Publication
Amsterdam De Arbeiderspers 1981
ISBN
902950191X / 9789029501910
Language
Collection
Description
Andrei Bely's novel Petersburg is considered one of the four greatest prose masterpieces of the 20th century. In this new edition of the best-selling translation, the reader will have access to the translators' detailed commentary, which provides the necessary historical and literary context for understanding the novel, as well as a foreword by Olga Matich, acclaimed scholar of Russian literature. Set in 1905 in St. Petersburg, a city in the throes of sociopolitical conflict, the novel follows university student Nikolai Apollonovich Ableukhov, who has gotten entangled with a revolutionary terrorist organization with plans to assassinate a government official-Nikolai's own father, Apollon Apollonovich Ableukhov. With a sprawling cast of characters, set against a nightmarish city, it is all at once a historical, political, philosophical, and darkly comedic novel.… (more)
Genres
Subjects
User reviews
LibraryThing member GlebtheDancer
St. Petersburg is a strange book, set during the first socialist revolutions in Russia in 1905, written in 1916 with the Tsars losing their grip on power, and revised in 1922, after the Bolshevik revolution had succeeded. It covers a period of about 24 hours, in which Nikolai Ableukhov, an
St. Petersburg is often cited as a pioneer of modernist fiction. Although it covers similar territory to Dostoevsky's 'The Devils', its reliance on different narrative viewpoints and psychological slants set it apart. At times it borders on horror, as a lovesick and disturbed Nikolai stalks his love wearing a mask and cape, like a ghoul on the misty streets. Although clearly political, it is as much a 'father and son' novel as one about revolution, with Nikolai's reactionary politics and Apollon's fustiness presented as both a cause of, and metaphor for, Russia on the brink of revolution. This very human approach, combined with a genuine spookiness touched with comic absurdity, made for a fascinating and unique book. It was a very enjoyable read, but just disturbing enough to be uncomfortable. A book I enjoyed a lot.
Show More
anarchist and reactionary revolutionary, attempts to plant a bomb in his father's study. His father, Apollon, is a dignitary of the old guard, representing old Russia to Nikolai and his group. The bomb, in an old sardine tin, is planted early in the novel, and ticks away in the background as Apollon and Nikolai attend a society function and travel the streets of their home city.St. Petersburg is often cited as a pioneer of modernist fiction. Although it covers similar territory to Dostoevsky's 'The Devils', its reliance on different narrative viewpoints and psychological slants set it apart. At times it borders on horror, as a lovesick and disturbed Nikolai stalks his love wearing a mask and cape, like a ghoul on the misty streets. Although clearly political, it is as much a 'father and son' novel as one about revolution, with Nikolai's reactionary politics and Apollon's fustiness presented as both a cause of, and metaphor for, Russia on the brink of revolution. This very human approach, combined with a genuine spookiness touched with comic absurdity, made for a fascinating and unique book. It was a very enjoyable read, but just disturbing enough to be uncomfortable. A book I enjoyed a lot.
Show Less
LibraryThing member HadriantheBlind
"Time sharpens its teeth for everything-it devours body and soul and stone."
This is no ordinary book, and it was a mistake to think I could read it like one.
It is fantastically dense, with layers upon layers of symbolism, history - a very Russian book. Which is appropriate, as it deals with the
This is no ordinary book, and it was a mistake to think I could read it like one.
It is fantastically dense, with layers upon layers of symbolism, history - a very Russian book. Which is appropriate, as it deals with the
Show More
Russian idea of identity. The unusual style and use of symbols is very off-putting, but you become accustomed to it, if not totally comprehending. I will have to return to this book in the future. It deserves as much. Show Less
LibraryThing member funkendub
There are two translations of this available and the one published by Grove is shite, so caveat lecter.
LibraryThing member nog
Nabokov called it one of the best books of the 20th century. It's good, but really. The city and history are the real characters of this symbolist novel. It doesn't drag like a lot of Russian literature. I went and looked at photos of St. Petersburg and its monuments when I first started reading;
Show More
if you haven't been to that city, it helps. Show Less
LibraryThing member DRFP
"Not so loud, Nikolai Apollonovich - not so loud: people might hear us here!"
"They won't understand anything: it's quite impossible to understand..."
These sorts of modernist novels aren't really my cup of tea, I read them for the sake of it, and Petersburg didn't really do anything to change my
Historically important, sure. A pleasant read? That's another thing. But, to be fair, when contemplating whether to read a novel that is called a precursor to Ulysses you ought to know what you're letting yourself in for.
"They won't understand anything: it's quite impossible to understand..."
These sorts of modernist novels aren't really my cup of tea, I read them for the sake of it, and Petersburg didn't really do anything to change my
Show More
mind about such books. There are the surreal elements, the various allusions throughout, and the often incoherent mumblings of the characters that at times makes this hard work to get through. At other times there's a haunting beauty to the novel and some quite touching passages; it's just shame they're a slim section of the story.Historically important, sure. A pleasant read? That's another thing. But, to be fair, when contemplating whether to read a novel that is called a precursor to Ulysses you ought to know what you're letting yourself in for.
Show Less
LibraryThing member JVioland
Interesting take on the city in 1905 Russia. Like a travelogue.
LibraryThing member RussellBittner
I’ll generally give any novel or collection of short stories fifty pages before I give up. In the case of Boris Nikolaevich Bugayev’s (nom de plume: Andrey Biely) St. Petersburg, I gave it two hundred—and then abandoned ship. I just didn’t get it.
Both John Cournos, who wrote the
It could well have to do with my immediate reading environment: almost exclusively in the NYC subway system. But I do much of my reading on the subway – and do it to a good end. Unfortunately, this was not the case with St. Petersburg. I found the plot line every bit as noisy and chaotic as the subway system itself.
Far be it from me to dissuade anyone with a serious interest in Russian literature from undertaking a read of St. Petersburg and correcting, for him- or herself (and for any other potentially interested reader her at Goodreads my negative verdict. I’d prefer to think I just don’t have the right stuff for Biely.
Rather than give the novel a low rating, however, I'd prefer to leave that part of this review blank. If there's any fault here, I have to believe it's with the reader and not with the writer or translator.
RRB
11/08/13
Brooklyn, NY
Both John Cournos, who wrote the
Show More
Introduction and did the Russian – English translation, and George Reavey, who provided a Foreword, may rightly feel that Biely was an unrecognized genius. I don’t dispute that. I just don’t get him.It could well have to do with my immediate reading environment: almost exclusively in the NYC subway system. But I do much of my reading on the subway – and do it to a good end. Unfortunately, this was not the case with St. Petersburg. I found the plot line every bit as noisy and chaotic as the subway system itself.
Far be it from me to dissuade anyone with a serious interest in Russian literature from undertaking a read of St. Petersburg and correcting, for him- or herself (and for any other potentially interested reader her at Goodreads my negative verdict. I’d prefer to think I just don’t have the right stuff for Biely.
Rather than give the novel a low rating, however, I'd prefer to leave that part of this review blank. If there's any fault here, I have to believe it's with the reader and not with the writer or translator.
RRB
11/08/13
Brooklyn, NY
Show Less
LibraryThing member RussellBittner
I’ll generally give any novel or collection of short stories fifty pages before I give up. In the case of Boris Nikolaevich Bugayev’s (nom de plume: Andrey Biely) St. Petersburg, I gave it two hundred — and then abandoned ship. I just didn’t get it.
Both John Cournos, who wrote the
It could well have to do with my immediate reading environment: almost exclusively in the NYC subway system. But I do much of my reading on the subway – and do it to a good end. Unfortunately, this was not the case with St. Petersburg. I found the plot line every bit as noisy and chaotic as the subway system itself.
Far be it from me to dissuade anyone with a serious interest in Russian literature from undertaking a read of St. Petersburg and correcting, for him- or herself (and for any other potentially interested reader here at Goodreads) my negative verdict. I’d prefer to think I just don’t have the right stuff for Biely.
RRB
11/08/13
Brooklyn, NY
Both John Cournos, who wrote the
Show More
Introduction and did the Russian – English translation, and George Reavey, who provided a Foreword, may rightly feel that Biely was an unrecognized genius. I don’t dispute that. I just don’t get him.It could well have to do with my immediate reading environment: almost exclusively in the NYC subway system. But I do much of my reading on the subway – and do it to a good end. Unfortunately, this was not the case with St. Petersburg. I found the plot line every bit as noisy and chaotic as the subway system itself.
Far be it from me to dissuade anyone with a serious interest in Russian literature from undertaking a read of St. Petersburg and correcting, for him- or herself (and for any other potentially interested reader here at Goodreads) my negative verdict. I’d prefer to think I just don’t have the right stuff for Biely.
RRB
11/08/13
Brooklyn, NY
Show Less
LibraryThing member Garrison0550
I've read it a couple of times now. I highly recommend it - great book.
LibraryThing member Steve38
Definitely a strange book. At first glance a Laurence Stern ramble full of digressions. But the book was written, rewritten and revised many times over many years. If it is a ramble it is a very deliberate one. A very conscious adoption of a specific style carried through with great imagination and
Show More
persistence. A drift from figurative to impressionism tending towards abstract in literature rather than art. Thanks to the extensive footnotes a realisation that there is much, much more to this than a casual reading gives. Show Less
LibraryThing member colligan
First, what Petersburgs is not. A beach read. There is nothing simple about Petersburg. Even the plot, which on the surface seems simple, is just a framework on which hangs the complex experiences of its characters.
I came to this work knowing nothing of Bely or the Symbolist movement of which he
The author uses unique literary techniques to reveal multiple facets of both characters and setting. Reality is not so much broken apart as it is opened up to view what's inside. I felt somwhat like a tourist observing and appreciating a wonderful scene but not taking the time to explore the depths of what I see. Probably would have been better to have read at a younger age when time didn't seem like such a precious commodity. The work deserves serious attention.
I came to this work knowing nothing of Bely or the Symbolist movement of which he
Show More
was a part. The work's introduction was of great help but didn't begin to unravel the depth of the work. It became obvious the work was a masterpiece but also one that deserved serious and in-depth attention. I felt the work would make an excellent focus for Masters or Doctoral study. The author uses unique literary techniques to reveal multiple facets of both characters and setting. Reality is not so much broken apart as it is opened up to view what's inside. I felt somwhat like a tourist observing and appreciating a wonderful scene but not taking the time to explore the depths of what I see. Probably would have been better to have read at a younger age when time didn't seem like such a precious commodity. The work deserves serious attention.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Castlelass
“He was simply seized by an animal feeling for his own invaluable life; he had no desire to return from the corridor; he did not have the courage to glance into his own rooms; he now had neither strength nor time to look for the bomb a second time; everything got mixed up in his head, and he
One of the most unusual novels I have read. It is set in Petersburg in 1905 during the first Russian Revolution (the one we have largely forgotten). Published in 1913, this book portrays the city just before a series of revolutions that would dramatically change the course of history. It is not typical Russian literature – it does not follow a straight-forward plot or structure. The city itself serves as one of the main characters.
The narrative is infused with shapes:
“After the line, of everything symmetrical the figure that soothed him most was the square. He would give himself over for long periods to the unreflecting contemplation of: pyramids, triangles, parallelepipeds, cubes, trapezoids. Disquiet took hold of him only at the contemplation of a truncated cone. Zigzag lines he could not bear.”
and a whirl of colors:
“To their left the last gold and the last crimson fluttered in the leaves of the garden; on coming closer, a blue tit could be seen; a rustling thread stretched submissively from the garden on to the stones, to wind and chase between the feet of a passing pedestrian, and to murmur as it wove from leaves a red-and-yellow web of words.”
