The Bronze Horseman (poem) - Analysis

Analysis

Formally, the poem is an unusual mix of genres: the sections dealing with Tsar Peter are written in a solemn, odic, 18th-century style, while the Evgenii sections are prosaic, playful and, in the latter stages, filled with pathos. This mix of genres is anticipated by the title: "The Bronze Horseman" suggested a grandiose ode, but the subtitle "A Petersburg Tale" leads one to expect an unheroic protagonist. Metrically, the entire poem is written in using the four-foot iamb, one of Pushkin's preferred meters, a versatile form which is able to adapt to the changing mood of the poem. The poem has a varied rhyme scheme and stanzas of varying length.

The critic Michael Watchel has suggested that Pushkin intended to produce a national epic in this poem, arguing that the Peter sections have many of the typical features of epic poetry. He points to Pushkin's extensive use of Old Testament language and allusions when describing both the founding of St Petersburg and the flood and argues that they draw heavily on the Book of Genesis. However, he adds that the Evgenii plot runs counter to the epic mode, and praises Pushkin for his "remarkable ability to synthesize diverse materials, styles and genres". He concludes that if the poem is to be labeled a national epic, it is a "highly idiosyncratic" one.

The conflict between Tsar and citizen, or empire and individual, is a key theme of "The Bronze Horseman". Critics differ as to whether Pushkin ultimately sides with Evgenii - the little man -or Peter and historical necessity. The radical 19th-century critic Vissarion Belinsky considered the poem a vindication of Peter's policies, while the writer Dmitri Merezhkovsky thought it a poem of individual protest. The poem's ultimate ambiguity is both captivating and frustrating: as Pushkin's biographer Binyon puts it, Peter is ultimately "beneficent and sinister, suggesting the ambiguous nature of power and the inhumanity which is an inevitable concomitant of imperial greatness”. Evgenii's death seems to suggest that historical progress always comes at an ethical price, although the question of whether the ends of progress justify the means is left unanswered. (L. xix) John Bayley reads the poem as a study in Russian autocracy, arguing that the poem reveals "the almost superstitious awe and admiration of Russia for her most dynamic tyrants - a Peter or a Stalin".

A psychoanalytical reading by Daniel Rancour-Laferriere suggests that there is an underlying concern with couvade syndrome or male birthing in the poem. He argues that the passages of the creation of Petersburg resemble the Greek myth of Zeus giving birth to Athena, and suggests that the flood corresponds to the frequent use of water as a metaphor for birth in many cultures. He suggests that the imagery describing Peter and the Neva is gendered: Peter is male and the Neva female.