The novel “War and Peace” and its heroes in the assessments of literary criticism. Essay “Radical and populist criticism of the novel “War and Peace”

Author of the article: Weil P.
When the first part of “War and Peace” was published in the “Russian Messenger” in 1865 - at that time the novel was still called “1805” - Turgenev wrote to a friend: “To my true chagrin, I must admit that this novel seems positively bad to me , boring and unsuccessful. Tolstoy entered the wrong monastery - and all his shortcomings stuck out. All these little things, cunningly noticed and pretentiously expressed, small psychological remarks that he, under the pretext of “truth,” picks out from the armpits and other dark places of his heroes - how insignificant all this is on the broad canvas of a historical novel!
This one of the earliest assessments (later Turgenev changed his opinion) turned out to be prophetic to a certain extent. Descendants, however, without condemning the “stuff,” perceived “War and Peace” precisely and primarily as a historical novel, as a broad epic canvas, only incidentally noting small details - like the heavy tread of Princess Marya or the little princess’s mustache - as devices portrait characteristics.
In the case of Tolstoy's novel, the effect of monumental painting was felt. Contemporary Turgenev was still standing too close and looking at individual strokes. Over the years, from a distance, “War and Peace” has finally turned into a huge fresco, on which, God willing, one can discern the overall composition and grasp the flow of the plot - the nuances in the fresco are invisible and therefore insignificant.
This is probably why the monument erected by Tolstoy was so tempting to imitate. Russian literature does not know such an example: almost everything that is written in Russian about the war bears the stamp of Tolstoy’s influence; Almost every work that claims to be called an epic (at least in terms of time span, in terms of the number of characters) came out of War and Peace in one way or another. This influence was experienced by writers of such varying degrees of talent as Fadeev, Sholokhov, Simonov, Solzhenitsyn, Grossman, Vladimov and others, less noticeable (the only obvious exception is “Doctor Zhivago” by Pasternak, who followed the poetic tradition.) Following Tolstoy was captivating with its apparent simplicity. : it is enough to master the basic principles - historicism, nationality, psychologism - and lead the story, evenly alternating heroes and storylines.
However, “War and Peace” still stands in our literature as the lonely pinnacle of a grandiose novel in its scope, which - above all - is incredibly exciting to read. With all the historicism and psychologism, even in some fifth reading, I really want to simply, from a reader’s perspective, find out what will happen next, what will happen to the characters. Tolstoy’s book is captivating, and one gets the feeling that the author was captivated by his narrative in the same way - when suddenly phrases burst onto the pages as if from action-packed novels of a romantic nature: “Despite his seemingly weak build, Prince Andrei could endure physical fatigue much better than the best strong people." Or: “Prince Andrei was one of the best dancers of his time. Natasha danced superbly."
These infrequent inclusions in War and Peace are nevertheless not accidental. Tolstoy's book is full of admiration for the heroes and admiration for the beauty of man. What is noteworthy is that it is more masculine than feminine. In fact, there is only one unconditional beauty in the novel - Helen Bezukhova, but she is also one of the most repulsive characters, the personification of depravity and evil, which the author certainly condemns. Even Natasha Rostova is just ugly charming, but in the epilogue she turns into a “fertile female.” For this metamorphosis, Tolstoy was unanimously criticized by all Russian lovers of female images, and although there were speculations that the epilogue on nepotism and motherhood was written in polemics with the movement for emancipation, the secondary nature, the “complementarity” of a woman next to a man is clear throughout the text of War and Peace “It is not women who act at the forefront of history.
There are so many handsome men in the novel that Pierre Bezukhov and Kutuzov especially stand out for their ugliness, as the author repeatedly emphasizes. Not to mention the leading handsome men, like Prince Andrei Bolkonsky, Anatoly Kuragin or Boris Drubetsky, the most random people are good-looking, and Tolstoy considers it necessary to say about some silently flashed adjutant - “a handsome man,” although the adjutant will immediately disappear without a trace and the epithet will disappear for nothing.
But the author doesn’t feel sorry for epithets, just as he doesn’t feel sorry for words in general. The novel does not miss a single opportunity to add a clarifying touch to the overall picture. Tolstoy masterfully alternated broad strokes with small ones, and it is the small ones that create the face of the novel, its uniqueness, its fundamental originality. Of course, this is not a fresco, and if we stick to comparisons from the same series, “War and Peace” is rather a mosaic in which each pebble is both brilliant in itself and included in the brilliance of the entire composition.
Thus, the abundance of handsome men creates the effect of war as a holiday - this impression is present in the novel even when describing the bloodiest battles. Tolstoy’s Borodino stylistically correlates with Lermontov’s sublime anniversary poem, which Tolstoy called the “grain” of his novel, and there are direct indications of this: “Who, having taken off his shako, carefully unraveled and reassembled the assemblies; who polished the bayonet with dry clay, spreading it in his palms...” Of course, this is Lermontov’s “Borodino”: “Who cleaned the shako, all beaten up, Who sharpened the bayonet, grumbling angrily...”
All these beautiful adjutants, colonels and captains in smart uniforms go out to fight, as if on a parade somewhere on Tsaritsyn Meadow. And that, by the way, is why ugly Pierre looks so strikingly alien on the battlefield.
But later, when Tolstoy unfolds his historical and philosophical digressions about the horrors of war, the same stroke gives the exact opposite effect: war may be beautiful, but war kills beautiful people and thereby destroys the beauty of the world. This is how an expressive detail works ambivalently.
Tolstoy's small detail almost always looks more convincing and colorful than his detailed description. For example, Pierre Bezukhov’s thoughts about Platon Karataev are largely nullified by the remark that flashed almost without explanation about this hero: “He often said the exact opposite of what he said before, but both were true.”
It is precisely this optionality of the presence of meaning, which, as a direct consequence, turns out to be the presence of meaning in everything - and then leads Pierre to the conclusion that in Karataev God is greater than in the complex constructions of the Freemasons.
Divine nonsense is the most important element of the book. It appears in the form of small episodes and replicas, which one could, it seems, completely do without in a historical novel - but nonsense invariably appears and, which is very significant, as a rule, at moments of strong dramatic tension.
Pierre utters nonsense that is obvious even to himself (but not to the author!), pointing at someone else’s girl during the fire of Moscow and pathetically declaring to the French that this is his daughter, whom he saved from the fire.
Kutuzov promises Rastopchin not to give up Moscow, although both know that Moscow has already been given up.
During a period of acute longing for Prince Andrei, Natasha stuns the governesses: “The island of Madagascar,” she said. “Ma da gas kar,” she repeated each syllable clearly and, without answering the questions... left the room.”
Is it not from this Madagascar, which had nothing to do with the previous conversation and appeared literally out of nowhere, that Chekhov’s famous Africa, where the heat is terrible, came out? But Madagascar itself did not become famous, was not remembered - of course, because of the focus on reading the epic, which generations of Russian readers wanted to see in War and Peace. Meanwhile, Tolstoy managed not only to reproduce normal - that is, incoherent and illogical - human speech, but also to present tragic and fateful events as meaningless, as in the episodes with Pierre and Kutuzov.
This is a direct result of the worldview of Tolstoy the thinker and the skill of Tolstoy the artist. Perhaps the main philosophical line of the novel is the theme of the infinite number of sources, causes and causes of phenomena and events occurring on earth, the fundamental inability of man to embrace and realize this multitude, his helplessness and pitifulness in the face of the chaos of life. The author repeats this favorite thought persistently, sometimes even intrusively, varying situations and circumstances.