It is slow-paced. There are many digressions. It is occasionally absurd – the statue of the Bronze Horseman (Peter the Great) jumps off its pedestal and gallops around the city. The tone is one of foreboding. It is mostly dark, with a few hints of humor.
I read the English translation by John Elsworth. His afterword sheds light on some of the difficulties in translating it. This book is considered a classic and is worth reading for the historical perspective alone. I recognize the literary merit of this book but did not always enjoy reading it. I found it inventive and modernistic for its time.
Show More
could no longer remember exactly either the minute or the hour when the time expired: any moment might prove to be the fatal one. All he could do was wait here trembling in the corridor until daybreak.”One of the most unusual novels I have read. It is set in Petersburg in 1905 during the first Russian Revolution (the one we have largely forgotten). Published in 1913, this book portrays the city just before a series of revolutions that would dramatically change the course of history. It is not typical Russian literature – it does not follow a straight-forward plot or structure. The city itself serves as one of the main characters.
The narrative is infused with shapes:
“After the line, of everything symmetrical the figure that soothed him most was the square. He would give himself over for long periods to the unreflecting contemplation of: pyramids, triangles, parallelepipeds, cubes, trapezoids. Disquiet took hold of him only at the contemplation of a truncated cone. Zigzag lines he could not bear.”
and a whirl of colors:
“To their left the last gold and the last crimson fluttered in the leaves of the garden; on coming closer, a blue tit could be seen; a rustling thread stretched submissively from the garden on to the stones, to wind and chase between the feet of a passing pedestrian, and to murmur as it wove from leaves a red-and-yellow web of words.”
It is slow-paced. There are many digressions. It is occasionally absurd – the statue of the Bronze Horseman (Peter the Great) jumps off its pedestal and gallops around the city. The tone is one of foreboding. It is mostly dark, with a few hints of humor.
I read the English translation by John Elsworth. His afterword sheds light on some of the difficulties in translating it. This book is considered a classic and is worth reading for the historical perspective alone. I recognize the literary merit of this book but did not always enjoy reading it. I found it inventive and modernistic for its time.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Gypsy_Boy
Three stars for my enjoyment plus two for my respect. Given the date of its composition (first published in 1916), this is a mind-numbingly original and remarkable book. The story is so simple it can be told in a sentence or two. But this is a book that, ultimately, defies easy explanation or,
I enjoyed Petersburg. Really. It is, I think unarguably, a very dense work, though, and a fair amount of work on the part of the reader. I will say, however, that the narrative is mostly very clear. Indeed, sometimes I think Bely was trying to be purposefully obtuse. Still, though I started it with great apprehension, I did enjoy it and I would recommend it.
Show More
indeed, translation. It is so clearly and deeply rooted in Russian culture, in St. Petersburg (both history and culture), and in its times (about the 1905 revolution) that one simply has to either know about those things (i.e., be born Russian) or rely as I did upon very substantial and extensive notes. Don’t misunderstand: the notes were brilliant and indispensable. But the more I read, the more I realized that this almost impossibly inventive book is inextricably interwoven with its context. (Example: the lengthy note explaining the significance in why a particular building is painted yellow!) All that said: read this book! I highly recommend the translation I read (Maguire and Malmstad: 290 pages plus 60 pages of notes). I simply would not have understand this book at all without the notes. And I cannot praise it highly enough. It’s not entirely my cup of tea, but the achievement is so plain, so enormous, and so…mind-boggling, that I can understand why Nabokov considered it one of the four greatest books of the 20th century.I enjoyed Petersburg. Really. It is, I think unarguably, a very dense work, though, and a fair amount of work on the part of the reader. I will say, however, that the narrative is mostly very clear. Indeed, sometimes I think Bely was trying to be purposefully obtuse. Still, though I started it with great apprehension, I did enjoy it and I would recommend it.
Show Less
Awards
Read Russia Translation Prize (2010-2012)
Original publication date
1916 (1st ed.)
1922 (rev. ed., Berlin)
1928 (USSR)
1967 (French transl.)