American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages

Dead Souls in Translation Author(s): Carl R. Proffer Reviewed work(s): Source: The Slavic and East European Journal, Vol. 8, No. 4 (Winter, 1964), pp. 420-433 Published by: American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/304423 . Accessed: 12/01/2013 09:46
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Slavic and East European Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dead Souls in Translation

By Carl R. Proffer Reed College Periodically for more than a centuryDead Souls has been mutilated by translators. This lamentable fate began in 1854 with the
first English version, published in London under the title, Home script was written in English and had been submitted to the editor by a Russian noble who, for his own protection, could not be named. The editor says his "task has been confined to altering such verbal errors as might be expected, when we bear in mind that the Author has writtenin a language which is not his own... " The lot of Dead Souls in France was little better. In his translation (1859) Ernest Charribre called the chapters "songs" and affixed chapter titles The fragments of Part such as Le fou et le sage dans les steppes. Two were added, andthe work was "completed" with a French translation of a continuation of Dead Souls written by a Ukrainian named Atruly Gogolian fate! Dead Souls survived Va[[enko-Zaxarienko.2 all this, as well as bad translations by Isabel Hapgood and Stephen Graham. These are not commonly used now, because there are four modern translations available in paperback editions-those by B. G. Guerney, A. R. MacAndrew, David Magarshack, and Helen Michailoff. 3 Constance Garnett's translation is still available in the Modern Library series, and because of her reputation it deserves Stylistically the Guerney translation is the best. More than the others it conveys (sometimes sacrificing accuracy) the variety, But this translation has a very spice, and spirit of the original. serious defect which should be pointed out to teachers: the text differs radically fromGogol' 's definitive text. In his first edition (1942) Guerney, providing no documentation, notes oniy that he consulted three different texts. In the revised 1948 edition the translator says "all available texts have been consulted. " He continues: "Here, for the first time in English, the real tale ['Tale of Captain Kopejkin']is presented as based upon the author's first, suppressed version, with all due consideration given to the version usually 420 SEEJ, Vol. VIII, No. 4 (1964)
some comment. 4

Life in Russia.

In the forewordit was explained that the manu-

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dead Souls

in Translation

421

reader will find an entire chapter (the tenth, in this translation)

Englished. Also, in addition to manypassages, some of themquite long, hitherto scamped in translation or not translated at all, the whichhas never, to the best of the translator's knowledge, appeared
in English before." (xiii. ) It is no wonder that these passages had never appeared in English. The fact is that the passages to which he refers are unfinished manuscript variants. Guerney interpolated

Andwhen they did not fitvery neatly (as in the case of the so-called chapter ten), he took upon himself the task of deleting part of Gogol' 's own text. In his translation Guerney incorporates these passages which do not belong to the definitive Russian text: (1) from "As everybody knows, a feminine opinion" to "He became alluring" (184); (2) from "Say what you will, but balls are a fine thing" to "I love pleasant, harmless sociability" (186-187); (3) the last paragraph of chapter nine (228); (4) the whole of chapter ten (228-238). The texts used by Guerney in these four cases are variants. They may be found in Gogol' 's Complete Collected Works, VI, 603, 628, 629-640.s Guerney deleted a long passage fromchapter nine of the definitive Russian text-from Prelde vsego otneslis' k Koroboc2ke to the end

these fragmentsinto Gogol' 's final text wherever they would fit.

ofthechapter (195-196). This passage should, but does not, appear

in Guerney, 228. polated ? It is impossible to know how they are presented in the

Whatis the quality of the variant texts which Guerneyhas inter-

editions Guerney used, because he does not specify them. But in the edition of Gogol' 's complete works already cited the Russian text of Guerney's "chapter ten" contains fifty-four words inserted
in square or diagonal brackets by the editors--indicating

these words were struck out by Gogol' or that they representthe

editors' conjectures about words which are partially or totally indecipherable. Guerney's translation of the passage containing Oicitext. Forexample:
cayqamI, a OT IKOTOpbIX*' I'KaI cobepembc

either that

kov's mediation on balls (186-187) is also based on an incomplete M, Heypoxami, MJI KaCO "XoJIo~ Ji

o0o BceM" (603). The editor's footnote reads: V rukopisi fraza ne Nevertheless Guerney translates the sentence: "It zakon'ena, be may freezing, and the crops may have been poor or there may be something else for you to fret about, but when people come together
In the same passage they forget ... " (186, ital. mine). Guerney translates: "FydepHaTOpcrKmN rnoBap, . iymaio <1 HP30.)>"(603)

MIHO0 BMeCTe, no3adyaemb

the firstpublication of Dead Souls, planned to use these particular

in Diiikov's

as "the Governor's chef is famous" (186). There is no evidence that Gogol', who lived for ten years after passages in subsequent editions. Guerney comments cryptically

about the censorship. But there is nothingthe censors would fear

reflections on balls or in feminine opinions of men.

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

422

Slavic and East European Journal

Apparently Guerney's additions are simply passages which he liked. In one case he took only half of one paragraph fromGogol' 's variant. The text is twenty-five lines long; I cite only a few lines fromthe middle of the passage: MbIcJIae noeP- H "Hro obpasy IAyxy 1 13 18 CTOJIeTHI, HO Odpa3 BbIpaxeHH1 H\1 naJi OH oJIbLme K 19 CTOIeTMIO; BbIXOPIJIO IOInypI, KIOTOpoe Hp3d.>HeCCOJIbIO OCObeHHO 3aMyCHHM, OMeHb HpaBvJIOCB. [HpHVTOM] rydepHCKIHM, ObIIO COBceM B peuax Tr.I4MVoOBa, OHM bIJIH COBepmeHHO I3BeCTHO, HTO e306oAHLI M He MorIM [HM~aK] HOCCOpHTB. MyXTMHHenpzgaeT ojibmue BOpOCTH O~oPMTeJIbHbIV OT3bIB AaM HaCMeT IKpacoTbI. 3TO BO3BOPIoT B TaCKoe CBeTJIOe HaCTpoeHMI (602-603.) Guerneydoes not use all of this, but just from AYyx ..." Izvestno c'to mu''ine to the end of the passage (184). If he believed Gogol' intended to use this variant, he should have used the entire passage himself. And he should have documented the deviation from the accepted text. The intercalation of the extra chapter alters the structure of the As it was, Gogol' expressed concern about the structural novel. weaknesses in the second half of Dead Souls: "HIKTO He 3aM8eT4JI oTpadoTaHa MeHbLue jgaxe, HTO nOCJIeiAHH IHOJIOBHa IKHMFPI TO B HeI BeJIIKIIe IupoInyCKI, rJIaBHbIe M4BaXHbIle nepBoI., ITO H odCTOTeJICTBa comcpawgeHbI, HeBaXI)HbIe 14 C)IaTMbI OOIOMHbIe BLICTynaeT BHyTpeHHHI JZyX pacIipOcTpaHeHbI, HTO He CTOJIMKO CKIOJIbKIOMeqeTCq{ B FJIa3a riecTpoTa qacTeI BCerO COMHHeHHM, H JIOCKyCTHOCTL ero."(VIII, 288.) Also, the inclusion of "chapterten" unjustifiably expands the role of KoroboZka and Sobakevic. In terms of characterization, it is repetitious; it is a peripheral episode which is too lengthy. Gogol' used instead a passage in which he succinctly describes the reactions of Sobakevii, Koroboika, Manilov, and Selifan to the inquiries of the town officials (195-196). Guerney deletes this concise summary, replacing it with the long chapter which, in any case, Gogol' had not completed. Perhaps another reason that Gogol' did not use this chapter is that it provides motivation for the death of the prosecutor. He feels mortally wounded by Sobakevi"'s verbal attack on his character. He wonders if SobakeviE is correct, if his life has been worthless and meaningless. Were the author anyone except Gogol', motivation might be a reason for including the chapter. Butwhat is humorous, and at the same time frightening, about the death of the prosecutor is the utter lack of motivation; it is a meaningless absurdity in a world of absurdities. Thus, in the definitive text, the prosecutor dies ni s togo, ni s drugogo; it is a senseless death. Among Gogol' 's manuscripts is this note on Dead
6eCCMJIbHaI M3HM He DTO rOBopaWeio cMepTB0I. IOKax cTpa-llHoe C06bIT4e coBepmaeTca deccMBIcJIeHHO."(692, ital. mine.) Anotherinstance of Mr. Guerney's unconscionable textual juggling is inthe "Tale of Captain Kopejkin." It is well known that the version "Ia YcToTa Souls: CMeHHIOTCH MyTHOIO, HM4erO np a3AHOCTL

He

HagOBHO

cIa3aTb,

HTO

HM 3aHOCMHBOCTI,

HM HacMelIJIIBOCTM

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dead Souls in Translation

423

of the " Tale" sent to the censors was forbidden and that Gogol' wrote a completely new version which was passed. This new version appeared in the first and second editions of Dead Souls. However, in all modern editions the original "Tale" is restored-using the manuThis does not satisfy Mr. script originally submitted forcensorship. Guerney. He uses the original version of the "Tale" first; then he grafts onto this a few pages froman even earlier manuscript of the "Tale. " The interpolation from this earlier version appears in Guerney's translation from page 249 ("he had collected") to page 251 ("a new scheme" ).6 There is no justification for adulterating the final version of the "Tale" with an early draft. In Gogol' 's Complete Collected Works there are some six hundred pages of variant texts of Dead Souls. Among these are many highly amusing passages which Gogol' did not incorporate in his final text. We have no rightto select those which please us and tack them on here and there, particularly if this entails deletion of part of the definitive text. It is a pity that Mr. Guerney ruined a fine translation by taking such liberties, only the most flagrant of which I have noted here. There are three reasons why students should be advised not to use Andrew MacAndrew's translation of Dead Souls: (1) It is not a complete translation; many words, phrases, and whole sentences are omitted. (2) It contains numerous mistranslations. (3) It contains many poor translations. Though these faults mar the entire translation, the examples given below are taken almost exclusively fromchapters seven through ten. Not translated are the following:'gdJa IaBJIa MBaHOBHua He cylreCTByeT 3aTpy HeHMIy/"(140; "Boodme MacAndrew, 159);7 CMAeJI, KaK PFOBOpHTC~I, Ha CBoeM MecTe M AOJIXTHOCTL CBOIO nOCTMrHyJIB COBepmIeHCTBe" (14 9;168-169); "RI o06erqamJa cede HOC" (159; 179); "Ta-c, caKoBo cede, MoxeTe Boo6pa3Tb ero noJIo)KeHMie TyT, C OAHOI CTOpOHbI, TaK CIa3aTb, CeMra a c ApyroI-TO Sapby3, eMy HOAHOCIT Bce OAHO M TO xe There are frequent cases where JIimoo: '3aBTpa' "(203; 228). single words or phrases are not translated: i tret'ego etaz'a (141; MacAndrew, 159); bojko (135, line 30; 153); povelitel'no (142; 160); izdali (150; 169); eto stolica (163; 184); dama s belynmperom (164; 185); tak stranno (166; 187); daleko.. . u samogo vyxoda (162; 183); "eleznye skobki (176; 198); sudyr' moj (199, line 15; 223); moz'ete voobrazit' (201, line 3; 225); von, govorjat (201; 225); za s'est'ju stenami (206; 231). Gratuitous abridgment of Gogol' 's text results in such shoddy translations as the following: "cceMb JIeT coxpaHaBm1MMc B TOM xe rnoJIoxeHM M Ha TOM e MecTe" (161) - "that he had kept stored away for seven years" (182);"roBopi4JhM Te rOTopbie bZJIIMI no3aJaopHee" (151)-"they shouted" (170); "geJIaJ sBecLMa AJIxMHHbIe

