Writing and the Subject. Image-Text Relations in the Early Russian Avant-garde and Contemporary Russian Visual Poetry

Table of contents :
Cover......Page 2
Titlepage......Page 3
CONTENTS......Page 7
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......Page 9
1 INTRODUCTION......Page 11
2 WRITING THE IMAGE: THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE BOOK......Page 47
3 WRITING AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF VELIMIR CHLEBNIKOV......Page 95
4 MINIMALISM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRU›ENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS, 1917-1918......Page 133
5 POETRY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY, 1918-1919......Page 173
6 PALIMPSESTS. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ......Page 227
CONCLUSION......Page 289
NOTES......Page 305
BIBLIOGRAPHY......Page 329
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS......Page 343
SAMENVATTING......Page 345
INDEX......Page 351
Cover......Page 355

Citation preview

UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)

Writing and the 'Subject' Greve, C.

Link to publication

Citation for published version (APA): Greve, C. (2004). Writing and the 'Subject'. Amsterdam: Pegasus.

General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.

UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (http://dare.uva.nl)

Download date: 31 Jan 2020

mi mi WW

11 DD HH

Hl l

m m Writing g m m MM OO

üü m m ww En n mm mm mm

ii ris s

Charlottee Greve

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' IMAGE-TEXTT RELATIONS I NN T H E EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE A N D CONTEMPORARYY RUSSIAN VISUAL POETRY

ACADEMISCHH PROEFSCHRIFT

terr verkrijging van de graad van doctor aann de Universiteit van Amsterdam opp gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. mr. P.F. van der Heijden tenn overstaan van een door het college voor promoties ingestelde commissie, inn het openbaar te verdedigen in de Aula der Universiteit opp woensdag 12 mei 2004, te 14.00 uur d o o rr CHARLOTTE GREVE

geborenn te Aalborg, Denemarken

Promotiecommissie: : Promotor: : prof.. dr. W.G. Weststeijn Overigee leden: prof.. dr. M.G. Bal prof.. dr. D.L. Gamboni prof.. dr. A.A. Hansen Löve prof.. dr. T. Langerak dr.. J.M. Stelleman

FACULTEITT DER GEESTESWETENSCHAPPEN, UNIVERSITEIT VAN AMSTERDAM

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' IMAGE-TEXTT RELATIONS INN THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE AND CONTEMPORARYY RUSSIAN VISUAL POETRY

CHARLOTTEE GREVE

Pegasuss Oost-Europese Studies 3 Uitgeverijj Pegasus, Amsterdam 2004

PEGASUSS OOST-EUROPESE STUDIES is een serie studies op het gebied van de Oost-Europesee taalkunde, letterkunde, cultuurkunde en geschiedenis onder redactiee van: prof.. dr. Raymond Detrez (Universiteit van Gent) dr.. Wim Honselaar (Universiteit van Amsterdam) prof.. dr. Thomas Langerak (Universiteit van Gent) prof.. dr. Willem Weststeijn (Universiteit van Amsterdam) Redactieadres: : Uitgeverijj Pegasus Postbuss 11470 10011 GL Amsterdam Nederland d E-maill [email protected] ©© Copyright 2004 Uitgeverij Pegasus, Amsterdam www.pegasusboek.nl l ISBNN 90 6143 292 8 / NUR 630 Bandontwerpp en vormgeving Victor Levie en Barbara Herrmann Drukk en afwerking Koninklijke Wöhrmann bv Allee rechten voorbehouden. Niets uit deze uitgave mag worden verveelvoudigd, opgeslagen in eenn geautomatiseerd gegevensbestand, of openbaar gemaakt, in enige vorm of op enige wijze, hetzijj elektronisch, mechanisch, door fotokopieën, opnamen, of enig andere manier, zonder voorafgaandee schriftelijke toestemming van de uitgever. Voorr zover het maken van kopieën uit deze uitgave is toegestaan op grond van artikel 16B Auteurswett 1912 j° het besluit van 20 juni 1974, St.b. 351, zoals gewijzigd bij het Besluit van 233 augustus 1985, S t b . 471 en artikel 17 Auteurswet 1912, dient men de daarvoor wettelijk verschuldigdee vergoedingen te voldoen aan de Stichtingg Reprorecht (Postbus 3060, 2130 KB Hoofddorp).. Voor het overnemen van (een) gedeelte(n) uit deze uitgave in bloemlezingen, readerss en andere compilatiewerken (artikel 16 Auteurswet 1912), dient men zich tot de uitgever tee wenden. Ondankss alle aan de samenstelling van de tekst bestede zorg, kan noch de redactie noch de uitgeverr aansprakelijkheid aanvaarden voor eventuele schade, die zou kunnen voortvloeien uit enigee fout, die in deze uitgave zou kunnen voorkomen. Alll rights reserved. N o part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a database or retrieval system,, or published, in any form or in any way, electronically, mechanically, by print, photoprint, microfilmm or any other means without prior written permission from the publisher.

CONTENTS S

Acknowledgments s 11

Introduction Theoreticall background Signaturee Deicticc painting Poeticall vs. everyday language Thee formalist theory of faktura Fakturaa in painting Fakturaa of the letter Fakturaa of the poetic word Handwritingg and the subject

1 4 6 10 14 17 21 26 29 33

22

Writing the image: The early avant-garde book Thee book as a palpable thing Writingg the subject Textt as image Thee book as a kinetic object (1) AA Game in Hell Too present the subject through handwriting

37 38 43 50 57 63 74

33

Writing as an "imagetext" in the poetic universe of Velimir Chlebnikov Languagee theory Universall language Writingg and painting Handwritingg Anagramm and permutation

85 86 94 100 110 115

4.. Minimalism and play in Aleksej Krucenych's Caucasian books, 1917-19188 Futurismm in the Caucasus, 1915-1920 Bookk production Thee automatism of reading Eco-poetryy — a minimal "economic poetic" language Thee page as an alternative visual-verbal space Eco-poetryy between a "suprematist" ideal and poetic praxis 55

Poetry of the future, Varvara Stepanova's visual poetry, 1918-1919 Fromm 'cveto-pis" to poster Krucenychh and Rodcenko Collagee Gly-Glyy Gaustcabaa

123 124 128 135 143 150 156 163 167 183 186 188 197

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' Palimpsests.. Visual poetfy by Ry Nikonova and Sergej Sigej Transposition n

217 7 219 9

6.1.. Ry Nikonova. A poetics of infinite permutation Mathematicss and poetry Transpositionn between different signsystems Vacuumm poetry Thee Black Square Disorientation n Vector-poems s Poem-performance-gesture e Thee book as a kinetic object (2) AA poetics of flux

221 1 223 3 226 6 232 2 234 4 237 7 240 0 244 4 249 9 255 5

6.2.. Sergej Sigej's visual poetry - ann inventory of indices Instrumentss of writing Handwriting g Palimpsests s Visuall language Inventoryy of indices

257 7 260 0 264 4 267 7 272 2 278 8

Conclusion n

279 9

Notes s

295 5

Bibliography y

319 9

Listt of illustrations

333 3

Samenvatting g

335 5

Index x

341 1

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS S

Thiss book had perhaps never become a reality was it not for my friend Tat'j ana Kuvanova.. During the past 10 years she has taken me on many phantasmagoricall voyages to Moscow art exhibitions. On one of these, I saw some pages of illustrationss by Natal'ja Goncarova for the first time. This was at the George Costakiss exhibition in Moscow in 1997.1 will therefore dedicate this book to Tan'ja. . II gratefully acknowledge here the support which this project received from variouss institutions and individuals. The research for Writing and the 'Subject' was fundedd by the Danish Research Academy. To my promoter, Willem G. Weststeijn,, I owe my greatest debt for the support and interest he has shown during thee entire period of my PhD studies and for accepting me as a PhD student underr his supervision at the Slavisch Seminarium, University of Amsterdam. I alsoo thank Wim Honselaar, who edited and prepared the manuscript for publication,, Nicole Chamot for proofreading the manuscript, the Pegasus publishing housee for publishing the book, and Kjeld Bjornager, my former supervisor at thee University of Aarhus. Myy warm thanks go to Jane for her patient support and invaluable friendship, too my parents for feeding my interest in art, Randy for providing me with luxuriouss shelter in Moscow. Additional thanks go to all my friends, to Marjolein, andd my "room-mates" Philip Westbroek and Frans Jansen. Additionall acknowledgments go to the staff at the Majakovskij Museum (Moscow),, the Literary Museum (Moscow), the Stedelijk Museum (Amsterdam), the Russiann State Library's Museum of Books and Manuscript Department, to Ry Nikonovaa and Sergej Sigej for allowing me use their works in this publication andd for stimulating conversations and hospitality, Sergej Birjukov for interest andd support, Aleksandr Lavrent'ev for kindly showing me the works of Varvara Stepanovaa held in the Rodcenko-Stepanova family collection, Peter Hellyer at thee British Library's Russian Avant-Garde Book Collection, Anatolij (Moscow),

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Kiraa Moss at the Peter Daugaard Collection (Copenhagen), the staff at the Amsterdamm University Library, the New York Public Library, the RGALI, and the numerouss people, who at one time or another have discussed this project with mee and given me valuable information or inspiration.

11 INTRODUCTION

Inn its physical form writing consists of graphic marks or traces on a surface. It is,, therefore, self-evidently visible. Accordingly, it combines elements from bothh image and language. It is the medium in which a real physical integration off image and text is most obvious. As an "imagetext" the written mark urges thee perceiver to reflect on the image-text relations inherent in the written sign. Whatt happens to language when the reader's blind and fast movement of the eyess over the page is arrested; when he or she is compelled to pause at the individuall elements: the letter, the line, the spacing, the page, the paper quality, the bookk and so forth? There is a rupture inserted between the conventional representationn of the sound of the grapheme and the mark. It is due to this rupture thatt writing can function as an image. The written mark, as an image - and for a momentt independendy from its relation to language - can be arranged freely on thee white canvas/page in a painterly composition rather than according to a textuall convention. As a self-validated system, writing is not connected (exclusively)) with sound; it functions both as image and text - even more so, when thee mark is handwritten. It can reflect the individuality of the writing subject, andd it can present a 'subject' in the written mark (or in the material of the bookobject);; it can function as a signature. Inn the historical (early) Russian avant-garde (ca. 1910-1930), the relationship and interactionn between word and image were realized in praxis in the production off handmade, handwritten and illustrated books and in theory in the poetics of thee letter. The early avant-garde's experiments with book design, handwriting, illustrations,, printing techniques, type-setting, color and text, and universal languagess still attract the attention of not only researchers of art and literature, collectors,, curators, and critics, but also contemporary artists and poets and the generall public.1 This avant-garde practice was by no means a unique phenomenon;; it is just one example of many in which the visible graphic sign on the pagee is emphasized (one can for instance think of ancient Greek pattern poetry, 11

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

emblematicc poetry, manuscript books, the poetry of Stéphane Mallarmé, Guillaumee Apollinaire, and Filippo Tomasso Marinetti, and the later concrete poetry). . However,, in the early Russian avant-garde, a major paradigmatic turn took placee among artists and poets that for a number of years signified a "pictorial turn"" in the cultural sphere. 2 In his analysis of cubism's influence on Czech and Russiann poetry, Mojmir Grygar states mat the 1910s can be considered a period off pictorial hegemony. 3 Velimir Chlebnikov famously expresses this relationshipp between the arts: "My chotim, ctoby slovo smelo poslo za zivopis'ju" ("Wee want the word boldly to follow painting"; 1940: 334). In addition, Roman Jakobsonn has emphasized the importance of cubism for the development of modernn linguistics: Thosee of us who were concerned with language learned to apply the principlee of relativity in linguistic operation; we were consistently drawn in this directionn by the spectacular development of modern physics and by the pictoriall theory and practice of Cubism where everything is based on relationshipp and interaction between parts and wholes, between color and shape,, between the representation and represented. (1971a: 632) Forr a (short) period of time, the image was taken as the predominant and favoredd mode of expression and was used as a model in all cultural spheres: painting,, literature (both prose and poetry), music and theory (formalist theory greww out of this atmosphere). 4 Poets turned into painters and painters into poets,, theorists based their theoretical apparatus on pictorial analysis, musicians incorporatedd color in composite works, books were made that are now exhibitedd as art in major museums around the world, universal languages were conceivedd of, inscriptions featured on the pictorial canvas alongside lines and planess (as in cubist paintings) and so forth. In addition, these artists and poets calledd themselves futurists ("budedjane" [men of the future]), yet (unlike the Italiann futurists or the constructivists who followed), they seemed to be interestedd in the distant past, in non-mechanical means of production and shamanisticc speaking in tongues, more than trains, skyscrapers, cars, travelling to the moon,, and telephone wires (although alongside cave paintings, dinosaur-like

22

INTRODUCTION N

animals,, giant Venuses reminiscent of Stone baba's andpoluustav manuscripts thesee were integrated into their art and poetry).5 Itt is perhaps this strangeness and impurity that most attracts us in the modern technologicall age of today. Once again, Russian avant-garde artists and poets distinguishh themselves today by being preoccupied with handwriting. The visual poett Pierre Gamier identifies handwriting as a unique feature among Russian contemporaryy visual poets compared to their Western colleagues who are "afraidd that the hand should distort the visual communication". 6 It is to this strangenesss and impurity that I devote this book. Thee relationship between word and image in the works of the Russian avantgardee has been studied and described primarily by art historians,7 rather than literaryy critics who are, apparendy, just not used to look at the text. They seem too prefer to leave the visible to the art historians while keeping the invisible to themselves.. This is painstakingly evident in anthologies of modern poetry or reprintss of the works of poets working with the visible sign; visual poetry is rarelyy represented and even less so alongside "normal" poetry. It is reserved for speciall anthologies of visual poetry, concrete poetry, conceptual art and so on. Theree are exceptions, however. In relation to the Russian avant-garde, I will mentionn the selected poems by Krucenych published by Wilhelm Fink Verlag, thee reproductions of a number of Velimir Chlebnikov and Aleksej Krucenych's, Vasilijj Kamenskij's, and others' books by the Moscow publishing house Gileja, andd Sergej Birjukov's anthology Zevgma (1994). In criticism, the influence of paintingg on verbal art, and more specifically on poetry, has been discussed. Notablee is Chardziev and Trenin's Poêticeskaja kul'tura Majakovskogo (1970) and Mojmirr Grygar's essay 'Kubizm i poézija avangarda' (1973). However, literary criticss have hardly touched upon writing as an integrated "imagetext" phenomenon.. A few exceptions are Gerald J anecek's The hook of Russian Literature (1984) andd more recently Russfajpoéticeskij avangard (1999) by the Russian philologist I. E.. VasiTev. Thee fundamental premise for this book is that the very nature of the material makess a mere comparison of artistic and poetic strategies and techniques secondaryy to the fact that the works examined are integrated unities of image and 33

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

textt and, therefore, in a concrete and material way impel the reader/ spectator too oscillate between two representational modes. Both modes, the image and thee text, will be regarded as similar on the one hand (some images are like writing,, and writing is an image) and different on the other (no image can be satdsfyinglyy described or understood in linguistic terms alone, and no text can be understoodd in pictorial terms alone). My focus will therefore be on the various relationsrelations between the two modes in what can be called "art works of visible language". 8 8 Theoreticall background Inn its physical, graphic form, writing is an imagetext, which, if taken literally, embracess features from both the image and the text, and appeals to both the eye andd the ear:9 Iff writing is the medium of absence and artifice, the image is the medium off presence and nature, sometimes cozening us with illusion, sometimes withh powerful recollection and sensory immediacy. Writing is caught betweenn two othernesses, voice and vision, the speaking and the seeing subject.. (Mitchell 1995: 114) Traditionally,, the image has been regarded as having the advantage of an unmediatedd comprehension. It functions by way of similitude. It therefore creates ann (illusionary) impression of the signified thing's presence before the eyes or in thee mind of the beholder. Very differendy, phonological writing has been regardedd as functioning due to the notion of absence of the signified object or concept.. Writing is the medium through which human beings for centuries havee been able to communicate and store thought, while the image has been designatedd the function of aesthetic pleasure, Beauty. Inn theories on the evolution of writing, the phonological alphabet is generally consideredd the ultimate development, i.e., the last stage in a successive developmentt from pictures to various mnemonic or descriptive devices over wordsyllabicc systems, and syllabic systems.10 Just like gestures, the pictures are merelyy described as "forerunners of writing" and imply the possible direct perceptionn of the object signified: 44

INTRODUCTION N

[T]hiss is the stage in which pictures can convey the general meaning intendedd by the writer. In this stage visible drawn forms - just like gesture languagee - can express meaning direcdy without an intervening linguistic form.form. (Gelb 1952: 191) Althoughh writing, according to this theory, originated in images, it is only by losingg the implied motivatedness of the iconic signs and by shifting towards a phonographicc writing that the graphic sign-systems are recognized as functional inn the transmission of communication. The phonographic alphabet consists of markss that signify (absent) sounds of a given language. It is an abstract arbitrary systemm of signs in which the written marks have no likeness whatsoever with thee thing or concept signified. Moreover, the physical sensory aspect of writing iss generally viewed as a mere necessary supplement to speech - a transparent notationall system, which helps man to fix spoken language in a permanent form.. This enables the current civilization to memorize, to store large quantities off information, and to distribute this information in an easy and practical manner. . Thee main purpose of the graphic system, it has generally been acknowledged, is too serve as a supplementary instrument for speech. Therefore, it must retreat to aa secondary position in relation to the signified information/spoken words. However,, this supplementary role has regularly been questioned,11 as Roman Jakobsonn rhetorically enquires: Whyy is it that visual sign patterns are either confined to a merely concomitant,, subsidiary role, such as gestures and facial expressions, or - as with letterss and glyphs - these semiotic sets constitute [...] parasitic formations, optionall superstructures imposed upon spoken language and implying its earlierr acquisition? (1994c: 468) II will not concern myself with the reason why writing has acquired the role of supplementt to speech or how. With the material at hand (handwritten illustrated books,, theories of universal writing systems, visual poetry), it is my concern to investigatee what the visual and material sensory sign adds to the reader/ spectator'ss perception of the text and (to a lesser degree) what the text adds to the image. .

55

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Signature e Inn writing, Derrida has claimed, a fundamental feature is absence, not only absencee of the signified (sound and meaning) but also of the writer and the circumstancess (the context) in which the text was written. This is a fundamental departuree from Saussure's theory of (spoken) language which is marked by singularityy and unity (between signifier and signified, the utterance and the utterer, andd between the act of uttering and the circumstances surrounding it). Writing disruptss this singularity and unity by the distance between the written mark and thee writer. In Derrida's words, writing relies most fundamentally on a notion of iterabilityy that renders the unity between utterance and utterer, signifier and signifierr impossible. Not even a receiver of the text is necessary for it to function ass writing: Inn order for my "written communication" to retain this function as writing,, i.e., its readability, it must remain readable despite the absolute disappearancee of any receiver, determined in general. My communication must bee repeatable — iterable — in the absolute absence of the receiver or of any empiricallyy determinable collectivity of receivers. Such iterability [...] structuress the mark of writing itself, no matter what particular type of writingg is involved (whether pictographic, hieroglyphic, ideographic, phonetic, alphabetic,, to cite the old categories). A writing that is not structurally readablee - iterable - beyond the death of the addressee would not be writing,, p e r r i d a 1988: 7) Inn order to read a written text, the reader must (despite empirical variations) be ablee to recogni2e the identity of a signifying form. These iterative marks can be decodedd independent of the producer, and the reader (however distant in time andd space) must be able to read the text. Therefore, however individual a handwritingg and signature might be, it is also always repeatable, it is also just a quotation: : Effectss of signature are the most common thing in the world. But the conditionn of possibility of those effects is simultaneously, once again, the conditionn of their impossibility, of the impossibility of their rigorous purity.rity. In order to function, that is, to be readable, a signature must have a repeatable,, iterable, imitable form; it must be able to be detached from the presentt and singular intention of its production. (Derrida 1988: 20) 66

INTRODUCTION N

However,, the purpose of Derrick's Grammatology is not to provide the reader/ spectatorr with a means to study the materiality of the written mark and the functionss and effects of the non-identical elements of any given (individual) instancee of writing.12 It is this irregularity and disparity that visual poetry exploits inn the emphasis on the duality of the material mark as a visual thing — as a physical,, material image - and as text. Inn its material form writing is an image. In fact, the visible is a part of any writtenn text; it is often the first and only means by which the reader/spectator can identifyy an unknown text presented to him or her. Before we start to read the textt (i.e. decipher the written signs and/or transform them into speech), we lookk at the text and scan the page for any visible signs that might lead us to identification.. The text is always similar to other texts. It responds to a certain iconologyiconology of texts; i.e. the visible text is coded.13 In accordance with this iconology, aa large sheet of thin paper and columns usually identify a newspaper text. A poemm is differentiated from the prose text by being written in short lines of two,, three or four and sometimes more to compose cubes (to our eye) of a certainn number. A prose text is identified as a densely written page where the lines (inn Western languages) are written horizontally divided only by regular small spaces.. Within one genre (poetry for instance) we are able to identify subgenress with the eye alone.14 The classical sonnet gives a different visual impressionn than an ode and a haiku poem a different impression than an elegy. The eyee can to some extent also identify the rhyme structure; the rhymes with a masculinee ending look different from those with a dactylic ending, and the combinationn of both creates a certain visual pattern. Even the most individual of alll visual texts — handwritten texts — are coded; we identify the image as a signature,, a letter, a diary or a manuscript. Thesee conventions with which we identify a text can be violated and it is in the instancess where our expectations are frustrated that the written sign insists on itss presence and forces the reader/spectator to pause on the material mark on thee page. When poets emphasize the visible and material aspect of the written sign,, the experience of the sign is transformed from blind deciphering to a vision^ aa sensory comprehension of the text (sometimes also involving other senses: 77

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

touch,, smell and taste). Our perception of the text approximates to the way we perceivee a painting and the materiality of the painterly surface, its faktura. This iss especially true with regard to handwriting. Inn its function as a signature, handwriting comes close to the function of the indicess of a painting's faktura. Traditionally, faktura (the texture of the painterly surface,, the construction of materials in the painting, and the painterly manner reifiedd by the brushstrokes in the paint) serves as a means of classification and verification.. It points to the authorship of a certain person. Thus, the institution off authorship relies on these signs of originality and individuality in order to enframeframe a particular group of paintings. The name of the author designates a certainn group of paintings as distinct from any other painting. The date, place and circumstancess of the painting and the manner of painting are signs of originality.155 The painting is attributed to a certain artist due to a technical study of thesee signs: Perhapss the first procedure in attribution is to secure clear evidence of the materiall traces of the author in the work, metonymie contiguities that movee in a series from the author in the world, the flesh-and-blood J. Bloggs,, into the artifact in question. The traces may be direcdy autographic -- evidence of a particular hand at work in the artifact's shaping. Or they mayy be more indirect - perhaps documents pertaining to the work, or the physicall traces of a milieu. (Bal and Bryson 1991: 180) Thesee signs are indices to be found in the material texture of visual arts, in the materiall itself, the handling of it, and the uneven surface of the painting. Thus, thee material and the painterly manner are signs that point to a certain author, whoo due to institutional conventions has been assigned a particular number of paintingss (or texts in the case of literature). These indices are defined as standingg in existential relation to the object (or concept) signified such as a bullet holee to a bullet, a footprint to a foot, a fingerprint to a certain person and so on. 166 However, the way the spectator perceives these indices is highly coded. Theyy are taken as the guarantee of authenticity and originality. This is the social codingg of the painterly indices. Not very differendy, visual poetry is often perceivedd as a possibility for the poet to fill the gap (that absence has left in writing) withh presence. 88

INTRODUCTION N

Visuall poetry is often perceived as an exploitation of the visual mark in order to individualizee writing, to create an utterance unrepeatable and unique. Thus, in relationn to concrete poetry, Wendy Steiner argues that the concrete poets' fundamentall aspiration was (as an ultimate development of cubism) to merge art withh life, to create an artwork as a thing in itself and to dissolve the tension betweenn sign and thing. The absence of the object signified in a word should be replacedd by the presence of the concrete object. This art is iconic, Steiner claims;; it involves an appeal to shared properties between sign and object. Furthermore,, in order to obtain the presence strived for, the word approximates to painting:: "In order for words to become things, they need the palpability and materialityy of things. And since painting is an art with ample materiality of this sort,, the concrete poet makes the boundary between poem and painting as indistinctt as possible" (1985: 199). This painterly quality, she argues, makes space forr free and individual play. The poem resembles the performance in its openness;; since the reading process is set free from the upper-left-to-lower-right readingg convention the poem can be entered and exited at any given point. This artt therefore sweeps away obstacles against the total sameness of painting and poem:: the sequence of word-art and the material presence of the picture. Free fromm the connection with sound and only existing in its graphic visual manifestation,, concrete art almost does away with the word. Inn the beginning of her argument, Steiner recognizes that "all presence [in the concretee project] is mitigated by the sign function". Words are therefore, to a certainn extent a kind of "word-tokens" (repeatable signs standing for an absent referent).. However, subsequently she goes on to insist on the singularity and uniquenesss of the concrete poetic utterance: "Repetitive as the word-tokens mayy be, the strongly indexical functioning of the poem insists upon the specificity,, uniqueness, and presence of its meaning" (1985: 208). Finally, in concluding,, she ignores this duality inherent in the written mark and states: "I see the meaningg of this [interartistic] comparison as an attempt to personify the work, too make it simultaneously a presence visible, continuous with our experience in thee extra-artistic world, and a voice, words that are real in a very different sense"" (1985: 218). Thus, emphasizing the material of writing and the possibi99

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

lityy of asserting individuality in die disposition of signs, visual poetry is often seenn as a unique possibility to "erode", "erase" or at least "bridge the gap" betweenn art and life, absence and presence, writing and voice. Visual poetry can "instill new life into the texf \ 1 7 This is a compelling conclusion, but it is also reductivee to the concrete poetic project and to visual poetry in general. It is exactlyy this tension between iterability (absence) and singularity and individuality (presence)) that makes concrete poetry (as well as Mallarmé, Apollinaire, and the Russiann avant-garde experiments in the close interaction of text and image) interesting.. The representation of the "subject", I will argue, is an important issue inn the practice of both the early avant-garde poetry and handmade books as welll as in contemporary visual poetry and artists' books. I will insist on the doublee nature of the graphic mark of writing as both an index waiting to be filled withwith presence, and a sign (repeatable and thus deferring presence, uniqueness and singularity).. It is the duality of both possibilities (signature and token) that makess the study of the various image-text relations in poetry (with a set on the visuall graphic sign in general and in the Russian avant-garde specifically) interesting. . Deicticc painting Thee materiality of a painting, its surface quality, the peculiarities of the brush strokess embedded in the paint (its fakturd), is traditionally associated with the handhand of the maker. It is a peculiar indexical sign that functions in the painting as thee painter's signature. Moreover, these indices point to a particular mode of perception.. Norman Bryson shows that the way the viewer perceives a painting iss not an a priori given, but is developed in the interaction between painting and perceiver.. Certain paintings conceal the indices of the particular circumstances off its making (its "deictic indexicality of the painterly manner" 18 ) and therefore implyy a disengaged viewer. This kind of viewer perceives the painting as a closedd entity at a distance from die time and circumstances of its making, while thee paintings with a definite mark of its making on the painterly surface address thee viewer directly from the same point of time. Thee deictic verbal signs are those words in language that point to a certain time, 10 0

INTRODUCTION N

place,, and person such as I, you, here, there, now, then. They are categorized by Peircee as indices, and correspond to the linguistic category of pronouns. Jakobsonn characterizes these signs as shifters that incorporate elements from both thee symbol and the index: " I "" means the person uttering "I". Thus on one hand, the sign " I " cannot representt its object without being associated with the latter "by a conventionaltional rule," and in different codes the same meaning is assigned to differentt sequences such as "I", "ego", "Ich", "ja" etc.: consequendy " I " is a symbol.. On the other hand, the sign " I " cannot represent its object withoutt "being in existential relation" with this object: the word " I " designatingg the utterer is existentially related to his utterance, and hence functions ass an index. (1957: 2) Itt has often been maintained that the meaning of the pronoun " I " is determinedd from the oppositional relation between the " I " and the "you". " I " is onlyy " I " because it is not "you".19 Thus, the term " I " only obtains its value in relationn to a "you". The value of "here" is only established due to its opposition too "there" and so on. The denotative meaning of " I " is the addresser of an utterance:: "the logical sender of the sentence is the sender of the utterance" and accordingly,, "you" is the addressee: "the logical receiver of the sentence is the receiverr of the utterance" (Eco 1979: 116). However, when a person says, "I amm leaving" the pronoun " I " does not signify the same person who says, "You can'tt leave now, I just arrived". The meaning is therefore also indexically linked too a certain person given by a certain situational framework that the addresser sharess with the addressee. When the situation changes the meaning of the word " I "" changes; the indices are variables. The situational framework which both thee addresser and the addressee share can be defined as the deictic field: "The deicticc field is an intersubjective structure, whose specific dimensions and internall structure model the concrete social activity in which the language users aree engaged" (P.Jones 1995: 36). Inn painting, Norman Bryson argues that two distinct temporal modes can be identified.. One is analogous to the linguistic category of the aorist, i.e. the tense inn language which presents an action as completed at a certain time before the utterance.. The utterer simply describes the action without involvement or en11 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

gagementt of him or herself, or of the addressee of that utterance {he ran, for instance).. The other is analogous to the deictic tenses, i.e. the tenses that present ann action while enclosing information about the spatial position relative to its contentt (here, there, near, far off), and its own relative temporality (yesterday, today,, tomorrow, sooner, later, long ago) {be has run, for instance) (1983: 88). Accordingg to Bryson, these two modes correspond to Western painting and to Chinesee painting respectively. The first "is predicated on the disavowal of deicticc reference, on the disappearance of the body as site of the image [...] for the painterr and for the viewing subject" (1983: 89). The second is a painting in whichh "the work of production is constantly displayed in the wake of its traces; inn this tradition the body of labour is on constant display" (1983: 92). In the firstt kind of painting, the traces of production are concealed by the stroke in a palimpsestt "of which only the final version shows through, above an indeterminablee debris of revisions" (1983: 92). This kind of painting presupposes a disengagedd spectator; it is the painting of the Gaze: "Elimination of the diachronicc movement of deixis creates, or at least seeks, a synchronic instant of viewingg that will eclipse the body, and the glance, in an infinitely extended Gaze off the image as pure idea: the image as eidolon"' (1983: 94). Corresponding to the activelyy involved spectator is the painting of the Glance: "Painting of the glance addressess vision in the durational temporality of the viewing subject; it does not seekk to bracket out the process of viewing, nor in its own techniques does it excludee the traces of the body of labour" (1983: 94). Brysonn thus suggests that a certain deictic mode of painting can be identified andd read as an ideograph. Similar to an utterance in language, a deictic field betweenn sender and receiver (artist and spectator) frames the situation in which thee painting serves as a kind of mediator pointing to the " I " (embedded in the materiall of the painting) and therefore to a "you" (addressed by the "I") and to thee time and place of the making of the image. The painting has become a shifter.200 The mode of perception is not forever given; it changes in an interactionn between the transmitter and receiver (the artist and the spectator) with the materiall of the painting as that upon which both work in a simultaneous interaction: : 12 2

INTRODUCTION N

Thee practices of painting and of viewing involve a material work upon a materiall surface of signs coextensive with the society, not topologically abstractedd outside it; to remove the concept of interactive labour is only to extendd the doctrine of the Gaze into a doctrine of manipulation. Yet painterr and viewer are neither the transmitter and receiver of a founding perception,, nor the bearers of an imprint stamped upon them (in the Imaginary,, in atopia) by the social base; they are agents operating through labourbour on the materiality of the visual sign; what must be recognised is that cruciall term labour, work of the body on matter, transformation of matter throughh work, the minimal definition of practice as what the body doer, the alterationn of the semiotic field in the durée of painting, in the mobility of tracee and of Glance. (1983: 150) Inn relation to handwriting, I will argue that a certain " I " is presented in the materiall graphic mark that interacts with the viewer ("you") in a completely differentt manner than would be the case had the same text been printed. Thus, handwritingg is often perceived as a sign of authority (a legal mandate in the absence off the signer) and as a somatically inflected sign (as testifying to the psychology off the handwriting subject). The material writing (handwriting) is often regardedd as a self-image ("a somatically inflected sign") and an extension of the bodilyy self, Imago. However, the signature, manuscript or letter is also written in thee symbolic system of language and, therefore, a sign inscribed in the social andd cultural meaning production, Logos. This is the double possibility of the writtenn mark: Nott all written language is produced directly by hand, but whether marks, strokes,, signs, glyphs, letters, or characters, writing's visual forms posses ann irresolvable dual identity in their material existence as images and their functionn as elements of language. Because of this fundamental dualism, writingg is charged with binary qualities. It manifests itself with the phenomenall presence of the imago and yet performs the signifying operations off the logos. It is an act of individual expression and an instance of that mostt rule-bound and social of human systems - language. It is at once personall and social, unique and cultural, asserting real physical presence andd functioning through intertextual chains of association and reference. It iss both an object and an act, a sign and a basis for signification, a thing in itselff and something coming into being, a production and a process, an inscriptionn and the activity of inscribing. (Drucker 1998: 57) 13 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Thee standardized typeset text is (to a large extent) perceived as transparent. As longg as the reader recognizes the text as belonging to a certain type, he or she immediatelyy engages in an effortless deciphering of the text. The identical letterss are arranged according to a certain convention of this particular text and thee time, place and circumstances of the writing are only of significance with regardd to the ability of the reader to read the code of the text. The writing of the textt as a process is not visible and has no significance in the act of reading standardizedd texts. Moreover, the individual who wrote the text is absent from the visiblee graphic mark (or reduced to a minimum) and the reader is not addressed ass a spectator. Any misprint, blank space, missing line and so on is seen as irregularities,, as noise. The signature (and handwriting) on the other hand, gains itss significance from these very irregularities. They are the means by which the signaturee functions. It is interpreted as a gesture, as a certain person's individual mark,, as a means by which he or she can assert his or her self in the world. Poeticall vs. everyday language Inn her historical account of critical approaches to the graphic sign of writing, Johannaa Drucker claims that the Russian futurists did not possess a structural linguisticc system of concepts or a semiotic vocabulary with which they could addresss their art and poetic practice.21 This is partly true, theoretical writings aboutt the materiality of language rarely enclosed a treatment of the graphic markss on the page produced by writing; the focus was on the materiality of sound.. However, in a few cases, the futurists addressed the question of the materiall written sign; they did it in painterly and not in linguistic terms. They used wordss as "sdvig" [displacement], "faktura" [texture, faktura], "bespredmetnost"' [non-objectivity],, "postroenija" [composition] to describe their poetry. As Krystynaa Pomorska points out, "The direct transformation of Cubism into poetry wass Russian Futurism" (1968: 20). Another important conceptual basis was the aestheticc theory of the Ukrainian philologist Aleksandr Potebnja (1835-1891). I willl argue that on the basis of Potebnja's semiotic theory of language and the neww analytical approach to painting in cubism, the Russian futurists developed thee concept^z>è/#rtf.22

14 4

INTRODUCTION N

Inn the Russian avant-garde and in symbolism, a fundamental distinction was made betweenn poetic language and everyday language. This distinction was to a certainn extent, based on Potebnja's theory of the sign.23 Potebnja introduced Wilhelmm von Humboldt's concept of the three-fold nature of the sign in Russia.24 Thee sign, he claimed, consists of three fundamental elements: 1) the outer form (articulatedd sound), 2) the inner form (a representation, or image), and 3) the meaningg of the word. The representation was defined as an inner poetical essence,, which in the initial apperceptive process of naming an object, was developedd as a comparison between the ideas already present in the mind of an individuall (A) and the object, which had to be named (x). Between the ideas and the objectt something similar appeared (a).25 The name was, according to Potebnja, ann image in relation to the meaning: the characteristics of the object. Inn the course of the evolution of language many words lose their inner form; thee representation or, in other words, the apperceived relation between sound andd meaning disappears. The triadic sign structure is replaced by a dual structuree of meaning and articulated sound. The word in which there is a direct link betweenn sound and meaning (the object signified) is called a prosaic word. In somee instances, the lost inner form cannot be retrieved; the word has become "empty".. However, in creating a new word on the basis of this "empty" word, a neww image or representation can be developed. In this instance, the word with thee new meaning again becomes a poetic word.26 The image links the new word too the meaning of the previous word and so on "into the unattainable depths of time"time" (Potebnja 1976b: 300), In other instances, the lost inner form can be retrieved.. This means that every successful etymological analysis of a word can leadd to an idea or image behind the meaning preceding the stage when the meaningg was direcdy associated with the sound (Potebnja 1976a: 534). Thus,, the words with a direct link between meaning and sound are the words withh a lost representation and were identified by Potebnja as prosaic words. Thee words with a still present inner form were identified as poetic words. 27 This theoryy placed an original moment of creation inside the poetic word, a moment inn which an image is created. Consequently, the process of retrieving the imagenessness of the word through etymological analysis was seen as a process of bringing

15 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

forthh a hidden creative potential of the word: 3 T OO Aaer HaM npaBo npeAnoAO>KHTb, HTO B TO Bpeivw, KorAa CAOBO 6MAO He nycTUMM 3HaKOM, a eme CBOKHM pe3yAbTaTOM annepneimHH, o&bflCHeHHH BocnpHHTHH,, HanoAHHBinero HeAOBeica TaKHM >Ke paAocrHMM HyBcraoM TBOpHecTBa,, Kanoe ncnuTHBaeT yneHMK, B roAOBe Koero ÖAecHyAa MMCAI., ocBemaiomafll ueAUH p«A Ao Toro TCMHHX HBACHHH H HeoTAeAHMaa OT HHXX B nepBwe MHHyTH, — HTO B TO BpeMfl ropa3Ao HCHBee nyBCTBOBaAacb 3aKOHHOCTbb CAOBa H ero CBH3b c caMHM npeAMeTOM. (Potebnja 1976c: 173)

(Thiss entitles us to assume that, at the time, when the word was not an empty sign,, but still a fresh result of apperception, of the explanation of perceptions that hadd filled man with the same feeling of joy as the scientist experiences, when a thoughtt flashed across his mind, which casts light on a whole line of, until then, obscuree phenomena and which is, at first, inseparable from these phenomena thatt at that time, the lawfulness of the word and its connection with the object itselff was felt far more vividly.) Accordingg to Potebnja, the poetic work of art, as well as a pictorial work of art, wass created in a process similar to the process described in relation to the poeticc word. The difference between the word and a work of art is merely a questionn of complexity. A work of art (poetic, pictorial or other) consists of (1) an outerr form (the material of the work of art: a sequence of words in poetry, color,, lines and planes in a picture), (2) an inner form (an image), and (3) a meaning.. Inspired by Gotthold Ephraim Lessing's essay 'Laokoon: Oder über diee Grenzen der Malerei und Poesie' (1766), Potebnja, so to speak, incorporatedd the "pregnant moment" into the very structure of the sign. In a poetic workk of art, the "naturalness" of poetic language develops in the convenient (andd economic) relation between the object represented, the means by which it iss represented and the reception of the written text. In this way, a "pregnant moment"" is created and the material of poetry (the words) becomes transparent: : [Thee poet] desires rather to make the ideas awakened by him within us livingg things, so that for the moment we realise the true sensous impressions off the objects he describes and cease in this moment of illusion to be consciouss of the means — namely, the words - which he employs for his purpose.. (Lessing 1949: 61) 16 6

INTRODUCTION N

Theree is no principal difference between the arts as long as this relation of conveniencee is upheld, i.e. as long as the means employed does not disturb and tire thee perceptive efforts of the reader (or the spectator in visual arts). It is an argumentt from necessity: to keep within limits of what is considered easy to perceive,, rather than what many writers and painters desire to do. The economy of effortt lies at the foundation of Potebnja's aesthetic theory and at the foundation off his main concern: cognition. Thee perception of a work of art is, according to Potebnja, a cognitive process involvingg the three present elements of the work of art: the image, the outer form,, and the meaning. In this process, the meaning (x) is always larger (i.e. moree ungraspable) than the image (a). In the triadic sign-structure, the inner formm (a representation, an image) is a generalization of certain but not all aspectss of the represented object or concept. Therefore, with a reference to Humboldt,, Potebnja claims that the complexity of a cognitive question troublingg the mind of the producer of a work of art is, to a certain extent, never fullyy contained within the image, which is much simpler and more concrete thann this question. In more abstract terms, he claims that A (the ideas in the mindd of the producer) are always larger than a (the image), whereas, in turn, a is alwayss smaller than x (the meaning). Referring to Tjutcev's poem 'Silentium', Potebnjaa claims that the x of the poem will never be fully comprehended neitherr by the writer nor reader: "Kak serdce vyskazat' sebja? / Drugomu kak ponjat'' tebja? / Pojmet li on, cem ty zives'? / Mysl' izrecennaja est' loz'" ("How cann the heart express itself? / How can another person understand you? / Does hee understand what you are living for? / An expressed thought is a lie"; 1976a: 559).. The inability of the poet to fully express himself and of the reader/ beholderr to fully grasp the existential question determining the form of the work off art was a fundamental enigma for the symbolists and cubo-futurists alike.28 Thee formalist theory of faktura Thee formalists, and especially the Opojaz group (associated with V. Sklovskij, L.. Jakubinskij, and V. Èjchenbaum) (founded in 1916), but also the Moscow linguisticc circle (founded in 1915) to which Roman Jakobson and Osip Brik be-

17 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

longed,, were intimately connected with the futurists. They took part in the avant-gardee activities. Jakobson became a close friend of Krucenych and contributedd %aum' poetry 29 to one of Krucenych's books; Brik was a close friend of Majakovskijj and David Burljuk. They were to a certain extent the theoretical equivalentt to the avant-garde practitioners (they were also practitioners themselves)selves) and they were able to formulate theoretically the findings that the avantgardee had incorporated in its art and poetry. Both the formalists (as they were laterr to be named) and the futurists based themselves on the semiotic system of aestheticss developed by Potebnja. Accordingg to Potebnja, the word — in the sense of the material side of the word -- was to be seen as objectified thought, an idea which was (from the point of vieww of perception) to a large extent preserved in Sklovskij's theory: MM BOT AAA Toro, HTO6M BepHyrb omymeHHe >KH3HH, nonyBCTBOBaTb BemH,, AAfl Toro, HTOOU AeAan> KaMem> KaMeHHUM, cymecrayeT TO, HTO Ha3HBaeTCHH HCKyccrBOM. UeAbio HCKyccTBa HBAJieTCfl AaTb omymeHHe BemH,, KaK BHAemie, a He KaK y3HaBaHHe; npneMOM HCKyccrBa HBAHeTca npHeMM «ocrpaHeHHfl» Bemen H npHeM 3aTpyAeHHoS 4>opMM, yBeAHHHBaKJIHHHH TpyAHOCTb H AOATOTy BOdipHflTHfl, TaK KaK BOCIIpHHHMaTeAbHHH

npoueccc B HCKyccTBe caMOueAeH H AOAJKCH 6hrn> npoAAeH; HCKycciBo ecn>> cnocoö nepeïKHTb AeAaHte BemH, a CAeAaHHoe B HCKyccTBe He Ba>KHO.. (Sklovskij 1990d: 63) (Therefore,, in order to return the sensation of life, to feel things, in order to make aa stone stony, there exists what we call art. The purpose of art is to give a sensation off a thing as a vision and not as recognition. An artistic device is the method of "de-familiarization"" of things and the method of impeded form (the increased difficultyficulty and duration of perception), because the perceptual process in art is an end inn itself and should be prolonged. Art is a means of living through the making of a thing,, while the already made in art is of no importance.) Sklovskijj transposes, so to speak, Potebnja's "pregnant moment" from the representation,, or image that links sound with meaning to the experience (and realization)) of the structure and material of the word or work of art. Thus, accordingg to Sklovskij, art is not a means for contemplative penetration from outsidee into the "living inner form", but a "living through" the making of the thing.. In other words, the formalist theory as expressed by Sklovskij was a the18 8

