When I write history, I like to be true to the smallest detail. L.N. Tolstoy What is simplicity, truth, kindness? Is a person who has all these character traits omnipotent? These questions are often asked by people, but they are not easy to answer. Let's turn to the classics. Let her help you figure this out.
The name of Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy is familiar to us from early childhood. But then I read the novel “War and Peace”. This great work makes you look at the questions posed differently. How often was Tolstoy reproached?
The fact that he distorted the history of one thousand eight hundred and twelve, that he distorted characters Patriotic War. According to the great writer, history as science and history as art have differences. Art can penetrate into the most distant eras and convey the essence of past events and inner world people who participated in them.
Indeed, history as a science focuses on the particulars and details of events, limiting itself only to their external description, while history as art covers and conveys the general course of events, while at the same time penetrating into their depth. This must be kept in mind when assessing historical events in the novel.
“War and Peace.” Let's open the pages of this work.
Salon of Anna Pavlovna Scherer. Here for the first time a sharp dispute about Napoleon arises. It begins with guests of a noble lady's salon. This dispute will end only in the epilogue of the novel.
For the author, not only was there nothing attractive about Napoleon, but, on the contrary, Tolstoy always considered him a man whose “mind and conscience were darkened,” and therefore all his actions “were too contrary to truth and goodness. “. Not statesman, able to read in the minds and souls of people, and a spoiled, capricious and narcissistic poser - this is how the Emperor of France appears in many scenes of the novel. So, having met the Russian ambassador, he “looked into Balashev’s face with his big eyes and immediately began to look past him.” Let us dwell a little on this detail and conclude that Napoleon was not interested in Balashev’s personality. It was clear that only what was happening in his soul was of interest to him. It seemed to him that everything in the world depended only on his will.
Maybe it’s too early to draw a conclusion from such a particular case as Napoleon’s inattention to the Russian ambassador? But this meeting was preceded by other episodes in which this emperor’s manner of “looking past” people also manifested itself. Let us remember the moment when the Polish lancers, in order to please Bonaparte, rush into the Viliya River. They were drowning, and Napoleon sat calmly on a log and did other things. Let us recall the scene of the emperor’s trip across the Austerlitz battlefield, where he showed complete indifference to the killed, wounded and dying. The imaginary greatness of Napoleon is exposed with particular force in the scene depicting him on Poklonnaya Hill, from where he admired the marvelous panorama of Moscow. “Here it is, this capital; she lies at my feet, awaiting her fate.
One word of mine, one movement of my hand, and this ancient capital perished. “So thought Napoleon, who waited in vain for a deputation of “boyars” with the keys to the majestic city spread out before his eyes. No. Moscow did not go to him “with a guilty head.” Where is this greatness? It is where goodness and justice are, where the spirit of the people is.
According to “popular thought,” Tolstoy created the image of Kutuzov. Of all the historical figures depicted in “War and Peace,” the writer calls him one truly great man. The source that gave the commander the extraordinary power of insight into the meaning of the events that took place “lay in this popular feeling, which he carried within himself in all its purity and strength.”
Military review scene. Kutuzov walked through the ranks, “occasionally stopping and speaking a few kind words to the officers whom he knew from Turkish war, and sometimes to soldiers. Looking at the shoes, he sadly shook his head several times. “The field marshal recognizes and warmly greets his old colleagues. He enters into a conversation with Timokhin.
When meeting with soldiers, the Russian commander knows how to find a common language with them and often uses funny joke, or even an old man’s good-natured curse. The feeling of love for the Motherland was embedded in the soul of every Russian soldier and in the soul of the old commander-in-chief. Unlike Bonaparte, the Russian commander did not consider the leadership of military operations to be a kind of game of chess and never took credit for main role in the successes achieved by his armies. The field marshal led the battles not in Napoleonic style, but in his own way. He
He was convinced that the “spirit of the army” was of decisive importance in war, and he directed all his efforts to leading it.
During battles, Napoleon behaves nervously, trying to keep in his hands all the threads of control of the battle. Kutuzov, on the other hand, acts with concentration, trusts the commanders - his comrades-in-arms, and believes in the courage of his soldiers. It is not Napoleon, but the Russian commander-in-chief who takes full responsibility on his shoulders when the situation requires the most difficult sacrifices. It is difficult to forget the alarm-filled scene of the military council in Fili. Kutuzov announced his decision to leave Moscow without a fight and retreat into the depths of Russia! In those scary watch The question arose before him: “Did I really allow Napoleon to reach Moscow? And when did I do this?
