Big Book 2019

In both the Battle of Borodino and the streets of French-occupied Moscow Pierre is described as bumbling and oblivious. Truly believing that he is inconspicuous, in both of these situations he forgets both his height, girth, and nobility, all which draw attention to him. Despite his awkward behavior in both situations, in Moscow, Pierre seems to have undergone some change that allows him to take action. This new change in Pierre is sandwiched between news of Natasha that is strategically placed to give the reader more context to Pierre’s personal development. Pierre first deciding to go to the battlefield is a huge step for him in terms of taking action, and yet he satisfies his obligation to defend his country by what is essentially sightseeing. In the Battle of Borodino, Pierre becomes slowly aware of the reality of where he is but still fails to take significant steps to help others. After cluelessly riding into battle, Pierre is constantly in the way and unaware of the danger of his situation. He does eventually realize the gravity of the battle after seeing someone he had been talking to die, but overall is unable to help out.

In Moscow, while Pierre does not (at least so far) complete his mission of killing Napoleon, he takes a more realistic and pertinent goal. Pierre runs into a fire to save a girl and defends a woman from a French soldier. While neither of these situations turn out perfectly, Pierre is trying to help others and utilizing his own strengths to do so. While walking through the streets he still has a warped sense of reality; he believes that he is destined to kill Napoleon based on a misspelled version of his name adding up to 666 and is unaware of Moscow burning around him. Despite the continuation of an unawareness of the dangers of his surrounds, Pierre is able to do something to help his fellow Russians. This is a big step up from his behavior at the Battle of Borodino. What event in Pierre’s life led to his ability to act? Many things have happened to Pierre since the battle. He believes that Andrei and Anatole are dead, knows his wife is leaving him, and has spent days hiding out at his late sponsor’s house. Out of all the traumatic and life-changing things that have happened to Pierre during this time, his brief conversation with Natasha seems the most likely out of any one event to help spur Pierre into some form of action.

Although brief and inconsequential in relation to the other things happening in Russia, this moment is one that he mentally swings back to quite often. Natasha’s power over him has been pretty significant, and this brief willingness to take action could be due to her effect on him. Natasha’s possible effect on Pierre hints at what could possibly be the development of a romance between the two, but this idea is quickly shut down when Natasha is informed of Andrei’s arrival almost directly after Pierre’s scene of action. Her return to an unresponsive state followed by a spiritual moment with Andrei, shifts the focus away from Pierre’s personal development directly to the re-ignition of Natasha and Andrei’s love. At this point in the book, Tolstoy is artfully speeding up the plot by complicating the relationship between these three characters in a way that leaves feeling the inevitable doom of Pierre, Andrei, and Natasha’s individually precarious situations.

Throughout the book, Pierre is typically depicted as a naive, helpless, aimless fool; however, when Moscow is aflame, we get a glimpse into a Pierre with motives and a desire to leap into action for a noble cause. A perfect example of Pierre the good-for-nothing idler, is when he is playing spectator during the battle of Borodino. While everyone surrounding him is assigned to a very specific role and task, he floats from one location to the other, curious as to what the big boys are up to. Pierre cannot even do the bare minimum tasks of “distinguish[ing the Russian] troops from the enemy’s” (761). Later, when questioned as to his role in this production and whether he is a doctor, he answers with “No, I’m just here” (762). Tolstoy does not even leave it up to interpretation whether Pierre is completely useless in the battle, he allows Pierre to admit it bluntly himself. He inquires like an ignorant child at the plans of these lofty military men, yet is incapable of comprehending a single plan they describe. He listens to the military strategies of Bennigsen, “straining all his mental forces in order to understand the essence of the forthcoming battle, but felt with chagrin that his mental ability was insufficient for that. He understood nothing” (768). As much as Pierre tries, his intellectual abilities are seemingly far less than his company when it comes to warfare, or really anything else. Pierre also seems to be completely unaware of his surroundings, including the not-very-subtle dangerous aspects. He apparently does “not hear the sounds of the bullets whining on all sides, and of the shells that flew over his head, did not see the enemy on the other side of the river, and for a long time did not see the dead and wounded, though many fell not far from him” (791). The battle is in full swing with explosives flying back and forth, carnage is everywhere, and yet Pierre trots on without at clue. Not only is he absentmindedly charging forward, he can’t even recall where he is going (796). It would seem, based on these dulled senses, that Pierre is lost in thought; however, as demonstrated by his lack of understanding during the battle strategy scenes, there are clearly not a lot of thoughts going through his brain to distract from his physical senses. He is a naive oaf wandering around a war zone.

