Essay on hadji murat

The novel by Leo Tolstoy entitled “ Hadji Murat” is an interesting piece because it is both historical and fiction. It is a fictitious story written about an important Avar leader during the 1800s who was once a big influence in the history of Russia. The story’s plot revolves around a war between Muslims and Russia. Tolstoy has an interesting way of going about the story, how he separated plot lines in order to show the affects of the events on each character in the novel. This was a very good read which has received a number of good reviews. The novel was first published in the early 1910s, and is still being enjoyed today. This was written during Tolstoy’s last days as a writer. It was originally written in Russian and later on translated into English and a variety of other languages for people to enjoy.
The difficult thing about books that were written for a specific language are context and grammar issues. Not all languages have the same sentence structures. Therefore, there were some things in the book that could not be directly translated and understood verbatim. Not that the translated novel was done shabbily. It is just that there are cultural differences that cannot be explained when translated into a different language. There were some areas in the book which required further analysis, making the reader repeat the sentence out loud just to understand the deeper meaning behind the worlds. These are common issues found in books that were originally meant for other languages. Some parts needed more analysis and were still not clear in terms of understanding. However, this did not compromise the quality of Tolstoy’s novel.
Tolstoy reanimates Hadji Murad as a character. He was someone who gets caught in between two powerful leaders, Shamil and Nicholas I. He became a pawn for both and fought against the two, switching sides. He had a conflict with his personal interests, which caused him to choose his allies. He was a family man who was set on saving the ones he loved. He never failed in letting those around him know that the only thing he cared about was getting his family back. There can be a conflict in where his power lies. He faces battles head on, with no disregard if conflict could be avoided. This could be seen as a strength, but for others it might be a weakness. Whenever he changed his allegiances, he would pledge his head as well as his body, but not his whole heart, spirit or soul. It is like he is only giving himself physically, but leaving his true self out of the conflict.
The conflicts seen in him were between his heart and his common sense, though. This is why he is caught between the forces. We see why his heart was a big problem in his decision making process. Murat is somewhat an anti- or non- hero which the book is centered around. However, in history, he is seen as a traitor since he turned his back on those he was first fighting for and had joined forces with Russia. There is a sense of empathy that you can get from the author. It is like he has real emotions towards the characters which made them seem more real and engaging. It was Murat’s love for his wife that really made readers feel the emotional rollercoaster that he might have felt through the events in the novel.
Tsar Nicholas is the antagonist in the book, and this was portrayed well by the words of Tolstoy. He hated this character and let everyone know that he was weak, petty and ignorant. He was a tyrant who had no consideration for anyone else. He was lustful and enjoyed flatter, not someone who would usually be seen in his high position. He was a character to hate and feel disgusted about. This character can be compared to another leader, Stalin. However, Nicholas was not as emotional or portrayed with feelings.
Shamil is someone who we could see reading the book by Machiavelli’s The Prince. He is someone who rules with an iron fist. He exercises cruelty and oppression. This is done because he feels that it is necessary, not for his own personal pleasure. We can see that Shamil is more human than Nicholas. He was presented to have more feelings and emotions. He was capable of being hurt, even by youngest wife.
The book had a resounding theme of need. It was not about who was the more powerful ruler, or who won the war. The story about Murat was about how he could not separate his life in war from his family. He changes his alliances just for his love for his family – this seems to be his overall goal. There was humor and a lot of humanity seen in Shamar, but not in Nicholas. This is something that is very strange since the author himself is Russian. While this book was not historically accurate, it showed a lot of relevant historical points. They were not done in a direct and factual way, but they could be compared to certain figures in history as well as events. You could even compare some of the battles and problems in this book with the events going on now between the wars in Syria and Egypt. However, in these events, all those involved are Muslim.