War and Peace are bad heroes. Brief description of the main characters of the novel War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy

The epic novel “War and Peace” is a grandiose work in its design, idea, and scale of the events depicted. There are a huge number of characters in it, and along with real historical figures, fictional ones coexist here, who nevertheless seem to us no less real. Their psychological authenticity is such that attempts often arose in these heroes created creative imagination writer using the method of realistic typification, to find the features of real people - prototypes of the heroes of the novel "War and Peace"..

In the works of realist writers, it is indeed not uncommon to find characters who have such prototypes. Let us consider in the article the question of whether it is possible to find them in individual characters in the novel “War and Peace”.

Prototypes of heroes hardly existed. Tolstoy himself more than once spoke sharply negatively about this issue. But nevertheless, his characters were so typical and lifelike, the degree of reliability of their depiction was so extraordinary that the writer’s contemporaries, and even readers of a later time, continued to wonder: had such people never existed in the world and the writer simply invented them. That is why Tolstoy had to explain himself on this matter in a separate article - “A few words about the book “War and Peace.” Here he once again emphasized that one should not look for prototypes of the heroes of the novel "War and Peace." It is this clearly expressed writer’s position that allows us to fairly accurately assess those “candidates” for their role that we know about.

Researchers of Tolstoy’s work have established that in depicting the characters in the novel, the writer proceeded from a kind of “questionnaire” information: he determined them by business abilities, by the nature of love relationships, by artistic tastes, etc. At the same time, the heroes were not taken in isolation, but were distributed among families: Rostov, Bolkonsky, Kuragin. Then, in the process of creating the novel, the characters of the characters became more defined, sometimes changing and becoming more precise. At the same time, the writer adhered to the principle of historical and psychological authenticity of each of the characters he drew.

This largely explains the choice of the main characters' surnames. Tolstoy deliberately used traditional surnames familiar to the nobility of that era, only slightly modifying them: this is how, for example, the surnames Drubetskoy appeared by analogy with Trubetskoy, Bolkonsky - Volkonsky, etc. All this prompted the writer’s contemporary readers to draw certain parallels. So one lady from the family of Prince Volkonsky turned to the writer with a question about Prince Andrei as a possible relative. This caused a fair objection from the writer, which is very important for us to understand whether the heroes of the novel “War and Peace” had prototypes.

And yet, attempts to connect Tolstoy’s heroes with certain individuals continued. Sometimes you can see in them traces of Tolstoy’s real idea, which he later abandoned for one reason or another. This happened with the image of an aristocrat, the owner of a fashionable St. Petersburg salon, maid of honor Anna Pavlovna Sherer. Her salon in the novel is a vivid expression of the anti-national essence of the aristocracy and high society, and Anna Pavlovna herself is the embodiment of stiffness, deceit, and false courtesy characteristic of this environment. But on original plan this character was supposed to play a completely different role, the heroine, who was called the maid of honor Annette D., seemed quite a sweet and pretty lady. It is likely that in this initial version Tolstoy imagined a real person - his aunt maid of honor Alexandra Andreevna Tolstoy, whose friendship he was proud of. This is how he writes about the supposed heroine of the novel in terms of work: “She was smart, mocking and sensitive and, if she was not positively truthful, she differed from the crowd of her kind in her truthfulness.” The initial version of the novel largely retains the features of the prototype in this heroine. This image was truly transformed into the final edition of the novel. dramatic changes, becoming its complete opposite.

Of course, other examples can be found that do not involve such a dramatic change. Everyone remembers the image of Denisov, whose very name is clearly intended to evoke an association with Denis Davydov, a participant in the Patriotic War of 1812, a hussar who, like the hero of the novel, fought in a partisan detachment. Here the similarity between the character and the prototype is quite obvious, although, of course, in this case we cannot talk about simple copying. Also indicative is the image of Marya Dmitrievna Akhrosimova, whose prototype is considered to be an influential and wealthy noble lady known in Moscow who lived on Povarskaya - Ofrosimova: the consonance of surnames here is quite obvious. By the way, there is a similar image in Griboedov’s comedy “Woe from Wit” - this is the formidable Moscow lady Khlestova, whom even Famusov is afraid of.

A number of similar examples could be continued further, but perhaps the most interesting from the point of view of the problem of prototypes is the story associated with the image of Tolstoy’s most beloved and dear heroine - Natasha Rostova. According to one version, her prototype could be a girl close to the Tolstoy family - Tatyana Bers, married Kuzminskaya. She subsequently wrote a book of memoirs, “My Life at Home and in Yasnaya Polyana”, in which she claimed that Tolstoy wrote Natasha from her, accordingly, she considered her mother to be the prototype of Countess Rostova, etc. There is several evidence from the writer that gives reason to consider such a version as possible. But still they do not give reason to say that the fate of T.A. Kuzminskaya and her character exactly corresponded to the life of his heroine. Perhaps it was only a question of portrait resemblance. Moreover, as researchers of the writer’s work have established, Tolstoy’s work on this image followed a completely different path.

It is known that at first this heroine appears in the drafts of the unfinished novel “The Decembrists,” which was supposed to tell about the return from exile of the old Decembrist Peter and his wife Natasha. Both of them, naturally, are already quite middle-aged people. So, when working on the image of Natasha Rostova from War and Peace, Tolstoy started from the final phase of the development of the character of the heroine: the Decembrist’s wife, who followed her husband to Siberia and shared all the hardships that befell him. It can hardly be assumed that a very young girl could serve as a prototype for such Natasha, although this does not exclude the possibility that the writer closely followed the life of his friend Tatyana. Rather, we can talk about the opposite effect. Perhaps, after the appearance of Tolstoy’s novel, Kuzminskaya was able to evaluate herself, her youth differently, and better understand her life. However, many of the images from Tolstoy’s novel could have had the same meaning for other people, and not only his contemporaries.

This is precisely the essence of creative writing - to find individual facts in life, on the basis of which types of people are created that are close and understandable to many. And the more perfect artistic creation, the deeper this connection can be. It is no coincidence that they so often try to find prototypes of the pinnacle works of literature, be it “War and Peace”, “Anna Karenina”, “Eugene Onegin”, “Fathers and Sons” or “The Brothers Karamazov”. But of course, none of the heroes of these classic works of Russian literature can be completely reduced to their possible prototypes, although identifying them makes it possible to better understand creative laboratory writer.

Alexander
ARKHANGELSKY

Heroes of War and Peace

We continue to publish chapters from the new textbook on Russian literature for the 10th grade

Character system

Like everything in the epic “War and Peace,” it is extremely complex and very simple at the same time.

It is complex because the composition of the book is multi-figured, dozens of plot lines, intertwining, form its dense artistic fabric. Simple - because all the heterogeneous heroes belonging to incompatible class, cultural, and property circles are clearly divided into several groups. And we find this division at all levels, in all parts of the epic. These are groups of heroes who are equally far from folk life, from the spontaneous movement of history, from the truth - or equally close to them.

Tolstoy's novel epic is permeated by the end-to-end idea that the unknowable and objective historical process is controlled directly by God; that choosing the right path both in private life and in great history a person can do this not with the help of a proud mind, but with the help of a sensitive heart. The one who guessed right, felt the mysterious course of history and the no less mysterious laws of everyday life, is wise and great, even if he is small in his social status. Anyone who boasts of his power over the nature of things, who selfishly imposes his personal interests on life, is petty, even if he is great in his social position. According to this strict opposition Tolstoy’s heroes are “distributed” into several types, into several groups.

Playmakers

Oh days - let's call them playmakers - busy only with chatting, arranging their personal affairs, serving their petty whims, their egocentric desires. And at any cost, regardless of the fate of other people. This is the lowest of all ranks in Tolstoy's hierarchy. The heroes belonging to him are always of the same type; the narrator demonstratively uses the same detail to characterize them.

The head of the capital's salon, Anna Pavlovna Sherer, appearing on the pages of War and Peace, each time with an unnatural smile moves from one circle to another and treats guests to an interesting visitor. She is confident that she shapes public opinion and influences the course of things (although she herself changes her beliefs precisely in response to fashion).

Diplomat Bilibin is convinced that it is they, diplomats, who control historical process(but in fact he is busy with idle talk: from one scene to another he collects wrinkles on his forehead and utters a pre-prepared sharp word).

Drubetsky's mother Anna Mikhailovna, who persistently promotes her son, accompanies all her conversations with a mournful smile. In Boris Drubetsky himself, as soon as he appears on the pages of the epic, the narrator always highlights one feature: his indifferent calm of an intelligent and proud careerist.

As soon as the narrator starts talking about the predatory Helen, he will certainly mention her luxurious shoulders and bust. And whenever Andrei Bolkonsky’s young wife, the little princess, appears, the narrator will pay attention to her raised lip with a mustache.

This monotony of narrative technique does not indicate the poverty of the artistic arsenal, but, on the contrary, the deliberate goal that the author sets for the narrator. Playmakers themselves are monotonous and unchanging; only their views change, the being remains the same. They don't develop. And the immobility of their images, the resemblance to death masks is precisely emphasized stylistically.

The only character in the epic who belongs to this “lower” group and, for all that, is endowed with a moving, lively character is Fyodor Dolokhov. “Semyonovsky officer, famous player and buster,” he is endowed with an extraordinary appearance - and this alone sets him apart from the crowd playmakers: “The lines... of the mouth were remarkably finely curved. In the middle, the upper lip energetically dropped onto the strong lower lip like a sharp wedge, and something like two smiles formed in the corners, one on each side; and all together, and especially in combination with a firm, insolent, intelligent look, made an impression such that it was impossible not to notice this face.”

Moreover, Dolokhov is languishing and bored in that pool worldly life that sucks in the rest burners. That’s why he indulges in all sorts of bad things, getting into scandalous stories (such as the plot with the bear and the policeman in the first part, for which Dolokhov was demoted to the rank and file). In the battle scenes, we witness Dolokhov's fearlessness, then we see how tenderly he treats his mother... But his fearlessness is aimless, Dolokhov's tenderness is an exception to his own rules. And the rules become hatred and contempt for people.

This is fully manifested in the episode with Pierre (having become Helen’s lover, Dolokhov provokes Bezukhov to a duel), and at the moment when Dolokhov helps Anatoly Kuragin prepare the kidnapping of Natasha. And especially in the card game scene: Fyodor cruelly and dishonestly beats Nikolai Rostov, vilely taking out on him his anger at Sonya, who refused Dolokhov.

Dolokhov's rebellion against the world (and this is also “peace”!) playmakers In the end, it turns out that he himself is wasting his life, throwing it into disarray. And this is especially offensive for the narrator to realize, who singles Dolokhov out from the crowd, as if giving him a chance to break out of the terrible circle.

And in the center of this circle, this funnel that sucks human souls, - the Kuragin family.

The main “ancestral” quality of the entire family is cold selfishness. It is inherent in his father, Prince Vasily, with his courtly self-awareness. It is not for nothing that for the first time the prince appears before the reader “in a courtly, embroidered uniform, in stockings, shoes, with the stars, with a bright expression on his flat face.” Prince Vasily himself does not calculate anything, does not plan ahead, one can say that instinct acts for him: when he tries to marry Anatole’s son to Princess Marya, and when he tries to deprive Pierre of his inheritance, and when, having suffered an involuntary defeat along the way, he imposes on Pierre his daughter Helen.

Helen, whose “unchanging smile” emphasizes the uniqueness and one-dimensionality of this heroine, is unable to change. It was as if she had been frozen for years in the same state: static deathly sculptural beauty. Kuragina also does not specifically plan anything, she also obeys almost animal instinct: bringing her husband closer and moving him away, having lovers and intending to convert to Catholicism, preparing the ground for divorce and starting two novels at once, one of which (either) must culminate in marriage.

External beauty replaces Helen's inner content. This characteristic also applies to her brother, Anatoly Kuragin. A tall, handsome man with “beautiful big eyes,” he is not gifted with intelligence (although not as stupid as his brother Hippolytus), but “but he also had the ability of calm and unchangeable confidence, precious for the world.” This confidence is akin to the instinct of profit that controls the souls of Prince Vasily and Helen. And although Anatole does not pursue personal gain, he hunts for pleasure with the same unquenchable passion - and with the same readiness to sacrifice any neighbor. This is what he does to Natasha Rostova, making her fall in love with him, preparing to take her away - and not thinking about her fate, about the fate of Andrei Bolkonsky, whom Natasha is going to marry...

Actually, the Kuragins play in the vain, “worldly” dimension of the “world” the same role that Napoleon plays in the “military” dimension: they personify secular indifference to good and evil. At their whim, the Kuragins draw the surrounding life into a terrible whirlpool. This family is like a pool. Having approached him at a dangerous distance, it is easy to die - only a miracle saves Pierre, Natasha, and Andrei Bolkonsky (who would certainly have challenged Anatole to a duel if not for the circumstances of the war).

Chiefs

To the first, lowest category of heroes - playmakers- in Tolstoy’s epic corresponds to the last, upper category of heroes - leaders . The method of depicting them is the same: the narrator draws attention to one single trait of the character’s character, behavior or appearance. And at every meeting of the reader with this hero, he stubbornly, almost insistently points out this trait.

