Sie sind auf Seite 1von 30

OXFORD

SLAVONIC
PAPERS
NEW SERIES

V O L U M E X V 1982

CONTENTS
Some A p o c r y p h a l
Research

Fellow

Sources o f K i e v a n R u s s i a n H i s t o r i o g r a p h y

of Clare College,

Iulianiya Lazarevskaya

By .

A .

By

S I M O N

F R A N K L I N ,

Cambridge
G R E E N A N ,

Lecturer

in Russian,

University

of

Liverpool

R u s s i a n M i s s i o n s to L o n d o n , 1 7 1 1 - 1 7 8 9 : F u r t h e r E x t r a c t s f r o m the C o t t r e l l P a p e r s
By

I G O R

V I N O G R A D O F F

' O t h o u , great m o n a r c h o f a p o w ' r f u l


By

A .

G .

CROSS,

A n Unknown
Russian,

Professor

of Russian

reign!':

Studies,

P o e m b y A . S. S h i s h k o v By

University

of California

at

M A R K

of

of Sarajevo,

sometime

S V E T O Z A R

Visiting

T h e s e s in S l a v o n i c Studies A p p r o v e d
1977-1981. W i t h a Cumulative
Librarian

Bards a n d

Russian

Tsars

Leeds

A L T S H U L L E R ,

Assistant

Professor

of

P A M E L A

D A V I D S O N ,

Lecturer

in

Russian,

Birmingham

Ivo A n d r i c a n d F o l k L i t e r a t u r e By
University

of

Irvine

V y a c h e s l a v I v a n o v ' s T r a n s l a t i o n s o f D a n t e By
University

English

University

of All Souls College,

Fellow

K O L J E V I C ,

Professor

of All Souls College,

for H i g h e r

Degrees b y

I n d e x , 1907-1981 By j . s.

G .

of English

British

Universities,

SIMMONS,

Oxford

CLARENDON

Literature,

Oxford

PRESS'OXFORD

Fellow

and

Vyacheslav Ivanov's
Translations of Dante
By P A M E L A

DAVIDSON

A s a movement, Russian Symbolism tended to be syncretic i n its


approach to other cultures, a n d one o f the p r i n c i p a l means w h i c h
the Russian Symbolists adopted i n order to incorporate the legacy o f
other cultures into their o w n tradition was that o f translation. Dante,
as a representative o f the mystical tradition i n love a n d i n poetry,
was a figure o f p r i m a r y importance to the Russian Symbolists. It is
not altogether surprising therefore that, despite the wide variety o f
Russian translations o f Dante's works w h i c h already existed at the
beginning o f the twentieth century, many o f the younger generation
of the Russian Symbolists should have tried to produce new transla
tions of Dante's works of their o w n . It was no longer enough simply
to have a Russian Dante, as for example M i n ' s translation p r o v i d e d ;
it was necessary to have a new Russian Symbolist Dante who w o u l d
reflect a l l o f the characteristics w i t h w h i c h the Symbolists invested
their image o f Dante.
1

It is for this reason that we find Bryusov, Ellis, Sergey Solov'ev,


and Vyacheslav Ivanov a l l engaged o n translations of Dante's works
at various stages o f their literary careers. Ivanov's translations from
Dante are very m u c h a phenomenon o f their age, a n d yet at the same
time they are extremely revealing o f the highly idiosyncratic w a y i n
w h i c h Ivanov adapted Dante to fit into the framework o f his o w n
particular spiritual outlook. Ivanov's translations, like any other trans
lations, are the product o f a n act o f understanding w h i c h is at the
same time a n act o f transformation a n d assimilation.
Amongst Ivanov's unpublished papers we find evidence that Ivanov
worked o n translations o f parts o f Dante's three major works i n the
order o f their composition: the Vita Nuova, the Convivio, a n d the
Divina Commedia. I n this article we shall examine each o f Ivanov's
translations o f Dante's works i n turn, starting w i t h a n outline o f the
general history o f the project, a n d continuing w i t h the text o f the
translation, a n d a n analysis o f its merits, shortcomings, a n d particular
characteristics.

B i b l i o g r a p h i c a l details o f p u b l i s h e d R u s s i a n translations o f D a n t e ' s w o r k s c a n be f o u n d i n


V . T . D a n c h e n k o , Dante Alig'eri: bibliograficheskii ukazatel' russkikh perevodov i kriticheskoi literatury
na russkom yazyke 1762-1972 ( M . , 1973), 2 6 - 4 8 .

I . Vita Nuova
A t one stage or another o f their development, a l l o f Ivanov's projected
translations o f Dante's works were linked w i t h the Sabashnikov
brothers' publishing-house. I n 1910 this publishing-house decided to
found a new series, entitled T a m y a t n i k i m i r o v o i literatury'. It is clear
from the original p l a n for this series, d r a w n up i n 1910, that Dante
was one o f the authors who was to be represented among its p u b l i c a
tions; the series was to include five sections, ' A n t i c h n y e pisateli',
'Narodnoe tvorchestvo', 'Slavyanskii m i r ' , ' K l a s s i k i m i r a ' , and
' V o z r o z h d e n i e E v r o p y ' ; Dante's name figures twice, amongst the
authors listed i n the last two sections o f the series.
Ivanov's first involvement w i t h the Sabashnikov series was as a
translator o f the Greek classics. I n 1911 Ivanov undertook to translate
Aeschylus's tragedies a n d poems by Alcaeus a n d Sappho for the series.
T w o years later, having established himself as one o f Sabashnikov's
translators i n the field o f classical antiquity, Ivanov sought to widen
his scope a n d to turn to the translation o f Dante's works. T h e reasons
for this were partly economic; as Ivanov wrote to M . V . Sabashnikov
from R o m e o n 20 J a n u a r y 1913, he found that he worked better i n
Italy than i n Russia, a n d therefore wished to stay o n i n Italy beyond
the a u t u m n , for longer than he had originally planned ; this decision
entailed sacrificing the income from a course o f lectures w h i c h Ivanov
w o u l d have read i n St. Petersburg had he returned to Russia. Ivanov
was therefore looking for extra translations to take o n i n order to make
his extended stay i n Italy financially feasible. I n his letter, he made
the following suggestions to Sabashnikov:
2

As for poetic translations, I am attracted and even inspired by a great deal


which would fit into your programme naturally. I am not just speaking of
poets of classical antiquity. I would be happy for example to translate at
some point Dante's Purgatory and particularly his Paradise, his New Life,
and, in the field of classical antiquity, to show that I am capable of providing
a faithful and harmonious translation of Aristophanes.
4

A l t h o u g h Sabashnikov d i d not take up Ivanov's offer of a translation


of part o f the Commedia, he d i d react positively to the idea that Ivanov
should translate the Vita Nuova. O n 10 M a r c h 1913 Sabashnikov sent
off a definitive reply to Ivanov's proposal i n the form o f a letter a n d
contract w h i c h Ivanov signed a n d returned to h i m o n 21 A p r i l 1 9 1 3 .
5

See A . L . P a n i n a , ' A r k h i v i z d a t e l ' s t v a M . i S. S a b a s h n i k o v y k h ' , Gosudarstvennaya biblioteka


im. Lenina, Zapiski Otdela rukopisei, v y p . 33 (1972), 9 1 , a n d M . V . S a b a s h n i k o v , " ' V e c h n y e
k n i g i " p e r v o n a c h a l ' n y i p r o e k t s e r i i " P a m y a t n i k i m i r o v o i l i t e r a t u r y " ' (1910), G o s u d a r s t v e n n a y a
b i b l i o t e k a i m . L e n i n a , M o s c o w , O t d e l r u k o p i s e i [ G B L ] , fond 261, k. 9, ed. khr. 105.
M . V . S a b a s h n i k o v , L e t t e r s to V . I v a n o v , 6 A p r . 1911 a n d 16 M a r . 1912 (GBL, fond 109).
(Dates t h r o u g h o u t this a r t i c l e are g i v e n i n O l d S t y l e before 1 F e b . 1918 a n d i n N e w Style
thereafter.)
G B L , fond 261, k. 4, ed. khr. 2 5 .
M . V . S a b a s h n i k o v ' s letter to I v a n o v is i n GBL, fond 1 0 9 ; the c o n t r a c t is i n GBL, fond 261,
k. 8, ed. khr. 7.
3

T h e contract repeated the agreement w h i c h Ivanov h a d concluded


two years previously w i t h Sabashnikov to translate a l l o f Aeschylus's
tragedies, a n d added to this the translation o f Dante's Vita Nuova a n d
of further poems by Sappho. A c c o r d i n g to the terms of the contract,
Ivanov undertook to complete a l l these translations w i t h i n the next
two years.
W e know that Ivanov d i d indeed send his additional translations
of Sappho to Sabashnikov from Italy i n the spring o f 1 9 1 3 , a n d that
the manuscript o f his translation o f Agamemnon, the first part o f
Aeschylus's Oresteia trilogy, was completed o n 1 J u n e 1913 i n R o m e
and received b y Sabashnikov i n M o s c o w at the end o f the m o n t h .
However, Ivanov d i d not keep to the contract's deadline as far as the
translations o f Aeschylus's other tragedies a n d o f Dante's Vita Nuova
were concerned. Ivanov's complete translation o f the Oresteia was only
ready for p r i n t i n g i n 1916, a n d we know from Ivanov's autobio
graphical letter written i n Sochi i n J a n u a r y a n d February 1917 that his
m a i n current occupation at that time was still w o r k i n g o n his transla
tions o f Aeschylus's other tragedies a n d o f Dante's Vita Nuova. T h e
p r i n t i n g o f Ivanov's translation o f the Oresteia was made impossible
by the heavy damage caused b y the fire w h i c h occurred i n the b u i l d i n g
of the Sabashnikov publishing-house i n 1 9 1 7 ; it is possible that the
project o f p u b l i s h i n g Ivanov's translation o f the Vita Nuova was also
dropped at this stage for the same reason. A l t h o u g h i n 1926 Ivanov
d i d return once more to the question o f Sabashnikov p u b l i s h i n g his
translation o f the Oresteia, we find no further reference to the p u b l i c a
tion of the translation o f the Vita Nuova i n Ivanov's a n d Sabashnikov's
corresponde nee.
6

Ivanov's interest i n the translation of the Vita Nuova continued d u r i n g


the years w h i c h he spent at the U n i v e r s i t y o f Baku ( 1 9 2 0 - 4 ) . W e
know that d u r i n g this period Ivanov introduced a n I t a l i a n language
course for beginners into the university c u r r i c u l u m . O n e o f Ivanov's
1 0

I z d a t e l ' s t v o M . i S. S a b a s h n i k o v y k h to I v a n o v , 8 N o v . 1913 ( G B L , fond 109).


