1Januaryянваря · 1-е января
Лучше знать немного истинно хорошего и нужного, чем очень много посредственного и ненужного.
It is better to know a little of what is truly good and needful than a great deal of what is mediocre and needless.
1. Какое огромное богатство может быть в маленькой избранной библиотеке. Общество мудрейших и достойнейших людей, избранное из всех цивилизованных стран мира на протяжении тысяч лет, предоставило нам здесь в лучшем порядке результаты своего изучения и своей мудрости. Сами люди скрыты и недоступны, они, может быть, были бы нетерпеливы, если бы мы нарушили их уединение и прервали их занятия, может быть, общественные условия сделали бы невозможным общение с ними, но мысль, которую они не открывали даже лучшим своим друзьям, написана здесь ясными словами для нас, посторонних людей иного века. Да, мы обязаны хорошим книгам самыми главными духовными благодеяниями в нашей жизни.
1. What enormous wealth there can be in a small, select library. A society of the wisest and worthiest people, chosen from all the civilized countries of the world over thousands of years, has set before us here, in the best order, the results of their study and their wisdom. The people themselves are hidden and out of reach; they might perhaps be impatient if we disturbed their solitude and interrupted their pursuits; perhaps the conditions of society would make it impossible to have any dealings with them; but the thought they did not disclose even to their best friends is written here in clear words for us, strangers of another age. Yes, we owe to good books the chief spiritual benefits of our lives.
From Books, in Society and Solitude · close to the original .
Emerson’s own wordsConsider what you have in the smallest chosen library. A company of the wisest and wittiest men that could be picked out of all civil countries, in a thousand years, have set in best order the results of their learning and wisdom. The men themselves were hid and inaccessible, solitary, impatient of interruption, fenced by etiquette; but the thought which they did not uncover to their bosom friend is here written out in transparent words to us, the strangers of another age.
We owe to books those general benefits which come from high intellectual action.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Books, in Society and Solitude (1870), Paragraph beginning 'But it is not less true that there are books which are of that importance in a man's private experience'; the four sentences that follow it.
Close, sentence by sentence. 'Consider what you have in the smallest chosen library' becomes an exclamation ('What enormous wealth there can be in a small chosen library'); 'the wisest and wittiest men' becomes 'the wisest and worthiest'; 'in a thousand years' becomes 'over thousands of years'; 'solitary, impatient of interruption, fenced by etiquette' is spelled out (they might be impatient if we broke into their solitude and their work; social conditions might make meeting them impossible). The last sentence is freer: 'We owe to books those general benefits which come from high intellectual action' becomes 'Yes, we owe to good books the chief spiritual benefits of our life'. Emerson's five sentences are printed here; the reviewer may prefer Tolstoy's version because of that last sentence.
2. Мы из породы жвачных, и нам недостаточно только набивать себя множеством книг: если только мы не пережуем и не переварим хорошенько всего, чтó проглотили, книги нам не дадут силы и питания.
2. We are of the ruminant kind, and it is not enough for us merely to cram ourselves with a multitude of books: unless we chew over and digest well all that we have swallowed, books will give us neither strength nor nourishment.
From Of the Conduct of the Understanding · close to the original .
Locke’s own wordsThis is that which I think great readers are apt to be mistaken in.
… it is thinking makes what we read ours. We are of the ruminating kind, and it is not enough to cram ourselves with a great load of collections; unless we chew them over again, they will not give us strength and nourishment.
Source text: archive.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Of the Conduct of the Understanding (published posthumously, 1706), §20 'Reading'; ed. Thomas Fowler (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1882), §20 'Reading', the third and fourth sentences.
Close. Tolstoy keeps Locke's image and order; 'a great load of collections' becomes 'a multitude of books', and 'unless we chew them over again' becomes 'unless we chew over and digest well all that we have swallowed', so Tolstoy adds the digesting and makes books the subject of the last clause. Locke's sentence is printed here.
3. Опасайся того, чтобы чтение многих писателей и всякого рода книг не произвело смутности и неопределенности в твоей голове. Следует питать свой ум только писателями несомненного достоинства, если желаешь извлечь что-нибудь полезное. Слишком много книг развлекает ум. Поэтому читай только книги, признанные бесспорно хорошими. Если когда-нибудь явится желание перейти на время к другого рода сочинениям, не забывай никогда возвращаться опять к прежним.
3. Take care that reading many writers and books of every kind does not produce confusion and vagueness in your head. You should feed your mind only on writers of unquestioned worth, if you wish to gain anything useful. Too many books distract the mind. So read only books recognized as indisputably good. If ever the wish comes to turn for a while to writings of another kind, never forget to come back again to the former ones.
From Moral Letters to Lucilius · shortened by Tolstoy .
Original · LatinIllud autem vide, ne ista lectio auctorum multorum et omnis generis voluminum habeat aliquid vagum et instabile. Certis ingeniis immorari et innutriri oportet, si velis aliquid trahere quod in animo fideliter sedeat.
Distringit librorum multitudo; …
Probatos itaque semper lege, et si quando ad alios deverti libuerit, ad priores redi.
Source text: thelatinlibrary.comIn English · Richard M. Gummere (Loeb, 1917), 1917Be careful, however, lest this reading of many authors and books of every sort may tend to make you discursive and unsteady. You must linger among a limited number of master-thinkers, and digest their works, if you would derive ideas which shall win firm hold in your mind.
And in reading of many books is distraction.
So you should always read standard authors; and when you crave a change, fall back upon those whom you read before.
Source text: en.wikisource.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Moral Letters to Lucilius, Letter 2.2–4.
Four sentences of the letter, close in sense and order. Kept: the warning that reading many authors and every kind of book has something vague and unsteady in it (Tolstoy: "vagueness and uncertainty in your head"); one must dwell on and be nourished by sure minds ("writers of undoubted worth") to draw what will stay in the mind ("something useful"); "the multitude of books distracts"; read the approved ones always, and when you wish to turn to others, return to the first. Dropped: the examples between (the traveller with many hosts and no friends, food that passes straight through, medicines changed too often, the plant often moved), and "since you cannot read all the books you have, it is enough to have as many as you read". The letter is in neither Ramage's Latin selection nor Tolstoy's Thoughts of Wise Men; no intermediary was found.
4. Читайте прежде всего лучшие книги, а то вы и совсем не успеете прочесть их.
4. Read the best books first, or you may not have a chance to read them at all.
From A Week on the Concord and Merrimack Rivers · close to the original .
Tolstoy’s version, in EnglishRead the best books first, or you will not have time to read them at all.
Thoreau’s own wordsScholars are wont to sell their birthright for a mess of learning.
Read the best books first, or you may not have a chance to read them at all.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. A Week on the Concord and Merrimack Rivers (1849), Sunday, Sunday, in the passage on reading that begins 'Scholars are wont to sell their birthright for a mess of learning'.
A close translation; Tolstoy adds 'first of all' (прежде всего). The Jubilee list of Tolstoy's sources names a Russian Thoreau selection («Философия естественной жизни», Posrednik, 1903) and the calendar Every Day with Thoreau, either of which may have been his route; neither was found online.
Translation note. Tolstoy kept the author’s words closely, so the author’s own English is printed here (ruling 1); Tolstoy’s Russian, translated, is in the source panel.
5. Читать следует только тогда, когда иссяк источник собственных мыслей, чтó нередко случается и с самым умным человеком. Но спугнуть, ради книги, собственную неокрепшую мысль — это значит совершить преступление против духа.
5. One should read only when the spring of one’s own thoughts has run dry, which happens not infrequently even to the most intelligent man. But to frighten away, for the sake of a book, a thought of one’s own that has not yet grown strong is to commit a crime against the spirit.
From Parerga und Paralipomena II, ch. XXII · close to the original .
What Tolstoy read · Frauenstädt, Arthur Schopenhauer: Lichtstrahlen aus seinen WerkenLeſen ſoll man nur dann, wenn die Quelle der eigenen Gedanken ſtockt; was auch beim beſten Kopfe oft genug der Fall ſein wird. Hingegen die eigenen, urkräftigen Gedanken verſcheuchen, um ein Buch zur Hand zu nehmen, iſt Sünde wider den heiligen Geiſt.
Source text: archive.orgOriginal · GermanLeſen ſoll man alſo nur dann, wann die Quelle der eigenen Gedanken ſtockt; was auch beim beſten Kopfe oft genug der Fall ſeyn wird. Hin⸗ gegen die eigenen, urkräftigen Gedanken verſcheuchen, um ein Buch zur Hand zu nehmen, iſt Sünde wider den heiligen Geiſt.
