Vladimir Titov’s Letter to Vladimir Odoevsky as a Well-Known Response to Ivan Turgenev’s Article “Hamlet and Don Quixote” (Contemporaries’ Reception of Turgenev’s Interpretation of the Image of Hamlet)

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Tekst Kniga Knigoizdanie-Text Book Publishing Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.17223/23062061/26/6
Ivan O. Volkov
{"title":"Vladimir Titov’s Letter to Vladimir Odoevsky as a Well-Known Response to Ivan Turgenev’s Article “Hamlet and Don Quixote” (Contemporaries’ Reception of Turgenev’s Interpretation of the Image of Hamlet)","authors":"Ivan O. Volkov","doi":"10.17223/23062061/26/6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For the first time, in the article, Vladimir Titov’s letter (dated 12/24 February 1869) is published and commented. In the 1820s, in Russia, Titov was well-known as a writer and literature theorist, the author of a romantic novella The Remote House on Vasilyevsky Island (1829) close to Society of Lyubomudriye. The letter extracted from the archives of the National Library of Russia is addressed to Duke Vladimir Odoevsky whose relationship with Titov was friendly from the very beginning of their acquaintance. The letter focuses on Ivan Turgenev’s speech published in the first issue of Sovremennik and titled “Hamlet and Don Quixote”. Reacting to Turgenev’s article, Titov shortly and critically accesses the comparison concentrating mainly on the image of Hamlet and thoroughly expresses his opinion on the essence of his tragic state. Titov’s opinion is just the opposite of Turgenev’s complex and multidimensional interpretation. Having experienced the great impact of the philosophy of German idealism at the beginning of his career, Titov to a great extent idealizes Shakespeare’s character whom he long knows and whom he is clearly eager to vindicate. Meanwhile, Titov does not pursue the aim to absolutely advocate the romantic halo of Hamlet as a Titanic personality (grandiose intellect and scale of feeling) and to enact the tragic pathos of the inner fight only. Developing Goethe’s definition of the essence of the character’s inner conflict, Titov, on the one hand, approaches its real understanding underlying the prince’s necessity to stay in a derogatory position of a “pitiful semiclown, indecisive grouch and shred”. On the other hand, the assessment can not be absolutely objective because Titov wants to see Hamlet as a victim of the fatal fortune which turns him into a character of an almost classical tragedy of fate. Titov’s bright and developed reaction (in the document of private nature) to Turgenev’s article is attractive and important first of all for its vividly demonstrated novelty and creativity of the writer’s view, wideness and multimodality of the author’s perception of Hamlet’s image. For the first time, Turgenev gave a developed interpretation of Shakespeare’s image in the tale “Hamlet of Shchigrovsky Province” (1848). Continuing his searches in the area of “Russian” (or “steppe”) Hamlet, Turgenev creates moral and philosophical problems of the English tragedy in the crisis socio-historical and cultural atmosphere of Russia of the 1840s. However, the principles of the artistic generalization and the peculiarities of the new reading, not mentioned and not fully comprehended by his contemporaries, were surprising and rejected when the speech “Hamlet and Don Quixote” appeared, in which Shakespeare’s character is presented ultimately vividly and lively in the then current interpretation.","PeriodicalId":40676,"journal":{"name":"Tekst Kniga Knigoizdanie-Text Book Publishing","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tekst Kniga Knigoizdanie-Text Book Publishing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17223/23062061/26/6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For the first time, in the article, Vladimir Titov’s letter (dated 12/24 February 1869) is published and commented. In the 1820s, in Russia, Titov was well-known as a writer and literature theorist, the author of a romantic novella The Remote House on Vasilyevsky Island (1829) close to Society of Lyubomudriye. The letter extracted from the archives of the National Library of Russia is addressed to Duke Vladimir Odoevsky whose relationship with Titov was friendly from the very beginning of their acquaintance. The letter focuses on Ivan Turgenev’s speech published in the first issue of Sovremennik and titled “Hamlet and Don Quixote”. Reacting to Turgenev’s article, Titov shortly and critically accesses the comparison concentrating mainly on the image of Hamlet and thoroughly expresses his opinion on the essence of his tragic state. Titov’s opinion is just the opposite of Turgenev’s complex and multidimensional interpretation. Having experienced the great impact of the philosophy of German idealism at the beginning of his career, Titov to a great extent idealizes Shakespeare’s character whom he long knows and whom he is clearly eager to vindicate. Meanwhile, Titov does not pursue the aim to absolutely advocate the romantic halo of Hamlet as a Titanic personality (grandiose intellect and scale of feeling) and to enact the tragic pathos of the inner fight only. Developing Goethe’s definition of the essence of the character’s inner conflict, Titov, on the one hand, approaches its real understanding underlying the prince’s necessity to stay in a derogatory position of a “pitiful semiclown, indecisive grouch and shred”. On the other hand, the assessment can not be absolutely objective because Titov wants to see Hamlet as a victim of the fatal fortune which turns him into a character of an almost classical tragedy of fate. Titov’s bright and developed reaction (in the document of private nature) to Turgenev’s article is attractive and important first of all for its vividly demonstrated novelty and creativity of the writer’s view, wideness and multimodality of the author’s perception of Hamlet’s image. For the first time, Turgenev gave a developed interpretation of Shakespeare’s image in the tale “Hamlet of Shchigrovsky Province” (1848). Continuing his searches in the area of “Russian” (or “steppe”) Hamlet, Turgenev creates moral and philosophical problems of the English tragedy in the crisis socio-historical and cultural atmosphere of Russia of the 1840s. However, the principles of the artistic generalization and the peculiarities of the new reading, not mentioned and not fully comprehended by his contemporaries, were surprising and rejected when the speech “Hamlet and Don Quixote” appeared, in which Shakespeare’s character is presented ultimately vividly and lively in the then current interpretation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
季托夫给奥多耶夫斯基的信——对屠格涅夫《哈姆雷特与堂吉诃德》一文的著名回应(屠格涅夫对哈姆雷特形象的解读的当代人解读)
第一次,在文章中,弗拉基米尔·提托夫的信(日期为1869年2月12日/24日)被发表并评论。19世纪20年代,在俄罗斯,Titov作为作家和文学理论家而闻名,他的浪漫主义中篇小说《瓦西里耶夫斯基岛上的偏僻小屋》(1829)就在柳波穆德里耶协会附近。从俄罗斯国家图书馆的档案中摘录的这封信是写给弗拉基米尔·奥多耶夫斯基公爵的,他与季托夫的关系从一开始就很友好。这封信的重点是伊万·屠格涅夫在《当代》第一期发表的题为《哈姆雷特与堂吉诃德》的演讲。蒂托夫对屠格涅夫的文章作了简短而批判的回应,以哈姆雷特的形象为中心进行了比较,并深入地阐述了他对哈姆雷特悲剧状态本质的看法。蒂托夫的观点正好与屠格涅夫复杂而多维的解释相反。提托夫早年经历了德国理想主义哲学的巨大影响,他在很大程度上理想化了莎士比亚的角色,他对莎士比亚的认识很长时间了,他显然渴望为他辩护。同时,Titov并没有追求绝对崇尚哈姆雷特作为泰坦尼克人格的浪漫光环(宏大的智慧和磅礴的情感),而只是演绎内心斗争的悲怆。一方面,Titov发展了歌德对人物内心冲突本质的定义,接近了真正的理解,即王子必须停留在一个贬损的位置上,成为一个“可怜的半城市,优柔寡断的发牢骚和破碎”。另一方面,评价也不能绝对客观,因为Titov想把哈姆雷特看作是命运的受害者,命运把他变成了一个近乎经典的命运悲剧的人物。蒂托夫对屠格涅夫文章的鲜明而深入的反应(在私人性的文献中)是吸引人的,首先是因为它生动地展示了作者观点的新颖性和创造性,以及作者对哈姆雷特形象感知的广泛性和多模性。屠格涅夫第一次在故事《什奇格罗夫斯基省的哈姆雷特》(1848)中对莎士比亚的形象进行了详尽的诠释。屠格涅夫继续他在“俄罗斯”(或“草原”)哈姆雷特领域的研究,在19世纪40年代俄罗斯危机的社会历史和文化氛围中创造了英国悲剧的道德和哲学问题。然而,当《哈姆雷特与唐吉诃德》的演讲出现时,莎士比亚的艺术泛化原则和新阅读的特殊性,没有被同时代的人提及和完全理解,却令人惊讶和拒绝,在当时的解释中,莎士比亚的性格最终被生动活泼地呈现出来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Tekst Kniga Knigoizdanie-Text Book Publishing
Tekst Kniga Knigoizdanie-Text Book Publishing HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Titles of editions: Between advertising and pragmatics On church singing in the Fedoseevtsy collection Paternal Testaments. Article I The reader-character in Yuri Felzen’s novel Letters about Lermontov Book review: Tatsumi, Y. & Tsurumi, T. (eds) (2020) Publishing in Tsarist Russia: A history of print media from Enlightenment to Revolution. London: Bloomsbury Academic. 280 р. Perception of pictorial text: Problematization, actualization, new methodological approaches
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1