Canadian Slavonic Papers

On Russian Romantic Poetry of Pushkin's Era

Author(s): Riccardo Picchio
Source: Études Slaves et Est-Européennes / Slavic and East-European Studies, Vol. 15 (1970), pp.
16-30
Published by: Canadian Association of Slavists
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41056113 .
Accessed: 28/06/2014 19:00

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Canadian Association of Slavists and Canadian Slavonic Papers are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Études Slaves et Est-Européennes / Slavic and East-European Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 On Russian RomanticPoetryof Pushkin's Era

fey
Riccardo Picchio

Before presentingsome thoughtson the 'Russian romantic

poetryof Pushkin's era/' I should confessthat ^ while preparing
this paper r->I was assailed by various criticaltemptations.My
initialreadinessto yieldto the enticementof some brilliantformula
of historicalcriticismcould perhaps be excused by those readers
who have already spent a part of theirSlavistic life tryingto see
theirway in the overcrowdedkingdomof Russian Muses. Taking
as a startingpoint for my considerationsthe title of this paper,
I could even challenge the Tightnessof the concept both of
'
"Russian romanticpoetry"and of a "Pushkin's era as a specific
era in the historyof Russian literature.As a matterof fact the
difficultyin definingromanticpoetryin Russia seems to be even
more bafflingthan the many problems with which we are con-
frontedwhen seekingthe actual featuresof Romanticismin gen-
eral. Even if we don't take into account the entanglingphiloso-
phemes about Romanticismconsideredas an eternal categoryof
the human spiritand universalhistory, we mustadmitthathistoric
Romanticismalso, consideredas a literarymovementor at least
as a concreteliteraryfashion,fades and finallygets lost in the
European Far East more than elsewhere. It would be difficult to
determinethe dates of birthand death of such a movementor
fashionor mood withina societywhich apparentlyabsorbs from
the West any kind of novelty,definitelydisowning nothingbut
what is actuallydead. Russian Romanticsdid not reallyfightfora
romanticideal of art nor did theyengage themselvesin any kind
of polemics against actual or alleged anti-romanticways of
thinking.1
At the beginningof the XIX centuryso-called Russian Classi-
cism was no longer in a condition to contend with the new
trendsfor the theoreticalfoundationsof literature.2By the time
when discussions between Classics and Romantics burst forth
almost everywherein Europe, fromMadame de Staël to Victor
Hugo and up to the French-German critical speculations by
Heinrich Heine, by the time then of Goethe's classical senectus,

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 SLAVIC AND EAST-EUROPEAN STUDIES 17

by the time of Manzoni's youth and of Adam Mickiewicz's

polemics against the Old Wise Man (Sniadecki) who could
discover the whole world in a speck of dust without seeing
the vivifyingtruth of the heart3 : in short, from the Napo-
leonic age up to the early thirties,literary and ideological
fashions in Russia displayed a conceited tendency towards
the syncreticmergingof Classicism and Romanticism,withinthe
boundaries of high-lifecommon taste, fed by a blend of senti-
mentalismand Neo-classicism. The only literarybattles which
were actually fought,as for instance that of Arzamas against
the remains of the Beseda, did not lead to any battle array cor-
respondingto the typicaloppositionof Romanticismto classicistic
or to otherantiromantic poetics.4It is beyond doubt that,especially
as far as the characterof Shaxovskoj's "Fialkin" 5 and the actual
"party boss" Zhukoskij are concerned, the Arzamas-Beseda
quarrel representedthe uprising of a young modernizingpoetic
generationagainst any kind of conservatism.It is also true,how-
ever, that this would be a wrong startingpoint for any attempt
to establish a correspondenceof the romanticpoetic revolution
to Tynjanov's "arxaisty-novatory"opposition.6 The ideologic
world of the old society,embodied by Derzhavin and Shishkov,
had no less pronenessto Romanticismthan the youngergeneration
of the followers of Karamzin under the guidance of Vasilij
Andreevich Zhukovskij.If we were in fact to seek a correspon-
dence in the new era to the classic-sentimentalistic Derzhavin-
Karamzin opposition,we should perhaps think about dialectic
comparisonsnot only between Zhukovskij and Gnedich or Bat-
jushkov, but also between some aspects of the poetry of Zhu-
kovskij and some aspects of Pushkin's. The ideas of Shishkov
concerningthe functionof the slavorussian traditionallanguage
as the best expressionof national spiritualitycould betterfitinto
the romanticconceptionof the historyof the language than would
the cosmopolitantrendsof the school of Karamzin.7If we consider
how immediatelythe literarytendencies were linked with the
general political situation,we will not escape thinkingthat most
of the currentideas on poetryand art merelyreflectedin terms
of home politics the outstanding concerns of Russian foreign
politics. Even if we translate quite mechanically the adjective
"classic" with "French" and, on the other hand, we apply to
the conceptof Romanticismthe national equivalents of "German"
and "English" ; 8 I mean even if we translate the Romantic-

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
18 ÉTUDES SLAVES ET EST-EUROPÉENNES

