Saturday, December 6, 2014
"ANNA KARENINA," LECTURE NOTES (INTRODUCTION)
Note: Back when I was teaching at Miami University I developed 125 pages of lecture text (handwritten) on the novel "Anna Karenina." I've decided to present all of this long lecture on my blog.
LECTURE NOTES ON TOLSTOY'S "ANNA KARENINA"
INTRODUCTION
Tolstoy's "Anna Karenina" is often considered the greatest novel ever written. It was Chekhov's favorite novel, Bunin's favorite novel, Nabokov's favorite novel (after his own). It is the second of Tolstoy's great novels and continues with many of the same themes and the same literary methods as his "War and Peace."
He conceived the idea for the story of an adulteress about 1870 but began writing it only three years later. Certain events in his own life influenced how he came to begin writing the novel; his early conception of the work changed in the process of writing.
On Jan. 4, 1872, at 7:00 p.m. a woman called Anna Stepanovna Pirogova, the mistress of Tolstoy's landowner-neighbor A.N. Bibikov, three herself under a train at a small station, Yasenki, in the vicinity of Tolstoy's estate of Yasnaja Poljana. He was present at the autopsy, conducted in a barracks near the station [see Norton Critical Ed. of "A.K.," p. 745, Troyat biog. of Tolstoy, p. 419].
In March, 1873, Tolstoy was working on a novel (never completed) about the age of Peter the Great. By chance he picked up a book of stories by Pushkin, "The Tales of Belkin," which he had read some five-six times previously. He was so enthralled by the book that he read it all the way through again. One fragment, beginning, "The guests were gathered in the summer house," seemed to ring a bell in his head. "Unwittingly, unexpectantly, without myself knowing why and how it would come out, I began inventing people and events."
Tolstoy later thanked "the divine Pushkin" for giving him the inspiration to begin writing [Norton Crit. Ed., p. 746-47]. This is quite a common experience with writers, who often derive their impetus to write from reading other writers, and whose creative inspiration is often set off by the music and rhythms of a single phrase.
But Tolstoy took the broad foundation for "A.K." from a different, more important, Pushkin work, his novel in verse "Eugene Onegin." This brilliant work ends with a woman exactly in the same situation in which Anna K. finds herself near the beginning of Tolstoy's novel. The Pushkin heroine, Tatyana, decides to remain faithful to her stodgy husband. Anna does not. Tolstoy's novel treats adultery and the consequences of passionate love.
Of course, Tolstoy does not limit himself to the issue of passionate love. While his portrayal of the adulterous relationship (Anna and Vronsky) is central, it is really part of a much broader look at marriage and family, especially love between men and women.
Tolstoy begins with his usual didactic, preaching tone, the thing that still irritates those who don't like Tolstoy. His early Anna is called Tatyana, who is to be depicted as a coarse, vulgar woman. She was to be painted all black, and her wronged husband Karenin all white. But the artist in Tolstoy trumped the moralist, and, as the novel progressed the whole issue of Anna's guilt and her husband's fault (or lack of fault) became more complex.
Most importantly of all, as he wrote on in the early drafts, Tolstoy added the character of Konstantin Lyovin, his own alter ego and the spokesman for his moral messages. So we get, in effect, two overlapping novels, the story of Lyovin and Kitty and the story of Anna-Vronsky-Karenin. The novel shows what appears to be Lyovin's progress toward contentment in a sort of ideal family life, and Anna's progress toward perdition after she repudiates the conventionally accepted family life. But is all much more complex than this, and in the end there are implications that Lyovin's "near ideal" family life in communion with wife, children, and Nature is far from ideal.
THE BEGINNINGS OF THE NOVEL: STIVA OBLONSKY
(TO BE CONTINUED)
Saturday, November 29, 2014
LERMONTOV AND GOGOL
The year 2014 marks the two-hundredth anniversary of Mikhail Lermontov's birth. So all over the Russian-speaking world people are getting together to commemorate his short life and to read his poetry.
It is always interesting to contemplate meetings between great writers, to consider what they may have said to one another. In 1878 Tolstoy and Dostoevsky sat in the same lecture hall, listening to a talk by Solovyov. They never met, not that day or any other, but if they had the fur surely would have flown.
Here are three great Russian writers, Lermontov, Pushkin, and Gogol, pictured in confabulation, as part of the mammoth Monument to A Thousand Years of Russian History, in Great Novgorod. Such a confabulation never took place, as the three of them never got together. Gogol and Pushkin, however, did know each other, although they were not great friends, and Pushkin provided Gogol with the plots for some of his most famous works.
Lermontov and Gogol met only twice, on two successive days in Moscow, May 9 and May 10, 1840. Lermontov showed up for a party commemorating Gogol's nameday on May 9. It was held in the gardens of the historian and publicist Pogodin, with whom Gogol was lodging at the time. The next day they met again, at a gathering hosted by E.A. Sverbeeva.
On that spring in 1840 Gogol was the most renowned Russian writer of the time, and Lermontov, already highly respected for his verse, had just published the best early realistic novel in Russian literature (A Hero of Our Time).
Each of them was on the way somewhere else at the time they met. Gogol was soon off back to his beloved Rome, while Lermontov, still in the army and exiled from St. Petersburg for his unruly ways, was bound for the Caucasus, where he would be killed in a duel a year later.
