The images of the commanders Kutuzov and Napoleon, created in Tolstoy’s epic “War and Peace,” are a vivid embodiment of Tolstoy’s principles of depicting historical figures. These heroes do not in every way coincide with their prototypes: the author of War and Peace did not strive to create documentary-reliable portraits of them. Thus, in the novel many famous historical facts, some of the true qualities of the commanders are exaggerated (for example, the senility and passivity of Kutuzov, the narcissism and posturing of Napoleon).
Evaluating the Russian and French commanders, like all other historical figures, Tolstoy applied strict moral criteria. The antithesis of Kutuzov - Napoleon is the main moral antithesis of the novel. If Kutuzov can be called a “positive” hero of history, then Napoleon, as depicted by Tolstoy, is its main “anti-hero”.
The author emphasizes the self-confidence and limitations of the French commander, manifested in all his actions, gestures and words. The portrait of the “European hero” is ironic, extremely reduced. “Plump, short figure”, “ fat thighs short legs", a fussy gait - this is Napoleon in the image of Tolstoy. In the behavior of this hero, his manner of speaking, narrow-mindedness and narcissism are evident. He is convinced of his greatness and genius: “it’s not what’s good that’s good, but what came into his head.”
The writer emphasizes the contrast between Napoleon's inflated self-esteem and his insignificance. The resulting comic effect- the best proof of the powerlessness and emptiness of a historical figure who “pretends” to be strong and majestic.
According to Tolstoy, Napoleon played “the cruel, sad and difficult, inhuman role that was intended for him.” It is unlikely that he could bear the full weight of this historical role, if only his mind and conscience were not darkened.
Napoleon is a deeply unhappy person who does not notice this only due to a complete lack of moral sense. This “European hero” is morally blind, unable to understand “neither goodness, nor beauty, nor truth, nor the meaning of his actions, which were too opposite to goodness and truth, too far from everything human for him to understand their meaning.”
It is possible, according to the writer, to arrive at “good and truth” only by renouncing one’s imaginary greatness, but Napoleon is completely incapable of this “heroic” act.
However, despite the fact that Napoleon is doomed to play his “negative” role in history, Tolstoy does not at all diminish his moral responsibility for what he did: “He, destined by providence for the sad, unfree role of the executioner of nations, assured himself that the purpose of his actions was good peoples and that he could lead the destinies of millions and do good deeds through power! ... He imagined that by his will there was a war with Russia, and the horror of what had happened did not strike his soul.”
Napoleon's antipode - Kutuzov - is the embodiment of folk morality, true greatness, “simplicity, goodness and truth.” The “Kutuzovian”, popular principle is contrasted with the “Napoleonic”, egoistic one.
It is difficult to call a Russian commander a “hero”: after all, he does not strive for superiority over other people. In general, Kutuzov in Tolstoy’s portrayal does not correspond to traditional ideas about a military genius. The writer deliberately exaggerates the decrepitude of the Russian commander. So, the commander-in-chief falls asleep during one of the military councils. This happens not because Kutuzov wanted to “show his contempt for the disposition or for anything else,” but because “for him it was about the irrepressible satisfaction of a human need - sleep.”
Kutuzov does not give orders, approving what seems reasonable to him and rejecting what is unreasonable; he seems to be doing nothing, not looking for a fight. At the council in Fili, it is this commander who outwardly calmly decides to leave Moscow, although this costs him terrible mental anguish.
Tolstoy shows that, without trying to influence the course of history, Kutuzov obeys logic historical process, intuitively perceives the highest meaning of what is happening. This explains his external inactivity and reluctance to force the course of events. This person, the writer emphasizes, is endowed with true wisdom, a special instinct that motivates him during Patriotic War act in accordance with the principle “what must happen, will happen.”
The source of the “extraordinary power of insight into the meaning of occurring phenomena” that Kutuzov possessed was his folk feeling. He “carried within himself in all its purity and strength” this feeling, which placed the hero at the “highest human heights.” It was this feeling that was recognized by the people in Kutuzov - and the Russian people chose the commander “to represent the people’s war.”
Napoleon won almost all the battles. Kutuzov lost most of the battles - the Russian army suffered setbacks at Krasnoe and Berezina. But, in the end, it was the Russian army that defeated the French army, commanded by the “brilliant commander” Napoleon.
Thus, true greatness, according to Tolstoy, is not measured by any “false formulas” of historians, it is in closeness to the people and to the very essence of life. That is why Napoleon's genius turns out to be great in practice historical lies. Tolstoy found true greatness in Kutuzov, a modest war worker, a man of the people and for the people.
The great epic novel “War and Peace” is not only an outstanding work about the search for the meaning of life, about love and truth, but also a large-scale depiction of real historical events that left a huge mark on the life of Russia and Europe. However, any history is made by people, and therefore those individuals to whom L.N. Tolstoy, echoing reality, gives this right to creativity. These are M.I. Kutuzov and Napoleon I Bonaparte.
The Corsican Napoleone, who rose from the rank of junior lieutenant to become French emperor, conquered almost all of Europe and became a truly outstanding figure. His military and government experience, even genius, served as the reason for the creation of a legendary aura. But what do we learn when we meet Napoleon in the novel War and Peace? They present to us little man with a round belly, thick shoulders, a plump neck, fat thighs, short legs, youthful appearance full face and “overgrown fatty breasts.” In just 7 years, from 1805 to 1812, Napoleon lost his slender appearance, his agility and courage. There, the luxury and festivities that he cultivated at his court “gave” him the “groomed body” of a narcissistic, selfish nobleman. Napoleon could no longer be called a gallant soldier capable of military exploits. Moreover, L.N. Tolstoy paints us an image of a commander who cares little about his army or about anyone other than himself. For him, the death of thousands of other people, their devotion to him, the cruelty of war and its bloodiness are a common thing. He considers himself the main player in the world, destined to win all chess games brilliantly, regardless of others. And Napoleon plays brilliantly, showing himself to be a miserable, albeit self-confident, poser without a hint of sincerity or virtue.
The reader sees Russian Commander-in-Chief M.I. as completely different. Kutuzova. The commander was already an old man by the time the war began, and therefore it is not surprising that L.N. Tolstoy describes to us the senile appearance of Mikhail Illarionovich with a corpulent body, a thick neck, plump arms and a wrinkled face. But, unlike Napoleon, all of Kutuzov’s shortcomings fade into the background when his soul “emerges” with a kind smile on his face. His gait, in comparison with the decisive and sharp step of Bonaparte, is “diving, swaying,” unhurried. M.I. Kutuzov takes care of his soldiers without pretense; he treats them like a father, trying to preserve as much as possible more lives, understanding the horror of war. He is calm and passive, unlike the French emperor, but this is seen as positive trait. The Russian commander understands that impulsive pressure on the course of history cannot be productively influenced; such an approach can only leave bleeding wounds, which will have to be healed by other generations.
M.I. Kutuzov and Napoleon I are completely different personalities in the novel. They are not similar externally and internally. But such dissimilar figures only help the author to strengthen main idea novel: the truth is in virtue, in the ability to unite with all people and the whole Universe on the basis of mutual understanding and care. This is the only way to leave a positive mark on history.
Introduction
Leo Tolstoy's novel "War and Peace" is practically the only historical epic novel. He describes in detail the military campaigns of 1805, 1809 and the War of 1812. Some readers believe that the novel can be used to study individual battles throughout history. But for Tolstoy it was not the main thing to talk about the war, how historical event. He had a different plan - “people's thought.” Show people, their characters, revealing the meaning of life. Not only ordinary people, but also great historical figures such as Kutuzov, Napoleon, Alexander, Bagration. L.N. Tolstoy gives a specific description of Kutuzov and Napoleon in “War and Peace”. This open comparison of the two commanders runs through the entire plot of the work.
The principle of contrast, taken by Tolstoy as a basis, reveals in “War and Peace” the images of Kutuzov and Napoleon as military strategists, shows their attitude towards their country, towards their army, towards their people. The author created a true portrait of his heroes, without inventing heroism or false shortcomings. They are real, alive - from the description of their appearance to their character traits.
The place of heroes in the novel
At first glance, it seems that Napoleon is given more space in the novel than Kutuzov. We see him from the first lines to the last. Everyone is talking about him: in the salon of Anna Pavlovna Scherer, and in the house of Prince Bolkonsky, and in the soldiers’ ranks. Many believe that “...Bonaparte is invincible and that all of Europe can do nothing against him...” And Kutuzov does not appear in entire parts of the novel. They scold him, they laugh at him, they forget about him. Vasily Kuragin mockingly speaks of Kutuzov when it comes to who will be commander-in-chief in the military operations of 1812: “Is it possible to appoint as commander-in-chief a man who cannot sit on horseback, falls asleep in council, a man of the worst morals!...a decrepit and blind man? .. He doesn't see anything. Play blind man's buff..." But here Prince Vasily recognizes him as a commander: "I'm not even talking about his qualities as a general!" But Kutuzov is present invisibly, people rely on him, but they don’t say it out loud.
Napoleon Bonaparte
The great French emperor Napoleon Bonaparte in the novel is presented to us through the eyes of his soldiers, the Russian secular society, Russian and Austrian generals, the Russian army and Leo Tolstoy himself. His vision of Napoleon's small character traits helps us understand this complex character.
We see Napoleon in a moment of anger when he realizes that his general Murat made a mistake in his calculations and thereby gave the Russian army the opportunity to win. “Go, destroy the Russian army!” - he exclaims in a letter to his general.
We see him in his moment of glory, when Napoleon, with his head held high and a contemptuous grin, looks around the field of Austerlitz after the battle. They line up the wounded for him to examine; for him this is another trophy. He either respectfully or mockingly thanks the Russian General Repnin for a fair fight.
We see him in a moment of complete calm and confidence in victory, when he stands on the top of a hill on the morning before the Battle of Austerlitz. Unshakable, arrogant, he raises " white glove” and with one movement of his hand begins the battle.
We see him in a conversation with Alexander when he came to a meeting in Tilsit. A tough decision, undeniable by anyone, an imperious look and confidence in actions gives the French emperor what he wants. The Tilsit peace was incomprehensible to many, but Alexander was blinded by Bonaparte’s “honesty”; he did not see the cold calculation and obvious deception of this truce.
Tolstoy shows his attitude towards French soldiers without hiding it. For Napoleon, it is just a weapon that must always be ready for battle. He doesn't think about people at all. His cynicism, cruelty, complete indifference to human life, cold, calculating mind, cunning - these are the qualities that Tolstoy talks about. He has only one goal - to conquer Europe, to capture, precisely to capture, Russia and to conquer the whole world. But Napoleon did not calculate his strength; he did not understand that the Russian army was strong not only in howitzers and cannons, but above all in faith. Faith in God, faith in the Russian people, faith in one people, faith in the victory of Russia for the Russian Tsar. The outcome of the Battle of Borodino became a shameful defeat for Napoleon, the defeat of all his great plans.
Mikhail Ilarionovich Kutuzov
In comparison with Napoleon, the active, thinking young but experienced emperor, Kutuzov looks like a passive commander. We more often see him talking to soldiers, sleeping at military councils, not categorically deciding the course of battles and not imposing his opinions on other generals. He acts in his own way. The Russian army believes in him. All the soldiers call him “Kutuzov the Father” behind his back. Unlike Napoleon, he does not boast of his rank, but simply goes to the field not after the battle, but during it, fighting hand in hand next to his comrades. For him there are no privates and generals, everyone is united in the fight for the Russian land.
When inspecting the troops near Braunau, Kutuzov “looks at the soldiers with a gentle smile” and takes the problem of the lack of boots upon himself. He also recognizes Timokhin, to whom he gives a special bow. This suggests that for Kutuzov it is not his rank or title that is important, but simply a person with his soul. Tolstoy in “War and Peace” shows Kutuzov and Napoleon in clear contrast precisely in this aspect - the attitude towards his army. For Kutuzov, each soldier is an individual, a person with his own inclinations and shortcomings. Everyone is important to him. He often rubs his eyes, which are full of tears, because he tends to worry about people, about the outcome of the case. He is excited about Andrei Bolkonsky because he loves his father. He accepts the news of the death of old Bolkonsky with bitterness. Understands the losses and realizes the failure at Austerlitz. Makes the right decision during the Battle of Shengraben. He is thoroughly preparing for the Battle of Borodino and believes in the victory of the Russian army.
Comparison of Kutuzov and Napoleon
Kutuzov and Napoleon are two great commanders who played an important role in history. Each had their own goal - to defeat the enemy, but they went towards it in different ways. L.N. Tolstoy used different means to describe Kutuzov and Napoleon. He gives us and external characteristics, and the character of the soul, the action of thought. It all helps add up full image heroes and understand whose priorities are more important to us.
Comparison of Kutuzov and Napoleon in Tolstoy’s novel is not random selection author. He does not put two emperors on the same level - Alexander and Bonaparte, he builds a comparison of precisely two commanders - Kutuzov and Napoleon. Apparently, Alexander, still a very young ruler, did not have the qualities of a real commander to be able to resist “Napoleon himself.” Only Kutuzov could claim this.
Work test
This is a real historical figure, the French emperor. Tolstoy decided to debunk the legend of Napoleon from the standpoint of true humanism. At the beginning of the novel, this man is the idol of Andrei Bolkonsky; Pierre Bezukhov considers Napoleon a great man. But gradually these best heroes Tolstoy is disappointed in his idol. From the first appearance of Napoleon in the novel, they reveal deeply negative traits his character. Outwardly we see a well-fed and lordly pampered man with a “round belly”, “fat thighs and short legs”, “a white plump neck”, “a plump short figure”. There is nothing natural about Napoleon; all his behavior is sheer posturing. He is selfish, narcissistic, people were of no interest to him. After a won battle, he likes to walk around the battlefield and look at the victims. We can say that Napoleon and Kutuzov are opposed to each other, as sincere and artificial, kind and selfish, cruel.
In the novel, the people's commander Kutuzov appears before the readers a simple person, who is closely connected with the Russian people, religiously united with them, is able to raise the morale of soldiers when they do not have to hope for victory. Kutuzov always remained himself in any situation. He acts like a true Russian patriot. And it is contrasted with the image of Napoleon, who was deceitful and behaved feignedly, while Kutuzov, on the contrary, was kind and simple. He believed that the fate of the battle was decided not by the orders of the commander-in-chief, not by the place where the troops stood, not by the quality of the guns and killed people, but by that elusive force called the spirit of the army." And as they showed further events: Indeed, it is impossible to predict how events will unfold, how opponents will act - it is important to strive for victory and not to lose heart. Because there is a "reliable course of events".
KUTUZOVNAPOLEON Expressive figure, gait, gestures, facial expressions; sometimes affectionate, sometimes mocking glance; an old gentle smile, wrinkled like stars in the corners of the lips and eyes. Fat, short figure; fat breasts, round belly; fat thighs of short legs; fussy gait; unpleasant - a fake smile.
KUTUZOVNAPOLEON Shows true concern for the soldiers (look at Brown), and is gentle in his treatment of them (Timokhin). Tries to save the lives of soldiers. Does not care about the soldiers, is indifferent to them (crossing the Neman). Soldiers are a means to achieve glory and power.
KUTUZOVNAPOLEON Didn't play any role. He did not make any orders, but only agreed or disagreed with what was offered to him. The role of the “benefactor of the world.” Napoleon made his orders, which either had already been carried out before he made them, or could not be and were not carried out.
KUTUZOVNAPOLEON Tolstoy contrasts Napoleon (both as a military leader and as a person) with Field Marshal Kutuzov. Unlike the Emperor of France, the Russian commander did not consider the leadership of military operations to be a “game of chess.” Moreover, he never took credit for himself main role in the successes achieved by the Russian army. Unlike Napoleon, he relied not on his genius, but on the strength of the army. Kutuzov was convinced that the “spirit of the army” was of decisive importance in war. The imaginary greatness of Napoleon is especially clearly manifested in the scene when he stands on Poklonnaya Hill and admires the panorama of Moscow: “One word of mine, one movement of my hand, and this ancient capital perished...” But he did not have long to enjoy his greatness. He found himself in a pitiful and ridiculous position, never receiving the keys to the majestic city.
KUTUZOVNAPOLEON is portrayed as a commander who not so much directed the actions of the army as who did not interfere with the course of events. It is not the commander’s experience, but the experience of his heart that tells him that the outcome of the war is predetermined by the moral superiority of the Russians. Therefore, he sees his first task as raising morale among the troops and instilling faith in victory. Cruel in an effort to satisfy his ambition at the cost of thousands of lives, in an attempt to impose his will on an entire country. His behavior is determined not by his heart, but by his mind, therefore he is doomed to defeat. Tolstoy is not impressed by the number of states he won - he has a different measure: “There is no greatness where there is no simplicity and truth.”
KUTUZOVNAPOLEON He is kind, wise, simple and open to people, like an ordinary - old and morally experienced - person. The image is given in the perception of different people. He is depicted as a man and alive in conversations (with Bolkonsky, Denisov, Bagration), at military councils, in the Battles of Austerlitz and Borodino. Petty irritability, acting - he does not resemble a great man in any way. Coldness and pomposity are emphasized; he poses all the time, playing the role of a genius. “He was like a child who, holding on to the strings tied inside the carriage, imagines that he is driving.”
Article menu:
Turning to the characteristics of such characters as Kutuzov and Napoleon, we note that writers draw inspiration from the world of their own fantasies and dreams. But they are also interested in history. Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy followed the same path when he wrote out historical figures in the novel “War and Peace” - along with the fruits of the imagination. On the pages of the novel we received alternative life Russian Emperor Alexander and the great general Pyotr Ivanovich Bagration, the brilliant military leader Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov and the French commander, ruler Napoleon Bonaparte. As well as other persons who existed in reality.
Kutuzov and Napoleon represent two lines of unfolding of the war. Part of the world is devoted to everyday life, the search for an answer to the question of personal happiness, romantic relationships. The war section includes questions about spiritual quests and social problems, about the War of 1812, which was somewhat different from other military actions. She was different. Just what? The author of the epic novel tries to answer these and other questions by writing out the images of the characters.
Literary method: meaningful antithesis
Antithesis in literature appears where the author uses opposition: he describes polar things, refers to binary oppositions. Binaries, as we know, are the basis of mythological consciousness. No matter how a person denies that he is influenced by mythologies (Roland Barthes’ definition is used here), the influence of myths on us is very strong. And accordingly, binary oppositions.
Dear readers! We invite you to read L. N. Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace”
L. Tolstoy's novel is structured in such a way that the reader sympathizes with Kutuzov, but, on the contrary, he develops antipathy towards Napoleon. If the writer describes such characters as Andrei Bolkonsky, Pierre Bezukhov, Natasha Rostova in detail, then the commanders appear as heroes, the impression of which the reader gets as he reads the text. This impression is not influenced author's description figures, but actions and decisions. Let’s also pay attention to actions, thoughts, words, fragmentary descriptions of appearance.
But let’s make a remark: the images of Kutuzov and Napoleon in the novel “War and Peace” are not those historical figures. This is the artistic development of reality, and therefore those individuals who actually existed are presented here through the lenses of such development: some qualities are hidden, while others, on the contrary, are too prominent. Using this technique, the author presents the reader with his assessment of the characters.
Kutuzov and Napoleon as commanders in chief
So, both heroes lead the fighting during the War of 1812. Kutuzov defends own country and the land from Napoleon's aggressive intentions. Already here the reader develops sympathy for the Russian military leader, and at least hostility towards the Frenchman, and at maximum even hateful disgust.
