Slot: 29D-2 Dec. 29, 3:45 p.m. – 5:45 p.m.
Panel: Modernist Travel through Imperial
Spaces
Chair: Evgenii Bershtein, Reed College
Title: "Gogol in Palestine": Toska and
Obnazhenie in Viktor Shklovsky's
A Sentimental Journey
Author: Anne Dwyer, University of California,
Berkeley
As Viktor Shklovsky's A Sentimental
Journey (1923) follows
its hero's peregrinations from Petrograd to Galicia, Persia, the Caucasus, and
Ukraine, the wartime dissolution of boundaries comes to the narrative's fore.
Armies, political borders and landscapes are repeatedly bared (obnazheny), meaning that they are both literally
abandoned and figuratively revealed to be arbitrary and conventional. On a metafictive level the
memoir reads as an
illustration of the formalist concept obnazhenie priema (baring of the device) as it draws attention to its own montage-like
construction.
This
presentation examines an intertextual moment in which the wandering narrator
likens his own misery (toska)
to Gogol's experience in Palestine. The reference is to a late letter from
Gogol to Zhukovsky that stands out for its quasi-formalist language: Gogol
describes the barren Palestinian landscape as strannyi (strange) and obnazhennyi (bare), repeating the latter term
frequently.
Shklovsky's
dialogue with Gogol not only reveals a Russian source of the term obnazhenie
priema, but also sheds
light on central questions of Shklovsky's literary and theoretical oeuvre.
Gogol and Shklovsky both address the risks of traveling to exotic locales for
cheap artistic effect; both seem to take a perverse pleasure in finding the
bared ravages of history at the ends of their journeys; both also associate the
process of obnazhenie
with nomadism. Paradoxically, Gogol's repeated use of the word obnazhennyi in the ideologically charged context of
a pilgrimage to the Holy Land adds cultural and historical depth to a term that
ostensibly seeks to free art from the baggage of motivation and ideology. This
paper suggests that by referring to Gogol's pilgrimage, A Sentimental
Journey bares its own
status as a modernist pilgrimage to the Holy Land of obnazhenie—the war-torn borderlands where war,
history and art reveal themselves in all their nakedness. Moreover, Shklovsky's
passing identification with Gogol questions the possibility of a naked,
defamiliarized view of historical and literary objects while still affirming
the search for a defamiliarizing perspective and innovative artistic practice.
Title: The Archaeology of Russian Modernist
Scythianism
Author: Michael Kunichika, University of
California, Berkeley
This paper examines how the classical and
primitivistic impulses of Russian modernism found their primary locus in the
Steppe and in the regions surrounding the Black Sea. The region appeared to
Russian modernists as a quintessential borderland, revealing strata both mythic
and historical. Once the edge of the known world separating the ancient Greeks
from the Scythians, it became, millennia later, the periphery of the Russian
empire. Emblematic of the modernist period’s ability to connect archeology and
aesthetics, the Black Sea region presented Russian modernism with an exemplary
site upon which the primitive and the classical converged in a crucial
juxtaposition, and served to delineate the leading schools of Russian modernist
art and literature. This paper begins by focusing on the pronounced orientation
towards Hellenistic Athens and Scythian “barbarians” in the work of Viacheslav
Ivanov, Osip Mandel’shtam, the archeologist and historian Michael Rostovtseff,
Benedikt Livshits and Velimir Khlebnikov.
Insofar as this
paper will claim a more pronounced relationship between archeology and
aesthetics, I examine, in parallel with these writers, the work of Michael
Rostovtseff, an archeologist and later a famous historian of the Roman empire,
who was also a close member of Ivanov’s circle The Tower. Rostovtseff’s Iranians and Greeks in
the South of Russia (1918) provided material evidence to draw the Scythians,
and hence Russia, into the cultural orbit of antiquity, and I argue, supplied
these poets with the archeological underpinnings of their aesthetic programs.
Set against the Hellenistic impulse of Russian modernism, this paper will focus
principally on the Scythian theme of Russian modernism. It puts forward the
interpretation that the Scythians, and well as other “Asiatic nomads” supplied
Russian modernists with an ostensibly indigenous ancestor upon which to base
their own experience of modernity as exile or displacement.
Title: Japan and Velimir Khlebnikov’s Eurasia
Author: Susanna Lim, Wheaton College
This paper will discuss the significance
of Japan in the work of the futurist poet Velimir Khlebnikov (1885-1922). The
poet’s wish to seek out the “laws of time” governing history was first prompted
by his reflections on the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905). Khlebnikov was also
deeply interested in Japanese language and art: he was fascinated by ukiyo-e, and, in a letter to A. Kruchenykh
(1913), discussed the possibility of applying aspects of Japanese language and
verse to Russian literature.
Khlebnikov’s attraction to Japan can be
understood first and foremost in relation to the admiration and sympathy for
the East prominent in his work. However, in the context of the poet’s vision of
a Eurasian utopia, Japan’s place is not entirely unproblematic.
In this presentation I examine two of
Khlebnikov’s works related to Japan, “Letter to Two Japanese” (1916) and the
poem “The Coup d’État in Vladivostok,” (1922) in their historical context. The first is the Futurist’s enraptured response to
letters written by two Japanese youths to Russians and published in the
Japanese daily Kokumin Shimbun
and Russkoe Slovo;
the second, one of Khlebnikov’s last works, depicts the Japanese occupation of
the Russian Far East during the Civil War.
I suggest that although reflecting an
ideal of a harmony between East and West, these two texts at the same time also
point to a disjuncture between the poet’s utopianism, on the one hand, and the
reality of geopolitics and imperial maneuvering, on the other, a disjuncture
that is translated into ambivalence about Japan’s place in Eurasia.
At issue is the
shifting place of Japan in Khlebnikov’s Eurasia: the poet’s desire
to create a Eurasian utopia free from the fetters of the West comes to stand in
increasing tension with the reality of Japan’s imperial ventures and its
occupation of the Russian East.