Rethinking Romantic Irony - Puškin, Byron, Schlegel and The Queen of Spades

American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages
Rethinking Romantic Irony: Puškin, Byron, Schlegel and The Queen of Spades
Author(s): Maxim D. Shrayer
Source: The Slavic and East European Journal, Vol. 36, No. 4 (Winter, 1992), pp. 397-414
Published by: American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/308998
Accessed: 22-05-2018 16:09 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages is collaborating

with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Slavic and East European Journal
This content downloaded from 201.39.147.24 on Tue, 22 May 2018 16:09:38 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ARTICLES
RETHINKING ROMANTIC IRONY: PUSKIN,

BYRON, SCHLEGEL AND THE QUEEN OF SPADES
Maxim D. Shrayer, Yale University
It is a very good sign when the harmonious bores

are at a loss about how they should react to this
continuous self-parody, when they fluctuate end-
lessly between belief and disbelief until they get
dizzy and take what is meant as a joke seriously
and is meant seriously as a joke.'
Friedrich Schlegel, Critical Fragments
This essay will examine Pu'kin's The Queen of Spades (1833) in light of the
current debates on the place of romantic irony in the Romantic movement.
Pu'kin's oeuvre on the whole has been associated with Romanticism in one
way or another, although scholars indicate some unsolved problems with
Puskin's place in the Romantic "canon."2 Hopefully, a discussion of roman-
tic irony in The Queen of Spades-a recognized tour de force of Pu'kin's
prose-well elucidate Puskin's status as Romantic writer.
The defining statement of romantic irony-both as an artistic style and
as a philosophical system-originated within a group of German post-
Kantian aestheticians centering around Friedrich Schlegel (1772-1829).3
Friedrich Schlegel and his followers in their aesthetic writings insist on the
essentially chaotic nature of the universe and deny the possibility of any
absolute order. The essence of reality is defined as becoming, rather than
being. Schlegel writes, "An idea is a concept perfected to the point of irony,
an absolute synthesis of absolute antitheses, the continual self-creating
interchange of two conflicting thoughts."4
According to Schlegel, one must always sustain the "incredibly difficult
but not impossible dual awareness that everything one believes is both true
and false.'"5 This awareness opens new perspectives for artistic production.
As suggested by Anne K. Mellor, a romantic ironist is one who creates or
represents an ordered world in which he believes and to which he commits
himself, and, acknowledging his own limitations as a human being, is simul-
SEEJ, Vol. 36, No. 4 (1992): p. 397-p. 414 397
398 Slavic and East European Journal
taneously doomed to dwell in his fictional creations. A romantic ironist

constantly teeters between self-creation and self-destruction, stripping
away the limitations of his constructions.6 When commenting on the great
difficulty of remaining faithful to his own aesthetic project, Schlegel wrote
the following in his well-known essay On Incomprehensibility,
But what we want this irony to mean in the first place is something that happens in more ways
than one. For example, if one speaks of irony without using it, as I have just done; if one
speaks of irony ironically without in the process being aware of having fallen into a far more
noticeable irony; if one can't disentangle oneself from irony any more ... ; if irony turns into
a mannerism and becomes, as it were, ironical about the author. ... Irony is something one
cannot simply play games with. It can have incredibly long-lasting after-effects.7
Jerome McGann is his book, The Romantic Ideology, outlines three

major modern approaches to romantic irony. In modified form, they are as
follows: Meyer Abrams' disregarding of romantic irony, Anne Mellor's
taking Schlegel's views as foundation, and the traditional, or Kierke-
gaardian approach to romantic irony.8 The latter view considers romantic
irony as a set of artistic devices that allow the author to "form a club with
his readers and mock all and everything,"9 to appear as a figure in his own
writing, and to comment upon the action.10
Anne K. Mellor's English Romantic Irony still remains the best book in
English on the subject. Other useful discussions of the various aspects of
romantic irony can be found in Furst (1984), McGann (1983), and Muecke
(1969, 1970). Mellor's argument is based on her initial disagreement with
Meyer Abrams' definition of the Romantic movement as outlined in Natu-
ral Supernaturalism. Abrams proposes that we view English and German
Romantic works as presenting a secularized Judaeo-Christian idea of uni-
versal order, an order based on the teleology of Paradise Lost/Paradise
Regained. Mellor points out that Abrams is correct in a very general sense,
but his "failure" to discuss either Schlegel's concept of romantic irony or
Byron's Don Juan as its greatest English example puts into question the
very appropriateness of Abrams' attempt to constrict the romantic canon.11
As a result of his indifference towards Schlegel and some of Byron's works,
Abrams' totalizing view of the Romantic movement does not account for
some of its major modes and processes.12
Mellor's approach to the problem of romantic irony is Schlegelian. In the
introductory chapter, she states her intention to distinguish the philosophi-
cal and ontological dimensions of the Schlegelian concept from its artistic
or literary application. On the one hand, Anne Mellor's study is a major
step towards understanding the problem; on the other hand, the study
leaves one problem unresolved, namely the lack of a clearly outlined artis-
tic (stylistic) dimension of romantic irony. It is through the literary dimen-
sion of romantic irony, rather than through its aesthetics or world-vision,
that I will consider The Queen of Spades.
Romantic Irony and The Queen of Spades 399
Mellor defines romantic irony in the following way:

Romantic irony, then, is a mode of consciousness or way of thinking about the world that finds a
corresponding literary mode. The artist who perceives the universe as an infinitely abundant
chaos; who sees his own consciousness as simultaneously limited and involved in a process of
growth or becoming; who therefore enthusiastically engages in the difficult but exhilarating
balancing between self-creation and self-destruction; and who then articulates this experience
in a form that simultaneously creates and de-creates itself is producing the literary mode that
Schlegel called romantic irony. As a literary mode, romantic irony characteristically includes
certain elements: a philosophical conception of the universe as becoming, as an infinitely
abundant chaos; a literary structure that reflects both this chaos or process of becoming and the
systems that men impose upon it; and a language that draws attention to its own limitations.13
Mellor's definition is brilliant, but how does it apply to the actual object
of Mellor's examination-Byron's long lyrical poems, especially Don
Juan?
The problem with the relation of Byron's long poems to romantic irony
as defined by Mellor is that the poet himself as the agent who demystifies
his various Byronic characters (Giaour, Manfred, Childe Harold, Don
Juan, et al.) often falls into the trap of Byronism, either by becoming a
Byronic character himself or by identifying with one of the Byronic charac-
ters. Byron is a romantic ironist when he is anti-Byronic, thus allowing for a
double vision in his poems. The Giaour is the only character in the epony-
mous poem with whom we can identify,
And tell him-what thou dost behold!

