I study authoritarians and enjoy poetry. Reading all those books in Cyrillic. he/him
This link opens in a pop-up window
Леонид Юзефович — известный писатель, историк, автор романов "Казароза", "Журавли и карлики" и др., биографии …
Юзефович никогда не даёт забыть, что это в первую очередь роман: даже мемуарной основы не хватит, чтобы предполагать то, что он предполагает о чувствах и намерениях героев. Чмошная цитата Метерлинка в конце — логичный вывод из авторской позиции последних четырёх-пяти глав.
Варлама Шаламова справедливо называют большим художником, автором глубокой психологической и философской прозы. Написанное Шаламовым — …
Метод Шаламова будто бы истончается в форме эссе, но это только разнообразит критику воровской «морали»
Китай выстроил самую изощренную систему тотального контроля над населением в истории человечества. Полигоном для этого …
Equal Rites is a comic fantasy novel by Terry Pratchett. Published in 1987, it is …
I think it’s on the opposite side of the spectrum from Clarke’s “Piranesi” — and I like Pratchett’s viewpoint more: Clarke’s magic is desired and unreachable for those who seek it, so it’s a character of its own; Pratchett’s Esk postulates that not using magic when it’s there in your hands can be more important than using it, and that’s goes further than just admitting of its agency, it adds a very important nuance: whose agency is more of the liability to the living.
More literally Pratchett’s ecology is delivered in passages about Borrowing and things’ names and minds (Granny’s goats, and rocks of the University), but magic is the ultimate example of goals and means being one thing.
Most interesting takes on national literature always come from outsiders—like Kulbak’s “Raysn,” both silly and convincing, or Gogol’s “Mirgorod.”
Rafeyenko also has that complex background which lets him synthesise different worlds. Not he’s only a writer with seven Russian-language novels, but also a literary critic. In 2014 he was displaced from Donetsk to Kyiv (I have little understanding what chunk of life he had lost then, and it’s a bad habit to draw conclusions from person’s literary alter egos). A year ago, I’ve read his second-to-last book, “Length of Days,” about the presence of the war in Donetsk and Kyiv, about “national unity” that struggles to be born.
It’s pretty common to see national myths using women as substitute for Homeland, giving them roles to play in the national order: of a mother, of a lover, so one may seek her valorously, or loose her tragically. Rafeyenko too uses such …
Most interesting takes on national literature always come from outsiders—like Kulbak’s “Raysn,” both silly and convincing, or Gogol’s “Mirgorod.”
Rafeyenko also has that complex background which lets him synthesise different worlds. Not he’s only a writer with seven Russian-language novels, but also a literary critic. In 2014 he was displaced from Donetsk to Kyiv (I have little understanding what chunk of life he had lost then, and it’s a bad habit to draw conclusions from person’s literary alter egos). A year ago, I’ve read his second-to-last book, “Length of Days,” about the presence of the war in Donetsk and Kyiv, about “national unity” that struggles to be born.
It’s pretty common to see national myths using women as substitute for Homeland, giving them roles to play in the national order: of a mother, of a lover, so one may seek her valorously, or loose her tragically. Rafeyenko too uses such a trope, putting the name of his Lady Vitchyzna in the title, of one who was misinterpreted to be real.
Rafeyenko’s protagonist, Haba admits his relationship with women is complicated—he lost his love on the account of Russian invasion to the City of Z (Donetsk’s doppelgänger) with both his home and his language. As a displaced person in Kyiv, he tries to be an ideal Ukrainian, so he craves new normality—and he eventually finds it in a family, with his woman (the one that in reality never abandoned him) and his ancestors as his children. Along the way he renounces his role as a consumer in a complexity of Kyiv’s life, written in a form of a shopping mall, then of a cinema.
The field of opportunities which Rafeyenko depicts his characters in is sad and claustrophobic, yet the language he uses is spectacular. I’ve read it in Ukrainian and cannot imagine how much even a skilled translator can discard and adapt and how many footnotes they should provide for the reader to understand all Rafeyenko’s puns, his slips into Russian and regional lore. Though it was translated into English last year, so give it a try.
Чарльз Кловер много лет работал шефом московского бюро Financial Times. В своей книге он прослеживает …
Charles Clover’s Black Wind, White Snow is of course a good example how liberals are in owe of fascisms, but hey, it’s also poor researched!
Clover says he interviewed a lot of Nazbols, it seems like they instilled their ideas of Russian history in him (deterministic and stripped of reasoning). It overlaps with him trying to fit rich Amerikkan political lore over Russia, regardless of the era: “deep state”, “culture wars”, and “orthodox Marxism” (meaning some unified Soviet ideology) are regularly mentioned.
Book promises to explain phenomenon of “Russkiy mir” through the stories of political activism of Russian émigrés, Liev Gumilyov (one “spontaneous anarchist”!), and Alexandr Dugin. They all happen to be vewy cuwious chawactews, vewy talented, but twoubled intewectchuals, who fall for bigotwy and antisemitism by mewe accident. Also, they are all like Dostoyevsky in one way or another (it’s hard to portray Nikita Tikhonov as Dostoevsky, but Clover …
Charles Clover’s Black Wind, White Snow is of course a good example how liberals are in owe of fascisms, but hey, it’s also poor researched!
Clover says he interviewed a lot of Nazbols, it seems like they instilled their ideas of Russian history in him (deterministic and stripped of reasoning). It overlaps with him trying to fit rich Amerikkan political lore over Russia, regardless of the era: “deep state”, “culture wars”, and “orthodox Marxism” (meaning some unified Soviet ideology) are regularly mentioned.
Book promises to explain phenomenon of “Russkiy mir” through the stories of political activism of Russian émigrés, Liev Gumilyov (one “spontaneous anarchist”!), and Alexandr Dugin. They all happen to be vewy cuwious chawactews, vewy talented, but twoubled intewectchuals, who fall for bigotwy and antisemitism by mewe accident. Also, they are all like Dostoyevsky in one way or another (it’s hard to portray Nikita Tikhonov as Dostoevsky, but Clover solves the situation by saying he’s like Raskolnikov!)