novel tolstoy guerrilla war french

The attitude of L.N. Tolstoy to the war is contradictory and ambiguous. On the one hand, the writer, as a humanist, considers war "the most disgusting thing in life", unnatural, monstrous in its cruelty, "the purpose of which is murder", the weapon is "espionage and treason, deceit and lies, called military tricks." War, according to Tolstoy, brings only violence and suffering, separates people and hardens them, makes them violate universal moral laws ... And at the same time, Tolstoy, being a patriot, sings of war, "not suitable for any previous legends", partisan war, "which began with the entry of the enemy into Smolensk" and, according to the author, was one of the main reasons for the defeat of the French in Russia and the death of the Napoleonic army. Tolstoy characterizes this "war not according to the rules" as spontaneous, comparing it with a club, "rising with all its formidable and majestic strength and, without asking anyone's tastes and rules, nailed the French until the whole invasion died." Generated by a "sense of insult and revenge", personal hatred for the French, which was experienced by the inhabitants of Moscow, who left their homes and left the city so as not to submit to Napoleon's army, and the peasants who burned all their hay so that the French would not get it, the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthis war gradually spread to all strata of society. The awakened national consciousness, the unwillingness to be defeated by Napoleon united various classes in the struggle for the freedom and independence of Russia. That is why partisan warfare is so diverse in its manifestations, partisan detachments are so different from each other: "there were parties that adopted all the methods of the army, with infantry, artillery, headquarters; there were only Cossacks, there were peasants and landlords." The great army of Napoleon was destroyed in parts, thousands of Frenchmen - backward marauders, foragers - were exterminated by partisans, their numerous "small, prefabricated, foot and horse" detachments. The heroes of this war are representatives of various classes, having little in common, but united by the common goal of defending their homeland. These are the sexton, "who took several hundred prisoners a month", the hussar Denis Davydov, "who owns the first step" in legitimizing the guerrilla war, the elder Vasilisa, who "beat hundreds of French", and, of course, Tikhon Shcherbaty. In the image of this partisan, Tolstoy embodies a certain type of Russian peasant, not meek and humble, like Platon Karataev, but unusually courageous, not without a good, moral beginning in his soul, but in many ways acting instinctively. Therefore, he easily kills the French, "doesn't do them any harm, but beat two dozen marauders." Tikhon Shcherbaty, "one of the most needed, useful and brave people in the party," is distinguished by dexterity and ingenuity: "No one else discovered cases of attacks, no one else took him and beat the French." But at the same time, the reckless cruelty of Tikhon, who used to not bring tongues and not take prisoners, but who beat enemies not because of hatred and anger, but because of his underdevelopment, contradicts Tolstoy's humanistic convictions. With this hero, as well as with Dolokhov, who commanded a small party and fearlessly set off on the most dangerous sorties, a peculiar ideology of guerrilla warfare is associated, reflected in the words of Prince Andrei: "The French ruined my house, they are my enemies, they are all criminals. They must be executed Dolokhov considered it "stupid courtesy", "chivalry" to leave the French alive, who would still "die of hunger or be beaten by another party". However, such a hero as Denisov, who released the prisoners "on receipt", "had no conscience one person" and "who did not want to soil the honor of a soldier", as well as Petya Rostov, who "felt love for all people", felt pity for Vincent Bosse, a young drummer taken prisoner, embody Tolstoy's ideas of humanism, compassion and love for people. Laws peace, according to the author, will certainly triumph over the war, because hostility and hatred towards the enemy are replaced by pity and sympathy. , and now you can regret it, they are people too, "and the captured Italian admits to Pierre that" fighting with such a people as the Russians is a sin, because they, who suffered so much from the French, do not even have malice against them ... ".

1 of 6

Presentation on the topic: Tolstoy's attitude to War and Peace

slide number 1

Description of the slide:

slide number 2

Description of the slide:

Many are interested in what Tolstoy's attitude to the war was. It's easy enough to understand. You just need to read the novel "War and Peace". In the process, it will become quite clear that Tolstoy hated the war. The writer believed that murder is the most heinous of all possible crimes, and it cannot be justified by anything. Not noticeable in the work and enthusiastic attitude to military exploits.

slide number 3

Description of the slide:

Although there is one exception - an excerpt about the Battle of Shengraben and Tushin's act. Depicting the Patriotic War, the author admires the unity of the people. People had to unite in order to oppose the enemy with common forces. What did Tolstoy think about the war? Let's figure it out. Going through the materials that reflected the events of 1812, the writer realized that, despite all the criminality of the war with its many deaths, rivers of blood, dirt, betrayal, sometimes people are forced to fight. Perhaps this people in other times would not have harmed a fly, but if a jackal pounces on it, it, defending itself, will finish it off. However, during the killing, he does not feel any pleasure from it and does not think that this act is worthy of admiration. The author shows how much the soldiers who were forced to fight with the enemy loved their homeland.

slide number 4

Description of the slide:

Tolstoy's attitude to the war is, of course, interesting, but even more interesting is what he said about our enemies. The writer speaks with disdain about the French, who care more about their own "I" than about the nation - they are not particularly patriotic. And the Russian people, according to Tolstoy, are inherent in nobility and self-sacrifice in the name of saving the Motherland. Negative heroes in the work are also those persons who do not think at all about the fate of Russia (the guests of Helen Kuragina) and people who hide their indifference behind feigned patriotism (most of the nobles, not counting some worthy personalities: Andrei Bolkonsky, Rostovs, Kutuzov, Bezukhov). In addition, the writer frankly has a bad attitude towards those who enjoy the war - Napoleon and Dolokhov. It shouldn't be like this, it's unnatural. The war in Tolstoy's image is so terrible that it is amazing how these people can enjoy the battles. How cruel do you have to be for that.

slide number 5

Description of the slide:

The writer likes those people who, realizing that war is disgusting, vile, but sometimes inevitable, stand up for their country without any pathos and do not get any pleasure from killing opponents. These are Denisov, Bolkonsky, Kutuzov and many other persons depicted in the episodes. From here it becomes clear Tolstoy's attitude to the war. With particular trepidation, the author writes about the truce, when the Russians show compassion for the crippled French, humane treatment of the prisoners (Kutuzov's order to the soldiers at the end of the bloodshed is to pity the defeated opponents who received frostbite). Also, the writer is close to the scenes in which the enemies show humanity towards the Russians (interrogation of Bezukhov by Marshal Davout). Do not forget about the main idea of ​​the work - the solidarity of people. When peace reigns, the people, figuratively speaking, unite into one family, and during the war there is disunity. The novel also contains the idea of ​​patriotism. In addition, the author extols peace and speaks negatively about bloodshed. Tolstoy's attitude to the war is sharply negative. As you know, the writer was a pacifist.

slide number 6

Description of the slide:

What does Tolstoy say about the Patriotic War? He claims it is a crime. The writer does not divide soldiers into defenders and attackers. Countless people committed as many atrocities as would otherwise not have been accumulated in several centuries, and what is most terrible, no one in this period regarded this as something impermissible. This is how war was in Tolstoy's understanding: blood, dirt (both literally and figuratively) and atrocities that terrify any conscious person. But the writer understood that bloodshed was inevitable. Wars have been throughout the history of mankind and will be until the very end of its existence, nothing can be done about it. But our duty is to try to prevent atrocities and bloodshed, so that we ourselves and our families live in a world that, however, is so fragile. It must be protected by all means.

Arts and Entertainment

What was Tolstoy's attitude towards the war?

Many are interested in what Tolstoy's attitude to the war was. It's easy enough to understand. You just need to read the novel "War and Peace". In the process, it will become quite clear that Tolstoy hated the war. The writer believed that murder is the most heinous of all possible crimes, and it cannot be justified by anything.

The unity of the people

Not noticeable in the work and enthusiastic attitude to military exploits. Although there is one exception - an excerpt about the Battle of Shengraben and Tushin's act. Depicting the Patriotic War, the author admires the unity of the people. People had to unite in order to oppose the enemy with common forces.

People forced to defend

What did Tolstoy think about the war? Let's figure it out. Going through the materials that reflected the events of 1812, the writer realized that, despite all the criminality of the war with its many deaths, rivers of blood, dirt, betrayal, sometimes people are forced to fight. Perhaps this people in other times would not have harmed a fly, but if a jackal pounces on it, it, defending itself, will finish it off. However, during the killing, he does not feel any pleasure from it and does not think that this act is worthy of admiration. The author shows how much the soldiers who were forced to fight with the enemy loved their homeland.

Negative characters in the novel

Tolstoy's attitude to the war is, of course, interesting, but even more interesting is what he said about our enemies. The writer speaks with disdain about the French, who care more about their own "I" than about the nation - they are not particularly patriotic. And the Russian people, according to Tolstoy, are inherent in nobility and self-sacrifice in the name of saving the Motherland. Negative heroes in the work are also those persons who do not think at all about the fate of Russia (the guests of Helen Kuragina) and people who hide their indifference behind feigned patriotism (most of the nobles, not counting some worthy personalities: Andrei Bolkonsky, Rostovs, Kutuzov, Bezukhov). In addition, the writer frankly has a bad attitude towards those who enjoy the war - Napoleon and Dolokhov. It shouldn't be like this, it's unnatural. The war in Tolstoy's image is so terrible that it is amazing how these people can enjoy the battles. How cruel do you have to be for that.

Noble people and humane deeds in the novel

The writer likes those people who, realizing that war is disgusting, vile, but sometimes inevitable, stand up for their country without any pathos and do not get any pleasure from killing opponents. These are Denisov, Bolkonsky, Kutuzov and many other persons depicted in the episodes. From here it becomes clear Tolstoy's attitude to the war. With particular trepidation, the author writes about the truce, when the Russians show compassion for the crippled French, humane treatment of the prisoners (Kutuzov's order to the soldiers at the end of the bloodshed is to pity the defeated opponents who received frostbite). Also, the writer is close to the scenes in which the enemies show humanity towards the Russians (interrogation of Bezukhov by Marshal Davout). Do not forget about the main idea of ​​the work - the cohesion of people. When peace reigns, the people, figuratively speaking, unite into one family, and during the war there is disunity. The novel also contains the idea of ​​patriotism. In addition, the author extols peace and speaks negatively about bloodshed. Tolstoy's attitude to the war is sharply negative. As you know, the writer was a pacifist.

A crime that has no excuse

What does Tolstoy say about the Patriotic War? He claims it is a crime. The writer does not divide soldiers into defenders and attackers. Countless people committed as many atrocities as would otherwise not have been accumulated in several centuries, and what is most terrible, no one in this period regarded this as something impermissible.

This is how war was in Tolstoy's understanding: blood, dirt (both literally and figuratively) and atrocities that terrify any conscious person. But the writer understood that bloodshed was inevitable. Wars have been throughout the history of mankind and will be until the very end of its existence, nothing can be done about it. But our duty is to try to prevent atrocities and bloodshed, so that we ourselves and our families live in a world that, however, is so fragile. It must be protected by all means.

Actual

Miscellaneous
Miscellaneous

At the center of L. N. Tolstoy's novel "War and Peace" is the image of the Patriotic War of 1812, which stirred up the entire Russian people, showed the whole world its power and strength, put forward simple Russian heroes and the great commander - Kutuzov. At the same time, great historical upheavals revealed the true essence of each individual person, showed his attitude towards the Fatherland. depicts the war as a realist writer: in hard work, blood, suffering, death.

Also, L. N. Tolstoy sought in his work to reveal the national significance of the war, which united the whole society, all Russian people in a common impulse, to show that the fate of the campaign was decided not in headquarters and headquarters, but in the hearts of ordinary people: Platon Karataev and Tikhon Shcherbaty, Petya Rostov and Denisov ...

Can you list them all? In other words, the author-battle painter draws a large-scale image of the Russian people, who raised the "club" of the liberation war against the invaders. It is interesting to know what is Tolstoy's attitude to the war? According to Lev Nikolaevich, “war is the fun of idle and frivolous people”, and the novel “War and Peace” itself is an anti-war work, which once again emphasizes the senselessness of the cruelty of war, which brings death and human suffering. The writer reveals his point of view in the novel in various ways, for example, through the thoughts of his favorite characters. The same Prince Andrei, who, lying under the sky of Austerlitz, is disappointed in his former dreams of glory, power, of “his Toulon” (even his idol seems to Prince Bolkonsky now small and insignificant). An important role in understanding the author's position regarding the war is played by the comparison of the bright forest nature and the madness of people killing each other. Involuntarily, a panorama of the Borodino field appears before our eyes: “the oblique rays of the bright sun ... threw their dark, long shadows piercing with a pink and golden hue on it in the clear morning air. Farther on, the forests that complete the panorama, as if carved from some precious yellow-green stone, could be seen with their curved line of peaks on the horizon ... Closer, golden fields and copses shone. But now this most wonderful picture of nature is replaced by a terrible view of the battle, and all the fields are covered with "dim dampness and smoke", the smell of "strange saltpeter acid and blood." In the episode of the fight between a French and a Russian soldier over a bannik, in the pictures of military hospitals, in drawing up dispositions for battles, we are once again convinced of Leo Tolstoy's negative attitude towards the war. In his novel, the writer gives images of two wars: abroad in 1805-1807 and in Russia in 1812. The first, unnecessary and incomprehensible to the Russian people, was a war that was fought on the wrong side. Therefore, in this war, everyone is far from patriotism: officers think about awards and glory, and soldiers dream of returning home as soon as possible. The second is of a completely different nature: it is a people's war, just. In it, patriotic feelings engulfed various sections of Russian society: the merchant Ferapontov, who burned his shop when the French occupied Smolensk, so that the enemy would not get anything, and the peasants Karn and Vlas, who refused to sell “for the good money that they were offered, hay ”, and the Rostovs, who gave carts for the wounded in Moscow, thus completing their ruin. The popular character of the war of 1812 was especially widely reflected in the spontaneous growth of partisan detachments, which began to form after the enemy had entered Smolensk; it was they who, according to Tolstoy, "destroyed the great army in parts." As outstanding heroes, the author speaks of the partisan Denisov, and the peasant Tikhon Shcherbat, "the most useful and brave man" in the detachment of Vasily Dmitrievich, and the brave but ruthless Dolokhov. A special place in the understanding of the “hidden warmth” of Russian patriotism is occupied by the Battle of Borodino, in which the Russian army won a moral victory over a numerically superior enemy. Russian soldiers understood that Moscow was behind them, they knew that the future of the Motherland depended on the upcoming battle. It is no coincidence that the French generals informed Napoleon that "the Russians hold on to their places and produce hellish fire, from which the French army melts", "our fire pulls them out in rows, and they stand." Fighting for Moscow, the symbolic city of Russia, the Russian wars were ready to hold their positions to the end - only to win. And this is most clearly shown by the author on the example of the Rayevsky battery, from which “crowds of the wounded with faces disfigured by suffering walked, crawled and rushed on a stretcher.” The French, on the other hand, understood that they themselves were morally exhausted, devastated, and this was precisely what determined their complete defeat in the future. Having reached Moscow, the French army inevitably had to die from a mortal wound received by it at Borodino. While the Russian soldiers, not by word, but by deed, contributed to the overall victory in the war, the regulars of the St. Petersburg and Moscow salons were only capable of false patriotic appeals and speeches, thereby showing no interest in the fate of the Motherland. They were not allowed to "recognize the danger" and the difficult situation in which the Russian people found themselves. Tolstoy sharply condemns such "patriotism", shows the emptiness and worthlessness of these people. Undoubtedly, the Patriotic War of 1812 played a significant role in the life of Prince Andrei and Pierre. Patriots of their homeland, just like decent people, they took on a part of those trials and difficulties, that grief that befell the Russian people. And in many ways, the Battle of Borodino became, of course, a turning point in the life of Prince Bolkonsky and Count Bezukhov. As an experienced fighting man, Andrei was in this battle in his place and could still bring a lot of benefits. But fate, stubborn in its desire to destroy Bolkonsky, finally reached him. A senseless death by a stray grenade ended such a promising life. The battle of Borodino was also a great test for Pierre. Wanting to share the fate of the people, Russia, Count Bezukhov, not being a military man, took part in this battle. Before the eyes of Pierre, people suffered and died, but not only death itself struck him, but also the fact that the soldiers no longer saw any savagery in the destruction of people by people. On the day of the battle, Count Bezukhov was given a lot by the last conversation with Prince Andrei, who realized that the true outcome of the battle did not depend on staff officers, but on the feeling that now lived in the heart of every Russian soldier. According to Tolstoy, not only the bright heroism and patriotism of the Russian people made a significant contribution to the victory, but also, undoubtedly, the commander-in-chief of the Russian army Kutuzov, who was a favorite of soldiers and military officers. Outwardly, he was a decrepit, weak old man, but strong and handsome inwardly: the commander alone made bold, sober and correct decisions, did not think about himself, about honors and glory, setting himself only one task, which was his desire and desire: victory over a hated enemy. In the novel War and Peace, Tolstoy, on the one hand, shows the senselessness of war, shows how much grief and misfortune war brings to people, destroys the lives of thousands and thousands of people, on the other hand, shows the high patriotic spirit of the Russian people who participated in the liberation war against French invaders, and won. In the novel "War and Peace" L. N. Tolstoy with all severity administers a moral judgment on the high society and the bureaucratic elite of autocratic Russia. The value of a person, according to Leo Tolstoy, is determined by three concepts: simplicity, kindness and truth. Morality, according to the writer, is the ability to feel one's "I" as part of the universal "we". And Tolstoy's favorite heroes are simple and natural, kind and cordial, honest to people and their conscience. The writer sees people belonging to the high society in a completely different way, “envious and stuffy for a free heart and fiery passions,” as M. Yu. Lermontov said. From the first pages of the novel, we, the readers, find ourselves in the St. Petersburg living rooms of high society and get acquainted with the "cream" of this society: nobles, dignitaries, diplomats, ladies-in-waiting. Tolstoy tears off the veils of external brilliance, refined manners from these people, and their spiritual squalor, moral baseness appears before the reader. There is neither simplicity, nor kindness, nor truth in their behavior, in their relationships. Everything is unnatural, hypocritical in the salon of A. II. Scherer. Everything alive, whether it be thought and feeling, a sincere impulse or a topical witticism, goes out in a soulless atmosphere. That is why the naturalness and openness in Pierre's behavior scared Scherer so much. Here they are accustomed to the "decency of tight masks", to a masquerade. Prince Vasily speaks lazily, like an actor in the words of an old play, the hostess herself carries herself with artificial enthusiasm. Pierre felt like a boy in a toy store. L. N. Tolstoy compares an evening reception at Scherer's with a spinning workshop, in which "the spindles from different sides evenly and incessantly rustled." But in these “workshops” important matters are resolved, state intrigues are weaved, personal problems are resolved, selfish plans are outlined: places are sought for unsettled sons, like the idiot Ippolit Kuragin, profitable parties are outlined for marriage or marriage. In this light, as L. N. Tolstoy draws, "eternal inhuman enmity boils, the struggle for mortal blessings." Let us recall the distorted faces of the “mournful” Drubetskaya and the “benevolent” Prince Vasily, when the two of them clutched at the briefcase with the will at the bedside of the dying Count Bezukhov. And the hunt for Pierre, who became a rich man ?! After all, this is a whole "military operation", carefully thought out by Scherer and Prince Vasily. And without waiting for Pierre's explanation with Helen, the matchmaking, Prince Vasily bursts into the room with an icon in his hands and blesses the young - the mousetrap slammed shut. The siege of Marya Bolkonskaya, a rich bride for the shalopy Anatoly, begins, and only chance prevented the successful completion of this operation. What kind of love can we talk about when marriages are made according to frank calculation? With irony, even sarcasm, L. N. Tolstoy draws a “declaration of love” by Boris Drubetskoy and Julie Karagina. Julie knows that this brilliant but impoverished handsome man does not love her, but demands for his wealth a declaration of love in all forms. And Boris, uttering the right words, thinks that it is always possible to arrange so that he will see his wife extremely rarely. All tricks are good to achieve "fame, money and ranks." You can join the Masonic lodge, pretending that the ideas of love, equality, brotherhood are close to you. But in fact, people like Boris Drubetskoy joined this society with one goal - to make profitable acquaintances. And Pierre, a sincere and trusting person, soon saw that these people were not interested in questions of truth, the welfare of mankind, but in uniforms and crosses, which they achieved in life. Lies and falsehood in relations between people are especially hated by L.N., Tolstoy. With what irony does he talk about Prince Vasily when he simply robs Pierre, embezzling income from his estates and leaving several thousand dues from the Ryazan estate. And all this under the guise of kindness and care for the young man, whom he cannot leave to the mercy of fate. False and depraved and Helen Kuragina, who became Countess Bezukhova. She openly cheats on her husband and cynically declares that she does not want to have children from him. What could be worse than this in a woman? Even beauty and youth in people of high society take on a repulsive character, because this beauty is not warmed by spiritual warmth. They lie, playing at the patriotism of Julie Karagina, who has finally become Drubetskaya, and others like her. Their patriotism manifested itself in the rejection of French cuisine, French theater and the playful imposition of a fine for the use of French words. Let us recall with what enthusiasm the two-faced Prince Vasily admires, saying with the pride of a prophet: “What did I say about Kutuzov? I have always said that he alone is capable of defeating Napoleon. But when the news reached the courtiers that Moscow had been left to the French, Prince Vasily indisputably said that "nothing else could be expected from a blind, depraved old man." Tolstoy especially hates the imperial “game of war”: for Alexander the Great, the actual battlefield and the parade on Tsaritsynsky Meadow are one and the same (recall his dispute with Kutuzov before the battle of Austerlitz). In the military environment, which Leo Tolstoy knew well, careerism flourishes, fear of personal responsibility for the decision made. That is why many officers disliked the honest and principled Andrei Bolkonsky so much. Even on the eve of the Battle of Borodino, the staff officers are concerned not so much with the possible result as worries about their future rewards. They closely followed the weather vane of royal mercy. With severe ruthlessness, L. N. Tolstoy tore the masks off the representatives of high society, denouncing the anti-people essence of their ideology - the ideology of human separation, selfishness, vanity and contempt for people.

What, according to Tolstoy, is the reason for this event? Tolstoy cites the views of historians.

But he does not agree with any of them. “Any single reason taken or a whole series of reasons seems to us ... equally erroneous in its insignificance in comparison with the magnitude of the event ...”. A huge, terrible phenomenon - war, must be born of the same "huge" cause. Tolstoy does not undertake to find this reason. He says that "the more cleverly we try to explain these phenomena in nature, the more they become no more intelligible to us."

But if a person cannot know the laws of history, then he cannot influence them. Man is an untenable grain of sand in the historical stream. But within what limits is a person still free? "There are two aspects of life in every person: personal life, which is freer than its interests are aloof, and spontaneous life, where a person inevitably fulfills the laws proposed to him." This is a clear expression of those thoughts in the name of which the novel was created: a person is free at any given moment to act as he wants, but "a perfect deed cannot be returned, and its action, coinciding in time with millions of actions of other people, will have historical significance." Napoleon himself sincerely did not want war, but he - a slave of history - gives new orders that hasten the outbreak of war.

Napoleon is confident in his right to plunder and is confident that the looted valuables are his rightful property. Admiring deification surrounded Napoleon. He is accompanied by "admiring people", he puts a spyglass on the back of "the happy page who ran up." There is one general mood here. The French army is also some kind of closed "world". The people of this world have their own common desires, joys, but this is an “erroneous common”, because it is based on untruth, predatory aspirations, on the misfortunes of something else in common. Participation in this common pushes to stupid actions, turns human society into a herd.

Carried away by a single thirst for enrichment, a thirst for robbery, having lost their inner will, the soldiers and officers of the French army sincerely believe that Napoleon is leading them to happiness. And he, even more a slave of history than they are, considers himself God, because "for him it was not a new conviction that his presence in all parts of the world ... equally strikes and leads people into crazy self-forgetfulness." People tend to create idols, and idols easily forget that they did not create history, but history created them. Tolstoy puts Napoleon on a par with Anatole Kuragin. For Tolstoy, these are people of the same party - egoists, for whom the whole world is enclosed in their "I".

Answer