SOURCE: "Axmatova's Civic Poem 'Stansy' and Its Pushkinian Antecedent," in Slavic and East European Journal, Vol. 37, No. 2, Summer, 1993, pp. 194-210.

[In the following essay, Ketchian traces many of the devices and allusions in Akhmatova's poem "Stansy" to Pushkin.]

The purpose of this paper is to analyze Axmatova's poem "Stansy" ("Stances"), first in terms of its obvious Pushkinian predecessor and then in terms of its structure and content. A look into the genre and the distinguishing specifics for each of the two poems involved will precede the discussion of Axmatova's "Stansy." It will be followed by an examination of the poem's evolution through textual variants as it bears on the present discussion. In spite of the obviously close thematic connection between Axmatova's Requiem 1935–1940 and her cycle "Cerepki" ("Shards"), that comparison must be relegated to a future investigation.

"Stansy" (stances or stanzas) is a challenging genre, or subgenre, of poetry to define and classify. In French literature stances were usually four-line strophes with unrepeated rhymes and an obligatory pause at the end of the fourth line. The genre's slight role in English literature can be judged by the fleeting mention given to it in the English-language encyclopedias. A case in point is The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, which states in the last paragraph of the entry on Stanza:

The term "s." is sometimes applied to independent poems of complex metrical pattern, such as the ballade, the sestina, and the sonnet (q.q.v.). Synonymous or analogous terms include the early English batch and stave (q.v.).

All this is of no help for the task at hand. Nor is The Poetic Dictionary by A. Kvjatkovskij (Poeticeskij slovar') more enlightening.

The most applicable entry is by Mixail L. Gasparov in Kratkaja literaturnaja ènciklopedija (Concise Literary Encyclopedia), where he posits the following characteristics for the Russian version of "stansy":

Once stances entered Russian poetry, of the enumerated features only those of genre remained: in Russian poetry of the end of the eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth, the term stances was applied to works of elegiac lyrics (most often meditative, less frequently, love lyrics), usually composed in quatrains, most often in iambic tetrameter. The most famous is Pushkin's "Stansy" ("In the hope of glory and good …"). By the second half of the nineteenth century with the gradual disappearance of distinctions between the lyrical genres, the term "stances" was no longer used.

Reference is made here to the most famous piece in the genre, Puskin's "Stansy" ("V nadezde slavy i dobra"), which is one of three pieces to bear the Russian version of this word in the title (a fourth uses the French "Stances"). The pieces by Puskin include one of the first poems written by Puskin in the Lycée, the French-language "Stances" (1814) in five quatrains on the topic of "seize the moment" ("lovi mgnoven'e"); "Stances. From Voltaire" ("Stansy (Iz Vol'tera)") in nine quatrains on love ending early and logic taking its place; "Stances to Tolstoj" ("Stansy Tolstomu") in six quatrains on "lovi mgnoven'e"; and the one under investigation, "Stansy" ("V nadezde slavy i dobra"), the only Russian one with no explanation in its title. In this poem Puskin probably avoided explanation by giving it a title that in his verse was linked to light moments; his objective was ostensibly to veil its important reflective allusions. The famous poem "Brozu li ia vdol' ulic sumnyx" is called "Stansy" in Vremennik Puskinskoj komissii. Sbornik naucnyx trudov.

Although Gasparov states that use of the genre by Russian poets waned noticeably ("vyxodit iz upotreblenija") in the second half of the nineteenth century, yet Esenin, Annenskij, Severjanin, Sologub, Bal'mont, Gumilev and Mandel'stam have such pieces. Their "Stances," however, display few similarities to the two under investigation. What is more, Axmatova's "Stances," by being an obvious reflection of Puskin's, quietly refers to the general tenor of the master's poem, a fact that allows Axmatova to concentrate much into fewer lines. In many ways, moreover, Axmatova's poem constitutes a contemporary compressed echo of Puskin's text in terms of content and idea.

Puskin's poem titled "Stansy," which opens with "V nadezde slavy i dobra," is the only one of the four poems relevant to the present comparison. This poem seems initially to have been created in Pskov in 1826 and completed upon the poet's release from exile the same year. His objective was to ameliorate the plight of the exiled Decembrists by drawing—with formidable artistic imagination—public and official attention to their treatment, by attempting to soften the attitudes of officials toward them, and, not least, by raising the spirits of the exiles. Moreover, in choosing this named genre with its inherent meditative qualities, Puskin brought to the fore his esthetic deliberations on the role of the aristocracy, on the powers entrusted to an autocrat, as well as on past and present, juxtaposing the new ruler with a great predecessor. Indeed, "the poeticized event is not just different from real experience but also more durable, and perhaps more valuable, as well." His [translated] poem reads:

     Stances
 
     In the hope of glory and good
     I gaze ahead without fear:
     The beginning of Peter's glorious days
     Was marred by rebellions and executions.
 
     But with truth he captivated hearts,
     But with learning he tamed customs,
     And from the rebellious Strelets
     Before him Dolgorukij was distinguished.
     With his autocratic hand
     He boldly sowed enlightenment,
     He did not scorn his native land:
     He was aware of its destiny.
 
     Now an academician, now a hero,
     Now a navigator, now a carpenter,
     He with his all-encompassing soul
     On the throne was an eternal worker.
 
     Take pride in the family resemblance;
     In all be like your forebear:
     Like him, indefatigable and firm,
     And in memory, like him, forgiving.

The history and concept of this poem are treated extensively in D. D. Blagoj's study Tvorceskij put' Puskina: 1826–1830. An appeal to the newly enthroned Nicholas I, who in 1826 recalled Puskin from exile in Mixajlovskoe, it illumines the poet's conciliatory expectations and hope for the Decembrists' return under Nicholas' new rule. Puskin's esthetic embodiment of his wish and plan for the return of the Decembrists from Siberia was, regrettably, perceived by his circle more as a form of flattery and a retreat from his convictions. Hence his subsequent reply in verse in 1828, "Druz'jam" ("To My Friends"). Because Nicholas ostensibly fashioned himself after Peter I, Puskin (mostly in anticipation and hope) appears to have portrayed him as striving for the same objectives—a means of appeasing and guiding the tsar in the desired direction. While Puskin's speaker's respect for the tsar sounds rather genuine, Axmatova's attempted praise in the abhorred fifteen-poem cycle of 1950, "Slava miru" ("Glory to Peace"), sounds wooden and untypical of her poetry, almost as if the most recent recipient of the Stalin Prize had penned them. Thus, her frantic desire to secure the release from prison of her son Lev Gumilev (1912–1992), who after fighting valiantly in World War Two was arrested for the third time in 1949, was not translated into true art.

To be sure, literary aggrandizement of Peter has a long history. It was practiced in the West by Voltaire in his historical work Histoire de l'empire de Russie sous Pierre le Grand, as well as by most eighteenth-century Russian writers, including Feofan Prokopovic in "Sermon on the Interment of the Most Illustrious, Most Sovereign Peter the Great," Antiox Kantemir in his unfinished heroic epic "Petrida," Mixail Lomonosov in odes and especially in "Slovo poxval'noe Petru Velikomu" ("Eulogy on Peter the Great") and in the two cantos of the heroic epic "Petr Velikij" ("Peter the Great"; twenty-four cantos were planned), as well as by Gavriil Derzavin. A cursory reading of Puskin's "Zametki po russkoj istorii XVIII veka" ("Notes on Eighteenth Century Russian History") suggests admiration for Peter the Great as a great political and historical figure, but Sam Driver notes that "a close reading shows that in fact the poet equates the emperor with tyranny and inhuman despotism" and, what is more, Puskin was concerned about the welfare of the serfs and the nobility alike. Unlike Aleksandr Griboedov, Puskin disapproved of unlimited autocracy, even for Peter, hence the ambiguous depiction of the emperor in The Bronze Horseman and elsewhere. Puskin's "Stances," contends Blagoj, is a terse introduction to subsequent works by him connected with the theme of Peter, namely Arap Petra Velikogo (The Blackamoor of Peter the Great), Poltava, and Mednyi vsadnik (The Bronze Horseman). The example of merciful Peter the Pardoner was grounded in certain facts, among them his pardon of Prince Jakov Dolgorukij's audacities, which was sung by Derzavin in his ode "Vel'moza" ("The Grandee") and by Kondratij Ryleev (one of the executed Decembrists) in the poem "Grazdanskoe muzestvo" ("Civic Valor"). In contrast to the excerpt in "Notes on Eighteenth Century Russian History," Puskin in "Stances" mostly underscores Peter's positive traits and achievements, albeit a discordant note resounds in the mention of the Streltsy. Puskin's poetic speaker in "Stances," present through the personal pronoun in line two, fades out thereafter, which lends, as it were, a collective character to the plea. Acknowledging in stanza one the rebellions and executions at the onset of Peter's reign, Puskin then proceeds to highlight the Emperor's positive accomplishments which, to his mind, should be duplicated by Nicholas I, a bold implication for one only recently, and only tenuously, restored to favor. In stanza two the speaker points to a reconciliation between Peter and his subjects.

Stanzas three and four characterize Peter as the highest example of "tsar'-prosvetitel'" (an enlightened monarch)—much in the manner of Lomonosov in the two completed cantos of the epic "Peter the Great" and in his "Eulogy on Peter the Great." Blagoj notes parallels and analogies to virtually every word in Lomonosov—the leitmotif being the glorification of the "sage Teacher and Educator." Lexical echoes can also be observed, particularly in stanza four. Following Lomonosov's lead, Puskin further democratizes Peter. In doing so, his portrait comes close to that of a muzhik through descriptions of the emperor as "plotnik" (Lomonosov, in accordance with his own precepts of distinguishing three styles for appropriate topics, employs the higher-style word "stroitel" in the verse and the prosaic "plotnik" in his prose only) and "rabotnik" (Derzavin used this for the first time) in rhymed position for emphasis. Further, Puskin chooses the versatile word "sejal," which for all its lofty usage recalls also the practical meaning of a peasant sowing seeds in a field. Representing Peter as a reformer. Puskin calls on Nicholas for similar "mercy toward the fallen" ("milost' k padsim")—a plea that will be repeated in various forms to the end of his life. Yet Puskin refrains from spelling out his request in view of its being obvious to all concerned. In this poem Puskin remains hopeful of the realization of his objectives, a fact corroborated by what Blagoj terms "mazornyj jambiceskij stroj, kak u Lomonosova" ("an optimistic iambic arrangement like Lomonosov's"). Puskin's poem "Poslanie v Sibir'" ("Missive to Siberia"; beginning "Vo glubine sibirskix rud" ["In the bowels of Siberian mines"]) was commenced only a few days after the completion of "Stances" which, in turn, was written only nine days after "Poslanie k I. I. Puscinu" ("Epistle to I. I. Puscin"). Both "Missive to Siberia" and "Stances" were written in the same iambic tetrameter with alternate rhymes and the masculine rhymes placed first, in the odd lines. Indeed, all of Puskin's political lyrics of the second half of the 1820s will assume this form, with lexical echoing among the poems.

In following Puskin's lead for her poem's title, Axmatova alerts the reader to intertextuality without the overt imitation typical of a poem containing the word "imitation" in either the title or subtitle. Yet the indications of intertextuality are closer to the surface, and more easily recognized, than in cases where reference to subtexts does not exist. Axmatova's poem obviously takes Puskin's famous "Stances" as a touchstone and a point of reference, while placing it in her own tradition of balladic poems as well. I furnish here the Kralin-Axverdjan version of the [translated] poem as the one I find to be closest, at this level in scholarship, to Axmatova's finished version. Between lines, in fine print, are variant words and phrases from the other versions.

     Stances
 
     Moon of the Streltsy. Zamoskvorechye. Night.
     Like the procession at Calvary pass the hours of Holy Week.
     I am having a terrible nightmare. Can it really be that
     No one, no one, no one can help me?
 
     "It's not possible to live in the Kremlin,"
     The Preobrazhensky trooper is right,
     There the microbes of ancient atrocities still teem:
     Boris's wild fear, the malice of all the Ivans,
     And the Pretender's arrogance—instead of the people's rights.
                                   1940, April. Moscow

Axmatova employs Puskin's device of juxtaposing the present ruler with Peter, leaving out the specifics. In her poem the dichotomy is based upon two points of division between the oppressors and the oppressed. First, the Moscow River separates the speaker in Zamoskvorec'e geographically from the other, ruling bank of the Kremlin—"tam." Historically, Zamoskvorec'e was the Streltsy Quarter of Moscow. The speaker seems to unite with the trampled people at the very end and together to stand in opposition to the tyrants. (Puskin attempts to bring Peter closer to the people lexically through "plotnik.") Second, the unmentioned but intimated victims of Stalin are equated to Peter's victims, the Streltsy, who enter the poem by means of the epithet attached to the moon. Allusion to Christ's Passion (and to Requiem) is achieved through "krestnyj xod" and "Strastnaja nedelja." This dimension adds a third element to the comparison, which then counterbalances the three names of tsars and, consequently, the three types of reign that Peter sought to escape. Here, as in her essays on Puskin, Axmatova explains herself through her investigation of his biography and works. She then creates a tacit portrait of Stalin through a montage of his predecessors in the Kremlin using some of Puskin's words, as will be pointed out below. And her speaker's plea for help is rather muted, where her fear is not.

That the portrait is readily recognizable became clear to the poet through Lidija Cukovskaja's reaction to the poem. The incident is recorded by Cukovskaja in her memoirs, Zapiski ob Anne Axmatovoj (Notes on Anna Axmatova), where she notes that Axmatova wanted to include this piece in a collection she was preparing for publication in June of 1956. Together the friends deleted it, however, for fear the portrait of Stalin was too obvious:

Anna Axmatova very much wanted to offer [for publication—S. K.] "Stances." I, obviously, also wanted to … At first all is quiet, elegiac, pensive, and then suddenly in moving to the second quatrain, a blow of violent force. I'm wrong: not "in moving" but without any transition whatsoever, like the lash of a whip: "One mustn't live in the Kremlin."

And in the last two lines—a complete and accurate portrait of Stalin:

     Boris's wild fear and the malice of all the Ivans
      And the Pretender's arrogance instead of the people's rights.

"What do you think, will everyone guess that it is his portrait or have you alone guessed it?" asked Anna Andreevna.

"I think, everyone will."

"In that case, we won't include it," decided Anna Andreevna.

"Only Khrushchev is allowed to assail Stalin."

In a footnote on this page Cukovskaja says: "I quote this poem not in the variant in which it was published in the collection In Memory of Anna Axmatova but in the one Axmatova intended to include in The Course of Time, no. 61." Strangely, the version is identical to the one in Pamjati Anny Axmatovoj with the substitution of "zverstva drevnego" for "drevnej jarosti" in Pamjati. Lidija Cukovskaja must have forgotten that she had access to more than one version, for in the summer of 1990 she was incredulous when I pointed out the discrepancies between the two versions she had published. She began reciting the poem by heart as in Zapiski, and I pointed out on my sheet with four versions how the other one varied. Because the piece was not published in Axmatova's lifetime, all the several existing versions compete for recognition as final and authoritative. The variant favored by Axmatova, in all likelihood, is the one published by M. Kralin and G. R. Axverdjan alike, quoted above, with the exception of the former's division of lines. The vocabulary is closer to the time of the Ivans, and the punctuation, with the quotation marks in line five, is preferable to that of the other variants. The division of what should be line five into two separate lines—into lines five and six—as opposed to all other variants, is less likely as Axmatova's final version, since to this reader the division not only disrupts the poem's structural unity with Puskin but also the more frequent stanzaic organization into quatrains for Russian poems titled "Stances." Thus, Cukovskaja's entry of June 1, 1956, shows that both Cukovskaja and Axmatova wanted to include "Stances" in the collection under preparation.

The two "Stances," iambic in meter and structured in quatrains, differ, however, in other formal aspects. Puskin's five quatrains are composed in a neutral, rather light and optimistic-sounding iambic tetrameter (his other two Russian "Stances" are likewise in iambic tetrameter) with alternating masculine and feminine rhymes, closing on the feminine rhymes. This pattern of rhymes, ending with feminine rhymes, softens the poem's manner and conveys to the reader the hope that informs the comparisons and didacticisms. Whether the hope is actual, feigned, or reserved is debatable. Puskin further commends Peter's ability to distinguish between the violent and unruly Streltsy ("bujnyj strelec") of 1698 and the aristocratic dissident Prince Jakov Dolgorukij. The peroration enforces Puskin's mounting unformulated appeal—a pardon for the aristocratic Decembrists, and, if the poem was commenced in Pskov, for the poet himself as well.

Axmatova's two quatrains of weighty and dignified iambic hexameter with enclosing rhymes—less common in Russian verse than rhyming couplets or alternate rhymes—begin and end with forceful, choppy masculine rhymes. While Axmatova obviously aligns her aristocratic son Lev Gumilev with Prince Dolgorukij, who was pardoned by the Emperor, her fear of execution for her son and for others translates Puskin's "bujnyj strelec" into "streleckaja luna," i.e., a moon overlooking nightmarish deaths, which further conflates with the yellow moon in Requiem and Innokentij Annenskij's frightening yellow moon. Depending on which of the published versions is taken as Axmatova's choice for a final version (Puskin has negligible variations in the Jubilee Edition), the poem appears to have a dual focus—an unspecified, fairly obvious poetic speaker who appears as the twice-repeated personal pronoun "mne" in stanza one, and the vague but recognizable image of Stalin, cleverly montaged from mention of the names and traits of previous occupants of the Kremlin. The fact that Peter moved out of the Kremlin attests, in the speaker's understanding, to his determination to break with the atrocities of the past. In the context of Puskin's poem. Axmatova's metonymical mention of Peter as Preobrazenec (it was the Preobrazenskij Regiment he belonged to) distances Peter's reign, which ultimately had positive results, from Stalin's mass Terror. Peter's necessary harshness for the country's eventual good is thus contrasted to Stalin's unwarranted atrocities. The speaker seems to be urging the current occupant to leave the Kremlin and to follow Peter's lead.

Axmatova's "Stances," published in four different Western imprints until 1989, after which it was included in Soviet collections of Axmatova's works, has five major variants, including the two noted by Cukovskaja. The van der Eng-Liedmeier version seems to be an earlier draft. It even lacks the title and year common to all other versions. The version in Cukovskaja's Zapiski and those of Kralin and Axverdjan are nearly identical, save for punctuation marks and some vocabulary distinctions: in line six "zdes'" "—"tam","Ivanov" and the added "i" ("and") for the rhythm as well as for historic color in line seven—"Ioannov," in line five "ne nado"—"ne mozno" and more information on the venue of creation (Moscow) and the time (April, which makes Strastnaja nedelja relevant to the time of writing) in Kralin and Axverdjan. I believe that the Kralin and Axverdjan version is the favored one, but that Axmatova wanted to present the Cukovskaja version, as slightly more innocuous, for publication.

Both poems have an equally interesting structure. Puskin's "Stansy" is built on a concept of two's, a structure that can covey a sense of rhetorical balance so long as Nicholas decides to be similar to Peter. Semantically juxtaposed are the two tsars; the poet and the Decembrists; the Strelets and the aristocrat Dolgorukij coupled with the aristocratic poetic speaker. The obvious morphological symmetry in lines one, four, thirteen, fourteen, and eighteen constitutes nothing out of the ordinary: "Slavy i dobra; mjatezi i kazni; akademik—geroj; moreplavatel'—plotnik neutomim i tverd." In proximity, however, to other expressions of doubling the structural symmetry, too, becomes apparent. Anaphorical pairings lend syntactic balance for both contrast and/or juxtaposition as needed. The correspondences are: V—Vo (lines 1, 18); No—No (lines 5, 6); I—I (lines 7, 20); To—To (lines 13, 14); On—On (lines 10, 12). Also similar are: Pred nim—Kak on (lines 8, 19; as being connected with a personal pronoun in the third person which refers to Peter); Nacalo—Na trone (lines 3, 16; not only due to similarity of the two initial sounds but because of contrast/juxtaposition in meaning within the context, since both "Nacalo slavnyx dnej" and "Na trone" refer to Peter's reign). Lines 2 and 4 begin with verbs: Gljazu—Mracili. Further, lines 9 and 17 open with adjectives referring to the royal family: Samoderzavnym—Semejnym. Finally, the third "on" pairs with an implied one: On—[On] Ne preziral (lines 11, 15). Puskin utilizes both sound instrumentation (as will be seen) and structure (morphology and syntax) to further augment his verbal art and to amplify the juxtaposition.

The structure of Axmatova's poem hinges on the pattern of balladic poems, which it follows, hence a sizable collection of epithets: seven in eight lines. In contrast to the traditional ballad, however, all verbs in the poem are in the present tense. The predominance of symbolism based on the number three touches several areas, unusual for the traditional ballad but in keeping with the symbolism of three for the balladic poem, as seen in the three nominative sentences in the very first lines. They provide the time of day twice (the moon, night), the venue (to be contrasted to the Kremlin—it is probably the home of Axmatova's close friend Nina Ol'sevskaja, located in Zamoskvorec'e) and the historical allusion: "Streleckaja luna. Zamoskvorec'e. Noc'." The visual impression of the locus is that of a film frame. In rhythm, sound, and meaning the words simulate the fear of the speaker's pounding heart, further enhanced in the difficult, slow movement of the clock's "krestnyj xod," or rather of the hours of "Strastnaja nedelja." The earlier, van der Eng-Liedmier version stressed ephemeral movement with less of the fear component: "kak legkij dym" ("like light smoke").

The speaker of the poem is difficult to determine. In all likelihood the poem begins with the poet-persona and then changes into the thoughts of the Kremlin despot as reflected through the speaker's mind in her dream (in the version with "zdes" in line six). Ostensibly, in the version with "tam" in line six, the speaker does not change. If the speaker is synchronic to the poet Axmatova and not living in the past, then the word "tam" of the dream could have transposed her not only to the Kremlin but to the past with a view of the future. The speaker, then, is having a nightmare and in a query with a tripartite reiterative subject she answers her own question through negated emphasis: "Neuzto v samom dele / Nikto, nikto, nikto ne mozet mne pomoc'?" Expecting the worst, the speaker opens the poem with a Streltsy moon as a symbol of torture and death, even when those Streltsy who remained loyal to Peter were exiled to Siberia and their entire property was confiscated. If Peter showed no mercy to the Streltsy, he did, however, pardon the aristocratic Prince Dolgorukij. Conversely, in the years of Stalinist Terror not even a glimmer of hope existed for the aristocratic Gumilev whose persecution was predicated mainly on the fact of his father's execution in 1921.

A jarring prosaism—a distant echo of Puskin's prosaisms—commences the montage of Stalin: "mikroby." The versions with "zverstva" rather than "jarosti drevnej" in line six fit in better here. Where Puskin piles up the various professions Peter engaged in while in Western Europe, Axmatova garners negative characteristics, one for each of the three different namesakes, Boris, Ioann, Samozvanec, to depict one unnamed person, thereby providing a portrait without a portrait, or a metonymical one. Those psychological microbes all begin with sibilants, which create a hissing congregation with other supporting words: for Puskin's "ja bez bojazni"—"strax," for his "nezloben"—"zloby," for Peter working as a common laborer—"spes'." Here Axmatova transfers Puskin's vocabulary to the negative semantic field. These words in Axmatova thus pick up the two "s's" in the poem's title and those in the name Iosif Vissarionovich Stalin. Indeed, in what I consider the ultimate version—"vsex Ioannov zloby"—the older form of the tsars' name begins with two of the same sounds as Iosif, and Axmatova could have changed it for publication from Ioannov to Ivanov in the version presented by Cukovskaja for purposes of camouflage. Moreover, the title "Stansy" contains the first three sounds of Stalin's surname and the opening word repeats the first two sounds: "Streleckaja." More repetition of these sounds comes later: "Strastnoj", "strasnyj." with a proliferation of hissing "s's" and "z's: "snitsja, strasnyj son." Also the word Samozvanec begins with an "s" and contains a "z." Through masterful alliteration Axmatova presents a veritable viper's nest in the Kremlin, which reverberates with hissing and the snake image in the Pretender's lines on Marinea Mnisek in Puskin's Boris Godunov. In "Stances" Puskin has a delicate network of alliterative "p" sounds for reinforcing Peter's name in Nicholas' mind. Indeed, all the words containing the "p" sound have, or are used in, a positive sense: "vpered, pravdoj, privlek, pred nim, prosvescen'e, ne preziral, prednaznacen'e, moreplavatel', plotnik, prascuru podoben, pamjat'ju." The impact of the alliterated "p" in augmenting Peter's positive image through sound instrumentation is quite effective here. Still, quietly undercutting the overtly glorified image of Peter are the sibilants that Axmatova likewise probably sensed before utilizing them to such advantage in her own poem. In Puskin the sibilants, already signalled in the title, lead from glory and fearlessness and sowing enlightenment to executions, Streltsy, and autocrats, seeming to bind together inextricably the autocrat, country and the Streltsy: samoderzavec, strana, strel'cy, etc. Stanza three has the highest concentration of sibilants (in seven words) with stanzas one and five close behind (five words each).

The only person who can help Axmatova's speaker is the occupant of the Kremlin, but whereas in her poem "Podrazanie armjanskomu" ("Imitation from the Armenian") the ewe's devoured son is beyond help and the mother merely faces the tyrant fearlessly, here, to the speaker's question whether it is true that no one can help her, the focus zooms in on the current man in the Kremlin. Where in real life Axmatova made a desperate appeal to Stalin for her son's life, the poetic speaker's desire for help in "Stances" remains an unarticulated wishful attitude shown through the change of focus to the Kremlin.

As in a film, one can visualize the speaker's longing eyes conveying the message. Moreover, there could be here an implied reference through the historical flashback to former occupants of the Kremlin, notably to Stalin's immediate predecessor, Lenin, who in 1921 had Axmatova's first husband, the poet Nikolaj Gumilev (1886–1921), shot, and an indication that she in fact expects no aid now. With mention of "Preobrazenec" Axmatova posits as the instructive ideal Peter I, who in 1703 founded St. Petersburg so as to be able to live away from the Kremlin. By mentioning Peter only metonymically, Axmatova achieves distance and alienation between Peter and the unmentioned and tabooed, as it were, Stalin to show that Peter's "necessary" harshness is not equivalent to Stalin's countless atrocities. Yet some ambivalence may be present here if one considers the fact that most of the tortures and executions of the Streltsy were carried out at Preobrazensk, with Peter present at times. In fact, Puskin's Boris Godunov shows an unnamed terror perpetrated by Boris Godunov and that he "interrogated" some victims personally. That the poem is connected to Requiem is seen in mention of the Streltsy and the implied victims, her son in particular ("I will howl under the Kremlin towers / Like the Streltsy wives"—"Budu ja, kak streleckie zenki, / Pod Kremlevskimi basnjami vyt'"), as well as the image of the moon (Ketchian, "Moon"). The biblical "Strastnaja nedelja" further corroborates links with Requiem, but also hints at the torturing of the Streltsy. Only the inhabitant of the Kremlin can put an end to the terror, a tacit echoing without explicit words of Puskin's own plea. But Stalin remained deaf to these appeals and he lacked the qualities that Puskin sought to bring forth in Nicholas.

A final link to Stalin can be traced through the fact that Axmatova's "Streleckaja luna" literally denotes the Sagittarius moon of the Archer and a southern constellation visible in late spring (Axmatova's poem is dated April) and summer. It is the ninth sign of the zodiac which the sun enters on November 22 through December 21. In astrology it carries ominous meaning. The question arises as to what Sagittarius moon can exist in April and in the North in Moscow, Again, Axmatova is coding information. It will be recalled that the last day of this sign is December 21 (Capricorn the goat begins on December 22) and Stalin was born on December 21 (new style) in Georgia (construed as the South in Russia), where the constellation is best visible. Thus Axmatova's brilliant, kaleidoscopic image of the Streltsy further intertwines with that' of Stalin.

To sum up, it can be noted that, following Puskin's lead, Axmatova expressed artistically, utilizing literary tradition and historical facts as reflected by him, that which was otherwise denied expression in those difficult times—and she moved in her own new direction. Toward this end, she used to advantage devices found in Puskin: allusions, rhetorical devices, structural balance and meaningful sound instrumentation. And in the best tradition of the Russian esthetic imagination she, like Puskin, drew her inspiration from Russia's troubled past and present.