No presente trabalho propõe-se uma análise comparativa de Gente Pobre (1845), primeira obra do escritor russo Fiódor Mikhailovitch Dostoiévski, e Famintos (escrito na década de 1940, publicado em 1962), único romance do cabo-verdiano Luís Romano Madeira de Melo. Para tanto são levadas em conta certas coincidências entre os contextos em que se produzia Literatura na Rússia tzarista do século XIX e no Cabo Verde colônia de meados do século XX, e no cotejo entre as obras em questão consideramos, além da temática comum - a miséria -, aspectos relativos à linguagem e à postura humanista de ambos os autores, que os distanciam, em certa medida, dos escritores chamados naturalistas. / In this work we propose a comparative analysis of the novel Poor Folk, the first work of the Russian author Fyodor Mikhaylovich Dostoevsky, and The Famished (written in the decade of 1940 and published in 1962), the only novel of the Cape Verdean Luís Romano Madeira de Melo. To do this are taken into consideration some coincidences in the contexts in which the literature was produced, in the 19th century Tsarist Russia and in the Cape Verde-colony of mid-20th century. To compare the two works we consider, in addition to the common theme the poverty , aspects of the language and the humanist attitude of both authors, which in some way dissociate them from the so-called Naturalistic writers.

Em 1909, no palco do Teatro de Arte de Moscou, o afamado diretor russo Konstantin Stanislávski realiza a montagem da peça de Ivan Turguêniev Um mês no campo. Além de ser uma brilhante interpretação de obra clássica da literatura russa de um autor pouco difundido nesse país, o espetáculo marca o início da elaboração dos primeiros elementos do sistema Stanislávski, que definiria novas possibilidades para a arte do ator, momento decisivo na sua trajetória teatral. Esta dissertação apresenta o processo de montagem do espetáculo, reflete os primeiros germes do sistema Stanislávski e analisa as abordagens interpretativas do encenador na poética dramática da peça Um mês no campo. / In 1909, on the stage of Moscow Art Theatre, the acclaimed Russian director Konstantin Stanislavsky staged Ivan Turgenev s play, A Month in the Country. This performance was a decisive moment in his theatrical trajectory. Besides being a brilliant interpretation of a classic work of the Russian literature written by an author not widely known in this country, it was the starting point of development of the first elements of Stanislavskys \"system\", which would define new possibilities for the art of the actor. This dissertation presents the creation process of the spectacle, reflects on the first seeds of Stanislavskys \"system\" and analyses the directors interpretive approaches to the poetic drama of A Month in the Country.

Embora o nome Nabókov remeta tão-somente a escritor norte-americano, criador de Lolita, raro se lembra de sua origem russa. Nem os leitores, nem a crítica literária brasileira associam Nabókov à literatura russa, apesar de ter-se consagrado primeiramente como autor russo e por mais de 20 anos ter escrito nessa língua, com a qual ele se identifica tanto como escritor, tradutor e autotradutor, quanto como professor e teórico. A presente dissertação é o primeiro trabalho a trazer tradução direta do russo da coletânea de contos Primavera em Fialta (1956), obra-prima do momento russo de Nabókov, inédita no Brasil. Propõe-se a adentrar o arcabouço nabokoviano, delinear sua poética e traçado distintivo, ressaltando seus procedimentos estilísticos e lingüísticos. Finalmente, objetiva-se observar o processo tradutório de Nabókov, suscitando questões atreladas às mudanças de paisagem e língua literária e investigando a relação entre escritura, tradução e identidade cultural e artística. / Although Nabokov is usually best remembered as the North-American author of Lolita, his Russian origins are rarely mentioned. Brazilian readers and literary critics never think of linking Nabokov with Russian literature, even though he was first known as a Russian writer, for over two decades, and even though he identified himself as such, as well as being a translator, self-translator, teacher and theoretician. This master thesis is the first one to offer a direct translation from Russian into Portuguese of Spring in Fialta (1956), a remarkable collection of short stories from Nabokov s Russian period, considered a masterpiece, never yet published in Brazil. It will also describe Nabokov´s poetics and stylistic peculiarities, as well as the linguistic process at work in the short stories. This work aims at studying Nabokov´s translation process, raising issues linked with the changes in his literary landscape and language, and observing the relation between writing, translation, as well as cultural and artistic identity.

A primeira parte deste trabalho é uma tradução da novela "A senhoria", de Dostoiévski, direta do texto original em russo, seguida de um estudo sobre o tipo central da novela, um “sonhador” – um típico herói romântico –, e sua revelação como um “herói de seu tempo” – um “homem supérfluo”. A senhoria é uma obra que difere muito de todos os outros trabalhos de Dostoiévski. Mal recebida pela crítica de sua época, ela constitui sua primeira tentativa de caracterização de um tipo e de um tema a que ele iria se dedicar praticamente durante toda a sua carreira. E, em se tratando da literatura russa do século XIX, não há dúvida de que o que mais se sobressai é o fenômeno do herói. Com essa novela Dostoiévski apresenta, na figura do “sonhador” romântico, não só um fenômeno ainda corrente na vida russa em fins dos anos 40, mas também um novo elo na evolução do “herói do tempo”. / The first part of this work is a translation of Dostoevsky’s novel The Landlady, translated from the original Russian. This is followed by a study on the central figure of the novel, a “dreamer” -- a typical romantic hero -- and its revelation as a “hero of his time” -- a “superfluous man”. The Landlady differs from all of Dostoevsky’s other works. Badly received by critics when it was published, it was his first attempt to create a literary figure to whose depiction he would devote practically his entire subsequent career. There is no doubt that the most salient feature of Russian literature of the nineteenth century is the phenomenon of the hero. With this novel, Dostoevsky presents in the romantic “dreamer”, not only a phenomenon still current in Russian life at the end of 1840’s, but also a new link in the evolution of the "hero of the time."

Esta Tese visa aprofundar algumas questões da poética nabokoviana, a partir de uma tradução inédita do russo para o português brasileiro de capítulos de (Druguíe Beregá), de 1954, uma das variações de sua autobiografia, chamada, na Rússia, de romance. Incluída em seleções e antologias no mundo todo, esta obra de Nabókov possui uma história repleta de matizes linguísticos e estilísticos: um de seus princípios foi um conto-ensaio escrito em francês, Mademoiselle O (1936), recomposto e traduzido para o inglês, tornando-se uma primeira versão em livro de memórias, Conclusive Evidence, ou Speak, Memory (1951, EUA e Inglaterra, respectivamente), revertido e reformulado em russo, por sua vez retransformado em uma versão final, Speak, Memory: An Autobiography Revisited (1967). A comparação entre os textos corrobora a hipótese de que as transformações que se concretizam na recriação de , obra mediadora, são fundamentais para a leitura tanto da última versão em inglês, como também da primeira. Para Nabókov, essa reescritura, além do processo criativo inerente ao ato tradutório, passa a ser uma releitura e revisão de sua própria obra, com alterações que vão além das peculiaridades de cada língua. Dessa forma, faz-se necessário ler, traduzir e examinar cada versão como texto independente. A tradução, em todas as suas formas e manifestações, como mote e como prática, tem papel essencial na obra e na vida de Nabókov. É com ela que ele inicia sua trajetória literária, é por meio dela que ele retorna à Rússia e à língua russa. A relação do escritor com o tradutor e a (auto)tradução é crucial e a Tese tem o propósito de refletir sobre não uma Arte da Tradução nabokoviana, mas Artes da Tradução, já que transformam o tradutor em escritor, o autotradutor em revisor, e o revisor em reescritor. / This dissertation aims to deepen some issues about the Nabokovian poetics, presenting the first Russian translation into Brazilian Portuguese of some chapters of (1954), one of the variations of his autobiography, known as a novel in Russia. Included in selections and anthologies around the world, this work has a history full of linguistic and stylistic nuances: one of the first versions was a story-essay written in French, Mademoiselle O (1936), recomposed and translated into English, becoming a memoir, Conclusive Evidence, or Speak, Memory (1951, USA and England, respectively), reworked in Russian, and then reprocessed into a final version: Speak, Memory: An Autobiography Revisited (1967). A comparison of the texts shows that the transformations performed in recreating , an interposed work, are key to reading the last version in English, as well as the first. For Nabokov, this rewriting, besides the creative process inherent to the act of translation, becomes a reinterpretation and revision of his own work, full of changes beyond the peculiarities of each language. Thus, it is necessary to read, translate and study each version as a autonomous text. Translation in all its forms and expressions, as a theme and as a practice, plays an essential role in Nabokov\'s work and life. It is translating that he began his literary career, it is through it that he returns to Russia and Russian language. The writer\'s relationship with the translator and (self)translation is critical and the dissertation aims to reflect on not a Nabokovian Art of Translation, but multiple Arts of Translation since they transform the translator into a writer, the self-translator into an editor, the editor into a rewriter.

Le présent travail se propose d’étudier la réception de la littérature russe dans son ensemble par la presse française de l’époque de Louis-Philippe. On redécouvre dans ses subtilités complexes et hasardeuses toute la problématique politique et culturelle inhérente à l’acclimatation et l’implantation de la littérature russe, encore peu connue : relations entre deux pays, statut de la langue-source, traductions, réseaux d’information, reflets de la vie littéraire. Dans une Europe apparemment pacifiée, la France voit émerger une nouvelle classe d’intellectuels que la « question sociale » sollicite autant que les productions littéraires. Les journaux, les revues jouent un rôle accru de médiation culturelle et deviennent un pouvoir – ou un contrepouvoir – qui informe, juge et critique, dont les titres d’ailleurs proclament assez l’ambition : L’Europe littéraire, Le Globe, Revue des Deux Mondes, Revue Indépendante et d’autres encore. On verra comment les jugements littéraires ne peuvent s’abstraire des considérations sociopolitiques. Les articles journalistiques relèvent ainsi d’une catégorie toujours bien vivante : histoire, politique et littérature mêlées. Ecrire sur la littérature russe dans les années 1830-1840 n’est-ce pas aussi se situer par rapport à Louis-Philippe et Nicolas Ier ? / The present work suggests studying the reception of Russian literature in whole by the French press under the reign of Louis-Philippe. All political and cultural subject matter inherent in the process of familiarization and integration of so little known Russian literature develops in its complicated and accidental subtleties: relations between the two countries, Russian as a source language, translations, information networks, reflections of literary life. In apparently pacified Europe, in France there appears a new class of intellectuals that is interested in both « social matter » and literary works. Newspapers and reviews play an increasing role in cultural mediation and hold a power or a counter-power, which informs, judges and criticizes, and whose titles proclaim their aspirations well enough: L’Europe littéraire, Le Globe, Revue des Deux Mondes, Revue Indépendante and others. We can see that literary judgments are inseparable f! rom sociopolitical considerations. So the articles are followed from the existent category: a mixture of history, policy and literature. Writing about Russian literature during the 1830s-1840s, does it really mean to position yourselves towards Louis-Philippe and Nicholas the First ?

Victor Hugo fait partie des écrivains étrangers les plus publiés et les plus lus en URSS. Ce travail revient sur la diffusion et la réception de ses œuvres en Russie, en URSS et en Russie postsoviétique, et notamment sur l’entrée de l’écrivain dans le panthéon littéraire russe puis soviétique des écrivains étrangers, qui permet une large diffusion de ses œuvres.La méthodologie s’inspire de celle adoptée dans l’étude des transferts culturels (M. Espagne) et place au centre de l’attention les processus d’appropriation par la culture d’accueil. On s’intéresse à la création, à travers les traductions, de ce qu’on peut décrire comme l’« œuvre russe » de Victor Hugo ainsi qu’à la formation d’une figure de l’auteur. Alors que les travaux soviétiques affirment que les œuvres de Victor Hugo sont poursuivies par la censure avant la révolution de 1917 malgré l’intérêt des grands écrivains et penseurs russes, puis mises en avant à la période soviétique, on s’aperçoit que Victor Hugo entre dans le panthéon littéraire russe dès le tournant des XIXe et XXe siècle et ne fait que consolider sa place après la Révolution. La réinterprétation de l’œuvre et de la figure de l’auteur à la période soviétique est bien plus superficielle qu’il n’y paraît au premier abord. / Victor Hugo was one of the most published and well-known foreign writers in USSR. We will analyse the dissimination and the reception of his works in Russia, USSR and post-soviet Russia. We will pay a special attention to the way Victor Hugo joined the Russian (and then the Soviet) literary pantheon of foreign writers, which made it possible for his works to be widely published.Our methodology is based on the one proposed in the cultural transfers studies (M. Espagne). Thus, we will focus on the process of inclusion of Victor Hugo in the Russian/Soviet culture. The translations, especially the most published ones, came to form what can be described as Victor Hugo’s “Russians works”. The Russian image of Victor Hugo created by translations and critical works also differs from the French one.Soviet works on Victor Hugo in Russia state that Hugo’s works were censored until the Revolution in 1917, although Russian writers showed interest for them, and that they began to be widely published only after 1917. However, Victor Hugo joined the Russian literary pantheon as early as the turn of the 20th century, consolidating his place after the Revolution. In Soviet times Victor Hugo and his works underwent a process of reinterpretation that might seem cardinal at first sight, but occurs to be quite superficial indeed.

The key feature of realism in drama is capturing a person including all it's problems and flaws. Authors L. N. Tolstoj and Mrštík brothers in Government of darkness and Marysha congruently focused on life in countryside and the negative, almost destructive, way in which cities and their culture influence it. The aim of this thesis was to capture the main motives in the changes of life in Russian and Czech countryside. This analysis concludes that the most significant shifts are in peoples' morals, mostly due to the fact that both individuals as well as the whole society were intensively driven to earn and accumulate wealth, even at the cost of happiness, health or, sadly, human life. Tolstoj's drama also captures in more detail and depth abandonment of religion in pursuit of personal profit. Although the religious motive is an inherent part of rural mentality, it's mostly missing in the play by Mrštík brothers, who themselves were atheist. Significant space in those plays has been dedicated to female characters. They are described as either dominant, manipulative women with clear goals, or the authors emphasize their vulnerability and lack of experience. Matrjona and Lízalka are mature women whose main goal is to financially provide for their childs without any regard for their children's...

Este trabalho é composto pela tradução da novela O rei Lear da estepe, de Ivan Turguêniev, publicada em 1870, seguida de um breve comentário sobre a influência do dramaturgo inglês William Shakespeare na literatura russa. Em seguida há um estudo sobre o skaz literário presente na novela e da estilização, um recurso estilístico teorizado por Mikhail Bakhtin e Yuri Tyniánov. Assim como a paródia, a estilização é também a recriação de uma obra consagrada, mas, ao contrário daquela, não possui efeito cômico e sim concordância de sentido com o texto no qual foi inspirada. Por fim, há um apontamento sobre a existência de elementos do folclore russo no texto e comentários sobre a tradução baseados em cotejos com versões francesa, inglesa e portuguesa. / This research consist of a translation of Ivan Turgenevs novel The King Lear of the steppes, published in 1870, followed by a brief commentary on the influence of the English playwrighter William Shakespeare in Russian literature. Then there is a study of the literary skaz present in the novel and styling, a stylistic feature theorized by Mikhail Bakhtin and Yury Tynyanov. Like the parody, the styling is also a recreation of a consecrated work, but rather that it does not have comic effect, but agree with the text direction in which it was inspired. Finally, there is a note about the existence of elements of Russian folklore in the text and comments on the translation based on comparison with French, English and Portuguese versions.

This thesis compares four Czech translations of the novel Thérèse Raquin by the French writer Émile Zola. The introduction is focused on the source text and its author. Then the thesis deals with the reception of Thérèse Raquin in the Czech culture and refers also to its entry on the Russian cultural scene. The second part of the thesis is focused on an analysis of the Czech translations. This analysis considers the background in which each text was produced, especially from the point of view of time, and it aims to describe not only the language aspects of each translation, but also the global approach of the translator.