Cute clues

I received a letter from a reader. The return address ended with the extension “fr”, which is essential for the further narrative, and the letter itself was rather irritated. However, the irritation related not so much to me personally, but to the current state of the Russian language, which, in the opinion of my correspondent, was so spoiled by the Bolsheviks that it has not been Russian for a long time. As an illustration, they cited not some candidates of the indestructible bloc of communists and non-party members, but “Soviet expressions like let’s do this and that and in all seriousness, and he’s also a specialist.” Indeed, open ideologemes are not as infuriating as some harmless words that imperceptibly penetrate into speech and color it in specific tones. What an indestructible block there is: you came home, took off your jacket, and along with it left all your ideological vocabulary in the hallway - and now you are a normal person again. And then go and follow it.

I thought about the expression that one more (This is another fruit; She is one another mother; The concert was another one): it was a surprise to me that it was perceived as distinct Sovietism. Well, yes, a slight touch of vulgarity - but just like that. Although, perhaps, there is something in this. Indeed, this does not appear in pre-revolutionary texts. If you think about it, in general it’s even clear where it came from. After the 17th year, life split into “before” and “after”, and the very mention of “before” became risky: Who are your parents? What did you do before you were seventeen? Well, further in the text. Therefore, it is completely natural to spread expressions such as from the former or, as in our case, that still, in the sense of “pre-revolutionary, from a past life.” Originally it probably didn't mean "bad." One of my colleagues told me that her mother still says, for example: “We had those same teachers,” meaning that the teachers were real, with a gymnasium background. Of course, those who were nothing became everything, but if you seriously received treatment or studied, a doctor or teacher with a tarnished social background and a dubious track record was still more reliable. That one, in short. Although it is better not to advertise it. Then, as often happens in the history of language, the assessment changed, the meaning expanded, and now we have what we have: a combination that can refer to anything, expressing a vaguely negative assessment and some kind of incomprehensible malice.

The situation when some relatively innocent expression becomes an identifying mark, or even a red rag, is not uncommon. What is the large-scale discussion about the combination of this country worth? So the Patriarch came up with a linguistic reasoning: it’s not good when they say this country instead of our country. Unpatriotic. And what can we say about all kinds of professional patriots? They will, as they say, teach you to love your Motherland!

It's amazing how much has been written about this expression. They write that this is generally an Anglicism, but you can’t say that in Russian. Come on! Why can’t a person, being at home, exclaim: Will they give me coffee in this house today?!! They write that this is the influence of American culture: This land is your land, this land is my land, From California W the New York island, From the redwood forest to the Gulf Stream water This land was made for you and me. But this is, by the way, very patriotic, although with a clear colonialist bias.

They also write that Gorbachev came up with the idea of ​​calling the Motherland this country vilely during Perestroika. But these are really pipes. I remember very well that long before any Perestroika, the dissident intelligentsia said exactly this, with a characteristic intonation indicating a fig in one’s pocket: in this country... It was not necessary to speak out about Brezhnev or the Prague Spring. The pronoun was enough - everything became clear. It seems to me that the source here was quite sublime - Akhmatov’s “Requiem”: And if someday in this country / They plan to erect a monument to me, / I give my consent to this triumph, / But only with the condition - not to erect it / Not near the sea, where I was born: / The last connection with the sea was severed, / Not in the royal garden near the treasured stump, / Where the inconsolable shadow is looking for me, / But here, where I stood for three hundred hours / And where the bolt was not opened for me. These lines were written in 1940 about Stalin's terror. There, as everyone probably remembers, it is said: And if they shut my exhausted mouth, To which a hundred million people shout. For the intelligentsia, "Requiem" was a cult text and stood on a par with "GULAG". Akhmatova had everything in order with the use of pronouns and in general with the Russian language, as well as with patriotism. It is impossible to replace the pronoun here: And if someday in our country... The fact is that in the case of our country, the country is defined through belonging to the personal sphere of the speaker, and moreover, a certain we is implied - a community of people to which the speaker considers himself. And in the case of this one - through the circumstances of place and time. As Akhmatova, who owned all the pronouns, wrote later, in 1961, I was then with my people, Where my people, unfortunately, were.

No, of course, the patriots are right in their own way. In combination, there is a kind of detachment in this country, or, as the representatives of the formal school liked to say, defamiliarization. This is similar to how Gogol mentions two Russian men at the beginning of Dead Souls. A well-known problem: why, in fact, if the action takes place in the depths of Russia, would it be necessary to clarify that the men are Russian. And what? There is a large literature on this subject; researchers argue: either the Little Russian substratum has an effect here, or Gogol has such a special view of Russia - as if from outer space.

It’s in vain that they think that by blacklisting certain words and expressions they can achieve unanimity in society. If anything happens, we’ll get other identification marks and figure out how to call and wink. No pasaran!