Just finished Part 1. I know I'm only 10% done the book but that's 100+ pages so I figure it should at least be a good indication of what the rest of the book is like.
I like it. It's good. There's a lot of characters but they're all well-distinguished, have their own patterns of thinking and goals and idiosyncrasies, and the world and events and characters blend together into a realistic experience of time and space. It definitely took a lot of work to incorporate so much historical research from primary and secondary sources into this novel.
But honestly, I'm not getting that much out of it. Most of the characters aren't particularly "deep". I suppose it's a "me problem" as some of my favorite novels are Dickens's bildungsromans where you have a central main character who you can easily relate to and who receives a lot of the writer's attention, let's say.
So far, I haven't gotten any very well-expounded upon themes, or big message, or "meaning" from Tolstoy's work, I'm just seeing a bunch of (well-written) characters having tea with each other basically. Even in early Part 2 where I'm at now, it's just little quibbles outside of the war. I honestly might drop War and Peace because there are so many great books out there (at least 100 or so) that are worth devoting many years to, and maybe War and Peace just isn't one of those for me.
Thoughts? Feel free to call me a faggot
Does War and Peace get better?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
War and Peace only gets better
How much better and around where?
So I can tell if your "taste"/"perception" is similar to mine, can you tell me what you thought of book 1, part 1? Did it bore you or was it already exciting and engaging and interesting?
part one ends with pierre getting his inheritance and andrei going off to war does it not? i believe at this point the book its pretty much just beginning still and hasn't even really started getting into the main themes or action yet, just introducing charachters and setting the stage. its basically from there onward where you really start to look into the characters
Yes, that's Part 1 and where I am now (early Part 2) there's some pre-war antics like some officer stealing this other guy's wallet and stuff.
> hasn't even really started getting into the main themes or action yet,
Oh okay, good to know. Should I give it 1-2 more parts before deciding to put it down?
I would say at least finishing part 3 would be ideal if not part 1 of volume two
Got it, thank you. I'll try to do so.
Still, and really I'm just complaining, but it feels like a slog right now. I just spent 4 chapters reading about these soldiers I don't give a shit about (and Rostov is barely a character at this point so I don't care about him either) going to cross a bridge, then burning the bridge, and then they leave. This is visual novel tier of unnecessary filler right now.
I know I'm just being a brat but I just felt like venting a bit.
>filler
are you expecting some rewarding plot arc with a clear climax and a payoff? you should drop the book now, it's not coming.
it does come though, its just that the climax and payoff happens at the end like a normal book, not randomly 100 pages into the 1500 page book
> rewarding plot arc with a clear climax and a payoff? you should drop the book now, it's not coming.
What? Why not? I expect that of all fiction I read.
> the climax and payoff happens at the end like a normal book, not randomly 100 pages into the 1500 page book
This sounds dumb as fuck. A story doesn't have to blueball you for 99% of the page count just to jizz a waterfall on the very last page
lol im not saying nothing happens until the end im saying the climax and pay off to all of the characters stories comes at the last section and epilogue which is, you know, common sense. if you expect the book to spell out everything 1/4 the way in you are probably too retarded for literature
> climax and pay off to all of the characters stories comes at the last section and epilogue which is, you know, common sense
Not really, I expect moderate payoffs throughout the entire story
> if you expect the book to spell out everything 1/4 the way in
you seem dumb. There should be some payoff within 1/4 of the book.
moderate pay offs are not the fucking climax of the novel and full pay off the main characters arcs
I'm not asking for the climax of the novel or the full pay off you autist.
dude are you me? I'm on page 100 of the book and I'm really not enganged yet with the general plot
The whole book is great
well it just sounds like you don't enjoy the book for what it is. some of the best chapters in the book are literally people having tea or going hunting
i don't think the book got 'better' later on
If you arent interested in following the development and interactions of the characters over time you might as well drop the book because that is what tolstoy is all about and you will be pleb-filtered.