The withered frame, the ruined mind,
The wrack by passion left behind,
A shrivelled scroll, a scattered leaf,
Seared by the autumn blast of Grief!14
But even then, we are mindful of the Giaour's incredible narcissism,

sado-masochism, and patriarchal outlook. This stance corresponds to
Mellor's romantic-ironic "dual awareness," also central to Pu'kin's The
Queen of Spades. Conversely, when, towards the end of Don Juan, Byron
collapses his anti-Byronism and his Byronism into one whole, the result is
certainly not romantic-ironic, but rather stable-ironic and one-dimensional.
As stable irony it also possesses a dialectic of its own-one which Mellor
does not see. Don Juan roams from one place to another, from one woman
to another, and his life becomes more schematic, less human and less
appealing. In fact, Byron's persona and Don Juan as the Byronic character
are almost inseparable at the end of Don Juan. The open-endedness of the
poem is not "incomprehensible," it is a logical result of Byron's aesthetic
betrayal of romantic irony.
In Pulkin, more so than in Byron, we find a romantic ironist par excel-
lence. The emblematic achievements and shortcomings of Byron's career
revealed to Pugkin the failure of any attempt to impose a philosophical or

ideological schema upon the fictional text. Schlegel, the inventor of the
philosophical concept of romantic-ironic simultaneity, remained forever
within the abstract domain of his aesthetic writings, and his novel Lucinde
completely disregards his own aesthetic principles. Byron did not read
Schlegel; nor did Pugkin, who did not like reading in German. In general,
Pu'kin was skeptical of "philosophical meanderings".15 Byron in his long
poems is a romantic ironist only half-way. In The Queen of Spades16, how-
ever, Pugkin masters the artistic technique of romantic irony.
The main feature of Pu'kin's romantic irony in The Queen of Spades is
the existence of two dimensions interacting within the narrative. One of
them-apparent to most readers of the story-is a limited and local dimen-
sion which may be referred to as the thriller (ghost thriller, gambling thril-
ler, etc.).17 The thriller corresponds to the conventions of Puskin's contem-
poraries, of the Russian society of the first third of the 19th century. The
other, larger, dimension belongs to the narrator and his agents of romantic
irony in the narrative. The complex interaction between the two dimen-
sions serves to position the reader vis-a-vis the text so as to manipulate and
control her/him. Pugkin's genius recognized that although fiction should
always be more than a thriller, it should be a "good" thriller all the same.
Only then can the author play what T. S. Eliot called "monkey tricks"
behind the back of the audience. And it is this very romantic-ironic vision
of the Universe which permeates the discourse of The Queen of Spades.18
As indicated earlier, the study of romantic irony in Russian literature has
been unsatisfactory. In the West, scholars of Russian literature have tended
to treat Romanticism in the manner of Abrams. Since Abrams' view leaves
no place for romantic irony, many scholars in the field focus on other
aspects of the Russian Romantic heritage.19 In Russia, where scholarship is
still shaped by Gor'kij's distinction between positive and negative romanti-
cism, romantic irony is not viewed separately from stable irony.20 As a
result, in the many studies of The Queen of Spades scholars rarely mention
romantic irony.21
What is the function of romantic irony in The Queen of Spades? Let us
first look at Germann as a demystified Byronic character and identify this
demystification with the technique of romantic irony in the text. Then, let
us examine the most prominent readings of the story from the point of view
of romantic irony. Finally, we will consider the status of narration and the
modes of romantic irony in The Queen of Spades.
Viktor Zirmunskij, in an influential study of 1924, suggests that only
questions of the actual artistic impact of Byron's poetry upon Puskin's
poetry-not questions of the impact of Byron's personality and Byron's
ideas upon Pulkin-belong properly to the domain of literary studies.22
Pulkin borrowed from Byron a new literary genre-the long romantic
lyrical poem (romanti'eskaja liri'eskaja podma)-and certain concrete im-

