Feliks Jezierski 1880
In 1880, Feliks Jezierski’s translation of the poems 10, 13, 14, 15, 18, 25, 29, 24, 25 and 36 was published in the Biblioteka Warszawska. In 1896, the poem 15 was presented in the journal Obrazy literatury powszechnej with the aim to compare it to the earlier translation by Duchińska.
Compared to the earlier text, the translation by Jezierski is much more extensive and detailed. In the introductory part, the translator focuses on describing the basics of the epic using the great epics of Europe as a base for this. He dedicates a large part of the article to the notion that primeval epic poetry is the purest and most exact form of describing the sentience of the people. In his opinion, the popularity of the Kalevala can be explained by the integral part that magic plays in the story and how it touches the lives of all the characters. The translator states that magic is “the strongest monument of the primal meta physics”, which still makes the words, not only of folk poetry singers, but also of ordinary commoners surprisingly strong. The reason for the late publication of this primeval epic poetry is, according to the author, problems connected with using the trochaic alliteration meter, the lack of end rhymes and that the Finnish language does not follow one single pattern. Contrary to S. Duchińska, F. Jezierski presents the plot of the epic directly in the beginning in order to give the reader a chance to come to his/her own conclusions. Only after this, Jezierski begins to compare these to the translator’s analysis. Compared to the version from 1896, the translator is more clearly present in the text and the translation is, to a great extent, a collection of thoughts and feelings, that the writer has experienced when reading the Kalevala.
Jezierski has chosen a few single songs and focuses on themes that he finds significant. Unlike the earlier translator, he has not translated the songs in a consecutive order, but instead, he proceeds freely, for example, from the theme in the 5th poem to the 25th poem. He summarises Aino’s story into two sentences, whereas he gives much room to the character Kullervo. In the same way as in the earlier translation, the text is filled with comparisons and explanations that help the reader to understand the story, but on the other hand, they make the form and nature of the original text blurry. When Jezierski writes about the encounter between Väinämöinen and the witch queen of Pohjola, Jezierski compares the latter to a “Homeric goddess, who chases the danger away”. Jezierski says that Sampo is a sword or a jewel and that it is a talisman.
As his predecessor, Jezierski summarizes and shortens the text completely freely: At the end of the 10th poem, a side plot begins, the brothers Wajnamonen and Ilmarinen leave the scene, and we do not meet them until in the 16th poem. Jezierski writes a lot about Lemminkäinen and the sufferings of his mother. Both goodbyes and sorrows are depicted in a poetic form, with a large number of paraphrases and metaphors. When he describes the reaction of the mother who is in disbelief, Jezierski uses the expression “my living eyes tell lies”. After this, the translator returns to the main plot of the story “in order to get to a livelier character, to the unhappy Kulerwo” after the 30th poem. The description of Kullervo’s fate is also filled with numerous comments and comparisons. “When we add the wrinkled clothes of Oidipus’ kingship to these bloody talks, we have a tragedy of the same grand dimensions as a Greek tragedy”. The translation ends with the story of Marjatta, who “while she speaks calls , for unknown reasons, the rooster a German berry”.
Thus, at least one basic characteristic of Finnish folk poetry has been totally unknown to Jezierski. However, similar mistakes can also be found in the version from 1974. This shows that it is difficult to translate certain expressions that are characteristic for the Finnish language, both in style and grammatically, or even more so, that it is completely impossible to translate these – a problem that not only the Polish translations encounter. It was not possible to include the trochaic octameter or alliterations in the finalised translation, which is something that Jezierski mentions in the beginning.
In the theoretical part, F. Jezierski portrays the Kalevala as a primeval epic – a portrayal which is very typical for the time period. According to the author, an epic tale springs to life when the old world order is destroyed. The purpose of the epic tale is, thus, to preserve something form the past. The Kalevala represents the birth of the primeval spirit, which is being visualised as a way to approach nature and human beings. It is the spokesperson for gods and destiny and it is in no way responsible for either happiness or unhappiness. Jezierski sees the epic process as mechanic imprints that historical occurrences leave in the memory and life of the human being. Although Jezierski places the Kalevala next to the works Iliad, Odyssey, the Song of the Nibelungs and Hiawatha, he, nonetheless, objects strongly to the pan-Germanic aim to group the world of the Kalevala with the Song of the Nibelungs and the Edda. By pointing out the differences between the epic tales, he depicts the Kalevala as the scene of tribal battles, when the German epic tales already have moved on to political battles.
Similarities between people
In the same manner as Duchińska, Jezierski compares the Kalevala to Polish folklore and states that, despite everything, it is possible to observe great similarities between the Finnish and the Polish people. He identifies six themes that connects the Polish and the Finnish people. The first is the motive of the unhappy girl who, in her desperation, throws herself in the water. He compares Aino to the traditional story of Wanda, who did not want to marry a German man, as well as to Mickiewicz’s ballad about Świtezianka and even to princess Kunigunda. Another common motive is the very common topic in Polish folklore: a girl who is getting married says goodbye to her childhood home. As a third similarity he mentions the common themes in nursery rhymes. The fourth one is the rooster, which is a companion to the characters both in the Kalevala and in Polish folktales.
Jezierski finds similarities also in songs that begin with an optical delusion. “ What is that white against the green, is it snow or a flock of swans? […] It’s not snow, it’s not a flock of swans, it’s Hassan-Aga’s tent…”, the Polish text says. In the 4th poem in the Kalevala, Väinämöinen is at first mistaken for “a cloud from east” or “dawn of day”. The last similar characteristic, that Jezierski mentions, is the expression of grief through a discussion with relatives: in Finnish poems “Miksi itket, ihana Aino? […] Kyll’ on syytä itkeäkin…” and in the Polish folk song (approximately) ”Why you weep, why you lamente? […] How would I not weep, how would I not lament?”
It is notable that Jezierski does not express his opinion on the earlier translation, but instead, he focuses on different poems and theoretical subjects than his predecessor. Both articles can be divided into three parts, of which only one is the actual translation. The second part is the introductory or commentary section, where the reasons for the creation and popularity of the Kalevala is discussed. The third part presents direct references to research on Polish folk poetry.
Anna Walkowiak: ”Kalevala puolalais-suomalaisten kulttuurikontaktien lähteenä 1800-luvulla”. Kalevala maailmalla. Helsinki: SKS. 2012.