|
Henry James (whose novels are models of structural clarity
and symmetry) once referred to Tolstoy\'s War and Peace as a
\"loose and baggy monster.\" He might have said the same about
Anna Karenina, which, like War and Peace, is an epic, a sweeping
story on a grand scale. On the other hand, Anna Karenina is
more compact than War and Peace, and might be said to be a
psychological rather than a historical epic. It\'s easy to
imagine Tolstoy thinking of his novels much the way he thought
of Russia--as territories so vast their boundaries are out of
sight.
Tolstoy\'s epics are extremely realistic. They are filled
with precise physical details intended to convey to you an idea,
a mood, a feeling. Every time Karenin cracks his knuckles, for
example, you know he is nervous. When Anna screws up her eyes,
you know she is straining to see, trying to understand what is
happening either in front of or inside her. Kitty\'s \"truthful
eyes\" are a window to her undeceiving nature. And Stiva\'s
frequent playing with his whiskers is an indication of his
vanity and self-centeredness.
Tolstoy\'s set pieces--minutely rendered, theatrically staged
sequences--by themselves would have guaranteed him a permanent
place in literature. Not only does he give you an indelible
picture of a specific incident but he intertwines the
advancement of plot, the development of character, and the
elaboration of major themes. Notable set pieces in Anna
Karenina include Kitty and Levin\'s wedding, the steeplechase,
the harvest, and the hunt.
Symbolism and foreshadowing are also important techniques;
Tolstoy often uses them together. A symbol is something that
stands for something else. Tolstoy often uses a stormy sky to
symbolize--or represent--the turmoil in Levin\'s soul. One event
is said to foreshadow another if it gives a hint of what is to
happen later. For example, Vronsky\'s killing his horse in the
steeplechase foreshadows his responsibility in Anna\'s death
later on. It also symbolizes Vronsky\'s careless egotism. The
train station is a symbol of disaster. Anna\'s recurring dream
set in a train station foretells--or foreshadows--that she will
die in such a place.
Tolstoy did not go in for fancy language. What he wanted,
above all, was to communicate directly to his readers, and he
does so through fine observations presented in vivid, precise
language.
The translation considered the closest to Tolstoy\'s style is
that of Aylmer Maude (1918; revised 1938). In 1901, Constance
Garnett, the renowned translator of Dostoevsky and other Russian
writers, did an English version of Anna Karenina. Garnett\'s
translation is a more old--fashioned reading than Maude\'s.
Compare the following passages from Part VII, Chapter 23:
In order to carry through any undertaking in family life,
there must necessarily be either complete division between the
husband and wife, or loving agreement. When the relations of a
couple are vacillating and neither one thing nor the other, no
sort of enterprise can be undertaken.
(Garnett)
Before any definite step can be taken in a household, there
must be either complete division or loving accord between
husband and wife. When their relations are indefinite it is
impossible for them to make any move.
(Maude)
Another comparison, from Part I, Chapter 22, will show
further the difference between the two translations:
It was one of Kitty\'s happy days. Her dress did not feel
tight anywhere, the lace around her bodice did not slip, the
bows did not crumple or come off, the pink shoes with their high
curved heels did not pinch but seemed to make her feet lighter.
The thick rolls of fair hair kept up as if they had grown
naturally on the little head. All three buttons on each of her
long gloves, which fitted without changing the shape of her
hand, fastened without coming off. The black velvet ribbon of
her locket clasped her neck with unusual softness. The ribbon
was charming, and when Kitty had looked at her neck in the glass
at home, she felt that that ribbon was eloquent.
(Maude)
It was one of Kitty\'s best days. Her dress was not
uncomfortable anywhere; her lace berthe did not droop anywhere;
her rosettes were not crushed nor torn off, her pink slippers
with high, hollowed-out heels did not pinch, but gladdened her
feet; and the thick rolls of fair chignon kept up on her head as
if they were her own hair. All the three buttons buttoned up
without tearing on the long glove that covered her hand without
concealing its lines. The black velvet of her locket nestled
with special softness round her neck. That velvet was
delicious; at home, looking at her neck in the looking-glass,
Kitty had felt that the velvet was speaking.
(Garnett)
Again, Garnett\'s version is a bit dated--we don\'t refer to
\"berthes\" any longer, nor do we say that shoes \"gladden\" our
feet. But note an interesting difference, less to do with
language than with perception. Garnett, a woman, imagines more
fully the feel of the velvet locket on her neck; she sees it as
speaking to the wearer. According to Maude, a man, the locket
speaks to Kitty\'s admirers.
Look through both translations. Maude\'s is said to come
closer to Tolstoy\'s vigor. Yet, keep in mind that Garnett was
one of the earliest major English language translators of
Russian literature. All translations done after hers owe her
some debt.
|
