1 A Stowaway on the Steamship of Modernity: Pushkin and the Futurists James Rann UCL Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2 Declaration I, James Rann, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 3 Acknowledgements I owe a great debt of gratitude to my supervisor, Robin Aizlewood, who has been an inspirational discussion partner and an assiduous reader. Any errors in interpretation, argumentation or presentation are, however, my own. Many thanks must also go to numerous people who have read parts of this thesis, in various incarnations, and offered generous and insightful commentary. They include: Julian Graffy, Pamela Davidson, Seth Graham, Andreas Schönle, Alexandra Smith and Mark D. Steinberg. I am grateful to Chris Tapp for his willingness to lead me through certain aspects of Biblical exegesis, and to Robert Chandler and Robin Milner-Gulland for sharing their insights into Khlebnikov’s ‘Odinokii litsedei’ with me. I would also like to thank Julia, for her inspiration, kindness and support, and my parents, for everything. 4 Note on Conventions I have used the Library of Congress system of transliteration throughout, with the exception of the names of tsars and the cities Moscow and St Petersburg. References have been cited in accordance with the latest guidelines of the Modern Humanities Research Association. In the relevant chapters specific works have been referenced within the body of the text. They are as follows: Chapter One—Vladimir Markov, ed., Manifesty i programmy russkikh futuristov; Chapter Two—Velimir Khlebnikov, Sobranie sochinenii v shesti tomakh, ed. by Rudol’f Duganov with Evgenii Arenzon; Chapter Three—Vladimir Maiakovskii, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v trinadtsati tomakh, ed. by V. A. Katanian; Chapter Four—Vladimir Maiakovskii, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v trinadtsati tomakh, ed. by V. A. Katanian, and Aleksei Kruchenykh, 500 novykh ostrot i kalamburov. Unless otherwise stated, all translations are my own. 5 Abstract The declared intention of the Russian Futurist poets to ‘throw Pushkin from the steamship of Modernity’, expressed in their manifesto Poshchechina obshchestvennomu vkusu, has come to define their attitude to Russia’s pre-eminent poet and the literature of the past in general. However, its ubiquity has led to a reductive approach to Futurism in the scholarship of Pushkin reception and Russian Modernism. This thesis will contribute to both fields, and to our understanding of Futurism, by showing how, contrary to their reputation, three signatories of Poshchechina—Velimir Khlebnikov, Vladimir Maiakovskii and Aleksei Kruchenykh—engaged with Pushkin and his legacy in complex ways throughout their careers. Pushkin will be shown to play an essential role in the strategies adopted by the Futurists to articulate their identities, both collectively and as individuals, and in the related project of the presentation of a radical new model of literary evolution. Close reading of specific works and broad theoretical contextualization will reveal two tendencies: iconoclasm, which continues to be an important, and sophisticated, aspect of Futurist identity, and a less obvious transformative impulse which treats Pushkin’s life and work as myths which can be adapted to help the poet respond to contemporary imperatives. After examining the development of a collective persona in the manifestos in the first chapter, I will devote a chapter each to the work of Khlebnikov, Maiakovskii and Kruchenykh, focusing on the way in which they use a specific motif or element of intertextuality to facilitate their self-expression. The notion of the poet as a sort of prophet will be analysed in relation to Khlebnikov’s conceptualization of time; Maiakovskii’s relationship with the state will be elucidated by examining his attitude to monuments and moving statues; Kruchenykh’s innovative use of quotation will be understood as a response to new forms of mass reception. 6 Table of Contents Introduction. Aleksandr Pushkin and the Steamship of Modernity ........................................ 8 Chapter One. The Futurist Manifestos: Pushkin and the Formation of Futurism................. 44 Pushkin and the Formation of the Futurist Identity ............................................................ 56 A New Model of Cultural Progress ....................................................................................... 78 Summary .............................................................................................................................. 93 Chapter Two. Velimir Khlebnikov: Transforming Pushkin’s Myth of the Prophet ............... 95 The Rational Prophet ......................................................................................................... 102 ‘Odinokii litsedei’ ............................................................................................................... 112 Pushkin and the Bull .......................................................................................................... 115 Acting, Action and Prophecy .............................................................................................. 125 The Prison House of History............................................................................................... 142 Summary ............................................................................................................................ 162 Chapter Three. Vladimir Maiakovskii: Pushkin, the Statue and the State in Maiakovskii’s Poetic Mythology ........................................................................................................ 164 The Myth of the Statue ...................................................................................................... 166 The Meeting of Poet and Leader ....................................................................................... 174 Poet, Citizen and Bureaucrat ............................................................................................. 190 Alternative Monuments in ‘Vo ves’ golos’ ......................................................................... 212 Mobilizing Pushkin ............................................................................................................. 221 Summary ............................................................................................................................ 244 Chapter Four. Aleksei Kruchenykh: Pushkin and the Futurist Poetics of Quotation .......... 246 Quotation in the Silver Age ................................................................................................ 248 500 novykh ostrot i kalamburov Pushkina ......................................................................... 266 7 The Theoretical Context ..................................................................................................... 282 Post Scriptum ..................................................................................................................... 306 Summary ............................................................................................................................ 314 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 315 Bibliography .......................................................................................................................... 323 Primary Sources: Futurists ................................................................................................. 323 Primary Sources: Pushkin ................................................................................................... 324 Other Primary Sources ....................................................................................................... 324 Secondary Sources ............................................................................................................. 326 8 Introduction Aleksandr Pushkin and the Steamship of Modernity ‘Throw Pushkin, Dostoevskii, Tolstoi and so on and so forth from the steamship of Modernity.’1 This ringing phrase, which appeared in the Futurist manifesto Poshchechina obshchesvtennomu vkusu (1912), has not only become emblematic of the Futurist movement as a whole, but has entered into the Russian language as ‘winged words’. The longevity and ubiquity of this slogan is a testament to the Futurists’ ability to present themselves in an original and memorable way. One might detect some irony in the fact that the phrase which is axiomatic of Futurism has not freed them from the past, but rather forever bound them together with the classics. While this is certainly true, we should not underestimate the Futurists’ own awareness of this contradiction. Without doubt the skill of their phrase-making and, to use a not entirely anachronistic analogy, brand management, has had a distorting effect on the understanding of the Futurists’ relationship with the classics and in particular their attitude to Russia’s pre-eminent poet, Aleksandr Pushkin.2 The eagerness with which this slogan has been read as an encapsulation of Futurist attitudes to the past is indicative of the lack of attention given to this relationship, both in scholarship and in the popular imagination. This is regrettable because a fuller comprehension of the way the Futurists positioned themselves in regard to their predecessors is fundamental to understanding the Futurists’