This bumbling oblivion is starkly contrasted against a shockingly heroic Pierre in the fire. Something is ignited (pun intended!) within Pierre when the chaos of the fire strikes. In a town with a family in need of a hero, Pierre leaps to the rescue and willingly and consciously puts himself in harm’s way to perform the act of a hero. Unlike before, where Pierre accidentally happens upon harm’s way, here he is actively and knowingly plunging forward into the danger. While previously Pierre is numb to the world around him, here his intentions are heightened. Pierre goes from absolutely no intention at all (except for spectating, which is so passive it is hardly a very active “intention,” it’s more like the lack of an intention) to one of the more bold intentions of the entire book: saving the little girl from the fire. This act puts him “in that ecstasy of fury in which he was oblivious to everything and his strength increased tenfold” (930). Rarely do we see Pierre feeling such passionate emotions as he does here. Normally he is quite easy going and not very strong-viewed in any direction, but here we have words like “ecstasy” and “fury” that just radiate energy describing him. Additionally, while Pierre seems to laze around and slowly move throughout life with no purpose, here “he was in a hurry to… save someone” (928). This sense of urgency is rare for Pierre. This intense series of actions also leads to a dramatic emotional shift for Pierre; seeing the fire, “he suddenly felt freed of his burdensome thoughts. He felt young, cheerful, adroit, and resolute” (927). I find this line peculiar because I would rarely pinpoint Pierre as someone with “burdensome thoughts,” but nonetheless, the fire and his experience with it clearly awakened something within him. He is in a heightened emotional state, picking fights with the French soldiers and is in such a heightened emotional state that he can’t remember what is even happening. In the battle of Borodino, Pierre is a bystander, quite literally. He’s not part of the inner circle of the people in the battle; while he may know the right people, his inexperience and lack of general intelligence prevents him from connecting on the same level with the “military geniuses.” His lack of physical fitness and overall ineptness also keeps him from being one with the soldiers, although he connects with them more. Pierre remains on the outskirts of the war in terms of importance, even though he eventually wanders his way into the battlefield. In contrast, Pierre is the center of the action in the scene with the girl in the fire. For once, everyone else is idle and it is Pierre who takes action. Will this be a permanent change in Pierre? Are his days of being an ignorant spectator over, now that his inner desire to act has been awakened? Or was this a momentary spark of energy from Pierre, only a circumstantial instance? It seems as though only time will tell, but whether he continues along this path or reverts will be even more revealing about the contrast between these two scenes.

It is clear that Tolstoy believes things happen because they were destined to happen, that only “fatalism in history is inevitable for the explanation of senseless phenomena” (605). The War of 1812 was the result of a confluence of factors and that “no one thing is the cause” (606). In his eyes, the  collective “elemental, swarm like life” to “fulfill the laws prescribed” (605) drove them to occur. The moving of troops to the Eastern Front (604) and the dispute over the land of the Duke of Oldenburg are described as major reasons for war, but the simplest reason for the war could have been that Napoleon had the loyalty of his soldiers. The war could not have happened if the troops “had [not] been unwilling to enlist for a second tour of duty” (604). The belief in the inevitability of events has been imprinted to the leadership. Tolstoy’s ideas on the spirit of the men commanded winning battles has the same basis that the battle is determined before it is even waged.

Rastopchin uses posters, propaganda, and organized militias all in an attempt to maintain order in Moscow, yet some unknown force drove those citizens to begin packing. Rastopchin seemed to grasp the existence of this force And When faced with the challenge of how to punish Vereshchagin and deal with the angry crowd of Russians in front of him, he  unconsciously utilized this unknown force. His orders to “let the traitor perish and no disgrace the Russian name!” and “cut him down!” were not listened to, they were felt. “Hearing not the words but the wrathful sound of Rastopchin’s voice, the crowd groaned and moved closer”(889). His people responded to the passion in his voice. Like waves, they stopped and questioned their actions before they eventually crashed upon Vereshchagin. They crashed because they had reached the shore in the right place at the right time and their “swarm like” instincts “pushed them forward” (889). However, Rastopchin believes that it was he who swayed the crowd. His guilt drives him to “suddenly turn pale” (890). This belief of influence over the troops is attributed to Napoleon, and Tolstoy falls to disgracing Napoleon’s exploits. Napoleon’s leadership didn’t win the battle,  but rather an unknown force that is instinctual to humans.

