We all learned a little

Something and somehow...

We all remember that Pushkin's Onegin "knew enough Latin to understand epigraphs" and that Pushkin himself often used epigraphs in his work. In the first case, they meant "ancient inscriptions on monuments, buildings and tombs", which were included in textbooks and anthologies (Lotman Yu. M. Pushkin's novel "Eugene Onegin". Comment. L., 1980. pp. 131-132), and in the second we are talking about quotes before the essay or its section, expressing the author's idea, the main topic, idea, conflict. Alexander Sergeyevich liked to play with the word and with the" alien " text, and in the same "Onegin", after mentioning "epigraphs" (in chapter I), he gave a double, punning epigraph to the second chapter - in Latin and in Russian:

"O rus!.. Hor." ("O village!.. Horace") and " O Rus!". Pushkin used epigraphs extensively and inventively, mainly in prose and verse novels, but not in lyrical poetry.

In the future, Russian poets also avoided inscriptions-quotes in the lyrics. And those who at least occasionally resorted to them, usually remembered Pushkin's lines. Such epigraphs appeared during Pushkin's lifetime, for example, in E. Rostopchina's poem "Dream" (1830) - from the epistle " To Chaadaev "(1818), in Alexander Polezhaev's elegy "Prison" (1837)-from the poem "Robber Brothers": "Water, water!.." But I'm in vain/I gave the sufferer water." Both poems responded to the free-spirited poetry of the young Pushkin and were published a few years after their writing. The first one referred to one of the lists of" To Chaadaev "that were passed around:" Believe me, my friend , it will rise (...) Write down our names!", and in the second under

page 3

the epigraph was marked with the initials A. L., which, by the way, repeated Polezhaevsky's.

Unlike Evdokia Rostopchina, who provided epigraphs (including Pushkin's) for almost every work, without fear of accusations of bookishness, her contemporary and rival Karolina Pavlova used them extremely rarely. And, probably, it is no accident to the poem " Three Souls "(1845) about the fate of three poetesses (Rostopchina, American L.-M. Davidson and others) were preceded by two lines from "Eugene Onegin": "But it is sad to think that in vain/We were given youth". Probably, it was E. Rostopchina, who worshipped the genius of Pushkin and dedicated poems to him ("Oh, I will not forget / That Pushkin's inspired smile/ My simple-minded verse was awarded"), and began the tradition of referring to Pushkin's epigraphs in Russian poetry, and this was noticed by her contemporaries.

Poets of the second half of the XIX century and the beginning of the XX century responded to this tradition: Nekrasov and Polonsky, Pleshcheyev and Nadson, Bryusov and Balmont, Severyanin and Khodasevich, and especially Anna Akhmatova, in whom Pushkin's epigraphs not only perform an ideological and thematic function, but also play the role of a "push" for the development of the plot, or a reference point in thought, or the tuning fork of the mood, and for this it is enough not 2-3 lines, but one and not the whole phrase: "And the decrepit bunch of trees" ("Willow"), "And the Tsarskoye Selo guardian canopy..." ("To the City of Pushkin"), "From the Tsarskoye Selo lime trees..." ("The Heiress").

This is how L. Y. Ginzburg explains the interest of writers in quoting::

"Other people's words are always a godsend - they are taken for what they are; they still cannot be improved and remade. Other people's words, even remotely and inaccurately expressing our thoughts, act as a revelation or as a long-sought and found formula. Hence the charm of epigraphs and quotations" (Ginzburg L. Ya. The Man at the Writing Table, L., 1989, p. 12). However, not everyone succumbs to this charm. And the point is not only in the lack of book culture and in the direct relation to reality, for example, in A.V. Koltsov, Sergei Yesenin, Alexander Tvardovsky (Grishunin A. L. Epigraph / / KLE. M., 1975. Vol. 8. Stb. 916), but also in the fundamental refusal of direct citations (O. Mandelstam), from the authority of someone else's opinion (M. Tsvetaeva).

