RUSSIAN EMIGRE LITERATURE: RESISTING ERASURE

in Canadian-American Slavic Studies
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

References

1. This co-existence of competing literary institutions constitutes one of the most fascinating aspects of the study of twentieth-century Russian literary production. Although the co-existence of different literatures for different groups is a feature of developed national literatures, the coexistence of separate and competing institutions is unusual. See Robert Escarpit, Sociology of Literature. 2nd. ed. Trans. Ernest Pick (London: Frank Cass & Co., 1971). pp. 58-59. 2. Russkaia literatura v izgnanii. 2nd. ed. (Paris: YMCA-Press, 1984.) 3. See Olga Matich, with Michael Heim, eds. The Third Wave: Russian Literature in Emigration (Ann Arbor, MI: Ardis, 1984), for the proceedings of the conference.

4. Both the dynamic nature of the emigre condition in the twentieth century and its systemic relationship with the changing cultural situation in the Soviet Union are discussed elegantly by Lazar Fleishman in his call for a broad Structuralist cultural study, a radically new viewpoint on the place of emigre literature in twentieth-century Russian literature. See L. Fleishman, "Neskol'ko zamechanii k probleme literatury russkoi emigratsii." Odna ili dve russkikh literature? Ed. Georges Nivat (Paris: Sintaksis, 1981), 63-76; and F. Bol'dt, D. Segal, and L. Fleishman. "Problemy izucheniia literatury russkoi emigratsii pervoi treti XX veka," Slavica Hierosolymitana 3 (1978): 75-88. 5. See Mark Al'tshuller and Elena Dryzhakova. Pul'otr,!!cheniia: russkaia literatura 1953-1968 (Tenafly, NJ: Ermitazh, 1985), Iu. Mal'tsev, �'ol'naia russkaia literatura 1955-1975 (Frankfurt am Main: Posev, 1976). Bosiljka Stevanovic and Vladimir Wertsman. Free Voices in Russian Literature, 1950s-1980s: A Bio-Bibliographical Guide (New York: Russica, 1987); and Grigoii Svirskii, No lobnom meste: literatura nravstvennogo) soprotivleniia (1946-1975 gg.) (London: Overseas Publications Interchange, 1979). 6. For a study of the uses of aesopian language in Russian literature, see Lev Loseff, On the Beneficience of Censorship: Aesopian Language in Modern Russian literature. Trans. Jane Bobko (Munich: Otto Sagner, 1984).

7. The practice known as samizdat (self-publishing) involved the replication, usually by typewriter, of a manuscript, with subsequent circulation. Both individual works and entire samizdat journals were circulated in this way. Tamizdat (publishing "there," or abroad) referred to the publication in the West of a work by an author who remained in the Soviet Union. Many tamizdat publications made their way back to the Soviet Union, where they were passed from hand to hand. Neither samizdat nor tamizdat was legal, and punishments for their practice included imprisonment and enforced emigration. For extensive information on the history of samizdat and tamizdat, see the works listed in footnote 4. Deming Brown points out that, because of the widespread use of samizdat, tamizdat, and aesopian writing, Soviet Russian literature was in reality much less uniform than it appeared See Deming Brown, "On the Relationship Between the Literature of the Third Emigration and Soviet Literature on the Eve of Glasnosf." In Russiattness: Studies on a Nation's Identity, In Honor of Rufus Mathewson, 1918-1978 (Ann Arbor, MI: Ardis, 1990), p. 34. 8. Matich (21) lists 101 writers who emigrated between 1971 and 1982. In September 1983 the Russian-language newspaper Novyi amerikanets published a list of 76 writers from the most recent emigration ("Spisok...."). The lists overlapped by 50 names, making the total number of authors cited 127. The Stevanovic-Wertsman bio- bibliography identifies many more writers who emigrated in the 1970s, as well as many who emigrated earlier and later.

9. I am indebted to Heller for his discussion of the myth of unproductivity. See Michael Heller, "Survivors from Utopia," Survey 21.3 (96) (Summer 1975): 155-66; and "The Writer in Exile." Books Abroad Spring 1976: 271-328. Thompson also ounters this myth, even asserting that exile can empower writers in various ways. (Ewa M. Thompson, "The Writer in Exile: The Good Years," Slavic and East European Journal , 33, no. 4 (1989)� 499-515. 10. Lynn Visson, "Russian in America: Notes on the Russian Spoken by Emigres," Russian Language Journal 43, nos. 145-146 (1989): 187-91.

12. These emigre periodicals not only offered a venue for Russian literature abroad. They also served to engage writers in a cultural conversation, thus counteracting to a certain degree the geographical fragmentation of the emigration.

13. William Mills Todd III. Graduate Seminar on Russian Literature as an . Institution. Stanford University, Spring 1984. 14. Viktor Erofeev. Lecture at Middlebury College, Middlebury, VT. July 9, 1991. 15. Sintaksis, No. 3 (1979): 119.

16. Andrei Siniavskii� Personal interview. June 5, 1987. 17. With the imposition of new demands on Soviet publishing under Perestroika, writers in the Soviet Union also began to experience the economic constraints associated with market-based publishing institutions. 18. "10 let zhumalu 'Kontinent': interv'iu s glavnym redaktorom Vladimirom Maksimovym," Strelets 4 (April 1984): 39-42.

19. Valentina Sinkevich. "Poslednie dni Ivana Elagina," Novyi mir 3 (March 1990): 190-92. 20. As intermediaries between literature's producers (authors and publishers) and its consumers (readers), critics function as the public's sampler. On the one hand, reviews may give advice to readers about what to read. On the other hand, they may influence subsequent choices made by publishers. To the extent: that critical reviews alter the practical publishing possibilities offered manuscripts, they may eventually, indirectly, affect authors (Escarpit: 64-65). For an overview of the role of critics in the literary process, see also Hugh Dalziel Duncan, "Literature as a Social Institution." In Language and Literature in Society (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1953), pp. 58- 74.

21. Arnold McMillin, "Exiled Russian Writers of the Third Wave and the Emigre Press," The Modem Language Review 4 (April 1989), p. 408. 22. David M. Bethea"Emigration and Heritage." Slavic and East European Journal 31 (Thirtieth Anniversary Issue, 1987) pp. 141-64.

23. Struve, pp.389-390. 24. Wolfgang Kasack. Dictionary of Russian Literature Since 1917 (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1988). 25. Vladimir Samarin, "Dve emigratsii," Golos zarubezh'ia, Sept. 1976: 31-37. The practice of establishing prestige for a literary group by composing a long list of its writers has been widely used in discussions of twentieth-century Russian emigre literature. In Russian letters it dates back to the eighteenth century. See the discussion of the use of lists to establish prestige for the fledgling Russian national literature in Andre Meynieux, La litterature et le metier d'ecrivain en Russie avant Pouchkine, (Paris: Librairie des Cinques Continents, 1906), pp. 30, 34-37, 77-78 A most recent example is found in "Spisok pisatelei v emigratsii." Novyi amerikanets 188 (Sept. 18- 25,1983) p.3. " 26. Ronald Hingley. Russian Writers and Soviet Society 1917-1978 (New York: Random House, 1979). 27. Simon Karlinsky and Alfred Appel, Jr. The Bitter Air of Exile: Russian Writers in the West 1922-1972 (Berkely, CA: Univ. of California Press, 1989). pp. 6-7. 28. Matich, The Third Wave, pp. 81-83.

29.Ibid, p. 81. 30. Struve, Russkaia literalura v izgnanii, p. 7. 31. Edward J. BrawnRussian Literature Since the Revolution. Rev. ed. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press, 1982 ) p. 345.

32. Hingley, Russian Writers and Soviet Society, p. xvii.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 7 7 1
Full Text Views 0 0 0
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0