Throughout the novel, there have been many characters who have “fallen in love”. Oftentimes, their “love” ends up being temporary. Helene and Pierre, Natasha and Anatole, and Dolokhov and Helene. In my opinion, Andrei seems to be the most consistent character throughout the novel.

In the earlier parts of the novel, Andrei is written as someone who did not have much foresight for his own life. This was highlighted during the Battle of Austerlitz when he attempted to rush through the battlefield with a flag. He had no regard for his own life, but was rather motivated by his own desires for personal glory and high status.

It is important to also note that Andrei was someone who was disillusioned with married life. He left his pregnant wife to go fight a war, only to find out later that his wife had died in childbirth. Lisa’s death left Andrei in deep grief. He would begin to spend more time with his young son, taking more time at his estate. Then, when Napoleon invaded, Andrei would eventually join the war effort again, until he is wounded at the Battle of Borodino. In between his time with his son and the war, Andrei would fall in love again with Natasha.

I believe that Andrei’s love for Natasha was what brought him back out of his own grief. This is what makes me think that his love for her was genuine and why he was so hurt when Natasha did not stay loyal to him. He had even been willing to stay with her for a whole year before marriage. Throughout the novel, Andrei is one of the few characters who went through serious trauma in his personal relationships, and it never seems like he was ever able to fully recover from them.

His story arc makes him a very complicated character, but it also makes him the most human out of all the characters. Hardly anything works out for him in the story. His own dreams of personal glory, romance and family life are always cut short by an unpredictable tragedy. His ability to intellectually think through his own failures and bounce back from them makes his story a very human experience. Humans are nowhere near perfect, and so is Andrei’s story.

WARNING #2: Spolier alerts ahead! (For those who have not yet read Friday’s reading).

“Héléne, tormented by the old count’s suspicious and by the fact that her husband, to whom she had written (that wretched, depraved Pierre), would not answer her, had suddenly taken a huge dose of the prescribed medicine and had died in agony before aid could be given” (939). Reading these sentences was a shocking experience, like it will be, or has been, for many of you. After Tolstoy spent so much time setting up Héléne and Pierre’s story arc throughout almost the entire story, he almost unceremoniously threw it all away. Why, then, would he implement this plot twist in the first place?

I believe that Tolstoy’s use of these shocking events is meant to illustrate the contrast between the discrete, unpredictable nature of single human lives and the calmly mathematical characteristics of groups. Tolstoy (the essayist) consistently stresses that the actions of armies or nations of people are not governed by single events: rather, they all take part in the continuous stream of history and act predictably. For example, Tolstoy’s passage on 821 compares the course of history to infinitesimal calculus. In fact, he states that “The movement of mankind, proceeding from a countless number of human wills, occurs continuously” (821). Therefore, Tolstoy that believes that historians should employ a method similar to mathematical analysis in order to examine the dynamics of mankind. We can see his understanding of mathematics applied to groups during the scene of Rastopchin’s mob, when the crowd swells and finally unleashes their fear and anger on Vereshchagin. Although this is not an obvious parallel, the behavior of the crowd almost perfectly mirrors the ideal gas law of chemistry. When a contained gas (the crowd) is forced into situations of high temperature or pressure (the agitation resulting from the French’s invasion of Moscow), the volume of the gas increases and is likely to rupture the container in which it is held (“the barrier of human feeling”(890)). Therefore, Tolstoy’s examples of the predictability of groups demonstrate his knowledge of math and show that the discrete nature of human will is often hidden when placed in aggregate.

However, Tolstoy’s plot twists (like the one with Héléne’s death) show the opposite side of this argument: that “human reason allows for arbitrary, discrete units” (821). We measure in discrete units because that is the way that our lives unfold in the first place. For example, one of the first examples of unpredictability that appears in the book is Count Bezukhov’s death, which drastically alters Pierre’s story and the story of those around him. Previously, Pierre had been living a life without recognition, direction, or obligation. As soon as he gains money and prestige, he is forced into becoming a gentleman-in-waiting (a life which he despises) and is thereby brought into contact with Andrei, Natasha, and other key characters. More recently, Nikolai became acquainted with Marya by sheer chance, which has the potential to bring the Rostovs out of their poverty but hurt Sonya. In fact, every major character’s life has been drastically changed by a seemingly coincidental and unpredictable event. Therefore, Héléne’s death is just another step in Tolstoy’s thesis about the unpredictability of human life.

When Nikolai and Prince Andrei go off to war, their houses both descend into disarray. The presence of the children seems temporarily realign their affairs but cannot fix the incompetence of their parents. The Rostov household faces trouble in the face of the Old Count’s financial illiteracy and trusting nature. The Old Count has led the family to financial ruin by being too giving, lenient, and trustworthy. Easily taken advantage of, it is only when Nikolai returns that the families finances stop rapidly draining away. While Rostov has not had experience in finances or leadership, his time away at the army has enabled him to handle the chaos of his family life. He undergoes a clear transformation from the man who gambled away thousands of rubles to someone who can keep his family’s estate afloat.

Similarly, Andrei helps to correct the state of his family. His father has been allowing himself to be won over by the French woman staying at their house and has been neglecting Marya. Although Andrei has never had much power over his father or say in his actions, an apologetic word serves to both alienate him from his father and get his message across. Old Bolkonsky does not change his mistreatment of Marya but does stop seeing Mademoiselle Bourienne. Andrei’s power over his father is unprecedented and also arrises after his service. While Tolstoy does appear clearly anti-war, especially anti the second war with Napoleon, many of his characters return from battle changed for the better. His characters grow stronger and obtain leadership capabilities that their parents seem to lack. Tolstoy does not portray war to be an overall positive event, and yet the personal growth that arises from the circumstance of war is undeniable. The effect on the leadership capacity of the youth from Rostov to Prince Andrei to the commanding presence of Natasha in the face of the invasion of Moscow is undeniable.

“Forgetting his intention not to reveal his knowledge of French, Pierre, tearing the pistol away and dropping it, ran to the officer and began speaking to him in French” (3.3.28)

Ever since the beginning of the book, Pierre has been introduced to us as a genuinely goofy character. He is like a giant teddy bear, clueless and always caught in the wrong situation. Let’s take it back to some notable classic Pierre moments. At the beginning of the book, when Pierre and Anatole went out partying, I got my first taste of Pierre’s goofiness. To this day, I still do not understand why he did what he did. He just reminds me of someone who would do anything, as long as you dared him enough times.

Next, I want to talk about his scene when he was scrambling his name around. I still do not understand why Pierre became obsessed with his name and its connection to Napoleon. He kept psyching himself out by needlessly arranging his name until he scared himself. No normal person does that. Like I genuinely can’t understand what his motivations are. Similarly, when he plans to assassinate Napoleon by literally just walking up to him and either stabbing him or shooting him, I was dumbfounded. Not only is it going to take a much more detailed plan to assassinate the most powerful person in the world at that time, but he doesn’t even know if he will stab or shoot Napoleon. How do you not come to a conclusion on that?

Lastly, this incident highlighted Pierre’s utter cluelessness again. He concretely plans to hide his status and wealth by purposefully not speaking French. He even makes a big deal out of it, hoping that his plan will successfully hide his identity. Yet, not even days after he swears off speaking French, he blurts out French words to the officer. It seems like he doesn’t even know what he’s doing. He plans things, either half heartedly or completely idiotically, then proceeds to seemingly completely forget about his plans.

I really enjoy how Tolstoy has crafted Pierre’s character. It truly lightens up the book and adds some much needed humor to the plot. I love reading about Pierre because he not only  balances everything out, but he also reminds me of Will Cou

In the recent sequence about Helene’s dalliances with her two new boyfriends, Tolstoy decided to allow us to see her in a more three dimensional light, rather than allowing her to simply be the dumb, gold-digging wife; however, all of the brilliant ideas of navigating relationships and finding loopholes in the Catholic definitions of marriage come from men who she surrounds herself with. Tolstoy, then, only gives her credit for her social intelligence in light of the men that she listens to, so, in a way, he still manages to undermine her intellect.

When deliberating who she will marry between her two new lovers, she councils Bilibin (who was notably described as being one of those “male friends who can never pass into the category of lovers” (838) which I found quite funny) and is reminded that she can live out her older Catholic count, and then marry her younger prince, who can then justify marrying her. Because this bright idea is Bilibin’s, her social intelligence is made up of whose advice she listens to. Later, when talking to her mother, she is able to take the moral high ground, even though she has none, by laying out the argument that because she did not enter into a religious marriage. Notably, though, this argument is that of her Catholic lover. Again, here she takes to heart the logical arguments that a man sets forth for her. The only idea/theory that is uniquely Helene’s is that she thinks Pierre loves her with his whole heart and will be willing to let them get divorced. This is such a misconception! The only idea Helene has on her own is incorrect!

While Tolstoy gives Helene some credit, I find it frustrating that none of the women in War and Peace have thus had little to no ideas of their own, and have been left in the dutiful hands of their male family and friends. Marya, for example, was described as not understanding the happenings of war, and so she believed anything that her father said, even though we know that she is very well educated and capable of understanding anything she wishes to. In terms of female passivity, in general, Sonya’s relationship with Nikolai is completely left in his hands with the single exception of the mummer scene when she is dressed up as a man. Sonya is left, waiting at home, for Nikolai to be willing to marry her. Tolstoy has yet to give his female characters any type of feminine agency or intellect without giving men credit for their ideas.

In Tolstoy’s essay regarding Napoleon’s effect on the Battle of Borodino, he states that “many historians say that the battle of Borodino was not won by the french because Napoleon had a cold” (783). According to Tolstoy those historians believe that if Napoleon didn’t have the cold, his commands “would have been of still greater genius” (783). It sounds like the historians that Tolstoy is quoting are extremely biased towards Napoleon. They make it sound like Napoleon’s commands are already genius and not being sick would only further the superiority of his command. Tolstoy concedes that for people who only think in one particular way, where any random small event can cause the outcome of a major event to change, the argument historians made makes complete sense. Tolstoy then says that those who aren’t so closed minded believe the argument is “contrary to all human essence” (784). By describing the argument like that, he is saying that believing such a thing goes against what makes a human, a human. Tolstoy claims that the outcome of any event is based upon the “coincidence of all the wills of the people participating in [that] event” (784). Tolstoy is once again making the same argument that he has made throughout the whole book, that nothing can be predicted and that everything is coincidental. When Tolstoy states that “Napoleon’s influence on the course of those events is only external and fictitious” (784), he is saying that any commands or actions Napoleon did during the battle may have seemed to affect something, but in reality none of his commands or actions actually made their way to the battlefield in time for them to be of actual use. His next argument is that the French soldiers didn’t kill the Russian soldiers because they were ordered to, but instead because of their wills. Napoleon’s only effect on the Battle of Borodino was that he was a symbolic figure for the French soldiers to praise after every victory. If Napoleon had disappeared before the Battle of Borodino, the battle still would have happened and there would have been no difference in the outcome.

During the Rostov’s move from their Moscow home we witness a change in the family’s power dynamics.  Natasha Rostov, who is usually known for perpetuating drama, takes it upon herself to organize the packing of the family’s belongings and asserts dominance over the other members of the household.  She gives orders to their servants and even tries to set up the wounded soldiers to recover in their home: “Everybody expected some joke from her… but she stubbornly and passionately demanded to be obeyed” (855).  After initially allowing the servants to pack, Natasha takes issue with how the items are being prioritized, so she takes over their task and “quickly began repacking, deciding that the inferior domestic carpets and extra dishes should not be taken at all” (856).  Natasha makes executive decisions regarding which heirlooms deserved a spot in their storage and which would have to be sacrificed. She is effectively giving the orders but also taking on the work herself.

Natasha’s newfound authority also influences her parents, as they lose some of their power during such a chaotic time.  One of Natasha’s biggest tasks is trying to convince her parents to allow the wounded soldiers to utilize some of the family’s carts.  When taking this issue up with her mother, she ends up confusing the Countess and takes that confusion as agreement. Understanding that her father is under a lot of stress from the move and the threat of the French, Natasha pleads with her father and easily receives the desired response: “‘Of course it’s alright,’ the count said absentmindedly (854).  Her interference in the moving plans ends up disturbing the current power dynamics in the household. In a discussion with her husband in which he suggests they bring the wounded soldiers with them as part of their caravan in order to protect them, the Countess can sense the uncertainty with which he expresses this idea, and quickly deems it impractical.  “The countess was accustomed to this tone… she considered it her duty always to fight against whatever was expressed in that timid tone,” so she flips the script and tries to paint him as the one who is being inconsiderate by placing the lives of strangers above the success of their own children (859).

The shift of power is confirmed when the Count is speaking to Berg, a member of the family who has not witnessed the entire situation unfold.  Berg approaches the Count with only good intentions, asking his father-in-law to help him him obtain a chiffonier and a dressing table to give his wife Vera.  His main concern is hiring one of the Rostov’s muzhiks, but before he can even promise to pay for all of it the Count shuts it down: “Ask the countess, I’m not in charge” (861).  In this moment, the Count seems to surrender all of his power, admitting that he no longer feels in control of the family’s assets and movement. Not only does he acknowledge his own fall from grace, but he also understands that the power he lost in his earlier conversation with his wife was quickly assumed by her, enforcing the idea that power is not infinite and must be taken.