Aleksandr Pushkin 1799–1837
Russian poet, novelist, short-story writer and dramatist
Biography
Born Aleksandr Sergeevich Pushkin in Moscow, 26 May 1799. He was educated first at
home, and then attended the recently established Imperial lycée at Tsarskoe Selo, near St
Petersburg, 1811–17, where he began writing poetry. While writing, he worked as a civil
servant in St Petersburg, 1817–20, and in the latter year he gained public recognition for his
poetry but also attracted official disapproval for the political nature of some of it. As a result
he was exiled from 1820 to 1826, in southern Russia and later at his family’s estate at
Mikhailovskoe, near Pskov, before returning to St Petersburg. It was during the later 1820s
that he wrote much of his best-know poetry. In 1829 he spent some time with his brother and
others in the Russian army, during the conflict with the Turks in Transcaucasia. He married
Natalia Goncharova in 1831. In 1836 he became the founding editor of the periodical
Sovremennik [The Contemporary]. He died in a duel, 29 January 1837.
Many of Pushkin’s works, in a variety of genres, quickly became canonical in Russian
literature. They include the novel in verse Evgenii Onegin (Eugene Onegin), 1833; the
narrative poem Medny vsadnik (The Bronze Horseman), 1833; the short stories Pikovaia
dama (The Queen of Spades), 1834, and Kapitanskaia dochka (The Captain’s Daughter),
1836; and the verse-drama Boris Godunov (Boris Godunov), 1831.
Translations
Selections of Poetry
Anonymous, “[Russian Literature and Poetry]”, The Foreign Review and Contemporary
Miscellany, 2/4 (1828), pp. 279–309
Arndt, Walter, in his Pushkin Threefold: Narrative, Lyric, Polemic and Ribald Verse
(bilingual edition), New York: Dutton, 1972
Arndt, Walter, in Collected Narrative and Lyrical Poetry, translated by Arndt, Ann Arbor,
Michigan: Ardis, 1984
Bianchi, Martha Gilbert Dickinson, in Russian Lyrics: Songs of Cossack, Lover, Patriot and
Peasant, New York, Duffield 1910
Borrow, George, Targum: or, Metrical Translations from Thirty Languages and Dialects, St
Petersburg: Schulz and Beneze, 1835; London: Jarrold, 1892
Borrow, George, The Talisman: From the Russian of Alexander Pushkin, with Other Pieces,
St Petersburg: Schulz and Beneze, 1835
Bowra, C.M. [editor], in A Book of Russian Verse, various translators, London, Macmillan,
1943; reprinted Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1971
Bowra, C.M. [editor], in A Second Book of Russian Verse, various translators, London,
Macmillan, 1948; reprinted Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1971
Coxwell, C. Fillingham, in Russian Poems, translated by Coxwell, London: C.W. Daniel,
1929
1
Deutsch, Babette and Avrahm Yarmolinsky, in their Russian Poetry: An Anthology, New
York: International, 1927
Elton, Oliver, in his Verse from Pushkin and Others, London: Edward Arnold, 1935
Fennell, John, in his Pushkin, Harmondsworth and Baltimore: Penguin, 1964
Gray, Mary Kremer, A Collection of Short Lyrics by Pushkin, Done into English Verse …
From the Literal Translation of Ivan Bunin, Hartford, Connecticut: privately printed,
1936
Kisch, Cecil, in his The Wagon of Life and Other Lyrics by Russian Poets of the Nineteenth
Century (parallel texts), New York: Oxford University Press, 1947
Nabokov, Vladimir, in his Three Russian Poets: Selections from Pushkin, Lermontov and
Tyutchev, Norfolk, Connecticut: New Directions, 1944
Newmarch, Rosa, et al., in Poetry and Progress in Russia, edited by Newmarch, London and
New York: John Lane, 1907
Panin, Ivan, Poems by Alexandr Pushkin, Boston: Cupples and Hurd, 1888
Pollen, John, in his Rhymes from the Russian, London: Kegan Paul Trench Trübner, 1891
Shaw, Thomas Budge, “Pushkin, the Russian Poet”, Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine, 57
(June 1845) pp. 657–78; 58 (July 1845) pp. 28–43; 58 (August 1845) pp.140–56
Thomas, D.M., The Bronze Horseman: Selected Poems of Alexander Pushkin, London:
Secker and Warburg, and New York: Viking, 1982
Turner, Charles Edward, in his Studies in Russian Literature, London: Sampson Low,
Marston Searle and Rivington, 1882
Whittaker, Cynthia H., Alexander Pushkin: Epigrams and Satirical Verse, Ann Arbor,
Micigan: Ardis 1984
Wilson, C.T., in his Russian Lyrics in English Verse, London: Trübner, 1887
Yarmolinsky, Avrahm, et al., in The Poems, Prose and Plays of Alexander Pushkin, edited by
Yarmolinsky, New York: Modern Library, 1936
Yarmolinsky, Avrahm (editor), in A Treasury of Russian Verse, New York: Macmillan, 1949
Narrative Poetry
Tsygany, 1825–27
Arndt, Walter, The Gypsies (parallel text) in his Pushkin Threefold: Narrative, Lyric, Polemic
and Ribald Verse, 1972
Borrow, George, “Song: From the Russian of Pushkin” in his Targum: or, Metrical
Translations from Thirty Languages and Dialects, 1835
Bowra, C.M., “Gypsy’s Song”, in A Second Book of Russian Verse, various translators, 1948