For most Soviet poets, the authority of the sun of Russian poetry was unquestionable, it was sung and quoted, dedications were addressed to it, and references were made to it. For many, starting with And. Utkin and ending with V. Sokolov, there were also Pushkin's epigraphs. More often than others, they were used in his work by David Samoilov, who referred to himself as the "late Pushkin pleiad". Thus, the author relates the story of the last days of the Patriotic War and his participation in it to Pushkin's phrase: "I have matured/Among the sad storms... "(the poem "Near Countries"), and in the poetic story "Julius Klompus" Pushkin's lines "Late at night from the campaign" are played out./

page 4

The voivode has returned, " and the Samoylov hero is forced to escape from the bedroom of another man's wife, because her husband has returned. By the way, the poet often quotes his favorite Teacher from memory and instead of" returned " writes "returned" or adds "a" in the surname of Chaadaev, which is absent in the original:

"Chadaev, do you remember the past?", which breaks the Iambic rhythm ("Chaadaev, do you remember the past?" - "Night guest"), but for some reason the editors do not notice these descriptions.

But perhaps the most exceptional, unique example of the use of Pushkin's epigraphs is found in the poetry of Arseny Tarkovsky, who created a cycle dedicated to them (consisting of four poems - all of them are preceded by Pushkin's poems) and entitled "Pushkin's Epigraphs" (collection "Winter Day", 1980); By the way, such "condensed" epigraphy was peculiar to the author. Akhmatova's "Poem without a Hero", all three parts of which and the preface had epigraphs (though not only Pushkin's). If for Akhmatova, the reference to the classic gave an opportunity to hint at the subtext of the poem with its "triple bottom" ("There are no others, but those are far away","... I drink water for Years, / I am forbidden by the doctor to be sad"), then Tarkovsky set himself other tasks, choosing for his cycle Pushkin's theme of the poet and poetry, poetic vocation and the fate of the artist ("soul in the cherished lyre"). and by entering into a dialogue with the great predecessor.

In the first poem "Why, tell me, sister ..." with the epigraph " Sing me a song like a titmouse/Quietly beyond the sea lived ... "Pushkin's tit, caught in the "Winter Evening" from a Russian folk song, turns into a singer-soul who carries the unbearable burden of human existence and must sing, no matter what.

Sing about how you drank earthly Pain, salt, and bile (...) Sing how the Snow falls like a shroud on the apple blossom, How the wheat has risen, So that the hail has beaten the wheat ...

Pushkin's echoes at various levels - lexical, syntactic, metrorhythmic, rhyme - permeate the entire text:

sing, how-sing about how; let's drink (...) mug - get drunk, ladle;

for my poor youth - my poor burden; for my poor hovel-an unreliable dwelling; "you look through the forgotten gate on a dark, distant path" - the gate will not open, from me on the way back; you are tired - the body may languish. And the same verse size as in "Winter Evening" - 4-stop chorus, and the same rhyme na-itsa (tit-maiden): sister-to get drunk, languish-bird, tit-lies down, wheat-stops-singer (both of them in a more modern sound). The forms of address (my old lady, girlfriend; you, my friend) also overlap., -

page 5

sister, tramp; you, soul), and images of nature - but in Pushkin the winter storm is likened now to an animal, now to a man (as a traveler, as a child), and in Tarkovsky the elements (snow and hail) fall on spring and summer vegetation, bringing it death (shroud), as "living flesh" "the deadly needle." So Pushkin's request to the nanny turns into a spell addressed to the free soul of the singer and repeated seven times, and the realization that "poetry is a dangerous occupation, it requires payment with life and death" (from an interview with A. Tarkovsky to the magazine "Questions of Literature". 1979. N 6).

