Tolstoy

by A.N. Wilson

In this landmark biography of Count Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy, A.N. Wilson narrates the complex drama of the writer's life: his childhood of aristocratic privilege but emotional deprivation, his discovery of his literary genius after aimless years of gambling and womanizing, and his increasingly disastrous marriage. Wilson sweeps away the long-held belief that Tolstoy's works were the exact mirror of his life, and instead traces the roots of Tolstoy's art to his relationship with God, with women, and with Russia. He also breaks new ground in recreating the world that shaped the great novelist's life and art--the turmoil of ideas and politics in nineteenth-century Russia and the incredible literary renaissance that made Tolstoy's work possible. 24 pages of illustrations.

Genres: Biography, Nonfiction, Russia, History, Biography Memoir, Russian Literature, Literature

512 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1988

About the author

Andrew Norman Wilson is an English writer and newspaper columnist, known for his critical biographies, novels, works of popular history and religious views. He is an occasional columnist for the Daily Mail and former columnist for the London Evening Standard, and has been an occasional contributor to the Times Literary Supplement, New Statesman, The Spectator and The Observer.

Reviews

[Chrissie · Rating 1 out of 5]

Why should I continue reading a book that is making me miserable?

I have completed 1/4 of this very long book. I have had enough. What follows explains why I dislike it.

The language used is sophisticated rather than clear. At times one is even unsure who exactly the author is speaking of!

The author sees Tolstoy as the greatest writer of all time. He doesn't approach the man or his writing with balance.

Sweeping, judgmental statements are made that can surely be questioned!

Much is devoted to an explanation of how we should interpret Tolstoy's books. I am looking for a biography, a book that instead tells me of the events in his life, rather than an explanation of his books. The book’s focus is wrong for me, but may fit others.

In chapter 3, the author states that a novelist should not leave it up to a reader to ponder the message that is to be drawn from a book; all questions should be given crystal clear answers. We readers should not have to think; that is the author's job, not ours. I quite simply do not agree. I want to be nudged to think about interesting questions. I enjoy considering diverse alternatives on my own! I want to be given alternatives, not fast and firm answers.

Information is repeated. It is as if the different chapters were written at different times, and who ever put the book together hasn't checked the content of previous chapters.

Neither do I like the narrator of the audiobook - John Telfer. He over dramatizes. He turns the information into theatrics, He whispers to increase suspense. He changes volume and speed to help us understand the import of the author's lines. Seriously, I neither appreciate nor need this help! I do understand what he is saying so the narration I have given 2 rather than 1 star.

I very, very rarely dump a book, but I am doing this now. I am rating and reviewing the book because I think it is helpful for people to be provided with different points of view. I am fully aware that what another is looking for may be very different from what I am seeking. It is for this reason I have stated what it is that displeased me.

ETA: This audiobook is based on the 2012 edition of the book.

[Nathan · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is almost two books in one. Wilson begins the book with glittering literary praise, flushed with admiration for Tolstoy's novels and driven by an obsessive fan's knack for relating the fiction to Tolstoy's life and Tolstoy's Russia. Wilson is obviously well-acquainted with these substantial works, and his easy expertise is impressive, if rather showy.
When the narrative reaches Tolstoy's revolutionary period, there is a jarring shift in tone: the breathy te deums are replaced with a sneering paternalism and brutal cynicism, and Tolstoy quickly degenerates from brilliant artist to starry-eyed idealist.

This tension between Wilson's unabashed admiration for Tolstoy's novels and his barely-contained contempt for his political views disrupts the flow of the narrative, which, when detailing the objective facts rather than Wilson's opinion, is nicely intimate and well-crafted. If Wilson had stayed in the background as an historian, rather than playing judge and jury, his book would have been infinitely more valuable.

[Richard Newton · Rating 5 out of 5]

I enjoyed the excellently written, insightful and thoughtful biography of Tolstoy.

