I read the unabridged version. Since I didn't read your version, I can't say but generally the unabridged is the best.
2007-03-16 16:33:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by redunicorn 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
With great deference to the septuagenarian who posted before me, I think Leo Tolstoy's "War and Peace" is over-rated. I read an unabridged version and I liked it very much, but if you're not a slavophile and worried that the book may be just a little too long for you, read an abridged version or watch the movie (I haven't seen it).
It's a great book, but requires a good knowledge of history and of Russin history in particular (depending on which translation you read, a good working knowledge of the French language can come in handy, too.)
I'd never try to discourage anyone from reading any great work of literature, but there's so much good stuff out there that I don't think you'll be best allocating your reading time by devoting a couple of weeks to this book--(the patronymics and Russian dimiunatives can be quite confusing for someone unfamiliar with the Russian language--I'm not, by the way.) And if you'd really like to read the book, as someone suggested, in the author's own words, you'd do best to read it in the original Russian.
If you're supposed to read it for class, do as the teacher suggests. If you've got another reason...well, "War and Peace" really isn't the must-read it once was. Tolstoy plays tricks with history (it's still a very good story) and he's written some far better stuff--try "The Death of Ivan Ilych" or "Anna Karenina"--they're both better novels in my opinion.
I've read "The Russians" as Hemingway puts it, and my favorite is Dostoyevski's "Crime and Punishment," but if you're dead set on reading some dense long, "hard" classic literature, I think you'd be best rewarded by slogging through James Joyce's "Ulysses." Nobody important will ever be impressed by what you've read but you. Enjoy.
2007-03-17 00:21:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by herr_flipowitz 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I've read the unabridged version which I got at 16, 3 or 4 times (I'm now 70) and think I'll read it again when I can put aside a week or two for a leisurelly read. I have something called the Inner Sanctum edition, which ahs nice clear print and very good paper. It's edited (introduction and notes — not abridgment — by Clifton Fadiman). It has a separate useful pamphlet with organized lists (by family and/or setting) of all the characters and a couple of maps. There is a comparison of Napoleon's invasion and retreat route with the same for Hitler's army in World War II. I recommend you try to get this edition in a used book store.
I've also seen the Hollywood film (twice), the BBC TV series, and a Russian film.
I first heard War and Peace being read, in Yiddish by my grandmother to my great grandmother who came from Russia as a refugee after the revolution and lived till 1949, when she died over 100 years old. She told me that she first read War and Peace in Russia as a girl on her father's estate in the Ukraine. She read it when it was first out and being serialized in magazines. Her father and mother had come from farther north in the area near the Pripet Marshes in Belarus and she remembered as a child hearing older people talking about remembering seeing Napoleon's army pass through and then retreat through their area when they were children, so this book is very close to my memories of that generation of my family.
2007-03-16 23:41:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by silvcslt 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
I guess it would depend on what you are reading for, study or pleasure? I've only read the unabridged version and I'd guess you aren't missing anything. Unless you are doing deep literary analysis I'd just stay clear of it altogether. Interesting characters and an absurdly drawn out boring plot isn't really a great formula for enjoyment.
2007-03-17 01:54:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by Kevin 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Read the abridged unless you want to read about tactical canon stratagies, geographic canon positioning stratagies, etc... probably 1/3 or 1/4 is monotonous and useless and very boring non-fiction.
Back then the books were written in the most complete way possible.
Herman Melville as well as Tolstoy commenly wrote like this. Their writing skills and language are skilled to the max! Paragraphs last 3 and 4 pages sometimes
2007-03-16 23:46:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by punk bitch piece of shit 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course it is better. There are abridged versions, golden books versions, comic book versions, but they arent War and Peace - just pale imitations. Spend the time to read it as it was meant to be read -- in the author's own words. It will be worth the effort.
2007-03-16 23:41:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by Persiphone_Hellecat 7
·
0⤊
0⤋