The second epigraph is also a textbook, but not a "song" one, but a book - romantic and fragmentary one:" ...As a fleeting vision, / As a genius of pure beauty...And the poem begins with a comparison: "Like that Caucasian Prisoner in the pit...", that is, it would seem, refers us to Pushkin's poem, but soon it turns out that this is not Pushkin's Prisoner at all, but Tolstoy's: "he made whistles for children", "the children threw me scraps", " and Into the pit like a caged animal,/The children were looking at me." At first, there is a noticeable discrepancy between the highly poetic epigraph and the mundane, everyday sketches, but gradually the transition is made from toy "goats, sheep, camels and cockerels" (with a deliberate injection of diminutive suffixes) - to the problem of art and from "the clay of my poverty - pathetic art" - to high poetry. And now there are Pushkin's motifs of oblivion (I forgot, I lived vaguely, I sent heart anxiety, laziness of the heart, half-sleep of the soul) and awakening: "Like a fleeting vision, / The Muse appeared to me again... "(cf. in Eugene Onegin: "The Muse began to appear to me"). From the whole spectrum of Pushkin's resurrection - "and the deity, and inspiration, and life, and tears, and love" - Tarkovsky chooses one inspiration - " for the salvation of the soul languishing in a half-dream...". The muse frees the lyrical hero from the pit, brings him to the light and gives forgiveness.

And the laziness of my heart forgave me, Even now, in my declining years.

This ending seems to continue the ending of the previous poem ("Sing, soul, you will be forgiven"), where forgiveness was spoken of in the future tense and in an indefinite personal form as a desire and hope-here they are fulfilled, and a distinct autobiographical note is heard: the author was over 70 years old. If Pushkin's love gives birth to "wonderful moments" that mean the fullness of life, and "you" - "a genius of pure beauty", then Tarkovsky's "you" - a Muse that rescues the poet from everyday captivity and spiritual sleep.

The third epigraph is taken from "Poems composed at night during insomnia" and is broken off in a half-verse: "Why do you bother me?/What do you mean..? "(omitted "boring whisper"). Pushkin questioned life, trying to find its hidden meaning: "I want to understand you,/

page 6

I'm looking for meaning in you...". Tarkovsky also asks questions to Pushkin: "Tell me at least to a descendant ,/How to live in the world...", otherwise formulating them and being interested not in "whispers", "murmurs" and "reproaches", but for what to live for - "...for the sake of heaven, or for the sake of / Bread and vanity of the earth, / For the sake of/Words said in a notebook... " (for the spirit, body or poetry)? And instead of mythological and natural images that embody the complexity and mystery of life ("Parks babble babble, / Sleeping night flutter./ Life mouse running..."), there is a "disassembled" puzzle: "I took the puzzle apart - /I can't put it together." But it is useless to wait for ready-made solutions, and ironically reinterpreted words from the epigraph are heard:

I shout, but he doesn't hear me, Burns the candle until broad daylight, As if he's texting me back:

"Why do you bother me?"

The author sneers at himself for the familiar treatment of the classic with "you", for waiting for a solution from the "alien generation", whose "hop" makes his head spin, for his claims to teaching - "following me". Or maybe he laughs at those who easily enter into conversation with the "great and gone" (S. Yesenin). Is it worth calling out their shadows if you can have a conversation with their creative heritage?

The riddle of being, like Pushkin's, remains unsolved: "Good God, am I really going to follow him/In and out of life past the goal?/Past the meaning of being?" What is this - a summary of the bleak results of the life searches of both poets or one? What does it mean to go "to life from life": to your own from Pushkin's?.. What is there more in this "really" - tragedy, despair, bewilderment, fear of an aimless and meaningless life? Is calling out to God in search of truth or in supplication? In general, the "puzzle" can not be assembled, and hopes for help from the outside are unrealistic.

