A publication of the materials from the panel discussion marking the 90th anniversary of the outstanding Russian writer V. Shukshin. Participating in the event were authors and literary critics A. Bolshev, A. Varlamov, E. Vodolazkin, P. Glushakov, I. Esaulov, M. Kucherskaya, Z. Niva, I. Sukhikh, M. Tarkovsky, M. Chudakova, L. Chudnova, and E. Shukshina. Varying in size and genres, the contributions (essays, archival documents, reminiscences, and interpretations) discuss Shukshin’s artistic phenomenology and reveal unique features of his poetics, which confirm the relation of his prose to the traditions of Russian and European literature. Included in the collection after a 45-year delay is a poem mourning Shukshin’s death. Further in the section one can find critical reviews of his works. A keen reader will notice a certain repetition of Shukshin’s ‘quotation’ and imagery in the works by different contributors. A special focus is given to the topic of ‘Shukshin and modernity’.

The key topic of the article is the role and significance of V. Shukshin’s legacy in the history of Russian literature. The author opines that Shukshin’s prose manifests a constant determination to analyze artistic and social reality, which enriches knowledge about man and expands awareness about world culture. The topic is explored in the movie script for The Red Snowball Tree [Kalina krasnaya] and Shukshin’s short stories. Delving into motifs, the reviewer compares Shukshin’s works with those by F. Tyutchev and A. Platonov. Shukshin’s oeuvre is described as democratic, with a distinctive goal to not only depict, but comprehend the vast continent of Russian folk consciousness. Shukshin discovered that ordinary people were not just interesting as human beings (rather than exoticisms for some ethnographic and folklore studies by members of the intelligentsia), but also sacred in the sense that they possess a unique system of moral and aesthetic values. The discovery of village prose had led to idealization of folk culture. It was Shukshin’s pioneering achievement to overcome that trend.

Devoted to contemporary Russian prose, the article considers the short-listed novels of the 2017 Russian Booker Prize and identifies their common characteristics, such as immersion into history, fascination with the aesthetics of violence, and dreaming in metaphors, etc. The critic notes that the latest shortlist of the Russian Booker turned out fairly versatile: in terms of the novels’ themes, style, and inner arrangement and structuring by the author. At the same time, they share something more than obsession with history: an enthusiasm for cruelty, violence, and, prominently, sadism. Perhaps not of the De Sade’s self-sufficient and self-centered variety, but while it may be naturally woven into the narrative fabric, it is just as creepy. The phenomenon may have roots in the violent outbursts of post-imperial and post-colonial wars, raging along Russia’s borders, both eastern and western, and bloodbaths tearing the country apart from the inside. Or was it called to life by the development logic of modern Russian prose, epitomized and recorded by the Booker selection? Linked together within a common context, these short but insightful reviews offer a convincing description of the trends typifying at least one particular year of modern Russian prose: 2017.

The article discusses two new novels by contemporary Russian writers D. Novikov and A. Gelasimov, who, the author suggests, were writing them with a prize in mind. ‘The big political novel’ is a particularly relevant literary form that captures attention of experts and is secure in its place among the trends of the 2010s. It is the form used by Novikov for his Flame Out At Sea [Golomyanoe plamya] and by Gelasimov for his The Wind Rose [Roza vetrov]. However, as Zhuchkova points out, the authors’ desire to anticipate the readership’s expectation proved detrimental to the quality of their work: ‘the inner worlds of the two books are sick with falsehood’, and neither Novikov’s ‘neo-pochvennichestvo’, nor Gelasimov’s political metaphors (including his take on ‘the fashionable topic of the government’s total control over a human being’) do much for the respective novel’s artistic integrity. At the same time, the critic recognizes the authors’ talent, and in her detailed analysis of the two books’ plots and poetics she focuses on their writing strategies, seeking to paint an objective picture of their flaws and advantages.

The article considers the polemic of the Nobel Prize winner R. Menchu with the U.S. anthropologist D. Stoll, erupting after Menchu’s testimony about the barbaric persecution of the indigenous Q’iche’ Maya by the Guatemalan government. Stoll accused Menchu of falsifying facts and manipulating the reader’s perception. The story poses questions that are relevant for contemporary study of literature: who has the right to testify about historical events, and what are the authenticity criteria to be observed by the author of a documentary piece? In search for the answers, one digs into the notion of ‘eyewitness contract’, which means the author’s responsibility for the authenticity of the described events, and the reader’s willingness to hear and accept the testimony. Violation or inability to observe the terms of such a contract engenders discord (‘differend’, according to J. F. Lyotard), which, in its turn, questions the very possibility of reinstating the severed social ties and finding the appropriate language to create a ‘post-catastrophic literature’.

The author argues that A. Pushkin chose Kantian philosophy as the social-philosophical, as well as aesthetic, guide for the moral-legal and political tools to solve the burning issues of Russian society. The paper sets out to prove that there is every reason to consider Pugachev’s History [Istoriya Pugacheva] and The Captain’s Daughter [Kapitanskaya dochka] as a unique duology, where the same subject is interpreted by means of the historical apparatus (reliant on documents) and art, with a much wider scope. Kant’s influence manifests itself in Pushkin’s works starting from the ode Liberty [Volnost] to The Captain’s Daughter. It is stated that the poet structured his duology according to Kant’s The Metaphysics of Morals. In Pugachev’s History, Pushkin focuses on the problems of law. He follows Kant in claiming that substitution of natural law with a state of lawlessness was exactly what drove the Yaik Cossacks, and then peasants from the whole of the Volga region, to rebellion. The Captain’s Daughter, on the other hand, focuses on moral issues, in line with the structure of Kant’s most mature work on practical philosophy.

The article explores the structure and semantic history of the lexical complex ‘khandra’ [ennui] in the works by Aleksandr Pushkin. In particular, the author engages in an in-depth analysis of the famous fragment from Eugene Onegin [Evgeny Onegin], which evokes the memory of the word amongst a very broad readership. The author refers to Vladimir Nabokov’s commentary and points out the incompletion and inaccuracies in his interpretation of the fragment. The main question that the article sets out to answer is this: why would Pushkin introduce a strange new term ‘khandra’ while his readers would be happier with more familiar ‘toska’ [melancholy] and ‘skuka’ [boredom], which seem to be perfectly synonymous with the term describing Onegin’s state of mind. Moreover, they were used by Pushkin in numerous contemporaneous texts. In search of a good answer the author considers all instances of Pushkin using the ‘khandra’ vocabulary, and discovers that ‘skuka’, for example, has an additional meaning of enlightened universalism, untypical for ‘khandra’, and ‘toska’ may connote artistic anxiety, whereas ‘khandra’ denotes complete exhaustion of creativity.

The article explores the problems in the studies of Pushkin’s language, in particular, his typical word usage. In his polemic with critics (M. Epstein is among them), who accuse Pushkin of inaccuracies and historical blunders, the author reconstructs the historical context for certain words and justifies their specific usage in Pushkin’s works. The study focuses on such words as ‘zaperet’’ [‘to shut/lock’], ‘tasovat’sya’ [‘to socialize with’], etc. Thus the paper proves that Pushkin’s vocabulary may at times differ significantly from the modern usage (there is no shortage of such examples in the studies by the renowned linguist A. Penkovsky), or coincide with contemporary meanings (which is mostly the case), or sometimes astonish us with how it directly anticipates the phraseology we consider a modern invention. Here, as with any aspect of Pushkin’s work, rushed conclusions are out of place.

The article seeks to prove the hypothesis about intentional semantic references to Kierkegaard’s The Seducer’s Diary (part of his Either/Ortractate) in Ivan Goncharov’s Oblomov. In order to substantiate the suggestion, the author begins by analyzing the image of Cordelia, to whom Oblomov compares Olga, his own love interest. While not completely dismissing the traditional interpretation of this allusion (as Shakespeare’s Cordelia from King Lear), the author argues that the image might refer to the Cordelia from the Diary. Further comparing the two works, she discovers similarities in Goncharov’s and Kierkegaard’s philosophical agenda, which opens a new way for Oblomov’s interpretation. Just as Kierkegaard, the Russian novelist is exploring the relationship between the manipulative seducer (in a broad sense) and his prey. The seductive Stoltz is forcing his philosophy on Olga and Oblomov, claiming it to be the only truth. Finally, Olga gives in to it and ends up confused about her own feelings. Oblomov, by contrast, emerges as a victor rather than victim: he defies the alien influence and finds happiness, albeit too late in life. The covert allusions suggest the possibility for ambiguous interpretation of the novel: as a story of a man’s degradation and a philosophical statement about integrity and the right to choose one’s own destiny.

The article examines a book about the literary legacy of the Russian writer S. N. Schill (1863-1928), known by her pen-name Sergey Orlovsky. Unfairly obscure these days, she wrote books for children and young adults, prose, memoirs, poems, dramas, studies about Russian literary history, and engaged herself as translator and educator, who spared no effort in bringing education to the masses. Sofia Schill is mostly remembered today by her correspondence with R. M. Rilke, whom she knew personally, while her own legacy and biography remained unknown until very recently. The book published by RGGU press sought to rectify the injustice.

The article deals with Kaluga’s provincial environment as depicted by the writer Gleb Uspensky. As a young boy, he lived for a time at his grandfather’s in Kaluga. Uspensky’s memories about that period provided the material for his vignette Mikhalych. But it is his stories written during Uspensky’s brief six-month tenure as an officer of the Ryazhsk-Vyazma Railroad administration that stand out: A Checkbook [Knizhka chekov], Tax Dodgers [Neplatelshchiki], Whether You Want It Or Not[Khochesh-ne-khochesh], People of a Mediocre Mind [Lyudi srednego obraza mysley], The Truth Will Out[Shila v meshke ne utaish], The Guard Booth [Budka], etc. Kaluga gets a critical look, providing the subject for definition of ‘the physiognomy of a modern provincial town’. Examining the reasons for Uspensky’s short career in the railways, the article quotes from Uspensky’s letters, as well as from the memoirs of A. Ivanchin-Pisarev, an active figure in the Narodniks movement and the writer’s close friend. The article focuses on this selected period of Uspensky’s life and its significance for Kaluga, and sets out to clarify certain details of the writer’s biography, helping his name back into the collective mental map.

The provinces may constantly measure themselves against the capital, but they do not exist in order to please it: they occupy their own place in the country’s history and destiny. By the same token, literature of the provinces is not a ‘preparatory school’ to help you ascend to national fame, but a unique cultural milieu, complete with its own giants and value systems.

The aforementioned statements are reconfirmed by this article, which concerns itself with the expansive and versatile legacy of Leonid Naumovich Bolshakov, a writer of national and international renown, whose literary roots belong to the social and historical soil of the Orenburg region, and whose work produced a social and cultural impact particularly noticeable in his native area. The article offers a detailed account of his life and work. Bolshakov began his career as a journalist, later turning to documentary and historical prose, and research of 19th c. enigmatic literary subjects. Special attention is devoted to Bolshakov’s professional ties with I. Andronikov, and the research of his oeuvre by his descendants T. Bolshakova and S. Lyubichankovsky.

The second paper of the Dombrovsky cycle, this publication continues the quest to reconstruct the writer’s biography and shed light on unknown events of his life. Using a wide range of materials, from reminiscences to rare OGPU records to fiction, the article narrates Dombrovsky’s odyssey through Stalin’s gulags: in particular, his four arrests, incarceration, time in labour camps and banishments, which robbed him of 20 years of his life altogether. The article is especially notable as it contains a hitherto unpublished criminal case file of 1932, previously in a restricted FSB [Federal Security Service] archive, and examines the versions of the writer’s first arrest. It appears some of the events were depicted in Dombrovsky’s novels, and fairly accurately too: with passages quoting extracts from the case file almost to the letter. It is remarkable that the young Dombrovsky’s case was investigated by the same secret police officer, ‘the executioner of Russian literature’, who was handling Osip Mandelstam’s first case, and was chief interrogator in the cases of Andrey Platonov, Nikolay Klyuev, Boris Pilnyak, and other writers.

Egorova, L. (2018). Equivocation in ‘Macbeth’: The speech nature of the tragedy. Vologda: VoGU. 164 p.

The review focuses on equivocation in its linguistic, stylistic, historical, cultural, religious, and ideological aspects, and discusses its evolution from a rhetorical device to a concept replete with controversial connotations. The paper mentions the essential (and very scarce) bibliography on the subject, relevant for understanding not only Shakespeare's work, but also the Jacobean era, the repercussions of the religious reforms in England, and the development of European philosophy in general. The review devotes a lot of attention to the versatility of Egorova's monograph, which successfully distinguished nuances of the semantics, representation, and pragmatism of equivocation in Shakespeare. A special emphasis is placed on allusions, both literary and historical; on the author's in-depth analysis of the (im)possibility of translation of certain words in different contexts of Macbeth, and the role of equivocation in interpreting the tragedy. Also covered by the monograph are two other burning issues of Shakespeare studies: the author's religious affiliation and the date of Macbeth’s creation.

Burgess, A. (2017). Flame into being: The life and work of D. H. Lawrence. Translated and annotated by A. Nikolaevskaya. Moscow: Tsentr knigi Rudomino. 464 p.

A review of Anthony Burgess's book Flame Into Being. The Life and Work of D. H. Lawrence, prepared by Book Centre Rudomino (2017). Alla Nikolaevskaya (with participation of Nikolay Paltsev) prepared a seven-volume collected works by D. H. Lawrence, and two collections of his travel journals and essays. As a translator, she succeeded here in ‘preserving and transmitting the flame of the narration about the life and work of the Nottingham Phoenix'. English literature has very few writers so unlike as Lawrence and Burgess, and yet the younger fellow English writer produced a book to mark Lawrence's centenary ‘out of love': his way of ‘paying his debts', he said. Burgess called it ‘a short literary biography', stressing that he ‘wasn't attempting a detailed biography or a literary critique of Lawrence's oeuvre'. In an attempt to describe the influence of Lawrence's character on the works he produced, Burgess engages in interpretation of the former's life and work, imprinting his own unique self-portrait into this insightful study, which is bound to interest admirers of these two towering figures of British culture.

Golovacheva, I. (2017). A guide to ’Brave New World’ and beyond. Moscow: Izd. dom YASK. 344 p.

The review deals with I. Golovacheva's Guidebook to works by A. Huxley, and particularly his best known novel Brave New World. The monograph discusses the ways in which the scientific context of the period influenced Huxley's writings and their specific imagery: he is known to have had a keen interest in natural sciences and utopian social projects. On a separate note, the review examines

Gnedov, V. (2018). Poetry itself. Ed. by I. Kukuy. Moscow: Izd. knizhnogo magazina ‘Tsiolkovsky'. 478 p.

The paper takes a look at the positive and negative qualities of the collected poems by the futurist Vasilisk Gnedov in the book Poetry Itself [Poeziya sama]. The reviewer analyses the strategy of the compiler I. Kukuy in comparison with the previous attempts by N. Khardzhiev and S. Sigey. The author challenges the compiler's suggestion that Gnedov's poetry occupies a place within a semi-delirious branch of ‘art-brut' or, as L. Ginsburg stated, in the ranks of higher graphomania. On the contrary, the reviewer points out that Gnedov's later work belongs to Russian ego-futurism, and is related to Mayakovsky's ‘dog cycle', as well as the earlier polemic F. Sologub's ‘dog' cycle targeted against V. Burenin.

The 365 poems about Lenin, which were destroyed by N. Khardzhiev, are no longer considered ‘filth', but rather a spoof on the tear-off calendars printed in celebration of Lenin's centenary in 1970. Special attention is paid to the relationship between Gnedov, Mayakovsky, and D. Burlyuk. Finally, the words ‘Poetry itself' correspond to poems by A. Akhmatova, who referred to poetry as ‘one luxurious quotation': something overlooked by I. Kukuy.

Mann, Y. (2018). Karpo Solenik: ’A comical talent without a doubt’. Moscow: NLO. 184 p.

G. Ermolenko's review of Y. Mann's book Karpo Solenik: A Comical Talent Without a Doubt' [Karpo Solenik: ‘Reshitelno komichesky talant’] describes the scope of the research, the principles of organizing the material, and the relevance of the historical-cultural context for revealing of the Russo-Ukrainian actor's unique artistic personality. It also stresses the link between K. Solenik's evolution as an actor and the development of realism in Russian culture.

The review details Y. Mann's interpretation of Gogol's concept of the comical and characterizes the method used by the writer to compare and contrast K. Solenik's and M. Shchepkin's approaches to acting and dramaturgic challenges. It highlights the importance of the study's theoretical aspect, proves the accuracy of the author's conclusions about the role of provincial culture in the propagation of new aesthetic tendencies, and argues the importance of the author's idea about the affinity and close interaction of Slavic cultures.