Volume III
In Volume III, we see the war making its way more into domestic life: the division that Tolstoy has previously kept between them starts to fade. Pierre, in particular, becomes more involved in historical event than he is in earlier Volumes. He rides out to visit the troops and experience the war. Unlike Andrey and Nikolay, he is not fighting and makes an almost comic figure on the field, getting in the way of the soldiers. He quickly realizes the horror, which shocks him greatly: he is amazed that people can actually do this to each other and will come to their senses once they realize it is so bad. Tolstoy uses Pierre to show that the fashionableness of war only exists in the salons. Once out on the field there is little more than chaos and horror.
One of the most interested portions of Volume III is the abandonment and occupation of Moscow. Tolstoy shows this event in a few different ways. Kutuzov (the Russian commander)quickly recognizes there is no hope, based on the current state of the army in defending Moscow. They are weak after the moral victory at Borodino and must recuperate at their stores before engaging the enemy again.
Tolstoy agrees strongly with Kutuzov, citing him as the only man in the Russian army who, through extensive experience understands that the army will do what it will do and there is little effect that commanders can have on the outcome of the day---it comes down to the individual decisions of the soldiers. Really due to the esprit de corps. As a result, Kutuzov sees there is little hope in getting a tired army to defend the city: it is better to move on and regain strength.
In following the Rostov household, Tolstoy shows the domestic aspects of fleeing the city. There is the incredible organization required to pack up the rugs, dishes and other trappings of a high-class live in Moscow. The sequence highlights Count Rostov's inability in organization events that are life and death, versus organizing a dinner party. Natasha is the only one who can bring order and put both her mother and father in their places so work can be done, also pulling her out of her funk.
Of course, in Tolstoy's Russia, even the aristocrats feel for the soldiers---especially Natasha---and the Rostov's quickly unpack their cars to pack them back up with with wounded soldiers. This includes Princes Andrey, who up until this point was assumed to be dead. His presence leads to an emotional scene with Natasha, Mayra and Andrey later and his final perfect enlightenment (which he was unable to reach in his lifetime) at his death. (To comment briefly on this scene: Tolstoy had made clear Andrey's struggle with accepting love and enlightenment from god, which is embodied in Natasha in Volume II and is otherwise only reached in near death experiences. He reaches it the final time at his death. He never lives a happy and content life due to this lack of enlightenment. In contrast Pierre is able to find happiness through love and accept god. Tolstoy has it in for those who think critically of their faith.)
Pierre stays in Moscow during the evacuation, giving Tolstoy the opportunity to describe and more vividly show the state of Moscow beyond his beehive metaphor, which though very good, does not give the human sense of the city with so few in it. Pierre's wandering through the city (in search of Napoleon) gives a more stark view of the fires (previously seen only from a distance and in a rather romantic manner) and the lives lost due to them. Also we see a contrast in how the French troops treat the Russians when there are many of them versus how Pierre is treated by the single officer who takes up rooms with him: one-on-one, they can be nice, congenial and understanding; in a group-to-group setting, it is more violent, resulting in Pierre's arrest for protecting a woman.
We additionally see Napoleon's perspective on the empty city. Tolstoy revels in the idea the Napoleon waits and waits for the "welcoming" party to hand the city over to him (as other capitol cities have done) and no one very shows. The French then disappear into the city, with Napoleon losing control quickly. Tolstoy calls this loss of control inevitable---a result of moving soldiers into an empty city. The fire has a similar cause---a lack of normal inhabitants to prevent it.
I was fascinated by the empty city. As Tolstoy describes tens of thousands of people empty out, leaving the shell behind. The idea of wandering through an empty city with homes left as is or hastily packed up, then occupied (and looted) by soldiers is very cool.
I was a little put off by Andrey's death. I thought the use of it to bring together Mayra and Natasha was good. Their relationship was starting to become critical after Nikolay and Mayra's meeting. And Andrey's death allows further development of Nikolay and Mayra's relationship. Though it was a rather conspicuous plot point, it was a nice development.
Volume IV
Volume IV is a race to the end. Napoleon is bleeding as Tolstoy describes, comparing his ill-fated march back across Russia as a dying animal. The comparison is apt: Napoleon retreats down the toughest roads, carrying spoils from Moscow they can no longer bare and desperate for food and warmth. Tolstoy is able to capture this terror well in describing the cold and hunger. We see it not only from the more historical point of view, but also up-close-and-personal by following Pierre's detainment as a prisoner---which he finds almost pleasant and at very least freeing and enlightening due to interactions with Tolstoy's favorite class (the peasants)---and forced march with the retreating French soldiers.
It seems to me, and Tolstoy probably intends it that way, to be a rather bizarre proposition: marching your prisoners back across thousands of mile, when you don't have enough food or fuel for your own men and have ultimately lost the war you are fighting. But Tolstoy presses the idea that no rational decisions are being made (neither on the French nor Russian side) and the men involved in the retreat can hardly be controlled. If orders are given, they mean nothing---as every soldier knows exactly what they are doing: heading back home as quickly as possible.
On the home front, we see an equal rush to the end: final matches bing made and families being completely passed to the next generation---clearest with the death of Count Rostov and the return of Nikolay to take charge of the family. I was happy to see the decision of Nikolay to marry Mayra, though, Sonya, really troubled me, as her only selfish act backfired with the death of Andrey, leaving her pushed aside in this race to the end.
Pierre has yet another renaissance following his release and the death of his wife. Though I was not surprised by his joining with Natasha---I believe it was well telegraphed throughout the book---I was still a bit put off by the results. Natasha is portrayed as so pured---despite her brief dalliance with Anton---that even Pierre, with his rather regular redemptions, seems too rough for her. He seems like a poor alternative to Andrey who may have not been pure in soul, but was pure in deed, something Pierre, even with his redemptions was never. I suppose Natasha's influence was what he was missing to be pure in both ways It seems though, that to Tolstoy it is not the deeds that make the man, but some measure of his soul, which redeems him. (As a side note, I was surprised that Pierre did not give the Mason's white gloves to Natasha, as they were to represent just the type of love that Pierre found with her.)
Epilogue
The Epilogue looks seven years in the future to see hove the lives are for the couples formed in the final volume. Everyone is now contented with family lives. The most interesting, though, is Sonya. She is not given any sort of life and is hated by everyone for her constant acts of selflessness. It is almost a punishment that Tolstoy gives her, though I am unsure if it is due to her one act of selfishness or more a commentary on how a poor person raised with the rich is caught into a horrible position: no money for a dowry, yet too genteel to marry below her adoptive family's station.
The story with the family ends rather abruptly, with just the sense that life will go on as it has been described. The commentary in the back notes that it was rather unorthodox for the time, which I agree with---there was no closed cadence. Instead we are led into Tolstoy's argument about history for one final time.
I have come to agree at least partially with Tolstoy. History cannot be described exclusively through heroes. A command of a single man is not the whole story and despite everyone's best efforts events never go off just as planned because there are far too many individual decision makers (variables) involved in every event. Based on the decisions made up to a given point in history and the individuals involved there are no options (or very few). History is a constant contest between fate and free will, with neither winning out entirely.
It seems that the modern interpretation of history takes this more into account---the will of heroes is rarely put up as the reason; cause and effect is more closely examined. While it may not completely be the historical calculus Tolstoy is looking for, we are doing better at looking at the integral as opposed to the individual points.
Great book. A long read, but worth it.
8/10