T h e date o f c o m p l e t i o n o f the t r a n s l a t i o n o f Agamemnon w a s m a r k e d b y I v a n o v o n the
m a n u s c r i p t o f his t r a n s l a t i o n . T h e m a n u s c r i p t is i n I v a n o v ' s a r c h i v e i n R o m e a n d w a s k i n d l y
s h o w n to m e b y D i m i t r y V y a c h e s l a v o v i c h I v a n o v . M . V . S a b a s h n i k o v w r o t e to I v a n o v t h a t he
h a d r e c e i v e d this t r a n s l a t i o n o n 25 J u n e 1913 ( G B L , fond 109).
V y a c h e s l a v I v a n o v , Sobranie sochinenii (hereafter SS), e d i t e d b y D . V . I v a n o v a n d O .
Deschartes (Brussels, 1 9 7 1 - , ), i i , 2 2 .
T h e i n f o r m a t i o n ' o n the history o f I v a n o v ' s t r a n s l a t i o n o f the Oresteia is t a k e n f r o m the
preface w h i c h I v a n o v w r o t e to his t r a n s l a t i o n i n R o m e i n O c t o b e r 1926, a n d w h i c h is l o c a t e d
together w i t h I v a n o v ' s t r a n s l a t i o n o f A e s c h y l u s ' s t r i l o g y i n T s e n t r a l ' n y i g o s u d a r s t v e n n y i a r k h i v
l i t e r a t u r y i iskusstva [ T s G A L I ] , fond 225, op. 1, ed. khr. 2 9 . O n 9 A u g . 1926 I v a n o v w r o t e to
M . V . S a b a s h n i k o v from R o m e r e q u e s t i n g the latter either to p u b l i s h his t r a n s l a t i o n o f the
Oresteia o r to pass i t o n to the p u b l i s h i n g d i v i s i o n o f A k a d e m i y a k h u d o z h e s t v e n n y k h n a u k
( G B L , fond 261, k. 4, ed. khr. 2 5 ) .
N . V . K o t r e l e v , ' V y a c h . IvanovProfessor B a k i n s k o g o U n i v e r s i t e t a ' , Trudy po russkoi i
slavyanskoi filologii, L i t e r a t u r o v e d e n i e , x i (Uchenye zapiski Tartuskogo gos. universiteta, v y p . 209)
(1968), 3 2 7 .
7

1 0

former students who attended this course recalls that Ivanov used the
Vita Nuova as his basic language teaching text d u r i n g the second
semester o f this course; the students w o u l d read aloud a n d translate
from the Vita Nuova into Russian, a n d Ivanov w o u l d correct their
Italian pronunciation a n d improve their t r a n s l a t i o n . It is possible
that Ivanov's choice o f the Vita Nuova as a language teaching text
was linked to his o w n interest i n translating the Vita Nuova, a n d that
he wished to use the class as a forum for discussing techniques o f
translation o f this work.
After this point we find no more evidence o f Ivanov working on
his translation o f the Vita Nuova. It is difficult to say, on the basis
of the evidence w h i c h has survived, whether or not Ivanov ever
completed his translation, for only fragments o f it survive, a n d it is not
clear whether these represent the total o f Ivanov's work on the Vita
Nuova or only a part o f it. It seems likely, however, i n view o f the lack
of coherence among the fragments w h i c h have survived, that these do
not represent the whole o f Ivanov's work o n the Vita Nuova, but only
a r a n d o m selection o f surviving passages.
T h e fragments w h i c h have survived come from six different chapters
of the Vita Nuova. O n l y one of these fragments has ever been published ;
this is Ivanov's translation o f almost the whole o f the third chapter
of the Vita Nuova ; this passage came to be published because it was
used b y Ivanov as the basis o f his celebrated essay on the aesthetics
of Symbolism, O granitsakh iskusstva', first written a n d delivered as
a lecture i n 1913, a n d published i n Trudy i dni i n the following y e a r .
A p a r t from this passage, a l l the surviving fragments o f Ivanov's
translation are to be found i n the Manuscripts Department of the
L e n i n L i b r a r y i n M o s c o w . I n Ivanov's archive, there is a sheaf o f eight
foolscap sheets, boldly headed i n Ivanov's h a n d w r i t i n g 'Dante : Novaya
Zhizn .
These sheets contain the draft o f an introductory note by
Ivanov on the significance o f the Vita Nuova, a n d the text of Ivanov's
translations of various parts of this work. These consist o f the following
passages: Chapter I, the opening introduction to the Vita Nuova, i n
w h i c h Dante announces his intention to recount his memory o f the
events w h i c h occurred after the beginning o f his new life, a n d their
m e a n i n g ; the first half o f Chapter V , w h i c h contains the account of
the way i n w h i c h , when Dante was sitting i n c h u r c h staring at
Beatrice, the people present mistook the object o f his gaze for another
w o m a n who was sitting between Beatrice a n d D a n t e ; the sonnet from
Chapter V I I (of w h i c h Ivanov gives four different versions), i n w h i c h
Dante describes his distress at the departure o f this lady (who had
11

12

n 13

1 1

1 2

1 3

C o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h V i k t o r A n d r o n i k o v i c h M a n u i l o v , K o m a r o v o , L e n i n g r a d , 30 A p r . 1978.
Trudy dni, 1914, n o . 7, p p . 8 1 - 1 0 6 .
GBL, fond 109.

served as a cover for the object o f his true love) from the city, a n d
details the trials a n d torments o f love; the whole o f Chapter X X , i n
w h i c h Dante describes how a friend o f his requested h i m to write a
sonnet treating of love, a n d then gives the text of the sonnet w h i c h
he wrote a n d a prose explanation o f its m e a n i n g ; a n d finally, the
whole o f Chapter X X I , i n w h i c h Dante describes how he wished to
write more on the subject o f love, a n d how Beatrice b y the effect o f
her eyes a n d gaze was capable of evoking love not only i n people i n
w h o m love was dormant, but also i n those from w h o m love was totally
absent; a sonnet o n this subject, followed b y a prose explanation o f
its meaning, concludes the chapter.
T h e first three o f the passages described above are i n the form o f
a rough draft written out i n pencil, whereas the last two passages
(Chapters X X and X X I ) are written i n ink i n a m u c h more finished
version. T h e text of Ivanov's translations o f the two sonnets from these
last two chapters is given b e l o w ; since these translations are finished
versions rather than rough drafts, they w i l l provide us, together w i t h
the published fragment o f Ivanov's translation, w i t h a useful basis
upon which to draw certain conclusions about the general tendencies
reflected i n Ivanov's manner of translation.
Ivanov's translation o f the sonnet beginning ' A m o r e e '1 cor gentil
sono u n a cosa' from Chapter X X o f the Vita Nuova reads as follows:
:
,
?
.

- , .
, , ;
.
,
, .
.
,
.
.
T h e next translation is o f the sonnet beginning ' N e l i occhi porta
la m i a donna A m o r e ' , from Chapter X X I o f the Vita Nuotfa:
;
,.
;
, .

, ;
,
. ?
, ?
,
[ ; ]
.

14

,
,
, .
I f one begins to compare Ivanov's translations from the Vita Nuova
w i t h the text o f the original, one r a p i d l y becomes aware of the fact
that they are full o f minor distortions and inaccuracies. By 1913, the
year i n w h i c h the contract for the translation o f the Vita Nuova was
signed, Ivanov had already spent many months residing i n Italy, and
his knowledge of Italian was fluent. It was not therefore a question
of Ivanov failing to catch the meaning of the original ; it was more a
question, as we shall see, o f his attempting to b r i n g Dante more firmly
into the orbit o f Symbolist attitudes by investing the text o f his works
with features w h i c h were characteristic of his o w n particular under
standing of Dante and the medieval world-view as precursors o f the
Symbolist mode of thinking. Ivanov's translations of Dante's works are
acts of interpretation, w h i c h allow one to see w i t h particular clarity
some o f the distinctive ways i n w h i c h Ivanov adapted Dante to fit
into the Symbolist spiritual outlook and aesthetics.
T h e first, most general, tendency w h i c h emerges from Ivanov's
translations o f Dante is one w h i c h is endemic to the nature of
Symbolism as a movement, and w h i c h derives from the Symbolists'
view o f the role o f the Symbolist artist in society and the nature o f
his art. Ivanov's ideas on this subject can be found i n two essays w h i c h
he wrote i n 1904, T o e t i c h e r n " and ' K o p ' e A f i n y ' .
Ivanov's
spiritual and artistic golden age was the classical world of A n c i e n t
Greece, i n w h i c h man had been i n touch w i t h the mystical essence
of the universe and when it had been possible for 'boi'shoe*
or 'vsenarodnoe iskusstvo' to exist i n the form of universal myths. T h i s
ideal unity of m a n and the universe had, however, been broken, and
in the present day 'boi'shoe iskusstvo" was no longer possible. M a n
could only strive to create 'maloe iskusstvo' of w h i c h one particular
type w o u l d eventually lead h i m back to the ideal of universal art.
T h i s was keleinoe iskusstvo\ a form o f art i n w h i c h the artist
1 5

1 4

S q u a r e b r a c k e t s are used here a n d elsewhere to i n d i c a t e p u n c t u a t i o n o r parts o f w o r d s


w h i c h h a v e b e e n o m i t t e d f r o m the o r i g i n a l .
SS, i, 7 0 9 - 1 4 a n d 7 2 7 - 3 3 .
1 5

acknowledged the fatal split between himself and the world, and
retired to meditate i n solitude i n order to create an intuitive, personal,
and mystical art whose symbols w o u l d be the seeds of future myths.
T h e present stage of Symbolist art was identified by Ivanov w i t h
'keleinoe iskusstvo'. In this scheme Dante played an extremely important
role. O n the one hand, he was held up as the last true representative
of 'bol'shoe iskusstvo" ; the M i d d l e Ages were seen as the last period i n
history when a collective, unified spirit had informed a society and
its culture. O n the other hand, Dante's art was also seen to contain
features of 'keleinoe iskusstvo\ and as such was presented to the
Symbolist as a model to imitate in order to travel the path back to
ideal universal art. T h i s is the reason why Ivanov chose the following
lines from the Purgatorio ( X X V I I , 8 8 - 9 0 ) as the epigraph to his first
collection of poetry, Kormchie zvezdy (1903) :
Poco potea parer l i del di fuori
M a per quel poco vedev'io le stelle
D i lor solere e pi chiare e maggiori.

16

For Ivanov these lines expressed the spiritual stance of the Symbolist
artist, looking out from his isolation to the transcendent spiritual truths
of the universe w h i c h for the moment might simply be private symbols,
but would eventually become universal myths. Ivanov later repeated
this tercet in ' K o p ' e A f i n y ' , calling it the symbol of the mystical soul
of'keleinoe iskusstvo\ Blok took up Ivanov's epigraph in an essay on
the poetry and aesthetics of Ivanov, and used it to justify the isolation
and obscurity of Symbolist verse w h i c h w o u l d eventually, i n his and
Ivanov's view, lead to a purer art of universal m y t h .
W h i l e Symbolism was still at the stage of 'keleinoe iskusstvo\ the
process of artistic creation was naturally viewed as one i n w h i c h the
poet retired from the crowd i n order to meditate on his o w n before
producing a work of art w h i c h w o u l d be obscure and unintelligible
to the masses. I n 'Poet i chern"', Ivanov linked this view of the process
of artistic creation to two poems by Pushkin, 'Poet' and 'Poet i tolpa'
(originally entitled ' C h e r n ' ' ) . Ivanov wrote:
17

1 8

, ,
( )
. ,
,
' ' '' .
, ,
, ' 1 6

1 7

1 8

I b i d . 513.
I b i d . 729.
A l e k s a n d e r B l o k , Sobranie sochinenii v vos'mi tomakh ( M . - L . , 1 9 6 0 - 3 ) , v, 1 0 - 1 1 .

' . . . ' ' .


.
, ,
, ,
,
.
,
, : , , ' '
, ' ' .
19

It is natural, given this view o f the nature o f the creative process,


that when Ivanov came to start work o n his translation o f the Vita
Nuova, he should have been struck by the analogy between his o w n
views a n d Dante's account o f the way i n w h i c h he used to write poetry.
In particular, Chapter I I I of the Vita Nuova provided a strong parallel.
In this chapter Dante describes the way i n which, when he was out o n
a walk, he encountered Beatrice, whose greeting made h i m so happy
that he retired to his r o o m i n order to reflect i n solitude upon this
experience. I n his room, Dante has a dream i n w h i c h he sees a vision
of A m o r holding a figure wrapped i n a crimson sheet w h o m Dante
recognizes as Beatrice ; A m o r wakes the sleeping Beatrice i n order to
make her eat Dante's glowing heart w h i c h he holds i n his hand.
A m o r ' s happiness then changes to sorrow, a n d he departs. Dante
awakes i n anguish from his dream, reflects upon it, and then composes
a sonnet i n w h i c h he describes his vision a n d asks other poets to
interpret it for h i m .
It is easy to see how this passage w i t h its clear sequence o f events
moving from a n initial experience to w i t h d r a w a l for solitary medita
tion, followed by a vision w h i c h culminates i n the artistic creation
of a poem not comprehensible to allcould have been seen by Ivanov
as the perfect illustration of his o w n theory o f the nature o f artistic
creation. Ivanov accordingly began the essay w h i c h he wrote i n 1913
on the nature o f the creative process ( granitsakh iskusstva') by
quoting almost the whole o f the third chapter o f the Vita Nuova i n
his o w n translation, a n d then proceeded to derive his argument from
this passage. T h i s translation, a n d the use to w h i c h it has been put
by Ivanov, provide us w i t h a particularly clear example o f the constant
process o f cross-fertilization w h i c h took place between Ivanov's
Symbolist mode o f thinking a n d the text o f Dante's works. For, i f we
look closely at Ivanov's translation o f this passage, we c a n see that i n
the very manner o f his translation, Ivanov is already remodelling
Dante to make h i m accord more closely to his aesthetic theories.
1 9

SS, i, 711.

T o illustrate this 'remodelling' process, we can take the sentence


in w h i c h Dante describes how he retired to his r o o m after experiencing
the j o y of Beatrice's greeting. T h e original text reads: '. . . presi tanta
dolcezza, che come inebriato m i partio d a le genti, e ricorsi a lo
solingo luogo d'una m i a camera, e puosimi a pensare d i questa
cortesissima'. Ivanov has translated this as follows: '. . . ya ispytal
takuyu sladost\ chto, p'yanyi, ushel iz tolpy. Ubezhav v uedinenie svoei
gornitsy, predalsya a dumam milostivo?. There are a number of signifi
cant alterations in Ivanov's translation w h i c h derive directly from his
own view of the nature of the creative process ; first, instead of 'da le
genti', he writes Hz tolpy\ T h i s change has no foundation i n Dante's
text; Beatrice is accompanied by two other women, and no other
people are mentioned i n the chapter. Ivanov has clearly introduced
the idea of the c r o w d to make the text more consonant w i t h his
interpretation of Pushkin's poems (the word Holpd* occurs twice i n the
passage quoted above from 'Poet i c h e r n " ) . Secondly, Ivanov has
translated 'ricorsi' as 'ubezhav ; apart from changing the form of the
verb, he has changed its meaningfrom one of simply w i t h d r a w i n g
to that of r u n n i n g . T h i s again is clearly to b r i n g Dante's text closer
to Pushkin's poem 'Poet' from w h i c h Ivanov had quoted the line
'Bezhit on, dikii i surovy? i n support of his argument. F i n a l l y , instead
of the straightforward Italian w o r d 'camera', w h i c h i n Russian w o u l d
be 'komnata\ we have the unusual and archaic w o r d 'gornitsa\ a
chamber. It is clear that this word, w i t h the added emphasis w h i c h
it places on seclusion, is designed to evoke an association w i t h the
idea o f the '? to w h i c h the Symbolist poet retires i n order to
create 'keleinoe iskusstvo\
20

By dint of introducing these small changes o f emphasis, Ivanov


succeeds i n m a k i n g a passage from Dante's Vita Nuova read like a
manifesto for his o w n b r a n d o f Symbolist aesthetics.
A t the end of the passage quoted above from 'Poet i c h e r n " , Ivanov
defended the right o f contemporary Symbolist art to be esoteric and
obscure. W e have seen that this characteristic of Symbolist art was
directly linked by both Ivanov and Blok to Dante as a representative
oi'keleinoe iskusstvo\ It follows from this general attitude that Dante
was regarded by the Symbolists as a rather obscure, esoteric artist.
T h i s led to some considerable distortion of Dante. T o the medieval
m i n d the transcendent w o r l d was a reality w h i c h could be experienced
in a concrete way ; the mysteries of life after death could be described b y
Dante i n terms o f a real journey, conveyed through lucid, visual
images. F o r the Symbolists, however, the transcendent w o r l d was
2 0

F o r the text o f I v a n o v ' s t r a n s l a t i o n o f C h a p t e r I I I o f the Vita Nuova, see SS, i i , 6 2 8 - 9 .


A l l q u o t a t i o n s o f D a n t e ' s w o r k s are from D a n t e A l i g h i e r i , Tutte le opere, e d . L u i g i B l a s u c c i
( F l o r e n c e , 1965).

something m u c h more distant and abstract, to be recovered through


a n act of the i m a g i n a t i o n a n d intellect, rather than simply appre
hended as a reality; its mysteries were viewed as esoteric and i n
accessible truths w h i c h could only be intuited from a distance, and
expressed through vague images whose very obscurity was designed
to safeguard the otherwordly character of the truths they were hinting
at.
T h e Symbolists, wishing therefore to see i n Dante a precursor of
their o w n spiritual outlook, tended to invest h i m w i t h an uncharac
teristic aura of otherworldliness and obscurity. It is for this reason
that Ivanov made so m u c h of Dante's plea to the reader to note
l a dottrina che s'asconde/sotto '1 velame de l i versi strani' {Inferno,
I X , 6 2 - 3 ) , and appended these lines as an epigraph to his long and
obscure poem written i n terzinas, published i n Kormchie zvezdy,
' S f i n k s ' . It is hardly surprising therefore that, i n an attempt to make
Dante fit i n w i t h this general image, Ivanov should have endowed his
translations of Dante's works w i t h an obscurity and complexity w h i c h
is characteristic of his o w n language, but not of Dante's. T h r o u g h o u t
Ivanov's translations of Dante's works, we find a marked preference
for replacing the simple and straightforward b y the complicated, for
using archaic or obsolete terms i n place of normal, everyday words,
for substituting more involved syntax for simple sentence structure.
c

21

I f we start by e x a m i n i n g the way i n w h i c h Ivanov has translated


some of the terms referring to language i n the Vita Nuova, we shall see
this general tendency to replace the simple by the complex at work.
I n Chapter I I I , the 'parole' spoken b y the lordly figure who represents
Love become 'glagoly' i n Ivanov's translation; a simple Italian word
(which could have been translated as 'slova?) becomes archaic and
ponderous i n the Russian translation. T h e simple phrase lo dir
presente' w h i c h occurs i n the sonnet of this chapter becomes 'svito
sei' i n Ivanov's rendering, i n t r o d u c i n g classical a n d esoteric connota
tions w h i c h are entirely foreign to the original. I n the same way, i n
the sonnet from Chapter X X quoted above, the rhetorical 'sikh slov
provozvestitel" replaces the straightforward i n suo dittare pone'.
Ivanov not only changes the phrases by w h i c h Dante describes
language i n order to make the function of language appear more
obscure than it is i n reality, he also changes the language of the
original for the same general purpose. I n Chapter I I I Dante uses the
verb 'apparve' for the appearance of Beatrice; Ivanov translates this
verb by 'predstala\ w h i c h has a m u c h more ceremonial, majestic
resonance to it. Likewise we find the simple phrase 'appare manifes
tamente c h ' e l l a fue' as 'yavstvuet, chto predstalo ono\ T h e simple ' i n
c

2 1

SS, i , 6 4 3 - 6 0 .

mezzo a' becomes 'promezhan archaic version of mezhdu\ w h i c h


would have been the obvious translation. W h e n Dante seems to see
a cloud i n his room, he writes factually: 'me parea vedere ne la
mia camera una nebula d i colore d i fuoco' ; this becomes 'budto zastlalo
gornitsu ognetsvetnoe oblak* ; the verb 'zastlalo' is entirely absent from the
original, and reveals Ivanov's typical desire to a d d extra connotations
of obscurity to Dante's text. I n the same way, when A m o r departs,
Dante writes at the end o f the sonnet i n the same chapter : 'appresso
gir lo ne vedea piangendo' ; this is rendered by Ivanov as ' / s plachem
vzmyl v nadzvezdnye kraya\ w h i c h introduces an unusual verb (vzmyt')
in place of a simple verb i n d i c a t i n g upwards motion, and adds a
typically Symbolist abstract development of the concise I t a l i a n w o r d
'ne'.
In Ivanov's translation of the sonnet from Chapter X X we notice
similar features. T h e simple I t a l i a n conjunction 'tanto . . . che' is
rendered by the archaic Russian 'dokole\ Dante's 'spirito d ' A m o r e '
w h i c h has a quite precise meaning for the medieval mindbecomes
a vague reference to a 'vlasteliri.
As well as this general tendency to detract from the l u c i d simplicity
of Dante's language i n favour of a more abstract, rhetorical style,
Ivanov's translations from the Vita Nuova reveal other features w h i c h
are equally characteristic of his approach to Dante. T w o of these
features are linked to the particular characteristics o f Ivanov's inter
pretation of the figure of Beatrice. T h e first of these is to make Beatrice
into an erotic figure rather than a purely spiritual one. T h i s follows
on naturally from Ivanov's view that the essence of a l l religious
experience is to be found i n the Dionysian cult of Eros. T h e heart
of the Christian mystical experience thus has its roots i n a pagan cult,
and the Christian concept of love contains w i t h i n itself the D i o n y s i a n
ideal of E r o s . Dante's A m o r accordingly acquires features of the
Dionysian Eros, and Beatrice, as the object of these feelings of love,
naturally becomes endowed w i t h certain erotic characteristics besides
her more usual purely spiritual ones. W e can see this reflected i n
Ivanov's translation of Chapter I I I of the Vita Nuova i n w h i c h Dante
has a vision of A m o r bearing Beatrice i n his arms, and feeding her
Dante's heart. Dante writes: ' N e le sue braccia m i parea vedere una
persona dormire nuda, salvo che involta m i parea i n uno drappo
sanguigno leggeramente' ; Ivanov renders this as ' / budto na rukakh ego
spyashcheyu vizhu zhenu naguyu, edva prikrytuyu tkan'yu krovavo-aloyu\ T h e
difference between these two passages is small but significant; whereas
2 2

2 2

T h e s e ideas were expressed b y I v a n o v i n a series o f lectures, first p u b l i s h e d u n d e r the title


' E l l i n s k a y a r e l i g i y a s t r a d a y u s h c h e g o b o g a ' i n Novyiput', 1904, n o . 1, p p . 1 1 0 - 3 4 , n o . 2, p p . 4 8 - 7 8 ,
no. 3, p p . 3 8 - 6 1 , n o . 5, p p . 2 8 - 4 0 , n o . 8, p p . 1 7 - 2 6 , n o . 9, p p . 4 7 - 7 0 , a n d then, u n d e r the
new title o f ' R e l i g i y a D i o n i s a ' , i n Voprosy zhizni, 1905, n o . 6, p p . 1 8 5 - 2 2 0 , n o . 7, p p . 1 2 2 - 4 8 .

Dante has Beatrice fully but lightly covered, Ivanov presents her as
scarcely covered. Similarly, i n the sonnet, the Italian reads e ne le
braccia avea/madonna involta i n u n drappo dormendo', while the
Russian becomes I Gospozhu, pod legkim pokryvalomJV ob"yatiyakh
vladyki vizhu ya\ A g a i n , the same added emphasis on the lightness of
the covering recurs, and Beatrice is found i n the embraces of a 'ruler',
rather than simply carried i n the arms of A m o r .
T h e second of the features peculiar to Ivanov's interpretation of
Beatrice is the l i n k i n g of Beatrice to the figure of Sophia, as described
i n the teachings of the philosopher V l a d i m i r Solov'ev. T h i s was a
c o m m o n tendency among the Russian Symbolists, who sought to
combine two different traditions associated w i t h the expression of a
poet's mystical love of womanon the one hand, the Western European
medieval tradition of courtly love, c u l m i n a t i n g i n Dante's love of
Beatrice (associated i n the popular imagination w i t h the Catholic
cult of the V i r g i n M a r y ) , and on'the other hand, the Russian, Solov'evinspired tradition of worship of Sophia, the spirit of D i v i n e W i s d o m ,
often represented i n Russian iconography and later i n Solov'ev's poetry
as a w o m a n or Hsaritsa?figure.T h e Symbolists were helped i n making
this identification by the fact that Solov'ev's Sophiological poems,
V s y a v l a z u r i segodnya yavilas' . . .' ( 1 8 7 5 ) , ' U tsaritsy moei est'
vysokii dvorets . . .' ( 1 8 7 6 ) , and the famous T r i svidaniya' (1898),
i n w h i c h Solov'ev describes his three encounters w i t h Sophia, appeared
together w i t h Solov'ev's o w n translation of a sonnet from the Vita
Nuova i n Solov'ev's first published collection of v e r s e . T h e language
and imagery of Dante's and Solov'ev's verse blended into one i n the
Symbolists' poetic imagination, and became a single, c o m m o n source
for the expression of their intuitions of mystical love.
c

23

T h i s is reflected i n Ivanov's translations o f the two sonnets from


Chapters X X and X X I of the Vita Nuova quoted above. I n both of
these sonnets one can sense the influence of Solov'evian ideas ori the
language w h i c h Ivanov has used i n his translations. I n the first sonnet,
' A m o r e e '1 cor gentil sono una cosa', Dante describes the way i n w h i c h
the potentiality of love, always dormant i n the heart, is made actual
by the sight of the beauty o f a wise w o m a n ('saggia donna'). Ivanov's
translation subtly alters Dante's presentation of his subject, and gives
it a distinctly Solov'evian flavour. I n Ivanov's translation we read
'Zhenoi smirennomudroyu predstanetJVzor muzheskii plenyaya, Krasota\
Beauty here is not the concrete beauty of a wise woman, but an
abstract, personified Beauty w h i c h w i l l manifest itself i n the guise of
a wise w o m a n . T h e use of the w o r d 'zhena rather than 'zhenshchina!
for 'donna' immediately evokes an association w i t h Solov'ev's descrip2 3

V l a d i m i r S o l o v ' e v , Stikhotvoreniya

( M . , 1891 ) .

tion of S o p h i a . I n the introduction to the third edition o f his poems,


written i n 1900, Solov'ev identified the 'zhena, oblechennaya v solntse'
described i n R e v e l a t i o n (12:1) w i t h the incarnation o f 'Vechnaya
krasota' or Sophia, a n d this subsequently became a commonplace
among the S y m b o l i s t s . Ivanov's translation loses the subtle transition
from visual perception to the feeling of love w h i c h is so important a
part o f Dante's poem ; instead o f describing o n a simple, literal level
the process w h i c h occurs when a m a n sees a beautiful w o m a n , Ivanov's
translation takes us into a symbolic, abstract realm, i n w h i c h Beauty
appears to m a n as Sophia. I n this respect Ivanov's translation is
very reminiscent o f his earlier poem ' K r a s o t a ' , published at the
beginning o f his first collection o f poetry i n 1 9 0 3 .
T h i s poem
describes a vision i n w h i c h Beauty appears as a w o m a n to a traveller
and reveals her nature to h i m . Beauty is clearly identified w i t h Sophia
(she serves A d r a s t i a , whose cult is explicitly linked w i t h wisdom b y
Ivanov i n a note w h i c h he provides to the p o e m ) ,
a n d , to make
the point even clearer, the poem is dedicated to V l a d i m i r Solov'ev.
T h i s general parallel between ' K r a s o t a ' a n d the translation o f Dante's
sonnet, resting o n the link w h i c h Ivanov draws i n both cases between
Beauty a n d the figure o f Sophia, is reinforced b y textual similarities
the verb 'predstat" a n d the noun 'obitel are used b y Ivanov i n
both texts.
24

2 5

2 6

I n the sonnet described above, the link was d r a w n not between


Beatrice a n d Sophia, b u t simply between a female personification
of Beauty a n d S o p h i a . T h e next sonnet, however, from Chapter X X I ,
deals specifically with Beatrice, a n d i n his translation o f this sonnet
Ivanov describes Beatrice w i t h a term usually applied to S o p h i a . T o
express the idea that the person who sees Beatrice is blessed, Dante
writes ' . . . laudato c h i p r i m a l a v i d e ' ; Ivanov translates this as
Blazhen tsaritsu videvshii edva\ substituting for the simple p r o n o u n
'la' the w o r d tsaritsa\ F o r the Symbolist poets this w o r d h a d special
connotations, deriving from its use i n V l a d i m i r Solov'ev's Sophiological poems as a way o f referring to S o p h i a . It w o u l d be quite out
of character for Dante to refer to Beatrice b y any such term. This,
coupled w i t h the fact that i n the immediately preceding line Ivanov
had introduced another w o r d absent from the original, also c a r r y i n g
Sophiological associations,referring to the 'pomyslov s m i r e n n o m u d r y k h
sladost o f Beatrice's speechlends a distinctly S o l o v ' e v i a n aura to
the depiction of Beatrice i n this sonnet.
l

Ivanov's translations from the Vita Nuova c a n therefore be seen to


reveal i n the manner of their execution some of the major characteristics
2 4

I d e m , Stikhotvoreniya
SS, i , 517.
Ibid. 859.
2 6

( M . , 1921), x i i i .

A l t h o u g h the idea of the project may have originated in Italy in


1913, it seems unlikely that E r n actually started work on his translation
until some time after M a y 1914. W h e n E r n left Italy i n M a y 1913,
he returned to his home-town, Tiflis, and apparently settled d o w n to
work full-time on his dissertation. O n 18 February 1914 he wrote to
his friend the critc and literary historian A . S. G l i n k a that he hoped
to finish his dissertation w i t h i n the next two months, and then to take
it to M o s c o w and submit i t .
T h e translation of the Convivio was evidently under discussion i n
the spring of 1914, for we know from a letter from Pavel Florensky
that the question of whether or not a translation of the Convivio by
Vyacheslav Ivanov and E r n w o u l d be commissioned by
the
Sabashnikov publishing-house for the T a m y a t n i k i mirovoi literatury'
series was still undecided by m i d - M a y 1 9 1 4 . F r o m a letter w h i c h
E r n wrote to G l i n k a in two parts on 26 M a y and 1 J u n e 1914 we
learn that E r n was now i n M o s c o w , staying w i t h Vyacheslav Ivanov
and associating w i t h Pavel Florensky, having finally submitted his
dissertation on 25 M a y .
A t some point before mid-June, E r n moved from Ivanov's flat i n
Moscow to A n a p a , a coastal resort i n the Caucasus, not far from
Novorossiisk. It was here that E r n began work on his translation of
the Convivio. O n 8 J u l y 1914 he wrote to Ivanov from A n a p a , informing
h i m that he had sent h i m his translation of the Convivio on the
previous day by registered post. T h e letter is worth quoting i n the
original, because it is written i n a mock-Dantesque style w h i c h
evidently had the status of a private language between E r n and
Ivanov. E r n writes:
3 0

3 1

3 2

,
,
, ' '
, & ^1 '' .
,
Convito 25 [ ] , [ ]
,
,
. ,
e che nel libro della
memoria mia siano scritti con lettere d'oro tutti i dettagli del mio soavissimo
soggiorno neu' Arcadia dell' amist, imperocch voi tutti quanti Gattamori
e Gattamoretti siete proprio principi, principesse e principessine dell'amorosa
amist.

33

3 0

Ibid.
I a m v e r y grateful to N . V . K o t r e l e v w h o has h a d access to F l o r e n s k y ' s p r i v a t e a r c h i v e
for m a k i n g this i n f o r m a t i o n k n o w n to m e .
T s G A L I , fond 142, op. I , ed. khr. 313.
GBL, fond 109.
3 1

3 2

3 3

T h e last part of the letter w h i c h is in Italian is a parody of the


opening chapter of the Vita Nuova; the term Gattamori (gatta 'cat',
amore 'love') is perhaps intended as a parodie allusion to C a n Grande
(cane 'dog'), the famous lord of V e r o n a who provided Dante i n exile
w i t h generous hospitality a n d patronage, a fact w h i c h Dante acknow
ledged by dedicating the Paradiso to h i m .
Six days later E r n wrote again to his friend G l i n k a , describing the
feeling o f bliss w h i c h he experienced when w o r k i n g on his translation
of the Convivio for the Sabashnikov publishing-house. T h i s letter was
interrupted by the outbreak of war, and so was E r n ' s translation of
the Convivio, as transpires from the second half o f the letter, resumed
o n 2 i August 1914. I n this part of the letter E r n writes that he
had only succeeded i n translating half of the Convivio** T h e text w h i c h
E r n had posted off to Ivanov a few days before beginning this letter
must therefore have been the text of the half-completed translation of
the Convivio. Since we find no further evidence that E r n was able to
do any work on his translation before his death i n 1917, we can
surmise that the text he sent to Ivanov was passed on by Ivanov to
Sabashnikov, and is the same text as the one w h i c h is now i n the
Sabashnikov archive i n the M a n u s c r i p t s Department of the L e n i n
L i b r a r y . A s this manuscript is written entirely i n E r n ' s handwriting,
E r n must have already had Ivanov's translation of the canzone with
h i m when he left Ivanov's flat i n M o s c o w for A n a p a i n the summer
of 1914, and have written it out, incorporating it into the translation
of the prose part of the Convivio w h i c h he" completed while he was i n
A n a p a . T h i s dates Ivanov's translation of the canzone from the Convivio
to some time before J u n e 1 9 1 4 ; possibly it was done by Ivanov i n
M a y 1914 while E r n was staying w i t h h i m i n his flat.
H a v i n g outlined the background to the project, we can now turn to
the translation itself. Dante's Convivio consists of four tractates; the first
of these serves as a n introduction to the purpose of the work, and the
following three each consists of a canzone followed by a n exposition of
the meaning of the canzone i n prose. A s we have seen, E r n only
succeeded i n completing the translation of the first half of the Convivio,
i n w h i c h there is only one canzone at the beginning of the second
tractate, ' V o i che 'ntendono i l terzo ciel movete'. T h i s is the text w h i c h
Ivanov has translated, a n d w h i c h we shall examine below.
T h e subject of the canzone is the struggle w h i c h is taking place i n
Dante's heart between his past love for the dead Beatrice, who is now
i n the heavens, and his new love for another w o m a n . W h i l e Beatrice
represents the contemplative, mystical way w h i c h leads through faith
to truth, the second lady, as Dante explains i n his prose commentary
3 4

T s G A L I , fond 142, op. I , ed. khr. 3 1 3 .

(Convivio, I I , xv), represents Philosophy, the path w h i c h leads through


rational understanding based on the evidence of the senses to truth.
T h e canzone thus dramatizes, both through its explicit subject a n d
through the tension i n its form between poetic beauty a n d rational
sense, a n inner debate between the mystical and rational aspects of
man's soul. T h i s theme was one w h i c h held a place of special
importance i n Ivanov's world-view, and, as we shall see, it is presented
by h i m i n a characteristic way i n his translation.
T h e text of Ivanov's translation of ' V o i che 'ntendono i l terzo ciel
movete' is as follows :
, !
!

.
, , ,
.
,
,
!
,

,
, .

.
.
.
[,]

. .
.
, .

. ' ',
'
[ ' ] .

,
, .
, ,
[,] ,
.
: '
[,] [,] ?

? ,
[,] !
, ,
.
!'
4

, ,
, , '
, :
['] , .
, ,
?
!
,
, !
.
[,]
: "
, , !"['.]
!
[ ; ]
, , .

[ , ]
, [ , ]
: ?
?
' , ?'
F r o m the point of view of form, Ivanov's translation is faithful to
the original. It keeps exactly to the number of lines of Dante's canzone
four parts of thirteen lines each, followed by an envoi or tornata, as
Dante calls it, of nine lines. Ivanov has used iambic pentameters
throughout, and has successfully reproduced Dante's r h y m i n g scheme.
However, formal perfection i n a translation can sometimes only be
achieved at the expense of exactitude i n reproducing the meaning of
the o r i g i n a l ; there are instances i n Ivanov's translation where a line
or phrase has been added quite gratuitously, without any basis i n
the Italian, evidently i n order to make up an extra line or to preserve
the r h y m i n g scheme. For similar reasons, there are some omissions.
A s i n the case of Ivanov's translations from the Vita Nuova, these
additions and omissions tend to reflect features of Ivanov's own
spiritual outlook. There is the same tendency to prefer the complicated
to the simple. O n the syntactical level, this takes the form of the
introduction of enjambements. Whereas there are no enjambements i n

of Ivanov's approach to Dante w h i c h derive directly from Ivanov's


spiritual outlook a n d Symbolist aesthetics; Dante is presented through
the prism o f Ivanov's translations as a writer who has retired from
the c r o w d i n order to compose obscure, archaic verse, devoted to a
Beatrice who combines erotic features w i t h Sophiological ones.
L e t us now turn to Ivanov's translations of Dante's other works
a n d see what aspects of Ivanov's understanding of Dante are revealed
i n them.
2. Convivio
T h e next translation of a work by Dante i n w h i c h Ivanov became
involved was a j o i n t project ; i n 1914 he cooperated w i t h the philosopher
V l a d i m i r Frantsevich E r n ( 1 8 8 1 - 1 9 1 7 ) i n a translation of the Convivio,
w h i c h the Sabashnikov publishing-house was interested i n p r i n t i n g .
T h e project was never completed and only survives i n the form of a
manuscript text of the translation of the first half o f the Convivio, w h i c h
is i n the Sabashnikov archive of the M a n u s c r i p t s Department of the
L e n i n L i b r a r y i n M o s c o w . A l t h o u g h this manuscript is entirely i n
E r n ' s h a n d w r i t i n g , it is clear from various sources that Ivanov was
responsible for the translation of the canzone w h i c h occurs i n the first
half of the Convivio.
T h e friendship of Ivanov a n d E r n dates back to 1 9 0 4 ; as a young
man, E r n used to stay w i t h Ivanov i n the bashnya when visiting St.
P e t e r s b u r g . It seems likely that the seeds for the project of translating
the Convivio were sown many years later on Italian soil. I n the late
a u t u m n of 1912 Ivanov a n d his family moved from Switzerland to
R o m e where they remained u n t i l their return to Russia i n the a u t u m n
of 1 9 1 3 . E r n had been l i v i n g i n Italy, based i n R o m e , since 1 9 1 1 .
I n December 1912 he moved back from his country retreat near R o m e
to the city itself, a n d remained i n R o m e u n t i l his return to Russia
in M a y 1 9 1 3 .
E r n was thus i n R o m e w i t h Ivanov d u r i n g the
period from J a n u a r y to M a y 1913 when Ivanov started corresponding
w i t h Sabashnikov about his translation of the Vita Nuova and signed
the contract for this project. It seems probable that E r n w o u l d have
been interested i n Ivanov's project, a n d that Ivanov might have
subsequently suggested to Sabashnikov that he should also p l a n to
publish a translation of the Convivio, and recommended E r n to h i m
as a translator. E r n must have agreed to translate the prose parts
of the Convivio, but asked Ivanov, w i t h his reputation as a poet and
experience o f translating poetry, to deal w i t h the verse parts of the
work.
2 7

28

2 9

2 7

Dante Alighieri, '"Pirshestvo". Perevod " C o n v i v i o " sdelannyi V . F . E r n o m . Kantsona na


str. 4 3 - 5 p e r e v e d e n a V y a c h . I . I v a n o v y m ' ( G B L , fond 261, k. 10, ed. khr. 10).
See O . Deschartes's note i n SS, i i i , 8 3 3 .
E r n ' s m o v e m e n t s c a n be p l o t t e d f r o m his letters to A . S. G l i n k a o f 18 D e c . 1911, 9 D e c .
1912, 28 M a r . 1913 a n d 20 M a y 1913 ( T s G A L I , fond 142, op. 1, ed. khr. 3 1 3 ) .
2 8

2 9

Dante's canzone, Ivanov introduces them seven times i n the course o f


his translation (at the end of lines 4, 9, 15, 19, 2 1 , 23 and 4 0 ) , a n d
this naturally creates more tension i n the text. Ivanov also introduces
complicated inversions of natural word-order; whereas Dante very
rarely departs from the natural order i n his canzone, Ivanov frequently
employs this device ; one can look, for example, at the contrast between
the complexity of the first two lines of the envoi i n Ivanov's translation,
in w h i c h nearly every w o r d is put i n a different order from the
expected one, and the simplicity a n d straightforward sentence structure
of the original :
Canzone, io credo che saranno radi
color che tua ragione intendan bene.
O n the lexical level, Ivanov introduces numerous archaisms, such
as 'zane' (1. 3) to translate the simple conjunction 'che', to quote but
one example. Conversely, when Dante uses a disarmingly simple
phrase such as 'lo stato ov'io m i trovo' (1. 6 ) , Ivanov omits it.
T h e most characteristic feature of this particular translation by
Ivanov from Dante's works is his treatment of the theme o f the
relationship of m a n to the cosmos. T h i s theme is one of the corner
stones of Ivanov's world-view. There is some justification for intro
ducing it into the translation, since Dante's canzone opens w i t h an
address to the angelic intelligences who move the t h i r d sphere, V e n u s ,
the planet of love, w h i c h is held responsible by Dante for the state
in w h i c h he finds himself. Dante thus does link his o w n state to the
activities of the cosmos. However, i n Ivanov's translation, this link
acquires a quite different resonance.
Ivanov viewed m a n as a microcosm, and the universe as the macro
cosm. For Ivanov, the essence of the mystical experience was the
act of self-transcendence, the breaking of the soul's boundaries, often
achieved through an erotic experience of love. T h r o u g h this act, the
ideal of the mystical union of man, the microcosm, w i t h the universe,
the macrocosm, was a c h i e v e d .
Ivanov's ideas on mysticism were influenced by Nietzsche, and he
tended to impose his o w n concepts retrospectively on Dante's picture
of the universe. I n Ivanov's poem ' D u k h ' , published i n the ' P o r y v i
grani' section o f Kormchie zvezdy, we have a clear example of the way
in w h i c h Ivanov projected his o w n vision of the universe o n to Dante's ;
Ivanov's poem begins w i t h an epigraph from the Commedia {Paradiso,
X X X I I I , 145):
35

3 5

I n ' R e l i g i y a D i o n i s a ' I v a n o v w r i t e s : ' T h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s awareness o f his / outside its


i n d i v i d u a l b o u n d a r i e s pushes the i n d i v i d u a l to d e n y h i m s e l f a n d to pass i n t o a n a r e a o f non-I;
this constitutes the essence o f D i o n y s i a c e n t h u s i a s m ' (Voprosy zhizni, 1905, n o . 7, p . 143).

L ' A m o r che muove i l Sole e l'altre stelle


Dante, Parad. X X X I I I
, ,
;
, ,
.

;
;
,
.

, ,
;

.

36

T h e melodramatic post-Romantic flavour of this depiction of the


individual's soul, scooped up a n d hurled into the cosmic wheeling of
the planets, has little i n c o m m o n w i t h Dante's measured ascent through
the heavens of Paradise. W e find a similar tendency reflected i n some
of the distortions of Ivanov's translation o f ' V o i che 'ntendendo'. O n e
can take lines 46 of the canzone as an example. I n Ita lian they
read as follows :
E l ciel che segue lo vostro valore,
gentili creature che voi sete,
mi tragge ne lo stato ov'io mi trovo.
I f we t u r n back to Ivanov's translation, we can see that for the simple
el ciel' Ivanov has substituted 'svod neba bystrotechnyi\ introducing
the idea of the cosmic spaces i n 'svod' and of movement i n the
adjective; 'vlekomyV implies a stronger force than 'segue'; ' set'yuj
Svoim krugovrashcheniem' is a complete a d d i t i o n on Ivanov's part,
contributing further to the idea o f swirling, inevitable movement.
These additions have been made at the expense of Dante's c h a r m i n g
phrase 'gentili creature che v o i sete', a n d o f the important idea of the
'valore' o f the angelic intelligences, as well as of the state i n w h i c h
Dante finds himself.
Whereas for Dante the starry spheres are a part o f the real world,
on w h i c h they exert a controlled influence, for Ivanov they are
abstractions, 'blagie i mudrye besplotnye' (11. 8 - 9 ) . Ivanov translates ' u n
spirto . . . che vien ' raggi de la vostra stella' (11. 1 2 - 1 3 ) as 'tot
dukh, chei zvezdnyi lik mezh v as gor it \ w h i c h completely misses the point
of the o r i g i n a l ; i n Dante's vision a n d i n medieval cosmology the rays
of a planet were seen as the instrument of its influence on earth, as
c

3 6

SS, i , 5 1 8 - 1 9 .

Dante explains i n his prose commentary to the canzone (Convivio, I I ,


vi). Ivanov's translation substitutes for this precise concept a vague,
undefined image.
Similarly, i n the second stanza, the soul's simple direct statement
T o men vo' gire' is replaced by a lengthy paraphrase: 'Stol' sladko
gornii svet mechta yavlyalajChto dal'nyuyu dusha rvalasya gran'\Perestupit'\
T h i s paraphrase introduces typically I v a n o v i a n themes : the abstract
concept of the 'gornii svet' (its counterpart, the 'dol'nii mir' was also
gratuitously introduced by Ivanov i n line 8) and the idea of the soul
bursting to transcend its limitations ('rvalasya' and 'gran" directly echo
the title of the T o r y v i g r a n i ' section of Kormchie zvezdy).
T h e vision of the cosmos w h i c h Ivanov presents i n his translation
is quite different from that conveyed by the o r i g i n a l ; instead o f a
sense of real celestial bodies, we have abstractions; instead of an
organized system of influences, we have a chaotic universe i n perpetual
Dionysiac motion (the w o r d 'myatezh' is introduced by Ivanov i n
various forms at three points d u r i n g the canzone, i n lines 3 1 , 3 4 , a n d 46,
although it does not occur i n the original).
Ivanov's translation of this canzone from the Convivio can, therefore,
be seen to reveal a characteristic c o m b i n a t i o n of scholarly knowledge
and understanding of the original text together w i t h a generous
measure of poetic licence i n the adaptation of this text to the author's
spiritual outlook.
3. Divina Commedia
It now remains for us to examine the evidence w h i c h has survived
of Ivanov's p l a n to translate part of Dante's Commedia. T h e seeds of
this project apparently date back to the beginning of the twentieth
century. I. N . G o l e n i s h c h e v - K u t u z o v recalls Ivanov telling h i m i n
R o m e that at the beginning of the twentieth century i n Russia there
had been an agreement among the Symbolist poets to produce a
collective translation of the Commedia', the p l a n was for Bryusov to
translate the Inferno, and for Ivanov to translate the Purgatorio and
the Paradiso* It seems likely that this agreement was part of the
general plan, dating back to 1901, for the Brokgauz-Efron publishinghouse to publish an edition of Dante's works i n the series managed
by S. A . Vengerov entitled 'Biblioteka velikikh p i s a t e l e i ' . Vengerov
and Bryusov corresponded actively over this project from the end of
1904 until the end o f 1905, when the project was dropped. A t one
1

38

3 7

I . N . G o l e n i s h c h e v - K u t u z o v , Tvorchestvo Dante i mirovaya kul'tura

( M . , 1971 ), 4 6 7 - 8 a n d

4843 8

I n 1901, i n the second v o l u m e o f the series' first p u b l i c a t i o n , Sobranie sochinenii Shillera v


perevode russkikh pisatelei, e d . S. A . V e n g e r o v , 4 vols. ( S p b . , 1 9 0 1 - 2 ) , D a n t e was listed as one
o f the a u t h o r s whose w o r k s w o u l d be a m o n g the f o r t h c o m i n g p u b l i c a t i o n s i n the series.

