| “October” (No. 1) is full of high-quality prose: the compact and extravagant (starting from the title, in which you don’t look for typos) novel by Yuri Buida “that animal”, the tightly written “Sea Stories” by Afanasy Mamedov and Isaac Milkin (again proving that serious prose can be written in collaboration), “Short Stories” by Grigory Petrov , as usual, somewhat “foolish”, but cute. The coffee table book (and the year) opens with the first part of Anatoly Naiman’s novel “Everyone and Everyone.” It is, of course, impossible to judge the whole before the publication of the ending, but it is still clear from what has been published: the story of the life (and self-knowledge) of a man named Andrei is told with Naiman’s characteristic harsh observation, jewelry sophistication and hidden but powerful compassion for the human race. I hope to talk in detail about the novel “Everyone and Everyone” (the book version is being prepared by the EKSMO publishing house) in a month. For now, I just recommend it to our readers. And I’ll give you the beginning.
“Andrei could not explain convincingly even to himself how he fell into the category of serious people. In the company - I still understood this way and that, it started from school, just like that. It was completely natural and logical that those with whom he found himself in such simple relationships as a child and regularly saw each other in the next two decades of hot revelry, bathhouses, dachas, Baltic and Black Sea beaches, started - by his parents, but also by them, from themselves, according to their taste - an attractive life on the territory of some half a square kilometer around Chistye Prudy, and who, like him, did not move anywhere from there, did not leave, but ran into him and each other on the street, all the time without even stopping to talk, but only exchanging cheerful words as they walked, they accepted him long ago, together, imperceptibly started chatter, when the company became a club, nowhere, of course, not registered, not announced in any way, a metaphysical club, felt only psychologically, if want, imaginary, to become active members. More precisely, they accepted him just as he accepted them. Because he was not only their equal, but could also be considered an adornment - first to the company, now to the club.” And so on...
Unfortunately, the excellent issue ends with an extremely unpleasant, malicious and boring lampoon by one mediocre poet. I don’t mention the lampooner’s name out of natural disgust.
“New Literary Review” (No. 58) demonstrates the latest (and still not entirely heard in the West) squeak of intellectual fashion, the so-called “new economic criticism.” In the introductory note to the corresponding section, Mikhail Gronas states: “The emergence of new economic criticism, as well as other humanitarian “brands” (new historicism, cultural studies), is a consequence of the structural crisis of the humanities in the American (and, more broadly, in the Western) academy . Due to the general decline of interest in high culture, traditional subjects of these disciplines, for example classical literature, have become socially “depreciated” (quotes, if you think about it, they are worth a lot. - A.N. ). The loss of public interest in the subject inevitably (this “inevitable” is even touching. - A.N. ) leads to the loss of influence of the discipline - both in a broader context, in society, and within the academy.” All that remains is to “cross the pig into a crucian carp,” that is, to pass off truisms wrapped in fashionable wafers as a new word. Mr. Gronas then introduces the distinction between “moderate” and “radical” approaches in “economic criticism.” " The Moderate Economics of Literature studies the economic aspects of the production and circulation of literary texts." It is represented in “UFO” by William M. Todd III’s article “Dostoevsky as a Professional Writer: Profession, Occupation, Ethics” - a bit boring, mostly retelling commonplaces, but on the whole good (like other works of this venerable American Slavist). The “radicals” who “economize” the entire world culture (more precisely, those phenomena on which the radical’s gaze fell) are Mikhail Makeev (“Agreement with the Devil in the context of the emergence of capitalism in Russia: The economic significance of Christian symbolism in Saltykov-Shchedrin), James Driscoll (“A Man Without Interest: The Economy of Gifting in F. M. Dostoevsky’s Novel “The Idiot”) and Kirill Postoutenko (“Sale of the “Cabinet of Curiosities.” Images of Economic Totality in Balzac, Dickens, Marx and Chesterton”). In fact, the “radicals” are not radical at all - they talk more and more about “bourgeoisism” and about the difficulties of the formation of capitalism in Russia. Well, you can still notice a few fresh observations in these articles.
Herzen’s studies of “UFOs” were continued in the works of the main Herzenophile of the West, Eileen Kelly (“Was Herzen a liberal?” – he was, was; these are typical Russian liberals, like Kavelin and Chicherin, were not real liberals), Ilya Kalinin (“From the Other Shore to other shores. Clio Herzen and Mnemosyne Nabokov") and Ilya Kukulin (Herzen and Lydia Ginzburg as “revolutionaries of genres”).
The section “Semiotics of Childhood” is quite interesting, where, along with notes by Marina Krasnova (the impact of “Victorian” adult literature on children’s folklore) and Oleg Lekmanov (echoes of children’s literature in Nabokov’s work), the experiences of the newest (and young) children’s writers Olga Pakhomova and Anna are included Russ . The latter (the “Debut” laureate) writes like this: All day long, Marinated Piece, / Not wanting to leave for an hour, / Everything is standing in a pay phone / And calling her Sprat in Tomato (“Love”). Or something like this: I would gladly have someone, / Let’s say the little animal Coyote, / Because the little animal Coyote / Sings very sweetly at night (“Song”). Oh, fresh!
The most important thing in the magazine is Marietta Chudakova’s article “Military” poem by Simonov “Wait for me...” (July 1941) in the literary process of Soviet times,” carefully developing a specific (very multifaceted) plot and closely related to the theoretical concept developed by the author history of Soviet literature.
The new volume of “Notes of the Fatherland” (No. 8) is dedicated to the army and the military organization of the state. It opens with an article by Tatyana Malkina “Which Army I Refuse” - the author refuses the same army, which horrifies you and me. “What do I personally need from the Russian army? Nothing, if you think about it carefully. So that the word “Russian” would raise her status. Where can we find such a reform? Next, the floor is given to everyone, everyone, everyone - from the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation Sergei Ivanov “Reassessment of threats and challenges” and ex-minister Marshal Igor Sergeev (“From global confrontation to local problems”) to a wide variety of politicians, historians and publicists (ours and overseas), reflecting on the structure of the armed forces, the military budget, modern armies of foreign countries, the problem of a “professional” army, the place of the army (and the Ministry of Defense) in civil society, nuclear weapons, geopolitical innovations, ancient traditions, frightening prospects and the warrior spirit. Several important references are provided - “Structure of the armed forces of the world powers”, “Military expenditures of the world powers”, “Military budgets of the world powers”. It makes no sense to single out individual articles (including some that are quite controversial) here. The entire issue - in my opinion, one of the most informative and thoughtful in the short history of "OZ" - requires careful reading. Which, undoubtedly, will take a lot of time, but the game is clearly worth the candle. Andrey NEMZER
|
