Tolstoy's 'War and Peace'
As relevant as ever.
"We are forced to fall back on fatalism to explain the irrational events of history (that is to say, events the intelligence of which we do not see). The more we strive to account for such events in history rationally, the more irrational and incomprehensible do they become to us.
Every man lives for himself, using his freedom to attain his personal aims, and feels with his whole being that he can at any moment perform or not perform that action; but, so soon as he has done it, that action accomplished at a certain moment in time becomes irrevocable and belongs to history, in which it has not a free but a predestined significance.
The higher the man stands in the social scale, the more connections he has with others and the more power he has over them, the more conspicuous the predestination and inevitability of every act he commits." Leo Tolstoy. (W&P, Book Three. Part One)
A girlfriend gave me the two volume Penguin paperback in a case just over fifty years ago but I didn't get around to reading it. In the meantime I've seen two BBC adaptations I believe, so when reading the book it's a bit like deja vu, with flash-backs! It's beautifully written (and translated) and of course covers events from about 1805 to 1815, centred on St Petersburg and Moscow, dominated by the threat posed by Napoleon, who had the whole of Europe in thrall. But it's main focus is the lives and loves of essentially three families, the Rostovs, the Bolkonskys and illigitimate Pierre Bezukhof, their interweaving experiences and characterisation. Tolstoy devoted several years to its creation, and the prose appears fluid and effortless, though I'm sure it was anything but. This was centuries before word processors and other research devices to make the life of the author easier. You can smell the candle wax, hear the snort of the horses on the icy air, the sound of the cannon and the crunch of the hard-packed snow under the sledge runners. It describes a Russian, largely upper class, pre-revolution society, where honour was still defended by dual, and a woman's and family's reputation regarded as pre-eminent. The 'War and Peace' of the title relates of course primarily to the conflict between France and Russia, but there is also the war and peace of the characters both externally and internally focused on the suitors and obsessions of the young and beautiful Natasha Rostov and the suspense as to who will eventually capture her heart. In relating their fictional lives, we relive our own, and wonder why it took so long to turn the pages and connect with the great mind that produced them. Regards, Tim.
I opened my Bible at Ecclesiastes 7 with one of my dad's favourite little sayings (with a wry smile):
"3 Sorrow is better than laughter: for by the sadness of the countenance the heart is made better.
4 The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning; but the heart of fools is in the house of mirth.
5 It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise, than for a man to hear the song of fools.
6 For as the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of the fool: this also is vanity."
Dom Lowe So . . . being happy and having fun is a bad thing?
Please enlighten me Tim
Strangely I thought of you when I read it Dom but all philosophical views are to be treated with discretion and applied to deepen our understanding of life in general, I would say. Our lives are very brief and temporal and humans have always sought to come to terms with it, in whatever way they can, be it 'wine, women and song' , or something else. It is said Solomon, one of the legendary Kings of Israel, and reputedly the wisest man of his time wrote Eccesiastes. It's obviously not for everyone but I find it thought provoking. His theme is 'vanity', or the passing nature of all transient things. He speaks from a position of social supremacy, achievement and acknowledged 'wisdom', and it is his view of the latter that he seeks to impart and share. Basically his thesis is, "What makes a man wise." He was visited by contemporary potentates, notably the Queen of Sheba, seeking an answer to the same question. But reference yours, it should be pointed out, the word in the quoted exerpt is 'better'. He opines on the relative value of the two in the scheme of things. He does not prohibit song, laughter and mirth but suggests it has less value than sober thought. Indeed in a more famous passage, he extols the principle of everything having its place and time. I am sure you are familiar with it. In recent years it became a famous folk song by the Byrds (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKP4cfU28vM
) This is based on Ecclesiates 3: 1-8. Note: "A time to weep; a time to laugh. A time to mourn; a time to dance" - amongst all the other contrasted activities. In other words, everything has its time and place. Everything has value of itself and can be judged by its outcomes and results. Roughly nine hundred years later, Jesus added his 'take' on the subject in what is known as 'the Sermon on the Mount'. It has similarly problematic and counter intuitive pronouncements, turning all natural human assumptions upside down, praising meekness over power and poverty over wealth. In reference to Soloman, he utters the famous words, "Consider the lillies of the field and how they grow. Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed as one of these." In all these thoughts of the wise men of the past, we are challenged to contrast the physical with the spiritual, the temporal with the eternal, the obvious with the concealed. I hope this answers your question as best I can. Regards, Tim.
