That's a good point. Sometimes things really do fall apart in big ways. More often, though, we think they're falling apart when they're not. Or maybe it's more accurate to say that almost-falling-apart is normal.

Your comments are very similar to what mine would be. Actually the reason I mentioned having just finished the book (instead of just letting the quote stand alone) is that the task of saying much about it seems overwhelming, but I wanted to at least say "it's great."

I think the only substantial negative I can say about it is that I thought the historical philosophizing got pretty tiresome, which made the last couple of hundred pages a bit of a letdown.

There is a new BBC adaptation out that sounds and looks kind of stinky to me. Apparently a supposed incestuous relationship between Helene and Anatole is emphasized. I gather that there is respectable opinion that holds it to have been implied. I didn't pick up on that myself. But even if Tolstoy intended it, it was hardly a major part of the picture.

[*SPOILER FOLLOWS*]

I had a question that I didn't think the book really answered: what exactly happened to Helene? It was odd the way she was disposed of in a few sentences, and by that odd means. I half-expected that to turn out to be false rumor. When it became clear that she was really gone, I thought maybe the "herbs" or whatever it was that she was said to have taken were an abortifacent. That seems to be a widely-held opinion.

Congrats, Mac! Craig, I enjoyed the thoughts you expressed on your blog as well. I read it several years ago and have been wanting to revisit it ever since. I was telling Mac recently that it is funny how people always want to ask "Tolstoy, or Dostoevsky?" when really they could not be more different. One is expansive of everything and all society; the other very internal, of the interior lives of his characters. I enjoy Dostoevsky, but I adore Tolstoy.

Well, as I remember, there were at least 3 editions published years apart and I think that they did not all have all of this stuff in them. When I read it the last time, I couldn't remember having read it before.

AMDG

So I google "war and peace helene" to get some more info on her death, and every result on the first page is about this new BBC series, with headlines like this: "Bed-hopping antics of War and Peace's outrageous Helene (and her SEVEN lovers) have shocked viewers... but they haven't seen anything yet"

Definitely one to skip, I think.

~~I was telling Mac recently that it is funny how people always want to ask "Tolstoy, or Dostoevsky?" when really they could not be more different.~~

George Steiner, of course, wrote a rather well-known book of that title, but without the question mark. I have it but haven't read it, largely because I have yet to read any Tolstoy. One of these days. One goal of mine for this year is to read Anna Karenina.

"One is expansive of everything and all society; the other very internal, of the interior lives of his characters."

Steiner's case includes the argument that they're also radically different in their ideas of God and history.

Out of curiosity, Mac, which translation of W&P did you read?

Mac is a P/V disciple. So far I have stayed away from them. ;-)

Was it here that someone wrote that they felt P-V was better for Dost'y, but Garnett for Tolstoy? All the former I've read has been P-V, except for my first read of Bros. K, which was Andrew McAndrew. And I've read at least four translations of Notes From Underground.

Speaking of Russian lit, has anyone taken a look at this novel 'Laurus' that's getting so much attenion? I bought a copy a couple weeks ago but haven't had the chance to start it yet. It seems to be getting very high marks across the board from both religious and non-religious reviewers. Author is Eugene Vodolazkin.

"Familiarity breeds contempt, so I turn off the radio." --Graham Parker

I read Notes many years ago, and really don't remember it. Obviously I should read it again.

The audio version of Notes that I have is a good translation, but so far I've not been able to determine whose it is. P-V is good, but I like the newer one by Boris Jakim even better.

A good story. You pointed us to it once before, but I can't remember the context. Anyway--yes.

If we let ourselves worry about that, we'd never do anything else.

AMDG

For instance.

Just started reading Montgomery's Why Poe Drank Liquor and came across this interesting mention of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. He's quoting the Russian writer Andrei Sinyavsky as distinguishing two stylistic traditions in Russian literature:

"One is the realistic tradition which depicted the world in life size -- let us say the tradition of Turgenev, Chekhov, Tolstoy....It is the other category which I find more important--namely Gogol, Leskov, Dostoevsky....I call it 'the art of exaggeration' in contrast to the art which presents a life-sized portrait of reality."

"[P]eople are exaggerated, are caricatures--are unnatural, if you like" but such writing "provides an access to reality from another side...in contrast to the direct representation of the world as it is."

I did a little checking on Sinyavsky, and it turns out that he was a dissident Soviet literary critic who also wrote fiction under the name "Abram Tertz."

Interesting stuff.