As if determined to make his words a self-fulfilling prophecy, Balmont enslaved himself to the original text, like a desperate lover.He crafted translations that were so accurate in their mimicry of Whitman’s sentence and line structure that they were faithful to a fault (the clumsiest examples include “The Bravest Soldiers” turned into [shared], the first meaning of “common” in Russian). Balmont’s reinterpretation of Whitman in his translations and criticism involved a full-scale reimagining of Whitman and his work in visionary terms, the terms of poetic myth.This symbolist treatment was supported by Balmont’s main venue at the time — the influential literary almanac Balmont’s own position as an important symbolist poet and translator had long been secure.
Are they intended to be read together or separately? What about the different editions of Leaves of Grass? How does Whitman handle modernity and technological change?
Discuss the relationship of the poems in Leaves of Grass to one another.
They feel for many people, blend their souls with all creatures, make their minds present in the past, present and future.
If they are sensitive at all, the great epochs of change and reformation especially attract their imagination and having charmed them magnetically, such times send omens into the poets’ work, throw upon their writing flashes of their coming fires, the first blazes of their pearly and scarlet, tender and ferocious dawn.
To say, however, that the success of Whitman’s poems depended entirely on their appropriation by the purveyors of liberal propaganda is to ignore the poetry’s deeply spiritual resonance, without which the mysterious Russian soul simply would not be itself.
Ilya Repin, a painter and a Christian philosopher, expressed this resonance well when he wrote: ) American, who rose suddenly in front of me as Christianity’s second sun. How does Whitman incorporate current events into his poetry? What, in Whitman’s view, is the function of poetry? Describe Whitman’s account of his development as a poet. Walt Whitman’s influence on the creative output of 20th-century Russia — particularly in the years surrounding the 1917 Revolution — was enormous.As desperate lovers are wont to do, Balmont also projected his own glorified vision of Whitman as an icon of a new world onto Whitman’s work. For Whitman to sound as a prophet, however, his had to be the language of revelation: biblically self-referential, intentionally vague yet containing enough clues to suggest a hidden grand scheme.As Martin Bidney noted in his excellent essay “Leviathan, Yggdrasil, Earth Titan, Eagle: Balmont’s Reimagining of Walt Whitman”, [I]n presenting the American sage to the Russian public Balmont shaped both the Whitman persona and the form of its utterances according to his own style of writing, his own mode of vision, both in verse and prose. Thus, Balmont felt compelled to infuse the language of his translations with coded significance, over-using repetition, narrowing synonymic rows to one or two “key” words — as if beyond Whitman’s catalogues there lay another reality, to be summoned by rites and incantations, by repeating lines until meaning peeled away and only the ritual remained.Chukovsky was a school student, teaching himself English from dictionaries, old newspapers, and whatever he could buy from sailors.What were the chances that on that particular day, for that particular school-kid, the sailor would bring He was surprised to learn from his friends abroad that in Europe his own work was often compared to Whitman’s, and conceded to give the book a second chance. ” but that single sheet remained the full extent of his interest in Whitman.Chukovsky’s own poetic sensibilities can best be characterized as avant-gardist; this is considered by biographers one of the reasons for which Chukovsky’s talent as a poet was conscribed to children’s verse in the Soviet era.Unlike Balmont, who had an intuitive — and brilliant — affinity for complexly metered, if not necessarily rhymed, verse, Chukovsky’s ear was more rhythmically tuned.God’s child, Walt Whitman revealed in his simple heart anew the true meaning of God’s Word.Of course, I am unable to express the full importance of this raving apostle of the new democratic religion, but I believe this religion of fraternity, unity and equality is not as new as it appears to Mr. In Russia at the time, Kiseliova writes, writers and philosophers attempted to overcome the consequences of secularization, to return to the all-sacred word of the ancient Russian religiosity of knowledge.