Fyodor Sologub’s poetry and French symbolism

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

Liudmyla Harmash

FYODOR SOLOGUB'S POETRY AND FRENCH SYMBOLISM



Анотація

Стаття присвячена порівняльному аналізу лірики Федора Сологуба та його попередників, французьких поетів - символістів Поля Верлена та Шарля Бодлера. Поезія Сологуба розглядається у контексті основних положень символістської естетики, викладених у працях Жана Мореаса та в лекціях Дмитра Мережковського. Поезією французьких символістів Федор Сологуб зацікавився наприкінці 1880-х років. Першим значущим для російського символіста поетом став Поль Верлен, чиї вірші настільки співзвучні світовідчуттю Сологуба, що останній розглядав їх як органічну частину своєї творчості. Мальовничість і музичність верленівських віршів, прийоми сугестивного навіювання, містична іронія і високий рівень верифікації стали для Сологуба точкою відліку й одним із найважливіших орієнтирів у його творчих пошуках.

З Шарлем Бодлером Сологуб встановлює поетичний діалог. Проведений порівняльний аналіз віршів поетів показав, що, маючи загальні естетичні установки (ідея відповідностей, протиставлення сакрального і профанного світів, естетизація потворного і смерті, прагнення до нескінченного, богоборство та ін.) і використовуючи схожі поетичні прийоми (циклізацію, асоціації, звукопис та ін.), кожен поет створює унікальний художній світ. На наш погляд, головне, що є принциповою відмінністю світоглядної платформи Бодлера від позиції Сологуба - це можливість (у Бодлера) або неможливість (у Сологуба) звільнення людини від ілюзорного і несправедливого матеріального світу, у якому людина приречена на страждання, та досягнення нею вищого Ідеалу. Іншими словами, Бодлер загадує читачеві загадки, відповідь на які важко знайти, але у принципі можливо, а Сологуб залишає читача віч-на-віч з таємницею світового універсуму, де кожна нова відповідь не є остаточною і породжує безліч нових питань.

Ключові слова: російський символізм, французький символізм, Федір Сологуб, Шарль Бодлер, Поль Верлен, порівняльний аналіз, лірика.

lyrics fyodor sologub french symbolist poets verlaine baudelaire



Abstract

The article is devoted to a comparative analysis of the lyrics of Fyodor Sologub and his predecessors, French symbolist poets Paul Verlaine and Charles Baudelaire. The poetry of Sologub is considered in the context of the main provisions of symbolist aesthetics, set forth in the theoretical works of Jean Moreas and lectures of Dmitry Merezhkovsky. Fyodor Sologub became interested in poetry of the French Symbolists at the end of the 1880s and did not stop thereafter. The first significant poet for the Russian symbolist was Paul Verlaine, whose poems were so consonant with Sologub's worldview that the latter considered them as an organic part of his work. The picturesqueness and musicality of Verlaine's poems, his methods of suggestion, mystical irony, as well as the highest level of verification became for Sologub a starting point and one of the most important guidelines in his work.

Sologub enters into a poetic dialogue with Charles Baudelaire. The undertaken comparative analysis of their poems showed that, having common aesthetic features, aims and values (the idea of correspondences, the opposition of the sacred and profane worlds, the aestheticization of the ugly and death, the desire for infinity, 8 theomachism, etc.) and using similar poetic techniques (cyclization, associations, suggestion, grammatical constructions, sound writing, etc.), each poet, however, creates a unique artistic world. In our opinion, the main thing that is the fundamental difference between Baudelaire's worldview platform and Sologub's position is the possibility (for Baudelaire) or impossibility (for Sologub) of liberating a person from an illusory and deceitful material world, in which a person is doomed to suffering, and achieving the desired Ideal. In other words, Baudelaire asks the reader riddles, the answer to which is difficult to find, but possible, and Sologub puts the reader face to face with the mystery of the universe, where each new answer is not final and produces more and more new questions.

Key words: Russian symbolism, French symbolism, Fedor Sologub, Charles Baudelaire, Paul Verlaine, comparative analysis, lyrics.

Introduction

The 1890s are called `La Belle Epoque' in Europe and North America. In Russia it was a period of economic and cultural upsurge. This and the next decade are known under the name `Silver Age'. In the 1890s, French symbolism reaches the peak in its development, goes through a crisis and begins to disintegrate, especially after the death of Stephane Mallarme in 1898, “into many epigone or dissident one-day schools (`naturism', `synthetism', `paroxysm', `esotericism', `humanism', etc.) and eventually dies as a trend” (Kosikov, 1993: 34), while Russian symbolism is just starting to gain momentum. In Russia, unlike France, theory has outstripped practice. The poetic experiments of Valery Bryusov were preceded by two lectures of Dmitry Merezhkovsky “The Causes of the Decline of the Contemporary Russian Literature and the New Trends in it”, which were published in 1892. In fact, the work of Merezhkovsky repeats the manifesto of Jean Moreas. The main principles of symbolist aesthetics were outlined, which originate with the 1857 publication of Charles Baudelaire's “Les Fleurs du mal” and then formed in the 1860s - 1870s in the work of the French poets Paul Verlaine, Arthur Rimbaud and Stephane Mallarme.

Sologub showed interest in the work of the French Symbolists quite early. It is known that he translated the poetry and prose of Remy de Gourmont, Stephane Mallarme, Arthur Rimbaud, Henri de Regnier.



Symbol theory

The word symbol derives from the Greek oupPoXov symbolon, meaning `token, watchword'. In a broad sense, a symbol is a conventional sign, an image that does not have a visible resemblance to the designated object. A classic example of symbolism was given by Plato in his `symbol of the cave'. Dionysius the Areopagite at the end of the 1st century AD explained that symbols are objects that convey the `truth of the Divine essence', without directly displaying it, but are `dissimilar similarities'.

Jean Moreas published the Symbolist Manifesto (“Le Symbolisme”) in Le Figaro on 18 September 1886. He wrote that symbolism was hostile to “plain meanings, declamations, false sentimentality and matter-of-fact description”, and that its goal was to “clothe the Ideal in a perceptible form” whose “goal was not in itself, but whose sole purpose was to express the Ideal” (Moreas, 1886).

Thus, the Symbolists, like the Romantics before, who also relied on the teachings of Plato, contrapose two worlds - the true, higher, endless and boundless world of ideas and its poor, distorted and imperfect reflection or the world of phenomena. Human mind is not able to know the essence of the true world, which is available only to the intuitive insight of the artist:

Милый друг, иль ты не видишь,

Что все видимое нами -

Только отблеск, только тени

От незримого очами?.. (Solovyov, 1974: 93).

Decadence and Symbolism

At the same time, the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries was often characterized as a period of decline, when pessimistic moods prevailed, weariness from life was felt, refinement of feelings - Fin de siecle. For most contemporaries, this definition is quickly becoming synonymous with “decadence”: “Je suis 1'Empire a la fin de la decadence” (Verlaine).

A huge influence on Russian culture was exerted by Arthur Schopenhauer's `philosophy of pessimism', whose “Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung” were in many ways consonant with the searches of the Symbolists and, first of all, Fyodor Sologub.

Charles Baudelaire defined the language of decadence as “supreme soupir d'une personne deja transformee et preparee pour la vie spirituelle - est singulierement propre a exprimer la passion telle que l'a comprise et sentie le monde poetique modern” (“the last breath of a strong man, already changed and ready for spiritual life - it is capable of expressing true passion as understood and felt by the modern poetic world”) (Baudelaire, 1980: 952). This statement is not about the decline of poetry, but on the contrary, about changes in culture and even, in a sense, about its rise.

It is difficult, almost impossible, to distinguish b etween decadents and symbolists. Most often researchers write that “the French decadents closed themselves in their inner world, while the symbolists strove to unite themself with the eternal spirit” (Kuntsevich, 2017: 12). In the 1880s, the aesthetic was articulated by a series of manifestos and attracted a generation of writers. The term `symbolist' was first applied by the critic Jean Moreas, who invented the term to distinguish the Symbolists from the related Decadents of literature and of art.

In Russian literature, decadent motifs were primarily characteristic of one of the currents of the new direction, represented by a group of St. Petersburg writers (N. Minsky, D. Merezhkovsky, Z. Gippius, F. Sologub, and others).

Fedor Sologub and Paul Verlaine

V.E. Bagno, A.B. Strelnikova, S.V. Fain studied the problem of the reception of Verlaine's work by Russian symbolist poets, including F. Sologub. They pointed out the features of the common worldview, the similarity of images and motifs, the careful sound processing of the verse, its melodiousness, the sophistication of metrics and rhythm. So, they laid the foundation for this area of investigation, the scale and multidimensionality of which are obvious and will require repeated reference to this issue in the future.

Sologub began translating Verlaine as early as 1889, “not prompted by anything external. I translated because I loved him” (Sologub, 1908: 7), and retained an interest in his lyrics for thirty years. The Russian poet was so deeply imbued with the music of Verlaine's lines that a few years later, in 1908, he published his translations from Verlaine as a separate book, and it had two titles: “Paul Verlaine. Poems Selected and Translated by Fyodor Sologub” and “Fyodor Sologub. Poetry. Book Seven. Translations from Paul Verlaine”. The mirroring of the names indicates a special closeness between the poetry of the French and Russian Symbolists. The translated texts are considered by Sologub as an integral part of his own artistic world.

What does Sologub love most in Verlaine's poetry? The researchers noted that, first of all, he was interested in `landscapes of the soul' in the spirit of the Impressionists, methods of suggestion, which made an unnamed poetic image appears in the mind of the reader, as if at the intersection of associative links and hints contained in the text (Strelnikova, 2007: 11). Sologub selects poems in which Verlaine refers to musical and song genres - serenade, song, arietta. He is also interested in the theatrical techniques that Verlaine uses in his poetry - masks, dramatic forms, various roles and voices - which serve to convey the diversity and illusory nature of life.

In the preface to the translations, Sologub emphasizes that he i s attracted by the `mystical irony' inherent in the poems of the French poet. Understanding the life of the poet in its dynamic development as a `created legend', Sologub distinguishes two paths followed by artists depending on their attitude to reality - lyrical and ironic: “One pole is the lyrical oblivion of this world, the denial of its meager and boring two shores, the ever-flowing routine, and the ever-returning daily routine, the eternal desire for what is not. <.. .> This is the area of Lyrics, poetry that denies the world” (Sologub, 1991: 162-163). Reaching fullness in its development, the lyric reveals the fatal inconsistency of the world, and then it is replaced by irony, which opens up the opportunity for the artist to “approach humbly to the phenomena of life, say yes to everything, accept and approve to the end everything that appears...” (Sologub, 1991: 164). In Verlaine's poetry, Sologub sees “the acceptance of life in `fatal contradictions', when all the impossibility is affirmed as a necessity, the eternal world of freedom is found behind a motley veil of accidents. Beauty and delight are mysteriously manifested in every earthly and gross ecstasy” (Sologub, 1908: 9). I completely agree with V. Bagno, who argued that “the principles of mystical irony correspond to the mindset of Sologub himself, who really managed, albeit through the figurative veil of a somewhat obsessive myth, more perspicaciously than many of his Russian and French contemporaries to determine the originality of the poetic world of Verlaine” (Bagno, 1991: 135). In the lyrics of the French poet, Sologub notes the features that characterize both his own work and his theoretical principles. This explains his selective approach to the selection of Verlaine's poems. They were a school for Sologub, which later allowed him to develop his poetic mastery.

Fyodor Sologub and Charles Baudelaire

In 1898, Sologub wrote a poem beginning with the words “There are correspondences in everything”, thus entering into an imaginary dialogue with Baudelaire's famous poetic manifesto - the poem “Correspondences” (1855).

Below are the texts of the poems:

Correspondances Charles Baudelaire

La Nature est un temple ou de vivants piliers Laissent parfois sortir de confuses paroles ; L'homme y passe a travers des forets de symboles Qui l'observent avec des regards familiers.

Comme de longs echos qui de loin se confondent Dans une tenebreuse et profonde unite, Vaste comme la nuit et comme la clarte, Les parfums, les couleurs et les sons se repondent. II est des parfums frais comme des chairs d'enfants, Doux comme les hautbois, verts comme les prairies, -- Et d'autres, corrompus, riches et triomphants, Ayant l'expansion des choses infinies, Comme l'ambre, le musc, le benjoin et l'encens, Qui chantent les transports de l'esprit et des sens.

Есть соответствия во всем...

Федор Сологуб

Есть соответствия во всем, -- Не тщетно простираем руки: В ответ на счастье и на муки И смех и слезы мы найдем.

И если жаждем утешенья, Бежим далёко от людей. Среди лесов, среди полей -- Покой, безмыслие, забвенье. Ветвями ветер шелестит, Трава травою так и пахнет. Никто в изгнании не чахнет, Не презирает и не мстит.

Так, доверяяся природе,

Наперекор судьбе, во всем

Мы соответствия найдем

Своей душе, своей свободе.

The works of the two poets are not only separated by a significant time interval of 43 years, there are also important semantic differences between them. Baudelaire's poem “Correspondence” is descriptive in nature. The author builds a strict, closed, rationally thought out and consistent system, one of the elements of which is a man. The dialogue between nature and man is established. Understanding becomes possible, provided that man applies the keys given in the poem to decipher the `des confuses paroles'. In fact, the poem's title is the key to the secrets of nature, and the poem itself is a list of fenomena between correspondences are established. The correspondences are compared with a long echo, the countless sounds of which come together to form a unity. We also note that at the same time the text establishes connections between the organs of perception of a man - his ability to see, smell and hear the world around him, as well as between his spirit and feelings. Thus, the reader unfolds the same `landscape of the soul' of the artist, where the microcosm is equated with the macrocosm. The whole poem is imbued with the pathos of triumph and a sense of admiration for the harmonious unity of the world and man, in which everything is connected with everything.

The similarity between the grammatical structure of both poems only emphasizes the semantic differences. They are built as a stringing of homogeneous members of the sentence, but let's compare how different the choice of what is listed is:

Baudelaire: `dark and deep unity', 'night and light', 'scents, colours and sounds', 'corrupted, rich and triumphant', 'amber, musk, benzoin and incense', 'mind and senses', and, finally, such an extended three-part construction: 'fresh as children's flesh, / Soft as oboes, green as meadows'.

Sologub: `happiness and torment', `among the forests, among the fields', “peace, thoughtlessness, oblivion', “wasting away, / Does not despise and does not take revenge', `his soul, his freedom'.

If Baudelaire's homogeneous members are either synonyms, or their contrast (for example, day and night, spirit and feelings) further emphasizes the unity that has been established between them as poles that contain all intermediate states), and the only, perhaps, a word with a negative shade (`corrompus') emphasizes the general triumphant mood, then everything is different in Sologus's poem. He uses vocabulary with negative semantics. Words united on a formal basis, for the most part, continue to exist locally, independently of each other, nothing connects them, so the reader does not have a sense of correspondence between them, despite the author's initial statement. Contrary to the declarative first line, one gets the impression of chaos, a heap of disparate concepts, united only by the motif of exile. And only the finale of the poem, which is a variation of the last line of Baudelaire's masterpiece, is not by chance so similar to its predecessor and sounds encouraging. It seems that there is a reconciliation of the previous disharmonious combinations of words that previously resisted and did not want to “get into pairs”, breaking out of the unity to which the lyrical hero of Sologub persistently strives. `Keys of the mystery' (in the words of another symbolist, Valery Bryusov) are lost for him. He feels like a lonely exile, forced to flee from people who can only despise him and take revenge, and his knowledge of `correspondences in everything' in practice ends in futile attempts to escape, and only faith in nature and resistance to the predetermined fate give him hope of finding the desired harmony, a lost paradise that exists in the poetic world of the Russian poet only potentially, as an opportunity and aspiration for freedom, which can be obtained at the cost of continuous suffering and torment. If Baudelaire has two equal actants (subjects of action) - nature and man, and man here is a generalizing concept, he is equal to all mankind, Sologub's hero is opposed to `others' - those who torment him and cause of all his troubles. Sologub's hero has not yet realized that he is condemned to be free (the main thesis of Jean Paul Sartre), but the Russian writer, one might say, foresaw one of the key problems posed and comprehended by the French existentialists and formulated by one of the characters in Sartre's play: “Hell is other people”. From these `others' Sologub's hero tries to find salvat ion and consolation in nature. But unity and harmony, in fact, are impossible here, “among the forests, among the fields”, where only “peace, thoughtlessness, oblivion” are available to him.

Baudelaire and Sologub have similar attitude to life. The characteristic that Z. Vengerova gives the French poet's view of the imperfections of the surrounding world in the article “Symbolist Poets in France”, published in 1892 in the journal “Vestnik Evropy” (“The Herald of Europe”), is quite applicable to the Russian symbolist: “No one saw the evil and ugliness of life so clearly, no one knew how to so bring to light the ulcer of vulgarity, like Baudelaire” (Vengerova, 1907: 422). Sologub shares with

Baudelaire the main features of the decadent perception of the world: simultaneously with the worship of beauty, they also show its opposite, admiring various manifestations of ugliness as an indispensable condition for the existence of the category of beauty and as a reflection of life in its entirety. Therefore, “Une charogne” (“Carrion”) can be considered as a continuation, completion and generalization of the principle of reflection of everything in everything, revealed by Baudelaire in “Correspondences”. In “Une charogne”, he shows how the disgusting decomposed flesh, h aving been cleansed by solar rays, again merges with majestic nature, thereby proving the inextricable relationship between beauty and ugliness and affirming the final harmony of the universe:

Le soleil rayonnait sur cette pourriture, Comme afin de la cuire a point,

Et de rendre au centuple a la grande Nature

Tout ce qu'ensemble elle avait joint... (Baudelaire)

Sologub adhered to a similar position, who “insisted on the inseparability of good and evil, pleasure and pain” (Rosenthal & Foley, 1993: 13).

In addition, Baudelaire turns to the aesthetics of ugliness in order to rid beauty of the slightest signs of vulgarity, Baudelaire beauty is primarily `pure and strange', in his own words. The rejection of traditional ideas about beauty occurs due to the combin ation, as Baudelaire writes, `terrible with buffoonery', as a result of which “new, combined with `uglyness', beauty gains its energy through convergence with the banal while simultaneously deforming to the strange” (Friedrich, 2010: 52).

The category of ugliness in Sologub is primarily associated with his attitude to life, which in his artistic world is personified by a certain `ugly and wicked woman' (Sologub). In it, unlike Baudelaire, the ugliness is connected not so much with the `strange' as with the “terrible'. Thus, highly appreciating the work of his older contemporary, Alexander Blok noted that Sologub seeks to show the reader the wrong side of life, imbued with the dullness and vulgarity of dull everyday life, a narrow philistine world: “We observe in stylized forms something ugly, blowing something otherworldly, unreal - and behind it one sees non-existence, the devilish face, the chaos of the underworld” (Blok, 1962: 161). Cruel reality in

Sologub's poetry is symbolized by a fantastic creature - a gray dusty petty demon, whose image genetically goes back to a number of different sources - to a gray man from Adelbert von Chamisso's fantastic novella “Peter Schlemihl's Miraculous Story”, to Gogol's evil spirits, to Dostoevsky's “Demons”, to ideas about evil spirits that existed in Russian folklore etc.:

Недотыкомка серая

Истомила коварной улыбкою,

Истомила присядкою зыбкою,

-- Помоги мне, таинственный друг!

Недотыкомку серую

Хоть со мной умертви ты, ехидную,

Чтоб она хоть в тоску панихидную

Не ругалась над прахом моим (Sologub, 1979: 234).

This a non-human fantastic character, invented by Sologub, is small and insignificant by itself. But nedotykomka (or `petty demon') is capable of mocking the lyrical hero, dancing in front of him and, destroying him, curse over his ashes. It is an unnoticeable to others, continuously lasting torment, which brings physical and mental strength to complete exhaustion and finally forces the hero to seek death - the `comforter death' that can only end his torment. The `unsteady squatting' of the underdog resembles Baudelaire's “Danse macabre” (“Dance of Death”), which, as is known, goes back to the medieval dance macabre. It is more likely that Sologub's poem alludes to the dances of Russian buffoons, who performed in taverns, sang the so-called `shameful songs' and “dared to come to the sad commemoration for the old memory of some once understandable ritual with dances and games” (Belyaev, 1854: 72).

The theme of death-salvation from life's adversities turns into an incredible fear of death, the horror of individual death. Even the boredom of life recedes before death, the inevitability of which causes the lyrical hero of the poem “Полуночною порою...” (“Sometimes At Midnight...”) (the author eventually abandoned the original name “Страх” (“Fear”)) literally panic fear, akin to what the hero of the poem “The Raven” by Edgar Allan Poe experiences who found himself face to face with the metaphysical horror of `nothing':

<.. .> Жизнь докучная забыта, Плотно дверь моя закрыта, -- Что же слышно мне за ней?

Отчего она, шатаясь,

Чуть заметно открываясь,

Заскрипела на петлях?

Дверь моя, не открывайся!

Внешний холод, не врывайся!

Нестерпим мне этот страх.

Что мне делать? Заклинать ли?

Дверь рукою задержать ли?

Но слаба рука моя,

И уста дрожат от страха.

Так, воздвигнутый из праха,

Скоро прахом стану я (Sologub, 1979: 190-191).

The psychological disclosure of the topic prepares its philosophical interpretation - the fear of death is overcome by contempt for life, a cult of death appears (“О смерть! Я твой...” (“Oh death! I am yours...”)), a sermon of death (“Пойми, что гибель неизбежна...” (“Understand that death is inevitable...”)), behind which all the same there is real despair.

The acute experience of the crisis of religion is expressed in both poets in blasphemy, causes a feeling of loneliness, anxiety, and leads to the glorification of death.

Baudelaire was the first, long before Sologub, to characterize death as a comforter. In the sonnet “La Mort des pauvres” (“The Death of the Poor”), the poet sees in death the `angel of mercy', who, plunging a person into eternal sleep, saves him from earthly suffering, grants him rest and peace, even if on the other side of life:

C'est un Ange qui tient dans ses doigts magnetiques

Le sommeil et le don des reves extatiques,

Et qui refait le lit des gens pauvres et nus;

C'est la gloire des Dieux, c'est le grenier mystique,

C'est la bourse du pauvre et sa patrie antique,

C'est le portique ouvert sur les Cieux inconnus!

(Baudelaire)

Avril Payman calls Sologub the singer of Death and the devil, for whom the fictional poetic world has become a refuge from life (Payman, 1998: 48). The poet makes his choice in favour of the devil not because he worships death, for him this is the lesser of two evils. Not God, but the devil is for Sologub the embodiment of the paternal principle (“Отец мой, Дьявол” (“My Father, the Devil”)). His prayers are addressed to the devil for salvation from life's vicissitudes. One of the diabolical incarnations is the Sun, which the poet perceives not as a source of life, but as a snake full of malice and hatred for all living things:

Змий, царящий над вселенною,

Весь в огне, безумно злой,

Я хвалю тебя смиренною,

Дерзновенною хулой (Sologub, 1979: 269).

As early as 1894, he devotes himself to death:

О смерть! Я твой. Повсюду вижу

Одну тебя, -- и ненавижу

Очарования земли... (Sologub, 1979: 120).

This is the fundamental difference between Sologub's lyrical hero and the enthusiastically worshiping Beauty of Baudelaire's one. In the “Hymn to Beauty”, which is considered the poet's aesthetic manifesto, the latter proclaims Beauty the only value, placing it above both God and the devil:

De Satan ou de Dieu, qu'importe ? Ange ou Sirene, Qu'importe, si tu rends, - fee aux yeux de velours, Rythme, parfum, lueur, o mon unique reine ! - L'univers moins hideux et les instants moins lourds ?

(Baudelaire)

Aestheticization of beauty leads to blurring of the boundaries between the sacred and the profane, good and evil. This position is akin to the immoralism of the Romantics, in whom aesthetics supplanted morality, and is in opposition to the ideas of beauty of the ancient Greeks of the classical period, for whom the ideal was the harmonious unity of a perfect body and high moral qualities. Aestheticization of the ugliness by the French poet becomes “one of the means of creating a multi-coloured palette of the world, in every phenomenon of which the face of the Infinite is visible” (Friedrich, 2010: 51).



Conclusions

Fyodor Sologub began to take an interest in the poetry of the French Symbolists in the late 1880s and has not stopped since then. Paul Verlaine became for him the first significant symbolist poet, whose verses were so consonant with Sologub's worldview that the latter considered them as an organic part of his work. The picturesqueness and musicality of Verlaine's poems, methods of suggestion, mystical irony, as well as the highest level of verification became for Sologub a starting point and one of the most important guidelines in his artictic search.

Sologub enters into a poetic dialogue with Charles Baudelaire. The undertaken comparative analysis of their poems showed that, having common aesthetic principles (the idea of correspondences, the opposition of the sacred and profane worlds, the aestheticization of the ugly and death, the desire for infinity, theomachism, etc.) and using similar poetic techniques (cyclization, associations, suggestion, grammatical constructions, sound writing, etc.), each poet, however, created a unique artistic world. In our opinion, the main thing that is the fundamental difference between Baudelaire's worldview platform and Sologub's position is the possibility (for Baudelaire) or impossibility (for Sologub) of liberating a man from an illusory and deceitful material world, in which he is doomed to suffering, and achieving the desired Ideal. In other words, Baudelaire offers the reader enigmas, the answer to which is difficult to find, but it is fundamentally possible. But Sologub puts the reader face to face with the mystery of the universe, where each new answer is not final and only provokes to more and more questions.



References

Bagno, V.E. (1991). Fedor Sologub - perevodchik francuzskih simvolistov [Fyodor Sologub as a translator of French symbolists]. In Ju. D. Levin (Ed.). Na rubezhe XIX i XX vekov - At the turn of the XIX and XX centuries (pp. 129-214). Leningrad: Nauka [in Russian].

Baudelaire, C. Les fleurs du mal. https://www.poesie-francaise.fr/charles- baudelaire-les-fleurs-du-mal/ [in French].

Belyaev, I. (1854). O skomorohah [About buffoons]. Vremennik obshchestva istorii i drevnostej rossijskih - Vremennik of the Society of Russian History and Antiquities. Book 20. Moskva: V universitetskoj tipografii [in Russian].

Blok, A. (1962). Tvorchestvo F. Sologuba [Works by F. Sologub]. In Blok, A. Sobranie sochinenij - The Collected Works. (Vol. 1-8). (Vol. 5). Leningrad: Hudozhestvennaya literatura. 160-163 [in Russian].

Fajn, S. V. (1994). Pol Verlen i poeziya russkogo simvolizma (I. Annenskij, V. Bryusov, F. Sologub) [Paul Verlaine and the poetry of Russian symbolism (I. Annensky, V. Bryusov, F. Sologub)] Extended abstract of candidate's thesis. Moskva [in Russian].

Friedrich, H. (2010). Struktura sovremennoj liriki: Ot Bodlera do serediny dvadcatogo stoletiya [Von der Mitte des neunzehnten bis zur Mitte des zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts. Die Struktur Der MoDernen Lyrik]. Moskva: YAzyki slavyanskih kul'tur [in Russian].

Kosikov, G. K. (1993). Dva puti francuzskogo postromantizma: simvolisty i Lotreamon [Two Ways of French Post-Romanticism: Symbolists and Lautreamont]. In Kosikov G. K. (Ed.). Poeziya francuzskogo simvolizma. Lotreamon. Pesni Mal'dorora - The Poetry of French Symbolism. Lautreamont. Songs of Maldoror (pp. 5-62). Moskva [in Russian].

Kuncevich, D. V. (2017). Tvorchestvo N. Minskogo v kontekste francuzskogo simvolizma [Works by N. Minsky in the context of French symbolism]. Extended abstract of candidate's thesis. Moskva [in Russian].

Moreas, J. (1886). Un Manifeste litteraire, Le Symbolisme, Le Figaro. Supplement Litteraire, No. 38, Saturday 18 September. Retrieved from http://www.berlol.net/chrono/chr1886a.htm

Pajman, A. (1998). Istoriya russkogo simvolizma [History of Russian Symbolism]. Moskva: Respublika. [in Russian].

Rozental, S. H. & Fouli, X. P. (1993). Simvolicheskij aspekt romana F. Sologuba «Melkij bes» [The symbolic aspect of the novel by F. Sologub “The Petty Demon”]. In Russkaya literatura XX veka. Issledovaniya amerikanskih uchenyh - Russian literature of the XX century. Studies of American scientists. (pp. 6-23). Petro-RIF: Izdatelstvo S.-Peterburgskogo universiteta; USA: Universitet Dzhejmsa Medisona [in Russian].

Sologub, F. (1908). Predislovie [Preface]. In: Verlen P. Stihi izbrannye i perevedennye Fedorom Sologubom [Verlaine P. Poems selected and translated by Fyodor Sologub] (pp. 7-9). St. Petersburg [in Russian].

Sologub, F. (1979). Stihotvoreniya [Poems]. St. Petersburg: Akademicheskij proekt [in Russian].

Sologub, F. (1991). Tvorimaya legenda [The Created Legend]. Sankt- Peterburg - Moskva: Hudozhestvennaya literatura [in Russian].

Soloviev, V. S. (1974). Stihotvoreniya i shutochnye piesy [Poems and comic plays]. Leningrad: Sovetskij pisatel [in Russian].

Strelnikova, A. B. (2007). F. Sologub - perevodchik poezii P. Verlena [F. Sologub - translator of the poetry of P. Verlaine] Extended abstract of candidate's thesis. Tomsk [in Russian].

Vengerova, Z. (1907). Charles Baudelaire. Lettres, 1841-1866. Paris. In: «Mercure de France» in Vestnik Evropy. Book 11, 416-431 [in Russian].

Verlaine, P. Poemes. Retrieved from https://www.poesie-francaise.fr/poemes-paul-verlaine/ [in French].

Размещено на Allbest.ru