Pushkin, “Worldly Power” (1836)
 

Worldly Power

When time drew near for the momentous victory,
and God was dying on the cross in agony,
beside the Tree of Life Eternal could be seen
the Blessed Virgin and the sinner Magdalene,
          two women in distress
and inwardly immersed in sorrow measureless.
But at the foot now of the Cross of Calvary,
as on the doorstep of the governor, we see,
not sainted women deep in mourning, but instead
a pair of sentries wearing shakos, armed and dread.
What use, I’d like to know, can these protectors be?
Or is the Crucifixion now state property,
and you’re afraid of thieves or mice? Or are they there
to lend the King of Kings a more important air?
Or do you, as His mighty patron, think to bring
salvation to the Lord whom thorns have crowned as King,
the Christ, who yielded up His body to travails
beneath His persecutors’ scourges, spear and nails?
Or are you fearful lest the rabble that awaits
offend the One whose death redeemed all Adam’s race?
And so, to keep the way for strolling gentry clear,
it’s ordered not to let the common people near?


Edit
L5: pale, distressed > in distress


Crib

Worldly/Secular Power

When the great triumph was being accomplished,
and the Deity was expiring on the cross,
then on either side of the Life-Giving Tree,
Mary the Sinner and the Blessed Virgin
          stood, two women*
plunged in measureless sorrow.
But now at the foot of the Precious/True Cross,
as if on the porch of the city governor,
we see, posted in place of sainted women,
two stern/dread sentries in arms and shako(s).
Tell me, what is this protective guard for?**
Or is the Crucifixion state property,
and you fear thieves or mice?
Or do you think to lend importance to the King of Kings?
Or with mighty patronage to save
the Lord crowned with prickly thorns,
the Christ, who obediently yielded His flesh
to the scourges of tormenters, to nails and spear?
Or are you fearful lest the rabble offend
Him whose execution redeemed the entire race of Adam,
and, so as not to crowd the strolling gentry,
it’s ordered not to admit the common folk here?

* This was originally a full hexameter line in the manuscript—“stood, pale, two weak women”—but Pushkin crossed out the adjectives.

** Tell me, what is this … for?” has a conversational tone that contrasts with the elevated and religious/archaic register of much of the poem.


Original

Мирская власть

Когда великое свершалось торжество
И в муках на кресте кончалось Божество,
Тогда по сторонам Животворяща Древа
Мария-грешница и Пресвятая Дева
          Стояли две жены,
В неизмеримую печаль погружены.
Но у подножия теперь Креста Честнаго,
Как будто у крыльца правителя градскаго,
Мы зрим поставленных на место жён святых
В ружье и кивере двух грозных часовых.
К чему, скажите мне, хранительная стража?
Или Распятие казённая поклажа,
И вы боитеся воров или мышей?
Иль мните важности придать Царю Царей?
Иль покровительством спасаете могучим
Владыку, тернием венчанного колючим,
Христа, предавшего послушно плоть Свою
Бичам мучителей, гвоздям и копию?
Иль опасаетесь, чтоб чернь не оскорбила
Того, Чья казнь весь род Адамов искупила,
И, чтоб не потеснить гуляющих господ,
Пускать не велено сюда простой народ?


Note from Michael Wachtel’s Commentary to Pushkin’s Lyric Poetry, 1826-1836

The poem is at once a powerful religious statement and a searing critique of contemporary society. It must have been precipitated by an event or a story, but there has been little agreement on what that might be. Prince Viazemskii suspected that it “probably” referred to the fact that on Holy Friday at the Kazan Cathedral (in Petersburg), soldiers stood watch before the “плащаница” (a life-sized image [either painted or embroidered] of Christ after he was removed from the cross). Other possible sources include a French engraving showing the crucifixion and two soldiers from Napoleon’s Old Guard standing in front of it. (See Lerner, 186–187).


James Falen’s pentameter version may read better as an English poem, but he had to streamline it just a little too much for my purposes: https://books.google.ru/books?id=gkt...wer%22&f=false

Hi, Carl—

Very nice translation! I’m a bit confused, though. In line 9 it says that we see the guards “на место” of the sainted women. Are the guards real people standing in front of and hiding the iconostasis where, presumably, the women are depicted, or have the women been painted over? I presume the former, since the N speculates that perhaps the purpose of the guards is to protect the picture from thieves or mice. Michael Wachtel’s note helps clarify this.

I wondered if Pushkin had intended to go back and fill out line 5 to make it conform to the meter. (You mentioned that the line had originally been hexameter, but I read the Russian as pentameter.)

It is interesting that in the picture, only two of the three or four women named Mary (not to mention the Beloved Disciple, John) who were present are depicted. I wondered if Pushkin was slyly presenting an allegory of the Church’s view of women as either paragons of virtue or vessels of depravity. Of course, it was not unusual for such depictions of saints to omit characters mentioned in the Bible who would have been present.

