Russian Literature in the Post-Soviet Period: a Japanese Viewpoint

Japanese Slavic and East European Studies Vol.33. 2012 SYMPOSIUM ARTICLE Russian Literature in the Post-Soviet Period: A Japanese Viewpoint Kazuhisa Iwamoto (Wakkanai Hokusei Gakuen University) 1. Russian Literature in the Post-Soviet Era and Japanese Readers Twenty years have passed since the Soviet Union disintegrated, and today, in this symposium, some of the changes in Russian literature and culture over this 20-year period will be discussed. The Japanese had some opportunities to discuss Russian literature in the post-Soviet period. For example, in 1996, Quo Vadis Russia, a large symposium on Russian culture, history, and society, was held at the University of Tokyo. Russian writers Fasil Iskander and Alexander Genis participated in this event. This symposium was so remarkable that a special issue of the well-known Japanese journal Gendai Shiso (Contemporary Philosophy) was dedicated to it (1997, No.4). Unfortunately, this symposium left a vague impression, as nobody could know “Quo Vadis Russia” or anticipate Putin’s regime. Now it can be said that a turning point in Russian literature was embodied in this symposium. One of the great Soviet writers, Iskander, made an appearance during it, and Genis discussed the most famous writer of the new generation, Victor Pelevin. Two years later, Vladimir Sorokin’s splatter novel Roman (1994) was translated into Japanese by Tetsuo Mochizuki, and the Japanese could get a taste of contemporary Russian literature. In addition to this translation, famous conceptualists from Moscow visited Japan during these times, and their school became popular in Japan, where Ilya Kabakov gave numerous presentations of his works. From 1999 to 2001, Sorokin taught at the Tokyo 37 Kazuhisa Iwamoto University of Foreign Studies, and, in 1999 and 2000, Dmitry Prigov visited Tokyo, Sapporo, and other cities. In 2001, the Conference of Japanese and Russian Writers was held at the University of Tokyo, in which Tatyana Tolstaya, Boris Akunin, Viktor Pelevin, Sergei Gandlevsky, and Vyacheslav Kuritsyn participated. Tolstaya had published her novel The Slynx/Kys in 2000, and a part of the novel was translated into Japanese by Kyoko Numano in 2001. This novel, which describes a dystopic future Moscow city with a medieval tone, is considered to be an expression of grief about the disorder in Russian society and literature of the Yeltsin era. Akunin and Pelevin were new faces that appeared in Russia in the 1990s. Akunin is popular novelist of detective stories, and Kyoko Numano translated some of them into Japanese, The Winter Queen (Азазель, 1998) in 2001 and Murder on the Leviathan (Левиафан, 1998) and The Death of Achilles (Смерть Ахилесса, 1998) in 2007. Pelevin describes the loss and confusion that emerged after the disintegration of the Soviet Union in The Yellow Arrow (Желтая стрела, 1993), Chapaev and Void (Чапаев и пустота, 1996), and Generation P (Generation П, 1999), the first two of which were published by Gunzosha in Tokyo (The Yellowo Arrow—2010, Chapaev and Void —2007). After his visit to Tokyo, Gandlevsky published the novel NRZB (НРЗБ, 2002), but it would be difficult to say that this work is well known in Japan. It seems as though the Japanese stopped paying attention to contemporary Russian literature after the conference in Tokyo. Russian writers often complain that foreigners are only interested in Sorokin and Pelevin. A search for “Russian literature” in Wikipedia in various languages confirms that not only the Japanese, but also readers from other countries, pay little attention to Russian writers after Sorokin and Pelevin. Nonetheless, other writers have been translated into Japanese. For example, in 2009, Izumi Maeda translated the novel Daniel Stein, Interpreter (Даниэль Штайн. Переводчик, 2006) by Lyudmila Ulitskaya. This translation attracted many Japanese readers. In one of the most famous Japanese literary journals, Shincho, Kyoko Numano translated the short stories of such unique writers as Marina Vishnevetskaya and Olga 38 Russian Literature in the Post-Soviet Period Slavnikova. Thus, it is unclear why Sorokin and Pelevin are still considered by the Japanese as Russia's newest writers. From 2010 to 2012, Pelevin’s Yellow Arrow and Sorokin’s Blue Lard (Голубое сало, 1999) were translated into Japanese, and these translations were accepted as the latest in Russian literature. However, these two novels, which were published almost 20 years ago and describe the social disorder of those times, can hardly be considered to be the latest in Russian literature. If literature and art have eternal value, works from 20 years ago must remain contemporary. Historically, however, Russian literature has confronted government and society, and this is certainly evident in the work of Sorokin and Pelevin. An understanding of the transformation in Russian literature in the last 20 years requires an examination of the changes of Russian politics and society. Olga Slavnikova, a winner of the Russian Booker Prize in 2006, lectured on contemporary Russian literature in 2009 at the Tokyo University of Foreign Studies. In this lecture, she presented lists of “popular writers” and “not popular, but talented writers.” The list of “popular writers” included Alexandra Marinina, Boris Akunin, Tatyana Tolstaya, Vladimir Makanin, Lyudmila Petrushevskaya, Alexandr Kabakov, Lyudmila Ulitskaya, Viktor Pelevin, Vladimir Sorokin, Dmitry Bykov, and Zakhar Prilepin. Many of these writers have had long careers, but Bykov and Prilepin began writing in the 21st Century. Bykov writes science fiction novels about aliens and warfare. Prilepin was an activist in the National Bolshevik Party, led by Eduard Limonov, and the hero of his best-known novel, Sanka (Санькя, 2006), is also an activist. Olga Slavinikova became popular in the 2000s. The current task of Japanese slavists is to introduce these writers (Bykov, Prilepin, and Slavnikova) to Japanese readers. Then why do foreigners tend to close the history of Russian literature with Sorokin and Pelevin, in other words, with the frame of the 1990s? One answer to this question is modernism, or avant-gardism, which prefers the evolution of art. Such a position evaluates only new styles. Sorokin and Pelevin have their own unique styles, but the writers who came after them do not seem to present any new radicalism. However, literature has other values besides just style. Art needs talent and uniqueness, but it is not true that talent can be found only in new styles. 39 Kazuhisa Iwamoto Uniqueness also exists in the mode of perception (how to see things, how to understand situations). Talent also exists in the sensitivity to words. Even if literature requires originality, it is not a competition in technical innovation. Another reason for this apparently arbitrary cut-off point is the Soviet Union. Foreigners tend to consider the entire period after 1991 as “post- Soviet,” and they sometimes ignore the differences between the 1990s and the 2000s. If they are paying attention primarily to the difference between the Soviet and post-Soviet periods, then they would indeed have to consider Sorokin and Pelevin to be the symbolical writers of the 1990s, when Russian society fell into disorder and remained unstable. 2. 1990s and 2000s It is well known that the political, economic, and social systems in Russia have changed in the 21st Century. The 1990s were Yeltsin’s years, but the 2000s were Putin’s. Since the crisis in 1998, the Russian economy has been growing. On the other hand, the plutocracy of the 1990s has been destroyed. The activities of Sorokin were also associated with changes in politics and in society. Many critics have argued that his literary style changed in the 21st Century. In 2002, the young nationalist party “Moving together” (Идущие вместе) accused Sorokin of the production and distribution of pornography. In front of the Bolshoi Theater, his books were thrown into a toilet. Sorokin moved away from the scandals; as a writer, he stopped his destruction of plot. He published Trilogy (Трилогия, 2002-2005), where, instead, he regarded plot as one of the important elements of a novel. Trilogy is a mysterious novel. It describes the fate of supermen who were born after the Tunguska explosion. In another of his novels, Day of the Oprichinik (День опричника, 2006), a future Russia is described in the framework of the period of Ivan the Terrible. This novel is a clear protest against the Putin regime. In the 21st Century, not only did the political situation change, but IT (Information Technology) also developed and was popularized. Needless to say, IT was clearly relevant to publication and literature. At the end of the 20th Century, when the world clamored for an “IT revolution,” some critics insisted that IT would kill literature: books, novels, 40 Russian Literature in the Post-Soviet Period and authors would disappear. The critics predicted that the development of the Internet would make free texts ubiquitous; printed books would be lost; hypertext would permit readers to select their desired plots; novels would become interactive, like role-playing games for the computer; texts would be connected to photos, movies, and sounds; and the traditional novel, in which invariable words are read in a single direction, from the beginning to the end, would disappear. Cyberspace is so open to society that collaboration between people would become easier; writings would pertain not to single authors, but to an anonymous collectivity. Indeed, not all of these predictions were false. The prestigious Japanese company “Shinchosha” published the novel Train- man (Densha-otoko, 2004), which was anonymously and collectively written on the BBS (Bulletin Board System) “2-channel.” However, the dystopia without printed books has yet to be realized. E-books and Internet shopping have become popular, but printed books and libraries still exist. Novels and authors have also survived. In fact, contrary to the predictions, the length of copyrights has been extended.

Load more