Can we have a thread to swoon over Tolstoy?

>Why haven't you read his religious writings?

all his writings are

Kreutzer Sonata is probably my favourite.
His thoughts on history dynamics from War and Peace are nice, rest of it is just a decent soap opera.
Anna Karenina is pretty solid piece of literatute, it gots its moments but is sadly not on par with best Dostoyevsky's works.
Resurrection is worth noting, pretty much sums up his 'philosophy'.
Death of I.I. and Hadji Murad are both well-writen but a bit mediocre in terms of presented ideas.
Definitely extremely skilled writer, but a little bit too narrow in his 'philosophic' sensitivity.

>I am fifty-five years old and, with the exception of the fourteen or fifteen years of my childhood, I have been until recently a “Nihilist” in the proper signification of that term. I have not been a Socialist or Revolutionist, but a Nihilist in the sense of being completely without faith.

>Five years ago I began to believe in the doctrine of Christ, and in consequence a great change has been wrought in me. I now no longer care for the things that I had prized, and I have begun to desire things concerning which I had formerly been indifferent. Like a man who, going out on business, on his way suddenly becomes convinced of the futility of that business and turns back; and all that stood to the right now stands to the left, and all that was to the left is now to the right; his wish to be as far from home as possible is changed to the desire of being as near home as possible – so, I may say, the whole aim and purpose of my life has been changed; my desires are no more what they have been. For me, good and evil have changed places. This experience came through my apprehending the doctrine of Christ in an altogether different way, and seeing it in quite a new light.

en.wikisource.org/wiki/What_I_Believe_(Tolstoy)/Introduction

Kreutzer Sonata is probably his worst piece of wring. You have absolute trash tier taste.

>Anna Karenina.
>"Pretty solid."

This.
Anna Karenina is not 'pretty solid'. It is decent. At best.

>>>/pelbdit/

I would say it's alright. Let's not get overboard here. Its not like it's one of the best works of literature ever or anything.

Which is Tolstoys shortest short story?

Learning the rooskie and I'm confident I could tackle some Tolstoy if I leaned heavily on a dictionary.

Alyosha the Pot is like 5 pages.

Cheers buddy

I've read a few of his novels over the past year: The Cossacks, War and Peace, Hadji Murat, and also many of his short stories. The more I read him, the more I think his shorter works are the best; from soldier stories like the Woodfellers, to The Forged Coupon and Ivan Ilyich. Even a little ten page or so thing like After The Ball. I'm waiting a while until I read Anna Karenina because I didn't want to get burned out on the author, something that can happen with the best, just like having too much of a good thing. Tolstoy turned me into a Russophile, and so I also started reading Dostoevsky, Chekhov, Turgenev. They really are something else. I can only guess why they are so good, and that is because they were writing about people, and people haven't changed much. But they write without the affectations and formalities of English authors, whose prose is more formal, felicitous, and intelligent, something you have to tune into to appreciate; whereas somebody like Tolstoy is speaking directly about matters of the soul. This is why I would breeze through War and Peace when I would struggle to commit to Charles Dickens.

What historical books/ literary works should I read before I into War and Peace?

Russian authors and painters perfected realism. Among all the great geniuses Tolstoy is at the head.

This.

It's the best history book I have ever read.

You don't really need to read anything, but do have a familiarity with the Napoleonic era, like who the big players were, what they were like, which battles were major, stuff like that.

How Much Land Does a Man Need is fantastic. Second

About 400 pages into War and Peace. It's good, quite good. Pierre is /our guy/.

Pierre is beta. Andrei is the alpha that we should aspire to be.

There's a good 3-4 part Napoleon documentary on YouTube. I would recommend you want it for some background knowledge.

As long as you have a rough idea of the Napoleonic war and a decent understanding of the geography/countries so you can visualise the advancements and locations.

Anna Karenina is a perfect novel, and the pinnacle of moralist realism. If you really didn't like AK you probably lack (besides good taste) fundamental knowledge of Christianity -- specifically eastern orthodoxy. Also, his style is rarely translated properly so you're not entirely to blame for not enjoying it. Marian Schwartz probably does the best job.

Seconding Marian Schwartz.

Andrei is kind of an autist too, he's Chad on the outside but robot on the inside. Nikolai Rostov is a total fucking normie though.

AK was written during his nihilist period. He literally renounced the work.

A truly great work transcends translation. If a book is "rarely translated properly" then it's not a great book.

I agree, generally speaking, but Tolstoy's style is particularly susceptible to "corrections" when being translated.

>AK was written during his nihilist period.

Yes, if you actually read the book you can tell. He's very much against nihilsim.

>He literally renounced the work.
Who cares? Kafka wanted all his shit burned

I only read Anna Karenina. It was ok, but the characters were annoying.