Coxwell, C. Fillingham, The Gypsies (excerpts) in Russian Poems, translated by Coxwell,
1929
Fennell, John, The Gypsies, in his Pushkin, Harmondsworth and Baltimore: Penguin, 1964
Thomas, D.M., The Gypsies in his The Bronze Horseman: Selected Poems of Alexander
Pushkin, 1982
Turner, Charles Edward, “Zemphira’s Song”, in his Studies in Russian Literature, 1882
Evgenii Onegin, 1833
See entry on Eugene Onegin, below
2
Mednyi vsadnik, 1837, written 1833
Arndt, Walter, The Bronze Horseman in his Pushkin Threefold: Narrative, Lyric, Polemic
and Ribald Verse, 1972
Coxwell, C. Fillingham, The Bronze Horseman in Russian Poems, translated by Coxwell,
1929
Elton, Oliver, The Bronze Horseman in his Verse from Pushkin and Others, London: Edward
Arnold, 1955
Fennell, John, The Bronze Horseman (bilingual edition) in his Pushkin, Harmondsworth and
Baltimore: Penguin, 1964
Johnston, Charles, “The Bronze Horseman” in his Narrative Poems by Alexander Pushkin
and Michael Lermontov, New York: Random House, 1983; London: Bodley Head,
1984
Lednicki, Waclaw, Pushkin’s Bronze Horseman: The Story of a Masterpiece, University of
California Press, 1955 (includes Elton’s translation of the poem)
Thomas, D.M., The Bronze Horseman in his The Bronze Horseman: Selected Poems of
Alexander Pushkin, 1982
Turner, Charles Edward, The Bronze Cavalier (excerpts) in his Studies in Russian Literature,
1882
Short Story
Pikovaia dama, 1834
Aitken, Gillion R., “The Queen of Spades”, in his The Complete Prose Tales of Alexandr
Sergeyevitch Pushkin, London: Barrie and Rockliff, and New York: Norton, 1966
Anonymous, “The Queen of Spades”, Papers for the People, 38 (1850), Edinburgh:
Chambers, pp. 1–18; reprinted in Living Age, vol. 27, Boston, E. Littell, 1850 pp. 405–
13
Bronstein, Ethel O., “The Queen of Spades” in A Treasury of Russian Literature, edited by
Bernard Guilbert Guerney, New York: Vanguard Press, 1943
Chamot, A.E., “The Queen of Spades” in his Selected Russian Short Stories, London: Milford
and Oxford University Press, 1925
Debreczeny, Paul, “The Queen of Spades”, in Complete Prose Fiction, edited and translated
by Debreczeny, Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1983
Duddington, Natalie, “The Queen of Spades” in The Captain’s Daughter and Other Tales,
translated by Duddington, with an introduction by Edward Garnett, New York: Viking
Press, 1928; London: Dent, 1933; revised edition as The Captain’s Daughter and Other
Stories, 1961
Edmonds, Rosemary, “The Queen of Spades” in The Queen of Spades, The Negro of Peter
the Great, The Captain’s Daughter, translated by Edmonds, Harmondsworth: Penguin,
1962
Keane, Thomas, “The Queen of Spades” in his The Prose Tales of Alexander Poushkin,
London: Bell,1894; reprinted Freeport, New York: Books for Libraries Press, 1971
3
Myers, Alan, “The Queen of Spades” in Tales of the Late Ivan Petrovich Belkin, The Queen
of Spades, The Captain’s Daughter, Peter the Great’s Blackamore, with an
introduction by Andrew Kahn, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1997
Nack, James, “The Queen of Spades: A Russian Legend” in The Gift of Friendship: A Token
of Remembrance, for 1854, Philadelphia: Henry F. Anners, 1853, pp. 128–48
Townsend, Rochelle S., “The Queen of Spades” in Short Stories by Russian Authors,
translated by Townsend, London: Dent, and New York: Dutton, 1924
Novel
Kapitanskaia dochka, 1836
Aitken, Gillon R., The Captain’s Daughter in his The Complete Prose Tales of Alexandr
Sergeyevitch Pushkin, 1966
Debreczeny, Paul, The Captain’s Daughter, in Complete Prose Fiction, edited and translated
by Debreczeny, Stanford, California: 1983
Duddington, Natalie, The Captain’s Daughter in The Captain’s Daughter and Other Tales,
translated by Duddington, 1928
Edmonds, Rosemary, The Queen of Spades, The Negro of Peter the Great, The Captain’s
Daughter, translated by Edmonds, 1962
Hebbe, G.C., The Captain’s Daughter; or, The Generosity of the Russian Usurper
Pugatscheff, New York: C. Müller, 1846
Keane, Thomas, The Captain’s Daughter, in his The Prose Tales of Alexander Poushkin,
1896
Myers, Alan, The Captain’s Daughter in Tales of the Late Ivan Petrovich Belkin, The Queen
of Spades, The Captain’s Daughter, Peter the Great’s Blackamore, with an
introduction by Andrew Kahn, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1997
Telfer (née Mouravieff), Mrs.J. Buchan, The Captain’s Daughter in her Russian Romance,
London: H.S. King, 1875; reprinted New York: Island Press, 1946
Zielinska, Marie H. de, Marie: A Story of Russian Love, Chicago: Janson McClurg, 1877
Play
Boris Godunov, 1841, produced 1870
Barbour, Philip L., Boris Godunov (parallel texts), New York: Columbia University Press,
1953
Dole, Nathan Haskell, Boris Godunóf (excerpts; bilingual edition) in his Pushkin, 1964
Fennell, John, Boris Godunov: A Drama in Verse, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner, and
