Sledenje Byronovemu vplivu na Nikolaja Nekrasova

2018

The article investigates various facets of George Gordon Byron’s influence on Nikolay Nekrasov. Traditionally, scholars have viewed these two poets as antipodes, belonging to different literary movements, Nekrasov to Realism and Byron to Romanticism. However, an analysis demonstrates that the themes and problematics of Byron’s poetry, as well as the classic Byronic hero and motifs, remained relevant to Nekrasov throughout his entire literary career, beginning with his early collection Mechty i zvuki (1840), up to his poem Komu na Rusi zhit’ khorosho (1877). Particularly the latter’s structure was influenced by the structure of Byron’s long poems.

2013

is the mysterious link connecting the great Slavic literature with the literature of the West" 1. These surprising and unusual words were spoken by the greatest Polish poet, Adam Mickiewicz, on 20 December 1842 at the Collège de France in Paris. On 20 December 1842 Mickiewicz, a Romantic and the most important of Polish poets, the man who expressed the Polish mentality the most fully, was in his third year of lecturing in Paris and was trying to introduce the Western cultural elite to the Slavic world: he outlined the history, the literature, and the unique character of the Slavs. He spoke not only about Polish or Czech culture, but also about the Southern Slavs and about Russia, a country on which he was a great expert, not onlya paradoxas a tsarist prisoner but also as a friend of many Russians and a poet loved by the Russian intelligentsia of his time (but that's just by the way). It also needs adding that today Mickiewicz's lectures at the Collège de France are considered to be the sum and synthesis of Polish Romanticism. It was in the third lecture of the third year of the Slavic literature course, when Mickiewicz was discussing "how Slavic poets, men of letters, writers understand their mission and their duties" 2 , that those extraordinary words were spoken about the mysterious relations between the spirit of contemporary Slavic poets and the spirit of Byron. What is the real significance of identifying such a connection between Byron and Slavic poets? What is the meaning of the words: "Byron is the mysterious link connecting the great Slavic literature with the literature of the West"? How was establishing such a connection between Byron and Slavic poets possible? What is its essence? 1 All documentation refers to the original texts in Polish. The cited fragments have been translated into English by Joanna Dutkiewicz who also translated the present paper. Mickiewicz (1997: 33). 2 Ibidem, p. 25.

The Reception of Byron in Europe. Volume II: Northern, Central and Eastern Europe, ed. Richard Cardwell, Continuum Press, London and New York, 2004

One might find oneself in a fairly odd situation when trying to explore the Hungarian reception of Byron’s poetry. Most of the documents mentioning, dealing with or analyzing him or his poetry are more informative about the 19th-century Hungarian literary criticism than about the English poet himself. Naturally, this is not an entirely unexpected discovery as – regarding the history of his reception – the “Byron–phenomenon” is a totally separate chapter in other nations’ literature as well and is not merely about how the works of an English poet were received. For this reason, it would not say much if I tried to give an account of all 19th century receptive Byron–interpretations one after the other creating a kind of annotative bibliography with the ambition of literary​ history. The “real content” of these writings is not Byron, but some problems of the history of literary criticism and the approach towards literature. The aim of the interpretation does not seem to be Byron; on the contrary: in most cases, Byron is the illustration, the reasoning to something else, to something entirely different. To make this ‘something else’ apparent, it seems to be more practical first to shortly recount the process of Byron’s getting into the Hungarian literary consciousness.

2010

Every student of Polish literature knows that English and German poetry played a significant role in the Polish Romantic breakthrough. Most of us studied the Byronie hero on the basis of Mickiewicz's translation of The Giaour at school, and view him as an antecedent of Mickiewicz's Konrad Wallenrod, the mysterious remorse-tom national avenger figure. But I strongly suspect that because we are so familiar with this subject, we tend to ignore the intricacies involved in the Polish reception of British literature at the turn of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. BOA-Mickiewicz's pronounced aim was to create Polish national literature, which he perceived as only beginning to develop in the poetry of Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz and Franciszek Karpiński: Ancestors develop the language; that is what the poet has to find; that is what influences him. One has to wait a long time before the language [parallel to that] in which Don Juan was written develops. 1

Balkan araştırma enstitüsü dergisi, 2016

Lord Byron was one of many English writers who chose the East as the subject of their writings. However, his uniqueness stands in truly experiencing the region. Lord Byron, in his Grand Tour through Portugal, Spain, Malta, Albania and Greece, found a non-drying source for his writings. Above all, Balkan was the place where his muse dwelled. Sources that Balkan offered fascinated him and made him become a bridge between The East and the West. This study aims to reveal Byron's depiction of this mystical world in his work, The Giaour, as the first poem of The Turkish Tales. Being familiar with the diversity of religions and nations in Balkan, Byron used more than one narrator in the poem. This narration is the subject of our study through which we tried to prove that the mentality is something that Balkan inhabitants share and it prevails over their religious belief.

AUC PHILOLOGICA, 2016

The article contrasts Byron ' s use of Ossianic themes and style with Romantic Ossianism in the work of the leading Czech Romantic Karel Hynek Mácha (1810-1836). Although Byron ' s uses of Ossianic material seem restricted to his "juvenile" poetry (Hours of Idleness), it has been argued that features of Ossian poems are employed in Byron ' s later work. The analysis of Byron ' s uses of Ossianic material will show their affinity with Romantic Ossianism, especially in proto-existentialist terms, but also in view of hybridization of genres and styles (amalgamating a minuscule story of Ryno and Orla in the fifth book of Fingal with the Classical story of Nisus and Euryalus in the Aeneid). In the work of Karel Hynek Mácha, often described as the most important Czech follower of Byron, these features are strengthened in contact with a popular form of German Ossianism (Ernst Christoph von Houwald ' s tale Madness and Death) and also in resistance to dogmatic aspects of Czech nationalist ideology. In Mácha ' s poetry and prose fragments the juvenile features of his Ossianism (analogous to those of Byron) are overcome. Ossianic symbols (the stringless harp, the blind harpist) are used both "against the grain, " to deconstruct the nationalist ideology of the Czech "revival" or "resurrection, " and creatively-in Mácha ' s figurative language articulating the tragic temporality of individual and collective existence.

2014

The Inscription on the Monument of a Newfoundland Dog, which Byron had engraved on the memorial to his dog Boatswain in the grounds of Newstead Abbey, has been one of the most often reprinted and translated poems by Byron. In her book Kindred Brutes Christine Kenyon-Jones has thoroughly examined the genealogy of the poem and pointed to its potential for manifold interpretations and to its role in establishing the image of Byron as ‘a misanthropic dog-lover’. The Polish reception of the poem confi rms both its ideological and political potential and its role in the creation of one of the stereotypical images of Byron. This paper examines Polish translations of Byron’s Inscription, pointing to the role of the poet’s lives, particularly L. Belloc’s French biography, in the formation of the myth of the Byron and in the transmission of the knowledge of his works. It also traces literary allusions to the poem in the works of Polish writers. In the Russian-controlled Congress Kingdom of Po...

This article is devoted to the literary contribution of well-known Kazakh poet Abai Kunanbayev and the assonance of his works with G.Byron's works. The main assonance in their works is noticed in describing features of nature, laws of life. His main contribution to Kazakh literature was his translations from Russian poets and writers. He was first who found the school of translation in Kazakhstan. His transl ation skills are example to the translators of present generation. Also in this article is written the situations, which prevented to the development of translation from Kazakh language into Russian and other foreign languages and the reasons of prohibition publishing of Abai Kunanbayev's works. The government refused publishing Abai's works as Abai in his works criticized the head of nation, officials, the violence, the cruelty made up to people and the position of rich people under poor. The only way of s olving this problem was to take independence from Russian Empire and create own Kazakh government.

Konturen, 2015

2014

"This methodical and instructional monograph on Lord Byron and armenology does not limit the discourse within these two topics. Such a strategy would be detrimental factor to the subject matter presented here. In order to make this oeuvre meaningful a drastically arduous modus operandi must have been formulated to demonstrate armenology through Byronic mindset of approach to an endevour of re-writing an essay. For didactic reasons most of the English text of different writers were translated into Armenian, then they were all translated back into English from Armenian — like a XXI century palimpsest (παλίμψηστος). This is how Lord Byron would have done this task as an armenologist! Regrettably though justly, the title of the 'Father of Armenology' has been always reserved for St. Mesrop Mashtots. No one can be the father of armenology but an Armenian. Lord Byron was a master in Armenian studies, and the main force behind armenology to be propagated amongst European academics. Armenology consists of four main phases: Ա պարբերաշրջան) from V Century to early XVIII century; Բ պարբերաշրջան) from early XVIII century to the late XIX century; Գ պարբերաշրջան) from late XIX century to early XX century, and Դ պարբերաշրջան) from early XX to the present day. Lord Byron was studying its phase Ա from V century to early XVIII century. This was a serious undertaking for Byron, and it must have been a real devotion and love towards Armenian. Passages in Armenian are used throughout the text is a reminder, that Armenian studies cannot exist without Armenian. The chronological boarders for this oeuvre are 1788-1824. The main emphasis will be the period between the years of 1816 and 1824. This was a period in Byron’s life, when romantic poetry disappeared and it was replaced with the Armenian language, literature, history and music. Byron as a poet is left for others to discuss. Throughout the monograph Byron is looked at through a different lens to discover Byron as a man. Unfortunately, during recent decades so many biographies had fabricated and published numerous biographies on Byron, that the real Byron was lost in the vast quantity of babble. Byron became nothing but a commercial tool for publishers, who have tailored their own “Byron” to be marketed towards the reader’s “moral” and religion. This was mainly due to the conspiracy of “paper business” and publishing “standards“ which have created the most evil censorship machine ever. However, time changed everything. On one hand, this monograph will ruthlessly ignore each and every “standard” which was established and shamelessly maintained by men for hundreds of years either for the sake of public’s “moral” or defence of the “Christian values.” Byron deserves finally to be presented in his real colours, something that almost all Byron biographers have intentionally ignored partly due to their own ignorance in man’s psychology, especially when it comes to a homosexual man, who is in exile, disguised as Child Harold. On the other hand, this monograph will emphasize on armenology, where Byron found his own solitude. The essence of this monograph and its subject matter is not how others were possessed and captivated by Byron, or his gift of poetry, but rather the fact how Byron was haunted by Armenia, the Armenians, their language, literature, religion, culture etc. Throughout the text of this monograph Armenian, English, French, Greek and Russian languages are used. Most armenologists speak at least 5 languages. Lord Byron himself spoke Armenian, English, French, Greek and Latin. This is a standard phenomenon. However, the architectonics of the monograph allows the reader to block or disregard non-English text; the contextual relationship to the subject matter just in English will not be measured by the disturbed readers ignorance. The English text just by itself is an idiot proof discourse! Passages in Armenian are used throughout the text as a reminder, that Armenian studies cannot exist without Armenian. What would be the reason of compiling a monograph on Lord Byron and Armenology without Armenian? Therefore, “if the poet’s body belongs to England, and his heart — to Greece, then you, Armenians, inherit the purest element — a portion of his soul since his solidarity, peace and intimate love remains with You!” (Չ. Գամմել, անգլիացի բանաստեղծ). Human collective mind and effort is always victorious! This will be proven on every line of this essay. "