Piano World Home Page Forums Fun Stuff! - Parties, Tours, Projects & More... Just For The Fun of It War and Peace - Tolstoy

Interesting! I may play with it later but have to work now:

Cool app TS, I must try to check it out.
I'm not sure I'm up for a full re-read (so many books, so little time), but I look forward to joining in the conversation.

All very interesting. But I had some completely different views of the characters now that I've got Vasily and Helene out the door of the salon.

Anna Pavlona - an intelligent woman who might have been in a very different situation in a different time - a deal maker, a presidential advisor, the power behind the throne, eh?

Prince Vassily - I think he's an egotist - he maybe thinks he's so rich that Napolean, even if he wins, will make no difference to him. Altho it may be that he's only blase on the surface and is scheming behind the scenes.

Princess Bolkonsky - an airhead. Oh dear! But really, turns her innocent charm on everyone, flits from subject to subject, is cutsey.

Pierre Bezukhov - probably astute - Anna's afraid of him. Infatuated with Helene. He was discussing something with the abbe - a little excitedly. Don't know yet if he just gets a little over-enthusiastic or if he sort of likes to be provocative.

Prince Andrei Bolkonsky - not at all impressive. A snot. So young, so bored with life. I'd guess he's an opportunist - will take whichever side will get him along.

I must admit I was surprised when Pierre and Andrei not only knew each other but seemed to "have a history" - maybe something political in common.

And I was surprised that Pierre has been living with Vassily.

So - I guess there's some character development yet to come judging from the previous comments here

Good comment, Cathy.....let's see how they develop. I want to reread the first chapter or two, as now I know the characters and they're a little less confusing. My only disagreement is that I don't remember Pierre being astute but I do want to reread as I may be influenced by the coming chapters.

I think Pierre and Andrei may have been childhood friends, correct? Andrei could be a little snotty; that's probably an apt description. I think Vasily is a manipulator, but again that could be coming slightly later.

Thanks for joining, Barabaram!

A FUN FACT:

So if, like me, you read that Anatole cost Prince Vassily 40,000 Russian Rubles (RR) a year, and that , and you wonder, how much would that be in 2019 US dollars?

Well, in the period around 1805-1809, the RR was valued by US Customs at about $0.55 = 1 RR. In the 214 years between 1805 (Anna Pavlovna Scherer's soiree was in July 1805) and 2019, the US Consumer Price Index in US dollars has gone up by a factor of 17.08. Therefore, 1 RR in 1805 is now equivalent in purchasing power in the US to $0.55 x 17.082 = $9.39 in 2019, so the conversion factor between RR of 1805 to USD in 2019 is 9.39.

So this means that in 2019 US dollars, Anatole cost Prince Vassily the current equivalent of about 40,000 x 9.39 = $376K a year, and . Both of them were very naughty boys!

Hi everybody! I'm happy to see conflicting reactions to the characters here, because, even though some people claim that it's pretty much black-and-white with Tolstoy (you know which characters you're not supposed to like and vice versa), things are more complex.

A couple of comments (I'm always busier during the first half of the weeks, and things have been intense at work):

1. Yes, Nikolai's obsession with the emperor is intriguing, it's described almost like romantic love. It partly reflects his idealistic patriotism but actually a student of mine took it further and analyzed Nikolai's character throughout the novel as Tolstoy's critique of militant masculinity (we'll see more of this theme later). And yes, he is young and naive, and somewhat reckless. Nikolai has certain preconceptions about war and heroism, he wants to be that brave hussar "hacking" right and left, but reality proves different, much more prosaic and brutal--this is why when he sees stretches for the injured and the dead, it takes him a while to process what they actually mean (this discrepancy between the romantization of war and its reality is one of Tolstoy's favorite themes going back to his early "Sevastopol Stories"). So, during his encounter with Andrei, Andrei's behavior doesn't fit into Nikolai's stereotype of what military heroism is like, while Andrei, precisely because he knows what the reality of the battle is like, mocks Nikolai's embellished account of it.

2. The scene with Dolokhov/cards. You're right, we never find out for sure whether Dolokhov cheated or not, but he does seem to possess some quasi-demonic power over young Nikolai and he uses it--Nikolai somehow can't not play (I think that by referring to his reputation as a cheater, Dolokhov provokes Nikolai who doesn't want to show that he's afraid and now has to play; so, he psychologically manipulates hot-blooded Nikolai). There's also an interesting parallel between this scene and the earlier battle scene, in both cases Nikolai is praying to be saved, feels lonely and is panicking (war and peace, both parts echo each other at the level of imagery, situations, etc.).. Dolokhov is a really interesting character, even though he is not one of the major ones. But this is already book/volume 2, right? Sorry.

3. Andrei... Full disclosure--I had a huge crush on Andrei when I read War and Peace for the first time as a teenager. Less so on his character earlier in the novel, rather his later development. "So young and bored with life," as jotur (Cathy?) said--this is precisely why
I know that many readers hate him for his cruel treatment of his wife in those early chapters, and he is too insensitive and cold, I agree. But Tolstoy portrays poor Lise not entirely positively either--yes, she's nice and social and pretty but clearly somewhat superficial and banal, she sort of embodies that triviality of high society that Andrei is trying to escape (but we can't help feeling sorry for her, Tolstoy just doesn't let us have an easy choice).

As for Napoleon--he captured the minds of the young people across Europe at the time, no matter which side they were fighting on. He was the epitome of greatness, heroism and military genius. So, this explains Andrei's fascination. But, as you'll see later, Tolstoy's philosophy of history is aimed precisely against the idea that history is made by "great individuals," and Andrei's disillusionment in Napoleon helps make this point. But more importantly, as you pointed out, it is Andrei's transcendental spiritual experience by looking at the sky of Austerlitz that changes his perspective. Compared to this sublime experience, the "great" Napoleon indeed becomes small and insignificant.

Great comments!

Tyrone - I was mentally doing the math also, but didn't take it as far as you have. I didn't check the exchange rates, for instance. They were quite wealthy, it seems, but that's the way of the aristocrats in Eurasia of long ago.

Dumka - I enjoyed your comments on Nikolai vs Andre and their perspectives from the battle. You articulated my thoughts way better than I could have. Poor Lise; we barely got to know her. I really hadn't had much time to develop an opinion of her; maybe she was too superficial but she was barely even an adult herself as of yet.

Wealthy, as far as landed aristocracy went, but also reckless! I read that Tolstoy himself lost the family home at cards, and the winner literally disassembled his mansion and moved it many miles away. And not everyone was wealthy. For example, Princess Drubetskoy and many others who spent or lost their family fortunes (maybe at card!)


It's all very sad. I really liked the little princess a lot and the first time I read the book, I despised Andrei Bolkonsky for treating her like a dog turd.

Ah, now I'm at the dinner at the Rostov's, and I can see, given the policeman and the bear, why cmb13 wouldn't have used "astute" with Pierre I'm sort of keeping everyone sorted out - but sheesh, Boris's mother is an old witch. I cringe every time I read of her. At this point I see more that people may be taking Napolean seriously, and there is more a sense that the war is serious. I can almost see why Count Vassily would prefer Ipollito to Anatoly as envoy to Vienna, but neither is a very sympathetic character - tho I suspect the Count really doesn't care except as to what it might gain himself.

And tho I still think the "little princess" is basically an airhead, she did at least recognize the way she was being treated and thought the men were idiots for not recognizing the worth/intelligence of Anna Scherer. Good for her.

I'm way behind you folks, but the observations are very helpful.

It's funny, Cathy, I don't actually remember all the details you're pointing out as some of the minor characters have slipped out of my awareness! When time permits, I'm going to reread some of these sections, though.

Boris's mother is that dirt poor Princess Drubetskoy who at Anna Pavlovna's soiree at the beginning of Book 1, begged Prince Vassily to get a commission in the Guard for her son.

EDIT: Print out a copy of the character cheat sheet and keep in your copy of the novel

That's actually a really good idea!

The section in which Andrei and Nicolai meet, via Boris, is another I'd like to reread. I had to remind myself when we come across Boris once again.

And actually, as to the Masons, Pierre says the abbe must be a mason when he and Andrei get together after the salon - dunno when they're mentioned again.

They'll be coming around again....don't worry!

cmb13 - thanks for the links to the study guide and wikipedia. I think I'll only want to read them up to where I am in the book at any one time, just to kind of cement what I've read. But for that they'll be helpful - sometimes I agree and sometimes not

Thanks, Cathy, for reminding us about some minor/secondary characters. They are fun and add a lot to the fictional world of the novel. I usually assign students a character or two to trace throughout the novel and keep a journal about, and they are responsible for discussing "their" characters in greater detail in class. This way secondary characters get some attention. Boris is one of those interesting secondary characters, definitely. His mother is indeed offputting but we should remember that she is impoverished, if noble, and a widow, so without money and power she has to rely on connections and even some scheming to secure a future for her son (I'm not saying we are supposed to love her but, in a sense, she's just being a devoted mother, even though her methods leave to be desired). (I'm not trying to correct anybody or influence your perceptions of the characters, just giving more context).

Dolokhov is probably the most intriguing among those relatively secondary characters, but he's pretty memorable. I also enjoy (in a wicked way) Tolstoy's descriptions of Vera (Natasha's older sister) and Berg.

I like that minor character journal idea; that sounds like a fun project and a great way to engage the class! Very clever!

MORE FUN FACTS:

I found this interesting article entitled "18 Novel Facts About War and Peace" and among the interesting human interest stories within, it tells of how Mikhail Katkov, a Moscow University professor and publisher of the Russian Messenger agreed to pay Tolstoy 300 Russian Rubles (RR) per printer's page for his serialisation of W&P over the course of a protracted negotiation in October/November 1864. That seemed high to me. What did Tolstoy get in today's USD terms for writing W&P?

It turns out that we know exactly what the exchange rate in March of 1867 was. It was in March 1867 that Alaska was purchased by the US Treasury from Imperial Russia for $7,200,000 USD at a weighted average exchange rate of $1.00 USD = 1.60 RR. In the 152 years between 1867 and 2019, the US Consumer Price Index in US dollars has gone up by a factor of 18.30. Therefore, 1 RR in 1867 is now equivalent in purchasing power in the US to 18.30 / 1.60 = $11.44 in 2019, so the conversion factor between RR of 1867 to USD in 2019 is 11.44.

So this means that in 2019 US dollars, Katkov paid Tolstoy the current equivalent of about 300 x 11.44 = $3,432 USD per printer's page, and for the first 10 printers page (just enough to cover Anna Pavlovna's soiree at the beginning of Book 1) Tolstoy received the equivalent of $34,320 USD. So indeed, Tolstoy's 300 RR per printer's page was very high, but I was able to verify it from this book which cited Tolstoy's published correspondence with his wife that detailed the negotiation. I guess Tolstoy was an awesome negotiator and probably only the wealthy in Russia could afford to subscribe to Katkov's Russian Messenger since I imagine the subscription fee must have been exorbitant! (Now of course, printer's pages are large - I imagine for 19th-century printing presses, they might have been newspaper size or close to it, but even so, this is a lot of money. Tolstoy received $34K for telling the tale of Anna Pavlovna's soiree!)

As usual, Wikipedia has a ton of info on W&P. This wikipedia article lists all of the characters, both minor or major, in the novel.

BTW, in March 1868, Tolstoy published an essay about what he thinks W&P is and is not. If this essay isn't in any of your translations of the novel (in P&V, it's found on pp. 1217-1224), it can be found in full on pp. 1309-1317 here.

Ok, this might be a TL;DR post for many of you, but oh well!

Firstly, thanks for indulging me in the "minor characters" posts, but the truth of the matter is, since I'm making my own character list, rather than necessarily using the one in the front of the book (you can't tell the players without a scorecard), I don't really know who's major and who's minor, so they all kind of have something to say to me. Secondly, I tend to be trivia detail oriented, so I can go on and on, and probably will!

Humor - I found a lot of it in the chapter about the Rostov's name day and dinner. Tolstoy makes an aside about how all parents think their children tell them everything when Countess R is saying that she'll know if anything is going on between Natasha and Boris. Then there's the whole description about how long visitors stay and how you can tell - "the sort of conversation ...which is designed to last just long enough so that one can get up at the first pause, with a rustling of skirts, say" [I'm charmed, but my mother's health] or whatever polite excuse you have, "and again, with a rustling of skirts, go back to the front hall, put on a fur coat or a cloak, and drive off." And when the guests overstay that convention, after they've left, the Countess says "What manners! They sat and sat!" And then, as everyone is arriving for the dinner: "It was that time before a formal dinner when the assembled guests refrain from beginning a long conversation, expecting to be called the hors d'oeuvres ...The hosts keep glancing at the door and occasionally exchange glances with each other. The guests try to guess from these glances who or what they are still waiting for: an important belated relation or a dish that is not quite ready yet." I laughed.

I will also have to say I didn't find Natasha cute, or charming, or likable at all. Perhaps dumka1 can shed some light here. But when I was 13 I was 4 or 5 years beyond dolls, and 9 or 10 beyond standing up at a dinner and demanding to know what was for dessert And Boris and Nicolai - still with the younger people, tho both are going into the army. Vera was 17 and was with the adults - so how old are Boris and Nicolai? And still playing with children? And how could Boris actually love Natasha, who's only 13 (tho Jerry Lee Lewis got away with it, I guess)? Count Rostov alluded to his parents getting married at 13, but I'd guess they were also much more mature and had more "work history" at that age than Natasha has - or maybe not. But the children of the poor certainly would have had. No dollies to be kissed by your current crush for them - sheesh. But - how did the attitude toward children differ in that class at that time?

I've kind of re-thought Lise, too, now that the book has been taking the realities of the war a little more seriously. She told Andrei she was afraid, but she never answered him, really, when he asked why.But she was very young, pregnant, her husband was turning against her, she was being sent to his relatives w/o her friends being around, and - she had heard of some of the atrocities of Napolean and now her husband was going off to war against him. So maybe she had fears she knew but couldn't say.

I did think about the situation Anna Mikhailovna was in, being poor and entirely dependent on relatives. There certainly wasn't an option, at that time, for women (unless they were born poor) to make a living for themselves. I guess some younger women would go be governesses, but Anna M wouldn't have thought about being, say, a scullery maid But I don't like her any way

So, I've read thru the end of Part I, but I haven't quite assimilated it yet. I will say that it's not entirely clear to me how successful Anna M was in getting the will that recognizes Pierre as the sole heir to be the official one. And what was with Boris telling Pierre that neither he (Boris) nor his mother wanted or would take anything from Pierre's inheritance? Is Boris as conniving as his mother?

Well, that's it for now. Tyrone, I find the background stuff really interesting.