What did they say to each other when they met? Nobody knows. Apparently nothing of much interest, since neither of the two writers recorded a single word of that conversation.
Thursday, November 20, 2014
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
UNOFFICIAL "MUSEUM" OF "THE MASTER AND MARGARITA" at Apt. No. 50 in Moscow
Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita features the story of Satan's visit to Moscow in the time of Stalin. It also retells the story of the passion of Jesus Christ:
"Immortality. . . It's come now, immortality."
Begemot, the Black Tomcat of "Master and Margarita." The name means literally "hippopotamus," and is usually translated by translators of Bulgakov as "Behemoth."
N.Y. Times Travel section, Nov. 13, 1994
The first floor of Bldg. No. 10, Bol'shaja Sadovaja St. in Moscow is the site of the Museum-Theater of the Bulgakov House. Since May of 2007 there has been a second museum in the building. It is called The State Museum of M.A. Bulgakov and is located in Apt. No. 50 upstairs.
Bulgakov himself once lived in Apt. 50 (beginning in Sept., 1921), and, in writing his brilliant novel, The Master and Margarita, he used the apartment as prototype for the place occupied by the devil (Woland) and his henchmen (Apt. 302)--including the most popular character in the story, the huge black tomcat called Begemot--during their visit to Moscow. Patriarch Ponds, the little park where Woland makes his first appearance in the novel, is located nearby.
In the early nineties there were not yet any Bulgakov museums at the site, but there was a sort of unofficial "museum" of tributes to the novel in graffiti outside Apt. No. 50. During these times the apartment was still occupied, various efforts were made to keep sightseers and graffiti artists away, but they kept coming to "the apartment of the devil."
Here I am posting various photographs of the graffiti, some of it quite impressive artistically. I took these pictures in the summer of 1992 or 1993.
Mikhail Bulgakov:
"Master, I'm yours. Margo."
"We love those who don't love us; we destroy those who love us."
"Stop the world; I want to get off."
Woland (Satan) as pictured in his most devilish aspect:
Friday, November 7, 2014
What's it going to be then, eh? Translating Burgess' CLOCKWORK ORANGE into Russian
Translating Anthony Burgess' Clockwork Orange into Russian presents some rather unusual difficulties. When writing the novel in English, Burgess invented a slang-argot for his juvenile delinquents of the not-too-distant future. The argot is replete with Russian words, many of them jazzed up by Little Alex and his "droogies" (friends, from the Russian word друг).The translator V. Boshnyak could have attempted to do something similar, throwing words with English roots into the Russian text. This would have been a formidable task. So instead of doing this, he kept all Russian words for the text of his translation, but used the Latin alphabet, rather than Cyrillic, for the slangy words:
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
THE 'П' ALL OVER PEREDONOV (IN SOLOGUB'S NOVEL "PETTY DEMON")
ВЕНЗЕЛЬ (MONOGRAM) OF TSAR PAUL THE FIRST (AND LAST), ON WALLS OF THE ENGINEERS' CASTLE, ST. PETERSBURG, RUSSIA
The "mad tsar" Павел I (Paul--ruled 1796-1801), son of Catherine the Great, made sure to stick his monogram all over the castle that he had built (complete with moat). He was terrified of assassination and hoped the castle (and the multiple monograms) might help him be secure. But he was assassinated in March of 1801, only forty days after he moved into his new fortress.
The writer Fyodor Sologub lived in St. Petersburg and would certainly have noticed all the monograms on the Mikhailovsky Castle (another name for the Engineers' Castle). Subconsciously or consciously these monograms may have been the impetus for a scene in Sologub's novel Мелкий бес (The Petty Demon--a modernist "Decadent" novel published in 1907), in which the paranoiac anti-hero Peredonov attempts to protect his identity from evil forces he imagines assailing him by painting the letter P (Cyrillic П, which looks like the Greek Pi and is the same letter on Paul's monograms) all over his body.
Incidentally, U.R. Bowie's illustrious career as Russian scholar begins with the publication of his Master's thesis on The Petty Demon, in 1969, Tulane University: "The Paradox of Peredonovshchina." That work of art is still probably extant, moldering away somewhere in the Tulane library, assuming that Hurricane Katrina did not wash it away.
Saturday, October 4, 2014
THE DANCING BEAR IN THE GRAND RUSSIAN ROUND AND ROUND
COATS OF ARMS FOR THE CITIES OF YAROSLAVL, PERM, NOVGOROD
Coastal Brown Bears, Mother and Child
"MORNING IN A PINE FOREST," BY IVAN SHISHKIN (detail)
BEAR COAT OF ARMS FOR CITY OF YAROSLAVL, ON BASE OF STATUE OF THE FOUNDER OF THE CITY (1010 A.D.), YAROSLAV THE WISE
R. Bowie
June 4, 2008
This article
originally published in Johnson’s Russia List, #110, 2008
THE DANCING BEAR IN THE GRAND RUSSIAN ROUND AND ROUND
When we are speaking about the
future (in particular, about the Russian future), the one thing that we can be
certain of is that we certainly cannot be certain of anything.