Classic polemicsin termsof Russian national sensitivity, it would

be difficultto single out amid the contemporariesof Zhukovskij
the representativeof a romanticparty. Instead of studyingthe
oppositionin the fieldof the theoryof literature,it would perhaps
be easier startingfromthe situationaround 1820, to go back to
the inward toil of XVIII centurymuscovite and St. Peterburg
Freemasonry,thatis to Elagin and Novikov up to the antimasonic
propaganda under Catherine II and finallyto the masonic revival
during the fin de siècle period, correspondingfrom a literary
pointof view to the age of Sentimentalism.Most of the so-called
romantictrends in Russian poetryof the time of Pushkin are
seeminglyjust new aspects of the literarycivilizationcreated in
Russia by the post-petrinewesternizingsociety in the XVIII
century.
'Vhen the members of the Arzamas started planning the
publication of a journal interpretingthe orientation of the
group,Zhukovskijconceived it as the standard-bearerof the new
German literature.9Zhukovskij himselfwas directlyinfluenced
by German romanticliterature,although many criticsdo not re-
cognize in him the quality of "romantic,"but just that of "pre-
romantic."His germanophileenthusiasm,however, was not at
all shared by his Arzamas colleagues. Instead of the German
Schwärmerei,both Batjushkov and Vjazemskij were anticipating,
forthe Arzamas journal, a revival of what theycalled "the spirit
of Addison." As you see, the criticaltemptationsat which I have
just hinted and which arise fromsuch a cultural landscape, are
numerousand multifaced.As a matterof fact, Russian literary
life up to the early thirtiesand to the death of Pushkin looks
like a traditionalfeast open to the whole of the aristocracy.10No
wonder that such a gathering,where initiated people could
single out any kind of intellectualand moral contrast,showed
its old-fashioneduniformity on the contraryto the social outsiders,
that is to the raznochincyof Belinskij's era. Since Belinskij's
point of view everythingbefore the thirtiesbelonged to Roman-
ticism while nothing romanticcould be singled out in Russia
beforethat time,e.g., fromVeselovskij's viewpoint,the historian
of Russian literaturehas the possibilityof building up, on the
basis of such a vagueness of the objective features,all kinds
of interpretations.It seems to me, however,that our duty is not
to thinkout an exegetic formulain order to put together,within
the same historiographie pigeon-hole,differenttrendsor different

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 SLAVIC AND EAST-EUROPEAN STUDIES 19

personalities,but ratherto underline the conventionalityof any

classification.In the case of the Russian romanticismof Push-
kin's era, there is no doubt that the term "Romanticism*must
be understood simply as a generic allusion to the prevailing
fashion during a given period, and within a given milieu. Any
attemptto exceed these limits,in order to detect more concrete
obedience to the rules of an alleged Russian poetic school, is
in my opinion doomed to failure.Classicism, Sentimentalism,Ro-
manticismand other variants of these main poetic trends re-
present in fact the continuityof a traditionaldiscussion within
a culturalcommunityto which Russia did not belong up to the
XVIII century.This discussion was started by the Italian Re-
naissance, when the problem of how to choose the models for
the realization of the ideals of perfectionin poetic activityled
the humanistictheoreticiansto a comparison between classical
and vernacularwriters.The French Querelle des anciens et des
modernes renewed the same discussion, which became then a
kind of conventional premise to any furtherapproach to the
theoryof literature.From this point of view, to be a Romantic
or a Classic, within the humanisticcommunityfromthe Latin
and Germanic area up to Bohemia and Poland, entailed a degree
of allusiveness and of conventionalityaccording to the stylistic
traditionof the local literature.Practically,the followersof the
Romantic School, almost everywherethroughoutthe West at
the beginningof the XIX century,accepted a poetic canon, the
comprehensibility of which depended on the previous acceptance
of the traditional dichotomyof the classical and respectively
modern stylisticheritage.According to this codifieddialectic op-
positionof two symbolsof the tradition,historyitselfbecame in
the post-humanisticcommunityan element of conventionality,
so thatthe "Classic world" or the "Middle Ages" were translated
into literarytopoi.
Russia enteredthe Modern European Communityin the XVIII
centurywhen the humanisticquarrel, on the poetic and stylistic
attitudes towards the so-called "classic" or "modern" patterns
had already reached in the West a high degree of conventionality.
Russian writersthen startedplayingthe same game as the writers
in the West without assimilating,however, the entire tradition
which stood behind both the "Classical" and the "Medieval"
symbols. The result of this, at least as far as the generations
up to the beginningof the XIX centuryare concerned,was that

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
20 ÉTUDES SLAVES ET EST-EUROPEENNES

Russian literaturedid not reach the right perspective,so that

the idea of 'modernity"was interpretedin its French acceptation
as well as the idea of 'classical heritage". The classical sources
of the actual classical traditionwere neglected and, instead, the
pseudoclassic French patternswere studied. Even today, thanks
to Lomonosov or Sumarokov and partially also to Feofan Pro-
kopovic, Boileau and his interpretation of the Horatian division
of rhetoricallanguage into threestylesreplace formany Russians
Horace himself.Russian classicism is just an imitationof the
French interpretation of the Italo-Iatinheritageof the "Iatinitas,"
withoutany direct contact with the "Iatinitas" either classic or
humanisticitself.It seems to me that just this lack of sensitivity
to the pre-XVIH centuryheritagell togetherwith the intentional
rejection of its Polish variants prevented pre-Pushkin Russian
culture fromproducingmany original poetic voices. If we were
to apply to this section of cultural historysome principles of
geo-sociological determinism,we would recognize in the birth
of Modern Russian literatureduring the XVIII centurythe re-
petitionof the same evolutive trends which had already char-
acterized the birth of Old Russian literatureat the beginning
of the XI century.Justas, during and shortlyafterthe time of
JaroslavPremudryj,the Greek heritagewas transferred to Kievian
Rus* withoutany concretehistoricalperspective,but only in the
conventionalstiffnessof the prologues to Bizantine Chronicles
or of Simeon Metaphrastoss hagiographiecollection,so in a similar
way at the time of Trediakovskij. Sumarokov, and Lomonosov,
the classic or classicisticheritage was assimilated in Russia in
a French or a least in a francocentric perspective,according to
which Boileau or Christian Wolff up to Winckelmann could
take the place of Plato or Cicero in the same manner as Seneca
could be replaced by Corneille and Racine up to Metastasio.12
What in the West representedmerely the continuationof a
traditionaldiscussion on poetics,having recourseto conventional
symbols which stood for the whole of the rhetoricaltradition
consideredin its twofoldaspect, became in Russia just a literary
play, a kind of noble jeu de société where the symbols of the
classical world were confusedwith the classical world itselfand
the actual "drevnjaja Rus" was replaced by a fictitiousMoyen
Age russe. It is no wonder against such a cultural background,
that the firstappearance of romantictrendsin Russian literature
at the beginningof the XIX centuryalso did not reach the full

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 SLAVIC AND EAST-EUROPEAN STUDIES 21

strength of a revolutionary movement. The real meaningof Ro-

in
manticism, fact, could not be fullyunderstoodat that time
in termsof poetics,but ratherin termsof an extraliterary mission
oftheliterary itself.Since fromtheXVIII century
activity Russian
point of view, therewas no actual realitybehind any poetic
symbol,the romanticsymbolscould easily coexistand cohabit
withotherrhetorical simulacratakingpart in the same literary
jeu de société.Within the limitsof the extremely sophisticated
commontaste of the Russian aristocracy, Romanticism did not
reveal anythingnew when exaltingthe adventurouslife or in
populargenuineness. The literaryworldwhichRussia had entered
some decades beforewas one the kingdomof fiction,and the
XVIII century had alreadyproducedits Russian publicto which
we can go back forinstancethroughPushkin'sParasha, in the
Domik v Kolomne:
... no doch'
byla,ey, ey prekrasnaya devitsa
i *->
glaza brovy temnye kak noch'
V nej vkusbyl obrazovannyj. Ona
citala socinenijaEmina.13
The nameofFëdorAleksandrovic Eminstandshereforthewhole
of the richXVIII centurynarrativetradition, where the limits
betweenthemodernnoveland themedievalromanceare almost
undetectable,so that one could speak about a strongRussian
Romanticism ante-Iitteram,not onlyas far as the popularityof
Richardsonor Oliver Goldsmithis concerned,but also fromthe
pointof view of domesticliterarytrends.But the real strength
of EuropeanRomanticliterature did not consistin its theoretical
principlesand thisis the reasonwhy Romanticism finallyruled
overRussianliterature, in spiteoftheinitiallack of attractiveness
of its slogans.It would be incorrect, however,to qualifyas ro-
manticboth the literaturewhich accepted romanticelements
along with otheringredients and the literature which,on the
contrary, was markedby preponderant romanticfeaturesbecause
of the acceptanceof a quite new Weltanschauung.If we want
to draw all the consequencesfromour reasoning,we should
thenadmitthatin Russia Romanticism did not play a decisive
partbeforethethirties and thatjustwhentherevolutionary aspect
of Romanticismsucceededin changingthe conditionsfor any
literaryactivity, thiskindof revolution was conceivedveryoften

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
22 ÉTUDES SLAVES ET EST-EUROPEENNES

as an antiromanticuprising. From this point of view, Russian

literature,from Lermontov and Gogol' up to the time when
Tolstoj and Dostoevskij became symbols of the antinaturalistic
reactionin post-Zola France, could really representthe continuity
of the Siècle romantiquefarbeyond the limitsof Romantictheory
and poetics. If this is true, Romanticismdoes not in Russia re-
present a distinctivemark, but just a poetic ingredientwhich
influencedin various degrees differentcultural ages.
As for the age of Pushkin, it would seem that the function
of romantictrendsor fashionsshould not be overestimatedeither
fromthe point of view of the theoryof literatureor fromthat
of literarypractice. The work of Pushkin himselfcould hardly'
be interpreted
" by means of such historiographieclichés as Ro-
mantic or "Neoclassic". Although he was fiftyyears younger,
Pushkin became finally,because of his untimelydeath, a con-
temporaryof Goethe : a privilege,however,which could not be
accorded to the whole of Russian literatureof his time. While
there was in Germany a Romantische Schule, there were just
romanticattitudesin Russia.
If neitherthe obedience to romanticpoetics nor any other
attitude towards Romanticismcan be taken as a critical basis
for the evaluation of the poetryof Pushkin's era, how should
we then interpret,or rather,classifythe writerswho happened
to be contemporariesof the greatestof Russian poets ? In my
opinion, any criterionis acceptable provided that we take care
to checkitsvaliditya posteriori.Nothingpreventsus fromchecking
the degree of "romanticization"let us say of Russian literature
duringthe age of Aleksandr Sergeevich Pushkin, even if we do
not see any reason to label as romantic everythingincluded
withinthe boundaries of this literaryperiod.
I thinkthatthis general argumentationcould be well founded
if we took as a central topic the work of Vasilij Andreevich
Zhukovskij.The discussionabout the actual literarycredo of this
centralpersonalityduringthe whole period of Pushkin's activity
has led a scholar like Sakulin 14 on the one hand to emphasize
his romanticism, while Aleksandr Veselovskij on the otherhand
insisted on the illegitimacyof this classificationclaiming that it
originatesfrom a wrong perspectiveof the historyof western
influencesin Russia. Zhukovskij has been labelled romanticas
well as sentimentaland even preromantic, but it would seem that
he could also deserve other definitions,as for instance that of

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 SLAVIC AND EAST-EUROPEAN STUDIES 23

neoclassic 15 : all oftheseformulasmightcorrespondto some aspect

of his creation,but none of them could be taken as a basis for
the definitionboth of the whole of his poetryand of the literary
season he represented.
The case of Zhukovskij,however, is not typical enough of
what we call the Era of Pushkin. As a matterof fact,the "Push-
kinian age" does not correspondonly to a chronologicalconcept.
It seems ratherto apply to a specifichuman sectionof the literary
entourage of Pushkin. Here I am not alluding to the so-called
"Pushkinian Pleiad" alone, since I agree with those criticswho
do not find much more in common among people like DeFvig,
Boratynskij,Pletnëv, Jazykov,and Vjazemskij than theirhuman
relationshipto Pushkin.16I would preferrather to consider as
belongingto the literaryEra of Pushkin his contemporariessensu
strictu,i.e., those who belonged to his generation"and whom one
could also call the writersof the "Kuklja-age. The case of
Kjuchel beker, in fact, shows very clearly how importantit was
at that time to have attended the same school or to have taken
part in the same studentmerrymakings. If we add to this that
precisely the contemporaries of Pushkin carried out the revo-
lutionarywork which led to the Decembrist revoltof 1825, we
will get an even clearer image of that fatallyclipped generation.
The success of such a historiographie formulaas 'the Decembrist
literature gives us formerevidence of the necessityof discovering
extraliterary featuresin order to give an individual countenance
to a literarylifewhereeclecticismwas stilla markof good manners.
I would also consideras belonging to the generationof Pushkin
and thereforeto "Pushkin's Era" people like Katenin, who was
seven years older, died sixteen years later and who is quoted
sometimesas a swimmeragainst the stream because he finally
preferredCorneille to Shakespeare and implicitlyopted forClass-
icism against Romanticism.Katenin belongs to the Pushkinian
world not only because of his friendship with the author of
"Evgenij Onegin" notwithstandinghis membershipin Shishkov
group but because he shared with Pushkin that aristocraticeclec-
ticismin poetics just mentionedand which also overflowsfrom
his work. Katenin's translationof the Lenore by Bürger, his
poetic celebrationof suicide as the only possible escape fromthe
desert of the world and fromthe pains of human life, where
poetryrepresentsa kind of buried treasure (I am referringto
the "cantata" Saffo, writtenin 1835-1838, and in particularto

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
24 ÉTUDES SLAVES ET EST-EUROPEENNES

the final farewell: "... O zizni klad, v pustynemira/ odna na-

persnica skorbej!/ So mnoj tuda, so mnoju, lira I..."),17 these and
other aspects of Katenins poetry,including his typical choices
of the texts to imitate or to translate (Ossian, Villon. Goethe,
Bürger,Dante) would hardly justify,in our historicperspective,
the classificationof this poet simply as a "ne-romantik"(as he
called himself)or as a true 'classicist/' 18 Once again we are
then confrontedwith a literaryphenomenonforwhich the expla-
nation could hardly be given by such conventionalcriticalcate-
gories as Romanticism,Classicism and so forth.
Vilgelm Karlovic Kjuchel'beker, as we know him by his
writingsand also thanks to Tynjanov's books,19could be taken
as the most typicalrepresentativeof what we call today the Ro-
mantic poetry of Pushkin's era. In his tragedy The Argives
(Argivjane), in which Pushkin also was passionately interested
around 1822 and which he used to quote also under the title
Timoleon, we fend some statementreferringexplicitly to the
anticlassicicisticpolemic and to romanticaesthetics. The intro-
duction of intermezzi,for instance is justified this way : "...
M.ezdudejstvijat honecno, ne vstrecajutsja ni v tragedijach
drevnich,ni novesich; no iz komikov
* Moler predsestvovalav-
toru svoim primeront.. . Sverdì estestvenny e suscestva, pojavl-
jajusciesja v sent mezdudejstvii,ne protivnyni ducha greceskoj
tragedii (u Eschila i Evripida bogi naravne s ljud'mi dejstujut
v ich proizvedenijach),ni obrazu myslej vrementizobrazaemych
poetom: korinfjanebyli togda crezuicajnosueverny.Vsego bolee
prosit autor, ctoby ne socli ego mezdudejstvie allegorieju : net
nicego skucnee i cholodnee allegorij..."21The taunting remark
concerningboring allegory and the ostentatiousmixing of the
tragicand comic genresseem to be hintingat an intentionalpro-
romanticpolemic, but on the other hand the author's zeal in
upholding his innovations by means of erudite referencesto
classical "auctores" could also lead us to believe that he is still
re-echoinghis school experiencesin the spiritof brilliantXVIII
centuryeclecticism.As to the originand the sources of this Tra-
gedy by Kjuchel'beker,it would seem that the problem deserves
more research; for the time being one can only point to the
fact that Kjuchelbeker, who had learned Italian and visited
Italy, could have known the tragedy, Timoleone, by Vittorio
Alfieri.22The choice ofthe subjectitselfcould have been suggested
to the Russian Decembrist by Alfieri,since Alfieri had already

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 SLAVIC AND EAST-EUROPEAN STUDIES 25

giventhe characterof Timoleonthe tragicmask of the fighter

forfreedomstressing at the same timethe conflict betweenthe
good of the nationand that of the individual.Togetherwith
Virginiaand the Congiurade' Pazzi, the tragedyTimoleoneby
VittorioAlfieriwas part of a trilogylabelled by the author
23
'tragediedella libertà/'
In almostall the poeticcreationsof this time,the spiritof
thenew century does notyetoppose the spiritof the late XVIII
century. Veryoftena romanticformclothesan illuministic con-
tent,romanticvehemenceis marriedto illuministic reason or
viceversa.
A youngfighter forthe freedomof Russia, whose ambitions
developedfromTyrtaeusto Brutusup to the Decembristconspi-
racy,VladimirRaevskijthus expressedhis ideals and opinions
in one of his well knownPoslanija :
... N acalo vsemodno,i vsemodin konec
no v mirenravstvennom ne mozetbytravenstvo
P-"lis nezavisimost*estmudrogocerta;
pod igomdespota-tirana *-*on svoboden...
dlja pol'zy bliznegozit >- sladkaja mecta...
The finalconclusionof thisold-fashioned
"meditation
poétique*
being:
... Zelane, prichoty
i strastiobuzdat
dolzny rassudkommy,ctobmerunaslazdatsja...24
And thiswas also the ideologic-rhetorical
intonation
of Ryleev's
famousOde to Civil Courage(Grazdanskoemuzhestvo):
... No podvigvojna gigantskoj
i stydsrazennych imvragov
v sude urna,v sude vekov^
nietopred doblestju grazdanskoj...25

On theotherhand,however, therewouldbe no problemin singling

out a large numberof typicalromanticelementsin the workof
thesepoetsand also in thoseof theirspiritualcompanions.The
main pointof thispaper should be emphasized: the poetryof
thetimeofPushkin,up to theearlythirties,
was deeplypermeated
by romantic trends
borrowed from the traditionof 'Vestern lite-

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
26 ÉTUDES SLAVES ET EST-EUROPÉENNES

rature,which was discoveredtoo recentlyand thereforewas not

fullyassimilatedby romanticattitudesand romanticfashion,al-
though Romanticismwas conceived neitheras an incompatible
exclusive method nor as a messianic revelation.Even Pushkin's
Prorokdid not consolidate the messianic conceptionof poetryin
Russia, and this was, incidentally,one of the reasons of Mickie-
wicz's deception in connection with the ideal of a panslavic
romanticpalingenesis under Polish-Russian leadership.
There was at that time no Romantic poetic school in Russia,
but just a varietyof poetic attitudesin the romanticstyle. At
firstsight it is not so easy to recognize the voice of Griboedov
in the followinglines :
Ne naslazdene zizni eel'
Ne uteserie nasa zizn.
O 1 ne obmanyvajsja,serdce.
O 1 prizrahi,ne uvlekajtef...26

In conclusion,two points should be added : When claiming

that Russian romanticpoetry of Pushkin's era was expressed
by means of stylisticattitudesratherthan of theoreticconsciouness,
one obviously cannot deny the existence of theoreticstatements
in favorof Romanticism.As a matterof fact,it would be sufficient
to quote, in this connection,a very characteristicpoem by Vene-
vitinov,where the youngerpoet addresses Pushkin as the Russian
representativeof a new 'Veltliteraturthe symbols of which are
Byron,Chénier, and Goethe. As forGoethe, Venevitinovsays :
Nastavnik nas, nastavniktvoj,
on kroetsjav stranemectarûj,
v svoej Germanii rodnoj...27

To be a Romantic,or at least a romanticallyorientedperson

became almost a social dutyin Russia duringand afterthe anti-
napoleonic war. A comparativestudyof the whole of the patriotic
Russian poetryconnected with the war could help in detecting
the originof a numberof topoi and stylemes.One could quote,
forinstance,two passages of two quite different poems by Raev-
skij and Glinka, where the image of Kutuzov, as the Old wise
spiritof Russia, already shows typical elements of stylization:
Glinka, in his Pesa* russkogovojna pri vide gorjascej Moskvy,
says :

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 SLAVIC AND EAST-EUROPEAN STUDIES 27

"... Druzja, bodrej1 Uz bliskomscerie :

Uz vozd' ljubimec nas sedoj,
Ustroilmudro vojsk dvizene
I v tylvragam grozitbedoj Í..."28
and Raevskij :
"... Pust' starec vozd'prostretrukoju
I shazet : 'Tarn upornyjwag V*
Rasseem gromypred soboju ^
I ispolinstoglavyj>- v prach Ì 29
Even if Romanficismin Russia up to the thirties,is just one
of the various componentsof multifacedcivilization,its role among
thatopen-mindedsociety,which was hesitatingabout takingmore
bindingstepsboth in literatureand in politics,could not be under-
estimated.
Yale University

NOTES
1. As regards as well the critical uncertaintyabout Slavic Romanticismas the
ambitionto reduce this movementto neat chronologicaland conceptual limits, I would
cite - among other typicalrecentinterpretations - D. Ö2EVSKIJ (TSCHI2EVSKIJ),
On Romanticismin Slavic Literatures,"Musagetes," 1, S'Gravenhage 1957 (in particular
see the note 1 on page 7) and Russische Literaturgeschichte 1, die
des 19 Jahrhunderts,
Romantik,München 1964. - On the other hand, attentionhas been well drawn to the
dangerof confusingthe historicaldata with the historiographieconceptsby R. WELLEK,
The concept of Romanticismin literaryhistory,"Comparative literature,"I, 1-2, 1949,
reprintedin his Concepts of Criticism,New Haven 1963, and also The unity of the
Romanticmovement,in Romanticism,problems of definition,explanationand evaluation,
edited by J.B. HOLSTED, Boston 1968. According to R. Wellek what is importantis
obviouslythe "coherenceand unityof the romanticmovement*in its historicalactuality.
For a recentRussian interpretation of romanticismas a unitycf. V.V. VANSLOV, Estetika
romantizma,Moskva 1966. The differencesbetween Russian and Western Romanticism
have been explained in various ways ; for the problemswhich are of particularinterest
in this connectionthe old marxistbook by B. MEJLAX, Pushkin i russkij romantizm,
Moskva-Leningrad1937, is still of considerable utility. Among the most typical and
interestinginterpretations one should now also mention that of G.A. GUKOVSKIJ, in
Pushkin i russkie romantiki,Moskva 1965 (a brilliant study writtentwentyyears ago,
but only now become accessible to students). Also according to Gukovskij (pp. 21-22)
the absence in Russia of polemical clashes, of illusions and of consequent deceptions
connectedwith the bourgeois French Revolution was decisive: the cultural differences
between Russia and the West thus correspondalso in the Romantic age, to sociological
differences.See finallythe excellentcritical synthesisby P.V. IEZUITOVA, whose trust
is the characterizationof Russian Romanticismas a spiritualand socio-politicalmovement,
in Istoriia russkoi poezii. t.l. Leningrad 1968. m>. 224-237.
2. The crisis of most typical Classicism (of Latin-Frenchinspiration) in Russia,
during the second half of the 18th centurythrough a complex game of preeminently

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
28 ÉTUDES SLAVES ET EST-EUROPÉENNES

Germaninfluences up to the revivalon neoclassicism as dialecticallyopposedto senti-

mentalism in a preromantic atmosphere, is describedmoreaccurately thanelsewherein
E. LO GATTO, Storiadella letteratura russa,5th ed., Firenze1964 (in particular pp.
106-111and 183-187; see also the Frenchedition: Histoirede la littérature russedes
originesà nos jours,traduitde l'italienpar M. et A.M. Cabrini,Paris 1965).
3. A. MICKIEWICZ, Romantycznosc, lines 67-69, Dziela, Tom I, Wiersze,p.
107,Warszawa1955.
4. One of the bestpresentations, in spiritpalpablypro-Karamzin-Zhukovskij and
anti-Shishkov, of theseproblemsis still to be foundunderthe caption"Arzamas"in
Entsiklopedicheskij slovar*Brokgaus-Efron, torn2, Spb. 1890,pp. 76-78. For the parti-
culars,see "Arzamas"i arzamasskie protokoly, editedby M.S. BOROVSKAJA-MAJKO-
VAJA,Leningrad1933. It seemsto me thatthe Arzamas-Beseda polemic,againstthe
background of the mainlinguistic-idealogical quarrelbetweenShishkovians and Karam-
zinians,is still to be consideredan episode of "mirrored culture,"typicalof 18th
century Russia.The termsof thedebate,thereas well as in otherEuropeancommunities
whichgave life to moreconcreteromantic movements, are still "Progress"and "Con-
servation."Such an opposition,whichwas an essentialproductof the "Siècle philo-
sophique,"willbe revivified in theromantic neoclassicpolemics(and eventually evenwith-
in thebodyof Romanticism itself)overtheconceptsof tradition, spontaneity,sentiment,
truthand thelike.In thecase of Arzamas,however, beyondthebrilliantlanguage"à la
mode"of a groupof aristocratic it seemsto me thattheconceptual
intellectuals, opposi-
tionis not yet thatof an illuministic and rationalistic "left" (despitethe new faces
andthenameswhichweresuppliedto thesocialgamethrough theballadsof Zhukovskij )
to theAncienrégimerepresented byproor anti-volterians.
5. "Fialkin" (i. e. Mr. Violet), a character soon famousby the comedyUrok
koketkami Hi Lipetzkievody(A lessonto the coquettesof the watersof Lipetzk),in
whichprinceA.A. SHAXOVSKOJ (1777-1846)deridesthepoeticworldof Zhukovskij
and his followers, an ideologicalpolemicmoresubstantial
reflects thancould be shown
at firstblushby the essentially scenicverveof the caricature. Beyondthe poetic-literary
discussion, the conservative SHAXOVSKOJ sensesthe dangerof the new leftand, in
substance, he seeks"the revolution" in back of the façadeof sentimentalism.
6. The arxaisty-novatory opposition,in any case, fitsthe conceptof "Pushkin
era" betterthanthatof Romanticschool,or trend,as opposedto any "conservative,"
classical,pseudoclassicalor even"neoclassical," idealof poetry.See Yu. N. TYNYANOV,
Arxaisty i novatory (JURIJN. TYNJANOV, Archaisten und Neuerer.Nachdruckder
Leningrader Ausgabevon 1929 miteinerVorbemerkung von DmitrijTSCHI2eWSKIJ),
München1967.
7. The debateoverRussianliterary languageat thebeginning of the19thcentury, as
the conclusionto the long 18thcentury discussion,could merita thoroughhistorico-
criticalrevision.Practically one oftentendsto do the storyof the Shishkov-Karamzin
polemicin partisanterms,mostof thetimeaccepting as a factualdatumthatShishkov,
the conservative, was indisputably wrongvis-à-visKaramzinthe innovator.Even the
clearlypartisanargument, accordingto whichShishkovdid not grasp the "courseof
history"is thusused to underlinea supposedanti-historicity of Shishkovian positions
in defenseof the Slavorussian tradition.The pointof departure of a like exegetictra-
ditionshouldperhapsbe localizedin the essaywritten morethana hundredyearsago
by AkademieJ. GROT, Karamzinv istoriirusskogoliteraturnago yazyka,in "Zhurnal
Ministerstva NarodnogoProsveschcheniya," IV, 1867. At anyrate,onlya naiveschema-
tizationof theliterary currents couldlead to an opposition betweenthe "Karamzinline"
(up to Pushkin) and the "Derzhavin-Shishkov line" (initiallythe Beseda lyubitelei
russkogoslova metat Derzhavin'shome) side by side withthe oppositionRomanticism
and classicizing Traditionalism. Followingthisroute,one could cometo classifyall the
Karamzinians in the"romantic" currentand evenAdmiralShishkovin theoppositeone :
whatnot onlywould be a strain,but almosta capsizingof reality(in additionto the

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 SLAVIC AND EAST-EUROPEAN STUDIES 29

above cited study by GROT, see, for the reconstructionof the critical tradition still
working today, P.K. SHCHEBALSKIJ, AS. Shishkov, ego soyuzniki i prothniki, in
"Russkij Vestnik," XI, 1870), and finallysee the forthcomingstudy by M. COLUCCI,
// pensiero linguistico e critico di AS. Siskov, to be published by the Universityof
Rome (with bibliography).
8. This was the opinion of manypeople for example in Poland, where the Romantic-
Classic discussion was startedby the Poznan teacher,Hans Samuel KAULFUSS, who in
1816 wrote an essay on the question Warum ist die deutsche Sprache und Literaturals
Hilfsmittelzur Fortbildungder französischenvorzuziehen? : a germanophilepamphlet
to which thereimmediatelyreactedsuch a qualifiedrevieweras the francophileStanislaw
Kostka POTOCKI. Cf. St. KAWYN, in Walka romantykówz klasykami (edited by
St. K.) (Bibl. Narodowa, Seria I, n. 183), Wrociaw-Warszawa-Kraków,I960, p. IV.
9. See M. EHRHARD, V.A. Joukovski et le prêromantismerusse, Paris 1838,
pp. 100 ff.See also N.V. IZMAILOV, in Istorija russkojpoezii, op. cit.,pp. 237-266. The
importance,real or supposed, of Zhukovskij as the spiritual fatherof the new Russian
generationsflourishingbetween the twenties and the thirties,could be conceptualized
in Bulharin's controvertedstatementin the 11th issue of 1836 of "Severnaya pchela" :
"Pushkin,notwithstanding all his originality,is nothingbut an outgrowthof Zhukovskij.
Pushkin was not created by Schiller, not by Byron,but by Zhukovskij" (See MEJLAX,
Pushkin i russkij romanticism, op. cit., pp. 28-29).
10. M. EHRHARD, op. ctt.,p. 100. As to fictitious characterof Russianliterarylabels,
Pushkin wrote: "With us, journalistscall each other a classic and a romanticthe same
way as little old ladies call dare-devilsa freemasonof a Voltairian without having any
idea eitherof Voltaire or of freemasonry..."(B. MEJLAX, op. cit., p. 35).
11. Given the tremendousnumberof problemswhich everyreader can easily recall
in his own memorywith this intentionallyschematicgeneralities as a commencement,
any precise bibliographic referencewould be inadequate. The point of departure is
representedby the general acceptance of the fact that "... The history of criticism
fromthe beginningof the Renaissance to the middle of the 18th centuryconsistsin the
establishment,elaboration and spread of a view of literaturewhich is substantiallythe
same in 1750 as it was in 1550." (R. WELLEK, A historyof moderncriticism: 1750-
1930, the later Eighteenthcentury,New Haven and London, 1966, p. 5). Russians joined
in the modernliterarygame just at the end of this tricentennialprocess of definingthe
"concept of literature."
12. See also R. PICCHIO, La letteraturarussa antica, Firenze-Milano1968, pp. 30-31.
13. Domik v kolomme (1830), oktava XIII: "... But the daughter ^vas a girl
really beautiful: eyes and brows dark as the night. She had an educated taste. She read
the works by Emin..."
14. P. SAKULIN, Zhukovskij, in Istorija russkoj literaturyXIX v., edited by
Ovsjaniko-Kulikovskij,Moskva 1908, vol. 1.- Cf. E. LO GATTO, Histoire...,op. cit.,pp.
208-209.
15. A.N. VESELOVSKIJ, V.A. Zhukovskij. Poezija chuvstva i "serdecbnogo"
voobrazhenija,Pietroburgo1904. - E. LO GATTO, Histoire..., op. cit., p. 208.
16. Generallyon the problem,as well as on the inadequacy of the term "Pleyada"
(for which can be substituted"krug," i. e. "circle"), cf. what B.S. MEJLAX has recently
writtenin Istorija russkoj poezii, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 315-320.
17. J.A. KATENIN, Stixotvorenija(Biblioteka Poeta, malaja serija, izd. 3). Lenin-
grad 1954, p. 281 : "Oh buried treasureof life, in the waste of the world you sole
repositoryof sorrows! With me let us go there,lyre..."
18. A typical synthesis of the historico-criticaldiscussion concerning Katenin's
romanticrepudiationof Romanticismis to be found, recently,in D. TSCHKSEWSKIJ's
RussischeLiteraturgeschichte des 19 Jahrhunderts, I, op. cit., pp. 85-87. - From op. cit.
TYNYANOV's point of view (the origin of which goes probably back to Belinskij's
interpretationof the inner political split of Russian classicism during the first two

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
30 ÉTUDES SLAVES ET EST-EUROPEENNES

decadesof the 19thcentury)Kateninwas the leaderof so called "youngerarchaists"

("mladshiearxaisty").See Yu. TYNJANOV,Arxaisty i novatory,op. cit.,pp. 107 ff.
19. Yu. TYNJANOV,Kjuxlja, 1925.
20. Cf. V.K. KJUXEL'BEKER,Izbrannyeproizvedenijav dvux tamax,ed. by
N.V. KOROLEVA, Moskva-Leningrad 1967 (especiallysee vol. 1, pp. 16-18and vol.
2. do. 743-745).
21. V.K. KJUXEL'BEKER,op. cit.,vol. 2, p. 179 : "Intermezzi, of course,arefound
neitherin ancientnor in the newesttragedies : but amongthe comediansMolièrepre-
cursedthe author,withhis example...Supernatural beingsappearingin thisintermezzo
are againstneitherthe spiritof Greektragedy(in Aeschylusand Euripidesgods on a
levelwithpeopleact in theirdeeds) nor the formof thoughtof the timerepresented
by thepoet: Corinthians werethenextremely Aboveall, the authorbegs
superstitious.
notto considerhis intermezzo an allegory: thereis nothing moreborinethanallegory..."
22. This tragedy of Alfieriis mentioned by Tynjanovonlyas a thematic antecedent.
Cf. %%
Argivijane,"neizdannaja tragedikaKjuxel'bekera, in Arxaistyi novatory,op. cit.,pp.
293-329.
23. That the tragedies of Alfieriwereknownand studiedin the Russianambiance
in whichKjuxel'bekerbusied himselfresultsalso froma polemicmentionby A.S.
Pushkinin thefirstdraftof theprefaceto BorisGodunov,written in Frenchto Raevskij
and datedJanuary 30, 1829: "... Rien de plus ridiculeque les petitschangements des
règlesreçues.Alfieriest profondément frappédu ridiculede Va parte,il le supprime
et là-dessusallongele monologue. Quellepuérilité..." (Akad.Nauk SSSR,A.S. PUSHKIN,
PolnoeSobraniesochinenijv desjatitomax,izdanievtoroe,Moskva,1958, 163). These
noteswere derivedfromthe same "note folder"out of whichPushkinabout a year
laterwas to developtheotherdraft(in Russian)forthesameprefaceto Bons Godunov.
In thethirdof thesedrafts, amongtheworkswhichhad servedhim as a model (here,
in connection with the typeof verse) the tragedyby Kjuxel'bekeris mentioned too.
(Cf. Ibid.,p. 165).
24. V.F. RAEVSKIJ,PoslaniePetruGrigoi* evicu Priklonskomu, lines 51-55 and
75-78,in Polnoesobraniestixotoverenij, editedbyV.G. BAZANOV (Bibliotekapoeta),
Moskva-Leningrad 1967, pp. 80-81. "There is one beginningfor everybody and for
everybody thereis one end - but in the worldof moralstherecannotbe anyequality
- onlyindependence is thetraitof thewise man; - undertheyokeof a despot-tyrant
he is free...- to live fortheweal of neighbour is a sweetdream...// ... desire,whims
and passionswe mustbridlewithour reason,in orderto enjoymeasure."
25. K. RYLEEV, Stixotvorenija, edited by N.I. MARDOVCHENKO (Biblio-
tekaPoeta,Malaja serija,no 57), Moskva1947,p. 20. "But theheroicgiganticdeed of
thewarrior, - and theshameof theenemiesdefeatedby him- in thetrialof reason,
in thetrialof centuries - are nothingin comparison withcivilcourage."
26. A.S. GRYBOEDOV, Prosti, otecestvo !, in Sochinenijav stixax, ed. by
I. MEDVEDEVA (BibliotecaPoeta), Moskva-Leningrad 1967, p. 353. "Delightis not
thegoal of life- our lifeis notconsolation. - Oh ! don'tdeceiveyourself, heart! -
Oh phantasms, don'tenthrall !"
27. D.V. VENEVITINOV, Polnoesobrante stixotvorentj(BibliotekaPoetaBolshaya
Serija,VtoroeIzdanie), Leningrad1960, p. 84 : "Our teacher,yourteacher,hides in
the land of dream,in his nativeGermany..."
28. F.N. GLINKA, Izbrannyeproizvedenija(BibliotekaPoeta), Leningrad1957,
p. 127 : "Friends,cheerup ! Revengeis alreadyclose by: the chief,our greydarling,
has alreadyskillfully plannedthe movement of armiesand, in the rear,he threatens
misfortune to thefoemen."
29. V.F. RAEVSKIJ,op. cit.,p. 53 : "Let the old chiefstretch out his hand and
say: "Thereis thestubborn foe !" We will sow thunders beforeus and thegiantwith
a hundred headswill be reducedto powder."

This content downloaded from 193.105.245.159 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 19:00:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions