2023-05-23 18:29:46
– Vera, why exactly “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”? What in this text, covered with a thick layer of centuries-old patina, seemed close to you?
– “The word …” fascinated me from an early time, from Yaroslavna’s lament, which we memorized at school. As an inhabitant of Odessa, and even a captain’s daughter, I am especially sensitive to the elements of water and wind, to the state of waiting on the shore. Yaroslavna was waiting on the wall in Putivl, calling out to the Dnieper, and I imagined my mother and the steep slopes above the stormy Black Sea, to which my father set off. The wives of sailors are always Yaroslavna, and the sailors themselves, like the courageous Prince Igor, overcome the invasion of waves and winds…
For me, “Word …” has no time frame. It does not reflect the problems of the century, but the century itself looks into it, trying to see itself. The scope of the “Word …” is somewhat in contact with the “Divine Comedy”: it has its own Beatrice, and the hero’s wanderings in the gloomy forest of events and thoughts, and a happy denouement with the movement to the divine hypostasis (Holy Mother of God Pirogoscha). And at the same time, the unusual metaphorical and multifaceted perspectives, including, in addition to the historical, spiritual, cultural, literary, psychological, political and religious.
Why is there a need for a new translation? Is the Russian language changing so rapidly that, say, Zabolotsky’s transcription seems outdated?
– Well, who proceeds from this criterion, referring to literary translation! How many translations of Romeo and Juliet, for example, are there? Balmont, Apollon Grigoriev, Mikhailovsky, Radlova, Shchepkina-Kupernik, Pasternak – and this is not a complete list. Undertaking a translation, the translator usually proceeds from the internal consonance with the original or the idea of it. It is consonance that gives rise to its attitude and its vision. This is an intimate process, I would even say, mysterious, when you suddenly begin to refract in the field of images penetrating from the outside, and at some point the desired resonance occurs.
I turned to the translation, because I heard the “Word …” in my own way. Both rhythmically and conceptually. The “Word…” is full of inner harmonies, inner music, which, in my opinion, does not need a syllabo-tonic organization. Therefore, quite intuitively, I plunged into a free, only partly regulated verse (close to a triple, as Irina Rodnyanskaya specified).
As for the conceptual aspect, here, first of all, I was not satisfied with any of the existing concepts of Boyan. Starting with Radishchev, who calls Boyan “the sweetest singer”, the characteristics of this songwriter practically do not change. Zhukovsky Boyan – “the joy of ancient years”; Pushkin has a “sweet singer”, the Decembrists have a “citizen singer”, Zabolotsky has an “old nightingale”, full of “wonderful powers”. My Boyan is fundamentally different. In my interpretation, this is a court poet, praising the one who needs to be praised, and blaspheming the one who should be blasphemed. He is opposed in the Lay by a narrator who is neither the author nor Boyan. The narrator treats Boyan with irony. This is especially evident at the end, where two versions of the songs of praise are given. “Boyan da Khodyna” glorifies the ruler, and the narrator glorifies the defenders of “glorious Christians from the filthy Polovtsian troops.”
And Olegova’s favorites
Songwriters Svyatoslavovs
Boyan to Hodyna
So they said, striking the strings:
– It’s hard for a head without shoulders,
Trouble for a body without a head
And the Russian land – without Igor.
Sr:
For the health of princes and squads,
Protecting glorious Christians
From the filthy Polovtsian troops!
Glory to the princes and the squad!
Amen.
– How do you solve the problem of “spreading through the tree of thought”? What interpretation of this lexeme do you give – is it a reflection or is it a squirrel, as the researchers assumed?
– For me it was not a stumbling block. The issue resolved itself in accordance with the concept of translation. Andrey Zaliznyak, who proved the authenticity of the “Word…” and received the A.I. run around squirrel than thought. But, on the other hand, the artistic flight can be very wide. In the same “Word about Igor’s Campaign”, a little lower, the expression “I think of the tree” is found. The tree is present, and it is mental, therefore, the combination of two ideas – “thought” and “tree” – was certainly possible in the mind of the author. I basically came up with the same thing. And in life, between a squirrel and a thought, I always choose a thought.
– How did you work with the text – was it interlinear or direct access to the text? What dictionaries did you use, how did you adapt the realities and creatively refract the concepts of that time?
– I worked in all possible and acceptable ways for me, comparing the original with Likhachev’s excellent interlinear, considering how this would fit into the artistic concept. The artistic concept is the main thing for literary translation. Otherwise, it’s just an overlay.
For me, The Word… is a literary work, not a historical document. From it one can get an impression of the “traditions of ancient times,” just as one can get an impression of the war with Napoleon by reading Tolstoy’s War and Peace. It is impossible to study history from the text of “Words …”. Moreover, one gets the impression that the author himself did not want his work to be read as a historical document. Otherwise, he would not so clearly include in it things that either disagree with the facts or are not confirmed by anything. For example, in the literature it has been noted more than once that the eclipse refers to a different period of time (it was only on the ninth day, while in the “Word …” Igor’s campaign begins with it). Secondly, we do not find any historical references either to Troyan or to the “times of Troyan” anywhere. And Boyan is not a real historical figure. It is rather a collective image of the singer. And as for the historical figures, they did not utter any “golden words” or other things to which the narrator refers. I drew attention to these and many other points in the commentary, substantiating my point of view on The Word … as a work that develops artistic tasks.
– How is your translation fundamentally different from all existing ones?
– First of all, I introduced a new division for the Lay into the author and the narrator. The narrator did not exactly know about the discrepancies mentioned above – he is from a different, non-historical space, where Boyan, and the centuries of Troyan, and the “golden word”, and much more coexist. The author integrates everything together – the narrator, Boyan and the characters of “Words …”, giving a comprehensive coverage of the perception of what is happening.
Secondly, I approached the image of Boyan in a different way, which I have already spoken about. And thirdly, it gave new significance to the figure of Svyatoslav.
The main character for me is not Igor, but Svyatoslav. It is he who deliberately leads Igor to glory. Why? Igor has a number of qualities that distinguish him from other princes. First of all, greed and money-grubbing are not inherent in him. Going on a campaign, he does not seek to conquer the enemy’s lands for his own enrichment. It is worth remembering at least the end of the first day of the battle, when Igor’s army won. The warriors began to grab gold and silver, the red Polovtsian girls, and Igor took only the battle signs of the enemies, symbols of victory and power. This suggests that Igor understands the role of intangible values. Of all the princes condemned by Svyatoslav in his Golden Word, only Igor, perhaps, would be able to go on a campaign for an idea. It was precisely such a campaign that Svyatoslav, who dreamed of the unification of Rus’, hatched.
Svyatoslav calls on the princes to step into “golden stirrups for the offense of this time, for the Russian land, for the wounds of Igor” (which, by the way, we do not know anything about). Nobody responds to this. No one, except Ovlur, goes out to Igor, and God shows him the way. Why then was the call made?
There is only one explanation: the Golden Word was sent to Igor’s ears. It was a sign that the blasphemy was stopped and honor was given to him. Not the people, not the princes and not Boyan, but Svyatoslav personally put the fate of Igor and the Russian land on the same level.
What did he need it for?
– Mechanical connection of lands does not bring strengthening of positions, and there is no real unification. Svyatoslav was an excellent warrior – he captivated Kobyak, increasing the possessions of future Rus’. And at the same time, he understood that this alone would not achieve lasting power. Lands create an undeniable material advantage. However, without strengthening positions, it can turn into a negative factor. A hint of this is contained in the image of the Stugna River, which swallowed up “foreign streams and streams”, but did not correct its “bad stream” by this, but only killed the young Rostislav.
It was necessary to develop and strengthen positional parameters that would help consolidate the mined lands, and one of these parameters was the unification of princes. Svyatoslav devotes the rest of his life to establishing a coalition.
In his Golden Word, he reproaches Igor only for the fact that he spoke untimely and did not share his plans with him. He blames Igor for thoughtlessness and ambitious aspirations, but compared to what he says about Izyaslav and Vseslav, these are just trifles. The Russian land gave birth to many brave princes, but for some reason they all brought her only misfortunes. Both Prince Oleg, and Prince Vseslav, and other princes are described in the Golden Word as the destroyers of the Russian land, conquering plots from their brethren and weakening Rus’.
The essential difference between them and Igor is that their goals did not coincide with the interests of Rus’. Fragmented Rus’ did not need the strengthening of individual principalities and not the prosperity of estates. Rus’ demanded unification in order to put an end to strife and strengthen power.
Was Svyatoslav the only one who understood this?
– Svyatoslav understood that he was losing strength. He also understood that Igor was the ideal type of ruler for Rus’ of that time, since he cares not about wealth, but about fame. As for Igor’s unexpected outburst, selfless, non-profit-oriented recklessness sometimes becomes a decisive factor for victory, all other things being relatively equal. In addition, Svyatoslav, apparently, hopes that Igor will learn a lesson from his reckless act, remembering the experience of universal reproach. This is not Vsevolod’s buoy-tour, for whom any lessons are likely to be useless, since blood cannot be tamed.
So, through comparisons with other princes, a set of qualities gradually emerges that distinguishes Igor from the rest. In the Golden Word, Svyatoslav not only calls on the princes to unite and come out in defense of Igor, but gradually prepares an opinion about his exclusivity. All these points are reflected in my translation.
#poetess #USA #Vera #Zubareva #translation #Tale #Igors #Campaign