This is the first material I have ever read on Tolstoy's life. I have learnt there are different viewpoints and interpretations from the mass of materials he left, as well as the materials many of the others who knew him wrote. I cannot therefore comment on the accuracy of AN Wilson's particular interpretation or the choices of which elements of Tolstoy's life he has chosen to emphasise. I can only comment on my enjoyment of reading the book.

Wilson has a fluid and engaging writing style, and a fairly intellectual interpretation of Tolstoy's novels. What I liked was both the greater understanding of Tolstoy's life the book gave, but as important for me, was the historical and cultural context in which he wrote as this context flavours his writing and is helpful to understand to enjoy those books to the highest degree. War and Peace is one of my favourite books, and I will get more out of it the next time I read it. In contrast, I am not a huge fan of Anna Karenina, but I will now re-read it and suspect I will enjoy it more.

It is worth knowing this was published in 1984, and references to the Soviet Union as a currently existing and geographically unified country under a communist regime seem a bit quaint. But this does not remove from the main points or quality of the biography.

As a good biography of Tolstoy, I definitely recommend this, with the caveat that if you really want to understand Tolstoy, you will need to read other materials as well.

[Zorka Zamfirova · Rating 5 out of 5]

Knjiga je zahtevna ali odlična. Uživanje kao uživanje u starom ali dobrom vinu.

[mark · Rating 5 out of 5]

The only Tolstoy I’ve read is what has been excerpted in this book … so I am at a huge disadvantage to the author, A.N. Wilson. However, I suspect he is probably one of only a handful of people who have read The Complete Works of L.N. Tolstoy. I suspect David Foster Wallace might be one of those handful, who has bragged, Wallace, that he’s read everything you have. I say this because I see things—things that make me think Wallace got some ideas, not only philosophical ideas, but ideas for characters (The character Mario in Infinite Jest. That’s all I’ll say here about that.); phrases, and situations, also, from Tolstoy. In addition to that, I see similarities in the genius of both writers – the way in which they saw the world was in so much more detail than the average and/or ‘normal’ person. Wilson describes it thus: “One of the things which makes him [Tolstoy, and I will say, Wallace, too] such a memorable writer is his extra-consciousness, or super-consciousness, of existence itself.” [p.19] Wilson goes on: “We all know that there is such a thing as life, that we are alive, that the world is there, full of sights and sound. But, when we read Tolstoy (Wallace) for the first time, it is as if, until that moment, we had been looking at the world through a dusty window. He flings open the shutters, and we see everything sharp and clear for the first time.” [105] “Tolstoy, like all true writers, carried his life about with him, created the very cocoon of observant detachment, indolence and sensuality in which a creative mind flourishes. [p.105] Like many detached minds, Tolstoy was perfectly capable of deriving enjoyment from the company of those he despised. [p. 106] We will never know how much is embellishment, and how much the truth.” [p. 22] And both men had the education, background, and abilities to put that down on paper, using precise language and words. Both men were privileged white boys in their respective countries. But there does seem to be one big difference, besides the fact Tolstoy was born in Russia in 1828 & the Literary Field was in its infancy, and that is the anxiety factor. Wallace appears to have been born with an anxiety disorder, while Tolstoy’s troubles didn’t manifest until after he was mature. So … everyone has heard of Tolstoy’s novels, War and Peace (1869) and Anna Karenina (1877) which Tolstoy finished at age 49; but he continued to write up until his death at age 82, mostly non-fiction – personal, political and religious books and essays. He progressed in his thinking and writing from Historical Fiction (W&P); to Contemporary Fiction (AK) to memoir (A Confession) to philosophical and religious books & pamphlets (What I Believe, 1883; Where Love is, God Is, 1885; What Then Must We Do, 1886; On Life, 1887; The Kreutzer Sonata, 1889; Why Do Men Stupefy Themselves?, 1891; The First Step, 1892; The Kingdom of God is Within You, 1893; Christianity and Pacifism, 1894; What is Art?, 1898; What is Religion?, 1902; I Cannot Be Silent, 1908; among others, one of which was Resurrection, a novel, 1900, which got him formally excommunicated. Like Wallace, he suffered because of his genius and, like Wallace, thought of suicide after finishing his great works of fiction. Like Wallace, Tolstoy was complicated and conflicted and saw the ambiguities and paradoxes that living a meaningful life present. But unlike Wallace – he married young and had many, many children and responsibilities; and his readers and followers began to think of him as a holy man. And maybe he, Tolstoy, began to believe that, too. The author, Wilson, asserts that Ghandi learned the idea of passive resistance from Tolstoy (p.411). Maybe that’s so, I certainly don’t know. Wilson is very opinionated and makes a lot of assertions, conjectures, and assumptions. Such as: Male’s make great [better] fiction writers because of their innate ogling prowess developed out of the drive for sexual conquest. I don’t disagree. As Wilson says, we, males, see a lot more than just the girls. (Trust me, it’s true!) And that, “… prodigious literary geniuses” elements’ of genius tend to only “… coalesce after a period of total indolence.” [p.64] And but so I think he, Wilson, has every right to these assertions – he’s qualified, having read everything there is to read from and about Tolstoy (including the diaries of the man and his wife) as well as being a journalist, biographer, and fiction writer himself. We’ll never know what and how Wallace might have progressed had he lived past his great work, Infinite Jest, and the unfinished The Pale King. The thing about Tolstoy is that his writing and thinking seemed to evolve, whereas Wallace’s didn’t – he was stuck, kept worrying the same problems of being human. Maybe Tolstoy was crazy, thinking himself Christ-like … but times were different then. Darwin had published The Origin of Species in 1859 and evolution and atheism were hardly accepted ways of thinking about the world. Science was in its infancy, also. Freud didn’t come onto the scene until Tolstoy was nearly finished, so the idea of unconscious motivation was something unbeknownst to the Russian genius. All thought was God/Christ centered. There was no psychotherapy or Alcohol Anonymous or 12-Step programs. And but so I think the two great writers had similar minds, just in different times with different influences. I’m looking forward to reading War and Peace and Anna Karenina; but I’ll probably skip the rest – time is running out for me. So many books, now. However, if you’re young and love literature, I think a PhD dissertation comparing and contrasting the work and lives of Tolstoy and Wallace would be a very worth while project. Should you read this biography? Yes, if literary genius is of interest to you. If the process of fiction writing is of interest; and Russian history. And marital relations. And of course, the life and times of Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy.
PS
YouTube is a great resource. There are clips of Tolstoy; and Anna Karenina is available as audio book – free! (Which I’m going to indulge. The reader, a woman, does all the hard work for you – all the Russian names.)
April , 2014

[Matt Griffith]

The main puzzle this book poses for the reader is: who has the biggest ego - Tolstoy or A N Wilson? Watching the two of them go mano et mano is a good scrap, and Wilson does well to cut through the Tolstoy excesses, but by the end I found them both slightly monstorous. The book also lacks in the historical depth that later Russophiles would expect (I think Wilson lacked access to much of the historical archive when writing this back in the 70s and is not that insightful of the Russian cultural setting compared to later authors) and he doesn't give that much insight into Anna K or War & Peace, with too much weighting on the last confused period. So can't really recommend.

[Neil Randall · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent biography of one of the most complex of all literary figures. Wilson concentrates on the striking contradictions between the man and the artist, how Tolstoy struggled to reconcile his human weaknesses, failures and faults with his religious beliefs, and how his work, in the latter part of his life, suffered as a result, and how his family life and marriage (especially) broke down. Beautifully written and very well put together. Recommended.

[Jeff Netting · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an interesting book. It made me question the nature of literary biography and the ideal shape of it. I love Tolstoy, and wanted to know more about his later life especially, when he essentially gave up writing fiction (with the exception of Resurrection and some stories), and chose to become a saint. What I found most surprising was how the biography wasn’t particularly useful or interesting for trying to form some new opinion or interpretation of Tolstoy’s books themselves. The nature of the relationship between fiction and history, even if that history is the author’s life, seems to be very complicated and never clean or simple.

