Book Review: War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy

The main emotions I had after reading War and Peace were:

1. How I wish Prince Andrei had a better ending! and 
2. How in the world did Leo Tolstoy write this thing?

Like, seriously, how? I’m not sure anyone else could have pulled this off.

This book just seems so much more than a novel. It’s a blend between a novel, a historical account, a philosophy, a study on war strategy, and a psychological study. And it blends so well. Tolstoy’s prose is incredibly easy to read; he gently guides you from one part of history or POV to the next. I wouldn’t say this is a book to read purely for entertainment, but to marvel at in awe. It’s not entertainment in its essence (although reading it is often entertaining), but it’s an experience. I learned so much from this novel—about history, about historical criticism, about the true purpose of leaders, and about human nature.

Not all of the chapters of this book captured my interest (Pierre’s chapters with freemasonry come to mind), but I don’t think there is one page of this novel that one can skip without missing a gem of prose or thought. (Except for the second dialogue. I didn’t feel like I could skip the second dialogue with a clear conscience, but if any of you are thinking of reading War and Peace, I give you permission to skip it. It doesn’t add anything to the story and is almost painful to get through. I will admit, I wasn’t able to get through it. I’ve always struggled with purely philosophical texts, and placing this one at the end kind of ruins the effect of the ending of the actual story.) Tolstoy somehow makes war strategy and long battle scenes interesting. He does this by connecting every thought, every action to the person’s personality and psyche. This may sound like it would bog down the text, but it makes it even more interesting.       

War and Peace is the epitome of character development. This is my favorite part of practically any novel, so you can imagine how highly I rate this novel. Literally all of the characters are so complex and dynamic. I might not have liked Pierre until his POW journey or Natasha until she nursed Prince Andrei, but they were drawn so well, I couldn’t help but enjoy reading about them. And the fact that I did like them at the end is testament to Tolstoy’s ability to develop characters and show their growth. He writes deeply flawed, intrinsically human characters that you can watch grow and develop into slightly less deeply flawed characters. 

I know I said I adore Levin from Anna Karenina by Tolstoy, but that is nothing compared to how I feel about Prince Andrei. He continually broke my heart throughout the novel, and I felt such a connection towards him. I knew how his storyline ends before I started the book, but Tolstoy still had me begging that it’ll turn out differently. I honestly thought that he was too good for Natasha, but I also just wanted him to be happy. He is one of my favorite characters in literature. 

I loved Tolstoy’s metaphors and similes riddled throughout the novel, and I found his historical criticism fascinating. The first chapter where he delves into this topic is one of my favorite chapters of the novel (Book IX, Chapter 1). I’ve always found historical criticism interesting, but I know it’s not for everyone, and since it’s scattered heavily throughout the latter half of the novel, some people may just want Tolstoy to get back to the characters. But I don’t think the novel would be the same without it, and it produced such gems as questioning why an entire nation is subjugated after the defeat of its military, which is only a hundredth of the population. It seems like such a simple thought, but I had never really thought about it before, and while reading Tolstoy’s writing, it seems genius. He questions things I never thought to question before. 

It was very difficult for me to simplify my thoughts and write them down into a coherent, complete review, and I’m not sure I succeeded. Overall, I don’t think I can give this a 5/5 stars, because 

1. I could put the book down (usually when it got to Pierre’s POV).
2. It would get the highest rating for literary merit, but not for pure entertainment value. 
3. Reading the second epilogue last (which wasn’t part of the actual story) kind of put a slightly bad taste in my mouth. I wish I knew to not suffer through the majority of that, because I would have been able to process the actual novel better if I hadn’t.

So, it gets a 4.5/5.

*A note about the edition: I had been looking for a used copy of War and Peace, so when I finally found one in Denver, I grabbed it, not checking the translation or edition. It ended up being the Wordsworth Classics 1993 edition. I’m not sure I liked this edition (nothing wrong with the translation, though), because of the numerous typos and occasional formatting issues. One part of me excuses it as inevitable in such a large book, but the other part of me wishes they had been more careful before publishing. I also wonder if all editions were like this.