{"title":"Sergey Tretyakov and Ezra Pound: A Dialogue about Collectivization of Literature Between the Right and the Left","authors":"Nikon I. Kovalev","doi":"10.22455/2541-7894-2021-10-153-162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper is dedicated to the dialogue between Ezra Pound and Sergey Tretyakov on the pages of a Dutch magazine Front edited by a Dutch writer Sonja Prins, and other periodicals. This particular episode of Pound’s contacts with left-wing writers hasn’t been duly researched so far. In spite of the dangerous political atmosphere in the 1930s, authors with different ideological views could freely exchange their ideas in the periodicals. The Front published a wide range of anti-bourgeois authors — their views varied from communist to fascist. The Federation of Organizations of Soviet writers (FOSP) was mentioned as a co-founder of Front, although later its name was withdrawn because of the magazine’s publishing policy, which allowed right-wing writers. Tretyakov’s essay “Writer-kolkhoznik” was published in the first issue of the Front; the next issue contained Pound’s response to this essay. In spite of his pro-fascist views, Pound seemed interested in Tretyakov’s work on the kolkhoz. Later both writers continued to argue outside the magazine — Tretyakov mentioned Pound in his Berlin lecture The Writer and the Socialist Village, Pound referred to Tretyakov, this time purely ironically, in Italian press. In the end the dialogue failed, both writers tended to speak about their own main topics — Tretyakov continued to reflect on the writer in the kolkhoz, and Pound was interested in the classical Russian literature and in the attitude to the classical Russian literary heritage in the new socialist Russia.","PeriodicalId":34458,"journal":{"name":"Literatura dvukh Amerik","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Literatura dvukh Amerik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22455/2541-7894-2021-10-153-162","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The paper is dedicated to the dialogue between Ezra Pound and Sergey Tretyakov on the pages of a Dutch magazine Front edited by a Dutch writer Sonja Prins, and other periodicals. This particular episode of Pound’s contacts with left-wing writers hasn’t been duly researched so far. In spite of the dangerous political atmosphere in the 1930s, authors with different ideological views could freely exchange their ideas in the periodicals. The Front published a wide range of anti-bourgeois authors — their views varied from communist to fascist. The Federation of Organizations of Soviet writers (FOSP) was mentioned as a co-founder of Front, although later its name was withdrawn because of the magazine’s publishing policy, which allowed right-wing writers. Tretyakov’s essay “Writer-kolkhoznik” was published in the first issue of the Front; the next issue contained Pound’s response to this essay. In spite of his pro-fascist views, Pound seemed interested in Tretyakov’s work on the kolkhoz. Later both writers continued to argue outside the magazine — Tretyakov mentioned Pound in his Berlin lecture The Writer and the Socialist Village, Pound referred to Tretyakov, this time purely ironically, in Italian press. In the end the dialogue failed, both writers tended to speak about their own main topics — Tretyakov continued to reflect on the writer in the kolkhoz, and Pound was interested in the classical Russian literature and in the attitude to the classical Russian literary heritage in the new socialist Russia.
这篇论文是关于庞德和谢尔盖·特列季亚科夫在荷兰作家索尼娅·普林斯编辑的《前线》杂志和其他期刊上的对话。到目前为止,庞德与左翼作家接触的这一特殊事件还没有得到充分的研究。尽管20世纪30年代的政治气氛危险,但不同思想观点的作者可以在期刊上自由交流思想。《前线》出版了大量反资产阶级作家的作品——他们的观点从共产主义到法西斯主义不一而足。苏联作家组织联合会(Federation of Organizations of Soviet writers, FOSP)被认为是《前线》的联合创始人之一,但后来由于该杂志允许右翼作家的出版政策,该组织的名字被撤销了。特列季亚科夫的文章《作家—集体农庄》发表在《前线》第一期上;下一期刊登了庞德对这篇文章的回应。尽管庞德有亲法西斯的观点,但他似乎对特列季亚科夫关于集体农庄的著作很感兴趣。后来两位作家继续在杂志之外争论——特列季亚科夫在柏林的演讲《作家和社会主义村》中提到了庞德,庞德在意大利媒体上提到特列季亚科夫,这一次纯粹是讽刺。最后,对话失败了,两位作家都倾向于谈论自己的主要话题——特列季亚科夫继续在集体农庄反思作家,庞德则对俄罗斯古典文学感兴趣,并对新社会主义俄国对俄罗斯古典文学遗产的态度感兴趣。