Only 4 people ever in the entire world have actually finished War & Peace.

The piece I'm writing will probably mainly focus on the essays and not the book itself and I'm sure I'm going to catch shit for that but YOU TELL ME HOW THE FUCK TO TIE ALL OF THESE DISCOMPARATE WORKS TOGETHER.

I don't HAVE to write about more than W&P right now, but the thing is if I don't I then somehow have to write about The Idiot, Notes from the Underground and two of the following: Hadji Murad, Family Happiness, and Poor Folk all within the same essay at the end of the semester which is even gayer, I'd rather be able to just discuss The Idiot and Notes From The Underground so I'm trying to somehow get the short stories in with W&P. Why we're even READING those stories is beyond me, Poor Folk is the worst thing Dostoevsky's ever written and Family Happiness is boring.

He is the only man in the entire universe who has read all of these works completely, I have decided.

Want to bet that he hasn't read them lately?

WHEN I WAS 10.

READING TIPS
• List the Characters - For those works that are particularly long make a list of major characters. The list should include the different forms of the name, such as the christian and birth name, and the relation the characters have to one another. As you work through the book keep the list close by for quick reference. Periodically list one or two major events of each Character's life. If you forget who a character is or how s/he is related to other events your list can help bridge the gap.

• Make Notations - As you progress through a novel make notes at the top of the page when major events happen. This will make reviewing previous events less time consuming. In addition one can review the major events at a glance and get a better idea of the overall story. This makes the work "smaller" and easier to understand.

• Discuss - If possible discuss with others what you read. This increases comprehension and retention.

• Review the Story - After reading a particularly long or challenging section replay the events and dialogs in your head. Go back to the book if something doesn't make sense. Some find it beneficial to purchase a summary of the text, such as Cliff Notes, to read a summary of what they have just read.

• Translation - If you are reading the work in a language other than Russian keep in mind you are not reading the original as Tolstoy wrote it. As a result sentence structures that don't feel quite right probably lost something in the translation. When this happens reread the sentence for it's general meaning.

• Read the Russian - If possible work around the previously mentioned barrier by reading the work in Russian.

You've just discovered that professors are literary sadists to their students.

I have lists of characters, I just wanted some basic plot point reminders, even a more fleshed out table of contents (one of the translations used to do this, had a summary of each chapter*). Also some sort of very base analysis of Hadji Murad, but if you search on that you get a lot of stuff about Ivan Ilych.

Basically I don't want to have to reread the entire things. Welcome to skimming can I take your order, I suppose.

* when your book is so convoluted that you need to summarize each chapter briefly within the table of contents, you should perhaps examine reediting your work. Note to anyone current writing any books right now.

(xp)

is this on soulseek

two months and a lot of insomnia later: take that cashier lady! i almost wanted to track her down and let her know she was wrong

So with Ryan, that makes three. Still waiting for number four.

A clue that your book may be too damn long, then. W&P would have worked better if it had been chopped into three vols: you would actually realise when you've finished one.

i think most russian novels were published in serial form anyway. it's modern publishing that puts them in gigantic single volumes. not sure this applies to W&P tho

The problem is basically my topic, there is no way to relate Poor Folk and the themes of Tolstoys essays. I might as well just be totally lame and write about the treatment of women and romantic relations like EVERYONE ELSE IN THE CLASS and stop trying to be clever and work in Bahktin like I'm Sterling or something.

If War & Peace was actually about war & peace and not about omg Pierre got all the money and who is he going to marry and omg my sister is such a bitch and oh no he's going to marry Ellen but they don't love each other and Ellen has no real friends cos she's too pretty and the Prince hates his stupid wife and now everyone has to die and wait Pierre's now getting married to Natascha wtf wtf I'd probably like it a lot better but OTOH if Crime & Punishment was actually about crimes being committed and then being punished then it'd be about 4 pages long.

or how I learned to stop lurking and work in Bahktin

DRAMATIS PERSONAE:
PYOTR KIRILOVICH BEZHUKOV, a golf raver
PRINCE IPPOLIT KURAGIN, a charlton lido
COUNTESS NATALYA ROSTOVA
TRACER HAND, a traitor to his homeland

TRACER HAND is sitting in a chair made from hundreds of choice early and mid-nineties R+S vinyl releases. PRINCE IPPOLIT KURAGIN and PYOTR KIRILOVICH BEZHUKOV are standing nearby, looking sketchy and holding big glasses of lager. COUNTESS NATALYA ROSTOVA is attached to the ceiling via a number of suction cups. Playing in the background is Atmosfear's "Motivation (Dimitri From Paris remix)."

TRACER HAND: It just seems like the argument that if we pay Haggar workers .25/hr to make corduroy jeans in Ciudad Juarez, they'll buy lots of refrigerators and cars and CDs and matchsticks, has seemed, como se dice, BUSHEET MAN.

PRINCE IPPOLIT KURAGIN: Ah durnt lark Trayrcer's turn!

PYOTR KIRILOVICH BEZHUKOV: Haha!

PRINCE IPPOLIT KURAGIN: Pierre can ah borror yer hepflarsk? What yow gorinnit?

PYOTR KIRILOVICH BEZHUKOV: Grayrveh.

COUNTESS NATALYA ROSTOVA: By the way, your reflection on the lost joys of collectivism touches on something I just wrote in an (otherwise rather prosaic) essay I just posted to the Rostova site. Yes, I've been experiencing major nostalgia for the Soviet Union!

Everyone turns into a Sanrio character.

THE END

DRAMATIS PERSONAE:
NAPOLEON: al pacino

Moscow is destroy by Napoleon to the tune of "Utopia - Me Giorgio" by Giorgio Moroder

(if sometimes equals always)

which short stories?

Tolstoy's Kreutzer Sonata is one of the most fucked up, nightmarish, writhing masses of hell imaginable.

sorry, missed your earlier paragraph. what a miserable range of options.

good luck there.

The moral of the story: when the options are a survey on Russian literature versus a seminar on two specific authors, TAKE THE SURVEY because seminars are all about being an obscurist sadist.

this is so true! what the hell was he on when he wrote that? i always feel kinda guilty when i tell people to read it, but it's one of those you gotta read it to believe it kinda things.

'read it to believe it' is right. good to read to remember a completely pre-feminist world.

chapter 5 is a good place to dig in if you only have 3 minutes.

Wot about the exploding taiga wtf??

Option that shit immediately for next Thomas Pynchon novel.

(This passage comes at the end of Book Six, chapter 8 -- Norton Critical Edition)

After supper, the dancing continued for some time, and those who left did so pleased that they had been privileged to enjoy the last ball of one year and the first of another in one evening, for the New Year had arrived during the dance of Natasha and Prince Andrew. The prince himself, though he felt revived by that dance and the others of the evening, chose to hold back from further waltzing in favor of renewing acquaintances. He had just finished a conversation with an old friend of his father's when he felt a very cold breeze. Turning away from the dancers to the windows, he saw that a tall man had opened one and was standing with his face looking out into the dark night and with one hand on the sill, evidently enjoying the brisk but chill air. Frowning, for something about the man looked familiar, he approached the other, who turned with an initially distracted air to the prince as he approached.

"Josef Sergeyivich!" said Bolkónski with sudden emotion, immediately recognizing the other, who responded with a "Andrew Nikolaivich!" in the like spirit. Prince Andrew was happily surprised at finding Josef Sergeyivich Danilov, a good friend from his youth and a fellow prince, in Petersburg, or in Russia for that matter, for he had been given to understand that the other had been out of the country for some time.

"Indeed I was!" said Danilov heartily to Bolkónski's question on that matter. "In England, of all places, where they combine a healthy and active dislike of Bonaparte--or should I call him 'l'Empereur Napoleon' now?--with an odd appreciation of the latest of mock-French fashions, at least in some quarters!"

Prince Josef was as near to Prince Andrew's height as was possible, with a smooth and pale complexion, an excellent build, well-cared-for blond hair, light brown eyes, and a very animated voice. He fairly brimmed with good spirits, in much the same way that Prince Andrew remembered him, and it was not long before the two were engaged in an voluble discussion of what they had occupied themselves with for the past five years, for they had last met in Petersburg in 1804. The initial shock of pleasure upon meeting Danilov so carried Bolkónski that it was some time before he remembered the open window.

"I was merely trying to clear the air of all the musty perfumes and recollections of similar balls in years past by old men that seem to collect at such occasions like these," replied Danilov to Prince Andrew's query, using the same irreverence that he always seemed to possess in a good quantity. Bolkónski laughed with him as he closed the window, then asked if he was doing anything at present.

"I? No, not now, I am just getting used to home again. However, I have learned that you have gotten involved with Speránski and his reform drive."

"Indeed I have," replied Prince Andrew proudly. "I only recently have recovered from an extended state of inaction, and Speránski is a man who inspires activity in those willing to listen to him."

Prince Josef smiled wryly before replying. "Perhaps he is, Andrushka, but I do not feel that we should set him up on the level of Peter the First yet. I have already met him recently, and he seems to be one of those who construct intricate plans inappropriate for the problem they are meant to solve, then tries to force them past a very concerted opposition, blind to the fact that it is more powerful than he is--that earlier proposal to abolish court ranks and the like trod on a number of toes. By the next New Year's Eve, he will have fallen into obscurity."

Bolkónski was shocked at this attack, responding quickly and angrily, "Josef Sergeyivich, you have been away far too long to make such a sweeping statement. Speránski has the support of the Emperor, and that is enough. He may have upset those who are blind to the need of modernizing, but such people will always exist. I find it odd that you of all people choose to take their side in this!"

"Andrushka, do be mindful of decorum!" cautioned Prince Josef hastily, indicating the inquisitive looks on those standing nearby. "Now, you should know better than to accuse me of supporting those dusty figures from older regimes who still infest the higher echelons! I merely point out that Speránski, while intelligent and highly placed, is not omnipotent and beyond reproach. In Russia, I have come to believe, reform is either carried out by a strong personality at the very top of the government, or it is not carried out at all. Speránski has chosen a middle ground, and will undoubtedly fall because of it."

Prince Andrew did not immediately reply, so Danilov turned again to the window, looking toward the sky through the glass. Prince Andrew studied him as he stood there, thinking on how he had addressed a question that he himself had been considering only recently, though he did not wish to admit it to his friend. Can Speránski last, indeed? I have no doubt in his abilities, but it does seem that he is making numerous enemies, men who ought to know better. One would have thought they would have learned from our war with Napoleon, yet they remain stubbornly set in their ways now that peace is assured. If they only could wake from their slumber, as I have done!

"But enough of that!" Prince Josef suddenly said, turning back to Prince Andrew. "Politics is politics, and I have no doubt you will come through unscathed in the end. A liberal you may be, but your family connections will save you in any reactionary period."

"Indeed," said Bolkónski with a grin, "in the same way your reputation for pointing out the faults of any side you disagree with may get you into trouble no matter which side succeeds!"

Danilov laughed loudly. "If that happens, I will be off to England again! Russia may not be in good odor there, but the friends I have made there will look after me until it is safe to return again without ruffling the feathers of those who have no sense of humor."

The two continued talking well into the night, standing by the window and watching a new snow begin to fall.

I wish I could help but a totally wild guess would be something about the thematic difference between T and D you talked about, laid over the social landscape of a rapidly transforming russia, and maybe arguing about the relative unity of T's voices compared to D, drawing in Bakhtin's notion of dialogism being tied to a certain modernizing moment and arguing that T's social/thematic/ideological space was distinct from D's and rooted in an earlier period (relations of countryside as opposed to city, etc.)

this is all just blowing smoke tho.

No one was a greater influence on D than Gogol (in fact, no one was a greater influence on the golden age of Russian literature than Gogol). If you have time, a look at his play The Governmnent Inspector may be instructive in this case.

Tolstoy I think is a far inferior writer to D. But, again, there is a massive shift in his work where he moves from being overtly religious to humanism. The keynote passage in this shift is when Levin goes for a walk in the strawberry garden in Anna Karenina, but it is not AK as a novel that shows this shift completely; works thereafter do exemplify his humanism.

Family Happiness might not be T's most successful story, but the title is ironic. Please note the similarity to the title and the opening line of AK: 'Every happy family is alike. All unhappy families are unhappy in their own way.' Both stories concern themselves with how marriage kills the dreams of youth and the ensuing struggle between habit and striking out of the everyday.

Disclaimer: I have not studied Russian literature, and most of these books I read 10-15 years ago.

So now I break down and go spend yet another $25 on a book that I don't even enjoy. I understand like minor differences in translations and the differences between abridged/unabridged and all that stuff you learn in like 8th grade English buut I really, honestly am flabbergasted by the fact that BOTH versions of War & Peace that I own have not only entirely different chapter structuring from each other but also from the book the class was using. What in the fuck? Anyone want to attempt to explain this at all? Did Tolstoy just not write in chapters or something, leaving everyone free to cut it up as they wish?

One edition might choose to translate from one Russian edition; another translator might pick a different one. Or if either of the translations involved is less than recent -- translators have been known to take major liberties with things like chapter breaks and labels.

(Hell, there are two versions of The Great Gatsby in print, and you don't even have a translation issue in that case.)

WHERE DA BITCHUZ!

I also took a midterm today in which I answered the first question wrong. Not unusual, but the thing was, the second I wrote Bach, I knew I didn't mean Bach but rather Beethoven. I giggled. And WENT ON WITH THE TEST. I looked back on it like three times, giggled, then went on again. And never actually fixed the mistake. WTF? Beethoven is the new Bazarov in my comedy backlog.

I'd bet the chapter breaks are different because of the different ages of the translations, but that's only a guess -- I haven't read any Tolstoy, and haven't read much Russian fiction at all beyond The Idiot. It isn't very helpful, except at least you know the editor wasn't trying to trick you.

(And I guess your notes still have some use? I mean, "book 12, chapter 5," you at least know that's not at the very beginning or anything.)

Not W&P though - thats literary mentalism.

btw, the 7-hour '68 Bondarchuk film version -- which allegedly cost $700 million in contemporary dollars -- is playing in NYC right now, and figures to tour.

http://www.filmforum.org/films/warandpeace.html

I will not see it due to time constraints and bcz I've never read it.

Been there, done that. 'Ve read and wathed teh t'ings.
Memories are darn hazy, tho.

I read it one college summer (for pleasure), eight years ago. The only thing I specifically remember was Prince Aleksei (sic?) saying or thinking that happiness was really only the absence of unhappiness. Since Charlie Brown is sometimes seen reading War & Peace, maybe one of those Peanuts "Happiness is..." things should include the line.

The butler did it.

What's with the hate for Hadji Murad? By far the most readable, and great for an introduction to Daghestan.

I don't understand why people have trouble finishing this book. It's such a page-turner--just a great narrative. I've had far more trouble with some shorter classics like Madame Bovary, where there are long drawn out descriptive sections.

Oh, and Britishers should definitely get the Anthony Briggs translation--doesn't have the stuffiness you usually associate with most translated fiction.

it's one of those rare doorstop-sized lit classics - like don quixote - that's actually fun and even downright thrilling to read, IF you've got the right translation. (burton raffel for quixote, briggs for tolstoy)

i got the english version of the new jack reacher novel, but i'm having trouble with some of the concepts.

Reading Quixote, it's like Confed. of Dunces-level Roffles!

Is the Anthony Briggs one that new Penguin translation? I'm reading that right now and it's a breeze.

New Penguin one. It is hell of a delightful Spanish breeze.

xpost-That's right. The one where all the peasants talk in Mockney accents.

I read it one college summer (for pleasure), eight years ago. The only thing I specifically remember was Prince Aleksei (sic?) saying or thinking that happiness was really only the absence of unhappiness. Since Charlie Brown is sometimes seen reading War & Peace, maybe one of those Peanuts "Happiness is..." things should include the line.

That bit about "happiness" sounds almost like a Buddhist take on things.

Does anyone remember the Peanuts strips where Snoopy is reading the novel...one word a day?

This number is about to go way up.

For those reading it now, which translation do you have?

I have the Rosemary Edmonds one from 1957, which I started pre-quarantine, so am now on page 222 of 1444.