This book started with a working title "1805".Tolstoy looked to portray the state of Russians , elites and peasants alike , that led to the Decembrists Revolt in1825.The paradox of this movement was the dichotomy , and passionate ensuing debate , on the direction the Slav nation must take when in defeating the Imperialists Napoleonic Invasion the Russians could at last address the direction of their future without unhealthy overt external interference.They had militarily won the Right to enact A Slavic solution for a Slav problem.
One of the greatest narratives , its many concepts and themes which transcend nationality, ideology and time in that it expresses universal values , actions that shape moments in Human History ,be it temporal or those that cast shadows across the ages.
And so we get to the crux of why 1805 has to be the starting point of this debate.Catherine the Great had started the great Eurocentralisation of the Russian nation on a predominately Prussian Germanic Model ( being Prussian herself) , at one level releasing technologies into the agrarian and urban sectors , establishing an efficient methodical bureaucratic central governing mechanisms , all these supported by encouraging immigration of German skilled technicians and administrators and a wholesale reorganisation of the Church into an effective organ of the State.On the other hand a rigid class system was established for the elites and Serfdom of the Peasants was enshrined with a near religiously ordained caste system.
The pursuing of this system into the Period of the Romanovs led to a rigid ,stolid and satiated elite strata which had become completely uncaring and out of touch with the land and the culture in which it was born.So much so that French was the language of the rulings elites , and all cultural and ideas of progress from Europe were apishly followed whether they suited the Russian situation or not.
Napoleon and a host of strong charismatic leaders that ultimately led nations into cataclysmic upheavals can be identified as fast-tracking into a decade or so a direction their respective societies would have traversed in a timespan of about forty years had none of these individuals shown up.No one entity these names are famous for leading went in a trajectory that would not have led to the same point in national objectives had governmental institutions been in charge instead of individual strongmen.Strong leaders of this nature do not go against the flow , rather they ride crest , fuelling momentum.With the defeat of Napoleon the Russian ruling classes realised not only independence for themselves , but an opportunity to determine and change society from within.
In the video below , the concept of Tolstoys perception that History is a mass fluid movement work of individuals and not the work of Heroes or Great Men.
Another of Tolstoys great universal observations is the combining of Newtons Law on Motion to the outcome of Wars.His contention is that no matter the material size of the invading force or the ammunition they have at hand , the ultimate victory in War will come to the side with the Greatest Human Spirit and Heart to Fight and Resist allied with unlimited time to rebel and resist over years and generations.The Afghan resistance to the British twice , the Soviet Union and now NATO ( in which ultimately there is only going to be one winner) amply bears Tolstoys formula out.
“Military science says, the greater the numbers [of an army] the greater the strength. ... For military science to make this assertion is like defining energy in mechanics by reference to the mass only. It is like saying that the momenta of moving bodies will be equal or unequal according to the equality or inequality of their masses. But momentum (or ‘quantity of motion’) is the product of mass and velocity. So in warfare the strength of an army is the product of its mass and of something else, some unknown factor x”
He goes on to debate what this unknown x may stand for and rejects the common explanations, especially the interpretation of x as the amount of genius of the commanding general. He goes on to say that [WP, 1224]:
“We must accept the unknown and see it for what it is: the more or less active desire to fight and face danger. Only then, expressing the known historical facts by means of equations, shall we be able to compare the relative values of the unknown factor; only then may we hope to arrive at the unknown itself.
You can get more information of the mathematical themes of War and peace in this Russian archival article.
And Finally the video below has a rendition of a Tolstoy Short Story with an Aphoristic message called "Evil Allures But Good Endures"
No comments:
Post a Comment