Briggs: The abandonment of Moscow. Rostopchin's inconsistent behaviour.
Maude: The author's reflections on the abandonment of Moscow. Rastopchin's conduct and that of private individuals
Pevear and Volokhonsky: Thoughts on the abandoning and burning of Moscow. Rastopchin's role.
Translation:
V.
In counterposition to Kutuzov, in that same time, in an event still more important than the retreating army without a battle, in the abandonment of Moscow and burning of it, Rastopchin, presenting to us as leading these events, acted completely otherwise.
This event — the abandonment of Moscow and the burning of it — was so the same inevitable as the retreat of the troops without battle for Moscow after the Borodino battle.
Every Russian person, not in the foundation of reasoning, but in this foundation of feeling which lies in us and lies in our fathers, could predict that what was subjected.
Beginning from Smolensk, in all the cities and villages of the Russian earth, without the participation of Count Rastopchin and his posters, was happening that very same what happened in Moscow. The people with carelessness were awaiting the enemy, did not rebel, did not worry, tore nobody apart in pieces, but calmly were awaiting their fate, feeling in themselves the forces at a very difficult moment of finding that what must be done. And as only the enemy was approaching, the richest elements of the population went away, leaving their property; the poorest stayed and lit and exterminated that what stayed.
This consciousness that this will be so and always will be so, lied and lies in the soul of Russian men. And this consciousness, and more, the premonition that Moscow will be taken, lied in Russian and Moscow society in the 12th year. Those which began to leave from Moscow still in July and the beginning of August, showed that they were awaiting this. Those, which left with that they could seize, leaving at home half their property, acted so owing to this hidden (latent) patriotism, which is expressed not in phrases, not in the murder of children for the safety of the fatherland and so on unnatural actions, but which is expressed unnoticed, simply, organically and because of it always produces the strongest results.
"It’s a shame to run from dangers; only the underpants run from Moscow," they said. Rastopchin in his posters inspired to them that to leave from Moscow was shameful. They were ashamed to receive the name coward, were ashamed to go, but they all the same rode, knowing that it was so needed. What for did they ride? It cannot be suggested that Rastopchin scared them with the horrors that were produced by Napoleon in conquered lands. They were leaving, and first left the rich, educated people, who knew very well that Vienna and Berlin stayed intact, and that there, in their time of the lessons of Napoleon, the residents funnily accompanied the time with the charming French, which so loved then Russian men and in particular ladies.
They rode because of how for Russian people it could not be the issue: whether okay or badly will under the management of French be Moscow. Under the management of the French could not be: this was only worse. They were leaving and before the Borodino battle, and still faster after the Borodino battle, not looking at the appeals for protection, despite the statements of the commander in chief of Moscow about his intentions to raise Iverskaya and go fight, and to air balls which must be the ruin of the French, and despite all that nonsense, about which wrote Rastopchin in his posters. They knew that the army must fight, and that should it not, then with young ladies and servant people it cannot be to go to three mountains to fight with Napoleon, and that they need to leave, or pity to abandon in death their property. They were leaving and not thinking about the majestic meaning of this huge, rich capital, the abandoned inhabitants and given away to victims of fire (a big abandoned wooden city necessarily should burn); they were leaving everyone for themselves, but together with that, only owing to that they left, and subjected that grand event, which forever will remain a better glory of the Russian people. That lady, which still in the month of June, with her own Negros and jesters, rose from Moscow to the Saratov village, with the vague consciousness that she was not Bonaparte’s servant, and with the fear for her is not stopped by the order of the Count Rastopchin, did simply and truly that great business, which saved Russia. The same Count Rastopchin, who shamed those that were leaving, that took out public places, that betrayed to nowhere worthless weapons to the drunken rabble, that lifted images, that forbade Augustine to take out the relics and icons, that seized all private carts formerly in Moscow, that on 136 carts took away the made Leppich air orb, that hinted that he burned Moscow, that said he burned his house and wrote a proclamation to the French, where he solemnly reproached them that they ravaged his children's shelter; that took the glory of burning Moscow, that abdicated from it, that ordered people to catch all spies and to bring them, that reproached for these people, that sent all the French from Moscow, that left in the city madam Ober-Shalme, formed the center of only French Moscow of the population, but without particular guilt ordered to grab and take away to the link the old venerable mail director Klyucharev; that collected people at three mountains so that to fight with the French, that, so to get off from these people, gave back to kill a man, and he himself was leaving at the rear gate; that spoke that he will not outlive the misfortunes of Moscow, that wrote in albums French poems about his participation in these cases,736 — this person did not understand the meanings of the ongoing events, but wanted to only do something himself, to surprise someone, commit something patriotic and heroic, and as a boy frolicked above the stately and inevitable event of the abandonment and burning of Moscow, and tried with his little hand to encourage, that held up during the huge, carrying him away, popular flow.
736
Je suis né Tartare. Je voulus être Romain. Les Français m’appelèrent barbare. Les Russes — Georges Dandin. That is: I was born Tatar. I want to be Roman. The French called me barbarian. The Russians — George Danden. (I was born a Tartar. I wanted to be Roman. The French called me barbarian. The Russians - Georges Dandin.)
Time: July and the beginning of August 1812
Mentioned: June
Locations: Moscow
Mentioned: Borodino, Russia (and Russian. Russes in French), Smolensk, Vienna, Berlin, French (Francais in French), Iver Church, Three Hills, Saratov, Home for Children (Orphanage in Mandelker, Maude, and Dunnigan, though uncapitalized in the latter. Foundling Asylum in Dole. childhood home in Briggs), Tartar (Tartare in French.), Roman (Romain in French)
Pevear and Volokhonsky Notes: Another "while this was happening" opening "Rastopchin, whom we picture as the guiding hand of this event, acted quite differently." The abandoning and burning of Moscow is spoiled here and talked about in a rather matter-of-fact manner. Tolstoy claims that every Russian could predict what was happening "on the basis of the feeling that is inside us and was inside our fathers".
"the wealthiest elements of the population left, abandoning their property; the poorest stayed and set fire to and destroyed what remained."
"the hidden (latent) patriotism which is expressed not in phrases, not in the killing of children to save the fatherland, and similar unnatural acts, but inconspicuously, simply, organically, and therefore always produces the strongest results."
Tolstoy explains that despite the way society continues to function and even flourishes under French occupation, the Russians could not stay and be under French rule. The rest of the chapter is really a screed against Rastopchin and his actions leading up to the French occupation of Moscow.
Characters (characters who do not appear, but are mentioned are placed in italics. First appearances are in Bold. First mentions are underlined. Final appearance denoted by *):
Kutuzof
Count Rostopchin (also "the commander-in-chief of Moscow")
Napoleon
Avgustin (as in Dole and Wiener. "Father Augustin" in Edmonds, Mandelker, and Dunnigan. Bell drops the name.)
Leppich
Madame Aubert-Chalme
Kliucharef ("Klyucharev" in Maude, Wiener, and Dunnigan. The "venerable old postmaster". "Klyucharyov" in Briggs and Mandelker. "Klucharov" in Garnett and Edmonds.)
(of course, the army and the Russian people in general. Also similar to the theoretical French corporal in the opening of Book 3, there is a lady and her "negroes" and jesters. Also a man that Rostopchin sentences to be killed that will appear later in the novel. George Dandin is also referenced in the footnote/Rostopchin poem.)
Abridged Versions: End of Chapter 10 in Bell.
Gibian: Chapter 4.
Fuller: Entire chapter is cut.
Komroff: Entire chapter is cut.
Kropotkin: Entire chapter is cut.
Bromfield: No apparent corresponding chapter.
Simmons: Chapter 4: A lot of Rostopchin's specific actions are removed, as are the theoretical people that Tolstoy uses as examples.
Additional Notes: Gibian: "S.N. Glinka...tells us that on August 30 he was at Rostopchin's house. During the conversation the latter sat down, wrote this proclamation, and ordered it to be printed at once, remarking to Glinka: "Nothing will happen at the Three Hills, but this will tell our peasants what they should do when the enemy occupies Moscow."
Mikaberidze:Page xvii: “In such a context, the Russian occupation of Paris--without plunder and destruction--in 1814 offered a rather dramatic contrast to the French entrance into Moscow and was used to augment the positive reputations of Russia and, above all, Alexander I himself...Sergei Glinka, (xviii) editor of a prominent Russian literary journal and a close companion of Rostopchin, rejected the Moscow governor’s involvement and could not make himself believe that a few ‘dozen Russian peasants and foreigner craftsmen’, who were executed by the Allied forces on charges of igniting fire, would have indeed ‘set fires in Moscow in the presence of Napoleon’s army’....’Moscow burnt down (because) it was supposed to burn,’ proclaimed Glinka. ‘Who burned Moscow? The war! It was without a doubt the result of a war the likes of which the world had never seen before…’ For Buturlin, Rostopchin had long prepared for this ‘deed worthy of a true Roman’, preparing incendiary materials and recruiting incendiaries who then scattered throughout the city under the direction of undercover police officers….Modest Bogdanovich...devoted one chapter to the fire of Moscow and argued that the city was destroyed not by (xix) Napoleon or the Grande Armee (although, he argued, the latter did contribute to the fires) but through the activities of Rostopchin and zealous Muscovites….the first generation of Soviet historians, writing between the 1920s and the 1940s, believed that Moscow was burned by the Russians. Framing his discussion within a Communist ideological framework, Mikhail Pokrovskii spoke openly of Moscow being abandoned by the aristocracy and of ‘(Russian) police burning the city on the orders of Rostopchin’. These aristocratic elites could not care less about the impact of the fires would have on the common people, the historian argued...."
My Religion: "I know now that all men are everywhere brothers and equals. When I think now of all the evil that I have done, that I have endured, and that I have seen about me, arising from national enmities, I see clearly that it is all due to that gross imposture called patriotism, — love for one's native land. When I think now of my education, I see how these hateful feelings were grafted into my mind."
The Russian Idea in War and Peace: .Tolstoy’s clearest and most vital example of the person who believes himself an active hero is Rastopchin...The author presents not only individual characters but an entire nation (the French who lead Europe against us) and whole circles within Russia herself--the court circle, the military headquarters--as guilty of exaggerating their whole significance, of this absurd and insolent self-aggrandizement...the acceptance of the conviction that behind one’s personality is the ability to change and direct events, leads only to mistakes and is inevitably linked with the worst passions--vanity, self-love, envy, hatred, and others...
No comments:
Post a Comment