Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
‘One bearded sage concluded: there’s no motion.’ Pushkin’s ‘philosophical epigram’ and a dispute about hexameter
https://doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2021-3-148-168
Abstract
Pushkin’s epigram ‘Motion’ [‘Dvizhenie’] (1825) has fascinated scholars for years. However, all its interpretations relied on its external context — either philosophical or political. The article sets out to interpret ‘Motion’ in the light of the literary and polemic agenda that was on Pushkin’s mind at the time of the poem’s writing. Printed in the fourth issue of Küchelbecker’s Mnemozina for the year 1825, practically right before Pushkin’s ‘To the Sea’ [‘K moryu’], were Küchelbecker’s hexameters entitled ‘A hymn to Bacchus (from Homer)’ [‘Gimn Bakhusu (Iz Gomera)’], with a note of ‘Tsarskoe Selo, 1817.’ This may have seemed to Pushkin a reference to the dispute around hexameter (in the years 1813–1814 and 1817–1820); the episode with an argument between two philosophers was included in the response that S. Uvarov, a proponent of hexameter, wrote to V. Kapnist, who promoted the versification of Russian folk songs as an alternative to hexameter. This allows for the assumption that Pushkin’s epigram was addressed to Küchelbecker, with whom, since their time at the Lyceum, Pushkin had engaged in a dispute about the suitability of hexameter for Russian poetry.
About the Author
E. V. Abdullaev
Tashkent Orthodox Theological Seminary
Uzbekistan
Uzbekistan
Evgeny V. Abdullaev - Candidate of Philosophy.
91 Avlieot St., Tashkent, 100015, Uzbekistan.
References
1. Abdullaev, E. (2016). Philosophers and the Philosopher in Pushkin’s ‘Message to Lida’ [‘Poslanie Lide’]. Voprosy Literatury, 3, pp. 59-81. (In Russ.)
2. Alekseev, M. (1956). Pushkin and the science of his time: Studies and sketches. In: M. Alekseev, ed., Pushkin: Research and materials. Vol. 1. Moscow, Leningrad: AN SSSR, pp. 9-125. (In Russ.)
3. Arkhipova, A. (1978). Traces of the 1810s literary polemic in the letters from G. Glinka to W. Küchelbecker. In: N. Izmaylov, ed., Pushkin: Research and materials. Vol. 8. Leningrad: Nauka, pp. 147-150. (In Russ.)
4. Bayle, P. (1820). Dictionnaire historique et critique (tt. 1-16). Nouvelle édition. T. 15. Paris: Desoer. (In French).
5. Bondi, S. (1978). On Pushkin: Articles and research. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaya literatura. (In Russ.)
6. Chernyaev, N. (1900). ‘Movement’ [‘Dvizhenie’]. In: N. Chernyaev, Critical essays and notes on Pushkin. Kharkiv: Tipografiya ‘Yuzhnogo kraya,’ pp. 327-333. (In Russ.)
7. Diogenes Laertius. (1979). The lives and opinions of eminent philosophers. Translated by M. Gasparov. Moscow: Mysl. (In Russ.)
8. Glebov, G. (1937). Pushkin’s philosophical epigrams. Pushkin: Vremennik Pushkinskoy Komissii, 3, pp. 399-400. (In Russ.)
9. Golts, T. (1998). The publisher of ‘Urania’ and his circle. In: T. Golts and A. Grishunin, eds., Urania. A 1826 pocketbook for the admirers of Russian literature. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 207-263. (In Russ.)
10. Gorky, M., Blagoy, D., Bondi, S. et al., eds. (1937-1959). The complete collected works of A. Pushkin (16 vols). Moscow, Leningrad: AN SSSR. (In Russ.)
11. Katenin, P. (1934). Reminiscences of Pushkin. In: I. Zilberstein and I. Sergievsky, eds., Literary heritage. Vol. 16/18: <Aleksandr Pushkin>. Moscow: Zhurnalno-gazetnoe obiedinenie, pp. 616-656. (In Russ.)
12. Krasnoborodko, T. and Khitrova, D. (2008). Pushkin’s draft of an objection to Küchelbecker’s essay. In: A. Dolinin, L. Fleishman and L. Livak, eds., Russian literature and the West. A tribute for David M. Bethea. Stanford: Stanford University, pp. 66-116. (In Russ.)
13. Küchelbecker, W. (1979). A take on the current state of Russian literature. In: I. Korolyov and I. Rak, eds., W. Küchelbecker: A journey. Journal. Articles. Leningrad: Nauka, pp. 434-435. (In Russ.)
14. Mayofis, M. (2008). Appealing to Europe: The Arzamas Literary Society and Russian modernisation project of 1815-1818. Moscow: NLO. (In Russ.)
15. Pugachev, V. (1977). Pushkin’s ‘Movement’ [‘Dvizhenie’] and N. I. Turgenev’s ‘Something on villain-socage’ [‘Nechto o barshchine’]. Vremennik Pushkinskoy Komissii 1974. Leningrad: Nauka, pp. 113-115. (In Russ.)
16. Pushkin, A. (1935). ‘On a admire le Cynique...’ In: M. Tsyavlovsky, L. Modzalevsky and T. Zenger, eds., By Pushkin’s hand: Uncollected and unpublished texts. Moscow, Leningrad: Academia, pp. 496-497. (In Russ.)
17. Tarasov, E., ed. (1921). Nikolay Ivanovich Turgenev’s journals and letters of 1816-1824. Vol. 3. Petrograd: Akademicheskaya dvenadtsataya gosudarstvennaya tipografiya. (In Russ.)
18. Tseits, N. (1939). On the history of Pushkin’s idea of ‘Ermak’ that he never developed. Pushkin: Vremennik Pushkinskoy Komissii, 4-5, pp. 386-396. (In Russ.)
19. Tynyanov, Y. (1934). Pushkin and Küchelbecker. In: I. Zilberstein and I. Sergievsky, eds., Literary heritage. Vol. 16/18: <Aleksandr Pushkin>. Moscow: Zhurnalno-gazetnoe obiedinenie, pp. 321-378. (In Russ.)
20. Tynyanov, Y. (1939). W. K. Küchelbecker. In: Y. Tynyanov, ed., The works of W. Küchelbecker (2 vols). Vol. 1. Leningrad: Sovetskiy pistael, pp. 4-17. (In Russ.)
21. Tynyanov, Y. (1969). The archaists and Pushkin. In: Y. Tynyanov, Pushkin and his contemporaries. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 23-121. (In Russ.)
22. Uvarov, S. (1815). A reply to V. V. Kapnist’s letter on hexameter. In: The 17th reading at The Colloquy of Lovers of the Russian Word Society. St. Petersburg: [s. n.], pp. 55-56. (In Russ.)
23. Vatsuro, V., Ilyin-Tomich, A. and Kiselyova, L., eds. (1994). ‘Arzamas’: A collection (2 books). Moscow: Khudozhestvennaya literatura. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Abdullaev E.V. ‘One bearded sage concluded: there’s no motion.’ Pushkin’s ‘philosophical epigram’ and a dispute about hexameter. Voprosy literatury. 2021;(3):148-168. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2021-3-148-168
Views:
287
Email this article 
