War and Peace by Leo TolstoyMy rating: 3 of 5 stars
Epic. But maybe a little too epic. I’d take Tolstoy’s advice here and not expect a novel if you ever get around to reading this huge tome, because it definitely stretches the definition of “novel” a bit. Anna Karenina is more conventional and straightforward to follow compared to this and is probably a better introduction to his writing style if you’re not ready to invest the time in this sink. (and that's ironic because Anna Karenina is also really long hah...)
That said, W+P is surprisingly not that difficult to read considering its length- well, compared with other similarly regarded lengthy epics like Ulysses anyway. The only real major impediments here are the large amounts of untranslated French (that is, if you’re reading a version that only includes the translations as footnotes like Pevear+Volokhonsky and aren’t fluent in French; you can make an argument for/against not translating the French, but at the end of the day it’s still a hassle to deal with the translation footnotes, let alone the actual historical footnotes) and the chapter-long philosophical digressions that become increasingly common towards the end of the book. The digressions themselves actually aren’t irrelevant to the narrative, even though they sometimes can feel that way; they try to focus instead on the greater subjects that inspired the telling of this story to begin with: topics like the functional differences between art and history when they overlap, what the human experience in war and peace reveals about the meaning of life, the power/lack thereof of rulers in light of history, why historians suck at their job (seriously), and so on.
It's all definitely worth contemplating in light of the actual story being told… but also rather tiring to read through at times, especially in the second epilogue where it's just nonstop philosophizing/pseudo-philosophizing for all I care (and I wasn't really impressed with the scientific analogies, but that's probably a sign of how the times have changed since this book was written). If this were a true novel, you’d expect the main fictional-historical narrative to speak these things for themselves, but no, Tolstoy just had to get in your face about them because of course these subjects matter, right? It almost feels like listening to a friend who rambles about politics because they just can't get over their obsession with it- of course politics matters (in that it affects how we all live directly/indirectly), but it's not something I want to hear or talk about to the point where I just vomit politics everyday for the rest of my waking life.
Regarding the actual story and its themes themselves, it comes off surprisingly relevant for a 19th century work centered on a period during the high point of the Romantic era (not that Romanticism is irrelevant by any means… but you get the picture). A lot of the emotions, moments, and experiences conveyed here seem almost prescient of notions I’d considered modern/20th century (like the apparent meaninglessness of war- I mean in the All Quiet on the Western Front / WWI sense), and there were definitely moments where I thought I’ve felt this before and then oh my god I’M PIERRE BEZUKHOV. Just Tolstoy being on point in expressing our thoughts and feelings before we even knew how to describe them (let alone were born to experience them) as always.
The pacing of course is slow/gradual, and it takes more than one-to-two hundred pages for the plot to feel like it’s going anywhere- unsurprisingly so given the number of focal characters there are to follow; even though Pierre, Andrei, and Natasha are often touted as the “main” characters, enough other characters get attention from the narrator (particularly Nikolai and Kutuzov/Napoleon to a lesser extent) that you start to realize this book is really less about the individual characters than it is about something much bigger and encompassing all of them. But it’s also interesting how much more lifelike the fictional characters are compared with their nonfictional costars, most of whom I wouldn’t have been able to tell otherwise given my lack of knowledge of this particular era of history if not for how much more boring it was to read about them, haha... Even the initially intimidating figure of Napoleon comes off as underwhelming and smaller-than-life the more he appears, albeit purposely so (since the unpredictable motion of history dwarfs the wills of "larger-than-life" individuals and so on).
In hindsight, I feel like the less consistently interesting parts of this book tended to distract or almost overshadow the better parts. One of the best things about W+P is its account of how individuals experience war in contrast with life outside of war; for his time, Tolstoy was probably unprecedented in his ability to capture such a feeling so succinctly- but with the amount of other material also crammed into this book, it was easy for me to lose sight of those moments after they had passed, especially towards the end.
All-in-all, definitely worth reading if you can get through it, but not an absolutely essential must-read rec if you value the limited time you have on earth, because for the extreme length of this book, it wasn't entirely life-changing or inspiring the way I've felt about other classics in the past, even though it did have its awe-inducing moments. Okay sorry, that might've come out a bit more morbid and sardonic than I meant it to sound. (But I kinda mean it. If it weren't for the fact that it was "only ~40 pages," I'd have probably passed on the second epilogue. I mean who writes second epilogues-let-alone-epilogues these days anyway??)