INTRODUCTION N oryy of the emancipation of the reader/spectator. He or she was to be engaged activelyy and consciously in a signifying process. It was, moreover, a theory of thee emancipation of word-things as expressed in language from merely designatingg meaning (an object relation) or thought to a material thing in its own right. Throughh the techniques of de-familiarization and impeded form, which were elevatedd to the essential techniques in the creation of art, art should invite the perceiverr to engage in a new perception of things: UeAbioo o6pa3a HBAHCTCH He npHÖAHHceHHe 3HaneHHJi ero K Haineiny noHHMarono,, a co3AaHHe ocoGoro Bocnpiwrnui rrpeAMeTa, co3danue «eudetihH» ezo, aa ne HKcoB. 4.. B o HMfl CBOGOAH AHHHoro CAyna» MM oTpmjaeM npaBonncaHHe. (Burljukk et al. 2000b: 42) (1.. We stopped considering word-construction and the word-pronunciation accordingg to grammatical rules, after we began to see in the letters only directing speeches.. We shatter the syntax. 2.. We have begun to attach content to the wordss according to their graphic and phoneticphonetic characteristics. 3.. We have become aware of the role of prefixes and suffixes. 4.. In the name of the freedom of individual caprice, we reject orthography.) T h ee bits and pieces of language were then constructed according to a simulta-

26 6

INTRODUCTION N neouss spatial organization of the verbal material. This is radicalized in what Krucenychh later calls the "faktura slova" \faktura of the word] in his essay of the samee name: CTpyKTypaa CAOBa HAH cmxa — STO ero cocraBHHe Hacra (3ByK, SyKBa, CAor HH T. A.) o6o3HanHM HX a - b - c — d. Oaioypa CAOBa - STO pacnoAo>iceHHe 3THXX HacreH (a - d - c - b HAH b - c - d - a HAH eme HHane), 4>aKTypa STOO AeAaHHe CAOBa, KOHcrpyKHHfl, HacAoeHHe, HaKonAeHHe, pacnoAOMceH H ee TeM HAH HHMM o 6 p a 3 0 M CAOrOB, 6yKB H CAOB. ( 1 9 9 2 : 1 1 )

(Thee structure of the word or the poem is its component parts (sound, letter, syllablee etc.); let us call them a - b - c - d. Faktura of the word is the arrangement off these parts ( a - d - c - b o r b - c - d - a o r i n y e t another way); faktura is the makingg of the word, the construction, layering, accumulation, arrangement in one wayy or another of syllables, letters and words.) Inn Krucenych's interpretation, faktura of the word is an expressive device through whichh every unit of language can obtain its own self-sufficient identity independentt of grammatical, phonetic or other language rules. In addition, he mentionss eight different ways of conveying the faktura of language: (1) sound-texturee or the instrumentality of language, (2) syllabic faktura, (3) rhythmic faktura, (4)) semantic faktura, (5) syntactic faktura, (6) the faktura of outline, (7) the fakturatura of coloring, and (8) the faktura of reciting. In the last three examples, Krucenychh is opening up a much wider definition offaktura, as a paradigmatic organizationn of disparate materials that reflect the nature of the materials themselvess and their relation to other materials of the composition. Inn this declaration as well as in the declaration in A Trap for Judges, there seems too be no distinction between material as speech sounds and material as graphic marks.. In A Trap for Judges writing is looked at and is mentioned as parallel to the JWW^^ characteristics of language. Similarly, although Krucenych's mentioning of thethe faktura of outline and coloring is brief, it does signify (as I will show in the followingg chapters) that with the concept offaktura, the cubo-futurists as well ass the following suprematists and constructivists were able to move effortlessly betweenn the material of sound and the material of the letter. Furthermore, althoughh the material of the letter, (hand-)writing and outline is rarely mentioned, itt is addressed direcdy in the declaration 'Bukva kak takovaja' ('The Letter as 27 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Such1).333 In this declaration (entirely dedicated to writing as a material, physical phenomenon),, writing is addressed in painterly terms: "Ponjatno, neobjazateFno,, ctoby recar' byl by i piscom knigi samorunnoj, pozaluj, lucse esli by sej porucüü éto chudozniku" ("Naturally, the speaker need not necessarily also have beenn the writer of the self-runed book, it is perhaps even better if this was entrustedd to an artist"; Chlebnikov and Krucenych 2000a: 49). The word presentedd on the page as a material mark attracts the attention of the spectator as if itt were a brushstroke on a painterly surface; it should be perceived "as if by a blindd man". Thus, the visual mark oscillates between two modes of perception: thee sign of language and the sign as an image. II will suggest that, the emphasis on the painterly approach to writing could have beenn inspired by the alphabetical, numerical and other characters in the cubist paintingss of Picasso and Braque. Robert Rosenblum argues that from the spectator'ss perception of the painting, the inclusion of alphabetical, numerical and musicall symbols in the picture foregrounds the analogy between a picture and writing: : Confrontedd with these various alphabetical, numerical and musical symbols,, one realizes that the arcs and planes that surround them are also to bee read as symbols, and that they are no more to be considered identical withh the thing to which it refers. The parallelism of these traditional symbolss and Braque's and Picasso's newly invented geometrical symbols is insistedd upon through the way in which both are subjected to the same fragmentation.. (2001*. 66) Fromm the point of view of the reader (of the alphabetical and numerical signs in thee pictorial composition), Yve-Alain Bois maintains that the "fragmentation", whichh Rosenblum saw as the fundamental analogy between the pictorial elementss and the written signs in cubist paintings, is a result of an "anagrammatic pulsion"" related to a critique of the instrumentality of language. In fact, the visuall approach to the written word deimtrumentali^es the everyday word; it becomess as it were, a poetic word. Firsdy, the insertion of the letter into the picturee transforms the letter into a spatial figure — an operation which emphasizes thee graphic nature of the letter as opposed to its verbal function. Secondly, Bois

28 8

INTRODUCTION N

argues,, Picasso insists on the opacity of the linguistic signs; that is, the letters aree "made strange" in order to be ddnstrumentali^ed and thereby "poeticized" (1992:: 202-3). I will consider 3000'and the cubo-futurist poetics olfaktura as equivalentt to this anagrammatization and deinstrumentalization of the painted alphabeticall and numerical signs in paintings. Fakturaa of the poetic word Thee theory offaktura was interpreted and transposed to the verbal arts by the cubo-futuristss using Potebnja's triadic sign structure as a theoretical basis. In thee first collective manifesto signed by David Burljuk, Aleksej Krucenych, Vladimirr Majakovskij and Velimir Chlebnikov 'Poscecina obscestvennomu vkusu'' ('A slap in the Face of Public Tasted (1912), the artists and poets proclaimedd the right to hate all previous languages: "My prikavgvaem ctit' prava poétov:: [...] Na nepreodolimuju nenavist' k suscestvovavsemu do nich jazyku" ("Wee order that the poets' rights be revered: [...] To feel an insurmountable hatredd for the language existing before their time"; Burljuk et al. 2000a: 41 [Lawtonn 1988: 51-52]). Instead, they proclaimed with a sweeping gesture the comingg of the new self-sufficient word: "Doloj slovo-sredstvo, da zdravstvuet Samovitoe,Samovitoe, samocennoe Slovol" ("Down with the word-tool, long live the Self-centered,tered, selfsufficient Wora\'\ Burljuk et al. 2000b: 43). In discarding all previous wordss from poetical language and setting out to create a new purified language, thee futurists rejected the historicity of Potebnja's poetic word (and thereby of thee inner form or the etymological meaning). However, in its essence the dichotomyy between the prosaic and the poetical language was upheld. The self-sufficientt word was for the futurists what the poetic word was for Potebnja, and the word-toolword-tool'was'was for the futurists what the prosaic word was for Potebnja. Through thee rejection of the old and the creation of the new, the words were actualized. Thee "samovitoe slovo" [self-centered word] was an altered version of the auto nomous,, concrete "obraznoe slovo" [image-word] of Potebnja. Thee poetic word should distinguish itself as an expressive language with a set onn the experience of perception. Thus, Krucenych and Chlebnikov promoted a poetryy of impeded perception: "Ctob pisalos' tugo i citalos' tugo neudobnee 29 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' smazannychh sapog ili gruzovika v gostinoj" ("May there be written heavily and readd heavily; more inconvenient than dirty boots or a truck in a living room"; Chlebnikovv and Krucenych 2000b: 46). The impeded form of Sklovskij, the surfacee value of Burljuk, the set on expression ('ustanovka na vyrazenie') of Romann J akobson and thefaktura and the heaviness ('tugost") of the poetics of Chlebnikovv and Krucenych were one string of conceptions constituting the conceptt of poeticalness in language that should draw the attention of the perceiverr towards language as an end in itself. Inn his manifesto, 'Novye puti slova' ('New Ways for the Word'), Krucenych distinguishess a new poetic language, %aum\ from the poetic language of the past thatt was enslaved by philosophical, psychological and everyday thoughts: JIcHoee H peuiHTeAbHoe AOKa3aTeAi>CTBo TOMV, HTO AO CHX nop CAOBO 6MAO

BB KaHAaAax HBAfleTCfl ero noAHHHeHHOcrb CMHCAy. Ao CHX nop yrBep>KAaAH:: «MHCAb AHKTyerr 3aKorai CAOBy, a He Hao6opoi». M M yKa3aAH Ha 3Ty OIUHÖKyy H AaAH CB060AHHH A3hIK, 3ayMHMH H BCeACHCKHH. H e p e 3 MWCAb

iHAHH xyAo^cHHKH npexame K CAOBy, MH >Ke Hepe3 CAOBa K HenocpeACTBeHHOMyy nocnwceHHio. (1967: 65-66) (AA clear and final proof of the fact that until now, the word has been fettered is providedd by its subordination to rational thought. Up until this moment it has beenn maintained: "rational thought dictates the laws to the word and not the other wayy round". We pointed out this mistake and provided a free language, a ^aum'andd universal language. Previous artists moved through thought to the word, we movee through the word to immediate apprehension.) Thiss was a direct and unconcealed rejection of Potebnja's "thinking in images". Thee chief component in Krucenych's theory of %aunf was the material outer formm of the word (sound or letter). He radicalized this idea, stating that the wordd is "wider than its meaning" — as direcdy opposed to Potebnja's claim thatt a (image) < x (meaning). Emphasis had changed from the inner form to thee outer form. Thus, the creation of meaning was dependent on the outer form;; the outer form should reveal "immediate apprehension" of an irrational, mysticc or emotional content. This meaning was indefinite, "it started to slip".34 Inn T h e Declaration of the Word as Such', an indirect reference is made by Krucenychh to the frustrated poet in Tjutcev's 'Silentium' who has realized that 30 0

INTRODUCTION N hee is unable to adequately express himself through words. Krucenych claims thatt the p o e t should feel free to express himself n o t only in an individual language,, b u t also in a language completely removed from everyday communication: : MbiCAbb H pe*n> He ycneBaioT 3a nepoKHBamieM BAOXHOBeHHoro, noaTOMy XyAOMCHHKK BOAeH BHpa>KaTbCfl H e TOAfcKO o 6 l H H M H3HKOM (nOHHTHfl), HO H AHHHHMM (TBOpeii; HHAHBHAyaACH), H H3WKOM, H e HMeiOIUHM O I I p e A e A e H HOIX)) 3HaHeHHfl, (He 3aCTbIBIHHM), 3ayMHMM. O 6 1 U H H A3HK CBfl3bIBaeT,

CBO6OAHHHH no3BOAfleT BHpa3HTbCH noAHee. (2000a: 44) Thoughtt and speech cannot keep up with the inspired artist's experience, thereforee the artist is at liberty to express him/herself not only in the common languagee (of concepts), but also in a personal one (the creator is an individual), as welll as in the language, which does not have a definite meaning (which is not stiffened);; %aum'language. The common language binds, free language allows for fullerr expression. (Translation in Lawton 1988: 67 [modified]) R o m a nn J a k o b s o n described this special language in the 1919-essay o n Chlebnikov'ss poetry, TSIovejsaja russkaja poézija' ( T h e Newest Russian Poetry'): Taioiee CAOBa KaK 6 M noAHCKHBaioT ce6e 3HaHemie. B STOM CAynae HeAb3«, nOJKaAVHH TOBOpHTb 0 6 OTCyTCTBHH CeMaHTHKH. 3 T O , TOHHeH, CAOBa C OT-

pHiiaTeAbHOHH BHyTpeHHefi o^opMOH, [...] H a pflAe npHMepoB M H BHACAH, KaKK CAOBO B no33HH XAeÖHHKOBa yTpaHHBaeT npeAMeTHOCTb, AaAee BHVTpeHHIOK)) Q^OpMy. B HCTOpHH n 0 3 3 H H BCeX BpeMCH H HapOAOB MM

HeoAHOKpaTHoo Ha6AK>AaeM, HTO no3Ty, n o BMpa^ceHHio TpeAMKOBCKoro, Ba>KeHH KeHHHH HeBecraa H TBOH, BO3BMHH see rrpoica>KeHHHH B3anieHH rHHAoro mmui

(After having left the tsarist concerns You descended to the deathbed of the sick Where in pus and vomit You suddenly found pleasure [...] - Kiss me, slain soldier I am your bride, Take it all, leper Instead of rotting food

Inn this poem, a woman attends to a wounded man who is lying on his deathbed.. The distance between the solemn (the princess, deathbed, bride) and thee lowest of the low (pus, vomit, leprosy) is even more comical in this poem. Inn addition are the implied sexual connotations: "I stal ja zamecat': sgoraja / Kakk budto na kostre, / I mig esce - sijaju / Upavsej nic sestre" ("And I began too notice: burning / As if on a fire, / And yet another moment - 1 shine / Towardss a sister, who has fallen face down"). Inn the sixth poem, the lyric subject is also a dying soldier. On one level, he ("I") iss lying wounded on a battlefield dreaming of "Her" (the loved one). This theme hass associations with Lermontov's 'Son' ('Dream') describing a wounded soldierr on a batdefield in Daghes tan.7 However, due to the comical rhyme between "uzoryy (krovi)" [patterns (of blood)] and "pozorom" [disgrace] and between "cepi"" [chains] and "nelepo" [ridiculously], this high styleis ridiculed. Moreover, 47 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

theree is a shift from "Ona" [She] (the loved one) to the earth (covered with dew).. The ground on which the soldier is lying is described as dry, while 'She' is coveredd with dew. A spearhead penetrates the ground, and blood is flooding: "Kop'jaa kusok torcit iz pyli, / Iz krovi lipkie uzory, / Pochoronit' nas pozabyli // Pust' smert' popolnitsja pozorom" ("A spearhead sticks up from the dust, / Viscouss patterns are made from blood, / They forgot to bury us / Let death be filledfilled with disgrace"). Again, the attentive reader must oscillate between the romanticc image of a dying soldier longing for his beloved and a man who has justt been with a woman, but longs for the divine love of the only one who can satiatee his thirst. Twoo poems in this book are identified as letters from Natasa to Herzen ("Iz pisemm Natasa k Gercenu" [From Natasa's Letters to Herzen"]). "Natasa" probablyy refers to Natal'ja A. Zachar'ina, and the addressee, her husband from 1838,, the famous Russian author and revolutionary Aleksandr Ivanovic Herzen. Thus,, these poems are inscribed in a realistic context. Moreover, the lines " O , den'' Krutic!" ("O, day of the Kruticy!), refer to the Krutickij monastery wheretoo Herzen was exiled in the period 1834-1835 (Krucenych 2001: 412), and the settingg is the Russian province (Herzen was secredy married to Natal'ja in Vladimir).. For a Russian reader, these references undoubtedly bring the scandal afterr Herzen's exile to mind. Disillusioned by Herzen's affair with a maid, Natal'ja,, being in Geneva during one of Herzen's travels in Europe, started an affairr with the German poet and housefriend Herwegh. Herzen became aware of thee relationship and Natal'ja is disgraced. The scandal undoubtedly intrigued Krucenychh and served as the incitement for these two poems. Inn the first poem, a lonely woman describes a walk in a garden and a second personn is referred to through the word "tvoim (zontikom)" [your (umbrella)] andd "tvoim (stakanom)" [your glass]. This person is presumably Aleksandr Herzen,, the addressee of the poems. The imagery is typically romantic. Words likee "trepet" [trembling], "golubaja rosea" [pale blue grove], "dal"' [distance], "gimnyy ptic" [hymns of birds], "glubina bytija" [the depths of being], "zvezda" [star]] and so forth belong to the vocabulary of romantic and symbolist love poetry.. Furthermore, in the lines, "J a rano k lipam uchozu / V dal' mank rosea

48 8

WRITINGG THE IMAGE: THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE BOOK

golubaja"" ("I go early to the lime trees / In the distance the pale blue grove is luring"),, and the line, "Ja daleko" ("I am far away"), thee woman's feelings of lonelinesss and isolation is reflected in nature, the distant grove. In the same way inn the third stanza, birds singing hymns and a church bell tolling in the distance aree reflections of the woman's own sentiment as she falls to her knees in prayer. However,, the typically (even clichéd) vocabulary is contrasted with the use of plainn words such as "umbrella" and "glass". Moreover, it is very unlikely that Natal'jaa Herzen would address her husband with the informal "ty" [you]; a secondd level is created in which the poem is inscribed into the real context of Natal'jaa Herzen's public disgrace. Thee second "letter" is also written according to romantic sentiment. It describess the passionate rhythm of music at a party heard by a young woman, whilee she is walking around outside thinking of her beloved. However, the partyy is almost like an orgy in hell: "Tarn veseljatsja zavodnye / V stradanii kuklyy i gul'be / I devy tosci vypisnye / Glumjatsja vse krivjas' v bozbe" ("In theree mechanical dolls are having fun / in suffering and revelry / And gaunt maidenss just discharged / Are mocking and swearing with wry faces"). The womann is clearly estranged from her surroundings and finds consolation in naturee surrounded by birch trees. Here a flock of sheep appears: "Sizu odna..., ovecc stada.." ("I sit alone..., a flock of sheep"). The distance between the poet andd the lyric subject is not only marked by the use of a female lyric "I", but also byy the ironic use of odd words (discharged maidens) and contrasts (a flock of sheepp and mechanical dolls dancing). Thus,, there is a clear discrepancy between the lyric subject and the concrete poet.. Not only are two of the poems written in the first person singular giving voicee to a woman's lyric sentiment, there is also an ironic distance between the impliedd poet and the lyric subject, emphasized by the use of wrong words, shifts andd contrasts. The poems have been written as a pastiche on the late romantic orr symbolist love poems. The setting is either near a river, in a country house garden,, or at a deathbed. Death, nature as an allegory of the soul, loneliness and estrangementt of the individual are emblematic of this genre, but words like "umbrella",, "vomit", "pus", and associations with sexual relationships are a 49 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

displacementt from the emblematic to the grotesque. The concrete poet's ironic distancee to the lyric subjects of amateurish love poems, the debased sexual metaphorss and the wrong words, parody the poems and the emblematic romantic/symbolisttic/symbolist poetry. The concrete poet's use of the pronoun " I " in a poem designatedd as an address from a woman to a man does not mean that Krucenychh saw himself as a woman but that he uses the guise of a woman to present aa certain type of lyric text and ironize their poetic language and style. This kind off poetry leaves no room for identification between the reader and the lyric subject,, it is a poetry which mocks and ridicules a certain style of writing as well ass the romantic sentiment itself.8 Textt as image Michaill Larionov's paintings and the illustrations for the first books of the early Russiann avant-garde have often been connected to the Russian fubok, the shop signs,, or any other Russian folk-art or artefact in which he took an interest. Theree was nothing new about this preoccupation among the Russian intellectualss and artists. The Abramtsovo and Talashkino workshops were renowned for theirr collection of folk arts and crafts and the inspiration of this culture is visiblee in their art. Similarly, Old Russian motifs, popular beliefs, pagan rites and mythss appeared in symbolist poetry too. 9 Larionov's interest in folk-art, however,, was clearly guided by his own artistic priorities. His presentation and use off folk-art is not imitative, sacral, or romantic as were the neo-primitivist paintingss of many of his contemporaries and predecessors. In the article T h e Sacred Profaned.. Image and Word in the Paintings of Mikhail Larionov', John E. Malmstadd points out that Larionov deconstructed the way in which the folk tradition hadd been viewed through generations of high art and used crudity as a deliberatee means of aesthetic deformation (1996: 157). Malmstadd cites Jakov Tugenchold's reaction to Larionov's painting Venera na bu/'varebu/'vare (The Boulevard Venus) shown at the December 1913 "Mir iskusstvo" ("Worldd of Art") exhibition in Moscow: "Forget all talk about the spirit of Old Russiann art, folk-art, and the lubok in Larionov. This is the spirit of sheer anarchism"" (Malmstad 1996: 154). Similarly, Malmstad claims (that contrary to com50 0

WRITINGG THE IMAGE: THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE BOOK

monn presumptions), Larionov's paintings are motivated by his experience as an ordinaryy soldier and not by the lubok. The so-called "soldier's paintings" from 19100 and 1912 serve as a point of departure for an entire series of paintings withh inscriptions of various kinds. Such inscriptions are inserted into the pictoriall composition and become a part of it. They complement (in the form of identificationss reminiscent of the icon practice of designating and naming saints,, cartoon-like speech balloons, graffiti on a wall or fence), authorize (in thee form of a signature), and identify (in the form of a tide). In all cases, the inscriptionss in the paintings are written not in the manner of the lubok, but in the mannerr of simple commonplace graffiti scribbled on walls in public places and inn the soldier's barracks in which Larionov had been living. This manner of writingg is a mixture of handwritten and printed letters, both lowercase and capitalss (characteristic of the writing of the semiliterate), often with misspellings, run-onn words, wrong word-transfers, capital letters inside words and so on (Malmstadd 1996: 162-168). Thus, in the painting OtdjchajuBj soldat {Resting Soldier)dier) (1910-11), the inscriptions "srok" sluzby" [call-up period], "1910,1911, 1909",, and "ML" are identified by Malmstad as designating soldiers' simple graffitii and the initials of the painter are incorporated into the painting on the samee level as the graffiti inscriptions. Malmstad reads the last inscription on the paintingg "poslednii ras' sra" as "Last time [I] shat" incorporating misspelling as aa sign of the semiliterate. Inn the painting Venera (Venus) (1912), the inscriptions designating the subject andd the tide ("Venera"), the year of making ("1912 g"), and the signature ("michail"),, are written in mixed printed and handwritten letters. This painting reversess the pose of the reclining Venus that could be seen in Eduard Manet's UOlympiaUOlympia from 1863, and Gauguin's painting Te arii vahine, which, for their part, aree ^interpretations of Tizian's classical Venus ofUrbino.™ In quoting and giving hiss individual interpretation of the classical Venus, Larionov comments on the emblematicc image of a woman and the semiotic order in which she is inscribed. Larionovv explicidy (while exaggerating and caricaturing) borrows elements from Gauguin'ss painting, such as the vivid yellow tonalities. This color underlines the implicitt fact that this "venus" is a prostitute (the color yellow refers to the yel51 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

loww card that the prostitutes in Russia were required to carry). Thus, subverting Westernn high art iconography in a Russian primitivist manner Larionov introducedd the image of a prostitute to a Russian public: Thesee elements he borrows only to deconstruct the compositional generic antecedentss by comically rendering the subject, replete with the cheeky cupidd exposing his mistress found in several of the Western predecessors, inn a Russian primitivist manner. (There is, of course, no such subject in Russiann folk art.) This is a very Russian bawd, but a very innocent one; she lackss even a hint of the seductive eroticism and sensuality of the Manet andd Gauguin monsters of profane love. Once again, Larionov has appropriatedd his subject matter from high art while parodically subverting it to hiss own purposes in a witty divertimento. (Malmstad 1996: 166) Thesee elements (the graffiti-like manner of writing and the deconstruction of Westernn high art) can also be found in Larionov's illustrations for Aleksej Krucenych'ss book Old-Time Love. Thee text was calligraphed by Larionov and not by the poet himself, a fact that is likelyy to be overlooked by the reader because handwriting is most often ascribedd to the writing subject (the poet) as a kind of signature, and it is nowhere direcdyy ascribed to Larionov. In Old-Time Love, the script is rather uniform. Theree is a slight difference between the somewhat neater written text on the firstfirst pages and the more casual handwriting on the last pages, but this does not seemm to be motivated by the shifting lyric subjects nor the content of the poems.. However, another interesting fact is the merging of handwriting with the similarlyy "personal" spelling of written text, which is also most often seen as a kindd of signature. Gerald Janecek has shown that there is an inconsistency in orthography.. Besides, direct misspellings (the word "chotes" and "nescasnym"), thee hard sign and the letter 'jat" are used in some words according to the pre19177 orthography reform, while these letters are omitted in others. Sometimes, thiss inconsistency occurs within one line for example, "Ty smotri vo sled" prekrasnym"" in which the hard sign is used after the consonant at the end of thee word "sled", but not in the word "prekrasnym". Janecek ascribes this inconsistencyy to Krucenych himself. He argues that Krucenych usually uses his ownn personal spelling which differs from that of Larionov's and from that of 52 2

WRITINGG THE IMAGE: THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE BOOK

bothh the new and the old orthography. The words "chotes" and "nescasnym" reflectt the pronunciation of the words, the use of'jat" and the 'i' are used for phoneticc accuracy, and punctuation is sometimes omitted. After having analyzedd Krucenych's spelling, J anecek concludes that Krucenych is inclined towardss the use of the new orthography (instated in 1917) in which no hard signs aree used after final consonants and in which 'jat" is substituted by 'e' (1984: 75)." " Inn Old-Time Love, however, it is remarkable that the misspellings and most of thee evident inconsistencies in the use of the old or new orthography (especially thee use of the hard sign at the end of a word ending with a consonant) are part off the very first poem in the book. If this were the personal spelling of Krucenych,, one would think that the inconsistencies would be more consistent. Theree is no apparent motivation for this inconsistency in the first poem (except thatt the lyric subject is presumably older than the addressee and thus perhaps moree inclined to the use of the old orthography). At the time, there was much discussionn and confusion as to which orthographic system should be used. Perhapss Krucenych is simply presenting through the handwriting subject (as a thirdd instance in the text), the way common people wrote, just as Larionov in hiss "soldiers' paintings" presented the way the soldiers' barracks were graffitied. Whilee the use of wrong words or accidental sexual metaphors must be ascribed to thee - naive — speaker of the poems (the lyric subject), the spelling and the style off the handwriting must in this book be ascribed to the handwriting subject. The concretee poet, Krucenych, may be perfecdy able to write with correct orthographyy and spelling, but he consistendy chooses not to do so. Thee handwritten lithographed text of this book merges with the illustrations (alsoo drawn by Larionov) and a new relationship between illustration and text is presented.. The book contains four illustrations, a front and a back cover. All illustrationss are drawn in rayonist style with the same lithographic pen that was usedd for the handwritten text. The publication of Old-Time hove seems to coincidee with Larionov's development of his new rayonist style. The theory was proclaimedd in 1912 and is described as "a play of lines from which forms gradually arise"" (Partonl 993:44). The theory was based on the scientificclaim that all objects

53 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

emanatee reflected rays of light that intersect each other to create "intangible spatiall forms" (Partonl993: 45). In Old-Time Love, the rayonist style is mixed with neo-primitivistt style. Two pages with illustrations have no text and the crossing liness in the rayonist drawings make it very difficult to discern figures, while the restt of the illustrations show easily recognizable figures of women and a vase withh flowers. This vase with flowers is repeated in three drawings: on the front andd back cover and on the first page in the book. Thee vase on the front cover is drawn in a complex composition of triangles in a rayonistrayonist style (figure 1). Above the vase butterflies are hovering. This image recurss in the illustration on page one (figure 3). O n this page, doodles, which look likee leaves, fall from the illustration down through the text, almost functioning ass accents of the handwritten words. In this way, a unity is created between text andd illustration which would have been very difficult to create in a printed book.. Moreover, the drawing on the cover zooms in on the vase, and it appears thatt the form of the body in the vase creates a hole in the middle. This form hass clear associations to female genitalia, while the situation of the o-form in thee middle of the word "ljubov"' [love] induces the word with a vulgar erotic connotation.. The lapidary style of the letters creates a formal unity between drawingg and text. The sharp edges of the letter 's' and 'aja' in the word "oldtime"" (starinnaja) correspond with the sharp edges of the vase. The handwrittenn 'b' in the otherwise capital lettered word "ljubov"' makes it possible for thee vertical line of the V to follow the form of the vase.12 Writing and illustrationn is intertwined and becomes a graphic whole. Thematically,, the illustrations complement the poems in a rather traditional manner.. They depict figures situated on beds, in rooms, and on the streets of a city.. With some difficulty, a figure can be discerned from the many crossing liness in the illustration on page seven. A woman is standing along the left hand sidee of the page facing the viewer and holding an umbrella in her hand (figure 4).. She is wearing high-heeled boots, a long narrow dress, and a hat.

54 4

WRITINGG THE IMAGE: THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE BOOK

>> S 'IS—SI- 1- ,11

Fig.1 1

Fig.. 2

*nj*mm>*nj*mm>::ï ï

..

Fig.. 3

Fig.. 4

55 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Evenn less distinct is the image behind her of a man walking. A street is marked beneathh his feet with diagonal lines and to the left a lamppost (which is spreadingg its light) is drawn. This drawing corresponds with elements from the third poem:: "Vsego milej ty v sljapke staroj / Izmjatye boka, / [ . . . ] / S takoj toboj iduu ja rjadom, / ljublju guljat'" ("You are even lovelier in your old hat / with a crumpledd rim / [...] / Side by side with such a you I walk, / I love to take a walk")) and the fourth poem (From Natasa's letter to Herzen): "V svjascennyj trepett prichozy / Pod zontikom tvoim guljaja" ("I get into a holy trembling / Walkingg under your umbrella"). In the poems, a story of love between a man andd a woman is told, walks on the streets of a city, and a lonely woman walking underr an umbrella. These elements can be recognized in the illustrations. Larionov'ss illustrations correspond with a wide range of pictures on the same theme.. Thus, the drawing on the last page of the book shows a woman in a jackett and skirt wearing shoes with high heels. She has her back towards the viewerr as if walking away while adjusting her hat with both hands. The woman iss wearing a transparent skirt that clearly shows her underwear. Similarly, in Larionov'ss painting Boulevard Venus, a woman is walking with an umbrella in her onee hand and through her skirt five legs in yellow stockings show with two muchh larger spread legs embracing the figure from behind. The illustration for Old-TimeOld-Time Love has undeniable structural characteristics in common with the socalledd Venus Anadyomène pose showing a woman standing slighdy bent with handss on her head as though adjusting her hair like the classical Venus figure in Ingres'' Venus Anadyomène. Thee reclining woman on page one, and in part, the woman on page three are comparablee to Tizian's Venus of Urhino. In this classical picture of a naked womann as well as in Ingres' Venus Anadyomène, the naked (desired) body of a womann is transformed into "ideal beauty" or "sensual love". The naked flesh of thee woman was displaced into a personified mythological setting. Thus, the Venusnus Anadyomène represents the Roman goddess of love and fertility after her mythologicall birth (Frascina 1993: 113). Although the exchange value of the femalee body and the voyeuristic gaze of the male viewer is implicit, these are legitimatedd by a system of representational conventions. These conventions are 56 6

WRITINGG THE IMAGE: THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE BOOK clearlyy broken by Larionov in his "Venus" images. In his illustrations for OldTimeTime Love, the woman is identified as a common prostitute, the image of carnal desire.. The same theme can be seen in Bol'sakov's book Le Futur, which is illustratedd by Larionov and Goncarova. In Larionov's illustration, a face is composedd from crossing lines and central in the composition is the inscription "3 r. BII ja". These letters and signs are fragments of words. "3 r." signifies three rubles,, and the letters are parts of the word "bljad'" [whore]. Another illustration inn Bol'sakov's book shows two prostitutes and a customer in the crowd of a cityy street in rayomst manner. In the transparent lines, the drawings depict suspenders,, a girdle, and the content of a handbag. Itt is clear, that Larionov in the illustrations for Old-Time Love mixes structural characteristicss from classical iconography. According to traditional iconography,, the naked figure of a woman is an emblem of an idealized and mythologizedd woman (without the ra/woman's desired and sexualized body). This imagee is displaced and merges in Larionov's drawings with the modern city's prostitute.133 Thus, as Malmstad has shown, Larionov - rejecting ethnographic fact utilizedd the formal aspects of primitive art for the depictions of the lowest levels off urban society and military encampments to deconstruct canonical works of highh art. In a similar manner, Krucenych used the emblematic imagery of romanticc love poetry and added every sign of degeneration: sex, vomit, pus, leprosy,, and death. With this ironic distance, he exposed the romantic and symbolistt genre to ridicule. Thee book as a kinetic object (1) Old-TimeOld-Time Love and the following hand-made lithographed books were met with dismissall and contempt by contemporary criticism. In one of the reviews, however,, a critic under the name of Nemo does say something very significant aboutt the nature of these books: riepeAOO MHOH ABe KHIDKHIIH. O H H Aa>Ke He HanenaTaHH B THnorpa(|>HH OGMHHHMM cnocoöoM. Tr. KpyneHbix H XACÖHHKOB, xyAO>KHHK HeHCTOBHH M.. AapHOHOB H r->Ka ToHHapoBa OTKa3aAHCb OT n3o6peTeHHa ryTreH6epra.. Hx «KHHI-H» Airrorpa(|>HpyiOTai. HaMepeimo H3AOMaHHMM rronep-

57 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' KOM,, c HeyAaHHHMH noTyraMH noA. crapocAaBHHCKyio craAH3aiinK> H HanHcaHbii 3TH KHHTH. Kmim «nmiiyTCfl» B XX BeKe! Pa3Be STO He CMeuiHo?? ... «nepenHCHHK» BMecro uiyMflmeii poTaiiHOHHOH ManniHH. ("NEMO"" OR RGB Mus. 57, 4) (Beforee me I have two booklets. They are not even printed typographically in the usuall way. Messrs Krucenych and Chlebnikov, the frenzied artist M. Larionov, andd Miss. Goncarova have rejected the invention of Gutenberg. Their "books" aree lithographed. Moreover, these books have been written in a deliberate tortuouss handwriting and in an unsuccessful attempt at Old Church Slavonic stylization.. Books are "written" in the 20th century! Isn't that absurd? ... A "copyist" insteadd of the noisy rotary press.) Accordingg to this review, the astonishing thing about the books was, first of all, thee use of handwriting and the fact that they were made with the old-fashioned andd slow method of lithography, when they could have been printed mechanicallyy on a rotary press. The books seemed to be deliberately crude, when they couldd have been printed beautifully. There is no question that this choice in favorr of lithography and hand-written text, rather than letter-printing and mechanicall reproduction with the advantages in terms of distribution and smoothness inn design that the handmade process excluded, was a conscious one. Anatolijj Strigalev describes the experience of the avant-garde book in relation too Vasilij Kamenskij's books:14 Ha6paHHMHH TaraiM o6pa30M TCKCT HeAi>3fl HirraTb H BocnpuHUMaTb aBTOMaTHHecKHH 6erAo: npweM 6e30TKa3HO npoBoirnpyeT o6ocrpeHHe BHHMaHHfll H B03HHKHOBeHHe H e p a B H O A y i l l H O r O SMOIJHOHaAbHOrO

KOHTaKTaa Motovy TCKCTOM H HirraioiuHM. (1995: 515) (Sett up in this way, the text cannot be read and perceived automatically in a glance:: the technique unavoidably provokes a heightened sensitivity and the developmentt of a keen emotional contact between text and reader.) Thee books invite a somatic experience; an experience of the material, of the thing,, and by disrupting the commonly used straight line and monotony of the printedd letter, the reader must investigate the page in a way very similar to the experiencee of a picture. Describing the experience of the handmade book, the Russiann art historian Ekaterina Degot' involves all the senses: sight, touch,

58 8

WRITINGG THE IMAGE: THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE BOOK smell,, taste and hearing. This description (which I will cite here at length) is rife withh associations of bodily pleasure: CoBpeMeHHoee HCKVCCTBO eABa AH norrpocHiin> o HyBCTBeHHHX HacAa>KAeHHHX.. A KHHra, 3TOT CHMBOA HHTeAAeKTyaAbHblX HeHHOcreH, Ha HHX n o npexojeMyy meApa. K u n r y MO>KHO HioxaTb, TporaTb H rAaAHTb. KHHTOH xoHercHH oÖAaAaTb. O C O 6 C H H O 30Ber K ocjöaHHio KHHra pyKOAeAbHaa, yHHKaAbHa».. H a BHcraBKe TaKHX KHHT AyniiiHe H3 Hac c TpyAOM yAep^caTc»» OT npHcryna KAenTOMaHHH. Kaicafl BaKxaAHfl TaKTHAbHOcra, Kanoe HCKymeHHee Tporan» niepoxoBaTbie crpaHHHbi c HepoBHbiM pyHHbiM 0 6 pe30M,, xoAOAHMe MeTaAAHHecKHe, TenAbie 6y\ia>KHbie; BCAenyio y3HaBaTb, KaKK KHHra CKAeeHa, cirorra, HyBcreoBaTb qbaiaypy KOHTypa, nepoKHBarb HacAoeHHee KOAAaaca; CAeAHTb 3a nonepKOM, IIOHTH BMcyHyB H3HK HacAa>KAaxbCfll ouiHÖKaMH; oÖHapyncHBaTb Bee HOBtie H HOBbie ciopnpH3M, pa3BopaHHBaTbb inypmamHe nanHpocHO-6yMa)KHHe MCIHOHKH, Aeprarb 3a HHTOHKH,, ocropo^cHO AHUiaTb B npope3H, xpaHfliLrne ocrpoTy MaKeTHoro HO>Ka;; HaKOHen, pa3raAUBaTb KHHry B TOM, MTO yace OTopBaAOCb OT KHHJKHoroo KopeuiKa H craAO HacroAbHiiM TeaTpOM, B03AyuiHbiM 3MeeM, KaTaAOHCHMMM 5HUHKOM. T e p e G H T b BCe 3TO, n O p T H T b H COTBOpHeCTBOBaTb.

MrpaTbb B KHHiy. H o ncicynieHHe AacKaTb 3TH KHHI-H B3rAHAOM H pyKoii BAeneTT 3a CO6OH HCKymemie AacKarb HX H onncaHHeivi, noAAaTbca noTOKy AeTaAeS,, rrpneMOB H npneMHHKOB, ocraTbca c HHMH HaBcerAa H 3a6brn>cfl. (1994:: 13) (Contemporaryy art hardly asks for sensual pleasures, but the book - this symbol off intellectual values - is still abundant with them. A book can be smelled, touchedd and stroked. A book one wants to possess. Especially the handmade, uniquee book invites the touch. O n an exhibition of such books the best of us can hardlyy restrain ourselves from an attack of kleptomania. What bacchanalia of tactility,tility, what temptation to touch the rough pages with uneven hand-cut edges, the coldd metallic, the warm paper sheets; to blindfoldedly learn how the book is glued together,, sewn, feel thefaktura of the contours, to experience the layers of the collage;; to follow the handwriting with the eyes, almost to put one's tongue out to takee pleasure in the faults; to discover still new surprises, turn the rustling protectivee sheets of cigarette paper, pull in the strings, carefully breathe in the cuts whichh preserve the sharpness of the modeling knife; and finally, to interpret the bookk which has broken away from the book spine and become a table theater, a kite,, a catalogue box. To disturb all this, spoil and co-create; to play with the book.. But the temptation to caress these books with the gaze and the hand entails aa temptation to caress them with description, to give in to the flow of details, de-

59 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' vicess and tricks, to stay with them forever and forget oneself.) Thee experience of the handmade book as it is described here is marked by a desiree to touch with the eye.15 It is an almost erotic bodily experience or the experiencee of a child totally engulfed in playing. With the danger of yet again narrowingg the cultural context to which the Russian avant-garde book artists referredd (i.e. to the Russian broadsheet, the /ubok), I will nevertheless draw on Jurijj Lotman's comparison of the experience evoked by the /ubok to the child's experiencee of an illustrated book: AeTHH He «CMOTpHT», a paccMaTpuBaioT HAAJOcrpa-raBHUH MaTepnaA, TporaiOTT ero H Bep-nrr H, ecAH TCKCT npoiOBeA BnenaTAeHHe, HanHHaioT rrpMraTb,, ABHraTbCfl, KpHnaTb HAH nen». (1977b: 327) (Childrenn do not "look", they scrutinize the illustrative material, touch it and turn itt and, if the text made an impression, they begin to jump and move about, shout andd sing.) Thee /ubok most often oriented the spectator towards a spatial perception of a theatricall kind rather than a painterly one, the space represented on the sheet, thee use of draperies, footlights, and sometimes the representation of spectators createdd a conventional set of devices to remove the action from reality into a theatricall world of play and simulacra. The use of masks, costumes, buffoonish acts,, and simultaneity in time are other devices. Furthermore, the nature of the sheett enables the perceiver to touch it, turn it, and manipulate it. Some sheets aree made in a way that forces the reader to turn them and read the text from differentt angles or sides (Lotman 1977: 335). Thus, the /ubok was intended for ann active playful perception equivalent to the way children experience images. Inn a similar manner, Lotman describes childrens* experiences of drawing, i.e. in thee act of making images: BcnoMHHMM KaK pncyiOT ACTH. LJeAb HX AejrreAbHOCTH He pHcyHOK, a pHcoBaHHe.. FIpH STOM pHCOBaHne npoBouHpyeT onpeAeAeHHoe HrpoBoe noBeAeHHe:: npHroBapHBaHHe, B030y>KAeHHbie « e c r u H BhiKpHKH. O&beicr pHcoBaHHHH Bee BpeMfl MeHfleTCfl. [...] Macro, BnaAaa B 3Kcra3, Aero cnAoiirb 3anepKHBaioTT cipaHHiry HAH pByr ee, AaBaa, Te\t caMMM, BMXOA CBoeivry B030y>KAeHHio.. OneBHAHO, HTO H3o6pa>KeHHe Ha 6yMare 3Aecb He KOHCH60 0

WRITINGG THE IMAGE: THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE BOOK Hafll iieAb, a 3AeMeirr «pHCOBaAtHOH HrpH». (1977b: 339) (Lett us remember how children draw. The purpose of their activity is not the finishedd drawing, but the act of drawing. Moreover, drawing provokes a certain playfull behavior prattle, agitated gestures and outbursts. The drawn object changes continuouslyy [...]. When becoming ecstatic, the children often cross everything outt completely or tear the drawing apart, giving thereby themselves a way out of theirr agitation. Obviously, the image on the paper is not an end in itself, but an elementt of the "drawing game".) Lotmann argues that without being aware of the active playful and syncretic perceptionn that the lubok engaged its readers in (as opposed to perception of the culturalcultural representational art), this cultural phenomenon cannot be understood properly.. This was the kind of experience that the Russian avant-garde bookartistss attempted to evoke in the reader/spectator, i.e., an actively responsive andd perhaps bodily reaction to the text, the image, and the book. They thereforee situated the book within an actionist context that was, in fact, an integrated partt of artistic life. Thee year 1913 saw numerous public appearances take place in the streets of Moscoww and St. Petersburg. Evenings were dedicated to the recital of poetry or the readingg of declarations. Such appearances involved a conscious relation to the cityscapee as decor, to costumes, the audience and even to a certain kind of makeup.. The first of such appearances took the form of a parade of jesters in which artistss with painted faces strolled up and down the streets of St. Petersburg. In thee 1913 manifesto published to accompany the performance, Larionov and Zdanevicc claimed the street of the modern city, as the scene for new art: HcTynAeHHOMyy ropOAy AyroBHx AaMn, o6pii3raHHMM TeAaMH yAimaM, )KMymHMOii AOMaM - MM npiraecAH pacKpanieHHoe AHIJO; cTapT AaH H AopoHocaa >KAeT 6eryHOB. [...] OÖHOBACHHA >KH3Hb TpeÖyer HOBOH oömecTBeHHOCTHH H HOBOTO npOIIOBeAHHHeCTBa [...] M i l CBfl3aAH HCKyCCTBO c JKH3HBK).. rioCAe AOATOrO yeAHHeHbfl MaCTepOB, Mil IpOMKO II03HaAH JKH3HBB H >KH3Hb BTOprHVAaCb B HCKyCCTBO. l l o p a HCKyCCTBy BTOprHyTbCH B

>KH3Hb.. PacKpacKa Anna — HanaAO BTop>KeHHfl. (Larionov and Zdanevic

2000:: 242) (Wee brought the painted face to the frenzied town of arc lamps, to the streets be-

61 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' spatteredd with bodies, to the huddled up houses; die start is given and the tracks awaitt the runners. [...] The renewal of life requires a new public spirit and a new propagation.. [...] We connected art to life. After the long isolation of the masters, wee made a loud acquaintance with life, and life invaded art. It is time for art to invadee life. The painting of faces is the beginning of this invasion.) Thee signs painted on their faces were numbers, letters or simple pictures of animalss reminiscent of cave-paintings and hieroglyphs (Markov 1968: 185). Inn October of the same year, an evening was held in dedication to the recital of futuristt poetry. Posters were printed on toilet paper and members of the Gilejagroupp with painted faces and with a teaspoon in their buttonhole paraded the streetss of Moscow: Thee one who enjoyed this 'masker's parade' most was Mayakovsky [...] Hee paraded along Kuznetsky in a new yellow blouse, made by his mother, withh a wooden spoon in the buttonhole (like the others), and read his own poetryy in a pleasant, velvety bass voice. The passersby were naturally curious;; some of them followed the futurists and spoke to them. One little girl gavee Mayakovsky an orange, which he began to eat. The crowd, astonished,, whispered, "He's eating, he's eating". (Markov 1968: 133) Thesee public appearances were designed to outrage the authorities and establishedd art critics, to scandalize, astound the public, and even offend the audiencee (as Krucenych's spilling a cup of hot tea on the first row of the orchestra seatss demonstrated) (Markov 1968: 134). This theatricality, which was an integrall part of the avant-garde artistic life, has often been described but most often ass secondary to the book production.16 However, as Ekaterina Degot' notes, thee "theatrical variety" of typography and material calls for a sensory experience,, which "muffles" the voice of unity, the theatrical is an integrated part off the nature of these books: TaKOBaa AOByiiiKa yHHKaAbHOH, npHAyMaHHOH KHHIH. IlocAe CKyAHoti AHeTH,, rrocAe OAHHaKOBbix onipMCKOB THnorpadpHH oHa OAapHBaer Hac oJ)aHTacTHHecKHMM TeaTpaAbHHM pa3Hoo6pa3HeM, B03>KnraeT Bee Haura ApeMaBiiiHee cnocoÖHOCTH K HyBCTBOBaHmo - HO oAHOBpeMeHHO uryMOM npHeMOBB 3arAyuiaeT TOAOC neAoro, TOAOC noHflTHfl: a HTO, CO6CTBCHHO, nepeAA HaMH? HTO 3a napaAOKc? Kaxan noTpe6HOcn> 3acraBAJieT XyAOÏKHHKOBB H II03TOB AeAaTb KHHru pyicaMH? (1994: 13) 62 2

WRITINGG THE IMAGE: THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE BOOK (Suchh is the snare of the uniquely conceived book. After a meager diet, after identicall typographic offshoots, the unique book offers us fantastic theatrical variety, lightenss our slumbering talents for sensing - but, at the same time, muffles the voicee of unity with a noise of devices, the voice of understanding: and what is it, actually,, that we have before us? What is the nature of this paradox? What necessityy compels the artists and poets to make handmade books?) AA Game in Hell Thee theatrical is not only a feature of the appearance and materiality of A Game inin Hell, but also of the theme of the book describing a game in hell between sinnerss and devils. It is the most commented upon and best-documented book fromm this period and gives a good insight into the creative process and thoughts behindd the book-form. It was published twice. The first edition appeared in Augustt 1912, die second at the end of 1913.17 Goncarova and Malevic illustratedd the first edition, Ol'ga Rozanova and Malevic die second one. Krucenych andd Chlebnikov wrote the poem in a constant process of adding and deleting neww verses over a period of two years (from February-March 1912 to January 1914).. This process is reflected in die composition of the poem. It is written wimm an archaic technique which Roman Jakobson has named "nanizyvanija" (stringing)) (1979: 319).18 This technique is defined by Jakobson as a free associativee chain of motifs that do not flow from one to anodier from logical necessity,, but is composed on the principle of formal equivalence or contrast. The freee stringing of associations enables the writers to weave togedier a variety of imagess and techniques that cross over canonized boundaries between high andd low art, and between art and literature. Inn the initial phase, the poem consisted of about 40-50 lines by Krucenych whichh were presented to Chlebnikov. Chlebnikov then started adding lines and fhee co-aumorship became a fact: BB OAHy H3 CAeAyioiuHx serpen, KaacercH B HepaniAHBOH H cryAeHHecKHr O A O HH KOMHaTe X A e Ö H H K O B a , fl B H T a i U H A H 3 KOAeHKOpOBOH T e T p a A K H

(3aMnopTqbeAü)) ABa AMCTKa — HaGpocKH, crpoic 40-50, CBoeii nepBOH no3MHH «Mrpa B aAy». CnpoMHo noica3aA eMy. BApyr, K MoeMy yAHBAeHHio, BeAHMHpp yceACfl H npuHHAOi npHimcHBaTb K MOHM CTpoHKaM cBepxy, CHH3yy H BOKpyr - coocrBeHHwe. [...] rioKa3aA MHe HcnempeHHwe ero 63 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' ÖHcepHWMM noMepKOM crpaHHHKH. BMecre rrpoHAH, nocnopHAH, eme nonpaBHAH.. TaK HeoacHAaHHo H HenpomBOAbHO MBI craAH coaBTOpaMH. (Krucenychh 1996:49) (Att one of the following encounters, (I believe it was in Chlebnikov's untidy and typicallyy bare student room) I pulled out from a calico note-book (a substitute brief-case)) two leaflets - sketches, about 40-50 lines, of my first epic poem "A Gamee in Hell". I humbly showed them to him. Suddenly, to my surprise, Velimir satt down and began to add to my lines his own above, under and around. [...] He showedd me the pages, which were covered with his minute handwriting. We read itt together, argued, and corrected some more. In such an unexpected and involuntaryy way we became co-authors.) Thiss passage not only reveals some interesting information about the emergence off co-authorship, but also gives insight into the worship and aura that surrounded Velimirr Chlebnikov. Not only did he not hesitate to correct and add to another writer'ss manuscript, he was also allowed to do this and was appreciated for it. Thee afterlife of the poem also reveals this fact: Chlebnikov was almost entirely creditedd for the poem. In 1914, in filling out a form of his publications for S. Vengerov'ss dictionary, Chlebnikov did not give credit to Krucenych for the poemm (Markov 1962: 83). Moreover, Burljuk, after having read the poem, wrote inn a letter to Lifsic: "Yesterday I was sent Igra v adu. There is written on it 'A workk by A. Krucenykh and V. Khlebnikov'. A few excellent verses by Vitya and somee disgusting stuff by the other one" (Markov 1962: 83). Jakobson also referss to Chlebnikov as the principal author of the poem in mis sentence: "Workingg on the poem 'Igra v adu' (1912) Chlebnikov and his co-author A.E. Krucenych.. .." (1976: 35). Finally, Krucenych too gives primary credit of authorship too Chlebnikov. When an edition of Chlebnikov's collected works was prepared,199 Krucenych was apparently asked for advice. He then thought it best to publishh the second edition of the poem because it would include more of Chlebnikov'ss verses (Chlebnikov 1968b: 308). However, the general acknowledgmentt of Chlebnikov's verses, the depreciation of Krucenych's part in the process,, and the claims that the latter's verses are recognizable by their "rude eroticism"" (Markov 1962: 86) are only justified by a presumption. It is, in fact, ratherr difficult to determine which verses belong to which of the two authors

64 4

WRITINGG THE IMAGE: THE EARLY RUSSIAN AVANT-GARDE BOOK involved.20 0 Thee poem reflects the somewhat casual and prolonged process of its making in thee use of the stringing technique. The stringing of verses is made possible by the excessivee and repetitive use of the compound and, which links the stanzas and versess together:21 HH Bee yBHAeAH: OH paaceH / M paHa B HCM AaBHO 3HflAa / H Tpyn COHOKCH o6e3o6pa>KeHH / M Kpecr oAeïKAa o6Ha>KaAa / / Ho MOT - H HCT Kpecra, / MM Bee KTO BHAeA - 3aApo>KaA, / rionyflB B cepAiie pe3 xAMCra, / M TaM 3aMeTHBIIIHH KHIDKaA.

(Andd everybody saw it now: he is in disguise / And the wound has long been gapingg /And the disfigured corpse was cremated / And the clothes revealed the cross / // But in an instance - the cross is gone / And everybody who saw it - started to tremblee / Feeling the cut of a whip in their heart / And there a dagger was noticed.) ) Thesee lines describe the unveiling of a player as a devil in disguise. The repetitivetive use of and gives expression to the shocking revelation to the players. It is thee child's way of telling a story breathlessly fast, unable to stop the associative chainn of thought and the adding of details.22 Therefore, this technique makes it possiblee to produce endless associations and add new lines wherever it pleases thee authors. In A Game in Hellthis also means that the structure of the poem seemss to collapse under the weight of associative chains. There is almost no narrativee structure in the poem, and the free association of images connects seeminglyy incoherent narrative sequences. Inn his memoirs, Krucenych writes that A Game in Hell is an imitation of lubok: "Étoo ironiceskaja, sdelannaja pod lubok, izdevka nad archaiceskim certom" ("Thiss is an ironic mockery of the archaic demon, made in the imitation of lubok";lubok"; 1996: 50). The concrete quotation of lubok imagery in the text of A GameGame in Helicon be seen in some parts of the text. In the second edition of A GameGame in Hell, Malevic' illustration shows two devils who saw a woman in two (figuree 5). An almost identical scene can be found in a lubok (figure 6).

65 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Fig.. 5

rbfwwee eaeumcKM urb K Z B O C T O ^ njfeiep>.K#io j>T6 6

ttaatAttaatA KAoe

MraoBeHHee co3AaBafl CAOBa, KOTopwe TO VMHpaioT, TO noAynaiOT npaBo öeccMepTTM,, nepeHocHT STO npaBo B >KH3Hb miceM. HoBoe CAOBO He TOAbKOO AOAJKHO ÖMTb Ha3BaHO, HO H GiTTb H a n p a B A e H H M M K Ha3hIBaeMOH

BeiHH.. (1972: 223) (Wordd creation is hostile to the bookish petrification of language. It takes as its modell the fact that in villages, by rivers and forests, language is being created to thiss very day; every minute sees the birth of words that either die or gain the right too immortality. Word creation transfers this right to the world of literary creativity [literallyy "the life of writing" C.G.]. A new word must not only be uttered, it must bee directed toward the thing it names.) (1987: 382) Languagee theory Chlebnikov'ss theory of the sign is constructed on the assumption that "pure" languagee should be differentiated from everyday language. In 'Our Fundamentals',, he claims that the word has a double identity as an everyday word and a 86 6

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV " p u r e "" word: "Slovo delitsja na cistoe i b y t o v o e " ("A w o r d contains two parts: puree essence and everyday dross"; 1972: 229 [1987: 377]). H e differentiates betweenn an everyday word and a "self-sufficient w o r d " , or a w o r d encapsulating thee reason o f daylight and a word encapsulating the reason of a starry night. T h e everydayy w o r d is a "self-evident falsehood" which swallows u p or hides its p o tentiall meanings and leaves only o n e interpretation, that of the everyday meaning withh its direct link between signifier and signified. H ee compares everyday language with "playing with word-dolls." A boy uses a chairr as a horse, believing while playing, that it is a real horse. Consequently, twoo rags can replace two h u m a n beings complete with hearts and passions: [MJrpafll B KyKAH, peÖeHOK MOJKCT HCKpeHHe 3aAHBaTbCfl CAe3aMH, KorAa eroo KOMOK TpHnoK yMHpaeT, cMepTeAbHO 6OACH; ycTpairaaTb cBaAböy AByx coGpamiHH TpanoK, coBepmeHHO HeoTAHHHMHX Apyr oT Apyra, B AynnieM CAynaee c IIAOCKHMH TynHMH KomjaMH TOAOBH. B O Bpernfl HipM 3TH TpanoHKHH — >KHBMe, HacTOJuuHe MOAH, c cepAueM H crpacTflMH. QrcioAa noHHMaHHee H3HKa, KaK nrpM B KyKAH; B HCH H3 TpanoneK 3Byxa CIUHTM KyKAMM AAA Bcex BemeJi MHpa. (1972: 234) (AA child playing with dolls may shed heartfelt tears when his bundle of rags and scrapss becomes deathly ill and dies; or may arrange a marriage between two rags figuress indistinguishable one from the other, except perhaps for their blunt flat heads.. While the child is playing, those rag dolls are live people with feelings and emotions.. So we may come to an understanding of language as playing with dolls: inn language, scraps of sound are used to make dolls and replace all the things in thee world.) (1987: 383) T h ee words are like dolls that substitute real things due to a convention, which is c o m m o nn to all the involved "players" (i.e., to the people of a certain language community).. According to the distinction between everyday language and " p u r e "" language, a distinction must also b e made between the everyday sound andd the " p u r e " sound. In Chlebnikov's poetics, the sounds in everyday (practical)) language seem to b e defined according to the concept of the p h o n e m e . H e doess n o t appear; moreover, to separate the function of the letter from that of thee p h o n e m e ; and therefore, a distinction must also b e made between everyday writingg and " p u r e " writing, and between an everyday letter and a " p u r e " letter.

87 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' I nn his theoretical writings, Chlebnikov alternately talks of letters and sounds: "zvuko-vescestva"" [sound elements] (1972: 228), "éti zvukovye oceredi - rjad [...]] mirovych istin" ("these sound sequences constitute a series of [...] universall truths"; 1972: 225 [1987: 370]), "azbucnye istiny" [alphabetic verities] (1972: 228)) a n d so forth. 2 B o t h t h e sounds and the letters, or, to use m o r e m o d e r n termss t h e p h o n e m e s and the graphemes of everyday language are negatively definedfined by their difference from other units in language and are isolated from the contextt o f relations in language. T h e y d o not have a meaning. T h e meanings of t h ee w o r d s " b i g " and " d i g " differ because of the difference between the letter ' b ' andd 'd*. Accordingly, the phonemes as well as the graphemes can only signify in combinationn with o t h e r phonemes o r graphemes. Chlebnikov gives an example o ff two w o r d s which change meaning just by changing the initial consonant: "dvorjane"" [courtiers] becomes "tvorjane" [creatiers] when 'd' is substituted by 't'.. In principle, the same can be said a b o u t Chlebnikov's theory of inner flexion.. I n the w o r d s " b o b r " [beaver] and " b a b r " [tiger] the two words differ in m e a n i n gg due to the different vowels ' o ' and 'a'. In the poetics of Chlebnikov however,, these letters have an additional grammatically connoted meaning. T h e letterr ' o ' signifies something that must b e followed or chased, whereas die letter 'a'' signifies s o m e t h i n g from which o n e has to flee. According to Chlebnikov, t h ee two vowels represent the accusative and genitive case respectively. In the samee way, the difference in meaning between "lesina" [tree trunk] and "lysina" [baldd spot] lies in the flexion of t h e w o r d s ' stem. T h e word "les" [forest] means t h ee presence of something (trees) identified as the meaning of the dative case, whilee "lysyj" [bald] means the absence o f something identified as the meaning o ff the genitive: A e cc ecTb AaTeAbHUH naAOK, A H C H H - poAirreAbHUH. KaK H B ApyrHx CAynaaxx e n u cyn> AOKa3aTeAi>CTBa pa3HMX naAOKeiï OAHOH H TOH >Ke OCHOBW.. M e c r o , rAe Hcne3HyA Aec, 30BeTca AHCHHOH. (1972: 172) (Les(Les is the dative case, lysyi is the genitive. Here, as in other examples, the letters e anddj prove the existence of two different cases for an identical stem. A place wheree the forest no longer grows is called a bald spot.) (1987: 278) I nn the a b o v e - m e n t i o n e d case of "dvorjane" and "tvorjane", the replacement of 88 8

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV 'd'' by V creates the neologism "tvorjane". Here, the new word keeps the memory off the öfirgrWword in its grammatical form and aquires an additional meaning byy way of the verb "tvorit"' [to create]. Similarly, when changing the letter 'p' to aa letter 'n' in the neologisms "nraviteFstvo" and "nravitel'" (bringing to mind thee words "nravit'sja" [to like, to love] and "nravstvennost"' [morality]), the letterr 'n' has replaced the letter 'p' in the word "pravitel'stvo" [government] (1972: 232)) and two neologisms are created. The words "tvorjane", "nravitel'stvo", andd "nravitel"' have no definite meaning. Thee substituting of one letter or sound with another opens up new potential meanings.. Therefore, the words no longer belong to the category of everyday language,, but to what Chlebnikov calls "slovotvorcestvo" [word-creation]. In thee poetic creative act, in the word "boec" [warrior] the initial letter 'b' can be isolatedd and substituted by the letters ' p \ 'n', or 'm' to create the neologisms "poec",, "noec", and "moec". While retaining the semantic meaning of "boec", thiss meaning is at the same time crossed over and replaced by the meanings "pet"' [too sing], "nyt"' [to ache or moan], or "myt"' [to wash]. Such a creative act meanss that the signifier and signified are no longer direcdy linked. In Chlebnikov'ss terminology, this represents a shift from the "silent" or "deaf-dumb" languagee to a "speaking" one: CAOBOTBOpHeCTBOO eCTb B 3 p H B H3HKOBOrO MOAHaHHfl, TAyxO-HeMMX

nAacTOBB A3HKa. 3aMeHHB B crapoM CAoBe OAHH 3BVK ApyruM, MM cpa3y co3AaeMM nyn. H3 OAHOH AOAHHW H3MKa B Apyryio H KaK nyTeHUM npoAaraeMM nym cooömeHiw B crpaHe CAOB nepe3 xpeÖTM H3MKOBoro MOAMamwi.. (1972: 229) (Wordd creation is the blowing up of linguistic silence, the deaf-and-dumb layers of language.. By replacing one sound in an old word with another, we immediately createe a path from one linguistic valley to another, and like engineers in the land off language we cut paths of communication through mountains of linguistic silence.)) (1987: 377) Thiss is very close to Potebnja's distinction between the poetic and the prosaic word.. The poetic word still contains the inner form (the representation or image), whichh links meaning to sound in the word. The prosaic language has lost this thirdd element of the triadic sign-structure. Chlebnikov gives the two words 89 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' "ziry"" and " z e n " ' as examples, which according to Chlebnikov m e a n b o t h stars a n dd eye, and eye and earth respectively. According to Chlebnikov, there is a thirdd meaning uniting the meanings of the two words which are neither t h e real earthh n o r the nWeye, b u t the reflecting surface of a mirror: 3 T a KK CAOBO « 3 H p W » 3HaHHT H 3 B e 3 A H , H TAa3J CAOBO - « 3 e H b » H TAa3, H

3eMAK>,, H o HTO oGiqero Me>KAy rAa30M H 3eMAefi? 3HaHHT, 3To CAOBO 03HanaeTT He HeAOBenecKHH rAa3, He 3CMAHD, HaceAeHHyio HCAOBCKOM, a HTO-TOO Tperbe. H 3TO Tperbe noTOHyAo B 6MTOBOM 3HaneHHH cAOBa, OAHOMM H3 B03MO>KHWX, HO CaMOM 6AH3KOM K HeAOBCKy. Mo>KeT 6bm> KaHHfl OAHoroo npoHCxo>KAeHiM H HHCAa KOAe6aHHH. Orpa)KeHHe. 3epKaAO, 30H (axo),, 3w6b (oTpajKemi» 6ypa), 3MeH, ABHraioinHHCfl oTpajKaacb. 3BaTb, 3Be3Abi,, 3opbKa, 3apH, 3apHHua (oTpaïKeHHe MOAHHH), 3em>, 3paK, o3epo, 3yAA - 6OAB 6e3 npHHHma, OTpaaceHHan. (1972: 207) (33 [^ is the resonant vibration of distant strings. Separate vibrations with one singlee origin and with an identical number of vibrations. Reflection. Zerkalo [mirror], 94 4

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV %pi%pi [echo], (echo) %yb' [ripple] (the reflection of a storm), %mei [serpent], which movess by vibrating. Zvat' [to call],, %ve%dy [stars], %>r'ka [dawnlight], %aria [dawn], ^arnitsa^arnitsa [heat lightning] (lightning's reflection), %en' [earth; dial.], %rak [the look of something],, o^ero [lake], %ud [itch], a pain without any origin, reflected pain.) (1987: 314-315) ) Inn a later version, the same letter was characterized in almost the same way, exceptt that the emotional associations were substituted by a geometrical form: "Ctoo Z znacit otrazenie dvizuscejsja tocki ot certy zerkala pod uglom, ravnym ugluu padenija. Udar luca o tverduju ploskost"' ("3 (z) means the reflection of a movingg point from the surface of a mirror at an angle equal to the angle of incidence.. The impact of a ray upon a solid surface"; 1972: 217 [1987: 365]). This developmentt is even more apparent where it concerns the letter ' b \ By 19081909,, Chlebnikov had already listed the meanings of sounds including the consonantt 'b': "B: basa / bajat' / baba / b. nacala radosti baloven' [...] b. ob"edinjaett nacala blag zizni." ("'B': base / talk / old woman / 'b'. the source of joyy a spoilt child [...] 'b'. unites the sources of life's blessings"; Percova 2000: 365).. In 'Artists of the World!' the same consonant is characterized in the followingg way: "Cto B znacit vstrecu dvuch tocek, dvizuscijsja po prjamoj s raznychh storon. Bor'ba ich, povorot odnoj tocki ot udara drugoj" ("B (b) means thee meeting of two points moving along a straight line from opposite directions.. Their clash, the reversal of one point by the impact of the other"; 1972: 2188 [1987: 366]). In this way, subjective emotional associations are translated intoo an objective geometrical form. Based on these geometrical forms, an inventoryy of indexical signs can be construed - comparable to a Mendeleev's law inn science (Chlebnikov 1972: 228). Thee sound-letters of the universal language are then constructed according to threee principles. Oraic Tolic identified them as decomposition, logization, and ontologization:: 1. the consonants are freed from the context of the syntagmatic sequencess of everyday language and are isolated as "autonomous alphabetic paradigms";; 2. to these isolated sounds, an abstract "volume of meaning" is attached;; the sounds are transformed into noetic categories; 3. these categories of meaningg are turned into ontological entities, "hyperstasized" abstract truths

95 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

(Oraicc Tolic 1985: 46). In the third phase of ontologization, the sounds are transformedd into cosmic entities governing the universe. Accordingly, the spatiall inner form of sound is explained in 'Zangezi' as a constellation of moving points,, lines, surfaces and so forth: "Ploskosti, prjamye ploscadi, udary tocek, bozestvennyjj krug, ugol padenija, pucek lucej proc' iz tocki i v nee - vot tajnye glybyy jazyka" ("Planes, the lines defining an area, the impact of points, the godlikee circle, the angle of incidence, the fascicule of rays proceeding from a point orr penetrating it - these are the secret building blocks of language"; Chlebnikov 1968c:: 333 [1989: 345]). The lines, points, and planes move in relation to each otherr and are, therefore, unstable. They do not imply the arresting of time in a purelyy spatial form. They exist both in a spatial and a temporal dimension.4 Moreover,, the letters are connected to what Chlebnikov calls "destiny" or "worldd truth". The initial letter of countries ('g' for Germany, 'r' for Russia), historicall persons, or events acquires independent existence and functions like a "name". 55 These letters are governed by an inner representation, which is connectedd to "World truth" or destiny: "V pervoj soglasnoj my vidim nositelja sud'byy i put' dlja vol', pridavaja ej rokovoj smysl" ("In the initial consonant we seee the bearer of destiny and the path of forces that give it a fateful significance";; 1972: 188 [1987: 293]).6 Thee indexical signs should have a graphic form, created by artists, which correspondss to the representation of the sound. An attempt was made to conceive off a new system of written characters, which was based on the geometrical representationn of the sound-letter. In 'Chudozniki mira' ('Artists of the World!'), Chlebnikovv gives the artists more or less clear instructions as to the creation of aa few letters of the universal language. The abstract form of the sound 'c' he definess in the following way: "C oznacaet pustotu odnogo tela, zapolnennuju ob"emomm drugogo tela, tak cto otricatel'nyj ob"em pervogo tela tocno raven polozitel'nomuu ob"emu vtorogo" ("H (cb) means the empty space of one body containingg the volume of another body, in such a way that the negative volume off the first body is exacdy equal to the positive volume of the second"; 1972: 2177 [1987: 366]) and the letter: "C v vide casi" ("H (cb) in the form of a goblet"; 1972:: 219 [1987: 367]). The letter *V' he imagines as a circle with a point in its

96 6

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV

middlee corresponding to the definition of its semantic meaning: "V na vsech jazykachh znacit vrascenie odnoj tocki krugom drugoj ili po celomu krugu ili po castii ego, duge, werch i nazad" ("B (v) in all languages means the turning of onee point around another, either in a full circle or only a part of one, along an arc,, up or down"; 1972: 217 [1987: 365]). The letter 'L' he imagines as a circular planee with a vertical axis corresponding to its definition as a form of upwards movementt along a vertical line, as well as to the spreading of "waves" on a wide surfacee (1972: 218). Thoughh it has already been noted a number of times, it remains interesting to notee the similarity between the proposed characters of the new universal languagee and the existing Russian alphabet.7 By comparing Chlebnikov's ideas of thee geometrical form of letters in the universal language with those in the Russiann alphabet, it is evident that the forms of the Russian alphabet have influencedd Chlebnikov at least in respect to the forms of characters in the universal language.. This is consistent with the nature of Chlebnikov's "scientific" investigationn into the essence of initial letters of the language. Accordingg to Chlebnikov's idea of the inner representation of the letters, the commonn denominator functions in the word like a passage in a canal system. It uncoverss hidden correspondences between the words, discovers their semantic potential,, and opens up a free passage between them. However, these words are usedd as the basis for a comparison between the initial letters in order to isolate thee common denominator, the representation. For instance, the word "cerep" [skull]] is a very important poetic image in Chlebnikov's poetry and is at the samee time used as an example of the meaning of 'c'. 8 Moreover, as Vroon pointss out, Chlebnikov's poems are often extended proof of his propositions (Vroonn 1983: 176). For instance, most of the words mentioned in 'Our Fundamentals',, from which the common denominator of words beginning with T iss derived, are parts of the poem 'Slovo o El"' ('A word about 'L"): "lodka" [boat],, "lyzi" [skis], "lad'ja" [boat], "ladon"' [palm of the hand], "lapa" [paw], "list"" [leaf or sheet of paper], "lopast"' [blade, vane], "lasty" [flippers], "luc" [ray],, "log" [broad gully], "lezanka" [stove-bench], "prolivat"' [to pour out] (Chlebnikovv 1972: 237 and 1968c: 70-72), and the phrase "luza livnja" [a puddle

97 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

afterr a cloud burst] (1972: 230 and 1968c: 71). It can be assumed that the words whichh are used as "scientific material" in order to construct a "Mendeleev's law"" of sound-letters are indeed derived from the poetic vocabulary of the writerr himself. Consequently, there is a movement from poetic practice to the universall language. However,, the contrary movement is more evident. The language of the stars is partt of Chlebnikov's poetry in the poem 'Carapina po nebu' ('A Scratch in the Sky5).. The poem has the sub-title, "Proryv v jazyki. Soedinenie zvezdnogo jazykaa i obydennogo" ("A breach in languages. A combination of the language off the stars and the ordinary"; 1968c: 75). In 'Zangezi', the following lines precedee an almost identical poem: 3 p ,, Ka, 3AI>, H T 3 B O H H MM a36yKH, BMAHH AeHCTByiOmHMH AHIjaMH 3THX ACT, BoraTMpflMHH AHefi.

(1968c:: 330) ( R , K , I , G -Alphabett war-makers — theyy were the actors in the drama of those years, warrior-heroess of those days) (1989:: 342)9

Itt is not my intention here to analyze the character and the function of the languagee of the stars, but merely to emphasize the interactive relationship between thee "scientific" investigation of Chlebnikov into the semantic meaning of the letters,, the isolation of the common denominator, and the poetic practice of "word-creation".. Chlebnikov, as the creator of the evidence and proof of his own scientificscientific investigation, becomes at one and the same time, the scientist and the objectject of the investigation. Consequendy, the subjective and objective aspects of word-creationn merge in Chlebnikov's idea of a universal language. The script hass its own life which is fed by and feeds language, and creates new words. The semanticc meanings of the initial letters are isolated on the background of these words.. In the same manner, the existing Russian alphabet undoubtedly influ-

98 8

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV

encedd the abstract geometrical inner form of the language of the stars. The proposedd new letterforms differ litde from the Russian alphabet. Thee emotional-geometrical form, therefore, inscribes itself into the very letter off the already existing alphabet. The letter can be seen as a kind of ideogram, as aa visual expression of the inner geometrical form. This is often interpreted as accidental,, a paradoxical mistake on Chlebnikov's part, yet, he did appear to applyy a certain iconic meaning the letters, especially to the hand-written ones. Thee characters of the new universal alphabet must be conceived of as an alphabett on another level. There is an iconic relation between the outer form of the letterr (its shape) and the inner form (the geometrical abstract form). This idea is veryy similar to the ideas of Kandinskij, who claims: "form is the external expressionn of inner content": Iff the reader of these lines looks at one of the letters with unaccustomed eyes,, i.e., not as a customary sign for a part of a word, but rather as a thing, thenn he will see in this letter, apart from the practical-purposive abstract formm created by man for the purpose of invariably indicating a particular sound,, another corporeal form, which quite independendy produces a certainn external and internal impression - i.e., independent of its abstract formm already mentioned. In this way, the letter consists of: 1. Its principal formm (^overall appearance), which, very crudely characterized, appears "gay",, "sad", "striving", "striking", "defiant", "ostentatious", etc., etc. 2. Thee letter consists of individual lines, bent this way or that, which on each occasionn also produce a certain internal impression, i.e., are likewise "gay," "sad,"" etc. As soon as the reader has sensed these two elements of the letter,, there arises in him a feeling that this letter produces as a being with its ownn inner life. (1994: 245) Att the time, such interest was indeed prevalent and can be seen in the manifestoo 'Cto est' slovo' CWhat is the Word') by Kul'bin: BB CAoBe — HAea (nepBoe AHUO neAOBeKa H BceAeHHOH — co3HaHne). Pa3raAKaa CAOBa — B 6yKBe. ByKBa — aAeMeirr CAOBa KaK TaKOBoro. Oiia — CHMBOA,, coAep>KaumH HACK) CAOBa, (HMA), (|)OHHHecKyio 4>opMy H HanepTaTeAbHyro.. CAOBO - UMA (HapeneHHe). TeAo CAOBa - GyKBa. 3HaneHHe Ka>KAOHH GyKBH — cBoeo6pa3Hoe, HenpeAOJKHoe. KajKAaa 6yKBa — y>Ke WMA. CAOBecHOCTbb — TBopnecKoe coneTaHHe HMCH. CAOBecHoe TBOpnecTBO — öpaHHann 6opb6a AHCcoHnpyiomnx SAeMeHTOB CAOBa, yAOBAeTBopjuomaa 99 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' C03ByMHMMM p e i l i e H H C M HAH AaJOUiafl 3CTeTHHeCKyiO HeyAOBACTBOpeH-

HocTb.. (2000: 45) (Inn the word is the idea (what comes first to man and to the universe is consciousness).. The solution of a word lies in the letter. The letter is an element of thee word as such. It is a symbol, which contains the idea of a word (the name), its phoneticc and its graphic form. The word is a name (naming). The body of the wordd is the letter. The meaning of each letter is distinct, unalterable. Every letter is alreadyy a name. Literature is the creative combination of names. Literature is the conjugall fight between dissonant elements of the word, which is either supplementedd with a harmonious solution or is failing to give aesmetic satisfaction.) Kul'binn clearly states a direct relationship between meaning, sound, and the visuall materialization, the letter. Writingg and painting Throughoutt the ages movements of thought have for various reasons rejected thee phonological alphabetic system. In end of 19th and beginning of 20th centuryy Russia, there emerged a renewed interest in the creation of new languages andd new graphic systems. The common solution to this was most often seen to bee the creation of graphic signs which were modeled on an ideographic or pictographicc system (although such ideas were rarely reali2ed). In 1914, Nikolaj Burljukk wrote about the limits of the existing phonological alphabet: M HH HeMH AAH MHomx nyBCTB, MM nepepocAH KOpCeTM fleTpOBCKOH a30yKH.. rio3TOMy H 3aKaHHHBaio CBoe Kpantoe o6o3penne 3aAan HOBoro HCKyCCTBaa n p H 3 H B O M K C03AaHHK> HOBOH a3ÖyKH, AAA HOBfalX 3ByKOB.

MHoraee HAen MOIVT 6brn> nepeAami (2000:: 58)

AHHUJ

HAeorpadDHHecKHM nncbMOM.

(Wee are dumb to many feelings; we have grown out of the corset of the Petrine alphabet.. Therefore, I close my short overview of tasks for the new art with a call forr the creation of a new alphabet, an alphabet for new sounds. Many ideas can onlyy be communicated with an ideographic script.) Similarly,, because of its limiting expressive qualities Chlebnikov considered completelyy rejecting the known graphic system. In a letter to Chlebnikov, Jakobsonn refers to a conversation in which the former had evidently expressed

100 0

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV doubtss about the efficacy o f the alphabet: "Pomnite, Viktor Vkdimirovic, g o vorilii Vy m n e , cto nasa azbuka sliskom bedna dlja poézii i kak by s bukvennymi stichamii ne zajti v tupik" ( " D o you remember, Viktor Vladimirovic, that you toldd m e that o u r alphabet is t o o p o o r for poetry and h o w it is possible n o t t o reachh a deadlock with letter-poems"; 1999: 57). M o s tt radically of all the futurists and t h e constructivists, Aleksej N . Cicerin rejectedd t h e hierarchization o f the graphic system into different stages in a n evolutionaryy process that concluded in a phonological alphabet. Instead, Cicerin saww each graphic system as parallel and equal systems t o answer different needs: riepeoueHHBB 3HaneHHe HCTopuHecKofi nepcneKTHBbi A A N B I J T COHAH

CAeACTBHeMM pa3BHTHH npeAinecTBOBaBiiiHx craAHH cMMCAOBoro rpaqV AeHHfl;; CTaAHH: miKTorpaqbHHecKyio, HAeorpaqbtrHecKyio H qboHorpaMMHyioo pa3AO>KHAH n o BepTHKaAH, OAHy HaA Apyroii, O&WICHHB HX, xaK OAHy H33 ApyroH, He o6pamaa BHinnaHiM Ha TO, HTO HCAH H Ha3HaneHHfl HX He npoTHBopenaTT Apyr Apyry H He 3aMeHJiioT Apyr Apyra, MTO Bee STH CTaAHH BcerAaa H Be3Ae cocymecTBOBaAH H cocymecTByioT, oneHb noAe3HM H iieAecoo6pa3HH,, nrpaioT o^ieHb öoAbuiyio poAb B HameM 6bny, CTOA CnAOIHbb H pHAOM B AOKa3aTeAbCTBe n p a B , KaK H a n p . , B pa3AHHHHX y A o c r o -

BepeHHflx,, rAe Tencr corAacyeTca c o6«3aTeABHMM CKpenAeHHeM e r o iirraMnoM,, nenaTbio H n p o n . (1988: 196) (Firstt the importance of a historical perspective was overestimated, and then the alphabett was considered a result of a development of previous stages of graphic signn drawing). The stages (pictographic, ideographic, and phonographic) were arrangedd on a vertical line one on top of the other after having explained them as onee from the other without paying attention to the fact that their aim and purpose doo not contradict one another and are not interchangeable, that all these stages alwayss and everywhere have co-existed and co-exist, that they are very useful and expedient,, and that they play a very significant role in our everyday life — always standingg as evidence of rightfulness, for example on various certificates where the textt corresponds to the obligatory authentication of a stamp, a seal and so on.) T h ee mistrust towards the phonological alphabet was connected t o a m o r e generall mistrust towards language as a fulfilling m e d i u m for poetry. I n his 1913 b o o kk Explodity, Krucenych wrote: "Perezivanie ne ukladyvaetsja v slova (zastyvsie,, ponjatija) - muki slova - gnoseologiceskoe odinocestvo. Otsjuda stremleniee k s v o b o d n o m u jazyku" ("Experience cannot be kept within the words (the 101 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' stiffened,, concepts). T h e torments of the w o r d are its gnoseological loneliness. F r o mm this emerges the aspiration t o a free %aum'language";

1913a). In 1913, in

t h ee declaration ' N e w Ways of the W o r d ' (with reference t o Fet and to Tjutcev's p o e mm 'Silentium'), h e wrote: « OO ecAH 6 6e3 CAOBa CKasaTbca AymeH 6 H A O MO>KHO?» (eT). «MucAb H3peneHHafll ecn> AO>KI>» (TioTHeB) TpiCKAM rrpaBHÏ JTloHeMy >Ke 6MAO He y i r mm OT MHCAH, H nucaTB He cAOBaMH — noHflTMMH, a CBOGOAHO o6pa30BaHHHMH?? H60 eatu xydomwK óeccuAen 3Hauum OH He oejiadeji MamepuajioMi. (Krucenychh 1967: 67) ("Oh,, were it only possible for the soul to express itself without words?" (Fet). "Ann expressed thought is a lie" (Tjutcev) — they are threefold right! Why should it nott be possible to reject thought, and write not with word-concepts, but with freelyy created words? For if the artist is powerless it means that be didn 't master the materials'.^ als'.^ I nn his 1926 declaration 'Kan-Fun', Cicerin (again most radically of all) declared thatt t h e w o r d was unfit t o serve as a poetic sign: B c f l K H HH H3HKOBOH pJIA, KaK C a M H H r p y Ö b l H , TaK H y T O H H e H H e H I H H H , I I O A -

pa3yMeBaeTT ropa3AO GoAbnie Toro, neM xoneT CKa3aTb. MaTepHaAOM AAJI 3 H a K aa

r i 0 3 3 H H AOAMCeH ÖHTb H H O H , 5 e C C A O B e C H M H M a T e p H a A , n O A H H H f l -

IOHÏHHCHH ocHOBHOMy 3aK0Hy KoHCTpyKTHBH3Ma. [...] Co3Hamie HeecTecrBeHHOCTHH npHBeAerHH CAOBa Ha opraHH3amno 3Haica I1O33HH Ha3peBaAO A a B H O ;; I l 0 3 T y A a B H O «HyBCTBOBaAH» H 6 0 H 3 A H B O XOTeAH «CKa3aTbCH 6 e 3

CAOB».. (1988: 195).

(Anyy linguistic sequence, no matter how coarse or refined it may be, implies a lot moree than what it wants to say. The material for a poetic sign must be a different one,, a non-verbal material, which obeys the fundamental law of constructivism. [...]] The acknowledgement of the unnatural privilege of the word in the organizationn of the Poetic sign matured a long time ago. The poet has long "felt" and timidlyy wanted to "express himself without words".) H e r e ,, b o t h Krucenych and Cicerin refer m o r e or less direcdy to Potebnja's languagee theory. Although the aforementioned q u o t e by Krucenych was n o d o u b t aa polemic attack o n Potebnja (and his proposition of poetry as a special kind of thinking),, Potebnja was undoubtedly crucial in the futurists' rejection of the

102 2

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV supremacyy of literature over other semiotic sign systems.10 Because Potebnja understoodd language and art as having a cognitive function, he (with a direct quotee from Tjutcev's 'Silentium') characterized the inherent quality of language ass consisting exactly of the speaker/writer's inability to fully express his or her ideas.. Likewise, the listener/ reader is unable to fully understand the ideas expressedd by the speaker/writer: "Every comprehension is at the same time incomprehension". . Thus,, the distrust towards the already known script was also an attack on the supremacyy of linguistics over other means of expression. For the poets, one possiblee solution was to emphasize the literally visual aspect of writing and to diminishh the relation of the letter to sound. A new interest emerged in the pictoriall values of the graphics of writing, rendering the reader approach writing as aa sensory object similar to a picture. Cicerin expressed this turn towards visual languagee in the following statement: "Zakon konstruktivnoj poétiki predopredeljaett vosprijatie znakov ee putem zrenija - posredstvom glaza" ("The law of constructivistt poetics implies a perception of its signs through sight - by means off the eye"; 1988: 197). Similarly, in 1925, G.O. Vinokur wrote about the meaningfull nuances of the graphic sign that the connection between graphics andd phonetics is not at all a principal one. He uses the Chinese or Egypt script ass evidence: BB nocAeAHeM y6e>KAaeT XOTH 6M OAHO TO oöcrojrreAbCTBo, HTO cymecrByioTT Taicne rpamHX CCMeHa CAOBa. M 3 3THX HCXOAHMXX TOHeK CrpOHTCfl CAOBO, H HOBhIH CeHTCAb H3HKOB MO>KeT IIpOCTO

HanoAHHTbb AaAOHb 28 3ByKaMH a36yKH, 3epHaMn s3MKa. (1972: 228) (Wordd creation teaches us that all the enormous variety of words derives from the 114 4

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV fundamentall sounds of die alphabet, which are die seeds of words.. From these basicc elements the word is formed and a latterday sower of languages can easily fill hiss palm with the twenty-eight sounds of the Russian alphabet, the seeds of language.)) (1987: 376) Itt is clear that die lyric " I " of the poem 'Poetic Convictions' is a writer who inscribess himself in a temporal as well as a spatial dimension of die world, and whoo manifests himself as the creator of this world. However,, this world-text also creates itself. In 'Zangezi', a pine writes a book in thee sand: "V volnach pescanych / Morja kacalis', sinej priceske, / Sosen zanozy.. / Pocerkom sosen / Byla napisana kniga peska, / Kniga morskogo pevca"" ("See the patterns of waves of sand / and the curly hair of die sea — / diee beach, the branches, the debris. / Pinetree branches move a hand / and a bookk is written on the sand - / The book of die pine, die shore, the sea"; 1968c:: 357-358 [1989: 366]). Hansen-Löve shows the double function of Chlebnikov'ss words on the one as hand a cultural, pragmatic and communicativetive "thing-ness" (predmetnost5) and on the other hand, a natural "matter-ness" (vescnost*)) that functions in a "World", which is textualized as a World-text. Thiss World-text is substituted by a number of metonymie signifiers: the "world"" as "language", "'word", "text", "alphabet", "book" "letter" "handwriting"" and so forth (Hansen-Löve 1985b: 27).16 Anagramm and permutation Thee image of die sower/poet filling his fist with seeds/letters and spreading themm on the field is a recurrent image in the poetics of Chlebnikov. It is an imagee of the anagrammatic pulsion that lies at the foundation of Chlebnikov's universall language.17 It is present in the isolation of the phonemes/graphemes, theirr semantization, and their function in the word-creation of Chlebnikov. Thiss is evident from die mutative formation of neologisms in the words "tvorjane",, "bobr" and "babr", and "lesina" and "lysina". This is also evident in Chlebnikov'ss theoretical speculations about die sign. Using ^aum'as an example inn which the sounds in everyday words are shuffled and rearranged, he derived hiss theory of the semantic essence of the initial letters of words.

115 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' Thiss anagrammatic pulsion was most clearly expressed in the quoted passage by Kul'binn in which he claimed that literature is the creative combination of distinctt letters: "Telo slova — bukva. Znacenie kaidoj bukvy — svoeobraznoe, nepreloznoe.. Kazdaja bukva — uze Imja. Slovesnost'— tvorceskoe soktanie imen" ("The bodyy of the word is the letter. The meaning of each letter is distinct, unalterable.. Every letter is already a Name. Literature is the creative combination of names"; 2000:: 45 [my italics^). In Chlebnikov's writings, this is expressed (on an ontologicall level) by means of the old mythological image of the God/sower/poet, who creates/sows/writess the world/field/book: E C A HH Bbl HaXOAHTeCb B p o m e , BH BHAHTe AyOH, COCHbl, e A H , COCHbl C XOAOAHMMM TeMHHM CHHeBaTMM OTAHBOM, KpaCHafl paAOCTb eAOBbTX

niHineK,, roAy6oe cepe6po 6epe30Boü namn TaM, BAaAH. Ho Bee STO pa3H O o 6 p a 3 H ee AHCTBbI, CTBOAOB, BeTOK C03AaHO rOpCTbK) nOHTH HeOTAUHH-

MWXX Apyr OT Apyra 3epen, Becb Aec B GyAymeM - noMecTHTca y Bac Ha AaAOHH.. [.. .] [M] HOBblH CeHTeAb H3MKOB MO>KeT rTOOCTO H a n O A H H T b

AaAOKbb 28 3ByicaMH a3ÖyKH, 3epHaMH «3HKa. (Chlebnikov 1972: 228) (Supposee you are in a forest You see before you oak trees, pine trees, spruces thee pines mottled with cold dark blues, the wonderful delight of spruce cones, and theree in the distance the bluish silver of a clump of birches. But all this variety of leaves,, of tree trunks and branches, was created from a handful of seeds, each one practicallyy indistinguishable from the next; an entire forest of the future can fit in thee palm of your hand [...] [A]nd a latterday sower of languages can easily fill his palmm with the twenty-eight sounds of the Russian alphabet, the seeds of language.) (Chlebnikovv 1987: 376) Thee 28 sounds of the alphabet are the 19 consonantal letters of the universal languagee (except 'f) and a number of other letters (not specified). Here, the analogyy between nature, the book, the creator-God and the poet is evident. Moreover,, in 'O stichach' ('On Poetry'), the image explains the mysterious workk of %aum' poetry in the reader's unconscious: Penbb Bbicniero pa3yMa, Aa>Ke HenoHflTHan, KaKHMH-TO ceMeHaMH naAaeT B nepH03eMM Ayxa H no3AHee 3araAo*iHNMH rn/THMH Aaer CBOH BCXOAM- Pa3Be noHHMaerr 3eMAJi nHCbMena 3epeH, KOTopbie öpocaeT B Hee naxapb? Her. H oo oceHHHH HHBa Bee >tce BbrpacraeT OTBCTOM Ha 3TH 3epHa. (1972: 226)

116 6

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV (The(The speech of higher reason, even when it is not understandable, falls like seed intoo the fertile soil of the spirit and only much later, in mysterious ways, does it bringg forth its shoots. Does the earth understand the writing of the seeds a farmer scatterss on its surface? No. But the grain still ripens in autumn, in response to thosee seeds.) (1987: 371) Justt like %autn' poetry, the mysterious letters of the universal alphabet are comparablee to a book of revelation. Veryy similar to the image of the plowman and the sower is the image of the alphabett as building blocks in a world-construction. This is an idea, at the crux of certainn kabbalistic interpretations. According to these interpretations, the Torah appearedd as a disordered heap of consonantal letters. However, the coming of thee Messiah disposes of letters in a new way: "For the kabbalist, God will abolishh the present ordering of these letters, or else will teach us how to read them accordingg to a new disposition, only after the coming of the Messiah" (Eco 1995:: 26). The anagrammatic is evident in The Book of Creation, Sefer Yet^rah. Accordingg to this work, the letters of the Hebrew alphabet were conceived of as thee building "stones" of the world: Twenty-twoo foundation letters: He ordained them, He hewed them, He combinedd them, He weighed them, He interchanged them. And He createdd with them the whole creation and everything to be created in the future.. (II, 2) (Eco 1995: 29) Thee world was created from the 22 letters (or stones) of the Hebrew alphabet andd the ten Seflrots, which were the ten hypostases of divinity. From this finite numberr an endless number of combinations were possible: Howw did He combine them? Two stones build two houses, three stones buildd six houses, four stones build twenty-four houses, five stones build a hundredd and twenty houses, six stones build seven hundred and twenty houses,, seven stones build five thousand and forty houses. Begin from heree and think of what the mouth is unable to say and the ear unable to hearr (TV, 16). (Eco 1995: 29) Chlebnikovv no doubt had the kabbalistic tradition in mind, when he named the differentt parts of 'Zangezi' a "koloda ploskostej slova" [A stack of word planes].18

117 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' Perhapss he also had it in mind when he referred to the structure of the narrativee as an architectural structure built of stones: rioBeCTbb CTpOHTCH H3 CAOB, KaK CTpOHTeAbHOH eAHHHITM 3AaHHfl. EAHHHUeÜÜ CAyïKHT MaAHH KaMeHb paBHOBeAHKHX CAOB. [...] TaKHM 0 6 p a 3 0 M Ha-

xoAirrcfll HOBMH BHA pa6oTu B oÖAacTH peneBoro AeAa. PaccKa3 ecn> 3OAnecTBoo H3 CAOB. 3oAHecTBo H3 «paccKa30B» ecrb cBepxnoBecTb. rAHÖOH xyAO^CHHKyy CApKHT He CAOBO, a paccKa3 nepBoro nopflAKa. (Chlebnikov 1968c:: 317) AA story is made of words, the way a building is made of construction units. Equivalentt words, like minute building blocks, serve as the construction units of a story.. [...] Thus do we discover a new kind of operation in the realm of verbal art. Narrativee is architecture composed of words; an architecture composed of narrativess is a "supersaga". The artist's building block is no longer the word, but the first-orderfirst-order narrative. (Chlebnikov 1989: 331) Moreover,, Chlebnikov refers to the letters as building blocks: "tajnye glyby jazyka"" ("secret building blocks of language"; 1968c: 333 [1989: 345]). He refers too speech as an architectural structure of spatial blocks: "Reci - 2danija iz glyb prostranstva"" ("Speech is an edifice built out of blocks of space"; 1968c: 333 [1989:: 345]), and to the letters in the alphabet as spatial entities: "Prostranstvo zvucitt cerez azbuki" ("Alphabet is the echo of space" 1968c: 325 [1989: 338]). Consequendy,, language is the space in which writing occurs as a constant permutationn and anagrammatization; writing is a kind of "cosmic permutation" (Ecoo 1995: 28), a constant process of writing and re-writing: BarpaMHH MopoB 6yAyr pa36HpaTb crapoe crpoeHHe HapoAOB, HepHHAaMHH xBOpeii 6yAy HcnpaBAjrn> nepHOBHK, HeAOBenecKHH AHCTOK pyKonHCH H

KpioHijHMHH nyM nocAe ncmcapoB 6yAy BMÖHpaTb 6peBHa H CBan HapoAOB AAMM HOBoro cpy6a HOBOH H36M.

TOHKOHH nHAOH HaXOTKH ByAyy BHTaHHBaTb HOBoe 3Aaroie, BtinHAio HOBHH HapoA, rpySofii IIHAOH CMIIHflKa BbiAepHyy rB03AH H3 creH, HTO6M paccunaAocb a, seAHKoe a, Too HaAeBaiomee nepcrHeM Baine STO coAHne, Too CMOTpamee nepe3 creKAo CAe3 co6anoHKH. (Chlebnikovv 1972: 100) 118 8

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV Withh the grabhooks of wholesale slaughter I I will pull down the old order of nations, withh the ink of disease I will proof the rough draft, the pages of human manuscript; withh the crowbars of epidemics that follow great fires I will roll out the ridgepoles, thee foundation-pilings of nations, and frame up a new dwelling. II will fashion a new edifice with the hacksaws of tuberculosis, II will cut out a new nation. II will wrench nails from the walls with the ripsaws of typhoid fever, andd thus I shall extend myself, my great self, andd wear this sun of yours as a ring on my finger, andd examine it all through the lens of a puppy dog's tears. (Chlebnikovv 1997:101) I nn this p o e m , sickness is spread, buildings are b u r n t down, history is re-written andd the w o o d for a new building is chosen; i.e. t h e foundation for a new world. I nn 'Edinaja kniga' ('The O n e , the Only Book'), t h e old b o o k s / w o r l d s , including itss religions, are burned d o w n t o give way to a n e w b o o k / w o r l d written by t h e lyricc " I " : CAOHCHAHH Kocrep

HH caMH AerAH Ha Hero. BeAHee BAOBH B oÖAaice AHMa cicpwBaAHCb, HTOÖbll yCKOpHTb ITpHXOA KHHrHH eAHHOH.

[...] ] poAA HeAOBeHecrea — KHHIH HHTaTeAb! HH Ha o6AO>KKe — HaATIHCb T B o p n a ,

M MM Moe, iracbMeHa roAyöue. (1968c:: 68) II have seen them go to the fire, liee down in a heap and vanish whitee as widows in clouds of smoke inn order to hasten the coming off the One, the Only Book, [...] ] Racee of Humanity, you are Readers of the Book whosee cover bears the creator's signature, thee sky-blue letters of my name! (1997:: 77)

119 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' Thus,, in the poetic world of Chlebnikov, the world is a book or a poem: "Mir kakk stichotvorenie" ("The world as Poen"; 1968c: 259 [1987: 338]), and the creatorr is the poet: "Chocu byt' glagolom - / 'Azm est' bog'" ("I want to be a verb —— / 'I am God"'; 1968c: 168). But the poet is at the same time a book: "Ja kniga zasochsichh morej" ("I am a book of dried out oceans"; 1968c: 169), which also hass to be destroyed in order to be written again: "Smert'! Ja - belaja stranica! / Cegoo ty choces' — napisi!" ("Death! I am a white page! / Write whatever you want!";; 1968c: 263). O n this ontological level, the process of writing is an ageoldd mythic process of sacrifice and redemption: riosTT — aBTop «ocHOBHoro» MHqba H ero repoii-JKepTBa H repoH-noGeAHTeAb,, cyOT^eKT H o6i>eKT TeKcra, acepTByiomHH (ïKpeu.) H >KepTByeMMH (>KepTBa),, BHHa H ee HCKynAeroie. O H — ycTaHOBHreAb HMCH: HeMyio u 6e3AejrreAbHyK)) AO Hero BceAeHHyio OH coTBopuA B cAOBe, coGpaB ee no nacTHM,, KOTopwe OH OTOJKACCTBHA (T.C npHAaA HM 3HaneHHe, HaineA HX TaHHHH,, CKpHTWH HAH yTpaHeHHMH CMMCA) H BMpa3HA B 3ByKC B c e A e H -

Hafll co3AaHHoro TaKHM o6pa30M nosTHHecKoro TeKcra «CHAtHee» H Hpne, HeMM Ta >Ke BceAeHHaH, B3ffraH BHe omicaHiifl, AO Hero. (Toporov 1987: 215-

216) ) (Thee poet is the author of the "fundamental" myth and his hero-sacrifice and hero-conqueror,, the subject and the object of the text, the sacrificer (the priest) andd the sacrificed (the sacrifice), the guilt and its redemption. He is the disposer of names:: the dumb and inactive universe before him he creates in the word, after havingg collected its parts, which he identified (i.e., he gave them significance, foundd their secret, hidden or lost meaning) and expressed in sound. The universe off the poetic text created in this way is "more powerful" and brighter than the veryy same universe outside of description, before him.) Thus,, the visual aspect of writing is an integrated part of writing and cannot be separatedd from Chlebnikov's conception of a universal language or from his poetryy as a whole. Chlebnikov did not seem to be particularly interested in the actuall graphic aspect of his published poetry, nor did he actively take any part in thee publication of handwritten lithographed books. Neither did take active steps towardss an actual realization in the characters for his universal language, nor was hee likely to have thought that these characters would ever actually come into being.. And yet, writing as a literally visual language (as letters, handwriting, sig 120 0

WRITINGG AS AN "IMAGETEXT" IN THE POETIC UNIVERSE OF CHLEBNIKOV

naturess and so forth) was an integrated part of his poetic universe. Onn all levels of this universe, in his poetry, essays, manifestos, and Utopian prose, writingg seems to be a major concern. It is looked at, commented upon, read aloud,, written and re-written continually. It functions on several language levels: everydayy language, "word-creation" or %aum\ and universal language. Sometimess the sign can best be described according to Saussure's theory of the signifierr and signified, and sometimes it should be regarded as a peculiar "sign of meaning",, best described according to Potebnja's triadic sign structure. Moreover,, the universal language consists of signs that can be characterized as symbolss (names), indexical signs (similar to a number), and as an iconic material signn (a kind of ideogram). Handwriting, on the other hand, functions as both an imagee (a kind of signature piece), and an element of language, and thus is a contingentt of History or Logos. These functions of the written language are all interrelatedd and should be regarded as important in the poetic universe of Chlebnikov. .

121 1

44 MINIMALISM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'SS CAUCASIAN BOOKS,

1917-1918 8

Untill recently, little was known about the large number of books produced betweenn 1916 and 1919 by Aleksej Krucenych. The books in question are very smalll and consist of only a few leaves each. They have a homemade feel and evenn simpler look than the lithographed handwritten books made just a few years earlier.. Only a few copies were produced. Made in the Caucasus at a time when Russiaa was undergoing the First World War, two revolutions, and finally a civil war,, it is no wonder that there has been only the scarcest evidence as regards theirr numbers and content. On top of this, the books preceded the formation off 41 °, a futurist group of poets and painters in Tiflis, which as an avant-garde movementt drew much critical attention. Inn 1982, Rosemarie Ziegler wrote a significant article on Krucenych's productionn between 1916 and 1919. This was followed in 1997 by Tat'jana Gor'jaceva'ss article 'K ponjatiju ékonomii tvorcestva'. Most recendy, the Majakovskij Museumm in Moscow has issued a catalogue of its substantial collection.1 However,, this catalogue reproduces just the covers and occasionally one or two pagess from a few of the books. Generally reproduction of the books remains veryy scarce. With the exception of a few pages from various books, only the bookss Tunlap, F/nagt, and Kaa/da%ha.ve been reproduced; the first in Ekaterina Bobrinskaja'ss article Teorija "momental'nogo tvorcestva" A. Krucenych', the secondd in Gerald J anecek's book The Look of Russian Literature, and the third in thee 2002 catalogue for the exhibition "The Russian Avant-Garde Book, 19101934"" at the Museum of Modern Art in New York. I have been able to study thee books held at the Majakovskij Museum, and to reproduce pages from the bookss Ba/os and Nestrofe as well as a few hitherto never reproduced pages from FoFo Ijfa here. My analysis will be made on the basis of these and other books fromm the collection at the Majakovskij Museum.

123 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Itt is clear that these books represent a further development of some of the featuress of the early avant-garde handwritten and illustrated lithographed books, yett in a more radicalized and concentrated manner. The intertwined verbal and visuall representation, the handwritten text, and the handmade appearance, are featuress that are radicalized and simplified in the new books. Especially interestingg is the close interaction between text and image, which becomes evident fromm a mere glance at any of the pages. These pages not only reveal a minimal expressionn but a radical relation to the space of the page: line, spaces, reading direction,, and so forth. Moreover, they reveal an emphasis on the individual letter,, which appeals to a visual perception but hampers any attempt at articulation.. Rosemarie Ziegler has called these poems mute suprematist poetry. This is partlyy as a result of the obvious similarity in (minimal) expression with the suprematistt (minimal) painterly expression. It is also partly due to Krucenych's friendshipp with Kazimir Malevic and Ol'ga Rozanova, who were closely involvedd in the propagation of suprematism in Moscow and St. Petersburg after 1915. . However,, the casual, capricious and fragmentary appearance of the books, as welll as the apparent inconsistency in poetic practice, is not in accordance with suprematism.. I have chosen to analyze the books in which Krucenych seems to attemptt to incorporate suprematist ideas into his book production. The books inn question are Balos, Nestroc'e, Tunsap, and Kovka^t from 1917, and Fo-ly-fay Kaalda^Kaalda^ Ra-va-cba, and F/nagt from 1918. In so doing, I hope to underline the particularitiess of Krucenych's production and to reevaluate the significance of thee interrelationship between text and image. Futurismm in the Caucasus, 1915-1920 Att the beginning of 1915, Krucenych moved to the Caucasus and started to workk at a school for drawing at the women's gymnasium in Batalpasinsk.2 At thee same time, he continued the publication of books in cooperation with his friendss in Moscow: Malevic, Kljun, Jakobson and Rozanova. The result of this cooperationn were the books Tajnyeporoki akademikov [Secret Vices ofAcademicians) andd Zaumnajagniga{A Trans-rational hoog), which were published in Moscow. 124 4

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS Thee first had texts by Krucenych, Kljun and Malevic and drawings by Kljun, whilee the second had texts by Krucenych and Aljagrov (Jakobson) and was designedd by Rozanova. At the end of May 1915, Malevic wrote to Michail Matjusinn and mentioned the plans to publish a new magazine, Supremus, for which Rozanovaa was to be the secretary. She later mentioned Krucenych's possible participationn along with Aljagrov and others (Ziegler 1982: 253 n. 13). In Decemberr of the same year, the "Last Futurist Exhibition of Paintings, 0,10" took place.. At this exhibition, Malevic' pamphlet From Cubism to Suprematism. New PainterlyPainterly'Realismappeared for the first time. In the pamphlet, Malevic declared: "Noo ja preobrazilsja v nule form i vysel za 0 - 1" ("But I transformed myself intoo a zero-form and went beyond 0 - 1"; 1995: 34). In January 1916, the book VojnaVojna (War) appeared in Petrograd with texts by Krucenych and linocuts by Rozanova. . Withh the outbreak of the war, Krucenych was drafted into military service. He startedd working as a technical drawer on the building of the Erzerum railway linee in the town Sarykamys. In his continued correspondence with Malevic, Rozanova,, Matjusin, and others, he apparently expressed his concern about the situation.. In a letter dated June 1916, Malevic wrote to Matjusin: KpyneHwxx oneHb Macro rnmieT H3 CapMKaMtiuia. Bee napeHb roTOBHTbCfl rrocAee BOHHU 3aBepHyrb «Bepny». A ^ H 6or, a 6yAy oneHb paA 3a Hero. R TO>Kee nocHAaio einy, Kaic OH Ha3biBaeT, «BeTpormcH». UHmy eNty HOBhie CBOHH 3 M a H H H MbICAH O £4066, O KOMn03HHHH CAOBeCHblX MaCC (AO CHX

nopp KOMnoHHpoBaAacb pH(|)Ma, a He CAOBa). (Kovtun 1976: 190) (Krucenychh writes me a lot from Sarykamys. All the time, the chap intends to turn thee coin after the war. God knows, I will be very happy for him. I also send him whatt he calls "windmail". I write to him about my new tasks and thoughts on the word,, on the composition of verbal masses (until now only the rhyme and not the wordd is composed).) Krucenychh is unhappy about going to the Caucasus and the prospect of spendingg a long time there which is also evident in another letter to Matjusin dated Decemberr 1916: "A ja by tak sobralsja v Piter! [...] Ja t(ak) rastrepan vsem slucivsimsja,, cto napisu Vam eelovee'e pis'mo po uspokoenii" ("I would really like

125 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' too go to Piter [St Petersburg C.G.\\ [...] I feel so confused about all that has happenedd that I will write you a more human letter for your tranquility"; Kovtun:: 175). However, on the way to Sarykamys, he spent the month of March in Tifliss where he made contact with local poets and painters: RR nsicaA BaM c Aopora, HTO eA>' B Tnc|)AHce Ha npoAOA>KtrreAbHoe BpeMfl, T.e.. Ha secb MapT 1916 r. BOT H npHÖbiA. [...] 3Aecb o (|)yTypH3Me HHKaKOH AirrepaTypfaii HCT, a HecK. HCAOBCK BcrpeTHA, HTO HCKDCHHO HHTepecyioTCfl —— A H AaA HM Koe-HTO AAA npocBemeHHH. (OR RGB Sem. 10.4.1916) (II wrote to you on the road, that I am on my way to Tiflis for a long time, i.e. for thee whole of March 1916. Well, IVe just arrived. [...] There is no literature on futurismm at all, but I met some people, who are sincerely interested - I gave them somethingg for their enlightenment.) Inn 1916, Krucenych's book of collages VseUnskaja vojna (Universal War *b) appeared,, a publication that seemed to initiate an extensive flurry of activity publishing,, organizing, and giving lectures on futurism. Inn January of the next year, the book 1918 appeared, and he wrote to §emsurin:33 "u-r-ra-ra: 1918 - vysla éto ne kniga a celaja vystavka" ("hu-r-ra-ah: 1918 hass been published: this is not a book, but an entire exhibition!"; OR RGB, Sem.. 6.3.1917). Lithographed ferroconcrete poems by Kamenskij, poems by Krucenych,, lithographs with colored collages by K. Zdanevic, and collages by Krucenychh were included in the book. At the end of the spring, Ucites' chudogil (Learn(Learn Arterst) appeared. This book is lithographed and includes a poem by the Polishh artist Z. Waliszewski, poems by Krucenych (some of which he illustrated himself),, and drawings by K. Zdanevic. As Ziegler notes, these two productions indicatee that Krucenych, along with his continued orientation towards Moscow andd Petrograd, now regarded Tiflis as a third cultural centre (1982: 232). In 19177 he also initiated the production of around 30 autographed books beginningg with Golubyejajca (Sky-blue Eggs), Nosobo/ka, Balos, Kovka^ Tunsap, Gorodv osadeosade (A Town Under Siege), and Nestrvfe.4 Inn November 1917, the Syndicate of Futurists was founded. Participants were thee poets I. Zdanevic, Kara-Dardis, A. Krucenych, N. Cernjavskij, Z. Waliszewski,, and the painters V. Gudiasvili (Gudiev) and K. Zdanevic. Characteristic of 126 6

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

thiss Tiflis group of artists and poets was an interest in primitivism, lubok, folkart,, the shop-sign painter Niko Pirosmanasvili, children's art and language, the artt of the village, and fairy tales (NikoFskaja 1987: 91). Moreover, the group wass similar to the Moscow group of cubo-futurists in its promotion of close tiess between poets and painters. Thus, both Krucenych and Ilja Zdanevic were educatedd painters, the art of Cernjavskij was a mixture of poetry and painting, thee artist Z. Waliszewski wrote poems, and Krucenych and I. Zdanevic publishedd articles about painting (Ibid: 92). In the period between November 1917 andd 1919, Krucenych gave a number of lectures. These lectures were primarily dedicatedd to 320/9'and futurism and had titles such as: 'O Zaumi' ('About Zaum'),Zaum'), 'Slovo kak takovoe' (The Word as Such^, 'Éko-chud' ('Eco-art'), 'O bezumiii v iskusstve' ('About Insanity in Alt'), 'O novom jazyke' ('About a New Language*),, 'Istorija russkogo futurizma' (The History of Russian Futurism1) (Zieglerr 1982: 234). Inn December, the artists' saloon The Fantastic Little Inn was opened. Three groupss used the inn simultaneously: The Poets' Workshop, The Blue Horns, andd 41 ° (NikoFskaja 2000: 69). The inn became the center of a lively artists' environment t Tblisii has become a fantastic city. This fantastic city needed a fantastic cornerr and one fine day at Rustaveli Prospect No. 12, in the courtyard, poetss and artists opened The Fantastic Litde Inn, which consisted of a smalll room designed for 10-15 people in which by some miracle as many ass 50 people managed to fit. The walls of the room were decorated with phantasmagoria.. The Inn was open almost every evening and poets and artistss read their poems and lectures. (NikoFskaja 1998: 167) Inn the spring of 1918, the Syndicate of Futurists held two evenings. The first onee was devoted to futurist poetry, while the second was devoted to futurist paintingg (NikoFskaja 2000: 44). Shortly hereafter, the Syndicate of Futurists stoppedd its activities and a new group under the name of 41° was formed. This groupp was officially founded in May 1918. The participants were: I. Zdanevic, Igor'' Terent'ev, Aleksej Krucenych and N. Cernjavskij (NikoFskaja 2000: 57). Alsoo in the spring, from April 15 to 17, an exhibition of paintings and drawings

127 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

byy Moscow futurists, primarily from Krucenych's own collection, took place.5 Krucenychh exhibited collages from Universal War 1>'and %aum' poems (compositionss of words). During this time, he also produced 16 books including the twoo printed books O^jrenie roi^ {Obesity of Roses) with poems by Igor' Terent'ev, Ol'gaa Rozanova, Krucenych, and Malacholija v kapote {Malacholija in a Housecoat) withh poems by Krucenych and drawings by K. Zdanevic. In 1919, Krucenych continuedd the production of books, some of which appeared under the imprint 41°. . However,, in the same year, Ilja Zdanevic left for Constantinople and subsequendyy for Paris, and Krucenych left for Baku. As a consequence, the group 411 ° fell apart. In Baku, Krucenych continued the production of books, some of whichh were autographed, but the character of the books had changed. They all hadd hard covers and often appeared in series like Zamaul' l-ï\A and the books Mjate%Mjate% {Mutiny I-X). These were all published under the imprint 41°. Moreover, thesee later books often included collages and color. These are elements that the books,, which are the focus of this chapter, lack entirely. Bookk production Thee development of an active artistic and poetic environment and the propagatingg of futurism and %aum'zre direcdy reflected in the appearance of the books producedd during the first very short period from approximately the spring of 19177 to the summer of 1918. The production of these books came immediately afterr the collectively produced lithographed books 1918 and Learn Ariërs! and theyy were again followed by the printed books Obesity of Rases, Malacholija in a

Housecoat,Housecoat, and Lakirvvannoe triko {Lacquered Tights). What first strikes one abo thee books is their very simple appearance, next, the sheer quantity of books (aroundd 30), all of which were produced in just 1-6 copies each. The tide of the bookss often consists of either just a single 32/ww'word: Balos, Kovkatg, Coc, F/nagt,F/nagt, Èftryc, or other %aum'word combinations: Kle^san ba or Ra va cha? These weree features that Krucenych had not used formerly in his books nor did hee employ them ever again. Thee covers for the books are almost identical in design. Many of them have the 128 8

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

wordss "Na pravach rukopisi" [With manuscript-rights] written and underlined att the top of the cover. Then follows Krucenych's signature, which is almost exclusivelyy written with a small 'a' for Aleksej: "a. Krucenych". This is a signature,, which emphasizes the uniqueness and authenticity of each book (of which noo two are exacdy alike). However, in 1919, beginning with the book Salamak (possiblyy referring to die word "salamata" [a kind of porridge] and "durak" [fool]),, Krucenych started signing his name as merely "A. Kru." (this may have beenn a nick-name adopted in the group 41 °). Apart from the book Balos (bearingg the imprint "Supremus"), none of the books bear an imprint until 1919 and thee production of Lacquered Tights, Zamaul\ and Mutiny. This makes the books easilyy distinguishable from the rest of Krucenych's productions. Sometimes copiess of Tunfap, Kaa/da^ Kovkatg, or one of the other early Caucasus books appearr with this imprint, but they were most likely not produced during this period.riod.88 However, some of the books were included in later compilations dating fromm the 1920s. Thee books are made of between 5 and 7 pieces of paper, which are folded to makee a book of 10 to 14 pages. They are sewn together with simple thread, fixedfixed with metal staples or not fixed at all {MMcatalogur. 7). The paper is sometimess plain white at others graph or file paper. The printing techniques used cann hardly be called printing: hectography, blue, violet, and black carbon paper copy,, typewriter, rubber stamp, or drawn with colored pencil and simple lead pencil.. Of these methods, hectography is the most productive (with regard to numberr of copies made at once). Compared to lithography, the process is very simplee and was used in offices to duplicate documents. 9 While making it possiblee to produce a large amount of copies without a printing press, the method alsoo demanded the most technical material. Krucenych probably first used this methodd in the book Te li k (1914) and he continued to use it in the production off the Caucasus books. However,, contrary to recent belief, the books in question were almost never madee entirely by means of this technique. Often carbon paper was the main duplicatingg technique, but more common was the mixing of different techniques.. Thus, only two of the books in the MM collection are hectographed 129 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

throughout,, while others have been made with various other simple techniques. Somee books even have pages drawn in lead pencil which adds to the fragmentaryy and uneven character of the books. 10 For instance, in the first copy of Tunsap,Tunsap, 3 pages are written with blue or purple carbon paper, while 8 pages are hectographed;; in the second copy, 6 pages are written with blue carbon paper, 1 withh purple carbon paper, while 4 are hectographed; in the third copy (part of thee book Coca, which appeared in Moscow in 192111), 2 pages are written in leadd pencil, 1 with blue carbon paper, 8 are hectographed. 12 Thee pages of the books seem to have been produced one at a time and then compiledd into a book. The different kinds of printing techniques and paper quality weree symmetrically collected. This made it possible to use leftovers from previouslyy produced pages to produce new books. It also made it convenient to producee pages along the way when a pressing creative impulse arose or when the materiall or financial circumstances made production possible (as suggested by Janecekk 1984: 109). Thus, most of the copies of a book included a variety of differentt printing techniques, and different kinds of paper which renders the notionn of copy questionable if this notion implies similarity. The simple method off copying used also makes such a notion invalid. When simply writing a text with carbonn paper, the technique allows a certain amount of copies to be made, however,, this simple technique does not guarantee two identical copies. Therefore, itt must be concluded that as the exact copying of text (one of the main features off the Gutenberg printing technique) is literally impossible, this was unlikely to havee been a prominent concern in the production of these books. Byy comparing the books held at the collection of the Majakovskij Museum, however,, it appears that, although production methods and paper quality varied considerablyy from one book to the next, the content of the different copies of thee same book is (with a few exceptions) always the same.13 The books were oftenn reissued in books compiled at a later date as were the books Tunlap and F/nagt,F/nagt, which were produced in 1917 but reissued in Moscow in 1921. These laterr issues sometimes had an extra cover, and though (in addition to the reissued book)) some additional pages from other books were often included, the content off the books was unchanged. It also does not seem likely that a single page from

130 0

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUÉENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

aa book could appear in a different book from that in which it first appeared, exceptt of course in the different editions oil^vsecb knig {From All'Books), which aree compilations of different pages from different books, as the tide states. It can, therefore,, not be doubted that these books were to be comprehended as closed entitiess just like any of Krucenych's previous works. Thee varying production method, paper quality and design are prominent featuress of these books. Nevertheless, the simplicity of these factors gives the appearancee of the books a rather uniform visual impression. Apart from an occasionall rubberstamped page, all of the books are handwritten on whitish paper withh a simple (mosdy blue) line. Some pages have actual text written on them andd no or very little visual design (a handwritten text, some lines, squares, or zigzagg forms), while other pages consist of single letters spread over the page in aa seemingly arbitrary fashion with a few lines or squares accompanying them. Alll the books have a postcard size of approximately 16 cm long and 11 cm wide.144 This format reveals another characteristic of the books: they were probablyy meant to epitomize the aesthetic concerns that were discussed by Krucenychh in his letters. The books were sent in envelopes together with letters to his friendss in Moscow and St. Petersburg.' 5 Thee letters of Roman Jakobson, Michail Matjusin, Kazimir Malevic and Ol'ga Rozanovaa bear witness to the correspondence that Krucenych was anxious to maintainn during his stay in the Caucasus. More than anything, continuous contactt with Rozanova seems to be of utmost importance to him. She provided poemss for the books halos and Nestroc'e (both from 1917), and she also functionedd as a critic. Until her death in 1918, the two of them had an intense correspondence.. This reciprocal relationship encompassed the years that Krucenych spentt in the Caucasus while Rozanova lived in Moscow and subsequendy in Vladimir.. Without a doubt, some of these books were sent to her. In a letter to Krucenychh she writes about three of his books in a way which suggests that she hadd definitely seen them: "V 'Fo-ly-fa' nacertatel'naja storona slabee, cem v 'Nestroc'e'' i 'Beguscee'. Oblozka chorosa i pervaja stranica..." ("In Fo-ly-fa the graphicc outline is weaker than in Nestroc'e and Beguscee. The cover is good, and thee first page ..."; Chardziev-Caga archive). 131 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Anotherr important correspondent of Krucenych's was Semsurin whose opinion thee former evidently valued. Not only did Krucenych give examples of this new poetry:: " u / k u / m u / c k u / c a / k u [...] Vse éto futurizm vernee éko-chud i éko-é2 (ékonomija-poézija)"" ("u/ku/mu/cku/ca/ku [...] All of this is futurism, or ratherr eco-art and eco-poetry (economy-poetry)"; OR RGB Shem. 3.4.1917), butt he also sent Semsurin examples of books: "Posylaju 2-ékz Tunsap - éto samajaa zlaja i futurnaja kniga" ("I send you the second copy of Tunsap - this is thee most evil and futuristic book"; OR RGB §em. 17.7.1917). Therefore, it seems likelyy that these books were, at least to a certain extent, meant to epitomize Krucenych'ss aesthetic ideas and theories of the time and to demonstrate these concernss in vividly to his friends in Moscow and St. Petersburg. Thee simplicity of production may have been dictated of course by lack of financiall or material means. Apart from discussions on current work, the letters, whichh Krucenych sent to his friends in Moscow, also include enquiries about money;; this is especially true of the letters to Semsurin. This Moscow merchant andd patron financed certain of Krucenych's productions as well as (on Krucenych'ss request), Rozanova's production of the book War and some of her paintings.166 From these letters, it must be assumed that the possibility of producingg anything substantial was very limited. The First World War and the followingg revolution and civil war meant a scarcity of paint and paper. In a letter too Semsurin from 1916, Rozanova mentions this lack of materials: Itt was necessary to order sheets with the tide at the printer's, and moreover alll the paper collages had to be done in Petrograd, since there was no coloredd paper in Vladimir. Here it was difficult even to find black, for it had completelyy disappeared from the shops. (Gurjanova 2000: 192) Evidendy,, the later production of printed books or books with a hard cover must havee meant that an extensive network existed, which could support such a productionn both financially and materially. But in the short period from 1917 until latee 1918 or the beginning of 1919, Krucenych felt isolated from his old friends inn Moscow and St. Petersburg and at the same time saw himself as a tutor for hiss new friends in Tiflis. This meant that he also needed to demonstrate his ideas vividlyy to these new associates. Because of his position as a technical drawer at 132 2

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

thee railway (which must have given him easy access to simple copy-book and carbonn paper), this simple production method was ideal: it no doubt allowed Krucenychh a substantial freedom to work and produce whenever he wanted or neededd to, and the books could easily be sent by post to Moscow. Thee method also answered some of Krucenych's more aesthetic concerns. Althoughh the books apparendy consisted of self-enclosed entities, the production methodd leaves an impression of a preliminary solution. I will argue that this impression,, which might have been unintentionally created by a shortage and lack off financing, is indicative of the very character of Krucenych's writing. This is byy nature fragmentary, inconsistent and fluctuating. This inconsistency could evenn be present within one text, which at times was an irritant to Rozanova: B o o G m e ,, B CHAy, OHeBHAHO, MOeH HHAHBHAyaAfcHOH OAHOCTOpOHHOCTH,

MHee oueHfc TpyAHO acreTHHecKH Bocnpmurrb cMemeHHe (B OAHOM H TOM }Kee crnxoTBop(eHHii) 2-x 3aAaHHH — öecnpeAMeTHOCTb — c OAHOH cropoHU:: Kana / AH KHM / KpHH 6a pan. (H TaK AaAee). H c Apyron cropoHbi 3KceHTpHHHyioo npeAMeTHOCTb: ToAcraa KOAÖaca / BaroH c ciraeio Myc|>TOK),, [...] R Tenepb HcnoBeAyio, HTO npeAMeTHOCTb H 6e3npeAM(eTHOcn>) (BB >KHBonHCH) He 2 pa3HHx HanpaB(AeHHfl) B OAHOM HCKyccTBe, a 2 pa3HMXX HCKyccTBa [...]. HnKaKOH CBA3HÜ! (Gur'janova 1999a: 73) (Onn the whole, obviously because of my individual one-sidedness, I find it very difficultt aesthetically to grasp the confusion (in one and the same poem) of two taskss - non-objectivity — on the one hand: kapa / li kirn / kric ba rac (and so on). Andd on the other hand, eccentric objectivity: A thick sausage / A wagon with a bluee muff. [...] I now profess that objectivity and non-objectivity (in painting) are nott two different directions in one art, but two different arts [...]. There is no connectionn at all!!!) Thiss quotation demonstrates the clash of interests between Krucenych's inconsistencyy and his fluctuating aesthetic concerns and Rozanova's more strict aestheticc system. Furthermore,, this production method provides a second more consciously intendedd possibility, namely, the unlimited experimentation with the intertwining off visual and verbal representations. Such a concern was present at the very beginningg of the production of cubo-futurist books and gradually became more

133 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

andd more explicit. Thus, in the books The Worldbackwards and Explodity, it becamee increasingly difficult to separate the verbal from the visual representation. Inn a letter to Semsurin, Krucenych expresses a similar concern: "V torn cto bukvaa - est' risunok-zivopis' vse bol'se ubezdajus' - no poka éto sekret dlja vsegoo sveta" ("I get more and more convinced, that the letter is a drawingpainting,, but for the time being it's a secret to the whole world"; OR RGB, Sem.. 1.11.1915). Moreover, this was a major concern of Malevic', who was clearlyy a great influence on Krucenych.17 However, I will argue that the limited numberr of actual suprematist books in this period and the constant mix of nonobjectivee and objective poetry suggest that Krucenych did not always agree withh Malevic and Rozanova, or was unable to subordinate his creative impulse underr the suprematist meta-physical system of thought.

Fig.. 10

134 4

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

Thee automatism of reading Thee first book that seems to be directly connected with suprematism is Nosoboj&zz (1917) in which it is stated: "Esli net zaumnoj (bezpredmetnoj supremus) poéziii - to net nikakoj" ("If there is no %aum' (non-objective supremus) poetry, thenn there is none at all"; Krucenych 1917b). The content of the book, however,, is largely polemical whereas the book Ba/osxs consists of poems that are composedd as columns of %aum' words. Similarly, the word "supremus" is writtenn in a vertical column: s-u-p-r-e-m-u-s, just as the tide is written in a column withh a vertical line to its right side. This line is the only thing on the cover that remotelyy resembles an illustration. The inscription "Supremus" on the cover pagee (see figure 10) is unique in its direct reference to the suprematist movementt in painting. The collaboration with Rozanova, who is credited for two poemss in the book, also suggests that it was seen as a contribution to the propagationn of suprematism. Nina Gur'janova has documented and noted this point:: as the enthusiastic secretary of the planned publication of the journal Supremus,premus, Rozanova gathered material for the first release which was supposed to includee among other things, the book Balos (1992: 93). However, apart from the simplicityy of the columnar arrangement of the letters in tide and imprint and thee simple line on the cover, there is nothing in the design of the book to suggestt a suprematist influence. The cover design, however, introduces the columnarr design as a prominent feature of the poems that seem to consist of repetitionstions of a minimal sound-scheme. Thee title-poem 'Balos' consists of 9 lines, each of one word, some of them consistingg of only one syllable: "Ballos / Kalóc / Galós / Balós / Sol / Va / Juk / Cii / Malós". Four words are combinations of a consonant and a suffix made upp of the consonants T and 's'/'c'. In the fifth line the word "valos" is inverted too the syllable "Sol" followed by "va". Two one-syllable lines follow, which havee an entirely different sound scheme: "juk", "ci". The same method of repetition,tition, sudden shifts and breaks is also evident in the fourth poem which consistss of the repetition of one-syllable words with a simple sound combination followedd by a "bum" in the end: "gér / bér / bez / géz / bum". These are simplee methods of creating a surprising effect, by means of only a slight change in 135 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

thee sound pattern. More importantly perhaps, in the first poem the words "kaloc"" and "galos" could remind one of the word "kalosi" / "galosi" [galoshes], andd the rhythm of the poem could indicate the rhythmic sound of heavy footstepss interspersed by some lighter ones. AA similar effect is created in the second and third poems. In these two poems simplee repetition, inversion, the shift of a few consonants, and one single vowel makee up a column of words as in the first poem: "zma / lzal / mzy / zmylzym",, or in the second poem: "ryz / zyka / byzga / gryz / samka / ta / mka / magacaa / ckarta". Here, the simple seemingly incomprehensible %aum' words alsoo remind one of a real Russian word or of parts of words: "byzga" of "bryzgat"'' [to sprinkle or splash], "zyka" of "muzyka" [music] or "zykat'" [the shoutt or whisde, whiz] or "gryz" of "gryzt"' [to bite], "samka" is the word for a femalee animal, "maka" reminds one of "makaka" [an ape], "ckarta" of "Dzakarta"" [Jakarta]. These words could consist of distorted parts from some exoticc scenario about animals that grind their teeth, scream, and whiz. Similarly, thee word "lzal" in the last poem reminds one of "lizat"' [to lick], "zma" of "zmej"" [snake], or "zima" [summer]. The word "mzy" also brings to mind wordss beginning with "maz-" indicating grease, paintt or smearing. These words againn have connotations connected to a snake and so on. Evidendy, Krucenych playss with our desire to (re-)construct a meaning of the ^aum' words and a contextt in which they can be understood. In this way the poems balance the compositionn of sound variables and the play with word associations that these soundss invoke in the reader. Inn the seventh poem, although the sounds 'c', 'ch', 'c', 'z' are forwarded and thuss remove the focus from the meaning of the words to their sound structure, thee first half s real Russian words seem to compose a part of a normal Symbolist orr Akmeist poem: "Mecom barchata / ciferblat v / cvetach / zracki carapajut" ("Withh a velvety sword / a clock face in / flowers / pupils scratch"). This is followedd by the words: "ton' / kom / pot" which could mean "drown / clod / sweat",, but also compose the word "kompot" [stewed fruit]), and an absurd effectt is created. Similarly, the words in the book's last two poems (according to thee credits written by Rozanova) play with the absurd. 136 6

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

Thee first poem, "fiir / fu / faj / ta / n / kaf / tan / fon / tan / iir / fuf', is largelyy a construction over the sounds in the exclamations "fu" [ugh!] and "fi" [pah!],, which interestingly enough in Russian are expressions of contempt, whilee the words "fifi" [a bimbo] and "fufu" [taking things lightly or carelessly or makingg a fool of someone] have connotations of fun and laughter. Moreover, inn the middle part of the poem, two words with definite reference to real Russiann words ("kaf-tan" [caftan] and "fon-tan" [fountain] are included. Thee most interesting poem in this book is 'Krymkaja'. Nina Gur'janova has shownn how the existing three different titles of this poem (given in three differentt editions) can change the impression of it: first as being an imitation of the soundss in the Caucasian language with the title 'Kavkazskij étjud' ('Caucasian study'),, then as a self-contained poem with the wrong word "Krymnaja" as the titlee (which has the word "Krym" [Crimea] and the adjective female ending in it),, and finally to a ^aww'poem with the word "Kromnaja" 19 as the title (Gur'janovaa 1992: 91). The variant in halos reads: "Krym()kaja," with a crossed out letterr 's' in the Russian word "Krymskaja" [Crimean] (figure 11):

Fig.. 11 137 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Kaa' ' 'KpwM M

('Krymm kaja'

aA6w w AaMaA A 6MT Ty y

Ucc al by Damall byt u Al l On n Y) )

Y HH

AA A OHH

bl l

II am n o t in a position to judge whether or n o t there is anything tartaric Crimean, Arabicc o r Georgian in the poem's sound structure, but it does seem to me that thee s o u n d s of the p o e m have much in c o m m o n with Russian. In fact, it can be seenn as a study in abstraction: syllables and letters have b e e n part of actual words fromm w h i c h (as the varying tides indicate) only these sounds remain. Therefore,, the m o s t interesting aspect of this p o e m is the missing middle letter in t h ee tide, which the reader automatically assumes to be the Russian letter ' s \ This letterr is n o t erased b u t crossed o u t and, presumably, left hidden under the black leadd in this copy. In this way the reader's attention is drawn to the automatism withh which readers readily fill in gaps o r correct words in order for the words to c o n f o r mm to a particular language code. This crossed o u t letter is a visual trace of t h ee automatism of reading which would not have been possible to demonstrate soo vividly without this graphic trace o n the page. AA very similar b o o k in visual design and poetic structure is Kovka^i. However, inn this b o o k , Krucenych wrote all the p o e m s himself. I n the tide of the book, t h ee w o r d " K a v k a z " [Caucasus] can easily be identified and the sounds seem to havee b e e n influenced by Caucasian languages and Russian. In the second p o e m t h ee w o r d "Tblisi" [Tiflis] seems t o emerge in the word "tvilisi": Aacbapp aAacc aAacbap cbanapTT TBHAHcbyy THAHcbyy TBHAHCHH Bepoo apacc Biipn.

(Lafar alas alafar fakart tvilifu tilifu tvilisi vero aras viri)

T h ee w o r d "fakart" could remind one of "fekalii" [feces], the ending "fu" ex138 8

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

pressess contempt, and the word "vero" could be Latin, which here would be an expressionn of confirmation: "this is true". Of course other associations could bee just as true. A much less complex and more repetitive sound structure is to bee found on the fifth page: "kiri / krag / kab / kita / kitr / kir / kiros". In this poemm all the words begin with a "ki" except the second and third words, which repeatt the sound of the preceding "krag". A similar phenomenon is to be foundd in the ninth poem, which has an even barer sound structure: some lines onlyy consisting of one letter: "nu / kam / ku / cenuka / u / ku / su / uki / s / bu". . Thesee poems unfold different combinatory methods to vary a sound scheme andd create sound effects that are structured, yet seem to be expressions of chancee and play. The sounds enter a rather simple structure of repetition. In thiss way, they refer to sounds within the structure of the poem itself and seem too be motivated by their likeness to or contrast with the other sounds in the poem.. In addition, the rhythm of the columnar design adds to the sense of likenesss and repetition, which is sometimes broken by a change in sound structure.. Thus, the surprising effect of a sudden "bum" features against a backgroundd of repetition and likeness. Moreover, the columnar design adds emphasiss to each line and therefore to each syllable or single letter. This is true of all thesee poems. While two out of three vowels in a three-syllable Russian word are normallyy reduced, the chopping up of words into single syllables or letters inducess these sounds with new emphasis. Inn these poems it is the suggested meaning of the words that stand out. These meaningss are often expressions of contempt, reminiscent of feces, or they bear unpleasantt associations to grinding, scrubbing, biting and so on. These meaningss are most often suggestive and the %aum' words give an impression of being justt parts of real words, or the poems give the impression of being an abstractionn of a raz/poem. A curious example of this is included in the book Nestrofe. Presumably,, both Krucenych and Rozanova wrote this (it was published here underr both their names). The poem reads:

139 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' (Afterr having painted with a flower lips s inn a wheel off greedy eyes izmalyvaja a headd down cuu the ground prolomm carvonec triol'' I fly high rycirk k II fall)

ITBCTKOMM HaMa3aB

ryöbi i KOAece e JKaAHMXX TAa3 H3MaAWBafl l BHH33 TOAOBOH

n yy 3eMAio npoAOMM napBOHeii TpHOAbb Aeny Bbiury pHItHpK K naAaio o

A ss Gur'janova has demonstrated o n the basis of the letters from Rozanova to Krucenych,, Rozanova's original version o f the poe m was very different: 20 'Hae3AHHua' '

( T h ee Horsewoman'

U,BeTKOMM Ha\ia3aB ryöhi ToAyGoaAaH H ÜAyöbb naAeHHH B KOAece >KaAHbix

Afterr having painted the lips withh a flower Scarletblue e Breakingg the depth of the fall in aa wheel of greedy eyes, Headd down Kissingg the ground Straightt against danger II accept the coin of success. Tripletss of striking hooves Harnessingg together with triolets off the banging of the heart II fly high II fall II hang II depend on the mercy of a horse.)

TAa33 H3AaMHBafl, B H H 33 TOAOBOH i i e A y aa 3eMAK)

HanpOAOMM onacHocTH MepBOHeuu ynnexa 2 1 npHeMAio. TpHOAHH yAapoB Konbrr CC TpHOAeTaMH cryKOB cepA.ua cnparafl l Aenyy Bwniy riaAaio o Buuiy y O TT MHAOCTH KOHCKOH 3aBHiny

(Gur'janovaa 1992, 103) T h ee comparison of Rozanova's original poem and the version printed in Nestrofe clearlyy shows that u n d e r the strong influence of Krucenych, the p o e m has literallyy b e e n robbed of its referentiality and changed into a ^aum'poem.

T h e only

completee line remaining is "After having painted with a flower / lips". W o r d s havee been left out: "scarletblue", "depth", "fall", "success", " I accept", " I de140 0

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS p e n dd o n the mercy of a h o r s e " an so on, and syllables have been cut off w o r d s : " ( n a ) p r o l o m "" and "trior(etami)'\ Letters have been left out in a word: "c(el)u(ja)'\\ and a single letter in a w o r d has b e e n changed: "cervonec" - "carv o n e c "" and "izlamyvaja" - "izmalyvaja". 22 G o n e are the horse and the horsew o m a n ,, and with the h o r s e w o m a n the somewhat high-flown pathos. T h e p o e m hass b e c o m e strangely quirky and m o r e like a buffoonish act, which of course is supportedd by the added ^ « w ' w o r d "rycirk" which is a change from "rycar"' [knight]] to a w o r d containing the w o r d circus. T h ee skeletonizing of a text to its minimal units is a well-known technique of Krucenych's:: it was used in his famous p o e m 'Vysoty' ('Heights') in which t h e creedd is ribbed of consonants leaving only the vowels. This is the only case wheree such a technique has been unveiled. However, countless attempts have beenn made to decipher the p o e m 'Dyr bul scyl' and other %aum' poems. Krucenych'ss o w n interpretations of this p o e m contribute to the belief that there m u s t bee a text hidden behind the text. Such an interpretation is given in Mabcholija in aa Housecoat Aup-6yA-muAA (6yAe>KK AMpy y6nAA meAH iirainn n p w rr

(dyr-bul-scyl (bulez dyru ubil sceli sis pryg

IIIHIHKOB))

siskov))

(Rowelll and Wye 2002: 119) T h ee words in the brackets reproduce s o m e of the sounds from the presumed originaloriginal poem: "bulez" ["buleznik" is a cobblestone], "dyry" [in the hole], " u b i l " [ h e / II killed] and "sceli" [cracks]. However, the " s i s " is the final w o r d in Explodityplodity and Siskov was a Russian sectarian w h o was also mentioned in this book. Thesee last words have nothing to do with the p o e m 'Dyr bul scyl'. As I m e n tionedd in the first chapter, in the first published edition of the p o e m , it is a part off the triptych of three %aum' p o e m s with the epithet: " 3 poems written in my ow nn language and differing from the others! Its w o r d s have no specific meaning".. In Zaumnyjjavyk

u: Sejfullinoj {Zaum' Language Sejfullina), Krucenych wrote:

141 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' TaK,, CHMBOAHcraMH 6MAH HcnoAb30BaHii He Bee 3BVKH pyccKoro H3HKa,

HOO HeKoTopwe, HanGoAee cAaAKO (He npHTBopHO AH?) H BbicnpeHHe (He HH3KonoKAOHHoo AH?) 3BeHHnme raMMM. 3ByKH ace, Ha HX BKyc rpyGbie, 6MAHH B 3aroHe. OyrypH3M BOcnoAHHA STOT npo6eA, AaB rAyxoH H TSÜKGAHHH 3ByKOKpHA AWp - 6yA - IintfA (c TaTapCKHM OTTCHKOM). (1925: 28)

(Thee symbolists did not use all the sounds of the Russian language, but some of them:: the sweetest (not feigning, I wonder?) and most high-flown (not servility, I wonder?)) jingling scales. But the sounds, which were too coarse for their taste, weree kept down. By giving the obscure and heavy line of sounds: dyr-bul-scyl (withh a Tartar hint), futurism filled in this gap.) Indeed,, some likeness to Turkic languages can be found.23 However, in T h e Wordd as Such', Krucenych and Chlebnikov wrote: "kstati v ètom pjatistdsii bol'see russkogo nacional'nogo cem vo vsej poézii Puskina" ("by the way, in these fivee lines there is more national Russian that in all of Puskin's poetry"; Chlebnikovv and Krucenych 2000: 47). Burljuk also gave his interpretation of the poem: "Dyrojj budet urodnoe lico scastlivych oluchov" (Kovtun 1989: 16) meaning somethingg like: "A hole will be the deformed face of happy fools". In a similar manner,, on a page in Nesfrofe, Krucenych states: "V zaumi soversenno otkrovenen:: tut zakryvaet zagadka (k-ruju legko otgadat' komu nuzno)" ("In %aum'\t iss absolutely candid: here is hidden a riddle (which is easily solved for anyone whoo needs to)". In this statement, the interpretive approach to Krucenych's poetryy is encouraged in his own inverted way. However,, can we take it for granted that such an interpretation is possible, just becausee Krucenych says so? Of course the poem 'Heights' and Rozanova's transformedd poem in Nestroë'e support such an approach. However, the reader hass no way of knowing this and is bound to try to interpret the poem because off the statement that follows (notwithstanding that such an interpretation may nott exist). In a letter to Semsurin, Krucenych gives a similar but at the same timee very different statement: AA riddle ... the reader is curious first of all and convinced that zaum means something,, i.e. has some logical meaning. Hence one can sort of catch the readerr by a worm-riddle, by mystery. Women and art have to have mystery; too say "I love" is to make a very definite commitment, and a person never

142 2

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

wantss to do that. He is covert; he is greedy; he is a mystifier. And he seeks, insteadd of I - e (I love), something equal and perhaps special - and this willl be: lefanta chiol or raz faz gaz ... kho - bo - ro mo - cho - ro and darknesss and zero and new art! Does an artist intentionally hide in the tree holee of zaum? - 1 don't know ..." (Janecek 1996: 250) Inn this statement, Krucenych admits to a conscious strategy of obstructing the interpretivee approach. He constantly undermines the interpretive efforts of the reader.. Whether there is meaning or not in the %aum' poems, the chances are thatt it will be so obscure that the reader will be thrown back onto the text and ann endless chain of possible interpretations: tartar, Puskin, symbolism, Russian, shamanism,, speaking in tongues, haiku, and so forth. Inn almost all of the poems mentioned, each poem seems to construe its own ruless according to the particular sound scheme of this particular poem. The soundss and the sound associations are motivated by the inner structure of each singlee poem. The auto-referentiality of the sound structure, the sensory effect off the shifts and breaks, and the motivatedness of each sound within each poem,, make these poems single instances of experience. This is underlined by thee opening request in Kovkaig to read one page a day. Similarly, meaning associationss are created in the reader's mind from the %aum' words. Based on the similarityy of the %aum' words with real known words, the reader is inclined to attemptt to interpret the poems. However, it is also evident from the poem 'Krym(}kaja'' that this is a deliberate strategy of Krucenych to point to the automatismm of reading. None of the %aum' words seem to be constructed accordingg to any particular kind of system, whether that system embodies etymologicall meaning associations or morphological or phonetic rules. Thus, each poemm is an instance of experience motivated by a combination of sound structuree and semantic associations (most often) of disgust, contempt, unpleasant feelings,, animals, and so on. Eco-poetryy - a minimal "economic poetic" language Inn the preface to Universal War ï>, Krucenych emphasized the parallel developmentt of ^aum'znd non-objective painting, or to be more precise, suprematism:

143 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' 3 T HH HaKAeHKH pOMCAeHM TeM >Ke, HTO H 3ayMHMH H3HK — OCBo6o>KAeHHeM

TBOpHH OT HeHy>KHbix yAoöcTB (apafl öecnpeAMeTHocrb). 3ayMHaa >KHBOnHCbb craHOBHTCH npeo6AaAaK>meH. PaHbiiie O. Po3aHOBa AaAa o6pa3uu ee,, Tenepb pa3pa6aThiBaioT eme HCCKOABKO XVACOKHHKOB, B TOM HHCAC K. MaAeBHH,, Tlymt H Ap., AaB MaAo roBopHmee Ha3BaHHe: cynpeMaTH3Ma. [...] 3ayMHMHH H3UK (nepBWM npeAcraBirreAeM KoeroflBAHiocbH) noAaer pyKy 3ayMHOHH )KHBOnHCH. (1916) (Thesee collages are born from the same impulse as %aum' language: the liberation off creation from unnecessary conveniences (raging non-objectivity). Zaum' paintingg is becoming predominant. Previously, O. Rozanova provided examples of it; noww several other artists are developing it, among them K. Malevic, Puni, and others,, after having given it die unexpressive appellation: suprematism. [...] Zaum' languagee (of which I am the premier representative) extends a hand to spurn' painting.) ) Here,, Krucenych reverses Chlebnikov's statement from 1912: "My chotim, ctobyy slovo smelo poslo za zivopis'ju" ("We want the word courageously to follow painting";; Chlebnikov 1940: 334). By extending his hand to painting, Krucenych oncee again reversed the hierarchical relationship between poetry and painting. Inn his estimation, poetry and poetic language no longer lagged behind painterly techniques:: painting had finally arrived at the same conclusions as had he in his %aum'%aum' poetry. There is, however, strong evidence of Malevic' influence on Krucenych'ss poetics at this particular period of time. This can be seen in the developmentt in Krucenych's poems of what seems like a minimal poetic 'language': Xo o Bo o Po o

ro o

Ho o Po o Ma a

ra a

Pa a Co o Bo o Po o (Krucenychh 1973: 216)

(Cho o Bo o Ro o Go o Co o Ro o Ca a Ga a Ra a So o Bo o Ro) )

144 4

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

Thiss minimal "language" was probably introduced for the first time in the lithographedd book Learn Arters! (1916). Except for the first lines "cho-bo-ro" thiss chain of monosyllable words does not reappear in the same constellation. However,, variations of this chain of sounds, fragments of it, and new supplements,, appear in the books to come. 24 In Zamaul' 777, it appears in the following design: : Xoo Boo Koo

60 po 60

po MO

po

(cho vo ko

JKAMHJKAMH

bo ro bo

ro mo ro zlyc)

Thiss design makes it possible to combine the chain after one's own choice. Thee chain "cho-bo-ro" is repeated numerous times throughout the different books.. The same is the case with the chain "raz-faz-caz" and "ryz-dyz-fyz".25 Ass Hansen-Löve remarks, these sound-chains appear as austere paradigmatic variations,, in which the mechanical combination of sounds presents the most basicc rules of repetition, substitution and alternation (1996: 103). The chains consistt of combinations with one to three consonants and a vowel, and althoughh the sounds 'i', 'u', and 'je' do appear, the most frequently used vowels aree 'o', 'a', or the Russian sound 'y'. These sounds in combination with a consonantt often follow each other in pairs of three as in Nestrofe and Tunlap. Other slightlyy more complex chains appear as in Tun/ap: "sa-ma-ga-mak-glac-gak-sama-del"'' or "cen-men-ben-zen-rap-map-nap", and the technique is widely used inn the titles of books. The first book with such a title was Te-Ii-le from 1914. Laterr Fo-/y-fa, Ra-va-cba, and Gly-gly appeared. Thesee paradigmatic chains stand out as purely auto-referential, but contrary to thee poems in Baks and Kovka^i, they are not so self-enclosed as to refer to the soundss within the limits of just one poem on just one page of a book: fragmentss appear in many books and on many pages. Therefore, these few very austeree chains of sounds are closest to what might be called a "language" based onn immanent laws and seem to be supported by a certain system. Contrary to the previouss poems, there do not seem to be any associations possible with real Russiann or foreign words. Therefore, the meaning of the minimal "language" 145 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' developingg from such paradigmatic chains is difficult to determine. Inn the book Nosobojka, the simplest chain, "cho-bo-ro," appears to be programmaticc of Krucenych's concept "éko-éz" (eco[nomic]-poetry) and "éko-chud" (eco[nomic]-art)) and is put forward as an analogy to suprematism: 3 K O - 3 33 - caMaa Bceoöma» H KpaTKaa (3ayMHaa) no33HH [...]. MupcKOHua H 3KO-333 — 3Ko-xyA (xo-6o-po). A.KpyneHHX — reHmi, snoxa, HyAb [...] 3KOxyAA (H) CynpeMyc AaioT BnepBHe (minimum) KpacoK H AHHHH. Y 4>yTyPHCT(OB)) KpacKH BAfoÖAeHHoro nonyraH. (Krucenych 1917b)

(Eco-poetryy is the most universal and concise (gaum') poetry. [...] Worldbackwards andd eco-poetry is eco-art (cho-bo-ro). A. Krucenych is a genius, an epoch, a zero [...].. For the first time eco-art (and) Supremus give (a minimum) of colors and lines.. By the futurists there are colors of a parrot in love.) Inn this statement, Krucenych dissociates himself from futurism and expresses hiss agreement with the new movement in art that his friend Malevic introduced too the Moscow art scene in 1915. It seems likely that Krucenych engaged in somee of his most radical experiments with spurn' poetry and the intertwining of graphicc design and sound under Malevic' influence. However,, in 1916 in a letter to Matjusin, Malevic expressed some doubts about Krucenych'ss poetry. He criticized Krucenych's poem 'Dyr bul scyl' for being an accumulationn of letters, which do not constitute a word, but nevertheless pretendd to be a "word as such". He argued that Krucenych's references to speakingg in the tongues of the Russian sectarians, the nervous system, and religious ecstasy,, were merely justifications of a continuing fight against thought in language.. He added that because of this, Krucenych remains within the narrow limitss of thought without being able to transform the letter into something substantiallyy other than thought. According to Malevic, Krucenych and his followerss "think when they were supposed to listen" and the letter never develops intoo an entity in its own right (Kovtun 1976: 191). Inn the system of Malevic, sound is a graphic letter, or a mystical "note", only moree refined than a musical note: HOBMHH

nosT - KaK 6w B03BpaT K 3Byicy (HO He H3bPiecTBy). H3 3ByKa noAy-

HHAOCbb CAOBO. T e i i e p b H3 CAOBa nOAyHHACfl 3ByK. 3 T O T B03BpaT He eCTb

146 6

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRU^ENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS HATHH Ha3aA- 3Aecb nosT ocraBHA Bee cAOBa H HX Ha3HaHeHHe. H o H3T>AA H 33 HHX 3ByK KaK 3 A e M e H T I I 0 3 3 H H . H 6 y K B a yJKe H e 3 H a K AAÜ B H p a H f e H H f l

Beinen,, a 3ByKOBaH HOTa (He My3HKaAbHafl). H 3Ta HOTa-6yKBa, noKaAyfi, TOHfame,, «cHee H BHpa3HTeAbHee HOT My3MKaAbHMX, nepexoA 3Byica H3 6yKBHH B 6yKBy nepexoAHT coBepmeHHee, HOKCAH H3 HOTM B HOTy. [...] npHAHH K HAee 3ByKa, noAyHHAH HOTa-6yKBH, Bwpa>KaioiH.He 3ByKOBHe MaccM.. Mo^ceT 6hm>, B KOMno3HHHH 3THX 3ByKOBbix Mace (ÖMBHIHX CAOB) HH HaHAeTca HOBaa Aopora. (Kovtun 1976: 191) (Thee new poet is like a return to sound (but not to paganism). From sound we obtainedd the word. Now we obtain sound from the word. This return is not a step back.. The poet left all words and their meanings behind him, but he took sound withh him as an element of poetry. And the letter is no longer a sign for expressing things,, but a sonic note (not a musical one). And this note-letter is perhaps subder,, clearer and more expressive than musical notes. The passage of sound from letterr to letter passes more perfecdy than from note to note. [...] Arriving at the ideaa of sound, we were given note-letters expressing sonic masses. Perhaps in a compositionn of these sound masses (former words) a new path will be found.) T h u s ,, the letter is capable of expressing sound directly and distinctly. These sound-letterss should b e arranged in sound masses (in a spatial composition) thatt give our consciousness the ability to penetrate space and reach "still further andd further away from the earth". This is similar to the suprematist paintings in whichh "a plane of paint (zivopisnyj cvet) is hung o n a white sheet of canvas" andd immediately gives "a strong sense of space" (Kovtun 1976: 192). Therefore thee letters should be freed from the linearity of conventional reading-space: TaKHMM o6pa30M, MM BbipMBaeM GyKBy H3 crpoKH, H3 OAHoro HanpaBAeHHH,, H A a e M e i ! B03MO}KHOCTb CBOÖOAHOrO ABHHCeHHÜ. ( C T p O K H Hy>KHH

MHpyy H:HHOBHHKOB H AOMaiHHeH nepenncKH). ( K o v t u n 1976: 191) (Inn this way we rip the letter from its line and from one direction, and we give it thee possibility of free movement (Verse-lines are necessary in a world of clerks andd domestic correspondence).) T h ee sound o f die poet — freed from referential meaning — is like a groan, which hee does n o t dare to express. It should be p u t into m o v e m e n t by rhythm and tempo:: " E s t ' poézija, gde ostaetsja cistyj ritm i temp kak dvizenie i vremja; zdes' ritm ii temp opirajutsja na bukvy kak znaki, zakljucajuscie v sebe tot ili inoj zvuk"

147 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' ("Theree exists a poetry in which pure rhythm and tempo remain as movement andd time; here rhythm and tempo rely on letters like signs containing this or thatt sound"; Malevic 1995: 142). Thus, Malevic' theory of the new poetry is basedd on an idea of pure sound realized in the graphic letter and rhythm which aree both founded in a bodily-emotional primal gesture, the groan. This gesture iss an expression of economy, which he saw as the most fundamental concept andd as governing all arts because of a necessary economizing of energy:26 (B)cHKoee AeücTBo coBepinaeTOi nepe3 SHepmio TeAa, a BaiKoe TCAO CTpeMHTCHH K COXpaHeHHOCTH CBOeH 3 H e p r H H , a IIOTOMy BCflKOe MOe AeHCTBO AOA>KHOO

coBepinaTbCfl 3K0HOMHHecKHM nyTeM. (Malevic 1995: 155)

(Everyy act is accomplished due to bodily energy, and every body seeks to preserve itss energy. Therefore, my every act must be accomplished in an economical way.) AA similar idea may have inhabited Krucenych, which his parallel concepts of eco-poetryy and eco-art show. In this respect the book Nestroc'e can be seen as programmatic.. The very tide suggests the elimination of the line in writing, and onn a page he wrote: "Strocki nuzny cinovnikam i Bal'montam ot nich samoubijstvoo u nas bukvy letajut" ("Clerks and Bal'monts need lines; from them we gett suicide. We have letters that fly!"; Krucenych 1917g [see figure 13]). This is aa direct quotation from Malevic' letter to Matjusin in which directions for a new poetryy are given. Theree is only scarce evidence left as to the meanings of eco-art and eco-poetry.277 But, Krucenych did take some effort in explaining the concepts in his letterss to Semsurin. In a letter from April 1917 for instance, he gives examples of aa number of such poems and concludes: "Vse éto futurizm vernee èko-chud i éko-ézz (èkonomija-poézija)" ("All this is futurism or rather eco-art and ecopoetryy (economic-poetry)"; OR RGB, Sem. 3.4.1917). In another letter from thee same year, he states: "cho-bo-ro mo-co-ro i mracnotst', i nul', i novoe iskusstvo"" ("cho-bo-ro mo-co-ro is both darkness, and zero, and the new art!"; OR RGB,, §em. 12.7.1917), and in a third letter: "Pisu (v poézii i teorii) éko-chud i éko-ézz - éto znacit (bystrota) óèonomija-poqija" ("I write (in poetry and theory) eco-artt and eco-poetry - that is (speed) rawiomic-poetry"; OR RGB, Sem. 10.10.1917). . 148 8

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS Moreover,, a n e w and revised version of ' T h e Declaration of the W o r d as Such' appearedd in 1917. This version h a d die following lines added: " V zaumnoj poéziii dostigaetsja vyssaja i okoncatel'naja vsemirnost' i ékonomija - (éko-chud) primer:: cho-bo-(ro)" ("The highest a n d final (universality) and e c o n o m y - (ékochud)) ex.: cho-bo-ro is reached in Zaum'poetry";

Gorjaceva 1997: 237). H o w -

ever,, this sentence was left o u t in the 1921 edition, where it says: "7) zaum' — samoee kratkoe iskusstvo, kak p o dlitel'nosti puti o t vosprijatija k vosproizvedeniju,, tak i p o svoej forme, naprimer: K u b o a (Gamsun), Cho-bo-ro i dr." ("7)) Zaum'is t h e most concise art, b o t h with regards the distance from perceptiontion to reproduction and with regards its form, ex.: K u b o a (Hamsun), c h o - b o roo etc."; MMcatalogue. 77). T h u s , however widely used in Malevich' theoretical writingss in t h e years to come, this concept of economy of art had a short life in thee writings of Krucenych. Tat'janaa Gorjaceva argues that Krucenych developed his concept of e c o n o m i c artt just after having received Sklovskij's 'Art as Technique' from Semsurin. 2 8 In thiss article Slovskij launched a polemic attack o n the ideas of the still popular philologistt Aleksandr Potebnja and his disciples. T h e economy of art was a d e v e l o p m e n tt of Potebnja's idea of art as a condensation of thought by the latter's discipless (É. Mach, R. Avenarius, and B. Lezin). Lezin's article, 'Artistic Creationn as a Special F o r m of E c o n o m i c Thinking' (1911), contains some ideas whichh closely resemble the ideas that Male vie' developed o n this subject: P H T MM HCXOAHT H3 opraHHnecKoro cymecrea neAOBeKa, ynpaBAiw BCCMH

ecrecTBeHHMMHH npoHBAemiflMH e r o , KaK peryAHpytomHH 3AeMeHT (KpoBoo6pameHHe,, onerine m/Abca, AHxamie, H T.A.) ] PHTM MH 3aMenaeM B H3MKe,, necHe, B paöoTe H Boo6me BO Bcex 5KH3HCHHMX npoflBAein>flx neAOBeKa.. PHTM MOJKHO onpeAeAHTb, KaK HBAemie, npe>KAe Bcero, MexaHHHecKoe,, qDH3HHecKoe, 3aKAK>naiomeecH B npaBHAbHOM HepeAOBaHtm COOTBeTCTByiOIHHXX A p y T A p y r y M O M e i r r O B , K O T O p b i e MOrVT HBAflTbCH H KaK

KpacKH,, H KaK 3ByKH, H KaK ABH>KymHecfl MacTHiihi. BcHKoro H3 Hac n o p a >KaeTT HAeaAbHo-npaBHAbHoe TeneHHe BpeMeHH, ABH^CHHA; MO>KHO CMCAO

CKa3aTb,, HTO 3aKOHH, ynpaBAfliomHe BCCACHHOH, cyrb nponBAeHHe pimvia, 3KOHOMHH.. (Lezin 1911: 203) (Rhythmm derives from the organic essence of man, which governs all his natural functionss as a regulating element (blood circulation, the beating of the pulse, 149 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' breathingg and so on) [...] We notice the rhythm in speech, in song, in the working processs and really in man's every vital function. Rhythm can be determined as a mainlyy mechanical, physical, phenomenon, which contains a regulated alternation off correlated moments. It can manifest itself as color, sound, and as moving elements.. Every one of us is struck by the ideally regulated flow of time and movement.. It is safe to say that the laws, which guide the universe, are functions of rhythm;; of economy.) Butt the futurists (and after them Sklovskij) rejected the noetic aspect of this schooll of thought. Thus, Krucenych rejected die image as a constituent of poeticc language. He would, therefore, reject Lezin's claim that die origin of languagee be formulated in the following manner: sound + affect + image. Krucenychh believed that poetic language should consist of sound and affect alone. Moreover,, Sklovskij identified the idea of the economy of art with die automatic perceptionn of practical language. Consequendy, "economy" was opposed to his ownn idea of a "difficult" or "impeded" poetic language. Thus, either Krucenych misinterpretss Sklovskij's main argument, or this is just an unfortunate term that simplyy means a very minimal sound-expression "free from unnecessary comfort (puree non-objectivity)" (Krucenych 1916). In this sense, "cho-bo-ro" emerges ass a meta-language or a "pra-zvuk" - the primeval beginning of speech, as a seriess of emotional outbursts - in which "cho-bo-ro", "ni-ni-ni", "kraz-faz-caz" orr "ra-va-cha" represent different emotional states. Thee page as an alternative visual-verbal space Krucenychh comes closest to the suprematist poetry of Malevic in the scattered liness and letters that appear throughout the books. In Kovhvg and halos the illustrationss are almost non-existent and, except for the tide of Rozanova's poem in Baks,Baks, the visual impression of the handwriting does not add anything new to thee poems. These two books appear rather uniform and bare. However, this is nott characteristic of the books as a whole; the book Nestrofe sets an example of aa new interaction of visual and verbal representation. The programmatic statementt in Nestrofe, as mentioned above, prompts this new relationship. In this statement,, no words or sounds are mentioned; instead the line and the letter are realizedd as existing in an oppositional relationship (lines and letters exist for 150 0

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

clerkss and symbolists, whereas for "us" the letters fly - naturally, the "us" must includee Krucenych). Thiss is a development of the opposition between poetical and practical languagee that could be seen in Potebnja's aesthetic system and developed by the earlyy Russian avant-garde into a dichotomy between poetical and everyday language.. A similar statement is made in the book Coc from 1918: "Gde slovopokojnikk bezsil'no pomozet tarn zarkij risunok! Raspjal' glaza milyj okurok!" ("Wheree the deceased word powerlessly assists, there is a burning drawing! Openn your eyes up wide, dear stub!"; MMcatalogur. 45). Here, the term "the deceasedd word" undoubtedly refers to Sklovskij's T h e resurrection of the Word', andd inscribes itself in the same dichotomy of practical vs. poetic language, i.e., deadd vs. living. In Nestrofe this dichotomy is extended to include the page the linee and the letter. Inn the poem 'Cvetkom namazav...' ('After having painted with a flower.. .*) by Rozanovaa and Krucenych. The page has the name of Krucenych and Rozanova att the top just as on most covers of the books (see figure 12). The names are underlined,, while a stipulated line towards the end could indicate a break or a pause.. Between these lines the word "guby" [lips] is framed in a square box, the wordd "kolese" [wheel] is written from the top to the bottom with one letter or syllablee on interchanging sides of a zigzag figure. The words "vniz" [downwards]] and "golovoj" [with the head] are written on top of a curved line that in factt indicates a downward movement. Finally, the words "glaz" [eyes] and "izmalyvaja"" (a neologism which reminiscences "izlamyvaja" [to break], and "malyj"" [little]) have syllables, which are written on a vertical line. The vertically writtenn syllables and the zigzagging of a word are techniques that break up the usuall linearity of the printed word. Thesee techniques distribute the letters in another spatial composition and therebyy emphasize the conventionality of the linear reading process. In this way,, the reading process is impeded but is also potentially richer in its variety. Thee reader is never sure that the combination, which makes up these words, is thee right one. This relative choice of combination gives way to play and chance.

151 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Fig.. 12

However,, the convention of linearity is not entirely lost here. Although the horizontall left to right movement of reading is obstructed, one letter still followss the other in a linear way. In a similar manner, the two words on a curved linee are still readable according to the convention from left to right (although thee line is bent downwards). This technique is iconic and indicates the movementt of the head. The visual design of this page demonstrates different techniques,, which are used throughout the books. Thee pages vary little, but they seem to include five basic principles: an iconic relationn between text and illustration, the breaking up of the text by the emphasizingg of single syllables, letters or words, the breaking up of the line, of the spacee in planes, and the creation of a purely graphic design (which (mostly) includess letters). The iconicity of the design can be found in the poem 'Gud paravozaa na pod'em' ('Hoot of a climbing locomotive') from the book Learn Arters!.Arters!. However, this poem is onomatopoeic in its very structure, which in itselff is rare, and its design supports this onomatopoeic structure by indicating 152 2

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS thee sound of the hooting steam-pipe of the locomotive. A similar technique usedd on the cover of the first edition of Explodity indicates the movement and thee roar of the masses. A last example is the cover-design for the book Ry/omu rylurylu (To the Pock-marked Snout) (1918) on which marks of a pen spot the page like aa pockmarked face. Thiss iconic relationship is slighdy different on another page from Learn Artersl Onn this page the iconic design refers exclusively to the forms of the letters themselves.. A Cyrillic letter 'c' is drawn in the upper left hand corner with a circlee around it that iconically imitates the form of the letter. Similarly the letter 'k' iss written in an hourglass form, which imitates the triangular shape of the letter. Thee letter T is written in the top right corner with lines, which could indicate a tiltedd capital letter 'A' but also follows the form of the letter T and so on. Here, thee letters do indeed seem to fly freely. Another example of this is the cover of FoFo lyfa, on which the curved lines of the illustration follow the curved lines of thee letters. Thee book A Town under Siege includes pages of primarily polemical content, whichh is very similar in its pathos to the cubo-futurist manifesto 'A Slap in the Facee of Public Taste': (TTja^Kaioo naAbiiw B My3eax Hcnpa BMKHAaa BeuiH HeHpKHbie KaK HacMopK pe>Kyy BeHep Mapnio no ropAy CKOAI>3HT npbiTKHH pe3aK BWCKOHHA H3 pyKHH nonieA nAflcaTb He pa36wpaH KpacHBbix H nepHwx «ocraHOBHCb ocraHOBHCbb 6e3yMHbiH TecaK» — a B My3ee pa3AHBaAocb aciipHoe 3AOBOHbe.. (Krucenych 1917f) (II soil my fingers in museums of fat and throw out unnecessary things as snot; I cutt Venuses; Over the throat of Maria slide a sharp chopper; it fell out of my hand;; I went dancing and couldn't tell the red from the black; "Halt! Halt! You ravingg chopper" and a greasy stench spread in the museum.) Onn this page, single letters are written in boxes, or a word or a syllable of a wordd is framed by a geometrical shape and written vertically (in addition, a triangularr shape in front of the words "prytkij rezak" [sharp chopper] indicates an iconicc slicing of the page/canvas). This way of breaking up the text by emphasizingg single syllables, letters, or words, stops the - automatic - perception of

153 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

thee text and forces the reader to pause at the word to comprehend the visual graphicc material sign. Similarly, the programmatic text in Nestroc'e has words framedd by geometrical shapes and the word "letajut" [thev fly] is written in zigzagg shape (figure 13). In this way, the non-poetical text of practical language has beenn taken to a halt and the perception obstructed by the visual design. In the poeticc texts, the lines indicate the chopping up of words as in figure 14, in whichh the design accompanying the text "ko vo bo co vo mo" separates the threee syllables "ko" and "bo" by square forms.

Fig.. 13

Fig. 14

Inn Nestroc'e and in numerous other books, the paradigmatic chain "raz-faz-cazryz-dyz-fyz-mo-(n)-fo-lo"" is written in a column very similar to the design in thee books Ba/os and Kovka^i, however, in Nestroc'e, the column is broken up by zigzaggingg lines (figure 15). Similarly the chain: "cen-men-ben-zen-rap-mappap"" in Tunsap is broken up, which makes the single words dance upon the page. Inn F/nagt, one word is even written up side down inside a curved line (cf. Jane154 4

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

cekk 1984: 108). In these cases the chain of words can still be read and the columnn reconstructed, but the breaking up of the line creates another relationship withh the space of the page. This space is noo longer divided into conventionalizedd spaces in between the letters (indicating the end of one letter and the beginningg of another) or white spaces between the lines (indicating the difference betweenn the lines and guiding the direction of reading). The space is broken up intoo planes in which the letters are arranged as in Nestroc'e. Here, the %aum' wordss "bumg gly y alios mulomng oblyg" are arranged according to the lines in thee design of the page.

Fig.. 15

Fig. 16

Evenn more radical is the design in Kacilda^ where one simple zigzag line rearrangess the direction of the letters. This makes it necessary to turn the page sometimess up to 180 degrees in order to read the text. Somee poems consist of just a few letters. As Janecek points out, on a page in Foly-fa,ly-fa, only three letters indicate the beginning of a poem: "s-g-a". Similarly, in 155 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Nestrvc'e,Nestrvc'e, two consonants 'c' and ' b ' and the double letter 'u' constitute the text (figuree 16). On such pages the letters have become purely graphic signs. They aree equal and only slighdy more complex in design to two simple lines. In F/nagtF/nagt there is even a page with no letters at all.29 This similarity of the line and thee letter brings Rousseau's note to mind in which he emphasizes the two distinctt figures from which the Latin alphabet is composed: the straight and the circularr line (1966: 18). The scribbles on the pages of these books also brings Rogovin'ss and Larionov's imitations of cave-paintings in Worldbachvards to mind.. In this sense, writing is reduced to nothing but a trace. Eco-poetryy between a "suprematist" ideal and poetic praxis Thee extreme minimalism of the poetic expression, which is revealed particularly inn the books Nestrof'e, F/nagt and Kaa/da%, seems to eliminate articulation. This iss what Rosemarie Ziegler (1982) has called silent mute or "suprematist" poetry wheree the role of the sound retreats to a secondary position. This kind of poetic expressionn was clearly developed under the influence of Malevic, which the adoptionn by Krucenych of the term "flying letters" shows. But it is interesting to see howw Krucenych realizes this suprematism in his poetry. For Malevic the letter wass to be seen as a note, however not in a musical sense but as a mystical sign off sound, which would reveal the poet's primal bodily-emotional state of mind. Theree seems to be a direct correspondence between the emotional state of the poet,, the sound, and the concrete materialization of it - the letter. The letter itselff is regarded as a cosmic entity that is able to transgress the limitations of Euclidiann space. Similarly, Malevic reduced his pictorial vocabulary to include just a square,, a cross, and a circle, upon which an elaborate system of relations was built.. This is a system which leaned on a metaphysical system of thought. However,, such a system does not seem to be relevant for Krucenych. Krucenych'ss explorations into suprematist poetry were limited to a very short periodd of time. With the publishing of Obesity of Roses in 1918, his interest in suprematistt poetry seemed to shift in another direction. He now became increasinglyy interested in the relation of sound to the unconscious and more specifically,, to oral and anal eroticism. This is a development that can be followed in

156 6

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS Krucenych'ss letters to Semsurin. In 1915, Krucenych mentions Freud's books TheThe Psycho-pathology of Everyday Life and The Interpretation of Dreams; a. year later he asks:: "Cto oznacaet bukva c,f\ dr. so storony émocii?" ("What does the letters 'P, 'k',, and V mean in relation to the emotions, etc.?"; OR RGB, Sem. 12.3.1916), andd in 1917, he explains the meaning of the letter 'f: "f- fert - fortuna - falos -- Afrodite" (OR RGB, Sem. 5.10.1917). The interest in the meaning of letters iss also reflected in the tides of his books dating from 1918: Coc (1918) and Zugdigidigi (Zudoêestva) (1919), Coca (1921), Z^udo,

Zudutnye %udesa, and Zud' (the last

threee from 1922). T h e tide Coc and Coca refer perhaps to the words "cosat"' [to suckk (with the V becoming a 't)] o r t o "cokat' [the clatter of metal against stone]. T h ee w o r d " z u d " ' means an itch. T h e letter ' z ' is ascribed with a positive meaningg and used widely a n d especially as attributes t o his o w n signature: " E g o zijatel'stvaa zudar' zemli v o z d ' zaumcev Aleksej Krucenych" ("His highness, Lord off the Earth, Leader o f the zaum's, Aleksej Krucenych"; Krucenych 1922). Here,, t h e letter ' z ' has substituted the letter ' s ' and the word "zudar'" literally readss "itcher". Krucenych'ss interest in the absolute meaning of words also expresses itself in a dislikee o f the letter T which h e associates with symbolist poetry. This interest is alsoo directed towards the meaning o f the letter V : " C t o oznacaet bukva u? P o m o e m uu (sekret) polet, glub'. Ostal'nye glasn. bolee pokojny, u - dvizenie trevogi. G d ee o b é t o m procest'?" ("What does the letter 'u' mean? In my opinion (a secret) itt means flight, depth. T h e other vowels are m o r e tranquil: 'u' is m o v e m e n t , agitation.. Where can you read about this?"; O R R G B , Sem. 11.2.1916). This particularr interest is similar to Chlebnikov's seeing the form of letters as a direct expressionn o f sound and an emotionally charged geometrical form. Krucenych o nn the other hand, expresses his interest in the letter in a manner which has provenn t o b e typical of his poetic experiments of the time (fig. 17): BemeAOMM

(Thingbreaker

YMOAOMM

Thoughtbreaker

PeneAOMM öyKBOMOAA (Krucenychh 1918a)

Speechbreaker Letterspeech)

157 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' O nn another page in the same book, the word "recelom" is followed by a n u m b e rr of letters and s o m e numbers, as an expression of the "breaking up of language".. This is a paradigmatic chain of words with the same suffix (-lom) which meanss breaking or fracturing. However, the last word is an inversion of the suffixfix to (-mol). This is a contraction of "molvil" [indicating reported speech], and itt inverts the negative chain of destructive n o u n s to a positive conclusion: the creationn of a language o f letters. I n F/nagt this paradigmatic chain is extended withh just one line (figure 18): KpOBOMOA A

(Bloodspeech) )

MMmammmmmm sWÊmËBmÊmmmmmiBBMamÊSliMMmammmmmm sWÊmËBmÊmmmmmiBBMamÊSli WÊÊSÊÊÊ WÊÊSÊÊÊ

Wk Wk if!.. /

tt

\: \: : : : . :

:: B l i > I

s/'s/' /

iJ J'iJ ''J ''J /f /f

%%

//

O O*>*«»••

VV i ^ ^ 11 * :

:

::: : :-. mmmMmmtwPlmmtnmm mmmMmmtwPlmmtnmm WÊmm WÊmm

Fig.. 17

&&

.-%

-i

Fig.. 18

Forr Krucenych, %aum' language is above all, an individual instantaneous expressionn and in this sense the letter is a materialized gesture, an instantaneous bodily-emotionall experience. As I have shown, this notion is present in Malevic' writingss o n poetry where he describes the act of writing as the materialization o ff a gesture:

158 8

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUCENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

ToBopp no3Ta - pHTM H TeMn - AeAHT npoMOKyncH, ACASTT Maccy 3ByKOByK) HH B HCHocTb HCHepnHBaiomHe npHBOAHT >KecTM caiworo reAa. KorAa 3aropaercHH nAaMfl noaTa, OH craHOBHTCH, noAHHMaeT pyKH,rorHÖaeTTCAO, AeAa»» H3 Hero Ty dx>pMy, KOTopaa AAH 3pirreAS 6yAeT HCHBOH, HOBOH, peaAbHoüü uepKOBbio. (1995: 149) (Thee poet's dialect, rhythm and tempo divide the mass of sound into intervals and makee clear the detailed gestures of me body itself. When the poet's fire breaks out,, he rises, raises his hand, bends his body, and turns it into the form mat will becomee a living, new, real church for the perceiver.) AA very similar description can be found in a panegyric to Krucenych from Terent'evv (a close companion and friend during uiese years): x 3 T HH KHHITI BTHpaiOTCfl B K05icy co3HaHHfl, >KHBOTBopfl ero! [...] TaKHe KHHTHH He HcnpaBAflioTCH aBTOpoM, He nepenHCHBaioTCfl: OHH TOHHHH

CAeAA KpoBH npoH3BOAi>HO ynaBuieü H3 HaKAOHeHHoro K öyMare nepa; OHH naxnyTT dpocoJ>opoM, KaK CBOKHC AOKOHH M03ra. (1919: 7) (Thesee books sink into the skin of our consciousness and revive it! [...] Such bookss cannot be improved by the author; cannot be rewritten: mey are the exact tracee of blood, which randomly fall from the pen to the paper; they smell like phosphor,, like the fresh locks of brain.) Thee difference between these two artists seems to be the absence of the "new reall church" in the characteristic of Krucenych's poetry as it is laconically expressedd on a page in Salamak. Ayinaa - HacMopK (BbiriAioHyAA — H Her!) Thee soul is snot (II spat it out — and gone it is!) (1919a) Therefore,, although influenced by Malevic, Krucenych seems to be more interestedd in the breaking down of reality in poetry (thingbreaker), of reason (thoughtbreaker),, of language (speechbreaker), and even of articulation (letterspeech). Fromm this pile of broken pieces of language and literature, only a vague attempt iss made to construe a new language ("cho-bo-ro", "raz-faz-gaz") founded in a bodily-emotionall experience. There seems to be no reason to believe that die 159 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

scatteredd letters on the pages in these books should be ascribed any meaning apartt from the meaning that arises from the similarity or contrast to other soundss within a poem or as being in opposition to the symbolist sound-scheme. Thee main interest remains the breaking down of the conventions of writing and reading.. In this way, the poetry takes the form of de-writing while the perceptionn of the poems remains an act of de-reading.

Inn the production of Krucenych, therefore, there can be no doubt that the bookss produced when he found himself partly cut off from his usual partners (Malevic,, Matjusin, Rozanova, and Chlebnikov), were evidence of his fundamentall interest in the book, the intertwining of text and image, and the conventions off writing and reading. In this production, these interests reach their most radicall form ever. In accordance with the theories of Malevic, in these books, the pagee is comprehended both as a pictorial surface-space and as a conventionalizedd space of writing. Both the realization of the page as a pictorial surface on whichh letters are composed according to pictorial lines and planes and the disruptionn of the regulated space of the book-page (which renders meaning possible),, hamper meaning-production and even articulation of the sounds. In the ultimatee minimal form the text on the page consists of a few lines as if to point too the nature of the letter and writing as virtually consisting of only lines on a page.. However, this is also a reduction of writing to a coming into being of writing: aa trace or a gesture. This writing emerges as a few scratches of a surface, a primall act of asserting the "self; a trace or a gesture emerge as the fundamental essencee of writing. Interestingly enough, Malevic often included inscriptions in hiss pre-suprematist paintings such as An Englishman in Moscow and Partial Eclipse. CompositionComposition with Mona Lisa. In his suprematist paintings, however, these inscr tionss are entirely left out. On the painting Suprematism (with Blue Triangle and BlackBlack Rectangle) (1915), an actual trace of writing can be found in the upper right cornerr of the painting (dependent of course on the way the painting has been hung).. Here, (although the letter "V ('B^ must have consciously been left discernablee in the white painting as a trace) the pure form of suprematist painting suddenlyy seems to exclude verbal representation, the letter (see Douglas et al. 1990:: Plate 106).

160 0

MINIMALISMM AND PLAY IN ALEKSEJ KRUÉENYCH'S CAUCASIAN BOOKS

Inn the production of Krucenych, the symbolization and the conventionalization off writing are constandy questioned. Krucenych seemed to agree with Malevic' onn going "beyond zero" in a creation of a minimal language and considering thee page a pictorial surface and the letter a pictorial element. However, Malevic introducedd the view that the letter should be comprehended as a mystical note, ass a meta-physical sign. This does not agree with Krucenych's constant search forr every possible way to disrupt the symbolic order. Thus, in his early productionn from the Caucasus, every page can be seen as a new attempt to play with thee conventions of writing, whether in %aum' poetry, spurn' propagation, antisymbolistt mockery, or in manifestos. The %aum' poetry emerges as empty indexicall signs on the instantaneous singularity of each page. This poetry consists off mechanical combinations of sounds, repetitions, tautology, shifts, or minimal variationss of sound-schemes. Onlyy the simple paradigmatic chains "cho-bo-ro" and "raz-faz-gaz" and the variationss of these chains emerge as a kind of new 'language'. But although thesee chains were programmatic for the theory of eco-poetry, they do not receivee a consistent justification within a system. They remain strictly private utterancess or expressions of mystification, of play. Krucenych seems constandy too play with the automatism of reading, which is most evident in the crossed outt letter in the poem 'Krym()kaja\ This poem shows to what extent the reader iss always focused on the production of or the re-establishing of meaning. Finally,, the book itself is questioned as being the material bearer of meaning relyingg on a high degree of conventionalization. All of these conventions are questionedd but are never entirely given up. Therefore, the conventions of the book (thee copy, the copyright, the turning of the pages, the direction of reading, the pagee as being a (white) space on which letters, lines, stanzas, and poems can be differentiated),, of the letters (materialized language), and of the poem (a structuree of lines, sound repetitions and space), are, apart from one or two exceptions,, partly or entirely reconstructable. Thus, although these conventions are veryy often difficult to apprehend, every page emerges as a new playful attempt too disrupt the conventions of writing and reading. Therefore, although attempts weree clearly made to construct a theory of economical poetry as the answer to

161 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' thee emergence of suprematism in painting, the poetical practice of Krucenych remainss preoccupied with the disruption of meaning in poetry, which according too Malevic, never frees the letter from the conventions of symbolization.

162 2

55 POETRY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARAA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL

POETRY,, 1918-1919

Itt is clear from the previous chapter that the outbreak of the First World War saww a change in the Moscow avant-garde art and literary scene. Il'ja Zdanevic andd Aleksej Krucenych had left for the Caucasus and though the former never returnedd to Moscow, Krucenych returned in 1922. At the same time, Michail Larionovv and NataTja Goncarova had left for Paris to work with the Djagilev ballet,, and Ol'ga Rozanova had died in 1918. Furthermore, new aesthetic systemss and ideas had emerged from the early cubo-futurist avant-garde. A milestonee in the transformation of the Russian avant-garde was the "0-10, the Last Futuristt Exhibition of Pictures" (December 1915) where Kazimir Malevic exhibitedd his black square for the first time and proclaimed a new art movement, suprematism.. Another important movement had already surfaced in 1913 with Vladimirr Tatlin's counter-reliefs (three-dimensional objects made of diverse materialss such as glass, wood, and metal). These reliefs initiated the works of non-utilitariann constructions.1 A third factor in the development of a second avant-gardee movement was the participation of new young artists such as Aleksandrr Rodcenko, Varvara Stepanova and Aleksej Gan who were not rooted in anti-symbolistt confrontation. They were strongly influenced by both Malevic andd Tatlin, but at the "lOja gosudarstvennaja vystavka: Bespredmetnoe tvorcestvoo i Suprematism" ("10th State Exhibition of Non-Objective Art and Suprematism")) held in Moscow in April 1919, took sides with Tatlin. A couple of yearss later, they were to found the First Working Group of Constructivists, whichh marked the appearance of constructivism as a new major avant-garde movementt in post-revolutionary Russia. Off the constructivists, Varvara Stepanova remains known primarily as a typographicall and textile designer and as the wife of Aleksandr Rodcenko, famous forr his photomontages and graphic designs. At the age of 18, Stepanova had 163 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

movedd to Moscow from Kazan' to continue her art studies and in 1915-17 becamee acquainted with cubo-futurist art and poetry. At this point in time, cubofuturismm as a major movement in art and poetry was already a closed book. However,, the work of Rozanova and Krucenych had a strong impact on Stepanovaa and inspired her own production of handmade books and %aum' poetry. Stepanovaa began to write t(aum' poetry in 1917 and produced a couple of handmadee books and single pages with brighdy colored designs intertwined with handwrittenn letters. In Stepanova's books, all elements of the preceding avantgardee book-production are found. However, these books also represent the graduall development of a new relationship between word and image. Stepanova'ss books were made in the short and tumultuous period just after the Octoberr Revolution. Next to the development of already initiated individual artisticc projects, the Revolution posed new questions to artists and poets, namely,, how they felt about the new socio-political situation and how they should respond.. Varvara Stepanova took an active part in discussions between individuall artists and also in the new state institutions for the arts. In this chapter, I willl show how the production of handmade books and the writing of %aum' poetryy inscribed itself in the aesthetic development following the October Revolution.. This chapter is not to mark the beginning of the end of the avant-garde movementt and the handmade and handwritten books, but rather to present yet anotherr approach to this phenomenon referred to by David Burljuk, Vasilij Kamenskijj and Vladimir Majakovskij as the Third Revolution of the Spirit.2 Varvaraa Stepanova's books are still fairly inaccessible, a fact which is due to theirr nature as (mostly) unique, single hand-colored pages or as extremely rare, handmadee books of limited number. The books Rfny chomle (1918), Zigra ar (1918),, and Globolkim (1918),3 consist of single pages with color poetry and were neverr published. Yet another book of poems with a similar design has recendy beenn reproduced under the tide J ad' (Poison) (original version dates from 1919).4 Thee poems are written or painted directly onto the page in between or on patchess of bright colors, whereas Toft (1919) appeared as a book very similar to thosee produced by Krucenych during his Caucasian period. In Toft, no color is used;; there are merely simple, grid-like illustrations by Rodcenko. This book

164 4

POETRYY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY wass published a n d a n u m b e r of copies still exist. O u t o f all the books o f this period,, Varst (1918/19) is distinctive because it is typewritten. 5 Veryy different from these b o o k s and single hand-colored manuscript pages are thee illustrations for Aleksej Krucenych's play Gly-Gly (1919) and the b o o k Gaust fabafaba (1919). 6 T h e s e t w o b o o k s contain collage elements, and Gaust caba uses newspaperr as the basis for handwritten p o e m s or collages. Evgenij K o v t u n reproducedd this b o o k in its entirety in the b o o k From Surface to Space (1974). Apart fromm this reproduction and a few single pages, three copies o f Gaust caba are knownn t o exist today. 7 1 have h a d the fortune to study o n e of these, the copy heldd at the M o s c o w Literary Museum and to reproduce some pages. I have also beenn able, for t h e first time, to compare this copy with the t w o hitherto reproducedd copies a n d t o study the b o o k in detail. Evgenij Kovtun's article *Varvara Stepanova'ss Anti-Book', which accompanied the reproduction o f Gaust caba in FromFrom Surface to Space, is still the only substantial article written about the b o o k . Withh the analysis in this chapter, I will cast new light o n some aspects o f the b o o kk unnoticed by K o v t u n and t o challenge his notion of the "anti-book". Seenn in a post-revolutionary context, the handwritten text acquires n e w meaning.. I t is no longer merely a negation o f communication and a self-reflexive critiquee o f the prosaic word, b u t also a n e w language of revolution: the language off the posters, and graffiti o n the walls in the streets and in the squares o f the city.. Aleksej Krucenych (who, though n o t actually present in M o s c o w t o witnesss the events h e describes) characterizes this shift in the following way: ECAHH AO peBOAiouHH GyAeTAHHe AepHtaAH Kypc Ha nyÖAHKy ayAHTopHH, TOO c nepB&ix >Ke AHCH peBOAiomm OHH IICAHKOM BHIHAH Ha yAHiry, B TOA-

rry,, CAHAHO> C paöoHHMH MaccaMH. ByAeTAflHe Ha 3a6opax, pHAOM c rrpaBHTeAbCTBeHHMMHH ra3CTaMH, paCKAeHBaAH CBOH B03BaHHfl H Ü 0 3 M M ,

CTHXHH H KapTHHH. (1996: 100) (Iff before the revolution, the Men of the Future headed for the public of auditoriums,riums, then from the very first days of the revolution, they exclusively went out on thee streets, into the crowd; they blended in with the working masses. The Men of thee Future pasted their appeals and poems, verses and pictures onto the fences nextt to the government's newspapers.)

165 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Inn the article 'From Faktura to Factography', Benjamin Buchloh claims that a profoundd paradigmatic change took place in post-1920 Russia: the modernist avant-garde'ss concern for the self-reflexive pictorial and sculptural production wass abandoned and replaced by a concern for productivist practices (1987: 80). Thiss shift was gradually taking place in the period dating approximately from 19199 to 1922 and is clearly reflected in Stepanova's statement 'On Constructivism'(1921): : Experimentall cognition, as "active thought", as the action of the contemporaryy epoch (rather than contemplation), produces an analytical method inn art that destroys the sacred value of the work as a unique object by layingg bare its material foundations [...] The formal approach is opposed to spiritualityy and ideas, and the work is transformed into an experiment, a formm of laboratory work. (Lavrent'ev 1988a: 173-74) Thee contrast between the contemplative self-reflexive artistic approach and the productivistt professional approach is evident. However, as Buchloh emphasizes, thesee constructivist objects differ little from the "self-reflexive verification and epistemologicall critique" of the modernist paradigm. Therefore, a crisis was graduallyy recognized within this paradigm. In the 1920s, this art failed to address thee audience of the new society, it was "a crisis of audience relationships, a momentt in which the historical institutionalization of the avant-garde had reached itss peak of credibility, from which legitimation was only to be obtained by a redefinitionn of its relationship with the new urban masses and their cultural demands"" (Buchloh 1987: 88). Thus, around 1919, iconic imagery was reintroducedd for the first time (Ibid: 90). There is, however, a problem in explaining thiss change, which underlies Buchloh's outline of paradigmatic changes. As Paull Wood points out, it was a time marked by the First World War, civil war, revolutionn and until 1928 or 1929 when the industrialization campaigns were beginningg to give results, an almost total lack of industry in Russia (1992: 358). Thus,, the "new urban masses" did not exist until much later. There was, however,, a pressing need to involve the artists in the construction of communist Russiaa and a desire among the artists and poets to become involved in influencingg the development of a new culture. This involvement included a (re-)evalua-

166 6

POETRYY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY

tionn of the relationship between art and life, art and state, and art and public reflectedflected in innate struggles for power and influence in the new cultural institutions,, for the right (and only) answer to the suddenly emerged problems in a multitudee of artistic ways. Therefore, the first years after the revolution were distinguishedd by both an unprecedented freedom and variety of responses to thee new situation, and by complex relations between cultural institutions and artistss and among individual artists and artistic groups. Itt was in the midst of this rapid development that Stepanova produced her handwrittenn books. Clear elements of the early avant-garde critique of representationn as well as an awareness of handwriting and collage as a means of expressingg a new revolutionary message can be seen in the books, i.e., the reduction of alll formal and material operations to purely indexical signs, and the beginning tendencyy to incorporate or create iconic (representative) imagery. In the followingg pages, I will focus on pages containing color-poetry from Rtny chomle and ZigraZigra ar, the book Toft, the known illustrations for G/y-G/y, and the book Gaust (aba,(aba, which represents a mixture of all the anti- or representative strategies and constitutess a work of art rife with contradictions. Fromm 'cveto-pis" to poster Itt is remarkable with what emotional and expressive vocabulary the poetic experimentss of Rozanova and Stepanova have been described. In her major articlee on Rozanova, Gur'janova thus writes about Rozanova's "poetic etudes": "Noo postepenno stanovitsja uznavaem ee sobstvennyj golos, bogatstvo ego ternbra,, muzykal'nost' zvucanija: ego 'jarkost" i neznost', delikatnost' ee poézii — kakk i zivopisi" ("But gradually her own voice became distinguishable, the richnesss of its timbre, the musicality of sounds: its 'brightness' and tenderness, the delicacyy of her poetry as well as her painting"; 1992: 89). Similarly, Aleksandr Lavrent'evv describes Stepanova's poetry as emotionally tainted landscapes: "Thee sound of a poem may be rough like a rough, natural material ('Shukh taz khkon'),, smooth-flowing like a breath of wind (Tianta chiol7), or impulsive ('Aftaa iur inkay' (1988a: 21). John E. Bowlt gives the following description: "Thee sounds that she arranged in syncopated patterns - 'Afta yur inka/Nair 167 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' prazi/Tavenioo lirka/Taiuz fai' (Rtny khomle) - are jazzy, harsh, lapidary, as if shee wished to recapture the 'original' utterance, the primal poem, like the baby's gibberishh or the witch doctor's mumbo-jumbo" (1988: 10). Corresponding to thee same sphere of imagery, Lavrent'ev writes about the book Poisom "This is thee level of the primitive shaman's magic, wishing to cure the illness as well as too destroy his enemies with the help of the same forces" (Stepanova 1993). Thesee poems clearly invite an emotional interpretation - one delicate and fine, thee other harsh, dark and jazzy. Thee relation to sound and color, the relationship between phonemes and music andd between phonemes and color is described in a similar manner. There is a remarkablee congruence in the descriptions of these relations in the work of the twoo artists, of which I will give just a few examples. Stepanova's color poetry is characterizedd as an "optophoic synthesis": [B]utt none of them [Filonov, Malevic, Rozanova] accompanied their versess with dynamic visual structures which [...] act as colored counterpointss to these brusque phonemes. The result is an audacious optophonic synthesiss of radical neologism and abstract painting, a formal stenography thatt a number of writers and musicians [...] were also exploring. It is interestingg to note the reference to Russia's most avant-garde composer, Nikolaii Roslavets, in one of Stepanova's illustrations to Gly-Gly. (Bowlt 1988: 10) ) Similarly,, Rozanova's vpum' poetry is characterized as musical etudes: BB ocHOBe ee 3ayMHo5 IIO33HH BcerAa Ae>KaT ABe HAH rpw {^OHCMH, KOTOpbiee OHa eapbHpyeT, apaiCKHpyeT, oöurphiBafl "rAacHwe" H "corAacHue" pHÓJ>MHH — KaK 3TO npOHCXOAHT CO 3ByKOM B My3hIKaAbHOM 3TIOAe. Mo>KHO

CKa3an>,, HTO ee CTHXH cymecTByioT "AAH roAoca" - He B npocrpaHCTBe, a BOO BpeMeHH. (Gur'janova 1992: 93) (Att the basis of her %aum' poetry are always two or three phonemes that she varies,, arranges, playing on "vowel" and "consonant" rhymes, like it is done with the soundss in a musical etude. One could say that her poems are made "for die voice" —— not in space, but in time.) Stepanovaa makes use of contrasts between colors, just as the sounds in her poetryy emphasize contrast and conflict: 168 8

POETRYY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY Colorr plays a major role in Stepanova's work. One might even speak of thee text's color-facture. Color may be cool and recede deep into the page, orr bright and warm, pulling off the surface of the page. Cool shades are in constantt conflict with warm ones, just as in Stepanova's poetry vowels and consonantss are in conflict. (Lavrent'ev 1988a: 21) Similarly,, the contrast between colors is emphasized in Rozanova's work: Teiwaa KaïKAOH ee cynpeMaranecKOH KOMTJO3HII;HH - 3TO "po>KAeHHe" UBeTaa (icaK B no33nn — po>KAeHne 3Byica) B AHCCOHaHCHbix KoirrpacTHux coneTaHHflxx cseTAoro H Aencoro, TeriAoro H xoAOAHoro, co3ByHHoro H aTOHaAbHoro.. CBeTOHOCHOCTb ee >KHBonncHoro ijBeTa cooTBercTByeT oTKpHTOCTHH H HHcroTe 3ByKa B II033HH. (Gur'janova 1992: 95) (Thee theme of every one of her suprematist compositions is the "birth" of color (inn her poetry it is the birth of sound) in dissonant contrasting combinations of lightt and dark, heavy and light, warm and cold, harmonious and atonal. The light structuree of her painterly color corresponds to the openness and purity of sound inn her poetry. Yet,, there is a difference between Rozanova's poetry and use of color and the colorr poetry of Stepanova. While comparing Rozanova's poetic experiments withh those of Stepanova, there can be no doubt regarding its influence, but theree is also a tinge of parody in the latter's poetry. Itt is interesting to compare the two poems 'lefanta ciol...' by Rozanova and 'Aftaa jur inka...' by Stepanova: (Lefantaa ciol miall anta HMMHOA A immiol l neulomae e HeyAOMae e samaa smiett caMaa cMHerT ae e ae e HHTTHOAA 0(\> yHT ciggioll of unt aa varenest aa BapeHecT HHMHOAA aT Ta p e e r iccioll at ta rest)

Aeó^airraa HHOA

MHaAA airra

AtbTaa KJp HHKa HaHpp npa3H TaBeHboo AHpKa Taio33 oJ)aH OO MaAH TOTTH OAee Ma«4>T H3Baa AeflTTH Ho^>Taa AHflpT

(Aftaa jur inka nairr prazi taven'oo lirka Tajuzz fai OO mali totti Olee majaft izvaa lejatti Iftaa lijart)

(Rodcenkoo and Stepanova 1991: 73)

(Rozanovaa 1992: 100)

Thesee poems are very similar in their sound structure in which the vowels 'a' andd 'i' stand out and in both poems a more or less complex net of repetition, 169 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' syllabicc metathesis, and inner rhyme can be distinguished. Both poems have a simplee metric structure (Rozanova's poem is consistendy trochaic, while Stepanova'ss poem is iambic in its metric structure); they even have a simple rhyme structure.. Thus, both poems are conventional in their formal structure. Moreover,, the words do not break the phonetic laws and can be pronounced without strainn (Stepanova's poem is provided with stressed syllables). This suggests that thesee poems were meant for recitation. Att first sight, the poems are in every respect so similar that the direct influence off Rozanova's poetry on that of Stepanova is indubitable. Nevertheless, the soundd structure of Stepanova's poem is easily distinguishable from that of Rozanova.. In the fifth line of Stepanova's poem, the sound structure changes fromm a consistent 'a-i' structure to a completely different tone: "O mali totti / olee majaft", and then again to "Izva lefatti". While the first half of the poem hass some words that bear resemblance to English ("ink", "lirka" [similar to "lyrics"],, "afta jur" [similar to "after you"] and "(ta)ven'o" [similar to "when you"]),, the middle part is more similar in sound to Spanish or Italian, and the thirdd part to yet another, unknown language. The poetic emotional strain, equallyy present in Rozanova's poetry, appears to shift towards parody: are these liness a parody of a foreign language, romantic love poetry, or oi^aum^ Is Stepanovaa mocking the early avant-garde %aum'? It is difficult to say. But the foreignn sounding words in her %aum'poetry ("post kard" [similar to "post-card"] andd "mont ognitta" [a name of a mountain?] in Gaust caba and "komsita" [soundss like the French "comme ei comme ca" or a non-existing word with a Spanishh or Italian sounding ending] in Toft) are a recurrent element. In a poem inn Gaust caba, the initial line ("O te ta") lends an expressive quality to the poem: OO Te Ta Moo HaHHO Hmpaa xAeflHna HeppaiOHiXHH Hnp6oo App

(O te ta do najco Citra chlejacca Cerrajunci Cirbo Ar)

Thiss poem almost echoes a poem by Rozanova: " O Klementina / otvet' na lju

170 0

POETRYY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY

bov'// tvoj mracnyj vid / gorit prekrasno / [tvoja] devic'ja gibel' / [tebja] zovet // nebrezno / k otravnym caram" ("Oh Klementina / answer my love / your gloomyy look / burns beautifully / [your] maidenly downfall / calls you / carelesslyy / to poisonous charms"; Rozanova 1992: 100). This proto-poem was deconstructedd and transformed into a ^a«w'poem: "A. Klementina! / Uvaz' at mesta!! / Tvoj carnyj [a]kvar[i]um / Gorit jakmisto! / Divan'e more / Uvaet maremm / Igraé zvaet / O / K / Marém / Carèm!...".9 In this de-constructed ^w/ww'poem,, Rozanova parodies romantic love poetry, whereas Stepanova's poemm poses as a mz/poem without transforming the high-flown pathos into a degraded,, absurd text. Instead, in this poem Stepanova preserves the pathos thoughh the words are unintelligible. Therefore, it has a touch of parody which is significandyy different from Krucenych's 'Dyr bul scyl' or from Rozanova's 'A. Klementina!'. . Thee sound structure of Stepanova's poems is also somewhat different from that off her predecessor's and on the verge of becoming a parodyy of %aum'. While Rozanovaa invents ingenious and humoristic semantic meanings with her metatheticc transformations of the sounds ("Vul'gark' ach bulVarov / varvary gusary // val's Ara bik / Araby bar arapy / Turk gubjat tara" ("Vulgarian ah! Boulevards // barbars hussars / waltz Ara bik / Arabs bar tricks / Turk destroy tara"; Rozanovaa 1992: 100), Stepanova does not play with the sound structure, it seems, in orderr to open up new semantic meaning. In a poem from Toft, she creates metatheticc transformations ("nygoglob / gly o ..." and "engary raibary"), but the wordss remain empty signifiers. In this poem, the words "o idice zdrait" are possiblyy derived from the Russian "idti" [to go] and the English word "straight". Theyy are contrasted to the otherwise completely unintelligible words in the rest off the poems and become a parody not of traditional high art poetry, but of %aum'%aum'itself.itself. This effect is perhaps unintentional, but the difference between this poetryy and that of Rozanova is obvious. Theree are also significant similarities, however, with the poetry of Krucenych. Stepanovaa uses paradigmatic chains similar to the spurn' poems of Krucenych's Caucasiann period: "zist / ligs / mast / kzems / usdr..." (Zigra at) or "zanistra / stargll / mimn / oneb / glips / kilele / ogle / mesin / rabs / dsm / tesm / osma 171 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT* // meos ..." (Zigra ar). This last poem is drawn in black capital letters along the insidee rim of a bright yellow circle. It is in this kind of composition that Stepanova'ss work becomes interesting. As Bowlt and Lavrent'ev remark, in these compositions,, a strong interaction between color planes and %aum'words is evident. Inn Russian modernism, there was considerable interest not only in the close relationshipp between color and sound in music, but also between color and phonemess in poetry.10 Referring to Rimbaud's "Voyelles', Kul'bin gave every consonantt a specific color: Ka>KAaHH corAacHaa HMeeT CBOH uBer: p - KpacHaa (KpoBb, Apana, Bpa>KAa, pon);; m - jKeATaa (iKeAaHHe, BOJKAeAemie, >Ka>KAa); c - CHHHH; 3 - 3eAeHa*; xx - nepHo->KeATafl; K — nepHaa. UBCT cymecTByeT B HCHBonncn, 3ByK - B MV3HKCC [...] CAOBO KaK TaKOBoe He MaTepHaAbHO H He SHepreTiiHHO. CHHTe33 ero c \ry3bncoH Aaer dDOHeraKy cAOBa (3BVK). CHHTC3 c >KHBoroicbio AaeTT HanepTaHHe CAOBa. (2000: 45-46) (Everyy consonant has its own color: 'r' is red (blood, fight, enemy, destiny) [all Russiann words are spelled with a 'r']; 'z' is yellow (desire, lust, craving) [all Russian wordss are spelled with a Y]; 's'' is blue; Y is green; 'ch' is black-yellow; 'k' is black. Colorr belongs to painting, sound to music. [...] The word as such is not material andd not energetic. The synthesis with painting provides the graphics of words.) Similarly,, in the new variant of T h e Declaration of the Word as Such' (1917), Krucenychh writes Ker Aa)Ke x o p o m o HX Hane^aTaTb pa3HHMHH KpacKaMH HAH öyKBH OAHHM uBeTOM, a (|)HrypM HanpaBAemwi HXX ABHMceHHH ApyrHM. KaK n o TBoeMy? IlepepHcyio BO BAaAHMHpe. (1999: 73) ) (Yourr non-objective [poems] of letters in movement are awfully interesting, and in printt they will become amazing. Perhaps it would even be good to print them in differentt colors, or the letters with one color, and with another one for the figures directingg their movements. What do you think? I will draw them again in Vladimir.) ) O t h e rr interesting examples of Rozanova's use of color from these years are her colorr collages. In these, Rozanova assembled pieces of colored paper o r cloth inn abstract compositions that (similar to the relief) "convey a special sense of space". 1 22 Influenced by Rozanova, Krucenych made the b o o k Universal WarTi>, 173 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

whichh included 9 poems and 12 color collages. Unlike Rozanova's color collages,, however, the theme of war is evident in Krucenych's collages. They show moree or less absurd allegories of war, with Germany, the number one enemy.13 Itt is evident that these experiments were influenced both by Malevic' ideas of thee "letters that fly" and the close relationship between "letter masses" and "colorr planes". However,, as Gur'janova points out, the disparity between Malevich and Rozanovaa can be detected in Malevich' use of the word "paint" and Rozanova's use off the word "color": "[W]hen he [Malevich] uses the word 'color' in his writingss [...] he still means 'paint', the materiality of color contingent on texture" (Gur'janovaa 2000: 113). Whereas Malevic is primarily concerned with texture (i.e.,, the inter-relationship or contrast between pigment, form and line), Rozanovaa is primarily concerned with a non-material expression of "pure" color. Therefore,, texture contaminates the nature of color (Gur'janova 2000: 113). In herr review of Rozanova's posthumous exhibition in 1919, Stepanova characterizess Rozanova and Malevic' experiments with color as distinctly different: Olgaa Rozanova's art is the play and movement of colour. Colour is alive in herr pictures, hence there is no texture \faktura C.G.] to interfere with the perfectt expression of colour. [.. .J Characteristic of Olga Rozanova's creativee work is the Great Colourfulness which drives painting from rooms andd museums into streets and squares. [...] Analysing Rozanova's Suprematistt period we may see that her Suprematism is the reverse of that of Malevich's.. His works are based on the composition of squares, Rozanova'ss - on colour. Malevich employs colour to contrast different planes whilee on Rozanova's canvases composition serves to reveal all the potentialitiess of colour on a planar surface. In Suprematism she produced the Suprematismm of the painting rather than that of a square. [In the pieces of thee last period] we witness a transition from the planes of Suprematism to ann extensive reduction of colour intensity, which makes colour independent off form and plane. (Rozanova 1992: 106) Inn light of the ongoing power struggle between Rodcenko and Malevic in connectionn with the "The 10th State Exhibition: Non-Objective Creation and Suprematism",, it is understandable that it was Stepanova's clear intention to characterizee Rozanova's work as different to that of Malevic'.14 However, it is also a 174 4

POETRYY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY d o c u m e n tt in which Stepanova expresses her o w n priorities and artistic values. I nn this review, it is interesting to see that (as markedly different from the cubist orr futurist manifestos preceding it) there is a distinction between the clearly positivelyy valued "color" and the negatively valued "faktura". " C o l o r " means movement,, expression, spirituality paired with technique, integrity and independence,, and it is connected with streets and squares, while "faktura"

signifies

squaree forms, contrast between different planes, form and plane, suprematism, futurismm and cubism, and r o o m s and museums. T h e use of the term faktura, however,, is n o t simple. Reviewing Rodcenko's contributions for the "10th State Exhibition",, Stepanova appears to take the opposite stance: MeMM e m e BbmrpbiBaiOT ero nepHwe Beiuw, - HTO TaM HeT Kpacon, a noTOMyy OHH H CHAbHH TOAbKO >KHBOnHCbK), H e 6 y A y H H 3aTCMHCHH HHKaKHMH nOCTOpOHHHMHH 3AeMCHTaMH, HH Aa>Ke UBeTOM. [...] KaK BHXOA H3 UBeTO-

Boroo cynpeMaTH3Ma - yHHHTOHceroie KBaApaTa H HOBaa 4>opMa, yrAyÖAeHHee >KHBonHCH B caMoe ce6n, KaK npoó^eccHOHaAbHbiH MOMCHT, HOBaa HHTepecHafff (J>aKTypa H TOABKO >KHBonHCb He rAaAKoe 3aicpaiHHBaHHe B OAHOHH KpacKe, caMO HeÖAaroAapHOH, - B nepHOH. [...] B «nepHbix» >Ke HHHeroo Kporne >KHBonHCH HeT, a noTOMy HX KAaH. [...]] XyAOMtHHKH H imcaTeAH o6fl3aHM HeMeAAH B3HTb ropmKH C KpaCKaMH HH KHCTflMH CBOerO MaCTepCTBa HAAIOMHHOBaTb, pa3pHCOBaTb Bee ÖOKa,

A6aa H rpyAH ropoAOB, BOK3aAOB H BCHHO öerymnx craw >KeAe3HOAopo>KHNxx BaroHOB. (Jangfeldt 1977: 23) (Inn the name of the great step forward of everybody's equality before the culture, lett the Free word of the creative personality be written everywhere: on the walls of houses,, fences, roofs, the streets of our cities, greens and on the backs of cars, equipages,, trams and on the clothes of all citizens. [...] It is the artists' and writers' dutyy immediately to grab a pot of paint and illuminate, paint all over all sides, foreheadss and breasts of the cities, stations and the eternally running packs of railroadd carriages with his paintbrushes.) Thiss actionism of handwriting reminds one of Larionov and Zdanevic's declarationn *Why We Paint Ourselves' (1913). The newspaper called for a third "revolutionn of the spirit" (Gassner 1992: 193). The kafé did not last long (it was closedd down by the authorities in April 1918), the same pathos, however, can stilll be found in Majakovskij's poem 'Prikaz po armii iskusstva' ('Order to the Armyy of Art/) printed on the front page of the first issue of the journal Iskusstvo kommunykommuny {Art of the Commune) published in Petrograd from December 1918 to Aprill 1919 (Lodder 1983: 76): "Na ulice tascite rojali, / Baraban, / rojal' raskrojaa li, / no ctob grochot byl, / ctob grom/ [...] Ulicy - nasi kisti. / Ploscadi nasii palitry / Knigoj vremeni / tysjacelistoj / revoljucii dni ne vospety. / Na ulicy,, futuristy, / barabansciki i poéty!" ("Drag pianos into the streets, / and a drum,, / when opening the pianos up wide / let there be a crash / let there be thunderr / [...] We bring our brushes into the street / our palettes into the 203 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' squaress / With the thousand-page book of time / Revolution's days have yet to bee sung. / Into the streets, futurists, / drummers and poets!"; Majakovskij 1963:: 249-250). A similar poem was published in the fifth edition olhkusstvo (A.rf)(A.rf) (the follower of A.rt of'the Commune) apparently as a polemic response to a numberr of attacks launched in the newspaper Vecernie Moskvy {Moscow Evening) by,, among others, the head of two sections of MONO, Moskovskij Otdel Narodnogoo Obrazovanija (the Moscow Department of People's Education), IZOO "izobrazitePnye iskusstva" (Fine arts) and "narodnye prazdnestva" (People'ss festivities), the government official Vladimir Frice. This conflict was at its climaxx in February-March 1919 (Jangfeldt 1977: 42). Inn the poem 'My idem' (*We Are Coming'), Majakovskij opposes "we", the "conquerors",, "architects" and "illuminators of tomorrow's cities" to the "old evil-mindedd men", who fight them in the newspapers: [HJOBMHH rpflAeT apXHTeKTOp — / 3TO M i l , HAAJOMHHaTOpM 3aBTpaiHHHX

ropOAOB.. / M H HAeM / HepyiiraMo, / 6oApo. / 3 H , ABaAuaTHAeTHHe! / B3MBaeTT B BaM. / BapaöaHH, / Taumre KpacoK BëApa. / 3aHOBo oÖKpacHMCH.. / CHHH, MocKBa! / H nycKafi / c raaerw / KaKOH-HHÖyAt BwpoAOK / cpaacaeTCfll c HaMH / (He Ha CMepn>, a Ha JKHBOT). (1963: 261-262) (Thee new architect of the future - / that is we, the illuminators of tomorrow's cities.. / We are coming / inviolably, / cheerfully. / Hey, twenty-year-olds! / You are calledd for. / Drumming, / carry pots of paint. / Let us get soaked in paint again. / Shine,, Moscow! / And just let / any newspapers' degenerate / strike us / (on the stomach))41 1 Thee futurists were excluded from the decorations in relation to the May 1 celebrationss in 1919, and in the dedication in a copy of Vojna imir (Warand'Peace), whichh Majakovskij gave to Stepanova. O n March 4, 1919, he wrote: "Tov. Stepanovojj na pamjat' ob atake na Frice V. Majakovskij" ("For comrade Stepanova inn the memory of the attack on Frice. V. Majakovskij"; Jangfeldt 1977: 50). This indicatess that Stepanova had been involved in or at least sympathized with Majakovskijj in his struggle with Frice in the newspaper columns. The question is, iff this political and cultural climate could have influenced Stepanova's choice of writingg her handwritten %aum'poetry on the pages oilyyestija.

204 4

POETRYY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY

Fig.. 24 T h ee poems in Gaust caba do not differ from die p o e m s in Stepanova's color poedcc compositions and some poems are even repeated. They have a very clear rhythmm and a somewhat conventional formal structure. Unlike Krucenych's p o e mm 'Dyr bul scyl', Stepanova's poems are pronounceable, and some words evenn seem to remind o n e of Russian and foreign words. T h e main feature thoughh is repetitions of sounds, rhythm or morphological constructs, which seemm to constitute the structuring element. As I have mentioned, Stepanova's poetryy is very expressive and seen in this light, the handwritten %aum' texts in GaustGaust caba are in line with the initial aesthetic response to the Revolution. It was thee gesture of a political pathos that did not exclude the newspaper text, but respondedd artistically and poetically to the politics of the new rulers of the country.. T h u s , Krucenych in a later apology for %aum'language

wrote:

HeAb3fll BecTH ce&H H3HKOBO OAHHaKOBO H B KOMHaTe CBoen, 11 Ha yAHne 11 BB 3aceAaHHH 3aKOHOAaTeAbHoro ynpe«AeHHH. 3Ty HCTHHV nepBMM co3Ha205 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' TeAbHOO yCBOHAH II03TW cbyTypHCTM. O H H AOKa3aAH, HTO nOSTHMeCKHH

H3WKK een. BnoAHe o6oco6AeHHaafl3HKOBanKaTeropua [...]. 3ayMHHH H3MK ecrbb npe>KAe Bcero H3MK nyoAHHHoro AetfCTBHtf, TeMn H pHTM KOToporo noo CKopocTH H AHHaMHKe AaAetco npeBocxoAHT MeAAHTeAhHocrb O6HHHOHH HeAOBenecKOH penn. (1923) (Onee cannot behave language-wise in the same way in one's own room, and on thee street and at meetings in the legislative institution. The futurist poets were the firstfirst to consciously adopt this truth. They proved that the poetic language is a completelyy isolated language category [...]. Zauw' language is first of all the languagee of public events, its tempo and rhythm which in speed and dynamics by farr surpasses die slowness of ordinary human speech.) Zaum'Zaum' was the new expressive language just like brightly colored images were thee new images for the streets and squares, so wrote Stepanova in her review of Rozanova'ss paintings. Indeed, the handwritten letters in Gaustcaba remind one off graffiti scrawled across a wall and there is no sign of any hidden pun or commentt in the newspaper texts that might cast light on her use of this backgroundd for her poems (see figure 24). Although the Mallarméan exclusion of thee typeset lettering and the monotony of the column is obviously the modernistt context of Stepanova's book, Gaust caba is not so much an anti-book as a neww book, a book that speaks the language of the streets and squares, loud and clear.. One language is individual, singular and un-repeatable; the other is public andd relies on the exact repetition of identical signs. One language should be perceivedd and felt; therefore, the letters should be visible and palpable. The otherr should be understood as signs of an absent meaning; therefore, the letters shouldd be absent as well. There is no sign of a direct response to the newspaper textt or any indication that the graffiti text on top of the newspaper typeset is thee result of a struggle between academicians such as Frice and the futurists of thee columns of Vecernie Moskvy. However, there is a clear indication, that this graffitii should indeed be seen as a new revolutionary language with all its "épatage"épatage and defiant individualism" Qangfeldt 1977: 92). Thee six collages in Stepanova's book, which are reproduced in their entirety by Evgenijj Kovtun, 42 have clippings from popular magazines glued onto the newspaperr page. The clippings show fragments of pictures and text, and seem

206 6

POETRYY OF THEE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY

too be cut very deliberately. This is characteristic of all the collages that I have beenn able to study. The play with formal equivalences or contrasts, which were thee dominant qualities of Stepanova's illustrations for Gly-Gly, are also dominantt features in the collages in Gaust caba, and like the former illustrations, somee pages in Gaust caba also include semantic puns. The three copies of the book,, which I am familiar with, have a similar collage on the cover (see figure 25)..

. c

Fig.. 25

207 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Fig.. 26

208 8

POETRYY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY

Onn the cover, a piece of pink paper (one with remnants of the word "gosudarstvennyj"" [state-], another with remnants of the words "vystavka kartin, gravjur"'' [exhibition of paintings, engravings], and a third (without words) in a rectangularr shape with two wing-like shapes at the sides is glued onto the newspaperr page. Onn top of this, a white piece of paper is glued which has an axe-likee shape. The proportions and forms of the cut-outs seem to be exacdy thee same, which indicates that Stepanova did attempt to create a sense of uniformityy between the copies. Similarly, the cut-outs of the collages in figures 26, 277 and 28 have exacdy the same shapes, although the paper used is different. I havee been able to compare the two already reproduced copies with the one, whichh is held at the Literary Museum in Moscow, and it appears that the pages andd the forms of all the collages of these copies correspond completely.

Fig.. 27

Fig. 28

209 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Somee pages presumed to be a part of Gaust caba are very different, however, whichh indicates that these might not have been part of the original books and mayy have been produced at a later stage or in a different context; or there was somee variation among the different copies. These pages differ in look from thosee included in the book by being more complex in their compositions, and includingg popular photographs or fashion imagery from many different sources (seee figure 30). 43 1 will therefore regard these compositions, not as parts of GaustGaust êaba, but as individual compositions. Evenn in the black and white reproductions given here, it is obvious that there aree significant contrasts in the tone of colors between the clip-outs and between thee clippings and the typeset of the newspaper page. The white seems to cut holess in the page as in figure 27, while the darker clippings set off against the backgroundd of white. O n this page, the mosdy white piece of paper is contrastedd with a dark clip-out of what seems like an image from a popular magazinee of a ball with men in black suits. Similarly, on another page, two clippings withh large black letters are added to the fine clip-out with fragments of a lithographh the color of which is contrasted to the darker newspaper background (see figuree 29). This formal contrast or equivalence between the texture of the printedd texts, images or letters seems to be the main feature in these constructions. Thus,, one page has a clipping from an advertisement for rugs and carpets (see Bowltt et al. 1974: 149). The text is written (black on white) on a whitish page andd next to the advertisement there is an image of some kind of obelisk. But thee background is a very finely crossed net of black lines. Onto this clipping, anotherr rectangular clipping of a very rough and textured quality has been glued.. This page shows very clearly the three-doubling of the idea of a rug, and thee texture of different rug-like surfaces. In figure 26, a ceiling is shown in a clippingg from a magazine. It is richly decorated and shows a chandelier indicating thatt it is derived from a rich mansion or palace. In this image, there is a round shapee in the very middle, which is echoed in the clipping beneath with has an imagee of a pipe in front of a piece of cardboard with a round shape on it. Similarly, thee round shapes in the rectangular-shaped image from a popular magazine are echoedd in the technical drawing for a foundation of a building in figure 27.

210 0

POETRYY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY

Fig.. 29

Thus,, the newspaper, which serves as a page, is the carrier of the pictorial composition.. The canvas is doubled and thereby symbolized by a newspaper page, whichh has a certain texture. This texture is contrasted by the texture of the other paperr qualities. In this way, the collages in this book actualize the theory oifaktura.ra. The contrast between the different faktura (texture, color and shape) constitutess the meaningol the composition. In this perspective, the forms of the clippings aree strictly formal contrasts between round and square, lightt and dark. The letters andd images of both the newspaper page and the clippings lose their referentiality;; they gain meaning only within the formal context of the page.

211 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

However,, the collages can also be read as in figure 28. On this page a picture of aa staircase in what seems like a hall in a rich patrician home or a castle is glued ontoo the page. It has a marble floor and pedestal with a vase in the middle of thee hall. Beneath this pedestal, the inscription, "Escalier d'honneur" is preservedd in the clipping. This image is glued onto another clipping from the page off a book. The text in English and the image of this clipping concern a lace dress,, and has the word Netherlands in the text. Beneath the text, a golden hornn is placed as a kind of vignette. Thus, in this page, four countries are represented:: Netherlands, France, Russia, and England. Similarly, another collage has aa clipping with a fragment of an image from Manchester and a clipping with a textt in German. One page has images of Siamese twins from a Russian popular magazinee (see Bowlt et al. 1974: 147) and another has a German advertisement forr carpets and rugs inserted into the collage. This last clipping has the year 19022 written at the bottom. If the collages are read'm this way, there is no doubt,, that the glued-on clippings represent the old bourgeois world, which is contrastedd with the Russian communist newspaper text. Thiss reading is supported by the page in figure 30, which does not seem to belongg to Gaust caba, but is, however, composed with a newspaper sheet as a background.. The composition shows images from popular magazines, which aree cut into one or two strips. Two strips from the same image show Rasputin featuredd by aristocratic women (compare photos in Radzinsky 2000). The faces alll look direcdy towards the beholder. Between these two strips from the same photographh (it has the inscription, G.E. Rasputin, in the lower left corner) the headd of a variety girl has been inserted. Beneath these strips, two strips from a photographh of Nikolas II have been placed with the head cut through. Nikolas III wears a uniform and between these strips and another strip showing soldiers fromm Napoleon's era, a naked torso of a woman has been placed. There can be noo doubt that this collage is a comment on the old regime's degenerated passion,, which is shattered by the scissors. Perhaps the red cutting in the upper rightt corner with the word "Snarjady" [projectiles] represents the Red army that overthreww this regime. Such a reading can be supported by the fact that this is nott the only time Stepanova uses collages to a polemical end.

212 2

POETRYY OF THE FUTURE, VARYARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY

Fig.. 30

Ass Ekaterina Degot' points out, this kind of political collage can also be seen in thee 1922 collage made as part of the ongoing rejection of Malevic' suprematism aroundd and following the 1919 "10 th State Exhibition". Stepanova inserted a newspaperr advertisement for hypnosis, from the publishing house, "The Spiritualist",, onto the book cover, thereby ridiculing Malevic' book, Bog ne skinut {God hashas not been abandoned) (figure 31). In the collage, the clippings cover the word "ne" [not]] in the title as a comment on Malevic' aesthetics (Degot' 2000: 62). This collagee has become a readable text and the self-reflexive attention to the individuall elements; the reality fragment has shifted in favor of allegory. 213 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

yHOBMC. . ^

^^ ''

ao:lt> y

flfl 1

' ****». «**•**

Bor r •i|||*J| |HMHYT T 3 » , -33 e* J

HCH3fCCTB0, , UEPHOBb. . tDAEPHKA. .

5«|pJ J K.. MAJ1E1MH, , :: :

WÊÊÊKÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊI^KKÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊ WÊÊÊKÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊI^KKÊÊÊÊ

Fig.. 31

Thus,, Stepanova's book is a curious mixture of artistic strategies. On the one handd the predominant mode of representation is strictly formal and correspondss to a "neutral" element in the book. This interpretation corresponds withh Rosalind Krauss' reading of Picasso's Papier collé, i.e., the newspaper is includedd to spark a contrast between the various kinds oifaktura. On the other hand,, the contrast between the handwritten letters and the typeset newspaper cann be interpreted as a negation of the instrumentalized language of communicationn corresponding to Mallermé's modernist exclusion of the newspaper. It is 214 4

POETRYY OF THE FUTURE, VARVARA STEPANOVA'S VISUAL POETRY

alsoo true of this book, that in comparison to the early avant-garde books, Gaust (aba(aba is the single most hand-made book. The collages are composed of different newspaperr in each and every book. Similarly, the letters of the poems are handwrittenn directly on the page. It is also important to note that this book was numbered.. Thus, although Stepanova apparently attempted to create uniform collages,, the paper quality and origin are very different, and every book is unique andd authentic. It is to a much higher degree a work of art than the hand-written lithographedd books of the cubo-futurists. It can, therefore, be interpreted as a reactionn to the commoditization of art and the "loss of aura" in an age of mass reproduction,, as Walter Benjamin would put it. According to such an interpretation,, the book is inscribed in a modernist critique of the market conditions of capitalistt society. However, this can hardly be said to be the case in post-revolutionaryy Russia. Although the artists for a short period of time fought for the autonomyy of art, they were at this point not submitted to the market, and they fullyy supported the revolution and although reluctandy at first, in reality, they veryy quickly joined the state regulated artistic organizations. Ass I have shown, a political reading is possible: the handwritten %aum' texts may havee negated the monotony of the typeset newspaper text, but only to present thiss actionist script as a new mode of artistic expression in a revolutionary Russia.. In 1919, Stepanova probably felt her views to be in line with the content of governmentt politics, or at least that they should be the right and only answer to thee need for a revolutionary art form. This is a situation which differs considerablyy from that of Picasso's or Mallarmé's France. This book is very complex andd full of contradictions, and a few months into 1919, Stepanova probably abandonedd the actionist gesture-writing along with ^aum* poetry, whereas she retainedd and developed the polygraphic techniques explored in these early books: thee expressiveness of the lettering, the line, the coloring, the use of contrast, the collagee and so forth, and she moved hastily towards an art, which must be characterizedd as examples of what Oraic-Tolic called avant-garde collage II, an art whichh could freely transgress the border between art and life.

215 5

66 PALIMPSESTS. VISUAL POETRY BY RYNIKONOVAANDD SERGEJ SIGEJ

Ryy Nikonova (Anna Tarsis) and Sergej Sigej (Sigov) are perhaps the most interestingg visual poets of Russia today. No other poets or artists have in a more directt way attempted to unite the artistic and poetic problems of the early Russian avant-gardee with the ideas of the contemporary Western and Russian avantgarde.11 Moreover, the visual poetry of Nikonova and Sigej has a definite congruencee with the early Russian avant-garde experiments in the integration of textt and image. This is obvious with regard to their techniques and modes of artisticc expression, as well as their ideas and conceptions. The ideas of the early avant-gardee are consistently brought into play in their poetic ideas and work. Thus,, the work of both Nikonova and Sigej can be seen as an attempt to rethinkk some of the central issues of the early avant-garde: the close relation betweenn literature and art, the literally material and physical object-quality of script,, poem, and book (appealing to multiple senses), the performance element,, and the (unstable) status of the author. Bothh Nikonova and Sigej began their literary and artistic production around the beginningg of the 1960s (Nikonova in 1959 and Sigej in 1962). During the subsequentt 40 years, they continuously experimented with almost every possible poeticc technique and style. In 1965, Nikonova founded the Uktus School in Sverdlovskk (Ekaterinburg). Between 1962 and 1964, Sigej had been a member off Anarfut, a group of dada-futurists in Vologda. In Sverdlovsk he was one of thee founding members of the Uktus School. The group produced the handmade (andd handwritten) sami%dat)o\im2l Nomer of which a total of 35 unique issues weree made. Nomer lasted until 1974, when the group fell prey to suppression fromm the Soviet authorities. In the same year, Nikonova and Sigej moved to Ejskk near the Azov Sea. Here, they produced the sami^dat journal Transponans of whichh 36 editions appeared of 5 handmade copies each between 1979 and 1987. Thiss was the main organ of the group of transfurists to which Nikonova, Sigej,

217 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

andd Boris Konstriktor (Aksel'rod) belonged.2 Inn die 1980s, Sigej became acquainted widi Nikolaj Chardziev, die Moscow collectorr and researcher of the early avant-garde, Igor Bachterev, who was a formerr member of the absurdist OBERIU-group, 3 and Vasilisk Gnedov. 4 These meetingss were to have a profound influence on Sigej's work. The 1980s also gavee Nikonova and Sigej the opportunity to partake in the literary underground lifee of Leningrad and Moscow. In Leningrad they appeared at performances and poetryy readings. From 1986, taking part in mail-art projects, they had their first directt contact with Western experimental poets and artists. From 1987 they began too send their work to international mail-art and visual poetry exhibitions, and in 1990,, they were visited in Ejsk by Western artists. In recent years, Sigej and Nikonovaa have made collaborative books with contemporary avant-garde visual poetss and artists. Collaborators include: Use and Pierre Gamier, Vittore Baroni, Johnn M. Bennett, R. Crozier, Carlo Belloli among others. 5 The couple lived in Ejskk until 1998 when they emigrated. They now live in Germany. Throughoutt the years, Nikonova and Sigej have produced numerous handmadee books (Nikonova has produced around 500), two sami^dat journals (Nomerandmerand Transponans), and a handmade journal for international vacuum poetry {Double).{Double). They have participated in exhibitions of visual poetry and mail-art in Canada,, Brazil, Italy, Germany, and Mexico as well as in Russia, and extend theirr production not only to art and poetry but also to research and theoretical writings.. Yet, little of their work has been published.6 In Russia, a number of theoreticall articles aside, only a couple of booklets containing their work have appeared.7 7 Myy study in this chapter on the work of Nikonova and Sigej will be based on publishedd as well as unpublished material, and on interviews and conversations withh the poets. The focus will be on image-text relations in their work and in particular,, in their visual poetry. Although the poets are married and have workedd together since the mid-1960s, their approach to poetic experimentation andd visual poetry is very different. I will therefore analyze their work separately andd from different points of view using the palimpsest as a uniting element. In itss broadest definition, this is a model describing the overwriting of texts by 218 8

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ texts.. In the poetics of Nikonova and Sigej it is applied to discern a relationship betweenn present and previous texts, and is equivalent to their concept of transponirovanieponirovanie [transposing]. Transposition n Transpositionn is a musical term signifying the transfer of music from one musicall key to another, for example into a key which suits the voice of a particular singer.. In this case, music is transposed into the singer's personal tonality. This elementt of acquisition is central to the concept as used by Ry Nikonova. She usedd the concept for the first time in 1968 to characterize the transfer of somethingg already existing to a qualitatively changed mode or expression. One of her firstfirst transposed works was an American book of technical drawings featuring ann excavator. Nikonova added her own drawings on top of the technical drawingss thereby transforming it into a work of art. The basis for such works can be anyy text or image including literary texts, photographs, or graphic art (Nikonovaa 1993: 255). Thee concept is also connected to Transponans. This sami^dat journal not only coveredd transposed works, but almost any kind of integrational, visual, conceptual,, minimalist, action, vacuum, gesture, pictographic, %aum\ and abstract poetryy or prose (Nikonova 1993: 255). It stood for an integrational line which was centrall to the concept of transfurism HAefll TpaHCc|>ypH3Ma npocra:

MM

noAaraeM

HCOGXOAHMMM

pa3BHTHe Bcex

AOCTTOKeHHHH H a n i H X npeAUieCTBeHHHKOB H CHHTC3 3TOrO TpaAHUHOHHOrO

pKee pyccK. aBaHrapAa c coBpeivteHHOH nosTHH. KyAbTypofi. (Kuzminsky 1986:: 547). (Thee idea of transfurism is simple: we see it as imperative that all achievements of ourr predecessors are developed and that a synthesis of this traditional Russian avant-gardee with the contemporary poetic culture is reached.) Thus,, in the poetry of Nikonova and Sigej and in the poetics of transfurism, two themess are recurrent and play an important role. The first is the relation to previousvious texts* Unlike the early avant-garde, their manifestos are devoid of the almost violentt attempt to free themselves from past high art culture. The relation of 219 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' t h ee n e w avant-garde with previous texts appears to be an interplay between past a n dd present texts, as a series of returns and projections. Ry Nikonova characterizess this relationship as that of a parasite. Similar t o the technique of the palimpsest,, the new text uses the originaltext as a background or as a potential: P . H .. PIapa3HT — coBepmeHHo 3aKOHHHH npeAcraBirreAb c|)ayHM, B TOM H H C A ee H XyAOiKeCTBeHHOH. C P o p M M n a p a 3 H T H p O B a H H f l XVAOJKeCTBeHHMX

npHHimnoB,, «HaAaraTeAbHue» TCKCTW, nirraionrHeai noTeHrjHaAOM npeAHAymeroo coAep>KaHHH, npeBpameHHoro HMH B 4>OH... HacKOAbKo napa3HTHHeHH naAmnncecT H noAOJKirreAbHoe AH STO HBAeHHe — IIOAHC|>OHHHH noGeAHTeAH u noGe>KAeHHoro (pe^b o TeKCTax)? TpaHcnoHHpoBaHHe —— 3TO BeAt> TO»e HcnoAi>30BaHHe roTOBOH cJjopMH. C.C.. [...] npe>KAe Bcero, naAHMncecr - STO coBMecTHoe TBopnecTBo, rAe HeTT noGeAHTeAH H no6e)KAeHHoro, HO rAe e c u Hncrafl KOAAaGopamüi... H oo Aa>Ke ecAH aBTopw He AoroBapHBaioTCH 3apaHee o COBMCCTHOM raopHecTBe,, TO BHeApeHne B npKoe BOBce He «BARCTCR yHHHTo>KeHHeM. [...] O A H H MM CAOBOM, ceroAHKinHHH naAHMncecT — STO yBeAHHeHHe oGteMa HCKyccTBa.. (Nikonova and Sigej 1995: 26-27) (R.N.. A parasite is a completely legitimate representative of the fauna, including thee artistic. Forms of parasitizing artistic principles, superimposing texts, living on thee potential of previous texts' content, turning them into a basis... To what extentt is the palimpsest a parasite, and is this a positive phenomenon - the polyphonyy of the conqueror and the defeated (with regards to texts)? You know, transpositionn is also a utilization of ready forms. S.S.. [...] First of all, the palimpsest is a joint creation, where there is no conqueror andd no defeated part only a pure collaboration... But even if the authors did not comee to an agreement about the collaborative work beforehand, then the intrusion intoo the Other is never destructive [...]. In one word, the palimpsest of today is an increasee of art's capacity.) I nn the palimpsest, the original writing is erased or rubbed out to make place for a secondd n e w text. T h e earlier writing is effaced and superseded by a latter, which sometimess leaves traces of the earlier text. T h u s , this technique used as a model o ff the relationship between existing and new texts contains an element of destructionn o f the previous text, though is not completely destructive. It has an elementt of appropriation, though is n o t completely appropriating (traces are left o ff the previous text). T h e palimpsest is an encapsulation of a simultaneous

220 0

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

presencee of previous and new text and of orignal znd imitation. In hes Paradis artificiels,ciels, Baudelaire describes the special state of mind conjured by opium. In this state,, memory is experienced as an immense conglomerate of previous events, ass a euphoric superimposition: Whatt is the human brain, if not an immense natural palimpsest? My brain iss a palimpsest, as yours is too, reader. Innumerable layers of ideas and feelingss have fallen one after another on your brain, as gently as light. It seemedd as if each were swallowing up the previous one. But in reality none hass perished... Forgetting is only momentary therefore; and in such solemnn circumstances, in death perhaps, and generally in the intense excitementt generated by opium, the whole immense, complicated palimpsest of memoryy unfolds in an instant, with all its superimposed layers of dead feelings,, mysteriously embalmed in what we call oblivion... Just as every action,, thrown into the whirlwind of universal action, is in itself irrevocablee and irreparable, an abstraction of its possible results, so each thought is ineffaceable.. The palimpsest of memory is indestructible. (Quoted in Genettee 1982: 228) Thee past can be seen as a reservoir of potential material, which can be integratedd into new constellations.9 Such a relationship is not so much a relationshipp of quotation and intertextuality, but more a relationship of appropriation. Thiss overturns the status of previous texts as completed and untouchable workss and of the author as the incontestable originator of this or that work of art.. In an interview, Sergej Sigej ironically compares the author-function with thatt of the cattle-breeder. The sign of authorship is merely a stamp of appropriationn just like the cattle-breeder brands his cows with a mark different from thatt of his neighbor: "This is my cow, therefore on the cow we burn a mark, thuss in order to appropriate, we have to put a stamp. I stamped it, thus it is mine"" (2003). The second important theme in the works of Sigej and Nikonova,, therefore, is the function and status of the author. 6.1.. Ry Nikonova. A poetics of infinite permutation Inn studying and describing the work of Ry Nikonova one faces certain difficulties.. Hardly published, her work is, consequendy, in a constant state of manuscript.100 This non-static condition of Nikonova's work enables her to use and 221 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

re-usee individual parts of her work and create a multitude of text variants accordingg to a variety of poetic techniques.11 Nikonova describes this multitude as aa carpet of possible styles.12 These individual realizations of possible techniques cann be said to be mapped out as a number of sites dominated by different techniquess or styles: one site describes the possibility of using coordinate systems, anotherr of using gestures, a third of using medicine, and so forth. This kind of mappingg seems to aspire to universality, to the writing of a Book of all known orr possible techniques. 13 In the overall "carpet" of Nikonova's work, no systemss are prior to or better than others, though an attempt is made to integrate alll parts into one unit: OOAHUM CAOBOM, BaAeHTHOCTb no3Ta craHOBHTCfl BcenorAomaiomeH. MHTerpaiiHOHHwee TCHACHUHH B HeAOBenecKOH Ae>rreAbHocra ceroAHH HBCTBeHHSI,, H a CTMKe MeAKHX CneUHC^HKaUHH pO>KAaiOTCH HOBbie HayKH H

HOBHee TexHHKH, HO, KaK MHe KajKeTCH, HMeHHO HCKyccTBo B cHAax o6-beAHHHTbb BCE CHOBa. (Nikonova 1993: 251) (Thee poet's valency becomes all-encompassing. Today, the integrational tendenciess in human activities are obvious; at the junction of fine specifications new sciencess and new techniques thrive. But, so it seems to me, the arts have the power too unite everything anew.) Thiss is the horizontal or integrational axis found in Nikonova's work. However, herr work can also be described along a vertical axis, or along what I call a deconstructionall axis: TpaHCnoHHpoBaHHee Ha 4>opMaAbHOM — BemecTBeHHOM — ypoBHe noAb3yeTCHH npneMOM Ae-KOHcrpyKimji, AonoAHeHHH H 3aMemeHrai, TO ecn> AeKOHCTpyKiiHHH KOMneHCHpyeMHx. B AeKOHcrpyKHHio B CBOIO onepeAb BXOAHT:: CABHT, Koppeioypa — 3aHepKHBaHHH —, MaHHnyAHpoBaHHe reorpaqbHeHH o6i>eKTa, HeKOTopue SAeMeHTH BaHAaAH3Ma, KyAHHapT H TOMy noAoÖHoe.. (Kuzminskij 1986: 553). (Onn a formal (object) level, transposition makes use of the de-constructional techniquee of supplement and substitution, i.e., deconstruction of equilibrators. Deconstructionn includes displacement, correction (crossing out), manipulation withh the geography of an object, some elements of vandalism, culinart, and so on.) Here,, deconstruction should be understood as an alternating decomposition 222 2

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

andd composition; i.e. a manipulation with the minimal units of the visual signs off a text. It is connected to the early Russian avant-garde concept %aum\ It is a strategyy of destabilizing the signifiers. These two axes in her work should not be seenn as yet another dichotomy between paradigmatic and syntagmatic chains, butt rather as an interrelated and interactive relationship, as two principles, whichh permeate all levels of her work. Mathematicss and poetry Sincee Nikonova's poems are usually dated, it is possible to reconstruct a (genetic)) chain of transformations of one (often very simple) minimal poem into numerouss more complex poems. 14 I see this vertical axis of Nikonova's work as beingg based on a constructivist principle of mechanical manipulation with a finitee number of distinct elements. Thus, it is not the genesis of such a chain but thee process of transformation which is significant in the work of Ry Nikonova. Therefore,, I wish to emphasize this process character of her work: every individuall text is endlessly manipulated, or modulated, corresponding to what Nikonovaa has called "mathematical operationalism".15 Ryy Nikonova has repeatedly stated her fascination with mathematics, and has actuallyy written poems based on numbers. 16 Her attraction to numbers seems to bee inspired by their abstract and conventional aspects.17 With mathematics and thuss with numbers, we are able to describe the world without naming things'. Numberss are the most familiar form of the mathematical because, in our usuall dealing with things, when we calculate or count, numbers are the closestt to that which we recognize in things without deriving it from them. (Heideggerr 1993: 277) Nikonova'ss use of numbers in poetry may be related to her acquaintance with Jasperr Johns's number-paintings in the 1960's. She quotes him as saying that he includedd numbers in his paintings to avoid images: "pisat' tol'ko cifry, ctoby izbezat'' 'obrazov'" ("To paint only numbers in order to avoid images"; 1995: 223).18 Onee element of the mathematical in the poetics of Nikonova therefore seems to bee the ability to use numbers as signs without denoting things, thus presenting numberss as more immediately present in their new, defamiliarized situation. O n 223 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

aa more fundamental level, the mathematical can be seen as the underlying principlee of her poetics. Sincee its Phoenician origin, the alphabet has been linked direcdy to numbers: Onee of our most priceless possessions is the established sequence of the alphabett with its twenty-odd letters in their fixed order. [...] Numbers are indissolublyy linked to the fixed sequence of the alphabet: the first letter standss for the first number, die next letter for the next number, and so forth.. (Menninger 1969: 262) Inn both Hebrew and Greek, letters have numerical values according to their orderr in the alphabet Another common idea is the anagrammatic conception of thee (world-)text as consisting of a combination of a finite number of letters withh a number value: "All the innumerable words that make up the language are resolvedd into a limited number of some 20 to 30 individual phonetic symbols" (Menningerr 1969: 264). Here, it is natural to think of Leibniz's interest in creatingg a philosophical language, which should function as a calculus.19 Similarly, Chlebnikov'ss interest in numbers was fed by a neopythagorean idea of the unity off numbers and music and was reflected in the creation of a universal language.200 Both of these attempts to construct universal languages were based on thee idea that the detachment of letters from sound makes the letters function in thee same way as numbers. Accordingly, letters - when detached from sound cann be used like numbers as a finite series of units. This is a fundamental elementt in writing, as Derrida famously remarks: "The history of the voice and its writingg is comprehended between two mute writings, between two poles of universalityy relating to each other as the natural and the artificial: the pictogram andd algebra" (1997: 303). Thus,, the letters of the alphabet can be seen as a finite series of purely visual signss which do not necessarily have to be connected to sound and which, therefore,, can function in the same way as numbers. Accordingly, in the poetics of Nikonova,, the image, the letter, and the number seem to merge in a constructivisttivist principle of free manipulation of elementary units (the letters). Such a principlee uses tautology as a basic structural element: "Alfavit svjazyvaet Puskinaa i Gorbaceva, Barkova i Bednogo, u vsech bukvy odni i te ze, pora èto 224 4

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

zametit'"" ("The alphabet connects Puskin and Gorbacev, Barkov and Bednyj; theyy all use the same letters. It is about time we notice this"; Nikonova 1993: 252). . Correspondingg with Borges' well-known proposition, that everything has already beenn written, a poem consists merely of yet another alphabet combination.21 Repeatedd and endlessly combined, the alphabet is a finite series of signs. O n this meta-level,, the infinite possible mutations of such signs comprise the real event inn literature. Every new combination constitutes a new pattern in an (endless) chainn of possible patterns. In one chain of transformations, the first (fairly traditional)) two-lined poem ("Smotrju na tebja / Pogibnes' ty" ["I look at you / Youu are dying"] is then manipulated in four subsequent poems. In the first transformation,, the first line of the initial poem is isolated and doubled, the first syllablee is subtracted and the preposition "na" is substituted by "de" in the secondd line ("Rju na tebja / Rju de tebja"). In the second transformation, the constructionn is manipulated into a two-voiced dialogue: 11 Pioo Haa Te6aa

2 Pio Ae Te6fl

(1 1 Rju u na a tebja a

22 Rju u de e tebja) )

Inn the third, the letter 'r' is added ("Rju dre trebja"); and in the fourth and final example,, the letters 'rn' and 'rp' are added to the sentence ("Rjurna tebjarn / Rnjuu dre trebjarp"). Anotherr chain shows both the free manipulation of letters and a gradual merging withh numbers. The simple minimalist poem consisting of two R's placed verticallyy on the page is manipulated and modulated through the years.22 The letter 'R'' may stand for the initial letter in Nikonova's pseudonym Ry, which is evidentt in the development and transformation of this minimalist poem. In the secondd poem in this chain, the Russian letter 'y' ((blr) in the name "Ry" is doubled.. In the third poem, the initial letter 'R' is laterally reversed, and instead of thee entire letter 'y' only the second half of the letter is left, making the poem lookk like a palindrome. At the end of the fourth poem, a sign similar to the numberr 9 substitutes the reversed letter 'R'. The entire sequence bears some 225 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' resemblancee to the number P6169. Finally in the fifth poem, the second 'y' is extendedd with an additional line consisting of the second half of the letter V' formingg the number P61611. Unlike the previous chain of transformations, this chainn has a distinctly visual character. Some letters are cut into pieces and some resemblee numbers more than letters. The final three poems are purely visual, detachedd from sound and unreferential. Thesee transformations and manipulations of an initial poem express a formal constructivistt principle in which every sentence, word or letter can be isolated andd subtracted, multiplied or added in a free combination of distinct units. Nikonovaa provides an illustration of this principle in her poem 'A Poem which explainss the process of the Literary Work': CTHX,, yHCHflioirjHH npoiiecc AirrepaTypHOHH paöoTM

(A Poem which explains the process of the Literary Work

a B r ee ++

a c f e + b d g m

6 A > K MM

a66

BA

DK

66

BA

-

aa

eM M

r>K e

ab cd fg em b a

cd - m fg e)

([1981]] 2001: 119) Accordingly,, the poetic work is based on a (de-)constructional principle that allowss for the free manipulation and combination of distinct units (the letters) thatt function like numbers in mathematics. Transpositionn between different sign systems Ryy Nikonova repeatedly cites Cicerin as one of her most admired predecessors. Moree than anyone, Cicerin opened up poetry to a multitude of possible signs.23 Inn his poetics, the borders between different artistic or non-artistic systems weree transgressed and a multitude of different signs were integrated within one

226 6

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

artisticc text, regardless of the code required to interpret these signs. According too modern information theory, it is the inherent property of artistic systems to bee able to integrate non-systemic material without eliminating these anomalies, insteadd allowing them to take on structural meaning, and be transformed into information: : Artt - and here it manifests its structural kinship to life - is capable of transformingg noise into information. It complicates its own structure owingg to its correlation with its environment (in all other systems the clash withh the environment can only lead to the fade-out of information. (Lotmann 1977: 75) Inn Nikonova's work, there seems to be no limit to the kind of signs that can be integratedd into a poetic text. In a third chain, the simple "Zuet Abissinija / cvetyy / cveta alljuminija" ("Abyssinia masticates / flowers / of an aluminum color")) is constructed according to a number of rhythmic repetitions, with the wordd "zuet" [masticates] as the only divergence. In the following transformation,tion, the tautological structure of the poem is visually demonstrated in the form off a coordinate system. The words "Abissinija" and "alljuminia" are located on eachh side of the left horizontal coordinate line, while the words "cvety" and "cveta"" are located on each side of the right coordinate line. On the vertical line abovee the other words, the word "zuet" is placed (figure 32).

Fig.. 32 227 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Heree the visual element is a mathematical coordinate system that structures the similarr or divergent elements on left-right and up-down axes. Moreover, vectorss are drawn between the tautological elements, and arrows are drawn to indicatee reading-orientation. In this way, the mathematical element indicates repetitiontion or deviation in the formal structure of the poem, and seems not to correspondd or augment the semantic content of the initial poem. A cross-section of Nikonova'ss work shows such chains of transformations of individual poems. Thee chain of transformations of the poem 'BR' includes five visual poems that encompasss many of the elements most often found in Nikonova's visual poetry.. These elements draw on mathematics (tables, vectors, coordinate systems, doublingg and so forth) and on physics (atoms, molecules, quantum field theory too name a few).

Fig.. 33

228 8

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

Fig.. 34

Fig.. 35

Fig.. 36

229 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Ryy Nikonova's so-called "architextural" constructions consist of "buildingblocks"" of tautologically collected letters. The visual element is a grid structuringg the text, which is similar to the way in which computer models describe an image.. In electronic imaging, the images we see are constructed of flows of electricc pulses spelled out in matrices of long series of letters and digits, translatablee into on-off or yes-no choices. In the architextures of Nikonova, the blankk spaces (the vacuum) in the grid-structure are merely an offot no choice in thee series of tautologically structured modules. 24 Furthermore, vectors are drawnn between single isomorphic constituents whose role Nikonova describes ass a kind of memory-technique, fixating the interactive isomorphism hidden in thee poem's sound-structure. These vectors are indices of events in the text, movementss or trajectories of travelling elements. Thee visual poems in figures 33 and 35 are architextural constructions. The first constructionn has the repetition of the initial poem 'BR' as its basic structure, whilee vectors unite the letters 'e', 'o', and V in the one-line poem "Brebrabr' v oknoo svetit" ("Brebrabr shines through the window"). The second poem is constructedd like a mirror with "Br" and "db" on either side of the centerline, thee letters T and 'ch' beneath on either side, and finally the letter 'f under the centerr line. Vectors emanate from the construction though do not appear to leadd to any particular direction. The same poem is given in a coordinate variant, in figurefigure 36. This poem is written in Latin letters and is constructed with a coordinatee system (or musical sheet?) as the basic form, though it repeats the constructionn from the previous variant. The grid and the vectors do not seem to be inn congruence with any propositional content in the individual texts; they merelyy reveal the iterative mathematical structure of the text as a fundamental conditionn for any textual structure. The final poem in this chain is a complex compositionn of circular, triangular and square forms, letters, vectors and dots (seee figure 37).The poem in figure 34 is integrated into the bottom of the composition,, enclosed by a circle. A similar simple composition of the letters 'b' andd 'r' is integrated at the top, enclosed by a square. In between these forms, singlee 'b's or 'r's 21e.flowingin the system though they seem to be divided betweenn the bottom and center (which has mostly 'b's) and top (which has mostly

230 230

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

'r's).. This image is very similar to how one might imagine a molecular model. Accordingg to such a model, matter can be broken into a number of molecules, thee molecules into atoms and the atoms again into a quantum field or vacuum. Thus,, the world is countable, structurable and describable according to a mathematicall model. The elementary units (the atoms) can be combined endlesslyy in an ungraspable variety of forms and structures. The richness and complexityy of the entire universe is in reality just a combination of a few modular elements.255 Projected onto literature, the alphabet is a series of such modular elementss which when combined, construct literary patterns and when deconstructed,, can dissipate into minimal units: a quantum field, or vacuum.

231 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Vacuumm poetry Thee intensified attention of modernist poetry to the graphic mark on the page, too the spaces between them, and the (white) margins around them,26 leads to a conceptionn of the page in which every (minimal) mark, even a fold obtains sign status.. This conception ultimately walks hand in hand with the fascination with silence: : Wee live inside the act of discourse. But we should not assume that a verbal matrixx is the only one in which the articulations and conduct of the mind aree conceivable. There are modes of intellectual and sensous reality foundedd not on language, but on other communicative energies such as thee icon or the musical note. And there are actions of the spirit rooted in silence.. (Steiner 1979: 31) Thus,, the last page of Vasilisk Gnedov's book from 1913 Smert' iskusstvulis emptyy except for the tide: 'A Poem of the End'. Sergej Sigej has compared this bookk of 15 poems with the garden of (15) stones in the Ryoanju Buddhist templee near Kyoto. Of the fifteen stones in this garden only fourteen are visible at anyy one time, the fifteenth becomes visible only through deep meditation (Brookss 2000: 53). It is not known if Gnedov had this garden in mind when makingg the book. However, it is likely that this image is familiar to Nikonova, whoo is probably also familiar with John Cage's ideas regarding the "void", as Nataliee Crohn Schmitt describes: Cagee has often expressed his ideas about the "void": "The sand in which thee stones in a Japanese Garden lie is also something". "No silence exists thatt is not pregnant with sound". There is, Cage believes, no such thing as non-activity:: in art as in nature, no space, no sound, no activity can be discountedd as background, as inconsequential, irrelevant, or nonexistent. (1990:: 24) Thiss image clearly exemplifies the new conception of silence. To a modern scientificc mind absolute silence does not exist nor does completely empty space. Thus,, there emerges a conception of silence and emptiness as a potential. Accordingly,, Nikonova's conception of silence and emptiness is marked by an understandingg of this space as a field of possible but not yet visible texts: "Sfera

232 2

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

mokhh interesov v iskusstve - vozduch, prostranstvo, kotoroe POKA dostatocnoo prozracno" ("The sphere of my interests in art lies in the air, the space, whichh is jA'//sufficiendy transparent"; Nikonova 1993: 247). Itt is interesting to consider Nikonova's visual poetry in relation to field theory inn quantum physics. In the vocabulary of her poetics, terms like energies, vectors,, quantum, lines of force, gravitation, and so forth frequendy feature. A parallell with quantum field theory is therefore an instructive metaphor for her approachh to the page. This metaphor was used by Umberto Eco to characterize hiss concept of the "Open Work": [When]] we encounter an artist who uses scientific terminology to define hiss artistic intentions we will not assume that the structures of his art are a reflectionn of the presumed structures of the real universe; rather, we will pointt out that the diffusion of certain notions in a cultural milieu has particularlyy influenced the artist in question, so that his art wants and has to bee seen as the imaginative reaction, the structural methaphorization, of a certainn vision of things (which science has made available to contemporary man).. (1988:86) Accordingg to the popular interpretation of quantum field theory, the classical distinctionn between solid, indestructible particles and the void is invalid. Particless are not material substance, but condensations of energy which come and go.. These particles are not only composed of energies, they also emit energies themselves.. They are organized in modules or patterns to create matter, though matterr can just as easily lose its individual character and dissolve into the underlyingg field, or emerge again in a new constellation. Thus, the whole universe appearss as a dynamic, changing web of energy patterns. Particles must be conceivedd of as condensations of a continuous field present throughout space, whilee at the same time determine the structure of this space. According to this view,, only endless transformations or creations by transformation exist; there is noo original moment and no end, no void and no chaos, only a dynamic interdependencee between these.27 Applying this theory as a metaphor for the work off Nikonova, I do not however intend to invoke it as the essential model for herr poetics. In reality, her work appears to interact with any possible field of culturall phenomena: mathematics, biology, music, painting, and so forth. How233 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' ever,, as she frequently uses concepts derived from quantum physics, it is instructivee to use this theory as a metaphor for certain aspects of her work. Thee Black Square Inn the visual poetry of Ry Nikonova, Kazimir Malevich* Black Square plays an importantt role as an icon of the ideal synthesis of literature and painting. The BlackBlack Square is seen as the ultimate palimpsest, as the supreme finality of all literature: : ECAHH paccMaTpHBaTb rneAeBp MepHoro KBaApaTa KaK AjrrepaTypHMH KOAAanc,, BMecTHBuiHH B ce6» Bee CAOBa Bcex BpeMeH H HapoAOB, TO BHXOAA CHOBa B Bep6aAbHyio cchepy CTaHOBHTca H3AHIIIHHM. (Nikonova

1998:82) ) (Iff one regards the masterpiece of the Black Square as a literary collapse which containss all words of all times and peoples, then turning again to a verbal sphere becomess superfluous.) Thiss is most plainly visualized in her poem 'Transponirovanie kartiny K. Malevichaa v cernyj bespauznyj stich' (Transposition of K. Malevich' Picture to a Blackk Poem without Spaces') (figure38). However, a potential transgression of thee Black Square emerges in the thinning of the edges of this visual poem resultingg from an apparendy arbitrary transgression of the geometrical lines of the squaree by blurry unstructured letters. Thus, it can also be seen as a reservoir of potential: : HaicoiiAeHHbiHH 3TOH «nepHOH Ahipofi» HCKyccrea KOAAocaAbHHH noTeHmiaAA MO>KeT CKOAAancHpoBaTboi B OAHy TOHKy, HcnapHTbCH AO 6eAoro KBaApaTa,, AO BaKyyMHoro HCKyccTBa riAaT(|>opMbi [...] HO Mo>tceT irpocro npopacTHH SHepmefi BeKTOpoB. (Nikonova and Sigej 1990) (Thee colossal potential accumulated by this "black gap" of art can collapse into a dot,, evaporate to a white square, to the vacuum art of a platform [...] or it can simplyy grow vectors of energy.) Onee possibility, therefore, is to reveal the so-called energies hidden in the black geometricall form. These are realized as vectors springing out from the geometricall form, leading apparendy no-where at times. 234 4

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

1983 3 Fig.. 38

>.. r »» . ,,

,

. *

.. - v « . *•; ** ! • •, £ •

,.:.

.. i; rr

'

4

t

•"

,,

11 11

^f---- » » • • TV

'' / ' ' ' • r ' i : ! V = - i i - . 11

.v--'-^-^-Vc

•1

*

f-

*

•. : . •- {•..„ , , ,.- .'.'. •• • f\r

,%.

vv ' • '"*' 8

%:

>..«: § 2 * . !-

. . ..

*

U.-V..

%%

f

•• • - V -

235 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

3EAA

tilKONüVA

Fig.. 40

236 6

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

Anotherr equally persistent possibility is the vacuum which can be seen as the totall dissemination of text, as in the next visual poem (figure 39). This poem is comparablee to a field of not yet condensed black dots, with the possibility of formingg letters and in the end of forming a text. Or perhaps this has already beenn a text and only traces of the original text remain? Similarly, the architextures, ass I have shown, are grid-structures which correspond to the iterative mathematicall structure of the text. The example given in figure 40 shows an architecturall transformation of Nikonova's article 'A Gesture of Square Freedom' in English.. Numerous examples can be given, some very simple, others very complex.. In the end, the text does not seem to be necessary to support such an architecturall grid. The grid itself can survive as a kind of empty form. Disorientation n Ann important element of Ry Nikonova's visual poetry is her clear intention to disorientatee the reader. The architectural grid and vectors guide the reader's ga2ee away from the European way of reading (the strict left-right orientation on thee horizontal axis and the up-down orientation on the vertical axis). Although Nikonovaa regrets the architectural construction's lack of possible reading directions,, the grid-structure does offer a vertical axis, a Chinese axis of reading text. Inn light of the aforementioned parallel to quantum physics, the following exampless given by Nikonova under the heading: 'Svobodno konvertiruemye stichi'' ('Freely Converting Poems') are perhaps too emblematic of the intended disorientationn of the reader. Commenting on the first poem (figure 41), she writes: : CraxoTBopeHJiee BOKpyr coAHua «B» o6Hapy>KHBaeT TOABKO HeKOTOpwe H3 CBOHXX Ayneii c noTOKaMH corAacmjx. B HeM noAHepKHBaeTCH cerMeirrapHOCTbb 3axBaneHHoro rrpocraHCTBa. «B» HcnycKaeT IÏOTOKH KBairroBB [...] BeKTopHaa 3Heprafl cmxoTBopeHHH HeBHAHKa, OHa He no3BOAflerr AyneBOMy craxoTBOpemno npeBpaTHTbCfl B ccJjepuMecKoe, CHfliomeee nAiopaAH3MOM TCXHUKH HTCHHA. 3Aecb Bcero AHIIIB 2 MaHepw HTeHHKK B03M05KHH: oGbiHHaii eBponeficKafl (cAeBa HanpaBa) H KjrraHCKafl (cBepxyy BHH3). (1992)

237 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' (Thee poem around the sun *B' reveals just some of its rays with flows of consonants.. In this poem the segmentation of the seized space is emphasized. The 'B' emitss quantum flows [...] The poem's vector energy is not large; it does not allow thee ray-poem to transform into a spherical poem, which is radiating with a pluralismm of the reader technique. Here, there are only 2 manners of reading possible: thee ordinary European (left-right) and the Chinese (up-down).) Itt is correct that we involuntarily read the letters on the horizontal line from left too right and the letters on the vertical line from top to the bottom, but in doing soo the reader-direction clashes with what is supposed to happen chronologically.. If we see the letters as emitting from the sun 'B' (as the arrow-like vectors indicate),, the letters 'n, n' on the vertical line are emitting before the *b' letters. Consequently,, we actually read the movement backwards, which makes this poemm a lot more interesting than Nikonova's own comments would have one believe. . Nikonovaa characterizes the next poem (figure 42) as a triangular shaped poem consistingg of four quantum elements with vectors around it seeking "verbal food".. Indeed, if the reader stops for a moment to contemplate this poem, he orr she involuntarily seeks a continuation of the fragmented syllables and letters, thoughh it is not certain whether such a continuation exists. One poem, figure 43,, is only an indication, a beginning characterized as a "proto-poem". The formm of the ' O ' in the top right corner of me coordinate system echoes the formm in the bottom left corner. However, this form is broken. Perhaps the beginningg has already been deemed a failure? Another technique is the crossing overr of words as in figure 44. This poem is remarkably rich with potential significance.. According to one interpretation, the crossing out of the words negatess both "tut" [here] and "tarn" [there]. According to another interpretation, thesee crossed out words are involuntarily read. In the first reading, here and theree are equaled to no-where, and in the second reading, here and there seem too be the same, both here and there. In this poem and in the other poems mentioned,, there is no one reader orientation; the reader is disorientated. Furthermore,, the interpretation is dependent on the reading subject him- or herself and onn the way he or she chooses to interpret the visual signs.

238 8

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

J» »

OO

oo

Fig.. 42

I vj

Fig.. 43

TAM M

HE E TYT T HE E TYT T HE E TAM M XXt t Fig.. 44

239 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' Vector-poems s Itt is clear that the page is seen as a field of energies and in the poetics of Ry N i konova,, it is of great important if there has already been a text or if the text is stilll to c o m e . A p p r o a c h i n g the page this way actually implies that there is always aa possible (but n o t yet realized) text before the text: E C A HH TAyÖOKO BHHKHyTb B B a K y y M H ï i e 6 e 3 A H H , TO A K > 6 o H TeKCT, H a H O C H -

M H HH Ha HHcryio GyMary, — 3TO n p o u e c c BhraBAemifl y>Ke cymecTByiomHx Haa 3TOH GyMare TCKCTOBHX B03MO>KHOCTeH, TO ecTB BaKyyMHaa AirrepaTypa -- 3TO CBoGoAa HHTaTeAK) npeAnoAaraxb TCKCT. Etpn AOcraTOHHo i i m p o KOMM B3rAHAe AioGaa HHcrafl CTpamma ecn> eMKocTb e GCCHHCACHHMM KOAHMeCTBOMM HeBHAHMHX TCKCTOB, a n p O H e C C B b l G o p O H H O T O BOCnpHiTTHfl

-- He GoAee HeM n p o u e c c oGeAHeHHfl TaKHx crpaHim. (Nikonova 1998: 83) (Iff one was to look deep into the vacuum abyss, then any text, which has been markedd down on a clean piece of paper is a result of a process of revelation of the textuall possibilities which already existed on this piece of paper, i.e. vacuum literaturee is the freedom of the reader to propose a text. Seen from a sufficiently broad pointt of view, any clean page is a capacity with an immense quantity of invisible texts,, and the process of selective perception is nothing more than a process of impoverishmentt of such pages.) Conceivingg it this way, the page with disparate black dots is an image of endless possibilities.. Every actual realization of something decreases the possibilities: X o n yy OTMeTHTb oAHy HHTepecHyio oco6eHHocn>, B03HHKaK>nryio BBrairraHHHX.. E C A H B BaicyyMe ecn> B C E , TO BbTHirraHHH nero-AnGo OH npHoGpeTaeTT C n E L U i A A H 3 A L l H I O , T.e. HanpaBAeHHocrb, B E K T O P H O C T b [...].. Hy, a ecAH, npeAiiOAOJKHM, H3 BaicyyMa MO>KHO GWAO 6 M Bwnecrb noHTHH Bee, a ocraBHTb eAHHCTBeHHyio ero nacn», a HMCHHO - AjrrepaTypy?? Tan H B03HHKaeT AirrepaTypa, nyTeM BHHAeHeHHH H3 oGmeii Maccw, HH noAynaeTca, HTO OHa - Bcero AHiiib KBaHTOBWH BaKyyM, HOH ero. (Nikonovaa 1982-83) (II would like to mention an interesting peculiarity that is becoming apparent in the processs of deducting. If the vacuum contains everything, then when deducting somethingg it acquires specialisation, i.e. direction, vector quality [...]. Well, but if, let uss suppose, from the vacuum there could be deducted almost everything, and theree would be left only a single part, namely literature? In this way literature arises,, by the way of deduction from the common mass, and it appears that literaturee is merely a quantum vacuum, a particle of such a vacuum.) 240 0

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

Thee development of vector-poems and gesture-poems is closely connected to thee image of the Black Square. The creation of the book of vector-poems, Foro, forr example, Nikonova describes in the following way: Beginning in 1980, the Fof»-cyclee consisted entirely of vectors on the basis of the Black Square without letterss and gesture elements and with a purely decorative meaning. Then in 1981-1983,, letters were added to the Fora-theme after which the forms were apprehendedd as visual poems (see figure 45). Later, in 1990, the motives were transferredd with a stencil technique which enabled reproduction. In 1983, gesturee elements were added as the possibility to perform in front of a Leningrad audiencee emerged. The vector-poems were raw/with gestures, and through a cut-upp abstract painting (as in figure 46). In this way a revival of the Foro-cyc\z occurred.. This is a revealing description of the process of creation, which consistss of what can best be described as variations on a theme: a basic sound, poem,, or technique is modulated and developed into multiple variants. Inn the vector-poems, the Black Square explodes into scores of directional vectors.. These can be seen as trajectories of energies, or as traces of particles. They appearr as a mixture of gesture and diagram, or as a kind of writing. Guy Brett describess the similar phenomenon in the drawings of Gordon Matta-Clark. Brettt characterizes these drawings as art-works that use graphic devices to "visualizee energy": Thee relationship between a literal trace and a sign - a configuration with pre-thoughtt and more complex meanings - therefore becomes multivalent andd ambivalent, with traces acting as signs and signs acting as traces. In the transcriptiontranscription of energies drawing often approaches script, or writing. (2000: 40) ) Takingg into account Nikonova's relationship with Malevich' Black Square, the vectorss springing from the square can be seen as a kind of pre-writing or even ass post-writing: the gestures appear after the collapse of all literature into a big, blackk gap.

241 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

"" Fig.. 45

242 2

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

Fig.. 46

243 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' Poemm - performance - gesture Inn the 1980s, a performative element was added to Ry Nikonova's visual poetry whenn the opportunity to perform in front of an audience arose. These performancess were most commonly rooted in her visual poetry. In the developmentt of the above-mentioned book Foroy the movement from visual poetry to gesturee was a part of the transformation of the vector-technique. This book developedd from purely decorative compositions with vectors into visual poems basedd on the Black Square. The vector-poems were read in front of an audience withh gestures: OAHa>KAww B AemmrpaAe, nepeA Heoo^HiiHaAbHHM nosTHHecKHM BwcryriAeHHeMM B OAHOM H3 KyALTypmix noABaAOB Ha FleTpa AaBpoBa, H 3aAVMaAaCbb O TOM KaK 6 b l MHe AeMOHCTpHpOBaTb B H 3 y a A b H H e BeKTOpHhie CTHXH,

HH noHAAa: 3TO HaAo AeAaTb >KecraMH. MaHycKpHirmoe ABn>KeHHe nopoAHAOO ABPMteHHe no33HH B npocTpaHCTBe - >KecTe3HK>. (Nikonova 1993: 248) ) (Oncee in Leningrad, before an unofficial poetic appearance in one of the cultural basementss on Peter Lavrov Street, I considered how I could demonstrate the visuall vector poems, and realized: this has to be done with gestures. The manuscript movementt gave rise to movement of poetry in space - agestry.) Nikonovaa often describes the first move from visual poetry to gestures as a developmentt from a musical score to gestures. As Sergej Sigej points out, it is interestingg that the script is transferred into gestures, thus reversing what is generallyy historically recognized as the development of writing.28 Usually described ass a development from gestures through spoken language to writing, gestures aree seen as a kind of pre-language. Thiss initial impulse towards gestures and mute language is similar to the performancee elements in the historical avant-garde.The early avant-garde performances,, however, were not directly related to poetry. Vasilisk Gnedov apparendy introducedd this aspect by performing poems with gestures from his book Death toto Art. The book's 15 poems were of decreasing size, with the next to last poem consistingg of the letter 'Ju' only. According to one memoirist, this poem was performedd in the "Brodjacaja sobaka"(Stray Dog) nightclub in St. Petersburg

244 4

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

Gnedov]] paused and then threw both arms upwards, [...] a hole of about twoo vershoks'm width formed between the end [of his waistcoat] and the start off his trousers, and he inspiradonally cried out: "Yu!". (Brooks 2000:16) Similarly,, 'Poem of the End' was performed with a soundless gesture. Descriptionstions of such recitations have been given by a number of memoirists of which Vladimirr Markov cites a few: AA memoirist described such a recitation as follows: "[This poem] had no wordss and consisted only of one gesture, the arm being quickly raised in frontt of the hair, then sharply dropped, and then moved to the right". Ignat'evv [...] gave the following description of the gesture: "He read [this poem]] with a rhythmic movement. The hand was drawing a line: from left too right and vice versa (the second one canceled the first, a plus and minus resultt in minus). 'Poem of the End' is actually 'Poem of Nothing,' a zero, ass it is drawn graphically". (1968: 80) Thiss performance seems not to have had the same purely provocative nature of thee parades and public readings. It seems to be a controlled and purely aesthetic elementt emerging as a consequence of the emptiness of this last page in Gnedov'ss book. 29 Inn the gesture-poetry of Ry Nikonova, the emptying of words in poetry and the transformationn of this "vacuum" to deaf-mute gestures exhibit an additional elementt that seems to be based upon her constructivist poetry. Some of these gesturess approach an actual language based on a gesture "grammar". Initially, an attemptt was made to structure the gestures using the coordinates of the body: vowelss for the hands, and consonants for the legs. However, according to Nikonova,, this technique proved to be too complex and required too much explanation.tion. Therefore, the most commonly used structuring technique is the use of color.. Nikonova performs her poems wearing colored gloves to differentiate leftt and right: red for the right hand and green for the left. This is similar to the simplee language of a traffic light, or that of flag signals. In addition, home-made coloredd megaphones, cuffs in the form of disks of different color and shape, and necklacess (a picture frame or a chain of megaphones) are used. Later, Nikonova startedd to use fans that are waved accompanying the articulation of abstract sounds. . 245 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Thee colors on the megaphones and disks match the pronounced sounds of the oftenn abstract poems. This syncretism of sound and color was based on an idea off the merging of graphic and gesture elements. Integrated into the variety of Nikonova'ss gesture vocabulary are sometimes literary or painterly elements. Somee cuffs have a collage of letters on them, and one has the color and shape off Malevich' Black Square (the basis from which vector poems were created). Sometimess a picture frame is used through which the gestures are made. At others,, a picture with cut out parts (see figure 46). As in even- other aspect of Nikonova'ss work, these new developments are transformed further into multiplee variations of gestures and gesture-poems.

Fig.. 47

246 6

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

f ! ——

[[

11 ll

aa f»:sgBSR>»£i j

»fff ___ /

JL

Jl"?2^B B

EE

iff • LT^'' 1 Fig.. 48

Fig.. 49

247 7

|H|

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Thee book-form served as a kind of documentation of which there are three types. Inn the first category is Font, categorized by Nikonova as a book of vectorpoemss with gestures around the Black Square. In the second, are the books of so-calledd gesture scores, which are either stenciled or drawn by hand. One such bookk is Vartitura %esta (A Scone for Gestures) Vol. 1 from 1989-90. In this book, gesturess are stylized into figures using hands and feet to illustrate gestures. The bookk A Score for Gestures Vol. 2 (1990) belongs to the third category. This book includess abstract compositions, which are stenciled as a negative (see figure 47). Thee forms of some of the abstract figures bear some resemblance to bodies with longg gesturing arms and fingers, while in other compositions, the arms and handss are substituted by arrows. The book is also a catalogue of documentary photographss from 1984-85 reconstructing the performances of gestures taking placee in Leningrad in 1984-84. The scenarios for the performances were written inn the period between 1981 and 85. Thus, photographs document the transformationn of the scenarios to gestures.

Apartt from the books, visual poems were made as a development of the gesture-poems.. In figure 49, the photograph with a reconstruction of a performance withh gestures is transformed into a series of stylized gestures with arrows and letters.. This visual poem was developed from the 1984 original performance to thee 1985 photograph of the reconstruction and reached its current form during thee years 1999 to 2001. In another visual poem the cut-off photograph of Nikonova'ss arms (in gesture-like position) is mirrored a number of times (see figuree 48). Each photograph has the English word " O n " or " N o " inserted in the compositionn with arrows and hands. The word spells "On" when the hands are turnedd to the right, while it spells " N o " when the hands are turned left. Characteristicc of all these gesture-poems is the stylization of gestures into what appearss to be a number of standard positions. These gesture-poems often use arrowss or letters as additional elements, which only emphasize the stylized vocabularycabulary of the gestures. The stenciled scores, however, seem to take on their ow artisticc life and acquire various forms of decorative qualities. In some of these figuresfigures the photographed gestures are entirely unrecognizable. Although the stenciledd figures have gesture features, it is wrong to see them as merely picto-

248 8

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

grams.. The poses on the photographs are far simpler and more stylized. Furthermore,, from the photographs it becomes clear that Nikonova is using the bodyy as a kind of coordinate system, giving the gestures a possibility of left/rightt or up/down positioning (emphasized by colored gloves). These types off gestures are significandy different from the gestures or performances of the earlyy avant-garde. Clearly Nikonova plays on the possible semiotic coding of gesturess similar to traffic lights or flag signals. The books of gesture-poems seemm to be both documentary collections of such gestures and transformations off the gesture-theme into artists' books. Thee book as a kinetic object (2) Inn the 1960s the artist's book appeared. These were defined as "books or booklikee objects, over the final appearance of which an artist has had a high degree off control: where the book is intended as a work of art in itself' (Bury 1995: 1). Contraryy to such an integrated book is the Hvre depeintn. This kind of book is definedd as "a luxury item featuring original graphics given over by a painter or sculptorr to an elegandy typographed text" (Hubert & Hubert 1999: 8). The differencee boils down to the degree of integration of the various parts (binding, paper,, printing, text, and so forth) in the book as a whole. In books following thee tradition of ativredepemtre, the text has a privileged place in relation to the otherr aspects of the book (however important they may be). The artist's book onn the other hand, must be perceived as an integrated unity: "The artist book, howeverr disruptive of tradition, strives for cohesion among its constituent parts byy giving equal status to images, typography, binding, page-setting, folds, collages,, and text" (Hubert & Hubert 1999: 11). Inn accordance with this definition, the artists' book can be seen as an intermediaa creation. I interpret the concept of medium as a conventionall system of interrelatedd material, symbolic, functional, institutional, cultural, perceptive, productivee and self-representational features. Regarded as a medium, the book offerss certain possibilities to the visual artist, which are inherent qualities of a traditionall book: It is a collection or sequence of pages contained within a relativelyy cheaply produced and distributed object, it is customarily portable and 249 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' easilyy stored, its contents are conveniently accessible (it can be experienced by oneselff at one's own speed), it is more spatially economical, it allows its reader randomm access, it is replicable and in principle limidessly reproducible and it has manyy buyers as opposed to both a traditional artwork, as well as any more inventivee works of art such as performance art, video installations, movies and so forthh (Kostelanetz 1985: 27-29). Forr the poet on the other hand, the artists' book possesses some of the qualitiesties which are inherent in a traditional work of art: It enables the artist/poet to makee an integrated unity of the textual as well as other elements of the book object,, thereby emphasizing the material quality of writing. In this way, the bookk is perceived in much the same way as a traditional painting and is experiencedd as a thing which is unique and authentic due to the limited numbers of copiess (and because production methods make it often impossible for one copy too be identical to another). Usually just a few copies are made and sometimes justt a single unique copy, a collectors' item, which is exhibited as opposed to archived.. The book artist usually controls all phases of the book's production fromm the writing of the text to the page layout, binding, cover design, and sometimess even the publishing and distribution. Inn the performances of Ry Nikonova, the book appears to play an important role.300 In the avant-garde, the book appealed to experimentation. It gave the possibilityy of emphasizing and including a diversity of material in terms of cover,, paper, and binding and so on. It had the sequence (the turning of die pages)) as a fundamental characteristic, and the three-dimensional 'real' space appeall as an inherent quality. Recalling the early avant-garde, Ry Nikonova characterizess this appeal: Bpama»» crpammbi BOKpyr ocH-KopeuiKa, oGmaflCb c KHHTOH nocpeAcrBOMM BHpblBaHHH HAH OKHTaHHfl CTpaHHII HAH, H a o G o p O T , BKAeHBaHHH CBOHXX TeKCTOB, pa3AHHHMX A O n O A H e H H H [...] Mbl C03AaeM H3 KHOTH

KHHeTHHecKHHH oG-beicr, a BOKpyr Hero — aTMoedbepy coyHacnw ecAH JOK Hee B co3AaHHH, Tan B pa3pyineHHH oö-beicra. (1998: 80) (Turningg the pages around the spine as an axis, and communicating with the book byy tearing out or burning its pages, or, on the contrary by inserting our own texts andd all kinds of supplements [...] we create the book as a kinetic object and the 250 0

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ surroundingg atmosphere of participation, if not in the creation, then at least in its destruction.)31 1 T h ee turning of the page stresses the process of reading, appeals to a sensory perceptionn (touching), and actively involves the perceiver. T h ee performance element was taken to a literal level w h e n some books were performedperformed'in'in front of an audience. A book-flute ('A pneumatic flute' see figure 50),, was activated by the reader/performer blowing through it. T h e flute sounds w h e nn the shreds of paper rustle as the reader/performer breathes or blows into it.. N o t only does this book appeal to the senses of sound, touch, and sight, it also undoubtedlyy alludes to the traditional idea that writing is the materialized spirit (thee word made flesh - the incarnation of the word of God), and the b o o k the receptaclee of the spiritual word. In the performance of the book-flute, the a u t h o r / creatorr (who is also the reader) literally blows spirit into the book.

Fig.. 50 251 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Thee most renowned work by Ry Nikonova and die group of Transfurists is die sami^datsami^dat journal Transponans. This journal contained early avant-garde poetry, prose,, and manifestos (by Aleksej Krucenych, Velimir Chlebnikov, and Iliazd amongg others), works by a large number of the unofficial literary scene (Boris Konstriktor,, Vladimir ErP, Leon Bogdanov, Dmitrij Prigov, Andrej Monastyrskij,, Il'ja Kabakov, Lev Rubinstejn, Sven Gundlach, Konstantin Zvezdocetov, Vladislavv Len, Lev Kropivnickij, Genrich Sapgir and so on), poems by early (Western)) avant-gardists (Hugo Ball, Kurt Schwitters, Artaud), and translations off contemporary (Western) avantgardists (Hans Arp, Frans Mon, Gerhard Rühn)) (Janecek 1987). It included pictographic, conceptual, minimal, vacuum, actionn and other kinds of poetry. From the 28 th edition of Transponans onwards, thee standard design of the journal followed the so-called Restructure. From 1991,, Double, an international journal of visual poetry was initiated with the samee Restructure. Invitations were sent out to visual artists all over the world requestingg material for the journal to be sent (see figure 51). The only requirementt was that the format (with certain permissible variations) of the contribution matchedd the standard template of the Restructure, a triangle and square far from thee standard format of a book. The challenge of this book-form is a creation of aa kinetic object which is perceived and handled like a sculpture. It is not easily storedd and creates another sensibility towards the book-form. Furthermore, in thiss structure, the archetype of Nikonova's form-language - Malevich' Black SquareSquare - can be recognized. Once again, the Restructure challenges not only our perceptionn of the book-form but the finite form of this painting, which Nikonovaa perceives as a visual-verbal collapse. Thiss structure enabled the idea of transposition as a physical form. It allows the differentt layers and therefore, the works of different authors to interact in a directt way. Such a literally collaborate form appeared perhaps for the first time in NomefeNomefe 8th issue. In this edition, empty spaces were left on certain pages. Thesee were gradually filled with readers' comments and writings. Some readers evenn glued in their own productions on these pages. Thus, the idea was developedd to leave empty spaces in the journal under the heading; "Write your own!". . 252 2

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

im*im* row AST.W CÖM«» Ï » can {«r **o) «f

mm ? swMts 50Ï.SXWS X* camiKBis. fi,SA3ï,, CSIfllXAW. C/O U t ïlKSmXK

osna/taosna/ta n ait. tem s»ouj« vuem&nvuem&n tag #8; ïTRiL I.S090

'11

Fig.. 51 N i k o n o v aa saw this as a n e w avant-garde answer to the early avant-gardes inscriptionn "Read and tear t o pieces!" F o r her, the preservation and interaction of previouss texts is central: XVAO>KHHKK npeACTaeT KaK 3aHHTepecoBaHHbifi HHTaTeAb, BbranTHBaiomHH H33 nepBoGbiTHoro MaTepnaAa CBOH AHHHMH aBTOpcKHH TCKCT. 3 T O npeA-

noAaraeT,, HTO AAH CAeAyiomero aBTopa-HHTaTeAH HOBbie TeKCTbi Moryr CHOBaa npeACTaTb He K neiny He oOJBbiBaioiiiHM MaTepnaAOM. EAHHCTB e H H O HH OrOBOpKOH AOA>KHO 6 b I T b HX T H p a ^ K H p O B a H H e , TaK KaK B H e A p e H n e BB p y K O A e A b H B I H n O M H H H H K eCTb aKT AHHHOCTHOrO B3aHMOOTHOIHeHHfl.

(Kuzminskyy 1986: 553) (Thee artist appears as an interested reader who abstracts from the original material hiss or her own personal text of which he or she becomes the author. This presupposess that for the following author-reader the new texts can appear anew as a materiall without any commitment whatsoever. The reproduction of these texts shouldd be the only reservation, because the intrusion into the hand-made original copyy is an act of personal interrelation.) Inn Nikonova's work, this principle can be seen o n numerous pages from which windowswindows have been cut allowing the text on the previous page to be seen.

253 3

VCTUTINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Fig.. 52

254 4

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ Inn figure 45, we see a complex integration of two visual poems due to the cutoutt window in the middle of the page. The same can be seen on numerous pagess of Transponans. This is a double act of destruction and creation; i.e. the destructionn by overwriting the work of a previous author, and the creation by allowingg this "previous" work to become a direct (collaborative) part of the new work.. This principle constitutes the artistic principle of the journal Double's production.. Because of the cut-out windows throughout the journal and the transgressionn of one layer of pages over another, an interaction and collaborationn between various artists and poets is made possible (see figure 52). Consequently,, this journal involves the reader/producer/performer in a creative act in whichh the status of the author is played upon. One artistic text is integrated into anotherr overlapping and therefore overwriting the work of the previous author. Thee very form of the journal invites such a co- or over-writing between the textss of different authors. AA poetics of flux Accordingg to formalist criticism, a poem can be described as a poetic constructionn containing energies in matrices of architectonic tension.32 However, while formalistt criticism connects architectonic tensions to a propositional content, thee propositional content in Ry Nikonova's work is the architectonic tension itself.. Regardless of semantic content (or lack of such content), the main object off Nikonova's poetics seems to be the experimentation with and demonstration off (endless) possibilities of styles and techniques. Moreover, these experiments includee the transgression of possible and/or conventional limits, both in relationn to known techniques, and in relation to systemic and disciplinary limitations: : AyHinee BWCTpaHBaTb reHeTHHecicyio uenoHKy H3 BapHatrroB OAHoro CTHXOBOTpeHHfl,, AeAaTb e r o >KeCTOBHM, nOAH(hoHHMeCKHM, KOOpAH-

HaAbHWM,, TaKTHAbHMM, MaxeMaTHHecKHM, BaKyyMHMM... EAiDKe Bcero K noMTHioo «accemïHfl no33HH», Ha MOH B3rAHA, caM npouecc, H3rn6w M03ra.. (Nikonova 1999a) (Thee best would be to collect a genetic chain of variants of one poem; make it a 255 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' gesture-poem,, polyphonic, coordinate, tactic, mathematical, vacuum... Closest to thee concept of the essence ojpoetry, in my opinion, is the very process, the twists of thee brain.) Similarr to the mathematical principle of permutation, Nikonova's poems transformm and permute infinitely according to technical, stylistic, structural, systemic, orr disciplinary patterns. In both the transposition within one artistic system and thee transposition between different artistic systems, an underlying constructivist andd auto-referential principle seems to dominate. Forr Ry Nikonova, the page is a platform, where anything can happen. For her, thee revelation of possibilities is an exploration of the platform, i.e., not the emptyy white sheet of paper, the possible text, the margin, and the spaces, but thee interdependent relation between all these elements. Consequently, the classicall dichotomy between the empty white space of the page and the black letterss of the text is transformed into a dichotomy of the imagined, potential or previouss text and the real text, or between the empty page and the potential. On thee one hand, every trajectory of minimal movement or energy on an empty page leadss to order and therefore to a limitation of possibilities. On the other hand, suchh an approach to the page opens up a wealth of possibilities, a wealth of possiblee realizations, which take form and are transformed and modulated in accordancee with numerous possible techniques. Byy constandy rewriting and transforming her texts, Nikonova places herself at thee center of the work as the omnipresent creator of a universal system. However,, in the process of describing Everything, Nikonova undermines her own authority.. The author is first the author, then the reader, and then again the author andd so forth, using and reusing her work as the material for developing new variants.. For her, the preservation of and interaction with previous texts is central.. This is evident from the transformations of her poems, from her books, and fromm the ^-structure of the journal Double. A literal inscription of one work into anotherr characterizes this relationship between new and previous texts. The work inn its entirety appears as an unstable conglomerate of writings, contracting or expanding,, emitting offsprings, i.e., a Black Square in a constant state of flux.

256 6

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ 6.2.. Sergej Sigej's visual poetry - an inventory of indices Inn 1990, Sergej Sigej proposed a controversial definition of visual poetry that clearlyy refers to the early avant-garde's close and interactive relationship betweenn poets and painters. This relationship expressed itself in an attempt to createe a visual-verbal language, which was to be understood by everybody regardlesss of native language barriers. Chlebnikov's renowned sentence: "We wantt the word boldly to follow painting" is reflected in Sigej's definition of visuall poetry: ApVTHMHH CAOBaMH, - II03TH npeBpainaKJTCH B XyAOJKHHKH, H O co3AaeT n p HH 3TOM CTHXH. B H 3 y a A b H a f l n 0 3 3 H f l HCKAIOHaeT p a 3 r O B O p O H3HKe KaK

cpeACTBee oömeHHfl. O H MOJKCT 6HTB pyccKHM HAH AK>6MM ApyraM, HO

ecAHH OH xoneT craTb ceroAHfl nosTHHecKHM, OH npeBpamaeTCfl [. -.] B «HepHMHH amHK», He HyjKAaioiuHHCfl B nepeBOAe, H6O BH3yaAi>Hoe CTHXOTBopeHHee roBopHT 3pHTeAio H3MKOM >KHBonHCH no npeHMymecTBy. (1992:: 32) (Inn other words, the poets turn themselves into artists, but create nonetheless poems.. Visual poetry excludes any talk about language as a means of communication.. It may be Russian or any other language, but if it is to be poetic, it must turn [...]] into a "black box", without the need of translation because visual poems speakk for the most part to the spectator in the language of art.) Inn visual poetry, the attention shifts from the signified to the signifier, from representationn to presentation. It appears as a reaction against the language as a meanss to communicate. Roland Barthes expresses this in The Pleasure of the Text Lasdy,, the text can, if it wants, attack the canonical structures of the languagee itself (Sollers): lexicon (exuberant neologisms, portmanteau words, transliterations),, syntax (no more logical cell, no more sentence). It is a matterr of effecting, by transmutation (and no longer only by transformation,, a new philosophic state of the language-substance; this extraordinary state,, this incandescent metal, outside origin and outside communication, thenn becomes language, and not a language, whether disconnected, mimed,, mocked. (1975: 31) Inn this, it is similar to vpum\ to a destabilizing of the relation between signifier andd signified or to a complete disruption of this relation. The meaning then is thatt of a shifter. 257 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

Accordingg to Sigej, a distinction has to be made between the visualization of poetryy (as in the case of Apollinaire, Mallarmé, and later of many concrete poetss like Eugene Gomringer) and visual poetry. This distinction can be difficult too uphold, but it seems justified when comparing the visual poetry of Sigej, with thee broadest definition of visual poetry (which includes any text with an increasedd attention to the place of the sign on the page). In a more narrow definitionn of visual poetry, the visual element is taken a step further, and it becomes stilll harder to distinguish such work from visual art. The textual element in visuall poetry is reduced to a material and has a visual quality. It can be manipulatedd just like any other material in visual art.33 It is a material in a very direct way:: it is literally any found fragment and piece of texts and images. Thus, the textuall is visible and manipulated in the same way as is the material in visual art. Inn his conception of visual poetry, the relation to these already existing texts andd images as material for his own art and the handling of this material are central. . Inn analyzing Marcel Duchamp's ready-mades, Rosalind Krauss compares the readymadee with the photograph because of its instantaneous isolation from realityity and its inherent dependence on the existence of this reality at the same time. Inn die inclusion of an object within the realm of art, it loses its fixed meaning; it gainss signification in the same way as the index:34 Thee readymade's parallel with the photograph is established by its process off production. It is about the physical transposition of an object from the continuumm of reality into the fixed condition of the art-image by a moment off isolation or selection. And in this process, it also recalls the function of thee shifter. It is a sign which is inherendy 'empty', its signification a function off only this one instance, guaranteed by the existential presence of just this object.. It is the meaningless meaning that is instituted through the terms off the index. (1999a: 206) Thee interesting thing about Duchamp's ready-made art objects as for example his urinall is not so much that the urinal is a thing (a urinal) but that this thing from thee continuum of everyday life has become a sign, a shifter. In Duchamp's ready-mades,, the artist does not naively transport fragments of reality into the picturee space. The things are transformed in that practice. Although they are 258 8

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

pointingg to 'reality', they have at the same time become signs of an absent referent;; they are to he.filledwith significance (1999a: 206).35 Duchamp undoubtedly playss a significant role in Sigej's visual poetics and in the relation of his own workk to works by other authors, which he sees as an act of signing or appropriation.. Thus, especially significant is what he calls Duchamp's "moustachetechnique"" referring to Duchamp's adding a moustache to Leonardo da Vinci's imagee of Mona Lisa and thereby appropriating this work of art, "signing" it as it weree his own work.36 Accordingg to Bachtin, in communicating, the speaker is not the originator of words:: "The speaker is not the biblical Adam, dealing only with virgin and still unnamedd objects, giving them names for the first time" (1986: 93). He or she willl always seek to assimilate the other's word and engage in a dialogue with it: Thiss is why the unique speech experience of each individual is shaped and developedd in continuous and constant interaction with other's individual utterances.. This experience can be characterized to some degree as the processs of assimilation - more or less creative - of others' words (and not thee words of a language). Our speech, that is, all our utterances (including creativee works), is filled with others' words, varying degrees of otherness orr varying degrees of "our-own-ness", varying degrees of awareness and detachment.. These words of others carry with them their own expression, theirr own evaluative tone, which we assimilate, rework, and re-accentuate. (1986:: 89) Sincee in authoring, the author always relies on his memory reserve of others' wordss (texts), this act relates to the sphere of his own individual memory. The authorising,authorising, on the other hand, relates to the sphere of public memory. This sharedd memory is ordered and the individual elements (works) are classified and differentiatedd according to a convention of authority and originality?1 Thus, the institutionn of authorship paradoxically relies on signs of originality. However, in modernn poetry, Roland Barthes argues, these signs of authority and subjectivity havee become shifters. Therefore, the point of origin has been deferred; language referss only back to language itself. The text is a "multi-dimensional space in whichh a variety of writings, none of them original, blend and clash. The text is a tissuetissue of quotations drawn from the innumerable centres of culture" (1977: 259 9

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' 146).. Thus, writing is a palimpsestdc construct consisting of quotations from the culturall net of signs.38 Instrumentss of writing Accordingg to Sergej Sigej's definition of visual poetry, a poem written with attentionn to the location of the signs on the page and therefore with an increased significationn to the place of the sign, is not necessarily a visual poem but instead aa "visualization" of a poem. In this he sees the difference between his own poetryy and concrete poetry. Moreover, Sigej stresses the signification of instrumentss used. While the dis-placement of the signs on the page of the concrete poett is primarily obtained with help of the typewriter, this instrument is in visuall poetry just one of many instruments. Moreover, it is not only used for utilitariann purposes but also as an object for artistic manipulation: the artistic gaze is turnedd to every step in the production-process. Likewise, the xerox which is anotherr favored instrument of the concrete poet, is not just used for reproductivee purposes, but is manipulated (Sigej 1993: 68). Thee reproductive utilitarian possibilities of both the typewriter and the xerox weree especially important for the Soviet sami^dat culture. Both instruments becamee (to some extent unobtainable) symbols of free expression for the unofficiall artist, poet, scientist, religious grouping, and so forth. But also the manuscriptt acquired an almost sacred status within this culture.39 However, visual poetryy and the art-book scene should be seen as sami^dat in the "second degree". 400 Consequently, the xerox, the writing machine and the manuscript becomee objects of artistic manipulation and acquire semiotic signification: KcepOKomifll — Me^rra caMH3AaTHHKOB H

B 3TOM

KanecrBe OHa, KOHCHHO, He

CAHIIIKOMM H H T e p e C H a , CKpMTHe B H e H B03MO>KHOCTH TBOpHeCKOH TeXHHKH

HaHHHaioTT omymaTbCfl

TOABKO

n p « HecbopMaAbHOM ee HcnoAb30BaHHH.

(Sigejj 1993: 68) (Xeroxx is the dream of the sami^datciks and in this respect it is of course not terriblyy interesting. Its hidden possibilities of artistic techniques are beginning to be feltt only when it is used in an informal way.) Indeed,, reproductive methods of various kinds are explored and manipulated 260 0

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ almostt endlessly by Sergej Sigej: [K]a>KAoee nosTHMecKoe COCTOHHHC TpeöyeT AAH CBoero 3aKperiAeHHfl o c o 5 o r oo MaTepnaAa... no33H« HanHHaerai, KorAa nosT o&bflBAfleT CMepn. pyKoimanvtt H nepHOBHicaM, Bbi6npaH eAHHCTBeHHHH BepHNH cnocoG cpeAHH rpaBiopH Ha AHHOAeyMe, rpaBiopbi Ha KapTOHe, TpacbapeTa, cbpoTTa>Kaa BbinyKAoro HAH BAaBAeHHoro inpHchra, npo3panHOH 6yMarH HAH öyMaraa KonHpoBaABHOH, Band H cnnneK, nypGaHa H Tonopa. [3]Aecb K AaAeKK OT MHCAH Koro-AH6o anaTHpoBaTb, nocKOABKy rrpoÖAeivia MaTepnaAaa H onpeAeAeHHOH TCXHHKH AHKryeTCH npoÖAeMOH THpa>KHpoBaHHfl: BHee THpanca no33iw HeAeHCTBHTeAbHa. (Sigej 1995: 296) (Inn order to consolidate itself, every poetic position demands a special material... Poetryy begins when the poet has announced the death of the manuscripts and drafts,, selecting the only true means among the linocuts, cardboard engravings, stencil,, frottage of script in relief or imprinted, transparent paper or carbon-paper, cottonn wadding and matches, blocks and axes. Here I am far from the thought of shockingg anyone, since the problem of material and a certain technique is dictated byy the problem of reproduction: without reproduction poetry is ineffective.) T h ee issue of reproduction was crucial for the sami^dat culture as well as for the historicall avant-garde. T h e constant lack of reproductive possibilities, of paper, color,, and so o n were problems facing Krucenych, Goncarova, Rozanova, Larionov,, Malevich, and U'ja Zdanevic (Iliazd) at the beginning of the century andd especially during the First World War and the civil war that followed. H o w ever,, the limitations imposed by reality o n the avant-gardists (such as a constant lackk of material), were turned into artistic value. T h e handwriting, collage, and thee primitive reproduction techniques were used for artistic purposes to create aa n u m b e r of books, which transgressed the limitations between the arts. Sergej Sigejj expresses a similar awareness of the interplay between reproduction and artisticc value: 4 1 RR He 3Haio HTO Tanoe oKOHHaTeAbHaa cbopMa KHHI-H, H36e>KaTb KaHOHHnecKoroo TeKCTa - HaMepeHHe? - npoijecc! / BooGme, ecn> ABe npoÖAeMbi n p nn H3roTOBAeHHH X3HA-M3HA KHHH npoÖAeMa THpaJKa H npoÖAeMa xyAO)KecTBeHHOCTH.. (1993: 70) (II do not know such a thing as a finished book-form. Is the avoidance of a canonicall text intentional? - It is a process! In general, there are two problems in 261 1

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' connectionn with the making of hand-made books: the problem of reproduction andd the problem of artistic value.) Ass an unofficial artist and poet, Sigej always experienced a lack of the most elementaryy materials and reproductive instruments. 42 For a long period of time thee only possible reproductive method was copying by hand. Sigej was an eager studentt and researcher of the historical as well as the contemporary Western avant-gardee and spent hours in the library meticulously copying programmatic textss and poems of Kandinskij, Chlebnikov, Malevich, Krucenych, Iliazd, and soo forth. Later, type written copies or clip-outs of texts by John Cage, Isidore Isou,, and Chlebnikov, among others, were added to this collection of avantgardee documents. These handwritten or type written copies and cutouts graduallyy became the material for Sigej's visual poetic work. Thus, the two bookobjectss Krucenych and Velikajajuturnalia: eta okom (The Great Futurologia: to be Read withwith the Eye) have developed over a period of more than 20 years. The first book-objectt is dated 1973-1995 and the second 1976-1999. They both contain hand-copiedd texts by the Russian historical avant-garde, and they both take the naturee of a collection. Thee first book-object is a case with two strings fastened to the cover, which makess it possible to lock the case with knots. It is necessary for the reader to unknott the strings in order to enter the book-space. When unfolded, three singularr booklets appear, along with some individual pages with drawings. All the bookss look like exercise books and bear Krucenych's name as well as that of Sigej.. One book bears Krucenych's name on the top written as an imitation of Krucenych'ss own signature. Below, Krucenych's name and the title, "Slovo o podvigachh Gogolja" ("A Tale about Gogol's heroic Deeds"), are handwritten onn white paper and glued onto the cover. At the bottom, Sigej has signed and datedd the book 1985/95. Another book has the cover illustration for Krucenych'ss book Old-Time Love glued onto its cover. The drawing is overwritten with thee English word "Cannibalism". Thee second book-object is a black suitcase, which contains a number of objects. AA long piece of sackcloth can be unfolded. It is painted in red, orange or blue andd has white painted Russian letters, and some round cardboard pieces with 262 2

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

whitee Latin letters glued onto it. When this long piece of cloth is unfolded, a numberr of small letters stand up at the bottom of the suitcase and a book appears.. This book is evidently a notebook with copied texts from the early Russiann avant-garde. It also contains golden paper pieces and strings. Some pieces off paper indicate the texts of Krucenych (Kru), Iliazd and so on. Figure 53 showss the handwritten copy of Gnedov's manifesto 'Smert' iskusstvu!' ('Death too Art!'). It has red circles drawn over the text and a brownish color (dirt?) has beenn smeared inside. To the binding, an extra white and golden piece of paper hass been added. This extra page has red circles on it and the names Gnedov, Chrisanf,, Zdanevic, Pariach, Terent'ev, Krucenych, Cicerin, Ignat'ev, Sersenevich,, Sever) anin, and Sigej.

Fig.. 53

Whenn turned, the left page has an almost unreadable text of what seems to be ann index for the book. The pages are illustrated'with drawings on top of the text. Thesee illustrations are simply drawn fantasy figures with big square heads and 263 3

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

onee eye, two legs and large male genitals drawn in red. This overt sexual symbolismm is also present on the tabs in the margin. The letters "Chu" (reminiscent off "chuj" [dick] and "chudoznik" [artist]), three hard signs, and at the bottom, a letterr 'f is written in the form of a penis (from which drops fall into the golden marginn below). The penises, the drops in the margin, and the big red circles suggestt blood and sperm. This overt sexuality can be seen as a metaphor for thee handling of the texts and the book: the unlocking of the suitcase, the unfolding,, the letters rising, the opening, the turning, the touch, and the act of reading.. The reader/ perceiver is indeed in direct physical contact with the book,, as was the copyist and illustrator, Sergej Sigej, who has handled the text, manipulatedd it and appropriated it before it became accessible to our gaze and touch. 43 3 Handwriting g KrucenychKrucenych and The Great Vuturologa should not be seen as visual poetry, but as book-objectss with illustrations. They have certain similarities with sentimental memorymemory chests (nostalgic and sentimental assemblages containing objects of affectionn or commemoration). 44 In this sense, they contain the strange double sense off the collective fanaticism of a youngster: collecting, ordering, enclosing in (secret)) catalogues, locking the collection with locks, hiding it and handling it carefully;; and the chaotic and unkempt look of an old toy. Central to this collective fanaticismm is the handwritten copied text, which constitutes the background of thee illustrated assembled pages. Inn the visual poetry of Sergej Sigej, the importance of handwriting is obvious. Inn light of the above-mentioned sami^dat culture, handwriting is a substitute for thee longed for 'Text", access to which is extremely difficult or has been given upp on. The "Text" is turned into an almost sacred text or a fetish, and the readerr into a monk meticulously copying it. This act is both symbolic in its religious/sexuall devotion and as a cultural act of reproduction or preservation. It is aa memory reserve but also a personal intervention, a cultural institution and an objectt of fantasies. The personal intervention in the copyist's original text can be seenn in the personal mark of the hand-written text. It is a mark of the copyist's 264 4

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ presence,, an indicator of his (bodily) intervention. However, this presence, I will argue,, is a consciously transformed presence to a sign representing 'presence'. Inn Sigej's visual poetry, the "author" (and the "subject") is a theme which is developedd and manipulated in a number of different ways. Inn the poetics of Serge j Sigej, the indexicality of handwriting is a sign of an aesthetictic attitude towards writing in a double sense: as poetic and painterly. Inscribing himselff in the tradition of the early Russian avant-garde, Sigej sees handwriting ass the first step from the visualization of poetry to the actual visual poem itself: npoTHBonocraBAeHHee pyKH H nonepKa crporofi ynopflAOHeHHocm ranorpa^cKoroo Ha5opa OKa3aAocb nepBMM inaroM K npeBpamemiio CTHXOTBOpeHHfll B HeMTo, noABAacTHoe xyAO>KHHKy. (1992: 29) {Thee opposition of hand and handwriting to the strict regularity of the typographicc typesetting proved to be the first step towards changing a poem into somethingg controlled by the artist.) Handwritingg appears as a mediator between visual and verbal languages. In its ultimatee consequence, the signs are reduced to purely visual signifiers as in the poetryy of Cicerin. In the manifest 'Kan-Fun', he proclaims the death to verbal languagee and the superiority of the image. The poem can include any available signn and material, exemplified in his book Mena Vsech (Change of All) (1923) in whichh the visual gains an increasingly important role and in the end completely substitutess the linguistic code. In his book Mena vsech esce ra^ (Change ofAll Once Again),Again), Sigej creates a tribute to Cicerin (fig. 54). The book (which has not (yet) beenn assembled) consists of a number of pages with assemblages of pictorial signs,, stamps, graphs, symbols and so forth. The stylized image of Cicerin is includedd on several of the pages along with logos, stamps, and images derived fromm the early Russian or Dada avant-garde. In the pages shown here, the rubberstampp of John Held's recent performance The Fake Picabia Brothers is included.. Moreover, the poem 'Avekivekov' ('Unto Ages of Ages') and the penultimatee untitled poem in Cicerin's collection are included.

265 5

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT'

spree spree Fig.. 54

266 6

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ Thee words in Sigej's poems are actual images, the meanings of which are fairly simple.. Similar to a rebus, they appear to be various icons and symbols from thee avant-garde along with images of glyphic or hieroglyphic writings and chemicall and other scientific symbols. On these pages, the material poses as signs. However,, the images refuse to be translated to a verbal code. Inn addition to the direct reference to Cicerin in many of his visual poems, Sigej alsoo frequendy mentions the work and theories of Isidore Isou (a member of thee French lettristgroup founded in the late 1940s). In order to subvert the symbolicc code of language, this group includes all kinds of marks ranging from gestural,, somatic, trace signs of the automatic tradition to all kinds of invented signss which engage with an alternative tradition of the hieroglyphic character andd its mythic visual propensity (Drucker 1998: 67). The letters are distributed onn the page producing the graphic equivalent to drawing. Thereby, the letters aree stripped of their linguistic function. Sigej clearly inscribes himself in this traditionn in which the sign is reduced to a visual signifier. The purely visual writingg turns into a glyphic script: Thee only recourse left to the spectator is to focus on their visual properties.. Lacking verbal identity, letters function exclusively as pictorial signs,, with the result that their significance derives according to the rules governingg abstract art. (Bohn 1996: 176-177) Lingeringg between hieroglyph and gesture, a writing estranged from its linguisticc code can only be read as a personal-somatic script. Palimpsests s Inn Krucenych and The Great Futurologa, the copyist has left a personal mark (his signature)) on the enclosed copied text-fragments. Thus, by copying a text by hand,, the text is digested by the artist and transformed into his or her personal text.. Copying is turned into an act of appropriation. It is an example of Sigej's techniquee of "metamtekstoz" (a neologism created from the words "metempsychosis"" and "text"): ripHCTpacTHee K nepenHCHBaHHK) CBOHX H ny>KHx TCKCTOB TO>Ke 3aBOAHAo BB Ae6pn: B>KHBHTb co5cTBeHHoe B TKam> ny>Koro — ocymecrBHTb «nepece267 7

WRITINGG AND THE 'SUBJECT' AeHHee AyuiH» oAHoro TeKcra B ApyroH - «MeTaMTeKCT03». (Sigej 1993: 73) (Thee predilection for copying one's own and someone else's texts also led into a labyrinth:: to breathe one's own into the texture of another's - to carry out a "migrationn of the soul" of one text into another — "metemtextosis".) Thee superimposition of a personal mark on the body of the Other text is a sign off appropriation, of over-writing the original text with a new one. It is also a seriess of returns and projections: returns to previous texts/images and the projectionn of these texts and images into the artist's new work. It is a migration of the soull between texts, a "metemtextosis". Inn 1968, Sigej applied the technique of "metemtextosis" to Velimir Chlebnikov'ss poem 'Saman i Venera' (The Shaman and Venus'). Sigej copied this text andd added an extra word to almost everyone of Chlebnikov's. The idea of overwritingg - 'Vpisat' svoe v cuzoe" ("inscribing one's own into the other") however,, is also connected to Sigej's idea of the palimpsest (an act of erasing, overwriting,, suppression, and adding). It implies the co-existence of the original textt as a trace and the imposing on this orignal a new text. Initially, Sigej identifiedd this technique with one of over-writing (with black ink or white correction fluid)) on printed texts. During die years 1969-1973, this was a favored technique.. One example is the over-writing of what appears to be a book of fairytales.. In 1971 it was changed into the book Vorokov (The Eye Thief). Single letterss or syllables were substituted by fat black dots to create a rhyuSmic pattern. AA new %aum -like text appears from the remaining letters. Some lines from the bottom,, die text reads: "Pobezala, chvala veki 2amachnula na Anu Alpul' venik krikomm zal na lieu. Na rog ona stolknula Tajnusko" ("She ran off, praise raised herr eyelids to Anu Alpul' birch besom stung witii a scream on die face. She stumbledd over a horn Tajnusko"). However, it is the black dots that stand out witfii tfieir almost hypnotic effect (see figure 55). Inn 1980-1983, the book Ir-faer-was created. The term "irfaerism" was invented byy Sigej and Dmitrij Prigov and means roughly the same as transposition: a text iss transposed into another text or textual system.45 However this term signifies nott only the principle but also the technique of overwriting one text enabling anotherr text to appear. "Irfaerism" was applied to an Ossetian book in a col268 8

PALIMPSESTS.. VISUAL POETRY BY RY NIKONOVA AND SERGEJ SIGEJ

laboratee work by Sergej Sigej, Ry Nikonova, Boris Konstriktor and Dmitrij Prigov.466 On certain pages only letters foreign to the Cyrillic alphabet remain (thee rest are painted over), while on other pages, complex drawings are included.477 The ink-dots and lines of the reworked text develop into patterns of glyphicc script. It has similar features to that of the Morse alphabet or Morgenstern'ss renowned poem 'Fisches Nachtgesang' (1905), but it can also be seen as indicess of writing, as a kind of gesture script.48 Writing has become a trace, an extremelyy condensed text - as presentation - to the line.

To|oa## 3 ||ep^|453|3Bec|y. —— AaM|MOio*y|«y!- -||T P e6Ma;i« A^||##. — «|#

HaéfM*? ? —— OHWfnHT, - cKa3aaaPfaH«.

—— fe4i)é«T?-n||aK|.

•-—— HeffoKaiKy.

—— Tkimtl, i f *T|a|aTi>, «*? M M # r | t | | y | || Mnaac|Ky. P ^ W a m m u M - M —— #lflaBaft!^a|f|MaaWAa|êMt-~A|Tf:H

ce|if#

** M'4NI#yKO^,(ic4tNe»f no.*. tpyuiyfffcpacHo|| M#TOM#«*>M n»É|H|y.iMN# MMofl. ;|o|r(( npoaefétl ««epea (Mtfiuty | H.icii#y4acb B >• tym|yy ctèfttoft. Toraaa #JHH p|o