CKIM M ICaKoro

BbIfIACKIH HO IeJbnIM JMCTaM, HO B MeM COCTOMJIM 3TM BbIlIM-

poga

TO HMICOMY He OHM BIJIMA3

bIJIO I13BeCTHO"

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

424

Slavic and East European Journal

(157)- "taking lengthy notes, although no one ever discovered what theywereabout" (177); "FIomaIJ BApyr B XO)? A ~bJIA pacKynJTeHi HapacxBaT" (160)- "there was suddenly a great demand" (180); BBIfyI?JIbI apby3"(176)-""a fat watermelon" (197). "TOJICTOleIKM, Scastlivoe ix pereselenie (151) becomes simply "their resettlement" (170); izvestnyj Ivan Antonovic (148) becomes simply "Ivan Antonovich" (167). Frequently Mr. MacAndrew abridges (or alters) Gogol''s series or catalogues, particularly those which contain proper names. For example: M nFImmeT cyA: fpenpoBOAM?T Te6~ F3 I?apeBonoimamcKa
B TIOPBLM Taxoro-TO npenHpOBO1Tb Tesr

M TBI B3 KaxoM-HM6BY BecberoHcK, A B z3 nepee3xaem b ce6e TIOMBI TIOPLM1y roBopAImb, ocMaTpMBasa HOBoe o6MTaJIMiue: "HeT, BOT BecBeroHciaH B aICI, TIOPLMa y eT noMIome: TTa XOTL 4 B Tax eCTL a 0 m MeCTO, ou~MecTBa 6oabmue! "-"AbaKyM orpoB!" (138139, ital. mine.)

ropoaa,

a TOT

cya

IIimeT OnISITb:

And then the court decides that your case and your person are to be transferred to some other town and some other jail. So move new and to no! The you your you say: 'Oh, quarters, jail I've just come from is much cleaner and there's enough space there to play a game of skittles. And there's more social life too.. . "And you, Akim Fyrov... " (156-157.)
He CTOuWaHS HAMa3TO COBeplmeIHHO nomIaa JIOXB, " 3a cetc TeM CorO BHMMaHAMS! M BCJieA xe Mac OTfnpaBHTCH MCKaT TpeTbero cMepTHoro, qTOOBI, paccKa3aBIMA eMy, noceie BMecTe C HMM BOCKCJIaIMHyT C dJIaropoAHbIM

"Lay

MeHHO o~oBleT MX HM eCTB,

HerOAOBaH4IeM:

HTpA3HaIOT, TO qTOMI O HeM rOBOpAHTb. (173.)

I To Henpe"IKacas nomuaasi xIo!" Bce Becb ropon, MI cMepTHICe CCoJIbtO HarOBOpSITCSI HenpeneHHOIAOCbITa z IOTOM TO He CTOT M He OCTOMHO, BHmNaHI

"Why, but it's an obvious lie-one shouldn't pay any attention to it!" And so, the lie is certain to go all over town, and every mortal will have his fill of discussing it before he agrees it's unworthy of his attention. (194. ) Mr. MacAndrew abbreviates even short catalogues. Thus pered trojnymi podsvec'nikami, cvetami, konfektami i butylkami (174) becomes simply "among the three-branched candlesticks and the bottles" (195). Other passages which have undergone such distortion are: p. 162, lines 8-13; p. 167, line 1; p. 170, lines 10-21; p. 73, lines 22-24.

