Any "War and Peace" (by Tolstoy) experts?

[Brazen]

I've been reading the book from my local library. They have the Maude translation, and I'm really liking it and would like to buy it, but all the new books are translated by Constance Garnett.

Now I hear a lot of people have complained that one of the difficulties in reading War and Peace is not only that it's long, but that it's just rough reading. I think this book reads very smooth and I have no problem getting lost in the story, so I'm wondering if maybe it's due to differences in the translations.

Another thing is, I've seen both volumes together in a 1100 page book (from Oxford Press). The book I have is 1700 pages. Could the differences be because the story was condensed, or would it be due to physically fitting more text on a page?

 

[BigToque]

War, what is it good for?

I'm sorry I can't be of any real help though.

 

[Brazen]

did you know it's original title was "War, What Is It Good For" - Elaine Benes

 

[torpid]

I'm sure it's the typesetting and page size. There is also the dunnigan and edmonds translations to consider. A quick search on the net leads me to believe those two might be more accurate translations, something to do with the official / corrected russian versions being the basis for those two translations whereas less accurate russian texts being the basis for the two you mentioned.

 

[torpid]

And I believe the general reason it is considered "tough" is because of the style of writing where there are tons of characters in a loosely related plot. The style is fairly common in film and novels these days. Some people still find films like that confusing, so it's not surprising people find novels like that confusing too.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: torpid
I'm sure it's the typesetting and page size. There is also the dunnigan and edmonds translations to consider. A quick search on the net leads me to believe those two might be more accurate translations, something to do with the official / corrected russian versions being the basis for those two translations whereas less accurate russian texts being the basis for the two you mentioned.

Actually, the reason I would really like to find a Maude translation is because the Maudes were friends of Tolstoy and Tolstoy himself endorsed the Maudes' translation.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: Brazen

Originally posted by: torpid
I'm sure it's the typesetting and page size. There is also the dunnigan and edmonds translations to consider. A quick search on the net leads me to believe those two might be more accurate translations, something to do with the official / corrected russian versions being the basis for those two translations whereas less accurate russian texts being the basis for the two you mentioned.

Actually, the reason I would really like to find a Maude translation is because the Maudes were friends of Tolstoy and Tolstoy himself endorsed the Maudes' translation.

Yeah but that doesn't necessarily mean it's the most accurate.

 

[Brazen]

How do you define accurate? Language has changed over the last 150 years, both Russian and English. If Tolstoy's original Russian text was updated to use modern Russian language, would that be more "accurate?" Mr. and Mrs. Maude based their translations off Tolstoy's original text and even worked with Tolstoy himself to get the translation to be as true to Tolstoy's writing as possible. I'm not saying you are wrong by any means, it's just something I'm considering. I'm a bit of a traditionalist, anyway, so sticking to Tolstoy's original intentions is important to me.

 

[torpid]

From what I gather, tolstoy had some bad handwriting and his wife would transcribe his texts, sometimes inaccurately. I believe that is the difference between the initial russian version and the later one - corrections and the like. But I'm not 100% sure. I'll ask the russian lit PHD student I know, although her focus is a different author. But her advisor, aka the nutty professor, would definitely know.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: torpid
From what I gather, tolstoy had some bad handwriting and his wife would transcribe his texts, sometimes inaccurately. I believe that is the difference between the initial russian version and the later one - corrections and the like. But I'm not 100% sure. I'll ask the russian lit PHD student I know, although her focus is a different author. But her advisor, aka the nutty professor, would definitely know.

Hey that would be cool if you do. Thanks!