DOCSLIB.ORG

'Pushkin Was a Live Volcano . . .'

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
'Pushkin Was a Live Volcano . . .' Click here for Full Issue of Fidelio Volume 8, Number 3, Fall 1999 ‘Pushkin Was a Live Volcano...’ The Poet, As Seen by His Contemporaries by E.S. Lebedeva Pushkin was a live volcano, whose collaboration, chance meetings on inner life burst from him like the post roads, or in some Cos- a column of fire. sack settlement, or on the Geor- —F. Glinka (I, 245)1 gian Military Highway. People of different levels of culture gave Poetry is the exclusive passion of those testimony about him, and there is few, who are born poets. a great range of variety in how —A.S. Pushkin they perceived the personality of the poet: from tender solicitude at ushkin lived his life in a big the sight of a missing button on and noisy crowd—not in his jacket, to amazement at the Pisolation, but surrounded by scope of the phenomenon that many people who had the opportu- was Pushkin. nity to see him. We can hear the All social layers are represent- chorus of his contemporaries, with ed on the list of people who have its great range of voices, in their said what they had to say about reminiscences about him. the poet—from the Emperor to These memoirs have a certain the serf, from the fashionable for- peculiar feature. The people closest tune-teller to the old Cossack to the poet found it difficult to Manuscript sketch, 1820, self-portrait (lower left) woman, who remembered speak, and they did not do so right with members of the Rayevsky family. Pushkin. The richness of these away. Alexander Sergeyevich’s memoirs is a natural response to friend S.A. Sobolevsky expressed the reason for this con- the character of his genius, open as it was to the world straint, in his own way, in 1855: “In order not to retell and to people: In Pushkin’s own words (as related by what is superfluous, or fail to tell adequately what should A.O. Smirnova), he saw his own mind in every person, be told, every friend of Pushkin ought to remain silent. .. and every conversation partner was interesting for him— Let those who didn’t know him, write about him.” (I, 38) “from the police watchman, to the Tsar.” Be that as it may, memoirs about the poet ultimately I.I. Pushchin, the “first friend, . priceless friend,” filled two large volumes. sketched the far from simple relations among the Lycée The degree of his closeness to the memoir writers classmates. “From the very beginning, Pushkin annoyed varies—friendship of many years, blood kinship, literary many people, and therefore did not inspire general sym- pathy; that is the lot of an eccentric being, among peo- –––––––––– ple.” (I, 82) Even earlier, his perceptive and loving grand- Eleonora Sergeyevna Lebedeva heads the methodological mother had worried, as she observed the unusual child: department of the All-Russian Pushkin Museum in St. “He rushes from one extreme to another. He has no mid- Petersburg, and is the founder of the periodical, “Christian dle ground. God only knows, what it will all end in.” Culture: The Pushkin Epoch.” She works in Tsarskoye Selo (Ver., 33)2 (Pushkin), the suburb of St. Petersburg where Pushkin P.A. Pletnyov, whom the poet described as the posses- attended the Lycée. sor of “a beautiful soul, full of sacred dreams, living and 67 © 1999 Schiller Institute, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission strictly prohibited. clear poetry, lofty thoughts and simplicity,” formulated . but slim, strong and well-built. Women liked Pushkin; his amazement at Pushkin, in this way: “The ardent he fascinated them, and he inspired more than a few pas- nature of his soul, fused with his clarity of mind, made sions in his time. When he was flirting with a woman or him an extraordinary, even strange being, in whom all when he was genuinely engaged with her, his conversation qualities took an extreme form.” (II, 254) became unusually alluring. It should be noted that one In 1820, I.A. Capodistria, chief of the Collegium of rarely meets a person, who can express himself as indiffer- Foreign Affairs, wrote upon sending Pushkin to General ently and insufferably as Pushkin used to, when he was Inzov in the South: “There is no extreme, into which this not interested in the topic of discussion. But he would unfortunate young man would not fall, nor is there any become brilliantly eloquent, when it had to do with some- degree of perfection, which he could not attain, highly thing close to his heart. Then he was a poet, and rather gifted as he is.” (Ver., 90) more inspired than in any of his compositions.” (I, 63) Count Benkendorf recorded the paradox of Pushkin, The remarks of A.N. Vulf, “the Lovelace of Tver,” are from his own point of view: well known: “He knows wo- “Pushkin united in himself men like nobody else. For that two unique beings: He was a reason, though lacking any of great poet, and a great liberal, the external attributes, which hating any authority.” always influence the fairer sex, Adam Mickiewicz saw the he wins their favor with the uniqueness of his Russian fel- sheer brilliance of his mind.” It low writer, in his combination is interesting to contrast yet of poetic genius and civic, his- another “male” view of torical thinking: “The bullet Pushkin with these opinions— that felled Pushkin inflicted a the less popularized statement terrible blow against intellec- by A.A. Mukhanov (in a letter tual Russia. Now Russia has to his brother, May 1827): excellent writers . But “Alexander Pushkin, who is nobody will replace Pushkin. setting off into the night, will Only once is it granted to a bring you this letter.Try to get country, to produce a person, to know him better; it is who unites in himself to such impossible to value highly a degree such diverse and, enough the pleasure of passing seemingly, mutually exclusive time with him, thinking about qualities.” (I, 143) the impressions which his Russian religious philoso- unusual gifts awake in us. He phy has remarked upon Push- is a hundred times more inter- kin’s antinomic nature, from Manuscript page, “The Prisoner of the Caucasus,” 1834. esting in male company, than an ontological standpoint.3 with women, when he makes The comments cited above are sweeping statements himself comprehensible to the females by constantly dissi- about the poet’s personality. Other observers record more pating himself into pettiness.” (Ver., 235) particular, but very striking contradictions in the poet’s A.P. Kern, who observed the poet in quite varied cir- character, actions, and psyche. cumstances, noted: “He was very uneven in his manners: “I knew Alexander Sergeyevich as a quick-tempered sometimes loudly merry, sometimes sad, sometimes shy, person, sometimes to the point of frenzy,” testified his sometimes bold, sometimes inexhaustibly gracious, some- Kishinyov acquaintance, Lt. Col. I.P. Liprandi, “but at a times exceedingly boring—and there was no way to moment of danger, specifically, when he came face to face guess what mood he would be in a minute later.”4 with death, at which moment a person completely reveals These states, coming in frequent and rapid succession, himself, Pushkin was to a high degree imperturbable. sought an outlet, and Pushkin’s artistic nature expressed When things reached that barrier, he was as cool as ice. .. them not only in his creative work, but in life. In such cases, I have rarely encountered such a nature as “The Arabian Devil” [“Bes-Arabsky,” a pun on Pushkin’s. These two extremes, united as they were in “Bessarabian”–RBD] Petersburg friends of the poet called Alexander Sergeyevich, must be very rare.” (I, 316) him among themselves, when he was exiled to Bessarabia. The poet’s brother recalls: “Pushkin was not good-look- One rather air-headed Kishinyov lady saw him like this: ing, but his face was expressive and animated; he was short “Pushkin was still very young. He wasn’t exactly black, 68 but swarthy, or sun-burned. He was kind, well-mannered, physiognomy is so special and expressive, that any good but a mischief-maker. I would tell him, ‘You’re such a painter can capture it, but at the same time, it changes and child!’ And he called me a rose in the sweetbriar. I would shifts so much, that it is difficult to imagine that any por- say to him, ‘You’ll be jealous.’ And he’d say, ‘No! No! trait of Pushkin could give a true idea of him.” (Ver., 232) Never.’ He would improvise verses for us. Pushkin would That was said in 1827. After Pushkin’s death, his often walk in the city park. But every time, he put on a acquaintance V.A. Nashchokina recalled, “I have seen different costume. You’d look, and there would be many portraits of him, but sadly I must admit that not Pushkin as a Serb or a Moldavian. Ladies of his acquain- one of them conveyed even one-hundredth of the spiritual tance gave him the clothes. The Moldavians were wearing beauty of his face—especially his amazing eyes. In my cassocks at the time. Another time, you’d look, and whole long life, I have never seen any other eyes like Pushkin would be a Turk. that.” His eyes were light blue, or When he walked about in ordinary sometimes dark blue. clothes, in his overcoat, then he’d In 1827, when Pushkin was at always have one side over his the zenith of his fame, O.A.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Musorgsky's Boris Godunov
    22 JANUARY 2019 Musorgsky’s Boris Godunov PROFESSOR MARINA FROLOVA-WALKER Today we are going to look at what is possibly the most famous of Russian operas – Musorgsky’s Boris Godunov. Its route to international celebrity is very clear – the great impresario Serge Diaghilev staged it in Paris in 1908, with the star bass Fyodor Chaliapin in the main role. The opera the Parisians saw would have taken Musorgsky by surprise. First, it was staged in a heavily reworked edition made by Rimsky-Korsakov after Musorgsky’s death, where only about 20% of the bars in the original were left unchanged. But that was still a modest affair compared to the steps Diaghilev took on his own initiative. The production had a Russian cast singing the opera in Russian, and Diaghilev was worried that the Parisians would lose patience with scenes that were more wordy, since they would follow none of it, so he decided simply to cut these scenes, even though this meant that some crucial turning points in the drama were lost altogether. He then reordered the remaining scenes to heighten contrasts, jumbling the chronology. In effect, the opera had become a series of striking tableaux rather than a drama with a coherent plot. But as pure spectacle, it was indeed impressive, with astonishing sets provided by the painter Golovin and with the excitement generated by Chaliapin as Boris. For all its shortcomings, it was this production that brought Musorgsky’s masterwork to the world’s attention. 1908, the year of the Paris production was nearly thirty years after Musorgsky’s death, and nearly and forty years after the opera was completed.
    [Show full text]
  • Art and Power in Putin's Russia
    RUSSIA Art and Power in Putin’s Russia BY SASHA PEVAK The separation between art and power in Russia’s recent history has never been clear-cut. Soon after the fall of the USSR, contemporary art, namely actionism in the 90s, openly criticized society and entered the political sphere. This trend continued after Vladimir Putin’s election in 2000. Russian identity politics in the 2000s were based on four pillars: state nationalism with the Putin’s “power vertical”, the vision of Russia as a nation-state, Orthodox religion, and the myth of the Unique Russian Path, reinforced by the notion of “sovereign democracy” and the idea of the omnipresence of a fifth column inside the country 1. The will to consolidate society around these values provoked, according to political scientist Lena Jonson, tensions between the State and culture, especially as far as religious issues were concerned. These issues were the cause of the trials against the exhibitions “Attention! Religion” (2003) and “Forbidden Art – 2006” (2007), shown in Moscow at the Andrei Sakharov Museum and Public Centre. The latter staged temporary events and activities based on the defence of Human Rights. For part of the national opinion, the Centre symbolized democracy in Russia, whereas for others it represented an antipatriotic element, all the more so because it was financed by foreign foundations. In 2014, the Department of Justice catalogued it as a “foreign agent,” on the pretext that it carried out political actions with American subsidies 2. In 2003, the exhibition “Caution, Religion!”, organized by Aroutioun Zouloumian, was vandalized by religious activists several days after the opening 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Випперовские Чтения» «Классика И Современность. Отражения» 26–28 Февраля 2018 Года
    МЕЖДУНАРОДНАЯ НАУЧНАЯ КОНФЕРЕНЦИЯ «ВИППЕРОВСКИЕ ЧТЕНИЯ» «КЛАССИКА И СОВРЕМЕННОСТЬ. ОТРАЖЕНИЯ» 26–28 февраля 2018 года INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH VIPPER CONFERENCE “CLASSICS AND CONTEMPORANEITY. REFLECTIONS” 26–28 February, 2018 1 ПРОГРАММА феноменов искусства, наделенных статусом «классиче- with the Apollon journal came up with the specific dis- interventions, contemporary museum increasingly ских». Будут проанализированы разные формы диалога course, which, by appealing to the museum categories, prefers extra- systematic and extra-historical caram- PROGRAM с искусством прошлого, с его классическими образцами, made the impressionist and post- impressionist painting bolage (J.-H. Martin) view that assumes the maximum их творческий потенциал, функции и цели, границы их acceptable by the educated public. The problem was set scope of associations, comparisons, and interpreta- 26 ФЕВРАЛЯ, ПОНЕДЕЛЬНИК смыслообразующих и формообразующих возможностей. again after the October, when in 1918–1920 the Moscow tions. At the same time, different museums, such as ГЛАВНОЕ ЗДАНИЕ ГМИИ им. А.С. ПУШКИНА, Krasimira Lukitcheva (Russia) museum community proposed a number of alternative Louvre, Versaille, Prado, Villa Borghese, demonstrate (ул. Волхонка, д. 12) ЗАЛ 30 INTERPRETING THE CLASSICAL HERITAGE IN THEORY concepts of the new museum, where modern French art various strategies of work with contemporary mate- 26 FEBRUARY, MONDAY AND PRACTICE OF ART OF THE SECOND HALF OF THE was once again the central point of discussion (Museum rial. Evaluation of the pros and cons of international HALL 30, THE MAIN BUILDING OF THE PUSHKIN 20th — BEGINNING OF THE 21st CENTURY of Artistic Culture, Museums of the New Western Art, experience is one of the pressing problems in creating STATE MUSEUM (12, VOLKHONKA STREET) The talk will address the complex and tense context Pavel Muratov’s project of reorganization of the Muse- the concept of the 21st century museum.
    [Show full text]
  • Boris Godunov
    Boris Godunov and Little Tragedies Alexander Pushkin Translated by Roger Clarke FE<NFIC; :C8JJ@:J ONEWORLD CLASSICS LTD London House 243-253 Lower Mortlake Road Richmond Surrey TW9 2LL United Kingdom www.oneworldclassics.com Boris Godunov first published in Russian in 1831 The Mean-Spirited Knight first published in Russian in 1836 Mozart and Salieri first published in Russian in 1831 The Stone Guest first published in Russian in 1839 A Feast during the Plague first published in Russian in 1832 This translation first published by Oneworld Classics Limited in 2010 English translations, introductions, notes, extra material and appendices © Roger Clarke, 2010 Front cover image © Catriona Gray Printed in Great Britain by MPG Books, Cornwall ISBN: 978-1-84749-147-3 All the material in this volume is reprinted with permission or presumed to be in the public domain. Every effort has been made to ascertain and acknowledge the copyright status, but should there have been any unwitting oversight on our part, we would be happy to rectify the error in subsequent printings. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise), without the prior written permission of the publisher. This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not be resold, lent, hired out or otherwise circulated without the express prior consent of the publisher. Contents Boris Godunov 1 Introduction by Roger Clarke 3 Boris Godunov 9 Little Tragedies 105 Introduction by Roger Clarke 107 The Mean-Spirited Knight 109 Mozart and Salieri 131 The Stone Guest 143 A Feast during the Plague 181 Notes on Boris Godunov 193 Notes on Little Tragedies 224 Extra Material 241 Alexander Pushkin’s Life 243 Boris Godunov 251 Little Tragedies 262 Translator’s Note 280 Select Bibliography 282 Appendices 285 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Network Map of Knowledge And
    Humphry Davy George Grosz Patrick Galvin August Wilhelm von Hofmann Mervyn Gotsman Peter Blake Willa Cather Norman Vincent Peale Hans Holbein the Elder David Bomberg Hans Lewy Mark Ryden Juan Gris Ian Stevenson Charles Coleman (English painter) Mauritz de Haas David Drake Donald E. Westlake John Morton Blum Yehuda Amichai Stephen Smale Bernd and Hilla Becher Vitsentzos Kornaros Maxfield Parrish L. Sprague de Camp Derek Jarman Baron Carl von Rokitansky John LaFarge Richard Francis Burton Jamie Hewlett George Sterling Sergei Winogradsky Federico Halbherr Jean-Léon Gérôme William M. Bass Roy Lichtenstein Jacob Isaakszoon van Ruisdael Tony Cliff Julia Margaret Cameron Arnold Sommerfeld Adrian Willaert Olga Arsenievna Oleinik LeMoine Fitzgerald Christian Krohg Wilfred Thesiger Jean-Joseph Benjamin-Constant Eva Hesse `Abd Allah ibn `Abbas Him Mark Lai Clark Ashton Smith Clint Eastwood Therkel Mathiassen Bettie Page Frank DuMond Peter Whittle Salvador Espriu Gaetano Fichera William Cubley Jean Tinguely Amado Nervo Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay Ferdinand Hodler Françoise Sagan Dave Meltzer Anton Julius Carlson Bela Cikoš Sesija John Cleese Kan Nyunt Charlotte Lamb Benjamin Silliman Howard Hendricks Jim Russell (cartoonist) Kate Chopin Gary Becker Harvey Kurtzman Michel Tapié John C. Maxwell Stan Pitt Henry Lawson Gustave Boulanger Wayne Shorter Irshad Kamil Joseph Greenberg Dungeons & Dragons Serbian epic poetry Adrian Ludwig Richter Eliseu Visconti Albert Maignan Syed Nazeer Husain Hakushu Kitahara Lim Cheng Hoe David Brin Bernard Ogilvie Dodge Star Wars Karel Capek Hudson River School Alfred Hitchcock Vladimir Colin Robert Kroetsch Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai Stephen Sondheim Robert Ludlum Frank Frazetta Walter Tevis Sax Rohmer Rafael Sabatini Ralph Nader Manon Gropius Aristide Maillol Ed Roth Jonathan Dordick Abdur Razzaq (Professor) John W.
    [Show full text]
  • The Inextricable Link Between Literature and Music in 19Th
    COMPOSERS AS STORYTELLERS: THE INEXTRICABLE LINK BETWEEN LITERATURE AND MUSIC IN 19TH CENTURY RUSSIA A Thesis Presented to The Graduate Faculty of The University of Akron In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Music Ashley Shank December 2010 COMPOSERS AS STORYTELLERS: THE INEXTRICABLE LINK BETWEEN LITERATURE AND MUSIC IN 19TH CENTURY RUSSIA Ashley Shank Thesis Approved: Accepted: _______________________________ _______________________________ Advisor Interim Dean of the College Dr. Brooks Toliver Dr. Dudley Turner _______________________________ _______________________________ Faculty Reader Dean of the Graduate School Mr. George Pope Dr. George R. Newkome _______________________________ _______________________________ School Director Date Dr. William Guegold ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I. OVERVIEW OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF SECULAR ART MUSIC IN RUSSIA……..………………………………………………..……………….1 Introduction……………………..…………………………………………………1 The Introduction of Secular High Art………………………………………..……3 Nicholas I and the Rise of the Noble Dilettantes…………………..………….....10 The Rise of the Russian School and Musical Professionalism……..……………19 Nationalism…………………………..………………………………………..…23 Arts Policies and Censorship………………………..…………………………...25 II. MUSIC AND LITERATURE AS A CULTURAL DUET………………..…32 Cross-Pollination……………………………………………………………...…32 The Russian Soul in Literature and Music………………..……………………...38 Music in Poetry: Sound and Form…………………………..……………...……44 III. STORIES IN MUSIC…………………………………………………… ….51 iii Opera……………………………………………………………………………..57
    [Show full text]
  • Best History Museums in Moscow"
    "Best History Museums in Moscow" Realizado por : Cityseeker 5 Ubicaciones indicadas State Historical Museum "Russia Through the Ages" It is impossible to miss this museum, given that it sits right on Red Square. At the entrance, there's always someone dressed as Ivan the Terrible or Lenin, for those looking for a photograph. The museum opened its doors to the public in 1883 and recognized as Russia's largest museum as it houses artifacts that are over a hundred years old. Inside, there are by Marcin Konsek various exhibitions dedicated to the sweeping richness of Russian history, from mammoth tusks and bronze age relics to the posters dating back to the Soviet-era. +7 495 692 3731 www.shm.ru/ [email protected] Red Square 1, Moscú Romanov Boyar House in Zariadie "Typical 17th-Century Boyar Home" According to legend, the first Tsar of the Romanov dynasty (Mikhail Fedorovich) was born here on July 12, 1596. This 16th-century estate belonged to his grandfather, Nikita Romanov. After numerous repairs and reconstructions, the chambers became a good example of a typical 17th- century boyar home. In 1932 the museum became a branch of the State by Alvesgaspar Historical Museum. The chambers' interior illustrates the life of boyars during the 17th Century. The exhibition shows the best pieces of applied and folk arts from the funds of the State Historical Museum. +7 495 698 1256 www.shm.ru/romanovy.html Varvarka Ulitsa 10, Moscú Pushkin Museum on the Arbat "The Residence of Alexander Pushkin" This two-story 19th-century house is a very interesting place for those who would like to know more about Russia's great poet Alexander Pushkin and about the city life at the time.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia in the Accounts of Sixteenth-Century English Voyagers, Ed
    Rude and Barbarous Kingdom: Russia in the Accounts of Sixteenth-Century English Voyagers, ed. Lloyd E. Berry and Robert O. Crummey, Madison, Milwaukee and London: University of Wisconsin Press, 1968. xxiii, 391 pp. $7.50. This attractively-presented volume is yet another instance of the work of publishers in making available in a more accessible form primary sources which it was hitherto necessary to seek among dusty collections of the Hakluyt Society publications. Here we have in a single volume accounts of the travels of Richard Chancellor, Anthony Jenkinson and Thomas Randolph, together with the better-known and more extensive narrative contained in Giles Fletcher's Of the Russe Commonwealth and Sir Jerome Horsey's Travels. The most entertaining component of this volume is certainly the series of descriptions culled from George Turberville's Tragicall Tales, all written to various friends in rhyming couplets. This was apparently the sixteenth-century equivalent of the picture postcard, through apparently Turberville was not having a wonderful time! English merchants evidently enjoyed high favour at the court of Ivan IV, but Horsey's account reflects the change of policy brought about by the accession to power of Boris Godunov. Although the English travellers were very astute observers, naturally there are many inaccuracies in their accounts. Horsey, for instance, mistook the Volkhov for the Volga, and most of these good Anglicans came away from Russia with weird ideas about the Orthodox Church. The editors have, by their introductions and footnotes, provided an invaluable service. However, in the introduction to the text of Chancellor's account it is stated that his observation of the practice of debt-bondage is interesting in that "the practice of bondage by loan contract did not reach its full development until the economic collapse at the end of the century and the civil wars that followed".
    [Show full text]
  • Invisible Architecture: Ideologies of Space in the Nineteenth-Century City
    Invisible Architecture: Ideologies of Space in the Nineteenth- Century City A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities. 2014 Ben Moore School of Arts, Languages and Cultures 2 Contents Abstract 5 Declaration and Copyright Statement 6 Acknowledgments 7 Note on Abbreviations and Editions 8 Introduction 9 ‘Invisible’ vs ‘Ideology’ 11 The Constellation and the Dialectical Image 17 The Optical Unconscious 21 Architectural Unconscious 24 The City from Above and the City from Below 29 Reading Modernity, Reading Architecture 34 Cities and Texts 36 Chapters 1. Gogol’s Dream-City 41 Unity and Multiplicity 45 Imagination and Dreams 57 Arabesque, Ecstasy, Montage 66 The Overcoat 75 2. The Underground City: Kay, Engels and Gaskell 80 James Kay and Friedrich Engels’s Manchester 84 Cellar-dwelling 93 Mary Barton’s Cellars 100 3. The Unstable City: Dombey and Son 113 The Two Houses of Dombey 117 The Trading House 120 The Domestic House 132 The Railway 141 4. The Uncanny City: Our Mutual Friend 154 3 In Search of a Clue 158 The River and the Gaze 166 Uncanny Houses 171 Hidden Secrets and Hauntings 174 Uncanny Return 180 The Hollow down by the Flare 184 5. Zola’s Transparent City 192 The Spectacle as Relation between Part and Whole 192 Zola and Montage 199 La Curée and Haussmann’s Paris 204 Au Bonheur des Dames and the Commodified World 215 Conclusion: Thoughts on Whiteness 226 The Whiteness of the Whale 227 Two Theories of Whiteness 232 Whiteness in the City I: Concealment and Revelation 234 Whiteness in the City II: Ornament and Fashion 239 Whiteness in the City III: Targeted by Whiteness 244 Carker’s Whiteness 246 Bibliography 249 List of Illustrations 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Pushkin and the Futurists
    1 A Stowaway on the Steamship of Modernity: Pushkin and the Futurists James Rann UCL Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2 Declaration I, James Rann, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 3 Acknowledgements I owe a great debt of gratitude to my supervisor, Robin Aizlewood, who has been an inspirational discussion partner and an assiduous reader. Any errors in interpretation, argumentation or presentation are, however, my own. Many thanks must also go to numerous people who have read parts of this thesis, in various incarnations, and offered generous and insightful commentary. They include: Julian Graffy, Pamela Davidson, Seth Graham, Andreas Schönle, Alexandra Smith and Mark D. Steinberg. I am grateful to Chris Tapp for his willingness to lead me through certain aspects of Biblical exegesis, and to Robert Chandler and Robin Milner-Gulland for sharing their insights into Khlebnikov’s ‘Odinokii litsedei’ with me. I would also like to thank Julia, for her inspiration, kindness and support, and my parents, for everything. 4 Note on Conventions I have used the Library of Congress system of transliteration throughout, with the exception of the names of tsars and the cities Moscow and St Petersburg. References have been cited in accordance with the latest guidelines of the Modern Humanities Research Association. In the relevant chapters specific works have been referenced within the body of the text. They are as follows: Chapter One—Vladimir Markov, ed., Manifesty i programmy russkikh futuristov; Chapter Two—Velimir Khlebnikov, Sobranie sochinenii v shesti tomakh, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Exoticism and Auto-Exoticism in Opera and Operetta
    HStud 27 (2013)2, 291–311 DOI: 10.1556/HStud.27.2013.2.7 TURKS, HUNGARIANS, AND GYPSIES ON STAGE: EXOTICISM AND AUTO-EXOTICISM IN OPERA AND OPERETTA LYNN HOOKER Indiana University, IN, USA E-mail: [email protected] The tradition of European “classical music” has long evoked the exotic, and two of the most prominent exotic referents in that tradition are the Middle East, first and foremost the Turk, and the Hungarian Gypsy, raising the questions of how these “exotic” traditions are related, and what their comparison might tell us about the idea of musical exoticism more broadly. In this essay, I briefly survey the “Turkish style” and its use in Classical-period opera; discuss its replacement by Hungar- ian-Gypsy style in the nineteenth century; and finally examine the interesting juxta- position of Turkish and Hungarian-Gypsy topics in two fin-de-siècle Central Euro- pean operettas, Der Zigeunerbaron by the Austrian Johann Strauss Jr. and Gül baba by the Hungarian Jenõ Huszka. An examination of these works and their reception reveals fissures between the Viennese and Budapest versions of operettas featuring “exotic” topics and characters, and between the operetta industries in the two cities. These details offer a fascinating look at the dividing line between exoticism and auto-exoticism and at the significance of references to Turkish and Hungar- ian-Gypsy topics in the Central European cultural climate of this period – in short, a reconsideration of what it means to be Hungarian, and for whom. Keywords: Hungarian music, exoticism, auto-exoticism, Hungarian-Gypsy style, Turkish style (alla turca), operetta, Johann Strauss Jr., Jenõ Huszka The tradition of European “classical music” has long evoked the exotic: “linking [works] to some especially fascinating, attractive, or fearsome place: to an Else- where and, usually, to its inhabitants and their supposed inclinations and ways” (Locke, 2009, 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Nombre Autor
    ANUARI DE FILOLOGIA. LLENGÜES I LITERATURES MODERNES (Anu.Filol.Lleng.Lit.Mod.) 9/2019, pp. 53-57, ISSN: 2014-1394, DOI: 10.1344/AFLM2019.9.4 PUSHKIN – «DON JUAN» IN THE INTERPRETATION OF P. HUBER AND M. ARMALINSKIY TATIANA SHEMETOVA M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0003-3342-8508 ABSTRACT This article is devoted to the description of the two mythologemes of Pushkin myth (PM). According to the first, the great Russian poet secretly loved one woman all his life and dedicated many unattributed poems to her. This is the mythologeme of Pushkin’s hidden love. The other side of the myth is based on the “Ushakova’s Album” (her personal notebook for her friends’ poetries), in which the poet joked down the names of all his beloveds (Don Juan List). On the basis of this document, the literary critic P. Guber and the “publisher” of Pushkin’s Secret Notes, M. Armalinsky, make ambiguous conclusions and give a new life to Pushkin myth in the 20-21st centuries. KEYWORDS: the myth of Pushkin, hidden love, Russian literature of the twentieth century, “Don Juan of Pushkin,” Pushkin’s Secret Notes, P. Guber, M. Armalinsky. INTRODUCTION: THE STATE OF THE QUESTION The application of the concept “Pushkin myth” (PM) is very diverse, which sometimes leads to an unreasonable expansion of the meaning of the term. Like any myth (ancient or modern), the PM is a plot that develops from episodes- mythologemes. In this article we will review two mythologemes of the PM: “monogamous Pushkin” and “Pushkin – Don Juan (i.
    [Show full text]