Wilson gives a relatively concise overview of Tolstoy’s life. He’s a good writer, and the writing is accessible and the book is very readable. My main complaint is how quick Wilson is to express judgments of both Tolstoy and the subjects Tolstoy was engaged with. He is quick to call Tolstoy’s opinions and thoughts absurd or ridiculous, to evaluate the strengths or weaknesses of Tolstoy’s fictions, and even expresses his own views on Christianity, art, and politics. This padded the book a good deal in my opinion. To paraphrase Blake, “Give me the facts, and I will make a judgment for myself.” What does it matter what Wilson thinks of all of this? I had never heard of him before getting this biography, and I’m much more interested in what Tolstoy, a massive figure in literature and history, thinks. I also didn’t find Wilson’s interpretations of Tolstoy’s works particularly interesting or helpful. In other words, this would have been a great book if it had stuck more closely to its subject.

All in all, I’ve come to think that, in general, the chronology of an author’s life included with any good edition is a fair amount of information. Reading this much detail was interesting, but at times it felt like I was indulging in gossip, scandalous information that just isn’t necessary for reading War and Peace or Anna Karenina. Not a bad book, glad I read it, but I’ll never reread it and perhaps my time would’ve been better spent reading Tolstoy himself.

[Steve Gordon · Rating 1 out of 5]

Garbage. I find it fascinating how half wits are both published and acclaimed in the literary world. I only finished the book because my curiosity about Tolstoy's life, being provoked, overwhelmed my abhorrence of the writer. First and foremost of the crimes here - the constant sniping at Tolstoy's ideology. The author writes from a Christian perspective. If you believe in one version of fantastical beings, you can't really comment on other people's interpretations of fantasy can you? Furthermore, how does the mention that Napoleon III was Napoleon Bonaparte's grandson make it past an editor? How can a book use the term "negro" in 1988? How can an author use "menopause" out of the blue to define a woman's action? And finally, the attributing of spurious comments to Lenin and Trotsky, who played no role in Tolstoy's life, to impugn the Russian Revolution (which was an underlying seeming necessity for the author) was the final straw. Sometimes, I can overlook an author's nauseating political views to get what I can from the subject at hand (Tolstoy). Unfortunately, I couldn't do it here.

[ajdina · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5*

“November 2 was the last day that he wrote in his diary. ‘It was a hard night,’ he wrote. He had been addicted to the habit of chronicling his own existence for the last sixty-three years. Now at last his pen was still and his tongue had begun to babble. ‘The muzhiks … you know how they die …’ he murmured as someone was trying to straighten a pillow. Then he passed into a sort of delirium. One of the sentences which he muttered in this state was ‘Search, always go on searching.’”

[Sally O'wheel · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had to chuck out half my books because I am 'down sizing'. This book was on my shelf. It used to belong to my dad. I had kept it all this time because I wanted to read it. Now I have. It's a bit dated - published in the 1980s, so before the fall of the USSR. And I wonder how Sofia would be written about today.

I think I probably agree with a lot of Tolstoy's wild ideas, pacifism, etc.

Sad ending.

[Philip Pajakowski · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very good on Tolstoy’s context in Russia and his personal relationships. Wilson indulges in a bit too much pop psychology and seems obsessed with reminding us that Stalin was no good.

[Josiah · Rating 3 out of 5]

Never get a Dickensian to write about the Russians. Wilson is far too cynical, far too ironic, and like Dickens far too focused on childhood to penetrate into Tolstoy. A biographer does not need to love or even like their subject, but they do need to revere them; Wilson reveres the text but not the man, and so this descends at its worst into cod-Freudian attacks on Tolstoy that simply don't make for interesting reading. Tolstoy is the best author ever, and one of the most important popular religious figures of the last 500 years- Wilson does not understand the latter and does not explain the former particularly well.

[Michael Kenan Baldwin · Rating 3 out of 5]

A dated and impressionistic biography—countless references to ‘today’s Soviet Union’—written with verve, enjoyable and accessible. For example, you can expect to read passages like this about Tolstoy’s religious awakening met with his wife’s traditionalism:

Tolstoy’s son Ilya recalls that, by this stage of the family history, ‘the world was divided into two camps. . . . with Papa in one and Maman and everyone else in the other’. Yet for his sisters, whose devotion to their father was intense, there was soon to come a time when they felt that they could not serve God and maman. Sofya’s increasing bad temper and absence of sympathy for her husband was to have the effect of alienating some of the children and making them side with their father.

It’s not based on any original (e.g. archival) research. I’m sure an academic historian could pick many holes in the details. As man a of literature, the best parts are Wilson’s readings of Tolstoy’s classics, and noted comparisons to Dickens.
I marked it down for various Freudian psycho-sexual nonsense, especially in the first half.

Tolstoy was (eventually) a vegetarian, anti-institutional Quaker-style Christian, and an anarcho-pacifist. He was competent in Turkish and Arabic but limited in English. He felt Muslims superior to Western Europeans. His translation of ‘And the Word was with God’ in John 1 read: 'Reasoning replaced God'. Wilson writes that he was too soon (and too individualistic) for one successful revolution—the Bolshevik revolution—but too late for the other failed one—the Decemberist one of 1825.

Tolstoy said Christianity should forget the doctrine of Christ's resurrection, and instead tell us what to do. He wanted a new enlightened religion predicated not on future beatitude but earthly beatitude in the here and now: a practical, enlightened religion unbound by dogma and mystery. Tolstoy was heavily influenced by Rousseau & by Dickens—a portrait of whom was perpetually above his desk and remains so in Yasnaya Polyana to this day. But he hated Shakespeare.

[Brian Willis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Surely the greatest traditional biography of one of the greatest novelists of all time. It isn't so much the proliferation of works that makes him great. He doesn't have the sheer number of books as say Dickens, his hero. It's the fact that War and Peace as well as Anna Karenina are two of the greatest books ever written by themselves: the former of both national and family epic, and the latter of romantic tragedy.

Personally, I believe War and Peace is probably the greatest novel of all time. It has everything but mainly, if you were to ask me "what novel comes closest to explaining the meaning of life?", that's the one. Pierre Bezukhov in War and Peace and Levin in Anna Karenin for me are two of the greatest characters in all of literature, heroes who grow the most in their respective works and come closest to "getting it" in the great game of life by the end and thus are spared by the author. As a result, the best part of this biography are those great chapters in the middle that fully chart and explain the development and meaning of those novels as he composed them. Placed alongside his own life, I finally see where some of his conclusions in those narratives came from, what real people they were based on, and the inspirations for their composition.

Tolstoy was probably a little bit difficult to live with and be around but mostly because he certainly lives by the adage "lived to the beat of his own drummer". In just a couple of generations, he would not have been tolerated by Russian governments. But thankfully, he didn't because, like for instance Les Miserables and David Copperfield, his two masterpieces are must read stone cold classics that will enrich your understanding of life. This 500+ page biography thankfully doesn't match the epic length of those novels but doesn't short change its subject either who lived to a ripe old age. If you are looking for the classic traditional type biography of this classic author, this is probably the one.

[Martina · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tolstoy is another massive biography by A. N. Wilson – 572 pages. Born in a period of peace, flanked by two wars – the Decembrist revolt of 1825 and the 1917 Russian revolution – Leo Tolstoy’s national epic is War and Peace. Gleaned from his diaries, and the diaries of his wife, Wilson details the life of the writer and the thinker, whose art grew from three ‘uneasy and irresolvable’ relationships – with women, with Russia, and with God.

The biography commences with the death of his mother at 40 when Count Lev (Leo) Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1828-1910) was barely two years old, and the death of his father at 42 when Leo was nine. The last of four sons (the Ant Brothers) with his sister Marya the youngest, they lived with their aunt. His aunt, his home town of Yasnaya Polyana (200 kilometres – 120 miles – south of Moscow), and his wife and children were his ‘constants’ as he attempts ‘to reconstruct his mother’s existence.’ From 1841-1847 he also lived at the borderlands of Europe and Asiatic Russia, which influenced his approach to literature, life, and living.

Tolstoy was a prolific reader of British, French, and German literature. Wilson claims that ‘we do have incontrovertible evidence that A Sentimental Journey through France and Italy [Laurence Sterne, 1768] was what started Tolstoy off as a writer.’ The reason ‘stemmed from its usability as a blueprint for Romantic egotists’ and it ‘is attractively short.’ Tolstoy sent his first story, Childhood, to the editor of a serial, when he lived in Tiflis (Tbilisi, Georgia) before he spent a year in the Crimean War (1854-55). From 1857 to 1862 he traveled overseas – the only time he left Russia. In London in 1861 he met French writer Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, who had just finished a book called War and Peace.

Marrying at 34 to Sofya, who was 18, he fathered 13 children in the first 26 years of their marriage (three died before they turned two years of age). But it was Sofya’s younger sister, Tatyana, who was said to provide ‘the inexpressive liveliness’ for Tolstoy to begin War and Peace. It was Sofya’s insistence on archiving all of his drafts in the Rumyantsev Museum in Moscow that enabled historians to recreate the evolution of this masterpiece.

Although his diary ceased during his greatest works – War and Peace (1869), and Anna Karenina (1877) – there was a ‘diary-war with his wife in which each wrote rude remarks meant for the other’s perusal,’ leading to ‘important channels of literary energy … the phase before he started writing fiction.’ It was a war and peace approach to marriage.

He was predominantly influenced by events in real life, which he changed to suit the story. At the age of 32, two of his brothers were dead, Dmitry at 29 (Leo was 28) and Nikolay at 37 (Leo was 32). The death of Dmitry influenced his writing of the death of Levin in Anna Karenina, which Wilson says ‘is one of the very greatest scenes in Tolstoy … because it was not like that at the time … the crucial theme of those particular chapters in Anna Karenina is not feeling, but lack of feeling.’

Wilson describes War and Peace as ‘unforgettable and endlessly rereadable not because of the accuracy and thoroughness of its historical research, but because each character [580 of them] in turn is imagined with all the integrity of Tolstoy’s being. He is each character, in turn, acting them with all the vigour of his family at charades.’

It was from Tolstoy that Mahatma Gandhi was inspired by the idea of passive resistance, after reading The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894), a work of non-fiction and ‘an infinitely sad book to read.’ Gandhi then wrote to Tolstoy in the last year of Tolstoy’s life.

The best three chapters of this biography are the last ones, from 1900, with Tolstoy in the last ten years of his life. The chapter, Sad Steps, is the death of his oldest brother by five years, Sergey, in 1904, ‘hideously, of cancer of the face and tongue.’ The last of his brothers died four days after Tolstoy visited him. It was his inspiration for Reminiscences (1907). He also wrote ‘fifteen thousand words of nonsense about Shakespeare’ – which stated that William Shakespeare could not portray human characters at all.

By 1910 six of his 13 children had died. His relationship with his wife and family were fraught with difficulties, in which the family was divided into two camps – with their father or with their mother. He secretly ‘escaped’ his family, and fled by train, only to have them, the press, church members, fans, and everyone following after him, to his death-bed at Astapovo train station at the age of 82: ‘It is one of the most extraordinary demonstrations of public sympathy in the history of the world.’

The difference between Wilson’s work and other biographies is that he obsessively links Tolstoy and his works with his life, matching scenes with diary extracts. He also contrasts Tolstoy’s literacy works with the timing of the works of other Russian authors – particularly Ivan Turgenev, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Maxim Gorky, and Anton Checkov – and Tolstoy’s own reading list. Wilson presents both the literary genius and his ‘contradictions and paradoxes’ in a ‘warts-and-all’ expose – of which there are many. Wilson states that ‘Tolstoy has … an abiding capacity to irritate his reader … to disturb, to unsettle, to upset.’ While the focus is on Tolstoy, his marriage is inextricable to the development of his manuscripts in what Wilson describes as ‘one of the most impressive partnerships in literary history.’

Often there are annoying sentences about what other biographers 'missed' and Wilson intrudes a bit too often with his own thinking. In addition, some sentences are awkwardly written. Nevertheless, it is a well-documented, interesting view of the life of the writer.

[John Nelson · Rating 4 out of 5]

A thorough recounting of Tolstoy's life, from his early years roving about without a vocation, to finding his calling as a novelist and publishing his two great novels (War and Peace and Anna Karenina) while still a relatively young man, through his decline as a writer but rise as a celebrity (if that term can be applied to men and women of the nineteenth century). During his final decades, Tolstoy was treated as a sage, even by illiterate peasants who cannot have been familiar with his now-celebrated writings. Like Ernest Hemingway and some other writers, Tolstoy appears to have enjoyed being recognized as a personality, perhaps even more than he enjoyed writing itself.

Four stars for a solid biography of an important subject.

[عبدالرحمن ال عتيق · Rating 5 out of 5]

من السير الرائعة جدا... لغتها مميزة ركزت على نقاط أحبها كثيرا في حياة الأدباء.
علاقاته بأقاربه
كيف تشكلت ذائقته الأدبية
أهم الشخصيات في حياته
علاقاته السياسية الاجتماعية الثقافية
أهم أعماله وماوراء كواليس كتابتها
الحكم على بعض صفاته بأسلوب متوسط ليس فيه تجن ولا تبجيل مبالغ فيه
الفصلان الأخيران مميزان جدا وتجعلك متحمس كما لو كنت أمام قصة أو رواية مشوقة...
علاقة تولستوي مع صوفيا تستحق أن يكتب عنها الكثير

كتاب مميز وأتمنى لو ترجم .

[David Bisset · Rating 5 out of 5]

Magisterial

This is a reissue with a new preface. It is superb, with numerous comments by the author. The gestation of the masterpieces is explained in great depth, and in addition the spiritual writings are given due weight. Tolstoy was a literary genius, and a flawed saint. Reading this book is strongly recommended.

[Trevor · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great biography of a remarkable man. In addition to covering the major events in Tolstoy’s life, the author discusses the books he wrote, their significance, and what influenced Tolstoy in his writings. Did a good job of exploring Tolstoy’s spiritual development and beliefs.

[Zach Korthals · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars

The first half is the stronger half. The author seems to be more enraptured with their understanding of the inner life of Tolstoy than presenting a narrative. It suffered from length due to this.

[Julia Churchley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent and thoroughly enjoyable. I knew little about Tolstoy so found this biography enlightening, fascinating and very amusing in parts. Especially enjoyed it when Tolstoy challenged Tuegenev to a dual

[Richard Anderson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Involving portrait of the great novelist.

[General Kutuzov · Rating 5 out of 5]

Outstanding. Wilson appreciates the writer of War and Peace and Anna Karenina, and rightly, in my view, mocks the silly, anti-property crusader of later years.

[Eric Kalnins · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting and informative read. A little too much of the biographers 'opinions'.

19.31

[Patricia Ibarra · Rating 4 out of 5]

What a complex man this great Russian writer was.

[Kathleen Brandt · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was never into Tolstoy's writing. Picked this up and was bored out of my skull.

[Danny Mcalister · Rating 5 out of 5]

an Wilson did a wonderful job telling his story

[Juliet]

Mid

[إِسْرَآءْ مَهْدِيٓ · Rating 3 out of 5]

!! المعني الحقيقي لعدم الرضا