The tragic irony is intensified in the last poem, and the epigraph is chosen not from Pushkin's lyrics, but from "Small Tragedies" ("The Miserly Knight"), but again an interrupted verse: "I want a chest every time/My unlock... " ("I'm getting hot and trembling"). The first lines after the epigraph seem to be a parody:

The store cheated me out:

The cashier needs my cell phone number more.

From the world of Pushkin's Miser with its untold riches, we find ourselves in the Soviet reality with its poverty, penny-pinching deception, and pathetic miscalculation. But there is avarice that overcomes chivalry, and here is poverty that is ready to give up its last penny. This is where the juxtaposition of the two heroes begins. One for life, all the powers of the mind and

page 7

I spent my souls on acquisition, convinced of the power and power of gold: "What is beyond my control? like some kind of demon/ The other gains other values - "incomparable sorrows", "precious jealousy", "royal generosity" of lies and networks of slander, "blue as turquoise". In his chest, as in Pandora's box, there is "neither wealth nor fame", but only sorrows and disasters. The poet is the antithesis of the Miserly Knight, not only because he is a poor "rich man", but also because he is not one of the persecutors, but of the persecuted. A merciless usurer took money from the poor and enjoyed their suffering, Tarkovsky's hero is in the position of a persecuted person:

They shot me right in the chest, like in a shooting gallery, and chased my soul like a prize.

But he does not feel like a victim, is proud of his lack of money, and is even grateful to the "best people" and " evil givers "for giving him, along with other" gifts " - "the right to direct free speech". So, the sorrowful life of one person is interpreted as the lot of a Poet.

This switch from the everyday, single, random plan to the hagiographic one (the artist's life as asceticism) ends the whole cycle. And it began with appeals to the poet's soul to respond to the "calls of being" (recall Pushkin's "all the impressions of being") and with the hope of understanding and forgiveness. At the end, there is a roll call not only with Pushkin's demand for freedom of creativity ("The road to freedom/Go where your free mind leads you..." - "To the Poet"), but also with Akhmatova's belief in the salvation and preservation of "Russian speech, the great Russian word", "free and pure" ("Courage").

"Following" Pushkin ("following him") Tarkovsky reflects on the meaning of being, on his life's journey, on creativity, and, rereading Pushkin's works, creates his own "versions"based on their motives. Not limited to epigraphs, the modern poet includes in his poems Pushkin's reminiscences, quotations, paraphrases, and parodies, playing epigraphic lines, which are the main subject of the dialogue between the descendant and the ancestor.

After Tarkovsky, few people turned to Pushkin's epigraphs: it is difficult to say anything new in this area. Boris Chichibabin and Yuri Levitansky were among the few who decided to do so. The former, citing as an epigraph to the poem "Poet's Defense" (collection "Kolokol", 1989) the words of Pushkin: "And among the insignificant children of the world, / Perhaps he is more insignificant than all", enters into an open dispute with the classic, sharply objecting to him: "but that I may be more insignificant than all,/ that's why a genius can't be right", "I swear that a poet can't be insignificant even for a moment". And the second epigraph "Summer tends to harsh prose..."

page 8

(unsigned) is a starting point for a conversation about the relationship between poetry and prose (collection "White Poems", 1991):

I suppose Pushkin, saying

that, they say, is ready for harsh prose,

not so simple and this was the question...

Reflecting on Pushkin's phrase, Levitansky argues that its essence is not in the need to switch to prose genres in adulthood, but in the fact that prose should be "put into verse", "not shunning everyday nonsense".

And today I say to prose-enter my poems and make yourself at home!

And in response to the critics 'accusations of their winglessness, an ironic voice is heard:" A year, "I will say," a year!" In both poems, we see an unusual, unconventional use of epigraphs.

Thus, according to our observations, in Russian poetry of recent decades, the interaction between the epigraph and the text is becoming more complex, deeper, and more multifaceted, and "conversations" with Pushkin and his work are more direct and active, but occur less and less often, perhaps because it seems "read out" and outdated.

Safed

Israel

Permanent link to this publication: