The book is a communion with a great mind.
I will surely read it. BTW, thanks for the info doc.
ReplyDelete