Fantasy and Reality in Abram Terc's Early Prose
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
FANTASY AND REALITY IN ABRAM TERC’S EARLY PROSE A DOCUMENTARY-NARRATOLOGICAL STUDY COLOFON © 2005 Martine Artz UITGAVE Department of Slavic Literature, University of Amsterdam DRUK Grafisch Project Management, Universiteit van Amsterdam FANTASY AND REALITY IN ABRAM TERC’S EARLY PROSE A DOCUMENTARY-NARRATOLOGICAL STUDY ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. mr. P.F. van der Heijden ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties ingestelde commissie, in het openbaar te verdedigen in de Aula der Universiteit op dinsdag 21 juni 2005 te 14.00 uur door Martine Jacoba Artz geboren te Groningen Promotiecommissie Promotor prof. dr. W.G. Weststeijn Overige leden prof. dr. J.J. van Baak dr. E. de Haard prof. dr. W.J.J. Honselaar prof. dr. E. Ibsch prof. dr. B. Naarden prof. dr. J. Neubauer Faculteit der Geesteswetenschappen FANTASY AND REALITY IN ABRAM TERC’S EARLY PROSE A DOCUMENTARY-NARRATOLOGICAL STUDY L’ironie irrite. Non pas qu’elle se moque ou qu’elle attaque mais parce qu’elle nous prive des certitudes en dévoilant le monde comme ambiguïté. Leonardo Sciascia: “Rien de plus difficile à comprendre, de plus indéchiffrable que l’ironie”. Milan Kundera, L’art du roman !N, ,F:4 $Z &F, ^H@ @FH"&":@F\ >" $J<"(,! ="F (J$4H >, 4F8JFFH&@, >@ F&b2\ 4F8JFFH&" F *,6FH&4H,:\>@FH\`. !>*D,6 E4>b&F846-!$D"< G,DP, EB@8@6>@6 >@R4 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...............................................9 PREFACE ........................................................... 11 Notes............................................................. 15 CHAPTER I: THE TRIAL IN CONTEXT.................................. 17 A. Introduction .................................................... 17 B. The aftermath...................................................22 Notes............................................................. 31 CHAPTER II: THE CHARGE AGAINST ANDREJ SINJAVSKIJ.............. 37 A. Introduction .................................................... 37 B. The facts........................................................39 C. The search for legal evidence.......................................45 D. Conclusion...................................................... 47 Notes.............................................................49 CHAPTER III: SINJAVSKIJ’S APOLOGY ................................ 55 A. Introduction .................................................... 55 B. The split message ................................................56 C. The split sender..................................................58 1. The device of mystification ......................................58 2. Authorial versus personal.......................................59 3. Abstract versus concrete author.................................. 61 4. Vja…eslav Ivanov...............................................62 5. Abram Terc ...................................................62 6. Irony.........................................................65 D. The split addressee...............................................67 E. The split context.................................................69 F. Summary ....................................................... 72 Notes............................................................. 75 CHAPTER IV: SUSPENSE IN PCHENC ..................................85 A. Introduction ....................................................85 B. Interpretations ..................................................99 Notes............................................................ 115 CHAPTER V: SUSPENSE IN LJUBIMOV ............................... 121 A. Introduction ................................................... 121 Preface........................................................ 122 The mystification of the plot.................................... 123 The mystification of the narrator................................ 124 1. On the scientific turnover accomplished by Lenja Tichomirov on the first of May.................................................. 127 The mystification of the plot.................................... 127 The mystification of the narrator................................ 129 2. Explaining the causes of the first chapter.......................... 131 The mystification of the plot.................................... 132 The mystification of the narrator................................ 134 3. Victory Day .................................................. 136 The mystification of the plot....................................138 The mystification of the narrator................................140 4. The reception of the visitors .................................... 146 The mystification of the plot.................................... 147 The mystification of the narrator................................148 5. The worldly and otherworldly life of S.S. Proferansov............... 150 The mystification of the plot.................................... 151 The mystification of the narrator................................ 152 6. At daggers drawn ............................................. 153 The mystification of the plot.................................... 155 The mystification of the narrator................................ 157 7. Final chords..................................................160 The mystification of the plot?................................... 162 The mystification of the narrator?............................... 162 Conclusion..................................................... 163 B. Interpretations ................................................. 164 Notes............................................................ 179 CONCLUSION...................................................... 187 BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................189 INDEX............................................................. 199 SAMENVATTING ...................................................205 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I dedicate this study to my admired teachers prof. dr. Jan van der Eng and dr. Jeanne van der Eng-Liedmeier. I feel deeply indebted to both for their warm support and useful comments during the first years of working on this study. I also wish to express my sincere gratitude to my promotor prof. dr. Willem Weststeijn who has supervised the completion of the last chapters, and to dr. Eric de Haard who has given me valuable advice. Heartfelt thanks are also due to prof. Vja…eslav Vsevolodovi… Ivanov in Moscow, who gave me unreservedly of his time during his visit to Amsterdam in 1990. His interesting lectures and personal comments have contributed much to my understanding of Abram Terc’s early prose and the circumstances of his arrest and trial. I would also like to express my appreciation to dr. Mojmír Grygar who explained to me the meaning of the term ‘avtostilizacija’, and to drs. Hans Driessen who gave me a copy of his graduation thesis on Pchenc. Two lawyers have been so kind as to check the second chapter on its judicial correctness: the late dr. Ger van den Berg (Institute of Eastern European Law, University of Leiden) who gave me useful advice, and LL. M. Hans Eyl in Jerusalem, whose great knowledge of literature and law has saved me from making some mistakes. I also wish to thank my brother-in-law dr. Marcel Claessen for his great patience and his willingness to solve many nerve-racking computer problems for me. Finally, I owe more than I can say to Willemien Vereijken-Ebels, who has given unstintingly and unreservedly of her time to correcting my English. 9 10 PREFACE In February 1966, at the end of an internationally reported trial in Moscow, Andrej Sinjavskij and Julij Danièl’ were sentenced to seven respectively five years of forced labour for making and disseminating anti-Soviet propaganda. The alleged propaganda appeared in the form of prose fiction — a dozen fantastic stories, a literary-philosophical essay and a collection of aphorisms and philosophical rêveries — which had been published in the West under the pseudonyms Abram Terc respectively Nikolaj Aržak. It was in the middle of the Cold War. The first section of this study of Sinjavskij-Terc’s early prose will be devoted to this once notorious trial. In the first chapter I will attempt to place this juridical cause célèbre as well as this controversial literary oeuvre in their historical-artistic context. The second chapter will be devoted to the formulation and scope of the charge. In the third I will describe the arguments that Sinjavskij put forward in the courtroom on his own behalf; Roman Jakobson’s concept of the split functions of the literary communication will serve as a model here. During the trial Sinjavskij, in his capacity as reader of his own work, was clearly interested in accentuating certain aspects of his writings and disregarding some other; yet in spite of his awkward position at that moment, the comments he made “in the dock” on various literary issues shed an interesting light upon his artistic views and methods.1 Interpretations made by other readers who were somehow involved in this affair will be discussed as well: those of the judge, prosecutor, social accusers, defence attorney, witnesses à charge and décharge, supporters and opponents both within and outside the courtroom, press reporters etc. All of them were passionate readers with their own interests and preoccupations, who nolens volens performed a duty and played a role. Thus it seemed as if the theme of role- playing and masquerade which is so prominent in Terc’s