>and then count pidorov proposed natasha, but she is already engaged with count semenov! what will she do??how the fuck do you read this seriously. this shit feels like it was written for middle aged women.
>>23979588Filtered by the second greatest novel of all time
I agree, the true connoisseur reads marvel comic books and James Patterson
>forgetting Andrei Bolkonsky as the main point-of-view character for most of the Napoleonic wars (chilling with Kutuzov, then giving us one of the most engrossing depictions of the battle of Austerlitz, then fighting at Borodino)>forgetting /ourincel/ Pierre Bezhukov constantly revealing his power-level at every ball and getting into a love triangle where he’s hopelessly outmatched (after accidentally marrying a slut)>forgetting ditzy Nikolai Rostov’s career among the hussars and partying so hard that he ruins his entire family>forgetting /ourstacy/ Elena Kuragina who likes to watch when her brother despoils virgin women and then fucks him too>forgetting Boris Drubetskoy’s whole “muh grind mindset” plot line>forgetting Sonya Rostov constantly tripping over herself when trying to make her cousin fall in love with her, and then has to live as a cuckquean when her cousin marries and pumps a rich heiress full of kidsJust come out and say you haven’t read “War and Peace”.
>>23979588The Austerlitz bit of the novel is the most excited I've ever been while reading a book
>>23979667>forgetting melodramatic shit about marriage and cucking that feels like it was written for middle aged women.
>>23979594What's the first?
>>23979588had the same thought while reading this. War and piss might be one of the worst classics I've ever read, such a bloated melodrama about nothing. Don't know if I'll be going for AK, Tolstoy is such a bad writer
that never happens in the book though
>>23979837NTA, but Don Quixote
>>23979859war and peace at least has some war in it, ak is just 100% relationship slop
>Zoomers try to read classic Russian literature
Ukrainian seethe
>>23979588The problem isn't the content, Henry James has an even more dry subject matter yet is a brilliant writer. The problem lies in how Tolstoy writes it. It feels as if he's rushing through the events. Both the character psychology and the descriptions are given only a cursory glance without diving deeper into them. Anna Karenina is much better in this regard, Tolstoy takes his time instead of jumping from character to character. He also takes time to develop them instead of introducing 5 different characters every page.
Wostov!
>>23979588Yeah man thats the book. That's the Peace part of War and Peace. If you keep reading you'll also find some parts are about War.
>>23979935>just 100% relationship slopYou mean the fundamental core of human experience and the most important aspect of life?
>>23979588Wow so he got cucked?The NTR is unending
Call me a retard if you'd like but the sheer number of characters in this made it unreadable for me.Anna Karenina blows W&P out of the water imo.
>>23979588Such an ugly cover, the colour reminds me of a drained and faded swimming pool, or an Indian slum house.
>>23981228All 19th century literature is about cuckoldry.
>>23979837Anna Karenina
>>23979859>>23979935This board truly deserves the slow death it’s going through
>Tolstoy was later skeptical of his novels. In January 1871, Lev Nikolaevich sent a letter to Fet: “How happy I am..., that I will never again write verbose nonsense like "The War">On December 6, 1908, Leo Tolstoy wrote in his diary: "People love me for those trifles - "War and Peace", etc., which seem to them very important"uhhhm tolstoybros... what the fuck did he mean by that?
>>23982002It’s well known that he repudiated all his art later in life. According to him his only good works were short stories for kids.
>>23979588Anna Karenina and War and Peace are low tier Tolstoy, his shorter work is where it’s at.
>>23981209you think he has a life?
>>23979588>>23979859>>23980011Which translation did you read? You didn't read Tolstoy so don't talk about he 'writes' you, you read a different work.Was it P&V? There's your problem. They can't write and have an utterly retarded pseudo literal translation method. iirc one speaks Russians and gives some literal translation, then one, who doesn't speak Russian, writes it while preserving the literalism for some inane reason. I'm not sure why they're pushed as the go to translations of works, I can't remember, probably nepotism or something. Regardless of method, they absolutely cannot write and shouldn't be anywhere near literature.I learnt this after buying P&V War and Peace, and trying to read it. Unlike lit, who either through poor taste or brainwashing can't discern good from bad, I keep my own senses no matter the 'status' involved. If you look it up, you should find people (who speak Russian) going into it deeper.
>>23982276>he 'writes' youhow?*how he 'writes', you read a different work
>>23982276Andrzej Stawar (W&P) and Jan Cichocki (AK).
>>23979830>>23979667The dichotomy between soul and soulless, it isn't the author's job how you view things, now I haven't read war and peace but the opinion of >>23979667 has me alot more keen to read it, you can call every book ever melodramatic shit for women, at least it's not proust you fag, it's about how engaging you can make melodramatic old women shit, just admit you're filtered by the act of reading and go do whatever homo shit you do, watching sigma insta reels you pussy, enough of your attitude
>>23979837Demons, the true based niggers pick
>>23982284ok carry on. i presume none are gibberish like p&v. just note that you are reading their works, which are only as good as their writing. translation is restrictive which is damaging. to write well, to free up this restriction, you generally have to deviate which makes it a better work, fully naturalised, but further from the original. accuracy is a useless approach for literature, except for initial study of originals where you don't know the language but have some idea of how to interpret it to glean close meaning.
>>23982276I read it in russian
