War and Peace

Considered a classic, War and Peace is many things.  First, it's the voluminous tale of Napoleon's campaign against (and ultimate retreat from) Russia in the early 1810s.  Second, it paints a portrait of Russian high society at the turn of the nineteenth century.  Third, it looks at the things that drive individuals- power, prestige, influence, wealth- and the ultimate futility of it all when that is made life's object.  For all three, the book mostly centers on the lives of several (fictional) Russian aristocratic families, ultimately connected by events and social status.  In this sense, the book is historical fiction, as said families interact with historical personas and within the construct of historical events.  However, note that I say the book mostly centers on these lives- the other portion of the book is a treatise on history, the study of history, and the inevitability/predestination of events.  These treatise segments are sprinkled between the historical fiction portions.

War and Peace didn't meet my expectations.  Tolstoy himself said "It is not a novel, even less is it an epic poem, and still less an historical chronicle.  War and Peace is what the author wished . . ."  What Tolstoy wished, apparently, was to create a hodge-podge.  But more on that in a moment.  There were some good points:
- The historical fiction aspect was interesting at times.  Its essence reminded me of Ken Follett's Century Trilogy (book one of which I reviewed here), using different families to paint a picture of the period.  Fun fact: the Russian aristocracy spoke French, which Tolstoy preserves here (2% of the book is in French).
- Tolstoy brings up some good points about the nature of man and life.  I saw two main themes:

1. The chief object of life is not that which most of us spend our time pursuing, and you see some characters suffer through events until they come to that conclusion.  There is much in this world that does not satisfy . . . one character here reminded me of Ecclesiastes (a book of the Bible where Solomon discovers the futility of chasing wealth/power/etc.).
2. The inevitability (predestination) of events.  Tolstoy claims that, as we are subjected to physical laws (like gravity), so too we are subject to higher laws that govern our direction and remove any possibility we have of true freedom.  I agreed with elements of his discussion, and he brings up some interesting points.  

Those points aside, my disappointment lay in the following problems:
- It's a hodge-podge.  The oscillation between historical fiction and treatise is annoying.  The latter parts were (to me) breathtakingly boring.  He could have worked the treatise portions into the text (through characters and situations), but (for whatever reason) he chose not to, and the result is a work that lacks cohesion and is consistently jarring.
- Length.  My version was 1309 pages, the last 93 of which were the epilogue.  I've read long books before- no worries there- but this could have been so much shorter.  The treatise portions were especially redundant, and could have been omitted or condensed to great effect.
- Lack of suspense.  Tolstoy, at times, created tense situations . . . and (seemingly) deliberately diffused them.  Why, for example, would he state the end result when a character is in a tight spot, and then rewind and give details that added little to the narrative?  At times he seemed to be saying, "please don't enjoy this."

In the end, I don't get why this is so highly revered.  It's too much packed into one volume.  More brevity, suspense, and consistency in format are needed.

Rating: C+