ages and motifs, but he borrowed these traditions not mechanically, but in
accordance with his individual taste and the creative aspirations of his
epoch. Zirmunskij examines in detail the way Pugkin was influenced by the
novelistic plots and medieval fabulae of Byron's poems.
The impact of Byron's romantic irony upon Pulkin's prose might have
travelled via Pugkin's "southern" poems. In The Queen of Spades one can
find at least three features of Byronic influence: the romanticized medieval
fabula is certainly present in the narrative;23 the structure of the narrative
resembles some of Byron's poems with sudden beginnings/entanglements
and abruptness of narration; and Germann himself is a Byronic character.
Pugkin as romantic ironist demystifies Germann's Byronism in the course
of the story.
From the very first episode when we encounter Germann observing the
officers gambling at Narumov's, he is surrounded by an aura of mystery
and alienation. He is of German extraction. He never punts although he
spends nights watching the play, which "interests him intensely"24 (igra
zanimaet menja sil'no).25 Very little is said about Germann when we first
meet him; nontheless the reader is intrigued by the obvious differences
between Germann and everybody else at the gaming table. Germann is
unlike anyone. His words reveal strength of character, pride, and alien-
ation. His strategy in life is not to sacrifice the 'essential' for the sake of the
'superfluous.'26 Germann, like everyone else at Narumov's, hears Tomskij's
story, and his comment is skeptical.27 Germann is Byronic, gloomy and
alienated, and his non-participation in the game intrigues the officers and
the readers. Tomskij, unlike the others, is portrayed as being confident that
he understands Germann and can see through him. As several critics sug-
gest, Tomskij's characterization of Germann as an "economical"28 German
(rascetlivyj nemec) is offered at this point in the narrative precisely to
obfuscate the doubleness of Germann's nature.29
It is important to keep in mind that Germann appears in Chapter 2
disguised under his uniform. And in fact the reader is not certain until
Germann's story is narrated at the end of the chapter that Germann and
the young engineer beneath Lizan'ka's window are the same person.
Lizan'ka herself does not yet know Germann's name.
There is a tradition in the criticism of The Queen of Spades of viewing
Germann as a Napoleonic figure.30 (Napoleon, of course, was among the
most important personalities for Byron and other actors on the Romantic
stage.) External rather than internal affinities exist between Germann and
Napoleon allowing us to read Germann as one of the many little Napoleons
of his time and milieu.
Germann the Byronic/Napoleonic figure sees Lizan'ka's pretty face in
the window of the Countess' house, and this event "decides his fate."31 In
Chapter III up until the point when Germann enters the Countess' house,
communication between Germann and Lizan'ka develops and their mutual
attraction grows. Germann the Byronic/Napoleonic figure here becomes a
Wertherian figure. We certainly know that Germann wants to learn the
secret of the three cards. Because of the effect of the narrative, however,
until Germann hides in the Countess' bedroom when she returns from the
ball, the reader is not sure whether Germann came for the Countess' secret
or for a rendezvous with Lizan'ka. It is not by chance that Germann, a
Russified German, copies his first letters to Lizan'ka from a German novel
which very well could have been The Sufferings of Young Werther by Goe-
the. Germann as an innamorato is inventive in conventional terms. As his
passion grows, he begins to compose his own letters and expresses in them
both the "inflexibility of his desires and the disorder of an unrestrained
imagination"32 (nepreklonnost' ego strastej, i besporjadok neobuzdannogo
voobraienija).33 Because Lizan'ka has no idea of Germann's real intentions
(if one can speak of them in the letter-exchange episode), she is caught in
an actual romantic situation. But one must emphasize that although the
readers are told of Germann's true goal, they are still likely to 'buy into'
Germann's Wertherian romance.
From acting like Werther, Germann metamorphoses into Faust in the
episode in the Countess' bedroom. Andrei Kodjak in his article on the
Faust legend in The Queen of Spades examines the role of the legend in
Pu'kin's narrative. In particular, he discusses the Faust legend as one of the
four main sign systems in the story along with the numbers sign system,
narrator sign system, and ghost sign system. Sharing Kodjak's beliefs,
Mark Simpson treats The Queen of Spades as a Russian Gothic novel which
re-enacts the Faust legend. Kodjak's reading of The Queen of Spades as a
Faustian tale is, nonetheless, not free of shortcomings. Still, the scene at
the Countess' bedroom certainly carries some traits of Faustianism. Here
Germann offers to take over the Countess' sin, in a Faustian pact with
Satan: "Reveal your secret to me! What is it to you? ... Perhaps it is
connected to a terrible sin, to a pact with the devil. . . . Think: you are old,
you do not have long to live-I am ready to take your sin on my soul. Just
reveal your secret to me. Think. .. ."34
Tomskij creates a bridge for the reader from Germann as Faust back to
Germann as a Byronic/Napoleonic character. During the ball scene, chrono-
logically preceded by the scene in the house and narrated after it, Tomskij
describes Germann to Lizan'ka as a "truly romantic character" (lico istinno
romaniceskoe), having the profile of Napoleon and the soul of Mephis-
topheles' and "at least three crimes on his conscience."35 Lizan'ka, condi-
tioned by sentimental novels36 and sharpened by Tomskij's remark at the
ball, regards Germann with a mixture of fear and desire. The narrator's
comment about the vapidity of the persona, created by the contemporary
novels and recreated by Lizan'ka's imagination,37 passes virtually unno-

ticed. In the scene in Lizan'ka's bedroom, Germann is portrayed as a
Byronic/Napoleonic figure again. Hands crossed and brows knitted, he
even sits on the window-sill in the pose of Napoleon. Lizan'ka sees the
resemblance between Napoleon's portrait and Germann. Germann's act
reveals a great strength of will, callousness (he is breaking Lizan'ka's
heart), and fearlessness (he is ready to go alone down the secret back stairs
in the first hour of morning).
The next chapter enhances Germann's mysterious aura as he makes a
public appearance at the Countess' funeral service. Germann falls down by
the coffin after the Countess winks at him. The reader knows this from the
omniscient narrator. But the society has a different impression of Ger-
mann: Lizan'ka faints after his fall, the two falls are connected, and one of
the Countess's close relatives tells an Englishman that Germann is the
Countess' illegitimate son. One can assume that this information quickly
circulates. Thus, the St. Petersburg public is increasingly intrigued by Ger-
mann; and they focus on his Byronism/Napoleonism.38
When Germann punts for the first time in his life at Cekalinskij's house,
bets 47,000 rubles and wins, it is a major event.39 Everyone knows that he
has never played before. At the same time, the society perceives Germann
as a Byronic/Napoleonic character after the incident in the cathedral.
These two notions are interwoven, and the society becomes preoccupied
with Germann's personality and his secret. Not saying anything to anyone,
Germann leaves after winning two nights in a row. When he arrives at
Cekalinskij's on the third night, everyone is mystified by him. Puikin
writes:
Everyone was waiting for him. The generals and Privy Councillors left their whist to watch
such unusual play. The young officers jumped up from the couches; all of the servants
gathered in the drawing-room. They surrounded Hermann. The old gamblers did not place
their cards, waiting impatiently to see how he would end.4
It is only when Germann loses in the game that everyone turns away from
him. To society Germann is mysterious and Napoleonic insofar as he controls
their imagination by winning astronomical sums. Once he has lost, there is
no more mystery about him. Thus, Germann's loss demystifies him in the
eyes of society. His Byronism/Napoleonism is gone in a moment. What the
society now sees is a madman. The same society needs to complete the cycle
of Germann's mystification-demystification by sentencing him to an institu-
tion. Only when he is confined to a madhouse is Germann seen by them as a
madman. There is only a small step between perceiving Germann as a
Byronic/Napoleonic persona and as a madman. And Germann makes this
step himself-he loses. Society has to put Germann in an institution to
redeem its own recent infatuation with him. Society has to separate itself
from Germann since if he is not mad, they are. At the same time, the society
with the exception of the omniscient narrator and-to some extent-
Tomskij, completely misreads Germann from the very beginning.
One might propose that Germann as a romantic-ironic character under-
goes a process of demystification within the course of the narrative.41 The
narrator constructs him as a Byronic character at the beginning. Germann
goes through a first circle of demystification, moving from Byronism/
Napoleonism through Wertherianism to Faustianism and then back to
Byronism/Napoleonism. There are in fact two circles in Germann's demys-
tification. One, the inner circle, encompasses the Germann-Werther-Faust-
Napoleon stages and is based on the events that are hidden from the public
and known to the reader. Exemplifying this circle is Germann's pursuit of
Lizan'ka and of the old Countess with her secret. In the first circle the
reader possesses a great advantage over the public and recognizes what
Germann is striving for. The inner circle of demystification joins the large
external circle when Germann collapses in the cathedral. For the publ
Germann's demystification begins at Narumov's in Chapter I and ends a
the madhouse; it culminates at the last punting night scene. And it is
precisely the technique of romantic irony, or one of parallel mystificati
and unravelling the mystification, that allows the reader to join with t
public in the punting scene. Although the reader is seemingly much m
aware of Germann's actual self, she/he still identifies with Germann's m
niacal desire to win. The reader is still mystified by the three cards. In fact
in the last punting scene, when Germann places his last bet of 188,000 t
reader-joined with the public-is inseparable from Germann. The reade
is Germann for a moment! When he loses, things come to order. Germa
is put into a madhouse. The society forgets about him as quickly as the
were once lured by his mysterious aura. The readers can enjoy the informa-
tion, shared with them by the narrator, and speculate about possible rea
ings of the story. Tomskij can marry Princess Polina and remain above a
beyond society. And what about the narrator? And Pu'kin? They c
observe their readers become their characters, particles of the fundame
tally unchanging infinite Universe.
One must distinguish two main readings of The Queen of Spades. Th
first treats the story as realistic and tries to demystify all the instances of th
mystic and the fantastic.42 It reads the punting scene as realistic, a queen of
spades simply sticking to the ace due to the newness of the pack. It the
treats Tomskij's anecdote as consisting of two parts. One-the real, pre
ents Count Saint-Germain as an historical person who lived in Parisian hi
society in the 1750s and died in 1784.43 In the realistic reading, Count Saint-
Germain simply gives Tomskij's grandmother the money she lost in pun
ing. The very story of the cards-the second half of Tomskij's narration
evolves out of Saint-Germain's mystical aura. This reading would seem

