Ivan Turgenev as a reader of Goethe’s Faust (on Turgenev’s personal library). Article 1

The article considers one of the most important aspects of the so-called Turgenev vs. Goethe problem, namely, the study of the reader’s reception of Faust. For the first time, the writer’s marks and marginalia are subjected to a holistic analysis on the pages of the tragedy (its first part) translated by Mikhail Vronchenko (St. Petersburg, 1844), drawing on the content of an article written on purpose about this Russian publication. In a purposeful comparative movement between the German original text and the Russian translation, Turgenev carefully brought to the surface not only the fact of their inconsistency, but also succinctly expressed his understanding both of the development of the plot and the main characters. He often offered his own options for conveying meanings into Russian, and at the same time he extremely valued Goethe’s word. In this regard, especially important and bearing the greatest semantic load is his constant note: “not that!”, which he gives in the margins, simultaneously underlining fragments - individual verses, lines, entire passages. During his reading, Turgenev showed great sensitivity to the concept of personality developed by Goethe. The first thing to attract his attention was Posvyasheniye [Dedication], where he crosses out two verses I grust ’ vo vsem, chem bytie zemnoe / Izukrashalo prezhde svoy polet and comments: Not that at all. Here it is important for Turgenev to preserve the meaning associated with the depth of the author’s reflection, in which dramatic notes sound. Of the two: Prologues” to Faust, Turgenev is clearly only interested in the one depicting a conversation in the sky. Its significance as an element preceding the philosophical concept of the tragedy was well understood by the writer, as evidenced not only by the abundance of comments made, but also by the concentration on two images - Faust and Mephistopheles, surrounded by the most important themes of nature and creation. The cornerstone of all Turgenev’s criticism of Vronchenko is the error in the translation of the word streben, which denotes the hero’s state of dissatisfaction and embodies his spiritual and mental torment. Vronchenko made a wrong choice choosing the Russian word mudrstvovat’ [to philosophize], which transfers the hero’s quest to the narrow plane of only the philosophical and introduces a shade of disapproval, emphasizing excessive profundity and futility of reflection. In the first scene, Turgenev is interested in Faust’s attempt to evoke the Spirit of the Earth using a magical ritual. First, the writer crosses out and double-marks “NB” the passage depicting Faust with the book of prophecies, and then dwells on the actual appearance of the Spirit questioning its exorcist, a mortal who has decided to compete with the eternal. In the second scene, the writer draws attention to the festive bustle of the townspeople, who are no strangers to fun and mischief; he is dissatisfied with how the translator rudely and awkwardly intensified the colours of the lively and spontaneous behaviour of the townspeople. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References