In view of this, it is nothing less
than astounding that the majority of pundits who lucubrate about the prospects
for Russia in the next 10-50 years deal so superficially with the realities and
lessons of the Russian past. Those who do speak of the past often belabor
events of the 1990s, or limit themselves to discussion of the Soviet
Union (two tiny blips on the timeline of Russian history). Others
may treat in some depth historical parallels from the eighteenth or nineteenth
centuries, but practically no one touches upon that vast expanse of Russian
history and culture that forms the foundation upon which modern Russian
cultural mores, and, consequently, the contemporary Russian political and
economic system, rest.
Bear imagery has become prominent
recently with the inauguration of the new President, Medvedev, whose name is
derived from the Russian word for ‘bear.’ As one brief illustration, therefore,
of Russia ’s lengthy cultural
heritage (and its consequences for contemporary Russia ), let us now speak of the Bear.
Literature on the bear as a prehistoric image of reverence and awe throughout
much of the world is immense, so we must limit ourselves here to a few telling
details.
If you go back far enough in human
history you will find connections to the bear that are relevant to practically
everything in modern civilization. Here are some examples. The cities Bern (Switzerland )
and Berlin (Germany )
are just two of the multitude of place names in Europe and Asia
that are bear names. Bern
still maintains bear pits as tourist sites and an ancient clock tower that
features, among other things, a parade of bear figurines every hour on the
hour. The word “arctic” comes from the Greek word for bear (“arctos”). In
ancient Germany
military fraternities initiated a young man (to stifle his inhibitions against
killing) by forcing him to strip naked, don the skin of a flayed bear and “work
himself into a bestial rage: in other words, to go. . . BERSERK.[1]
Why the worldwide bear mania that so
inspired our ancestors? Why the obsession with the bear in folk practices that
are observed all the way across Northern Europe and Asia, all the way across
North America (in Native American mythology and folklore)? Maybe because, as
the prominent mythologist Joseph Campbell has suggested, the earliest object of
religion in the history of the world was the bear:
“in the high Alps, in the
neighborhood of St. Gallen, and again in Germany, some thirty miles northwest
of Nürnberg. . . a series of caves
containing the ceremonially arranged skulls of a number of cave bears have been
discovered from the period (it is almost incredible!) of Neanderthal Man.”[2]
In caves excavated in the Alps (dating not later than 75,000 B.C.) a number of
altars were discovered, “the earliest altars of any kind yet found, or known
anywhere in the world” (Campbell , P.M.,
p. 341). The focus of worship at these altars was bear skulls and leg bones. As
evidenced by the title of the book by Shepherd and Sanders (“The Sacred Paw”),
the leg bones of bears have continued to inspire awe in much of the world
(Native American culture, Eurasian culture, etc.) up almost to the present day.
“The mystery of death, then, had
been met and faced, both for the beasts killed in the hunt and for man. And the
answer found was one that has been giving comfort to those who wish comfort
ever since, namely: ‘Nothing dies; death and birth are but a threshold
crossing, back and forth, as it were, through a veil’” (P.M., p. 342).
Beginning with bears, therefore, we
have worked our way into the issue of the grand round and round, an issue that
obsesses (bedevils?) the modern Russian psyche, and an issue that
linear-oriented Western pundits blithesomely ignore. Before returning to this
issue, let’s take a look at the folklore of the bear on the Russian land. As
mentioned above, parts of northern Russia
lie right in the midst of that “circumpolar paleolithic cult of the bear”
mentioned by Campbell .
Although there is no definitive proof of this assertion, anthropologists often
assume that the bear was at one time a totem animal for the ancient Slavs. One
piece of evidence for this is toponymy: there are bear names (of rivers, hills,
islands, settlements, etc.) all over northern Russia . The coat of arms of the
cities of Great Novgorod, Yaroslavl ’
and Perm all feature depictions of bears.[3] More
evidence is to be found in what are obvious naming taboos connected with the
bear. From time out of mind, all over the world, there has been a prohibition
against speaking the name of a god or other supernatural being. This often
includes the names of the dead, of witches, the Devil, etc., plus the names of
totem animals. In an article on naming taboos in the Standard Dictionary of
Folklore and Mythology, it is noted that “Ural-Altaic peoples of Siberia . . . never speak the name of the bear; they call
him Little Old Man, Grandfather, dear Uncle, or Wise One. . . North American
Kiowa Indians say that unless you are named for the bear you must not say
bear.”[4] The word “bruin” (“Brownie”), used for bear in
German (and sometimes in English) is another euphemism. Vladimir Dahl’s entry
on bears in his famous four-volume interpretive dictionary of Russian is full
of euphemisms used to name the bear: e.g., “kosolapyj” (“knock-kneed, clumsy”),
“mokhnatyj” (“shaggy”), “leshij” (“wood demon”), “lesnoj chert” (“devil of the
woods”). The bear is also given human names: Mishka (Mike), Mishuk (Mikey),
Mikhailo Ivanich Toptygin, which suggest the special affinity that Russians
have had for the bear and they way they have likened him to humans.[5]
Westerners dealing with Russians
often underestimate the role of superstition in Russian life. Naming taboos
still exist in Russia
today. Most Russians would cringe at the common American practice of naming
babies before birth. You let the evil spirits know the name of your unborn baby
and they may conjure with that name. Baby showers or gift-giving for unborn
babies are also rare in Russia .
