War and Peace readalong thread 2022 - thread 3

[VikingNorthUtsire]

Welcome to the third thread. Please see the OP in threads 1 or 2 for the full info.on the readalong, links to different editions and translations, blog posts, etc.

I think most of us are established now so for this post I'll just re-shsre the reading schedule

Different editions name and number their chapters differently - some refer to four books divided into parts (as below), others refer to fifteen books although it's essentially the same structure just with different numbering. Hopefully there's enough info below to keep us all in sync, and always happy to let anyone know via PM what's happening in today's chapter so we can keep together.

Book 1: 1805
Book 1 Part One (25 chapters): 1/1 - 25/1
Book 1 Part Two (21 chapters): 26/1 - 15/2
Book 1 Part Three (19 chapters): 16/2 - 6/3
DAY OFF: 7/3
Book 2: 1806-1812
Book 2 Part One (16 chapters): 8/3 - 23/3
Book 2 Part Two (21 chapters): 24/3 - 13/4
Book 2 Part Three (26 chapters): 14/4 - 9/5
Book 2 Part Four (13 chapters): 10/5 - 22/5
Book 2 Part Five (22 chapters): 23/5 - 13/6
DAY OFF: 14/6
Book 3: 1812
Book Three Part One (23 chapters): 15/6 - 7/7
Book Three Part Two (39 chapters): 8/7 - 15/8
Book Three Part Three (34 chapters): 16/8 - 18/9
DAY OFF: 19/9
Book 4: 1812-13
Book Four Part One (16 chapters): 20/9 - 5/10
Book Four Part Two (19 chapters): 6/10 - 24/10
Book Four Part Three (19 chapters): 25/10 - 12/11
Book Four Part Four (20 chapters): 13/11 - 2/12
DAY OFF: 3/12
Epilogue One 1812-20 (16 chapters): 3/12 - 19/12
Epilogue Two (12 chapters): 20/12 - 31/12

I wouldn't say he knows it, SanFran. I can't see how he would get the news.
We are one chapter away from the end of Part Two!

Are we really... wowsers! Mind you, November's just around the corner and we'll be done and dusted by the end of the year! It has actually not felt like I've spent almost ten months reading the same book, at all - and I have got sooo much out of reading alongside you wonderful bunch so thank you!

Really looking forward to seeing how it all plays out - and reading the appendices as I'm pretty sure they're part of the 'challenge' and I totally skipped them last time 😃

Why am I thinking the appendices are going to be a bit of a chore?! 🤔😁

Thanks for keeping the thread going, SanFran. Even in the depths of the longest war section, you always come up with a good comment!

There’s appendices?! When are we due to finish the actual book?

We will take it to the very end, Chessie 😬

😆

We sure will... but I may have mistyped as, having checked the original thread, it's two epilogues that we've got after the main book is done, not appendices. We're due to finish the last part of the main story on the 3rd December so really not long to go although I see epilogues as part of the main text really (still think I skipped them before!)

23 & 24 October

Chapter 18
The French realize that the war is lost and retreat as quickly as possible.

Chapter 19
Many Russian officers believe the French are not retreating quickly enough and want to attack them. Kutuzov prevents them from doing so.

Thanks SanFran - I did get a bit confused as I could see the epilogues on the contents list but not appendices!! I’m on kindle so not as easy to just have a look at later sections without worrying about losing my place.

Yes, I agree we may as well read the epilogues too - in for a penny, in for a pound as my grandma used to say!

Finished Book 4, Part One last night, where Prince Andrei dies. Reading that in quick succession was good actually. There were a number of deaths, all very detailed by Tolstoy and stark in contrast. We had the battle deaths in the last Book, which were chaotic. In this one we had the murders at the post and the feelings of those all around, then Andrei’s death slow and drawn out but nursed by someone he loved.

I’m enjoying all the repetitive “the cause is cumulative” stuff, I had a life event recently and it’s calming to be reminded there’s nothing I could have done or changed.

Ah sorry didn’t quote… up to here in the thread. I actually made good progress on Part Two today on the commute the chapters are very short and I’ve learned to just storm through the war stuff and not try too hard to make sense of exactly what is going on (think the point of the text is that no one could or can anyway!)

