In this week’s short poems “Sing Not, My Love,” by Alexander Pushkin and “Farewell to Russia” by Mikhail Lermontov, I took note of stanza and line repetitions, both of which contribute to a recursive, and almost nostalgic, perspective on each author’s life during their periods of exilement. To begin with some background from earlier class discussions: both of these authors had dominated the Russian literature produced in the mid 19^th century. Their contributions to lyric poetry during the literary era of Russian Romanticism remain as some of the most significant additions to recorded Russian poetry (Gillespie). I found that a large component of Russian Romanticism revolves around nostalgia for the past. This “longing for the past” is expressed not only through the subject matter of these two poems— which references old Russia whilst written from exile—but is also expressed through form—whether that be the repetition of entire stanzas, or the couplet repetition evident in Lermontov’s “Farewell to Russia.”

To begin, the most prevalent stylistic choice utilized by Alexander Pushkin in “Sing Not, My Love,” is his entire duplication of the first stanza at the end of the poem, in which he expresses a sadness and distance from the memories of his childhood. Note that Pushkin begins this lyrical poem with a rejection of his childhood memories, symbolically represented as “Georgia’s songs” (Pushkin 1). His memories from his youth from the small southern province Georgia become encapsulated and represented by a channel of mixed emotions that possess a “mournful grace” (6). These memories harbor the fondness of his early years all while reminding him of his loss, specifically the “poor maiden’s face,” which we later learn is a “reference to Maria Raevskaya,” one of Pushkin’s first loves who had “followed her husband to Siberia when he was exiled” (129). I find it interesting that Pushkin invokes this historical character that followed her husband, Prince Sergey Volkonsky, who had been previously exiled to Serbia before Pushkin. The main difference between Volkonsky’s exile and Pushkin’s is that Volkonsky was trailed by the same lover that Pushkin had lost year’s prior. This detail, along with the repetition of the entire first stanza leads me to believe that Pushkin remains unresolved regarding his exile. He rejects the recognition of his old life, as it is no longer attainable nor pleasant for him. His lover most distinctly has chosen a different man who had inexcusably similar circumstances to Pushkin. What is most interesting is that this reference is closely followed by the aforementioned repeated stanza, as if the initial and ultimate presence of this stanza bounds Pushkin into isolation, leaving him handcuffed to the “haunting force—“ the recursive and seemingly eternal sentence to Siberia (11,12). The resolve of this stanza is rhythmically pleasing, precise, and accurate: it seems almost natural that instead of thinking forward, or looking back to his past childhood, he should remain both symbolically and physically entrapped between not only the bookends of repeated stanzas, but also the between the isolating forests of his Siberian exilement.

Furthermore, I found a similar stylistic choice utilized by Mikhail Lermontov in his “Farewell to Russia,” produced in 1840, which was promptly before his second exile (Manuylov, V.A. The Life of Lermontov). This shorter poem features a resolved narrator who begins with a quatrain referencing negative characteristics of Russia, calling it the “land of the masters— “the land of the unwashed” (Lermontov 2,1). Unlike Pushkin, Lermontov does not look nostalgically towards the past: he instead calls his very Russian’s “cringing slaves,” clearly rejecting them (4). Also, notice the clear sense of direction in Lermontov’s narrative. Instead of remaining encapsulated by a mix of mourning and rejection as does Pushkin in “Sing Not, My Love,” Lermontov hopefully lists his wishes for his exile: “peace[ful]” skies, and distance from “tsars” and “everspying eyes”(7,8). His clear and assured direction in thought is supported by the emphatic usage of couplet repetition in each adjacent phrase: “Land of…”, “You…”, and “Far from” (1-2,3-4, 7-8). Each of these repetitions reference a strong sense of movement away from “unwashed Russia, and towards the “peace beneath Caucasian skies” (6). Finally, I find it very interesting that this poem precedes Lermontov’s second exile from Russia, and within this poem, Lermontov utilizes duple line repetition in order to emphasize direction of thought. It is arguable that this is a clear reference between style and meaning; I think it is safe to at least presume that with an experience of previous exilement, this line repetition could perhaps just represent his sureness to move on from his contentious Russian past.

In sum, I think that both of these poems, each by Pushkin and Lermontov, represent how different uses of rhetorical style can offer various interpretations of each poem’s relationship with exilement and nostalgia for the past. In my analysis, Pushkin’s repetition of a stanza informs my assumptions that Pushkin had perhaps felt entrapped by his exile and his isolation form society. His style seems to reflect both a physical and emotional isolation from both his past childhood and his future aspirations. Meanwhile, Lermontov’s anaphoric repetition at the beginning of each two lines in his “ Farewell to Russia” functions as an emphatic and resolute method to dismiss his past and move towards his future exile. Lermontov’s strong rhetorical technique establishes a strong sense of direction to which he envisions a peace in isolation. Thus, even though both of these lyric poems regard Romanticism, including its themes of nostalgia, each poem utilizes various repetitive styles, which inform various interpretations of each author’s perspective on exile.