“It’s difficult and painful for him to think about it, but he gathered all his spiritual and physical strength and did not give in to despair. The Russian commander-in-chief retains confidence in victory over the enemy and in the rightness of his cause to the end. He instills this confidence in everyone - from the general to the soldier. Only Kutuzov could have guessed Battle of Borodino. Only he alone could give Moscow to the enemy in order to save Russia, for the sake of saving the army, in order to win the war.
All the commander’s actions are subordinated to one goal - to defeat the enemy, to expel him from Russian soil. And only when the war is won, Kutuzov ceases his activities as commander-in-chief. The most important aspect of the appearance of a Russian commander is a living connection with the people, a heartfelt understanding of their moods and thoughts. The ability to take into account the mood of the masses is the wisdom and greatness of the commander in chief. Napoleon and Kutuzov - two commanders, two historical figures With different essence, purpose and purpose in life. The “Kutuzov” principle as a symbol of the people is opposed to the “Napoleonic”, anti-people, inhumane.
That is why Tolstoy leads all his favorite heroes away from “Napoleonic” principles and puts them on the path of rapprochement with the people. Truly, “there is no greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth.”
(No ratings yet)
Tolstoy L. N.
An essay on a work on the topic: There is no greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth
When I write history, I like to be true to the smallest detail.
L. N. Tolstoy
What is simplicity, kindness? Is a person who has all these character traits omnipotent? These questions are often asked by people, but they are not easy to answer. Let's turn to the classics. Let her help you figure this out. The name of Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy has been familiar to us since early childhood. But then I read the novel “War and Peace”. This great work makes you look at the questions posed differently. How often Tolstoy was reproached for distorting the history of the year one thousand eight hundred and twelve, that he distorted the characters of the Patriotic War. According to the great writer, history and art history have differences. Art can penetrate into the most distant eras and convey the essence of past events and the inner world of the people who participated in them. Indeed, history as a science focuses on the particulars and details of events, limiting itself only to their external description, while history as art covers and conveys the general course of events, while at the same time penetrating into their depth. This must be kept in mind when assessing the historical events in the novel “War and Peace”.
Let's open the pages of this work. Salon of Anna Pavlovna Scherer. Here for the first time a sharp dispute about Napoleon arises. It begins with guests of a noble lady's salon. This dispute will end only in the epilogue of the novel.
For the author, not only was there nothing attractive about Napoleon, but, on the contrary, Tolstoy always considered him a man whose “mind and conscience were darkened,” and therefore all his actions “were too contrary to truth and goodness.” Not a statesman who knows how to read in the minds and souls of people, but a spoiled, capricious and narcissistic poser - this is how the Emperor of France appears in many scenes of the novel. So, having met the Russian ambassador, he “looked into Balashev’s face with his big eyes and immediately began to look past him.” Let us dwell a little on this detail and conclude that Napoleon was not interested in Balashev’s personality. It was clear that only what was happening in his soul was of interest to him. It seemed to him that everything in the world depended only on his will.
Maybe it’s too early to draw a conclusion from such a particular case as Napoleon’s inattention to the Russian ambassador? But this meeting was preceded by other episodes in which this emperor’s manner of “looking past” people also manifested itself. Let us remember the moment when the Polish lancers, in order to please Bonaparte, rush into the Viliya River. They were drowning, and Napoleon sat calmly on a log and did other things. Let us recall the scene of the emperor’s trip across the Austerlitz battlefield, where he showed complete indifference to the killed, wounded and dying.
The imaginary greatness of Napoleon is exposed with particular force in the scene depicting him on Poklonnaya Hill, from where he admired the marvelous panorama of Moscow. “Here it is, this capital; she lies at my feet, awaiting her fate. One word of mine, one movement of my hand, and this ancient capital perished.” So thought Napoleon, who waited in vain for a deputation of “boyars” with the keys to the majestic city spread out before his eyes. No. Moscow did not go to him “with a guilty head.”
Where is this greatness? It is where goodness and justice are, where the spirit of the people is. According to “popular thought,” Tolstoy created the image of Kutuzov. Of all the historical figures depicted in “War and Peace,” the writer calls him one truly great man. The source that gave the commander the extraordinary power of insight into the meaning of the events that took place “lay in this popular feeling, which he carried within himself in all its purity and strength.”
Military review scene. Kutuzov walked through the ranks, “occasionally stopping and speaking a few kind words to the officers whom he knew from the Turkish war, and sometimes to the soldiers. Looking at the shoes, he sadly shook his head several times.” The field marshal recognizes and warmly greets his old colleagues. He enters into a conversation with Timokhin. When meeting with soldiers, the Russian commander knows how to find common ground with them, often using a funny joke, or even an old man’s good-natured curse.
The feeling of love for the Motherland was embedded in the soul of every Russian soldier and in the soul of the old commander-in-chief. Unlike Bonaparte, the Russian commander did not consider the leadership of military operations a kind of game of chess and never ascribed to himself the main role in the successes achieved by his armies. The field marshal led the battles not in Napoleonic style, but in his own way. He was convinced that the “spirit of the army” was of decisive importance in war, and he directed all his efforts to leading it. During battles, Napoleon behaves nervously, trying to keep in his hands all the threads of control of the battle. Kutuzov, on the other hand, acts with concentration, trusts the commanders - his comrades-in-arms, and believes in the courage of his soldiers.
It is not Napoleon, but the Russian commander-in-chief who takes full responsibility on his shoulders when the situation requires the most difficult sacrifices. It is difficult to forget the alarm-filled scene of the military council in Fili. Kutuzov announced his decision to leave Moscow without a fight and retreat into the depths of Russia! In those terrible hours, the question arose before him: “Did I really allow Napoleon to reach Moscow? And when did I do this? It is difficult and painful for him to think about this, but he gathered all his mental and physical strength and did not succumb to despair. The Russian commander-in-chief retains confidence in victory over the enemy and in the rightness of his cause to the end. He instills this confidence in everyone - from the general to the soldier. Only Kutuzov could have predicted the Battle of Borodino. Only he alone could give Moscow to the enemy in order to save Russia, for the sake of saving the army, in order to win the war. All the commander’s actions are subordinated to one goal - to defeat the enemy, to expel him from Russian soil. And only when the war is won, Kutuzov ceases his activities as commander-in-chief.
The most important aspect of the appearance of a Russian commander is a living connection with the people, a heartfelt understanding of their moods and thoughts. The ability to take into account the mood of the masses is the wisdom and greatness of the commander in chief.
Napoleon and Kutuzov are two commanders, two historical figures with different essence, purpose and purpose in life. The “Kutuzov” principle as a symbol of the people is opposed to the “Napoleonic”, anti-people, inhumane. That is why Tolstoy leads all his favorite heroes away from “Napoleonic” principles and puts them on the path of rapprochement with the people. Truly, “there is no greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth.”
http://vsekratko.ru/tolstoy/vojnaimir255
“There is no greatness where there is no simplicity, goodness and truth”. According to JI. N. Tolstoy, the decisive force of history is the people. And the main criterion for assessing a person, in his opinion, is the attitude towards the people. Tolstoy denied in history the role of individuals who put their own interests above those of the people. In his epic novel “War and Peace” he contrasts Kutuzov, the commander people's war, and Napoleon - “the most insignificant instrument of history,” “a man with a darkened conscience.”
Kutuzov appears before us as a majestic commander, a true people's leader. He is not interested in either fame or wealth - he, together with Russian soldiers, fights for the freedom of his Motherland. With simplicity, kindness and sincerity, he managed to achieve boundless trust and love on the part of his army, they listen to him, believe him and unquestioningly obey: “... through an irresistible mysterious connection that supports the same mood throughout the army, called the spirit of the army and constituting the main nerve war, Kutuzov’s words, his order for battle the next day, were transmitted simultaneously to all ends of the army.” This is an extremely experienced and skillful commander, who with wise orders helps soldiers to believe in themselves, in their strengths, strengthens the military spirit: “With many years of military experience, he knew and with his senile mind understood that it is impossible for one person to lead hundreds of thousands of people fighting death, and knew that the fate of the battle was not decided by the orders of the commander-in-chief, not by the place where the troops stood, not by the number of guns and killed people, but by that elusive force called the spirit of the army, and he followed this force and led it, as far as it was in his power "
Kutuzov is a person like everyone else, and he treats the captured French with sympathy and humanity: “They are worse than the last beggars. While they were strong, we did not feel sorry for ourselves, but now we can feel sorry for them. They are people too." And he read the same sympathy for the prisoners, according to Tolstoy, in all the glances directed at him. There is nothing ostentatious, nothing heroic in Kutuzov, he is close to the soldiers who feel in him loved one. Outwardly it is ordinary old man, fat and overweight, but it is in these details that the “simplicity, kindness and truth” of the great commander shines through.