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dead Souls in Translation

425

Mistranslations are numerous:"BO3BeCTH ee B IIepi Co3zaHHe" (134)- "make a work of art out of them" (151); "noMeImHua Kopobouqia" (136)- "mother Korobochka" (153); c"HJIM, Kar y Hac BBIpaxaIoTcs,, (141)-"or, if you wish, charmingcpacHBoi nJIoomanH" square" (159); " gae, I~eJIKHyB naJIbtuaMH" (151) - "and then, snapping his fingers" (171); CHO HecpaBHeHHO 3saMeaTeJIBHee" (157) - "but even more striking" (178); "Ho Bem~lb JIa oMeHL (158)-" was essential" (178); "no BLrpabeHHIO CBImeHHaai" ropoIncKoro cBeTa" (158)-"asitwas called in the town" (179); "cTaixaH BegeT "this seems be to misbehavHexopomo glass cebe" (159)and waring" (179); "MapCOBCIroe H BoeHHoe" (165)-"impressive like" (186); "HenpHSITHOCTL"(1 76)- "deterioration" (197); "CleeKH DTOrO ap y3a" (176)- "the doors of this contraption" (197);"Bcee AaMaM coBepmeIHHo He IIOHpaBHJIOCb TaKoe obxo3reHHe HIntxCOBa" (170)- "by no means did all the ladies approve of Chichikov's behavior" (191). Frequently mistranslations are accompanied by other abridgment "canorm C pe3HIMHl and distortion: BCex IBeTOB, BbTJlIaziaaMH ropon TopryeT iarozapH KcaIcHMm Topxot, xaJIaTHbIM doio nosyxzeHbHM pyCCKOM HaTypl" (135) - "boots which were of the kind with multicolored decorations (which sell very well, owing to the Russian predilection for casual wear)" (152);8 "MaCTO bIJIM CJIOBa HMeHHH OTeCTB, M IOTOM BbICTaBIeHBI TOJIbKOHaaJIbHbIe (136)-"whenever possible he had just used the initials" sBe TOMrCH" (153); "BMAHeIOT no BceI jIOmanH IKCYM HaMaBaJIeHHaIX B nHpaMxie6 M~y, mca s~pa,MeoB, rpoBH IoaHO BbIrJIRZAIBaeT Becb over the are sacks in square piled pyraHLI apceHaJ" (139)--"all mids; there's no end to the grain" (157); "3x KatoM AJIHHHLIZ, BO " (136)--'"What an odd one! " (153); "To, BCIO CTPOKy pa3sexaacsq! simply stayed that way" (159). In addition to outright errors, there are other poor translations, unskilful translations which do nothing more than convey the general idea expressed by Gogol'. They are dull and spiritless. For example, pljunes* (175) becomes "in the end you get tired of the whole business" (196). Drugoe zapoe~' (198) becomes "You'd talk differently" (222). Gogol' 's italicized drugoe-tret'e (158) is " something "Y Moero private" in one case, simply "anything" (179) in another.
-caniMTaHa

He pIIpHHHMaa TaI~ H OCTaBaJIOCb Ip I3HIMn, was dirty that (141) "anything HapyCHOCTH" npIjBJeraTea3mHOM MTO MOIJIO FpSH3HO,

CaxiHMX-HMHyAM AecaHTI CmHIOX" (200) is "mind you, this Captain Kopeikin has on him perhaps ten five-ruble notes at best" (224-225). I can think of no surer way of ruining Gogol' for those who are reading him for the first time than to recommend such a clumsy, careless, uninspired translation as this.9 In some respects Constance Garnett's translation of Dead Souls stands the test of time rather well. The most unsatisfying thing about
COCTOHT H3

KoneMKHHa

Becb

accMrHaLHMOHMI

aHrc,

IOHIMaeTe,

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

426

Slavic and East European Journal

it is that Gogol"s style becomes indistinguishable fromthat of Turgenev, Tolstoj, Dostoevskij, or Cexov. And, although her translationis superior to MacAndrew's, it does suffer from some of the same For example, some single words and phrases are shortcomings. omitted: posle moej smerti (130; Garnett, 183),10odni dlinnye (220; 38), bez konca (220; 39), kak prizrak (221;40), v eto vremja (222; 42), kak citatel' videl (222; 42), sovsem (54, last line; 78), nezametno (56, line 6; 80). Such omissions naturally result in distortion. As modifiers disappear "HectcoJbtco I3 (56) beymIJIzI erPo" Beex" (56)comes simply "He was.astonished" (81); "sHaJIa noiTIr
"knewthem all"

(42); "rinpexaBmeMI AaevaM"

BeMHOI

(81);

"BeJ4coAymLH'o

(179) -

"the lady's"

BBIHoczIJa"

(222)--"rescued"

OJIbCTBI4e" (38) is simply "pleasure"

no anILeMiMeIicTep,

cTapoCTM"

(127)-"old

age"

(180); and "He0oJabmoe

(251); "'ecTeJioynoB-

TopaI

translation of "I/4IMCB HaaJIa BAjoPMTb HaaTeaere sentence("PepoMi

Kaa BOAIITCH, to "even the police master bantered" (243); and "Tchitchikov soon perceived a human figure wrangling with the peasant" (160) is the

noAmy-IMIBaJTI" (173)is contracted

(55).

Gogol''s "cAae cam

But in only one instance have I discovered the deletion of an entire

Ham LbIJa CaJIBHO paccepxeH" [217]). Ingeneral

MyczxmcoM,npHexaBUIMM

copo

3aMeT4JIa

Kyo-TO a

M'Irypy,

ico"(114).

one. Other such errors are: "cambrii 3IycaBBii MCOHL" (217)- "a sly brute" (35); "?CO 3BOH" (220) -"a jingle of bells" (39); JICOJIbHbIH (222) - "shining pond" (41); "cca cve-To cyxze z "saCHI InpyAA' ee (171) - "brief and ordinary" (240); "cecTpe OOBItKHOBeHHbIe" of sent sister a material" MaTepzIIy" piece my TIp c~caizm (180)--"I B BopoTa OBI M1MMYXY-IHe" (253); ~xBaTIaJa... CIJIHO TaI she were XOT (177) - "beat on the gate as though beating a man" (248).

she is much more scrupulous than MacAndrew. Although outright errors in translation occur even less frequently than omissions, they do exist. For example: v dolznostnom sloge (202) is translated "in the language suitable" (14) instead of "in the official style" (that used in bureaucratic dolznosti); posle vypuska (180) is "after graduation, " not "after a holiday" (252); prim ernyj suprug (219) is not a "faithful husband" (38), but an "exemplary"

There are many other renderings to which one mightobject. ' Bold" would be better than "insolent marvels " (39) for derzkie diva prirody (220); "breathing of the horses" (40) is an inadequate translation of sap los"adej (221), as is "by the roadside" (188) for posredi dorogi "Because we have worried Pavel Ivanovitch" (53) is an in(134). exact translation of potomu to my nadoeli Pavlu (37), and "heartfelt effusions" (used by Magarshack and Ivanovicu Guerney) is a more precise rendering of k serdecvnym izlijanijam (36) than Garnett's "to pour out his heart" (52). "So much trash" (Guerney, 36) is more accurate than "utterly worthless" (Garnett, 52) for sovers'ennaja drjan' (36). Gogol' 's boot-loving lieutenant is from Ryazan in chapter six (Garnett, 185), but fromKazan in the next chapter (215). Other minor

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dead Souls in Translation

427

annoyances in the translation are the spelling of the hero's name (Tchitchikov) and the fact that it is divided into two "volumes," the second beginning with chapter ten, at which point the pagination begins anew. The fragments of Part Two of Dead Souls are separated as "book two" of "volume two. " There is, however, a more important defect: she uses not the original version of the " Tale of Captain Kopejkin, " but the one which Gogol' was forced to write in order to placate the dull-witted censors. Gogol' 's letters of early 1842 reveal how bitterly he resented this alteration. He submitted only because he felt that the "Tale" was "essential, not forthe connection of events, but in order to distract the reader for a moment, to replace one impression with another" If for no other reason, the Garnett translation should be (XII, 55). set aside because of the text used for the "Tale. " Helen Michailoff uses the proper text of "Kopejkin," while providing the censored version in an appendix. Apart fromthis important consideration it is difficult to choose between the Garnett and Michailoff translations. My feeling is that the more recent translation is usually more accurate (in terms of both literalness and style), but it would be possible to quote many examples on either side. The Magarshack translation is superior to both-in spite of the fact that Helen Michailoff's renderings are sometimes more idiomatic and lively than his. While there are few outright errors in the Michailoff version, omissions, such as those noted in the following example, are rather frequent:
TaKc MIBaeT Ha JIzLax

npHexaBmUIMHaaJabHMIXOMBBepeHHbIX ynpaBiaeHMIo AXMecT nocae Toro, CKaK y e nIepBbIMcTpax npomea, OH yBIAeJIS, TTO MHOPOe eMy HpaBMTCe,

IqIHOBHIIICOB BO Bpe~M

OCMOTpa

HaiKcOHeynIOIIyTHTL,To-ecTb npOI43HeCTM C npMHETHOIo ycCMeIOTCeI BABoe B OTBeT HE Mem~oM HecKOJabKO COB. 3TO ObCTynIMBHIe ero lpzIaJIxeHHie q MHOBHMKM;CMeIOTC. OT AyIM OT Hero noaajiee Te, j ICOTOpbIe IM OTopbIe. v npo BnpoqeM, HecICOJIbtO nJIoxo ycJImaI IO3HeceHHIe M o y ABepem, y caMorP HaIKOHeL CJIOBa, CTOmIUMII aaajie Bbxona, KaKom-HHMyab. rioJTHimLezCKMM, OTpony He CMesB1 TOJLKO MTO TnoKaa mHiCH BO BCIO Z3HL CBOIO0 aBH1I4I yabrIdy, XOTH{ Ta yaIIa boazee noxoxa Ha TO, cKax bI A cobdpaIacH qMXHyTL nocae ipenioro KTO-HMAy Tabacy. (162, ital. mine. ) So it is with the faces of government officials when their offices are inspected by a higher functionary: after their first frighthas subsided, and they perceive that he is pleased with
nepeA TeM HapoAy HaM OTpaeHMII, HO HHM3MeHHbIM 3aiKOKIyJIaIK, M TOT, CBOM KaKylo- TO Ha BpaaeT Jaie coe

M MTO OH CaM M3BOJIMJ

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

428

Slavic and East European Journal many things, that he is even gracious enough to joke, that is, to say a few words with an agreeable smile, those who crowd close to him laugh in response twice as hard as the occasion calls for, those who stand farther off and have not caught much of what he has said are laughing wholeheartedly too; even the policeman who is standing at the door, at the very exit, and who has never laughed in all his born days, even he, in accordance with the unalterable law [zakonam]of reflection, is displaying on his face some sort of smile, which looks as though he [kto-nibud'] were about to sneeze after a pinch of strong snuff. (183. )

Gogol' 's synonymy is cancelled out as udalec naputaet, napletet, izlomaet, vyvorotit prirodu (207) is abridged to "audacious pen driver who distorts and twists nature" (234). Scarcely a page is unOn page 77 of her text she omits: es'c'e, marred by such deletions. vsegda, ves'ma, oxotnik guljat', nikak, vsjakimi, ocen', daze, and zdorovye (70); then too "passion" and "children" are not acOn page 78 she curate renderings of strastihka and rebjatiki. omits: vse-taki, *erst', daze, o predmetax vysokix, stoit, opjat', as "rebuke" and replacing vnov', svecej, while translatinggovoriil omissions are: visevOther this task." "to with perform vytolkat' ~im po stene, obyknovenno, vdrug, znaet, odnako Z(103;Michailoff, 117); protiv gostinicy, bolee, da'e(Michailoff, 3); vygljadyvajuCimi, vsegda, kak samovar (Michailoff, 5); kak blin, daze, bog ix znaet, predprosto (Michailoff, 6); voobs'c'e my kak-to ne sozdalis'dlja stavitel'nyx zasedanij (198; Michailoff, 222). Two kinds of omissions tend to destroy important stylistic mannerisms: (1) deletion of words such as ves'ma, oc'en', vsegda, sovsem, vovse, nepremenno, besprestanno which Gogol' uses with unusual frequency to lend the narrative a hyperbolic quality; (2) deTo varying extents all the translators are guilty of letion of dale. this. Checking sixty pages scattered through the Michailoff version I found that daze is ignored more than twenty times. Di*evskij saw the frequent use of this word as a peculiarity of the "view from below" in Sinel', but daz'e is used freely in Dead Souls as well. With or in confeigned naivet6, Gogol' often employs da'e "illogically" nection with puns. The translator erases both of these effects in the following passage: IHoMTMe icTep npaJeXHO., MV BeCLMa BaJacsa doJIee B CoMJIOCO~Mo MITaJI ale K HOuaM, IOHPOBI <<HoM i>> m(<<I{JIIO NOu eiaii D HaTypb I 3iKKapTCray3eHa, M3 KOTOpbIX TainHCTBaM eQ eJblV JITICTaM... Ipoine BeCLMa AJIIHHH Ie BbTlICKIn IIO MeHee, IKTO nIpocBelleHHbre: JImoAIn boJiee InJII ToCe ~bIJI, MITarJI KapaM3I9Ha, KcTo <<MocIKoBcKvIeBeioMocT,~?> IKTO gace co4ceM HIMero He MITaJI. (156-157.)

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dead Souls in Translation

429

The Postmaster was inclined toward philosophy and read Young's Night Thoughts and Eckhartshausen's The Key to the Mysteries The others of Nature, copying lengthy passages fromboth... were also more or less enlightened people: some read Karamzin, some Moskovskie Vedomosti, and some did not read anything at all. (177. ) Among the omissions noted here, the last is perhaps the most damaging. Gogol' 's dax'e leads us to believe that the following item will be the climax of this series; then this logical expectation (of something above either the Moscow News or Karamzin) is frustrated as the sentence explodes into sovsem nil'ego. I have found only one bad translation which seems to be the result of misconstruing the Russian: blagodarja xalatnym pobu?,den'jam russkoj natury is "thanks to the Russian partiality for casual wear" note eight. In many other (151) which is not what is meant-see cases the choice of translation can be questioned; often unnecessary abridgment is involved: "B HeXCHIXpa3roBopax, upoHcxoAIUIX B yeaIIHeH4HH" (157)--"in tender moments" (177); "BCqIKOM 'yJI" duel" (179); (159)- "to (158)--"a "npi4beraTb IC cpaHLy3cICoMy" use the French" (179); c3T4Hbdr 3HaeT IKaIKMecJyxM' (197)' K "these extraordinary rumors" (221); "pa3HbI JIaiCehciKi TCya IeT I (9)- "his personal effects" (6); "CTpyMJIa nOTOKII cJIe3bfI" (11)"are shedding tears" (10); "oqeHL OTaJIeHHo"(100)- -"somewhat from afar" (112); BecLMa HeMHO: "Ho 1Mx qOMTMevcTep bIJiIO oJUMH (197)- "but they were not many. In fact, the PostTOJICO" master was the only one" (221). Certainly the connotations of "second-rate gentlemen" (3) do not apply to gospodin srednej ruki. Less important deviations fromthe Russian are the fragmentation of many periods into short sentences, the use of the past tense instead of the praesens historicum (a shortcoming shared, especially in the " Tale," by all the translators except Guerney), and the changing of the narrative "we" or impersonal constructions:to "I" (Neizvestno, kak on eto delal... --"I don't know how he did it"). Amore serious objection is that she, like Constance Garnett, uses an early version of the surviving chapters of Part Two. In the single Russian MS. there are five layers of corrections and improvements above the basic text. The version incorporating the last level of corrections is used in the most authoritative editions of Gogol' (see Pol. sob. soc'., VII). Often an earlier (lower) level of the text is included as rannjaja redakcija (Sob. soc'.v 6 tt., M., 1959). In her notes the translator says the early version is more completebut there is a difference between completeness and length. This early version does contain some episodes which Gogol' deleted from thelaterone (in Sob. soc'., 1952-1953, V, 402-437, these episodes are given in the appendices), but we must accept Gogol' 's last word. It is not true, as the translator asserts, that the versions "differ

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

430

Slavic and East European Journal

mostly in the wording of sentences, " that there is no reason for preferring one to the other. There are significant alterations (see Slonimskij's notes in Gogol', Sob. so'., M., 1959, V, 562-563), and Gogol' 's attempts to be more concise - typical of his work on the first volume as well-are apparent everywhere. Considering the demerits of the other translations, David Magarshack's must be recommended. He uses the definitive text of both parts of Dead Souls. The translation has been made with obvious care; omissions, even of single words, are infrequent. The translations are accurate in substance, though not always in style. It appears that he consulted Constance Garnett's version (examining the two translations, the great number of parallels immediately becomes apparent), using the best of her renderings, replacing the words and phrases she had skipped over, and correcting the errors. The only outright error I have discovered is his translation of obitateli he read obyvateli instead of (243) as "Philistines" (255)-obviously obitateli. There are some other questionable translations and places where he takes unnecessary liberties: gustye brovi (219-220)of them was "beetling brows" (230), vooruzilis' vse (199)-"none in favour" (209), pustynno-xoroso(ll3)--"beautiful" (122), pis'meco (145)- "letter" (154). Many readers will object to the use of Mr. Chichikov, Mrs. Korobochka, and the frequent substitution of " sir" or "my dear sir" for the Russian manner of address by means of first name and patronymic (154; Magarshack, 164). In its chaste simplicity Pu'kin's style might be compared to the Doric column, Tolstoj's heavy grandeur to the Corinthian columnin this scheme Gogol' 's style is a kind of rococo sugar stick. And, like all translators except Guerney, Magarshack fails to reproduce this style. There is hardly a hint of Gogol"s polychromatic Russian with its lexical opulence, the skilfully individualized language of each character, the sudden and frequent shifts from exalted poetry to coarse prose, and the magnificently muddled grammar. The translation does not reflect this variety; too consistently the English is Thus Oiiikov's Ex, brat, vres" polite, cultivated, and colorless. ty da es'c'e i sil'no!" (146) becomes a weak, bloodless "Good Lord, my dear fellow, what nonsense you talk" (156) and dolgo es'ce u nego vertelsja na jazyke vsjakoj vzdor (152) becomes "he kepttalkNozdrev's raucous Zato, brat (162). ing all sorts of nonsense" Ci`ikov, kak pokutili my (65) becomes "but what a wonderful time he had... my dear Chichikov" (73) in one case and "what a glorious time we had" (76) in another; in the English Nozdrev's voice disapOther examples pears-it might be a dainty society girl speaking. are: Delo jajca vyedennogo ne stoit (55) - "the whole thing isn't worth a farthing" (64), poceluj sovers'ilsja zvonko (180)--"they kissed so noisily"(189-190). (Compare Guerney, 208: "The kiss was consummated sonorously." ) Magarshack's translation of popol'zovat'sja nasvet klubni'ki p. 75)is preferable to Garnett's ("enjoying a piece of cheesecake,"

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dead Souls

in Translation

431

"gathering roses while ye may," p. 95, but not as apt as Guerney's The following examples "crawling after the strawberries," p. 71. illustrate the ability of the various translators to handle passages which require some resourcefulness and creativity: ne za 'ivot, a na smert'(179). ... nepremenno rasserditsja ... who is quite certain to become terribly angry (Magarshack, 188). *. . he is bound to be not slightly but mortally offended (Garnett, 251). . . . who will inevitably become incensed not only to the extent of wishing to beat me within an inch of my life, but actually to death (Guerney, 207). ... he'll become furious (MacAndrew, 201). ... who will feel mortally insulted (Michailoff, 202). "Vona! posla pisat' gubernija!" (164). "Look at them! The whole provincial administration in full swing ! " (Magarshack, 174). "Well, they are all at it! " (Garnett, 230). "There she goes! The province is off on the light fantastic!" (Guerney, 189). "There they go! " (MacAndrew, 185). "There they go! " (Michailoff, 185). The shortcomings of Magarshack's translation (they are almost all of a stylistic nature) are outweighed by its merits."' He takes fewer liberties than any of the other translators; it is clear that his work was done carefully, conscientiously, and, on the whole, with accuracy. In addition, his introduction, an account of the history of the writing of Dead Souls, is useful. 12 He is the only one who translates the last version of Part Two; and too often students, frightened away by gloomy tales of Gogol' 's decline, do not pass judgment on this part of his work for themselves. It is this translation I would recommend to students.

