Moscow State University of Printing Arts. Racer C

Textology - area philological science about the history of texts and the principles of their publication; texts, primarily literary and folklore, but also scientific, if they were associated with the study of literature, folklore and language. Manuscripts, like books, have their own destiny, their own history. Textology studies manuscripts, lifetime and posthumous editions of literary works, diaries, notebooks, letters; records of oral folk art.

Depending on the object of study, there are branches of textual criticism: textual criticism of antiquity, the Middle Ages (medieval), folklore, oriental literatures, modern literature, historical and linguistic sources. Such diversity does not prevent us from considering science as one.

Textology occupies a well-defined and independent place in the system of philological knowledge. It is closely connected with the theory and history of literature, and serves as the basis for literary criticism and historical source studies.

“Textology, in particular the study and interpretation of draft manuscripts,” wrote S. M. Bondi, “belongs to those disciplines united by the collective concept of “literary criticism,” which are closest to what we call the exact sciences. The conclusions of textual studies can least of all be arbitrary and subjective. Argumentation must be strictly logical and scientifically convincing.

Textual criticism is the science of the history of texts, it considers texts historically. "Textology analyzes the text not only in its spatial dimensions and in its final form, but also in temporal terms, that is, diachronically." The history of the text - its origin and development - connects textual criticism with the philosophical category of historicism.

The study of the history of the monument at all stages of its existence gives an idea of ​​the sequence of the history of the creation of the text. The history of the text reflects the patterns of the author's artistic thinking, his personality and worldview, individuality and creative will.

The history of the text must be considered and studied as a whole. The relationship between the historical and the theoretical is an important principle of scientific text criticism.

The practical application of textual criticism lies in the scientific publication of a literary monument, based on a preliminary comprehensive study of the history of its text.

The disputes that have arisen many times about whether textual criticism is a science or an auxiliary discipline are not only terminological; they clarify the scientific potential of textual research and the prospects for the development of this branch of knowledge. The correct answer to the question about the meaning of textual criticism lies in the analysis of its connections with philological science.

Auxiliary disciplines are necessary in scientific research, but they lose their meaning and meaning if they lose their connection with science. Textology, as N. F. Belchikov noted, “definitely has a scientific basis, is guided scientific method participating in the solution of issues necessary for the development of literary thought.

N.L. Vershinina. Introduction to Literary Studies - Moscow, 2005

Encyclopedic YouTube

1 / 3

✪ Sin and salvation in Catholic and Orthodox culture - Mikhail Dmitriev

✪ ST5101.1 Rus 1. Introduction to the subject. Fragments of exegesis.

✪ Terentiev A.A. Some approaches to the translation of Buddhist terms

Subtitles

My topic is very complex both in sound and substance, in French it sounds like la question épineuse, a prickly question. The question of sin and salvation, as they are understood in two Christian traditions, is directly related to the history of the West and to the history of Rus'. These traditions are interesting in comparison. I would like to emphasize that when we address this story as historians, we address from non-denominational positions: we are not interested in where the teaching is more in line with the Gospel, what is better, what is worse. We are interested in how ideas about sin and human salvation were first formulated at the normative level, how theoretical ideas about sin, salvation, and human nature developed. Next, we are interested in how the transition from the normative level to the level of experienced Christianity takes place. “Experienced” is an unusual term for us, because it is a direct translation from the French term le christianisme vécu. Of interest is the question of the form in which the Christian teaching penetrated into society, into the parish, what penetrated into the life of an individual believer and groups of believers. There is no need to explain that this question is of fundamental importance if we are interested in the history of Christian cultures in the West, in the East, in any region of the world, when it comes to non-Christian cultures. After emphasizing that we will be interested in one of the settings of the human mentality, we will begin to consider the problem from the normative level. We are faced with a widespread stereotype, which is reinforced by the synodal translation of the Bible and our school ideas about Christianity. These ideas most often proceed from the fact that there are differences between Protestants and Catholics, between Catholics and Protestants of different eras, between Orthodox and Protestants and Catholics on the other hand, but a single Christianity in its main doctrinal features is homogeneous, in particular in how it is understood sin and salvation. Important for the Christian worldview is the fall of Adam and Eve. It is assumed that God punished Adam and Eve and their offspring by expelling them from paradise after they discovered their nakedness and at the same time tried to hide from God. This plot is present in a huge amount of poetry and iconography: “And it was said that you, Adam, will plow the land and get bread, food in the sweat of your face. And you, Eve, will give birth in pain and suffering. It is usually believed that such a myth or notion postulates the idea that all people are cursed and are punished for what happened once in paradise. In the early 1980s, while dealing with a meeting between Protestants and Orthodox, and then between Catholics and Orthodox within the Ukrainian-Belarusian borders, I was forced to raise the question of what actually distinguished Catholics and Orthodox, as well as Protestants and Orthodox. I saw in the texts of the sermons with which I worked, instructive Ukrainian-Belarusian handwritten gospels, and it seemed to me that the authors teach about sin in different ways in these sermon compositions. I delved into literature, wondering what the doctrine of sin and salvation was that was brought to Rus' after baptism in 988. I found that the doctrine of original sin, which is inherited by each individual person, since each individual person is guilty before God of the sin of Adam, is practically absent in the Orthodox tradition that came from Byzantium. I read a book by the Catholic author Francis Tenant, published at the beginning of the 20th century. Tenant analyzes Byzantine patristics, the teachings of the Church Fathers about the consequences of Adam's fall into sin. Part of this book made a comical impression on me, because the author says: “Look, here Gregory of Nyssa has already almost come to the Augustinian understanding of original sin, but for some reason he has not taken the decisive step.” And such theologians as Theodore of Mopsuestia and John Chrysostom, this authoritative author calls heretics who do not understand what original sin is. This is a characteristic response of confessional colored historiography. What really distinguished Augustine and the Augustinian tradition? We must make a short comment: without the legacy of Augustine, it is impossible to understand the intellectual history of Western Christianity. This is the central author who created the matrix for the thinking of generations of Western Christian preachers, theologians. One of the main lines that goes back to Augustine is about sin and salvation. In The City of God, Augustine explains what the consequences of original sin are for subsequent generations of people. The logic of Augustine's statements is as follows, since all people are born from a man and a woman and nothing else, original sin can be transmitted to them, because Adam and Eve gave birth to all subsequent generations. Augustine says, don't we see in the way life is born that at this moment the will of a person is not only weak, it is absent, a person cannot cope with passions. This is proof that every person born in a marital relationship is given original sin. The logic is very simple: a person cannot be born without a relationship between a man and a woman, and, accordingly, avoid the transfer of what the parents had through this event. At the beginning, I mentioned the synodal translation of the Bible. The authors who analyze this translation acknowledge that the Greek text of the New Testament, the Septuagint or the translation of the seventy interpreters, provides a translation of the key text from the letter of the apostle Paul to the Romans 5.12. This saying says that just as death entered into all people by one person, so sin entered by one person into all people, because everyone sinned in it. The Latin translation gives literally "in him all have sinned," while the Greek gives an indefinite form, because "by this all have sinned," not "in him," but "by this." When we read the Slavic Bible, we see that it retains the vagueness of the expression "by this all have sinned." In the Ostroh Bible, published in 1581 by Ivan Fedorov in Volyn, Ukraine, it says “everyone sinned about him”, there is no “e”, there “everyone sinned about him”. And in the synodal translation of the Bible, published in the 1870s, it says “in it all have sinned,” that is, the synodal translation of the Bible here follows the Vulgate. The difference is enormous: “all sinned in him”, that is, a man X and a woman M were born, and they all sinned in Adam, or did they not sin in Adam? This is one of the sides in research when philology, theology, philosophy, the language of philosophical concepts, textual criticism, in the end, the problem of translation and the problem of culture intersect. The most important thing is not how it sounds in the Slavic or non-Slavic translation of the Bible, but how it is then experienced. Speaking at one of the conferences on the role of Augustinism in the history of Christianity, I had to prepare a report on whether the Augustinian view of sin caused any controversy in Russian thought of the 17th century. It turned out that he did: Russian authors, first in the 1630s, and then in the 1650s-1660s, responded to the trends that came from Western Russian or Ukrainian-Belarusian lands and which introduced the idea of about original sin. We find in this study what settled in the parish culture, in the sermons that were offered to the parishioners. Monuments, namely numerous Ukrainian-Belarusian handwritten instructive gospels, contain traces of the penetration of the expression “decay pervotny” into Ukrainian-Belarusian everyday life. Primitive decadence is the original description, which goes on to original sin. I will illustrate with one example how change entered the culture of the parishioners and wards. My colleague from the University of Alberta in Canada, Peter Roland, pointed me to the texts of correspondence between the Ukrainian author Lazar Baranovich and Simeon Polotsky, a man important to Moscow life in the second half of the 17th century. Lazar Baranovich, through the mediation of Simeon of Polotsk, sought to have his work published in Moscow in the edition of the "Words of the Preacher Trumpets". In correspondence with Polotsky, he mentions the concept of original sin, peccatum originale, and Polotsky writes to him: “You know, here my letters are read, they are clarified, for God’s sake never mention original sin, here this concept is hated.” And then he says: “In general, it’s hard for me here, because I’m here as a person who walks between talking trees in the forest. They, of course, say something, but they have as much understanding of true things as trees. IN this case we see that the idea of ​​original sin is not accepted here. There is an interesting research perspective. All concepts that are associated with original sin are associated with the concept of salvation. All ideas about human nature are connected, on the other hand, with the idea of ​​original sin and salvation, because we are dealing with Christian medieval and early modern cultures. There is a wonderful story about how specific ideas about sin influenced Russian authors, how it entered the culture of even Soviet people through literature. In the 1920s, Dostoevsky was not included in the curriculum of the history of literature in the Soviet school, and in the 1950s he was introduced, apparently after the death of Stalin. Starting from the 1950s, all children in the 9th grade, the current 10th grade, had to study Crime and Punishment, study the question raised by Raskolnikov: “Am I a trembling creature or do I have a right?”. To study the problem of sin and salvation: where is sin and where is not. From the point of view of our understanding, the fact that Sonechka Marmeladova has to earn a living for her family by prostitution is nothing sinful. From the point of view of Dostoevsky and Russian culture, the idea that Raskolnikov is going to kill a senselessly existing harmful old money-lender is a sin. The most acute problems are posed in literary form. This is an excellent material not only for literary and cultural studies, but also for studies of how medieval traditions of understanding sin, salvation and human nature survive to Soviet culture. We must see from this example that this is not an abstract and unnecessary scholastic story about sin and salvation in a normative culture.

Issues

One of the problems of textology is the problem of text attribution, which is carried out within the framework of forensic psychology based on the methods of content analysis and psycholinguistics.

A significant part of literary works either remains unpublished during the life of the author, or is published with inaccuracies and distortions, both due to negligence and deliberately (conditions of censorship, etc.). Unpublished works often exist in a number of lists, of which none can be preferred to another in terms of reliability (for example, “Woe from Wit” by Griboyedov). Finally, all works of literature until the middle of the 15th century, when typography was invented, generally remained in the form of manuscripts, which only in the most rare cases were autographs or copies reviewed and corrected by the author (authorized copies). Not a single autograph has come down to us from the works of ancient literature. In medieval literature, almost every work had a complex history of the text and a number of authors, and often the oldest list that has come down to us is separated by several centuries from the time the work was written (for example, “Song of Roland”, which arose at the end of the 11th century, is represented by only one list of the end XII century and a large number of lists of the XIII-XIV centuries).

Tasks of textology

The main task of textual criticism is to give the correct text of the published literary work. The question of what is considered a "correct" or "canonical" text is not always understood in the same way. Different philological schools differently understood the ways of restoration on the basis of the remaining different editions of the text of the same work. Yes, before mid-nineteenth century in publishing technology, the exact ("diplomatic") reproduction of one manuscript, recognized for some reason as the best, prevails. Since the middle of the 19th century, so-called "critical" publications have been common, reconstructing the alleged prototype by contaminating the variants of all manuscripts available for research. The textology of the early 20th century is characterized by a very great psychologism in its approach to the question of the so-called "author's will" (cf. M. Hoffmann's work on Pushkin's text, N.K. .

Criticism of the text

Criticism of the text basically boils down to two points:

1. to establish authenticity or forgery
2. to reconstruction, in the case of ascertaining the authenticity of the original text, distorted by correspondence and alterations and which has come down to us in the form of scattered and incomplete fragments.

The summary of this analysis of all existing variants of a given text and their relationship to each other is called the "critical apparatus", which is now considered a necessary accessory for any scientific critical edition of literary works.

Criticism of the text of the source, recognized as authentic, in turn consists of two consecutive points:

1. diagnosis (that is, stating the corruption of a given place in the text), the basis of which is either a violation of the logical meaning, or a discrepancy with the architectonics of the whole, the testimony of other monuments or other parts of the same monument
2. conjecture, that is, drawing up a project to correct the text, the source of which can be either indirect indications in the monument under study and close to it, or a guesswork based on a general interpretation of the logical meaning of the monument, the historical conditions for its occurrence, the relationship to other monuments, its artistic structures (e.g. rhythm), etc.

In the latter case, we often deal with the so-called "divinatory criticism" (from the Latin divinatio - "the ability to guess"), when a heavily corrupted text is reconstructed from indirect data.

History of textual criticism

Textual criticism developed initially on the basis of the study of the manuscript tradition of ancient (and later medieval) authors, that is, precisely on the basis of such documentary materials, among which, as mentioned above, there are no (with rare exceptions) autographs. IN Lately it has been successfully applied to the texts of works of new and recent literature, and the presence of autographs has introduced a completely new range of problems into textology - the "creative history of the work", which is a new type of "history of the text" - a type limited chronological framework the life of the author, and even already - the chronological framework of his work on this work.

The specific material on which the methods of textual criticism were developed and improved can be divided into the following categories:

1. monuments that have come down to us in insignificant fragments (for example, texts of ancient Greek lyricists, comedies of Menander)
2. monuments that have come down to us in numerous editions diverging from one another:
   1. subjected to numerous distortions during correspondence (until the end of printing) - these are the texts of most ancient authors
   2. subjected to repeated alterations and revisions up to the unification (contamination of several works into one) - such is the history of the text of most works fiction feudal period
3. monuments that are a collection of a number of other monuments that have been built up over a number of centuries, belonging to different eras and arising in different social environments (for example, the Bible, partly Homer's poems or Russian chronicles and chronographs)
4. monuments that have been preserved in a few or even in a single, sometimes greatly distorted, edition: this can sometimes include works of new literature that were not printed during the author’s lifetime and did not receive a final finish, such as Griboyedov’s “Woe from Wit” or Lermontov’s “Demon”
5. falsifications :
   1. monuments, entirely false - “The gift of Konstantin”, the so-called “False Isidore’s decrees”, the missing books of Titus Livy, Fallaris’s letters, “Lyubushin sud”, “Kraledvorskaya manuscript”, the end of Pushkin’s “Mermaid”, etc.
   2. interpolations or insertions (for example, Christian interpolations in pagan authors, later insertions of episodes or chronological dates in annals and chronicles).

The analysis of each of these categories of monuments is associated with special techniques of textual criticism.

The second of the enumerated categories of monuments is the most common in practice, which, in turn, is divided into three groups. Such a breakdown can be quite clearly carried out on the monuments of ancient Russian literature:

1. the lists are almost identical (there are only spelling and stylistic variations, minor insertions or omissions)
2. lists both similar and significantly different from each other (various plot options, insert episodes)
3. lists sharply diverging from each other, retaining only the general framework of the plot.

Each of these three cases requires special research methods. So, for example, in the first case, one list is placed as the basis for comparison, and all the rest are brought under it as options, forming a critical apparatus; at the same time, the comparison should be based on an older list with a typical text, although a “typical” text is by no means always the oldest text (the oldest text can come down to us just in one of the later lists); as a result of constructing the apparatus, that is, bringing all the options under one list, the relationship of the lists is established, and they are divided into groups, then the “archetype” of each group is established, and, finally, the relationship between the groups.

In this way, a “genealogical tree of lists” is built, which is a schematic representation of the history of the text. This work is more or less difficult, depending on the relative completeness of the lists; the more intermediate links are lost, the more difficult it is. So, for example, in one case we can establish that one of the lists of the first group is an archetype for the entire second group, in another case we can limit ourselves to the statement that the second group goes back to such and such a list of the first group, but this list itself is an archetype - should be considered lost.

This way of research, methodologically verified for the first of the three cases cited, is significantly modified for the second and third cases. Of course, they are also found in medieval literature somewhat different cases: for example, among the lists of the "Song of Roland" one, the so-called Oxford, according to the structure of the plot, can be contrasted as a special group with all the other lists of the XIII-XIV centuries, forming the second group, but in this last one one of the youngest lists, Venetian (end of the XIV century), converges on one basis (assonances

Witkowski G., Textkritik und Editionstechnik neuerer Schriftwerke, Lpz., 1924

Norize A., Problems and methods of literary history, Boston, 1922

See also the textual apparatus in the academic edition of Op. Pushkin, in the edition of Op. Tolstoy under the general editorship of V. G. Chertkov, Gogol under the editorship of Tikhonravov, Lermontov under the editorship of. Eikhenbaum and others.

The word textology is of comparatively recent origin. It received the rights of citizenship approximately in the middle of the 1930s and was almost for the first time introduced by B. V. Tomashevsky into the course he read in 1926/27 academic year at the Institute of Art History in Leningrad.

This course was published in 1928 under the title "The Writer and the Book" with the subtitle "Essay on Textual Studies" - it was still impossible to make this subtitle the title.

And in 1957 - 1967. one after another, four collections of the Institute of World Literature of the USSR Academy of Sciences were published under the title “Questions of Textology”, books” on the title pages of which appear: “Fundamentals of Textology”, “Textology on the Material of Russian Literature of the 10th - 17th Centuries”, “Textology. Brief essay”, “Textology”.

But if the term "textology" is new, then the concept itself is very old. Philological criticism, text criticism, archeography, hermeneutics, exegesis - words covering approximately the same concept, but applied to different areas of knowledge: history, ancient literature, source studies, the Bible.

Courses in textual criticism are now taught at a number of universities and pedagogical institutes, some research institutes have sections on textual criticism, and there is a special textual commission within the International Committee of Slavists. Articles on textual criticism are published in thick literary-critical journals.

The main achievement of modern textology can be formulated as follows: the text of a work of art is recognized as a fact of national culture. He is in in a certain sense belongs not only to the author, but to the people as a whole. “I don’t create anything, I don’t formulate anything that personally belongs to me alone,” wrote Saltykov, “but I give only what every honest heart hurts at the moment” (“Letters to Auntie,” ch. XIV).

This book is based on the section "Textology", published by the publishing house "Prosveshchenie" in 1970, the book "Palaeography and Textology of Modern Times". All material has been significantly revised: a number of wordings have been clarified, new data have been introduced, the text has been shortened in some cases, but partially supplemented.

In this case, concern for the text: its accuracy, authenticity, accessibility - acquires social significance. This is the responsibility of the textologist before the people. Questions of textual criticism have now acquired a socio-political dimension.

The texts of writers (Belinsky, L. Tolstoy, A. Ostrovsky, Nekrasov, Chekhov) are published, on the basis of decisions of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, about faulty texts (M. L. Mikhailov, Demyan Bedny), we read special resolutions of the Central Committee of the CPSU.

A special article devoted to the text of Belinsky's letter to Gogol attracts attention not only by the subtlety of the analysis, but also by conclusions of ideological significance, and for a long time holds the attention of literary critics and historians of social thought 1 .

Folklore, ancient literature, modern literature - all of them are equally objects of textual criticism. Textology should exist as a single science. Its problematics and basic concepts (autograph, list, draft, white copy, copy, archetype, variant, etc.), general methods and techniques (attribution, dating, commenting, linking, studying typical copyist mistakes, etc.) - all this allows us to speak about a science with a common goal. However, historically, three disparate disciplines emerged.

Of course, folklore, ancient literature and modern literature have their own characteristics, their own research methods, but the specifics of each of them should not be exaggerated. The principle is important, not the number of certain cases in each industry.

So, in ancient literature (not to mention folklore, where the record may be very late), there is almost always no author's manuscript, but there is a complex genealogy of surviving and lost lists. Elucidation of this genealogy is most often the way to establish the text (or texts). In the new literature, the autograph is mostly present.

This does not mean, however, that there are no similar cases in the new literature, when the text has to be established on the basis of a number of lists that are difficult to correlate with each other. Establishing the text of Pushkin's Gavriiliada, Belinsky's Letters to Gogol, A. K. Tolstoy's History of the Russian State from Gostomysl to Timashev, many epigrams, works of "free" poetry, etc., is similar to the work of a textologist-"ancientist".

• 1 Oksman Yu, G. Belinsky's letter to Gogol as a historical document. - “Student. app. Saratov state. un-ta im. N. G. Chernyshevsky, 1952, vol. XXXI, p. 111 - 204; Bogaevskaya K. P. Belinsky's letter to Gogol. - "Lit. inheritance”, 1950, vol. 56, p. 513 - 605.

In ancient literature, the question of the so-called "unity" of works is very acute. Quite often it is necessary to isolate various parts belonging to different authors, but merged into one in their existence. Sometimes, within a single work, a textual critic has to rearrange parts (for example, in The Lay of Igor's Campaign).

In the new literature, such cases are rare, but not excluded.

Let us recall the rearrangement of the parts in Pushkin's Egyptian Nights proposed by B. V. Tomashevsky, who restored the correct order of the passages; we recall the composition of Pushkin's unfinished article on criticism, reconstructed by Soviet researchers. There is still no consensus on how to print the text of Tolstoy's "War and Peace": where to place philosophical chapters - "interspersed" with the text of "artistic" chapters or separately, how to place the French text - in the main text or in footnotes - instructions Tolstoy on this score are not the same and allow different interpretations 1 .

It is very difficult, and sometimes impossible, in the critical legacy of Dobrolyubov (and other critics of the revolutionary-democratic camp) to separate the parts that belong to them from what is written by other, novice or inept contributors to Sovremennik. In this sense, the dispute about whether Dobrolyubov or the proofreader of Sovremennik Pyotr Dmitriev is the author of the article “On the Significance of Our Latest Feats in the Caucasus” is instructive.

In ancient texts, the establishment of the main (in other terminology - canonical) text turns out to be impossible in most cases. In the new literature, the establishment of such a text is the first and most important task of the textual critic. To some extent to similar provisions ancient literature those cases of new literature are approaching when the text has several editions, or when there is no autograph and lifetime edition and only more or less authoritative lists exist. In publications of the academic type (or those approaching them), for example, two editions of "Taras Bulba" - the edition of "Mirgorod" in 1835 and an excellent one - in the edition of the Works of 1842. The same with "Nevsky Prospekt", "Portrait", " Auditor" and other works of Gogol. Other examples can be cited.

Ancient literature is characterized by the frequent anonymity of the text. In the new literature, this is a case that is less common, but still quite common.

• 1 N. K. Gudziya, N. N. Gusev, V. A. Zhdanov, E. E. Zaidenshnur, L. D. Opulskaya, N. M. Fortunatov, B. M. and now there are still a number of unclear and unresolved issues.

Disputes about the authorship of certain works accompany, in fact, the study of the literary heritage of almost every writer. The larger the writer, the more significant these disputes. Let us recall that the old discussion about the author of "An Excerpt from a Journey to **I***T***" has not yet been completed 1 . No less than nine candidates claim to be recognized as the authors of the News about Some Russian Writers. There is a huge literature about Pushkin, in which for more than a century there have been disputes about the belonging of some poems and a number of articles to the poet. Among researchers, there is a lively debate about the author of the poem "On Chernov's Death" - Ryleev or Kuchelbeker.

The poetic and journalistic heritage of Nekrasov is not fully defined. Until recently, there were disputes about the ownership of the "Proverbs" and the poem "He is our eighth miracle ...". Articles Ap. Grigoriev, A. N. Pleshcheev, N. N. Strakhov are constantly attributed to Dostoevsky, articles by P. L. Lavrov - V. V. Lesevich, articles by M. N. Longinov - Nekrasov, article Ap. Grigoriev about Fet was attributed to J.K. Grot, and another article about Fet was either Ostrovsky or Ap. Grigoriev, but turned out to be owned by L. May, P. N. Kudryavtsev’s article about Fet in Sovremennik in 1850 was attributed either to Nekrasov or V. P. Botkin.

Regarding the authorship of the works of critics of the revolutionary-democratic camp - Belinsky, Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyubov, Pisarev, M. Antonovich, and others - a very large literature has accumulated. Especially "lucky" Belinsky. The most diverse articles by various authors (A. D. Galakhov, M. N. Katkov, P. N. Kudryavtsev, I. I. Panaev, and others) were attributed to criticism; in a number of cases, the issue remains unresolved, and today not everyone recognizes Chernyshevsky as the author of the proclamation "To the lordly peasants ...". Until now, there are disputes about Dobrolyubov's ownership of some articles in Sovremennik. As we can see, in the new literature the problem of attribution is an important part of the research work of a textual critic.

So, both in the ancient and in the new textology we are talking about the same phenomena. Each of them has a different specific gravity for different periods. Various methodological techniques, however, do not prevent us from considering science as one. Disunity does not bring any benefit, and unification will mutually enrich both sides. The practical difficulty lies in the fact that in our time it is difficult to meet a scientist who would be equally a specialist in both ancient and new literature and who could unite textual criticism in a single presentation. But if today it is still impossible to create a unified textology in its final form, this does not mean that we should abandon such a trend. Materials for it should be gradually accumulated and ways of uniting the two historically separated disciplines 1 should be groped for.

• 1 The most convincing hypothesis about the authorship of N. I. Novikov. See the witty article by Yu. Ivanov "Let's Recreate Real Circumstances". - “Quest. lit.", 1966, No. 2, p. 163 - 171.

So far, the “new” textology is more oriented towards the rigor of the method and individual methods of research by historians of ancient Russian literature than the ancient textual criticism towards the new one. The future historian of science will note the influence of the ideas of A. A. Shakhmatov, V. N. Peretz, O. A. Dobiash-Rozhdestvenskaya, and others on the development of new textual criticism.

Before our very eyes, textology has moved from a practical discipline ("editing instructions") into a different category and is developing along the path of theoretical generalizations. Disputes about the essence and principles of this science are the best confirmation of this 2 .

A number of general questions arise in textual criticism today, work is underway to clarify the essence of science, to establish basic concepts - all this was unthinkable before, when narrow practicality narrowed the horizon and prevented us from seeing the fundamental foundations of science.

It is still difficult to substantiate all of them now: a number of questions are posed so far only in the first approximation - without this it is impossible to go further.

Any edition of the text must be strictly scientific. Everyone agrees on this: both those who recognize the establishment of the main text as the most important task of a textologist, and those who, relying on ancient texts, deny this task in this form, allowing for the plurality of scientifically prepared texts 3 .

The textual criticism of the new literature firmly recognizes only one main text. The edition may differ depending on the reader's address in introductory articles, notes, the volume of variants, etc., but the text of the writer, as it is currently established, can be only one. “A penny pamphlet with Pushkin's poems,” wrote G.O. Vinokur, “in principle differs from an academic publication only in that it is free from critical apparatus” 4 .

• 1 The tendency towards rapprochement and unification of the "old" and "new" textology underlies the content of the book: Likhachev D.S. Textology; Brief essay. M. - L., "Science", 1964; cf. my review (“Vopr. Lit.”, 1964, No. 12, pp. 218 - 220). Questions of textual criticism of ancient literature and folklore are considered in the book: Likhachev D. Textology on the material of Russian literature of the 10th - 17th centuries. M. - L., Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1962.
• 2 See: Berkov P. N. Problems of modern textual criticism. - “Quest. lit.", 1963, No. 12, p. 78 - 95. See, in addition, the materials of the discussion on the essence of textual criticism in the articles by B. Ya. Bukhshtab, A. L. Grishunin, D. S. Likhachev and E. I. Prokhorov. - “Rus. lit.", 1965, No. 1 and No. 3.
• 3 See: Likhachev D.S. Textology. Brief essay. M. - L., 1964, p. 82. Reference to this edition will be further indicated: Likhachev D.S. Brief essay.
• 4 Vinokur G. O. Criticism poetic text. M., 1927. Reference to this edition will be further indicated: Vinokur G. O. Criticism ...

The text of a work of art is created by one writer, as a rare exception - by two writers (the Goncourt brothers, E. Erkman and A. Shatrian, Ilf and Petrov), even more rarely - by a group of authors. in folklore and ancient Russian literature the situation is different and more complex.

Everything in the text, from the text itself to punctuation marks, the arrangement of paragraphs or individual lines, is intended to serve one goal - to achieve the greatest artistic effect, to express the artist's intention with the greatest force.

In no other form of verbal creativity (for example, in a scientific, journalistic text, etc.) does this accuracy reach such maximum exactingness. Replacing one word in it with another - synonymous, changing the arrangement of paragraphs or other details is unlikely to distort the author's thought. Not so in verbal art. “I prefer to breathe like a dog, rather than speed up by one second a phrase that has not yet matured,” Flaubert wrote to M. Du Cane in 1852. 1

A work of art exists precisely and only in this form. One incorrect, seemingly minor detail can destroy the impression of the whole, and the world becomes spiritually poorer because of this.

The ultimate accuracy of the text is the possibility of the most complete perception of a work of art. Leo Tolstoy was absolutely right when he said that “strange as it may seem to say, art still requires much more precision, precision than science.. ." 2.

This sense of responsibility for the text was very well felt already in Ancient Rus'. Monks-scribes humbly asked to forgive them for involuntary mistakes, blunders and inaccuracies in the text. “Where the sinner was registered, not by reason, or thoughtlessness, or bewilderment, or disobedience, or disobedience, or did not consider, or was too lazy to consider, or did not see, - and you, for God's sake, forgive me and do not curse, but correct yourself" .

For an artist, not only such obvious factors as, for example, rhyme or rhythm (of both verse and prose) are important, but also the sound of this or that word, their combination, even their drawing (“appearance”) and a number of others, not conditions that are always clear to us, by which he is guided in his choice.

Our perception of Pushkin's unfinished work will be very different if we read: "History of the village of Gorokhin" (as Zhukovsky read) or "History of the village of Goryukhin" - such reading is now recognized as accurate. Only one letter has changed, but what a change in meaning is hidden behind it! "Gorokhino" - a word with a humorous connotation, refers us almost to the times of Tsar Pea, and at the root of the word "Goryukhino" lies a clearly tangible - grief.

• 1 Flaubert G. Collected. op. in 5 volumes, vol. V. M., Pravda, 1956, p. 56.
• 2 Tolstoy L. N. Complete. coll. soch., vol. 78. M., Goslitizdat, 1956, p. 156 - 157. Letter to L. D. Semenov dated June 6, 1908. Precision - accuracy (French)

Only one letter and punctuation marks distinguish the reading of the famous line from Gogol's Notes of a Madman from each other.

“Does he know what? - the Algerian dey has a bump right under his nose!

Or: “Do you know that the Bey of Algeria has a bump right under his nose!”

Seems no need to explain that the meaning of these two lines is not quite the same 1 .

Sometimes one letter changes the meaning quite significantly:

Satyrs bold lord

Satyrs bold ruler -

allows different understanding of the text of this stanza of "Eugene Onegin" 2 .

Decidedly in everything - from the largest to the smallest - the text of a work of art requires absolute accuracy as possible. A writer who does not consider a story complete for months because four words have not yet fallen into place in it (such was, for example, Babel) is not an anecdotal example at all. However, due to various reasons, the text of a work of art is often not published in the form that the writer wants. The circumstances due to which the text undergoes all sorts of distortions can be very diverse. The tsarist censorship bears great responsibility for the spoiling of texts. In Soviet times, researchers did a great job of restoring writers' texts from censorship cuts and forced corrections.

Sometimes the author - if he himself published his works - often could not publish them in full, constrained financially. An incomplete edition remains the only lifetime edition and is then sometimes traditionally recognized as allegedly expressing the will of the author.

A significant place is also occupied by what can be called autocensorship. For one reason or another (personal, tactical, public, etc.), the author does not want or is not able to print the work in its completed form.

• 1 Berkov P.N. On one imaginary misprint by Gogol. (On the history of the text of "Notes of a Madman"). - In the book: Gogol. Articles and materials. L., 1954, p. 356 - 361. "Day" is also mentioned in the entry of P. A. Vyazemsky in 1829 (Notebooks. 1813 - 1848. M., "Nauka", 1963, p. 188).
• 2 Berkov P. N. “The Brave Lord”, or “The Bold Satire”? To the textual criticism of the stanza of the XVIII chapter of the first "Eugene Onegin". - “Rus. lit.", 1962, No. 1, p. 60 - 63. PN Berkov's considerations in favor of the second reading seem convincing.

Sometimes the faces depicted in the work are alive, sometimes some intimate details do not allow the author himself (or on the advice of relatives) to publish the work without certain cuts or replacements. It is known that Pushkin was very dissatisfied with the fact that Bestuzhev, without his consent, published in 1824 the elegy "The flying ridge is thinning clouds ..." in full. Pushkin systematically excluded from the text three lines addressed to Ekaterina (?) Raevskaya:

When the shadow of the night rose on the huts,

And the young maiden was looking for you in the dark

And she called her friends names.

For the same reasons of auto-censorship, Pushkin preferred to remove the lines about the meeting and conversation with the disgraced "Proconsul of the Caucasus" General Yermolov in the text of "Journey to Arzrum".

If a work, for personal or much more often political reasons, remains unpublished, it sometimes goes from hand to hand in a huge number of lists, anonymous or with a fantastic name of the author. In this case, it quickly acquires all the signs of folklore existence. We still do not exactly know the authors of many poems of "free" Russian poetry. Establishing their main text also presents considerable difficulties. The text is steadily and more and more distorted, often the original author is replaced by another on a completely arbitrary guess: a more significant author, as a rule, displaces a less well-known one: Ryleev is credited with the verses of Pleshcheev or Kuchelbeker, Nekrasov - satirical verses of a third-rate poet, etc.

Consistently, voluntarily or involuntarily, the sources of damage to the text are the clerk (in our time - a typist), editor, typesetter, proofreader, etc. - some of them are sure that they improve the text by their intervention.

Even in the most prosperous publishing process, the printing process is almost always a source of error. The reissue "enriches" the text with new typos - almost no book can do without them. "It is impossible to print a book without errors" - these words of Isaac Newton from his letter of 1709 remain valid today 1 .

The following episode is known: a bet was made that "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow" in the edition of A. S. Suvorin in 1888 would be released without a single misprint. After careful editing of title page and on the cover, nevertheless, was ... A. I. Radishchev!

• 1 Cited. according to the article by A. A. Morozov "On the reproduction of texts by Russian poets of the 18th century." - “Rus. lit.", 1966, No. 2, p. 75. Recently, these words were erroneously attributed to S. A. Vengerov. See: Fortunatov N. M. Concerning the new edition of "War and Peace" by L. N. Tolstoy. - Philol. science”, 1966, no. 1, p. 187.

No matter how attentive the typist, typesetter, proofreader and proofreader are, they make a certain number of mistakes. An experienced calculator (in a special institute) makes at least 1% errors.

For a work of fiction, say, 10 pages, this will result in a distortion of about five lines of text. For a poem of medium length, 20 lines, this will be expressed in distortion, at least in one line.

It all depends, of course, on the type of distortion. Sometimes we have before us an easily recoverable meaninglessness of the text, sometimes - and this is especially terrible - the error is "comprehended" and passes from edition to edition.

In some cases, the establishment of an exact text corresponding to the last desire of the author is a rather simple task, in others it is a complex search, requiring the involvement of the most diverse material.

Thus is determined The first task of textual criticism is to establish the exact text of a work.

However, this is not the only task of textual criticism.

Usually it is necessary to establish not just one text, but a group or even the sum of texts of a given author (selected works, collected works, complete collected works, etc.).

Thus, it arises the second task is the organization (codification) of these texts.

It cannot be solved unequivocally and once and for all. Different purposes of publication determine different types of publication. All publications must be identical in text, but each time the volume and composition of the publication and its composition change.

Finally, the textual critic must be able not only to establish and organize the text, but also to bring it to the modern reader; The third task is to comment on the text.

It should make the work understandable to a wide variety of reader groups. The reader will find in the comments the necessary information about the place and time of the first publication, about reprints, about manuscripts and their features (here or in the introductory article), in the so-called "preamble" he will receive information about the place of this work in the writer's creative path, about the meaning of the work.

An important section of textual criticism is the so-called real commentary. It is based on the fact that our memory is essentially very limited; much is easily forgotten and slips away from the consciousness of contemporaries, not to mention descendants. Little things that are characteristic of a particular time, have lost their sharpness, topical hints, the names of people who have not left a noticeable trace on themselves, require hard and thankless work to restore. The result of lengthy investigations, sometimes taking several days, is formulated in five or six lines of a mean reference.

Without the preliminary establishment of an exact text, neither history nor theory of literature can exist.

The text of a work of art is equally the subject of study of textual criticism, history, and theory of literature, but the point of view and purpose from which the same material is studied are different.

It would be wrong to put an equal sign between textual criticism and text history. The history of the text is not an independent science. These or other facts of the history of the text, with which the textual critic constantly operates, are necessary to him only to the extent that they help him establish the text of the work. The historian of literature, investigating the creative history of a work, will approach them from different positions, draw different conclusions from them.

“A literary scholar cannot but be a textual critic, that is, a person who does not know how to understand the text. Equally, a textual critic will appear in a very miserable form if he is not a literary critic, that is, he fails to understand the meaning of the text being studied and published” - these words of B. V. Tomashevsky remain valid today 1 .

It is assumed that a textologist prepares texts, composes and comments on them not so that the result of his work remains in a single copy in a desk drawer, but for publication, i.e., so that it becomes public domain.

However, this feature of textology is not fundamental, but simply the most frequent form of its practical application. It is wrong to reduce textual criticism only to publishing problems. The researcher may not set himself directly editorial tasks; the result of his work can find its full expression in the textual study of the monument in the form of an article or a book.

Astronomy became a science, ceasing to be a practical guide for navigators, geometry from practical land surveying turned into a mathematical discipline. Likewise, textology is transforming before our eyes from a manual for publishing workers into an auxiliary (maybe, more precisely, into an applied) philological discipline, which has its own subject of study.

• 1 Tomashevsky B.V. The tenth chapter of "Eugene Onegin". - "Lit. inheritance”, 1934, v. 16 - 18, p. 413.

P main text problems

Terminology

The first task of a textologist is to establish the text of a work. The text established by the textual critic has not yet received a permanent designation. IN various works it is called by many different names: authentic, definitive, definitive, canonical, stable, precise, authentic, basic, etc. Of all these designations, the main one seems to be the most appropriate.

The term canonical (it occurs most often) is inconvenient. The point, of course, is not that it goes back to the theological tradition, but that this concept is based on a completely wrong idea that the text can be established once and for all, that is, canonized. The illusion that there is a text ne varietur must be dispelled 1 . The text does not have this feature. We can only say that "for today" this text is the most accurate. But always (or almost always) texts gradually, over time, improve. New, previously unknown autographs, new lists are discovered, the testimonies of contemporaries that have not yet been put into circulation are taken into account, new materials are found in the archives, researchers offer new conjectures, etc. The textual critic strives for the best text as an ideal, the achievement of which as it approaches it moves away every time. As B. V. Tomashevsky wrote back in 1922, “the establishment of a “canonical” text is not some kind of piece-work, the boundaries of which are easily determined ...” 2 . Only a few feuilletonists still sharpen their wit about the fact that the editor of a long-dead poet receives a fee "for him".

It is enough to recall the history of establishing the text of the ode “Liberty” by Radishchev, “Letters from Belinsky to Gogol”, “War and Peace” by Tolstoy, “Russian Women” by Nekrasov, to make clear the work, sometimes taking several generations of scientists.

Other terms used in the literature also do not seem to be successful. Some of them are unreasonably complex (for example, a definitive text), others are unclear (authentic - the question immediately arises - why?), others suggest exactly what is fundamentally unacceptable for a textologist (stability), the fourth are not so much terms as colloquial, almost everyday values ​​(accurate, genuine), etc.

• 1 B. V. Tomashevsky objected to the term “canonical text” (“Lit. Heritage”, 1934, vol. 16-18, p. 1055); P. N. Berkov does not accept it in the article “Problems of modern textual criticism” (“Vopr. Lit.”, 1963, No. 12, p. 89); this term is also rejected in the textual criticism of folklore (Chistov K.V. Modern problems of textual criticism of Russian folklore. M., 1963, p. 39).
• 2 Notes to the edition: Pushkin A. Gavriiliada. Pg., 1922, p. 96.

The term body text is most suitable for textual criticism 1 .

However, it should be borne in mind that in the book Fundamentals of Textual Studies 2 a different interpretation of the term proposed here is given.

According to E. I. Prokhorov, the main text is one that is based on the identification and study of "all handwritten and printed sources of the text of the work." This text, which in itself is the result of complex textological work, forms the basis for further study.

What and for what?

To identify distortions in it, to correct it and to establish the "genuine author's text."

It seems to suffice to quote these two small quotations to make clear the illegitimacy of the formulated point of view. First, the text is established, and then further work continues on it, as a result of which it acquires a new quality and receives a new designation. It would seem that as a result of "revealing and studying" the desired text is established. It turns out not! This process is needed in order to select the text that will be further researched.

In fact, no one breaks textual work into two artificial stages. It is impossible to define their boundaries. By comparing the texts, the textologist thereby corrects them; using other data, he checks the text, bringing it to the degree of accuracy that modern knowledge of the materials allows.

It may be objected that we need to take something as a basis, that we need to work not on any text chosen at random, but on the most suitable one - let's agree to call it the original one (without giving it a terminological meaning). The textologist of new Russian literature will most often have to take in this capacity the text of the last lifetime edition; of course, in some specific cases it will be necessary to use a different text, but such cases are hardly numerous.

Last creative will

When establishing the main text, two cases must be distinguished.

While the author is alive, he is the only and indisputable manager of his text: he can change or leave it unchanged from edition to edition, he can return to an earlier edition, etc. The publisher is obliged to obey his will. “I am sad to see,” Pushkin wrote to A. A. Bestuzhev on January 12, 1824, “that they are treating me like a dead person, not respecting either my will or poor property.”

• 1 This term was, in particular, adopted by the founders of Soviet textual criticism B. V. Tomashevsky and B. M. Eikhenbaum. See: Gogol N. V. Full. coll. cit., vol. II. M., Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1937, p. 697; Sat: Editor and book, vol. 3. M., 1962, p. 65 and other materials.
• 2 The same in the book: Prokhorov E. I. Textology (Principles of publishing classical literature). M., "Higher. school", 1966.

“Only when the action of this will ceases, that is, after the death of the author, does the problem of stabilizing the text arise - a problem very important in practical terms and difficult in theoretical terms” 1 .

The writer often, more or less categorically, insists on his desire to consider one and not another text as corresponding to his author's will.

Saltykov-Shchedrin, in a letter to L. F. Panteleev dated March 30, 1887, "positively forbade" the reprinting of his works scattered in various editions, in addition to those listed by him in the plan of the 13-volume collected works 2 .

“If my collected works are ever published, I ardently ask you to use only the texts corrected by me in the collected works of ed. "Petropolis" 3, - Bunin wrote to N. D. Teleshov on December 8, 1945.

Shortly before his death, N. A. Zabolotsky completed the preparation for printing a new edition of his poems and poems and approved this particular text with a special inscription. "The texts of this manuscript have been verified, corrected and finally established: previously published versions of many verses should be replaced by the texts given here" 4 .

Similarly, Andrei Bely, preparing a new edition in Soviet times, radically reworked his old poems and “with all the force of conviction” announced this “dying will”. Nevertheless, the editors of the "Poet's Library", "meaning to present the poetry of A. Bely in its true historical sound (...) was forced (...) to deviate from the will of the author" 5 . This decision cannot but be considered fair. Let me remind you that the novel by A. Bely "Petersburg" also exists in two different editions (the original and much later), the same applies to the novel by L. Leonov "The Thief", etc.

• 1 Bibliography of fiction and literary criticism. Textbook for library institutes. Ed. B. Ya. Bukhshtaba. Part 1. M., “Owls. Russia", 1960, p. 34; cf.: Tsimbal S. Fantasy and reality. - “Quest. lit., 1967, No. 9, p. 160.
• 2 Saltykov-Shchedrin. M. E. Sobr. op; in 20 volumes, vol. XX. M., 1974, p. 324 - 325.
• 3 See: Historical Archive, 1952, No. 2, p. 162 and in a somewhat weakened wording in the Literary Testament (Moscow, 1962, No. 4, p. 222). Here we consider not so much textological as ethical and tactical questions about the publication of letters from writers who have imposed a direct ban or semi-ban on this kind of their writings.
• 4 Zabolotsky N. A. Poems and poems. Poet's Library. Big series. M. - L., “Owls. writer", 1965, p. 447.
• 5 Bely Andrey. Poems and poems. M. - L., “Owls. writer, 1966, p. 574 (“The Poet's Library”. Large series).

special question - diaries and letters of the writer. They very often reveal the creative process with extraordinary depth, essentially clarify the socio-political views of the writer, explain the facts of his biography reflected in the work, reveal the psychology of creativity from various sides, establish prototypes, etc. On the other hand, the reader is quite legitimately interested in not only the work of the writer: the question naturally arises - what is it? match or not authentic life form the way the reader imagined him according to his works, etc. Interest in the personality of the writer is the legal right of the reader, and where he does not cross certain boundaries, it does not become gossip, there is nothing bad in it. “... The letter is located,” Acad. M. P. Alekseev, - in close proximity to fiction and can sometimes turn into a special kind artistic creativity...» 1 All of the above determines the legitimacy and even the necessity of publishing and studying the daily records and epistolary of the writer 2 . However, this point of view is not accepted by all. In 1884, when immediately after the death of I. S. Turgenev, the “First Collection of I. S. Turgenev’s Letters” was published, protests were heard in the press.

As we can see, the rights of a textual critic are almost incompatible with the duties of an executor, and in a number of cases he is forced to violate the "will" of the author.

This jewel of the writer's heritage for the culture of the people as a whole frees the editor from the functions of a notary that are unusual for him and allows him, without remorse, not to carry out the testamentary orders of the artist, but to alienate his creations in favor of the people.

We rightfully ignore Pushkin's prohibition marks on some of his works today; its "do not" or "do not print" is no longer taken into account.

On the manuscript of the article "N. X. Ketcher" Herzen writes: "Nothing to print." We are not currently complying with this order.

• 1 Turgenev I. S. Full. coll. op. and letters in 28 volumes. Letters, vol. 1. M. - L., Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1961, p. 15.
• 2 N. K. Gudziy formulated a different point of view in our days in the article “On the Complete Collected Works of the Writer”. - “Quest. lit.", 1959, No. 6, p. 196 - 206. Back in 1895, V. G. Korolenko rightly noted that “the life of a public figure will always be in sight (Selected letters, vol. 3, 1936, p. 92 - 93) - this determines the inevitability of publishing materials of this kind (See: Solovyov V.S. Letters, vol. 2. St. Petersburg, 1909, p. 267). On the publication of Turgenev's letters to M. G. Savina, see the note by E. Vilenskaya and L. Roitberg in the publication: Boborykin P. D. Memoirs, vol. II. M., "Artist. lit.", 1965, p. 576. A number of materials related to the publication of writers' letters are contained in the publication: "Publications de la societe d" histoire litteraire de la France. Les editions de correspondances. Colloque 20 avril 1968 ". Paris, 1969.

Critical articles in "Vremya", which Dostoevsky "renounced" in a letter to P. V. Bykov on April 15, 1876, are now included in his collected works 1

We will forever remain grateful to Max Brod, who did not fulfill the dying will of the testator and preserved the legacy of Kafka for the world.

The examples listed here of ignoring the will of the author relate to the text of the work. The concept of the last author's creative will refers primarily to the text. The composition of this or that publication, its composition and auxiliary apparatus are determined by a number of factors (first of all, the intended purpose of the book) and are decided by the modern publisher 2 .

In this case, particularly difficult problems arise.

In general terms, the solution to the problem can be formulated as follows: we take for the main text the text in which the last creative will of the author is most fully expressed. In many cases, this will is expressed in the last lifetime edition. However, this cannot be considered a rule. Mechanically putting an equal sign between the last lifetime and the last creative editions is a serious mistake. From the fact that Pushkin wrote down the text of the poem “Madonna” (dated July 8, 1830) for the last time in his life in the album of Yu. that the August entry should be reproduced in editions of Pushkin's works as the main one. In establishing the main text, it is imperative to take into account a number of factors that limit the mechanical application of this principle.

Let's list the most important ones.

1. The last lifetime text can be crippled by the editors or censorship. The textual critic is obliged to remove these forced corrections and restore the original text.

And in this case, the researcher must exercise the necessary caution. It is known, for example, that Leskov's novel "On the Knives" was significantly corrected in the editorial office of the "Russian Messenger" and that Leskov (in a letter to one of the editors - N. A. Lyubimov - November 18, 1870) sharply protested against this. It would seem that today in the publications of Leskov, the editing of the journal text should be eliminated.

• 1 Dostoevsky F. M. Letters, vol. III. 1872 - 1877. M. - L., "Academia", 1934, p. 208.
• 2 A supporter of the preservation of the author's composition and author's selection, in particular for Chekhov, was K.I. N. Akopova, G. Vladykin, Z. Paperny, A. Puzikov and A. Revyakin argued with him in a collective response (“More about the “people's publication.” - “Lit. Gaz.”, 1960, March 24, No. 36 ( 4161), p. 3).

Let's not forget that usually the text of a magazine is more crippled than the text of a separate edition or collected works. The journal is designed for a wider readership than a separate publication or collected works. However, it suddenly turns out that in a separate edition of the novel in 1871, all these distortions remained. Leskov, as it were, authorized them, and now we also do not have the right to restore them "for the author." Such grounds would arise only if it were possible to prove that Leskov did not have the opportunity to restore them in a separate publication.

It must be remembered that pre-revolutionary editors (for example, N. V. Gerbel, P. V. Bykov) often filled in censorship gaps on their own guesses, and sometimes even corrected the author.

Sometimes the editorial revision was disguised with a false reference to censorship. Not wanting to offend Ogarev with a refusal, the editors of Sovremennik preferred to inform him that the Monologues 1 had not been censored - a technique that has been used more than once in journal editorial practice and is not always taken into account by researchers who take these references at face value.

2. The last lifetime text may be the result of auto-censorship. Sometimes we have before us "personal", intimate considerations; sometimes (for example, in "Russian Women" by Nekrasov) - auto-censorship in anticipation of government censorship: it is better to change it yourself than to wait for much more ridiculous cuts from the censor.

3. The last lifetime text can be published in the absence of the author: Lermontov did not have the opportunity to follow the publication of "The Hero of Our Time", but did it for him (rather carelessly) A. A. Kraevsky; the researcher must replace the missing author and correct the work modern writer publisher.

4. The author suffers from a kind of abulia - he is indifferent to republished texts and, in fact, does not lead them. Such was, for example, the late Tolstoy or Tyutchev 2 . Sometimes the author could not take part in the publication due to departure, arrest or illness. It also happens that an aged author expresses his will in a confused and contradictory way.

5. Sometimes the author entrusts the publication to certain persons, giving them greater or lesser authority regarding the editing of the text. So, N. Ya. Prokopovich interfered in Gogol's texts not arbitrarily, but at the request of the writer; Turgenev, on similar grounds, ruled the texts of Tyutchev and Fet, N. N. Strakhov - texts of L. Tolstoy. In all these cases, the textual critic cannot unconditionally accept the editorial correction - in different cases the decision may be different. On this occasion, L. D. Opulskaya very correctly noted: “... the scope of the author’s creative work includes everything that was consciously done by him, even if under outside influence or in accordance with outside advice. However, influence must be distinguished from pressure, coercion, outside interference, with which the author was forced to agree or with which he passively agreed. Everything belonging to this area, without any doubt, does not belong to the creative activity of the author and, to the extent that it can be discovered, is subject to elimination.

• 1 Levin Yu. D. Edition of poems by M. L. Mikhailov. - In: Edition of classical literature. From the experience of the Poet's Library. M., 1963, p. 221, 227, 229. Hereafter reference to this edition will be referred to as Classic Literature Edition.
• 2 See notes by K. V. Pigarev to the publication: Tyutchev F. I. Lyrics, vol. 1. M., “Nauka”, 1966, p. 317 and ate.

6. The revision started by the author was not completed by him. Such is the case, for example, with Korolenko's story "Wilderness". A textologist has no right to print a half-finished work as the last lifetime edition, but can only use it in variants. Similarly, Leskov's story "Excessive maternal tenderness", in addition to the printed lifetime text, was preserved in an unfinished edit for the new edition. Precisely because this revision has not been carried through to the end, it is rightly rejected and the printed edition is preferred to it in the new edition (1958). .

7. In a number of cases, the original editions, for one reason or another, should be preferred to the last one. Thus, it is natural to print works of “free” poetry in the form in which they came out from the author’s pen. Later, in some cases, these texts by the author, or more often in oral existence, were processed and, in a modified form, were included in collections. Sometimes the existing edition differed from the author's from the very beginning and belonged to the masses that put it into circulation in a "corrected" form. In this case, it is correct to take the early text as the main text. And so it was done by me in the publication “Free Russian Poetry of the Second half of XIX century "(L., 1959. "B-ka poet." Big series).

In general, one should keep in mind the cases when the text is mobile in its existence. The author now and then supplemented and changed the work, responding to new events (such, for example, Zhukovsky's "The Singer in the Camp of Russian Warriors" or Voeikov's "Crazy House", having several chronological layers, "final" editions). In this case, the position of the textual critic is especially difficult 1 .

• 14th International Congress of Slavists. Materials of the discussion, vol. 1. M., 1962, p. 607. Compare: Slonimsky A. L. Questions of the Gogol text. - “Izv. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. OLYA, 1953, no. 5, p. 401 - 416; Prokhorov E. I. "The Works of Nikolai Gogol" edition of 1842 as a source of the text. - In the book: Questions of textual criticism. M., 1957, p. 135 - 169; Yermolov V. What is contraindicated for textology? - "Rus, lit.", 1959, No. 1, p. 119 - 128; Bukhshtab B. Ya. Notes to the ed.: Fet. A. Full. coll. poems. L., "Owls. writer ", (937, pp. 670 - 679; Pigarev K.V. Tyutchev's poems in the Poet's Library. - Edition of classical literature, pp. 169 - 197, etc.

Another case is parodies: here, too, their original version, the one that actively participated in the modern literary struggle, and not the one that was subsequently redone by the author (for example, for a separate publication), deserves preference, so the decision made by A. A. Morozov in publication "Russian poetic parody (XVII - early XX century)" (L., 1960, "Poet's Library". Large series), is quite justified.

E. Rudnitskaya's examination of the texts of the first and second editions of Kolokol for the new (facsimile) edition led her to the correct conclusion that the text of the first edition 2 should be taken as the basis.

In some cases, the issue is more complicated and deserves special consideration.

Western people

Branit - and writes ... reports.

Subsequently, when in 1857 the question arose of reprinting the poem in the collection “For Easy Reading”, Turgenev, who at that time became close to the Aksakov family, in particular with K. S. Aksakov, in the most categorical form demanded the removal of the stanza, and this requirement has been completed.

In the 1898 edition of Turgenev's works, the stanza was restored, and we find it in five Soviet editions.

The restoration of this stanza is logically motivated by the fact that “this exclusion weakens the ideological sound of the poem, its sharp polemical nature, violates the historical perspective, and most importantly, obscures Turgenev’s closeness to Belinsky in one of the most important years for the 40s 19th century questions (...) "an indispensable condition" to throw out the episode about the "clever Moscow" (...) is explained not by artistic considerations, but by personal reasons - relations with the Aksakov family" 3 .

One cannot but agree with the motives put forward by the researcher - a formal understanding of the "last will" can hardly take place here - I would like to see this stanza restored in the main text of the poem 1.

• 1 Lotman Yu. M. Voeikov's satire "House of the Mad" app. Tartu State un-ta”, 1973, no. 306, p. 3 - 43; Poetry 1790 - 1870s. Intro. article to the publisher: Poets of the 1790s - 1810s. L., "Owls. writer”, 1971 (“Poet's library”. Large series), p. 32 et seq.
• 2 Rudnitskaya E. Preface to the edition: "The Bell". Newspaper of A. I. Herzen and N. P. Ogarev ... . M., Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1960, p. XXII.
• 3 Gabel M. O. I. S. Turgenev in the fight against Slavophilism in the 40s and the poem "Landlord". - “Student. app. Kharkov state. library in-ta”, 1962, no. VI, p. 136.

8. Even where the last creative will of the author is clearly expressed, the textual critic cannot unconditionally accept the text. It must be remembered that the author, almost as a rule, is a poor proofreader of his creations: he reads his text not in a proofreading way, but paying primary attention to the creative side, and is almost unable to read his text with the original. Pushkin did not notice a typo in a short story, and as a result stationmaster has two names - Samson and Simeon. In "Taras Bulba" Gogol, in describing Taras's attempt to visit Ostap in prison in the words: "Taras saw a decent number of haiduks ..." - missed the last word, and in the authorized clerk's copy of the second edition of the story, in the edition of "Mirgorod" in 1835, in volume 2nd Works of 1842 and vol. 2nd Works of 1855, the text turned out to be meaningless: "Taras saw a decent number in full armament." In the same way, in the third chapter of the first volume of Dead Souls, the "protopope" to whom Korobochka sold "two girls" turned into "Protopopov" for more than a hundred years as a result of a clerical error. L. Tolstoy was so carried away by the creative editing of proofreading that he did not notice either the corrections of Sofya Andreevna, who tried to “improve” the text in some places, or the complete absurdities that arose as a result of the negligence of the copyist or a typographical error. In the story "Divine and Human", published twice during Tolstoy's lifetime in the "Circle of Reading", the doctor gives the prisoner to calm down ... rum! - it should have been, of course, "bromine". Sometimes, not wanting to check the copy with his manuscript, Tolstoy inserted another one, not the one that was originally, but often artistically weaker, into the space left empty (not sorted out by the scribe), the textual critic will do the right thing, preferring the original version 2.

AND modern prose writers and poets are poor proofreaders of their works: Mayakovsky, for example, was resolutely unable to monitor the correctness of his text. In the poem “Vladimir Ilyich Lenin”, instead of “pay off”, the typist typed the meaningless “pay off”, the author did not notice this, but the proofreaders “corrected”, and “splashed” appeared in print. In the same poem, the meaningless wandered from edition to edition: “Under this petty-bourgeois element, a dead swell is still swaying” instead of “This petty-bourgeois element ...” 1

• 1 The preference for the first edition took place in the edition of Kozma Prutkov (edited by P. N. Berkov, "Academia", 1933), Tyutchev (edited by G. I. Chulkov, "Academia", 1933 - 1934), in the three-volume "Poet's Library" ( Large series) - Trediakovsky, Lomonosov, Sumarokov (edited by A. S. Orlov, 1935), but in general this practice was rejected by Soviet textual criticism.
• 2 A number of examples of this kind are indicated in the article by N. K. Gudziy and V. A. Zhdanov “Issues of textual criticism”. - “New. world”, 1953, no. 3, p. 233 - 242.

The cases listed here limit the mechanical application of the principle of the last lifetime edition, as supposedly equal to the last creative will. The concept of the author's will cannot be turned into a fetish and absolutized. It must always be remembered that the writer's creative will is "not static, but dynamic" 2 , that the task of the textual critic is precisely to reveal it in the text that expresses it with the greatest completeness and accuracy.

Thus, instead of a mechanical formula about the "rule" of the last author's will, it is natural to propose the principle of the author's last creative will. It expresses more precisely that first requirement which must be laid at the foundation of any work to establish a text; it can ensure the inviolability of the author's text.

Establishing body text

“You can’t throw out a word from a song” - these words of a folk saying with sufficient clarity formulate the problem of establishing the main text.

Not so long ago, in Voprosy Literatury (1961, No. 8, pp. 196–201), a polemic was published between V. Kovsky, who proposed to “edit” the text of the classics, and E. Prokhorov, who quite reasonably denied this right. V. Petushkov’s proposal for school-type publications to simplify archaic spellings, for example, Pushkin, and instead of “village” to print “villages”, instead of “windows” - “windows”, instead of “husbands” - “husbands”, instead of “fair yard” was met with unanimous condemnation - "fair", etc. 3

Every now and then one has to struggle with an indefatigable desire to “correct” texts that are supposedly not quite suitable for our day. In the edition of Lenmuzgiz, the collection of selected articles by V.V. Stasov turned out to be completely spoiled by such amendments. About 50 (!) amendments were made to the article on Mussorgsky alone.

• 1 For a series of data, see: Lavrov N.P. Editorial and textological preparation of collected works of Soviet writers. "Book", vol. XI. M., 1965, p. 76 - 103; Karpov A. “All one hundred volumes of my party books ...” - “Vopr. lit.", 1963, No. 7, p. 53 - 67.
• 2 Likhachev D.S. Brief essay, p. 63. “... There is absolutely not a single reliable case in which we could vouch that this or that design of a poetic idea is the design is really final,” wrote G. O. Vinokur (Vinokur G. O. Criticism ... , p. 17).
• 3 Petushkov V. Literary language and writers. - "Star", 1956, No. 10, p. 162 - 171. Compare: Nazarenko V. On a campaign against the classics. - “Leningr. truth”, 1956, October 7, No. 236 (12653), p. 3 and Petushkov V. Response to criticism of V. Nazarenko. Letter to the editor. - "Star", 1956, No. 12, p. 183 - 184.

In Mayakovsky's collection "Invincible Weapon" (M., GIHL, 1941, p. 6) in the poem "Call", (1927) the line:

In response to the rampant White Guard anger -

in accordance with the tasks of the time was redone:

In response to rampant fascist malice.

It goes without saying that the textual critic is obliged to keep the author's arrangement of the text intact, even if it contradicts the publisher's instructions.

“Ladder” by Mayakovsky, a short line-paragraph by V. Shklovsky, or the arrangement of lines by V. M. Doroshevich, which seems to contradict the grammatical rules, is their creative achievement and should be preserved.

It is difficult to reconcile with the fact that in a number of publications, and especially in publications for children, partly in dramatizations, in books published to help foreigners learning Russian, the right to adapt texts, to adapt them for one or another age category, is explicitly assigned.

Reductions are not yet the worst kind of this recycling. Arbitrary titles are not uncommon, not even specified and not indicated by conditional brackets, fragmentation of the text into fragments, etc. In children's and youth publications, “facilitation” of spelling is carried out, and sometimes “simplification” of the text.

It is especially necessary to protest against the latter.

Not to mention the fact that adaptation is a pedagogically dubious technique, children will never be able to reasonably explain why the same work is printed differently in different publications.

We, in our “adult” arrogance, tend to belittle the abilities of the young reader and imagine him as a “stupid” who needs to submit the text in a simplified form, supposedly corresponding to the level of his development and understanding. It is also understandable if the editor excludes some parts that are unacceptable for ethical reasons (sexual themes, etc.), but it is more difficult to agree with the simplification of spelling: is it not possible to explain to the child that “altar” used to be written, and now “altar”, which used to be they wrote “three days”, and now “three days”, etc. In any case, excessive modernization, essentially anti-historical, should be avoided in every possible way.

• 1 Stasov V. V. Selected articles, ed. A. V. Ossovsky and A. Dmitriev. L., Muzgiz, 1949. (“... Certain provisions have been omitted that have lost their relevance at the present time and do not have special historical and educational value,” we read in the preface on p. 7). See the Corrupted Edition article for this edition. - Pravda, 1950, May 20, No. 140 (11612), p. 3.

“The destruction of these traces of a living language,” writes B. M. Eikhenbaum, “is tantamount to its falsification; it is uncivilized and anti-historical. There are few such traces, and they can always be specified in the comments (for the school and at the same time to get acquainted with the history mother tongue)" 1 .

On the verge of a bad anecdote is the episode described in the "Literaturnaya Gazeta" in the article by A. Petukhova "On Your Own" about the "Collection of texts for presentations in grades V - VII", compiled by A. Dobrovolskaya and M. Soshina and published in Kiev by the publishing house "Radyanska school" in 1950 - 1962. four editions. Here is not only an abbreviation, but also a retelling of the texts of the classics! The provisions do not save the notes: "According to Chekhov", "According to Korolenko" - these writers hardly need co-authorship with A. Dobrovolskaya and M. Soshina 2 .

It must be emphatically emphasized that the difference between editions is the difference in introductory articles, notes, the volume of variants, but not the difference in the text. The writer's text, as it is currently established, only one exists.

What is said here is nothing new. As early as April 3, 1920, that is, at the very dawn of Soviet textual criticism, M. Gorky wrote to V. I. Lenin: “I ask you to call Vorovsky and point out to him that the abridged editions of Russian classics must necessarily be identical in text with the full publications issued by the state publishing house. Of course, you understand that this is necessary.

In direct connection with the issue of the inviolability of the author's text, there is a peculiar problem of the second, parallel text of the work, not sanctioned by the author, but which has received significant, and sometimes predominant distribution.

While we are reproducing the text of the poem by P. S. Parfenov 4 “Through the valleys and over the hills ...”, the stanza is obligatory for us:

• 1 Eikhenbaum B. M. Fundamentals of textual criticism. - In Sat: Editor and book. Collection of articles, vol. 3. M., 1962, p. 80. Reference to this edition will be further indicated: Eikhenbaum BM Fundamentals of textual criticism.
• 2 "Lit. Gaz.", 1962, June 21, No. 73 (4506), p. 2. Compare: Chudakov A. Living word and canons of the anthology. - "Lit. Gaz.", 1973, October 10, No. 4 (4431), p. 5.
• 3 Gorky M. Sobr. op. in 30 volumes, v. 29. M., 1954, p. 392. "Abridged" in this case means "chosen ones." See the same wording in the letter simultaneously sent by Gorky to V.V. Vorovsky (Archive of A.M. Gorky, vol. X, book 1.M., 1964, p. 14).
• 4 The question of the author of this song is already in the literature and has recently become the subject of a trial: either S. Ya. Alymov or P. S. Parfenov were considered the author of the text of the poem. The Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Moscow City Court recognized PS Parfyonov as the author. See: Shilov A. V. Unknown authors of famous songs. M., Vseros. choir. about-in, 1961; Mikolenko Ya. Who is the author of the famous song? - "Social. legality”, 1963, No. 6, th. 72 - 78; "Lit. Russia”, 1963, September 20, No. 38, p. 23. Curiously, the panel of judges dealt not only with attribution problems, but also decided that changes made to the text of one work by another author were legally (?) illegal. Changes can only be made by heirs (??!) - with such a decision, in which the text of a work of art is fundamentally equated to property, a textologist will never agree.

Glory will not cease these days,

Will never be silent

Partisan aftermath

Occupied cities...

But in its folklore existence, the rhyme of the first and third lines was destroyed, and according to the laws of folk etymology, the incomprehensible “aftermath” was “understood”:

Partisan detachments

They occupied the cities...

This is how this text is now printed in all collections of songs, in all author's collections of S. Alymov, who was previously considered its author. It is this text that is analyzed in special works, such as, for example, in the article by A. N. Lozanova in "Essays on Russian folk poetic creativity of the Soviet era" (M., 1952, pp. 101 - 103). Apparently, this is how it should be printed there. He won, so to speak. But another thing is in the author's collection of poems by Parfyonov, if such a one were realized: there we should probably reproduce his original text.

If you think about it, the folklore text is parallel and, if unequal, then at least more popular: it, in essence, supplanted Parfenov's original text.

This peculiar dualism of texts complicates the established concepts. It turns out that there may be cases when the parallel existence of two texts is possible. One - not the author's - is established only by historical and literary research and is unknown to almost anyone, but meanwhile it is he who can claim to be recognized as the main one.

Approximately the same kind of problem arises for a text that has been set to music and has become so popular that it is the text adapted for music that has become universal and has "pushed aside" the authentic author's text.

Probably, in some cases, textual changes were made with the consent of the author, that is, they were authorized. But this does not change the solution of questions about the main text, but creates a second author's text. The study of the "musical" texts of Fet, Mey, A. K. Tolstoy, Turgenev makes us pay attention to such alterations and each time to study their fate in particular. Where the changes belong to the composer, one has to reckon with the fact that through the romance that has become popular, they entered our consciousness precisely in this edition. The composer changed the text because certain words did not fit into the melody, or because the musician wanted to Russify the text; we could talk about the coincidence of the logical stress "with the musical accent of the singing line" 1 . K. S. Aksakov’s poem “My Marikhen is so small, so small...” most likely it was Tchaikovsky who changed it to “My Lizochek ...”. Fet's line "At dawn, don't wake her up..." in some musical transcriptions reads "Don't wake her up at dawn...". In Zhukovsky's Maid of Orleans, the line "In the pastures of a bloody war..." the singers, in order to eliminate archaism, sing "disastrous" 2 .

Similar questions arise when studying the texts of the libretto. However, cases of the author's reworking of his work, it seems, are not particularly frequent.

Another similar problem is the texts of works of free poetry. Quite often they have become popular, having gone a long way through oral tradition. The process that occurs during such existence is fundamentally close to the existence of folklore works and in itself is of considerable interest.

It happens that a poem in the XIX century. gained incomparable popularity through songbooks or, conversely, entering songbooks from, relatively speaking, folklore existence. Its author was forgotten, and the poem remained in the memory of the people as a nameless one.

While "Troika" was a poem by Nekrasov, its text in all reprints was exactly the same as it was established by the power of its creator.

But as soon as the poem began to be passed from mouth to mouth, the text began to quickly transform: out of 48 lines, then 36, then 34, then 32, then 22, then 20 or even 16 remained, the title began to change, options began to appear. In folklore versions, the text ended up in songbooks. But these texts are something fundamentally different from the texts of the author. The thread between the "Troika" of Nekrasov and the "Troika" of the songwriters broke, and thus the obligation to reproduce the original author's text, as it were, disappeared. The poet could protest, but practically could not prevent the countless reprints of the "distorted" text in collections. Again, a second, parallel text arose, claiming an equivalent existence.

As you can see, the issues of the main text of the work are sometimes not solved unambiguously. This circumstance must be taken into account by the textual critic 3 .

• 1 Alekseev M.P. Poetic texts for romances by Pauline Viardot. - Turgenev collection. Materials for the Complete Works and Letters of I. S. Turgenev, vol. IV. M. - L., "Science", 1968, p. 194.
• 2 Indicated by Yu. D. Levin. Wed more about changing the poetic text in musical performance: Kovalenkov A. Degree of accuracy. Notes on the verse. M. “Owls. writer", 1972, p. 124 - 125.
• 3 A special question about the authorship of works published under a certain name, but marked: “Literary record of such and such” (for example: Malkov P. Notes of the commandant of the Moscow Kremlin. Literary record of A. Ya. Sverdlov. M., Mod. guard”, 1959 or: Gavrilov F. Notes of an ordinary party member. Literary processing by D. Shcheglov. L "1940); a number of examples are named in the article by V. Cardin “Literary Record” (Short Literary Encyclopedia, vol. IV. M., 1967, column 253 - 254). Compare: Cardin V. Only he can tell about it. - “Quest. lit.", 1974, No. 4, p. 72 - 80. Questions of authorship acquire significant, and far from only legal, interest in the study, for example, of the memoirs of F. Chaliapin. The text dictated by Chaliapin to the stenographer was then finalized by Gorky. See: Correspondence of A. M. Gorky with I. A. Gruzdev. M., "Nauka", 1966, p. 24, 80, 109.

Whatever principles we establish, no matter how hard we try to be pedantically strict and consistent in our well-founded provisions, in practical work there are quite often incidents when the textual critic has to resolve situations that arise before him in a new way every time and sometimes even enter into contradiction with his textual conscience, waive the views just stated. No theory and no instruction will ever be able to foresee all those surprises that lie in wait for the researcher at every step when establishing a text.

One of these "dramatic" cases met B. M. Eikhenbaum while working on Saltykov-Shchedrin's Mon Repos Refuge.

In the Fourth Essay ("Finis Mon Repos"), the censorship did not miss one passage - it was quoted in the censor's report. The corresponding pages of the Notes of the Fatherland (1879, No. 9, pp. 231 - 232) had to be reprinted. The white autograph and proofreading have not been preserved. In the draft autograph, this passage is read differently than in the censor's report. Therefore, Saltykov reworked this place in the white autograph: from a comparison of the texts, it can be seen that he reworked in the direction of strengthening political sarcasm against the hunters.

The editor could go the formally invulnerable way - to give the surviving printed (softened by the censor) text of the Notes of the Fatherland.

However, it is difficult to admit that the censor in the official report quoted a non-existent text; how accurately he quoted him is another matter - there are often cases of distorted, approximate, abbreviated quotations, etc. Still, the editor preferred to give a politically sharp place in the editorial office of the censor's report, rather than the writer's softened draft 1 .

In the practice of Saltykov-Shchedrin there were others, even more difficult cases. So, under the influence of censorship, the author several times created not other editions of prohibited works, but something essentially new. In the future, it was this text that during the life of the satirist was repeatedly reprinted, as if canceling the first one, which most corresponded to his author's will. The textual critic has to refer this text to the section of other editions and variants - what the writer would do with perfect freedom of choice remains unknown. So Mayakovsky retained the title "A Cloud in Pants" instead of the "Thirteenth Apostle" eliminated by the tsarist censorship, motivating this with a laconic one - "he got used to it."

• 1 Shchedrin N. (M. E. Saltykov). Full coll. cit., vol. XIII. M., 1936, p. 130 and 559-560. In the newest edition, this textual solution is supported with a slight clarification. See: Saltykov-Shchedrin M.E. Sobr. op. in 20 volumes, vol. XIII. M., 1972, p. 368 and commentary by V. E. Bograd; With. 735.

Working with censored materials requires special care. If in some cases we not only have the right, but are obliged to restore the censorship omission or distortion discovered by the textual critic, then in others we should reckon with what can be called canonization (acceptance) by the author of the censorship even when he has the opportunity to eliminate it.

When eliminating forced cuts and distortions, one should focus not only on tsarist censorship, but also on the editorial offices of journals, which, in anticipation of censorship editing, in order not to let the author down, not to disrupt the timing of the publication of the journal and not jeopardize their existence, themselves edited the text. Perhaps the most eloquent example is Nekrasov's Russian Women, which went through: 1) the poet's auto-correction, probably out of caution, 2) editing by the editor of Otechestvennye Zapiski, Kraevsky, and 3) censorship. Until now, the complex work on the layer-by-layer removal of these three types of distortion of the text of the poem has not been completed. It is especially difficult (if not impossible) to distinguish Nekrasov's intentional editing from the creative revision of the manuscript.

In working with censored materials, the textual critic will come across many other cases, which are unthinkable to foresee.

In the same way, the textological conscience of a researcher willy-nilly has to come to terms with the fact that in all publications we give a contaminated text of Chernyshevsky's novel "Prologue". The novel was left unfinished. In the absence of another text, we mechanically attach the second, "Levitsky's Diary", to the first, completed part of the novel. It is difficult to reconstruct this second part. It remains unclear how it ended - whether Levitsky went to the people, the implementation of plans for secret printing, the organization of an underground revolutionary group, etc. In any case, sending the Diary on January 12, 1877, Chernyshevsky clearly wrote that this was a manuscript thrown by him . “I redid this part of the novel; what I send is abandoned by me” (Poln. sobr. soch., vol. XIV, p. 506).

When printing an unfinished novel these days, one should clearly separate the completed part from the unfinished and discarded part - it makes sense to print the second part, if not in an appendix, but immediately after the first, then petite.

These issues include the problem of the composition of the parts of Nekrasov's poem "Who in Rus' should live well" that have come down to us. During the life of the poet, only separate chapters were printed with unclear and sometimes contradictory headings (“From ... parts”), the plan of the poem as a whole remains not entirely certain.

For several decades there has been a dispute about the order in which the last parts of the poem should be printed. In pre-revolutionary posthumous editions, the order was as follows: "Last child", "Peasant Woman", "Feast for the Whole World", that is, according to the chronology of writing. P. N. Sakulin in 1922 proposed a different sequence: “Peasant Woman”, “Last Child”, “Feast for the Whole World”; he was guided in this by some of the evidence of the poet and by the internal connection of the parts. In 1934, V. V. Gippius, and in 1935, E. V. Bazilevskaya independently proposed another change: “Last Child”, “Feast for the Whole World”, “Peasant Woman”; they motivated this arrangement by the calendar sequence of action and the analysis of individual details. Thus, the researchers have already exhausted all possible options, but have not yet come to a sufficiently convincing solution. Apparently, in the current state of the sources, it is impossible. It remains to conditionally arrange the parts in the most probable way (“Last Child”, “Peasant Woman” and “Feast for the Whole World”), while emphasizing the fragmentation of the surviving fragments of the epic unfinished as a whole 1 .

For works Soviet literature Another important question arises - whether to take into account systematic editorial editing: in the vast majority of cases, it is (voluntarily or involuntarily) authorized and, therefore, should be included in the main text of the work 2 .

The first task of a textual critic is to establish the text (and, therefore, to compile a textological passport). Prior to this and without this, he is not entitled to proceed with the following tasks: its organization (codification) and commenting.

In order to establish the main text of a work, the textual critic first of all has to compare different editions or different manuscripts (or editions with manuscripts) and read the texts (mostly handwritten). Working on text may require all or some of these operations to be performed.

• 1 For a detailed presentation of the issue of the order of printing parts of “Who Lives Well in Rus'”, see: Gruzdev A.I. Commentary in the editor: Nekrasov N.A. Poln. coll. poems in 3 volumes, vol. III. L., "Owls. writer”, 1967 (“Poet's library”. Large series), p. 443 - 446 (in the same place and bibliography).
• 2 It is precisely this solution to the issue proposed by E. I. Prokhorov in the article “History of the text of the novel by N. A. Ostrovsky “How the Steel Was Tempered”. - In ed.: Textology of works of Soviet literature. Questions of textual criticism, issue IV M, "Nauka", 1967, p. 323 - 324. »

Verification of printed texts among themselves and with the manuscript is necessary, because, as a rule, the process of turning a manuscript into a printed text is the source of not only its improvement, but sometimes its damage. Only by reconciliation can we identify discrepancies and establish the text, having studied the history of the work in the volume and direction we need.

In modern conditions, a creatively completed manuscript goes through the following stages before publication: correspondence on a typewriter, editing after reviews and working with an editor, reprinting again (the printing house accepts only an impeccably clean original), first and second proofreading, and sometimes also verification, - in total five or six processes, of which four are associated with complete or partial rewriting of the text. In the past, this path was shorter (manuscript - two proofreadings), but it also "provided" a sufficient number of errors.

Let us recall that with the special care of reconciliation, only in the fourth edition of the works of V. I. Lenin in the article “Leo Tolstoy, as a mirror of the Russian revolution” was a gross distortion corrected: instead of “the totality of his views, taken as a whole”, hundreds of times were printed “harmful as a whole ". It is good that the manuscript has been preserved, otherwise the conjecture would hardly have been allowed: after all, “harmful” seems meaningful.

Not so long ago, in the text of "The Twelve" by Alexander Blok, the word "vitia" was read in Latin and it turned out Bumis! Clemenceau, read in Russian, became "Svetensvan", etc., the same type of recurring Baroco readings as Russian "vachoso", Norma, as "Post". The reverse type is reading the Russian spelling in Latin, for example, "Neruda", which turned into "Epida" (see: I. Ehrenburg "People, years, life." - "New World", 1965, No. 4, p. 32).

The reconciliation technique does not present any fundamental difficulties, but requires intense attention as a prerequisite for success. In order to exclude the influence of extraneous factors, BM Eikhenbaum and KI Khalabaev practiced checking texts over the phone for some time 1 . Unfortunately, depending on the diction, the phone can give a significant distortion of an unclearly pronounced word, and the “listener” may mistakenly consider it equal to the one in front of him in his text.

Verification can be done by one person holding two or more texts in front of him, or by a loud reading of two.

• 1 I had to witness these readings several times. See also about them: Berkov P.N. Proofreading and textology. - “Izv. Academy of Sciences of the USSR. OLYA, 1962, no. I, p. 73.

It is difficult to give advantage to any of these techniques: each has its own merits. It seems that the first way is more reliable and the number of errors with it is less than 1 .

If the reconciliation is done by two people, then the following rules must be adopted: 1) Since the one who reads aloud reads more accurately than the one who only follows the text, then a more complex text should be read loudly, in which more errors can be expected . For example, if we compare typescript with printed text, then the typescript text should be read aloud. 2) Loud reading is the responsibility of the employee responsible for the text. The so-called "subreader" does not bear responsibility, bribes are smooth from him. Therefore, “reversing roles” with such a reconciliation is hardly appropriate. This can only be done if both editors are "equal in rights". The reader reads aloud more consciously than the one who mechanically follows the text, and one might think that he will notice the error sooner (this does not mean, however, that the error is not noticed precisely by the subreader). 3) If there are two texts, it is necessary to read aloud that text (or a copy of that text), which is supposed to be closer to the last creative author's will. 4) It is advisable not only to check the text, but also punctuation marks, paragraphs, line and stanza boundaries.

But the pronunciation of the names of these signs in a stream of meaningful reading creates interruptions and even nonsense: “The East was white, period, the boat rolled, comma, line, the sail sounded merry, comma, dash, line, like an overturned sky, comma, line, the sea trembled under us , ellipsis, stanza.

Sometimes a system of abbreviated notation is used, which does not greatly alleviate the situation: “The East was white te the boat rolled the line,” etc., or even more risky reading, in which a comma is indicated by one stroke of a pencil on the table, a point by two, etc. In this case, errors easily arise at the slightest violation of "synchronism", if the blow denoting a comma was heard a fraction of a second later than necessary, and the voice already says the next word. 5) When checking the text together, isorhythmicity becomes important. If one of the workers (say, the “listener”) has a slower perceptual response than the “reader”, he will lag behind and, quite possibly, miss something.

It should be clearly understood that the study, and even more so the reproduction of variants, is not a self-contained work (a kind of art for art's sake), but is subject to a very specific task - to help establish the main text. To do this, it is necessary to restore, to the extent that they are recorded in writing, all the stages of the creative history of the work. Creative history is not a direct and immediate task of a textual critic, but in practice the establishment of a text cannot do without this work to a greater or lesser extent.

• 1 O. Riess in the book "Conversations about the skill of a proofreader" (M., "Art", 1959, pp. 52 - 53) opposes reading with a subreader; P. N. Verkov, in the article cited above, defends such a reading.

At the same time, the researcher studying this history is in the opposite position in relation to the writer. Before the textologist, the completed text in its final form. The writer went to this text in a complex creative way and did not know everything in advance. Drafts reflect various plans, various plot roads along which the writer walked, groping for the “correct” (from the point of view of the internal logic of the development of the image) path, when “I still did not clearly distinguish the distance of a free novel through a magic crystal.” The researcher, going gradually all the time back to the starting point, but knowing in advance the final result, tries to trace all the stages of the creative history of the work.

In this sense, the reader's perception of the work is completely different from the textological one. The reader, like the textual critic, sees the end result, but only sees it in its natural, so to speak, order, while the textual critic also knows it, but traces it, going from end to beginning.

Therefore, it is most expedient to check the texts by going back chronologically - from the last edition to the penultimate one, and so gradually ascending to the first, then to the white manuscript, then to drafts, to separate sketches, to the original plan, etc.; in this case, labor is saved and the creative idea and ways of its implementation are more clearly revealed.

Accordingly, in this way, the identified variants should be recorded in the so-called textological passport: in it, in chronological order, arranged horizontally, a set of variants is given in relation to the text taken as the original one. The last two columns give the adopted text and its rationale. If the accepted text is equal to the original one, there is naturally no motivation.

When reconciling, it is desirable to compare at least some copies of the same publication. In this way, important differences can sometimes be found in them. It is enough to recall Gogol's preface to "The Tale of how Ivan Ivanovich quarreled with Ivan Nikiforovich" found by N. L. Stepanov in 1936, unknown to anyone. This preface has been preserved in a single copy of the Library of the USSR Academy of Sciences: it was removed from the finished book. The fact is that the required copy was sent out by the printing house immediately after the print run, even before the release of the book. Gogol's book was detained, and the preface was withdrawn, but in the copy already sent to the Academy of Sciences, it was preserved and was not replaced by another copy. Obviously, other required copies (of the Public Library, the Rumyantsev Museum, etc.) were either sent out later or (less likely) replaced. It follows from this that when reconciling it is especially important to refer to those book depositories to which the book was received as a legal deposit. The withdrawn preface forced Gogol to add and in some ways change the text of "Viya" on the go.

The first attempts have already been made to mechanize the comparison of texts of different copies of the same publication. A special device was used to compare different copies of the first editions of Shakespeare - the main sources of his text (manuscripts, as you know, are missing). As a result, the machine compared 75,000 pages of two-column text approximately 40 times faster than a human could, and in doing so discovered several hundred hitherto unknown discrepancies 2 .

A significant achievement of Soviet textual criticism should be considered the method of reading a manuscript not by words or even parts of words (as editors traditionally worked), but by meaningful reading of the context.

This technique was persistently promoted in the works of B. V. Tomashevsky, but especially in the works of S. M. Bondi, who devoted several articles to substantiating it in detail 3 . At present, it can be considered generally accepted in Soviet textual practice.

An inexperienced textual critic strives at all costs to read a given word of the manuscript, then another, the next, or even individual pieces, etc. He may achieve some success in this work, but it can be said in advance that on the whole his work is more or less doomed to fail.

With all his ingenuity and wit, he runs the risk of taking what he wants or imagines to be truly written. V. S. Lyublinskii pointed out quite correctly that mirages easily arise during intense activity. . V. V. Vinogradov wittily remarked that “a textual critic, like a woman in love, often sees what he wants and what is not really there” 2 .

• 1 Wed. also various copies of the Literary Gazette (1847, May 1, No. 18). In the copy of Mrs. public library. M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, there is a translation of Heine's poem "Atta Troll": the number was detained, and the poem was withdrawn (Stadnikov G.V. On the history of the publication of the first Russian translation of Heinrich Heine's poem "Atta Troll" - "Rus. lit. ”, 1970, No. 3, p. 99).
• 2 See: Charlton Hinnan. Mechanized Collation at the Houghton Library. The Harvard Library Bulletin, vol. IX, 1955, No. 1, p. 132 - 134. See also: Fabian B., Kranz D. Interne Collation. Eine Einfuhrung in die maschinelle Textvergleichung. - In: Texte und Varianten. Probleme ihrer Edition und Interpretation. Hrsg. von Gunter Martens and Hans Zeiler. Munchen, C. H. Beck "sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1971, S. 385 - 400 (with a bibliography of the issue).
• 3 See: Bondi. S. M. New pages of Pushkin. (M., Mir, 1931) and Drafts of Pushkin. Articles 1930 - 1970 (M., "Enlightenment", 1971).

Starting to read the manuscript, the textual critic needs to overcome one more obstacle, the one that D.S. Likhachev called "the hypnosis of someone else's reading." This hypnosis is so strong that, as a methodological device, one should resolutely insist that the textual critic should not have the works of his predecessors in front of him, that he should not use their transcripts either for reference or for comparison. Only when the work is completed, in order to control, it is possible to recommend an appeal to other readings. By this time, the textual critic usually already has a conviction in his reading, the possibility of a critical assessment of the work of the predecessor arises.

The principles worked out by Soviet textological practice can be reduced to the following points:

1. Reading manuscripts (as well as checking) does not pursue a formal goal - to present the reader with a diplomatically exact copy of what was written by the writer, but has something else in mind - to help establish the main text. For this, it is necessary to comprehend the creative process in its gradual movement as a whole. To read the text is to understand it. Outside and before that, we have before us not a text, but a set of separate, fully or partially read words and phrases. The textual critic, S. M. Bondi insists, must not only read individual words, but also grasp their connection and meaning.

In order to stratify the manuscript into separate chronological layers, the textual critic, according to S. M. Bondi, must go from understanding the idea as a whole to parts, and then return to the whole again, all the while mindful of the context. The fatal marks “nrzb” (not parsed) encountered by the textual critic, according to the researcher, are evidence of unfinished, not fully understood work: “Nrzb” in transcription is not a misfortune, but a shame” (“Pushkin’s Drafts”, p. 190). However, it is impossible not to warn young, novice researchers: trying to avoid the terrible “nrzb”, they sometimes, trying to read a place that is difficult to read, simply think about it - it’s better to honestly admit to their failure in reading.

2 . A strict distinction is needed between the concepts of a draft and a draft. SM Bondi especially insists that they are both creatively and fundamentally different. A draft “is written for oneself, with the expectation that it will be deciphered in the future, whitewashed. White paper does not reflect the process of work, but its final result; it is almost always written for others” (ibid., p. 148).

• 1 Lyublinsky V.S. Two difficult cases of restoring an extinct text. - In: New methods of restoration and conservation of documents and books. Collection of works for 1958. M. - L., 1960, p. 153.
• 2 Vinogradov VV On the language of fiction. M., 1959, p. 325.

There are, of course, a number of intermediate stages, for example, the so-called author's summary, when a draft is whitewashed in order to clarify what has been created, further editing on a given paper area is technically impossible. This summary is the basis for further work, and often it turns back into a draft, etc.

3. The white manuscript gives the finished text, but it does not reflect the history of the work. For this purpose, a draft is much more valuable. The text of the white manuscript is almost or quite legible, but, paradoxically, it gives less guarantees that the text is correct. The author (and even more so a clerk or typist), rewriting a completed work, does this with a certain degree of automation and easily makes mistakes that are not in the draft, where everything is written albeit fluently, but consciously. In any case, reconciliation of the draft copy with the draft manuscript is an additional source of verification of the accuracy of the established text. An almost classic example is the so-called "goat" in the text of Turgenev's story "Petushkov", omitted by the author, who did not notice the typist's mistake, and not introduced by subsequent editors into Turgenev's texts for more than 80 years: "came to the bakery and began to read her a novel Zagoskin" instead of the correct one: "I came to the bakery and, as soon as I had some free time, I sat Vasilisa down and began to read Zagoskin's novel to her."

4. Seemingly easy reading of a white paper often leads to very insidious mistakes. That is how, in quick reading, when everything seems clear, the reading of Gorokhin instead of Goryukhino, Galub instead of Gasub, Tbimi-Kalar instead of Tbilisi by Pushkin, etc. arose. Hence the requirement to read a white manuscript twice and at least once in proofreading, that is, in syllables and letters. The classification of various types of errors, the most characteristic, frequent and typical, has been given several times in our literature.

INTRODUCTION

This manual is intended for students studying in the specialty "Publishing and Editing" and is devoted to the following main sections of the course of textual criticism: the history of the emergence and development of textual criticism of new Russian literature, the formation of types and types of publications that have undergone special scientific training, the rationale for techniques and methods for their selection, editing of classical texts, rules and principles of building the composition of publications different types and types, the structure and content of the comment, its types and types.

The material in the manual is covered from the standpoint of solving the problems of professional training of future editors, which determined the choice of the editions of classical texts considered in it, the goals and objectives of their editorial preparation.

So, for example, the problems of textual criticism of works of ancient Russian literature are not touched upon in the manual, since they require students to know the content and methods of special philological disciplines that are not included in the curriculum for preparing editors.

In the field of textual criticism and editorial practice of new Russian literature, the material is limited to the 19th century, i.e. the period of the final formation of the historical approach in the Russian science of literature and the emergence of the initial foundations of a systematic historical and cultural approach. This is due to the fact that the main parameters of this approach began to take shape only in the last decade of the twentieth century and have not yet taken shape as independent ones.

The system of basic terms and concepts of the theory and practice of textual criticism.

On average, in Russia, 60-65% of published books are reprints of various kinds.

The same (whatever it is called in different time - editorial philology, philological criticism, textology) - a philological discipline, an area of ​​editorial activity implemented with the aim of establishing and disseminating scientifically established texts of classical works in society, reproducing and describing the history of their creation, publication, functioning in literature (medieval textology) or literature (textology of new literature), t .e. in handwritten and printed form, handwritten book or in printed books.

Thus, high-quality editing of works of classical literature without the use of methods of textual preparation is objectively impossible. This determines the place, role, and significance of the training course "Textology" in the process of university training for editors of publishing houses.

The main objects and problems of textual research are related to the processes of successive changes in publications that reflect the author's heritage, with the meaning and content of his works as historical forms of expression of the context of public consciousness, cultural phenomena (science, art, worldview, ideology ...) and society's attitude towards them. . The objects of study are also creative way the author, the history of the creation of his works, the relationship between the sources of their text, the tasks and methods of scientific consideration of the text as a historical and literary phenomenon of culture. Hence, on the one hand, the adjacency of textual criticism with various areas of humanitarian knowledge, the historical nature of its main methods. On the other hand, the fact that it, the most accurate among all other philological disciplines, involves a complete identification and description of the essence of the object and subject of research.

(Tekxtkritik - philological criticism) - the former name of textual criticism, which is often used as a synonym. But it should be remembered that this implies the meaning of the word "criticism", which the ancient Greeks put into it, i.e. the art of evaluating, analyzing, discussing, comprehending. And therefore, "text criticism" as a synonym for textology means a set of techniques and methods for evaluating a work, analyzing its text, the sources of this text, their authenticity and accuracy, and not characterizing the quality of the content of the work or its meaning.

(from Lat. - edition) - a scientifically prepared edition of the texts of documents and classical works.

Classic piece, classic text in textology, it is customary to name all the works and texts of late authors, regardless of their place and significance in the work of the writer, the literary process.

The specificity of textology as a special historical and literary scientific discipline and the field of practical editorial and publishing activities is based on the methods comparative historical and literary analysis the totality of the facts of the history of the conception and writing of a classical work, its editions or publications, the work of the author, editor and other persons on the text of this work, its conception, forms and degree of embodiment of this concept in the author's original, drafts, sketches, texts of lifetime and posthumous editions or publications, establishing the author's text and text reflecting extraneous interference, editorial, proofreading, technical errors, accidental typos.

The main scientific and practical task of textological activity in literary criticism and editorial and publishing practice is the creation critical (scientifically established) text classical work, i.e. text of a classical work obtained by a textologist in the process of a special scientific (comparative literary) analysis of all known sources of the text of the work: the author's manuscript, copies, drafts, editions, publications, materials related to the history of writing and issuing the work (letters, diary entries, memoirs, censored materials, other official documents).

During the collection and scientific analysis of these documents, the main text is established, i.e. an authoritative text that most fully reveals the last will of the author, the meaningful meaning of the work, its literary form. All changes and amendments are made to this text based on other sources of the text of the published work.

Text source classical work is any of its text. The whole set of them according to the time of creation is divided into lifetime and posthumous. In the form of speech handwritten and printed. Handwritten include autographs, white text, drafts, sketches, plans, copies, lists, publishing originals.

Text written by the author's hand, typed on a typewriter or computer. Autographs are the most reliable sources of the author's text. But, unfortunately, they are destroyed quite often. Sometimes by the author himself. So, for example, N.M. Karamzin destroyed all his manuscripts, and A.P. Chekhov - drafts. In addition, the autograph, as a rule, reflects the early stage of the writer's work, a text that can then be radically and repeatedly reworked by the author.

white autograph is an autograph reflecting the final stage author's work over the handwritten version of the text of the work.

Plans, sketches - materials reflecting the intermediate stages of the author's work on the work, its text, idea, composition.

A handwritten or typewritten copy of the text of a work, made from a copy, but not by the author, but by another person. If the list has been reviewed by the author, corrected, supplemented by him, or even signed, then it should be an authorized list, i.e. about one that is as authoritative as an autograph.

A handwritten or typewritten reproduction of the text of a work, made from an autograph, both with the knowledge of the author, and without his consent.

Authorized copy- a copy reviewed by the author and signed by him. The authority of sources of this kind is the same as that of an autograph, especially in the absence of it or the absence of printed sources of the text.

The most accurate are mechanical (electronic, xero- and photographic) copies. But they can also contain errors. Photocopies, such as text written in pencil, are only faithfully reproduced under certain shooting conditions: brightness of light, angle of incidence of light, shooting angle, film speed, etc. Electronic and mechanical copies may contain distortions caused by accidental technical reasons.

Photographs of manuscripts or autographs, facsimile reproductions of them, author's proofreading are classified as handwritten sources. They also often reflect the last stage of the author's work. As a rule, there are no author's handwritten sources in ancient literature, and the recording of the text of a folklore work may be very late. Therefore, in this case we are talking about a comparison of various texts that are in a complex system of interconnection, mutual transitions, and complementaries.

: editions , publications , proofreading . According to the time of creation, they are divided into lifetime and posthumous. According to the level of scientific training - for those who have passed it and those who have not passed it.

According to the degree of participation of the author in the release of the publication or publication, all printed sources are divided into author's and those in which he did not participate. In textual criticism, all text sources matter. However, the degree of their significance is different. The author's and authorized ones are the most authoritative, i.e. created with the participation of the author or viewed by him.

The publication, however, is not at all an ideal way to reproduce the text of an author's work. Both the work itself and its text can be distorted both by the intervention of the editor and by other persons: the censor, for example. In addition, the text can be corrupted in typographical processes: typesetting, printing, proofreading. In other words: publication and printing can distort the original. These distortions are of an objective nature: in the overwhelming majority of cases they seem insignificant and, moreover, have the appearance of the author's will, so it seems that there is no point in establishing and eliminating them. Meanwhile, objectively, the situation is different. The textual critic often has to establish the text on the basis of a number of sources that are in a complex relationship.

In other words, text distortions are characteristic of both ancient and modern literature (more precisely, written literature and literature). But in the first case, the distortions and alterations are sometimes radical, while in the second, although they are more numerous, they are less significant and are often revealed only in the course of a special study.

In the theory and practice of Russian textology of the XVIII - XX centuries. the texts of the last lifetime editions were considered the most authoritative. In our time, these include those of them, in relation to which it can be argued that they are most consistent with the author's intention, the specifics of the writer's work.

A concept that denotes in textual criticism the absolute priority of the author's text, the need for its accurate reproduction. Last author's will- the last time of writing or the final author's version of the text of the work. It may not be the last time it was published or published. This text can be only one - the one that has been established at a given time by textual experts. And any arbitrary deviation from it, even the smallest one, is unacceptable.

Corrections made to the text without its sources, on a guess, meaning, context.

Compilation of the text of the work according to its various sources. This is due to the fact that in Russian literature of the 19th - 20th centuries there are works that, for censorship or other reasons, were not printed at one time, and such autographs or copies that were dangerous to keep: for example, “The Death of a Poet” by M. Yu . Lermontov, epigrams and "Gavriiliada" by A.S. Pushkin, Belinsky's letter to Gogol. Many works of this kind have been preserved only in lists, often later ones, i.e. as copies taken from other copies. Establishing such texts involves choosing a source closest to the autograph and adding texts from other sources to it.

To solve this problem, it is necessary first of all to get acquainted with a large number of lists, the history of their appearance, and determine the degree of authority of each of them. An example is the establishment of the text "Woe from Wit" by A.S. Griboyedov. The manuscript containing the last text of the comedy has not been preserved. The study of various types of lists made it possible to identify the following main sources of the text of the comedy: a partial lifetime publication, an early manuscript (“Museum Autograph”), the text of which takes into account the requirements of censorship, the Gendrovskaya Manuscript (1824), the Bulgarin List (1828). The last three sources of the text contain the author's notes. The “Bulgarin List” was chosen as the main text (a clerk's copy from the latest manuscript, reflecting the last stage of the author's work). It was supplemented by texts from other sources.

(lat. atributio - definition) establishment of authorship, belonging of a work to a given writer. Sometimes the term heuristics is used instead of the term attribution. The refutation of authorship is called attethesis. The need for attribution is a rather frequent and important phenomenon, which makes it possible to clarify the author's heritage. The fact is that some of the writer's works can be printed without his signature, under a pseudonym or cryptonym. Some works may not have been published before or during the life of the author, as the writer considered them weak, others - for censorship reasons or as a result of auto-censorship. Some of them could exist in oral form or lists, etc. This should also include the works of other persons, edited by the writer to such an extent that in fact one should talk about co-authorship, about the need to place them in the “Collective” section.

Perhaps, however, the opposite is also true. In 1939 N.P. Kashin, for example, attributed 16 articles published in the Muscovite in 1850-1852 to A.N. Ostrovsky. The evidence in all cases was circumstantial. In 1958, the foundation of this attribution, using the archive of M.P. Pogodin, analyzed by V.Ya. Lakshin. It turned out that only two of them were actually written by the playwright. The remaining 14 belong to L.A. Mayu, App. A. Grigoriev, S.P. Koloshin and P.P. Sumarokov. However, all 16 were edited by A.N. Ostrovsky and therefore to a large extent contained elements of his style.

The task of attribution, therefore, arises both when it is necessary to assert authorship, and when it is refuted, i.e. in the absence of indisputable evidence that the work belongs to a particular writer. Its main methods are documentary evidence, ideological or linguo-stylistic analysis. In practice, a combination of both is possible. Attribution based on indirect signs is also acceptable.

The most accurate is the testimony of the author himself, although it is not always indisputable. N.G. Chernyshevsky, for example, throughout the entire investigation (and there is no other evidence) persistently denied that he belonged to the proclamation "Bar peasants ...", although it was written by him. Sometimes the author can forget about the ownership of this or that work. Even such lists require very careful scrutiny. Suffice it to recall: for many years, the security inventory (inventory) of the manuscripts left by N.A. Dobrolyubov, was considered a list of the critic's works, and on this basis the attribution of some articles was built.

To an even lesser extent, such an attribution method as ideological analysis is convincing, since certain author's views do not represent an absolutely original judgment. First of all, what has been said refers to publications in periodicals, i.e. in the press, expressing certain points of view. Another option is not uncommon: individual thoughts and statements of the writer can be published for the first time in the works of other people.

As for the linguo-stylistic analysis, although this method is used quite often, its toolkit is practically not developed. In addition, its effectiveness depends on the exact knowledge of the stylistic features of the author's speech, i.e. from a condition, the observance of which, even with frequency analysis, the application of methods of probability theory and modern electronic means, is extremely difficult and insufficiently reliable.

It should be noted that in textual criticism there is not and cannot be absolute certainty that the composition of the writer's works is finally and completely established, because there is always the possibility of discovering new, previously unknown texts. And the larger the author, the more diverse and extensive his creative heritage, the higher this probability.

Establishing the time of writing, publication or publication of the work. Dating is one of the most important processes of textual preparation, since only knowledge of the time of creation of works allows us to reconstruct the sequence of development of the writer's work in the publication, to recreate the full picture of the formation of his literary heritage, views and forms of their expression. And consequently, to give a complete and correct literary assessment. No historical and literary study of the writer's legacy is possible without accurate (or at least relatively accurate) knowledge of the time when he wrote specific works. It is impossible to create a chronological composition without it.

In the full sense, to date a work means to establish all (initial, intermediate, final) stages of its creation. But the process of creativity finds its expression in the writing of the text. The previous stages - the appearance and formation of a general idea, specific images, individual phrases or lines, as a rule, are not fixed and cannot be accurately dated. They can be reflected in the commentary in the form of hypotheses, editorial assumptions, explicit or implicit analogies.

Dating should be as accurate as possible. But writing a work is an uneven process. It can be started and stopped, then resumed again and completed a number of years later (“Father Sergius” or “Resurrection” by Leo Tolstoy, for example). The author can write several works at the same time (“Who should live well in Rus'” and several dozen poems by Nekrasov; “Good-meaning people”, “Pompadours and Pompadours”, “Diary of a provincial in St. Petersburg” by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin and much more) .

It should also be remembered that the author's dating may be erroneous, especially when the date is put backdating. The date of recording in someone's album may also be the cause of the error. In addition, an inaccurate date can also be a kind of literary device. The dating of the works included in the cycles according to the time of publication of the completed cycle or the end of the writer's work on it also leads to errors. Therefore, all such cases require careful textual analysis.

The complexity of the task under consideration is reflected in the system of conventional signs accompanying dates in textologically prepared publications. The author's date, for example, is understood in textual criticism as part of the text and is therefore simply reproduced under it.

If exact dating is not possible and one has to be limited to certain chronological frames within “not earlier” or “later”, then the date is accompanied by a text in Latin: "terminus ante guem" or "terminus post guem".

The date indicating the time of the first publication is put in square brackets [..], the doubtful one is supplemented with the sign "?" .

Dates separated by a dash (1876 - 1879) indicate the period of writing the work; separated by commas (1876, 1879) are placed under the work written in several stages.

If necessary, additional designations can be introduced (for example, the size, font pattern has been changed).

Textual differences, regardless of the reasons that caused their appearance, are called:

It is obvious that the textologist is obliged to eliminate all extraneous interference in the text of the author. And in this sense, the greatest difficulty is self-censorship, i.e. such an author's reworking of a work, which is caused by the fear of a censorship ban. And since it was made by the author himself, the argumentation of the need to return to the previous version is, as a rule, extremely difficult, and sometimes even impossible.

Subject and objectives of the course.

Textual criticism is a philological discipline, the subject of which is the study of the text of a work and its critical examination for the purpose of its interpretation and subsequent publication. Textology generalizes the principles, methods and techniques of studying the text, based on comparative, historical-literary, literary and book studies research methods. Criticism of the text as "a system of methods for understanding the work" (A.A. Potebnya).

The study of textual criticism in the complex of book science disciplines is dictated by the need to form literary knowledge and practical professional skills of the future editor.

The aim of the course is for students to master the skills of textual work, to be able to independently apply the considered techniques. Along with lectures, the optimal forms of mastering the material are practical exercises on the topics "Spelling and punctuation", "Dating of the text", Attribution, "Arrangement of works" and tests.

History and tasks of textual criticism

Reading the text, its critical examination and correction in antiquity. Formation of textology as a scientific discipline. Literary heritage and issues of editorial culture. "A writer and a book. Essay on textology” B.V. Tomashevsky (1928) is the first domestic work summarizing the experience of studying literary monuments. Textual Practice and Vulgar Sociological Literary Criticism in the 1930s-1950s. Discussion about "ordering the edition of the classics". Works by D.S. Likhachev, B.Ya. Bukhshtaba, B.S. Meilaha, B.M. Eikhenbaum, S.A. Reiser, A.L. Grishunin, L.K. Chukovskaya, V.Ya. Proppa, E.I. Prokhorov. The problem of establishing the text in the absence of the author's manuscript in folklore works and works of ancient literature. "The Tale of Igor's Campaign" and the "Unity" of a Literary Monument. The history of textual criticism of the New Testament - the handwritten tradition, the occurrence of distortions, the reconstruction of the original. Sources and causes of distortion of the text.

Objects of textology. The main concepts are an autograph, a copy, a list, a draft, a white copy, an authorized edition, a canonical text, etc.

Textological methods and techniques - attribution, dating, conjecture, commenting, etc. Studying creative heritage author, editions of his works, letters and diaries, memoirs. Anonymity of the text and disputes about authorship. The plurality of texts and the establishment of the main text.

The influence of A.A. Shakhmatova, B.V. Tomashevsky, D.S. Likhachev on the development of modern textual criticism.

The main tasks of textual criticism are following the creative will of the author, establishing the main text, organizing and commenting on it, preparing it for publication.

Text sources

The text as a "primary given" (M.M. Bakhtin); “the material embodiment of the work, the source containing the work, the general basis” (A.L. Grishunin).

The history of the text - from a rough draft to an authorized edition. Corrections made to the text when reprinted. Identification, study, comparison and analysis of all sources of the text in order to establish a canonical text.

Indirect materials in textual work - epistolary, memoirs, diaries. Establishing their authenticity and reliability.

Handwritten text sources - autograph (drafts, plans, draft, white copy), copy, list.

A draft is an autograph reflecting the process of creating a work.

White paper - an autograph that fixes the result of the author's work on the work at this stage, a white manuscript, as a rule, intended for publication.

Copy - a manuscript (or other type of text) created by the author or another person with the aim of accurately reproducing the author's text.

A list is a manuscript (or other type of text) the purpose of which is not an exact reproduction of the author's text.

The study of handwritten text sources. Knowledge of the writer's creative laboratory and the correct reading of the text.

The publication of a work is an intermediate result of the author's work on the text. The study of printed text sources. "Side editions", other editions. Bibliography of the text. The fact of authorization of the publication and its establishment.

Main text

The problem of choosing the source of the main text. The essence of the disputes around the terms "main text" and "canonical text".

The creative will of the author as an idea, materially embodied in the text of the work. The inviolability of the author's creative will is the basic principle of textual criticism. The last lifetime authorized edition as the main text. Situations when a white copy, draft copy, copy, authorized list are considered as the main text.

The problem of revealing the true last creative will of the author in order to establish the "genuine author's text". The essence of the concepts of "author's will" and "main text" in cases of interference by an editor or censor, the presence of autocensorship, the publication of a text in the absence of the author, aboulia, the assignment of the publication by the author to other persons, etc.

Choice of main text from: completed and published works; works completed and not published; unfinished and unpublished works.

The fallacy of the mechanical equalization of the creative will of the author and the last lifetime edition as the embodiment and expression of this will.

Establishment of the main (canonical) text

Criticism of the test - the establishment of distortions in it that violate the author's will. Normativity of a critically established text.

Motivation for making textual corrections to the main text. The problem of contamination of various editions and variants, "adaptation", "improvement", "simplification", and "correction" of the text. Semantic analysis of the text. Mistakes and typos are “meaningful” and make the text meaningless. Author's text and variants of its folklore existence. Departure from the authentic author's text in texts set to music. Features of the texts of works of "free poetry".

Cases of admissibility of corrections or additions by conjecture - conjectures. The actual errors of the author, explained in the comments. Distortions of the text by the editor, typesetter, proofreader and ways to eliminate them. Analysis of the relationship between the author and the editor in the process of working on the manuscript.

Restoration of banknotes, elimination of distortions caused by censorship. Meaningful reading of the context (B.V. Tomashevsky, S.M. Bondi).

The original author's text in its latest edition is the main (canonical) text, obligatory for publications this work at the present stage of the study of sources. Drawing up a textual passport. Accepted text and its motivation.

Spelling and punctuation

Author's style. The language of the heroes of the works. Departure from the norms of the modern language. The author's will in relation to the text and in relation to punctuation marks. Morpheme and grapheme. Spelling as a system of text reproduction. Change of words, concepts, syntactic constructions in time and the problem of their correction. "Grotovskaya" spelling. Reform of 1918.

"Error" or artistic expressiveness text. Phonetic and morphological features of the author's language. Reproduction of punctuation and spelling of the original in scientific publications. Principles of the spelling "mode" in the modern edition of the classics. The problem of unification of stable spellings. Spelling and punctuation in mass publications.

Modern spelling rules and the preservation of phonetic, morphological and lexical features of the era. Writing foreign words. Punctuation and writing style.

Other editions and variants

Discrepancies in the sources of the text or their individual parts. Chronological sequence of text sources.

Draft text layering problem. Reasons for discrepancies. Independent (standalone) and linked text changes. Discrepancies and distortion of the text as a result of the author's and outside work on it.

The difference between the versions of a work and its various editions. Qualitative and quantitative character of differences. Chronological principle in the publication of editions. Draft (interim) edition. Variants of editions and variants of the canonical text.

Comparison of publications in order to identify options. The location of the options in the modern edition is in a special section, in the comments, as footnotes. Submission of options in typographic ways.

Variant summaries. transcription problem. Layered (differentiated) reproduction of variants. Editorial explanations for the texts of the published versions. System of conditional textual designations.

Text dating

Initial, intermediate and final stages of work on the work. Dates of commencement, completion and first publication. Textual methods of dating. The problem of authenticity of the author's date. Dating and historical and stylistic analysis of the text. Date-Title - Authenticity or literary device. The reasons for the erroneous dating are the date of the copy, the latest autographic recording, the completion of the cycle of works. Dating and selection of the source of the main text.

The place of the work in the work of the writer. Dates of authorized reprints. Direct, relative, double and approximate dates. Conscious and accidental distortion of dates.

Ways of establishing the date - by autograph, by edition, by epistolary heritage and memoirs. Documentary, historical, stylistic, sociological, paleographic and other ways. Comparison of available data. Establishing an approximate date by content, handwriting, location of the manuscript in the writer's archive, etc.

Conventional textual notation when publishing dates - angle brackets, question mark, dash, comma, etc.

Attribution

Attribution (heuristics) and attethesis. Attribution methods - documentary, ideological and analytical, sociological, linguo-stylistic. A combination of these methods, biographical facts and historical and literary techniques. Involvement of indirect data in solving the problem of authorship.

The role of the document in the attribution methodology. Critical attitude to the document. Historical and philological analysis of the document. Other methods of proof of copyright.

Defects in ideological and analytical attribution. Stylistic mimicry, imitation. Attribution of translated texts. Subjective-opportunistic principle of attribution.

Letters, diaries, memoirs and attribution. Interpretation of the testimonies of contemporaries. Copies, listings and attribution errors.

Dubia Section (doubtful authorship). "Dubiality" in text and authorship. The degree of probability of authorship. Location of the department Dubia" in the edition.

Forgery as a conscious act. The purpose of creating a fake and analyzing it as a historical and literary fact. Poem "Lights". F.E. Korsh and "Mermaid" A.S. Pushkin. "Diary" A.A. Vyrubova, "Letters and Notes of Omer de Gelle". literary hoaxes. Ossian, "Kraledvorskaya Manuscript", "Songs of the Western Slavs", chapters of the second part of "Dead Souls", Cherubina de Gabriak. Prosper Merimee as the author of literary hoaxes. Methods of "proofing" the authenticity of a literary monument.

Methods for detecting a fake - handwriting examination, chemical analysis, fluoroscopy, etc. Literary examination.

Types and types of publications

Types of publications and reader's development of the text. Textual definition of types of publications depending on the nature of the work on the text. Documentary publications (facsimile, photo reproduction, diplomatic).

Critical editions. Features of text preparation. Academic publication and its relationship with the tradition of publishing the works of a given author. Degree of completeness of texts. Scientific reference apparatus.

Scientific publication. Scientific publication. Mass edition. Mixed types of publications, their variability. Series " Literary monuments". Series "Poet's Library".

The essence of the main criteria is the subject of publication, functional (purpose) purpose, reader's address.

The relationship between the type of publication and the scientific reference apparatus. Introductory article, variants and other editions, historical-literary, real, linguistic comments, indexes.

The degree of completeness of the texts and the type of publication. complete collection works, collected works, selected works, collections, mono-editions. The relationship between the type and type of publication.

Arrangement of works

The evolution of the writer's work and the arrangement of works in the publication. The relationship of composition, type and type of publication. The location of the works and the creative will of the author. Features of the arrangement of works in poetry collections. "Book of Poems" and compiling collection. Completed and unfinished works. Features of the author's creativity and principles of placement of works in the publication. The main criteria are genre, chronology, subject matter. The difference between the publishing concept of "genre" and literary criticism.

alphabetical principle. Genre-chronological principle. Chronological arrangement within a genre group. Works published and unpublished during the lifetime of the author. Section "Unpublished". The peculiarity of the arrangement of cycles of works.

chronological principle. The theory of "single chronology". Publication of works edited by M.K. Lemke. Combination of works of different genres. Location of works with approximate dates. "Works of unknown years".

Anthological principle of location in collections of works by different authors.

Special sections in the publication, their purpose, justification, location.

Scientific and reference apparatus of the publication

The history of the apparatus of comments and indexes. Appointment of scientific reference apparatus. Accompanying articles, comments, indexes.

Volume, specificity and construction of the scientific reference apparatus. Text commenting system. Subordination of the commentary to the text of the work. The intersection of the functions of sections of the scientific reference apparatus.

Articles characterizing the publication. Historical-literary-biographical essay. "From the editor" ("From the publisher"). The relationship between the type of publication and the introductory article. Location of articles.

Types of comments as a system of additions to the text. Types of notes as separate references. Preamble to comments. Textual commentary as a set of information about the state of the writer's literary heritage. Historical and literary commentary. Real comment. Dictionary (linguistic) commentary.

Index of works. "Content". Summary index. Name index. Index of literary heroes. Chronological index. Pointer geographical names. Index of illustrations. Index of storage places for autographs. List of conditional abbreviations.

The dependence of the auxiliary apparatus on the reader's address and the functional purpose of the publication. Location of commentaries, notes, and indexes in an edition. Printing and aesthetic requirements for the design of the auxiliary apparatus.

Main literature

Grishunin A. L. Research aspects of textual criticism. M., 1998.

Likhachev D.S.Textology. M., 2006.

Likhachev D.S. Textology (based on Russian literature X - XVII centuries). M., 2001.

Fundamentals of textology. M., 1962.

Pankeev I.A. Compilation: editorial aspecthttp://www.bookchamber.ru/projects/knigochey/kngch_sm.html#2

Prokhorov E.I. Textology. M., 1966.

Racer S.A.Palaeography and textology of modern times. M., 1970.

Racer S.A. Fundamentals of textology. L., 1978.

Modern textology: Theory and practice. M., 1997.

Tomashevsky B.V. Writer and book. Essay on textology. M., 1959.

additional literature

Alekhina E.M., Zapadov A.V. book apparatus. M., 1957.

Belchikov N.F. Ways and skills of literary work. M., 1965.

Questions of textology. Issue. 1. M., 1957.

Questions of textology. Issue. 2. M., 1960.

Questions of textology. Issue. 3. Principles of publishing epistolary texts. M., 1964.

Metzger Bruce M. Textology of the New Testament. M., 1996.

Textology and genetic criticism. Common problems, theoretical perspectives. Anthology. M., 2008.

Chudakova M. O.Manuscript and book. M., 1986.

Exam Preparation Questions

Textology as scientific discipline: subject and main tasks.

Textological methods and techniques.

The influence of A.A. Shakhmatova, B.V. Tomashevsky, D.S. Likhachev on the development of modern textual criticism.

The place of textual criticism in the complex of bibliological disciplines.

Causes of distortion of the text.

Printed and handwritten text sources.

Comparison and analysis of text sources.

Auxiliary text sources.

Autograph, draft, white paper.

The problem of choosing the source of the main text.

Intervention of the editor or censor in the text.

Abulia.

Normativity of a critically established text.

The problem of text adaptation.

Features of the texts of works of "free poetry".

Meaningful context, restoration of banknotes.

Spelling and punctuation in documentary publications.

Unification of stable spellings.

Spelling and punctuation in mass publications.

Punctuation and writing style.

Other editions and variants.

System of conditional textual designations.

Text dating.

Textual methods of text dating.

Dating and historical and stylistic analysis of the text.

Causes of erroneous dating.

Textual designations when publishing dates.

attribution methods.

The role of the document in the attribution methodology.

Letters, diaries, memoirs and attribution.

Forgery as a conscious act of writing (publishing).

Hoaxes and forgeries. Fundamental difference. Editions of the works of Ossian, A. Vyrubova, Cherubina de Gabriac.

Counterfeit detection methods.

Types and types of publications.

Types of publications and readership.

Facsimile and diplomatic publications.

The degree of completeness of texts in publications of different types.

Features of the preparation of a scientific mass publication.

The subject of the publication, its functional purpose and the reader's address as the main criteria for the type of publication.

Type of publication and scientific reference apparatus.

Types of scientific reference apparatus.

Introductory article. Types, depending on the type of publication.

Introduction, preface. Their difference from the introductory article.

Historical-literary and real comments.

Types of pointers.

Types of publications.

Favorites as a type of publication.

Complete collection of works as a type of publications. Principles of preparation.

Principles of arrangement of works in the publication.

The location of the works and the creative will of the author.

Features of the arrangement of works in poetry collections.

"Book of Poems" and compiling collection.

Genre-chronological principle.

The chronological principle and theory of Lemke (unified chronology). The first PSS A.I. Herzen.

Location of unfinished works in a publication.

Combining works of different genres in the publication.

Volume, specificity and construction of the scientific reference apparatus.

Historical-literary-biographical essay as a kind of introductory article.

Preamble, its purpose and types.

Consolidated index in the publication.

Features of compiling a name index.

Subject index and publication type.

Location of indexes and comments in the publication.

Annotation. Its purpose, volume, style, location.

Features of folklore textology.

B. Metzger. Textology of the New Testament.

Critical check and correction of the text.

Transcription of the text as an editorial-textological activity.

Mono-edition as a type of publication. Types of mono-editions.

Series "Literary monuments" as a type of publication.

Chronological limits "terminusante" and "terminuspost".

Accurate, wide, double dates. "Hadji Murad" by L. Tolstoy, "Ballad" by B. Pasternak.