But commanders make decisions not only about strategy and tactics in battle. The fate of thousands of people and their lives depend on their actions. However, at the head of the military meat grinder, the heroes also stand differently: Kutuzov is on an equal footing with his subordinates, does not consider himself different from the soldiers, does not observe the battle while standing on a hill; the second clearly outlines the role of the emperor. However, Napoleon himself began as a soldier, and therefore he still had strict discipline and high demands on himself. But in a fit of paranoia and in a desire for safety, he allows only selected and close associates into the tent.
Portrait of Kutuzov
Simplicity, kindness, modesty - these are the features of Kutuzov, which were especially outlined by L. Tolstoy. However, not only the literary character Kutuzov, but also Kutuzov the historical figure possessed the same traits. High society did not accept him: it did not recognize either him or his methods of warfare. But it was impossible to disagree with the effectiveness of Mikhail Illarionovich’s tactics.
The field marshal appears on the pages of the novel tired man: aged, the body was filled with diseases, burden - not only physiological, but also psychological. Kutuzov defeats Napoleon in defiance of everyone, because those around him believed that the sick old commander, blind in one eye, would not defeat the younger and more active Frenchman. In Kutuzov, life seems to compete with itself: matter with form.
Dear readers! We invite you to read the article by L.N. Tolstoy.
L.N. Tolstoy favors Kutuzov. We see that the writer loves this character, he respects him, shows him understanding and sympathy. In addition, the writer admires Mikhail Illarionovich. Kutuzov is the exponent of the main idea of the novel, as conceived by the author, namely, “folk thought.” Therefore, Kutuzov, and not Napoleon, is the people’s commander here.
It is interesting that Kutuzov was appointed commander-in-chief against his will Russian Emperor, but in spite of it.
It is a rare case when the goal of one person (Kutuzov) coincides with the goal of the people. Everything that Kutuzov does, all the decisions that he makes, come from only one task - the salvation of the fatherland.
Kutuzov appears in the novel during the height of the crisis: the Russian army lost Smolensk, Napoleon began moving towards Moscow... The reader sees the commander, trying on “glasses” different people: soldiers, representatives of the partisan movement, directly the author of War and Peace, as well as Andrei Bolkonsky.
L.N. Tolstoy focuses on the image of Kutuzov as a “slumbering old man.” It seems that during the Battle of Austerlitz, the council of generals in Fili, and also at Borodino, he was passive and did not take an obvious part in the events. But this was only an appearance: this is the form of wisdom of a military leader. For example, at first Kutuzov dissuaded Emperor Alexander from the battle of Austerlitz, but he did not listen to him. The general’s behavior is a consequence of the fact that he realized: nothing can be changed and one should not regret, but think about the next steps.
Portrait of Napoleon
French Emperor seems to have won even before entering Russia: he is young, smart and cunning, full vitality. He is healthy and ready to conquer the whole world. But despite this, the reader develops a completely different vision of Napoleon: he does not like the French commander, but, on the contrary, warm emotions arise for the old man Kutuzov - in contrast to the opinion of secular society depicted in the novel.
Napoleon Bonaparte was an idol for that era. He was perceived as a genius, as a great and talented military man, as a man who managed to become an emperor from a simple soldier. They imitated Napoleon, they inherited him, they envied him. Everyone wanted to take his place. But no one would want to take Kutuzov’s place, because it would be an unbearable burden for an ordinary person, living by himself and his own interests, thirsting for glory. Who will notice here other features inherent in Napoleon? For example, arrogance, boasting and posturing, falsehood, self-deception, pride.
But Napoleon, unlike Kutuzov, was far from his soldiers. His army, according to L. Tolstoy, was “a bunch of marauders” who were interested in things that seemed valuable. Meanwhile, in Kutuzov we find imperishable values that cannot be stolen and taken away: this is respect for one’s neighbor, equality, justice, selfless service to the earth.
Thus, the figures of Kutuzov and Napoleon are people of the same profession and goal. They just achieved their goal by different means. If for Napoleon the end justified the means, then Kutuzov followed the ideas of I. Kant: he saw people as an end, but “never a means” (the reader noticed how Kutuzov was concerned about the problem of the soldiers’ lack of boots), and also did not put the end above the means.