|
2024-01-08 Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia
|
|
Interview: 'The main interest in Russian literature in the world is yet to come'
|
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
[Regnum] Interview with the editor-in-chief of Literaturnaya Gazeta Maxim Zamshev
by Alexey Sharavsky
Summing up the literary results of the year, IA Regnum talked with the editor-in-chief of Literaturnaya Gazeta, member of the Human Rights Council under the President of Russia Maxim Zamshev. We discussed who can be named writer of the year, what to do with writers who are foreign agents, whether artificial intelligence can produce art, and what place modern Russian literature has in the world.
Interview with the editor-in-chief of Literaturnaya Gazeta Maxim Zamshev
“We must accept the reality of the market”
IA Regnum: Maxim Adolfovich, now is the time to sum up the results of the year, many do this. And among other things, there is this literary summary of the year: VTsIOM asked Russians a question: who can they call the writer of the year? And 80% of Russians could not name anyone. How would you comment on this?
Maxim Zamshev : Firstly, I think that all sociology is a very crafty thing. Especially when it comes to literature, the audience of which is quite small. And the people who were included in this survey - whether they belong to it or not, we cannot say.
We now have a starting circulation of the book - two and a half thousand (this is if the circulation is good, usually a thousand). And such a small circulation is not because publishers do not want to publish a lot, this is a real market. That is, the publisher understands that a thousand copies will go away one way or another. And further reprints already depend on the success of this or that book.
Secondly, the answer to such a question for people who read is very difficult: for those who know only Pushkin, the answer is simple - Pushkin. And if you read a lot, it’s very difficult to choose.
And thirdly, literature once had a certain function in the USSR. Good or bad is another question, but literature was an important instrument of power in creating a particular moral climate in society. Throughout the Soviet period, the tasks and agreements between literature and the authorities were different. Sometimes it’s very hard, written in ink and blood, sometimes it’s softer. In the end, it ceased to suit both writers and the authorities, but nothing else other than the market that would shape the relationship between literature and society had yet to take shape. So that's the market.
IA Regnum: Do you accept this for yourself personally? Is literature regulated by the market more likely to be right or more likely to be wrong?
M.Z.: Correct. Until the 90s, the customer for the playwright, writer, and director was the state. Then the people became the customer. What people like is more successful.
After all, in the USSR this story was also imposed. And if you also take into account the philistine approach, when you came to visit, and there were collections of works selected by color, which no one reads, but they indicate prosperity.
Now this story is at least honest.
IA Regnum: Do you remember the parable about how Socrates was walking with his students and a wine merchant (or hetaera, there are different options) approached him and said: “You are so proud of your students, but if I entice them, they will go to by me, not by you." “Of course,” replied Socrates, “after all, you pull them down, and I pull them up.” Maybe the market is the same wine merchant?
M.Z.: There is no other form other than the market one yet. This is how it works all over the world - both in China and in America. Of course, literature is in fierce competition with other media institutions. And he loses to them both in serve and in speed. Literature is an institution that requires long reading.
Yes, once upon a time the Soviet intelligentsia, under conditions of censorship, did not take into account that the hungry still want to eat first. And the people, especially during Gorbachev’s time, were hungry. And the first thing he did was rush not for intellectual benefits, but for material ones. As a result, we came to the situation we came to. Many people simply don’t know even the most famous writers like Zakhar Prilepin.
That’s why so many Russians found it difficult to answer VTsIOM’s question. This is the reality of the market. And it must be accepted.
IA Regnum: Do you think there are countries where there would be much fewer people who found it difficult to answer the question about the writer of the year?
M.Z.: This is a general trend. Our living conditions are not much different from living conditions in France, for example. The same Internet, the same TV, the same quick pleasures. I admit that if we had conducted such a survey in Iran or another closed country, the answers might have been different. But in open societies all over the world, the majority equally do not understand why one should read a book. And not because he has a bad attitude towards the book, it’s just that life is very busy, a person needs to have a lot of skills to survive. And these skills are constantly becoming more complex. Under these conditions, it is difficult for many to answer the question “why read a book.”
IA Regnum: Let's assume that you are asked to answer VTsIOM's question about the writer of the year. Who would you name?
M.Z.: (Sigh, pause)
IA Regnum: I understand that it is especially difficult for the editor-in-chief of Literaturnaya Gazeta to answer this question - he must name either two hundred names or none. But these are the conditions of the survey - you must name no more than three names. Find it difficult to answer?
M.Z.: Writer of the Year - the formulation is too pretentious. I could talk about the books I've read. Moreover, I must immediately make a reservation: I may not know someone - I don’t read all the books, it’s simply impossible, although I try to read a lot.
I really liked the book by Pavel Krusanov. A very interesting debut by Anna Chukhlebova, a new writer, young and fresh. Now I started reading a new book by Vladimir Sorokin. I haven't read it to the end yet. We all understand about his political views, which, for example, do not intersect with me in any way, but in any case it is interesting. Well, we can’t help but mention Zakhar Prilepin.
IA Regnum: By the way, it was he who was named writer of the year by most of those Russians who could remember someone...
M.Z.: This, of course, is also fate. In general, it can be called every year. And here his position plays a role. If you judge the writer not only by his books, but by all his journalistic speeches, then, of course, he is a very bright figure. You can agree with him or disagree, but the brightness remains.
“To prohibit is only to stir up interest”
IA Regnum: But to the question of whether it is possible to judge a writer not only by his books, but also by his speeches. Of the ten names cited by VTsIOM as Russians’ answers to the question of who can be called the writer of the year, half belong to the classics (Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Lermontov, Yesenin, Tolstoy), and of the remaining five contemporaries, in addition to Prilepin and Pelevin, writers known directly support from Kiev (Akunin ( Grigory Chkhartishvili was included by Rosfinmonitoring in the register of organizations and individuals involved in extremist activities or terrorism) , Bykov (an individual recognized as a foreign agent in the Russian Federation), Glukhovsky (an individual recognized as a foreign agent in the Russian Federation) ).
M.Z. Personally, I never considered either Akunin, or even less Glukhovsky, to be any great writers. It seems to me that Akunin is a very successful publishing project. He is an intelligent and educated person who clearly knows what needs to be written for a certain audience at a certain time. But making him a writer of non-genre history is not entirely serious. You read there and you can see how the whole story is adjusted to his views. It's funny and boring to read, really. Some kind of parody.
Nevertheless, my clear position, which I have formulated many times: bans cannot solve anything in our time.
Society is currently undergoing a major restructuring. And including in relation to authorities. Many authorities of the past are leaving for obvious reasons - almost everything is changing. But this happens very slowly, and the people you named have strong reputations. Films were made, there was a lot of PR, and naturally, people will not immediately forget them.
Personally, I think that developing an attitude towards a writer’s work based on his political views is a rather dangerous matter. If we look at what Leo Tolstoy said in his time, I don’t think that - especially the guardians - will experience much joy about this. I'm not saying that Akunin is Tolstoy. I'm talking about the system.
IA Regnum: But let’s imagine that the president called you and asked for advice - what to do with Akunin’s books?
M.Z.: I think that those texts by Akunin that contain a violation of the law are undoubtedly subject to the measures provided for by the law. But if there is no violation of the law in the books, then let the people decide for themselves. There is no need to shove Akunin’s books into every corner of the bookstore, as was the case just recently. But banning is only fueling interest. Nowadays the media is such that they will still find somewhere to read it.
Our society is smart, it is not in a hurry, but it will develop its attitude towards these people. I admit that many simply will not buy these books precisely because of what Akunin says. But banning and confiscating... This is an extremely seductive method, and discussion of this method is emotionally justified. But if our goal is for Akunin’s books to stop influencing people’s minds, we certainly won’t achieve this goal with bans. Some other mechanisms are needed.
IA Regnum: Which ones?
M.Z.: They should be associated with the support of other writers. We have a lot of them, and the vast majority of them, let’s say, will not contribute to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. They may have different views, but these are people who live in Russia and serve the Russian cause. Let's support them somehow.
“In the field of art, artificial intelligence is just a trick”
IA Regnum: Another fashionable topic of the year is artificial intelligence. I know that you also have a musical education, and here is information for you as a musician. Recently we conducted an experiment: artificial intelligence wrote a number of musical works “in the style of Bach.” And people were asked to determine where is the work of Bach, and where is the artificial intelligence. Many couldn't. Do you think artificial intelligence can replace writers in the same way?
M.Z.: From the point of view of art, it makes no sense to replace writers, like musicians. Art is evolving. Why did artificial intelligence write “like Bach”? Because Bach already exists. And if Bach had not existed, he would not have written anything.
IA Regnum: But artificial intelligence can be tasked with creating something new. What do you think artificial intelligence cannot do to complete such a task?
M.Z.: Human feelings.
IA Regnum: But there is a point of view in science that feelings are also, in fact, a chemical reaction and artificial intelligence can be trained to do this.
M.Z.: Well... time will tell. I will say this: if you listen to music, you listen to the music of a certain author. After all, the purpose of art is different. The goal is the artist, his personality, how it manifests itself. Now everything can be calculated on a computer, except for a miracle. And art is a miracle.
However, perhaps someone can try to save money and try ordering something from artificial intelligence instead of composers and writers. But I feel sorry for those who will live in 20–30 years and read not Prilepin and Prokhanov, but what artificial intelligence writes. They will lose a lot. Although they may not understand this.
However, I believe that in the field of art, if artificial intelligence exists, it will be as a trick. This is an irrational area.
IA Regnum: How do you assess the prospects for literature in Russia? Is it dying, coming to life or stagnating?
M.Z.: It depends on the society. And our society must become wiser. There is low consumption, there is high consumption. It is not easy for the state to influence this process. No one can monopolize information and information flows now. Therefore, society simply needs to get smarter. And I think it will get wiser on its own.
Paradoxically, the difficult processes that are taking place in relation to Russian culture in the world, the injustice that is becoming more and more obvious, will contribute to the emergence of a society that not only consumes, but also thinks. When it comes to you that you are an “invader, an aggressor, a cannibal,” you begin to think - why? Why, when I have Gergiev, Bashmet, a huge number of theaters here, am I a cannibal? And this awareness, the development of society must occur in favor of a better choice. And it doesn’t matter - on the Internet or in a bookstore. People will just want to think.
And if we want to prove to ourselves and others that we are a cultural nation, we cannot do this by consuming Scryptonite with Morgenstern (Alisher Morgenstern is an individual recognized as a foreign agent in Russia).
This is the process I hope for. And from the cultural life that I observe in Russia, I feel that this process has slowly begun to take place.
Well-fed entropy - the Internet, we pay with a smile - contributes to a person’s relaxation and reluctance to build himself. Literature is the most important element in building oneself. And now we must begin to build ourselves anew - such a historical period. What to build yourself on? On thousands of news and blog posts? But they all contradict each other, you can’t build yourself on them. But there are fundamental things. And if you built yourself on them, then you analyze the rest of the information differently.
I realize I sound like an idealist here. But, I repeat, I notice that this process is underway.
IA Regnum: Can this process be controlled?
M.Z.: I'm not sure. I’m not a statesman, it’s difficult for me to judge, but I think that very fine tuning is needed here. The main thing is not to interfere. History has proven that, regardless of all possible influences, certain cultural processes take place. And the power that senses these processes and somehow takes them into account is smart.
IA Regnum: What does modern Russian literature give to the world? So we can very clearly say what our literature of the nineteenth century gave the world, what the authors of the Silver Age gave, what the authors of the 60s and 70s gave the world. What can modern Russian literature give to the world?
M.Z.: In my opinion, our main strength is that we maintain an irrationality in our approach to art. World literature is very large and interesting, but it all seems to be “according to laws.” We read the best authors, we understand that these are people who graduated from the philological faculty of some university and went to certain writing schools. And we have a janitor who works in the city of Surgut, for example, can suddenly publish a brilliant book of poetry. Absolutely everyone can study literature here. They can write whatever they want. The most unexpected things can appear at one time. And this irrationality and lack of scheme are very important in modern literature.
And as for Russian literature, it paradoxically seems to me that the main interest in it is yet to come.
“We want to show people something that is not available anywhere”
IA Regnum: Let's talk about the Literary Newspaper. From your point of view, is the publication you are making a publication for a narrow circle of readers or for a wide audience?
M.Z.: For a wide audience. This is a unique project that includes both a general political component and a literary one. There are no such publications anymore—there are specialized literary publications, and there are socio-political ones. We are trying to combine. Our weekly magazine comes out on 32 pages and is divided into two “notebooks”. The first is politics, society, culture. The second is devoted exclusively to literary processes. And it has always been this way - Literaturnaya Gazeta was made in order to be like this.
IA Regnum: What, from your point of view, can be called the success of a publication?
M.Z.: Criticism. When a publication is criticized a lot, I am very happy. Hysterics occur periodically - both on the right and on the left. When there is a nervous reaction to the newspaper, this is one of the main signs that everything is working out.
IA Regnum: If you had the opportunity to take a person who has not yet read your publication and tell him “start with this material, and you will understand what Literary Newspaper is,” what publication of this year would you recommend to him?
M.Z.: It’s so hard to say. Our goal is to make people better. We want to somehow bring him closer to high standards of life. This is one of our differences - we do not want to make the reader more informed; we cannot perform this task purely technically.
We want to show a person something that is not available anywhere. Maybe it didn't get that much attention. We don't want to follow trends, we try to create them. And I think we are succeeding.
IA Regnum: Would you like to name specific publications?
M.Z.: I think so. (Pause) Well, for example, the latest material about Yuri Grigorovich’s ballet is a reference material about a cultural event. (Pause) It seems to me that our anniversary materials dedicated to Alexander Prokhanov, where many writers spoke about him, are very interesting for a complete understanding of this person. Many consider him primarily a political tribune, a fighter, but we tried to show this personality in a much larger volume than it appears when Prokhanov speaks on some talk shows. And thirdly, there were materials about our trip to the Northern Military District zone, they were very detailed and conveyed our feeling about what was happening. It seems to me that our writers and artists should definitely visit there.
IA Regnum: What do you personally remember most from this trip?
M.Z.: When we read poetry in the library in Pervomaisk. This is already quite close to the line of contact. A lot of people came. I read poetry, and when I finished, they asked me: “Didn’t you hear how the air defense [system] worked on us?” I say: “No, I haven’t heard.” “Why,” they say, “it was loud, all the car alarms went off!” But I really didn’t hear - I was carried away by reading poetry.
|
Posted by badanov 2024-01-08 00:00||
||
Front Page|| [28 views ]
Top
|
|
Posted by Betty Panda5198 2024-01-08 09:29||
2024-01-08 09:29||
Front Page
Top
|
|
16:19 Mullah Richard
16:16 Procopius2k
16:15 swksvolFF
16:11 Besoeker
16:09 Tom
16:08 Procopius2k
16:05 Procopius2k
16:04 Skidmark
16:04 Lord Garth
16:01 Lord Garth
15:55 M. Murcek
15:52 Lord Garth
15:30 NoMoreBS
15:16 Mullah Richard
15:12 MikeKozlowski
15:09 NoMoreBS
14:57 NoMoreBS
14:56 Grom the Reflective
14:49 49 Pan
14:48 swksvolFF
14:48 ed in texas
14:37 Frank G
14:35 ed in texas
14:33 Frank G
|