Source text: archive.orgIn English · T. Bailey Saunders, 1891A man should read only when his own thoughts stagnate at their source, which will happen often enough even with the best of minds. On the other hand, to take up a book for the purpose of scaring away one's own original thoughts is sin against the Holy Spirit.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Parerga und Paralipomena II, ch. XXII (Selbstdenken), as excerpted in Frauenstädt, Lichtstrahlen aus seinen Werken (1862 ed.; Tolstoy had the 1891 ed.), Parerga II, 2nd ed. (Frauenstädt, Berlin 1862), § 266, p. 528; Lichtstrahlen cites "P. II, 412"; Saunders, The Art of Literature, "On Thinking for Oneself".
Two sentences from Schopenhauer's paragraph on reading as a substitute for thinking, closely: one should read only when the spring of one's own thoughts runs dry, which happens often enough to the best mind; to drive away one's own thoughts in order to take up a book is a sin against the Holy Ghost. Tolstoy calls the thoughts "not yet strong" (неокрепшую) where Schopenhauer has "urkräftig" (vigorous, original), and makes the sin against the Holy Ghost "a crime against the spirit". He leaves out the comparison that follows (fleeing free nature to look at a herbarium or a landscape in an engraving). Lichtstrahlen prints the passage starting at the same sentence.
6. В литературе повторяется то же, что в жизни. Куда ни обернешься, наталкиваешься на неисправимую чернь человечества, — имя же ей легион, — всюду кишащую и всё загаживающую, словно летние мухи. Отсюда такое размножение плохих книг, такой необычайный урожай литературных плевел, заглушающих хорошее зерно. Такие книги крадут у публики время, деньги и внимание, которые по-настоящему должны бы доставаться только на долю отборных произведений.
Плохие книги не только бесполезны, но положительно вредны. Ведь девять десятых текущей литературы только затем и печатаются, чтобы выманить из кармана доверчивой публики пару лишних талеров; ради этого же авторы, издатели и типографщики умышленно утолщают книжки.
Еще более вредный, наглый и бессовестный обман совершают построчные писаки: взимая по грошу за строчку своей стряпни, эти поденщики извращают вкус читателя и уничтожают истинное просвещение.
В противовес этой пагубе необходимо отвыкать читать, т. е., выражаясь другими словами, не следует вовсе читать книг, которые занимают общественное внимание или производят шум. Нужно, попросту говоря, отплевываться от всех тех изданий, первый год существования которых будет и последним их годом.
Нельзя, впрочем, не оговориться, что кто пишет для глупцов, тот всегда найдет обширный круг читателей; а между тем человечеству следовало бы употреблять коротко и скупо отмеренные существования на ознакомление с первоклассными мастерами всех веков и народов, с богато одаренными творцами, поднимающимися, словно башни, над множеством плохих писателей. Только писатели этого сорта способны образовывать и поучать.
Плохих книг никогда не прочтешь слишком мало, а хороших никогда не удастся прочесть слишком много. Плохие книги — нравственный яд, притупляющий ум.
Вследствие того, что толпа упорствует читать не лучшие книги всех времен, но лишь новейшие произведения современной литературы, теперешние писаки вертятся в тесном круге всё тех же повторяемых идей, все твердят одно и то же, и наш век не вылезает из собственной грязи.
6. In literature the same thing happens as in life. Wherever you turn, you come upon the incorrigible rabble of humanity — and its name is legion — swarming everywhere and fouling everything, like summer flies. Hence such a multiplication of bad books, such an extraordinary crop of literary tares, choking the good grain. Such books rob the public of time, money, and attention, which by rights ought to go to choice works alone.
Bad books are not only useless but positively harmful. For nine-tenths of current literature is printed only to coax a couple of extra thalers out of the pockets of a trusting public; to the same end authors, publishers, and printers deliberately pad out their books.
A still more harmful, brazen, and shameless fraud is committed by the scribblers paid by the line: charging a penny for each line of their concoctions, these day laborers pervert the reader’s taste and destroy true enlightenment.
As a counter to this bane, you must wean yourself from reading; that is, in other words, you should not read at all the books that occupy public attention or make a stir. You must, to put it plainly, spit and turn away from all those publications whose first year of existence will also be their last.
It must be added, however, that whoever writes for fools will always find a wide circle of readers; and yet humanity ought to spend its short and sparingly measured existences in coming to know the first-rate masters of all ages and peoples, the richly gifted creators who rise like towers above the multitude of bad writers. Only writers of this sort are able to educate and instruct.
You can never read too few bad books, and you will never manage to read too many good ones. Bad books are a moral poison that dulls the mind.
Because the crowd persists in reading, not the best books of all times, but only the newest works of contemporary literature, the scribblers of today turn round and round in a narrow circle of the same ideas, repeated over and over; they all keep saying one and the same thing, and our age does not climb out of its own mud.
From Parerga und Paralipomena II, ch. XXIV · shortened by Tolstoy .
Original · GermanEs iſt in der Litteratur nicht anders, als im Leben: wohin auch man ſich wende, trifft man ſogleich auf den inkorrigibeln Pöbel der Menſchheit, welcher überall legionenweiſe vorhanden iſt, Alles erfüllt und Alles beſchmutzt, wie die Fliegen im Som— mer. Daher die Unzahl ſchlechter Bücher, dieſes wuchernde Un— kraut der Litteratur, welches dem Waizen die Nahrung entzieht, und ihn erſtickt.
Sie ſind alſo nicht bloß unnütz, ſondern poſitiv ſchädlich. Neun Zehntel unſerer ganzen jetzigen Litteratur hat keinen andern Zweck, als dem Publiko einige Thaler aus der Taſche zu ſpielen: dazu haben ſich Autor, Verleger und Recen⸗ ſent feſt verſchworen.
Ein verſchmitzter und ſchlimmer, aber erklecklicher Streich ift es, der den Litteraten, Brodſchreibern und Vielſchreibern gegen den guten Geſchmack und die wahre Bildung des Zeitalters gelungen …
… vielmehr denke man alsdann, daß wer für Narren ſchreibt allezeit ein großes Publikum findet, und wende die ſtets knapp gemeſſene, dem Leſen beſtimmte Zeit ausſchließlich den Werken der großen, die übrige Menſchheit über⸗ ragenden Geiſter aller Zeiten und Volker zu, welche die Stimme des Ruhmes als ſolche bezeichnet.
Vom Schlechten kann man nie zu wenig und das Gute nie zu oft leſen: ſchlechte Bücher ſind intellektuelles Gift, ſie verderben den Geiſt. — Weil die Leute, ſtatt des Beſten aller Zeiten, immer nur das Neueſte leſen, bleiben die Schriftſteller …
… im engen Kreiſe der eirkulirenden Ideen, und das Zeitalter ver⸗
Source text: archive.orgIn English · Mrs. Rudolf Dircks, 1897It is the same in literature as in life. Wherever one goes one immediately comes upon the incorrigible mob of humanity. It exists everywhere in legions; crowding, soiling everything, like flies in summer. Hence the numberless bad books, those rank weeds of literature which extract nourishment from the corn and choke it.
They are not only useless, but they do positive harm. Nine-tenths of the whole of our present literature aims solely at taking a few shillings out of the public's pocket, and to accomplish this, author, publisher, and reviewer have joined forces.
Remember rather that the man who writes for fools always finds a large public: and only read for a limited and definite time exclusively the works of great minds, those who surpass other men of all times and countries, and whom the voice of fame points to as such. These alone really educate and instruct.
One can never read too little of bad, or too much of good books: bad books are intellectual poison; they destroy the mind.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Parerga und Paralipomena II, ch. XXIV (Ueber Lesen und Bücher), Parerga II, 2nd ed. (Frauenstädt, Berlin 1862), § 303, pp. 589-590; Dircks, "On Reading and Books".
Tolstoy's seven paragraphs follow § 303 in order, freely translated, and leave out its middle (the hack writers who have trained fashionable society to read only the newest books, the novels of Spindler, Bulwer and Sue, and the literary daily press). What he changes: author, publisher and reviewer "conspire" in Schopenhauer, while in Tolstoy authors, publishers and printers "deliberately thicken the books"; the bread-writers' "cunning and bad trick" against good taste and true culture becomes the "shameless deception" of hacks paid by the line; the art of not reading becomes "unlearning to read", with spitting at every book whose first year is its last; the reading time, "always scantly measured", becomes humanity's "briefly and sparingly measured" lives; the great minds stand "like towers" over the bad writers; "intellectual poison" becomes "moral poison" that dulls the mind. The last sentence (writers circle within the current ideas and the age sinks ever deeper into its own mud) is in Frauenstädt's 1862 edition; Dircks's English, from another text, ends the section differently, so it has no English here. Lichtstrahlen does not print this section.
Различие между ядами вещественными и умственными в том, что большинство ядов вещественных противны на вкус, яды же умственные, в виде газет и дурных книг, к несчастию, часто привлекательны.
The difference between material poisons and mental ones is that most material poisons are repugnant to the taste, while mental poisons, in the form of newspapers and bad books, are, unfortunately, often attractive.
Translation note. The Jubilee text breaks the italics at the commas; the English sets the line as one.
Tolstoy TodayТолстой сегодня · tolstoytoday.org/january/1