They are simply too optimistic in spirit. You don’t want to appear happy or the
fates may quickly squelch your happiness. This is probably the reason why so
many Russians respond to the question, “Kak dela?” (“How are you?”) with a
shrug of the shoulders, a Russian scowl, and a neutral answer: “Normal’no”
(“Same old same old”). If you say (as Americans do), “I’m doing great!” then
some malicious something out there might decide to show you just how great you
are NOT doing.
Of particular interest is the modern Russian word for bear, medved’. Most Russian folklorists and
anthropologists have assumed that this too is a euphemism. It means,
essentially, “honey eater” and almost certainly derives from the reluctance of
ancient Slavs to pronounce the real name of the bear.[6] A check
of the words for bear in other Slavic languages confirms that the animal came
to be called “honey eater” in Protoslavic times (before the Slavic languages
became separated into their three modern branches). The Polish word, e.g., is
niedźwiedź and the Belorussian word is mjadzvedz’ (see Unbegaun, Russskie familii,
p. 248).
In their zealous efforts to stamp
out pagan beliefs, Russian Orthodox Church authorities fought to extirpate ancient
reverence for the bear. This fight, supported by civil authorities, went on for
centuries. The original bear trainers were, apparently, the skomorokhi (medieval
minstrels and clowns associated with pagan religions and with the licentiousness
carnival behavior that lies at the core of pagan mythological beliefs), and this
was all the more reason why any manifestations of the ancient reverence for the
bear should be suppressed.
With his tendency to be both a
deeply religious Russian Orthodox believer and a scurrilous apostate
simultaneously, Ivan Groznyj (the Terrible--1533-1584) manifested ambivalent
attitudes toward the once sacred bear and the pagan bear handlers. Preparing
for his upcoming marriage to Marfa Sobakina in 1570, Groznyj sent an envoy to
the city of Great Novgorod , with an order to
have skomorokhi and performing bears sent to Moscow for the wedding celebrations
(Nekrylova, “Ursine Comedy,” p. 36). Bear baiting seems to have been a common
folk entertainment in the years of Ivan’s reign, which is also associated with
tales about how he and his equally sadistic son Ivan threw people into bear
pits, or sewed them up in bear skins and tossed them to the dogs.[7]
When a new religion attempts to
establish its beliefs and rituals, it tramples upon the most sacred symbols of
the religion that it supersedes. It is not surprising, therefore, that by the
nineteenth century the bear was denigrated and mocked, seen largely as a figure
of fun: (1) the embodiment of stupidity and clumsiness in the animal folk tales
(2) the entertainer who provoked laughter by his awkward imitations of human
behavior in the bear acts. More important, however, was that, despite centuries
of efforts to ban them, the bear acts were still going on in the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They were a particularly popular part
of village entertainments and performances in urban marketplace squares,
especially at times of the year associated with important (originally pagan)
seasonal highlights: winter solstice, Maslenitsa (ancient pagan pre-Lenten
festival), summer solstice, etc.
Old ideas are slow to die out.
Russian and Soviet folklorists have established that at the end of the
nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries there remained vestiges of
the ancient reverence for the bear, which was still connected in the folk psyche
with the most salient elements of the pagan mentality: a striving to promote fertility,
health, and well-being through the repetitive enactment of rituals that were
often highly sexual and violent. Because of their association with bears the
handlers/impresarios in the folk bear performances acquired the reputation of
healers and witch doctors. Since it was still widely believed that the bear
could drive away evil spirits, the handler would often have his bear step over
a sick person or pregnant woman. In accord with the belief that the paw of the
bear was supposed to have magical powers, it was sometimes hung up in the peasant
household “ot domovogo” (to conciliate the often capricious “household imp”) or
put under the floor to encourage the fertility of the domestic animals.[8]
One final example of bear ritual
perhaps explains best of all why the bear was, and remained, a figure of
reverence for so long on the Russian land. P. V. Shein, a famous collector of
Russian and Belorussian folklore, published a description of the festive rite
known as “komoeditsa,” carried out under the direction of a priest Simeon
Nechaev in Belorus (1874). “This festival is always observed on the eve of the
Annunciation and is dedicated to honoring the bear. Special viands are prepared
on this day: the first course consists of dried turnips, as a way of
emphasizing that the bear is primarily herbivorous; the second course consists
of kisel’ (jelled oats), because the bear loves oats; the third course consists
of lumps of peas, which is why the festival was given the name “komoeditsa”
(“lump-eating day”). After consuming the meal, everyone—both young and old—lies
down, not sleeping, but in very slow movements rolling from side to side, as if
in an attempt to stimulate the [hibernating] bear to make similar movements.
The ceremony continues for about two hours; it is intended to facilitate the
bear’s awakening and arising from his winter den. . . The peasants are
convinced that on Annunciation Day the bear comes out of hibernation. He is to
be greeted with encouragement for his well being.”[9]
This final example brings us to a
still-relevant truth about Russian mentalities—a truth that Westerners who
study any aspect of Russia ignore at their own peril: this truth is that
Russians, as opposed to modern Westerners, are cyclical thinkers, not linear
thinkers. Primitive and Oriental mythology, still vibrant in the cultural mores
of modern Russia ,
differ from Western mythology in several important ways. Here are the essential
parallels: (1) In the West—straight lines, progress (the apocalyptic view; we
are progressing toward some grand End, or at least toward some goal). In the
East--the circle; we are, essentially, doing the same thing over and over in
our lives, history repeats itself, and we’re not really getting anywhere (2) In
the West—free will, individualism, rationality; the assertive individual can
change his/her life, can alter for the better even the human condition on
earth. In the East—no free will, collectivism, irrationality; the individual
cannot really change anything; the broad masses have little choice but to go
with the eternal flow of ever-repetitive events (3) In the West—Nature is
darkness, alien to the principles of light and progress; death is an
abomination, something unacceptable (to be overcome, or, failing that, ignored
if at all possible). In the East—Nature, like all of life, is a blend of light
and darkness; Death is the complement of Life, not to be dreaded but accepted.
Furthermore, Death is not an end, but a new beginning in the eternally
repeating cycle: every exit is an entrance and every entrance an exit. The
ceremony of “komoeditsa” described above is exemplary, in that it reinforces and
promotes the beliefs in eternal return that so many other peasant rituals of
the solar calendar reinforced in Russia right up into the twentieth
century. Encourage the bear to come out of hibernation in the spring and renew
the cycle, and, by so doing, you also encourage the burgeoning of the spring
crops and the fertility of the cows and pigs upon whose prosperity the very
existence of the peasant depends. Even Christianity in agricultural Russia has the
same implications: Christ is ritually sacrificed once a year, and his
Resurrection on the third day renews the cycle, promotes the eternal round and
round of the agricultural season.
How did the modern West end up (at
least in the ideals that it professes to live by) on the linear path, while
modern Russia
(in the depth of its cultural mores and its mentality) remains committed to the
Eastern philosophy of the cycle? This is an issue that demands treatment in an
entire book, not in a short article. The usual answer is that Russia skipped the great
intellectual movements of Western civilization: the Renaissance, the Protestant
Reformation, etc., but the issue is more complex than that.[10]
At any rate, reformers (most
prominently, Peter the Great, Aleksandr II, Lenin, Gorbachev) have made
repetitive efforts to overcome the cyclical Russian mindset and force the
country onto a straight-line path. In other words, to undermine definitively
the venerable Russian tradition of GETTING NOWHERE and convince the Russian
people that it is worth trying to GET SOMEWHERE. These reformers have all
failed miserably. Now we are about to see (possibly) a new attempt on the part,
paradoxically, of a man whose very name embodies the principles of the round
and round: Medvedev.
The new President has been making
linear noises, assuring the Russian people that they can dispense with the
chaos of the round and round and live by a new set of rules (Western rules):
fixed and enforceable laws, the imperative to stamp out corruption, the
establishment of a true middle class and civil society. What the Bear President
professes to be seeking is DEMOCRACY, a word that is anathema from the point of
view of the grand eternal cycle. The last dance of the bear in Russian folk
life (if we don’t count the circus bears that are still around today) was that
of the trained bear who was still performing in villages and urban marketplace
squares in the early twentieth century. At the climactic moment of the
performance, controlled by his handler and trainer (he had a ring through his
nose and a lead attached to the ring), the bear got up on his back legs and did
a whirling dance round and round.[11]
So who is Dmitry Medvedev? Is he the
same old dancing bear, going round and round and getting nowhere, controlled by
his handler, another votary of the grand round and round of Eternal Mother
Russia (who is the handler? That’s obvious: VVP)? Or is he the bear who can
break the lead and set off on the linear path toward a brand new Russia ? I don’t
know. That’s a matter for the political pundits to pontificate upon. One thing
is for certain: better men than Medvedev have already tried and failed to stop
the round and round of Russian history.
One last point. For over 230 years
the United States of America
has been committed to the great linear path. The United States believes in progress,
and all of its institutions (political, religious, etc.) are aimed at getting
somewhere. Both major parties, Democrats and Republicans, harp incessantly upon
the idea of changing things for the better. But if we look at history (present,
past and future) from a broad philosophical perspective, of course, we must
admit that the ideas of the Neolithic primitive planters (hardwired in the
modern Russian psyche) still have validity. Great political reformers (ideologues
in the worst sense of the word), who assume that political Utopia is possible and
that human cultural mores can be radically revamped, often end up changing
essentials very little, while managing to murder huge numbers of innocent
people. Examples of such reformers throughout history are rife, but here we
need mention only one: “Velikij Ilich” (Vladimir Lenin). Medvedev, on the
contrary, is not an ideologue, and let us hope that his efforts to push Russia onto a
straight-line path will not involve the excesses of leaders like Lenin and
Peter I.
Any linear path, ultimately however,
anticipates, certainly in terms of the mortal individual, and almost certainly
in the future of the entire human race, the Great End of the Line (Armageddon
or the Apocalypse). This does not mean, however, that we should encourage the
dancing bear to just keep whirling round and round. We must make the best of
what we have here in our transient existence. So, Da zdravstvuet Medvezhonok!
(Long live the Baby Bear!). In terms of the venerable old ways, his ascension
to power is an extremely good omen. The ancient superstitions assume that the
sacred bear encourages the progression of the solar cycle, promotes well-being
and fertility (something that Russia
is desperate for in light of its demographic crisis). But (to take the Western
perspective) it would also be nice it the baby bear could soon break the lead
of his handler, shake the whirling rhythms out of his head, and set off down
the linear road, traipsing along on his plantigrade way, following the sign
marked, “TO SOMEWHERE.”
[1] Bruce Chatwin, Songlines (Vintage Classics, 1987), p. 219. For
Indo-European roots of the word ‘bear’ and the
profusion of words derived from these roots, see Paul Shephard and Barry
Sanders, The Sacred Paw: the Bear in
Nature, Myth, and Literature (NY: Viking Penguin, 1985), introduction, p.
xvi. The Shephard and Sanders book is an excellent compendium of bear lore
worldwide.
[2] Joseph Campbell, The Masks of God: Primitive Mythology (NY:
Viking Press, 1979, revised edition 1969), p. 339. The period during which
Neanderthal Man lived is assumed to have begun about 200,000 years ago and
ended about 75,000 years ago. Some scientists project a much later date for his
demise (between 25,000 and 20,000 B.C.) See p. 340-41. On p. 340 Campbell presents a map showing the most prominent areas
of Europe, Asia, and North America where the
bear cult was ascendant in prehistoric times (“the vestiges of a circumpolar
paleolithic cult of the bear”). These include parts of today’s northern Russia and show the influence of the bear
stretching southward, into modern Novgorod
Province and Belorus.
[3] See the chapter entitled “Medvezh’ja komedija” (“Ursine Comedy”) in the
book by A.F. Nekrylova, Russkie narodnye gorodskie prazdniki, uveselenija i
zrelishcha (konets XVIII-nachalo XX veka) [Russian Folk Urban Festivals,
Merry-Making, and Spectacles (at the End of the 19th and Beginning
of the 20th Centuries] (Iskusstvo Publishers: Leningrad, 1984),
p. 37-39.
[4] Maria Leach, editor, Standard Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology and
Legend (Harper and Row, one-vol. edition, 1984), p. 782-83.
[5] Vladimir Dal’ dictionary, II, 311. According to Boris Unbegaun, the
surname Toptygin comes, originally, from the nickname “tjazhelostup” (“clumsy
stepper, lummox”). B.O. Unbegaun, Russkie familii, translation from
English edited by B.A. Uspenskij (Moskva: Progress, 1989), p. 123.
[6] On the “honey eater” meaning see an informative letter by Elena Carducci
to the journal Russian Life (May/June, 2008, p. 5). Ms. Carducci cites
three Russian etymological dictionaries in support of her interpretation. The
issue of Russian Life for March/April, 2008, contains an interesting
compilation of Russian expressions relating to the bear (under “Survival
Russian,” by Mikhail Ivanov, p. 29), but perpetuates the erroneous folk
etymology (medved’ as “knower of the honey”), later corrected by Ms. Carducci.
[7] Isabel de Madariaga, Ivan the Terrible (New
Haven and London :
Yale University Press, 2005), p. 295, 358.
[8] Nekrylova, “Ursine Comedy,” p. 37-38. See also V.P. Anikin, Russkaja
narodnaja skazka [The Russian Folk Tale] (Moskva, Prosveshchenie, 1977), p.
44-45.
[9] Shein quoted in Anikin, The Russian Folk Tale, p. 45. Note the
involvement of an Orthodox priest and the connection of this pagan festival
with the Christian Annunciation Day. This is one of multiple examples of the
existence of syncretism (“dvoeverie” or “double belief”) in Russia .
Paganism coexisted for centuries with Christianity; they still coexist, so some
extent, to this very day.
[10] The literature on the Stone Age mythology and folklore that forms the
foundation of modern Russian cultural mores is vast. On primitive mythology of
the eternal round and round, the best books are by Joseph Campbell (especially
his four volume series titled The Masks of God). Equally important are
the many works by Mircea Eliade (for example, his The Myth of Eternal Return).
Seminal works relating to the influence of primitive plant mythology on Russian
culture are, e.g., V. Ja. Propp’s Russkie agrarnye prazdniki [Russian
Agrarian Festivals] (Leningrad University, 1963) and Mikhail Bakhtin’s Rabelais
and His World [original Russian title is Tvorchestvo Fransua Rable],
translated into English by H. Iswolsky (Indiana University Press, 1984).
[11] For a detailed description of the marketplace bear performances of the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, see Nekrylova, “Ursine Comedy,” p.
38-53.
"BEAR ON BASS," STATUE ON BOL'SHAJA PETERBURGSKAJA STREET, GREAT NOVGOROD, PICTURES TAKEN MAY, 2005
Postscript: Interesting book review on dancing bears in European history, on retired dancing bears in the former countries of the Soviet bloc, on how those bears have forgotten how to hibernate, and forgotten how to live independent lives now that their dancing days are done; also on how former denizens of the Communist world have also forgotten all these things.