What seems more certain to me is that Pushkin is presenting an allegory showing how a corrupt Church cannot bring the mass of people to Christ, but actively keeps them away, protecting the privilege of the aristocrats who give financial support to it.

I always feel a bit lost when reading Pushkin. He is sometimes an ardent monarchist and sometimes a passionate proponent of democracy. His gleeful description of the execution of Louis XVI and his family in his “Ode to Liberty” is disturbing. No wonder Tsar Alexander I exiled him. He is sometimes devoutly Orthodox and sometimes an atheist. Even his treatment of women can be feminist or misogynist.

I enjoyed your translation!

Glenn

The way I read it was that Pushkin was contrasting the actual crucifixion (lines 1-6) with the modern situation (lines 7ff). My impression was not that the women had been painted over or removed, but that they were simply not in the [picture, icon, whatever it was]; the guards have, as it were, taken their place.

Thanks, Glenn and Christine!

This is a question I hadn’t given much thought, and Christine has helped bring it into focus. I agree that Pushkin is contrasting the actual crucifixion with some modern scene in which sentries are guarding the crucifix and the two Maries are absent.

The original hexameter line was “Стояли, бледные, две слабые жены.” Wachtel apparently thinks Pushkin meant to fill it out, because he says it should be printed “Стояли <…> две <…> жены,” but as far as I know, it has always been printed as an indented hemistich. The “weak women” are of course being contrasted with the fierce-looking sentries, and my first thought was that Pushkin decided to emphasize that contrast using the short line rather than adjectives. It’s something I suppose we’ll never know.

There’s certainly a contrast between the Blessed Mary and the “Sinner Mary,” and in some of his poems, Pushkin seems to have something of a Madonna–Whore mindset, but here I thought their equality was more important—in contrast to the sanctimonious discrimination of church and state officials. I guess that’s close to what you're suggesting.

Remember that he was 18 and just out of school when he wrote “Ode to Liberty,” and he wrote the outrageously blasphemous “Гавриилиада” in his early twenties. It’s impossible to imagine him writing these in his thirties.

Glenn and whoever else happens by:

I’d like nothing better than to translate the short line as “two women in distress,” but that phrase, I think, has acquired an idiomatic meaning that ruins it for my purposes. Am I right?

Hi, Carl—

In the context of the crucifixion and the poem, “two women in distress” makes excellent sense.
The original, “Стояли [бледные], две [слабые] жены,” is literally, “They stood, pale, two weak women.” I think “in distress” nicely captures the obvious situation and clarifies the line’s missing words.

Thanks, Glenn. I’ve made the change, and we’ll see if anyone objects. It may have been nothing more than the echo of “damsel in distress” that was putting me off.

Hi, Carl—

Just a couple of items I thought I’d share:

1. In L1, I am having trouble stressing “the” to make a hexameter line. Could you replace it with “His?”

2. In L7, the word order seems awkward in English, and I’m having trouble stressing “of.” I notice that you have no sub feet in your iambic hexameter, but if you could tolerate a trochee and an anapest, you could try:
But now, placed at the foot of the Cross of Calvary,

Those were the only two nits I could pick. Lovely work!

Glenn

Sorry to have neglected you both after you've been so generous with comment.

Briefly, I don't think you needed to worry about any damsel-in-distress echoes. I'd be more concerned about the inversion in the next line, which could be easily tweaked:

the Blessed Virgin and the sinner Magdalene,
     two women in distress
and inwardly immersed in sorrow measureless.

>>>
the Blessed Virgin and the sinner Magdalene,
     two women in distress,
immersed in sorrow that was measureless.

Thanks again, Glenn. “The” in L1 is another case where a naturally unstressed word is automatically promoted because of its position between two other unstressed syllables. That’s the theory, anyway. Of course, we don’t give it a strong stress in reading, but it carries the stress nonetheless. The same is true of “on” in L2 and “of” in L7. I could change “the” to “His,” but I think I prefer not giving any hints about whose victory it is until L2. I’ll think about L7, but I tend to go very light on substitutions, since they’re not popular in Russian poetry. I’m slowly loosening up on that, and your advice and verses are a good influence, I think.

Thanks, Julie. I’ve learned on the Sphere to avoid inversions, and I’ve occasionally given Glenn a hard time about them, but I’m not as concerned about them here, since Pushkin is using elevated and archaic language for effect. I am thinking about your suggested tweak, which would require an extra foot to work, e.g.:

“immersed in sorrow whose extent was measureless.”

That sounds a bit fillerish to me, though you might say the same about “inwardly.”

I consider it bad etiquette to make anyone feel obliged to comment on anything, but your comments are so useful that I’m always tempted. )))