Playmakers belong to the “world” in the worst of its meanings, nothing in history depends on them, they rotate in the emptiness of the salon. Chiefs inextricably linked with war (again in the bad sense of the word); they stand at the head of historical collisions, separated from mere mortals by an impenetrable veil of their own greatness. But if Kuragin really draw the surrounding life into the worldly whirlpool, then leaders of nations only think that involve humanity in the historical whirlwind. In fact, they are just toys of chance, tools in the invisible hands of Providence.

And here let's stop for a second to agree on one important rule. And once and for all. IN fiction You have already encountered and will encounter images of real historical figures more than once. In Tolstoy's epic, these are Alexander I, and Napoleon, and Barclay de Tolly, and Russian and French generals, and the Moscow Governor-General Rostopchin. But we should not, we have no right to confuse “real” historical figures with their conventional ones images that act in novels, stories, poems. And the Emperor, and Napoleon, and Rostopchin, and especially Barclay de Tolly, and other Tolstoy characters depicted in “War and Peace” are the same fictional heroes like Pierre Bezukhov, like Natasha Rostova or Anatol Kuragin.

They resemble real historical figures a little more than Fyodor Dolokhov resembles his prototype, reveler and daredevil R.I. Dolokhov, and Vasily Denisov - to the partisan poet Denis Vasilyevich Davydov. The external outline of their biographies can be reproduced in a literary work with scrupulous, scientific accuracy, but the internal content is put into them by the writer, invented in accordance with the picture of life that he creates in his work.

Only by mastering this iron and irrevocable rule can we move on.

So, discussing the lowest category of heroes in “War and Peace,” we came to the conclusion that it has its own “mass” (Anna Pavlovna Scherer or, for example, Berg), its own center (Kuragins) and its own periphery (Dolokhov). The highest level is organized and structured according to the same principle.

Chief of leaders, which means the most dangerous, the most deceitful of them is Napoleon.

In Tolstoy's epic there is two Napoleonic images. One lives in legend about the great commander, which is retold to each other by different characters and in which he appears either as a powerful genius or as an equally powerful villain. Not only visitors to Anna Pavlovna Scherer’s salon believe in this legend at different stages of their journey, but also Andrei Bolkonsky and Pierre Bezukhov. At first we see Napoleon through their eyes, we imagine him in the light of their life ideal.

And another image is a character acting on the pages of the epic and shown through the eyes of the narrator and the heroes who suddenly encounter him on the battlefields. For the first time, Napoleon as a character in War and Peace appears in the chapters dedicated to the Battle of Austerlitz; first the narrator describes him, then we see him from the point of view of Prince Andrei.

The wounded Bolkonsky, who only recently idolized leader of the peoples, notices on the face of Napoleon, bending over him, “a radiance of complacency and happiness.” Having just experienced a spiritual upheaval, he looks into the eyes of his former idol and thinks “about the insignificance of greatness, about the insignificance of life, the meaning of which no one could understand.” And “the hero himself seemed so petty to him, with this petty vanity and joy of victory, in comparison with that high, fair and kind sky that he saw and understood.”

And the narrator - both in Austerlitz's chapters, and in Tilsit's, and in Borodin's - invariably emphasizes the ordinariness and comic insignificance of the appearance of the man whom the whole world idolizes and hates. The “fat, short” figure, “with wide, thick shoulders and an involuntarily protruding belly and chest, had that representative, dignified appearance that forty-year-old people living in the hall have.”

IN novel in the image of Napoleon there is not a trace of the power that is contained in legendary his image. For Tolstoy, only one thing matters: Napoleon, who imagined himself as the engine of history, is in fact pathetic and especially insignificant. Impersonal fate (or the unknowable will of Providence) made him an instrument of the historical process, and he imagined himself to be the creator of his victories. The words from the historiosophical ending of the book refer to Napoleon: “For us, with the measure of good and bad given to us by Christ, there is nothing immeasurable. And there is no greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth.”

A smaller and worsened copy of Napoleon, a parody of him is the Moscow mayor Rostopchin. He fusses, fusses, hangs up posters, quarrels with Kutuzov, thinking that the fate of Muscovites, the fate of Russia, depends on his decisions. But the narrator sternly and unswervingly explains to the reader that Moscow residents began to leave the capital not because someone called them to do so, but because they obeyed the will of Providence that they had guessed. And the fire broke out in Moscow not because Rostopchin wanted it (and especially not contrary to his orders), but because she couldn't help but burn: in abandoned wooden houses where invaders have settled, fire inevitably breaks out, sooner or later.

Rostopchin has the same attitude towards the departure of Muscovites and the Moscow fires that Napoleon has towards the victory on the Field of Austerlitz or the flight of the valiant French army from Russia. The only thing that is truly in his power (as well as in the power of Napoleon) is to protect the lives of the townspeople and militias entrusted to him, or to scatter them, whether out of whim or fear.

The key scene in which the narrator’s attitude towards leaders in general and to the image of Rostopchin in particular - the lynching execution of the merchant son Vereshchagin (volume III, chapters XXIV–XXV). In it the ruler is revealed as cruel and weak person, mortally afraid of an angry crowd and, out of horror of it, ready to shed blood without trial. Vereshchagin is described in great detail, with obvious compassion (“clanging his shackles... pressing the collar of his sheepskin coat... with a submissive gesture”). But Rostopchin is on his future victim do not look- the narrator deliberately repeats several times, with emphasis: “Rostopchin did not look at him.” Chiefs They treat people not as living beings, but as instruments of their power. And therefore they are worse than the crowd, more terrible than it.

It is not for nothing that even the angry, gloomy crowd in the courtyard of the Rostopchin house does not want to rush at Vereshchagin, accused of treason. Rostopchin is forced to repeat several times, setting her against the merchant’s son: “Beat him!.. Let the traitor die and not disgrace the name of the Russian!.. Rub him!” I order!" But even after this direct call-order, the crowd “groaned and advanced, but stopped again.” She still sees a man in Vereshchagin and does not dare to rush at him: “A tall fellow, with a petrified expression on his face and with a stopped raised hand, stood in front of Vereshchagin.” Only after, obeying the order of the officer, the soldier “with a face distorted with anger hit Vereshchagin on the head with a blunt broadsword” and the merchant’s son in a fox sheepskin coat “shortly and in surprise” cried out - “a barrier of human feeling stretched to the highest degree, which still held the crowd , broke through instantly.”

The images of Napoleon and Rostopchin stand at opposite poles of this group of heroes from War and Peace. And the bulk leaders All kinds of generals and chiefs of all stripes form here. All of them, as one, do not understand the inscrutable laws of history, they think that the outcome of the battle depends only on them, on their military talents or political abilities. It doesn’t matter which army they serve - French, Austrian or Russian. And the personification of this entire mass of generals in the epic is Barclay de Tolly, a dry “German” in Russian service. He does not understand anything about the spirit of the people and, together with other “Germans,” believes in the scheme of the correct disposition “Die erste Colonne marschiert, die zweite Colonne marschiert” (“The first column acts, the second column acts”).

The real Russian commander Barclay de Tolly, unlike artistic image, created by Tolstoy, was not a “German” (he came from a Scottish family that had been Russified a long time ago). And in his activities he never relied on a scheme. But this is where the line between historical figure and him way which literature creates. In Tolstoy’s picture of the world, “Germans” are not real representatives of a real people, but a symbol foreignness and cold rationalism, which only prevents us from understanding the natural course of things. Therefore Barclay de Tolly as novel hero turns into a dry “German”, which he was not in reality.

And at the very edge of this group of heroes, on the border separating the false leaders from wise men(we'll talk about them a little later), there is an image of the Russian Tsar Alexander I. He is so isolated from the general series that at first it even seems that his image is devoid of boring unambiguity, that it is complex and multi-component. Moreover, the image of Alexander I is invariably presented in an aura of admiration.

But let's ask ourselves a question: whose Is this admiration - for the narrator or for the characters? And then everything will immediately fall into place.

Here we see Alexander for the first time during a review of Austrian and Russian troops (volume I, part three, chapter VIII). First him neutral the narrator describes: “The handsome, young Emperor Alexander... with his pleasant face and sonorous, quiet voice attracted all the attention.” And then we begin to look at the king through the eyes lover into it Nikolai Rostov: “Nicholas clearly, down to all the details, examined the beautiful, young and happy face of the emperor, he experienced a feeling of tenderness and delight, the like of which he had never experienced. Everything - every feature, every movement - seemed charming to him about the sovereign.” The narrator discovers in Alexander ordinary features: beautiful, pleasant. But Nikolai Rostov discovers a completely different quality in them, excellent degree: they seem beautiful, “lovely” to him.

But here is Chapter XV of the same part, here the narrator and Prince Andrei, who is by no means in love with the sovereign, alternately look at Alexander I. This time there is no such internal gap in emotional assessments. The Emperor meets with Kutuzov, whom he clearly dislikes (and we do not yet know how highly the narrator values ​​Kutuzov).

It would seem that the narrator is again objective and neutral: “An unpleasant impression, just like the remnants of fog in a clear sky, ran across the young and happy face of the emperor and disappeared... the same charming combination of majesty and meekness was in his beautiful gray eyes, and on his thin on the lips there is the same possibility of various expressions and the predominant expression of complacent, innocent youth.” Again the “young and happy face”, again the charm of the appearance... And yet, pay attention: the narrator lifts the veil over his own attitude to all these qualities of a king. He says directly: “on thin lips” there was “the possibility of a variety of expressions.” That is, Alexander I always wears masks, behind which his real face is hidden.

What kind of face is this? It's contradictory. It contains kindness, sincerity - and falsity, lies. But the fact of the matter is that Alexander is opposed to Napoleon; Tolstoy does not want to belittle his image, but he cannot exalt it. Therefore, he resorts to the only possible method: showing the king first of all through the eyes of heroes, as a rule, devoted to him and worshiping his genius. It is they, blinded by their love and devotion, who pay attention only to best manifestations miscellaneous Alexander's faces; they recognize the real one in him leader.

In Chapter XVIII, Rostov again sees the Tsar: “The Tsar was pale, his cheeks were sunken and his eyes sunken; but there was even more charm and meekness in his features.” This is a typical Rostov look - the look of an honest but superficial officer in love with his sovereign. However, now Nikolai Rostov meets the Tsar far from the nobles, from thousands of eyes fixed on him; in front of him is a simple suffering mortal, gravely experiencing the defeat of the army: “Tolya said something long and passionately to the sovereign,” and he “apparently began to cry, closed his eyes with his hand and shook Tolya’s hand”... Then we will see the king through the eyes of a helpfully proud Drubetsky (volume III, part one, chapter III), the enthusiastic Petya Rostov (chapter XX, the same part and volume), Pierre - at the moment when he was captured by general enthusiasm during the Moscow meeting of the sovereign with the deputations of the nobility and merchants (chapter XXIII )...

The narrator, with his attitude, remains for the time being in a deep shadow. He only says through clenched teeth at the beginning of the third volume: “The Tsar is a slave of history,” but he refrains from direct assessments of the personality of Alexander I until the end of the fourth volume, when the Tsar directly encounters Kutuzov (chapters X and XI, part four). Only here, and even then not for long, does he show his restrained disapproval. After all, we are talking about the resignation of Kutuzov, who had just won, together with the entire Russian people, a victory over Napoleon!

And the result of the “Alexandrov’s” plot line will be summed up only in the epilogue, where the narrator will try with all his might to maintain justice in relation to the tsar, bringing his image closer to the image of Kutuzov: the latter was necessary for the movement of peoples from west to east, and the former for the return movement peoples from east to west.

Ordinary people

Both the playmakers and the leaders in the novel are contrasted ordinary people led by the lover of truth, the Moscow lady Marya Dmitrievna Akhrosimova. In their world she plays the same role as in little world The Kuragins and Bilibins are played by the St. Petersburg lady Anna Pavlovna Sherer. They have not risen above the general level of their time, their era, have not learned the truth of people's life, but instinctively live in conditional agreement with it. Although they sometimes act incorrectly, and human weaknesses they are fully present.

This discrepancy, this difference in potential, the combination in one personality of different qualities, good and not so good, distinguishes ordinary people and from playmakers, and from leaders. Heroes classified in this category, as a rule, are shallow people, and yet their portraits are painted in different colors and are obviously devoid of unambiguity and uniformity.

This is, in general, the hospitable Moscow Rostov family.

The old Count Ilya Andreich, the father of Natasha, Nikolai, Petya, Vera, is a weak-willed man, he allows his managers to rob him, he suffers at the thought of ruining his children, but he can’t do anything about it. Going to the village for two years, trying to move to St. Petersburg and get a job changes little in the general state of affairs.

The Count is not very smart, but at the same time he is fully endowed by God with heartfelt gifts - hospitality, cordiality, love for family and children. Two scenes characterize him from this side - and both are imbued with lyricism, the rapture of delight: a description of a dinner in a Rostov house in honor of Bagration and a description of a dog hunt. (Analyze both of these scenes yourself, show with what artistic means the narrator expresses his attitude to what is happening.) And one more scene is extremely important for understanding the image of the old count: the departure from burning Moscow. It is he who first gives the reckless (from the point of view of common sense) order to let the wounded into the carts; Having removed their acquired goods from the carts for the sake of Russian officers and soldiers, the Rostovs deal the final, irreparable blow to their own fortune... But they not only save several lives, but also, unexpectedly for themselves, give Natasha a chance to reconcile with Andrei.

Ilya Andreich's wife, Countess Rostova, is also not distinguished by her special intelligence - that abstract scientific mind, which the narrator treats with obvious distrust. She is hopelessly behind modern life; and when the family is completely ruined, the countess is not even able to understand why they should abandon their own carriage and cannot send a carriage for one of her friends. Moreover, we see injustice, sometimes cruelty, of the Countess towards Sonya, who is completely innocent of the fact that she is without a dowry.

And yet, she also has a special gift of humanity, which separates her from the crowd of wasters of life and brings her closer to the truth of life. This is the gift of love for one's own children; instinctively wise, deep and selfless love. The decisions she makes in relation to children are dictated not simply by the desire for profit and saving the family from ruin (although this is also the case); they are aimed at arranging the lives of the children themselves in the best possible way. And when the countess learns about the death of her beloved youngest son in the war, her life essentially ends; Having barely escaped insanity, she instantly ages and loses active interest in what is happening around her.

All the best Rostov qualities were passed on to the children - everyone except the dry, calculating and therefore unloved Vera. (Having married Berg, she naturally moved from the category ordinary people in number playmakers.) And also - except for the Rostovs’ pupil Sonya, who, despite all her kindness and sacrifice, turns out to be an “empty flower” and gradually, following Vera, slides out of the rounded world ordinary people into the plane playmakers.

Particularly touching is the youngest, Petya, who completely absorbed the atmosphere of the Rostov house. Like his father and mother, he is not very smart, but he is extremely sincere and sincere; this soulfulness is especially expressed in his musicality. Petya instantly gives in to the impulse of his heart; therefore, it is from his point of view that we look from the Moscow patriotic crowd at Emperor Alexander I - and share genuine youthful delight. (Although we feel: the narrator’s attitude towards the emperor is not as clear as the young character.) Petya’s death from an enemy bullet is one of the most poignant and most memorable episodes of Tolstoy’s epic.

But how does it have its own center? playmakers, y leaders, so he has it too ordinary people, populating the pages of War and Peace. This center is Nikolai Rostov and Marya Bolkonskaya, whose life lines, divided into three volumes, in the end they still intersect, obeying the unwritten law of affinity.

“A short, curly-haired young man with an open expression on his face,” he is distinguished by “impetuousness and enthusiasm.” Nikolai, as usual, is shallow (“he had that common sense of mediocrity that told him what should have been done,” the narrator says bluntly). But he is very emotional, impetuous, warm-hearted, and therefore musical, like all the Rostovs.

His life path is traced in the epic in almost as much detail as the paths of the main characters - Pierre, Andrey, Natasha. At the beginning of War and Peace, we see Nikolai as a young university student who gives up his studies to join the army. Then before us is a young officer of the Pavlograd Hussar Regiment, who is eager to fight and envies the seasoned warrior Vaska Denisov.

One of key episodes Nikolai Rostov's storyline - crossing the Enns, and then being wounded in the arm during the Battle of Shengraben. Here the hero first encounters an insoluble contradiction in his soul; he, who considered himself a fearless patriot, suddenly discovers that he is afraid of death and that the very thought of death is absurd - him, whom “everyone loves so much.” This experience not only does not reduce the image of the hero, on the contrary: it is at that moment that his spiritual maturation occurs.

And yet it’s not for nothing that Nikolai likes it so much in the army - and is so uncomfortable in everyday life. Regiment is a special world (another world in the middle wars), in which everything is arranged logically, simply, unambiguously. There are subordinates, there is a commander, and there is a commander of commanders - the Emperor, whom it is so natural and so pleasant to adore. And the life of civilians consists entirely of endless intricacies, of human sympathies and antipathies, clashes of private interests and common goals of the class. Arriving home on vacation, Rostov either gets confused in his relationship with Sonya, or loses to Dolokhov, which puts the family on the brink of financial disaster - and actually flees from worldly life to the regiment, like a monk to his monastery. (He doesn’t seem to notice that the same “worldly” orders operate in the army; when in the regiment he has to solve complex moral problems - for example, with officer Telyanin, who stole a wallet - Rostov is completely lost.)

Like any hero who claims in the novel space to have an independent line and active participation in the development of the main intrigue, Nikolai is “burdened” with a love plot. He is a kind fellow, an honest man, and therefore, having made a youthful promise to marry the dowryless Sonya, he considers himself bound for the rest of his life. And no persuasion from his mother, no hints from his loved ones about the need to find a rich bride can shake him. Despite the fact that his feeling for Sonya goes through different stages - either completely fading away, then returning again, then disappearing again.

Therefore, the most dramatic moment in Nikolai’s fate comes after the meeting in Bogucharovo. Here, during the tragic events of the summer of 1812, he accidentally meets Princess Marya Bolkonskaya, one of the richest brides in Russia, whom he would dream of marrying; Rostov selflessly helps the Bolkonskys get out of Bogucharov - and both of them, Nikolai and Marya, suddenly feel mutual attraction. But what's in the environment playmakers(and most ordinary people too) is considered the norm, for them it turns out to be an almost insurmountable obstacle: she is rich, he is poor.

Only the power of natural feeling is able to overcome this obstacle; Having gotten married, Rostov and Princess Marya live in perfect harmony, just as Kitty and Levin will later live in Anna Karenina. However, this is the difference between honest mediocrity and the impulse of truth-seeking, that the former does not know development, does not recognize doubts. As we have already noted, in the first part of the epilogue between Nikolai Rostov, on the one hand, Pierre Bezukhov and Nikolenka Bolkonsky, on the other, an invisible conflict is brewing, the line of which stretches into the distance, beyond the boundaries of the plot action.

Pierre, at the cost of new moral torment, new mistakes and new quests, is drawn into another turn in big history: he becomes a member of the early pre-Decembrist organizations. Nikolenka is completely on his side; it is not difficult to calculate that by the time of the uprising on Senate Square he will be a young man, most likely an officer, and with such a heightened sense of morality he will be on the side of the rebels. And the sincere, respectable, narrow-minded Nikolai, who has once and for all stopped developing, knows in advance that if anything happens he will shoot at the opponents of the legitimate ruler, his beloved sovereign...

Truth Seekers

This is the most important of the categories; without heroes - truth seekers there would be no epic “War and Peace” at all. Only two characters, two close friends - Andrei Bolkonsky and Pierre Bezukhov have the right to claim this special “title”. They cannot be called unconditionally positive; to create their images, the narrator uses a variety of colors - but precisely thanks to ambiguity they seem especially voluminous and bright.

Both of them, Prince Andrei and Count Pierre, are rich (Bolkonsky - initially, illegitimate Bezukhov - after sudden death father), smart, although in different ways. Bolkonsky's mind is cold and sharp; Bezukhov's mind is naive, but organic. Like many young people in the 1800s, they are crazy about Napoleon; a proud dream of a special role in world history, which means the conviction that personality controls the course of things, is equally inherent in both Bolkonsky and Bezukhov. From this common point, the narrator draws two very different storylines, which at first diverge very far, and then connect again, intersecting in the space of truth.

But this is where it turns out that truth seekers they become against their will. Neither one nor the other is going to seek the truth, they do not strive for moral improvement, and at first they are sure that the truth is revealed to them in the form of Napoleon. They are pushed to an intense search for truth by external circumstances, and perhaps by Providence itself. It’s just that the spiritual qualities of Andrei and Pierre are such that each of them is able to answer the call of fate, respond to its silent question; only because of this do they ultimately rise above the general level.

Prince Andrey

Bolkonsky is unhappy at the beginning of the book; he does not love his sweet but empty wife; is indifferent to the unborn child, and in the future does not show any special paternal feelings. The family “instinct” is as alien to him as the secular “instinct”; he can't get into the category ordinary people for the same reasons that it cannot be in the row playmakers. Neither the cold emptiness of the great world, nor the warmth of the family nest attracts him. But to break into the ranks of the chosen ones leaders he not only could, but would really like to. Napoleon, we repeat again and again, is a life example and guide for him.

Having learned from Bilibin that the Russian army (this takes place in 1805) was in a hopeless situation, Prince Andrei was almost happy about the tragic news. “It occurred to him that he was precisely destined to lead the Russian army out of this situation, that here he was, that Toulon, who would lead him out of the ranks of unknown officers and open for him the first path to glory” (volume I, part two, chapter XII ). You already know how it ends; we analyzed the scene with the eternal sky of Austerlitz in detail. The truth is revealed to Prince Andrey herself, without any effort on his part; he does not come to the conclusion about the insignificance of all narcissistic “heroes” in the face of eternity - this conclusion is to him immediately and in its entirety.

It would seem that Bolkonsky’s storyline is exhausted already at the end of the first volume, and the author has no choice but to declare the hero dead. And here, contrary to ordinary logic, the most important thing begins - truth-seeking. Having accepted the truth immediately and in its entirety, Prince Andrei suddenly loses it - and begins a painful, long search, taking a side road back to the feeling that once visited him on the field of Austerlitz.

Returning home, where everyone thought he was dead, Andrei learns about the birth of his son and the death of his wife: the little princess with a short upper lip disappears from his life horizon at the very moment when he is ready to finally open his heart to her! This news shocks the hero and awakens in him a feeling of guilt towards his dead wife; throwing military service(along with a vain dream of personal greatness), Bolkonsky settles in Bogucharovo, takes care of the house, reads, and raises his son.

It would seem that he anticipates the path that Nikolai Rostov will take at the end of the fourth volume - together with Andrei’s sister, Princess Marya. (Compare for yourself the descriptions of the economic concerns of Bolkonsky in Bogucharovo and Rostov in Bald Mountains - and you will be convinced of the non-random similarity, you will discover another plot parallel.) But that's the difference between ordinary heroes of "War and Peace" and truth seekers that the former stop where the latter continue their unstoppable movement.

Bolkonsky, having learned the truth of eternal heaven, thinks that it is enough to give up personal pride in order to find peace of mind. But actually country life cannot contain his unspent energy. And the truth, received as if as a gift, not personally suffered, not acquired as a result of long searches, begins to elude him. Andrei is withering in the village, his soul seems to be drying out. Pierre, who arrived in Bogucharovo, was struck by the terrible change that had occurred in his friend: “The words were kind, a smile was on the lips and face of Prince Andrei, but the look was extinguished, dead, to which, despite the visible desire, Prince Andrei could not give joyful and cheerful shine." Only for a moment does the prince awaken to a happy feeling of belonging to the truth - when for the first time after being wounded he pays attention to the eternal sky. And then a veil of hopelessness again obscures his life horizon.

What happened? Why does the author “doom” his hero to inexplicable torment? First of all, because the hero must independently “ripen” to the truth that was revealed to him by the will of Providence. The soul of Prince Andrei has difficult work ahead of him; he will have to go through numerous trials before he regains his sense of unshakable truth. And from this moment on, Prince Andrei’s storyline becomes like a spiral: it goes to a new turn, repeating at a more complex level the previous stage of his fate. He is destined to fall in love again, again to indulge in ambitious thoughts, to be disappointed again - both in love and in thoughts. And finally, come to the truth again.

The third part of the second volume opens with a symbolic description of Andrei’s trip to the Ryazan estates. Spring is coming; When entering the forest, Andrey notices an old oak tree on the edge of the road.

“Probably ten times older than the birch trees that made up the forest, it was ten times thicker and twice as tall as each birch tree. It was a huge oak tree, twice the girth, with branches that had apparently been broken off long ago and with broken bark overgrown with old sores. With his huge clumsy, asymmetrically splayed, gnarled hands and fingers, he stood like an old, angry and contemptuous freak between the smiling birches. Only he did not want to submit to the charm of spring and did not want to see either spring or the sun.”

It is clear that in the image of this oak personified Prince Andrei himself, who does not respond to the eternal joy of renewed life, is deadened. But on the affairs of the Ryazan estates, Bolkonsky will have to meet with Ilya Andreich Rostov - and, having spent the night in the Rostovs’ house, the prince again notices the bright, almost starless spring sky. And then he accidentally overhears the excited conversation between Sonya and Natasha.

A feeling of love latently awakens in Andrei’s heart (although the hero himself does not understand this yet); as a character folk tale, it’s as if he was sprinkled with living water - and on the way back, already at the beginning of June, the prince again sees the oak tree, personifying himself.

“The old oak tree, completely transformed, spread out like a tent of lush, dark greenery, was melting, slightly swaying in the rays of the evening sun... Through the tough hundred-year-old bark, juicy, young leaves broke through without knots... All the best moments of his life suddenly at the same time the time was remembered to him. And Austerlitz with the high sky, and the dead, reproachful face of his wife, and Pierre on the ferry, and the girl excited by the beauty of the night, and this night, and the moon...”