Napoleon is the complete opposite of Kutuzov. This is a man possessed by delusions of grandeur, the commander of an army of marauders, robbers and murderers who are overwhelmed by the thirst for profit and enrichment. According to the author, “it was a crowd of marauders, each of whom carried and carried with him a bunch of things that seemed valuable and necessary to him. The goal of each of these people when leaving Moscow... was... to keep what they had acquired.” Napoleon is characterized by hypocrisy, falsehood, posing, self-admiration; he is indifferent to the fate of people, because he is only interested in fame and money. However, the most disgusting and repulsive scene is the scene of the shameful flight of the “great emperor from the heroic army.” The author calls this betrayal towards the French army “the last degree of meanness.” Napoleon’s appearance is also described in satirical colors: “fat shoulders and thighs, a round belly, colorless eyes repel this man from us even more.” By denying the greatness of Napoleon, Tolstoy thereby denies war, showing the inhumanity of conquest for the sake of glory.
Essays on literature: There is no greatness where there is no simplicity"War and Peace" is a Russian national epic, which reflected the character of a great people at the moment when its historical destinies were being decided. Tolstoy, trying to cover everything that he knew and felt at that time, gave in the novel a set of life, morals, spiritual culture, beliefs and ideals of the people. That is main task Tolstoy was to reveal “the character of the Russian people and troops,” for which he used the images of Kutuzov (an exponent of the ideas of the masses) and Napoleon (a person personifying anti-national interests). L.N. Tolstoy in the novel depicts truly great people, whose names are remembered now and will be remembered in the future. Tolstoy had his own view on the role of personality in history. Every person has two lives: personal and spontaneous. Tolstoy said that a person consciously lives for himself, but serves as an unconscious tool for achieving universal human goals. The role of personality in history is negligible.
Even the most brilliant person cannot direct the movement of history at will. It is created by the masses, the people, and not by an individual who has risen above the people. But Lev Nikolaevich does not deny the role of man in history; he recognizes the obligation to act within the boundaries of the possible for everyone. In his opinion, one of the people who is gifted with the ability to penetrate into the course deserves the name of genius. historical events, comprehend them general meaning. There are only a few of them. Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov belongs to them.
He is an exponent of the patriotic spirit and moral strength of the Russian army. He is a talented and, when necessary, energetic commander. Tolstoy emphasizes that Kutuzov - folk hero. In the novel he appears as a truly Russian man, free from pretense, and a wise historical figure. The main thing for Leo Tolstoy in goodies- communication with the people. Napoleon, who is opposed to Kutuzov, is subjected to devastating exposure because he chose for himself the role of “executioner of nations”; Kutuzov is exalted as a commander who knows how to subordinate all his thoughts and actions to popular feeling. "People's Thought" opposes Napoleon's wars of conquest and blesses the liberation struggle. The people and the army placed their trust in Kutuzov in 1812, which he justified. The Russian commander is clearly superior to Napoleon.
He did not leave his army and appeared among the troops at all the most important moments of the war. And here we can talk about the unity of spirit between Kutuzov and the army, about their deep connection. The commander's patriotism, his confidence in the strength and courage of the Russian soldier, were transmitted to the army, which, in turn, felt a close connection with Kutuzov. He talks to the soldiers in simple Russian. Even sublime words in his mouth sound everyday and stand in contrast to the deceitful tinsel of Napoleon’s phrases.
So, for example, Kutuzov says to Bagration: “I bless you for a great feat.” And Napoleon, before the Battle of Shengraben, addresses his troops with a long warlike speech, promising them inexhaustible glory. Kutuzov is the same as the soldiers. You can compare him when, in a field situation, he calls an ordinary soldier darling, addresses the army with in simple words gratitude, and him, extinguished and indifferent, at the ceremonial meeting with the king. He believed in victory over the enemy, and this faith was transmitted to the army, which contributed to the uplifting of the soldiers and officers. Drawing the unity of Kutuzov and the army, Tolstoy leads the reader to the idea that the victorious outcome of the war was determined primarily by the high fighting spirit of the army and the people, which the French army did not have.
Napoleon did not support his troops in difficult moment. During the Battle of Borodino, he was so far away that (as it turned out later) not a single order of his during the battle could be carried out. Napoleon is an arrogant and cruel conqueror whose actions cannot be justified either by the logic of history or by needs French people. If Kutuzov embodies folk wisdom, then Napoleon is the exponent of false wisdom. According to Tolstoy, he believed in himself, and the whole world believed in him. This is a person for whom only what happened in his soul is interesting, and the rest did not matter. As much as Kutuzov expresses the interests of the people, Napoleon is so pathetic in his selfishness.
He opposes his “I” to history and thereby dooms himself to inevitable collapse. Distinctive feature Napoleon's character was also posturing. He is narcissistic, arrogant, intoxicated with success. Kutuzov, on the contrary, is very modest: he never boasted of his exploits.
The Russian commander is devoid of any panache or boasting, which is one of the features of the Russian national character. Napoleon started a war, cruel and bloody, without caring about the people who die as a result of this struggle. His army is an army of robbers and marauders. She captures Moscow, where she destroys food supplies for several months, cultural values... But still the Russian people are winning.
When confronted with this mass that has risen to defend the Motherland, Napoleon turns from an arrogant conqueror into a cowardly fugitive. War is replaced by peace, and “the feeling of insult and revenge” is replaced by “contempt and pity” among Russian soldiers. The appearance of our heroes is also contrasted. In Kutuzov’s depiction of Tolstoy, there is an expressive figure, gait, gestures, facial expressions, sometimes a gentle, sometimes mocking look. He writes: "... a simple, modest, and therefore truly majestic figure could not fit into that deceitful form of a European hero, ostensibly ruling people, which was invented."
Napoleon is depicted downright satirically. Tolstoy depicts him as a small man with an unpleasantly feigned smile (whereas about Kutuzov he writes: “His face became lighter and brighter from an old gentle smile, wrinkled like stars in the corners of his lips and eyes”), with a fat chest, a round belly, fat thighs of short legs Kutuzov and Napoleon are antipodes, but at the same time both are great people. However, if we follow Tolstoy's theory, the true genius of these two famous historical figures we can only name Kutuzov. This is confirmed by the words of the writer: “There is no greatness where there is no simplicity.” Lev Nikolaevich Tolstoy truthfully portrayed the Russian and French commanders, and also created living picture Russian reality first half of the 19th century century. Tolstoy himself highly praised his work, comparing it with the Iliad.
Indeed, "War and Peace" is one of the most significant works not only Russian, but also world literature. One Dutch writer said: “If God wanted to write a novel, he could not do it without taking War and Peace as a model.” I think one cannot but agree with this idea.
Hello)
I even specifically entered this quote into a search engine to know which work of Tolstoy it refers to. I was pleased to discover that this work is “War and Peace,” and the phrase was used to expose the egocentrism of the famous Napoleon Bonaparte. We all know what an idol Napoleon was during his lifetime. he was great. so what? after several major defeats and the loss of his army and most loyal comrades, all his greatness crumbled to dust. why did this happen? Now let’s leave Napoleon alone and think in general terms.
It’s no secret that in order to become a significant figure, to rise from the bottom and reach heights, you need to put in a lot of effort. Many great people began their careers from the lowest rung. but now the man has reached the top, he is, so to speak, on a horse, on the crest of glory. and this is where it really comes in important point, where many of the greats have made and are making mistakes. I already said once that being famous is a very serious test. So, it happened more than once that fame and greatness literally stupefied the people who achieved them. they forgot about who they were, about whose direct or indirect support they reached these heights, about the fact that life is changeable and nothing lasts forever. they imagined themselves as deities to whom everyone should bow. surrounded themselves with luxury. they committed any lie, any crime against those who tried to reason with them or resist their arrogance. they elevated themselves above people and ceased to understand their problems, feel their needs and empathize with them. So what we have as a result is self-centered greatness. which is artificially exaggerated by the bearer of this greatness and his sycophants and henchmen. this does not mean that such a person does not do anything useful for other people. does. but the trouble is, he exalts himself so much that his useful undertakings evoke not respect, but rejection. such greatness is very fragile, it lasts as long as there is a force supporting it (army, influence, authority, power, money, etc.); if this strength disappears, then greatness itself crumbles. because it was founded on the wrong foundation. and the former owner of greatness himself becomes useless and despised by everyone. or even loses his life.
however, there were those who, despite the heights and successes achieved, did not forget that once they were, roughly speaking, in a parasha, that there were those who helped them achieve such achievements. they were aware of their connection with “mere mortals”, clearly understood their needs and aspirations, tried to help and support them, communicated as equals, and were ready to give their lives for their well-being. They performed all their good and useful deeds without any self-exaltation or self-praise. and this kind of greatness is more durable. there is no need to resort to brute force to maintain it. it lives for a long time, including after the death of such a person. it will be preserved good memory in centuries. this is true greatness.
wow, I wrote a lot of nonsense, yeah)