Analysis
Tolstoy temporarily leaves most of his main characters in this section to describe the endgame of the 1812 war. His account focuses heavily on both sides’ tactical successes and failures – from maneuvers in battle to how they handled occupied territory. Before the French surrender, Pierre’s brush with execution becomes a cutting satire of French bureaucracy, which functions so badly that Pierre is nearly executed simply because a general was interrupted while he was deciding Pierre’s sentence.
However, the Russians also become objects of Tolstoy’s critique. He depicts disorganization and a lack of professionalism on both sides. On the Russian side, examples of this include Kutuzov’s lost disposition and the soldiers’ carousing before the battle of Tarutino. As Tolstoy explains, “No battle––Tarutino, Borodino, Austerlitz––comes off the way its organizers supposed. That is an essential condition” (1000). This belief obviously echoes his oft-repeated philosophy of history.
Likewise, the French failures are not limited to their ineffective bureaucracy. “Since the battle of Borodino and the looting of Moscow,” Tolstoy writes, “[the French army] had borne within itself, as it were, the chemical conditions of its decomposition” (1027). Napoleon and his generals seem to have good intentions – they order their men not to loot and treat the Russians they meet respectfully. However, the privation and lack of discipline in the French army means that the foot soldiers eagerly and violently loot Moscow at their first opportunity.
Throughout his war chapters, Tolstoy implicates fear and deprivation as sources of human cruelty. The French soldiers are at their most heartless when they are marching the prisoners out of Moscow. This behavior is easily explained by the fact that the soldiers have been living in increasingly miserable conditions and now must retreat as fast as they can or be killed. Likewise, Pierre tries to kill Dolokhovv_ earlier in the novel because of the primal fear the duel inspires in him.
Despite his mostly scathing critique of how the war’s endgame was handled, Tolstoy also includes vignettes of fundamental human kindness, continuing a motif that has cropped up throughout the novel. The French general Davout is infamous for his cruelty, but Pierre only has to look him in the eye to connect with him on a basic human level and arouse the man’s empathy. Likewise, the prisoners develop camaraderie despite their squalid living conditions, and Pierre becomes a better person through his relationship with the working-class soldier Platon Karataev.
The one main plot that is furthered here is that of Pierre, who now willingly engages in the life around him. Where he once avoided society, drowning himself in drink and women when he had to live within it, he now relishes the society he has. The fact that conditions are miserable is not lost on him, but instead, seems to engender a deeper appreciation for life itself. Simplicity is a virtue Pierre has sought throughout the novel but rarely finds - he usually ends up returning to his licentious ways, or committing to strange rituals like those of the Masons. Here, he has found a serenity in simplicity.

25/10/22

Volume 4, Part 3, Chapter* 1*

Tolstoy explains how the conventional rules of war and of history-writing are insufficient to fully convey the realities of the 1812 conflict.

Posting that analysis reminded me that I hadn't posted the analysis for Volume 4, Part 1, hope it isn't too confusing to post it now! Here is what Gradesaver has to say on it:

Analysis Volume 4, Part 1

This relatively short section focuses on how people experience death. At the beginning of the section, Tolstoy shows how death affects the living by exploring Petersburg society’s reaction to Hélène Bezukhov’s sudden illness. We never see Hélène’s point of view; we only learn about her illness by sifting through the conflicting rumors about her abrupt disappearance from society.
These rumors demonstrate two important reactions that people often have to death: panic and victim-blaming. The people at Anna Pavlovna’s soirée overreact to minor details of Hélène’s case, such as the fact that she is using an Italian doctor. Although they try to seem nonplussed, it is clear that Hélène’s imminent death has sown tension and fear among her friends. When it is clear that Hélène will not recover, her friends assume that her illness and death are a consequence of her machinations to get out of her marriage – a logical jump that makes her sudden demise more comprehensible.
In Pierre’s plot, Tolstoy explores the human response to death in much more detail. Pierre’s lengthy internal monologue in the execution yard reveals the death penalty to be a travesty that helps no one. Tolstoy emphasizes that the act of killing another person is nearly as horrible for the killer as it is for the victim. Despite his panic, Pierre finds peace in this realization, and refrains from blaming anyone for what he believes will be his impending execution. Instead, he sadly wonders who has caused this tragic state of affairs.
Pierre only finds renewal when he meets Platon Karataev in prison. Platon impresses Pierre with his simplicity, his wholehearted faith in God, and most importantly, his meek acceptance of death. As Platon explains, if he were not forced to risk his life as a soldier, his brother would have to, and this would be more of his tragedy because his brother has four children. By accepting the possibility of his death and trying to see the good in it, Platon becomes a role model for Pierre. His way of living allows Pierre to forget his earlier need for a heroic death and instead to focus on helping those around him.
Tolstoy closes the section with one more image of how people respond to death. Prince Andrei’s detached internal monologue reveals his inner resignation and gradual acceptance of death. The reactions of his family and friends to his passing is perhaps more relevant. Tolstoy notes that each character mourns for a different reason, and none of them are mourning only because they have lost Andrei. Marya cries because Nikolushkaa_ will grow up without a father; Sonya and Countess Rostov cry for Natasha; Count Rostov cries because he will soon die too. This moment illustrates how even when faced with the enormity of death, people tend to respond to how the death affects themselves and those around them – and not necessarily to the loss of the individual. Even in extreme circumstances, people consider the needs of themselves and their family first.
Finally, the one element of this section not concerned with death is the growing love between Nikolai Rostov and Marya. Though these two would have been terribly-matched had they met in earlier volumes, Nikolai's personal growth has prepared him to admire her near-saintliness. The way that Marya suffers for others, gives of herself even when prompted not to, and attempts to live morally in all ways all appeal to Nikolai, whose earlier passions have been quashed by the realities not only of war (which is ugly) but also of society (which is depraved, a lesson he learned through his gambling problems). Marya's simplicity touches on what he experienced during his sojourn in nature with his siblings long before, and in this way, the couple is now perfectly matched.

26/10/22

Volume 4, Part 3, Chapter 2

Tolstoy argues that the strength of an army rests in its spirit rather than its numbers.

Interesting to see Tolstoy explaining that "guerilla warfare is always successful" a hundred years before the Vietnam war!

I’m all caught up now and reading along :)

Hey BakeOffRewatch 👋

27/10/22

Chapter 3
As the French retreat, Russian partisans attack them. Captain Denisovv_ is with one such group of partisans. He wants to attack a French transport, but cannot determine how many men are guarding i

A bit behind with updating on the last section. Must admit I found it a struggle again.

I thought that Pierre’s earlier malaise being put down to having more than he needed, contrasted with his new circumstances where striving to meet basic needs brings regular bursts of satisfaction, felt like a very current conceptualisation.

I was also struck by the way he talks about brutalisation, the way things get to a certain point and people are carried along by the force of the way things ‘have’ to be. I think that’s a good way of understanding things that in retrospect look incomprehensible.

Thank you for posting the analysis of the previous sections, Desdamona.

I thought the discussion on guerilla warfare was good and on troop morale too. I think the last time we met Denisov, he was talking to Kutuzov and advocating for splinter groups to strike out from the main body of the army so I suppose he took matters into his own hands. He has gone rogue! It is no surprise either that Dolokhov is in agreement with him as he was always a loose cannon (pun intended!)

Oh good memory IsFuzzyBeagMise. I didn't remember that about Denisov but it certainly fits in.

It's weally wather splendid to have Denisov back, even if he is in cahoots with that wascal Dolokhov.

Hahaha! Wonderful to see Denisov, ba k at the heart of the action!

I must admit, the recent chapters on how war is won etc has put me in mind of the current situation in Ukraine as well... the smaller, less organised (allegedly) Ukrainians taking on the war machine that is Russia and succeeding in ways that Putin just never considered... its very astute writing from Tolstoy - a shame the lessons of war never seem to get learned!

28/10/22

Volume IV, Part 3, Chapter 4
Denisov’s group takes a French drummer boy prisoner. Denisov runs into Pyotr Rostovv_, who is nearby with his regiment.