very attractive in the context of romantic irony, but it contains one flaw that
is fatal. The "realists" deem it important for the narrator to signal to his
reader that there is no mystery, no secret. But does not the omniscient
narrator himself witness the appearance of the Countess in Germann's
bedroom: "someone looked in his window from the street"44 (kto-to s ulicy
vzgljanul k nemu v okogko)?45 Why would he mention it at all if not to
allow for the "ghost thriller" to continue? The realistic reading is important
if perceived in light of Mellor's double vision: the narrator asks the reader
to accept the ghost story and to question it simultaneously. It is not by
chance that he refers to someone at the window. Could that someone have
been a passer-by? But one is not fascinated by this version. One wants the
Countess' ghost. One seeks the thriller!
The second reading is most explicitly presented in Kodjak's article. He
interprets The Queen of Spades not merely as a "thriller ghost story," but as
a psychological tale. For Kodjak the Faust legend is central in the narra-
tive. Kodjak points to the connection between Count Saint-Germain, Ger-
mann, and the Countess (Grafinja in the Russian). Germann and Zermen
(Germain) are phonologically almost identical, and their names are related
etymologically, as well. The Countess (grafinja) is never referred to by her
last name although it is revealed in the story. Kodjak believes that this
omission separates the Countess from her grandson Tomskij, with whom
she shares her last name, being his paternal grandmother. Tomskij is also a
prince, not a count, which is very unlikely since his father, the Countess'
son, would be expected to inherit the title of his parents. The Russian word
grafinja sounds like both Germann and Zermen. Kodjak sees Germann as a
Faustian character, but one devoid of the humanistic quest of Goethe's
character. By offering the Countess to take over her sins, or to assume her
pact with Satan, Germann commits a Faustian act in a formal sense.
Kodjak suggests that the Countess once made a pact with Satan, or commit-
ted a Faustian act herself: she served as the recipient of the sin, taking it
over from Saint-Germain when he revealed to her the secret of the winning
cards. Then, in Kodjak's scheme there is a chain of Faustian acts in the
course of which the pact with Satan is transferred from one hand into
another. The problem most certainly lies in Saint-Germain himself. Com-
mentators refer to Count Saint-Germain as an historical figure whose in-
volvement with black magic, alchemy, and mysticism was legendary.
Tomskij gives the following portrait of Saint-Germain:
... he passed himself off as the Eternal Jew, as the inventor of an elixir of life and the
philosophers' stone and so forth. He was laughed at as a charlatan, and in his memoirs
Casanova says that he was a spy; however, in spite of his mysteriousness St. Germain had a
very respectable appearance and in society was a very genial person.46
The information in the possession of the reader could be used as evidence

of Saint-Germain's being another Faustian persona, although one trying to
understand the meaning of life and therefore more like Goethe's Faust than
like Germann. But Kodjak contradicts himself. Germann offers to take over
the Countess' Faustian sin, or to sell his soul to Mephistopheles. Such an act
implies that the Countess had earlier sold her soul to Mephistopheles; by
letting Germann take over her pact with Mephistopheles, she will free her-
self from that pact and regain her/a soul. But how did the Countess come to
sign the pact with Mephistopheles, and who is her Mephistopheles? From
Tomskij's story one knows that Saint-Germain revealed the three cards (the
secret) to the Countess. One also knows that he was a "close acquaintance"
(korotko znakom) of the Countess and that she still "loves him madly" (ljubit
bez pamjati).47 The Russian korotko is most likely a euphemism. On the
other hand, in order for her to pass her sin (secret) over to Germann, she has
to have assumed a sin from someone else. If Saint-Germain is her sin's
donor, and she is his recipient, Kodjak's scheme has problems. In fact,
public image of Saint-Germain as a mystic and alchemist, a Faustian ty
further complicates Kodjak's scheme. But, as Mark Simpson has suggest
in Gothic novels the recipient of Satan's favor must always await his return
often in disguise.48 Kodjak himself treats the scene in the Countess' bedroo
as empty of communication between the Countess and Germann.49 If that
true, the Countess then takes Germann for another man whom she awa
her eyes become enlivened when he appears in front of her. Whom does sh
await?
If in Paris the Countess had made a pact with Saint-Germain in which she
acted as Faust and he as Mephistopheles, it is Saint-Germain she awaits at
such a late hour in her bedroom. The Countess' pact with Saint-Germain as
Satan could have occurred on various terms. The question is whether it
occurred at all. Why would the Countess speak with love about Satan who
possesses her soul? This is not what Faust felt for Mephistopheles! If one
agrees with Kodjak's version of the absence of communication between the
Countess and Germann, or if one agrees that the Countess is taking Ger-
mann for Saint-Germain, the whole notion of a Faustian exchange between
Germann and the Countess is put into question. Kodjak sees Saint-
Germain as both Faust and Mephistopheles, but Saint-Germain can only
act as one of the above in his encounter with the Countess in Paris.
In each Faustian act of exchange, the recipient of the soul assumes the role
of Mephistopheles and the donor the role of Faust. To put it differently,
Mephistopheles passes the sin (secret) on to Faust in exchange for Faust's
soul. If the Countess acted as Mephistopheles in the exchange with Ger-
mann, she would obtain his soul and give him the secret of three cards. In the
"bedroom episode" Germann talks precisely about such an exchange. He
offers to take over the Countess' sin, that is her pact with Mephistopheles.
He offers to free her from the pact by assuming her role in the pact, the role
of a Faust, not of a Mephistopheles, unlike the apparent suggestion of
Tomskij's characterization of Germann. Even if Germann and the Countess
miscommunicate rather than have no communication at all, even if the
Countess envisions getting Germann's soul to die in peace while Germann
thinks about replacing her in her pact with Mephistopheles in exchange for
the secret of the three cards, the situation still does not follow the logic of
Kodjak's argument. Moreover, further complicating the situation, Kodjak
suggests that there are parallels between Germann and Saint-Germain: both
have a quest, share similar names, and seek information.50
A possible solution would establish Saint-Germain as Mephistopheles
and Germann as one of the many simultaneously existing facets of the
multifaceted Mephistopheles. The Countess awaits Saint-Germain, who
controls her as either her lover or the possessor of her soul; the first, or a
combination of both roles, typifies Tomskij's embedded narrative. Indeed,
why would she deny the existence of the three cards, saying instead, "That
was a joke . .. I swear to you, it was a joke!"51 (eto byla svutka . .. kljanus'
vam! Eto byla futka!).52 Perhaps it really was a joke? Ultimately, then the
Countess dies, scared by Germann, one of Saint-Germain's hypostases.
Because Kodjak does not acknowledge romantic irony as Puskin's
method in The Queen of Spades he must concentrate on the Faust sign
system in his study.53 However, only by acknowledging Saint-Germain's
crucial role in the course of the romantic-ironic mystification can we fully
account for the problematic points in the narrative.
One additional problem remains to be explained, the scene of the Count-
ess' visit to Germann's bedroom. Both the Countess and Germann are
manipulated by Saint-Germain; Saint-Germain exercises his power to
bring the Countess' ghost to Germann's bedroom and have her reveal the
secret of the three cards. And it is precisely because of the "intoxicating"
impact of the ghost thriller upon the reader that Saint-Germain allows the
Countess' visit. Everything-the secret of three cards, Germann, the
Countess, the punters, and the public-is predicated upon the romantic-
ironic design of the story, with Saint-Germain being the agent of the
romantic-ironic manipulation. The art of Puskin as romantic ironist in The
Queen of Spades is to allow the reader to apprehend his design, to see the
manipulations of Saint-Germain, while still prompting the reader to desire
to ghost thriller, to 'buy into' the mysticism, and to stop her/his breath short
when the Countess visits Germann and when he punts at Cekalinskij's.
Kodjak almost recognizes romantic irony without identifying it.54 His
notion of a doubleness in the narrative-ghost thriller and Faustian psycho-
logical story-partly anticipates my own view of the technique of romantic
irony. Kodjak's discussion of the role of the omniscient narrator in his

narrator sign system bears upon this discussion. How exactly is the narra-
tive organized in terms of romantic irony?
Tomskij relates the story of the three cards at the beginning of The Queen
of Spades. 55 Unknowingly, he is largely responsible for constructing Ger-
mann as a romantic-ironic character.56 Indeed, Tomskij is the only human
being in the story who is partially aware of the double nature of Germann-
his profile of Napoleon (external, appearance) and his soul of Mephistophe-
les (internal, nature). Therefore, Tomskij may be at least partially aware of
Germann's role as one of the facets of Mephistopheles inserted into the story
to manipulate the readers.57 It is not by chance that Tomskij is not present
during the punting scene at Cekalinskij's.58 Tomskij seems to sense the
constructedness of the narrative he is living. Theoretically, he could be the
one to stop Germann or to denounce the three cards' secret. Because in the
punting scene the reader completely forgets about the romantic-ironic de-
sign and allies herself/himself with Germann (i.e., becomes the object of
Saint-Germain's manipulation) Tomskij is not present in the scene. Other-
wise, his presence would remind one of the manipulation. But even Tomskij
the aristocrat, although he stays above and beyond the public (mystified and
demystified by Saint-Germain via Germann), remains a part of the thriller
narrative. He marries Princess Polina and is promoted to captain. Appar-
ently, he is constructed to suspect/signal that everything is of Pugkin's
romantic-ironic design, that everything is manipulated by Saint-Germain,
the narrator's agent. But he himself lives within this design although he
chooses not to subscribe to its mystifications.
Thus, romantic irony serves as the main structural/structuring principle
in the narrative of The Queen of Spades. The parallel co-existence and
interaction of the two dimensions of the narrative-the "thriller" and the
meditation on the vainness of human efforts to overcome fatum-allows
for a variety of interpretations and readings of Pugkin's story.59 This in part
explains the unceasing interest of scholars in The Queen of Spades and its
popularity with readers. The pleasure of reading The Queen of Spades lies
in its doubleness: optimistic/pessimistic, mystifying/demystifying, closed/
open, etc. Moreover, the reader can enjoy the excitement of being manipu-
lated by the narrator and falling into the traps of the narrative even when
she/he has apprehended the manipulation and attempts to undo it.60
Pu'kin as romantic ironist opposes the teleology of Paradise Lost/
Paradise Regained. Pu'kin's world is part of the greater design of the
eternal universe, and the narrative of Regained Paradise is simply another
mystification that one empowers, similar to the way in which one takes
stock of Germann's punting.61
This essay does not provide an exhaustive analysis of romantic irony in
The Queen of Spades. In fact, it sets out only one of the issues of the larger
evaluation of the artistic techniques of Russian Romanticism, and it is

intended to broaden our horizons of understanding the tale.62
"The bottle is half-empty," says Kant. "No, it is half-full," Schlegel re-

sponds. "Wait, Greek brothers," Byron intervenes, "it is half-empty be-
cause we are drinking the brandy and will drink the other half too as we go,
and we can go out and buy another one and start over again." Pu'kin's final
chord is the most universal, "It is always the same and depends upon the
way we look at it: half-full and half-empty, and we don't even have to drink
to be drunk."
Only the latter vision allows for a combination of the fantastic/mystic and
the real in a form that leans towards the harmonization of realistic and
aberrational in (re)presentation.63
NOTES
1 Schlegel, 156.
2 See, for example, Victor Terras' discussion in his article "Pu'kin and Romanticis
3 The concept of romantic irony is anatomized in a number of Friedrich Schlegel'
particularly in his essay On Incomprehensibility (1800), in Athenaeum Fragments (
and in Critical Fragments (1797). A comprehensive modern translation of sev
Schlegel's works is in Firchow's Friedrich Schlegel's Lucinde and the Fragments. Cat
Wheeler's The Romantic Ironists and Goethe contains a rather useful selection from a
number of texts pertaining to the subject of this essay.
4 Schlegel, 176.
5 Mellor, 13.
6 See Mellor, 4-5, 7-8, 14-15.
7 Schlegel, 267.
8 See McGann, 22.
9 This formulation was suggested to the author by Professor William Galperin of the
English Department at Rutgers, New Brunswick; despite its allegorical character it seems
to be very precise.
10 Mellor, 18.
11 See Mellor, 5-6.
12 Abrams limits his picture of the Romantic movement to its organicist trend, the provin-
cial British version represented largely by poets of Protestant sensibility: Wordsworth,
Coleridge and Blake. At the same time, he ignores the second major trend of European
Romanticism-the Continental, or romantic-ironic trend. For a recent polemics, see, for
instance, Galperin, 133; it is remarkable that in his rather critical review of Frederick
Garber's book on romantic irony Galperin departs from a reference to the post-Kantian
nature of the aesthetics of romantic ironists and from the reassertion of the two trends of
European Romanticism; the distinction between the two trends is crucial in the overall
approach to the texts of romantic irony. Works by both Byron and Pu'kin exemplify the
Continental trend.
13 Mellor, 24-25.
14 Byron, 113.
15 As demonstrated by Lauren G. Leighton, Pu'kin must have been indirectly familiar with
the ideals of the Schlegel school, most likely via P. A. Vjazemskij; see Leighton 1987,
134-135, 90-91, 96-97, 63, 51-54. This is not to say that there is a necessary connection
between Pu'kin's familiarity with Schlegelean easthetics and his art as romantic ironist;
Coleridge, who was well versed in post-Kantian philosophy, including the Schlegels,
nontheless represents the provincial English non-ironic trend of European Romanticism.
Alhough Leighton does not speak of romantic irony per se, in various places of his
commnetary he outlines the features that are romantic-ironic, as, for instance, in his
notes to Vjazemskij's criticism: "Even the most vigorous champions of the new Romantic
school were troubled by what they considered ambiguity in Pugkin's verse tales. He did
not spell out his heroes' motivations, and he did not decisively resolve their conflicts or
fully develop his themes." (Leighton 1987, 54). Sergej fon Stejn's discussion of Pu'kin's
attitudes to philosophy during the Lyceum years is also very illuminating: "Skeptiteskoe
otnogenie Pugkina k filosofii opredeljaetsja o'en' rano, imenno v Licee [...]. Skol'noe
eja izuienie re'itel'no ne davalos' Pugkinu, o EUm soxranilis' mnpgo'islennye rasskazy
ego licejskix tovarifiej. Doglo do nas i dokumental'noe ob etom svidetel'stvo v otzyve
professora A.P.Kunicyna, kotoryj konstatiroval, 6to uspexi Pugkina v filosofskix
predmetax '6cen' neveliki, a osoblivo po easti logiki'." (53) ?tejn also quotes from
Pugkin's letter to Delvig of May 2, 1827: "Ty penjaes' mne . . . za nemeckuju metafiziku
[. . .]. Bog vidit, kak ja nenaviiu i preziraju ed." (57)
16 Examination of romantic irony in Pugkin's oeuvre remains to be undertaken; Evgenij
Onegin is first on the author's list of candidates.
17 J. Thomas Shaw refers to The Queen of Spades as "psychologcal thriller." (115)
18 Two points in Mellor's book call for further investigation. First, one might question the
idea of simultaneity of the two dimensions/visions of romantic irony in Mellor's schema.
Second, on a larger scale, it is difficult to substantiate the idea of hovering between self-
creation and self-destruction, between being and becoming. Romantic ironists like
Pu'kin and-to some extent-Byron always maintain a very clear, non-chaotic vision of
the universe. This vision rejects any teleological narratives of apocalyptic rebirth in the
unchanging and all-encompassing infinite Nature.
19 Terras' article "Pugkin and Romanticism" is an exception that seems to prove the rule;
Terras mentions romantic irony as one of the aspects of Pu'kin's oeuvre. Although he
seems to be leaning towards Abrams' approach to Romanticism, he nontheless defines
romantic irony as the "doubling of the poet's mind which allows him alternately to merge
with his work and then again to observe it from the outside" (Terras, 50). Terras also talks
of a strong dose of romantic irony in The Queen of Spades. As of today, the only notable
article to discuss Russian romantic irony is that by Roman S. Strug, published in the
collection Romantic Irony (see Strug, 1988). Strug's article gives only a brief outline of
some dimensions of the subject without going into textual details.
20 Thus, for instance, Jurij Mann's Poetika russkogo romantizma (1976)-a major contribu-
tion to the field-hardly at all considers the problem of romantic irony.
21 V. V. Vinogradov's "Stil' 'Pikovoj damy' " (1936)-perhaps the most meticulous analysis
of the tale ever undertaken-makes only a few references in passing as regards irony and
its stylistic implications. The most significant among Vinogradov's observations on irony
in The Queen of Spades concerns the problem of the gambling jargon and its potential for
ironic two-dimensionality. (Vinogradov, 100) Some discussions of the tale's style-
relevant to this essay-may be found on pp. 77, 93, 106, 107, 113 of Vinogradov's article.
22 See Zirmunskij, 14-22.
23 This was demonstrated by Andrei Kodjak in his article on the Faust legend in The Queen
of Spades.
24 A. S. Pugkin, "The Queen of Spades," tr. Carl R. Proffer, 311; hereafter Proffer.
25 Pugkin, 320.
26 Proffer, 311.
27 Vinogradov makes a suggestion that as early as in Chapter 1 Tomskij is already launching
the mechanism of mystification: "No v 'Pikovoj dame' tajny kartoinoj igry uze v pervoj
glave osvoboideny Tomskim ot istolkovanija ix razgadki v 'ulersko-bytovom plane.
Preide vsego xarakterno, Cto oni svjazany so staruxoj--erez ne--s Kaliostro. Krome
togo, predpoloienie
28 Proffer, 311. o vulerskoj ulovke srazu ve otricaetsja Tomskim ... " (85)
29 See Makogonenko, 183; his article is written from a retrograde critical position, but
contains some observations that anticipate the subject of this study. In an influential
article on the theme of gambling in Russian literature Jurij Lotman characterizes Ger-
mann as follows: "Germann-c-elovek dvojnoj prirody, russkij nemec, s xolodnym umom
i plamennym voobraveniem-z-aidet vnezapnogo obogavvenija. Eto zastavljaet ego
vstupit' v Euiduju dlja nego sferu Sluvaja." (Lotman, 134)
30 See ibid, 187.
31 Proffer, 316.
32 Proffer, 318.
33 Puvkin, 336.
34 Proffer, 320.
35 Proffer, 321; the following excerpt from Wheeler's introduction to her anthology The
Romantic Ironists and Goethe will perhaps explain why Carl R. Proffer opted for 'roman-
tic' instead of the Russian romaniceskoe: "The word 'Romantisch', used to signify the
distinguishing characteristic of modern literature, originated form a family of terms,
including 'Roman' (meaning only very roughly 'novel' and including romance and related
prose narratives), the adjective 'Roman' (meaning Roman civilization), 'Romanze' (refer-
ring to medieval romances and ballads), and 'romantic' (suggesting love, the sentimental,
the exotic, and the fantastic). All these elements contributed to the acceptance of 'Ro-
mantisch' as the adjective used to describe the essentially modern." (3). Thus, lico
romaniceskoe in Puvkin's text can be read 'a modern character,' 'a new character,' 'a
character of the new epoch,' 'a figure of romantic-ironic discourse'.
36 Shaw writes the following about the state of Lizan'ka's mind: "Lizaveta Ivanovna's
imagination, like that of other heroines in Pushkin's works, is fed by her reading. She is
prepared to accept Tomsky's characterization of Germann [...]. She 'did not know
anything of the German language'; hence the 'current novels' involved were English and
French, and the hero is the Byronic hero and the hero of Gothic and post-Gothic novel."
(Shaw, 124)
37 Puvkin, 344.
38 In an interesting article Diana Lewis Burgin elucidates the connections between the
gossip about Germann and the ironic narrative mode: "The gossip about the Countess at
her funeral is included to support the reader's speculation that the Countess had a natural
son, an apparently tangential possibility which is in fact central to the mystery. The gossip
is a typical mystery story device [. . .]. Deliberately and ironically misleading in that it
gives only partially correct information, it nevertheless sets the reader thinking about a
possibility he may have ignored or forgotten." (Burgin, 54)
39 Jurij Lotman (1975) argues for a special, privileged position of card-playing in the Rus-
sian socio-cultural milieu of the time. His observations regarding the semiotics of gam-
bling in the context of The Queen of Spades are highly provocative.
40 Proffer, 325.
41 Shaw speaks of the "uncrowning of German" as implying the uncrowning of Napoleon
and the Napoleonic ideal. (119)
42 See Makogonenko quote from L. V. Cxaidze's article "O real'nom znavenii motiva trex
kart v 'Pikovoj dame'." (Makogonenko, 183-184)
43 See Pugkin, commentary, 774.

