Critique of pre-revolutionary prose translations in K. I. Chukovsky’s High Art: Framing the problem

Abstract

This article examines K. I. Chukovsky’s views on prerevolutionary translations as presented in his book High Art. The author analyzes Chukovsky’s selective approach: while he harshly criticized translators like M. A. Shishmareva, E. G. Beketova, and L. I. Umanets for their “pedestrian quality,” verbosity, and domestication, he made an exception for I. I. Vvedensky. It is well known that Vvedensky’s translations were rife with inaccuracies, contained unauthorized additions to the author’s text (including Dickens’ or Thackeray’ novels), and simply demonstrated a poor command of English. However, Chukovsky considered the conveyance of the original’s spirit and Vvedensky’s affinity with the “Gogolian” movement in Russian literature to be far more important. Vvedensky’s translation work was contrasted with that of  E. Lann’s school, being presented as more faithful to the spirit of the original. The author of the article concludes that Chukovsky’s evaluation criteria were determined not so much by the objective quality of the translation as by the ideological and cultural agenda of the era. Criticism of the “old” school of translation served to legitimize the new, Soviet school and was a means of distancing from the pre-revolutionary tradition. Thus, the article concludes that “High Art” served two divergent purposes: to legitimize the new Soviet translatorial paradigm as a cultural achievement and, simultaneously, to defend the translator’s status as a creative writer at a time when opportunities for original literary work were diminishing. This dual agenda explains the eclectic and often polemical nature of Chukovsky’s seminal work.