BYRONISM IN LERMONTOV'S A HERO OF OUR TIME by ALAN HARWOOD CAMERON BA, U ...

317 Pages·2009·14.22 MB·English

BYRONISM IN LERMONTOV'S
A HERO OF OUR TIME
by
ALAN HARWOOD CAMERON
B.A., University of Calgary, 1968
M.A., University of B r i t i sh Columbia, 1970
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
in the Department
SLAVONIC STUDIES
We accept this thesis as conforming to the
required standard
THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
A p r i l, 1974
In presenting this thesis in par i al fulfilment of the requirements for
an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that
the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study.
I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis
for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or
by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication
of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my
written permission.
Department of
The University of British Columbia
Vancouver 8, Canada
Date Afr, I l0 I f7f
}
ABSTRACT
Although Mikhail Lermontov is commonly known as
the "Russian Byron," up to t h is point no examination of
the Byronic features of A Hero of Our Time, (Geroy nashego
vremeni) has been made. This study presents the view
3
that, while the novel is much more than a simple expression
of Byronism, understanding the basic Byronic t r a i ts and
Lermontov1s own modification of them is essential for a
true comprehension of the novel.
Each of the f i r st five chapters is devoted to a
scrutiny of the separate tales that make up A Hero of Our
Time. The basic Byronic motifs of storms, poses and
exotic s e t t i n gs are examined in each part with commentary
on some Lermontovian variations on them. The secondary
figures, heroines, "pashas," v i l l a i ns and others are also
assessed against Byronic t r a d i t i o n. F i n a l l y, the different
presentations of Pechorin, the main figure, are analyzed
and evaluated to determine how the hero is and is not
"Byronic."
To ascertain exactly what the hero's Byronic
features might be, I have used^P.J. Thorslev's system of
prototypes for the Byronic hero, who could have any or a ll
of the t r a i ts of the Child of Nature, the Hero of S e n s i b i l i ty
or the Gothic V i l l a i n. By determining how Pechorin f i ts
into these categories, it is easy to see in what way he
resembles a Byronic hero.
The f i r st chapter deals with Princess Mary and
shows how Pechorin's love of nature, egocentric s e n s i t i v i ty
and nostalgic musings are part of the Byronic mainstream,
yet how h is cruel penchant f or e v il constitutes a modifi
cation. Chapter Two, on Beta, demonstrates Lermontov's
alterations of the fundamental Byronic love formula; in
the next chapter which concerns Maksim Maksimych I have
;
shown how the focal point of that story, Pechorin's external
description, is s t r i k i n g ly Byronic. Chapter Four presents
a new interpretation of Taman ' as a parody on the heroic
myth of i n f a l l i b i l i t y. The second l a st chapter points
out how the Byronism of The Fatalist is f i l t e r ed through
the actions of the story and how Pechorin reconciles the
belief in h is own free w i ll with the concept of fatalism.
Chapter Six concludes the study with a view of the novel
as a whole and a summation of the Byronic features of A
Hero of Our Time, '•
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
INTRODUCTION 1
FOOTNOTES ; 7
ONE — PRINCESS MARY 8
FOOTNOTES 107
TWO — BE LA 114
FOOTNOTES 166
THREE — MAKSIM MAKSIMYCH 169
FOOTNOTES 194
FOUR — TAMAN' 196
FOOTNOTES 237
FIVE — THE FATALIST 24 0
FOOTNOTES 267
SIX — CONCLUSION 270
FOOTNOTES 291
BIBLIOGRAPHY 29 3
V
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I should l i ke to express my sincere appreciation
to my adviser Dr. Michael H. F u t r e l l, whose patience, i n
sight and assistance were invaluable. I would also l i ke
to thank Dr. Zbigniew Folejewski and Professor G.H. Durrant
for their help and i n t e r e st in the preparation of this
study.
Without the f i n a n c i al assistance of the Canada
Council and the University of B r i t i sh Columbia I would not
have been able to f i n i sh my work, so an expression of
gratitude must go out to them too.
Lastly, I would l i ke to thank the staff of the
l i b r a ry of the University of B r i t i sh Columbia, and
especially those in the I n t e r l i b r a ry Loan Office whose
assistance was above and beyond the c a ll of duty.
INTRODUCTION
So many times has Mikhail Lermontov been c a l l ed
the "Russian Byron" by so many c r i t i cs that the real issue
of the r e l a t i o n s h ip between the works of the English author
and the Russian one has been clouded by generalization and
oversimplification. Some1 have asserted with l i t t le
concrete evidence that the influence of Byron on Lermontov
2
is obvious. Others have denied Byron's d i r e ct influence
on Lermontov, s t a t i ng that if the l a t t er were influenced
by the English author, this influence came through
Pushkin.
Certain valuable e f f o r ts to c l a r i fy the question
have been made. Many are r e s t r i c t ed to general discussion
and contain l i t t le detailed analysis. Two doctoral theses,
J.T. Shaw's "Byron and Lermontov: The Verse Tale," and
W.K. Matthews' "The Influence of Byron on Russian Poetry,"
are among the exceptions. Shaw's f o r m a l i s t ic study is
an important document f or Lermontov scholars: through a
chronological examination of the works from the puerile
apings of Byron to Lermontov's fine narrative achievements
in Mtsyvi (The Novice) and Demon (The Demon) Shaw traces
}
Lermontov's very real desire to emulate h is professed
"master." Matthews points out certain Byronic features
of Lermontov1s l y r ic poetry. Most scholars, such as M.
2
Nol'man, K. Cherny and M.N. Rozanov have r e s t r i c t ed their
discussions of Lermontov's "Byronism" to the l y r ic poems.
There is no question that the Byronic obsession with s e l f-
centred melancholy pervades Lermontov's poetry. As E.
Duchesne has said "Un t r a it est particulierement frappant
chez Lermontov, la t r i s t e s se pessimistequi colore d'une
3
teinte sombre ses e c r i t s ." Lyric poems such as Parus
(The Sail), Vykhozhu odin ya na dorogu . . . (Alone I Walk
the Way) and Utyos (The Cliff) emphasize the poet's
preoccupation with loneliness. Lermontov's great love of
nature is i l l u s t r a t ed in such works as Mtsyri, Siniye gory
Kavkaza, privetstvuyu vast (Blue Caucasian Mountains, I
Greet You!) and Rodina (Native Land). The strange master
piece demon and others such as Moy Demon (My Demon) demon
strate Lermontov's Byronic penchant f or e v i l. Lermontov's
poems have a ll been well discussed, but up to now no
detailed analysis has been made of the Byronic features of
his novel A Hero of Our Time, which is the subject of this
study.
It is well known that Lermontov was fascinated
with Byron's l i fe and works. In h is writings, including
the masses of l e t t e rs and j u v e n i l i a, Lermontov alludes to
Byron over t h i r ty times -- twice as many as to the next
person (Napoleon), and s ix times the number of references
4
to Pushkxn. Byron is the only author with whom he claims
3
any kind of s p i r i t u al kinship and from whom he takes more
than one epigraph. There is considerable evidence that
Lermontov's passion for Byron's works began at the age of
thirteen as he read translations of the English poet's
works by Zhukovsky and Kozlov. A.P. Shan-Girey states
that a f t er the death of "Michel's" tutor Gindrot, a certain
Englishman Winson took his place in 1829 and began to
teach the young Lermontov English. In Shan-Girey's opinion
he was a good pupil f or soon he began to read Byron, Moore
5
and Scott in the o r i g i n a l. It is c e r t a in that Lermontov
read Moore's l i fe of Byron for he was so impressed that
he wrote a poem about i t, which claimed that he and Byron
had "one soul and the same sufferings." Ye. A. Sushkova,
with whom Lermontov was v i o l e n t ly in love, reported that
in 1830 Lermontov would recite Pushkin and Lamartine and
7
"was inseparable from his huge volume of Byron." This
volume may or may not have been the work by Thomas Moore,
or it could have referred to French translations of the
English author which were very popular at that time. At
any rate there are a number of translations and adaptations
from Byron's works, including poems which claim again
that he and Byron have one soul. For example in his poem
Net ya ne Bayron . . . (No I'm not a Byron. . . ) the
3
poet claims that he too is an e x i le and a wanderer and
wants to reveal his thoughts to the masses. But he states
that he is s t i ll unknown; he began e a r l i er than Byron and
4
w i ll f i n i sh e a r l i e r. Yet "the image he used to describe
the secrecy of his thoughts, s i g n i f i c a n t ly is related to
g
an image from Byron."
Perhaps even more significant are the Russian
author's attempts at finding resemblances between his
l i fe and that of Lord Byron. At best Lermontov clutches
at straws. He sees s i m i l a r i t i es in precocious love
a f f a i r s, predictions made by fortune t e l l e r s, unhappy
home circumstances and even scribbling verses. As Shaw
demonstrates these s i m i l a r i t i es are hardly "astonishing"
as Lermontov declared they were. It seems clear that
Lermontov was s t r i v i ng to find and emphasize any kind of
9
s i m i l a r i t y, important or not, between himself and Byron.
It is notable how l i t t le study has been made of
the Byronic features of A Hero of Our Time. I do not
intend to study mere influences of one author on another;
rather I believe that though the Russian author did identify
with many of Byron's t r a i ts in h is l i fe and works, he
modified and developed them from their o r i g i n al forms to
suit h is own l i t e r a ry purposes. For example Lermontov
used the fragmentary style of story t e l l i n g. The division
of the novel into five parts with their complex inter
weaving of plots and characters to obtain mystery and
interest, parallels the structure of such poems as Byron's
The Giaour}® Naturally I shall t ry to mention a ll the