• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

SHARP RAYS OF THOUGHT: PSYCHOLOGICAL CONFLICT IN THE POETRY OF E. A. BARATYNSKY Elena Pedigo Clark A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures (Russian Literature). Chapel Hill 2012 Approved by: Dr. Lawrence Feinberg Dr. Radislav Lapushin Dr. Hana Píchová Dr. Christopher Putney Dr. Ewa Wampuszyc ©2012 Elena Pedigo Clark ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT ELENA PEDIGO CLARK: Sharp Rays of Thought: Psychological Conflict in the Poetry of E. A. Baratynsky (Under the direction of Radislav Lapushin) This dissertation examines psychological conflict in the work of the early nineteenth-century Russian poet E. A. Baratynsky (1800-1844) through a dual approach of close reading and interpretations based on the theories of analytical psychology. Baratynsky is demonstrated to be the “poet of thought” because thought acts in his poetry as the least favored psychic function, serving as both a source of pain and a source of inspiration. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am grateful for the support and advice of my advisor, Dr. Radislav Lapushin, throughout the process of completing this dissertation. I would also like to thank Dr. Lawrence Feinberg for his comments on the first two chapters, Dr. John Wright for his willingness to discuss the poems with me, Jenny Charlton Barrier for her assistance in proofreading, Brian Barrier for his assistance in formatting the final text, and Natalia Chernysheva for her explanations of obscure points of Russian vocabulary. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Introduction………………………………………………………………1 I. THE POET OF THOUGHT……………………………………..7 II. SHARP RAYS: BARATYNSKY’S POETRY OF THOUGHT………………….22 III. THE PSYCHE ACCORDING TO JUNG……………………….90 IV. CHILD OF PASSION AND DOUBT: BARATYNSKY’S POETRY OF FEELING………..153 V. MANY STORMY QUESTIONS HAVE I RESOLVED: FINLAND, ITALY, AND THE RECONCILIATION OF OPPOSITES IN BARATYNSKY’S POETRY………………..191 Appendix 1……………………………………………………………...226 Appendix 2……………………………………………………………...250 Appendix 3……………………………………………………………...261 Appendix 4……………………………………………………………...267 Works Cited…………………………………………………………….275 v The psyche is at cross purposes with itself C. G. Jung Introduction This dissertation examines the poetry of the poet E. A. Baratynsky (1800-1844) through the prism of psychological theories developed by C. G. Jung (1875-1961). As readers from Pushkin to the present have noted, the conflict between thought and feeling forms one of the knots that tie Baratynsky’s poetry together. This dissertation will confront this conflict through a dual approach: by performing close readings and structural analyses of significant poems from Baratynsky’s oeuvre, and by connecting these close readings with Jung’s theories on psychological types. The main thrust of the argument will be that thought, which is generally considered the central preoccupation of Baratynsky’s poetry, is central because it serves as what Jung calls the inferior function in the psyche of Baratynsky’s poetic persona, while feeling, which often appears to occupy a lower position than thought, does so precisely because it acts as the dominant function, the bedrock of the psyche. The aim of this dissertation is not to overturn or polemicize against previous conceptions of Baratynsky’s poetry, but to provide a set of conceptual tools that may allow readers to reconceptualize this central conflict. Taking theories from one discipline—in this case, psychology—and applying them to another—in this case, literature—can entail the risk of creating a theoretical chimera. In order to create an intellectually coherent argument, I have decided to use the approach that interdisciplinary theorist Lisa Lattuca calls “informed disciplinarity.” According to Lattuca, informed disciplinary research means that: “disciplinary questions may be informed by concepts or theories from another discipline or may rely upon methods from other disciplines, but these disciplinary contributions are made in the service of a disciplinary question” (Creating Interdisciplinarity 82). In the case of this dissertation, I will be consciously using the theories created for another discipline— psychology—in order to answer literature-focused questions about Baratynsky’s poetry. Because analytical psychology, like many other branches of psychology, is both an empirical science that relies on evidence gathered from experiments conducted according to the scientific method, and a set of theories used to describe certain phenomena as the theorist perceives them, it, rather like astronomy, is partly grounded in proven facts (if one is of a psychological type that accepts that “facts” can be “proven,” that is), and is partly based on speculation about the nature of things that are currently beyond our knowledge. This speculation is meant to provide possible explanations for perceived phenomena, while not claiming to be the last word in explaining these phenomena—more can always be discovered. As Jung himself says of his theories in “The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche”: It is not a question of his [the psychologist’s] asserting anything, but of constructing a model which opens up a promising and useful field of inquiry. A model does not assert that something is so, it simply illustrates a particular mode of observation. (CW 8: 184) This is the approach I will be using to apply analytical psychology to literary analysis: I assume that the theories utilized here provide useful perspectives on Baratynsky’s poetry which “open up a promising and useful field of inquiry.” These 2 theories and the illustrations of these theories may be drawn from both the “scientific” and “non-scientific” branches of Jungian psychology. My purpose in doing so is not to attempt to “prove” or disprove anything other than that the kind of cross-fertilization that takes place when one ventures outside one’s home discipline can reveal exciting insights back in the home discipline. The use of theories developed in the early twentieth century on literature written in the early nineteenth century also raises the question of a potential anachronism. The answer to that is twofold. Firstly, the application of theories and techniques developed after a work was produced can be illuminating even if that work was not produced with those theories and techniques in mind. An example of this would be the use of Formalist techniques on nineteenth-century works of literature. Secondly, the psyches that stand behind the poetry of Baratynsky and the theories of Jung are not so different, informed as they both are by the spirit of Weimar Classicism. Leaving aside all claims that Jung’s theories describe transcultural and transhistorical psychic structures as being unprovable, this dissertation will make use of theories generated by one thinker profoundly influenced by Goethe, Schiller, and the philosophers of German Idealism—Jung—to explain certain aspects of poetry produced by another thinker—Baratynsky—who was also writing under the influence of these same poets and philosophers. This brings us to an important caveat, which is that the psyche we will be discussing here will be that of Baratynsky’s poetic persona, not that of Baratynsky the person. While Baratynsky the poet and Baratynsky the individual may have shared much in common, and the psychic conflicts and structures in Baratynsky’s poetry may very well reflect those of Baratynsky’s own psyche, we only have access to the poetry, not 3 Baratynsky’s conscious psychology. Therefore, while this dissertation will occasionally reference Baratynsky’s biography and personal correspondence when it seems enlightening to do so, it will do so with the aim of illuminating the poetry, not the person. I should add a warning that “thinking” in the Jungian sense,1 that is, objective/logical systems of organization, will come under question. The problem, of course, is that Jung’s own system is an attempt to impose “thinking” as he defines it on things that are only partially categorizable into rational categories. Furthermore, I myself will be guilty of the same thing, as I also impose a “thinking” approach to poetry, which does not necessarily respond well to this kind of treatment. Not only that, but if my thesis is correct, then “thinking” is, at a certain level, inimical to Baratynsky’s poetry and worldview, and by taking an overly “thinking” approach, I am in danger of doing him and his poetry a great disservice. On the other hand, it can be useful to classify and organize things, and doing so in a “thinking” fashion can be a very efficient method. In the case of my analysis, though, I would like to start with the warning that when analyzing poetry, clinging too hard to any one conceptual method is likely to obscure a whole host of other meanings inherent in the poem. Therefore, while I will be presenting a certain reading of certain poems and of Baratynsky’s oeuvre as a whole, I would like to say at the outset that this reading should not be taken as too cut-and-dried, even if at times it appears to be. I say this not to attack my own analysis and interpretation before I even offer it, but, I hope, to provide the kind of conceptual flexibility necessary for dealing with an organic entity such as a poem or 1Thinking and the other psychological functions as defined by Jung will be described in more detail in Chapter Three. 4 poetry. And now, having laid down some general theoretical principles about the dubious quality of theoretical principles, we should turn to the actual topic of this dissertation, which is psychological conflict in Baratynsky’s poetry. Because Baratynsky is the poet of the “quiet voice” and may not be a familiar figure to readers, I will nonetheless begin with a brief biographical sketch in order to orient the reader in the cultural and personal background against which the poems under discussion were written.

Load more

  285

Copy Link