It's always nice to be reminded that Yea Forums is a big place and that the mes in parallel universes also post here.
Yeah I'm on page 150 now and it's still pretty mediocre. It's very high quality, that's for sure, but it's also mediocre in the sense that I haven't really gotten much out of it. I'll probably push to page 300?
Glad you enjoyed it
I find it good so far. Consistently good. Like 4/5 tier (sorry for the faggot rating system).
But not very captivating or engaging. And doesn't have that extra spark to push it to 5/5.
Maybe, yeah. But I'm a faggot so I have to say I think objectively the book so far hasn't been amazing. It's been consistently good and has a lot of effort put into it, and you could even describe it as perfect, but to me it's perfect in a boring way right now
> development and interactions of the characters
this is the only thing I care about in fiction and I am not particularly impressed by Tolstoy's attempt at it.
If there weren't posts about failures who have yet to finish the book they're reading, there wouldn't be any threads at all.
What is the point of your post? Just "I disagree but I'm too much of a pussy to reply directly to your points so instead I'll bemoan the state of Yea Forums as a whole"?
part 3 of book 1 I believe has the first bits of really major character development as well as the first major "action scene", I imagine if you arent intrigued to continue after that then to book may not be for you, but you would be missing out on a lot as that part is only a taste of the kino that follows in the later parts.
>over time
this is somewhat key in tolstoy
Okay, I will definitely finish Book One then. I'm halfway there. Maybe I'll power through it all today.
Thanks.
Gotcha.
starting in book two you can expect it to become much more focused on the main characters and you start really exploring the thoughts and philosophy of the characters and what drives them as they go through shit or reflect on the shit they went through by the end of book 1, that is where you start to hit much more dense dialogue as opposed to the vacant salon gossip type stuff that fills part 1
Got it... I'll try to push through for now.
Just got to page 175, I started semi-speedreading a bit, not sure if that has anything to do with it, but also I'm at the part where Prince Andrei starts to have some more agency and things are a bit more interesting now. :)
ok bros on page 200 and it's getting gud
which part/chapter is that?
I just finished Part 2 of Book 1 and the last 50 pages have all been quite fun and interesting. I still won't say my mind is particularly blown or that I'm ready to hop onto the author's dick, but now I feel that my time is rewarded. We primarily focus on Andrei Bolkonsky and Nikolai Rostov's actions.
Rostov had a typical "Yay I'm going to war!" -> "Oh fuck oh god this is war" kind of story so far but it was done decently and was desperately needed characterization.
Bolkonsky was far more interesting, seeing him go to the Emperor and be given awards and stuff only to see him leave and go back to the battlefront was a good moment. He reminds me a bit of Yang Wen-Li in terms of being the character who seems to be the embodiment of disillusionment (although Bolkonsky seems to seek a "hero's journey" and is only currently in the midst of the disillusionment).
Feel free to criticize my shallow interpretations (if they are so)
Also, one pet peeve I have (I am a young, unstudied retard, so feel free to disregard this) is that most of the main characters we focus on seem to lack agency. For example, I can count the actual actions/decisions made by Rostov/Bolkonsky in this part on one hand (which I suppose is realistic, but then again, I don't think realism is a particularly valuable aspect of a story in and of itself), whereas we have 20-30 other characters, some not even named, doing a lot of stuff and taking up pages. It's almost as if I'm reading a history textbook, which, if you're a history buff I assume you would appreciate but since I'm reading this more as a piece of fiction, I am slightly turned off by the seemingly needless description of exploits such as the ones by the "the man with a gold watch" who "drove off the left flank" with the "Kim Kardashian strategy" or whatever.
classic
disillusionment is definitely a prominent theme in Andrei's story in book 1, though it of course does end up being a lot deeper than just "wtf war sucks" kind of disillusionment by the end.
I would say that its in book 2 when you start to see the main characters really get "set loose" so to speak and the narrative starts to really focus entirely on their thoughts and actions (with some exceptions here and there of course)
> though it of course does end up being a lot deeper than just "wtf war sucks" kind of disillusionment by the end.
And I did expect that that would be the case.
Although, note that when I said "wtf war sucks" I was referring not to Bolkonsky but to Rostov.
Bolkonsky markedly has more to his character, I can tell even now.
Thanks for sharing btw user.
Really? That's great to hear. I am enjoying the moments where we get to focus more on some particular characters more than when we only get to see them amongst a huge crowd. So I'm looking forward to it.
You don't like Grrrrostov???
QRD (no spoilers) on the Grrrrostov meme?
I don't hate him. I just can't be bothered to remember much about him. His big moments in Part 2 were running to a bridge and then running away (unless I misremembered that) and saying some dumb shit about how he was excited for finally getting to fight, and then predictably getting scared, running, getting his wrist hurt, crying like a bitch, and saying stuff like "but my momma likes me!!! how can frenchies want to kill me?!!!"
I suppose people like him truly exist, but they must be very rare or at least I have had the pleasure to not encounter people like him, because currently Rostov seems like a pathetic human and almost a caricature
yea rostovs story in part one almost seems to be just a more shallow parallel of andre's since both involve their time in the military but you can at least rest assured that rostov does get his own actual unrelated character arc that actually explores its own themes
and yea there are a few other parts in the book where the scope of things once again increases, but for the most part the book starts to focus entirely on the individual main characters and a few of the most important side characters and their development after austerlitz
The Grrostov thing is just how Denisov pronounces Rostov's name and is hilarious.
As far as Rostov goes, keep in mind, he's a young and naive little twerp at the start of the novel. As he gains more life experience (and especially sees the horrors of war) he will grow and change.
Yes. Much better.
I thought Denisov pronounced it as Wostov or something? Anyway yeah it's funny it's like Daffy Duck or something
Will be cool to see Rostov grow
Awesome stuff man, this is great to hear
Denisov has a regular rhotacism, his “r”s sound like in French. More or less raunchy jokes about hussar parties have already been common even before Tolstoy's time.
en.wikipedia.org
Denisov is an obvious nod to a real person, a self-proclaimed true hussar, and poet of all things hussar:
en.wikipedia.org
>most of the main characters we focus on seem to lack agency
>It's almost as if I'm reading a history textbook
That's actually a major theme of the book. You'll see as you keep reading.
When will Yea Forums have the redpill that novels are fucking garbage? Most prose in general is, but at least short stories have some dignity to them.
Even the greatest novels are all midwit trash.
>muh prose
Filtered
it's a translation thing: the guy has a weird speech impediment. p&v do it literally with the grrr thing which doesn't really make sense in english and sounds weird, but is literally how he says it in russian, whereas other translations capture the idea of the guy having a speech impediment by using a more idiomatic impediment that works better in english
>muh novels for housewives
Actually scratch that, it's not just a major theme, but rather the entire philosophical framework the book is built upon.
well I guess im happy I didnt read P&V,
Denisov is a gweat chawacter and the way my transwation did the speech impediment totawy added to his charm
OP here. Prose is overrated imo.
Cool. It did lead to some characters and passages early on being boring but I'm glad that it was written that way with a purpose.
Is Rostov the first tsundere in fiction?
you're not ready.
I'm loving it now
Is Tolstoy unironically gay or a fujo?
are you unironically a woman?
What did she mean by this bros?
Did Dolokhov cuck Pierre or some shit? What does "compromise" mean in this context
>this entire thread
embarrassing
How can so many be so easilt filtered by a world classic? Go back to Harry Potter and GoT fucking plebs
What are you talking about? You clearly didn't even read the thread. I pushed passed the mediocre buildup and am now quite enjoying it. I wonder how someone with such limited reading faculty as yourself even managed to get past the first page of War and Peace.