New York: Dutton, 1918
Hayes, Alfred, Boris Godunóv: A Drama in Verse, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner,
and New York: Dutton, 1918
Reeve, F.D., Boris Godunov, with an introduction, in his An Anthology of Russian Plays:
Volume I 1790–1899, vol. I, New York: Vintage, 1961
Turner, Charles Edward, Boris Godunoff (excerpts) in his Studies in Russian Literature;
reprinted in The Drama: Its History, Literature and Influence on Civilization, edited by
Alfred Bates, vol. 18, London: Athenian Society, 1903
4
Underwood, Edna Worthley, “Scene from Boris Godunof” in The Slav Anthology: Russian,
Polish, Bohemian, Serbian, Croatian, Portland, Maine: Mosher Press 1931
Selected Poems
The talent of Russia’s greatest poet was recognized by English-speaking critics as early as
1824 (Bowring, 1824, p. 98). Though Pushkin was too young to earn a place in Bowring’s
faulty but influential anthology (Specimens of the Russian Poets, London, 1821–23), his
poetry was first translated into English for an ANONYMOUS article in The Foreign Review in
1828. These short excerpts from Ruslan i Ludmila, Kavkazkii plennik and “Brat’ia
razboiniki” preserve Pushkin’s meter but alter his rhyme schemes.
BORROW, who worked in St Petersburg for the Bible Society from 1833 to 1835,
published two small volumes in 1835 containing the first complete English translations of
Pushkin texts: Targum offers “The Black Shawl” (“Chernaya shal’”) and “Song” (Zemfira’s
song from Tsygany), while The Talisman presents the title work (“Talisman”) and “The
Mermaid” (“Rusalka”). Borrow, a confessed emulator of Edward Fairfax in the “targumanic
art”, retains Pushkin’s amphibrachic tetrameter in “The Black Shawl”, but misleadingly
favours transliteration over translation when it suits the meter. (Though Pushkin and Borrow
never met, the poet sent his English translator a note of thanks in 1855 for copies of Targum
and The Talisman, and kept the book in his personal library.)
Pushkin’s (and, elsewhere, Gogol’’s) first important champion in English was SHAW
(1845), named adjunct Professor of English Literature at Pushkin’s old school — the Lycée at
Tsarskoe Selo — in 1842. For his insightful, sometimes errant, article extolling Pushkin,
Shaw offers complete translations of 23 poems in which the original meter and rhyme scheme
are preserved, but without the monotonous metrical regularity of Borrow. In a detailed
introduction to the translations, Shaw berates Bowring for “[spinning] a collection of easy
rhymes”, and made the following claim for his own work:
Of the poetical merit of these translations, considered as English poems, their
writer has no very exalted idea; of their faithfulness as versions, on the
contrary, he has so deep a conviction, that he regrets exceedingly the fact, that
the universal ignorance prevailing in England of the Russian language, will
prevent the possibility of that important merit — strict fidelity — being tested
by the British reader.
Shaw’s verse, like his critical prose, exhibits considerable sophistication, and he generally
passes the test of fidelity; his renderings are easily the finest of Pushkin’s nearcontemporaries.
For his appreciation of Pushkin, TURNER (English Lector in the University of St
Petersburg) offers linear translations (1882), in generally accurate rhythmic prose, of two
dozen or so excerpts from a wide range of genres. WILSON (1887) presents 11 metrical,
rhymed translations, freely abridging originals and altering rhyming schemes and meter; his
5
English style is labored. Ivan Nikolaevich PANIN (1888), a widely published theologist,
offers the first lengthy volume (179 pages) of Pushkin’s poems in English, rendering his 68
selections into painfully literal prose, often bending meanings to support his view that
Pushkin was “a lyre on which … God invisibly played” (p. 19); with his contempt for critics,
idiosyncratic literality, and crabbed annotations, Panin uncannily anticipates Nabokov’s
approach to Evgenii Onegin some 75 years later (50 years later, GRAY (1936), with no
knowledge of Russian, inconsistently versifies 24 of Panin’s renderings). POLLEN (1891)
presents 10 of Pushkin’s most celebrated lyric poems, often sacrificing rhyme to achieve
admirable syntactic clarity while generally maintaining Pushkin’s original meter.
NEWMARCH (1907) gives seven poems (in addition to two excerpts from Evgenii
Onegin) in her own translations and in versions by W.R. MORFILL and Helen FRANK; these
specimens tend to preserve the original rhyme and meter, though literality is often sacrificed
for the sake of natural English rhythm. As a preface to the 13 lyrics (and four Onegin
excerpts) by “the great founder of Russian poetry”, BIANCHI, (1910) aided by an unnamed
native speaker, falls far short of preserving the “exact rhythm” she professes to retain.
