The Reception History of John Milton In
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE RECEPTION HISTORY OF JOHN MILTON IN RUSSIA AND THE FORMER SOVIET UNION (1745-2013) By OYDIN UZAKOVA Bachelor of Arts in English Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma 2001 Master of Arts in English University of Tulsa Tulsa, Oklahoma 2003 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 2014 THE RECEPTION HISTORY OF JOHN MILTON IN RUSSIA AND THE FORMER SOVIET UNION (1745-2013) Dissertation Approved: Dr. Edward Jones Dissertation Adviser Dr. Jeffrey Walker Dr. Andrew Wadoski Dr. Doren Recker ii Name: OYDIN UZAKOVA Date of Degree: MAY 2014 Title of Study: THE RECEPTION HISTORY OF JOHN MILTON IN RUSSIA AND THE FORMER SOVIET UNION (1745-2013) Major Field: ENGLISH Abstract: This study divides the reception history of John Milton in Russia and the former Soviet Union into three periods: pre-Soviet, Soviet, and post-Soviet. The rationale for this division is rooted in the clear ideological ethos that marks each period, shaping Milton’s image into a desirable propagandistic mould. Milton’s reputation in Russia has undergone a cyclical development, returning to the point where it essentially began, and paralleling the course of Russian religious, social, and intellectual history. The reception has largely depended on the perception of Milton’s epic Paradise Lost , in particular on the interpretation of Milton’s literary creation of Satan. As Milton’s epic has been deemed successful over time, so has the reputation of its creator followed suit. The first notices of Milton in Russia date from the manuscript translation of Paradise Lost in 1745 by Baron A. S. Stroganov. Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Russian society adhered to the tenets of the Russian Orthodox Church; hence appraisals of the poem predictably focus on Milton’s notions of Christian doctrine, especially those parts of Paradise Lost which reflect orthodox positions. The gradual secularization of Russian society after the Enlightenment brings with it the formation of a new, secular setting for Milton’s Christian epic, which advances further with the establishment of Marxist- Leninist ideology as a result of the October Revolution of 1917. The official atheism of the Soviet period propagates the Marxist exegesis of Milton’s epic, shaping its author into a revolutionary free thinker, who rebels against the old political system and asserts his right to liberty. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the consequent decline of dialectical materialism and faith in Communism, there followed the revival of Christian religion, and with it the return to examination of Christian contexts in Milton’s work. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................1 II. PRE-SOVIET CRITICISM OF JOHN MILTON (1745-1917) .............................39 III. SOVIET CRITICISM OF JOHN MILTON (1917-1991) .....................................93 IV. POST-SOVIET CRITICISM OF JOHN MILTON (1991-2013) .......................142 Post-Soviet Russian Editions of Milton’s Poetic Oeuvre ....................................235 V. CONCLUSION .....................................................................................................248 WORKS CITED ........................................................................................................250 iv CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Literary scholarship concerning the life and work of John Milton is vast and steadily increasing. An area of study which has not kept pace involves Milton’s reputation in Russia and the former Soviet Union. To date there exists one account of this subject, completed by a Canadian professor from the History Department of McGill University whose specialty is modern Russian, Slavic history and seventeenth and eighteenth century science. In 1983, Professor Valentine Boss contributed to the Milton Encyclopedia “Milton’s Influence in Russia,” which aims to inform Miltonists and seventeenth-century scholars of the subject in general. Boss’s survey focuses mainly on Milton’s influence in imperial Russia and concentrates on Russian translators of Milton’s works and on Russian poets, whose works show awareness of Milton either through imitation or passing notices. Boss’s book Milton and the Rise of Russian Satanism (1991) represents a valuable guide on the subject of Milton’s influence on the satanic tradition in Russian literature, by tracing the Russian and Soviet career of Milton’s Satan as a literary inspiration. However, as their titles suggest, both of Boss’s research efforts address the question of Milton’s poetic influence on Russian literature, which is not identical with the question of Milton’s reception history in Russia: while Milton’s poetic influence on 1 Russian authors can testify to their favorable reception of his works (through their imitation), it is only one indicator of Milton’s Russian reputation. In contrast, the goal of this reception study is to shed light on Russian and Soviet literary criticism of John Milton, furthering Boss’s aims to provide a detailed survey of Russian and Soviet critics’ writing on John Milton during the last two and a half centuries—from N. M. Karamzin to M. Iu. Sokolova. However informative, Boss’s article and book do not pretend to be comprehensive, and being published before the collapse of the Soviet Union, they do not cover the most recent developments in studies on Milton’s reputation and on Satan’s fate with the modern Russian critics in the last thirty years. Hence, the following survey aims to supplement Boss’s earlier efforts and update them through the year 2013. In fact, since no Russian scholarship exists on Milton’s reception history, the present study hopes to fill this void by reporting on the subject from the perspective of a native speaker, particularly since very few Western Miltonists are fluent in Russian and thus are equipped to do research in the former Soviet Union and report on this subject. However, it would be a mistake to attribute the thirty-year silence of Western critics on this subject to a lack of interest. On the contrary, the rare combination of Boss’s historical and Russian-language expertise on the topic, as well as the 1991 promising announcement of his two forthcoming books on Milton’s connections with Russian culture ( Poet-Prophet: Milton’s Russian Image from the Enlightenment to Pushkin and Russian Popular Culture and John Milton ) made it appear as if this particular niche had already been taken. However, the unexpected collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the ensuing political chaos made it almost impossible for a Westerner to travel there and 2 get access to the archives—an event that was most likely responsible for Boss’s two forthcoming books on Milton in Russian culture never materializing in print. This study divides the reception history of John Milton in Russia and the former Soviet Union into three periods: pre-Soviet, Soviet, and post-Soviet. The rationale for this division is rooted in the clear ideological ethos that marks each period, shaping Milton’s image into a desirable propagandistic mould. 1 Milton’s reputation in Russia has undergone a cyclical development, returning to the point where it essentially began, and paralleling the course of Russian religious, social, and intellectual history. The reception has largely depended on the perception of Milton’s epic Paradise Lost , in particular on the interpretation of Milton’s literary creation of Satan. As Milton’s epic has been deemed successful over time, so has the reputation of its creator followed suit. The first notices of Milton in Russia date from the manuscript translation of Paradise Lost in 1745 by Baron A. S. Stroganov. Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Russian society adhered to the tenets of the Russian Orthodox Church; hence appraisals of the poem predictably focus on Milton’s notions of Christian doctrine, especially those parts of Paradise Lost which reflect orthodox positions. The gradual secularization of Russian society after the Enlightenment brought with it the formation of a new, secular setting for Milton’s Christian epic, which advanced further with the establishment of Marxist-Leninist ideology as a result of the October Revolution of 1917. The official atheism of the Soviet period propagated the Marxist exegesis of Milton’s epic, shaping its author into a revolutionary free thinker who rebels against the old political system and asserts his right to liberty. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the consequent 1All Russian-language sources have been translated and transliterated by the author. 3 decline of dialectical materialism and faith in Communism, there followed the revival of Christian religion, and with it the return to examination of Christian contexts in Milton’s work. Thus, the overall argument of this reception study resides in the Russian and Soviet ideological appropriation of Milton’s life and works for religious and political ends. The ideological needs of each historical period served as a lens through which Milton’s writings were interpreted by their readers. Milton’s equal popularity with Decembrists and their sympathizers like A. N. Radishchev and A. S. Pushkin in imperial Russia, and Soviet Marxists like M. Gor’kii and A. V. Lunacharskii (Lenin’s Commissar for the Enlightenment) in the proletariat state, can be explained through the Russian identification of Satan in Paradise Lost with