Forrester, Sibelan E.S.

English

Works

Swarthmore College Works Russian Faculty Works Russian Winter 1995 Review Of "Russian Repertory In The Croatian National Theatre, 1874-1914" By Ž. B. Juričić Sibelan E.S. Forrester Swarthmore College, sforres1@swarthmore.edu This work is brought to you for free and open access by . It has been accepted for inclusion in Russian Faculty Works by an authorized administrator of Works. For more information, please contact myworks@swarthmore.edu. Follow this and additional works at: https://works.swarthmore.edu/fac-russian  Part of the Slavic Languages and Societies Commons Let us know how access to these works benefits you  Recommended Citation Sibelan E.S. Forrester. (1995). "Review Of "Russian Repertory In The Croatian National Theatre, 1874-1914" By Ž. B. Juričić". Slavic And East European Journal. Volume 39, Issue 4. 649-650. DOI: 10.2307/309133 https://works.swarthmore.edu/fac-russian/38 American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages ReviewAuthor(s): Sibelan ForresterReview by: Sibelan ForresterSource: The Slavic and East European Journal, Vol. 39, No. 4 (Winter, 1995), pp. 649-650Published by: American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European LanguagesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/309133Accessed: 06-04-2016 19:46 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available athttp://about.jstor.org/terms 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 trusteddigital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information aboutJSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages is collaboratingwith JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Slavic and East European JournalThis content downloaded from 130.58.65.20 on Wed, 06 Apr 2016 19:46:47 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Reviews 649 Czerwinski translates "poezja nie zawsze / przybiera forme wiersza" as "poetry does not always / take on the form / of a poem," he doesn't get any of the individual words wrong, but shows little sense for the whole, since he includes afigura etymologica (poetry-poem) avoided by R6zewicz. At the same time, Sokoloski's "at times / a poem needn't have / a verse form" solves the problem "poezja-wiersz" better, but includes an interpretation ("needn't") which is not necessarily contained in the original text. The same tendencies can be found in Czerwinski's and Sokoloski's renderings of "pozbawiona formy i tregci" as "freed of form of content" and "unformed / meaningless," respectively. Czerwinski's desire to translate every word leads him to use the far too positive "freed" (one says in Polish "pozbawiony wolnoici": "deprived of freedom"-perhaps "deprived" would have been better in this case as well). Sokoloski has the proper tone, but jumps too quickly from "form" to "formed" (Czerniawski's "formless" is better) and "contents" to "meaning"-differences which are significant for R6'ewicz's linguistic poetry. Czerniawski is often even freer than Sokoloski, sometimes adding words and lines which can't be found in the original, as well as switching the positions of stanzas. At the same time, as Piotr Wilczek points out in an article on Czerniawski's translations ("Adam Czerniawski jako tlumacz poezji R6?ewicza," Swiat literacki, 1991, No. 2, 79-83), quoting R6iewicz's Hungarian translator Andreas Fodor: "it's more difficult to find the proper tone than it is to discover lexical equivalents." Sometimes an English translation with an altered structure can be closer to the Polish original, since, as Wilczek points out, "even the most literal translation produces a completely new semantic structure." A purely literal translation gives the impres- sion of helplessness on the part of the translator. Wilczek rightly calls for more systematic thought on general difficulties of translations from Polish to English. One could view these problems as symptoms of the dilemma of translating lyric in general, but, when in doubt, one should at least produce a grammatically and stylistically readable text, which Czerwinski sometimes fails to do. Both Sokoloski's and Czerwinski's books contain a number of typos, and all the umlauts are missing in the German quotes in Czerwinski's book; this is especially irritating in "Eine Fliege im Zimmer," which contains long German passages. Despite these difficulties, it is gratifying that the occasion of the poet's seventieth birthday, which Czerwinski expressly commemorates in his dedication, gave rise to such a large quantity of translations of this great poet. Not only is R6ewicz's most recent work now accessible to the English-speaking readership, but the reader can also, if he or she so chooses, compare two or three different translations, thus getting a good concept of the multifaceted work of Tadeusz R6ewicz and of general issues in Polish-English translation. In the world of transla- tion, the more the merrier! Holt Meyer, Universitlit Potsdam Zelimir B. Juri'id. Russian Repertory in the Croatian National Theatre, 1874-1914. Notting- ham: Astra Press, 1994. 148 pp., ?18.00 (paper). ielimir Juri&i' approaches his topic through a wealth of factual material. His slim book traces the role of Russian plays in the Croatian theater from recognition of their theoretical desirabil- ity among members of the Illyrian Movement up to the First World War, with frequent references to later performances as well. Juri&id argues that Russian drama played a crucial role in the Croatian theater's shift from histrionic romanticism to a realistic acting style, citing the influence of visits by the Moscow Art Theater and other leading troupes of Russian and Soviet actors along with reception of the works presented in translation at the Croatian National Theater in Zagreb.This content downloaded from 130.58.65.20 on Wed, 06 Apr 2016 19:46:47 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 650 Slavic and East European Journal The book's structure is primarily chronological, beginning with a survey of plays that were translated from Russian but never performed. Later chapters examine the contributions of major authors such as Tolstoy, Griboedov, Ostrovskii, Chekhov, Gor'kii and Andreev, along with works by minor playwrights or stage adaptations of Dostoevsky's novels. Some of the background provided in the various sections, such as the discussion of censorship exerted by the Austro-Hungarian government in the case of Ostrovskii (57-58), can cast a useful light on other sections of the volume. Russian dramatic works often arrived in Zagreb by way of Parisian or Viennese adaptations, although some Croatian performances took place only a few months after the Russian premieres, and a few were even the first performances outside Russia itself. Along the way Juribid also outlines the historical development of the Croatian National Theater through the tenures of its various directors and the careers of its most famous actors. Juricid cites copiously from journalism and critical reviews of the period as well as from modern literary and theatrical histories; a great deal of information from archives and libraries becomes available here in English. Juriici's translates with verve: " 'How could Mandrovid be so irresponsible as to grant a visa to such a mediocre playwright? He is like a foreign body within the theatrical organism,' wrote Narodne Novine" (122). Thus, in addition to everything else his book gives something of a survey of theater criticism in Croatia before World War I, and in some cases later as well. Unfortunately, it is not always clear where the author is paraphrasing or summarizing the words of a critic, and where he is offering his own opinion or analysis of a play or its performance. Extensive reliance on citations and paraphrase repro- duces pedestrian and theoretically primitive opinion-in particular, truisms of nineteenth- century Russian literary criticism. "[T]he partisans of realist art had to wage a bitter fight against numerous foes before realist tendencies fully triumphed" (12): unlike the verbatim quotes from 1903 newspapers, this sort of vocabulary gives the book a needlessly old- fashioned tone. Such characterizations as "the restive South Slav temperament and mentality" (68) or "the passive whimpering and neurotic introspection of Chekhov's characters" (93-94) would gain from placement in their original context. At times, citations accumulate into unacknowledged contradictions, as when Gogol's plays are described as both "grotesque caricature portraits" and "realistic rendering of life" (8). In other places Juri&id writes with incisive humor, though without tapping into the vast and sophisticated scholarly literature on the major Russian authors whose dramatic works he discusses. Some terms whose use might vary between the fields of literature and drama should be clarified, especially the term "real- ism," which for the scholar of Russian literature has a heavily predetermined significance. A few factual inconsistencies, such as the misdating of a picture of Olga Knipper-Chekhova to 1877 rather than 1922 (?) and confusion over the original title of the minor Russian playwright Potapenko's play "Slepets" (113) or "Zhulik" (122), do not interfere with the book's clear presentation of its rich material, gleaned from extensive research. Juridi&'s study is likely to appeal to a limited, scholarly audience, but it is very informative and within its own limitations it casts further light on the interrelations of these two Slavic literatures. Sibelan Forrester, Swarthmore College G. Brogi Bercoff, G. Dell'Agata, P. Marchesani, and R. Picchio, eds. La Slavistica in Italia: Cinquant'anni di studi (1940-1990). Rome: Ministero per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali, Divisione Editoria, 1994. 487 pp. (cloth). This volume contains the proceedings of the first general congress of Italian Slavists held in Seiano in Spring, 1991. It is, as suggested by the title, a review of the last fifty years of research conducted by Italian scholars in this field. As a general introduction, Riccardo Picchio draws aThis content downloaded from 130.58.65.20 on Wed, 06 Apr 2016 19:46:47 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Review Of  Russian Repertory In The Croatian National Theatre, 1874-1914  By Ž. B. Juričić

https://works.swarthmore.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1037&amp;context=fac-russian

Review Of Russian Repertory In The Croatian National Theatre, 1874-1914 By Ž. B. Juričić

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Works