44 Proffer, 323.
45 Puskin, 349.
46 Proffer, 312.
47 Proffer, 312.
48 Simpson, 55-56.
49 Kodjak, 105-106.
50 Felix Raskol'nikov also points out the problems in Kodjak's analysis of the Faustian
legend in The Queen of Spades, see Raskol'nikov, 250-251.
51 Proffer, 319.
52 Pu'kin, 340.
53 Burgin also sees irony as a clue to resolving the contradictions of the mystery in the tale:
"Pu'kin reveals the mystery through irony. The truth is spoken by a character who
doesn't know he is right or believe in what he says." (53) Later in the same article Burgin
reaffirms her earlier statement on irony: "Germann's overactive but spiritually bankrupt
imagination, which reflects his banal, immoral and overly cautious soul, almost guesses
the demonic implications of the secret; but, ironically, he never understands its passion-
ate side (alien to his unromantic personality), nor does he believe the truth his imagina-
tion speaks." (55) Burgin's observations are very close to the author's understanding of
romantic irony in The Queen of Spades.
54 A similar assertion is made in Paul Debreczeny's excellent chapter on The Queen of
Spades in his The Other Pushkin (1983): "The linking of Hermann with Mephistopheles is
ironic not only because it romanticizes the hero, but also because in offering to take the
old Countess's sins on his own soul in exchange for her secret, he tries to enter into a
contract in which he would act the part of Faust." (204-205)
55 Burgin speaks directly of Tomskij's manipulatory function: "Tomskij tells the story of
taplickij in order to manipulate Germann into conflict with the Countess by increasing
the credibility of the Countess' secret." (49)
56 Shaw might have been the first to emphasize Tomskij's privileged position in the narrative
and his linkage with the ironic modes: "If there is irony, it is concealed in the characteriza-
tion of Tomsky in the story itself." (117) Later in the article, Shaw speaks directly of
Tomskij's role: "That Tomsky is given any position in the epilog-and particularly the
concluding one-suggests that his role in the entire story is more important than has been
hitherto recognized." (118)
57 In this connection, Debreczeny writes the following: "Moreover, the text of 'The Queen
of Spades' amply demonstrates that the view of Hermann-as-Mephistopheles is more
Tomskij's and Lizaveta's than the narrator's own." (191)
58 Gleb Zekulin indicates the peculiarity of Tomskij's appearances in the story, see Zekulin,
77.
59 A number of scholars have expressed in various ways the idea of a double vision in The
Queen of Spades. The author is most indebted to J. Thomas Shaw who noticed that
"everything is presented in double vision, one of which is ironic" (126), Paul Debreczeny
who spoke of "fantasy within reality, past within the present, and lyricism within an ironic
framework" (211), and Diana Lewis Burgin who observed that Pu'kin creates the "reader
ambivalence about the reality of irrational occurrences" in order to "interpret the story in
several ways, either fantastically, realistically, or both." (46)
60 In her introduction to the prose section of The Ardis Anthology of Russian Romanticism
Christine Rydel describes The Queen of Spades as a story wherein Pu'kin "begins to
debunk Romantic myths" (189); although Rydel does not speak directly about the roman-
tic irony of Pugkin's story, her brief remarks on the double status of the narrative antici-
pate several conclusions of this essay.
61 Debreczeny concludes the following about Pu'kin's vision: "Pushkin's poetic vision, open
to symbolical and psychological complexities, discerns the transitory nature of life and the
unity of opposites reconciled by the passage of time." (238)
62 Finally, it ought to be mentioned that Pu'kin's art and vision in The Queen of Spades
(1833) was shaped by the defeat of Decembrism in 1825 that signified a collapse of
Byronic aristocratic optimism. Lauren G. Leighton's article on gematria in The Queen of
Spades (Leighton, 1977) made the author think about the connection between Pu'kin's
romantic irony and Decembrism; the author intends to undertake a study of the impact of
Decembrism on romantic irony in Russian literature.
63 The author gratefully acknowledges his indebtedness to the following teachers and col-
leagues for their advise and encouragement at various stages of this work's completion:
Vladimir E. Alexandrov, William Galperin, Daria Kirjanov, James L. Rice, Alexander
M. Schenker, Mary-Adair Woodall. Special thanks to SEEJ's anonymous readers.
WORKS CITED
Byron, George. Poetry. Frank McConnel, ed. New York: Norton, 1978.
Burgin, Diana Lewis. "The Mystery of 'Pikovaja dama': A New Interpretation
Studia litteraria russica in honorem Vsevolod Setchkarev. Joachim T. Baer and Norman W.
Inhgam, eds. Munchen: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1974.
Debreczeny, Paul. The Other Pushkin: A Study of Alexander Pushkin's Prose Fiction. Stan-
ford: Stanford University Press, 1983.
Furst, Lilian R. Fictions of Romantic Irony. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.
Firchow, Paul, ed. and tr. Lucinde and the Fragments by Friedrich Schlegel. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 1971.
Galperin, William. "Self, Text, and Romantic Irony: The Example of Byron. By Frederic
Garber." Journal of English and Germanic Philology 89:1 (1990): 113-114.
Kodjak, Andrei. " 'The Queen of Spades' in the Context of the Faust Legend." Alexander
Pugkin. A Symposium on the 175th Anniversary of His Birth. A. Kodjak and K.
Taranovsky, eds. New York: New York University Press, 1976. 87-125.
Leighton, Lauren G. "Gematria in 'The Queen of Spades': A Decembrist Puzzle." SEEJ 21,
no.4 (1977): 455-69.
Leighton, Lauren Gray, ed. and tr. Russian Romantic Criticism. An Anthology. New York:
Greenwood Press, 1987.
Lotman, Ju. M. "Tema kartocnoj igry v russkoj literature nacala XIX veka." Ucenye zapiski
tartusskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Vol. 394 (1975): 120-144. (Trudy po zna-
kovym sistemam. Vol. VII).
Makogonenko, G. "O nekotoryx osobennostjax poetiki 'Pikovoj damy'. K stavos'mi-
desjatiletiju so dnja roidenija A. S. Pu'kina." Neva 6 (1979): 177-188.
McGann, Jerome. The Romantic Ideology. A Critical Investigation. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 1983.
Mellor, Anne K. English Romantic Irony. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1980.
Muecke, D. C. The Compass of Irony. London: Methuen, 1969.
Muecke, D. C. Irony. London: Methuen, 1970.
Pu'kin, Alexandr. Polnoe sobranie socinenij v desjati tomax. Vol. 6. Moscow: Nauka, 1964.
Pu'kin, A. S. "The Queen of Spades." Carl R. Proffer, tr. The Ardis Anthology of Russian
Romanticism. Christine Rydel, ed. Ann Arbor: Ardis, 1984.
Raskol'nikov, Feliks. "Irracional'noe v 'Pikovoj dame'." Revue des etudes slaves 59, 1-2
(1987): 247-261.
Rydel, Christine, ed. The Ardis Anthology of Russian Romanticism. Ann Arbor: Ardis, 1984.
Schlegel, Friedrich. Lucinde and the Fragments. Paul Firchow, tr. and ed. Minneanapolis:
University of Minnesota Press, 1971.
Shaw, Joseph T. "The Conclusion of Pushkin's Queen of Spades." Studies in Russian and
Polish Literature in Honor of Waclaw Lednicki. Zbignew Folejevski, ed. The Hague:
Mouton & Co., 1962. 114-126.
Simpson, Mark S. The Russian Gothic Novel and Its British Antecedents. Columbus: Slavica
Publishers Inc., 1986.
?tejn, Sergej fon. Pugkin mistik. Riga: Esperanto, 1931.
Strug, Roman S. "Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol: Ironic Modes in Russian Romanticism."
Romantic Irony. Frederick Garber, ed. Budapest: Akad6miai Kiad6, 1988. 241-249.
Terras, Victor. "Puskin and Romanticism." Alexander Pufkin Symposium II. A. Kodjak and
K. Pomorska, eds. Columbus: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1980. 49-59.
Vinogradov, V. V. "Stil' 'Pikovoj damy'." Vremennik pufkinskoj komissii. Vol. 2. Moscow-
Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Akademii nauk, 1936. 74-147.
Wheeler, Cathleen. German Aesthetic and Literary Criticism: The Romantic Ironists and
Goethe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984.
Zekulin, Gleb. "And in Conclusion, Who Is Tomsky? (Rereading 'The Queen of Spades')."
Transactions/Zapiski of the Association of Russian-American Scholars in the USA XX
(1987): 71-79.
Zirmunskij, Viktor. Bajron i Pulkin. Iz istorii romantieeskoj pocmy. Leningrad: Academia,
1924. Reprint by Mouton, The Hague, Paris, 1970.

Rethinking Romantic Irony - Puškin, Byron, Schlegel and The Queen of Spades

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Rethinking Romantic Irony - Puškin, Byron, Schlegel and The Queen of Spades

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages

American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages is collaborating

RETHINKING ROMANTIC IRONY: PUSKIN,

Maxim D. Shrayer, Yale University

It is a very good sign when the harmonious bores

SEEJ, Vol. 36, No. 4 (1992): p. 397-p. 414 397

taneously doomed to dwell in his fictional creations. A romantic ironist

Jerome McGann is his book, The Romantic Ideology, outlines three

Mellor defines romantic irony in the following way:

And tell him-what thou dost behold!

But even then, we are mindful of the Giaour's incredible narcissism,

revealed to Pugkin the failure of any attempt to impose a philosophical or

lyrical poem (romanti'eskaja liri'eskaja podma)-and certain concrete im-

novels and recreated by Lizan'ka's imagination,37 passes virtually unno-

evolves out of Saint-Germain's mystical aura. This reading would seem

The information in the possession of the reader could be used as evidence

irony. Kodjak's discussion of the role of the omniscient narrator in his

evaluation of the artistic techniques of Russian Romanticism, and it is

"The bottle is half-empty," says Kant. "No, it is half-full," Schlegel re-

43 See Pugkin, commentary, 774.

Você também pode gostar