雅科夫·加林科夫斯基《对感伤主义的悲惨致敬》

M. Baskina (Malikova)
{"title":"雅科夫·加林科夫斯基《对感伤主义的悲惨致敬》","authors":"M. Baskina (Malikova)","doi":"10.22455/2541-8297-2023-28-103-155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Yakov Galinkovsky (1777–1815) is remembered in the history of literature primarily as compiler and translator of the aesthetic encyclopedia “Coryphaeus, or a Key to Literature” (1802–1807), that had been trampled down by both opposing literary “camps,” the “karamzinists” and the “shishkovites;” and also as the author of critical articles anonymously published in 1805 in the “The Northern Messenger” that were harshly resented as directed against Karamzin and his school in literature. In his later years Galinkovsky was a member of “Beseda” (“Conversations of Lovers of Russian Word”) and although this affiliation originated primarily due to his family kinship to Derzhavin, this has made him a reputation, among contemporaries as well as most later researchers, of a “mediocre pedant” and musty “archaist.” His literary evolution was outlined as a rapid regression from the “karamzinism” of his earlier novels to the “anti-karamzinism” induced by his early association with Andrey Turgenev’s “Friendly Literary Society,” and lastly to “shishkovism.” We attempt to retrieve Galinkovsky from this dominant literary framework of the epoch that however was not central for him personally, and to position him in a different context and circle that was really relevant for him — that of learned translators and critics, “archaic enlighteners.” The present article offers a new reading of Galinkovsky’s earlier novels inaccurately labelled “karamzinist” and unfairly dismissed as a “miserable tribute to sentimentalism.” When read more closely and sympathetically and, more importantly, shifting the research outlook away from the focus on Karamzin, they appear to be primarily meta-literary critique and study of the genre possibilities, especially of the hybrid of epistolary novel of the “English” type with the modern and “realistic” Russian material. We also review the way Galinkovsky as a novelist-cum-translator read Laurence Sterne, one of the major literary models of literary sentimentalism. Galinkovsky noted the specificity and thus untranslatability into Russian of Sternean notions of “sentimentality” and “humour,” that had been totally absent from the dominant Russian image of “tender” and “sensitive” Sterne as created by Karamzin.","PeriodicalId":176975,"journal":{"name":"Literary Fact","volume":"196 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Yakov Galinkovsky’s “Miserable Tribute to Sentimentalism”\",\"authors\":\"M. Baskina (Malikova)\",\"doi\":\"10.22455/2541-8297-2023-28-103-155\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Yakov Galinkovsky (1777–1815) is remembered in the history of literature primarily as compiler and translator of the aesthetic encyclopedia “Coryphaeus, or a Key to Literature” (1802–1807), that had been trampled down by both opposing literary “camps,” the “karamzinists” and the “shishkovites;” and also as the author of critical articles anonymously published in 1805 in the “The Northern Messenger” that were harshly resented as directed against Karamzin and his school in literature. In his later years Galinkovsky was a member of “Beseda” (“Conversations of Lovers of Russian Word”) and although this affiliation originated primarily due to his family kinship to Derzhavin, this has made him a reputation, among contemporaries as well as most later researchers, of a “mediocre pedant” and musty “archaist.” His literary evolution was outlined as a rapid regression from the “karamzinism” of his earlier novels to the “anti-karamzinism” induced by his early association with Andrey Turgenev’s “Friendly Literary Society,” and lastly to “shishkovism.” We attempt to retrieve Galinkovsky from this dominant literary framework of the epoch that however was not central for him personally, and to position him in a different context and circle that was really relevant for him — that of learned translators and critics, “archaic enlighteners.” The present article offers a new reading of Galinkovsky’s earlier novels inaccurately labelled “karamzinist” and unfairly dismissed as a “miserable tribute to sentimentalism.” When read more closely and sympathetically and, more importantly, shifting the research outlook away from the focus on Karamzin, they appear to be primarily meta-literary critique and study of the genre possibilities, especially of the hybrid of epistolary novel of the “English” type with the modern and “realistic” Russian material. We also review the way Galinkovsky as a novelist-cum-translator read Laurence Sterne, one of the major literary models of literary sentimentalism. Galinkovsky noted the specificity and thus untranslatability into Russian of Sternean notions of “sentimentality” and “humour,” that had been totally absent from the dominant Russian image of “tender” and “sensitive” Sterne as created by Karamzin.\",\"PeriodicalId\":176975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Literary Fact\",\"volume\":\"196 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Literary Fact\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22455/2541-8297-2023-28-103-155\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Literary Fact","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22455/2541-8297-2023-28-103-155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

雅科夫·加林科夫斯基(1777-1815)在文学史上被人们铭记,主要是因为他是美学百科全书《文学之钥》(1802-1807)的编纂者和翻译家,这本书曾被两个对立的文学“阵营”——“卡拉姆津主义者”和“什什科维奇主义者”所践踏,他还在1805年的《北方信使》上匿名发表了一些批评文章,这些文章被认为是针对卡拉姆津和他的文学学派的,受到了严厉的谴责。在他的晚年,加林科夫斯基是“Beseda”(“俄语爱好者的对话”)的成员,尽管这种关系主要源于他与德尔扎文的家庭关系,但这使他在同时代以及后来的大多数研究人员中享有“平庸的学究”和发霉的“古物学家”的声誉。他的文学发展被概括为从早期小说的“卡拉姆津主义”到早期与安德烈·屠格涅夫的“友好文学协会”的联系所引发的“反卡拉姆津主义”的快速倒退,最后是“什什科夫主义”。我们试图把加林科夫斯基从那个时代占主导地位的文学框架中找回来,但这对他个人来说并不是中心,并把他置于一个与他真正相关的不同背景和圈子中——博学的翻译和评论家,“古老的启蒙者”。本文提供了对加林科夫斯基早期小说的一种新的解读,这些小说被错误地贴上了“卡拉姆津主义者”的标签,并被不公平地斥为“对感伤主义的悲惨致敬”。当我们更仔细、更有同情地阅读这些作品时,更重要的是,将研究视角从对卡拉姆津的关注中转移出来,它们似乎主要是对元文学的批评和对体裁可能性的研究,尤其是对“英语”类型的书信体小说与现代和“现实主义”的俄罗斯材料的混合。我们还回顾了作为小说家兼翻译家的加林科夫斯基是如何阅读劳伦斯·斯特恩的,斯特恩是文学感伤主义的主要文学典范之一。加林科夫斯基注意到斯特恩的“多愁善感”和“幽默”概念的特殊性,因此无法翻译成俄语,这些概念在卡拉姆津创造的斯特恩“温柔”和“敏感”的俄罗斯主导形象中是完全缺失的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Yakov Galinkovsky’s “Miserable Tribute to Sentimentalism”
Yakov Galinkovsky (1777–1815) is remembered in the history of literature primarily as compiler and translator of the aesthetic encyclopedia “Coryphaeus, or a Key to Literature” (1802–1807), that had been trampled down by both opposing literary “camps,” the “karamzinists” and the “shishkovites;” and also as the author of critical articles anonymously published in 1805 in the “The Northern Messenger” that were harshly resented as directed against Karamzin and his school in literature. In his later years Galinkovsky was a member of “Beseda” (“Conversations of Lovers of Russian Word”) and although this affiliation originated primarily due to his family kinship to Derzhavin, this has made him a reputation, among contemporaries as well as most later researchers, of a “mediocre pedant” and musty “archaist.” His literary evolution was outlined as a rapid regression from the “karamzinism” of his earlier novels to the “anti-karamzinism” induced by his early association with Andrey Turgenev’s “Friendly Literary Society,” and lastly to “shishkovism.” We attempt to retrieve Galinkovsky from this dominant literary framework of the epoch that however was not central for him personally, and to position him in a different context and circle that was really relevant for him — that of learned translators and critics, “archaic enlighteners.” The present article offers a new reading of Galinkovsky’s earlier novels inaccurately labelled “karamzinist” and unfairly dismissed as a “miserable tribute to sentimentalism.” When read more closely and sympathetically and, more importantly, shifting the research outlook away from the focus on Karamzin, they appear to be primarily meta-literary critique and study of the genre possibilities, especially of the hybrid of epistolary novel of the “English” type with the modern and “realistic” Russian material. We also review the way Galinkovsky as a novelist-cum-translator read Laurence Sterne, one of the major literary models of literary sentimentalism. Galinkovsky noted the specificity and thus untranslatability into Russian of Sternean notions of “sentimentality” and “humour,” that had been totally absent from the dominant Russian image of “tender” and “sensitive” Sterne as created by Karamzin.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信