Returning to St. Petersburg, Bolkonsky joins with renewed vigor in social activities; he believes that he is now driven not by personal vanity, not by pride, not by “Napoleonism,” but by a selfless desire to serve people, to serve the Fatherland. His new hero, leader, idol is the young energetic reformer Speransky. Behind Speransky, who wants to transform Russia, Bolkonsky ready to follow in the same way as before he was ready to imitate Napoleon in everything, who wanted to throw the whole universe at his feet.

But Tolstoy constructs the plot in such a way that the reader feels from the very beginning that something is not entirely right; Andrei sees a hero in Speransky, and the narrator sees another leader. This is how Bolkonsky’s acquaintance with Speransky is described in chapter V of part three of the second volume:

“Prince Andrei... watched all the movements of Speransky, this man, an insignificant seminarian and now in his own hands - these plump white hands - who had the fate of Russia, as Bolkonsky thought. Prince Andrei was struck by the extraordinary, contemptuous calm with which Speransky answered the old man. He seemed to be addressing him with his condescending word from an immeasurable height.”

What about this quote represents the character's point of view and what represents the narrator's point of view?

The judgment about the “insignificant seminarian” who holds the fate of Russia in his hands, of course, expresses the position of the enchanted Bolkonsky, who himself does not notice how he transfers the features of Napoleon to Speransky. And the mocking clarification - “as Bolkonsky thought” - comes from the narrator. Prince Andrey notices Speransky’s “disdainful calmness,” and his arrogance leader(“from an immeasurable height...”) - narrator.

In other words, Prince Andrei, in a new round of his biography, repeats the mistake of his youth; he is again blinded by the false example of someone else's pride, in which his own pride finds food. But then a significant meeting takes place in Bolkonsky’s life: he meets the same Natasha Rostova, whose voice on a moonlit night in the Ryazan estate brought him back to life. Falling in love is inevitable; matchmaking is a foregone conclusion. But since the stern father, old Bolkonsky, agreed to quick marriage doesn’t give, Andrei is forced to go abroad and stop collaborating with Speransky, which could seduce him and lead him back to his previous path leader. And the dramatic break with the bride after her failed escape with Kuragin completely pushes Prince Andrei, as it seems to him, to the margins of the historical process, to the outskirts of the empire. He is again under the command of Kutuzov.

But in fact, God continues to lead Bolkonsky in a special way, known to Him alone. Having overcome the temptation by the example of Napoleon, happily avoiding the temptation by the example of Speransky, having again lost hope of family happiness, Prince Andrei on the third repeats the pattern of his destiny over and over again. Because, having fallen under the command of Kutuzov, he is imperceptibly charged with the quiet energy of the old wise commander, as before he was charged with the stormy energy of Napoleon and the cold energy of Speransky.

It is no coincidence that Tolstoy uses the folklore principle triple hero test: after all, unlike Napoleon and Speransky, Kutuzov is truly close to the people and forms one whole with them. The artistic image of Kutuzov in “War and Peace” will be discussed in more detail below; For now, let's pay attention to this. Until now, Bolkonsky was aware that he worshiped Napoleon, he guessed that he was secretly imitating Speransky. And the hero does not even suspect that he is following the example of Kutuzov, adopting the “nationality” of the great commander. The spiritual work of self-education, using the example of Kutuzov, proceeds hidden and latent in him.

Moreover, Bolkonsky is sure that the decision to leave Kutuzov’s headquarters and go to the front, to rush into the thick of the battles, comes to him spontaneously, of course. In fact, he takes over from Mikhail Illarionovich a wise view of purely folk a character of war which is incompatible with court intrigue and pride leaders. If the heroic desire to pick up the regimental banner on the field of Austerlitz was the “Toulon” of Prince Andrei, then the sacrificial decision to participate in the battles of the Patriotic War is, if you like, his “Borodino”, comparable at the small level of an individual human life with the great battle of Borodino, morally won by Kutuzov.

It was on the eve of the Battle of Borodino that Andrei met his friend Pierre; happens between them third(folklore number again!) meaningful conversation. The first took place in St. Petersburg (volume I, part one, chapter VI), during which Andrei for the first time dropped the mask of a contemptuous socialite and openly told a friend that he was imitating Napoleon. During the second (volume II, part two, chapter XI), held in Bogucharovo, Pierre saw before him a man mournfully doubting the meaning of life, the existence of God, internally dead, having lost the incentive to move. This meeting with Pierre became for Prince Andrei “the era from which, although in appearance it was the same, but in the inner world his new life began.”

And here is the third conversation (volume III, part two, chapter XXV). Having overcome their involuntary alienation, on the eve of the day when, perhaps, both of them will die, the friends again openly discuss the most subtle, most important topics. They do not philosophize - there is neither time nor energy for philosophizing; but every word they say, even a very unfair one (like Andrei’s opinion about the prisoners), is weighed on special scales. And Bolkonsky’s final passage sounds like a premonition of imminent death: “Ah, my soul, Lately It became difficult for me to live. I see that I have begun to understand too much. But it is not right for a person to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil... Well, not for long! - he added.”

The wound on the Borodin field compositionally repeats the scene of Andrei's wound on the Austerlitz field; both there and here the truth is suddenly revealed to the hero. This truth is love, compassion, faith in God. (Here is another plot parallel.) But the fact of the matter is that in the first volume we had a character to whom the truth appeared contrary to everything; Now we see Bolkonsky, who has managed to prepare himself to accept the truth - at the cost of mental anguish and tossing. Please note: the last person Andrei sees on the Field of Austerlitz is the insignificant Napoleon, who seemed great to him; and the last person he sees on the Borodino field is his enemy, Anatol Kuragin, also seriously wounded...

Ahead of Andrey new meeting with Natasha; last meeting. Moreover, the folklore principle of triple repetition works here too. For the first time Andrey hears Natasha (without seeing her) in Otradnoye. Then he falls in love with her during Natasha’s first ball (volume II, part three, chapter XVII), explains to her and proposes. And here is the wounded Bolkonsky in Moscow, near the Rostovs’ house, at the very moment when Natasha orders the carts to be given to the wounded. The meaning of this final meeting is forgiveness and reconciliation; having forgiven Natasha and reconciled with her, Andrei finally comprehended the meaning love and therefore ready to part with earthly life... His death is depicted not as an irreparable tragedy, but as a solemnly sad result completed earthly journey.

It is not for nothing that Tolstoy carefully introduces the theme of the Gospel into the fabric of his narrative.

We are already accustomed to the fact that the heroes of Russian literature are second half of the 19th century centuries often pick up this main book of Christianity, which tells about the earthly life, teaching and resurrection of Jesus Christ; Just remember Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment.” However, Dostoevsky wrote about his own time, while Tolstoy turned to the events of the beginning of the century, when educated people from high society turned to the Gospel much less often. For the most part, they read Church Slavonic poorly, and rarely resorted to the French Bible; Only after the Patriotic War did work begin on translating the Gospel into living Russian. This work was headed by the future Metropolitan of Moscow Filaret (Drozdov); The publication of the Russian Gospel in 1819 influenced many writers, including Pushkin and Vyazemsky.

Prince Andrey is destined to die in 1812; nevertheless, Lev Nikolaevich decided to decisively violate chronology, and in Bolkonsky’s dying thoughts, quotes from the Russian Gospel emerge: the birds of the air “neither sow nor reap,” but “your Father feeds them”... Why? Yes, for the simple reason that Tolstoy wants to show: the wisdom of the Gospel entered Andrei’s soul, it became part of his own thoughts, he reads the Gospel as an explanation of his own life and his own death. If the writer forced the hero to quote the Gospel in French or even in Church Slavonic, this would immediately separate his inner world from the world of the Gospel. (In general, in the novel the characters speak French more often, the further they are from the national truth; Natasha Rostova generally utters only one line in French over the course of four volumes!) But Tolstoy’s goal is exactly the opposite: he seeks to forever connect the image of Andrei, who found truth, with the theme of the Gospel.

Pierre Bezukhov

If the storyline of Prince Andrei is spiral-shaped and each subsequent stage of his life in a new round repeats the previous stage, then the storyline of Pierre is up to the epilogue- looks like a shrinking circle with the figure of the peasant Platon Karataev in the center.

This circle at the beginning of the epic is immeasurably wide, almost like Pierre himself - “a massive, fat young man with a cropped head and glasses.” Like Prince Andrei, Bezukhov does not feel himself truth-seeker; he, too, considers Napoleon a great man - and is content with the common idea that history is controlled by great men, “heroes.”

We meet Pierre at the very moment when, from an excess of vitality, he takes part in carousing and almost robbery (the story with the policeman). Life force is his advantage over the dead light (Andrei says that Pierre is the only “living person”). And this is his main problem, since Bezukhov does not know what to apply his heroic strength to, it is aimless, there is something in it - then Nozdryov’s. Special spiritual and mental needs are inherent in Pierre from the very beginning (which is why he chooses Andrey as his friend), but they are scattered and do not take on a clear and distinct form.

Pierre is distinguished by energy, sensuality, reaching the point of passion, extreme ingenuousness and myopia (in the literal and figurative sense); all this dooms Pierre to take rash steps. As soon as Bezukhov becomes the heir to a huge fortune, playmakers They immediately entangle him in their nets, Prince Vasily marries Pierre to Helen. Of course, family life is not a given; accept the rules by which high society people live burners, Pierre can't. And so, having parted ways with Helen, he for the first time consciously begins to look for the answer to the questions that torment him about the meaning of life, about the purpose of man.

“What's wrong? What well? What should you love, what should you hate? Why live and what am I? What is life, what is death? What force controls everything? - he asked himself. And there was no answer to any of these questions, except one, not a logical answer, not to these questions at all. This answer was: “If you die, everything will end. You’ll die and you’ll find out everything, or you’ll stop asking.” But it was also scary to die” (volume II, part two, chapter I.).

And then on his life’s path he meets an old Mason-mentor, Joseph Alekseevich. (Freemasons were members of religious and political organizations, “orders,” “lodges,” who set themselves the goal of moral self-improvement and intended to transform society and the state on this basis.) Metaphor life path the road along which Pierre travels serves in the epic; Joseph Alekseevich himself approaches Bezukhov at the postal station in Torzhok and starts a conversation with him about the mysterious destiny of man. From the genre shadow of the family-everyday novel we immediately move into the space of the novel of education; Tolstoy slightly noticeably stylizes the “Masonic” chapters into novel prose of the late 18th - early 19th centuries.

In these conversations, conversations, reading and reflections, the same truth is revealed to Pierre that appeared on the field of Austerlitz to Prince Andrei (who, perhaps, also went through the “Masonic art”; in a conversation with Pierre, Bolkonsky mockingly mentions the gloves that Masons receive before marriage for his chosen one). The meaning of life is not in heroic deeds, not in becoming a leader like Napoleon, but in serving people, feeling involved in eternity...

But the truth is opens slightly, it sounds dull, like a distant echo. And the further, the more painfully Bezukhov feels the deceit of most Masons, the discrepancy between their petty social life and the proclaimed universal ideals. Yes, Joseph Alekseevich forever remains a moral authority for him, but Freemasonry itself eventually ceases to meet Pierre’s spiritual needs. Moreover, the reconciliation with Helen, which he agreed to under Masonic influence, does not lead to anything good. And having taken a step in the social field in the direction set by the Freemasons, having started a reform on his estates, Pierre suffers an inevitable defeat - his impracticality, gullibility and lack of system doom the land experiment to failure.

The disappointed Bezukhov first turns into a good-natured shadow of his predatory wife; it seems like a whirlpool playmakers is about to close over him. Then he again starts drinking, carousing, returns to the single habits of his youth - and eventually moves from St. Petersburg to Moscow. You and I have noted more than once that in Russian literature of the 19th century, St. Petersburg was associated with the European center of official, political, and cultural life in Russia; Moscow - with a rustic, traditional Russian habitat of retired nobles and lordly idlers. The transformation of Petersburger Pierre into a Muscovite is tantamount to his abandonment of any aspirations in life.

And here the tragic and Russia-cleansing events of the Patriotic War of 1812 are approaching. For Bezukhov they have a very special, personal meaning. After all, he has long been in love with Natasha Rostova, his hopes for an alliance with whom were crossed out twice - by his marriage to Helen and Natasha’s promise to Prince Andrei. Only after the story with Kuragin, in overcoming the consequences of which Pierre played a huge role, Bezukhov half-declares his love to Natasha: “Is everything lost? - he repeated. “If I were not me, but the most beautiful, smartest and best person in the world, and were free, I would this minute on my knees ask for your hand and love” (volume II, part five, chapter XXII).

It is no coincidence that immediately after the scene of explanation with Natasha Tolstaya, through the eyes of Pierre, he shows the famous comet of 1811, which foreshadowed the beginning of the war: “It seemed to Pierre that this star fully corresponded to what was in his blossoming to a new life, softened and encouraged soul.” The theme of national testing and the theme of personal salvation merge together in this episode.

