Literature of readers prevailed instead of the literature of writers In the Znamya magazine, its editor, Sergei Chuprinin, commemorated us with Starodum… Yes, one can say: he commemorated us kindly. Indeed: “... Admiring the beauty and provocativeness of thought, ...

Instead of the literature of writers, the literature of readers prevailed

IN

magazine Znamya, its editor Sergei Chuprinin commemorated us with Starodum ... Yes, you can say: he remembered kindly.

Indeed: “... Admiring the beauty and provocativeness of thought, the elegance of the style, the abyss of other virtues inherent in my colleagues, I personally am not ready to blindly rely on the opinion as an expert ...”. I selfishly omit the names of two “colleagues”, one of whom “amuses” Chuprinin by, for example, comparing Prokhanov with Dante, the other, on the contrary, is “closest” to him: “... on the opinion of my beloved (mutually, mutually! - S.R. .) Stanislav Rassadin.

Further: "... Self-proclaimed experts ... our glorious critics ...". And, finally, directly about me: “Remarkably accurate (well, anyway, thanks. - S.R.) in assessing the activities of writers of his own and his previous generation, he is defiantly insensitive to everything that younger people write, which is why the heading“ Starodum” in “Novaya Gazeta” can be called anything, but not expert”.

I convulsively recall: what kind of “younger people” did I deprive of my sensitivity? Sorokin? Prigov? Erofeev, who is Victor, those whom Znamya does not seem to favor and who, by the way, are over or under fifty? Maybe he forgot someone, which in itself is not surprising: he finally and long ago dropped out - ay! - from the ranks of the current literary criticism, God bless her at all. I, if it is necessary to convict me of something, am not an impostor expert, but a fugitive from professional obligations, exercising my sweet right not to finish reading what, excuse me, is boring. Deserter. Or…

From the book of Mark Kharitonov "Shorthand of the end of the century":

“It seemed interesting to me (criticism of Andrey Nemzer. - S.R.) judgments about people for whom literature stopped 20 years ago ... I conveyed to him the words of L.A. about Pelevin: “I haven’t read it and I don’t want to read it.” “He treats you the same way. He didn’t read and doesn’t want to read ... The 80s, 90s simply do not exist for him, R. and others. (Oh, this L.A. seems to be familiar to me! Yes, I can guess someone in R. Whom? - S.R.) They don’t like this time, they don’t want to live in it. There is emigration in space, they emigrated in time.” I liked this phrase.

And to me! But why - "20 years ago"? Is it not possible to emigrate, say, to Chekhov?

... There is, as you know, the concept of "literary process". Not that completely phantom, but close to it. It was not for nothing that they talked about him with special persistence at a time when the reader did not even suspect the existence of The Master and Margarita, when Life and Fate was arrested, and only a dull rumor rustled about Chevengur; when the "process" itself was man-made and controlled by the removal of books - and their authors, capable of creating a true picture of literature. But now - freedom ?!

She, she, long-awaited! And, it seems, in this freedom, this process once again proved that, just like Bulgakov's devastation, not in real reality, but in the minds and on occasion, it can do without literature itself. In which, I admit, there is still nothing particularly bad. The thing is, whose head are we talking about, why with admiration - without irony, honestly! – I follow how the same Andrey Nemzer, as if choosing the role not only of an expert, but of a demiurge-organizer, rallies around him those who, I will not hide, seem to me personally unoriginal and poorly readable. (I will repeat what I said once: in my opinion, as long as we have replaced the literature of writers, the literature of readers has prevailed, who perfectly assimilated what was created before them and who do not have the strength, who do not show the will to overcome inertia.)

The highly talented Nemzer is on the one hand. And on the other hand… How pathetically visible is the uproar raised by the party-mates around the blood-chilling incident – ​​imagine: the critic Dmitry Olshansky, for the agitated - Mitya, announced that from now on he ceases to be a “liberal” and migrates to the “Black Hundreds”. This is in his own words, in the opinion of others - almost in the "fascists". How to live after this, fellow citizens? (I am not ashamed and do not boast that I have not read a single line of this werewolf - hopefully, without shoulder straps? - and I draw information about another imitation of an intense spiritual life from the bibliographic review of the Novy Mir magazine. In my opinion, the most interesting thing is that in this magazine has.)

And I, my name ... Is there really no place for me outside the regular system? I still dare to assume that I, with my Starodum, are also performing - this time really self-proclaimed - a social order, so to speak: I am trying to play the role of a modest voice of those who, bored with the imitation of current prose (poetry - a special speech) , emigrate wherever he can and wants. Thank God, there are always promised areas in world literature. And I feel my role is quite optimistic.

Yes, regarding the future of literature, I am an optimist who perceives the current lack of fish as a respite; As for the time in which “I don’t want to live”… I remember that Alexei German literally said these words about himself, and having said that, he set to work on the film, which, I think, has every chance of being brilliant again.