"BEAR ON BASS," STATUE ON BOL'SHAJA PETERBURGSKAJA STREET, GREAT NOVGOROD, PICTURES TAKEN MAY, 2005
Postscript: Interesting book review on dancing bears in European history, on retired dancing bears in the former countries of the Soviet bloc, on how those bears have forgotten how to hibernate, and forgotten how to live independent lives now that their dancing days are done; also on how former denizens of the Communist world have also forgotten all these things.
Saturday, September 20, 2014
Review of THE JUDGMENT DAY ARCHIVES in "New York Times Book Review"
http://www.amazon.com/Judgment-Day-Archives-Novel/dp/0916515451/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1411222455&sr=1-1&keywords=Andrei+Moscovit%2C+The+Judgment+Day+Archives
NY
Times Book Review, Sun., Nov. 20, 1988
A
Case for Resurrection
Review of The Judgment Day Archives, by Andrei Moscovit, translated by Robert
Bowie, 402pp. San Francisco: Mercury House, 1988.
by
Stephen Dobyns
How is a witch doctor able to stop the
flow of blood from a wound with the repetition of a few muttered words? How can
a hypnotist cause a burn with a ruler? How can a yogi reduce his pulse rate and
make himself invulnerable to pain?
Well,
imagine that within the blood are elements that carry information from one part
of the body to another—protecting, strengthening, educating—and that it is
possible, if you’re a witch doctor or a yogi, to speak to these elements.
Imagine that these elements—call them transcendents—contain the code for the
whole human creature, and if a way were found to freeze and preserve a drop of
blood, then someday the human creature could be resurrected, cloned from that
one drop of blood. Imagine that a way has been found. Wouldn’t this guarantee
immortality?
Such
ideas are at the center of The Judgment
Day Archives, a sprawling Russian novel of great energy and imagination.
The scientist who makes the necessary discoveries is an Estonian hematologist,
Leida Rigel, a woman whose complicated private life includes two former
husbands, several boyfriends, two adolescent children and a difficult mother.
Additionally, she is being pursued by agents of the K.G.B. Leida Rigel is
brought in contact with a somewhat sinister Italian organization called the
International Enterprise for Research Financing, which supports potentially
lucrative research—alternatives to gasoline and electricity as well as these
peculiar discoveries about the blood.
Rigel and the
Enterprise represent knowledge and power. Only vision is needed to set them in
motion, and this is found in the person of a defrocked Russian priest, Father
Averyan, who preaches to a small flock of heretics at his vegetable farm
outside Paris. His message is that Judgment Day will be in the hands of the
living carrying out the will of God, that the living will resurrect the dead.
Once he comes under the influence of the Enterprise, however, his message
slightly changes.
“Leave a drop of
thy blood,” he preaches, “to be preserved eternally, in expectation of the
advent of thy enlightened son, who will learn from the Lord our God how to
create that suitable location, so that there the drop of thy blood may build
the whole of thee, raise thee anew in the flesh.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Together the
scientist, the capitalist and the visionary form a sect called variously “Sons
in Salvation of the Fathers,” “Acolytes of the Resurrection,” “Proselytes to
the Judgment Day Truth” and, more simply, “The Clients.” In southern New Hampshire
they establish the Judgment Day Archives. Judgment is needed because it is not
possible for everyone to be resurrected. There wouldn’t be enough room on
earth. Consequently, only certain people will be chosen. Some day, far in the
future, a court will be convened and the deserving will be brought back to
life, while the failed, the flawed and the futile will be left to their
oblivion. For a mere $3000 the faithful can have placed in the vaults of the
Archives a specially frozen drop of their blood and a cassette, magnetic or
video, containing their testimony: their arguments to this future court as to
why they should be resurrected. Despite the price, thousands flock to the
Archives from all over the world.
But the Archives
are prey to certain dangers. First, there is the greed of the Enterprise.
Secondly, there is the frustration of those people who can’t afford $3000.
Thirdly, there are others who would like to acquire the Archives’ secrets. For
instance, many members of the Communist Central Committee are rather elderly
and take a keen interest in the possibility of resurrection. This leads the
K.G.B. to kidnap Leida Rigel’s son in order to make her their agent. Will she
become the Judas of the sect?
All this would
be rather ponderous if the novel weren’t written with great verve and
intelligence. Andrei Moscovit is like a juggler trying to keep 10 balls in the
air: some fall but the performance is impressive. The jacket copy compares the
novel to Mikhail Bulgakov’s Master and
Margarita. This is hyperbolic; Mr. Moscovit lacks Bulgakov’s discipline,
wildness and vision. What he shares with Bulgakov is energy and scope.
The Judgment Day Archives is about many
things other than the K.G.B. versus a beautiful hematologist. It is about power
and our fear or our mortality. It is about how one preserves a sense of the
self in the face of great odds. Late in the book Leida Rigel’s son, now 19
years old, is in the army in northern Russia, where he repairs antiaircraft
equipment. He thinks, “The next war would be started not over a piece of
disputed land, not by the power brokers of the world, but simply because
somewhere or other the revulsion a person felt toward his own life would become
so unbearable that it would overcome even the instinct of self-preservation. An
intoxicating brew of loathing would begin foaming up in some little man’s
insides, and nothing but destruction would be able to damp it down. And if
someone considers his own life worthless, how can he be expected to take pity
on anyone else?”
Mr. Moscovit
uses the complicated machinery of his novel to investigate how we are able to
live in a difficult time. Although he never quite brings off this
investigation, neither does he fail. What he achieves is a marvelous piece of
verbal gymnastics, wonderfully written and gracefully translated by Robert
Bowie. The novel could be shorter and better controlled, yet while it often
threatens to break free of the author’s grip and escape into chaos, it never actually
does. Andre Moscovit is the pseudonym of Igor Efimov, a Russian émigré who
lives in New Jersey and is the founder of the Hermitage House Publishing
Company. He is the author of 15 books, including novels and works of political
philosophy; this is his first work to be translated into English.
INSET BOX:
What the Geezer Saw
He
had nearly finished his “marinated herring, sauce
de noix” and was pouring himself a dram glass of lukewarm vodka when she
appeared in the restaurant and walked slowly down the central passageway. . . .
Now,
if I didn’t know her and if there were nothing between us, he thought, would I
freeze the way I did just now, with my glass halfway to my mouth? Would I be
staring now, like that Air Force fellow and that gray-haired geezer, and like
the waiter, and that old babe with the wig slipping down?
So
her shoes weren’t made at the local Skorokhod factory, her dress doesn’t come
from Moscowseams, and the handbag obviously travelled across a border or two
before it ended up hanging from her shoulder. . . . But are there really so few
stylish women running around Moscow? . . . She played her role well, came up by
a circuitous route, asked if the seat were taken, sat down with an independent
air, and stuck her nose in the menu.
From
The Judgment Day Archives
Stephen Dobyns, a poet and novelist, is
the author most recently of Saratoga
Bestiary, a mystery novel to be published later this year.
Friday, August 22, 2014
JAMES LAUGHLIN PULLING HARD ON LEGS
Nabokov originally wanted a large nose for the cover of his book (see below). Later on he, or somebody, settled for the above artwork, in which Gogol's right eye has been stretched over onto the spine of the paperback, suggesting, perhaps, the torture to which the biographer of this book subjected his far-from-favorite author. Or, then again, when Nabokov pulled that eye over onto the spine, he may well have put Gogol's evil eye on himself. See below, my article, "Nabokov's Influence on Gogol."
In 1985, while working on my article, "Nabokov's Influence on Gogol," I wrote several times to the publisher of New Directions, James Laughlin, asking him questions about Nabokov's Nikolai Gogol.
I wanted to know why Nabokov had not incorporated the changes he made for the British edition of the book (Nikolay Gogol, 1973) into the New Directions edition. In particular, why had the "nightmare index" in the American edition not been sanitized, as it had been for the British edition.
I was especially interested in Laughlin's take on his own role in the book. Was the dialogue between Nabokov and his publisher genuinely fictitious, or could Laughlin recall having had such a conversation? Did Nabokov really suggest a huge nose for the cover art of the book?
Below are two letters from Laughlin, answering my questions but only sporadically, and, in the process, perpetuating a strange tale that he himself invented (about he and Nabokov, butterfly hunting on a mountaintop in Alta, Utah, and nearly perishing in the process).
First letter: Norfolk, Conn., 3/27/85
Dear Professor Bowie,
My archivist finally emerged from the briar patch but found nothing that answers your question.
The two xeroxes enclosed may shed some light for you, but they don't for me. I don't think he ever told me to do anything about dropping the index.
I recall his telling me there were some leg-pulls of me hidden in the book--he said I must find them--but I've never been able to. Volya loved his chess puzzles.
Sincerely,
J. Laughlin
Never did figure out why Laughlin called Nabokov "Volya." The scribblings at the bottom here are my attempt to translate the letter into Russian for a Russian friend.
Second letter: 4/30/85
Dear Mr. Bowie,
Sorry for the delay. We were down in Chile visiting Nicanor Parra.
In those days I owned a lodge in the Wasatch Mountains in Alta, Utah. Lepidoptera all over, so I invited Volya, Vera and Dmitri to visit. We had many adventures one of which is told in the enclosed page from Paris Review #90.
Yes, he wanted a big nose for the cover but the book was in our "Makers of Modern Literature" series, which had uniform typographical covers.
Sincerely,
J. Laughlin
Here is the page from the Paris Review #90 (winter, 1983), an interview with James Laughlin, "The Art of Publishing," in which Laughlin, possibly in an effort to get back at Nabokov for his "leg pulling" and his rather patronizing attitude to Laughlin, concocted the story of the adventure in the mountains. The picture, dated erroneously as 1965, was taken some time in the forties.
Thursday, August 21, 2014
VERA NABOKOV'S PROLEPTIC LETTER
In 1985 I wrote a letter to the London publisher of Nabokov's Nikolay Gogol (1973), requesting information for an article I was writing:
Prolepsis is a rhetorical device in which one answers an opponent's objection or argument before he/she has put it forward.
The London publisher did not reply, but forwarded my letter to Nabokov's widow, Vera Nabokov, in Switzerland. Whereupon she wrote me a letter in which she informed me that my approach was all wrong and that I need not write my article.
The article, which I published (against orders) in 1986 is called "Nabokov's Influence on Gogol."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)































.jpg)








