Arkady Dragomoshchenko. Correcting names

In everything else we were almost sure. But it wasn't like that.
Alexander Vvedensky . Some amount of talking

I

I was attracted to this topic - and I intend to talk about hierarchy - because lately the well-known creaking of the “steering wheel” has been heard much more clearly than before.

Due to circumstances, I had the opportunity to witness the speech of philosophers who, in connection with the publication of Russian translations of Jünger , quite convincingly talked about the happiness of finding a “topos”, “place”, about the need to limit what “we”, it turns out, misunderstood as “freedom”.

Perhaps I am mistaken, but in the course of further conversation the philosophers also touched upon the “subordination of oneself” to clear principles of submission , which, following their reasoning, will return “strength” (how it was lost and what it represents is anyone’s guess) and what Jünger knew for certain , who carried his knowledge through steel thunderstorms.

Is it really worth drawing analogies, referring to the political rhetoric that has come into use today, or referring to the somewhat less articulated desire of Russian literature? 1

On the other hand, I am amazed at how strangely the pattern of coincidences is sometimes woven together. Some politicians, philosophers, and even literary critics one day wait for the arrival of the traveler and find themselves almost participants in a “conference of birds.” But why Junger and not Kun Tzu? 2 If you have to choose, it’s Kong Tzu. How laconic he is. I wanted to say - the words are shorter. The language is different.

For example, hierarchy , which, if I understand correctly (in addition to “sacred power”), means a stable system of subordination in the picture of the world or society, is expressed in Kun Tzu by the concept of zhong (literally “devotion”). Although, looking ahead, I can unwittingly destroy the necessary sequence, co-subordination, the immutable order of times, which should not be done. So before zhong already exists appears, li . Translators suggest understanding li primarily as a ritual, a set of rules, a set of the rules. System.

Like a pyramid crowned with a speck of diamond dust, the System is accomplished in the Emperor (unfortunately, Kung Tzu clearly did not have time to touch upon the topic of the “two bodies of the king,” which was later done in Europe).

However, when approaching this point, you need to be as careful as possible. Here something arises that brings some animation to the silent picture of the arrival of the Son of Heaven, tianzi , in a chariot drawn by dragons.

The following concept of “correcting names” put forward by Kun Tzu undoubtedly makes it clear that any rigid, stable system, despite belief to the contrary, tends to be incomplete, to lose balance. Thus, the procedure for correcting names is nothing more than another return to stability . In other words, one’s own “topos” - previously, as you know, it was customary to talk about “roots”.

“If the names are wrong,” the Teacher answers Tzu-lu’s question, “then the words have no basis. If the words have no basis, then deeds cannot be carried out. If deeds are not carried out, then ritual and music do not flourish. If ritual and music do not flourish, punishments are not applied properly. If punishments are not applied properly, the people do not know how to behave . "

We will not dwell on Kun Tzu’s very vague indication regarding the possible connection between Plato’s “Cratylus” and his own “Republic”. Timur Novikov, for example, speaks about roots in his recent interview on the occasion of the opening of a Moscow exhibition, where exquisite fabrics instead of “Oscar Wildes” swaddle young pioneers, or rather, photographs of sculptures of the same pioneers, not so long ago intended for camps and carried away by the next by the wind. There is no doubt that Kung Tzu would not hesitate to include the mentioned exhibition in the program of correcting names, however, since we come from a different vocabulary, it remains to resort to the kindly proposed different term: “new seriousness” , which, according to Timur Novikov, “has moved on” , which is proven, in his words, by “the last elections that took place in the country; which became a clear demonstration of the replacement of postmodernism with a new seriousness” , and which should return prosperity to ritual and music.

Timur Novik's concern about prosperity and photographs being thrown into the trash is understandable. It has a basis and is conditioned by the times - as the artist himself says - “when cultural figures actively begin to preach other people’s values, and our [values] begin to belittle and throw into the same trash heap. This [we are still talking about photographs of gardening camp sculpture] - the destroyed ideal image of the future of our country, what it should strive for . "

Ie, values ​​are an unshakable rock.

The steadfastness of the latter is not only of aesthetic significance. It is stability, fixedness, closedness/completeness in an ascending subordination that provides the opportunity to create a table of ranks, the desire for which, in turn, can be described as a consequence of trauma, neurosis, and perhaps fear. After all, it happens that sometimes he also knocks on the hearts of the brave. Which, when switching to a different dialect, means constant prices, and if inflation, then almost elusive, mercifully giving time for adaptation.

Stasis and status are the same thing.

Circulation, waste, loss, uncertainty, dynamics, transgressiveness, incorrect names ultimately turn out to be nothing more than suffering. Freud's Eros-Thanatos metaphor continues its work with the regularity of a railroad.

The parallelism of the parallels also seemed undeniable. But the point is not in parallels and analogies. And not in “appropriate punishments” for distorting names, incorrect, inappropriate speech. The point is different. Another person playing on the stage of this story is Chuang Tzu:

"The speaker has something to say, but what he says is very vague. Then does speech really exist? Or has there never been speech? It is considered different from the twitter of a chick - is there really such a difference? Or is it not? Where to be speech to be inappropriate ?

The last question takes me back to the philosophers to understand: the only place of speech is exclusively in its irrelevance . Like so many other things.

Including the following conversation with the poet, critic Alexander Skidan and Irina Prokhorova, director of the publishing house “New Literary Review” and editor-in-chief of the magazine of the same name in Moscow, and since May 2000, “ joined ” the Andrei Bely Prize committee.

Of course, reader, you guessed it: we moved to other rooms a long time ago .

II

(other rooms, other voices)

ATD. Irina, we recently spoke with Marat Gelman about his “cultural machine,” which involves the creation of almost a calibration system for developing criteria in the artistic environment. In your opinion, is the institution of awards a similar machine, an instrument for creating a hierarchy?

IRINA PROKHOROVA. You know, the topic you touched on is painful and, apparently, suggests the beginning of big conversations - at least for the next ten years... But I will try to express a few simple thoughts about the formalization of the literary field. The idea is that if we start talking about hierarchies in popular terms, we somehow, albeit indirectly, albeit with reservations, begin to talk about an absolute monarchy.

The attraction to the idea of ​​some kind of supreme judge is inexhaustible. Moreover, it is on a national scale, no less, and then the imagination transforms the idea into pictures of simple Soviet subordination of structures. Adjusted for time.

On the other hand, when individual literary prizes arise, claims of bias are always made against them. In fact, it is assumed that literary prizes must be abstract representations of high taste, not really defining which one, but certainly disinterested, as a result of which it is believed that only truth is possible.

ALEXANDER SKIDAN. More often than not, the opposite happens.

IRINA PROKHOROVA. Yes, and, in my opinion, there should be just a lot of literary prizes. And they should all be extremely subjective.

ATD. What about the unobtrusive return of the dream of the First Poet of the Country, the first and main guardian of the Truth? Dreams of a standard? In a word, “show me how to do it.” Signs abound. It would seem, sometimes in unexpected areas of literature.

Criticism now gives preference to works with a skillfully composed anecdote, a brilliantly told story with an end in a familiar place...

In other words, in formal terms, preference is given to strictly organized works, the same hierarchical forms.

IRINA PROKHOROVA. The problem lies in the strange connection between literature and life. We have. For some reason, the rigid organization within works is then always transferred to the structure of literary organizations themselves, and then to political orders. This aberration in our country is rooted in a special way because a long stay within the boundaries of one model without any idea of ​​​​alternative possibilities also takes its toll, which cannot be ignored.

ALEXANDER SKIDAN. I’ll add about the spirit of the times, because the changes that have occurred in the social field are simply striking, and here we cannot help but mention the reason, the trigger moment of these changes, I mean the bombing of Kosovo, which unexpectedly consolidated certain social and cultural strata, as a result which led to the emergence of a certain fantasy axis onto which people began to project their anxieties, fears, hopes, and dreams.

After ten years of torn, fragmented world in which we found ourselves after the collapse of the Union, for the first time the possibility of gathering a social body arose. What follows seems to me a logical continuation of the need to assemble the body of the empire, and within it, oneself .

Both literature and culture in general, it seems, also fall into this turbulent zone of sociality, into which, we must not forget, considerable political investment is being poured.

Therefore, the desire for hierarchy, the desire for traditional relationships, transparent plots both in life and in literature is largely explained by the overwhelming fatigue from “freedom”, which in reality turned out to be not what it was imagined to be.

ATD. Well, yes, of course, of course! And yet, why in the innermost “depths” did it seem that freedom meant endless money and a lifetime pension from the right age? Compensation? But for what?

ALEXANDER SKIDAN. What is democracy? A world without metaphysics. Such a world has no metaphysical foundations...

ATD. Just a second, Sasha, metaphysics has always been a kind of strawberry field, where it’s so easy to get lost and disappear.

ALEXANDER SKIDAN. Partly. However, the “post-historical” world is a world in which no metaphysics works, but only efficiency mechanisms work. Volumes of information, speed of information transfer, new technologies that speed up the approach to urgent decisions, and so on... One way or another, the focus on efficiency, complexity and efficiency turned out to be a terrible blow for that communal body that we call Russia.

It’s just that today the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction... to foundations, hierarchies, to paternal metaphysics and, of course, to strict power and control in an ever-increasing space of society.

ATD. But power then takes on a metaphysical component. Yes? Because if she becomes the supreme judge, she is incomprehensible, and secondly, she must be unreal, not subject to any logic. No one can know by what laws the second, sacred body of the emperor exists.

ALEXANDER SKIDAN. Why... the emperor takes on the role of a metaphysical guarantor, a guarantor of the integrity of the people's body - I would say so.

ATD. Then the concern of the younger generation one way or another finds itself in Pelevin’s works - and here I clarify: Pelevin is introduced only as a figure of generalization.

Agree, transparency, hierarchy, stability are suitable only in Euclidean space, in others it loses its meaning...

IRINA PROKHOROVA. Imagine, I have a rather indecently optimistic attitude towards this phenomenon. I closely followed Sasha... we have a habit of connecting metaphysical aspects with traditional things, but why doesn’t anyone want to look for the possibilities of metaphysical entities in new manifestations and connections?

Yes, of course, metaphysics is associated with figures of power, such is the tradition. I don’t want to dwell on the fact that this may be the result of inability or ignorance of what freedom is, but first of all, I think this is due to the awareness of one’s own lack of competitiveness.

When society is closed, everyone is happy to build pantheons for local gods. When society opens up, it turns out that a lot is needed to enter into different relationships... meanwhile, the former propaganda machine cannot be denied insight and power. And if we return to Pelevin, it seems to me that he is perhaps one of the few authors trying to find metaphysics in other layers.

ALEXANDER SKIDAN. And let me talk about poetry... Based on the practice that is most interesting to me, I see in attempts of this kind of assembling and falling back to the origins of political rhetoric, control, management that in poetry there is clearly a return to the proven classical tradition, to all times closely related to political rhetoric.

But this is already about something else, although it is directly related to the correction of names.

Notes:

1 On May 28, on TVC, Gleb Pavlovsky, without missing a beat, switched to impeccably transparent vocabulary: “wartime government”, “extra front”, etc. Epaulets of Muammar Gaddafi began to appear more and more often in my dreams...

2 More familiar - Confucius.