Машинопись и компьютерный набор как способы авторской фиксации текста: какие текстологические проблемы они могут порождать? (из опыта посмертных изданий стихов Вс.Н.Некрасова)
Preparation for publication by means of computer typesetting of a poetic text based on author's typewriting is described as a" translation", in the process of which some potentially significant features of the text are lost, primarily related to its graphics.
The novel Doctor Zhivago, first published in 1957, immediately provoked critical debates that continue to this day, and has been the subject of numerous scholarly studies (C. Barnes, B. Gasparov, P. A. Jensen, A. Lavrov. M. Aucouturier, O. Raevsky-Hughes, I. Smirnov, L. Fleishman, Iu. Shcheglov, A. Khan, and many others). On one hand, Boris Pasternak’s positions (founded on his religious historiosophy) with regard to the events, people and situation that he depicts have formed one of the central topics of critical and scholarly contention. On the other hand, it is the specificity of the novel’s poetics and most centrally of its generic identity, the laws of its organization of novelistic time and problems of the prototypes of its central characters, that have served as objects of debate. It is our contention, however, that the choice of genre (that we have defined as being that of “a historical novel of a new type”) was fundamental for Pasternak and determined the entirety of the novel’s poetics. As we will demonstrate, the author was continuing the tradition of Walter Scott, which had been rejected by other contemporary Soviet authors who described the history of the twentieth century. In taking up work on the novel, Pasternak emphasized many times that he desired to present an image of the course of history of the first half of the twentieth century—the “forty- five-year era,” as he named this period several times in his letters. This dissertation describes the author’s search for a means for the artistic embodiment of contemporary events and his final choice of the “Walter Scott tradition” of historical novel for Doctor Zhivago. In this connection the work includes marked reflections of C. Dickens’ Tale of Two Cities, Pushkin’s The Captain’s Daughter and Dubrovsky, and L. Tolstoi’s War and Peace, as well as sharp polemics with historical works of prose fiction by Pasternak’s contemporaries and with the highly ideologically charged Soviet historiography. Separate consideration will be given to the specific events, situations and names that Pasternak considered it necessary to include in his narrative, presenting in this way his own version of a hierarchy of characteristic phenomena of these decades. The dissertation demonstrates that in Doctor Zhivago history is presented simultaneously as a force, organizing the actions of people and forming their characters and world-views, and also as a chain of events to be understood and made meaningful by the protagonists, and finally as an ineluctable law of human existence that has been reestablished by the force of artistic creation—by the poetry of Iurii Zhivago. At the very foundation of the Zhivago’s poetry lay the ideas of his uncle—the philosopher Vedeniapin, who defines history as an element of the Christian comprehension of the world. The central place of these characters in the novel defines the nature of Pasternak’s techniques with prototypes, by which he embeds into his characters the views, characteristics and fates of various of his contemporaries (A. Bely, A. Blok, D. Samarin, the author himself, and others). We also propose explanation of the work’s many anachronisms, which become a means for communication of the laws of the post-revolutionary period (1917-1943)—a period that “fell” out of history. At the same time we will show how historical time is reestablished in the Epilogue that completes the novel and in the “Poems of Doctor Zhivago.” This dissertation may be characterized as interdisciplinary. In it, the methods of literary- historical and intertextual analysis are applied. The text is examined in relation to social, cultural and historical phenomena of Russia during the first half of the twentieth century.
Aristarchus of Samothrace had excluded some verses from his edition of the Iliad (presumably those which were poorly attested in manuscript tradition) and had athetized some others (possibly those which were widespread). We may assume that his textual variants can also be divided in two similar groups: (1) those which were present in his edition (and were well attested in papyri) and (2) those which were cited only in his commentary (and were absent from most manuscripts). If we accept this hypothesis, it might help us to solve one of the important paradoxes of Homeric manuscript tradition. On the one hand, numerus versuum in ancient manuscript tradition is identical to mediaeval Homeric vulgate and to aristarchean edition (according to the mainstream view). That shows the influence of Aristarchus, because the standardization of Egyptian Homeric papyri concurs with the time of the great philologist. On the other hand, most readings of Aristarchus are absent from Homeric vulgate (only 30% of his readings, according to disputable calculations of T. Allen, can be seen in all or most manuscripts). That means on the opposite that the great philologist had little influence on the tradition. The suggested hypothesis can be in full or partly compatible with the others, e.g. the interesting assumption of M. Finkelberg about the role of Ptolemy VIII in Homeric tradition.
Classic book about childhood Lev Kassil
This note discusses one of the largely super uous conjectures unearthed by J. Diggle and given an honourable place in his otherwise very succinct and e cient apparatus criticus. Reported by none of the recent editors, and earlier by Prinz–Wecklein and Verrall, Herwerden’s μελανόσπλαγχνος in Euripides’ Medea 109 is an undesirable change of the sound, if idiosyncratic, mss. reading μεγαλόσπλαγχνος. Diggle, however, having (independently) conjectured the same word, patched together arguments for it. An additional attraction this conjecture gained in his eyes was due to his misreading of the remark (quoted in the heading) Wilamowitz made proofreading the rst volume of Murray’s OCT in 1901. While Wilamowitz discouraged Murray from reporting this conjecture with his usual “besser fort”, Diggle, on passing acquaintance with the letters, took it to mean “Herw. besser fort[asse]”, thus corroborating his point.
An article describes one of the earliest prose texts (never published or even known about) of Vsevolod Nekrasov, Russian concretist and conceptualist: it adds some significant information on "second avant-garde" notions of "classical literature".
The book is a publication of a full text of M.Kh. Aleshkovskiy’s candidate of sciences (PhD) thesis defended in 1967 and previously available only in a shortened popular edition.