What do you think?
Rate this book
Russian Library
Strolls with Pushkin
Andrei Sinyavsky, who writes under the pseudonym Abram Tertz, is one of the most eminent Russian literary figures of the post-Stalin period, and his Strolls with Pushkin is among the most controversial Russian literary texts of the past three decades. When it was first published in France, it was hailed by Western scholars as a brilliant critical work on Pushkin, but it was also violently attacked by Russian critics for its irreverent portrait of their country's greatest and most beloved poet. Now, with this first English translation, English-speaking audiences can judge the merits of this book for themselves.
Sinyavsky wrote Strolls with Pushkin while he was imprisoned for his writings in a Soviet labor camp, smuggled it out in letters to his wife, and published it in emigration in 1975. Fourteen years later, during the glasnost period, an excerpt was published in Russia, unleashing a storm of outrage from conservative nationalists for whom Pushkin was a symbol of Russian identity. In the book, Sinyavsky challenges the solemnity of official discourse on Pushkin by musing whimsically on the relationship between the poet's real life and his poetry, drawing on street anecdotes and caricatures to discuss the sources of his art in eroticism and his lighthearted acceptance of all kinds of people and behavior. Translated with great literary flair and enriched by an informative introduction and notes, the book not only provides a new, livelier portrait of Pushkin but also illuminates the ideology of the Russian literary culture for which he is the chief icon.
Sinyavsky wrote Strolls with Pushkin while he was imprisoned for his writings in a Soviet labor camp, smuggled it out in letters to his wife, and published it in emigration in 1975. Fourteen years later, during the glasnost period, an excerpt was published in Russia, unleashing a storm of outrage from conservative nationalists for whom Pushkin was a symbol of Russian identity. In the book, Sinyavsky challenges the solemnity of official discourse on Pushkin by musing whimsically on the relationship between the poet's real life and his poetry, drawing on street anecdotes and caricatures to discuss the sources of his art in eroticism and his lighthearted acceptance of all kinds of people and behavior. Translated with great literary flair and enriched by an informative introduction and notes, the book not only provides a new, livelier portrait of Pushkin but also illuminates the ideology of the Russian literary culture for which he is the chief icon.
194 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1975
7 people are currently reading
352 people want to read
About the author
Andrei Sinyavsky
43 books18 followersAndrei Donatovich Sinyavsky was a Russian writer and a literary critic. He was a Soviet dissident known as a defendant in the Sinyavsky–Daniel trial of 1965.
Russian: Андрей Донатович Синявский
Pen name: Абрам Терц
Pen name in English: Abram Tertz
Russian: Андрей Донатович Синявский
Pen name: Абрам Терц
Pen name in English: Abram Tertz
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
January 7, 2020
By the middle of the last century, the official Soviet philology turned Alexander Pushkin into an idealized icon and sterile poetical dogma. But sooner or later dogmas start suffering from necrosis and Andrei Sinyavsky was the one who decided to fight this dead dogma so Strolls with Pushkin is a new approach to the poet’s oeuvre and his life.
Infantility seems to have been one of Pushkin’s main features that ruled his behaviour throughout his entire life… So poetry and life to him were just a game… So it’s the source of his playful style… That’s why he has written so many tongue-in-cheek fairytales… So his poems were a device to win female hearts…
Writing Eugene Onegin he attempted to model the protagonist on himself and the result was a hollow aristocrat without any beliefs and convictions… He identified himself with Eugene Onegin but he ended up as Vladimir Lensky…
Poetry is an echo of an era the poet lives in…
…Nothing more
Will you squeeze out of my story
– that’s how Pushkin himself summed up the absence in his works of anything more than amusing anecdotes, elegantly and tastefully told. And perhaps we will find Pushkin easier to understand if we approach him not through the front hall, which is crammed with wreaths and busts that have an expression of uncompromising nobility on their brows, but rather with the help of the anecdotal caricatures of Pushkin that were sent back to the poet by the street, apparently in response to and in revenge for his great fame.
Infantility seems to have been one of Pushkin’s main features that ruled his behaviour throughout his entire life… So poetry and life to him were just a game… So it’s the source of his playful style… That’s why he has written so many tongue-in-cheek fairytales… So his poems were a device to win female hearts…
When you read Pushkin, you get the feeling that he has some bond with women, that he is at home with women – moreover as a specialist, one of those people you let into your house at all hours, someone indispensable, like a tailor, a hairdresser, a masseuse (she, after all, is a procuress, she, after all, is good at reading the cards), like a fashionable neurologist, a jeweler or a pet lapdog (so perky, with little curls…). You don’t have to stand on ceremony with a person like that, and every now and then you have to take him down a peg (You bastard! You upstart!), but you don’t kick him out, you don’t show him the door, you value him, you ask him for advice behind your mother-in-law’s back and sometimes you even suck up to him.
Writing Eugene Onegin he attempted to model the protagonist on himself and the result was a hollow aristocrat without any beliefs and convictions… He identified himself with Eugene Onegin but he ended up as Vladimir Lensky…
…With the accession of freedom everything became possible. The horizon swarmed with changes, and every object strove to stand upright, threatening at that very minute to turn world development in a different direction not as yet experienced by humanity. Conjectures of the sort “and what if Bonaparte had not caught a cold at the right time?” came into fashion. Pushkin, having the time of his life, played the solitaire of the so-called natural-historical process. If you drew the wrong queen, the whole picture would change irreparably. He was amused by this easy reversibility of events, which gave him food for thought and style. Galloping in the toe shoes of fate over the flagstones of the international forum, history, it seemed, was ready – for show, by bluffing – to replay its scenes from the beginning, to renew and change everything. Pushkin’s hands itched at the sight of such vacancies in the business of plot construction. In plain view, world-famous myths became overgrown with fresh stories, all ready to be set down on paper. Every louse aspired to become Napoleon. A little later and Raskolnikov would say: all is permitted! Everything was shaking. Everything was tottering on the brink of a conceptual abyss: and what if?! …the excessive hypotheticalness of being took your breath away.
Poetry is an echo of an era the poet lives in…
August 29, 2017
Perhaps there is no poet who makes one feel the futility of translation as Pushkin does. Too often even a good translator can’t avoid the aura of camp or self-parody, and yet the flavor of greatness hovers around every line, evanescent and just out of reach. Sinyavsky argues that this is because Pushkin was indeed lighthearted, but perhaps always running to escape the great poet in himself.
I picked this up on a whim, thinking it would indeed be a stroll with Pushkin—light, puffing on cigars as we chat after dinner on a summer evening. Not exactly. This is serious literary criticism, meaning literary in itself and intricately argued criticism. But it is also seriously rewarding if one proceeds slowly. I proceeded very slowly, because I had only read Eugene Onegin, and Sinyavsky explores the full extent of Pushkin’s prose and poetry. So I had to stop and read Walter Arndt’s Alexander Pushkin: Collected Narrative and Lyric Poetry (almost everything except the complete Eugene Onegin; it has excerpts) and the long novella The Captain’s Daughter to really understand what Sinyavsky was getting at.
Sinyavsky is addressing both Pushkin directly, as an author, and his place in Russian literature and indeed in Russian existence. While he admires Pushkin, his aim is to expose the cult of the poet to a cold bath. Early on, following a brief summary of the poet’s life, he describes three commemorations: the 1899 centenary of Pushkin’s birth, the 84th anniversary of his death in 1921, and the 100th anniversary of his death in 1937. He describes how the place of Pushkin was portrayed in each instance. For example, in 1921, what would be Pushkin’s place after the Revolution? Blok spoke on the role of the poet, and said:
And underlying much of the rest of the book is this underlying tragedy. Not in the simple sense of Pushkin’s early death in a duel, but in his relationship to his art and the persona he created to temporarily get out from under from the demands of that art.
In 1937, at the commemoration at the height of Stalin’s purges, Sinyavsky points out that the official line has totally co-opted the poet. He cites a statement that “In the final analysis Pushkin’s creation merged with the October socialist revolution as a river flows into the ocean.”
One gets the sense of Pushkin dancing furiously to entertain an audience, and writing his deceptively ‘simple’ poetry to do the same. Even while he was alive his works became iconic, with schoolboys memorizing works like The Bronze Horseman. But I was startled to read his poem To the Slanderers of Russia, defying the Western Europeans who criticized Russia for crushing the Polish rebellion in 1830. If Russians still memorize this, it certainly contributes to the fundamental tensions between Russia and the West.
Unfortunately I didn’t get to write this review when I finished Strolls and the poetry, so the points I wanted to make have faded a bit. But I highly recommend both. Despite the difficulty in getting his Russian into English, the poetry is still wonderful and essential to understanding Russian literary sensibility. (I chose the Arndt translation because it plunks for rhyme and meter; this may strain the meaning at times, but I thought it fit the spirit of the Sinyavsky analysis, pace Nabokov. Plus it was already on my shelves.)
Sinyavsky’s writing is not simple and quick to read, but I enjoyed the experience of working out his sentences. The translations by Catharine Theimer Nepomnyashchy and Slava I Yastremski are artful. Sinyavsky wrote this while incarcerated in the Dubrovlag labor camp, and smuggled it out in bits to his wife. He assembled and finished it after leaving the Soviet Union. The volume from Columbia University’s Russian Library includes excellent notes and a very helpful translation.
I picked this up on a whim, thinking it would indeed be a stroll with Pushkin—light, puffing on cigars as we chat after dinner on a summer evening. Not exactly. This is serious literary criticism, meaning literary in itself and intricately argued criticism. But it is also seriously rewarding if one proceeds slowly. I proceeded very slowly, because I had only read Eugene Onegin, and Sinyavsky explores the full extent of Pushkin’s prose and poetry. So I had to stop and read Walter Arndt’s Alexander Pushkin: Collected Narrative and Lyric Poetry (almost everything except the complete Eugene Onegin; it has excerpts) and the long novella The Captain’s Daughter to really understand what Sinyavsky was getting at.
Sinyavsky is addressing both Pushkin directly, as an author, and his place in Russian literature and indeed in Russian existence. While he admires Pushkin, his aim is to expose the cult of the poet to a cold bath. Early on, following a brief summary of the poet’s life, he describes three commemorations: the 1899 centenary of Pushkin’s birth, the 84th anniversary of his death in 1921, and the 100th anniversary of his death in 1937. He describes how the place of Pushkin was portrayed in each instance. For example, in 1921, what would be Pushkin’s place after the Revolution? Blok spoke on the role of the poet, and said:
Our memory preserves from infancy the cheerful name: Pushkin. This name, this sound fills up many days of our lives. The gloomy names of emperors, generals, inventors of weapons of murder, the torturers and martyrs of life. And next to them—this light name: Pushkin.
Pushkin was able to carry his creative burden lightly and cheerfully despite the fact that the role of the poet is neither light nor cheerful; it is tragic.
And underlying much of the rest of the book is this underlying tragedy. Not in the simple sense of Pushkin’s early death in a duel, but in his relationship to his art and the persona he created to temporarily get out from under from the demands of that art.
In 1937, at the commemoration at the height of Stalin’s purges, Sinyavsky points out that the official line has totally co-opted the poet. He cites a statement that “In the final analysis Pushkin’s creation merged with the October socialist revolution as a river flows into the ocean.”
One gets the sense of Pushkin dancing furiously to entertain an audience, and writing his deceptively ‘simple’ poetry to do the same. Even while he was alive his works became iconic, with schoolboys memorizing works like The Bronze Horseman. But I was startled to read his poem To the Slanderers of Russia, defying the Western Europeans who criticized Russia for crushing the Polish rebellion in 1830. If Russians still memorize this, it certainly contributes to the fundamental tensions between Russia and the West.
Unfortunately I didn’t get to write this review when I finished Strolls and the poetry, so the points I wanted to make have faded a bit. But I highly recommend both. Despite the difficulty in getting his Russian into English, the poetry is still wonderful and essential to understanding Russian literary sensibility. (I chose the Arndt translation because it plunks for rhyme and meter; this may strain the meaning at times, but I thought it fit the spirit of the Sinyavsky analysis, pace Nabokov. Plus it was already on my shelves.)
Sinyavsky’s writing is not simple and quick to read, but I enjoyed the experience of working out his sentences. The translations by Catharine Theimer Nepomnyashchy and Slava I Yastremski are artful. Sinyavsky wrote this while incarcerated in the Dubrovlag labor camp, and smuggled it out in bits to his wife. He assembled and finished it after leaving the Soviet Union. The volume from Columbia University’s Russian Library includes excellent notes and a very helpful translation.
June 10, 2017
Лучшее, что когда-либо было написано о Пушкине. Не о далеком, запредельном солнце русской поэзии, которое намылило глаза школьникам, а о человеке, о поэте, о жизни.
"Я вам пишу - чего же боле? / Что я могу еще сказать?
Ничего она не может сказать, одним рывком отворяя себя в сбивчивых ламентациях, смысл которых - если подходить к ним с буквальной меркой ее пустого романа с Онегиным - сводится к двум приблизительно, довольно типичным и тривиальным идеям: 1) "теперь ты будешь меня презирать" и 2) "а души ты моей все-таки не познал". Но как они сказаны!.."
"Вселенский замах не мешал ему при каждом шаге отдавать предпочтение расположенной под боком букашке. "
"Болтовня предполагала при общей светскости тона заведомое снижение речи в сферу частного быта, который таким способом вытаскивается на свет со всяким домашним хламом и житейской дребеденью. Отсюда и происходил реализм. Но та же болтовня исключала сколько-нибудь серьезное и длительное знакомство с действительностью, от которой автор отделывался комплиментами и, рассылая на ходу воздушные поцелуи, мчался дальше давить мух. С пушкинского реализма не спросишь: а где тут у вас показано крепостное право? и куда вы подевали знаменитую 10-ую главу из "Евгения Онегина?" Он всегда отговорится: да я пошутил."
"Скольких людей мы помним и любим только за то, что их угораздило жить неподалеку от Пушкина. И достойных, кто сами с усами - Кюхельбекера например, знаменитого главным образом тем, что Пушкин однажды, объевшись, почувствовал себя "кюхельбекерно". Теперь хоть лезь на Сенатскую площадь, хоть пиши трагедию - ничто не поможет: навсегда припечатали: кюхельбекерно."
"Я вам пишу - чего же боле? / Что я могу еще сказать?
Ничего она не может сказать, одним рывком отворяя себя в сбивчивых ламентациях, смысл которых - если подходить к ним с буквальной меркой ее пустого романа с Онегиным - сводится к двум приблизительно, довольно типичным и тривиальным идеям: 1) "теперь ты будешь меня презирать" и 2) "а души ты моей все-таки не познал". Но как они сказаны!.."
"Вселенский замах не мешал ему при каждом шаге отдавать предпочтение расположенной под боком букашке. "
"Болтовня предполагала при общей светскости тона заведомое снижение речи в сферу частного быта, который таким способом вытаскивается на свет со всяким домашним хламом и житейской дребеденью. Отсюда и происходил реализм. Но та же болтовня исключала сколько-нибудь серьезное и длительное знакомство с действительностью, от которой автор отделывался комплиментами и, рассылая на ходу воздушные поцелуи, мчался дальше давить мух. С пушкинского реализма не спросишь: а где тут у вас показано крепостное право? и куда вы подевали знаменитую 10-ую главу из "Евгения Онегина?" Он всегда отговорится: да я пошутил."
"Скольких людей мы помним и любим только за то, что их угораздило жить неподалеку от Пушкина. И достойных, кто сами с усами - Кюхельбекера например, знаменитого главным образом тем, что Пушкин однажды, объевшись, почувствовал себя "кюхельбекерно". Теперь хоть лезь на Сенатскую площадь, хоть пиши трагедию - ничто не поможет: навсегда припечатали: кюхельбекерно."
June 4, 2023
Giusto in tempo per festeggiare il compleanno del Sommo.
Adesso però voglio leggere il resto della bibliografia di Sinjavskij.
Adesso però voglio leggere il resto della bibliografia di Sinjavskij.
February 6, 2008
Almost as good as Voices from the Chorus, and maybe more enjoyable. Basically, Tertz expands the prision to include all of Russia, and renames the warden Fate. Never really thought about Fate, or took it seriously, until I read this book. Absolute confinement as absolute freedom - but again, Tertz shows you how it's done, rather than just describing the process abstractly.
August 29, 2021
127 furono le lettere scritte dall'autore alla moglie durante gli anni di gulag in un lager della Mordovia. In queste 127 lettere Sinjavskij ha inserito i frammenti che compongono le sue "passeggiate" letterarie, cioè le sue riflessioni sulla figura e sull'opera del sommo poeta russo. Non si tratta di un testo di critica letteraria ma di "prosa lirica", come è stato a più riprese affermato. Divagazioni e meditazioni scaturite dalla prigionia e dalla condizione imposta dai lavori forzati. Il tutto, ha un tono molto leggero e godibile perché si avverte tra le righe l'anima dell'autore. Non certo è un esercizio di sterile erudizione, semmai un manifesto della libertà creativa.
Ottimo anche il breve saggio del curatore Sergio Rapetti sulla figura di Sinjavskij, intitolato "Il soffio della poesia, per poter respirare e vivere". Illumina davvero il testo dando la giusta inquadratura al suo autore.
Ottimo anche il breve saggio del curatore Sergio Rapetti sulla figura di Sinjavskij, intitolato "Il soffio della poesia, per poter respirare e vivere". Illumina davvero il testo dando la giusta inquadratura al suo autore.
November 17, 2020
Отличная книга, столько блестящих идей и догадок! Не представляю, каким культурным багажом надо обладать, чтобы додуматься до всего этого, сидя в лагере. Была шокирована, прочитав об эффекте этой книги на некоторых уважаемых людей, которые судя по всему сидели в танке всю жизнь. Они, конечно, оскорбились и начали потрясать кулаками и требовать запретить и прекратить. Очень понравилась статья жены писателя, Марии Розановой, в конце книги - прекрасный итог: едкий, горький, смешной..
"Наверное, самым печальным открытием в это истории было то, что российские люди немного разучились читать. То ли слишком уж буквально к штыку приравняли перо, то ли еще какой бес попутал...Ощущение такое, что за 70 лет реализма многие стали читать по складам и только буквально."
"..мы выросли в эпоху такого пафоса, что до сих пор не можем избавиться от этого тяжкого груза. Мы так привыкли отечество славить, которое есть, клеймить несуществующих врагов и жить под звуки военно-физкультурного парада за сплошным частоколом из восклицательных знаков, что где-то уже не понимаем и не чувствуем, что горестный вопль "Солнце русско поэзии закатилось!" был возможен только один раз - в отчаянную минуту смерти. А потом дальним эхом: "и вчерашнее солнце на черных носилках несут..."
Журнал "Вопросы Литературы" 1990, стенограмма обсуждения книги Абрама Терца «Прогулки с Пушкиным», Ирина Роднянская в своей речи дала отличный краткий пересказ книги:
"Ибо суть книги, ее «весть»возникает из диалектики множественных переходов от «высокого»к «низкому»и обратно (в свободе которых автор подражает пусть и несколько «терцизированному», но все же сущему Пушкину). За всеми этими мгновенными перебежками и не уследишь, сколько ни верти головой: от «легкомыслия»пушкинского – к эротике, от эротики – к музе, от музы – к Татьяне, от Татьяны – к Судьбе, от Судьбы – к случаю и анекдоту, от анекдота – к всеобъемлющему благоволению, от благоволения – к знакомой нам уже «пустоте», от «пустоты»– к вампиризму, от вампиризма – к перечислительному пафосу количества, от этой каталогизации мира – к «ничтожности»пушкинских деталей, от них – сальто-мортале к классичности Пушкина, от классичности – к аристократизму и идее дворянства, от аристократизма – к (в книге это по-своему логично) фрагментарности пушкинских сочинений, от фрагментарности – к статуарности, от образа застывшей статуи – к мотиву воспоминаний, от «просто»воспоминаний – к анамнезису иной жизни, от анамнезиса – к частной биографии, от частной – к творимой публично, прилюдно, от человека – к поэту, от поэта – к Аполлону, от аполлонизма – к внечеловечности и изгойству, от изгойства – к царственности, от царственности – к самозванству, от самозванства – к дуэли…
Левитанский
Всего и надо, что вчитаться, — боже мой,
Всего и дела, что помедлить над строкою —
Не пролистнуть нетерпеливою рукою,
А задержаться, прочитать и перечесть.
"Наверное, самым печальным открытием в это истории было то, что российские люди немного разучились читать. То ли слишком уж буквально к штыку приравняли перо, то ли еще какой бес попутал...Ощущение такое, что за 70 лет реализма многие стали читать по складам и только буквально."
"..мы выросли в эпоху такого пафоса, что до сих пор не можем избавиться от этого тяжкого груза. Мы так привыкли отечество славить, которое есть, клеймить несуществующих врагов и жить под звуки военно-физкультурного парада за сплошным частоколом из восклицательных знаков, что где-то уже не понимаем и не чувствуем, что горестный вопль "Солнце русско поэзии закатилось!" был возможен только один раз - в отчаянную минуту смерти. А потом дальним эхом: "и вчерашнее солнце на черных носилках несут..."
Журнал "Вопросы Литературы" 1990, стенограмма обсуждения книги Абрама Терца «Прогулки с Пушкиным», Ирина Роднянская в своей речи дала отличный краткий пересказ книги:
"Ибо суть книги, ее «весть»возникает из диалектики множественных переходов от «высокого»к «низкому»и обратно (в свободе которых автор подражает пусть и несколько «терцизированному», но все же сущему Пушкину). За всеми этими мгновенными перебежками и не уследишь, сколько ни верти головой: от «легкомыслия»пушкинского – к эротике, от эротики – к музе, от музы – к Татьяне, от Татьяны – к Судьбе, от Судьбы – к случаю и анекдоту, от анекдота – к всеобъемлющему благоволению, от благоволения – к знакомой нам уже «пустоте», от «пустоты»– к вампиризму, от вампиризма – к перечислительному пафосу количества, от этой каталогизации мира – к «ничтожности»пушкинских деталей, от них – сальто-мортале к классичности Пушкина, от классичности – к аристократизму и идее дворянства, от аристократизма – к (в книге это по-своему логично) фрагментарности пушкинских сочинений, от фрагментарности – к статуарности, от образа застывшей статуи – к мотиву воспоминаний, от «просто»воспоминаний – к анамнезису иной жизни, от анамнезиса – к частной биографии, от частной – к творимой публично, прилюдно, от человека – к поэту, от поэта – к Аполлону, от аполлонизма – к внечеловечности и изгойству, от изгойства – к царственности, от царственности – к самозванству, от самозванства – к дуэли…
Левитанский
Всего и надо, что вчитаться, — боже мой,
Всего и дела, что помедлить над строкою —
Не пролистнуть нетерпеливою рукою,
А задержаться, прочитать и перечесть.
Want to read
November 8, 2025Structurally, it's no plodding monograph. Sinyavsky's prose is a cascade of digressions—part memoir, part farce, part ontology—mimicking Pushkin's own mercurial style: sonnet-staccato bursts into novelistic sprawl. He starts with the "problem" of Pushkin's accessibility ("He's everywhere, like God or the air we breathe, yet utterly elusive"), then veers into biographical burlesque, poetic autopsies, and metaphysical riffs. The "strolls" motif evokes leisurely perambulations (progulki), but they're anything but idle: Each chapter circles a Pushkinian crux, dismantling it like a watchmaker on acid. The appended "Journey to the River Black" (1989) shifts to visual art, contrasting Pushkin's ink with Francisco Goya's etchings—rivers of black as metaphors for creativity's dark underbelly.
Key Themes and Mechanisms: Dissecting the Pushkin Myth
At heart, Strolls is a takedown of idolatry—Soviet, émigré, universal—using Pushkin as scalpel and specimen. Sinyavsky's "mechanism" (to borrow your clinical lens) is deconstructive play: He posits literature not as biography's mirror but as a parallel reality, where the author's life fuels fictions that outlive and rewrite it. Pushkin isn't "explained" by his duels or exiles; instead, Sinyavsky traces how the poet's "black blood" (African heritage as primal chaos) powers a mechanism of evasion—dodging censors, critics, death itself through irony and metamorphosis. It's akin to how a neurotransmitter evades reuptake: Pushkin's verses "recirculate" cultural energies, turning personal scandal (affairs, gambling) into communal catharsis.
Psychodynamic Precision in Literary Form: Sinyavsky's "fantastic scholarship" mirrors psychoanalytic unpacking—Pushkin's flirtations as defense mechanisms (sublimation? projection?), his duels as reenactments of Oedipal rage. You'd relish the step-by-step: "See how Onegin's mirror scene reflects Lensky's death? It's narcissism's loop, trapping the hero in self-slaughter." No fluff; each claim checks against canon, building like evidence-based protocol. For your interest in moral injury (echoing Talmudic sages' dilemmas), Pushkin's "deadbeat" ethos models resilience: Ethical lapses (duels for honor's sake) fuel redemptive art, a mechanism for integrating shadow selves without erasure.
Key Themes and Mechanisms: Dissecting the Pushkin Myth
At heart, Strolls is a takedown of idolatry—Soviet, émigré, universal—using Pushkin as scalpel and specimen. Sinyavsky's "mechanism" (to borrow your clinical lens) is deconstructive play: He posits literature not as biography's mirror but as a parallel reality, where the author's life fuels fictions that outlive and rewrite it. Pushkin isn't "explained" by his duels or exiles; instead, Sinyavsky traces how the poet's "black blood" (African heritage as primal chaos) powers a mechanism of evasion—dodging censors, critics, death itself through irony and metamorphosis. It's akin to how a neurotransmitter evades reuptake: Pushkin's verses "recirculate" cultural energies, turning personal scandal (affairs, gambling) into communal catharsis.
Psychodynamic Precision in Literary Form: Sinyavsky's "fantastic scholarship" mirrors psychoanalytic unpacking—Pushkin's flirtations as defense mechanisms (sublimation? projection?), his duels as reenactments of Oedipal rage. You'd relish the step-by-step: "See how Onegin's mirror scene reflects Lensky's death? It's narcissism's loop, trapping the hero in self-slaughter." No fluff; each claim checks against canon, building like evidence-based protocol. For your interest in moral injury (echoing Talmudic sages' dilemmas), Pushkin's "deadbeat" ethos models resilience: Ethical lapses (duels for honor's sake) fuel redemptive art, a mechanism for integrating shadow selves without erasure.
December 21, 2017
Strolls with Pushkin – one of the most controversial books published during the glasnost period – is wonderfully readable, even if you are not steeped in Pushkinian erudition. In a brilliant display of intellectual and linguistic gymnastics, Sinyavsky takes on the cult of personality enveloping the man who represents the Russian soul.
Reviewed on The BookBlast® Diary 2017
Reviewed on The BookBlast® Diary 2017
September 2, 2017
A fine modern introduction to Pushkin's work.
December 16, 2020
I still love Pushkin
September 8, 2021
Ok, I didn’t quite finish this book but it was interesting. Can see how it must be shocking for Pushkin-lovers of all ages.
October 21, 2022
Чудесная, легкая, поэтическая вещь.
«Пусть солдат воюет, царь царствует, женщина любит, монах постится, а Пушкин, пусть Пушкин на все это смотрит, обо всём этом пишет, радея за всех и воодушевляя каждого».
«Пусть солдат воюет, царь царствует, женщина любит, монах постится, а Пушкин, пусть Пушкин на все это смотрит, обо всём этом пишет, радея за всех и воодушевляя каждого».
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews