Monday, December 23, 2024

BOOK: Johan Ludvig Runeberg, "The Tales of Ensign Stål"

Johan Ludvig Runeberg: The Tales of Ensign Stål. Translated by Charles Wharton Stork, Clement Burrbank Shaw, and C. D. Broad. With an Introduction by Yrjö Hirn and illustrations by Albert Edelfelt. Helsingfors: Söderstrom & Co., 1952. xxvi + 244 pp.

I first heard of this book and its author about ten years ago, thanks to a rather remote connection: I was reading Sven Hedin's propaganda book America in the Struggle of the Continents and found him quoting a phrase that seemed evidently to be from a poem, but there was no hint as to its source. By googling a bit, I found that it was from one of Runeberg's poems which form part of The Tales of Ensign Stål (in the present volume that particular poem is translated as The Ensign at the Fair).

There was much to fascinate me and excite my curiosity about this book and its author, and make me want to read it. Here was a man who was hailed as the national poet of Finland, but he wrote everything in Swedish! I was amazed by this. Finland had been under Swedish rule for many centuries, but apparently had been treated well enough that there was not much bad blood between them. I couldn't help but compare it to our own history; Slovenia had been part of the Austrian Empire (and its various predecessors) for many centuries, but if someone asked if a poet writing in German could have been considered our national poet, the idea is completely unthinkable. I could never regard such a poet as anything but a foreigner, even if he and his ancestors had lived here for generations. But apparently in Finland things were very different; I cannot entirely understand them, but I am fascinated by it nonetheless.

And then there was the subject matter of this book; here is a volume of poems about the Finnish War of 1808–9, a conflict so obscure by present-day standards that I had hardly ever heard of it before! — but it clearly loomed enormously large in the minds of Runeberg and his contemporaries in 19th-century Finland. How could I resist wanting to read more about it? I soon bought a secondhand copy of this book, but only got around to reading it now, some ten years later.

The book comes with a useful and interesting introduction which provides enough historical background that one can appreciate the poems just fine without feeling the need to look anything up in the wikipedia (though at times looking things up can be interesting just the same). Sweden used to be something of a great power in northern Europe, and that role brought her into a never-ending sequence of conflicts with Russia, conflicts which Sweden eventually mostly started losing. The war of 1808–9 was just the last step in this process, and in it Sweden lost Finland to Russia. Runeberg was born in 1804, so that as a young man he must have had plenty of opportunities to read and hear about the war from people who had experienced it themselves, and it was these things that inspired the poems in the present volume. In one of the first poems he presents the whole thing as being based on his conversations with an elderly veteran, the eponymous Ensign Stål, though judging by Yrjö Hirn's introduction at the start of the book, Runeberg's sources of inspiration were actually a bit more varied and complex than that.

I was a bit surprised that the volume, which is not very extensive, was translated by as many as three translators. The table of contents shows who translated which poem; if I counted aright, 25 poems are in Stork's translation, 9 in Shaw's, and only one (the first poem in the book, Finland) by Broad. In fact Shaw had previously published his own translation of the entire work, as The Songs of Ensign Stål (New York: G. E. Stechert & Co., 1925). On the other hand, Stork had published a translation titled The Tales of Ensign Stål (Princeton University Press, 1938), with an introduction by Yrjö Horn same as the present edition, but it was only about 150 pages long (the present edition is about 240 pages), so it was probably incomplete and contained only the poems which are marked, in the table of contents in the present volume, as having been translated by Stork. The present volume, then, is something of a second edition of Stork's 1938 book, with the missing poems supplied from Shaw's 1925 book.

Incidentally, Shaw's edition is available on hathitrust.org and actually looks very good. It has many of the same illustrations (by Edelfelt) as the present volume, as well as some musical scores, maps, a fairly extensive historical introduction, and best of all, a short introduction before each poem, with useful background information — just the thing which I occasionally missed while reading the present edition. One downside of Shaw's edition, however, is that he insists of describing the work as an ‘epic’ and the individual poems as ‘cantos’, which strikes me as simply silly; it's obviously a collection of poems about a shared topic, not a single epic poem.

Anyway, I enjoyed The Tales of Ensign Stål a great deal (the illustrations are a nice touch as well), so in the rest of this post I'll just write a few words about each of the poems that I particularly liked:

Finland (pp. 3–5): a beautiful poem full of love for his country. I particularly liked this stanza: “This is a sweet and lovely spot, / All, all we need lies here. / However fate may cast our lot / A land, a homeland, we have got — / And what is worthier, far or near, / To cherish and hold dear?”

The Veteran (pp. 29–35): an old veteran, hearing that a battle is to be fought close to where he lives, puts on his old uniform and goes to sit at the edge of the battlefield to watch the fight! “He longed to hear the clashing / Of sword-blades yet once more, / The full familiar echo / Of great field-cannons' roar;— / Would call to recollection / His young life's valiant mood, / See this new race of fighters,— / The courage of its blood.” Amazingly, although the fight occasionally comes close to him, nobody molests him and all bullets miraculously whizz past his ears. The Finns win the battle, and the veteran cheers on them as they return from the field: “Great thanks to you he renders / For this illustrious day; / For no more glorious combat / Did e'er his eye survey. / To God be praise and glory, / We triumph yet again; / Still lives our fathers' spirit, / And still our land has men!”

I really liked this poem because it is so very different from what we could imagine today. For someone to watch a battle and not get horribly killed himself in the process, is inconceivable today (frankly, I wonder how realistic it was even in 1808/9). Moreover, nowadays it seems as if two adjacent generations couldn't possibly do anything but hate each other and consider each other wrong about everything; but here the veteran gave full-throated, full-hearted praise to the soldiers of the young generation. Back then there was still the idea that society could continue from one generation to another, that where one generation left off, the next would continue building upon that; now, by contrast, everyone is convinced that it is every generation's duty to ignore or dismantle everything that was built before their time, and start anew from scratch. Sigh.

The Girl of the Cottage (pp. 42–6): a nice poem with a twist. The girl is watching soldiers returning from battle, but doesn't see her sweetheart amongst them. She goes to look for him on the battlefield, but doesn't find him among the dead there either. Previously, she grieved for him because she thought he was dead; but now, realizing that he had deserted to avoid risking his life, her grief takes an altogether darker turn: “When others came and he came not, I wept his fate most truly, / Among the dead there on the field I thought him lying duly; / I sorrowed, but my grief was sweet, 'twas not a grief to kill, / I would have lived a thousand years to sorrow for him still. // Mother, I sought until the light no more the west was streaking, / But never found amid the slain the face that I was seeking, / I'll dwell no longer in a world where men deceive and lie; / I found him not among the dead, and therefore I will die.” A beautiful ballad in a beautiful metre — what more could you wish for?

Sven Duva (pp. 47–54): Sven is a big and strong lad, with a brave heart but not much of a brain, and horribly clumsy at everything he tries to do; he joins the army, but even there he's the laughingstock of everyone by getting all the orders mixed up while drilling. But when war comes, he has the chance to prove himself; his unit is sent to hold a bridge against the incoming Russians, but his comrades are soon killed and Sven holds the bridge by himself long enough for reinforcements to arrive. (I was reminded of Macaulay's brave Horatius, but he had two companions while Sven stood alone.) Their commander, General Sandels, comes to praise Sven, but it is too late: “But Sandels saw that underneath his heart the grass was red, / His breast was pierced, and through the wound his life by now had sped. // These were the words the general spake: ‘We'll all of us admit / That bullet knew far more than we, it knew the place to hit; / It left unhurt the poor lad's head, which was not of the best, / And found itself a worthier mark, his noble, valiant breast.’ ”

You might say that this poem partly deals with the question of whether it's better to have a good heart or a good brain; I for one would be happy to agree that a person with a good heart and not much of a brain is to be preferred over the opposite, and I suspect that most people would say the same, but alas, in practice those with more brain than heart tend to fare better in life.

Incidentally, poor Sven's surname seems to be something of a joke: duva is Swedish for ‘dove’.

The Dying Soldier (pp. 59–62): although the war of 1808/9 was a bitter one, this poem shows that the author could see the humanity in his enemies as well. Night has fallen on the battlefield and an old Russian soldier is dying next to the body of a younger Finnish soldier with whom they had fought during the day. A girl arrives, searching for her sweetheart amongst the dead; and to be sure, it is none other than the young Finn we have just mentioned. The Russian tries to get up and say something, but in that moment he dies. “He came from out a hostile land, / He served a hostile cause; / But pity him, brother, take his hand, / And mind not what he was! / The time for vengeful thoughts is o'er, / And in the grave men hate no more.”

Sandels (pp. 70–7): General Sandels is taking his time at dinner and ignoring the messengers bringing increasingly urgent reports of a Russian attack. Soldiers begin to grumble that he is evidently a coward. But he proves his courage by showing himself on horseback in view of the enemy forces, indifferent to the bullets whistling past him; and it turns out that he had a plan all along: “Your men, are they good for a counter-attack? / Will they strike a downright blow? / The enemy's bottled, that was my plan.” It proves a great success, and the enemy is routed.

The Two Dragoons (pp. 80–3): a poem about a friendly rivalry between two soldiers. Lod was awarded a medal while Stål was recovering from an injury, and so Stål now recklessly charges a group of enemies in the hopes of either getting a medal of his own, or getting killed in the process. And he would have got killed, but Lod rushes to help him, and they both survive. “Lod to Sandels came, / With the medal from his jacket / In his hand displayed, / ‘Let Stål have another like it, / Or take this,’ he said.”

Old Man Hurtig (pp. 84–8): the fortunes of war have been turning against the Finnish side; Hurtig is an old soldier who feels they have been retreating too much, and resolves not to retreat any more. He goes to sleep “[d]reaming how he nevermore would flee”. The poem now deliberately skips any details about what exactly happens, and ends very touchingly with a scene of Hurtig's body lying in the field in the wake of the Finnish retreat: “And he slept, as if of Gustaf's glory / Every memory long since had passed;— / Deeper slept, from march and battle's story, / Than on bivouac field his last;— / Slumbered, from all care and trouble free, / Dreaming how he nevermore would flee.”

Kulneff (pp. 89–96): Kulneff is a Russian commander full of energy and zest for life, and his vigour and courage win the respect of his enemies: “Yet all the while throughout the war / There was no Finn but felt a glow / Of undisguised affection for / This battle-seasoned foe. / His well known features would evoke / An answering grin among our folk. / And bear would greet his brother bear / Across the carnage there. // [. . .] 'Twas something that can scarce be told, / When Kulneff and the Finns took hold; / They knew how to appreciate / A worthy wrestling-mate. // [. . .] Cowards alone deserve our hate, / Heap shame on them without remorse; / But hail to him who soon and late / Ran a true soldier's course! / A joyous cheer, a hearty cheer / For him who fought and knew no fear! / Further than that, why ask to know / If he was friend or foe?” I was really impressed by this poem and the sentiments contained therein, especially since they are so unthinkable today. I can't imagine that anybody in the numerous armed conflicts that are going on at present would admit to having such gallant respect for his enemies. Perhaps it's because technology has changed and war is now more impersonal than two hundred years ago.

Sveaborg (pp. 105–8): the important fortress of Sveaborg was handed over to the Russians treacherously by its commander, for which the narrator of this poem badmouths him in the most impressive manner — it's practically an adjuration — while scrupulously avoiding his name (which accordingly never occurs in the poem): “Call him the arm we trusted in, / That shrank in time of stress, / Call him Affliction, Scorn and Sin / And Death and Bitterness, / But mention not his former name, / Lest they should blush who bear the same. // Take all that's dismal in the tomb, / Take all in life that's base, / To form one name of guilt and gloom / For that one man's disgrace, / 'Twill rouse less grief in Finland's men / Than his at Sveaborg did then.”

Incidentally, the historical note at the start of the book tells us that his name was Karl Olof Kronstedt. He was sentenced to death in absentia, but “kept away from Sweden and lived in Finland where he received a pension from the Russian government” (p. x). A happy end, I guess :)) By the way, judging by the wikipedia, it isn't quite so clear if Kronstedt was really acting treacherously or not.

Döbeln at Jutas (pp. 109–21): General Döbeln has been badly ill with fever for some time, but an important battle is at hand and he realizes that his army will be routed unless he is there to lead it. His soldiers are delighted to see him again, he reviews the troops and speaks a few words to a soldier here and there, then leads them to a glorious attack: “From Döbeln's haughty eyes two tears were streaming: / ‘Come on, you gallant folk, then, to the fray! / I've seen enough, we've no more time for dreaming. / 'Twill be a good fight; this is Döbeln's day. / The harvest's ready. Adjutant, give orders / On hill and plain and through the forest borders / Down the whole front that we're to move ahead. / Not here, out there we'll fight. I've such reliance / In troops like these, I'd bid the world defiance. / We wait no longer, we attack instead.’ // From all the line rose sudden jubilation: / ‘Forward to death or victory!’ it rang.” Wow, what rousing lines! To slightly misquote a sentence from TV Tropes: ‘what can you say to verse like that, except: Get me a horse, I want to *invade* something!’

Döbeln's army achieves a resounding victory, but the general himself finally succumbs to his fever. In the last few stanzas we find him dying alone on the field, addressing god in a way which is not exactly prayer, for his religious opinions are too unconventional for that: “ ‘You have restored my country, by no merit / Of mine, for every other hope was hid. / Do You, all-seeing, look into my spirit, / If gratitude be there for what You did. / The slave may court his god with genuflexion; / I cannot cringe and grovel for protection, / I seek no favor, ask for no reward. / I would but stand here happy in Your presence, / With fervent heart but yielding no obeisance; / That prayer a free man's soul may still afford. // [. . .] But You it was who saved us and none other, / How shall I speak to You? My God, my brother, / Giver of victory, my thanks to You!’ ”

The Soldier Boy (pp. 125–8): the narrator of this poem is a boy descended from a long line of soldiers; he is an orphan: his father died in battle, and his mother “wept three long days through, / The fourth day she was dead.” But the boy thinks so highly of military glory that, at news of his father's death, he “was distressed, and happy too”; and although he is a beggar now, he can't wait to turn fifteen so he can join the army as well and continue the family tradition: “When whizzing bullets fill the air, / Whoever seeks may find me there, / For I in turn would follow where / My fathers led the way.”

The Ensign at the Fair (pp. 133–42): an old veteran, fallen on hard times, ekes out a miserable living as a balladeer, singing about old wartime days in the hope of alms from passers-by. At the end of the poem, a general whom we saw at the start of the poem as a rather cold and haughty figure, recognizes the veteran as an old comrade: “ ‘Random are the gifts of fortune, such is Wisdom's high decree; / Mine are glory and abundance, yours are need and poverty; / But the best are ours in common: faith untarnished, ever bright, / Honor by our blood attested, and the consciousness of right. // Therefore we are comrades. Come and sit by me then, battle-mate! / Gladly let us share the small things, who are equal in the great. / I have gold, if you require it; shelter, food unstintingly. / You may end your days in comfort, singing your brave song for me.’ ”

Lotta Svärd (pp. 143–51): Lotta is a soldier's widow who now works as a vivandière, following the troops with a cart and selling drinks, often close enough to the battle lines that a bullet occasionally whizzes through her tent. “She loved the war, with its griefs and joys, / Whatever their ebb and flow, / She was fond of the grizzled old soldier boys, / And that's why we liked her so. // [. . .] She followed the army, bold and true, / On all of its hard career. / Where shots were cracking and bullets flew / She never was far in the rear. // She liked to see her boys at their game, / And always she used to say, / No matter how close the fighting came, / ‘Well, I'm no nearer than they.’ ”

I liked this poem not just because it's quite touching, but also because it's an example of the wide range of people covered by the poems in this volume: war affects a lot of people besides just the soldiers who fight in it, and its effects linger long after the battles are over; Runeberg is of course very well aware of all this and shows it in the choice of characters and incidents illustrated in his poems (although soldiers and officers and battles understandably do take up the majority of his attention).

Incidentally, later this poem inspired the name of a Finnish women's auxiliary organization in the 1920s and '30s.

The Stranger's Vision (pp. 159–63): one of several poems that show the lasting impacts of the war decades after it was over. Late one evening, a traveller observes a curious scene through the windows of a stately home: “Upon the wall / I saw a picture and, with interval / Of space between, another there suspended. / The woman, as her steps drew near the pair, / Stopped short, the while her downcast brow ascended / With a glad attitude as if in prayer.” It turns out that she does this every night, and the paintings are of her two sons who had died in the war years ago: “She was those youthful heroes' aged mother; / She did not pray to them—she said good-night.”

Von Törne (pp. 170–7): one nice thing about the poems in this book is that the poet is very good at showing us the distinct personalities of his characters, many of whom have their own peculiar eccentricities. Major von Törne here is a kind of country squire, now commanding a regiment which he seems to have raised from amongst his own tenants, and he knows all his soldiers personally. He has stopped his regiment a good distance from the fight, and his men are taking pretty successful shots at the Russians from there; but a messenger from the general arrives, with an order to advance. At first von Törne shows no inclination to advance, and wastes time in endless prattling; but then an enemy bullet comes flying “[r]ight through the portal 'twixt the old man's knees”. The man now flies into a rage, and finally orders the attack: “He's shot the coat to tatters and damnation / The second day I've had it on my back! / The devil take that devil! Boys, attack!” :)

The Commissary Driver (pp. 204–9): a recurring theme in this book is how long the Finnish/Swedish army kept retreating, and how unhappy the men were about these endless retreats. In this poem we meet a remarkably lethargic and ill-kempt driver of a provisions cart; but then when the army reaches Siikajoki and finally gets ready to stop retreating and make a stand, the driver suddenly appears clean, upright, and looking several years younger. He explains why the change: “Slow's the way you travel, when your land you fly. / [. . .] What's the use, besides, to keep your face so clean? / When 'tis washed, your shame's the easier to be seen. / [. . .] Now 't 'as all been changed, like, no more shame to hide, / Finland lies before us, open heaven-wide; / There's no stain upon her, never more shall be, sir, / So a man can wash his face again, d'ye see, sir?”

Wilhelm von Schwerin (pp. 210–17): the protagonist is a young captain, only fifteen years old, who has distinguished himself by his courage and leadership, but within weeks he gets badly injured and dies; the poem ends with his funeral. You cannot help being touched, but you also can't help wondering how desperate they must have been if they allowed such a young man to get involved in the fighting.

Number Fifteen Stolt (pp. 218–23): here we meet a vagabond who has sort of joined the army in an informal manner — “you took the gun / A fallen man's hand let go / And came along with us on the run / To the heart of the battle's glow”. He distinguished himself in combat, and is accepted into the ranks and given the uniform of a recently killed comrade. It is the first time he was actually accepted anywhere, and he is moved to tears: “Now the first time on his wintry heart / A sunbeam of spring was cast, / And something within him thawed apart, / For tear upon tear flowed fast.”

The Brothers (pp. 224–9): the betrayal of the Sveaborg fortress, which we already encountered in one of the earlier poems, casts its long shadow over the current poem as well. Johan Wadenstjerna is visited by his brother, whom he has not seen for almost twenty years, but who evidently had some share in the guilt for the betrayal at Sveaborg, though the details aren't clear to me;* this brother is seeking reconciliation, but Johan drives him away at gunpoint; but Johan himself is anguished about this, and spends a sleepless night in tears.

[*According to the note in Shaw's edition, the brother's name is Carl Wilhelm Wadenstjerna and he doesn't seem to have been guilty of much more than commanding a battallion at Sveaborg, and going along with the surrender. That note also says that he and Johan were actually just brothers-in-law (more specifically, their wives were sisters), and that Johan “died within a year of Sveaborg's capitulation”, so I guess the poet took some liberties here in showing both men still alive 19 years after the end of the war. Perhaps he was inspired by the fact that Carl died in 1819, soon after the date of this poem, and we are perhaps meant to imagine that his death had something to do with the failed reconciliation attempt depicted here.]

The Provincial Governor (pp. 230–5): this poem shows as an example how valour can be found outside of combat as well. The protagonist, as the title shows, is a senior civil servant, not a soldier. By now most of Finland is in Russian hands, and a Russian general shows up, telling the governor to issue a proclamation that if those who still resist won't surrender, their families' property will be seized. The governor, however, dares to stand up to him and points out that such a confiscation would be contrary to Swedish law, which the czar had promised to uphold when he took over Finland. The general, evidently impressed by the man's courage and uprightness, shakes his hand and goes away. I couldn't help being impressed by this surprisingly wholesome turn of events; if this poem had been set in the present time, in the Russian-occupied parts of the Ukraine, the governor would probably have simply been killed, or deposed and packed off to some prison camp. In some ways our civilization has taken some considerable steps backwards since the days in which this book is set.

Labels: ,

Sunday, April 30, 2023

BOOK: Giovanni Pontano, "Eclogues. Garden of the Hesperides"

Giovanni Gioviano Pontano: Eclogues. Garden of the Hesperides. Edited and translated by Luke Roman. The I Tatti Renaissance Library, Vol. 94. Harvard University Press, 2022. 9780674274099. xxx + 285 pp.

The I Tatti Renaissance Library is hobbling along at a snail's pace compared to its best years (when they sometimes published as many as six volumes per year), but it *is* still hobbling along after all. Pontano feels almost like an old acquaintance now — this is the seventh volume by him in the series. Two of these were of his poetry (Baiae and On Married Love), so I had a pretty good idea of what to expect: poems that, while enjoyable enough in their way (and written by someone who clearly *really* enjoyed spending time at his villa in the countryside), are definitely not going to be exciting at any point, and that are going to be full of too many classical allusions for me to really appreciate them. And this is just what we got in the present volume, so I was not in the least disappointed. There are six eclogues of varying lengths, followed by a didactic poem about citrus trees which covers the last 40 % or so of the volume.

Lepidina

This is the longest of the eclogues in this book. A married couple of shepherds, Macron and Lepidina, are observing an interminable procession of nymphs and other similar creatures going to attend the wedding of the siren Parthenope (a personification of Naples, named after the earliest Greek settlement on its location) and the demigod Sebeto (a personification of a river that used to flow through Naples, but was, “by Pontano's time, more myth than reality”; p. 233). The poem ends with hopes of an auspicious marriage and allusions to the future history of Naples.

The nymphs and other deities in the procession are themselves personifications of various geographical features from Naples and its surroundings, including e.g. one named after Pontano's villa in the countryside. Thus, whatever is said about their activities or relations is invariably a thinly-veiled reference to some geographical fact, and fortunately the translator's notes clear up these references or I would stand no chance of understanding anything whatsoever. Indeed some of the references seem so local to Pontano and his life that it's hard to see how anyone could figure them out at all, were it not for the lucky fact that his Eclogues were first edited for publication, shortly after his death, by a close friend of his, Pietro Summonte, who was presumably able to rely on his personal familiarity with the author when writing explanatory notes to the poems. The translator's notes in the present volume often cite Summonte's 1512 edition as his source.

I can't say that I particularly enjoyed reading this poem, but it was nice to see that Pontano was clearly so very fond of the area where he lived.

Meliseus

A shorter and much more enjoyable eclogue, in which the shepherd Meliseus grieves the recent death of his wife Ariadne. It seems to him that the whole natural world of the countryside grieves with him, and even a local nymph eulogizes the deceased woman in a long mourning-song. Towards the end of the poem it seems that Meliseus is slowly getting better, or at least managing to distract himself with work. The poem was inspired by the death of Pontano's own wife (whose real name was Adriana) in 1490.

Maeon

A short eclogue about an unusual combination of topics. The characters are two shepherds who remember their late friend Maeon and contemplate how eventually the man's tomb and his memory will both be forgotten. (These characters stand for Pontano and two of his friends from his academy.) But then their talk turns to the various pleasures of life, mostly in a quite wholesome way (partly about the beauties of the natural environment, partly about the happiness of being together with someone you love), but eventually they end with some praise of the implausible, perverse virility of their farm animals: “Here is the shaggy ram [. . .] in whose broad groin triple testicles swell — this same ram is the husband of all the flock and father of all the flock. He is acknowledged as father of the female who will soon receive him as husband.” (P. 101.) You've got to love animal husbandry :)))

Acon

Another short and rather meandering eclogue. It starts with a bizarre tale of metamorphosis such as the ancient Greeks liked to tell to explain the origin of various plants or animals. In Pontano's version, jealous nymphs kill a girl with their eyes, but a friendly deity restores her to life — as a turnip. . . :)) The Greek gods could be famously unhelpful in these matters, but this struck me as uncommonly idiotic even by their standards.

In the rest of the poem, one gets the impression that Pontano simply liked to daydream about living an idealized rural life with his wife; I imagine that his actual career as a high official working for the king of Naples must have been a bit more stressful than that. In the present poem he is particularly keen on vegetables, and even gives some recipes for combinations that he likes (ll. 24–5, 195–9).

Coryle

This short poem contains two mythological stories, both it seems more or less entirely invented by Pontano and again involving some personifications of nearby geographical locations. In one story, the nymph Coryle is transformed by a envious witch into a hazel-tree, but this is told too briefly and is barely a story at all. The other story is a bit more playful; a group of women find Amor asleep and tie him up, blindfold him, and throw his bow and arrows away in revenge for all the trouble that he has been causing by making people fall in love. Later the nymph Ariadne finds him, liberates him, and he promptly makes her fall in love as well. Both stories have a connection to the love between Pontano and his wife (not that I would have any chance of noticing this if it wasn't for the translator's notes).

Quinquennius

This is hardly a pastoral poem at all. It consists of a conversation between Quinquennius, who as the name suggests is a five-year-old boy, and his mother. He is afraid of thunder, but she tells him it's just gods roasting chestnuts; then she tells him about Orcus, “a malevolent spirit, who cruelly attacks little boys” if they are naughty, and about an unnamed benevolent god who rewards them with treats if they are good. She is trying to use this carrot-and-stick approach to get the boy to stop wetting his bed at night. I don't know when I last cringed this hard while reading a poem :S But I suppose we shouldn't be surprised, as we already knew Pontano as a keen family man and a doting father and husband from some of his other poems earlier in the ITRL series.

Garden of the Hesperides

Here's something that poets would be unlikely to write nowadays: a didactic poem about the cultivation of oranges, in two books of about 600 lines each. (Actually, while Book I is all about oranges, Book II discusses citrons and lemons as well.) Frankly, I myself also find it hard to see why people thought it a good idea to write such poems, but didactic poems were definitely a thing in ancient times and then humanists like Pontano also liked to follow their example (besides the Garden of the Hesperides, he also wrote didactic poems about astronomy and “celestial phenomena”, p. xix). My idea of poetry is that I want to read something by the likes of, say, Byron or Shelley that will make me feel intense emotions. You certainly won't get *that* from a poem on the cultivation of oranges, which is a subject that is not of the slightest interest to me. But perhaps people like Pontano would say that poetry is simply a medium, and that any subject can be treated in it, and I can't really dispute that.

In any case, Pontano was clearly very interested in the subject of this poem, and presumably had a good deal of first-hand experience with growing oranges around his villas; he writes even about technicalities such as where to plant them, when to water them, how to fertilize them, how to graft them etc. etc. with such an enthusiasm that you can't help being impressed, and at least slightly charmed. But he also likes to switch suddenly from these technical matters to mythological ones, inventing just-so stories involving citruses and creatures from classical mythology (after Adonis was killed by a wild boar, Venus brought him back to life as an orange tree, p. 149; the nymph Alcyone seduced Neptune by offering him a bough with oranges, p. 199; etc.); he reminisces about time spent gardening with his now-dead wife (p. 167); he sucks up to Francesco Gonzaga (p. 221), the ruler of Mantua, to whom he also dedicated the poem; and he peppers his verse with classical and geographical allusions in greater abundance than I would have liked (it is all explained in the translator's notes at the end, of course, but having to read so many notes interferes with the reading of the poem). So there's a good bit of variety here, and I can't say that this poem was an unpleasant read at all, even if perhaps it was not the most exciting one.

Incidentally, the title alludes to the fact that in ancient mythology, the garden of the Hesperides, famous for its ‘golden apples’, was believed to have been located in Africa; and since citrus fruits have a golden colour and were also believed to have came to Europe from north Africa, it wasn't hard for Pontano to link them with the mythical garden (p. 252, n. 8). (But according to the wikipedia, citruses actually originated in southeast Asia.)

Some of his advice about fertilizing the trees is a bit. . . odd: “Indeed, you should take the greatest care to heap on the plant [. . .] dirty old sandals, bits of refuse, and filth derived from mucky streams to drip slow moisture into the deepest roots, once you have led in rain and river water. / The burial of dogs' bodies, squalid with decay, will be especially effective at providing you with heavy fruit and glistening youthfulness” (1.292–303; p. 165).

I liked this passage which likens the grafting of trees to social activities: “The lemon tree receives the orange, the citron the lemon, in hospitality, and they join dinner parties with shared tables. The citron accepts the hand of the orange tree in marriage, and together they exercise their marital rights, and both types of tree lie down in shared beds.” (2.318–21; p. 207.) This sounds very charming and proper, but then a few generations later you end up with monstrous abnormalities :)

Odd: “[t]he town of Amalfi was credited with the invention of the compass, although it had already been in use in China for centuries.” (P. 259, n. 19.)

Labels: , ,

Sunday, February 05, 2023

BOOK: Lionel Johnson, "Incurable"

Incurable: The Haunted Writings of Lionel Johnson, the Decadent Era's Dark Angel. Edited by Nina Antonia. London: Strange Attractor Press, 2018. 9781907222627. vi + 208 pp.

I'm not sure where and when I first heard of Lionel Johnson; he was a minor poet active in the 1880s and 1890s, so I must have encountered him in some book or another connected to my interest in fin-de-siècle literature. I vaguely thought of him as a decadent, though I now see that he wasn't really decadent in terms of the contents of his poems, only by association with other noted writers of the decadent school. At any rate, I think he deserves to be better known than he is, and the present volume is a very nice introduction to him; it contains a selection of about a hundred pages of Johnson's poems, as well as a few prose pieces.

The book starts with a 50-page biography of Johnson by the editor, Nina Antonia, with a great deal of interesting information about his work, the cultural background of the time, the literary circles in which he moved, other authors he was associated with, and so on, drawing upon an impressive number of memoirs, biographies and the like, as well as on Johnson's own poems. If there's any complaint I have about this part of the book, it's that it struck me as being written in a slightly too self-consciously literary style; but then you might say that that is precisely the style in which the biography of such a poet *should* be written. Another downside is that when the biography cites some book, it only gives the title and not the page number.

In any case, since I had known almost nothing about Johnson before reading this book, nearly everything here was new to me. Johnson comes across as almost a stereotypical 1890s poet; short and slender, reclusive and in some ways ascetic, but also fond of absinthe (p. 20) and of drink in general, and not too long for this sordid world, for which he was in any case too sensitive and ethereal. For a part of his career, he supported himself by contributing to magazines and newspapers (p. 23; a collection of his essays and critical writings, Post Liminium, appeared in 1912; I wonder if it might give us a glimpse at a very different side of Johnson than his collections of poetry). He was friends with Francis Russell (p. 3; Bertrand Russell's brother), W. B. Yeats, Ernest Dowson (p. 13), and with Alfred Douglas (p. 8), whom he introduced to Oscar Wilde (p. 26) — it's like a who's-who of the British fin de siècle. His career was cut short by alcoholism, and he died at the age of only 35.

A curious episode: at one point, late in life, Johnson claimed that the apartment he then lived in was haunted, and eventually moved out of it on that account. Subsequently two journalists spent a night there and reported that doors were mysteriously opening and closing by themselves, and bird footprints appeared on the floor (pp. 47–8; “one of the last great supernatural mysteries of the Victorian age”).

*

Although most of the book consists of poems, there are also three short prose pieces. The first of these, Incurable, also gives the book its title; it is a short story of a poet who despairs of ever writing any really good poetry, and decides to commit suicide by drowning. A fine sonnet comes to his mind in his final moments — very romantic. However, just as he is about to do the deed, he trips and falls into the river by accident, and finds himself desperately swimming to the opposite bank; a friend who has heard his cries comes to pick him up by boat. I wonder if Johnson meant us to see a little of himself in the protagonist; wasn't his alcoholism in a way also a protracted form of suicide? Anyway, I really liked the story, especially the relatively happy ending, with the unfortunate poet seemingly finding a new zest for life. It is much easier to want to commit suicide, than to actually commit it.

The Cultured Faun is a short but quite funny satirical essay in mockery of the sort of affected, decadent dandies and poseurs that we stereotypically associate with the 1890s. The essay was written in 1891, when it seems this stereotype was already fully developed.

Lastly there's On the Appreciation of Trifles, which struck me as being at least half serious. Johnson argues that “the real pleasure of life consists in the little details, the scarce-considered trifles of every day” (p. 69), and defends them against those who oppose them either for reasons of economy or of philistinism.

*

But the main part of the book, of course, is a selection of Johnson's poetry. Here are a few poems I liked:

Light! For the Stars are Pale (p. 83): a nice if somewhat gloomy sonnet. The poet describes our lives as “passing from night to night”: “Darkling we dwindle deathward, and our dying sight/ Strains back to pierce the living gloom; ere night be done/ We pass from night to night”; but he has optimism for the future, though I'm not sure why: “our sons shall see the light,/ Children of us shall laugh to welcome the free sun”.

Incense (pp. 88–90): the fragrance of certain flowers awakens the poet's memories: “Since now these fragrant memories/ Live, lives not also she, their soul of fire?” I don't *really* like poems about flowers, and the sentiments here might be slightly conventional, but the language of the poem is really beautiful and decorative.

Magic (pp. 92–5): the poem is told from the perspective of a magician (“my feet hasten through a faery field”, “my name is grown a popular scorn”), who contrasts his work with that of “logicians” and scientists; he defends his choice to toil in solitude in search of “everlasting verity”. But the final part of the poem seems to be written from the perspective of the fairies, who find that the world of magic is over: “the King of night is dead:/ [. . .] Our world is done:/ For all the witchery of the world is fled,/ And lost all wanton wisdom long since won.” It is not hard to imagine that in defending the magician, Johnson is really defending himself as a poet, and concluding with regret that the more modern the world becomes, the less space it has for the kind of poetry he liked.

Celtic Speech (p. 99): a nice short poem about the beauty of the Celtic languages, in Ireland and Scotland, with a nod to the recently deceased Cornish. He compares them to music; “The speech, that wakes the soul in withered faces,/ And wakes remembrance of great things gone by.” Johnson himself doesn't seem to have had much Celtic ancestry, except perhaps for a distant family connection to Wales (p. 9); but he was influenced by W. B. Yeats, and felt more Celtic than he actually was (for a time he even “feigned a purring Irish brogue”, p. 20).

Nihilism (p. 101): a beautiful but sad poem in which the poet is looking forward to the calm of death. “Soft and long gloom! The pausing from all thought!/ My life, I cannot taste: the eternal tomb/ Brings me the peace, which life has never brought./”

Mystic and Cavalier (pp. 102–3): narrated by the mystic, the poem contrasts his life with that of his friend the cavalier: “Yours are the victories of light: your feet/ Rest from good toil, where rest is brave and sweet./ But after warfare in a mourning gloom,/ I rest in clouds of doom.” Frankly, his mysticism doesn't seem to have borne much fruit; the poem is full of mists and clouds, and the mystic seems to be hoping that his death (“The end is set:/ Though the end be not yet”) will clear things up a little. I guess we can hardly doubt that the mystic is a stand-in for Johnson's own experiences as a poet.

Winchester (pp. 104–9): a longish poem in praise of his secondary school, Winchester College. He admires the beauty of its setting, its long history (and makes allusion to a number of former students who went on to greatness, but most of their names weren't really familiar to me and I wished the editor had added notes about them), and clearly has fond memories of his own time there: “Hast thou not in all to me/ Mother, more than mother, been?/ [. . .] Music is the thought of thee;/ Fragrance, all thy memory./ [. . .] Prouder name I have not wist!/ With the name of Wykehamist./” (That last name is derived from William of Wykeham, who founded the school in 1382.) Naturally, when reading a poem like this, I couldn't help comparing the poet's experiences to my own. I have reasonably fond memories of my secondary school days, but it would never occur to me to praise the school in such extravagant terms, and overall I am not fond of schools, or of education in general, or of any sort of institutions that try to tell people what to do and what not to do. So it's a bit hard for me to relate to Johnson's sentiments here, but I am at any rate happy for him that he had such a good time there.

Gwynedd (pp. 112–17): another longish poem full of Celtic enthusiasm, this time of the Welsh variety. Johnson writes ‘we’ when referring to the Welsh, and says rather optimistically: “Our sister lands are they, one people we,/ Cornwall desolate, Brittany desolate,/ And Wales: to us is granted to be great:/ Because as winds and seas and flames are free,/ We too have freedom full, as wild and rare./ [. . .] Born of wild land, children of mountains, we/ Fear neither running earth, nor stormy sea:/” etc.

A Cornish Night (pp. 118–22): a poem from the perspective of a widowed woman, addressing a group of aerial spirits. She wishes they could take her along, or give her some news of the otherworld; but they make no reply, of course, and the poem sounds such a steady note of high-pitched grief that I couldn't help feeling rather weary of it by the time I reached the end.

Beyond (p. 126): a nice short poem addressed to a dead friend; “Oh, is it you are dead, or I?/ Both! both dead, since we are asunder”.

Lines to a Lady Upon Her Third Birthday (pp. 133–6): the poet praises the ability of children to access an imaginary world: “Wilt thou not teach us, how to make/ Worlds of delight from things of nought,/ Or fetched from faery land, and wrought/ With flowers and lovely imageries?/ Pity us! for such wisdom dies:/ Pity thyself! youth flies, youth flies./” A nice poem, though perhaps three years is a bit early to start lamenting one's fading youth :)

The Age of a Dream and The Church of a Dream (pp. 139–40): two melancholy sonnets that appear to have been inspired by visions of ruined medieval churches.

In honorem Doriani creatorisque eius (“In Honour of Dorian and His Creator”; pp. 141–2): a Latin poem in praise of Wilde in what seem to be lively, short lines; fortunately an English translation is included, though in prose.

Vinum Daemonum (pp. 146–7): this poem is in English, despite its title. It is narrated by the drink itself, which is presented as a powerful, alluring, demoniac force. Johnson knew that his alcoholism was ruining his life, but was unable to resist it.

Ireland (pp. 151–61): a long, solemn, patriotic poem with many allusions to Ireland's history, mythology, her long struggle for freedom, with fervent prayers for a favourable outcome of the latter. I am at any rate glad that things ended up working out relatively well for the Irish, even if I can't say that I found this poem exactly an exciting read; no doubt these things moved Johnson and his contemporaries in a way that they can't move me; but above all, I envy them for living in an age when this kind of simple, honest patriotism was still possible, when it was still possible for one to be fond of one's people and one's country (or, to be fair, in Johnson's case, another people and another country, for he was not really Irish). Alas, globalisation and multiculturalism have taken all that away from us now.

The Dark Angel (pp. 162–4): a poem addressing the titular Dark Angel, who assails the poet's mind with unclean thoughts, passions and desires: “Because of thee, no thought, no thing,/ Abides for me undesecrate:/ [. . .] Nor will thine envious heart allow/ Delight untortured by desire./ [. . .] Thou art the whisper in the gloom,/ The hinting tone, the haunting laugh:” etc. etc. But the poet is defiant, and determined not to allow himself to be led into damnation. It is a lovely poem, but I could't help feeling (1) from the perspective of a non-religious reader like me, the poet seems to be simply blaming the devil for what are really perfectly natural thoughts arising within his own mind, and (2) the devil comes across as rather more badass and alluring than the poet perhaps intended (but then the same has often been said of Paradise Lost).

Satanas (pp. 166–7): another Latin poem, also with an English prose translation. “He who rules over souls,/ Of whom Heaven is plundered;/ He who speaks good with ill intention,/ Corrupting the heart with sweetness./ [. . .] Death is the purpose of his life. [. . .] As vice glisters the more,/ So the soul is tarnished more;/ And the heart withers at last,/ Through delicious sins.” Again one is not quite sure if this is really all that effective as propaganda *against* the devil :]

Dedication to Samuel Smith (p. 169), inscribed in a copy of Yeats' The Celtic Twilight, which couldn't wish for a better recommendation: “Better than book of mine could be/ Is this, where all enchantments blend,/ This book of Celtic phantasy,/ Made by the faeries and my friend.”

Ash Wednesday (p. 177): a nice short poem in memory of his friend and fellow poet, Ernest Dowson. “The visible vehement earth remains to me;/ The visionary quiet land holds thee:/ But what shall separate such friends as we?/” (Incidentally, there's another, unrelated, poem with the same title, on p. 149.)

Sancta silvarum (pp. 179–80): a charming little poem in which the poet admires a group of deer passing through the forest; “Under the forest airs,/ A life of grace is theirs:/ Courtly their look; they seem/ Things of a dream./” Actually Sancta silvarum is a cycle of four poems, of which only the third one is included here. I took a look at the others in the 1917 Poetical Works (pp. 70–4), and particularly liked the first one, in which the poet admires the “ancient forest” in nearly religious terms: “A consecrated stillness, old and holy;/ Commanding us to hail with homage/ Powers, that we see not, hid in beauty;/ A majesty immeasurable; a glorious/ Conclave of angels:” etc.

*

At the end of the book there's a section of “Ephemera” containing miscellaneous interesting things. There's a poem by Ernest Dowson, Extreme Unction, dedicated to Johnson. The wikipedia tells us that “one of the effects of the sacrament is to absolve the recipient of any sins not previously absolved through the sacrament of penance” — very convenient! I guess the topic was important to both Dowson and Johson, since both were converts to catholicism; but from the perspective of a non-believer like me, the concept of extreme unction makes catholicism look even sillier than it is, as if a larp where people play at being magicians had somehow gone extremely out of hand.

There's an interesting letter by Johnson to his American friend and fellow catholic, Louise Imogen Guiney, who was planning to have a mass sung for the recently deceased Aubrey Beardsley and asked Johnson, who had been his friend, for an account of him (pp. 42–3). I particularly liked the fact that Johnson in no way criticized the supposed immorality of Beardsley's art, which the more conventional part of the public had so much to complain about; “despite all wantonness of youthful genius, and all the morbidity of disease, his truest self was on the spiritual side of things, and his conversion was true to that self.” (P. 187.)

Lastly there's an essay on Johnson by Louise Imogen Guiney, evidently written soon after his death. It's partly about his life and personality, but mostly about his work. I liked this observation from p. 202: “He was a tower of wholesomeness in the decadence which his short life spanned.” She makes a good point there. To my mind, if someone was a poet in the 1890s, if he associated with Wilde and Beardsley and Dowson and Alfred Douglas and so on and so on — why, of course he was a decadent; how could anyone be any more of a decadent than that? But then, having now read some of Johnson's poetry, I can't help admitting that this sort of decadence-by-association seems like a very shallow way of defining it. His obvious fondness for his friends and his school, his ardent and enthusiastic Celtic patriotism, the deep and sincere catholic faith that pervades so many of his poems — all this is the very opposite of decadence; if you wanted to summarize it in a word, ‘wholesome’ would do better than ‘decadent’.

Errors

There are deplorably many errors in the text of Johnson's poems in this book; this is all the more regrettable since these errors generally don't occur in the early editions from the late 19th or early 20th century (scans of which are available on archive.org). In other words, these errors are simply due to carelessness in preparing the text of the present edition. Here are the ones I've noticed:

• In the text of Gwynedd on p. 115, about three lines' worth of text, “as nature's own [. . .] stormy sea:/ Even” is repeated twice, though in the second copy “ruining earth” is replaced by “running earth”. If we look at e.g. Johnson's Poems (London: Elkin Mathews, 1895), p. 25, we see that this passage appears only once there (with “ruining earth”).

• An error in the text of Ireland (p. 151): “And vexed with agony's bright joy's retreat” should have “agony” instead of “agony's” (see the 1897 ed., p. 1), and there should be a stanza break after that line. Another stanza break is missing before “Sweet Mother!” on p. 155 (1897, p. 4).

• In the same poem, we find “for the yet burn” (p. 154), which should of course be “thee” (1897, p. 3).

• On the same page, “The Prince of Peace love” should be “loves” (1897, p. 3).

• On p. 160, “they little Child” should be “thy” (1897, p. 8).

• On p. 171, there's “leftist” which should be “leftest” (1897, p. 25).

• On p. 170 there's “C.S.S.R.” where the 1897 ed. (p. 24) has “C.SS.R.”, which seems better; it is a reference to the Redemptorists (Congregatio Sanctissimi Redemptoris; the wikipedia, with the typical modern horror of full-stops, abbreviates it CSsR).

• On p. 177 we have “In Memorium” and a redundant comma after “quia”, neither of which errors is present e.g. in the 1912 ed. (Some Poems of Lionel Johnson, p. 64).

• “Sancta Silverum” (p. 179) should be “Sancta Silvarum” (Poems (1895), p. 60).

ToRead:

A number of interesting books are mentioned in the introduction:

  • Katharine Tynan: Memories (1924). A quote from it appears here on p. 3. She was an Irish writer and poet.
  • Rupert Croft-Cooke: Bosie (1963) and The Unrecorded Life of Oscar Wilde (1972). Mentioned here on p. 16; Croft-Cooke “was a later-in-life friend of Lord Alfred Douglas”.
  • Iain Fletcher (ed.): The Complete Poems of Lionel Johnson (London: The Unicorn Press, 1953; xlv + 395 pp.). Mentioned here on p. 17; seems to be the closest we have to a collected edition of Johnson's poems. There is also a revised second edition (New York and London: Garland Publishing, 1982, lxxvi + 381 pp.).
  • Lord Alfred Douglas: The Autobiography (Martin Secker, 1913). Mentioned here on p. 17; one of several autobiographical works he wrote.
  • Lord Alfred Douglas: The City of the Soul (1899). A collection of poems, initially published anonymously; it “did well until an emboldened Douglas put his name to a subsequent edition, thus ensuring a down-turn in sales, such was his infamy” (p. 45).
  • Norman Alford: The Rhymers' Club (1994). Mentioned here on p. 21. The Rhymers' Club was a group of poets founded by Yeats; Johnson also attended some of their meetings, and his work appeared in the anthologies that they produced in the early 1890s.
  • Richard Le Gallienne: The Romantic '90s (1925). Mentioned here on p. 22, with an anecdote where Johnson introduced Le Gallienne to absinthe. Le Gallienne outlived the 1890s by some half a century, and kept on writing; his wikipedia page contains a long list of his works, several of which sound interesting.
  • Murray Pittock (ed.): The Selected Letters of Lionel Johnson (Tregara Press, 1988). Mentioned here on p. 26. Not that I'm really interested in reading Johnson's letters, but I can't help wondering why ‘selected’ and not ‘collected’ — that just means that someone else will have to produce another edition at some point in the future :)
  • Francis Douglas and Percy Colson: Oscar Wilde and the Black Douglas (1949). Mentioned here on p. 27; Francis was the grandson of the 9th Marquess of Queensberry, the man whose persecution of Wilde led to the latter's ruin.
  • Caspar Wintermans: Lord Alfred Douglas: A Poet's Life and His Finest Work (Peter Owen, 2007). A biography, mentioned here on p. 30. Wintermans' wikipedia page lists several other publications of his about Wilde and Douglas.
  • Brian Reade: Sexual Heretics: Male Homosexuality in English Literature from 1850 to 1900 (1970). Mentioned here on pp. 33–4.
  • John Francis Bloxam: The Priest and the Acolyte. A short story which “brought The Chameleon [a college magazine edited by Alfred Douglas, of which only one issue appeared] into disrepute” (p. 35). It is described here as a “heinous tale of a priest who ravishes a fourteen-year-old and then encourages the boy to die with him”. Sounds like edgy students being edgy is hardly a new phenomenon :P
  • Edgar Jepson: Memories of a Victorian (1933). Mentioned here on p. 40. Apparently he also wrote a sequel, Memories of an Edwardian and Neo-Georgian (1937).
  • William Archer: Poets of the Younger Generaton (1902). The book contains a selection of poems from about 30-odd poets, interlaced with biographical and critical remarks by Archer. Among the poets included are Laurence Binyon, Bliss Carman, A. E. Housman, Rudyard Kipling, Richard Le Gallienne, George Santayana, Arthur Symons and W. B. Yeats. Archer's book is mentioned here on p. 41 for not including Johnson: “[h]is indefinite status was made official by his omission from a major study, Living Poets of the Younger Generation, by William Archer”. But perhaps we shouldn't make too much of this omission; Archer explains in his preface (p. 3) that he “regretfully omitted” some poets “for no better reason than that their work does not happen to chime with my idiosyncrasy.” He included only poets whose work he enjoyed: “I am quite willing to believe that in some of these cases the fault, the limitation, is on my side; but this belief has not induced me to affect a warmth I do not feel.”
  • Iain Fletcher: Decadence and the 1890s (Edward Arnold, 1979). Mentioned here on p. 51, though everyone else on the internet seems to call him Ian rather than Iain.

Incidentally, it turns out that a number of Johnson's books are available on archive.org:

Labels: , ,

Saturday, September 17, 2022

KNJIGA: Geoffrey Chaucer, "Legenda o dobrih ženah"

Geoffrey Chaucer: Legenda o dobrih ženah. Prevod in spremna beseda: Nada Grošelj. Institutum Studiorum Humanitatis, Ljubljana 2011. 978-961-6192-51-4. 165 str.

Geoffrey Chaucer je bil angleški pesnik iz 14. stoletja — verjetno edini srednjeangleški avtor, ki ga laik, kot sem jaz, z zmerno količino truda še lahko za silo razume. Pred mnogo leti sem kupil njegova zbrana dela v eni knjigi in jih prebral približno polovico, med drugim tudi Legendo o dobrih ženah; ker pa sem doslej seveda že vse pozabil, sem prišel na misel, da bi prebral Legendo še v slovenskem prevodu (za katerega sem šele pred nedavnim opazil, da obstaja).

Pravzaprav sem radoveden, zakaj se je prevajalka odločila prevesti ravno to delo, ko pa je eno od Chaucerjevih krajših in manj pomembnih; je pa res, da so pravzaprav bolj ali manj vsa njegova dela taka, razen Canterburyskih zgodb, te pa je že prevajal Marjan Strojan. Drugače tej knjigi ne morem očitati ničesar posebej resnega; prevod se mi je zdel prijeten in berljiv, tu in tam so pod črto koristne opombe, na začetku pa zanimiva in ne predolga spremna beseda (med drugim o okoliščinah, v katerih je pesnitev nastala, in o virih, iz katerih je Chaucer jemal snov zanjo).

Kot človeku, ki ne mara sprememb v jeziku, je v mojih očeh velik plus pri tem prevodu tudi to, da je v naslovu uporabljena beseda žene v svojem starejšem pomenu women namesto v današnjem wives. Radoveden sem, ali je kdaj kdo naredil kakšno raziskavo, kako je prišlo do tega, da se je besedi žena pomen tako temeljito skrčil iz woman na wife, da jo je dandanes v prvem od teh pomenov popolnoma izpodrinila beseda ženska (ki je, po obliki sodeč, morala nekoč nastati kot pridevnik). Še sredi 20. stoletja so novoustanovljeno žensko revijo poimenovali Naša žena in s tem vsekakor niso mislili le na poročene ženske; ko pa so bili izdajatelji prisiljeni pred nekaj leti ime zamenjati zaradi zapletov z blagovno znamko, so revijo preimenovali v Slovenska ženska — beseda žena je bila torej prej tam le še po inerciji, za na novo skovano ime pa se jim ni zdela več primerna. Toda zdaj revija spet izhaja pod starim imenom oz. pod nekakšno kombinacijo obeh. — Prav mogoče je tudi, da v našem lokalnem zdravstvenem domu še zdaj nekje visi tabla „dispanzer za žene“, ki sem jo tam videl pred časom, razen če so jo morda v zadnjih nekaj letih pri kakšni prenovi odstranili in zamenjali. —

Ena stvar, ki me je pri prevodu v tej knjigi vendarle motila, pa je tale: v izvirniku se verzi lepo rimajo, v prevodu pa so pogosto namesto rim le asonance. Poleg tega, ker so verzi jambski, je zadnji poudarjeni zlog tudi zadnji zlog v verzu sploh, tako da za asonanco med dvema verzoma ni treba drugega, kot da imata oba v zadnjem zlogu isti samoglasnik. To si je težko razlagati drugače kot s prevajalsko lenobo; v dobrih starih časih so se prevajalci pri teh rečeh bolj potrudili.

Kar je še huje: ne tako redko se tudi samoglasnika ne ujemata zares, največkrat zaradi razlike v dolžini — in tisto se potem res ne sliši dobro. Tule so primeri takšnih nepravih ujemanj že samo iz prologa: jásobràz (vrstici 48–9); znášràd (69–70); obràzškrlát (111–12); táldivjàl (195–6); lagàlmarjetica (217–18); lásobràz (249, 251); vsèmdiadém (298–9); dálznàl (366–7); znàlpostáv (412–13); o vàszagát (460–1); dálpozdràv (496–7); možápeklà (513–14); samozvánprestàl (568–9); brálomejevàl (572–3).

Še ena stvar, ki me moti, je platnica — kričeča pisava, v kateri je napisan naslov na njej, in nekakšna kvazi na pol erotična fotografija ženskega trupa pod njo, dajeta občutek, kot da bi poskušal nekdo s cenenim senzacionalizmom zavesti bralca v misel, da je knjiga veliko modernejša in bolj eksplicitna, kot je v resnici. To sicer ni težava le te knjige; izšla je v zbirki Dialog z antiko in kot lahko vidimo iz njene spletne strani, imajo vse knjige iz te zbirke na naslovnici neke bolj ali manj posrečeno izbrane (za moje pojme bolj manj kot bolj) fotografije, verjetno naročene s kakšnega stock photography websitea. To izgleda tako, kot da bi se nekdo po sili trudil dajati vtis, da so ta (večinoma antična) dela relevantna tudi za današnji čas; in če je tako, založbi tega seveda ne morem zameriti, saj se morda čutijo v to prisiljeni, da sploh lahko prodajo kak izvod; drugače pa se meni zdi, da je pravi odgovor na vprašanje „ali je tole antično/srednjeveško delo relevantno tudi za današnji čas?“ sestavljen iz treh delov: „(1) upam, da ne; (2) j**i se, ker si sploh vprašal; in (3) to delo je vredno pozornosti že zato, ker je bilo relevantno v svojem času in ker je eno od redkih ohranjenih iz tistega časa, ne glede na to, ali je relevantno tudi v našem ali ne.“ Kajti konec koncev, kaj pa je na našem času tako pomembnega, da bi se morali spraševati, ali je neko delo iz preteklosti slučajno relevantno tudi zdaj? Mi sicer slučajno živimo ravno v tem času in ne v kakšnem drugem, ampak samo zaradi tega še ne sledi, da je ta čas kaj pomembnejši od ostalih.

Kar pa je pri tej knjigi daleč najhuje: narekovaje uporablja vedno angleške “ ” namesto slovenskih „ “ ali » «. Oh, kaj bi dal, da bi mi bilo dano postati diktator Slovenije — s kakšnim užitkom bi pošiljal ljudi veslat na galeje za take prestopke!

Prolog

Pesnitev se začne s precej dolgim prologom, ki obsega kar petino celotnega dela. Menda ga nekateri štejejo za najboljši del pesnitve in najbrž imajo kar prav, saj je bil meni od cele pesnitve najmanj všeč ravno ta prolog, torej menda že mora biti dober. V njem je za moj okus čisto preveč navduševanja nad pomladno naravo, cvetlicami in podobnimi stvarmi; še posebej pa so pesniku všeč marjetice („cvetka vseh cvetic“, 53, 185) — obsedenost z njimi je po vsem videzu sodeč pobral iz francoske poezije, kjer je bilo to sredi 14. stoletja nekaj časa v modi (str. 15).

Sčasoma se pesniku v sanjah prikaže bog ljubezni in mu očita, da je v svojih prejšnjih delih prikazoval ženske kot nestanovitne in nagnjene k varanju; zdaj bo moral za kazen napisati pesnitev o dobrih ženskah, ki so se odlikovale po svoji zvestobi in v več primerih tudi trpele zaradi moških, nevrednih njihovega zaupanja. Boga ljubezni spremlja devetnajst žena, večinoma iz antične mitologije, ena ali dve pa sta zgodovinski osebnosti (249–69). Vodilna med njimi je Alkestis, slavna po tem, da je bila pripravljena umreti namesto svojega moža. Verjetno je Chaucer nameraval napisati legende o vseh devetnajstih, vendar jih je potem napisal le devet, pa še od tega je zadnja nedokončana.

Posamezne legende

Legende same so mi bile precej prijetnejše branje kot prolog, četudi sem nekatere med njimi že poznal od prej. Najbolj me je pri njih motilo, da so tako kratke; pesnik preprosto nima dovolj prostora, da bi pošteno povedal svojo zgodbo. Vmes se pogosto še celo izgovarja, češ da se mu ne da tega pisati na dolgo, da bi bilo dolgočasno, da bo tu nekaj izpustil ali povzel in da si lahko bralec več prebere v virih, na katere se njegova pesnitev opira (od teh virov je glavni Ovid, nekaj tudi Vergil in še razni kasnejši avtorji; str. 19–22).

Nad tem njegovim hitenjem in krajšanjem sem bil precej razočaran — zakaj se je sploh lotil pisanja tega dela, če se mu ni dalo povedati zgodb, kot se spodobi? Iz Canterburyskih zgodb vidimo, kako lepo zna Chaucer pripovedovati, če si vzame čas za to; škoda, da si ga tukaj ni. No, razlog za to je sicer verjetno precej banalen: vtis, ki sem ga dobil ob branju spremne besede, je, da je bilo to delo sprva napisano za zdolgočasene dvorne dame in gospode, ki so si z njim malo krajšali čas in ki so vse te zgodbe tako ali tako že poznali iz približno istih virov, iz katerih je zajemal tudi Chaucer (str. 22).

Legenda o Kleopatri

To je edina zgodovinska oseba med devetimi ali desetimi, o katerih je Chaucer dejansko napisal legende. Po tem, ko Antonij in Kleopatra izgubita pomorsko bitko proti Cezarju (to je imeniten akcijski prizor, 634–50), stori Antonij samomor, kmalu zatem pa mu sledi tudi Kleopatra, in to še na bolj dramatičen način, kot sem ga imel v spominu: izkopati dá jamo, ki ji bo za grob, in jo napolniti s strupenimi kačami, nato pa skoči vanjo, da jo kače s svojimi piki ubijejo.

Legenda o Tizbi iz Babilona

Žalostno zgodbo o Piramu in Tizbi sem poznal že od prej, sem pa pozabil, da sta bila iz Babilona. Piram in Tizba sta zaljubljenca, ki se odločita skupaj pobegniti od doma, ker starši ne odobravajo njune zveze. Zaradi spleta okoliščin in nesporazumov dobi Piram vtis, da so Tizbo požrli levi, zato v obupu stori samomor; nato Tizba, ki je pred levi v resnici uspela pobegniti, najde njegovo truplo in stori samomor še sama.

To je, kot rečeno, žalostna in zelo ganljiva zgodba, vendar si nisem mogel kaj, da si ne bi želel, da bi bila Piram in Tizba malo manj prenagljena v svojih reakcijah. Če se Piramu ne bi tako mudilo s samomorom, bi bilo vse še v redu. Je pa seveda res, da najbrž nihče ne bi hotel brati pesnitve, katere vsebina bi bila „zaljubljenca se uspešno izogneta levom in nepotrebnim samomorom in potem srečno zaživita skupno življenje v sosednjem mestu“. Morda je tako zgodbo celo kdo napisal, vendar se srednjeveškim menihom ni zdela dovolj zanimiva, da bi jo prepisovali, in se je zato izgubila tako kot še 99% ostale antične književnosti :)

Zanimivo pri tej zgodbi se mi je zdelo tudi to, da so v tistih časih očitno levi prežali takorekoč takoj zunaj mesta, celo tako velikega mesta, kot je bil Babilon. To so bili res drugačni časi.

Legenda o Didoni, kartažanski kraljici

To je ena od boljših legend v tej knjigi, ker ni tako kratka in ima zato pesnik končno dovolj prostora, da lahko zgodbo kolikor toliko spodobno pove. Enej je vodja skupine Trojancev, ki ob koncu trojanske vojne uspešno pobegnejo iz mesta; ustavijo se na afriški obali, kjer se v Eneja zaljubi kartažanska kraljica Dido. Tudi Enej ji obljubi ljubezen in zvestobo (1233–5), toda kmalu se je naveliča in naskrivaj odpluje naprej proti Italiji, Dido pa nato v obupu stori samomor (in to z Enejevim mečem, ki ga je ta prikladno pozabil ob odhodu).

Žalostno se mi zdi, da je šla Didona delat samomor zaradi takega nevrednega človeka, kot je Enej. Nevreden je še toliko bolj, ker, če prav razumem, so mu bili bogovi že prej povedali, da bo moral sčasoma oditi v Italijo in ustanoviti tam novo kraljestvo, torej bi bil moral vedeti, da se z Didono ne sme zaplesti ali pa jo mora vzeti s seboj; in tukaj vidimo (1316), da je bila ona tudi res pripravljena oditi z njim. Ker je vendarle šel brez nje, je to znak, da se je je res naveličal in je bila njegova pot v Italijo le prikladen izgovor.

Škoda, da se ni Dido odločila ostati živa; lahko bi poslala nad Eneja kartažansko ladjevje, ki bi zmlelo Eneja in njegove ladje; otrok, ki ji ga je bil zaplodil (1323), pa bi bil kot nalašč za to, da o prvi priliki konča v kakšni peči kot daritev Molohu, saj je to konec koncev vendarle Kartagina. V konfliktu med Kartažani in Rimljani sem vedno navijal za Kartažane in tole bi bila odlična priložnost, da se nastanek Rima sploh prepreči. Kdo ve, nemara pa je kdo že napisal kak alternativnozgodovinski roman na to temo :)

Legenda o Hipsipili in Medeji

Načelo „nategni in pobegni“, ki smo ga srečali pri prejšnji legendi, se nadaljuje tudi tukaj v še popolnejši različici. Jazon s svojimi argonavti se na poti proti Kolhidi ustavi na otoku Lemnosu, kjer zapelje tamkajšnjo kraljično Hipsipilo. Chaucer na koncu sijajno povzame ta del zgodbe: „Na kratko: Jazon je gospe postal/ zakonski drug in spraznil njen trezor,/ da si je prateža nabral za pot;/ zaplodil ji je še otroka dva,/ pa dvignil sidro za ves večni čas.“ (1559–63) To bi bilo skoraj smešno, če ne bi bilo hkrati tudi žalostno. Hipsipila po vsem videzu sodeč ne stori ničesar pretirano dramatičnega, vendar sčasoma umre od žalosti. No, po svoje je sicer tudi to dramatično; še dobro, da si dandanes ljudje po ločitvi ponavadi sčasoma poiščejo novo zvezo in ne žalujejo sami do konca življenja — ampak, spet, taka zgodba, četudi bi jo bil v antiki kdo napisal, se najbrž ne bi ohranila do danes.

Kakorkoli že, na Kolhidi se v Jazona zaljubi Medeja, hči tamkajšnjega kralja; pomaga mu priti do zlatega runa, nato pa pobegne od doma skupaj z njim in argonavti. Tu bi se zdaj dalo napisati čudovito dramatično zgodbo, polno umorov in nasilja — toda Chaucer, naj ga vrag pocitra, tega ne stori! V peščici verzov nam le pove, da je Jazon sčasoma zapustil tudi Medejo in si našel drugod še tretjo ženo (1656–60). Niti besede o tem, da je na begu iz Kolhide Medeja umorila svojega bratca, da bi se zasledovalci zamudili s pogrebom njegovega trupla; pa o tem, da je kasneje nagovorila hčerke kralja Peliasa, da so le-tega umorile, češ da ga bo Medeja potem oživila prerojenega in pomlajenega; pa da je še kasneje, ko jo je Jazon zapustil, umorila njegovo novo ženo, njenega očeta in še vsaj dva svoja otroka, ki ju je imela z Jazonom; pa da se je kasneje poročila z atenskim kraljem Egejem in ga skoraj uspela pripraviti do tega, da bi ubil svojega sina Tezeja.

Skratka, Medeja je ena od najboljših negativk v celi grški mitologiji; strastna in maščevalna čarovnica, ki verjetno vedno nosi črno spodnje perilo, z ene roke ji kaplja strup, z druge pa kri; pri Chaucerju pa ne dobimo od vsega tega popolnoma ničesar. Žalostno dejstvo je, da se taka Medeja pač ne vklaplja v Chaucerjev koncept — v teh legendah hoče pisati o ženskah, ki, ko so prevarane, žalujejo ali storijo samomor, ne pa o takih, ki se krvavo maščujejo z nekaj dobro merjenimi umori. Zato tiste dele antičnih mitov, ki štrlijo ven iz tega okvira, preprosto zamolči.

Legenda o Lukreciji

Za to zgodbo sem bil prej že slišal, vendar podrobnosti nisem poznal ali pa sem jih pozabil. Tarkvinij mlajši (sin Tarkvinija Ošabnega, zadnjega rimskega kralja) si poželi Lukrecije, žene viteza Kolatina. Medtem ko je slednji na vojski, Tarkvinij z grožnjami prisili Lukrecijo, da se mu vda. Lukrecija, da bi zaščitila svojo in moževo čast, pove sorodnikom, kaj se je zgodilo, nato pa stori samomor. Ko se zgodba razširi po Rimu, se ljudstvo v besu dvigne in nažene oba Tarkvinija iz mesta, monarhijo pa zamenjajo z republiko (Lukrecijin vdovec pa postane eden od prvih konzulov; op. 83 na str. 120).

Pri tej zgodbi mi je všeč to, da za razliko od večine drugih legend v tej knjigi Lukrecija vendarle dobi nekakšno zadoščenje, četudi šele po smrti; posrečena pa je tudi ta kombinacija osebnega in političnega: posledice ne prizadenejo le Tarkvinija osebno, ampak se spotoma izvede še revolucija v državi. Kakor sicer nisem velik ljubitelj Rimljanov, se mi pa njihova republika po malem vendarle dopade; navkljub vsem svojim pomanjkljivostim je ravno republika tisto obdobje, v katerem so ustvarili svojo veličino; doba cesarstva, ki ji je sledila, pa je bila za moje pojme tragedija in en sam dolg počasen zaton. Redkokatero posilstvo se tako dobro razplete; škoda je le, da ni še Lukrecija preživela. Všeč mi je tisti pregovor, da je srečno življenje najboljša oblika maščevanja, vendar pri legendah v tej knjigi ta pregovor žal ne velja.

Legenda o Ariadni

Ariadna je hči kretskega kralja Minosa, ki mu morajo Atenci vsako leto poslati nekaj ljudi, ki jih on potem zapre v labirint, kjer jih požre pošastni Minotaver. Enkrat je med žrtvami tudi Tezej, sin atenskega kralja Egeja; Ariadna se v Tezeja zaljubi in se mu odloči pomagati. Približno do sem sem zgodbo poznal, podrobnosti od tu naprej pa ne; pohvalno je, da zgodba tu pri Chaucerju ni tako okrajšana, kot so nekatere druge v tej knjigi. Ariadna priskrbi Tezeju ne le nit, po kateri je znana (da se ne bo izgubil v labirintu), ampak tudi orožje (drugače je bilo mišljeno, da so Minotavrove žrtve neoborožene) in „kroglice iz voska in lanu“ (2003–4), ki naj bi jih metal Minotavru v gobec, da se mu bo zaletelo in ga bo medtem lahko pokončal. Lepo je bilo videti takšne podrobnosti, ki jih v drugih legendah tako pogrešamo.

Kakorkoli že, Tezej obljubi Ariadni, da se bo z njo poročil, in ko ubije Minotavra, pobegne s Krete skupaj z njo in njeno sestro Fedro. Spotoma se ustavijo na nekem otoku, kjer se Tezej sicer poroči z Ariadno, vendar še isto noč odpluje naprej brez nje — ker je njena sestra lepša! (2172) Tu zgodbo potem Chaucer zaključi malo hitreje, kot bi si človek želel; menda se kasneje z Ariadno poroči bog Bakh in jo povzdigne v boginjo, iz njene krone pa nastanejo zvezde v ozvezdju Bika (str. 136).

Tu je sicer zelo pohvalno, da se stvari za Ariadno končajo tako ugodno; vseeno pa je v tej zgodbi še nekaj nedokončanih niti, ki me zelo žulijo. Kaj si na primer o vsem skupaj misli Fedra? Ali odobrava to, da bo Tezej takole zapustil Ariadno in se predvidoma kasneje v Atenah poročil z njo? Upam, da ne, saj je bilo prej videti, da se Ariadna in Fedra dobro razumeta. Kako bo torej izpadlo, ko bosta Tezej in Fedra prišla v Atene in bo ona tam njegovemu očetu in vsem ostalim povedala, da je Tezej že poročen z njeno sestro, ki jo je zapustil na nekem otoku ob poti?!

In, konec koncev: če je Minos tako mogočen, da mu Atenci še vedno vsako leto pošiljajo žrtve za Minotavra, potem je menda tudi tako mogočen, da lahko zdaj pošlje nad Atene ladjevje z nalogo, da se maščuje nad Tezejem in pripelje obe dekleti nazaj na Kreto. Kako da Ariadne in Tezeja ni skrbela ta možnost, ko sta se dogovarjala za beg s Krete in za poroko?

Legenda o Filomeli

To zgodbo sem približno že poznal, saj sem jo pred nekaj leti prebral v eni od renesančnih tragedij iz zbirke I Tatti Renaissance Library. Traški kralj Terej se poroči s Prokno, hčerjo atenskega kralja; čez nekaj let želi Prokne spet videti svojo sestro Filomelo, zato odpotuje Terej v Atene, da bi pripeljal od tam Filomelo na obisk v Trakijo. Res jo pripelje v Trakijo, toda ne na obisk k Prokni, pač pa jo nekam zapre in posili. (Boy, that escalated quickly.) Filomela uspe poslati po nekem služabniku sporočilo Prokni, kaj se je zgodilo, in ta pride do nje in jo reši.

Chaucer tu zgodbo konča, kar pomeni, da smo (podobno kot pri Medeji) prikrajšani za nekaj nasilja in, kar je še bolj obžalovanja vredno, za maščevanje. Zgodba se namreč nadaljuje tako, da Prokne ubije svojega sina Itisa, ki ga ima s Terejem, in slednjemu podtakne sinovo meso v hrano. Kasneje Prokne in Filomela pobegneta pred Terejevim besom, bogovi pa jih vse tri spremenijo v ptiče različnih vrst. Mogoče se mi zdi tudi, da to maščevanje ni bilo preveč po Chaucerjevem okusu, ker je Itis po našem pojmovanju nedolžen; toda mislim, da so dali stari Grki več na sorodstvene vezi kot mi, in sumim, da se jim Proknino maščevanje ni zdelo pretirano. Na misel mi je prišlo, da bi lahko Prokne možu v spanju enostavno prerezala vrat; toda po drugi strani, potem on ne bi imel časa vedeti, da se mu je maščevala, in za njim bi še vedno ostal sin, ki bi ga sčasoma lahko nasledil; z umorom sina pa se je Prokne Tereju maščevala huje in primerneje.

(To, da je Chaucer zgodbo končal tam, kjer jo je, je problematično še z nekega drugega vidika: očitno je, da zgodbe tam še ne more biti konec. Prokne in Filomela sta še vedno v Trakiji in si verjetno ne želita spet priti Tereju v kremplje. Jasno je torej, da bo bralca zanimalo, kako se zgodba nadaljuje, in škandalozno je, da si jo pesnik upa kar takole končati.)

Legenda o Filidi

Ta zgodba mi je bila popolnoma nova; če sem že kdaj prej slišal zanjo, sem jo popolnoma pozabil. Tezej, ki smo ga že srečali v eni od prejšnjih legend, ima sina Demofonta, ki ni padel daleč od drevesa. Na poti domov s trojanske vojne doživi Demofon brodolom nekje v Trakiji, na obali dežele, ki ji vlada kraljica Filis. Demofon ji obljubi, da se bo z njo poročil, in odpluje v Atene, češ da bo pripravil vse potrebno; seveda pa se potem ne vrne več. Ko Filis sprevidi, da jo je prevaral, mu pošlje očitkov polno pismo (iz katerega navaja Chaucer nekaj precej dolgih odlomkov), nato pa stori samomor. Jojmene! Kaj ji je bilo tega treba? Kot da ni dovolj žalostno že to, da se je pustila prevarati takemu človeku — toda še veliko bolj žalostno je, če zaradi tega potem stori samomor... Še dobro, da ljudje v resničnem življenju ne posežejo tako zlahka po svojem življenju kot tragične junakinje iz grške mitologije.

Ob tej zgodbi (in še nekaj prejšnjih) mi je prišlo na misel še nekaj: pa kakšen za vraga je ta starogrški mitološki svet, da se v njem kraljice in princese pustijo vse po vrsti nategniti (v več kot enem smislu) prvemu zapeljivemu brodolomcu, ki ga viharji prinesejo na njihove obale? Človek bi si mislil, da ponavadi razmerja med kronanimi glavami niso bila ravno tako enostavna; da je vsaka taka poroka v prvi vrsti politična odločitev, da se pred njo precej časa pogovarjajo diplomati in ambasadorji, ministri in svetovalci, kaj pa si o vsem skupaj mislita potencialni ženin in nevesta, je zadnja stvar, ki se pri tem komurkoli zdi pomembna.

Ta zgodba mi je bila zanimiva še iz nekega drugega razloga: iz nje vidimo, da se mit o Tezeju, Ariadni in Minotavru dogaja le eno generacijo pred trojansko vojno, saj se je le-te udeležil Tezejev sin. Doslej nisem imel pravega občutka za to, kakšen je medsebojni časovni položaj teh dveh mitov. Še ena zanimiva stvar pri tej zgodbi pa je ime Filis — zdaj torej vidim, od kod so Američani dobili ime Phyllis, ki je bilo tam svojčas precej priljubljeno (nekje do srede 20. stoletja).

Legenda o Hipermestri

Zgodbo o Danaidah sem od prej približno že poznal: kralj Danaos je imel petdeset hčera, njegov brat Egipt pa petdeset sinov; na bratovo zahtevo je moral Danaos dovoliti, da se njegove hčere poročijo s temi svojimi bratranci. Toda Danaju je bilo prerokovano, da ga bo ubil zet, zato hčeram naroči, naj svoje može na poročno noč umorijo. Vse razen ene, Hiperm(n)estre, to tudi res naredijo, ona pa svojega moža Linkeja pusti pri življenju (kasneje ta tudi res ubije Danaosa).

Pri Chaucerju je zgodba sicer nekoliko drugačna: Linkej je tu Danajev sin, ne Egiptov; Egipt pa se imenuje Egist in ima hčerko Hipermestro. Poleg tega naj bi se poročila le Hipermestra (z Linkejem), ne pa tudi njene sestre. Egist poskuša z grožnjami pripraviti šokirano Hipermestro do tega, da bi umorila Linkeja; toda ona le-tega posvari in skupaj pobegneta iz Egistove hiše. Na begu pa Linkej ne čaka nanjo in ker je Hipermestra počasnejša, jo Danaj ujame in jo da zapreti. Tu se legenda prekine, ker je Chaucer ni dokončal. Radoveden sem, kako bi se zgodba nadaljevala. Kaj misli Danaj storiti s Hipermestro? Če mu je prerokovano, da ga bo zet ubil, mu nič ne pomaga, če se zdaj znaša nad njo. Ali bo Linkej, čeprav je Hipermestro zdaj tako strahopetno zapustil, kasneje vendarle prišel nazaj in jo rešil ter ubil Danaja?

Chaucer se v zadnjih verzih (2716–18) zgraža nad Linkejem, ker Hipermestri ni pomagal, in to se po eni strani sliši smiselno, po drugi strani pa — kaj pa naj bi bil naredil? Nesti je menda ja ne more hitreje, kot lahko ona hodi sama, torej bi bil v tem primeru učinek le ta, da bi Danaj ujel oba in ne le nje. Ali bi lahko Linkej pričakal Danaja in se spopadel z njim? Morda, če le-ta ni imel s seboj večjega števila ljudi (te podrobnosti pa nam Chaucer ne pove). Skratka, mislim, da imamo še premalo podatkov, da bi lahko Linkeja dokončno odpisali.

*

Ta knjiga, skratka, je lahko čisto prijetno branje, ni pa spet nekaj, ob čemer bi človek omedleval od užitka. Če bi bil pripravljen Chaucer povedati te zgodbe na daljše in z več podrobnostmi, bi bile lahko še precej prijetnejše. Mislim, da je zdaj že razprodana, ampak na zadnji strani piše, da je stala 17 evrov; veseli me, da sem si jo sposodil v knjižnici, ker bi drugače dobil občutek, da od nje nisem imel za 17 evrov branja. (Za primerjavo: moj izvod Chaucerjevih zbranih del (s slovarčkom in precej opombami vred, skupaj 1327 strani), ki sem ga kupil leta 2000, je imel takrat priporočeno ceno 14 funtov, zdaj pa jo ima 25 funtov.)

Labels: , ,