Comprehension of D. E. Minh’s translation activity in the Russian literary criticism

Тип работы:

Узнать стоимость новой

Детальная информация о работе

Выдержка из работы

Theory of signs. Theory of translation. Standardization. Usage. Geographical linguistics (UDC 812)
DOI: 10. 18 454/RULB.5. 10 Жаткин Д. Н. 1, Милотаева О. С. 2
'-Пензенский государственный технологический университет, 2Пензенский государственный университет архитектуры и
В статье впервые представлен обзор материалов, связанных с изучением и восприятием творчества поэта-переводчика Дмитрия Егоровича Мина (1818−1885) русской литературной критикой и литературоведением. Отмечается, что значительный интерес, проявленный к творчеству Мина библиографами и составителями справочных изданий конца XIX — XX вв., долгое время сочетается с определенной ограниченностью внимания к нему со стороны ученых-литературоведов, в основном кратко упоминавших о деятельности переводчика при осмыслении пограничных проблем, таких, как русская рецепция У. Морриса, восприятие шекспировской драматургии в России 1870 — 1880-х гг., творчество Данте и его влияние на русскую и мировую культуру, цензурные препятствия при издании переводов итальянской литературы в России и др.
Ключевые слова: Д. Е. Мин, поэзия, традиция, художественный перевод, компаративистика, литературная критика, библиография, межкультурная коммуникация.
Zhatkin D.N.1, Milotaeva O.S. 2
'-Penza State Technological University, 2Penza State University of Architecture and Construction COMPREHENSION OF D.E. MINH'-S TRANSLATION ACTIVITY IN THE RUSSIAN LITERARY CRITICISM
The review of the materials connected with studying and perception of works of the poet-translator Dmitry Egorovich Minh (1818- 1885) in the Russian literary criticism is for the first time presented in the article. The considerable interest shown to Minh'-s creative works by bibliographers and authors of reference books of the end of the XIX-XXth centuries, for a long time was combined with a certain limitation of attention to it from the literary critics generally briefly mentioning the translator'-s activity at judgment of boundary problems, such as the Russian reception of U. Morris, perception of Shakespearean dramatic art in Russia in 1870 — 1880s, Dante'-s creative works and his influence on the Russian and world culture, strict censorship at the edition of the translations of the Italian literature in Russia, etc.
Keywords: D.E. Minh, poetry, tradition, literary translation, comparative study, literary criticism, bibliography, cross-cultural communication.
The research is carried out within implementation of the project on a grant of the Russian President of MD-5818. 2015.6 «Textual criticism and poetics of the Russian literary translation of the XIXth — the beginning of the XXIst century: the reception of English poetry of the Victorian era in synchronism and a diachronism».
Creative activity of the poet-translator Dmitry Egorovich Minh caused a fixed interest of the contemporary Russian critics. In 1843 even before the appearance of his first translation (Francesca da Rimini containing an episode of the V song of & quot-Hell"- from & quot-The Divine Comedy& quot- by Dante (Minh, 1843, p. 307−311)) in the conclusion of the pejorative review of the prose translation of & quot-Hell"- by Fang-Dim (E.V. Kologrivova) the author of the thesis & quot-Dant and his eyelids& quot- S.P. Shevyrev who also transferred the great Dante'-s work, with satisfaction reported: & quot-… almost all & quot-Hell"- by Dant has already translated in Russian by terza rimas with proximity and accuracy incredible. & lt-… >- A translator Minh, apparently, is unknown in our literature at all. Some literary songs were delivered to me — and I was surprised by this work, conscientious and great. & lt-… >- Minh studied the original, seized the Russian terza rima perfectly and translates Dante'-s works so close and truly that can outdo the best German translators& quot- (Shevyrev, 1843, p. 193−194).
In the second half of the 1840s — the beginning of the 1850s Minh was published only as the translator of & quot-The Divine Comedy& quot-, and, at the same time, small, but lexically and stylistically perfected fragments of the future big translation appearing on pages of & quot-Sovremennik"- (Minh, 1845, p. 151−162) and & quot-Moskvityanin"- (Minh, 1850, p. 11−20), testified to thorough approach of the translator to the chosen work. In 1852 after the publication of the I song of & quot-Hell"- in Minh'-s translation (Minh, 1852, p. I-IV, 215−224) I.I. Panayev specified in his & quot-Notes and reflections of the New poet concerning the Russian journalism& quot- that & quot-Mr Minh began working with love and knowledge& quot- and as a result the translation was & quot-very good and worthy of any respect& quot-: & quot-<-… >- to a certain extent he managed the main thing, he could reflect as far as possible the spirit of the original, — and that is very important!& quot- (Panayev, 1852, p. 114−115).
As we can see, from laconic judgments of S.P. Shevyrev, I.I. Panayev, and also their contemporaries who prepared anonymous publications the history of literary and critical understanding of the
activity of one of the most considerable Russian translators of the second half of the XIXth century D.E. Minh began.
Theoretical Background of Study
The theoretical and methodological base of the research is based on the works of classics of the Russian literary criticism Alexey N. Veselovsky, V.M. Zhirmunsky, M.M. Bakhtin, the works of the researchers of international literary relations, first of all, of the representatives of the Leningrad comparative-historical school -M.P. Alekseev, R.M. Gorokhova, Yu.D. Levin, K.I. Rovda, and also on the works concerning problems of Russian-English and Russian-Italian literary and historical and cultural interaction. Not numerous works of the foreign researchers affecting D.E. Minh'-s creative works in the context of international literary relations, in particular, the research of H. Buriot-Darsiles comprehending perception problems of Dante'-s & quot-The Divine Comedy& quot- by imperial censorship (Buriot-Darsiles, 1924), the book of A. Engel-Braunschmidt accenting questions of reception of the German poetry in Russia in the XIXth century were used (Engel-Braunschmidt, 1973). For understanding of D.E. Minh'-s translation manner, for comparison of his translations with the English originals the authoritative editions were also used.
D.E. Minh'-s heritage is studied by literary critics extremely poorly at present. So, in the works of academician M.P. Alekseev, the founder of the Leningrad comparative-historical school, the name of Minh can be found three times: in the article & quot-Problem of Literary Translation& quot- (1931) where the scrupulousness of Minh'-s work in the translation of & quot-The Divine Comedy& quot- is noted, numerous completions of the text from option to option (Alekseev, 1931, p. 176), in the article & quot-The First Acquaintance with Dante in Russia& quot- (1970) where it is casually mentioned strict censorship which arosed at the publication of the first full translation of Dante'-s & quot-Hell"- (Alekseev, 1970, p. 45), and in the article & quot-Russian Meetings of William Morris& quot- (Alekseev, 1996, p. 4), where in the note it is reported about Minh as the first translator of fragments from & quot-Earthly paradise& quot- by W. Morris and that sharply disapproving assessment which got this translation in I. S. Turgenev'-s letters (Turgenev, 1964, pp. 314, 316).
From the Leningrad comparative representatives R.M. Gorokhova became interested in Minh very much, whose most considerable works are devoted to the perception of the Italian literature (first of all, Torkvato Tasso'-s creative works) in Russia. In her article & quot-Dante'-s & quot-Hell"- in D.E. Minh'-s translation and imperial censorship& quot- (1966) the advantages of & quot-the first full Russian poetic translation of & quot-Hell"-"- are noted, in particular that it is written& quot-by the metre the most corresponding to the original — iambic pentameter terza rimas& quot- (Gorokhova, 1966, p. 48). R.M. Gorokhova calls Minh & quot-the talented and tireless poet-translator& quot- (Gorokhova, 1966, p. 48) also mentions his interpretations of Schiller, Byron, Shakespeare, Petrarch, Torkvato Tasso and other poets. The main volume of the article is devoted to identification of the reasons of the publication of & quot-Hell"- with strict censorship reductions, among which — censor'-s disapproval of the possibility to place tsars into a hell, undesirability of accusation of pastors in a self-interest, perception of invariable condemnation of indifference and indecision as an appeal to a civil activity, etc. (Gorokhova, 1966, p. 54−55).
K.I. Rovda, analyzing the translations of Shakespeare'-s works made in 1880s, among the others presented in his article & quot-Years of Reaction& quot- which was the part of the collective monograph & quot-Shakespeare and Russian Culture& quot- (1965) published under edition of the academician M.P. Alekseev, the short analysis of interpretation of the play & quot-King Joahn& quot- by D.E. Minh. Drawing conclusions from his reasonings, K.I. Rovda noted the fight of two tendencies in creation of translations, alterations and retellings of Shakespearean works in 1880s: one of them reflected & quot-aspiration to adapt Shakespeare'-s creative works for the lowered tastes of a bourgeois and petty-bourgeois reader and viewer& quot-, the second & quot-was directed to the original Shakespeare'-s development& quot- (Rovda, 1965, p. 650). Minh, along with D.V. Averkiyev and S.A. Yuryev, was ranked as a translator of the second group, whose activity corresponded to the tendencies of development of philological science in respect of Shakespeare'-s perception in particular and translated works in general.
Minh'-s biography and creative works drew attention of Yu.D. Levin who not only devoted the certain part of the book to him & quot-Russian Translators of the XIXth Century and Development of Literary Translation& quot- (Levin, 1985, p. 214−234), in which the author made the general review of his biography and creative activity, but also mentioned about the poet-translator in other sections of his book. Subsequently on the basis of materials of the book & quot-Russian Translators of the XIXth Century and Development of Literary Translation& quot- of the article about D.E. Minh in the fourth volume of the biographic dictionary & quot-The Russian writers. 1800 — 1917& quot- was prepared by Yu.D. Levin (Levin, 1999, p. 72−73). Minh was also mentioned in other scientific works of Yu. D. Levin. In the monograph & quot-Shakespeare and Russian Literature of the XIXth Century& quot- he was called among the audience on celebration of Shakespeare'-s anniversary in Moscow on April 11(23), 1864, and preparation to the anniversary of the translation of a monologue of the King Richard II said before the death in a dungeon (from the fifth scene of the V act of the drama & quot-Richard II& quot-) (Levin, 1988, p. 201) was noted- noting that Minh had translated & quot-King Joahn& quot-, Yu.D. Levin gave the characteristics to him as to the poet, & quot-glorified by the translation of & quot-The Divine Comedy& quot- by Dante& quot- (Levin, 1988, p. 317). In the article & quot-Burns in Russian& quot- Minh was characterized by Yu.D. Levin in the context of consideration of Russian translations of Burns'- works, and it was talked of interpretation of the first part of the poem & quot-The Vision& quot- (& quot-Videniye"-) as the only fact of Minh'-s appeal to Burns'- heritage (Levin, 1982, p. 546).
Minh'-s activity was also affected in the monographs of the Russian researchers of Dante Alighieri'-s creative works -A.K. Dzhivelegov (& quot-Dante Alighiyeri. Life and creative works& quot- (Dzhivelegov, 1933, p. 169)), I.N. Golenishchev-Kutuzov (& quot-Dante'-s creative works and world culture& quot- (Golenishchev-Kutuzov, 1971, p. 416)), A.A. Asoyan (& quot-"-Honor the greatest poet … "-. Destiny of & quot-The Divine Comedy& quot- of Dante in Russia& quot- (Asoyan, 1990, p. 19, 192 193)).
The question of influence of the Russian biobibliography on development and strengthening of D.E. Minh'-s literary reputation can cause a special discussion. Among posthumous comments on the translator D.D. Yazykov'-s edition & quot-The review of life and works of
the late Russian writers& quot- is remarkable. In the fifth part of it Minh'-s short biography and bibliographic data on his printed translations from Dante, F. Schiller, J. -G. Byron, W. Shakespeare, W. Morris, A. Tennyson, W. Wordsworth are presented (Yazykov, 1888−1909, ed. 5, p. 110−111). In the subsequent parts Yazykov made additions to data on Minh'-s translations from the above-mentioned West European writers, and also from J. Krabb, R. Burns, R. Buchanan, G. Longfello, T. Moore, P. -B. Shelley'-s, T. Tasso (Yazykov, 18 881 909, ed. 6, p. 9- ed. 8, p. 145- ed. 9, p. 98- ed. 11, p. 229). Nevertheless he didn'-t consider actual data about Minh'-s interpretations of F. Petrarch, J. Milton, T. Campbell.
Reference information about Minh is also represented in the bibliographic index prepared by A.V. Mezyer in 1902 & quot-The Russian literature from the XIth to the XIXth century inclusive& quot- (Mezyer, 1902, p. 229), in the book of the Ryazan local historians I.V. Dobrolyubov and S.D. Yakhontov appeared in 1910 & quot-Bibliographic book of writers, scientists and artists, natives (mainly) Ryazan province& quot- (Dobrolyubov & amp- Yakhontov, 1910, p. 145−146). S.A. Vengerov in the fourth volume of & quot-The book of the Russian writers& quot- (1917) added very modest biographic data of the translator with the list of the editions containing publications of his works, and also obituaries and responses on the published translations (Vengerov, 1917, p. 332).
Min is also mentioned in bibliographic editions of the Soviet period. So, in N.P. Smirnov-Sokolskiy'-s bibliography & quot-Russian literary almanacs and collections of the XVIII-XIXth centuries& quot- it is noted some collections containing translated works of Minh, -published by N.F. Shcherbina & quot-The collection of the best works of the Russian poetry& quot- (SPb., 1858), the collection & quot-Poets of All Times and People& quot- prepared by V.D. Kostomarov and F.N. Berg (M., 1862), & quot-The German poets in biographies and samples& quot- under N.V. Gerbel'-s edition (SPb., 1877), & quot-The collection of English poets& quot- published by the Society of distribution of useful books (M., 1879) (Smirnov-Sokolsky, 1965, pp. 260, 274, 332, 343). In the bibliographic edition & quot-Library of the Russian poetry of I.N. Rozanov"- the list of the almanacs and collections containing Minh'-s translations was added with N.V. Gerbel'-s anthology & quot-English poets in biographies and samples& quot- (SPb., 1875) (Goldberg & amp- Kostrova, 1975, p. 171). I.F. Masanov'-s investigation'-s are also interesting who established Minh'-s pseudonyms — D.M., De Minh, Demin, Dae Minh (it is established allegedly), Dyamin (Masanov, 1956−1960, v. 1, pp. 317, 334, 337, 353, 355). Bibliographic data on publications of the translation of & quot-The Divine Comedy& quot- made by D.E. Minh and also on literary and critical responses to this translation are contained in M.M. Kowalewski'-s works (Kowalewski, 1921, p. 58−60) and V.T. Danchenko (Danchenko, 1973) — data on Minh'-s translations from Shakespeare are included in the known Shakespearean bibliography of I.M. Levidova (Levidova, 1964, pp. 36, 46, 47, 63).
D.E. Min mainly drew attention of bibliographers and originators of reference boks (D.D. Yazykov, A.V. Mezyer, S.A. Vengerov, I.F. Masanov, N.P. Smirnov-Sokolsky, I.M. Levidova, V.T. Danchenko) thanks to whom it was succeeded to keep and systematize the valuable factual materials concerning separate Minh'-s publications in the Russian periodical press of the second half of the XIXth century, the emergence of responses to his publications. Minh'-s activity became a reference point for new generations of translators of Dante'-s & quot-The Divine Comedy& quot-, first of all for V. Ya. Bryusov and M.L. Lozinsky. At the same time the works of literary critics were limited either of a mention of Minh considering boundary problems, or of the short characteristic of separate episodes of his literary biography (strict censorship at the publication of Dante'-s & quot-Hell"- (R.M. Gorokhov), creation of the translation of the historical chronicle of W. Shakespeare & quot-King Joahn& quot- (K.I. Rovda)), or of the review adumbrating about activity of the translator and his achievements (Yu.D. Levin). Minh was distinctly perceived as the founder of one of the best readings of & quot-The Divine Comedy& quot- (I.N. Golenishchev-Kutuzov, A.A. Asoyan) while his other translations remained in the shadow, without causing interest, — the deep system judgment of Minh'-s creative works in the Russian literary criticism of the XXth century didn'-t occur that has to be surely filled with literary criticism of the XXIth century.
1. Алексеев, М.П. (1931). Проблема художественного перевода. Сборник трудов Иркутского государственного университета. Т. XVIII. Вып. 1: 149−196.
2. Алексеев, М.П. (1970). Первое знакомство с Данте в России. In Алексеев, М.П. (ed.) От классицизма к романтизму. Из истории международных связей русской литературы. Ленинград: Наука: 6−62.
3. Алексеев, М.П. (1996). Русские встречи Вильяма Морриса. In Лихачев, Д.С. (ed.) Россия — Запад — Восток. Встречные течения. К 100-летию со дня рождения М. П. Алексеева. Санкт-Петербург: Наука: 3−24.
4. Асоян, А.А. (1990). «Почтите высочайшего поэта…». Судьба «Божественной комедии» Данте в России. Москва: Книга.
5. Венгеров, С.А. (1917). Источники словаря русских писателей: [В 4 т.]. Т. 4. Петроград: тип. Императорской Академии Наук.
6. Голенищев-Кутузов, И.Н. (1971). Творчество Данте и мировая культура. Москва: Наука.
7. Гольдберг, В.В., Кострова М. И. (eds) (1975). Библиотека русской поэзии И. Н. Розанова. Библиографическое описание. Москва: Книга.
8. Горохова, Р.М. (1966). «Ад» Данте в переводе Д. Е. Мина и царская цензура. In Берков, П.Н., Бушмин, А.С., Жирмунский В. М. (eds) Русско-европейские литературные связи: Сборник статей к 70-летию М. П. Алексеева. Москва-Ленинград: Наука: 48−55.
9. Данченко, В.Т. (1973). Данте Алигьери. Библиографический указатель русских переводов и критической литературы на русском языке. 1762−1972. Москва: Книга.
10. Дживелегов, А.К. (1933). Данте Алигиери. Жизнь и творчество. Москва: Журнально-газетное объединение.
11. Добролюбов, И.В. & amp- Яхонтов, С.Д. (1910). Библиографический словарь писателей, ученых и художников, уроженцев (преимущественно) Рязанской губернии. Рязань: Губернская типография.
12. Ковалевский, М.М. (1921). Русские переводы «Божественной комедии». Казанский библиофил, 2: 58−60.
13. Левидова, И.М. (1964). Шекспир. Библиография русских переводов и критической литературы на русском языке. 17 481 962. Москва: Книга.
14. Левин, Ю.Д. (1982). Бернс на русском языке. In Р. Бернс. Стихотворения. Москва: Радуга: 533−558.
15. Левин, Ю.Д. (1985). Русские переводчики XIX века и развитие художественного перевода. Ленинград: Наука.
16. Левин, Ю.Д. (1988). Шекспир и русская литература XIX века. Ленинград: Наука.
17. Левин, Ю.Д. (1999). Мин Дмитрий Егорович. In Николаев, П.А. (ed.) Русские писатели. 1800−1917: Биографический словарь. Москва: Большая российская энциклопедия- Фианит. Т. 4: 72−73.
18. Масанов, И.Ф. (1956−1960). Словарь псевдонимов русских писателей, ученых и общественных деятелей: В 4 т. Т. 1−4. Москва: Издательство Всесоюзной книжной палаты.
19. Мезьер, А.В. (1902). Русская словесность с XI по XIX столетия включительно. Библиографический указатель произведений русской словесности в связи с историей литературы и критикой. Часть II. Русская словесность XVIII и XIX ст. Санкт-Петербург: типография Альтшулера.
20. Мин, Д.Е. (1843). Песнь пятая Дантова Ада. Москвитянин, 4: 307−311.
21. Мин, Д.Е. (1845). Две песни из Ада Данта Алигьери: Песнь тридцать вторая. Песнь тридцать третья. Современник, 11: 151−162.
22. Мин, Д.Е. (1850). Две песни из Дантова Ада: Песнь XXI. Пятая яма осьмого круга. Взяточники в смоляном озере. Злые Лапы- Песнь XXII. Наваррец Чиамполо. Проделка его с Злыми Лапами. Драка между ними по этому случаю. Москвитянин, 9: 1120.
23. Мин, Д.Е. (1852) Ад: Первая канзона Божественной комедии Данта Алигиери. Москвитянин, 3: I-IV, 215−224.
24. Панаев, И.И. (1852). Заметки и размышления Нового поэта по поводу русской журналистики. Современник, 3: 105−115.
25. Ровда, К.И. (1965). Годы реакции. In Алексеев, М.П. (ed.) Шекспир и русская культура (с. 627−698). Москва-Ленинград: Наука.
26. Смирнов-Сокольский, Н.П. (1965). Русские литературные альманахи и сборники XVIII—XIX вв. Москва: Книга.
27. Тургенев, И.С. (1964). Полное собрание сочинений и писем: В 28 т. Письма: В 13 т. Т. 17. Москва-Ленинград: Наука.
28. Шевырев, С.П. (1843). Критический перечень русской литературы 1843 г. Москвитянин, 3: 175−194.
29. Языков, Д.Д. (1888−1909). Обзор жизни и трудов покойных русских писателей. Выпуски 5 (1888), 6 (1890), 8 (1900), 9 (1905), 11 (1909). Санкт-Петербург: тип. А. С. Суворина (выпуски 5−6). Москва: Университетская типография (выпуски 8−9). Санкт-Петербург: тип. Императорской Академии Наук (выпуск 11).
30. Buriot-Darsiles, H. (1924). Dante et la censure russe. Revue de litterature compare, 4: 109−111.
31. Engel-Braunschmidt, A. (1973). Deutsche Dichter in Russland im 19. Jahrhundert: N.V. Gerbel'-s «Deutsche Dichter in Biographien und Proben» als Zentrum der Kenntnis und Verbreitung deutscher Dichtung. Munchen: W. Fink.

Показать Свернуть
Заполнить форму текущей работой