The human body is incomprehensible and disease is incomprehensible, for suffering is the sum total of many sufferings. Battles and wars are unpredictable because too many divergent forces influence their outcome, and “sometimes it seems that salvation lies in running back, sometimes in running forward.” The vicissitudes of the political and social activity of man and all humanity are unknowable, since life is not subject to unambiguous control by reason.
It seems that the author also had himself in mind when he wrote about Kutuzov, in whom there was “instead of a mind (grouping events and drawing conclusions) only the ability to calmly contemplate the course of events... He won’t come up with anything, won’t do anything,... but he will listen to everything, remember everything , will put everything in its place, will not interfere with anything useful and will not allow anything harmful.”
Tolstoy's Kutuzov despises knowledge and mind, putting forward something inexplicable as the highest wisdom, a certain substance that is more important than knowledge and mind - the soul, the spirit. This is, according to Tolstoy, the main and exclusive advantage of the Russian people, although when reading the novel it often seems that the heroes are divided on the basis of good French pronunciation. True, one does not contradict the other, and the real Russian, one might assume, has already surpassed and absorbed the European. The more varied and complex the mosaic of a book written largely in a foreign language.
In War and Peace, Tolstoy so firmly believes in the superiority and primacy of spirit over reason that in his famous list of the sources of self-confidence of different peoples, when it comes to Russians, there are even caricature notes. Having explained “the self-confidence of the Germans by their learning, the French by their belief in their charm, the English by their statehood, and the Italians by their temperament, Tolstoy finds a universal formula for the Russians: “A Russian is self-confident precisely because he knows nothing and does not want to know, because he does not believe, so that you can fully know anything.”
One of the consequences of this formula is eternal absolution, an indulgence given in advance to all future Russian boys who undertake to correct the star chart. And in fact, there is no ridicule here, because Tolstoy during the period of “War and Peace” applied this formula both to himself and, most importantly, to the people he glorified, as if admiring their stupidity and tongue-tiedness. These are the scenes of the Bogucharov riot, conversations with soldiers, and indeed almost any appearance of the people in the novel. Contrary to popular belief, there are few of them: it is estimated that only eight percent of the book is devoted to the actual topic of the people. (After the release of the novel, responding to critics’ reproaches that the intelligentsia, commoners, and few folk scenes were not depicted, the author admitted that he was not interested in these layers of the Russian population, that he knew and wanted to describe what he described: the Russian nobility.)
However, these percentages will increase sharply if we consider that from Tolstoy’s point of view, the people’s soul and spirit are expressed no less than by Platon Karataev or Tikhon Shcherbaty by Vasily Denisov, Field Marshal Kutuzov, and, finally - and most importantly - he himself, the author. And Pierre, who is already beginning to see the light, does without deciphering: “They want to attack all the people, one word - Moscow. They want to do one end. “Despite the vagueness of the soldier’s words, Pierre understood everything he wanted to say and nodded his head approvingly.”
According to Tolstoy, you cannot correct, but you can not interfere, you cannot explain, but you can understand, you cannot express, but you can name.
The thinker determined the direction of the artist's actions. In the poetics of War and Peace, this author’s worldview is expressed in the smallest detail. If events and phenomena arise from many causes, it means that there are no unimportant ones among them. Absolutely everything is important and significant, every pebble of the mosaic takes its rightful place, and the absence of any of them removes the mosaic from completeness and perfection. The more named, the better and more correct.
And Tolstoy calls it. His novel, especially the first half (in the second, the war generally overcomes the world, the episodes become larger, there are more philosophical digressions, fewer nuances), is full of small details, fleeting scenes, side, as if “to the side”, remarks. Sometimes it seems that all this is too much, and the bewilderment of Konstantin Leontyev, with his subtle aesthetic taste, is understandable: “Why... Why does Tolstoy need these excesses?” But Tolstoy himself - for the sake of the desire to name everything and not miss anything - is capable of even sacrificing style, leaving, for example, the glaring three “whats” in a short sentence, which resulted in a clumsy construction like: she knew that this meant that he was glad that she didn't leave.
If Tolstoy is merciless in his details, it is only out of an artistic principle that encourages him not to miss anything. Only Napoleon is openly tendentious, to whom the author flatly denied not only greatness, but also significance. Other characters only strive for full embodiment, and again - a fleeting touch not only clarifies the outline of the image, but often comes into conflict with it, which is one of the main pleasures of reading the novel.
Princess Marya, famous for her cordiality, to which many pages are devoted (to cordiality), appears coldly secular, almost like Helen: “The princess and princess... clasped their hands, firmly pressed their lips to the places where they fell in the first minute.” And of course, the princess, with her inaccessible high spirituality, immediately turns into a living person. The rollicking Denisov becomes alive when he makes “sounds like a dog barking” over the body of the murdered Petya Rostov.
These metamorphoses are even more clear in the description of historical figures, which explains why in Tolstoy they are reliable, why one does not feel (or almost does not feel: the exceptions are Napoleon, partly Kutuzov) artificiality and falsehood in episodes with characters who have real prototypes.
Thus, having devoted a lot of space to the statesman Speransky, the author finds the opportunity to actually put an end to him in a very indirect way - by conveying the impressions of Prince Andrei from dinner in the Speransky family: “There was nothing bad or inappropriate in what they said, everything was witty and could be funny; but that very thing that is the essence of fun not only didn’t happen, but they didn’t even know that it happened.” These last words so expressively convey the “unreality”, the lifelessness of Speransky, so disgusting to the author, that no further explanation is required why Prince Andrei, and with him Tolstoy, left him.
“The French Arakcheev” - Marshal Davout - is written in “War and Peace” with only black paint, and yet the most striking and memorable characteristic is the generally unimportant circumstance that he chose a dirty barn for his headquarters - because “Davout was one of those people who deliberately put themselves in the darkest conditions of life in order to have the right to be gloomy.” And such people, as everyone knows, were not only in France and not only in the time of Tolstoy.
Tolstoy's detail reigns supreme in the novel, being responsible for literally everything: it draws images, directs plot lines, builds composition, and finally creates a holistic picture of the author's philosophy. More precisely, it initially follows from their author’s worldview, but, forming Tolstoy’s unique mosaic poetics, the detail - the abundance of details - clarifies this worldview, makes it clearly visual and convincing. And dozens of the most touching pages about Natasha’s love for Prince Andrei can hardly be compared in touchingness and expressiveness with one - the only question that Natasha asks her mother about her fiancé: “Mom, isn’t it a shame that he is a widower?”
In the description of the war, the detail just as successfully fights against the superior forces of the epic - and wins. A huge event in the history of Russia was, as it were, deliberately chosen by the author to prove this writer’s hypothesis. Kutuzov's drowsiness, Napoleon's irritability, and the thin voice of Captain Tushin remain in the foreground. Tolstoy's detail was intended to destroy the genre of the heroic historical novel and did this, once and for all making the revival of the heroic epic impossible.
As for Tolstoy’s book itself, the “little things” that outraged Leontyev and upset Turgenev, which Tolstoy supposedly “picks out from under the armpits of his heroes” - as it turned out, determined both the heroes themselves and the narrative, which is why “War and Peace” did not turn into a monument , but has become a novel that is read with enthusiasm by generations.

Author of the article: Pisarev D.I.
The new, not yet finished novel by Count L. Tolstoy can be called an exemplary work regarding the pathology of Russian society. In this novel, a whole series of bright and varied pictures, written with the most majestic and imperturbable epic calm, poses and resolves the question of what happens to human minds and characters under such conditions that give people the opportunity to do without knowledge, without thoughts, without energy and without difficulty.
It is very possible, and even very likely, that Count Tolstoy does not mean to pose and resolve such a question. It is very likely that he simply wants to paint a series of pictures from the life of the Russian nobility during the time of Alexander I. He sees for himself and tries to show others, clearly, down to the smallest details and shades, all the features characterizing the time and the people of that time, people of the circle who most interesting to him or accessible to his study. He tries only to be truthful and accurate; his efforts do not tend to support or refute any theoretical idea with the images he creates; he, in all likelihood, treats the subject of his long and careful research with that involuntary and natural tenderness that a gifted historian usually feels for the distant or near past, resurrected under his hands; he, perhaps, finds even in the features of this past, in the figures and characters of the personalities depicted, in the concepts and habits of the depicted society, many features worthy of love and respect. All this can happen, all this is even very probable. But precisely because the author spent a lot of time, labor and love on studying and depicting the era and its representatives, precisely because the images he created live their own life, independent of the author’s intentions, enter into direct relationships with readers, speak for themselves and irresistibly lead the reader to thoughts and conclusions that the author did not have in mind and which he, perhaps, would not even approve of.
This truth, gushing out as a living spring from the facts themselves, this truth, breaking through beyond the personal sympathies and beliefs of the narrator, is especially precious in its irresistible persuasiveness. We will now try to extract this truth, this awl that cannot be hidden in a bag, from Count Tolstoy’s novel.
The novel "War and Peace" presents us with a whole bouquet of diverse and superbly finished characters, male and female, old and young. The selection of young male characters is especially rich. We will begin with them, and begin from the bottom, that is, with those figures about which disagreement is almost impossible and whose unsatisfactoriness will, in all likelihood, be recognized by all readers.
The first portrait in our art gallery will be Prince Boris Drubetskoy, a young man of noble origin, with a name and connections, but without a fortune, paving his way to wealth and honor with his ability to get along with people and take advantage of circumstances. The first of those circumstances that he uses with remarkable skill and success is his own mother, Princess Anna Mikhailovna. Everyone knows that a mother asking for her son always and everywhere turns out to be the most zealous, efficient, persistent, tireless and fearless of lawyers. In her eyes, the end justifies and sanctifies all means, without the slightest exception. She is ready to beg, cry, ingratiate herself, fawn, grovel, bother, swallow all sorts of insults, if only out of annoyance, out of a desire to get rid of her and stop her annoying cries, they finally throw an annoyingly demanded handout for her son. Boris knows all these advantages of his mother well. He also knows that all the humiliations to which a loving mother voluntarily exposes herself does not harm her son at all, if only this son, using her services, behaves with sufficient, decent independence.
Boris chooses the role of a respectful and obedient son, as the most profitable and convenient role for himself. It is beneficial and convenient, firstly, because it imposes on him the obligation not to interfere with those feats of sycophancy with which his mother lays the foundation for his brilliant career. Secondly, it is beneficial and convenient in that it puts him in the best light in the eyes of those strong people on whom his success depends. “What an exemplary young man!” everyone around him should think and talk about him. “How much noble pride he has and what magnanimous efforts he uses in order, out of love for his mother, to suppress in himself the too impetuous movements of young, uncalculated obstinacy, such movements that could have upset the poor old woman, who had concentrated all her thoughts and desires on her son's career. And how carefully and how successfully he hides his magnanimous efforts under the guise of outward calm! How he understands that these efforts, by the very fact of their existence, could serve as a heavy reproach to his poor mother, completely blinded by her ambitious maternal dreams and plans. What intelligence, what tact, what strength of character, what a heart of gold and what refined delicacy! "
When Anna Mikhailovna knocks on the thresholds of benefactors and benefactors, Boris behaves passively and calmly, like a man who has decided once and for all to respectfully and with dignity submit to his difficult and bitter fate, and to submit so that everyone can see it, but so that no one dares to tell him with warm sympathy: “Young man, in your eyes, in your face, in your entire dejected appearance, I see clearly that you are patiently and courageously bearing a heavy cross.” He goes with his mother to the dying rich man Bezukhov, on whom Anna Mikhailovna places some hopes, mainly because “he is so rich, and we are so poor!” He goes, but he makes even his mother feel that he is doing this exclusively for her, that he himself does not foresee anything from this trip except humiliation, and that there is a limit beyond which his obedience and his artificial calm can betray him. The hoax is carried out so skillfully that Anna Mikhailovna herself fears her respectful son, like a volcano from which a destructive eruption can be expected every minute; It goes without saying that this fear increases her respect for her son; She looks back at him at every step, asks him to be affectionate and attentive, reminds him of his promises, touches his hand, so that, depending on the circumstances, she either calms or excites him. Anxious and fussing in this way, Anna Mikhailovna remains in the firm confidence that without these skillful efforts and diligence on her part everything will go to waste, and the adamant Boris, if he does not anger strong people forever with an outburst of noble indignation, then at least will probably freeze them with the icy coldness of his treatment. all the hearts of patrons and benefactors.
If Boris so successfully mystifies his own mother, an experienced and intelligent woman, under whose eyes he grew up, then, of course, he is even easier and just as successful in fooling strangers with whom he has to deal. He bows to benefactors and patrons courteously, but so calmly and with such modest dignity that powerful people immediately feel the need to look at him more closely and distinguish him from the crowd of needy clients for whom annoying mothers and aunties ask. He answers their casual questions precisely and clearly, calmly and respectfully, showing neither annoyance at their harsh tone, nor any desire to engage in further conversation with them. Looking at Boris and listening to his calm answers, patrons and benefactors are immediately imbued with the conviction that Boris, remaining within the boundaries of strict politeness and impeccable respect, will not allow anyone to push him around and will always be able to stand up for his noble honor. Being a supplicant and seeker, Boris knows how to shift all the dirty work of this matter onto his mother, who, of course, lends her old shoulders with the greatest readiness and even begs her son to allow her to arrange his promotion. Leaving his mother to grovel before strong people, Boris himself knows how to remain pure and graceful, a modest but independent gentleman. Purity, grace, modesty, independence and gentlemanliness, of course, give him benefits that plaintive begging and base servility could not give him. That sop that can be thrown to a timid, dirty little fellow who barely dares to sit on the end of a chair and strives to kiss his benefactor on the shoulder is extremely inconvenient, embarrassing and even dangerous to offer to an elegant young man, in whom decent modesty coexists in the most harmonious way with an ineradicable and ever-vigilant sense of self. dignity. Such a post, to which it would be absolutely impossible to place a simply and openly groveling petitioner, is extremely decent for a modestly independent young man who knows how to bow at the right time, smile at the right time, make a serious and even stern face at the right time, and yield at the right time. or to be convinced, to reveal noble steadfastness in time, without even for a moment losing calm composure and decently respectful ease of manner.
Patrons usually love flatterers; They are pleased to see in the reverence of the people around them an involuntary tribute to the admiration brought by the genius of their minds and the incomparable superiority of their moral qualities. But for flattery to make a pleasant impression, it must be quite subtle, and the smarter the person who is being flattered, the subtler the flattery must be, and the subtler it is, the more pleasant it acts. When flattery turns out to be so crude that the person to whom it is addressed can recognize its insincerity, then it can produce a completely opposite effect on him and seriously damage the inexperienced flatterer. Let's take two flatterers: one is in awe of his patron, agrees with him in everything and clearly shows with all his actions and words that he has neither his own will nor his own conviction, that he, having now praised one judgment of his patron, is ready to extol another in a minute a judgment that is diametrically opposed, as long as it was expressed by the same patron; the other, on the contrary, knows how to show that, in order to please the patron, he does not have the slightest need to renounce his mental and moral independence, that all the patron’s judgments conquer his mind by the power of their own irresistible inner persuasiveness, that he obeys the patron at any given moment not with a feeling of slavish fear and slavish selfish servility, but with the living and deep pleasure of a free man who had the good fortune of finding himself a wise and generous leader. It is clear that of these two flatterers, the second will go much further than the first. The first will be fed and despised; the first will be dressed as a jester; the first will not be allowed further than the lackey role that he assumed in the short-sighted expectation of future benefits; the second, on the contrary, will be consulted; he may be loved; they may even feel respect for him; he can be made into friends and confidants. The high-society Molchalin, Prince Boris Drubetskoy, follows this second path and, of course, holding his beautiful head high and not staining the tips of his nails with any work, will easily and quickly reach this path to such well-known degrees that simple Molchalin will never crawl to. , innocently being mean and in awe of his boss and humbly earning himself an early stoop behind office papers. Boris acts in life the way a deft and agile gymnast climbs a tree. Standing with his foot on one branch, he already looks with his eyes for another, which he could grab with his hands in the next moment; his eyes and all his thoughts are directed upward; when his hand has found a reliable support point, he completely forgets about the branch on which he just now stood with all the weight of his body and from which his leg is already beginning to separate. Boris looks at all his acquaintances and at all those people with whom he can get acquainted precisely as at branches located one above the other, at a more or less distant distance from the top of a huge tree, from that top where the desired calm awaits a skilled gymnastics among luxury, honors and attributes of power. Boris immediately, with the penetrating gaze of a gifted commander or a good chess player, grasps the mutual relations of his acquaintances and those paths that can lead him from one already made acquaintance to another, still beckoning him to himself, and from this other to a third, still wrapped in golden a fog of majestic inaccessibility. Having managed to appear to the good-natured Pierre Bezukhov as a sweet, intelligent and firm young man, even managing to confuse and touch him with his intelligence and firmness at the very time when he and his mother came to the old Count Bezukhov to ask for poverty and for guards uniforms, Boris gets for himself This Pierre sent a letter of recommendation to Kutuzov’s adjutant, Prince Andrei Bolkonsky, and through Bolkonsky he met Adjutant General Dolgorukov and himself became an adjutant to some important person.
Having placed himself on friendly terms with Prince Bolkonsky, Boris immediately carefully separates his leg from the branch on which he was holding on. He immediately begins to gradually weaken his friendly connection with his childhood friend, the young Count Rostov, with whom he lived in the house for entire years and whose mother had just given him, Boris, five hundred rubles for uniforms, which were accepted by Princess Anna Mikhailovna with tears of tenderness and joyful gratitude. . After a six-month separation, after campaigns and battles endured by the young Rostov, Boris meets with him, his childhood friend, and on the same first date Rostov notices that Boris, to whom Bolkonsky comes at the same time, seems ashamed to have a friendly conversation with army hussar. The elegant guards officer, Boris, is offended by the army uniform and army habits of young Rostov, and most importantly, he is embarrassed by the thought that Bolkonsky will form an unfavorable opinion of him, seeing his friendly shortness with a man of bad taste. In Boris's relationship with Rostov, a slight tension is immediately revealed, which is especially convenient for Boris precisely because it is impossible to find fault with it, that it cannot be eliminated by frank explanations, and that it is also very difficult not to notice and not to feel. Thanks to this subtle tension, thanks to this subtle dissonance, slightly scratching the nerves, a person of bad taste will be quietly removed, having no reason to complain, be offended and break into ambition, and a person of good taste will see and notice that to the elegant Guards officer , Prince Boris Drubetsky, indelicate young people try to be his friends, whom he meekly and gracefully knows how to push back to their real place.
On a campaign, in war, in social salons - everywhere Boris pursues the same goal, everywhere he thinks exclusively, or at least primarily, about the interests of his career. Using with remarkable intelligibility all the smallest indications of experience, Boris soon turns into conscious and systematic tactics what was previously for him a matter of instinct and happy inspiration. He forms an unmistakably correct theory of career and acts according to this theory with the most unwavering constancy. Having become acquainted with Prince Bolkonsky and having approached through him to the highest spheres of military administration, Boris clearly understood what he had foreseen before, precisely what was in the army, in addition to the subordination and discipline that was written in the regulations and which was known in the regiment and he knew , there was another more significant subordination, the one that forced this drawn-out, purple-faced general to respectfully wait while captain Prince Andrei, for his own pleasure, found it more convenient to talk with ensign Drubetsky. More than ever, Boris decided to serve henceforth not according to what is written in the charter, but according to this unwritten subordination. He now felt that only due to the fact that he had been recommended to Prince Andrei, he had already become immediately superior to the general, who in other cases, at the front, could destroy him, the guards ensign" (1, 75) (1).
Based on the clearest and most unambiguous indications of experience, Boris decides once and for all that serving individuals is incomparably more profitable than serving a cause, and, as a person who is not in the least bound in his actions by an uncalculated love for any idea or for any was the case, he makes it a rule to always serve only individuals and always place all his trust not in any of his own real merits, but only in his good relations with influential persons who know how to reward and bring their faithful and obedient servants into the people .
In a casual conversation about service, Rostov tells Boris that he will not become an adjutant to anyone, because this is a “lackey position.” Boris, of course, turns out to be so free from prejudices that he is not embarrassed by the harsh and unpleasant word “lackey”. Firstly, he understands that _comparaison nest pas raison_ (Comparison is not proof (French). - Ed.) and that there is a huge difference between an adjutant and a footman, because the first is gladly received in the most brilliant drawing rooms, while the second is forced to stand in the hall and hold the master's fur coats. Secondly, he also understands that many lackeys live much more pleasantly than other gentlemen who have every right to consider themselves valiant servants of the fatherland. Thirdly, he is always ready to put on any livery himself, if only it will quickly and correctly lead him to his goal. This is what he expresses to Rostov, telling him, in response to his outburst about the adjutant, that “he would really like to become an adjutant,” “because, having already started a career in military service, one must try to make, if possible, a brilliant career.” (I, 62) (2). This frankness of Boris is very remarkable. It clearly proves that the majority of the society in which he lives and whose opinion he values, completely approves of his views on paving the road, on serving individuals, on unwritten subordination and on the undoubted convenience of livery as a means leading to an end. Boris calls Rostov a dreamer for his outburst against serving individuals, and the society to which Rostov belongs would, without any doubt, not only confirm, but also strengthen this verdict to a very significant extent, so Rostov, for his attempt to deny the system of patronage and unwritten chain of command, would have turned out to be not a dreamer, but simply a stupid and rude army brawler, incapable of understanding and appreciating the most legitimate and laudable aspirations of well-bred and respectable young men.
Boris, of course, continues to succeed under the shadow of his infallible theory, which is fully consistent with the mechanism and spirit of the society among which he seeks wealth and honor. “He fully adopted the unwritten subordination that he liked in Olmutz, according to which an ensign could stand without comparison above a general and according to which, for success in the service, what was needed was not effort in the service, not labor, not courage, not constancy, but it was necessary only the ability to deal with those who reward for service - and he was often surprised at his rapid successes and how others could not understand this. As a result of this discovery, his entire way of life, all his relationships with former acquaintances, all his plans for the future - completely changed. He was not rich, but he used the last of his money to be better dressed than others; he would rather deprive himself of many pleasures than allow himself to ride in a bad carriage or appear in an old uniform on the streets of St. Petersburg. He became closer and sought acquaintance only with people who were higher than him and therefore could be useful to him" (II, 106) (3).
With a special feeling of pride and pleasure, Boris enters the houses of high society; he takes the invitation from the maid of honor Anna Pavlovna Scherer for an “important promotion”; At an evening with her, he, of course, is not looking for entertainment; he, on the contrary, works in his own way in her living room; he carefully studies the terrain in which he has to maneuver in order to win new benefits and attract new benefactors; he carefully observes each face and evaluates the benefits and possibilities of rapprochement with each of them. He enters this high society with the firm intention of imitating it, that is, to shorten and narrow his mind as much as necessary, so as not to push himself in any way from the general level and under no circumstances irritate with his superiority this or that limited person capable of being useful in terms of unwritten chain of command.
At Anna Pavlovna's party, one very stupid young man, the son of the minister Prince Kuragin, after repeated attacks and long preparations, produces a stupid and hackneyed joke. Boris, of course, is so smart that such jokes should offend him and arouse in him that feeling of disgust that is usually born in a healthy person when he has to see or hear an idiot. Boris cannot find this joke witty or funny, but, being in a high society salon, he does not dare to stand this joke with a serious face, because his seriousness could be mistaken for a silent condemnation of a pun, over which, perhaps, the cream of St. Petersburg society would like laugh. So that the laughter of these cream of the crop does not take him by surprise, the prudent Boris takes his measures at the very second when a flat and alien wit falls from the lips of Prince Ippolit Kuragin. He smiles cautiously, so that his smile can be attributed to ridicule or approval of the joke, depending on how it is received. The cream laughs, recognizing in the sweet wit the flesh of his flesh and the bone of his bones - and the measures taken in advance by Boris turn out to be highly saving for him.
The stupid beauty, the worthy sister of Ippolit Kuragin, Countess Helen Bezukhova, who enjoys the reputation of a charming and very intelligent woman and attracts to her salon everything that sparkles with intelligence, wealth, nobility or high rank, finds it convenient for herself to bring the handsome and dexterous adjutant Boris closer to her person. Boris approaches with the greatest readiness, becomes her lover and in this circumstance sees, not without reason, a new and important promotion. If the path to rank and money passes through the boudoir of a beautiful woman, then, of course, there is no sufficient reason for Boris to stop in virtuous bewilderment or turn aside. Grabbing the hand of his stupid beauty, Drubetskoy cheerfully and quickly continues to move forward towards the golden goal.
He begs his closest superior for permission to be in his retinue in Tilsit, during the meeting of both emperors, and makes him feel on this occasion how carefully he, Boris, follows the readings of the political barometer and how carefully he considers all his smallest words and actions with the intentions and desires of high-ranking persons. That person who until now was for Boris General Bonaparte, a usurper and enemy of humanity, becomes for him Emperor Napoleon and a great man from the moment when, having learned about the proposed meeting, Boris begins to ask to go to Tilsit. Once in Tilsit, Boris felt that his position was strengthened. “They not only knew him, but they took a closer look at him and got used to him. Twice he carried out orders for the sovereign himself, so the sovereign knew him by sight, and all those close to him not only did not shy away from him, as before, considering him a new face, but would have been surprised , if he did not exist" (II, 172) (4).
There are no stops or packages on the path that Boris follows. An unexpected catastrophe may occur, which suddenly crushes and breaks an entire career that has begun well and continues successfully; such a catastrophe can overtake even the most cautious and prudent person; but it is difficult to expect from her that she would direct a person’s strength to useful work and open up wide scope for their development; after such a catastrophe a person usually finds himself flattened and crushed; a brilliant, cheerful and successful officer or official most often turns into a pathetic hypochondriac, into an openly low beggar, or simply into a bitter drunkard. Apart from such an unexpected catastrophe, given the smooth and favorable flow of everyday life, there is no chance that a person in Boris’s position would suddenly break away from his constant diplomatic game, which is always equally important and interesting for him, that he would suddenly stop and look back at himself. himself, gave himself a clear account of how the living forces of his mind were shrinking and withering, and with an energetic effort of will he suddenly jumped from the road of skillful, decent and brilliantly successful begging onto the completely unknown to him road of thankless, tedious and not at all lordly labor. The diplomatic game has such addictive properties and produces such brilliant results that a person immersed in this game soon begins to consider everything that is outside of it small and insignificant; all events, all phenomena of private and public life are assessed according to their relationship to winning or losing; all people are divided into means and hindrances; all feelings of one’s own soul are divided into laudable, that is, leading to winning, and reprehensible, that is, distracting attention from the game process. In the life of a person drawn into such a game, there is no place for such impressions from which a strong feeling could develop that is not subordinated to the interests of his career. Serious, pure, sincere love, without any admixture of selfish or ambitious calculations, love with all the bright depth of its pleasures, love with all its solemn and holy duties cannot take root in the dried-out soul of a person like Boris. Moral renewal through happy love is unthinkable for Boris. This is proven in Count Tolstoy’s novel by his story with Natasha Rostova, the sister of that army hussar whose uniform and manners offend Boris in the presence of Prince Bolkonsky.
When Natasha was 12 years old, and Boris was 17 or 18 years old, they played love with each other; once, shortly before Boris left for the regiment, Natasha kissed him, and they decided that their wedding would take place four years later, when Natasha turned 16. These four years passed, the bride and groom - both, if they did not forget their mutual obligations, then at least began to look at them as a childish prank; when Natasha could actually be a bride and when Boris was already a young man standing, as they say, on the best road, they met and became interested in each other again. After the first date, “Boris told himself that Natasha was just as attractive to him as before, but that he should not give in to this feeling, because marrying her, a girl with almost no fortune, would be the ruin of his career, and the resumption of previous relationship without the goal of marriage would be an ignoble act" (III, 50) 5.
Despite this prudent and saving consultation with himself, despite the decision to avoid meeting with Natasha, Boris gets carried away, begins to visit the Rostovs often, spends whole days with them, listens to Natasha’s songs, writes poetry for her in an album, and even stops visiting Countess Bezukhova. , from whom he receives daily invitations and reproachful notes. He keeps going to explain to Natasha that he can never and can never become her husband, but he still doesn’t have enough strength and courage to start and finish such a delicate explanation. He is becoming more and more confused every day. But some temporary and fleeting inattention to the great interests of his career constitutes the extreme limit of hobbies possible for Boris. To inflict any serious and irreparable blow on these great interests is unimaginable for him, even under the influence of the strongest passions available to him.
As soon as the old Countess Rostova has a serious word with Boris, as soon as she lets him feel that his frequent visits are noticed and taken into account, Boris immediately, so as not to compromise the girl and not spoil his career, turns to a prudent and noble flight. He stops visiting the Rostovs and even, having met them at the ball, passes by them twice and turns away each time (III, 65) (6).
Having sailed safely between the pitfalls of love, Boris is already flying non-stop, with full sails, to a reliable pier. His position in the service, his connections and acquaintances give him entry into houses where there are very rich brides. He begins to think that it is time for him to secure a profitable marriage. His youth, his handsome appearance, his presentable uniform, his intelligently and prudently managed career constitute a commodity that can be sold for a very good price. Boris looks out for a buyer and finds her in Moscow.
TALENT L.N. TOLSTOY AND THE NOVEL “WAR AND PEACE” IN THE EVALUATION OF CRITICS
In this novel, a whole series of bright and varied pictures, written with the most majestic and imperturbable epic calm, poses and resolves the question of what happens to human minds and characters under such conditions that give people the opportunity to do without knowledge, without thoughts, without energy and labor.... It is very likely that the author simply wants to draw a series of pictures from the life of the Russian nobility during the time of Alexander I. He himself sees and tries to show others clearly, down to the smallest details and shades, all the features that characterized the time and the people of that time people - people of the circle that is increasingly interesting to him or accessible to his study. He tries only to be truthful and accurate; his efforts do not tend to support or refute any theoretical idea created by the images; he, in all likelihood, treats the subject of his long and careful research with that involuntary and natural tenderness that a gifted historian usually feels for the distant or near past, resurrected under his hands; he, perhaps, finds in the features of this past, in the figures and characters of the personalities depicted, in the concepts and habits of the depicted society, many features worthy of love and respect. All this can happen, all this is even very probable. But precisely because the author spent a lot of time, labor and love on studying and depicting the era and its representatives, that is why its representatives live their own lives, independent of the author’s intentions, enter into direct relationships with themselves with readers, speak for themselves and uncontrollably lead the reader to thoughts and conclusions that the author did not have in mind and which he, perhaps, would not even approve of... (From the article by D.I. Pisarev “The Old Nobility”)
Count Tolstoy's novel "War and Peace" is interesting for the military in a double sense: for its description of scenes of the military and military life and for its desire to draw some conclusions regarding the theory of military affairs. The first, that is, the scenes, are inimitable and ... can constitute one of the most useful additions to any course in the theory of military art; the second, that is, the conclusions, do not withstand the most lenient criticism due to their one-sidedness, although they are interesting as a transitional stage in the development of the author’s views on military affairs...
In the foreground is an everyday peace-war picture; but what! Ten battle paintings of the best master, of the largest size, can be given for her. We boldly say that not a single military man, having read it, involuntarily said to himself: yes, he copied this from our regiment.
Count Tolstoy's combat scenes are no less instructive: the entire internal side of the battle, unknown to most military theorists and peaceful military practitioners, and yet giving success or failure, comes to the fore in his magnificently relief paintings. The difference between his descriptions of battles and descriptions of historical battles is the same as between a landscape and a topographical plan: the first gives less, gives from one point, but gives more accessible to the human eye and heart. The second gives every local object from a large number of sides, gives the terrain for dozens of miles, but gives it in a conventional drawing that has nothing in common with the objects depicted; and therefore everything on it is dead, lifeless, even to the trained eye... The moral physiognomy of the leading personalities, their struggle with themselves and with others, which precedes any determination, all this disappears - and from the fact that has developed from thousands of human lives, something remains like a heavily worn coin: the outline is visible, but what kind of face? The best numismatist does not recognize. Of course, there are exceptions, but they are extremely rare and in any case do not bring events to life before you in the same way as a landscape event brings it to life, that is, representing what an observant person could see at a given moment from one point...
Tolstoy's heroes are fictional, but living people; they suffer, they die, they perform great feats, cowardly: all this is like real people; and that is why they are highly instructive, and that is why the military leader who does not kill himself, thanks to Tolstoy’s story, will be worthy of regret, how unwise it is to bring gentlemen like Zherkov closer to oneself, how vigilantly you need to look closely to see the Tushins and Timokhins in the real light; how you need to be perceptively careful so as not to make a hero of some Zherkov or a serviceable and so smart and managerial nameless regimental commander after a battle... (M.I. Dragomirov. “War and Peace” of Count Tolstoy from a military point of view ")
Documents testify that Tolstoy did not have the gift of easy creativity, he was one of the most sublime, most patient, most diligent workers, and his grandiose world frescoes represent an artistic and labor mosaic, composed of an infinite number of multi-colored pieces, of a million tiny individual observations. Behind the apparent easy straightforwardness lies the most persistent work of craftsmanship - not of a dreamer, but of a slow, objective, patient master who, like the old German painters, carefully primed the canvas, deliberately measured the area, carefully outlined the contours and lines and then applied paint after paint before meaningfully the distribution of light and shadow to give vital illumination to your epic plot. Two thousand pages of the huge epic “War and Peace” were rewritten seven times; sketches and notes filled large drawers. Every historical detail, every semantic detail is substantiated based on selected documents; In order to give the description of the Battle of Borodino real accuracy, Tolstoy travels around the battlefield for two days with a map of the General Staff, travels many miles by rail to obtain this or that decorative detail from some surviving participant in the war. He not only digs up all the books, searches not only all the libraries, but even turns to noble families and archives for forgotten documents and private letters in order to find a grain of truth in them. This is how small balls of mercury are collected over the years - tens, hundreds of thousands of small observations, until they begin to merge into a rounded, pure, perfect form. And only then is the struggle for truth over, the search for clarity begins... One sticking out phrase, a not quite appropriate adjective, caught among tens of thousands of lines - and in horror, following the sent proofs, he telegraphs the metro page in Moscow and demands to stop the car, to satisfy the tonality of a syllable that did not satisfy him. This first proof again enters the retort of the spirit, is once again melted and again poured into form - no, if for someone art was not easy work, then it is precisely for him, whose art seems natural to us. For ten years, Tolstoy works eight, ten hours a day; It is not surprising that even this husband, who has the strongest nerves, is psychologically depressed after each of his big novels...
Tolstoy's accuracy in observations is not associated with any gradations in relation to the creatures of the earth: there are no partialities in his love. Napoleon, to his incorruptible gaze, is no more a man than any of his soldiers, and this latter is again no more important and no more significant than the dog that runs after him, or the stone that it touches with its paw. Everything in the circle of the earth - man and mass, plants and animals, men and women, old people and children, generals and men - flows with crystal clear regularity into his senses, in order to also pour out in the same order. This gives his art a resemblance to the eternal uniformity of incorruptible nature and his epic - sea monotonous and still the same magnificent rhythm, always reminiscent of Homer... (S. Zweig. From the book “Three Singers of Their Lives. Casanova. Stendhal. Tolstoy”)
That Tolstoy loves nature and depicts it with such skill, to which, it seems, no one has ever risen before, anyone who has read his works knows this. Nature is not described, but lives in our great artist. Sometimes she is even one of the characters in the story: remember the incomparable scene of the Rostovs’ Yule skating in “War and Peace”...
The beauty of nature finds in Tolstoy the most sympathetic connoisseur... But this extremely sensitive man, who feels how the beauty of nature flows through his eyes into his soul, does not admire every beautiful area. Tolstoy loves only those types of nature that awaken in him the consciousness of his unity with it... (G.V. Plekhanov. “Tolstoy and Nature”)
And with less development of creative powers and artistic features, a historical novel from an era so close to modern society would arouse the intense attention of the public. The venerable author knew very well that he would touch upon the still fresh memories of his contemporaries and would respond to many of their needs and secret sympathies when he based his novel on the characterization of our high society and the main political figures of the era of Alexander I, with the undisguised goal of building this characterization on the revealing evidence of legends , rumors, folklore and eyewitness accounts. The work ahead of him was not unimportant, but extremely rewarding...
The author is one of the initiates. He has knowledge of their language and uses it to discover under all forms of secularism an abyss of frivolity, insignificance, deceit, and sometimes completely rude, wild and ferocious attempts. One thing is most remarkable. The people of this circle seem to be under some kind of vow, condemning them to severe punishment - never to comprehend any of their assumptions, plans and aspirations. As if driven by an unknown hostile force, they run past the goals that they themselves have set for themselves, and if they achieve something, it is always not what they expected... They succeed in nothing, everything falls out of their hands... Young Pierre Bezukhov, capable of understanding goodness and moral dignity, marries a woman who is as dissolute as she is stupid by nature. Prince Bolkonsky, with all the makings of a serious mind and development, chooses as his wife a kind and empty secular doll, who is the misfortune of his life, although he has no reason to complain about her; his sister, Princess Maria, is saved from the yoke of her father’s despotic manners and constantly secluded village life into a warm and bright religious feeling, which ends in connections with vagabond saints, etc. So persistently this deplorable story with the best people of the described society returns in the novel, that in the end, with every picture of a young and fresh life beginning somewhere, with every story about a joyful phenomenon that promises a serious or instructive outcome, the reader is overcome with fear and doubt: behold, behold, they will deceive all hopes, voluntarily betray their content and turn into the impenetrable sands of emptiness and vulgarity, where they will disappear. And the reader is almost never wrong; they actually turn there and disappear there. But, the question arises - what kind of merciless hand and for what sins has it been burdened over this entire environment... What happened? Apparently nothing special happened. Society calmly lives on the same serfdom as its ancestors; Catherine's loan banks are open to him as before; the doors to the acquisition of fortune and to ruining oneself in the service in the same way stand wide open, letting in everyone who has the right to pass through them; finally, no new figures blocking the way, spoiling his life and confusing his thoughts are shown at all in Tolstoy’s novel. Why, however, is this society, which at the end of the last century believed in itself boundlessly, was distinguished by the strength of its composition and easily coped with life, - now, according to the author’s testimony, cannot arrange it in any way at will, has broken up into circles that almost despise each other, and is struck by the impotence that prevents its best people from even defining both themselves and clear goals for spiritual activity. .. (P.V. Annenkov. “Historical and aesthetic issues in the novel “War and Peace””)
Extreme observation, subtle analysis of mental movements, clarity and poetry in pictures of nature, elegant simplicity are the hallmarks of Count Tolstoy's talent... The depiction of an internal monologue, without exaggeration, can be called amazing. And, in our opinion, that side of Count Tolstoy’s talent, which gives him the opportunity to capture these psychic monologues, constitutes a special strength in his talent, unique to him... The special feature in Count Tolstoy’s talent is so original that one needs to look at it with great attention it, and only then will we understand its full importance for the artistic merit of his works. Psychological analysis is perhaps the most essential of the qualities that give strength to creative talent... Of course, this ability must be innate by nature, like any other ability; but it would not be enough to dwell on this too general explanation: only through independent (moral) activity does talent develop, and in this activity, the extraordinary energy of which is evidenced by the peculiarity of Count Tolstoy’s works that we noticed, we must see the basis of the strength acquired by his talent.
We are talking about self-deepening, about the desire for tireless observation of oneself. We can study the laws of human action, the play of passions, the concatenation of events, the influence of events and relationships by carefully observing other people; but all the knowledge acquired in this way will have neither depth nor accuracy if we do not study the most intimate laws of mental life, the play of which is open to us only in our (own) self-consciousness. He who has not studied man within himself will never achieve a deep knowledge of people. That feature of Count Tolstoy’s talent, which we spoke about above, proves that he extremely carefully studied the secrets of the human spirit within himself; this knowledge is precious not only because it gave him the opportunity to paint pictures of the internal movements of human thought, to which we drew the reader’s attention, but also, perhaps more, because it gave him a solid basis for the study of human life in general, for unraveling characters and the springs of action, the struggle of passions and impressions...
There is another force in Mr. Tolstoy’s talent that gives his works a very special dignity with its extremely remarkable freshness - the purity of moral feeling... Public morality has never reached such a high level as in our noble time - noble and beautiful, despite the remnants old dirt, because it strains all its strength to wash itself and cleanse itself from inherited sins... The beneficial influence of this trait of talent is not limited to those stories or episodes in which it comes to the fore noticeably: it constantly serves as a revitalizer, a refresher of talent . What in the world is more poetic, more charming than a pure youthful soul, responding with joyful love to everything that seems sublime and noble, pure and beautiful, like herself?..
Count Tolstoy has true talent. This means that his works are artistic, that is, in each of them the very idea that he wanted to realize in this work is very fully realized. He never says anything superfluous, because this would be contrary to the conditions of artistry; he never disfigures his works with an admixture of scenes and figures alien to the idea of ​​the work. This is precisely one of the main advantages of artistry. You need to have a lot of taste to appreciate the beauty of Count Tolstoy’s works, but a person who knows how to understand true beauty, true poetry, sees in Count Tolstoy a real artist, that is, a poet with remarkable talent. (N.G. Chernyshevsky. “War stories of L.N. Tolstoy”)
L. Tolstoy’s images of human personalities resemble those semi-convex human bodies on high reliefs, which sometimes seem to be about to separate from the plane in which they are sculptured and which holds them, will finally come out and stand before us like perfect sculptures, visible from all sides , tangible; but this is an optical illusion. They will never separate completely, from semicircular they will not become completely round - we will never see them from the other side.
In the image of Platon Karataev, the artist made the seemingly impossible possible: he was able to define a living, or at least temporarily seemingly living, personality in impersonality, in the absence of any definite features and sharp corners, in a special “roundness”, the impression of which is strikingly visual, even as if the geometric arises, however, not so much from the internal, spiritual, but from the external, bodily appearance: Karataev has a “round body”, “round head”, “round movements”, “round speeches”, “something round” "even in the smell. He is a molecule; He is the first and the last, the smallest and the greatest - the beginning and the end. He does not exist in himself: he is only a part of the Whole, a drop in the ocean of nationwide, all-human, universal life. And he reproduces this life with his personality or impersonality, just as a water drop with its perfect roundness reproduces the world sphere. Be that as it may, a miracle of art or a most ingenious optical illusion is accomplished, almost accomplished. Platon Karataev, despite his impersonality, seems personal, special, unique. But we would like to know him to the end, to see him from the other side. He is kind; but maybe at least once in his life he got annoyed with someone? he is chaste; but maybe he looked at at least one woman differently from the others? but speaks in proverbs; but maybe, but did he insert a word of his own into these sayings at least once? If only one word, one unexpected line would break this too regular, mathematically perfect “roundness” - and we would believe that he is a man of flesh and blood, that he exists.
But, precisely at the moment of our closest and greedy attention, Platon Karataev, as if on purpose, dies, disappears, dissolves like a water balloon in the ocean. And when he is even more defined in death, we are ready to admit that he could not have been defined in life, in human feelings, thoughts and actions: he did not live, but only was, precisely was, precisely “perfectly round” and with this he fulfilled his purpose, so that all he could do was die. And in our memory, just as in the memory of Pierre Bezukhov, Platon Karataev is forever imprinted not by a living face, but only by the living personification of everything Russian, good and “round”, that is, a huge, world-historical religious and moral symbol.... ( D.S. Merezhkovsky. From the treatise “L. Tolstoy and Dostoevsky”, 1902)
Genre and plot originality
The novel "War and Peace" is a work of large volume. It covers 16 years (from 1805 to 1821) of the life of Russia and more than five hundred different heroes. Among them there are real characters in the historical events described, fictional characters and many people to whom Tolstoy does not even give names, for example, “the general who ordered”, “the officer who did not arrive.” In this way, the writer wanted to show that the movement of history occurs not under the influence of any specific individuals, but thanks to all participants in the events. To combine such a huge material into one work, the author created a genre that had not been used by any writer before, which he called the epic novel.
The novel describes real historical events: the Battle of Austerlitz, Shengraben, Borodino, the conclusion of the Peace of Tilsit, the capture of Smolensk, the surrender of Moscow, partisan warfare and others, in which real historical figures manifest themselves. Historical events in the novel also play a compositional role. Since the Battle of Borodino largely determined the outcome of the War of 1812, 20 chapters are devoted to its description, it is the culminating center of the novel. The work contained pictures of battle, giving way to images of the world as the complete opposite of war, peace as the existence of a community of many, many people, as well as nature, that is, everything that surrounds a person in space and time. Disputes, misunderstandings, hidden and overt conflicts, fear, hostility, love... All this is real, living, sincere, like the heroes of a literary work themselves.
By being nearby at certain moments of their lives, people who are completely different from each other unexpectedly help themselves to better understand all the shades of feelings and motives of behavior. Thus, Prince Andrei Bolkonsky and Anatol Kuragin will play an important role in the life of Natasha Rostova, but their attitude towards this naive and fragile girl is different. The situation that has arisen allows us to discern the deep chasm between the moral ideals of these two men from high society. But their conflict does not last long - seeing that Anatole is also wounded, Prince Andrei forgives his opponent right on the battlefield. As the novel progresses, the worldview of the characters changes or gradually deepens. Three hundred thirty-three chapters of four volumes and twenty-eight chapters of the epilogue form a clear, definite picture.
The narration in the novel is not conducted in the first person, but the presence of the author in every scene is palpable: he always tries to assess the situation, show his attitude to the hero’s actions through their description, through the hero’s internal monologue, or through the author’s digression-reasoning. Sometimes the writer gives the reader the right to figure out what is happening for himself, showing the same event from different points of view. An example of such an image is the description of the Battle of Borodino: first, the author gives detailed historical information about the balance of forces, the readiness for battle on both sides, talks about the point of view of historians on this event; then shows the battle through the eyes of a non-professional in military affairs - Pierre Bezukhov (that is, shows a sensory, rather than logical perception of the event), reveals the thoughts of Prince Andrei and Kutuzov’s behavior during the battle. In his novel L.N. Tolstoy sought to express his point of view on historical events, show his attitude to important life problems, and answer the main question: “What is the meaning of life?” And Tolstoy’s call on this issue sounds so that one cannot but agree with him: “We must live, we must love, we must believe.”
Portrait characteristics of heroes
In the novel L.N. Tolstoy's "War and Peace" has over five hundred heroes. Among them are emperors and statesmen, generals and ordinary soldiers, aristocrats and peasants. Some characters, as is easy to see, are especially attractive to the author, while others, on the contrary, are alien and unpleasant. The means of portraiture is one of the most important artistic means in the novel "War and Peace".
The writer singles out a particular feature in the portrait of the hero and constantly draws our attention to it: this is Natasha’s large mouth, and Marya’s radiant eyes, and the dryness of Prince Andrei, and the massiveness of Pierre, and the old age and decrepitude of Kutuzov, and the roundness of Platon Karataev. But the remaining features of the heroes change, and Tolstoy describes these changes in such a way that you can understand everything that happens in the souls of the heroes. Tolstoy often uses the technique of contrast, emphasizing the discrepancy between the appearance and the inner world, the behavior of the characters and their internal state. For example, when Nikolai Rostov, upon returning home from the front, upon meeting Sonya, greeted her dryly and addressed her as “you,” in their hearts they “called each other “you” and kissed tenderly.”
Some portraits are characterized by excessive detail, while others, on the contrary, are barely sketched. However, almost every stroke complements our idea of ​​the hero. For example, introducing us to one of the main characters, Andrei Bolkonsky, the writer notes that he was “a very handsome young man with definite and dry features.” This phrase alone suggests that the hero is distinguished by restraint, practicality and strong will. In addition, we can guess about the inherent “pride of thought” that his sister Marya Bolkonskaya will feel in him. And in her portrait the author will especially highlight one single detail that conveys the essence of the heroine’s nature. Marya has “an ugly, weak body and a thin face,” but “the princess’s eyes, large, deep and radiant... were so beautiful that very often, despite the ugliness of her entire face, these eyes became more attractive than beauty.” These “radiant” eyes speak more eloquently than any words about the spiritual beauty of Marya Bolkonskaya. Tolstoy’s favorite heroine, Natasha Rostova, is no different in external beauty, “black-eyed, with a big mouth, ugly, but alive...” With her liveliness and cheerfulness, she is, above all, dear to the author. But Sonya, Natasha’s cousin, according to the writer, resembles “a beautiful, but not yet formed kitten, which will be a lovely cat.” And the reader feels that Sonya is far from Natasha, as if she lacks that spiritual wealth with which Tolstoy’s favorite is generously endowed.
The most internally beautiful characters in the novel are not distinguished by their external beauty. First of all, this applies to Pierre Bezukhov. A constant portrait feature is the massive, thick figure of Pierre Bezukhov, which, depending on the circumstances, can be either clumsy or strong. It can express confusion, anger, kindness, and rage. In other words, in Tolstoy’s work, the constant artistic detail acquires new, additional shades each time. Pierre's smile is different from others. When a smile appeared on his face, then suddenly the serious face instantly disappeared and another one appeared - a childish, kind one. Andrei Bolkonsky says about Pierre: “One living person among all our light.” And this word “alive” inextricably connects Pierre Bezukhov with Natasha Rostova, whose antipode is the brilliant St. Petersburg beauty Helen Kuragina. The author repeatedly draws attention to Helen’s unchanging smile, white full shoulders, glossy hair and beautiful figure. But, despite this “undoubtedly and too powerfully and victoriously acting beauty,” she certainly loses to both Natasha Rostova and Marya Bolkonskaya, because the presence of life is not felt in her features. The same can be said about Helen Kuragina’s brother, Anatole.
Turning to the portraits of ordinary people, it is easy to notice that Tolstoy values ​​in them, first of all, kindness and liveliness of character. It is no coincidence that he emphasizes this, for example, in Platon Karataev, drawing his smiling round face.
However, Tolstoy used portraiture not only when depicting fictional characters, but also when depicting historical figures, such as Emperor Napoleon and commander Kutuzov. Kutuzov and Napoleon are philosophically opposed to each other. Outwardly, Kutuzov is in no way inferior to the French emperor: “Kutuzov, in an unbuttoned uniform, from which, as if freed, his fat neck floated onto the collar, sat in a Voltaire chair.” Napoleon “was in a blue uniform, open over a white vest that hung down to his round belly, in white leggings that hugged the fat thighs of his thick legs, and in boots.” However, the expressions on their faces are noticeably different: “Napoleon had an unpleasantly feigned smile on his face,” but “an intelligent, kind and at the same time subtly mocking expression shone on Kutuzov’s plump face.” If the portrait of Kutuzov emphasizes ease and naturalness, then in the face of Napoleon it is pretense.
Kutuzov, like a mere mortal, “was weak to tears,” he “reluctantly played the role of chairman and head of the military council,” he spoke “clearly and distinctly” with the sovereign, and considered his soldiers “a wonderful, incomparable people.” He “understood that there was something stronger and more significant than his will - this was the inevitable course of events...” Despite his obesity and old man’s frailty, he felt inner peace and purity of soul.
In the image of Napoleon, Tolstoy emphasizes a certain mystery. Portrait characteristics of the French commander
etc.................