The language of the Nutcrackers

Russian literature in the conversation of Alexander Genis with Tatyana Tolstoy (1997)

Archival project "Radio Liberty this week 20 years ago." The most interesting and significant from the Archive of the Radio Freedom of twenty years ago. Incomplete story. Still living hopes. Could Russia go the other way?

Summing up. Conversations with Russian writers. For the first time on the air of November 8, 1997.

Ivan Tolstoy : In the summer of this year, Alexander Genis visited Moscow and St. Petersburg, where he recorded twelve conversations with twelve writers. So during the autumn months, our listeners get acquainted with the whole panorama of views on the Russian literature of those who make this very literature. Today's interlocutor is Tatyana Tolstaya.

Alexander Genis : You listen to the next program from our cycle about the latest literature. It is composed of conversations with the leading writers of modern Russia, which I recorded in the Moscow, St. Petersburg and New York Studio Radio Liberty in the spring and summer of this year. The purpose of this project is to create a group portrait of Russian literature at that turning point when it summarizes the results of the 20th century and is preparing to meet with a new century. The first part of the conversation in which I ask my interlocutors to sketch my concept of the domestic literature of our century, consists of answers to general questions, more or less the same for everyone. The second part of the conversation tailored by an individual pattern should become a kind of manifesto of personal poetics of each of the project participants. Today on the air conversation with Tatyana Tolstoy.

Tatyana is fat

Tatyana Tolstoy's prose is distinguished by sophisticated escapism. Her theme is the flight to the closed world, fenced off from vulgar everyday life with excellent metaphorical details. Often it is a world of childhood. The main weapon of Tolstoy is a metaphor, this is its magic wand, returning the past to a fairy tale. After all, the only way to escape from the destructive whirlwind of the so -called real life is not to believe that it is real, to return to the bright circles of the clear and honest rules of childhood. At the same time, a fat is by no means a good wizard, and her fairy tales with a bad end. The world is terrible in itself, life is initially tragic already because it obeys a chronos. However, fat and does not accept such a life. Contrary to her, she creates her world - tamed, cozy, immortal. Smart speaking things live in it, like a “young shy lampshade”, a Christmas spirit always reigns in it, they speak the language of the Nutcrackers. The secret, but the main secret of Tolstoy charm is in unnecessary stories that have nothing to do with the plot. The lower we bend over the text, the more talkative details are found in it, leading their independent existence. Each line forces the reader to change binoculars to a magnifying glass.

Tanya, what does Soviet literature mean to you?

Tatyana Tolstaya : Firstly, I know Soviet literature very poorly, because I studied poorly at school and avoided reading the recommended Soviet literature. And that of the literature in Russian, which I liked, I considered it to be Russian, not Soviet. Therefore, Soviet literature for me practically does not mean anything. Russian - everything, if, from my point of view, good literature. There are some exceptions, dubious cases. For example, Andrei Platonov, of course, is a great prose writer of the 20th century, but he considered himself exclusively a Soviet writer, and all his plans, ideas, not only literary, but also vital, were exclusively Soviet. It seems to us anti -Soviet, but he did not seem like that to himself. Everything that I saw not ideological in the text is everything that I saw artistic, that which coincided with my aesthetics and represented for me some kind of aesthetic, I am unfamiliar to me, but I was interested, I loved it all. I always passionately loved Russian literature.

Alexander Genis : Tatyana, is there a post -Soviet literature? And if so, what does it mean?

Tatyana Tolstaya : In my terms, therefore, there is no, because if there was no pre -Soviet, Soviet one, then there should not be a post -Soviet one. This is an ideological incision. In an ideological context, yes, all this exists, both the post -Soviet, and any. Well, Sorokin, for example. But when the post -Soviet time began to advance, when "Sovietness" began to decompose? I don’t know, it seemed to me that since the 60s. Any joke is part of the post -Soviet literature.

"They gained, gained wealth, and now there is something to escape. And it goes and saves"

Alexander Genis : Two centuries are being completed, in which the history of new Russian literature has met. Compare the achievements and failures of the literature of the 19th and 20th centuries. Once, a dotted line.

Tatyana Tolstaya : We had to, as Russian literature, we had to run in, tag and invest what others had done for centuries, squeeze into these two centuries, so achievements are monstrously huge. A striking thing - the whole 19th century Russian literature tiredly gave birth to geniuses, and not only geniuses of purely Russian literature, they are all generally recognized in the world. Then the 20th century comes and, it would seem, the stool is knocked out from under the feet, the patient should hang himself and should not remain. And in a striking way through the nightmare that we know very well, it is called in Russia the 20th century, some energy flows that Russian literature are completely amazingly pass-through the word collected in the 19th century, through a polished word, through a specially curved and curved word. I mean the word at any level - at the level of vocabulary, syntax, some kind of energy charge. They gained, gained wealth, and now there is something to escape. And it goes and saves. And although now it may be irrelevant for many, but for me it is still very important how much people testified to the fact that the word, literature saved them in the most gloomy hours of the 20th century! Those who say so are saved. Now it is very customary to deny the action of literature on humanity, but those on whom it acted on, which means that it acted on them.

Alexander Genis : Tatyana, what, in your opinion, the most powerful brought the literature of our century to Russian literature? What did the 20th century say that which the age of 19 did not say?

Tatyana Tolstaya : Nevertheless, literature of the 19th century is a literature of ideas, and literature of the 20th century is a literature of style. Of course, in the 20th century, great literature spoke of the idea, if not about ideas, but the idea was how to preserve the human face in the animal atmosphere, which intensified in Russia by the 20th century. But it is amazing that. That aesthetic standards in Russian literature have not decreased, despite such terrible things. It was not enough to shout loudly "Death to the tyrants!" And become a great writer. Those who did this, they existed, were popular, and everything was wonderful, but when the dungeons collapsed, and freedom more or less met us joyfully at the entrance, it turned out that these writers were forgotten instantly, they were stopped reading, and they read those who sang as a nightingale, and not like a goose.

Alexander Genis : The Goose that Rome saved?

Tatyana Tolstaya : Yes, who saved Rome. I am not at all inclined to believe that one who is ugly and poorly sings is not a great person. It’s just amazing just that it was possible to sing about anything, like Fet, “whisper, timid breath”, and despite all the evil cries of Dostoevsky that the people are starving, still remained. And in the 20th century, "whisper, timid breathing", and at 21, I hope. After all, this is still higher than the burning Lisbon and starving peoples. After all, even if you go and starve, you, when you remember the great poems or great prose, which is more difficult to remember, then it’s easier to burn, and it’s easier to starve.

Igor Pomerantsev and Tatyana Tolstaya

Alexander Genis : Tatyana, who in the 20th century in Russian literature is intimately close to you from writers, in whom do you feel the kinship of souls?

Tatyana Tolstaya : Partly - Nabokov, but only partly, to a certain level.

Alexander Genis : In which part?

Tatyana Tolstaya : In the part where it is not yet read and does not begin, which he certainly put into each text. Here is Nabokov’s naive perception, here is an amazing language, the flexibility of the text, this is wit, a human face, which is visible through his text. And at this first level, remarkable in all respects, Nabokov is close to me and just a cousin. And at the level where the steel design that he put up for each text is clarified, and the more you read Nabokov and Nabokov, the more you see, there it does not leave indifferent, because there is the highest degree of rationalism, intelligence that he developed in himself, and then showed in literature. And I don't have this. And then he is alien to me, it’s cold to me, it seems to me that this chessboard can be divided into ten thousand pieces, and still they will be beautiful, but for him the board is important.

"It seems to me that this chessboard can be divided into ten thousand pieces, and still they will be beautiful, but for him the board is important"

Alexander Genis : Tatyana Tolstoy's literature distinguishes a rare quality - a kind of biophilism. Her writer's optics is arranged in such an unusual way that her gaze itself has a storytelling. Everything that falls into the author’s field of view moves, animates, acquires an independent life, begins to somehow behave. This excessive, excessive prose simply teems with the same bizarre living creatures, which fills the Bosch paintings. A genuine drama is provided with a densely recorded back - here they unfold, without accompanying, without illustrating, not corresponding, but just accompanying the action of the remarkable living paintings in their narrative energy, each of which is a fairy tale twisted into a tight ball. Sometimes it is a Gothic landscape.

Announcer : "The chicken in Avoska hangs outside the window as a punished one, wipes in a black wind." "The naked tree drooped with grief." Sometimes it is a cubic still life, peace and peace in a circle of light on a white tablecloth. "On the saucer, a fan of cheese, a fan of a doctoral sausage, lemon wheels. As if breaking a small yellow bicycle. Rubine lights roam in jam."

Alexander Genis : Any of these paintings is a kind of hieroglyph. Capable of existing on a blank sheet of paper without neighbors, in itself, at the same time - an integral part of the overall structure. Offering each of his own story both wholesale and retail, Tolstaya forces the reader to look at the text of the tuning, at the same time keep distant and close in the focus. The charm of these stories is in that relaxed, natural grace, with which part becomes whole, and a whole part. The picture made up of independent elements, as well as the story made of autonomous stories, as if erects art to a degree, it reaches such an aesthetic density that it explodes a linear narrative. The text breaks away from the flat sheet, acquires a volume that allows the narrative in several dimensions at once, not only along the plot, but also above it. Such a composite letter requires the author of the virtuosity of the organist, who, as you know, plays one melody with his hands and the other with his feet. The essence of this three -dimensional secrecy is in the interaction of micro- and macrocosm. The shape of Tolstoy does not contradict, and does not correspond to the content, but lives with it in symbiosis. The mini -snappers of those speaking elements of the hieroglyphs from which the stories are composed, infect its prose as a microbe of the elephant. The scale ceases to play the role, the small does not become large, but imposes his will to him as yeast of the test. In such a prose, infected with curtailed images-strokes, an uncontrollable reaction begins. Suddenly, it seems to the author himself, a bizarre life is selfless in the text. Following her proceedings is the main pleasure of reading Tolstoy. Tatyana, what does your prose are indisputable for yours?

Tatyana Tolstaya : I could say that the fact that I write it, but it sounds stupid. But in fact, this is not so stupid, because I should and is forced to write in such a way that I recognize the text I have written in every way. That is, he must be recognized by me as a reflection in the mirror. If I recognize myself in the mirror, then this is me, this is my text. I can write a little not my text, and in some cases in my life I have to do this, but not in artistic prose. And then I have some disgust, as if I were pretending. You know how pretending to be when they came to the housing office or that your water supply does not work. You begin to build something so unusual. Children will not recognize you.

"I cannot read my texts for pleasure, I can only read them to introduce myself to the trance in which I write them"

Alexander Genis : Let's just say when you read the texts of your contemporaries, your colleagues, what is your texts from other texts is highlighted, what makes them yours?

Tatyana Tolstaya : Now I’m talking to the tape recorder, and God forbid I hear myself from the outside - I really do not like my voice on the tape recorder, while others believe that a completely normal voice, I just do not like it personally. It is somewhat related to how you read your own text and how you read others. I do not read my text, I write my text, I have to be in a state of scripture of my own text. If I had to, God forbid, read my text for my own pleasure, then it would be the black moment in my life. I can’t read my texts for pleasure, I can only read them to introduce myself to the trance in which I write them. I read all the other writers, without exception, for pleasure.

Alexander Genis : What does it mean to introduce yourself into a trance, explain?

Tatyana Tolstaya : In order to write anything to write, you need to introduce yourself to a certain state. Inspiration is not inspiration, insight is not insight, here is a certain trance. To do this, you need to feel like an act of promotional campaign. There is some kind of switching inside, all things become visible in some other light, there is some kind of shift, objects begin to go into the hand, leave the hands or regroup. A person writes without sitting, but walking, my dishes and performing some kind of body movements. And the whole world begins to turn to you with such a side that it is convenient for you to get small gifts from it.

"There is some kind of switching inside, all things become visible in some other light, there is some kind of shift, objects begin to go into the hand, leave or regroup"

Literally everything goes to the text. This is called "when you knew from what kind of litter." This is a very correct remark, all this grows from the litter, because the grade is transformed, the world turns the transformed side, all rubbish, the garbage suddenly becomes magical. They say that people feel so under the influence of some drugs. Since I never took drugs, it is difficult for me to judge this, but the description of these states is quite similar to what a person who is in a trance feels. Simple things begin to glow like on a theater stage under a strong blue light. This is a fairly strong lilac glow on all things visible and invisible, conceivable and intangible. Then you can do something.

Alexander Genis : "To do" implies a design, plot, hero, composition. How does all this come to your prose, what role it plays, is it meaningful, do you consciously choose the plot, how do you work on the composition?

Tatyana Tolstaya : Partly, yes. In fact, for a short story, it is very important that the plot, but not in the sense of the plot, but in the sense of the plot came entirely, so that it would be incredibly seen.

Alexander Genis : What does the plot mean for the story? A joke, story? How does it localize?

Tatyana Tolstaya : I am not strong in literary terminology, because it is very conditional and is used each time differently. In the Russian tradition, there is a concept of a plot and plot. It is different, these are different things. In general, it is harmful to know this to the writer, but since I have to teach American students, in American terminology, this is the difference between Subject and Plot. Plot is what can be retold. He left the house, went up the stairs, sat down, called - all these things. And Subject is about what. Here's about loneliness. This story will be about loneliness

Alexander Genis : And what are your stories about?

Tatyana Tolstaya : They are all about things that cannot be said in one word, but ultimately when the story is finished, then it can be said about it in one word.

Alexander Genis : And what are these stories about?

Tatyana Tolstaya : Each of them is ultimately about something. So I love my story "Night" - about the impossibility of contact. So I told the plot.

Alexander Genis : Are there typical stories that become stories in your stories? Are there any stories that attract you as a writer?

Tatyana Tolstaya : Of course. When I meet with the situation or when I witness a certain life story, an anecdote, in which I suddenly become piercingly sorry for a person for the fact that he, inside himself, equal to the gods, kings or anyone, and so warm and wonderful, suddenly, will be impressed by ruthless forces of life. It can be anything: a car passed by a car, or humiliated the indifferent fellow around the Kingdom of Primates. Then this sense of pity for a person for the fact that he should survive and transfer, and some kind of prospect at the same time, in which it is clear how large he is and how small he is, this causes some push. А в какую конкретно историю будет это чувство облачено, - это уже другое дело. Вот это самое трудное, мне очень трудно придумывать истории. Рассказ должен быть рассказом, чтобы, дослушав до конца, читатель не сказал: "Ну и что?" Вот это самое страшное: ну и что?

Tatyana Tolstaya with the first students of the school "Good text" in Peredelkino

Александр Генис : То есть у него должен быть конец?

Татьяна Толстая : У него должен быть конец даже не на уровне того, что написано в тексте. У рассказа, да вообще у любого текста два слоя, может, три, это уже высший пилотаж, можно восемь на восемь, как у упомянутого Набокова, но всегда должен быть второй слой, иначе это не литература. Один сюжет идет рассказанный на поверхности, а под ним идет второй. И вот если сквозь весь первый сюжет видно это подводное просвечивание русла, дна, утопленников, вот тогда это становится литературой. Вот продержать на двух уровнях некий текст, чтобы поверху текло одно невинное течение с кувшинками и стрекозами, а внизу чтобы таились эти силы, которые человеком управляют, неясные ему самому, какая-то мертвая Аленушка, какие-то рыбы, какие-то подводные течения, какие-то сети, чтобы это выдержать одновременно, чтобы это не разошлось, вот это очень сложно. И, главное, в конце свести эти вещи. А так, конечно, – "сказал он, и умер", "вздохнул и отвернулся", "за окном темнело" - ведь эти все концовки не значат ровным счетом ничего. Но вот если за каждой из букв этих концовок вам удастся построить огромный подвал, погреб, царство Аида, вот тогда можно писать любую.

"...продержать на двух уровнях некий текст, чтобы поверху текло одно невинное речение с кувшинками и стрекозами, а внизу чтобы таились эти силы, которые человеком управляют, неясные ему самому, какая-то мертвая Аленушка, какие-то рыбы, какие-то подводные течения, какие-то сети..."

Александр Генис : То есть не концовка, а исчерпанность предмета. Скажите, Татьяна, я прекрасно помню, как появились ваши рассказы, и первые критики, причем, очень тонкие критики, такие, как Фазиль Искандер, который приветствовал вашу прозу, говорил об излишней густоте ее. Что вы думаете о густоте текста в ваших сочинениях?

Татьяна Толстая : Густота текста - это очень сложная вещь. Дело в том, что она мне мешает. Я пробовала писать и так, и сяк, но как только я начинаю разжижать, я себя не узнаю. Значит, мне нужно писать густо. Человек обречен писать так, как он пишет, в конечном счете. Он может попытаться рвануть в разные стороны, но ничего с этим не поделаешь. Вот при этой густоте текста надо писать короткие рассказы, это неизбежно, это вещи взаимосвязанные, это все части одной формулы. Поэтому рассказы вне моего желания, вне моей воли у меня все выходили одинаковые по размеру. Я же писала в свое время руками и на машинке, но отдельными кусками. Потом соберешь, склеишь, поменяешь, по полу поползаешь, и получится рассказ - снова перепечатаешь. Одно и то же число страниц. У меня на машинке получалось 13, плюс-минус полстраницы. Значит, какой-то существовал внутренний модуль, который заставлял это делать. И, в частности, это было связано с удельным весом слова. А то и с густотой текста. А потом меня стало это мучить, потому что одна часть формулы стала давать некоторые искривления, значит, и вторая величина должна там увеличиваться или уменьшаться, и мои тексты стали более длинными, а тогда густота пришла в противоречие во всеми остальными элементами текста. Я решила, что надо резко все это поменять, и надо освобождаться от этой висящей надо мной секиры. И я стала придумывать текст более длинный, более пространный, не сказать, что водянистый, но построенный на других принципах. И этот текст пришел за десять лет. Он мне отдушина и, в то же время, я на него смотрю иногда и пугаюсь: господи, но ведь никто же не узнает, что я, это я в этом тексте, потому что это написано не по-моему, кроме отдельных каких-то кусков, где есть тени моего разлива. Но теперь я привыкла к этом тексту, полюбила его, и вот сейчас я его тихо-мирно дописываю. Для меня это эмиграция в другой стиль. Сейчас я с этим управлюсь и вернусь назад. Я еще не закончила вот этот роман, про который я говорю, а сама уже начала третий, где я вернулась и к густоте текста, и к длине произведения. Что из этого выйдет, я не знаю.

Александр Генис : Татьяна, еще один вопрос, который касается вашего стиля. Все говорят "метафора Татьяны Толстой". Но метафора - это вещь темная, каждый по-своему ее объясняет и понимает. Что такое метафора для вас?

Татьяна Толстая : Я вам отвечу, только ненаучно, ради бога, потому что в одной работе прочла: "Метафора и метонимия у Татьяны Толстой". Мне нужно сделать некоторое напряжение мысли, чтобы понять, где метафора, а где метонимия. Не потому, что я, скажем невежественна и не отличаю эти вещи, а я не хочу об этом знать. Там еще есть всякие сравнения, синекдохи, потом есть школы, в которых между метафорой и прямым выражением нет разницы, потом есть какие-то тонкости, деликатности… Упаси меня бог включать интеллект, дай бог, чтобы интуиция работала. Поэтому я вам скажу в целом. Метафора и все ее сестры, перечисленные мной, есть некая попытка соединить в общем знаменателе две любые несопоставимые части, детали этого мироздания. Я считаю, что общий знаменатель есть у всего, любые две вещи можно свести вместе в одну формулу. Вот это и есть желание писать метафорой, желание видеть метафору. Вообще, способность видеть метафорой есть, на самом деле, потребность видеть мир единым.