DEUTSCH, a noteworthy American poet, often collaborates with Avrahm Yarmolinsky
in anthologies of Russian poetry, the first of which appeared in 1921 (Modern Russian
Poetry, New York: Harcourt). The expanded edition, which appeared six years later
(DEUTSCH & YARMOLINSKY, 1927), contained 13 Pushkin poems in which Deutsch
scrupulously sought to preserve the original rhyme scheme, meter, and test length while
producing impressive alliteration and assonance, as, e.g., in “The Prophet” (“Prorok”). Her
translations, which often sacrifice precise literality, are the mainstay of Yarmolinsky (1936
and 1949). YARMOLINSKY (1936), the most extensive one-volume compendium since Panin,
offers 50 verse works, five of which were translated by Maurice BARING, Thomas SHAW,
Max EASTMAN, Constance GARNETT, and Oliver ELTON. Of the 45 Pushkin specimens in
Yarmolinsky (1949), all but one (translated by Eastman) appear in Deutsch versions.
COXWELL’s 35 specimens (1929) preserve original rhyme and meter, though original
paragraph- and stanza-breaks are often ignored; the sense of the original is disconcertingly
distorted. Of the 12 items in ELTON (1935), only two are lyrics; the translator favors sound
and structure over meaning, admires Shaw’s technical achievements (p. 22), and distorts
sense and strains style in order to retain original meters and rhyme schemes. The 47 Pushkin
poems in BOWRA (1943 and 1949) illustrate varying approaches of numerous translators
(BOWRA, Maurice BARING, ELTON, R.M. HEWITT, Maud F. JERROLD, V. de S. PINTO, W.A.
MORRISON). In NABOKOV (1944), the great prosaist and later defender of literality offers
rhymed metrical translations of two lyric poems and three long pieces from Pushkin’s
Malen’kie tragedii (Little Tragedies); in the lyrics, Nabokov eliminates feminine rhymes and
shortens lines while retaining an impressive degree of the original meaning. KISCH (1947)
presents the Russian and English in parallel, opening with 10 Pushkin lyrics in versions
which adhere to the meter and rhyme scheme of the originals.
6
In the most reliable English-language edition for students of Russian, FENNELL (1964)
furnishes 48 of Pushkin’s shorter poems — and six specimens of large-scale works — in
plain, graceful English prose; after the fashion of The Penguin Book of Russian Verse
(Harmondsworth, 1962), translations appear as non-linear blocks of prose under the Russian
originals on the same page. Even more encyclopedic in approach, ARNDT (1972) offers 74
shorter poems and seven longer specimens first in rhymed, metric translations, the in a
parallel section containing the Russian originals with plain prose versions opposite; in the
metric translations, structural conformity to the originals is often achieved by the introduction
of non-Pushkinian padding, and rhymes at times seem forced. In ARNDT (1984), the
translator’s numerous rhymed, metric translations (99 shorter poems, 12 complete narrative
poems, and excerpts from Onegin) are conveniently gathered together; the more obscure texts
in WHITTAKER (1984) make a useful, if much more uneven, companion volume. THOMAS
(1982), an accomplished British poet, adheres to no rigorous system, preferring to
approximate Pushkin’s meters and rhymes only when this does not interfere with the clarity
and force of the English; the 38 shorter poems and 10 complete longer items achieve a
stylistic naturalness rare in translations of Pushkin.
Narrative Poetry
The Gypsies (Tsygany, 1824)
BORROW (Targum, 1835; see above) offers the first English specimen from Tsygany:
Zemfira’s song. He preserves meter, rhyme-scheme, and sense, as in the first stanza: “Hoary
man, hateful man! / Gash my frame, burn my frame; / Bold I am, scoff I can / At the sword,
at the flame”. A rhythmic prose translation of the same song appears in TURNER (1882).
COXWELL (1929) offers four key excerpts in rhymed, metric versions, though
meaning is seriously distorted. BOWRA (1948) gives only Zemfira’s song, and preserves only
half the rhymes in his rather stilted English version. FENNELL (1964) furnishes a
scrupulously accurate prose translation of the complete Russian text, which appears above the
English on each page. A very literal, complete prose translation in ARNDT (1972) helpfully
appears line-by-line in parallel with the Russian: the metric translation is typical of Arndt’s
style (see above). In his fluid metric version, THOMAS (1982) abandons rhyme altogether,
and effectively interpolates a modified version of BORROW’s old rendering of Zemfira’s song.
The Bronze Horseman (Mednyi vsadnik, 1833)
TURNER (1882) gives 85 lines of Pushkin’s narrative masterpiece in sensible, rhythmic prose.
As elsewhere, COXWELL’s complete translation (1929) reproduces meter and rhymes at the
expense of meaning, though this version of Mednyi vsadnik is one of the more faithful items
in his Pushkin selection. ELTON’s (1935) annotated version frequently strains English style to
preserve the original rhyme scheme and meter, and the original meaning is often obscured;
LEDNICKI’s monograph on Mednyi vsadnik employs Elton’s translation as an appendix.
FENNELL’s prose translation (1964) under the original is a model of its kind (see
above). The versions in ARNDT (1972) have the virtues and vices of his other translations in
7
this collection (see above), though his rhymed, metric rendition is far more successful than
ELTON. THOMAS (1982) alters Pushkin’s stanza structure and chooses blank verse to stand
for the original rhymed iambic tetrameter, but the result is undeniably powerful. The
rhymed, metric translation in JOHNSTON (19894) is the most successful example of this
approach to Mednyi vsadnik; Johnston retains considerable line-by-line accuracy,
scrupulously reproduces the original’s structure, and achieves these difficult goals in tasteful,
fluid English verse.
Fiction
The Queen of Spades (Pikovaia dama, 1854)
The first English version of Pushkin’s most popular story appeared in ANONYMOUS (1850);
the original is shorn of its master epigraph and six chapter-epigraphs, and names are either
transliterated or concocted (as in the nonsensical “Princess Dolgorouski” and “convent of
Procashca”). None the less, this translation, though probably made from Merimée’s French
version (Phelps, p. 430), is reasonably faithful and complete, and the idioms of mid-19th
century English suit Pushkin’s tale well. James NACK (1853), who styles himself the story’s
author, proffers a completely recast abridgement, containing new character names,
redesigned incidents, and a moralistic tone and conclusion; the appalling result is more
Karamzin than Pushkin. Standing above the plethora of 19th century abridgements and
corruptions is KEANE, (1894) which has often been anthologized; this version is more literal
and sensitive to the original than ANONYMOUS (1850), though the chapter-epigraphs are still
missing and there are occasional mistranslations.
TOWNSEND’s more colloquial translation (1924) still lacks epigraphs, a flaw at last
corrected by CHAMOT (1925), who exactly reproduces the format of Pushkin’s original; the
metric translation of the epigraph for chapter 1 impressionistically renders a thorny mixed
meter, and the story’s general tone matches the detachment of the original. In her somewhat
more British version, DUDDINGTON (1928) also includes all epigraphs. BRONSTEIN (1943)
gives a more conversational rendering which reproduces the original’s topography, and she
provides footnoted translations of the four chapter epigraphs that contain French; her verse
rendering of the chapter 1 epigraph is closer to Pushkin’s original meter than Chamot, though
less agile. EDMONDS (1962) is faithful to the original format and offers several useful
footnotes, though her choices for English equivalents can be idiosyncratic, as in the
translation of the master epigraph. AITKEN (1966) offers a generally accurate, structurally
faithful translation in more modern English style. With its copious annotations and
scrupulous conformity to the original, DEBRECZENY (1983) is an excellent scholarly version
in graceful English; Walter Arndt furnishes the chapter 1 epigraph, and an 1819 fragment
anticipating the story’s opening scene is helpfully appended. MYERS combines close
adherence to Pushkin’s text, a fine introduction and notes by Andre Kahn, and a low price to
make this the textbook edition of choice.
8
The Captain’s Daughter (Kapitanskaia dochka, 1836)
The first English translation of Pushkin’s Scottian novel is HEBBE (1846). In her relatively
complete, tersely annotated version, TELFER eliminates the master epigraph and all 14
chapter-epigraphs and preserves verse in plain prose; the style is distractingly archaic, with
consistent use of forms of thee for second-person singular Russian forms nand excessive odd
transliterations peppering the text (e.g. yemstchick for iamschik). The abbreviated version of
ZIELINSKA (1877) is more appropriately colloquial, though the novel and one of its chapters
have been retitled to emphasize the hero’s love interest (Mar’ia Ivanovna Mironova), verse
passages and all epigraphs are omitted, and bizarre nicknames are interpolated. KEANE
(1896) presents a complete, annotated version without the mannered style of its predecessors;
verse passages receive rhymed, metrical translations, though the novel is still bereft of
epigraphs.
All epigraphs are included by DUDDINGTON (1928), as is Pushkin’s “omitted chapter”
(an early variant of chapter 13), though character names in the latter fragment are altered to
match those in Pushkin’s final version of the novel; archaism is avoided in this sparsely
annotated translation, with the rhyme and meter of verse passages only occasionally
preserved. EDMONDS (1958) annotates her version generously, includes all epigraphs and the
“omitted chapter” (with names altered as in Duddington), and preserves meter and rhyme in
the poetry specimens. The technical approach of AITKEN (1966) (format, verse renderings) is
identical to that of Duddington, though the annotations are somewhat fuller and the original
names in the “omitted chapter” are retained. As with Pikovaia dama, DEBRECZENY’s edition
(1983) leads the field; a graceful, literal translation is supported by almost 90 authoritative
notes and a faithful version of the “omitted chapter”. Thanks to Andrew Kahn’s excellent
introduction and annotations, MYERS offers a version that comes close to being as attractive
as DEBRECZENY. There are occasional misleading divergences from Pushkin’s original (e.g.
failure to translate posazhennyi otets as “proxy father” in chapter 12, which keeps the reader
from making a crucial connection back to Grinv’s dream in chapter 2), but the low price of
this edition makes it a good choice for those seeking a textbook.
Play
Boris Godunov (Boris Godunov, 1831, produced 1870)
The first English translation of Pushkin’s Shakespearean drama took the form of illustrative
excerpts for critical essays on the poet. TURNER gives five or six pages of translated material,
rendering Pushkin’s iambic pentameter and prose passages in rhythmic, generally accurate
prose. DOLE (1889,1890) preserves the original meter and opts for archaic diction in his
nearly complete presentation of Pimen and Grigorii’s scene, an extended excerpt from
Dimitrii and Marina’s garden scene (“Noch’. Sad. Fontan”), and shorter excerpts from
several other key scenes.
The first complete English version is HAYES (1918), who provides stress for most
names, favors translation over transliteration for place names, annotates untranslatable puns,
furnishes a list of dramatis personae (absent in the original), and leaves macaronic passages
9
in their original languages; two scenes omitted by Pushkin from the published Russian
edition are included in the main body of the play (though this is inconsistently noted).
UNDERWOOD (1931) gives one excerpt — the complete text of “Noch’. Sad. Fontan”) — in
iambic pentameter with slightly altered stanza structure. In his complete translation, Barbour
(1953) renders verse in iambic pentameter, and provides a parallel Russian text, extensive
notes (which contain English translations of the macaronic passages), dramatis personae list,
and Pushkin’s “omitted” scenes; there are fewer deliberate archaisms in Barbour than in
Hayes. REEVE’s literal translation (1961) into modern English makes only a casual attempt to
reproduce Pushkin’s iambic pentameter, and is the first to include the original dedication to
Karamzin; the “omitted” scenes are left out, and a short introduction to the play takes the
place of notes. Fennell (1964) furnishes key excerpts (Boris’s monologues, “Noch’. Sad.
Fontan”, Boris’s death scene, Basmanov and Pushkin at headquarters) with contextualizing
explanations above a scrupulous, modern English translation.
THOMAS P. HODGE
Further Reading
Alekseev, M.P., “Dzhon Bauring i ego ‘Rossiiskaia antologia’” and “Pushkin i angliiskie
puteshestvenniki v Rossi” in Russko-angliiskie literatunye sviazi: XVIII vek-pervvaia
polovina XIX veka), Literaturnoe nasledstvo, vol. 91, Moscow: Nauka, 1982
Alekseev, M.P., “Pushkin i zapad” in Pushkin i mirovaia literatura, Leningrad: Nauka, 1982
Bayley, John, “Select Bibliography” in his Pushkin: A Comparative Commentary,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971
Bowring, John, Specimens of the Russian Poets, vol. 1, 2nd edition, London: R. and A. Taylor,
1821; Boston: Cummings and Hilliard, 1822; vol. 2, London: Thomas Davison, 1823
Bowring, John, “Politics and Literature of Russia”, Westminster Review, 1/1 (January 1824)
pp. 80–101
Cross, Anthony, “Early English Specimens of the Russian Poets”, Canadian-American Slavic
Studies, 9/4 (Winter 1975) pp. 449–62
Feinstein, Elaine (editor), After Pushkin: Versions of the Poems of Alexander Pushkin by
Contemporary Poets, with an introduction by Feinstein, Manchester: Carcanet, 1999
Kandel’, B.L., “Ukazatel’ perevodov poemy Mednyi vsadni na iazyki narodov SSSR ii
inostrannye iazyki, in Mednyi vsadnik, by Pushkin, Literaturnye pamiatniki, Leningrad:
Nauka, 1978
Kandel’, B.L., “Ukazatel’ perevodov romana Kapitanskaia dochka in Kapitasnskaia dochka,
by Pushkin, 2nd edition, Literaturnye pamiatniki, Leningrad: Nauka, 1985
Lewanski, Richard C. (editor), The Literatures of the World in English Translation, vol. 2:
The Slavic Literatures, New York Public Library / Ungar, 1967; revised 1971
Phelps, Gilbert, “The Early phases of British Interest in Russian Literature”, Slavic and East
European Review, 36/87 (June 1958) pp. 418–33
Simmons, Ernest J., “Pushkin in English” in his Pushkin, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard
University Press, 1937
Wiener, Leo, in his Anthology of Russian Literature, part 2: The Nineteenth Century, New
York: Putnam 1903, pp. 122–25
10
Yarmolinsky, Avrahm (editor), Pushkin in English: A List of Works by and about Pushkin,
New York: New York Public Library, 1937
See also the translators’ introductions to Elton, Fennell, Thomas and Arndt (1984)
Eugene Onegin
Evgenii Onegin, 1833
Subtitled “A Novel in Verse”, containing eight chapters, 1825–31; originally published as
separate chapters 1825–32, and then twice during Pushkin’s lifetime in book form: 1833 and
1837.
Translations
Translators have used various editions, often making comparisons between two or more
versions and sometimes including passages that Pushkin ultimately rejected. During his work
on the novel, Pushkin frequently altered the text, rewriting some stanzas, adding or dropping
others, and even eliminating what was originally the eighth of nine chapters and aborting a
tenth. The two most authoritative modern editions, the large Academy edition of 12937 and
the small Academy edition of 1949, contain some differences in their efforts to arrive at a
canonical text.
Arndt, Wlter, Eugene Onegin, New York: Dutton 1961; revised edition, 1981
Clough, S.D.P., Pushkin’s Eugene Onegin (parallel texts), Oxford: S.D.P. Clough, 1988
(originally published by the translator in Hommage to Pushkin, Malvern,
Worcestershire, 1978 and 1982)
Deutsch, Babette, Eugene Onegin, in The Works of Alexander Pushkin, edited by Avrahm
Yarmolinsky, New York: Random House, 1936; revised edition, Baltimore and
Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1964
Elton, Oliver, Evgeny Onegin, London: Pushkin Press, 1937
Falen, James E., Eugene Onegin, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1990;
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995
Hofstadter, Eugene Onegin: A Novel in Verse / A Novel Versification, New York: Basic
Books, 1999
Johnston, Charles, Eugene Onegin, London: privately printed, 1977; New York: Viking,
1978; revised edition, Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1979
Kayden, Eugene M., Eugene Onegin, Yellow Spriongs, Ohio: Antioch Press, 1974
Nabokov, Vladimir, Eugene Onegin, 4 vols, New York: Bollingen Foundation, and London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1964; revised edition, 1976, 1981
Radin, Dorothea Prall and George Z. Patrick, Eugene Onegin, Berkeley: University of
California Press, and London: Cambridge University Press, 1937
Spalding, Lieutenant-Colonel Henry, Eugene Onéguine, London: Macmillan, 1881
11
Alexander Pushkin’s Eugene Onegin, subtitled “A Novel in Verse”, stands at the head of the
entire 19th-century Russian literary tradition. Referred to by at least one contemporary critic
as “encylopedic” on account not only of the breadth of its subject matter and allusions but
also of the richness of its vocabulary (and the resulting associations, which cannot be fully
duplicated in another language or at another time) as well as of its impressive variety in
narrative manners and tone, the novel remains both a progenitor in terms of character types
and language, as well as an outstanding achievement in its own right.
Few of the masterworks in the Russian poetical tradition translate well into English,
and with Onegin the problem is compounded by the formal devices that Pushkin employed to
dazzling effect. The poem is written in the iambic tetrameter, the most popular verse line of
Pushkin’s day, and the lines are then fitted into the so-called Onegin stanza, a 14-line unit
that rhymes AbAbCCddEffEgg (where small letters small for masculine or one-syllable
rhymes, and capitals for feminine rhymes, spreading over two syllables.) Pushkin maintains
the form over nearly 400 stanzas throughout the work, but manages to vary the effect by
employing both enjambment and a range of rhythmic and tonal manners.
While iambic tetrameter verse is not uncommon in English, the rhythms of that line in
English (which has shorter words and more frequent stressing than Russian) are simply not
the same, nor does the English tradition regularly make use of the distinction between
masculine and feminine rhyme to the extent that Russian poets do. That, along with the
difficulty of capturing Pushkin’s distinctive tone and rich pattern of lexical associations, may
help explain the extraordinary difficulty of conveying to the English reader just why this
poem is regarded as arguably the greatest work in Russian literature.
Despite its early date, the effort by SPALDING (1881) shows more than a little merit.
He follows Pushkin’s rhyme scheme, but, as is more typical for English verse, prefers to use
masculine rhymes almost exclusively. On the whole, his line scan well, the awkward
syntactic structures, while distracting at times, are hardly worse than those found in many of
his successors, and his rendering is reasonably accurate: in his prefaced, he mentions
checking his work against French and German translations, and the care shows. His
textological choices differ from those accepted today: he uses the titles for chapters that were
later dropped, he does not assign numbers to the “omitted” stanzas (and as a result his
numbering differs from that found in standard editions of the work), and he seems to have
gone back to at least a couple of different editions when deciding what to include — in any
case, he has at least some material that Pushkin eventually chose to omit. The lexicon is less
varied than that in Pushkin, and the translation frequently fails to convey the varieties in tone
that help account for the work’s liveliness; still, for his day, Spalding served his subject well.
The twentieth century translations all appeared in groups; the first three were
published close to the 1937 centennial of Pushkin’s death, the next three in the early 1960s,
and the most recent versions between 1986 and 1999. Of the first three, RADIN (1937) (using
a prose translation by PATRICK) chooses to ignore Pushkin’s use of feminine rhymes
throughout, and, what is more, in the first quatrain of each stanza rhymes only two of the four
12
lines. The decision to ease the restraints that the Russian places on the English is
understandable, though the result is to sacrifice the Onegin stanza as such. The verses
generally read smoothly, more smoothly than in many of the translations, and the language
does not grate on the modern ear. However, the tone of the English needs to be more varied
and the lexicon a tad more rarefied; Pushkin did not confine himself to everyday words.
DEUTSCH (1936) and ELTON (1937) both follow the Onegin stanza precisely, but with mixed
results. The former employs a modern poetic diction that would seem well-suited to Pushkin,
but there are frequent misjudgements in choices of individual words; the result is a text that
loses many of the subtle echoes in the Russian. Elton is the most exacting of the early
translators in purely academic terms; he carefully follows a 1930 Russian edition which in
term is based upon Pushkin’s own final edition of 1837. However, he often resorts to oldfashioned vocabulary and to filter words that flesh out his lines; the language ultimately lacks
Pushkin’s grace.
`
Among the next set of translations, the KAYDEN (1964) is a disappointment. He
rhymes only eight of the 14 lines in each stanza, and this half effort to follow Pushkin seems
inadequate in the light of what came before. The one rhyme that imitates the pattern of the
Onegin stanza, the final rhymed couplet, often seems awkward or forced — those crucial
couplets are more effective in the work of nearly all the other translations. The other two
translations of this period resulted in a huge controversy, which reverberates to this day and
perhaps did as much to increase the English-speaking public’s awareness of Pushkin as any
of the actual translations. NABOKOV (1964) does not simply provide a translation of the
poem, but adds an extraordinary commentary, along with a discourse on Russian verse theory
(long enough to be published as a separate volume) and a reproduction of the 1837 Russian
edition. At the same time, he chooses to ignore most features of the Onegin stanza than the
14 lines; the translation is in rhythmic prose with a generally iambic rhythm. To this day it is
hard to know what to make of this version; nearly all would agree that the commentary, while
at times verging on parody in its pedantry, is none the less extraordinarily valuable, but even
scholars of Russian literature find his efforts at a literal translation too heavy-handed and too
filled with lexical rarities. He attacked what he perceived as a rival translation by Arndt, who
replied in kind and who ultimately received the support of most who compared the two
versions. Like Deutsch and Elton, ARNDT (1963) reproduced the Onegin stanza faithfully,
but with a verve and feeling for the original could not match. His is not the perfect
translation; the effort to follow Pushkin’s tight scheme leads to some awkward constructions
and unsuccessful rhymes, which stand out all the more because of his overall success in
reproducing the sound and style of the original.
The version by CLOUGH, originally published by the translator in 1978 and 1982 as
part of his collection of translations from Pushkin and more recently reissued (1988) along
with most of the Russian text on facing pages, is something of an anomaly, making no effort
to maintain the form of the original. The stanzas and chapters are broken up into 13
“scenes”, with portions of Pushkin’s text simply omitted. The unrhymed free iambs are
reminiscent of Nabokov, to whom Clough expresses a debt, but the work is perhaps more a
paraphrase than a full translation.
13
For two decades, Arndt remained the standard, but it has more recently been
challenged by Johnston and Falen, both of whom remain faithful to the Onegin stanza. In
terms of quality, there is little to choose, though all three read quite differently. JOHNSTON
(1977) cites the Nabokov translation as his source for accuracy, and he is perhaps a bit closer
to the original overall than Arndt and has fewer instances of awkward syntax. On the other
hand, his rhymes are perhaps less successful and individual lines sometimes do not scan well.
FALEN (1990) also makes clear use of Nabokov in an attempt to ensure accuracy, and he
admits to learning from all his predecessors, though he has a voice very much his own. The
feminine rhymes in his version are occasionally awkward and a few turns of phrase are
jarring, but many lines and entire stanzas work extremely well. A fourth recent translation,
HOFSTADTER (1999) comprises a kind of anti-Nabokov, in that rather than adhering
scrupulously to the original he freely admits to a limited knowledge of Russian and bases his
effort largely on previous translations; despite some felicitous lines in this obsessive tour de
force, he does not match the standard set by his three immediate predecessors. While the full
magic of Pushkin’s poem may continue to elude translation, readers can rejoice at having
three quite accomplished versions and one sparkling commentary on hand.
BARRY P. SCHERR
Further Reading
Arndt, Walter, “Goading the Pony”, New York Review of Books (30 April 1964)
Brown, Edward J., “Nabokov and Pushkin (with Comments on New Translations of Eugene
Onegin)”, Slavic Review, 24 (1965) pp. 688–701
Clayton, J. Douglas, “The Theory and Practice of Poetic Translation in Pushkin and
Nabokov”, Canadian Slavonic Papers, 25/1 (1983) PP. 90–100
Dolinin, Alexander, Eugene Onegin entry in The Garland Companion to Vladimir Nabokov,
edited by Vladimir E. Alexandrov, New York: Garland, 1995
Eskin, Michael, Nabokovs Version von Pushkins “Evgenii Onegin”: Zwischen Version und
Fiktion: eine übersetzungs und fiktionsttheoretische Untersuchung, Munich: Sagner,
1994
Hofstadter, Douglas, „What’s Gained in Translation“, New York Times Book Review (8
December 1996) pp. 47–48
Hofstadter, Douglas, Le to bon de Marot: In Praise of the Music of Language, New York:
Basic Books, 1997
Leighton, Lauren G., Two Worlds, One Art: Literary Translation in Russia and America,
DeKally: Northern Illinois University Press, 1991
Monas, Sidney, “Where Are You, Pushkin?”, Hudson Review, 17 (1965) pp. 597–608#
Nabokov, Vladimir, “Problems of Translation: Onegin in English”, Partisan Review, 22/4
(1955) pp. 496–512
Nabokov, Vladimir, “On translating Pushkin: Pounding the Clavichord”, New York Review of
Books, (30 April 1964) pp. 14–16
Rosengrant, Judson, “Nabokov, Onegin, and the Theory of Translation”, Slavic and East
European Journal, 38/1 (1994) pp. 13–32
14
Shaw, J. Thomas, Translations of Onegin”, Russian Review, 24/2 (1965) pp. 111–27
Wilson, Edmund, “The Strange Case of Pushkin and Nabokov”, New York Review of Books,
(15 July 1965) pp. 3–5
See also the translators’ commentaries in translations mentioned above.
From: Encyclopedia of Literary Translation Into English, Volume 2, ed. by O. Classe,
Taylor and Francis 2000, pp. 1126–1133.
15