/wprg/ Day 13: War and Peace Reading Group

What did everyone think of the more didactic style of the first chapter of this book?

I think he makes a convincing argument but it was mostly already conveyed more powerfully before, for example with Andrei's experience at Austerlitz and his disillusionment with greatness after his encounter with Napoleon. Though in its rejection of the idea of the war having singular causes the chapter does seem to give a useful overview of the typical history textbook answers to that question for those of us not fully clued up on events.

And how do you feel about the passages exclusively concerned with real people and events, like Balashov's dispatch to Napoleon? Do you regret it when none of our fictional heroes are there to at least observe?

I think I enjoy it more when Tolstoi manages to integrate the historical and the fictional, such as that scene where Boris overhears the Emperor. It portrays the necessary factual event and reinforces our understanding of Boris' character, all without straining believability.

File: 31CB663A-CDEB-4A01-9FE8-1C1579033694-58811-000041E9D70526A1_tmp.png (103KB, 624x434px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 624x434px

>Rostov, smoking his pipe and turning his head about as the water trickled down his neck, listened inattentively, with an occasional glance at Ilyin who was pressing close to him. This officer, a lad of sixteen who had recently joined the regiment, was now in the same relation to Nikolai that Nikolai had been to Denisov seven years before. Ilyin tried to imitate Rostov in everything, and adored him as a girl might have done.

I don't give this youngster much chance of surviving the war.

>>8921578
I think Tolstoy gives a classic fatalistic argument, ie reality is determined and we cannot grasp the full picture so our perceived causes are only illusions.
I think this is a wrong way of looking at things; we've evolved to find causes in things because we can influence those causes to change things to our liking. While Napoleon was a product of his time when he reached power, his decisions DID matter, and looking at historic "causes" such as his intentions and mistakes can actually make us more prepared to deal with the present.

>>8921578
>And how do you feel about the passages exclusively concerned with real people and events, like Balashov's dispatch to Napoleon? Do you regret it when none of our fictional heroes are there to at least observe?
>I think I enjoy it more when Tolstoi manages to integrate the historical and the fictional, such as that scene where Boris overhears the Emperor. It portrays the necessary factual event and reinforces our understanding of Boris' character, all without straining believability.
I'll agree there, though it was a welcome breeze to have some other characters in focus for a change.

>>8921520
This reading group is such a fail

>>8922336
The catch up days didn't help like I thought they would. I wonder if all the other reading groups that have sprung up will fare any better.

>>8922641
I think we should have a poll before we can label this readthrough as having failed.

>>8922641
I can't talk about anyone else, but I've just been too busy over the new year period to keep up. But I'm gonna be catching up with you guys by the end of the week

Hoping the group doesn't disintegrate before then. The posters that are still here are dedicated and interesting enough to make it worthwhile keeping up till the end even if there's only like five of us by then.

Done reading for today.

File: F0B72E48-B437-4BCA-B38F-FD3E3AD0BDCF-60974-00004242F90CC3C4_tmp.jpg (36KB, 600x567px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 600x567px

>>8923785
>Bald Hills

File: 1482529032138.jpg (37KB, 500x366px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 500x366px

>>8923804
>Moscow

>>8923785
>>8923837
The madman.
He actually reached Moscow.

>>8922641
Don't mind the anon, he's trying to put our spirits down for awhile now.

Liked the beginning of this part.
It's like Tolstoy is getting on the central point of his book and insists pointing out this. The message of book is getting more evident and it's like he's saying "if you don't get it now, you will never understand the book".

His opening words makes you think about the events in a more humane way, trying to grasp a meaning behind the facts and numbers of a historical account. I agree with the anon, this is something that he already did. But i appreciate it nevertheless. It's very well written and can hype up the reader for what it's coming.

>>8921720
I don't agree with this interpretation. He's more bashing at the concept of the great man, not trying to undermine our influence on historic moments. There's this part where he says that the actions of Napoleon and Alexander were important, but so was the action of the little soldier, which the war never would've happened if masses of little soldiers weren't willing to give their lives to their country.
Yeah, there's this man called Napoleon who did this and that, but so what? He's only one man and by his side there's indefinite amount of others with their own self interests, having their equal share of responsibility for the historical event being depicted.

Also, i'm worried about my boy Andrei.
Pierre should have killed Dolokhov when he had the chance. Waste of human space.