stage d u r i n g these negotiations, from A p r i l until September 1905, it


was the p l a n that Bryusov w o u l d translate one o f the cantiche o f the
Commedia, a n d that Vengerov w o u l d find other translators to deal
with the other cantiche. Bryusov expressed a clear preference for the
Inferno at this stage, a n d it is extremely likely that Vengerov would
have approached Ivanov about the translation of either the Purgatorio
or the Paradiso, or both, particularly i n view of the fact that Ivanov,
like Bryusov, h a d already done some translations for Vengerov for
the edition o f Byron's works w h i c h had been published the previous
year i n the same series.
A p a r t from Golenishchev-Kutuzov's recollections, we do not,
however, have any direct evidence that Ivanov was involved i n the
Brokgauz-Efron translation project at this stage. W e find no indication
of an interest i n translating the Commedia among Ivanov's papers until
1913, when, as we have seen, Ivanov wrote to Sabashnikov from
R o m e a n d suggested that he should translate the Vita Nuova, the
Purgatorio or the Paradiso for the T a m y a t n i k i mirovoi literatury' series.
Sabashnikov took up only the first part o f Ivanov's suggestion, and
it was not u n t i l seven years later, i n 1920, that Ivanov once more
returned to the idea o f translating the Commedia. T h e first indication
that Ivanov was again contemplating this project comes i n a letter
w h i c h Ivanov wrote on 12 M a y 1920 to the Society o f Lovers of
Russian L i t e r a t u r e ; this letter was a request for the Society to lend its
official support to Ivanov's intention to travel abroad i n order to
finish his translation of Aeschylus's tragedies, write a monograph o n
Aeschylus, and translate Dante's Commedia.* It is interesting to
note that i n 1920, as i n 1913, Ivanov's translating activities continued
to reflect his characteristic desire to combine the w o r l d o f classical
antiquity with that of medieval Christianity.
T w o days later, o n 14 M a y 1920, Ivanov signed a contract with
the Brokgauz-Efron publishing-house i n w h i c h he undertook to
translate the whole of the Commedia w i t h i n the next three-and-a-half
y e a r s . T h e contract consists of nine clauses specifying the conditions
under w h i c h Ivanov's work is to be executed, a n d is signed by a
representative of the publishing-house's management, A . F . .
Ivanov undertook to translate Dante's Commedia into Russian i n two
versions, verse a n d prose, a n d to provide necessary notes a n d commen
taries to his translation.
39

40

42

3 9

See N . S o k o l o v , ' V . Y a . B r y u s o v p e r e v o d c h i k (iz p i s e m p o e t a ) ' , i n : Masterstvoperevoda:


sbornik statei ( M . , 1959), 3 6 8 - 8 8 , a n d S. B e l z a , ' B r y u s o v i D a n t e ' , i n : Dante i slavyane, e d .
I . B e l z a ( M . , 1965), 6 9 - 9 4 .
Bairon, e d . S. A . V e n g e r o v , 3 vols. ( S p b . , 1904).
G B L , fond 207, k. 3 2 , ed. khr. 12.
I a m e x t r e m e l y grateful to D . V . I v a n o v for g i v i n g me a c o p y o f this c o n t r a c t w h i c h
is i n I v a n o v ' s a r c h i v e i n R o m e .
4 0

4 1

4 2

W e have evidence that Ivanov was indeed w o r k i n g on a translation


of the Commedia d u r i n g the following month, i n J u n e 1920, from two
different sources. T h e first of these is the record kept by F . I. K o g a n
of the meetings of a poetry circle w h i c h met under Ivanov's d i r e c t i o n .
A t the fifteenth meeting of the poetry circle w h i c h , according to the
author of the record, took place a r o u n d 20 J u n e 1920, Ivanov revealed
that he was currently engaged i n w o r k i n g o n a translation o f Dante's
Commedia; this was i n response to a comment of F . I. K o g a n ' s about
the Dantesque influence w h i c h she sensed i n some of Ivanov's recent
poetry.
T h e second source of evidence is Perepiska iz dvukh uglov, first
published i n 1 9 2 1 . T h i s book contains the letters w h i c h Vyacheslav
Ivanov and his friend the literary critic and historian M i k h a i l
Gershenzon ( 1 8 6 9 - 1 9 2 5 ) wrote to each other from opposite corners
of a room w h i c h they were sharing i n a sanatorium near M o s c o w
during the summer o f 1 9 2 0 . I n these letters the two friends carried
on an intense philosophical debate about the role o f culture i n
civilization. T h e fourth letter i n this exchange, written b y Gershenzon
to Ivanov between 19 a n d 3 0 J u n e (the dates of Ivanov's letters w h i c h
precede and follow Gershenzon's undated letter), reveals that Ivanov
was then working o n a translation o f Dante's Purgatorio. Gershenzon
describes settling d o w n everyday after dinner to listen to Ivanov
reading out his morning's translation from the Purgatorio; Gershenzon
would check Ivanov's translation against the original text and dispute
it when he disagreed w i t h it. Gershenzon accurately distinguishes two
stages i n Ivanov's translating m e t h o d ; first the complete intellectual
understanding of the meaning of Dante's verses, and then the recreation
of something new w i t h i n the Russian t r a d i t i o n .
Gershenzon's description of Ivanov's translating activities is an
integral part of his argument against Ivanov's tendency towards
cultural obscurity and i n favour of a return to an earlier simplicity of
spirit. Gershenzon sees i n the relationship between the original text
of Dante's work and Ivanov's translation a concentrated expression
of the gulf between the simplicity and directness of the medieval
world-view and the obscurity of the modern m i n d , cluttered w i t h the
cultural heritage of m a n y centuries. I n Ivanov's translation Dante's
language becomes heavy a n d obscure; although Gershenzon may
experience a feeling of intoxication from the 'thick honey' of Ivanov's
verse, it nevertheless renews his feeling of painful oppression concerning
the state of modern culture. I n his desire to divest Dante of Symbolist
43

44

4 3

F . I. K o g a n , 'Zapisi vyskazyvanii V . I. I v a n o v a na z a n y a t i y a k h K r u z h k a poezii,


p r o i s k h o d i v s h e g o v t e c h e n i e f e v r a l y a - a v g u s t a 1 9 2 0 g o d a ' , 12 0 c t . 1953 (Institut m i r o v o i l i t e r a t u r y
i m . G o r ' k o g o , fond 55, op. 1, n . 6 ) .
SS, i i i , 3 8 7 .
4 4

obscurantism and return to h i m the concrete directness of the medieval


outlook, Gershenzon was anticipating the polemical, anti-Symbolist
tendency of M a n d e r s h t a m ' s Razgovor Dante ( 1 9 3 3 ) . Thus we can
see from this passage the characteristic importance w h i c h could be
attached to a translation from Dante as the expression of an entire
spiritual outlook, and the way i n w h i c h such a translation could
assume a central role i n current polemics over the relation of m a n
to his c u l t u r a l heritage.
W e note from this passage that it is no longer Ivanov's translation
of the Commedia w h i c h is being referred to, but simply Ivanov's
translation of the Purgatorio. It seems clear that the nature of Ivanov's
commitment to a translation of the Commedia changed from one of total
responsibilityas envisaged i n the contract described aboveto one
of partial responsibility. T h i s emerges clearly from a letter w h i c h S. A .
Vengerov wrote to Bryusov about seven weeks after the contract
between Ivanov and the Brokgauz-Efron company had been d r a w n
up. T h i s letter reveals a return to the type of cooperative translating
venture originally envisaged by Bryusov and Ivanov i n 1905 for the
same publishing-house. Vengerov's letter to Bryusov is dated 5 J u l y
1920 and includes a passage i n w h i c h Vengerov expresses his pleasure
at the news w h i c h he had recently heard from A . F . Perel'man that
Bryusov had decided to give 'them' (the Brokgauz-Efron publishinghouse) his translation of Goethe's Faust. Vengerov goes on to inquire
how Bryusov's work o n his translations of Goethe's Faust and of
Dante's Commedia is progressing, whether Bryusov is working simul
taneously on both translations or concentrating on one of them. I f
Bryusov has finished any part of his work, this w o u l d allow Vengerov
to reproach Vyacheslav Ivanov for his slowness; Vengerov is sure that
Ivanov's translation w i l l be a great literary feat, but finds it difficult
to believe i n its realization; Ivanov works very slowly, and i n
Vengerov's view, while having good faith i n Bryusov, the publishers
hold a gloomy view of the second part of the translation of the
Commedia.**
4 5

It is not surprising that Bryusov should have j o i n e d forces with


Ivanov i n the translation of the Commedia. As we have seen, Bryusov
and Ivanov had already considered cooperating over a translation
of the Commedia for the Brokgauz-Efron publishing-house as far back
as 1 9 0 5 ; since the failure of the original project, Bryusov had shown
remarkable persistence i n his attempts to get his translations from
the Commedia published, approaching Vengerov once more on the
4 5

O s i p M a n d e r s h t a m , Razgovor Dante ( M . , 1967), 2 1 - 2 .


G B L , fond 386, k. 79, ed. khr. 3 9 . C u r i o u s l y , neither S o k o l o v n o r B e l z a makes a n y reference
to this stage o f B r y u s o v ' s i n v o l v e m e n t i n a t r a n s l a t i o n o f the Commedia i n their articles m e n t i o n e d
i n n . 39.
4 6

4 7

matter i n 1915, and trying other publishers as well i n 1913 and 1 9 1 7 .


D u r i n g 1920 Bryusov a n d Ivanov came into frequent contact w i t h
each other as a result of the setting up of a L i t e r a r y Department
w i t h i n the People's Commissariat for E d u c a t i o n ( L i t o Narkomprosa) ,
and one can well imagine that Ivanov might have welcomed the
idea of having his share of the b u r d e n somewhat lightened by Bryusov's
participation i n the project.
A l t h o u g h it is not clearly stated i n Vengerov's letter just w h i c h
parts of the Commedia Bryusov and Ivanov were each responsible for,
it would seem reasonable to make the assumption that Bryusov was
translating the part for w h i c h he had always expressed a clear
preference i n previous negotiations with the Brokgauz-Efron pub
lishing-house, that is to say the Inferno. T h e 'second part' referred to
i n the letter by V e n g e r o v as Ivanov's responsibility could be either
the Purgatorio, or the Purgatorio a n d the Paradiso together. Since no
mention is made of the involvement of any other translator i n this
project, it seems likely that the latter version is the correct one.
W e do not know whether or not Ivanov continued w o r k i n g on his
translation of the Commedia d u r i n g the three-and-a-half years w h i c h
he spent at the U n i v e r s i t y of Baku after leaving M o s c o w i n August
1920. It seems likely that his interest i n this project continued, for
two of Ivanov's students from the Baku period recall that Ivanov had
translated parts of the Commedia. A t an evening dedicated to Ivanov
as a translator held at the W r i t e r s ' U n i o n i n L e n i n g r a d i n J a n u a r y
1977, Moisey Semenovich A r t m a n recalled that Ivanov had translated
part of the Commedia. A n o t h e r of Ivanov's students, V i k t o r A n d r o n i k o vich M a n u i l o v , accompanied Ivanov o n his last trip from Baku to
Moscow o n his way to Italy i n 1924. M a n u i l o v recalls clearly that i n
Moscow, before leaving for Italy, Ivanov showed h i m the manuscript
of his translations of certain passages from the Commedia ; M a n u i l o v
was not, however, able to recall exactly w h i c h passages Ivanov had
translated.
After Ivanov's emigration to Italy, references to his translation o f
the Commedia come to a n end, w i t h the exception o f one isolated
manifestation of interest. It remains, therefore, to turn our attention
to the text of the translation itself. T h e only part of Ivanov's translation
4 8

49

50

4 7

See B e l z a , o p . c i t . ( n . 3 9 ) , 7 8 - 9 3 .
B r y u s o v ' s a n d I v a n o v ' s j o i n t i n v o l v e m e n t i n L i t o N a r k o m p r o s a is d e s c r i b e d i n Khudozhestvennoe
slovo. Vremennik literaturnogo otdela NKP, e d i t e d b y V . Y a . B r y u s o v , 1920, n o . 1, p . 6 2 . I v a n o v ' s
' Z i m n i e sonety' a n d B r y u s o v ' s r e v i e w o f I v a n o v ' s Mladenchestvo were p u b l i s h e d i n the same
issue, p p . 1 0 - 1 2 a n d 5 7 .
See n . 11.
O n 7 M a r c h 1929, M . G o r ' k y w r o t e to P . S. K o g a n f r o m I t a l y suggesting that the latter
m i g h t like to p u b l i s h I v a n o v ' s t r a n s l a t i o n o f the Inferno; see Literaturnoe nasledstvo, l x x ( M . ,
1963), 213.
4 8

4 9

5 0

of the Commedia w h i c h appears to have survived is located among


Ivanov's papers i n the R o m e archive, together w i t h the BrokgauzEfron c o n t r a c t . It consists of four sheets of manuscript i n Ivanov's
handwriting. T h e first sheet carries the heading 'Chistilishche. Pesn'
pervaya', and the following three sheets contain Ivanov's translation
of lines 1-67 of the first canto of the Purgatorio. These lines are
written i n ink with very few corrections added. T h e impression is
that of a final version. T h e text of Ivanov's translation (incorporating
his corrections and with his numbering of the lines) reads as follows :
51

6 1


:
.

,
, ,
.

:
, , .

io

,
:
.

13

,

, ,

16

,
, ,
.

19


-, ,
, .

22

,
;
.

25

.
, ,
.

28


,
.

D . V . I v a n o v k i n d l y m a d e a c o p y o f this t r a n s l a t i o n
publication.

for me, a n d

consented

to its

31

,
,
.

34

,
, ,
.

37


,
.

40

" ? ,"
, ,
" , , ?

43


?
?

46

?
?
. "

49

, ,

.

52

: " .

:

55

.
, :
.

58

;
,
,

61


:
.

64

;
, ,
, .

67

[.]

N o t surprisingly, we find many of the same tendencies reflected


i n this translation as i n Ivanov's previous translations from other works
by Dante. F r o m the formal point of view, the translation is faultless;

Ivanov has created an unbroken succession of iambic pentameters with


alternating masculine and feminine rhymes; there are no irregularities
i n the metre or r h y m i n g scheme. However, as before, there is a general
tendency to complicate the original. Ivanov uses enjambements where
there are none i n the original (at the end of lines 5, 9, 54, 58, and
60) ; he tends to invert natural word-order i n order to create a more
complicated form of syntaxcompare, for example, lines 1 9 - 2 1 of
Ivanov's translation w i t h the same lines i n the o r i g i n a l ; we also find
the i n t r o d u c t i o n of unusual archaic words i n place o f simple ones
for example, the expression 'na suprotivnom polyuse' used for ' a l l ' altro
polo' (1. 2 9 ) ; when C a t o is described, 'diss" becomes rek\ and
'movendo quelle oneste p i u m e ' becomes 'chestne zyblya opererie" (1. 41
of the translation) ; unusual verbs like 'poprar (1. 46, for 'rotte') or
poslushestvovat (1. 57) create a sense of archaic obscurity w h i c h is
absent from the original.
Ivanov also has a tendency to replace v i v i d concrete images with
abstract paraphrases w h i c h make the meaning of the original m u c h
harder to grasp. O n e need look no further than the first tercet of the
canto for a n example of this. Dante's text reads as follows:
l

Per correr migliori acque alza le vele


ornai la navicella del mio ingegno,
che lascia dietro a s mar s crudele . . .
Dante's image of the little boat of his poetic genius preparing to
traverse the better waters of Purgatorio is one of the most celebrated
passages of the Commedia. Ivanov has made the point of the image
extremely hard to grasp; he has replaced the concrete image of
' m i g l i o r i acque' w i t h the abstract paraphrase 'na blagostnom prostore\
a n d he has also dropped the image of ' l a navicella del mio ingegno'
and reduced this to the single w o r d 'vdokhnoven'e'. It is consequently
m u c h more difficult for the reader to make the connection between
the images of the two seas, one cruel, one better, a n d Dante's poetic
genius as a boat w h i c h must traverse these two seas, although this
connection is crystal clear i n the original.
A p a r t from this general tendency towards abstraction a n d added
complexity, there are further characteristic types of distortion which
are also reflected i n this passage. O n e of these is the tendency to add
extra emphasis to the idea of the darkness of sin, contrasted w i t h the
transcendent r e a l m . Ivanov replaces the simple 'si purga' w i t h the m u c h
stronger W skvern ochistivshiisya? (1. 5 ) , m a k i n g the memory of sin m u c h
more forceful than i n the original. I n the same way, when V i r g i l
is describing Dante's past life to Cato, Ivanov adds the words
vo t'me grekhovnoijBluzhdaV to his speech (11. 5 9 - 6 0 ) , whereas i n the
original there is just a brief reference to Dante's past folly. Similarly,
l

i n lines 10-12 of his translation Ivanov contracts a n entire line of the


original 'seguitando i l mio canto con quel sono' into two words 'so
zvonom\ thus m a k i n g his translation difficult to follow, a n d then
introduces one-and-a-half lines of purely gratuitous a d d i t i o n a l
material: 'napela UrajSopernitsam bezumnym gor'kii rok' the themes of
madness and of inevitable fate were close to Ivanov as a result of his
interest i n Greek myths and D i o n y s i a n passion, a n d they are here
imposed on Dante's text.
T h e concrete reality of Dante's vision becomes fantastic and
melodramatic i n Ivanov's version; whereas Dante simply announces
his intention to sing of the second realm, Ivanov must add the w o r d
'chudesa? to qualify the second realm (1. 4 ) . Cato's first appearance is
unduly melodramatic i n Ivanov's rendering; instead o f ' v i d i presso d i
me u n veglio solo' we have 'Mne starets predstoyal do stopo chtenny' (1. 3 1 ) ,
'degno d i tanta reverenza i n vista' becomes 'Mastitoi uboyalsya ya
krasy (1. 3 2 ) , and the simple idea of the natural reverence a son owes
his father is replaced by a humble son q u a i l i n g before his father (1. 3 3 ) .
T h e same additional aura of trembling fear a n d melodrama w h i c h
accompanied the appearance of A m o r i n the third chapter of the Vita
Nuova discussed above is here applied to C a t o .
I n the same Vita Nuova passage we also saw how Ivanov introduced
his concept of the poet as a Pushkinian, prophet-like figure, retiring
from the crowd i n order to have visions and write poetry. I n his
translation of Purgatorio I, he does this once more : Dante writes 'o
sante Muse, p o i che vostro sono' ; Ivanov changes the original
completely i n order to make Dante the carrier of his o w n Symbolist
aestheticshe writes: 'l' vash, svyatye Muzy, ya prorok* (1. 8 ) .
I n conclusion, we can see that through his translations of Dante
Ivanov succeeded i n creating a text w h i c h reflected m a n y of the features
with w h i c h he endowed the figure of Dante i n his spiritual world-view
and Symbolist aesthetics. I n Ivanov's rendering, Dante becomes the
carrier of a typically I v a n o v i a n b r a n d of mysticism, based on the
Dionysian ideal of a n experience of ecstatic self-transcendence, i n
w h i c h elements of sin and Eros play a n important role. T h e image of
Beatrice becomes part-erotic, part-Solov'evian i n character. T h e trans
cendent realm is viewed as a n esoteric abstraction w h i c h can only
be hinted at i n veiled, unclear verse; Dante is presented i n this
context as an obscure, complex poet who anticipates i n his verse the
fundamental features of Symbolist aesthetics. Ivanov's translations of
Dante provide us with a clear insight into one of the central problems
of Ivanov's spiritual outlookthe attempt to incorporate the legacy of
pagan classical antiquity into the C h r i s t i a n tradition, to view Dante as
the successor of Dionysus.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen