I love Natasha! Why? I don't know!!! Pierre, too. And I LOVE the philosophizing Mr. T continues to engage in as the French army flees and falls apart and the Russian army falls apart too, for good measure.
I have a mere 160 pages left to read.
I have a mere 16 days left in Korea.
Thursday, May 25, 2006
Monday, May 08, 2006
Restructuring
Besides this, the entire staff of the Russian army was now reorganized...Very serious consideration had to be given to the question whether it would be better to put A in B's place and B in D's place, or to put D in A's place and so on--as if anything more than A's or B's satisfaction depended on this. - pp. 1183-1184
I dare say that reminds me of a Borders restructure or two!
Lately some of my friends and co-workers here have seen me with my tattered copy of The Book again, and this makes them ask the perfectly logical question: "Aren't you done yet?" Well, perhaps not perfectly logical, seeing as if I WERE done I likely wouldn't be carrying it AROUND now would I? But yeah, today was the first day in weeks and weeks --like maybe six or seven of them--that I've taken the book to work with me in my backpack and had time to read a bit in the coffee shop during my afternoon break. And there probably were things I could have been doing for the play as I sat sipping my cappuccino, but I read instead.
Also, I have received my first official "I'm done" from a friend back home who took the plunge, and that's scary. He totally kicked my butt! I still have 200 pages to go! I would like to point out that he needs to comment a bit on here though, now that he's DONE.
But only comment up to page 1200! Don't tell me what happens!!!
I dare say that reminds me of a Borders restructure or two!
Lately some of my friends and co-workers here have seen me with my tattered copy of The Book again, and this makes them ask the perfectly logical question: "Aren't you done yet?" Well, perhaps not perfectly logical, seeing as if I WERE done I likely wouldn't be carrying it AROUND now would I? But yeah, today was the first day in weeks and weeks --like maybe six or seven of them--that I've taken the book to work with me in my backpack and had time to read a bit in the coffee shop during my afternoon break. And there probably were things I could have been doing for the play as I sat sipping my cappuccino, but I read instead.
Also, I have received my first official "I'm done" from a friend back home who took the plunge, and that's scary. He totally kicked my butt! I still have 200 pages to go! I would like to point out that he needs to comment a bit on here though, now that he's DONE.
But only comment up to page 1200! Don't tell me what happens!!!
Monday, May 01, 2006
I'm the decider!
Napoleon, with his usual assurance, not that what was right was right, but that whatever entered his head was right, wrote to Kutuzov the first words that occurred to him, though they were utterly meaningless. - page 1182
Of course, then the exchange that follows between them does nothing to bring about peace. But Moscow and the citizenry and the army -- and Tolstoy -- are still regrouping and reckoning with Borodino and the march of historical events. It's taking me an exceedingly long time to read this part. I'm on the page-a-day plan. I am just too busy. My afternoon coffee shop time is now entirely given over to doctor appointments, play preparation/rehearsals, or some combination of these. At night I fall into bed and am lucky to get through one page before falling asleep! So maybe I won't even finish The Book before leaving Korea!
But don't we all know someone like Napoleon?
Or, as Ani puts it, "everyone is a fucking napoleon." Well, not to put too fine a point on it:
Now you think, so that is the way it's gonna be
That's what this is all about
I think that that is the way it always was
You chose not to notice until now
Yeah now that there's a problem you call me up to confide
And you go on for over an hour 'bout each one that took you for a ride...
- Ani DiFranco, 'Napoleon'
Her song is actually about the music industry, although it's also about a lot of other things, of course.
We expats over here are intrigued by tales of massive immigrant protests and political uprising back in the States. I heard on the AP Radio News a wonderful Bush sound bite. In response to the new Spanish version of "The Star-Spangled Banner" he was saying people who want to be U.S. citizens ought to learn English. He said, "And they should learn to sing the national anthem in English!" And the way he said it was just so classically -- Bush! Faux folksy, adamant, a slight feel of bewilderment. I couldn't help wondering if he can sing the national anthem. No one can sing the national anthem! Or if he knows all the words. I remembered Ramona Quimby's "by the dawnzer's lee light" as she puzzles over it and decides a dawnzer must be a kind of lamp.
And so time marches on, as do we all. Armies are on the move; emperors are born and emperors die, and their empires often do the same, if it takes a bit longer.
To recap for those who missed it, I would like to point out that, yes, I have just quoted Leo Tolstoy, George Bush, Ani DiFranco, and Beverly Cleary in one blog post. Imagine all four of them as guests at one dinner table!
Of course, then the exchange that follows between them does nothing to bring about peace. But Moscow and the citizenry and the army -- and Tolstoy -- are still regrouping and reckoning with Borodino and the march of historical events. It's taking me an exceedingly long time to read this part. I'm on the page-a-day plan. I am just too busy. My afternoon coffee shop time is now entirely given over to doctor appointments, play preparation/rehearsals, or some combination of these. At night I fall into bed and am lucky to get through one page before falling asleep! So maybe I won't even finish The Book before leaving Korea!
But don't we all know someone like Napoleon?
Or, as Ani puts it, "everyone is a fucking napoleon." Well, not to put too fine a point on it:
Now you think, so that is the way it's gonna be
That's what this is all about
I think that that is the way it always was
You chose not to notice until now
Yeah now that there's a problem you call me up to confide
And you go on for over an hour 'bout each one that took you for a ride...
- Ani DiFranco, 'Napoleon'
Her song is actually about the music industry, although it's also about a lot of other things, of course.
We expats over here are intrigued by tales of massive immigrant protests and political uprising back in the States. I heard on the AP Radio News a wonderful Bush sound bite. In response to the new Spanish version of "The Star-Spangled Banner" he was saying people who want to be U.S. citizens ought to learn English. He said, "And they should learn to sing the national anthem in English!" And the way he said it was just so classically -- Bush! Faux folksy, adamant, a slight feel of bewilderment. I couldn't help wondering if he can sing the national anthem. No one can sing the national anthem! Or if he knows all the words. I remembered Ramona Quimby's "by the dawnzer's lee light" as she puzzles over it and decides a dawnzer must be a kind of lamp.
And so time marches on, as do we all. Armies are on the move; emperors are born and emperors die, and their empires often do the same, if it takes a bit longer.
To recap for those who missed it, I would like to point out that, yes, I have just quoted Leo Tolstoy, George Bush, Ani DiFranco, and Beverly Cleary in one blog post. Imagine all four of them as guests at one dinner table!
Friday, April 28, 2006
Wow...
Oh my goodness! Prince Andrei! What?!?! Andrei...Natasha....wow. So amazing...pages 1172-1177...so amazing...
Monday, April 24, 2006
"The man who will not give his name"
Pierre felt himself to be an insignificant chip fallen between the wheels of a machine whose mechanism he did not understand but which worked smoothly. - p. 1149
So, the question is, will it be Sonya and Nikolai or Natasha and Andrei?
I personally think - I think? - it will be Natasha and Andrei. Not that my personal parallels and cosmic signs I've been taking from this book have anything to do with that, who, me? No! ; )
But if that's true, I do hope Mr. T. has something waiting in the wings for Sonya. I feel bad for her.
I named one of the girls in my advanced conversation/writing class "Natasha" last week. It wasn't particularly a War and Peace thing, but I do love that name. In German class in high school, my name was Natascha, a slightly different spelling. Well, last week the kids in this class, whom I adore and will miss terribly when I depart and who have great conversation skills and write me fantastic compositions every time, asked me for new English names. They were bored, after years at Ding Ding Dang, with their "Tony" and "Tom" and "Carol" and whatnot. Like, every single class I teach has a "Sally" and a "Jenny" and a few "Joey"s and we foreigner teachers are ALWAYS trying to get them to let us pick more original English names when we start up new classes, but it's always this whole long drama and "Oh, they're too hard, the kids can't say them," whatever.
But my advanced kids can say a lot of things! And I teach them many things! And they love me! And I love them! So I was only to happy to give them new names: Torrance, Everett, Wayne, Donovan, Daphne, Angelina, Gisele, Meredith, and Natasha. I looked at them, pondered their personalities, and made my choices. Overall, they're pleased.
But I digress. Oh, Natasha. Everyone in this book seems so special and comfortable to me right now.
When Pierre was on trial, the little riff about trials and interrogations being less concerned with seeking the truth than eking out a desired result was good food for thought.
There are six days left in April. Just thought I'd mention that.
(It may seem this post was not about The Book, really. And yet it was, it was...)
So, the question is, will it be Sonya and Nikolai or Natasha and Andrei?
I personally think - I think? - it will be Natasha and Andrei. Not that my personal parallels and cosmic signs I've been taking from this book have anything to do with that, who, me? No! ; )
But if that's true, I do hope Mr. T. has something waiting in the wings for Sonya. I feel bad for her.
I named one of the girls in my advanced conversation/writing class "Natasha" last week. It wasn't particularly a War and Peace thing, but I do love that name. In German class in high school, my name was Natascha, a slightly different spelling. Well, last week the kids in this class, whom I adore and will miss terribly when I depart and who have great conversation skills and write me fantastic compositions every time, asked me for new English names. They were bored, after years at Ding Ding Dang, with their "Tony" and "Tom" and "Carol" and whatnot. Like, every single class I teach has a "Sally" and a "Jenny" and a few "Joey"s and we foreigner teachers are ALWAYS trying to get them to let us pick more original English names when we start up new classes, but it's always this whole long drama and "Oh, they're too hard, the kids can't say them," whatever.
But my advanced kids can say a lot of things! And I teach them many things! And they love me! And I love them! So I was only to happy to give them new names: Torrance, Everett, Wayne, Donovan, Daphne, Angelina, Gisele, Meredith, and Natasha. I looked at them, pondered their personalities, and made my choices. Overall, they're pleased.
But I digress. Oh, Natasha. Everyone in this book seems so special and comfortable to me right now.
When Pierre was on trial, the little riff about trials and interrogations being less concerned with seeking the truth than eking out a desired result was good food for thought.
There are six days left in April. Just thought I'd mention that.
(It may seem this post was not about The Book, really. And yet it was, it was...)
Saturday, April 15, 2006
"They saw everything upside down..."
Poor Ellen! Poor Moscow! And the poor Emperor!
I've slowly but surely been resuming my reading. Dipped a toe in here, done a wrist-deep splash there. This book has truly been my Korea companion. I've gone into hiding, I've gone into a haze of foreigners and activities and late nights, I've gone into a full plate of artsy activities, I've gone into give-work-your-all mode. And with each plunge headlong the book has been with me, mirroring my steady progress. The war keeps marching along, and the peace is always there waiting in the wings.
Moscow's inhabitants have fled to distant provinces and Tolstoy comments that people looking back at that historical period think everyone was engaged in heroic acts. People looking back do not see the personal human interest stories of the moment.
And yet actually those personal interests of the moment are always so much more significant than the general issues that because of them the latter are never felt -- not even noticed, in fact. The majority of the people paid no attention to the general course of events but were influenced only by their immediate personal interests. And it was just these people whose activities were of the greatest service at the time. Those who endeavored to understand the general course of events and hoped by self-sacrifice and heroism to take part in it were the most useless members of society...The law forbidding us to taste of the fruit of the tree of knowledge is particularly manifested in historical events. Only unconscious action bears fruit... - pp. 1126-1127
This book is full of riches. Hoping to take part? I've done that. "Unconscious action bears fruit." Indeed.
Well, Happy Easter! Go in peace.
I've slowly but surely been resuming my reading. Dipped a toe in here, done a wrist-deep splash there. This book has truly been my Korea companion. I've gone into hiding, I've gone into a haze of foreigners and activities and late nights, I've gone into a full plate of artsy activities, I've gone into give-work-your-all mode. And with each plunge headlong the book has been with me, mirroring my steady progress. The war keeps marching along, and the peace is always there waiting in the wings.
Moscow's inhabitants have fled to distant provinces and Tolstoy comments that people looking back at that historical period think everyone was engaged in heroic acts. People looking back do not see the personal human interest stories of the moment.
And yet actually those personal interests of the moment are always so much more significant than the general issues that because of them the latter are never felt -- not even noticed, in fact. The majority of the people paid no attention to the general course of events but were influenced only by their immediate personal interests. And it was just these people whose activities were of the greatest service at the time. Those who endeavored to understand the general course of events and hoped by self-sacrifice and heroism to take part in it were the most useless members of society...The law forbidding us to taste of the fruit of the tree of knowledge is particularly manifested in historical events. Only unconscious action bears fruit... - pp. 1126-1127
This book is full of riches. Hoping to take part? I've done that. "Unconscious action bears fruit." Indeed.
Well, Happy Easter! Go in peace.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Sparkling & Quivering
Napoleon sits on a hill contemplating Moscow, the city he is about to roll into as the citizenry evacuate. He thinks:
"'Yet there she is, lying at my feet, her golden domes and crosses sparkling and quivering in the sunlight. But I will spare her. On those ancient monuments of barbarism and despotism I will inscribe the great words of justice and mercy....And that above all will make Aleksandr smart, I know him.' (For Napoleon the chief import of what had happened lay in his personal contest with Aleksandr.) 'From the heights of the Kremlin -- yes, there is the Kremlin, yes -- I will give them just laws , teach them the meaning of true civilization , and make generations of boyars remember their conqueror with love." -- p. 1046
It's nice when theories turn out correct in life, eh? Such as mine that I would read War and Peace and discover a lot in common between Napoleon and George W. Bush. Hello!
I can hear it now, my trusty copy of The Book crying, "Linda, why hast thou forsaken me?" I can't quite believe it's been more than two weeks since I read and blogged. I'm only 46 pages past where I was then (1000), too. I've been really busy. I have concocted a lot of activities for myself and when I don't have something to do I have been disappearing into the haze of the foreigners watering holes and my English teacher friends and just generally trying to forget the things in life making me uncomfortable. I also have to finish reading the awful book we are doing for our reading group, which meets in two days and I have 200 or so pages to go.
But I just wanted to check in and let the world know that I have found this whole the-wounded-into-the-Rostovs'-house thing fascinating. I am on the edge of my seat about Natasha and Prince Andrei. You had to know it was going to be him.
And besides, my slacking off gives you slowpokes a chance to catch up!!
"'Yet there she is, lying at my feet, her golden domes and crosses sparkling and quivering in the sunlight. But I will spare her. On those ancient monuments of barbarism and despotism I will inscribe the great words of justice and mercy....And that above all will make Aleksandr smart, I know him.' (For Napoleon the chief import of what had happened lay in his personal contest with Aleksandr.) 'From the heights of the Kremlin -- yes, there is the Kremlin, yes -- I will give them just laws , teach them the meaning of true civilization , and make generations of boyars remember their conqueror with love." -- p. 1046
It's nice when theories turn out correct in life, eh? Such as mine that I would read War and Peace and discover a lot in common between Napoleon and George W. Bush. Hello!
I can hear it now, my trusty copy of The Book crying, "Linda, why hast thou forsaken me?" I can't quite believe it's been more than two weeks since I read and blogged. I'm only 46 pages past where I was then (1000), too. I've been really busy. I have concocted a lot of activities for myself and when I don't have something to do I have been disappearing into the haze of the foreigners watering holes and my English teacher friends and just generally trying to forget the things in life making me uncomfortable. I also have to finish reading the awful book we are doing for our reading group, which meets in two days and I have 200 or so pages to go.
But I just wanted to check in and let the world know that I have found this whole the-wounded-into-the-Rostovs'-house thing fascinating. I am on the edge of my seat about Natasha and Prince Andrei. You had to know it was going to be him.
And besides, my slacking off gives you slowpokes a chance to catch up!!
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Must hitch up, time to hitch up!
I paused my War and Peace quest this past week. Hitting page 1000 made me realize that I've really been progressing through it at a steady clip, and it will be over before I know it. I am going to miss this little world that I've entered, and I will miss the characters I've come to know, and I will truly miss gaining all my little insights from it. But mostly I will miss just being in it, experiencing it finally after years of considering taking the plunge.
You are welcome to read the above paragraph as if it is about Korea instead of War and Peace. It might well be.
Today I brought the book with me to work, and thus had it with me after work, reading it on the subway to and from downtown this evening. I feel like I'm getting reacquainted with Ellen and Pierre and everyone. Pierre basically left Borodino shaking his head and asking "What the...?" Boy is he going through some emotional-philosophical upheaval!
Tonight on the subway I met a guy from Afghanistan. ! I mean, who ever meets someone from Afghanistan? It was really, really interesting to talk to him. I hope we can become friends. The weirdest thing -- apart from the very fact of having a conversation with someone from Afghanistan -- was that we automatically had something in common being foreigners in Korea. That's how bizarre it is, at times, to be here.
Naturally, the conversation at one point touched on Bush and American soldiers. (Those being two VERY different things, of course.) That was interesting, too.
So Pierre has left Borodino and seems to be ready to just say, what IS this? What are we all doing, and why, and how? Count Rostopchin gets into it with him about the proclamation, and Pierre simply stands there, his expression not changing. I imagine after what he's just witnessed, a little thing like this bigwig warning him off seems utterly ridiculous, although he likely will have to disappear.
Prior to that, with no room at the inn, Pierre dozes in his carriage dreaming of sitting at the table with his benefactor and many others, epiphanic wisdom floating into his brain. Tolstoy captures so well that sensation of waking up and then trying to get back into your dream, and how disappointing it is when the scene changes.
I feel bad for him about his crazy wife, but I did like that he didn't seem to care one whit about indulging in conversation about it. He's so over it. He's so over so many things, but he's still seeking, too. At long last, I can relate to Pierre. He's just being bombarded by insights and life. He can't help it.
"The one thing Pierre desired now with his whole soul was quickly to get away from the horrifying sensations he had undergone that day, to return to the ordinary conditions of life, and to sleep peacefully in his own bed in his own room. He felt that only in the ordinary conditions of life would he be able to understand himself and all he had seen and experienced. But these ordinary conditions were nowhere to be found." -- p. 1007
You are welcome to read the above paragraph as if it is about Korea instead of War and Peace. It might well be.
Today I brought the book with me to work, and thus had it with me after work, reading it on the subway to and from downtown this evening. I feel like I'm getting reacquainted with Ellen and Pierre and everyone. Pierre basically left Borodino shaking his head and asking "What the...?" Boy is he going through some emotional-philosophical upheaval!
Tonight on the subway I met a guy from Afghanistan. ! I mean, who ever meets someone from Afghanistan? It was really, really interesting to talk to him. I hope we can become friends. The weirdest thing -- apart from the very fact of having a conversation with someone from Afghanistan -- was that we automatically had something in common being foreigners in Korea. That's how bizarre it is, at times, to be here.
Naturally, the conversation at one point touched on Bush and American soldiers. (Those being two VERY different things, of course.) That was interesting, too.
So Pierre has left Borodino and seems to be ready to just say, what IS this? What are we all doing, and why, and how? Count Rostopchin gets into it with him about the proclamation, and Pierre simply stands there, his expression not changing. I imagine after what he's just witnessed, a little thing like this bigwig warning him off seems utterly ridiculous, although he likely will have to disappear.
Prior to that, with no room at the inn, Pierre dozes in his carriage dreaming of sitting at the table with his benefactor and many others, epiphanic wisdom floating into his brain. Tolstoy captures so well that sensation of waking up and then trying to get back into your dream, and how disappointing it is when the scene changes.
I feel bad for him about his crazy wife, but I did like that he didn't seem to care one whit about indulging in conversation about it. He's so over it. He's so over so many things, but he's still seeking, too. At long last, I can relate to Pierre. He's just being bombarded by insights and life. He can't help it.
"The one thing Pierre desired now with his whole soul was quickly to get away from the horrifying sensations he had undergone that day, to return to the ordinary conditions of life, and to sleep peacefully in his own bed in his own room. He felt that only in the ordinary conditions of life would he be able to understand himself and all he had seen and experienced. But these ordinary conditions were nowhere to be found." -- p. 1007
Friday, February 24, 2006
1000!
I've reached it. Page 1000. It's all downhill from here.
But I really won't want it to end! And I've even found myself holding back this week: I have slowed my reading pace, because I feel like War and Peace is a little world I'm inhabiting and I'm not ready to move.
As mentioned in my main blog I read a chunk of The Book, specifically the Borodino battle scenes, while sitting in the back row of the random sweat-smelling auditorium where we will hold preschool graduation this weekend and where on Thursday we had a rehearsal that purported to be a run-through but was more like a disaster. Needless to say, it was a strange juxtaposition of the mess of 5-year-old children delivering speeches, poems, songs and dances and the mess of soldiers delivering cannon fire, messages to their commanders, prayers. One was a chaotic battle gone awry but nonetheless destined to go down in history, and the other was great literature!
I'm definitely worried that Prince Andrei is going to die. He's spending a lot of pages feeling that he's about to die. And it's interesting to see how it makes him grapple with life, including the reminiscence about Natasha delightedly telling him a story one evening and him truly understanding her. It made me wonder--again--why did their relationship have to be doomed? Or, was it not, and she just sucks for screwing it up? I really related to Natasha and saw so many echoes of my falling for a twit in their falling for each other.
You may recall that while I've meant to read this book forever, part of what has re-sparked my interest of late is what I can gain from it vis-a-vis the current political situation in the U.S.A. Specifically, Napoleon=Dubya. Well that was ringing true in this week's reading! Things fall apart for Monsieur l'empereur and he just sits there atop his horse kind of shocked: Wait, I can't lose a war! Everyone's supposed to be admiring me! What's going on!
"This man, predestined by Providence for the deplorable, ineluctable role of executioner of peoples, persuaded himself that the motive of his acts had been the welfare of peoples, and that he could control the destinies of millions and do good by the exercise of his power!" - p. 981
In fact, that quote would be perfect, except I don't give Bush as much credit on that score as many analysts do. I think he's far more insidious than misguided. (And he's plenty misguided.)
"He boldly assumed full responsibility for what had happened, and his beclouded mind found justification in the belief that among the hundreds of thousands of men who lost their lives, there were fewer Frenchmen than Hessians and Bavarians." --p. 982
Tolstoy grappled with war, I know. It brought a lot of things to his life, not the least of which was wisdom that influenced this very masterpiece. But in this turning point scene, he reiterates how very senseless it is, how absurd to slaughter our fellow men, and how it is still more folly to think we actually understand history.
His mathematical-philosophical-historical motion musings at the start of Book Three Part Three are utterly brilliant. In fact, I hereby urge all of you, absolutely regardless of whether you're reading this book now or ever will, to go directly to your nearest bookstore, do not pass go, do not collect $200, and pick up the Signet Classic paperback ISBN 0451-52326-1 edition and read pages 985-991. Mr. T. is brilliant.
But I really won't want it to end! And I've even found myself holding back this week: I have slowed my reading pace, because I feel like War and Peace is a little world I'm inhabiting and I'm not ready to move.
As mentioned in my main blog I read a chunk of The Book, specifically the Borodino battle scenes, while sitting in the back row of the random sweat-smelling auditorium where we will hold preschool graduation this weekend and where on Thursday we had a rehearsal that purported to be a run-through but was more like a disaster. Needless to say, it was a strange juxtaposition of the mess of 5-year-old children delivering speeches, poems, songs and dances and the mess of soldiers delivering cannon fire, messages to their commanders, prayers. One was a chaotic battle gone awry but nonetheless destined to go down in history, and the other was great literature!
I'm definitely worried that Prince Andrei is going to die. He's spending a lot of pages feeling that he's about to die. And it's interesting to see how it makes him grapple with life, including the reminiscence about Natasha delightedly telling him a story one evening and him truly understanding her. It made me wonder--again--why did their relationship have to be doomed? Or, was it not, and she just sucks for screwing it up? I really related to Natasha and saw so many echoes of my falling for a twit in their falling for each other.
You may recall that while I've meant to read this book forever, part of what has re-sparked my interest of late is what I can gain from it vis-a-vis the current political situation in the U.S.A. Specifically, Napoleon=Dubya. Well that was ringing true in this week's reading! Things fall apart for Monsieur l'empereur and he just sits there atop his horse kind of shocked: Wait, I can't lose a war! Everyone's supposed to be admiring me! What's going on!
"This man, predestined by Providence for the deplorable, ineluctable role of executioner of peoples, persuaded himself that the motive of his acts had been the welfare of peoples, and that he could control the destinies of millions and do good by the exercise of his power!" - p. 981
In fact, that quote would be perfect, except I don't give Bush as much credit on that score as many analysts do. I think he's far more insidious than misguided. (And he's plenty misguided.)
"He boldly assumed full responsibility for what had happened, and his beclouded mind found justification in the belief that among the hundreds of thousands of men who lost their lives, there were fewer Frenchmen than Hessians and Bavarians." --p. 982
Tolstoy grappled with war, I know. It brought a lot of things to his life, not the least of which was wisdom that influenced this very masterpiece. But in this turning point scene, he reiterates how very senseless it is, how absurd to slaughter our fellow men, and how it is still more folly to think we actually understand history.
His mathematical-philosophical-historical motion musings at the start of Book Three Part Three are utterly brilliant. In fact, I hereby urge all of you, absolutely regardless of whether you're reading this book now or ever will, to go directly to your nearest bookstore, do not pass go, do not collect $200, and pick up the Signet Classic paperback ISBN 0451-52326-1 edition and read pages 985-991. Mr. T. is brilliant.
Friday, February 17, 2006
"Ah, with head all mazed, Living in a foreign land..."
I have definitely, officially got into a routine, which can be remarkably similar to a rut. A mere o-i-n-e away, in fact. I realized this today when I went, as usual, to the IKEA cafe (remember, it's just a cafe, no furniture store) in the shopping plaza across from my work. After the woman greeted me and I ordered my cappuccino, I turned and decided to sit at the second table from the counter instead of at the first table, and in the big comfy couch facing the door instead of the big comfy couch facing the kitchen and espresso machine area. I don't know why; I used to bounce around the tables in there but in the last couple weeks have sort of taken a liking to "my" spot on that particular couch. Well, I went for a new one today and I realized there are decorations on the wall that was in my new line of sight that I have literally never observed were there, including a very amusing one of the back of a witch and dangling broom that look like she has flown into the wall.
Isn't that pathetic? That I've been that unobservant? I've gone there two, three, four, sometimes five days a week for more than a month. I'd observed the other three walls, notably the one with the quote (in English) from Frost's "The Road Not Taken" along it. It was weird.
I must say that I like having this comforting little ritual for my reading of The Book, though. I do occasionally read bits of it elsewhere -- the subway, my bed. But my subway rides in Daegu tend to be short, so we're talking a page here and there, and lately I've taken to reading other things on the weekends and goodness knows that late at night I read about three sentences before fading off to sleep.
So, Rostov and Princess Marya, huh? I like this, but I really hope Mr. T's got something lovely in store for Sonya. I feel sorry for her. She's been so loyal and true while Natasha falls in love with someone new every five seconds and swears it's for life.
And hey! Borodino! Remember when I was babbling about "the" War and Peace battlefield in Nelson DeMille's The Charm School and swore soon enough I'd know what I was talking about, when I got to it in W&P? Well, it was Borodino (I think!) And the battle is about to happen! I've just finished the chapter where Tolstoy delineates how entirely NOT according to plan the whole thing was, despite historians' assurances to the contrary, assurances designed to make Napoleon and or Russian military commanders look brilliant.
The amusing part of today's reading was Julie -- she rather reminds me of a homecoming queen -- finding it so hard not to speak French and her guest the militia officer crying "Forfeit! Forfeit!" each time she slipped. It seems that with the newfound loathing of all things French the Russians in the rich nobility circles pay a little fine to the "Committee for Voluntary Contributions" whenever they slip up or utter a Gallicism. That in particular kind of reminds me of the "Voldemoort Swear Cup" at Cambridgeside Borders. The whole thing actually reminded me of my students, especially my pre-schoolers, who are just so delighted with themselves all the time that even though they know they're supposed to be speaking English and not Korean in my class, they can't help bursting forth sometimes. It was great fun, that chapter.
I guess Pierre's off to ride with the regiment now, for real. Maybe he finds meaning in his life at Borodino; I'll know soon. He's got to be the thinly veiled "fictional" representation of Tolstoy, with all his seeking and being an outcast with a healthy dose of dumb luck, religious inquiring and genuine good will, and so on. I think Tolstoy writes about him with a more disdainful tone earlier on in the book and then grows to like him because he probably did the same thing with himself.
As I sat in my couch facing a different direction today, getting a much needed new perspective, I received a bit of inspiration from The Book. Cosmic sign? Perhaps. I was stressing -- crying, even (good thing I'd sat facing away from coffee girl, you see) -- about a personal emotional decision, and then Kutuzov gives his sort of pep talk to Andrei about patience and time being the answer.
"'I'll tell you what to do, and what I do. When in doubt, my dear fellow--' he paused, 'do nothing.' He spoke with deliberate emphasis." -- p. 896
I needed that.
Isn't that pathetic? That I've been that unobservant? I've gone there two, three, four, sometimes five days a week for more than a month. I'd observed the other three walls, notably the one with the quote (in English) from Frost's "The Road Not Taken" along it. It was weird.
I must say that I like having this comforting little ritual for my reading of The Book, though. I do occasionally read bits of it elsewhere -- the subway, my bed. But my subway rides in Daegu tend to be short, so we're talking a page here and there, and lately I've taken to reading other things on the weekends and goodness knows that late at night I read about three sentences before fading off to sleep.
So, Rostov and Princess Marya, huh? I like this, but I really hope Mr. T's got something lovely in store for Sonya. I feel sorry for her. She's been so loyal and true while Natasha falls in love with someone new every five seconds and swears it's for life.
And hey! Borodino! Remember when I was babbling about "the" War and Peace battlefield in Nelson DeMille's The Charm School and swore soon enough I'd know what I was talking about, when I got to it in W&P? Well, it was Borodino (I think!) And the battle is about to happen! I've just finished the chapter where Tolstoy delineates how entirely NOT according to plan the whole thing was, despite historians' assurances to the contrary, assurances designed to make Napoleon and or Russian military commanders look brilliant.
The amusing part of today's reading was Julie -- she rather reminds me of a homecoming queen -- finding it so hard not to speak French and her guest the militia officer crying "Forfeit! Forfeit!" each time she slipped. It seems that with the newfound loathing of all things French the Russians in the rich nobility circles pay a little fine to the "Committee for Voluntary Contributions" whenever they slip up or utter a Gallicism. That in particular kind of reminds me of the "Voldemoort Swear Cup" at Cambridgeside Borders. The whole thing actually reminded me of my students, especially my pre-schoolers, who are just so delighted with themselves all the time that even though they know they're supposed to be speaking English and not Korean in my class, they can't help bursting forth sometimes. It was great fun, that chapter.
I guess Pierre's off to ride with the regiment now, for real. Maybe he finds meaning in his life at Borodino; I'll know soon. He's got to be the thinly veiled "fictional" representation of Tolstoy, with all his seeking and being an outcast with a healthy dose of dumb luck, religious inquiring and genuine good will, and so on. I think Tolstoy writes about him with a more disdainful tone earlier on in the book and then grows to like him because he probably did the same thing with himself.
As I sat in my couch facing a different direction today, getting a much needed new perspective, I received a bit of inspiration from The Book. Cosmic sign? Perhaps. I was stressing -- crying, even (good thing I'd sat facing away from coffee girl, you see) -- about a personal emotional decision, and then Kutuzov gives his sort of pep talk to Andrei about patience and time being the answer.
"'I'll tell you what to do, and what I do. When in doubt, my dear fellow--' he paused, 'do nothing.' He spoke with deliberate emphasis." -- p. 896
I needed that.
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Lovin' the Tsar
now reading: War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy
"Pfuhl was one of those inordinately, unshakably self-assured men -- self-assured to the point of martyrdom, as only a German can be, because only a German bases his self-assurance on an abstract idea: science, that is, the supposed knowledge of absoute truth. A Frenchman's self-assurance stems from his belief that he is mentally and physically irresistibly fascinating to both men and women. An Englishman's self-assurance is founded on his being a citizen of the best organized state in the world and on the fact that, as an Englishman he always knows what to do, and that whatever he does as an Englishman is unquestionably correct. An Italian is self-assured because he is excitable and easily forgets himself and others. A Russian is self-assured simply because he knows nothing and does not want to know anything, since he does not believe in the possibility of knowing anything fully. But a German's self-assurance is the worst of all, more inflexible and repellent than any other, because he imagines that he knows the truth, science, which is his own invention, but which for him is absolute truth." - pp. 770-771
I wonder what, if anything, Tolstoy might have added if he had written 100 years later, or 50, about the a U.S. citizen's self-assurance? Perhaps nothing, but perhaps something. How would Mr. T's world view have been different even thirty years later? He was so observant. If he had written 50 years later, it would have been a time when the U.S. had become a major player in European war (namely, World War I). Man, I'd like to hear from him today.
I like the way he wryly analyzes the German's self-assurance. I frankly like the way he questions just about everything. I love his scene of the generals and important people who influence the tsar trying to outdo each other with their brilliant strategies; people latch on to their opinions creating factions, but most people just shift their allegiance to the trendiest theory, the guy who's got everyone's support at the time.
Rostov has come of age, and Pierre, despite the passage of time, is still just a bit lost, but he means so well. Natasha saw that really early on, too, so she must be destined to be with him! The latest freemason nonsense to take hold in his brain is the numerology assigning the number 666 to L'empereur Napoleon and Pierre's subsequent desperate attempt to make the numbers work for his name to assign himself a pivotal role in the Apocalypse revelation. Oh, Pierre. Le pauvre! He has to find meaning somewhere, in something, and why shouldn't it be Natasha, you know?
So I failed. I did not even come close to writing daily this week as I aimed to. Maybe next week. But Napoleon is pushing deep into Russia, and things are getting intense! When the Tsar blows back into town and gives his speech, throngs pack the square; they hang on his every word, or even pounce upon a scrap of food dropped by him from the balcony. And the people of the rich nobility party circuit are now rejecting France, the French language, etc., and anti-French fervor is sweeping Russia where French was the thing to know a few years earlier.
And so it goes, and so it goes...
"Pfuhl was one of those inordinately, unshakably self-assured men -- self-assured to the point of martyrdom, as only a German can be, because only a German bases his self-assurance on an abstract idea: science, that is, the supposed knowledge of absoute truth. A Frenchman's self-assurance stems from his belief that he is mentally and physically irresistibly fascinating to both men and women. An Englishman's self-assurance is founded on his being a citizen of the best organized state in the world and on the fact that, as an Englishman he always knows what to do, and that whatever he does as an Englishman is unquestionably correct. An Italian is self-assured because he is excitable and easily forgets himself and others. A Russian is self-assured simply because he knows nothing and does not want to know anything, since he does not believe in the possibility of knowing anything fully. But a German's self-assurance is the worst of all, more inflexible and repellent than any other, because he imagines that he knows the truth, science, which is his own invention, but which for him is absolute truth." - pp. 770-771
I wonder what, if anything, Tolstoy might have added if he had written 100 years later, or 50, about the a U.S. citizen's self-assurance? Perhaps nothing, but perhaps something. How would Mr. T's world view have been different even thirty years later? He was so observant. If he had written 50 years later, it would have been a time when the U.S. had become a major player in European war (namely, World War I). Man, I'd like to hear from him today.
I like the way he wryly analyzes the German's self-assurance. I frankly like the way he questions just about everything. I love his scene of the generals and important people who influence the tsar trying to outdo each other with their brilliant strategies; people latch on to their opinions creating factions, but most people just shift their allegiance to the trendiest theory, the guy who's got everyone's support at the time.
Rostov has come of age, and Pierre, despite the passage of time, is still just a bit lost, but he means so well. Natasha saw that really early on, too, so she must be destined to be with him! The latest freemason nonsense to take hold in his brain is the numerology assigning the number 666 to L'empereur Napoleon and Pierre's subsequent desperate attempt to make the numbers work for his name to assign himself a pivotal role in the Apocalypse revelation. Oh, Pierre. Le pauvre! He has to find meaning somewhere, in something, and why shouldn't it be Natasha, you know?
So I failed. I did not even come close to writing daily this week as I aimed to. Maybe next week. But Napoleon is pushing deep into Russia, and things are getting intense! When the Tsar blows back into town and gives his speech, throngs pack the square; they hang on his every word, or even pounce upon a scrap of food dropped by him from the balcony. And the people of the rich nobility party circuit are now rejecting France, the French language, etc., and anti-French fervor is sweeping Russia where French was the thing to know a few years earlier.
And so it goes, and so it goes...
Saturday, February 11, 2006
"A king is the slave of history."
now reading: War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy
The war is on again as Book Three begins. I love the first chapter of Book Three, Part One, which is entirely a philosophical musing on whether historical events, and any events, are fated to be. No act, no politician's idea, no emperor's mistake, no general's accomplishment is the cause, that elusive "cause" of a war, something that the historians nevertheless seek, Tolstoy suggests.
"We inevitably resort to fatalism to explain the irrational phenomena of history (that is to say, phenomena the reasonableness of which we do not understand)." -- p. 731
And isn't the temptation to fatalism a great one? I have been indulging in it a lot lately as I try to puzzle about my life and why I came to Korea, and why now, and why I stayed working for Borders as long as I did, and how I wouldn't have met the people I met and had the experiences I had if it had been any other way. So many decisions that I couldn't explain to myself at the time I made them led me to the place where I am. Who could blame a person for sometimes thinking it must have been meant to be this way? It just must have! Logically I should have done so many other things so many different ways!
Synchronicity is a very appealing doctrine, of which I have become more and more fond of late. When I was working in Chestnut Hill I turned around one night after picking up all of the books to be reshelved that had been strewn around the psych & social sciences sections, and suddenly another book had appeared in the middle of the floor. I swear no one had come by, no customer, not even an employee who could have dropped it. It quite literally came across my path and I picked it up. It was Deepak Chopra's then-new-in-hardcover The Spontaneous Fulfillment of Desire. I read the inside flap and the mild irritation of "where did this book come from?" fast became curiosity as I noted the book was about finding the meaning in the coincidences in one's life. I clearly had to take the book home and read it that night!
It was a good book. I've given the idea of trusting in so-called coincidences a lot of thought since then. It's not supernatural, per se, but it just strikes me as too metaphysical for the agnostic foundation I have laid for myself. But I find myself going with the flow so often in life, and that flow guides me and does not seem to come from any idea I generate within myself.
"Consciously man lives for himself, but unconsciously he serves as an instrument for the accomplishment of the historical, social ends of mankind." - p.732
Now, this is much like the Lewis Thomas - Noam Chomsky sort of notion that humans are working toward some greater end we can't see or possibly conceive of. When you watch the ants build the anthill, isn't each ant carrying its weight, pursuing its own individual struggle, although we from above see it as clearly a group effort producing an end result? If you haven't read Thomas' The Lives of a Cell, do so. It's brilliant. So the anthill functions like an organism, he says. And Chomsky, who is obviously just brilliant beyond brilliant at all times, has theorized about this with regards to humans' development and use of language, that we are furthering some end we don't, we can't know about.
"History, that is, the unconscious, common, swarm life of mankind uses every moment of the life of kings as an instrument for its own ends." - p. 732
I'm rather fond of this philosophy. It's hard to resist its pull. I had no idea I was going to come across it in Tolstoy. Yet, it seems that I'm not sure how much I agree with Tolstoy here. It's hard to wrap my mind around the inevitability of historical events; don't you want to think things like, say, September 11th could have been avoided?
He does say that, though. If Napoleon hadn't taken offense at Russia's demand of withdrawal, there'd have been no war. If there hadn't been a French Revolution, this war wouldn't have happened. If the sergeants had refused to serve a second term, no war.
"And so there was no single cause for the war, but it happened simply because it had to happen. Millions of men, renouncing human feelings and reason, had to move from west to east to slay their fellows, just as some centuries earlier hordes of men had moved from east to west slaying their fellows." - p. 731
Isn't it also inevitable, then, that we wonder why?
The war is on again as Book Three begins. I love the first chapter of Book Three, Part One, which is entirely a philosophical musing on whether historical events, and any events, are fated to be. No act, no politician's idea, no emperor's mistake, no general's accomplishment is the cause, that elusive "cause" of a war, something that the historians nevertheless seek, Tolstoy suggests.
"We inevitably resort to fatalism to explain the irrational phenomena of history (that is to say, phenomena the reasonableness of which we do not understand)." -- p. 731
And isn't the temptation to fatalism a great one? I have been indulging in it a lot lately as I try to puzzle about my life and why I came to Korea, and why now, and why I stayed working for Borders as long as I did, and how I wouldn't have met the people I met and had the experiences I had if it had been any other way. So many decisions that I couldn't explain to myself at the time I made them led me to the place where I am. Who could blame a person for sometimes thinking it must have been meant to be this way? It just must have! Logically I should have done so many other things so many different ways!
Synchronicity is a very appealing doctrine, of which I have become more and more fond of late. When I was working in Chestnut Hill I turned around one night after picking up all of the books to be reshelved that had been strewn around the psych & social sciences sections, and suddenly another book had appeared in the middle of the floor. I swear no one had come by, no customer, not even an employee who could have dropped it. It quite literally came across my path and I picked it up. It was Deepak Chopra's then-new-in-hardcover The Spontaneous Fulfillment of Desire. I read the inside flap and the mild irritation of "where did this book come from?" fast became curiosity as I noted the book was about finding the meaning in the coincidences in one's life. I clearly had to take the book home and read it that night!
It was a good book. I've given the idea of trusting in so-called coincidences a lot of thought since then. It's not supernatural, per se, but it just strikes me as too metaphysical for the agnostic foundation I have laid for myself. But I find myself going with the flow so often in life, and that flow guides me and does not seem to come from any idea I generate within myself.
"Consciously man lives for himself, but unconsciously he serves as an instrument for the accomplishment of the historical, social ends of mankind." - p.732
Now, this is much like the Lewis Thomas - Noam Chomsky sort of notion that humans are working toward some greater end we can't see or possibly conceive of. When you watch the ants build the anthill, isn't each ant carrying its weight, pursuing its own individual struggle, although we from above see it as clearly a group effort producing an end result? If you haven't read Thomas' The Lives of a Cell, do so. It's brilliant. So the anthill functions like an organism, he says. And Chomsky, who is obviously just brilliant beyond brilliant at all times, has theorized about this with regards to humans' development and use of language, that we are furthering some end we don't, we can't know about.
"History, that is, the unconscious, common, swarm life of mankind uses every moment of the life of kings as an instrument for its own ends." - p. 732
I'm rather fond of this philosophy. It's hard to resist its pull. I had no idea I was going to come across it in Tolstoy. Yet, it seems that I'm not sure how much I agree with Tolstoy here. It's hard to wrap my mind around the inevitability of historical events; don't you want to think things like, say, September 11th could have been avoided?
He does say that, though. If Napoleon hadn't taken offense at Russia's demand of withdrawal, there'd have been no war. If there hadn't been a French Revolution, this war wouldn't have happened. If the sergeants had refused to serve a second term, no war.
"And so there was no single cause for the war, but it happened simply because it had to happen. Millions of men, renouncing human feelings and reason, had to move from west to east to slay their fellows, just as some centuries earlier hordes of men had moved from east to west slaying their fellows." - p. 731
Isn't it also inevitable, then, that we wonder why?
Sunday, February 05, 2006
Enabling (the good kind)
now reading: War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy
All right, so I still haven't exactly figured out why Tolstoy was a revolutionary and Dostoevsky wasn't, and it's been how long since Michael's comment? (I've been pretty crappy about posting to this blog.) But I offer you this:
1. Coretta Scott King and Betty Friedan have died. What icons! What amazing pillars of womanly strength! or strong womanhood! or something. What made them revolutionary?
2. This weekend I attended a workshop with Amnesty International Korea (I have joined the "foreigners chapter"). At one point we discussed "activism." I should say that they discussed, and I followed along through the help of my able interpreter, Eun Mi/Joanne, who is the leader of my foreigners' group and my new favorite friend. Anyway, it was hard for them to come up with an exact translation in Korean, so they were talking about the meaning of the word. It was summarized to me thus: "Not activity itself but the power to enable activity."
And so it is, I think, with the revolutionaries. I haven't actually bought into the Dostoevsky-wasn't-a-revolutionary thing, but I'm just putting that out there in general. And you know, Mr. T really did have a lot to say about Christianity and he never relegated women to some random 'other' status, that I can see. I would love to have beers with the guy.
Pierre is so random. He just crops up in the book every once in a while and we get to check in and see if he's feeling depressed, and if so what he will do about it: tie a policeman to a bear, or join the freemasons? In the mid-600s (pages) depression seems to set in thanks to his buddy Andrei falling in love with Natasha. Now, I had been relating to Natasha's and Andrei's strong pull toward each other, until I started getting a sense of foreboding and began delighting in Sonya and Nikolai's love instead. And sure enough, Natasha has gone and locked her eyes on yet another man, just when you thought Andrei was supposed to be her one and only. He still might be, for all I know, but she has sent the letter to his sister so she may have done herself in. I wanted to shout Girlfriend! ALWAYS reread your letter/e-mail and see if you really want to send it at this time! I, the passionate letter-writer, stand by that statement.
And now I'm on page 706 and Anatol and his friends are about to whisk her off into god-knows-what fate.
So, this is the thing about War and Peace. Or perhaps A, not THE thing. Tolstoy has brought these people into my life. I've been reading approximately 700 pages for approximately eight weeks and I do feel like I have spent that time getting to know these people. And you know, you can get to find out rather a lot about a person in eight weeks or so.
This seems to be Tolstoy's magic, as so many have pointed out: his realism, his understanding of the human condition. I don't really recall this dawning on me when I read Anna K years ago but I should have, especially when Patty had us writing essays analyzing it through the prism of M. Scott Peck's The Road Less Travelled. I kind of miss my little BGHS maverick new-age English department. It was so very Arizona.
Mr. T just peppers his book with these surprisingly astute analyses of people's thoughts, like: "'I'm at work, you see,' he added, pointing to the manuscript with the air of those unhappy people who regard their work as a means of salvation from the adversities of life." - p. 573 I also love it when he has an eccentric character repeat a phrase, as "Uncle" does during and after the hunt with "a fair field and a clear course," and Mr. T writes, "'I knew you wouldn't be able to resist--good thing you came out! Fair field, clear course!" (This was his favorite expression.)" - p. 600
Tolstoy really has the uncanny ability to make you think life is great and that we're all in it together, and also he kind of makes you wish you were alive at the time/place he's writing about.
Then again, I am in the 'peace' stretch...
All right, so I still haven't exactly figured out why Tolstoy was a revolutionary and Dostoevsky wasn't, and it's been how long since Michael's comment? (I've been pretty crappy about posting to this blog.) But I offer you this:
1. Coretta Scott King and Betty Friedan have died. What icons! What amazing pillars of womanly strength! or strong womanhood! or something. What made them revolutionary?
2. This weekend I attended a workshop with Amnesty International Korea (I have joined the "foreigners chapter"). At one point we discussed "activism." I should say that they discussed, and I followed along through the help of my able interpreter, Eun Mi/Joanne, who is the leader of my foreigners' group and my new favorite friend. Anyway, it was hard for them to come up with an exact translation in Korean, so they were talking about the meaning of the word. It was summarized to me thus: "Not activity itself but the power to enable activity."
And so it is, I think, with the revolutionaries. I haven't actually bought into the Dostoevsky-wasn't-a-revolutionary thing, but I'm just putting that out there in general. And you know, Mr. T really did have a lot to say about Christianity and he never relegated women to some random 'other' status, that I can see. I would love to have beers with the guy.
Pierre is so random. He just crops up in the book every once in a while and we get to check in and see if he's feeling depressed, and if so what he will do about it: tie a policeman to a bear, or join the freemasons? In the mid-600s (pages) depression seems to set in thanks to his buddy Andrei falling in love with Natasha. Now, I had been relating to Natasha's and Andrei's strong pull toward each other, until I started getting a sense of foreboding and began delighting in Sonya and Nikolai's love instead. And sure enough, Natasha has gone and locked her eyes on yet another man, just when you thought Andrei was supposed to be her one and only. He still might be, for all I know, but she has sent the letter to his sister so she may have done herself in. I wanted to shout Girlfriend! ALWAYS reread your letter/e-mail and see if you really want to send it at this time! I, the passionate letter-writer, stand by that statement.
And now I'm on page 706 and Anatol and his friends are about to whisk her off into god-knows-what fate.
So, this is the thing about War and Peace. Or perhaps A, not THE thing. Tolstoy has brought these people into my life. I've been reading approximately 700 pages for approximately eight weeks and I do feel like I have spent that time getting to know these people. And you know, you can get to find out rather a lot about a person in eight weeks or so.
This seems to be Tolstoy's magic, as so many have pointed out: his realism, his understanding of the human condition. I don't really recall this dawning on me when I read Anna K years ago but I should have, especially when Patty had us writing essays analyzing it through the prism of M. Scott Peck's The Road Less Travelled. I kind of miss my little BGHS maverick new-age English department. It was so very Arizona.
Mr. T just peppers his book with these surprisingly astute analyses of people's thoughts, like: "'I'm at work, you see,' he added, pointing to the manuscript with the air of those unhappy people who regard their work as a means of salvation from the adversities of life." - p. 573 I also love it when he has an eccentric character repeat a phrase, as "Uncle" does during and after the hunt with "a fair field and a clear course," and Mr. T writes, "'I knew you wouldn't be able to resist--good thing you came out! Fair field, clear course!" (This was his favorite expression.)" - p. 600
Tolstoy really has the uncanny ability to make you think life is great and that we're all in it together, and also he kind of makes you wish you were alive at the time/place he's writing about.
Then again, I am in the 'peace' stretch...
Sunday, January 29, 2006
Why we love Tolstoy
now reading: War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy
"The Bible legend tells us that the absence of toil -- idleness -- was a condition of the first man's state of bliss before the Fall. This love of idleness has remained the same in fallen man, but the curse still lies heavy on the human race, not only because we have to earn our bread in the sweat of our brow, but because our moral nature is such that we are unable to be idle and at peace. A secret voice tells us that we ought to feel guilty when we are idle. If man could find a state in which though idle he could feel that he was of some use and was fulfilling his duty, he would have discovered one of the elements of primeval bliss. And such a state of obligatory and irreproachable idleness is enjoyed by a whole class -- the military. It is just this obligatory and irreproachable idleness that has always constituted the chief attraction of military service." --p. 590
I am steadily progressing, now in Part Four of Book II. Slow and steady wins the race. I have lately realized that reading War and Peace really is a major life goal to be checked off my list. I mean, I have used that as the definitive thing-I-need-to-get-around-to-doing for so long that I wonder what will possibly replace it.
So, Natasha and Andrei. I'm not sure how I feel about this. I think Mr. T is trying to drop some hints that the relationship is destined for tragedy. At any rate, they are so ridiculously in love that as I sit in IKEA Cafe -- it's just a cafe, minus the IKEA furniture store -- across the street from work sipping my cappuccino and reading my daily dose of W & P, I get all warm and fuzzy and squishy-like feeling just thinking about it.
Pierre and his Freemasonry are a little wacky. Pierre is just lost. I'm not sure what to make of him. I do, however, think Mr. T is sassy about religion and a little subversive, but in a matter-of-fact way so people don't see him as confrontational and antagonistic. I adopt that approach sometimes, but not as well as him, methinks.
Rostov's gambling nightmare was painful, truly painful, to read. I know what it's like to have such nightmarish debts that some kind soul such as your parent graciously -- too graciously --bails you out of. You can only hope to make yourself worthy in the future. I also know what it's like to watch someone have that psychological power over you. It reminded me of Yvonne or something. Ahhh, my crazy past.
So Michael has posed some tantalizing and hard questions. I wish he would also post some *answers* to this blog--hint, hint. Well, now, how does one come to be called revolutionary? Even people who fight, or who are radical, aren't always revolutionary. Revolution implies turning the known world on its head, eh.
I think this requires some further discussion and thought. I shall get back to it. First, to think about Tolstoy v Dostoevsky for a minute. I think they're both great. I also think that Tolstoy has somehow cemented his place as "the most important," but I'm not sure exactly why that is. The sheer length of his tomes? I myself am a huge fan of Dostoevsky: Crime and Punishment and Notes from Underground ... phenomenal stuff.
This requires contemplation. Contemplate, I shall, but my time is short tonight. I'll try to post some revolutionary Russian author thoughts in (I hope) the next day or two.
"The Bible legend tells us that the absence of toil -- idleness -- was a condition of the first man's state of bliss before the Fall. This love of idleness has remained the same in fallen man, but the curse still lies heavy on the human race, not only because we have to earn our bread in the sweat of our brow, but because our moral nature is such that we are unable to be idle and at peace. A secret voice tells us that we ought to feel guilty when we are idle. If man could find a state in which though idle he could feel that he was of some use and was fulfilling his duty, he would have discovered one of the elements of primeval bliss. And such a state of obligatory and irreproachable idleness is enjoyed by a whole class -- the military. It is just this obligatory and irreproachable idleness that has always constituted the chief attraction of military service." --p. 590
I am steadily progressing, now in Part Four of Book II. Slow and steady wins the race. I have lately realized that reading War and Peace really is a major life goal to be checked off my list. I mean, I have used that as the definitive thing-I-need-to-get-around-to-doing for so long that I wonder what will possibly replace it.
So, Natasha and Andrei. I'm not sure how I feel about this. I think Mr. T is trying to drop some hints that the relationship is destined for tragedy. At any rate, they are so ridiculously in love that as I sit in IKEA Cafe -- it's just a cafe, minus the IKEA furniture store -- across the street from work sipping my cappuccino and reading my daily dose of W & P, I get all warm and fuzzy and squishy-like feeling just thinking about it.
Pierre and his Freemasonry are a little wacky. Pierre is just lost. I'm not sure what to make of him. I do, however, think Mr. T is sassy about religion and a little subversive, but in a matter-of-fact way so people don't see him as confrontational and antagonistic. I adopt that approach sometimes, but not as well as him, methinks.
Rostov's gambling nightmare was painful, truly painful, to read. I know what it's like to have such nightmarish debts that some kind soul such as your parent graciously -- too graciously --bails you out of. You can only hope to make yourself worthy in the future. I also know what it's like to watch someone have that psychological power over you. It reminded me of Yvonne or something. Ahhh, my crazy past.
So Michael has posed some tantalizing and hard questions. I wish he would also post some *answers* to this blog--hint, hint. Well, now, how does one come to be called revolutionary? Even people who fight, or who are radical, aren't always revolutionary. Revolution implies turning the known world on its head, eh.
I think this requires some further discussion and thought. I shall get back to it. First, to think about Tolstoy v Dostoevsky for a minute. I think they're both great. I also think that Tolstoy has somehow cemented his place as "the most important," but I'm not sure exactly why that is. The sheer length of his tomes? I myself am a huge fan of Dostoevsky: Crime and Punishment and Notes from Underground ... phenomenal stuff.
This requires contemplation. Contemplate, I shall, but my time is short tonight. I'll try to post some revolutionary Russian author thoughts in (I hope) the next day or two.
Monday, January 16, 2006
"Quelle terrible chose que la guerre!"
now reading: War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy
It makes a person think:
In War and Peace, the troops are battling. Characters we know are getting wounded, and Napoleon has ridden into the scene. Those who sit at home are in agony, awaiting news of their loved one, their beloved Nikolushka or whatever other soldier.
Sometimes it is a strange thing to sit halfway around the world from all that you know.
Today I read:
"Instead of the new life which he had hoped to lead, he was still living the old one, only in different surroundings." --p. 459
I have found it interesting that Napoleon's dramatic entrance into the scene presents him in a pretty good light, and that (spoiler alert!) (if it can count as a spoiler only 1/4 of the way through the book!) the first character we really know and care about who dies doesn't even die in battle.
Or is life the battle, and that's the point?
I'm also aware that I am possibly the only person reading the book -- even the initial slew of people who said they were interested have almost all bailed -- but I like to think a lot of you are reading this blog anyway, just for the hell of it.
I hope to be able to post something more insightful soon. It's been a rough couple of weeks. But I have started reading around 30 pages a day. I now take W & P with me to the coffee shop across from work every day on my afternoon break. It's a wonderful ritual.
I must also confess that I took another pause from reading it over the weekend because the universe delivered Bill Bryson's A Walk in the Woods into my hands and it in turn delivered to me some cosmic signs and the synchronicity of it all is unbelievable.
Come on, y'all. A little Tolstoy never hurt anybody... *smile*
It makes a person think:
In War and Peace, the troops are battling. Characters we know are getting wounded, and Napoleon has ridden into the scene. Those who sit at home are in agony, awaiting news of their loved one, their beloved Nikolushka or whatever other soldier.
Sometimes it is a strange thing to sit halfway around the world from all that you know.
Today I read:
"Instead of the new life which he had hoped to lead, he was still living the old one, only in different surroundings." --p. 459
I have found it interesting that Napoleon's dramatic entrance into the scene presents him in a pretty good light, and that (spoiler alert!) (if it can count as a spoiler only 1/4 of the way through the book!) the first character we really know and care about who dies doesn't even die in battle.
Or is life the battle, and that's the point?
I'm also aware that I am possibly the only person reading the book -- even the initial slew of people who said they were interested have almost all bailed -- but I like to think a lot of you are reading this blog anyway, just for the hell of it.
I hope to be able to post something more insightful soon. It's been a rough couple of weeks. But I have started reading around 30 pages a day. I now take W & P with me to the coffee shop across from work every day on my afternoon break. It's a wonderful ritual.
I must also confess that I took another pause from reading it over the weekend because the universe delivered Bill Bryson's A Walk in the Woods into my hands and it in turn delivered to me some cosmic signs and the synchronicity of it all is unbelievable.
Come on, y'all. A little Tolstoy never hurt anybody... *smile*
Sunday, January 08, 2006
Hibernation
now reading: War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy
I told you I would spend the entire winter reading this book. Now, I did have my unfortunate illness in December as well as taking my Christmas pause to read Dickens, but still. I'm pathetic. I'm on page two hundred something.
Sometimes people on the subway look at me reading it but unlike in the English-speaking world where I would secretly expect them be impressed (ha) I wonder if they know what it is or just wonder what the big book is. Then again, people stare at us "wei-guk" (foreigners) all the time even if we're not holding a 2,000 page novel in one hand and clinging to the hanging-hold-on-to-me-thingy with the other.
I'm reading about Prince Andrei running around with Prince Bagration's or whatever his name is troops after Napoleon was like, truce? Are you kidding?
I think Tolstoy was super sarcastic and would have been a fun guy to hang out with.
I love sarcasm. There is a distinct lack of it here in the R.O.K.
That's all right. Now that I've bought my new (to me, but really used) computer I plan to hibernate in my room the rest of my time in Korea anyway. <---slight exaggeration
Except if I was supposed to eat a lot to pack on some excess body fat before going into hibernation then I seriously failed in that regard.
I told you I would spend the entire winter reading this book. Now, I did have my unfortunate illness in December as well as taking my Christmas pause to read Dickens, but still. I'm pathetic. I'm on page two hundred something.
Sometimes people on the subway look at me reading it but unlike in the English-speaking world where I would secretly expect them be impressed (ha) I wonder if they know what it is or just wonder what the big book is. Then again, people stare at us "wei-guk" (foreigners) all the time even if we're not holding a 2,000 page novel in one hand and clinging to the hanging-hold-on-to-me-thingy with the other.
I'm reading about Prince Andrei running around with Prince Bagration's or whatever his name is troops after Napoleon was like, truce? Are you kidding?
I think Tolstoy was super sarcastic and would have been a fun guy to hang out with.
I love sarcasm. There is a distinct lack of it here in the R.O.K.
That's all right. Now that I've bought my new (to me, but really used) computer I plan to hibernate in my room the rest of my time in Korea anyway. <---slight exaggeration
Except if I was supposed to eat a lot to pack on some excess body fat before going into hibernation then I seriously failed in that regard.
Sunday, January 01, 2006
"If I were Tsar, I would never wage war..."
now reading: War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy
Come on, admit it: you want to make a New Year's resolution to read War and Peace! It will make you feel so accomplished!
I've been reading over the past few days the battle on the Danube, back and forth across the bridge, with Rostov trying to find his courage under fire and various commanders and officials doing various commander- and official-like things.
Mike asks if Koreans talk/discuss/care about Bush and U.S. foreign policy. I'm not sure about the caring, but there is occasional talk. The thing is, I'm not really in a situation where I get to talk much about such things at all. Most of my discussions about the man Dubya are with other foreigners: my co-workers at school (mostly Canadian) and my new American friends, one of whom is in the military, and so forth. I had a great discussion once, with the American's Korean friend's work club guys, over raw fish in Pusan, about U.S.-Korean policy and even "the North." That was largely my American friend and me doing the talking, with participation from two out of the three Koreans present.
At school, in my class of Level Ten 11-year olds, one of the oral test questions was "What do you think of George W. Bush?" Every single one answered, "I think he is bad." Why? "Because he has killed many Iraqi people." (Well, I should say, those who could get the tense right said that. I was more likely to get, "He kill Iraq people." I'm not overly fond of my Level Ten class, by the way. They don't like to put forth a lot of effort.) Then again, a few questions later on the test came, "What do you think of the United States?" The usual responses were, "I think it is very good." Why? "Because it is very beautiful" or "because it is big and rich." But one boy, one of the trio of little punks who make me miserable, said, "I think it is bad." Why? "Because there are a lot of gays." I was shocked and awed.
My impression overall is that the Iraq war left a bad taste in the mouth here as it did most places, but none of my co-workers really say much, nor do they respond to my sardonic comments about my so-called leader. There were definitely protests against Bush and seriously beefed up security outside the embassy in Seoul when Dubya blew through Asia and came here to the APEC summit the other month.
Here are my further impressions: the U.S. military is here in large numbers, most Korean adults desire peaceful reunification with "the North," the propaganda machine driven by the U.S. is in full force about what a threat North Korea is, and the generation of current adolescents is liable to forget North Korea even exists as they are completely distracted by their cell phones and computer gaming. In my level 13 class of 10- to 13-year-olds, one of the oral test questions was, "Should South Korea and North Korea be one country? Why or why not?" They mostly said no. "Because their leader is a very bad dictator." Not a lot of complex analysis of the situation. I heard that a lot of younger people (mostly who weren't born during the war, I'd wager) don't want to reunite because the North is so poor and the South would have to pay for everything. Interesting, since some call South Korea the "welfare queen of U.S. economic aid."
So, I've digressed pretty far from War and Peace, here. But I did find this interesting in what I read today, as Prince Andrei delivers the news to the Austrian emperor and war minister about their small victory:
"It will be as I said in the beginning of the campaign: the matter will not be settled by your skirmishes at Durenstein; as a rule things are settled not by gunpowder, but by those who invented it," said Bilibin. -- p. 200
We fight our wars, and then some great peace accord is signed. Why not just talk peace to begin with?
Come on, admit it: you want to make a New Year's resolution to read War and Peace! It will make you feel so accomplished!
I've been reading over the past few days the battle on the Danube, back and forth across the bridge, with Rostov trying to find his courage under fire and various commanders and officials doing various commander- and official-like things.
Mike asks if Koreans talk/discuss/care about Bush and U.S. foreign policy. I'm not sure about the caring, but there is occasional talk. The thing is, I'm not really in a situation where I get to talk much about such things at all. Most of my discussions about the man Dubya are with other foreigners: my co-workers at school (mostly Canadian) and my new American friends, one of whom is in the military, and so forth. I had a great discussion once, with the American's Korean friend's work club guys, over raw fish in Pusan, about U.S.-Korean policy and even "the North." That was largely my American friend and me doing the talking, with participation from two out of the three Koreans present.
At school, in my class of Level Ten 11-year olds, one of the oral test questions was "What do you think of George W. Bush?" Every single one answered, "I think he is bad." Why? "Because he has killed many Iraqi people." (Well, I should say, those who could get the tense right said that. I was more likely to get, "He kill Iraq people." I'm not overly fond of my Level Ten class, by the way. They don't like to put forth a lot of effort.) Then again, a few questions later on the test came, "What do you think of the United States?" The usual responses were, "I think it is very good." Why? "Because it is very beautiful" or "because it is big and rich." But one boy, one of the trio of little punks who make me miserable, said, "I think it is bad." Why? "Because there are a lot of gays." I was shocked and awed.
My impression overall is that the Iraq war left a bad taste in the mouth here as it did most places, but none of my co-workers really say much, nor do they respond to my sardonic comments about my so-called leader. There were definitely protests against Bush and seriously beefed up security outside the embassy in Seoul when Dubya blew through Asia and came here to the APEC summit the other month.
Here are my further impressions: the U.S. military is here in large numbers, most Korean adults desire peaceful reunification with "the North," the propaganda machine driven by the U.S. is in full force about what a threat North Korea is, and the generation of current adolescents is liable to forget North Korea even exists as they are completely distracted by their cell phones and computer gaming. In my level 13 class of 10- to 13-year-olds, one of the oral test questions was, "Should South Korea and North Korea be one country? Why or why not?" They mostly said no. "Because their leader is a very bad dictator." Not a lot of complex analysis of the situation. I heard that a lot of younger people (mostly who weren't born during the war, I'd wager) don't want to reunite because the North is so poor and the South would have to pay for everything. Interesting, since some call South Korea the "welfare queen of U.S. economic aid."
So, I've digressed pretty far from War and Peace, here. But I did find this interesting in what I read today, as Prince Andrei delivers the news to the Austrian emperor and war minister about their small victory:
"It will be as I said in the beginning of the campaign: the matter will not be settled by your skirmishes at Durenstein; as a rule things are settled not by gunpowder, but by those who invented it," said Bilibin. -- p. 200
We fight our wars, and then some great peace accord is signed. Why not just talk peace to begin with?
Sunday, December 18, 2005
Emperors
now reading: War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy
"And why the devil are we going to fight Bonaparte?" asked Shinshin...
The colonel...took offense at Shinshin's remark.
"It is for the reason, my dear sir...that he cannot view with indifference the danger threatening Russia...the safety of the Empire, its dignity, and the sanctity of its alliances...and the desire, which constitutes the Sovereign's sole and irrevocable aim: to establish peace in Europe on a firm foundation, has now brought him to the decision to dispatch part of the army across the frontier, thereby implementing new endeavors toward the achievement of this purpose." ...
"Do you know the old saying: 'Yeroma, Yeroma, you'd better stay home, the fences you mend should be your own'?" inquired Shinshin, furrowing his brow and smiling. "That fits us perfectly. Why, even Suvorov was beaten all hollow, and where will we find a Suvorov today? I ask you--" he said, continually shifting from Russian to French.
"We must fight to the last drop of blood," said the colonel, pounding on the table, "and die for our Emperor, then all will be well. And reason as little as possible..." -----pp.96-97
So many of the men are marching off to war, leaving their ladies and girlfriends and pregnant princesses behind. Some disagree, but the manifesto has been written and they set forth. In this book, as in real life, a lot of aimless young men turn to war as a vocation, not knowing quite what else to do.
I read an interesting comment about that shortly after September 11th. Young men, let's say ages 17-25, are often at the peak of their restlessness, and lest it turn into recklessness or worse, many societies require something of the young men right around that age. For example, mandatory military service. Or, I thought, for another example, Mormons send the boys off to serve missions for two years when they turn 19. It's almost as if you get them through that roughest spot and they might just turn into fine human beings. Otherwise, the temptation to turn to things like gangs or suicide bombing looms large. I found that commentary fascinating, and the dinner debate quoted above reminded me of it.
As for the comparisons of that quote to our current war, they go without saying.
Napoleon and Russia are both convinced the peace of Europe is at stake and they alone must save it, except not really "alone," because there are the hundreds of thousands of soldiers sent to make war to attain this peace.
Meanwhile, Natasha's got her eye on Pierre as he ambles into the Count's fortune, much to the dismay of most of this little circle of upper crust. Will he steal her heart away from Boris? She's a charming little character. So is Marya, who I think is in love with Julie and that's why she's so lackadaisical about marriage. I was once considering writing a thesis (well, for starters, getting a master's in English, obviously, which I still might do, who knows? anyway, the thesis--->) on lesbian relationships in 19th-century literature and how they relate to notions of revolution and freedom. This might just be some more material. We shall see.
I didn't have much time to read this week at all either, but this book really goes quickly. If I ever sit down to read more than 10 minutes at a time, and maybe every day instead of once or twice a week, I might not have to take the whole winter to read it!
"And why the devil are we going to fight Bonaparte?" asked Shinshin...
The colonel...took offense at Shinshin's remark.
"It is for the reason, my dear sir...that he cannot view with indifference the danger threatening Russia...the safety of the Empire, its dignity, and the sanctity of its alliances...and the desire, which constitutes the Sovereign's sole and irrevocable aim: to establish peace in Europe on a firm foundation, has now brought him to the decision to dispatch part of the army across the frontier, thereby implementing new endeavors toward the achievement of this purpose." ...
"Do you know the old saying: 'Yeroma, Yeroma, you'd better stay home, the fences you mend should be your own'?" inquired Shinshin, furrowing his brow and smiling. "That fits us perfectly. Why, even Suvorov was beaten all hollow, and where will we find a Suvorov today? I ask you--" he said, continually shifting from Russian to French.
"We must fight to the last drop of blood," said the colonel, pounding on the table, "and die for our Emperor, then all will be well. And reason as little as possible..." -----pp.96-97
So many of the men are marching off to war, leaving their ladies and girlfriends and pregnant princesses behind. Some disagree, but the manifesto has been written and they set forth. In this book, as in real life, a lot of aimless young men turn to war as a vocation, not knowing quite what else to do.
I read an interesting comment about that shortly after September 11th. Young men, let's say ages 17-25, are often at the peak of their restlessness, and lest it turn into recklessness or worse, many societies require something of the young men right around that age. For example, mandatory military service. Or, I thought, for another example, Mormons send the boys off to serve missions for two years when they turn 19. It's almost as if you get them through that roughest spot and they might just turn into fine human beings. Otherwise, the temptation to turn to things like gangs or suicide bombing looms large. I found that commentary fascinating, and the dinner debate quoted above reminded me of it.
As for the comparisons of that quote to our current war, they go without saying.
Napoleon and Russia are both convinced the peace of Europe is at stake and they alone must save it, except not really "alone," because there are the hundreds of thousands of soldiers sent to make war to attain this peace.
Meanwhile, Natasha's got her eye on Pierre as he ambles into the Count's fortune, much to the dismay of most of this little circle of upper crust. Will he steal her heart away from Boris? She's a charming little character. So is Marya, who I think is in love with Julie and that's why she's so lackadaisical about marriage. I was once considering writing a thesis (well, for starters, getting a master's in English, obviously, which I still might do, who knows? anyway, the thesis--->) on lesbian relationships in 19th-century literature and how they relate to notions of revolution and freedom. This might just be some more material. We shall see.
I didn't have much time to read this week at all either, but this book really goes quickly. If I ever sit down to read more than 10 minutes at a time, and maybe every day instead of once or twice a week, I might not have to take the whole winter to read it!
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
A Slow Start...
now reading: War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy
OK, so I still haven't exactly reached page 100. I've had a lot going on. Last week was quite crazed and this week looks like more of the same, including a pre-school field trip and other madness at work.
What that means for you, dear reader, is that if you get your hands on a copy of The Book any time in the next few days and start in on it, you'll probably be ahead of me!
My general reflections so far are:
1. (from the duh! files) Tolstoy was a great writer.
2. I wish I could remember what I felt when I started reading Anna Karenina. My approach to that book was so entirely not spontaneous, or even particularly self-propelled. I had lived it vicariously through my sister when she read it two years before me (and told me the ending). When it came around to my turn in AP English (teachers in cabinets notwithstanding) I was pretty blase about the whole thing. And, I did in fact read the whole thing; that, I do remember: finishing it in the waning days of Christmas break, sprawled horizontally across my waterbed, my feet poking off one side and my chest and elbows on the other edge, so amazed with myself that I was completing my read of such a gargantuan book.
I also remember that I did like it on the whole, but I hated the part about the wheat. It went on and on about what's-his-name-that-started-with-an-L's farming collective, and in my mind that extends for at minimum a hundred pages, although when my boss read AK (along with Oprah) last summer he came through that part completely unscathed saying, "Linda, it was only, like, 30 pages." Grrr.
But enough about Anna K! I'm on to a different Anna! And some Pyotrs, and lots of princes and counts and countesses and princesses and Boris and Natasha and young men off to the Guards and Napoleon stamping around the world stage.
If you're not up to reading War and Peace with us, you could go for Nelson DeMille's The Charm School instead. That was in fact one of the many cosmic signs in spring of 2004 that pointed me toward W & P. I love Nelson DeMille anyway, and I read about one book a year of his. The Charm School is from the late 80s and concerns Soviet-U.S. spying and whatnot (a thriller) and in it they go to the War and Peace battlefield. Or, maybe there are many battlefields but this was the big one. Or something. Maybe when I finish W&P I can go back and reread TCS and know what I'm talking about.
OK, so I still haven't exactly reached page 100. I've had a lot going on. Last week was quite crazed and this week looks like more of the same, including a pre-school field trip and other madness at work.
What that means for you, dear reader, is that if you get your hands on a copy of The Book any time in the next few days and start in on it, you'll probably be ahead of me!
My general reflections so far are:
1. (from the duh! files) Tolstoy was a great writer.
2. I wish I could remember what I felt when I started reading Anna Karenina. My approach to that book was so entirely not spontaneous, or even particularly self-propelled. I had lived it vicariously through my sister when she read it two years before me (and told me the ending). When it came around to my turn in AP English (teachers in cabinets notwithstanding) I was pretty blase about the whole thing. And, I did in fact read the whole thing; that, I do remember: finishing it in the waning days of Christmas break, sprawled horizontally across my waterbed, my feet poking off one side and my chest and elbows on the other edge, so amazed with myself that I was completing my read of such a gargantuan book.
I also remember that I did like it on the whole, but I hated the part about the wheat. It went on and on about what's-his-name-that-started-with-an-L's farming collective, and in my mind that extends for at minimum a hundred pages, although when my boss read AK (along with Oprah) last summer he came through that part completely unscathed saying, "Linda, it was only, like, 30 pages." Grrr.
But enough about Anna K! I'm on to a different Anna! And some Pyotrs, and lots of princes and counts and countesses and princesses and Boris and Natasha and young men off to the Guards and Napoleon stamping around the world stage.
If you're not up to reading War and Peace with us, you could go for Nelson DeMille's The Charm School instead. That was in fact one of the many cosmic signs in spring of 2004 that pointed me toward W & P. I love Nelson DeMille anyway, and I read about one book a year of his. The Charm School is from the late 80s and concerns Soviet-U.S. spying and whatnot (a thriller) and in it they go to the War and Peace battlefield. Or, maybe there are many battlefields but this was the big one. Or something. Maybe when I finish W&P I can go back and reread TCS and know what I'm talking about.
Saturday, December 10, 2005
Let us begin...
Welcome, stalwart literary souls!
The edition of Tolstoy's tome I have is the big fat mass market Signet Classic.
ISBN: 0-451-52326-1
I chose this edition for many reasons, most of which I can't remember now. That was more than a year ago, after all. I do recall that I sat for quite a while comparing the first lines of each text (very important), skimming the introductions and reading the "notes on texts," and of paramount importance seeing what they did with the French used in the book and with Tolstoy's revisions when he himself corrected proofs for the second edition. My exhaustive research led me to buy this one. Bonus points that it was translated by a woman.
I am on page 86. But don't be alarmed! It starts on page 29. So I've read less than 60 pages this week. I think Sunday will be my main War and Peace day. I did not read the entire introduction because I don't want the ending spoiled. PLEASE KEEP THAT IN MIND when you comment about the book to me!
I am excited about reading it. Finally! Here's a quote I liked this week:
"'Now, this war is against Napoleon. If it were a war for freedom I could understand it, and I should be the first to go into the army...'
Prince Andrei merely shrugged his shoulders at Pierre's childish statement. He looked as though he found it impossible to reply to such foolishness; and, indeed, it would have been difficult to make any other response than the one Prince Andrei made to this naive remark.
'If everyone fought only for his own convictions, there would be no wars,' he said."
--pp. 52-53
The edition of Tolstoy's tome I have is the big fat mass market Signet Classic.
ISBN: 0-451-52326-1
I chose this edition for many reasons, most of which I can't remember now. That was more than a year ago, after all. I do recall that I sat for quite a while comparing the first lines of each text (very important), skimming the introductions and reading the "notes on texts," and of paramount importance seeing what they did with the French used in the book and with Tolstoy's revisions when he himself corrected proofs for the second edition. My exhaustive research led me to buy this one. Bonus points that it was translated by a woman.
I am on page 86. But don't be alarmed! It starts on page 29. So I've read less than 60 pages this week. I think Sunday will be my main War and Peace day. I did not read the entire introduction because I don't want the ending spoiled. PLEASE KEEP THAT IN MIND when you comment about the book to me!
I am excited about reading it. Finally! Here's a quote I liked this week:
"'Now, this war is against Napoleon. If it were a war for freedom I could understand it, and I should be the first to go into the army...'
Prince Andrei merely shrugged his shoulders at Pierre's childish statement. He looked as though he found it impossible to reply to such foolishness; and, indeed, it would have been difficult to make any other response than the one Prince Andrei made to this naive remark.
'If everyone fought only for his own convictions, there would be no wars,' he said."
--pp. 52-53
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)