Notes 1. Home Life in Russia. By a Russian Noble. Revised edition of Revelations in Russia. 2 vols. (London: Hurst and Blackett, 1854. ) 2.
aJICF JxJIF 3TO4 ueJ poMaHa, roJIaeBKOPO H3aaHHnvIM
BCl-OJTb3OB

Nicolas Gogol, Les

3axapteHKo:

tpeCTaBJIAstT <<H.B. pez.,

ForoJ-MaTepHaJI

npoaoJIxaeHweM roB I{HeBe HeKmHM BaiUeHKOnocIenHHme nOJITopacTa cTpaHM? BTOpOrO TOMa lappbepa He qTO MHoe, Kax rpybyIo nozaUeJII{y .." B. FrnnHyc, (JI., 1936), I, 276. I 1 HccreosBaHHsI>>
AOBOJIbHO

Ames mortes, 2 vols.

He~enJIT r. B 1857

(Paris, 1859).

"IIappiep

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

432

Slavic and East European Journal

3. Dead Souls, transl. B. G. Guerney, 4th ed. (New York: Rhinehart & Co., 194-8); Dead Souls,transl. A. R. MacAndrew (New York: Signet Classics, David Magarshack (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1961); Dead Souls, transl. 1961); and Dead Souls,transl. Helen Michailoff (New York: Washington Square All citations are made fromthese editions. Page references Books, 1964). are given in parentheses following each quotation. 4. Dead Souls, transl. C. Garnett (New York: Modern Library, n. d.). There is also a translation by George Reavey, available in a British edition. AH CCCP, 5. H. ]B. Forora, (M.: <<IHoJHoe cobpanHe co4MHeHHII>> All page references to the Russian text are to Vol. VI of this 1937-1952). edition, unless otherwise indicated. Vol. VI, which contains Part I of Dead Souls, was published in 1951, and Guerney could not have used it. 6. The variant given in VI, 519-530 corresponds to the text of the "Tale" in Guerney's translation-with the exception of several lines, the source of which I have been unable to determine. 7. The second reference is to the page on which the translation should appear in the MacAndrew version. 8. Compare the superior translation of Guerney: "boots with fancy appliques of variegated colors (such boots as the town of Torzhok carries on a brisk trade in, owing to the easy-going ways and ease-loving inclinations of the Russian's nature)" (153). 9. It would seem that this translator is more prolific than proficient. Among his other translations is a volume of Gogol' entitled The Diary of a Madman and Other Stories (New York: Signet Classics, 1961). One can open to any page and see immediately that these translations suffer fromthe same For example, in Zapiski sumassveds"ego he leaves out, "Heydeficiencies. xez H DpaHsI?M? (III, Aa, DTO caMaR He6JIaroEnpHAITCTByompaH aepmasa" In Nos he skips over"cM TO MHOro eCTI Ha CBeTe BCqIKMX MaV211). M CIIOAHero B I COCTORHMM M opOB, KOTOpmIeHe IMeIOT ae fPMJIHOM MeCTaM"(III, 64). Gogol"s long catalogue TacKIaIOTCS 110 BCSKMM HerIpHCTOIMHB]M of heroes (an obvious imitation of Homer) in Taras Bul'ba (II, 126-127) is hardly recognizable in MacAndrew's version. On page 85 of this volume (his "translation" of ?inel') he leaves out single words or phrases in thirteen separate cases (mezdu kotorymi, daxe, sam, smutno, beglyj, ves'ma, isdc'a, uz'e, vidja, prosto, tem bolee, iz komnaty, bessmennye tIII, 159-160]), and entirelyignores one sentence ("Mepe3 lac nonaaJH yzHIH, not to mention the errors-such as m iaMnIaHCKoro"), translating"MToc1bI KSIa- HMHyOAHe B3AyMaJIyaIep)HMBaTn Xo3IMHH, OH BMDIIeJInIOTHXOHIKyy as "In spite of everythinghis host could think up to keep him, he went quickly out.. ." This kind of translation is, to use Gogol' 's terms, v nekotorom rode, 10. The second reference is to the page on which the translation should appear in Garnett. In all cases where citations are frompages after p. 178 of the Russian edition, the corresponding references to the Garnett translation are to "volume two" of the Modern Library edition. 11. I realize that, particularly with Gogol', one can argue that style is everything. A rather impractical solution might be using Guerney's ttranslation for the last chapter and chapters one through eight (where textual
H3 BHHerpeTa, XOJIOAHOM TeJIRTMHBI, lnamiTeTa, KOHIAMTepcKHx

COCTOSBIImnIMPOXKOB

soveroennaja drjan'.

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Dead Souls

in Translation

433 for the other

adulterations are not so serious and basic), and Magarshack's two chapters and Part Two.

12. He makes one error, twice stating that Part Two was begun in 1842; Helen Michailoff's Introduction is Gogol' began at least two years earlier. generally accurate but contains several questionable assertions. For example, it is not true that "the critics were unanimous in their attacks" on Revizor (the reviews of Vjazemskij in Sovremennik and V. Androsov in Moskovskij nabljudatel' were warmly favorable), and it is unfair to Gogol' and grossly misleading to describe Vybrannye mesta simply as "thirty-two highly moralizing essays advocating submission to the authorityof the Czar and the Church" (much of the book is devoted to literature and it contains invaluable comments on Dead Souls). Rene Wellek's introduction to Guerney's translation is excellent, while those in the MacAndrew and Garnett translations are almost useless.

This content downloaded on Sat, 12 Jan 2013 09:46:07 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions