V ASILISK GNEDOV’S F uturism Crispin Brooks A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy in the University of London School of Slavonic and East European Studies May 1998 ProQuest Number: U642013 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest. ProQuest U642013 Published by ProQuest LLC(2015). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Abstract This dissertation is an attempt to provide the first extended analysis of the Futurist work of Vasilisk Gnedov (1890-1978), one of the most interesting and original poets of the early Russian Avant-Garde. Interest in this hitherto neglected figure has grown in recent years, most importantly with the publication of his Sobranie stikhotvorenii (Trento, 1992), which has an introduction and commentaries by the scholar and Avant-Garde poet Sergei Sigei. The present study follows a pattern of increasing focus in its three main chapters: ‘World’, ‘Works’, and ‘Words’. The first, ‘World’, aims to locate Gnedov in three contexts: 1) the literary movement of which he was part, through a general survey of Russian Futurism and its less well known subset, Egofliturism; 2) the circumstances of the poet’s life, reconstructed fi'om existing articles on Gnedov and previously unused archive materials; 3) and his bibliography and historiography, charting Gnedov’s publishing output and the increasing interest in him in the last 10 years. The second chapter, ‘Works’, is a chronologically arranged analysis of all Gnedov’s poetry and prose of the period 1913- 19 (with a brief section detailing his later works), which seeks to highlight the central themes and show the development of Gnedov’s poetics. The chapter also publishes for the first time four previously unknown poems. The third chapter, ‘Words’, divides into two parts: 1) ‘Features of Gnedov’s Poetic Language. Dialectisms, Neologisms, Zaum'" describes the salient features of the poet’s innovative use of language; 2) the ‘Glossary’ provides definitions of the numerous rare words encountered in Gnedov’s writing and the most likely components of the neologisms. The dissertation is completed by a short ‘Conclusion’ and an ‘Annotated Bibliography’. .'■A In response to a Russian acquaintance who, after reading a poem by Gnedov, sighed: “3TQ He riyilJKHH...” . Table of Contents Page Preface Chapter 1. World i) Futurism 9 ii) The Poet’s Life 17 iii) Publication History 24 Chapter 2. Works i) Works of 1913 37 ii) Works of 1914 93 iii) Poems of 1917-1919 100 iv) Later Poetry 109 Chapter 3. Words i) Features of Gnedov’s Poetic Language: Dialectisms, Neologisms, Zaum’ 115 ii) Glossary 134 Conclusion 168 Annotated Bibliography 170 List of Abbreviations DaV Tolkovyi slovar' zhivogo velikorusskogo iazyka Vladimir a Dalia, ed. and rev. I Boduen-de-Kurtene, I-IV, St Petersburg, 1905 [Reprint: Paris, Librairie des Cinq Continents, 1954]. Els. Elsevier'sRussian-EnglishDictionary, comp. P. Macura, 1-4, Amsterdam, 1990. Ozhegov S. Ozhegov, Slovar' russkogo iazyka, Moscow, 1960. RF V. Markov, Russian Futurism. A History, London, 1969. Sobr. stikh. V. Gnedov, Sobranie stikhotvorenii, eds. N. Khardzhiev and M. Marzaduri, intro., text prep., and commentaries S. Sigei, Trento, Dipartimento di Storia della Civiltà Europea, Università di Trento, 1992. SRDG Slovar' russkikh donskikh govorov, comp. Z. Valiusinskaia et al., I-III, Rostov-on-Don, 1975-76. SRNG Slovar' russkikh narodnykh govorov, ed. F. Filin (from 1990, F. Sorokoletov) et al, 1-28, Leningrad, 1965-94. SSRLIa Slovar' sovremennogo russkogo literaturnogo iazyka, ed. V. Chernyshev et al, 1-17, Moscow, 1948-64. UED Ukrainian-English Dictionary, comp. C Andrusyshen and J. Krett, Toronto, 1990. URS Ukrains'kii-Rosiis'kii slovnik, ed. I. Kirichenko et al. I-VI, Kiev, 1958-63. Zabytyi avangard 1 Zabytyi avangard. Rossiia. Pervaia tret'XXstoletiia. Sbornik spravochnykh i teoreticheskikh materialov, eds. K. Kuz'^minskii, G. Janecek, and A. Ocheretianskii, Vienna, 1991. Zabytyi avangard 2 Zabytyi avangard. Rossiia. Pervaia tret' XX stoletiia. Kniga 2. Novyi sbornik spravochnykh i teoreticheskikh materialov, eds. A. Ocheretianskii, G. Janecek, and V. Kreid, New York, 1993. Note on Quotation, Transliteration, and the Order of the Works Larger quotations from Russian sources are indented in the text and given in Cyrillic. Quotations from Gnedov’s poetry will retain the orthography of the published original; where it has not been possible to consult the original source (‘Triolet’, ‘a La tyr”), the orthography will correspond to that of the subsequently published editions. Other quotations within the text are generally translated or, for poetry, transliterated, unless any specific feature of the original wording needs to be retained. The Library of Congress system is used for all transliteration. Where numbers in brackets follow a quotation from a work by Gnedov, this corresponds to the number given to each work in the Glossary. Because the exact date of writing is known in only one case, the order in which Gnedov’s works are analysed corresponds to the date of publication and follows that chosen by Sigei in Sobranie stikhotvorenii, with certain exceptions. In this analysis, ‘a La tyr” (written at some point in 1913; first published 1991) has been moved so that it follows ‘Slezzhit riabidii trun'ga sno— ’ (published September 1913) rather than following ‘Poema Kontsa’ (published April 1913). The theoretical article ‘Glas o soglase i zloglase’ is moved to correspond with its 1914 (unspecified month) publication date. Three poems (dated end November 1917) published here for the first time are placed before ‘Roiut vam mogilu bogi’ (written end October 1917; published 1918). The fourth previously unpublished poem, ‘Ekspromt’, is in the section on Gnedov’s later works. Preface Like other Avant-Garde art, Futurist poetry is equally capable of provoking hostility, misconception, and wonder. Poets on the cutting edge of literary innovation have been treated as hooligans, dilettantes, and geniuses; their work is prized by some for its intractability, whilst many more avoid it for the same reason. The name of Vasilisk Gnedov came to my attention as a figure whose experiments in poetry appeared to be groundbreaking but at the same time barely studied. The more I was able to find out about the poet, the more his innovatory works intrigued. This sense of fascination has remained with me, and has perhaps grown with time. Furthermore, the way in which Gnedov faced up to the extreme burdens and misfortunes that he experienced in his lifetime is in itself a source of inspiration. This thesis attempts to provide a balanced understanding of Gnedov’s contribution to Futurism as well as to help resuscitate the poet’s reputation. In some senses, I have been lucky in terms of history. I have been able to spend two years in Russia since I finished my undergraduate degree in 1993, and in that time previously inaccessible Futurist works and archive materials have become available. In addition, the increased openness in Russia has led to a boom in the study of and publications on the Avant-Garde. Part of this has been Sergei Sigei’s pioneering work on Gnedov, which includes several articles and two editions of Gnedov’s poetry, and the present thesis is greatly indebted to it. I owe a debt of gratitude to the many who have helped and supported me in this research. Professors John Elsworth and David Shepherd, and Dr. Peter Doyle at Manchester University inspired me to pursue the project in the first place. Sergei Sigei, with whom I have corresponded several times, has been a source of much information and encouragement. I am also fortunate to have benefited from valuable discussions with Aleksandr Pamis, Sergei Kudriavtsev, and Jeremy Hicks. The staff of SSEES library, Birmingham University Library, the Russian State Library (Moscow), the Russian State Archive for Literature and Art (Moscow), and the Maiakovskii State Museum (Moscow) have always been extremely helpful and efficient. I would especially like to thank my family, friends, and partner, Yelena Furman, for their support. Finally, my greatest obligation is to my supervisors Robin Aizlewood and Julian Grafïy who have assisted with all matters relating to the thesis’s structure, content, and style; without the enormous amount of time and patience they have devoted to it, this thesis would have been an impossible undertaking. Any inadequacies in its scholarship are mine alone. CHAPTER 1. WORLD i) FUTURISM A) General Painted faces and garish suits with carrots in the button hole; poets shouting, spitting, and throwing tea at their audiences; poetry recitals turning into drunken brawls; anti-aesthetic or incomprehensible poems that amused, astonished, and shocked the spectating students and intellectuals—such were the images of Futurism ingrained into Russian popular consciousness in 1913-14. Behind the screen of shock and scandal, however, the movement represented a serious and consistent attempt to renovate a culture that was perceived to be dead. Central to the Futurist rebellion