Step by step, the stubborn author leads his beloved hero to comprehend two inextricably linked truths: the truth of sincere family life and the truth of national unity. Out of curiosity, Pierre goes to the Borodin field just on the eve of the great battle; observing, communicating with the soldiers, he prepares his mind and his heart to perceive the thought that Bolkonsky will express to him during their last Borodin conversation: the truth is where “they” are, ordinary soldiers, ordinary Russian people.

The views that Bezukhov professed at the beginning of “War and Peace” are turned upside down, before he saw in Napoleon the source of the historical movement, now he sees in him the source of historical evil, the Antichrist. And he is ready to sacrifice himself to save humanity. The reader must understand: Pierre’s spiritual path has only been completed to the middle; the hero has not yet come to agreement with the narrator, who is convinced (and convinces the reader) that the matter is not about Napoleon at all, that the French emperor is just a toy in the hands of Providence. But the experiences that befell Bezukhov in French captivity, and most importantly, his acquaintance with Platon Karataev, will complete the work that has already begun in him.

During the execution of prisoners (a scene that refutes Andrei’s cruel arguments during Borodin’s last conversation), Pierre himself recognizes himself as an instrument in the wrong hands; his life and his death do not really depend on him. And communication with a simple peasant, the “rounded” soldier of the Absheron regiment Platon Karataev, finally reveals to Pierre the prospect of a new philosophy of life. The purpose of a person is not to become a bright personality, separate from all other personalities, but to reflect the people’s life in its entirety, to become a part of the universe. Only then can you feel truly immortal: “Ha, ha, ha! - Pierre laughed. And he said out loud to himself: “The soldier didn’t let me in.” They caught me, they locked me up. They are holding me captive. Who me? Me? Me - my immortal soul! Ha, ha, ha!.. Ha, ha, ha!.. - he laughed with tears welling up in his eyes... Pierre looked into the sky, into the depths of the receding, playing stars. “And all this is mine, and all this is in me, and all this is me!..”” (volume IV, part two, chapter XIV).

No wonder these reflections of Pierre sound almost like folk verses, they emphasize and strengthen the internal, irregular rhythm:

The soldier didn't let me in.
They caught me, they locked me up.
They are holding me captive.
Who me? Me?

The truth sounds like folk song, - and the sky into which Pierre directs his gaze makes the attentive reader remember the ending of the third volume, the appearance of the comet and, most importantly, the sky of Austerlitz. But the difference between the Austerlitz scene and the experience that visited Pierre in captivity is fundamental. Andrei, as we have already said, at the end of the first volume comes face to face with the truth contrary to own intentions. He just has a long, roundabout way to get to her. And Pierre comprehends it for the first time eventually painful searches.

But there is nothing final in Tolstoy's epic. Remember we said that Pierre's storyline is only Seems circular, that if you look at the epilogue, the picture will change somewhat? Now read the episode of Bezukhov’s arrival from St. Petersburg and especially the scene of the conversation in the office - with Nikolai Rostov, Denisov and Nikolenka Bolkonsky (chapters XIV-XVI of the first epilogue). Pierre, the same Pierre Bezukhov, who has already comprehended the fullness of the national truth, who has renounced personal ambitions, again starts talking about the need to correct social ills, about the need to counter the government’s mistakes. It is not difficult to guess that he became a member of the early Decembrist societies - and that a new thunderstorm began to swell on the historical horizon of Russia.

Natasha, with her feminine instincts, guesses the question that the narrator himself would clearly like to ask Pierre. “Do you know what I'm thinking? - she said, - about Platon Karataev. How is he? Would he approve of you now?”

What happens? Did the hero begin to evade the acquired and hard-won truth? And the middle one is right, ordinary Human Nikolai Rostov, who speaks with disapproval of the plans of Pierre and his new comrades? Does this mean Nikolai is now closer to Platon Karataev than Pierre himself?

Yes and no. Yes- because Pierre undoubtedly deviates from the “rounded”, family-oriented, national peaceful ideal, and is ready to join the “war”. Yes- because in his Masonic period he had already gone through the temptation of striving for the public good, and through the temptation of personal ambitions - at the moment when he counted the number of the beast in the name of Napoleon and convinced himself that it was he, Pierre, who was destined to rid humanity of this villain. No- because the entire epic “War and Peace” is permeated with a thought that Rostov is unable to comprehend: we are not free in our desires, in our choice - to participate or not to participate in historical upheavals.

Pierre is much closer than Rostov to this “nerve” of history; among other things, Karataev taught him by example submit circumstances, accept them as they are. By joining a secret society, Pierre moves away from the ideal and, in a certain sense, returns several steps back in his development - but not because he wants this, but because he can not evade the objective course of things. And, perhaps, having partially lost the truth, he will come to know it even more deeply at the end of his new path.

That is why the epic ends with a global historiosophical reasoning, the meaning of which is formulated in its last phrase: “... it is necessary to abandon the non-existent freedom and recognize the dependence that we do not feel.”

Sages

You and I talked about playmakers, O leaders, about ordinary people, O truth seekers. But there is another category of heroes in War and Peace, the mirror opposite leaders. This - sages. That is, characters who have comprehended the truth of national life and set an example for other heroes, seeking the truth. These are, first of all, staff captain Tushin, Platon Karataev and Kutuzov.

Staff Captain Tushin appears in the scene of the Shengraben battle; We see him first through the eyes of Prince Andrei - and this is no coincidence. If circumstances had turned out differently and Bolkonsky had been internally prepared for this meeting, it could have played the same role in his life as the meeting with Platon Karataev would have played in Pierre’s life. However, alas, Andrey is still blinded by the dream of his own “Toulon”. Having defended Tushin in chapter XXI (volume I, part two), when he is guiltily silent in front of Bagration and does not want issue boss, Prince Andrei does not understand that behind Tushino’s silence lies not servility, but an understanding of the hidden ethics of people’s life. Bolkonsky is not yet ready to meet his Karataev.

“A small, stooped man,” commander of an artillery battery, Tushin makes an extremely favorable impression on the reader from the very beginning; external awkwardness only sets off his undoubted natural intelligence. No wonder, when characterizing Tushin, Tolstoy resorts to his favorite technique, drawing attention to the hero’s eyes, this the mirror of one's heart: “Silent and smiling, Tushin, stepping from bare foot to foot, looked questioningly with large, intelligent and kind eyes...” (volume I, part two, chapter XV).

But why is such attention paid to such an insignificant figure, and in a scene that immediately follows the chapter dedicated to Napoleon himself? The guess does not come to the reader right away. But then he reaches chapter XX, and the image of the staff captain gradually begins to grow to symbolic proportions.

“Little Tushin with a straw bitten to one side” along with his battery forgotten and left without cover; he hardly notices it because he is completely absorbed general in fact, feels like an integral part of the entire people. On the eve of the battle, this little awkward man spoke of the fear of death and complete uncertainty about eternal life; now he is transforming before our eyes.

The narrator shows this small person large plan: “it was established in his head fantasy world, which was his pleasure at that moment. The enemy’s guns in his imagination were not guns, but pipes, from which an invisible smoker released smoke in rare puffs.” At this second, it is not the Russian and French armies that are confronting each other - little Napoleon, who imagines himself to be great, and little Tushin, who has risen to true greatness, are confronting each other. He is not afraid of death, he is only afraid of his superiors, and immediately becomes timid when a staff colonel appears at the battery. Then (Chapter XXI) Tushin cordially helps all the wounded (including Nikolai Rostov).

In the second volume we will once again meet with Staff Captain Tushin, who lost his arm in the war (analyze chapter XVIII of part two (Rostov arrives at the hospital) on your own, pay special attention to how - and why exactly - Tushin relates to Vasily Denisov’s intention to file a complaint with his superiors).

And Tushin, and another Tolstoy sage- Platon Karataev, are endowed with the same “physical” properties: they are small in stature, they have similar characters: They are affectionate and good-natured. But Tushin feels himself an integral part of the general life of the people only in the midst of wars, and in peaceful circumstances he is a simple, kind, timid and very ordinary person. And Plato is always involved in this life, in any circumstances. And on war and especially able peace. Because he wears world in your soul.

Pierre meets Plato at a difficult moment in his life - in captivity, when his fate hangs in the balance and depends on many accidents. The first thing that catches his eye (and strangely calms him down) is this roundness Karataev, a harmonious combination of external appearance and internal appearance. In Plato, everything is round - both movements, and the way of life that he organizes around himself, and even the homely “smell”. The narrator, with his characteristic persistence, repeats the words “round”, “rounded” as often as in the scene on the Austerlitz Field he repeated the word “sky”.

During the Battle of Shengraben, Andrei Bolkonsky was not ready to meet his Karataev, staff captain Tushin. And Pierre, by the time of the Moscow events, had matured enough to learn a lot from Plato. And above all - a true attitude towards life. That is why Karataev “remained forever in Pierre’s soul as the strongest and dearest memory and personification of everything Russian, kind and round.” After all, on the way back from Borodino to Moscow, Bezukhov had a dream during which Pierre heard a voice. “War is the most difficult task of subordinating human freedom to the laws of God,” said the voice. - Simplicity is submission to God, you cannot escape from him. AND They simple. They They don't say it, but they do it. The spoken word is silver, and the unspoken word is golden. A person cannot own anything while he is afraid of death. And whoever is not afraid of her, everything belongs to him. ...Connect everything? - Pierre said to himself. - No, don't connect. You can't connect thoughts, but match all these thoughts are what you need! Yes, it is necessary to mate, it is necessary to mate!”

Platon Karataev is the embodiment of this dream; it's all about it associated, he is not afraid of death, he thinks in proverbs, which summarize centuries-old folk wisdom; it is not for nothing that Pierre hears in his dreams the proverb “The spoken word is silver, but the unspoken word is golden.”

Can Platon Karataev be called a bright personality? No way. On the contrary: he generally not a person, because he does not have his own special spiritual needs, separate from the people, no aspirations and desires. For Tolstoy, he is more than a person, he is a piece of the people's soul. Karataev does not remember his own words spoken a minute ago, since he does not think in the usual meaning of this word, that is, he does not build his reasoning in a logical chain. It’s just that, as modern people would say, his mind is “connected” to the national consciousness, and Plato’s judgments reproduce transpersonal wisdom.

Karataev does not have a “special” love for people - he treats everyone equally lovingly. And to the master Pierre, and to the French soldier who ordered Plato to sew a shirt, and to the lanky dog ​​that became attached to him. Without being personality, he doesn't see personalities and around him, everyone he meets is the same particle of a single universe, like Plato himself. Death or separation therefore has no meaning for him; Karataev is not upset when he learns that the person with whom he became close has suddenly disappeared - after all, nothing changes from this! Immortal life of the people continues, and its constant presence will be revealed in every new person it meets.

The main lesson that Bezukhov learns from his communication with Karataev, the main quality that he strives to adopt from his “teacher” is voluntary dependence on eternal folk life. Only she gives a person a real feeling freedom. And when Karataev, having fallen ill, begins to lag behind the column of prisoners and is shot like a dog, Pierre is not too upset. Karataev’s individual life is over, but the eternal, national life in which he is involved continues, and there will be no end to it. That's why Tolstoy ends storyline Karataev is Pierre’s second dream, which was seen by the captive Bezukhov in the village of Shamsheva. “Life is everything. Life is God. Everything moves and moves, and this movement is God...”

"Karataev!" - Pierre remembered.

And suddenly Pierre introduced himself to a living, long-forgotten, gentle old teacher who taught Pierre geography in Switzerland... he showed Pierre a globe. This globe was a living, oscillating ball that had no dimensions. The entire surface of the ball consisted of drops tightly compressed together. And these drops all moved, moved and then merged from several into one, then from one they were divided into many. Each drop sought to spread out, to capture the greatest possible space, but others, striving for the same thing, compressed it, sometimes destroyed it, sometimes merged with it.

This is life, said the old teacher...

There is God in the middle, and every drop strives to expand in order to reflect Him in the greatest possible size... Here he is, Karataev, overflowing and disappearing.”

The metaphor of life as a “liquid oscillating ball” composed of individual drops combines all the symbolic images of “War and Peace” that we talked about above: the spindle, the clockwork, and the anthill; a circular movement connecting everything to everything - this is Tolstoy’s idea of ​​the people, of history, of the family. The meeting of Platon Karataev brings Pierre closer to understanding this truth.

From the image of Staff Captain Tushin we rose, as if a step up, to the image of Platon Karataev. But from Plato in the space of the epic one more step leads upward. The image of People's Field Marshal Kutuzov is raised here to an unattainable height. This old man, gray-haired, fat, walking heavily, with a plump face disfigured by a wound, towers over both Captain Tushin and even Platon Karataev: the truth nationalities, perceived by them instinctively, he comprehended consciously and elevated it to the principle of his life and his military leadership.

The main thing for Kutuzov (unlike all the leaders led by Napoleon) is to deviate from personal proud decision guess the correct course of events and don't interfere they should develop according to God's will, in truth. Having first met him in the first volume, in the scene of the review near Brenau, we see before us an absent-minded and cunning old man, an old campaigner, who is distinguished by “an affectation of respect.” And we don’t immediately understand that mask the unreasoning campaigner, which Kutuzov puts on when approaching powerful people, especially the tsar, is just one of the many ways of his self-defense. After all, he cannot, must not allow these self-righteous persons to really interfere in the course of events, and therefore he is obliged to affectionately evade their will, without contradicting it in words. So he will dodge and from the battle with Napoleon during World War II.

Kutuzov, as he appears in the battle scenes of the third and fourth volumes, is not a figure, but contemplator, he is convinced that victory requires not intelligence, not a scheme, but “something else, independent of intelligence and knowledge.” And above all, “it takes patience and time.” The old commander has both in abundance; he is endowed with the gift of “calm contemplation of the course of events” and sees his main purpose in do no harm. That is, listen to all reports, all main considerations, support useful ones (that is, those that agree with the natural course of things), and reject harmful ones.

A main secret which Kutuzov comprehended, as he is depicted in War and Peace, is the secret of maintaining folk spirit, main force in any fight against any enemy of the Fatherland.

That is why this old, weak, voluptuous man personifies Tolstoy’s idea of ​​the ideal politician, who has comprehended the main wisdom: the individual cannot influence the course of the historical events and must renounce the idea of ​​freedom in favor of the idea of ​​necessity. Tolstoy “instructs” Bolkonsky to express this thought: watching Kutuzov after his appointment as commander-in-chief, Prince Andrei reflects: “He will have nothing of his own. He... understands that there is something stronger and more significant than his will - this is the inevitable course of events... And most importantly... that he is Russian, despite the novel by Zhanlis and French sayings...” (volume III, part second, chapter XVI).

Without the figure of Kutuzov, Tolstoy would not have solved one of the main artistic tasks of his epic: to contrast the “false form of the European hero, supposedly controlling people, which history has come up with” - the “simple, modest and therefore truly majestic figure” of the people’s hero, which will never settle into this "false form"

Natasha Rostova

If we translate the typology of epic heroes into the traditional language of literary terms, then an internal pattern will naturally emerge. The world of everyday life and the world of lies are opposed dramatic And epic characters. Dramatic the characters of Pierre and Andrey are full of internal contradictions, always in motion and development; epic the characters of Karataev and Kutuzov are striking in their integrity. But in the portrait gallery created by Tolstoy in War and Peace, there is a character that does not fit into any of the listed categories. This lyrical the character of the main heroine of the epic, Natasha Rostova.

Does she belong to the life-wasters? It is impossible to even imagine this. With her sincerity, with her heightened sense of justice! Does it apply to ordinary people, like your relatives, Rostov? In many ways - yes; and yet it is not without reason that both Pierre and Andrei seek her love, are drawn to her, and stand out from the crowd. Wherein truth-seeker she - unlike them - cannot be called at all. No matter how much we re-read the scenes in which Natasha acts, we will not find anywhere a hint of search moral ideal, truth, truth. And in the epilogue, after marriage, she even loses the brightness of her temperament, the spirituality of her appearance; children's diapers replace what Pierre and Andrey give to reflection about the truth and the purpose of life.

Like the rest of the Rostovs, Natasha is not endowed with a sharp mind; when in chapter XVII of part four of the last volume, and then in the epilogue we see it next to the emphasized smart woman Marya Bolkonskaya-Rostova, this difference is especially striking. Natasha, as the narrator emphasizes, simply “didn’t deign to be smart.” But she is endowed with something else, which for Tolstoy is more important than the abstract mind, more important even than truth-seeking: the instinct of knowing life through experience. It is this inexplicable quality that brings Natasha’s image very close to to the sages, first of all, to Kutuzov - despite the fact that in everything else she is closer to ordinary people. It is simply impossible to “attribute” it to one particular category: it does not obey any classification, it breaks out beyond any definition.

Natasha, “black-eyed, with a big mouth, ugly, but alive,” is the most emotional of all the characters in the epic; That’s why she is the most musical of all Rostovs. The element of music lives not only in its singing, which everyone around recognizes as wonderful, but also in the voice Natasha. Remember, Andrei’s heart trembled for the first time when he heard Natasha’s conversation with Sonya on a moonlit night, without seeing the girls talking. Natasha’s singing heals brother Nikolai, who falls into despair after losing forty-three thousand, which ruined the Rostov family.

From the same emotional, sensitive, intuitive root grow both her egoism, fully revealed in the story with Anatoly Kuragin, and her selflessness, which is manifested both in the scene with carts for the wounded in the fire department of Moscow, and in the episodes where it is shown how she cares for a dying man Andrey, how he takes care of his mother, shocked by the news of Petya’s death.

And the main gift that is given to her and which raises her above all other heroes of the epic, even the best, is a special gift of happiness. They all suffer, suffer, seek the truth - or, like the impersonal Platon Karataev, affectionately possess it; only Natasha unselfishly enjoys life, feels its feverish pulse - and generously shares her happiness with everyone around her. Her happiness lies in her naturalness; That’s why the narrator so harshly contrasts the scene of Natasha Rostova’s first ball with the episode of her meeting and falling in love with Anatoly Kuragin. Please note: this acquaintance takes place in theater(volume II, part five, chapter IX). That is, where it reigns a game, pretense. This is not enough for Tolstoy; it forces the epic narrator to descend down the steps of emotions, to use in descriptions of what is happening sarcasm, strongly emphasize the idea of unnaturalness the atmosphere in which Natasha’s feelings for Kuragin arise.

No wonder it is to lyrical The heroine, Natasha, is credited with the most famous comparison of War and Peace. At that moment when Pierre, after a long separation, meets Rostova together with Princess Marya and does not recognize her, - and suddenly “the face, with attentive eyes, with difficulty, with effort, like a rusty door opening, smiled, and from this open door suddenly there was a smell of and doused Pierre with forgotten happiness... It smelled, enveloped and absorbed him all” (chapter XV of part four of the last volume).

But Natasha’s true calling, as Tolstoy shows in the epilogue (and unexpectedly for many readers), was revealed only in motherhood. Having gone into children, she realizes herself in them and through them; and this is no coincidence: after all, the family for Tolstoy is the same cosmos, the same holistic and saving world, like the Christian faith, like the life of the people.

M. M. Blinkina

AGE OF CHARACTERS IN THE NOVEL "WAR AND PEACE"

(Izvestia AN. Series of literature and language. - T. 57. - No. 1. - M., 1998. - P. 18-27)

1. INTRODUCTION

The main goal of this work is the mathematical modeling of certain aspects of plot development and the establishment of relationships between real and novel time, or more precisely, between the real and novel ages of the characters (and, in in this case, the relationship will be predictable and linear).

The very concept of “age” certainly has several aspects. Firstly, age literary character determined by novel time, which often does not coincide with real time. Secondly, numerals in the designation of age, in addition to their main (actually numerical) meaning, often have a number of additional meanings, that is, they carry an independent semantic load. They can, for example, contain a positive or negative assessment of the hero, reflect his individual characteristics, or introduce an ironic shade into the story.

Sections 2-6 describe how Leo Tolstoy changes the age characteristics of the heroes of War and Peace depending on their function in the novel, how young they are, what gender they are, and also on some other factors. individual characteristics.

Section 7 proposes a mathematical model that reflects the features of the “aging” of Tolstoy’s heroes.

2. AGE PARADOXES: TEXT ANALYSIS

Reading Leo Nikolayevich Tolstoy's novel "War and Peace", one cannot help but pay attention to some strange inconsistencies in the age characteristics of his characters. Consider, for example, the Rostov family. It's August 1805 - and we meet Natasha for the first time:... ran into the room thirteen year old girl, wrapping something in her muslin skirt...

In the same August 1805, we meet all the other children from this family, in particular, the older sister Vera: The countess's eldest daughter was four years older than my sister and behaved like a big girl.

Thus, in August 1805 Vere seventeen years. Now fast forward to December 1806: There was faith twenty years old beautiful girl... Natasha, half young lady, half girl...

We see that over the past year and four months Vera has managed to grow by three years. She was seventeen, and now she is neither eighteen nor nineteen; she's twenty at once. Natasha’s age in this fragment is given metaphorically, and not by number, which, as it turns out, is also not without reason.

Exactly three more years will pass and we will receive last message about the ages of these two sisters:

Natasha was sixteen years, and it was 1809, the same year that she and Boris counted on her fingers four years ago, after she kissed him.

So, over these four years, Natasha has grown by three, as, indeed, was expected. Instead of seventeen or even eighteen, she is now sixteen. And there won't be any more. This is the last mention of her age. Meanwhile, what happens to her unfortunate older sister?

I had faith twenty four years old, she went everywhere, and, despite the fact that she was undoubtedly good and sensible, until now no one had ever proposed to her.

As we can see, over the past three years, Vera has grown by four. If we count from the very beginning, that is, from August 1805, it turns out that in just over four years Vera grew by seven years. During this time period, the age difference between Natasha and Vera doubled. Vera is now not four, but eight years older than her sister.

This was an example of how the ages of two characters change relative to each other. Now let's look at a hero who at some point in time has different ages for different characters. This hero is Boris Drubetskoy. His age is never stated directly, so we will try to calculate it indirectly. On the one hand, we know that Boris is the same age as Nikolai Rostov: Two young men, a student and an officer, friends since childhood, were one year old ...

Nicholas was nineteen or twenty years old in January 1806:

How strange it was for the countess that her son, who was barely noticeable with his tiny limbs, was moving inside her twenty years ago, now a courageous warrior...

It follows that in August 1805 Boris was nineteen or twenty years old. Now let’s estimate his age from Pierre’s perspective. At the beginning of the novel, Pierre is twenty years old: Pierre from the age of ten was sent abroad with the tutor-abbot, where he stayed up to twenty years of age .

On the other hand, we know that Pierre left Boris fourteen year old boy and definitely didn’t remember him.

Thus, Boris is four years older than Pierre and at the beginning of the novel he is twenty-four years old, that is, he is twenty-four years old for Pierre, while for Nikolai he is still only twenty.

And finally, another, completely funny example: the age of Nikolenka Bolkonsky. In July 1805, his future mother appears before us: ... little Princess Volkonskaya, who got married last winter and now did not go out into the big world because of her pregnancy... waddled around the table with small, quick steps....

From universal human considerations, it is clear that Nikolenka should be born in the fall of 1805: but, contrary to everyday logic, this does not happen, he is born March 19, 1806 It is clear that such a character will have problems with age until the end of his novel life. So in 1811 he will be six years old, and in 1820 - fifteen.

How can such discrepancies be explained? Maybe the exact age of his characters is not important for Tolstoy? On the contrary, Tolstoy has a passion for numbers and, with amazing accuracy, sets the ages of even the most insignificant heroes. So Marya Dmitrievna Akhrosimova exclaims: Fifty eight years old lived in the world...: No, life is not over at thirty-one, - says Prince Andrey.

Tolstoy has numbers everywhere, and exact, fractional numbers. Age in War and Peace is certainly functional. No wonder Dolokhov, beating Nikolai at cards, I decided to continue the game until this entry increased to forty-three thousand. He chose this number because forty-three was the sum of his years added up with Sonya's years .

Thus, all the age discrepancies described above, and there are about thirty of them in the novel, are intentional. What are they due to?

Before starting to answer this question, I note that on average, over the course of the novel’s time, Tolstoy makes each of his characters a year older than they should be (this is shown by calculations that will be discussed later). Usually, the hero of a classic novel will always be twenty-one years old instead of twenty-one years and eleven months, and on average, therefore, such a hero turns out to be six months younger than his years.

However, even from the above examples it is already clear, firstly, that the author “ages” and “youngens” his heroes unequally, and secondly, that this does not happen randomly, but in a systemic, programmed way. How exactly?

From the very beginning, it becomes obvious that positive and negative characters age differently and disproportionately. (“Positive and negative” is, of course, a relative concept, but in Tolstoy, in most cases, the polarity of a character is defined almost unambiguously. The author of “War and Peace” is surprisingly frank in his likes and dislikes). As shown above, Natasha matures more slowly than expected, while Vera, on the contrary, grows up faster. Boris, as Nikolai's friend and friend of the Rostov family, appears to be twenty years old; In the role of Pierre's social acquaintance and Julie Karagina's future husband, he simultaneously turns out to be much older. The ages of the heroes seem to have been given a certain loose order, or rather, an anti-order. There is a feeling that the heroes are being “fined” by increasing their age. Tolstoy seems to punish his heroes with disproportionate aging.

There are, however, characters in the novel who grow older strictly in accordance with the years they have lived. Sonya, for example, being, in fact, neither a positive nor a negative heroine, but completely neutral and colorless, Sonya, who always studied well and remembered everything, grows up exceptionally neatly. The whole confusion of ages that takes place in the Rostov family does not affect her at all. In 1805 she fifteen year old girl , and in 1806 - sixteen year old girl in all the beauty of a newly bloomed flower. It is her age that the calculating Dolokhov wins against Rostov at cards, adding to his own. But Sonya is rather an exception.

In general, characters of “different polarities” grow up in different ways. Moreover, the extremely saturated space of age is divided between positive and negative heroes. Natasha and Sonya are mentioned under the age of sixteen. After the age of sixteen - Vera and Julie Karagina. Pierre, Nikolai and Petya Rostov, Nikolenka Bolkonsky are no more than twenty. Boris, Dolokhov, and the “ambiguous” Prince Andrei are strictly over twenty.

The question is not how old the hero is, the question is what age is recorded in the novel. Natasha is not supposed to be over sixteen; Marya is unacceptably old for a positive heroine, so not a word is said about her age; Helen, on the other hand, is defiantly young for a negative heroine, therefore we do not know how old she is.

The novel sets a boundary after which only negative heroes exist; border, crossing which, obviously positive hero simply ceases to exist in the space of age. In a completely symmetrical manner, the negative hero walks through the novel without age until he passes this border. Natasha loses age, reaching sixteen years old. Julie Karagina, on the contrary, is gaining age, being no longer in her first youth:

Julie was twenty seven years old. After the death of her brothers, she became very rich. She was now completely ugly; but I thought that she was not only just as good, but even much more attractive now than she was before... A man who ten years ago would have been afraid to go every day to the house where she was seventeen year old lady, in order not to compromise her and not to tie himself down, now he boldly went to her every day and communicated with her not as a young lady-bride, but as an acquaintance who does not have a gender.

The problem, however, is that Julie was never seventeen in this novel. In 1805, when this chubby young lady guest appears in the Rostovs' house, nothing is said about her age, for if Tolstoy had honestly given her seventeen years old, then now, in 1811, she would not have been twenty-seven, but only twenty-three, which is also, of course, is no longer the age for a positive heroine, but still not yet the time for the final transition to asexual beings. In general, negative heroes, as a rule, are not entitled to childhood and adolescence. This leads to funny misunderstandings:

Well, what, Lelya? - Prince Vasily turned to his daughter with that careless tone of habitual tenderness, which is acquired by parents who caress their children from childhood, but which Prince Violence only guessed through imitation of other parents.

Or maybe Prince Vasily is not to blame? Perhaps his purely negative children had no childhood at all. And it’s not for nothing that Pierre, before proposing to Helene, convinces himself that he knew her as a child. Was she even a child?

If we move from the lyrics to numbers, it turns out that in the novel there are positive characters aged 5, 6, 7, 9, 13, 15, 16, 20, as well as 40, 45, 50, 58. Negative characters are 17, 20, 24, 25, 27. That is, positive heroes from early youth They immediately reach a ripe old age. Negative heroes also, of course, experience senility, but the fraction of their age in their old age is less than that of positive ones. So, positive Marya Dmitrievna Akhrosimova says: Fifty eight years old lived in the world... The negative Prince Vasily evaluates himself with less accuracy: To me sixth decade, My friend...

In general, accurate calculations show that the aging coefficient in the “positive-negative” space is equal to -2.247, i.e. all other things being equal, the positive hero will be two years and three months younger than the negative one.

Let's now talk about two heroines who are emphatically ageless. These heroines are Helen and Princess Marya, which in itself is not accidental.

Helen symbolizes eternal beauty and youth in the novel. Her rightness, her strength in this inexhaustible youth. Time seems to have no power over her: Elena Vasilievna, that’s how it is at fifty years old she will be a beauty. Pierre, persuading himself to marry Helen, also cites her age as her main advantage. He remembers knowing her as a child. He says to himself: No, she's beautiful young woman! She's not bad woman!

Helen is the eternal bride. With a living husband, she chooses a new groom with charming spontaneity, one of the applicants being young and the other old. Helen dies under mysterious circumstances, preferring an old admirer to a young one, that is: as if she herself chooses old age and death, abandoning her privilege of eternal youth, and dissolves into oblivion.

Princess Marya also has no age, and it is not possible to calculate it from the final version of the novel. In fact, in 1811, she old dry princess, envies Natasha's beauty and youth. In the finale, in 1820, Marya is a happy young mother, she is expecting her fourth child, and her life, one might say, is just beginning, although at that moment she is no less than thirty-five years old, an age not very suitable for a lyrical heroine; That’s why she lives without age in this novel, thoroughly saturated with numbers.

It is curious that in the first edition of War and Peace, which differs from the final version in its extreme specificity and “ultimate directness,” the uncertainty in the images of Helen and Marya is partly removed. There in 1805 Marya was twenty years old: old prince he himself was involved in raising his daughter and, in order to develop both main virtues in her, up to twenty years gave her lessons in algebra and geometry and distributed her whole life in continuous studies.

And Helen, too, dies there not from an excess of youth...

4. FIRST COMPLETED VERSION OF THE NOVEL

The first version of "War and Peace" helps to solve many of the riddles posed in final version novel. What is very vaguely read in the final version appears in the early version with a clarity that is amazing for a novel narrative. The space of age here is not yet imbued with the romantic understatement that the modern reader encounters. Deliberate precision borders on banality. It is not surprising that in the final edition of the novel Tolstoy refuses such meticulousness. Mentions of age become one and a half times less. There are a lot of interesting details behind the scenes that are worth mentioning here.

Princess Marya, as already noted, at the beginning of the novel twenty years. Age Helen is not specified, but it is obviously limited from above by the age of her older brother. Moreover, in 1811 Anatoly was 28 years. He was in full splendor of his strength and beauty.

Thus, at the beginning of the novel, Anatole is twenty-two years old, his friend Dolokhov is twenty-five, and Pierre is twenty. Helen no more than twenty-one. Moreover, she probably no more than nineteen, because according to the unwritten laws of that time, she should not be older than Pierre. (The fact, for example, that Julie is older than Boris is especially emphasized.)

So, the scene in which socialite Helen tries to lead young Natasha Rostova astray looks completely comical, considering that Natasha at this moment is twenty years old, and Helen is twenty-four, that is, they, in fact, belong to the same age categories.

The early version also clarifies the age Boris: Hélène called him mon hage and treated him like a child... Sometimes in rare moments Pierre thought that this patronizing friendship was for an imaginary child who was 23 years old there was something unnatural.

These considerations relate to the autumn of 1809, that is, at the beginning of the novel Boris is nineteen years old, and his future bride Julie - twenty-one years old, if you count her age back from the moment of their wedding. Initially, Julie, apparently, was assigned the role of a more sympathetic heroine in the novel: A tall, plump, proud-looking lady with pretty daughter, rustling with dresses, entered the living room.

This pretty daughter is Julie Karagina, who was initially thought to be younger and more attractive. However, in 1811, Julie Akhrosimova (that’s her original name) will already be the “asexual” creature that we know her in the final version.

In the first version of the novel, Dolokhov wins from Nikolai not forty-three, but only forty-two thousand.

The ages of Natasha and Sonya are given several times. So, at the beginning of 1806 Natasha says: To me fifteenth year, my grandmother got married in my time.

In the summer of 1807, Natasha's age is mentioned twice: Natasha has passed 15 years and she has become very prettier this summer.

“And you sing,” said Prince Andrei. He said these simple words, looking straight into this beautiful eyes 15 year old girls.

This number of age entries allows us to establish that Natasha was born in the fall of 1791. Thus, at her first ball she shines at eighteen, and not at all at sixteen.

To make Natasha younger, Tolstoy also changes Sonya’s age. So, at the end of 1810 Sonya was already twentieth year. She had already stopped getting prettier, she didn’t promise anything more than what was in her, but that was enough.

In fact, Natasha is twenty years old at this moment, and Sonya is at least a year and a half older.

Unlike many other heroes, Prince Andrei does not have an exact age in the first version of the novel. Instead of the textbook thirty-one years old, he about thirty years old.

Of course, the accuracy and directness of the early version of the novel cannot serve as an “official clue” to age shifts, since we have no right to assume that Natasha and Pierre in the first edition are the same characters as Natasha and Pierre in the final version of the novel. By changing the age characteristics of the hero, the author partly changes the hero himself. However, the early version of the novel allows us to check the accuracy of the calculations made on the final text and ensure that these calculations are correct.

5. AGE AS A FUNCTION OF AGE (AGE STEREOTYPES)

There's only so long left to live -

I'm already sixteen years old!

Yu. Ryashentsev

The tradition of aging older characters compared to younger ones goes back centuries. In this sense, Tolstoy did not invent anything new. Calculations show that the coefficient of “aging with age” in a novel is 0.097, which, translated into human language, means a year of novel aging by ten years lived, that is, a ten-year-old hero may turn out to be eleven years old, a twenty-year-old hero twenty-two, and a fifty-year-old fifty-five. The result is not surprising. It is much more interesting how Tolstoy presents the ages of his heroes, how he evaluates them on the “young - old” scale. Let's start from the very beginning.

5.1. Up to ten years

Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy loved children very much.

Sometimes they would bring him a full room. Step by step

There’s nowhere to step, but he keeps shouting: More! More!

D. Kharms

Kharms is certainly right. There are many characters of infancy in the novel. What they have in common, perhaps, is that they do not seem to be independent units, endowed with their own problems and experiences. The age of up to ten years is a signal that the hero will, in fact, be a small mouthpiece for the author. The children in the novel see the world surprisingly subtly and correctly; they engage in systematic “defamiliarization” of their surroundings. They, not spoiled by the burden of civilization, are more successful than adults in solving their moral problems and at the same time seem to be completely devoid of reason. Therefore, such young characters, the number of which will grow to incredible limits by the end, look very artificial:

Five minutes later the little black-eyed three year old Natasha, her father's favorite, having learned from her brother that daddy was sleeping in the small sofa room, unnoticed by her mother, ran to her father... Nikolai turned around with a tender smile on his face.

- Natasha, Natasha! - the frightened whisper of Countess Marya was heard from the door, - daddy wants to sleep.

“No, mom, he doesn’t want to sleep,” little Natasha answered convincingly, “he’s laughing.”

Such an edifying little character. But the next one is a little older:

Only Andrei’s granddaughter, Malasha, six year old girl, to whom His Serene Highness, having caressed her, gave her a piece of sugar for tea, remained on the stove in the large hut... Malasha... understood the meaning of this advice differently. It seemed to her that it was only a matter of personal struggle between “grandfather” and “long-haired,” as she called Beningsen.

Amazing insight!

The last character in age to show signs of the same “childish-unconscious” behavior as all of Tolstoy’s juvenile characters is the eternally sixteen-year-old Natasha Rostova:

In the middle of the stage sat girls in red bodices and white skirts. They were all singing something. When they finished their song, the girl in white approached the prompter's booth, and a man in tight-fitting silk trousers on thick legs, with a feather and a dagger, approached her and began to sing and spread his arms...

After the village and in the serious mood in which Natasha was, all this was wild and surprising to her.

So, Natasha sees the world in the same childish, unreasonable way. It’s not because of their age that adult children look like young old people. Striving for globality, the author of “War and Peace” loses the little things, the individuality of babies, for example, Lev Nikolaevich’s children do not come individually, but as a set: At the table were her mother, the old woman Belova who lived with her, her wife, three children, governess, tutor, nephew with his tutor, Sonya, Denisov, Natasha, her three children, their governess and the old man Mikhail Ivanovich, the prince’s architect, who lived in Bald Mountains in retirement.

Individuality in this enumeration is due to everyone, even old lady Belova, whom we meet in the first and second last time. Even the tutor, and the governess, and also the tutor do not merge into the general concept of “tutors”. And only children, sexless and faceless, go en masse. Kharms had something to parody.

Heroes of the novel "War and Peace"

L.N. Tolstoy based his assessment of the heroes of his book on “popular thought.” Kutuzov, Bagration, captains Tushin and Timokhin, Andrei Bolkonsky and Pierre Bezukhov, Petya Rostov, Vasily Denisov, together with the people, stand up in defense of their homeland. The heroine of the novel, the wonderful “sorceress” Natasha Rostova, loves her homeland and people with all her heart. The negative characters of the novel: Prince Vasily Kuragin and his children Anatole, Hippolyte and Helen, careerist Boris Drubetskoy, money-grubber Berg, foreign generals in Russian service - they are all far from the people and care only about their own personal benefits.

The novel immortalizes Moscow's unprecedented feat. Its inhabitants, unlike the inhabitants of the capitals of other countries conquered by Napoleon, did not want to submit to the conquerors and left hometown. “For the Russian people,” says Tolstoy, “there could be no question whether it would be good or bad under the rule of the French in Moscow. It was impossible to be under French rule: that was the worst thing.”

Entering Moscow, which looked like an empty beehive. Napoleon felt that the hand of a powerful enemy was raised over him and his armies. He began to persistently seek a truce and twice sent ambassadors to Kutuzov. On behalf of the people and the army, Kutuzov resolutely rejected Napoleon's proposal for peace and organized a counter-offensive of his troops, supported by partisan detachments.

Having been defeated in the Battle of Tarutino, Napoleon left Moscow. Soon the disorderly flight of his regiments began. Turning into crowds of marauders and robbers, Napoleonic troops fled back along the same road that led them to the Russian capital.

After the battle of Krasnoye, Kutuzov addressed his soldiers with a speech in which he cordially congratulated them on their victory and thanked them for their faithful service to the fatherland. In the scene near Krasny, the deepest nationality of the great commander, his love for those who saved his homeland from foreign enslavement, and his true patriotism are revealed with particular insight.

However, it should be noted that there are scenes in War and Peace where the image of Kutuzov is shown contradictorily. Tolstoy believed that the development of all events taking place in the world does not depend on the will of people, but is predetermined from above. It seemed to the writer that Kutuzov thought the same and did not consider it necessary to interfere in the development of events. But this decisively contradicts the image of Kutuzov, which was created by Tolstoy himself. The writer emphasizes that great commander knew how to understand the spirit of the army and sought to control it, that all Kutuzov’s thoughts and all his actions were aimed at one goal - to defeat the enemy.

The image of the soldier Platon Karataev, whom Pierre Bezukhov met and became friends with in captivity, is also depicted contradictorily in the novel. Karataev is characterized by such traits as gentleness, humility, willingness to forgive and forget any offense. Pierre listens with surprise and then with delight to Karataev’s stories, which always end with evangelical calls to love everyone and forgive everyone. But the same Pierre had to see the terrible end of Platon Karataev. When the French were driving a party of prisoners along a muddy autumn road, Karataev fell from weakness and could not get up. And the guards mercilessly shot him. One cannot forget this terrible scene: Karataev lies dead near a dirty forest road, and next to him sits and howls a hungry, lonely, freezing little dog, which he so recently saved from death...

Fortunately, the “Karataev” traits were unusual for the Russian people who defended their land. Reading “War and Peace”, we see that it was not the Platon Karataevs who defeated Napoleon’s army. This was done by the fearless artillerymen of the modest captain Tushin, the brave soldiers of captain Timokhin, the cavalrymen of Uvarov, and the partisans of captain Denisov. The Russian army and the Russian people defeated the enemy. And this is shown with convincing force in the novel. It is no coincidence that during the Second World War, Tolstoy’s book was a reference book for people different countries who fought against the invasion of Hitler's fascist hordes. And it will always serve as a source of patriotic inspiration for freedom-loving people.

From the epilogue that ends the novel, we learn about how its heroes lived after the end of the Patriotic War of 1812. Pierre Bezukhov and Natasha Rostova united their destinies and found their happiness. Pierre is still concerned about the future of his homeland. He became a member of a secret organization from which the Decembrists would later emerge. Young Nikolenka Bolkonsky, the son of Prince Andrei, who died from a wound received on the Borodino field, listens carefully to his hot speeches.

You can guess about the future of these people by listening to their conversation. Nikolenka asked Pierre: “Uncle Pierre... If dad were alive... would he agree with you?” And Pierre replied: “I think so...”

At the end of the novel, Tolstoy depicts Nikolenka Bolkonsky’s dream. “He and Uncle Pierre walked ahead of a huge army,” Nikolenka dreamed. They were going to a difficult and glorious feat. Nikolenka’s father was with him, encouraging both him and Uncle Pierre. Waking up, Nikolenka makes a firm decision: to live in such a way as to be worthy of the memory of his father. "Father! Father! - Nikolenka thinks. “Yes, I will do something that would make even him happy.”

With this oath of Nikolenka, Tolstoy completes the storyline of the novel, as if lifting the curtain into the future, stretching threads from one era of Russian life to another, when the heroes of 1825 - the Decembrists - entered the historical arena.

Thus ends the work to which Tolstoy, by his own admission, devoted five years of “incessant and exceptional labor.”

In this article we will introduce you to the main characters of Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy's work "War and Peace". The characteristics of the heroes include the main features of their appearance and inner world. All the characters in the work are very interesting. The novel "War and Peace" is very large in volume. The characteristics of the heroes are given only briefly, but meanwhile, a separate work can be written for each of them. Let's begin our analysis with a description of the Rostov family.

Ilya Andreevich Rostov

The Rostov family in the work are typical Moscow representatives of the nobility. Its head, Ilya Andreevich, is known for his generosity and hospitality. This is the count, the father of Petya, Vera, Nikolai and Natasha Rostov, a rich man and a Moscow gentleman. He is spendthrift, good-natured, and loves to live. In general, speaking about the Rostov family, it should be noted that sincerity, goodwill, lively contact and ease in communication were characteristic of all its representatives.

Some episodes from the life of the writer's grandfather were used by him to create the image of Rostov. The fate of this man is burdened by the awareness of ruin, which he does not immediately understand and is unable to stop. Its appearance also has some similarities with the prototype. The author used this technique not only in relation to Ilya Andreevich. Some internal and external features the relatives and friends of Leo Tolstoy are also discernible in other characters, which is confirmed by the characteristics of the heroes. "War and Peace" is a large-scale work with a huge number of characters.

Nikolay Rostov

Nikolai Rostov - son of Ilya Andreevich, brother of Petya, Natasha and Vera, hussar, officer. At the end of the novel he appears as the husband of Marya Bolkonskaya, the princess. In the appearance of this man one could see “enthusiasm” and “impetuousness.” It reflected some of the characteristics of the writer’s father, who participated in the War of 1812. This hero is distinguished by such traits as cheerfulness, openness, goodwill and self-sacrifice. Convinced that he is neither a diplomat nor an official, Nikolai leaves the university at the beginning of the novel and enters the hussar regiment. Here he participates in Patriotic War 1812, in military campaigns. Nikolai receives his first baptism of fire when he crosses the Enns. In the Battle of Shengraben he was wounded in the arm. Having passed the tests, this man becomes a real hussar, a brave officer.

Petya Rostov

Petya Rostov - youngest child in the Rostov family, brother of Natasha, Nikolai and Vera. He appears at the beginning of the work as a small boy. Petya, like all Rostovs, is cheerful and kind, musical. He wants to imitate his brother and also wants to join the army. After Nikolai's departure, Petya becomes the main concern of the mother, who only realizes at that time the depth of her love for this child. During the war, he accidentally ends up in Denisov’s detachment on an assignment, where he remains because he wants to take part in the case. Petya dies by coincidence, showing before his death the best traits of the Rostovs in his relationships with his comrades.

Countess of Rostov

Rostova is a heroine, when creating the image of which the author used some circumstances of the life of L. A. Bers, Lev Nikolaevich’s mother-in-law, as well as P. N. Tolstoy, the writer’s paternal grandmother. The Countess was used to living in an atmosphere of kindness and love, in luxury. She is proud of the trust and friendship of her children, spoils them, and worries about their destinies. Despite the external weakness, even some of the heroine makes reasonable and informed decisions regarding her children. Her love for children is also dictated by her desire to marry Nikolai to a wealthy bride at any cost, as well as nagging towards Sonya.

Natasha Rostova

Natasha Rostova is one of the main characters of the work. She is the daughter of Rostov, the sister of Petya, Vera and Nikolai. At the end of the novel she becomes the wife of Pierre Bezukhov. This girl is presented as “ugly, but lively,” with a large mouth and black eyes. The prototype for this image was Tolstoy’s wife, as well as her sister T. A. Bers. Natasha is very sensitive and emotional, she can intuitively guess the characters of people, in manifestations of feelings she is sometimes selfish, but most often capable of self-sacrifice and self-forgetfulness. We see this, for example, during the transport of the wounded from Moscow, as well as in the episode of the mother’s nursing after Petya died.

One of Natasha's main advantages is her musicality and beautiful voice. With her singing, she can awaken all the best that is in a person. This is what saves Nikolai from despair after he lost a large sum.

Natasha, constantly getting carried away, lives in an atmosphere of happiness and love. After meeting Prince Andrei, a change occurs in her destiny. The insult inflicted by Bolkonsky (the old prince) pushes this heroine to become infatuated with Kuragin and to refuse Prince Andrei. Only after feeling and experiencing a lot does she realize her guilt before Bolkonsky. But this girl experiences true love only for Pierre, whose wife she becomes at the end of the novel.

Sonya

Sonya is the pupil and niece of Count Rostov, who grew up in his family. At the beginning of the work she is 15 years old. This girl fits completely into the Rostov family, she is unusually friendly and close to Natasha, and has been in love with Nikolai since childhood. Sonya is silent, restrained, cautious, reasonable, and has a highly developed ability for self-sacrifice. She attracts attention with her moral purity and beauty, but she does not have the charm and spontaneity that Natasha possesses.

Pierre Bezukhov

Pierre Bezukhov is one of the main characters in the novel. Therefore, without him, the characterization of the heroes ("War and Peace") would be incomplete. Let us briefly describe Pierre Bezukhov. He is the illegitimate son of a count, a famous nobleman who became the heir to a huge fortune and title. In the work he is depicted as a fat, massive young man wearing glasses. This hero is distinguished by a timid, intelligent, natural and observant look. He was raised abroad and appeared in Russia shortly before the start of the 1805 campaign and the death of his father. Pierre is prone to philosophical reflection, intelligent, kind-hearted and gentle, and compassionate towards others. He is also impractical, sometimes subject to passions. Andrei Bolkonsky, his closest friend, characterizes this hero as the only “living person” among all representatives of the world.

Anatol Kuragin

Anatole Kuragin is an officer, brother of Hippolyte and Helen, son of Prince Vasily. Unlike Hippolytus, a “calm fool,” his father looks at Anatole as a “restless” fool who must always be rescued from various troubles. This hero is stupid, arrogant, dapper, not eloquent in conversations, depraved, not resourceful, but has confidence. He looks at life as constant fun and pleasure.

Andrey Bolkonsky

Andrei Bolkonsky is one of the main characters in the work, the prince, brother of Princess Marya, son of N. A. Bolkonsky. Described as a "very handsome" young man of "short stature". He is proud, intelligent, and seeks great spiritual and intellectual content in life. Andrey is educated, reserved, practical, and has a strong will. His idol at the beginning of the novel is Napoleon, who will also be introduced to readers just below by our description of the heroes (“War and Peace”). Andrei Balkonsky dreams of imitating him. After participating in the war, he lives in the village, raises his son, and takes care of the farm. Then he returns to the army and dies in the Battle of Borodino.

Platon Karataev

Let's imagine this hero of the work "War and Peace". Platon Karataev is a soldier who met Pierre Bezukhov in captivity. In the service he was nicknamed Sokolik. Note that this character was not in the original version of the work. Its appearance was caused by the final design in philosophical concept"War and Peace" image of Pierre.

When he first met this good-natured, affectionate man, Pierre was struck by the feeling of something calm emanating from him. This character attracts others with his calmness, kindness, confidence, and smile. After the death of Karataev, thanks to his wisdom, folk philosophy, expressed unconsciously in his behavior, Pierre Bezukhov understands the meaning of existence.

But they are not only depicted in the work “War and Peace”. Characteristics of the heroes include real historical figures. The main ones are Kutuzov and Napoleon. Their images are described in some detail in the work "War and Peace". The characteristics of the heroes we have mentioned are given below.

Kutuzov

Kutuzov in the novel, as in reality, is the commander-in-chief of the Russian army. He is described as a man with a plump face, disfigured by a wound, with He walks heavily, plump, gray-haired. For the first time on the pages of the novel he appears in the episode when the review of troops near Branau is depicted. Impresses everyone with his knowledge of the matter, as well as his attention, which is hidden behind external absent-mindedness. Kutuzov is capable of being diplomatic, he is quite cunning. Before the Battle of Shengraben he blesses Bagration with tears in his eyes. A favorite of military officers and soldiers. He believes that to win the campaign against Napoleon, time and patience are needed, that the matter can be decided not by knowledge, not by intelligence and not by plans, but by something else that does not depend on them, that a person is not able to truly influence the course of history . Kutuzov contemplates the course of events more than interferes with them. However, he knows how to remember everything, listen, see, not interfere with anything useful and not allow anything harmful. This is a modest, simple and therefore majestic figure.

Napoleon

Napoleon - real historical figure, French Emperor. On the eve of the main events of the novel, he is the idol of Andrei Bolkonsky. Even Pierre Bezukhov bows before the greatness of this man. His confidence and self-satisfaction are expressed in the opinion that his presence plunges people into self-forgetfulness and delight, that everything in the world depends only on his will.

This is a brief description of the characters in the novel "War and Peace". It can serve as a basis for a more detailed analysis. Having turned to the work, you can supplement it if necessary. detailed characteristics heroes. "War and Peace" (volume 1 - introduction of the main characters, subsequent ones - character development) describes in detail each of these characters. Inner world many of them change over time. Therefore, Leo Tolstoy presented the characteristics of the heroes in dynamics ("War and Peace"). Volume 2, for example, reflects their lives between 1806 and 1812. The next two volumes describe further events and their reflection in the fate of the characters.

The characteristics of the heroes are of great importance for understanding such a creation of Leo Tolstoy as the work “War and Peace”. Through them the philosophy of the novel is reflected, the author's ideas and thoughts are conveyed.