Junip Hs kwesitshap Constantine Kedrov

« Junip Hs kwesitshap » Constantine [Kedrov] considers that chaos is better than the false hierarchy
 30.12.2009 |  Автор: admin Автор: Admin
Constantine [Kedrov]: It is remembered, in the spring of 1982 to me into [Peredelkino] arrived Aleksey [Parshchikov], Olga [Sviblova] (then his wife) and Finnish Slavist the yucca Of [malinen]. They arrived and they asked to somehow name briefly that how we dealt the last 10 years. I proposed: give let this it will be metaphor squared, [metametafora]. But all objected: this will difficultly pronounce, all will speak metametametameta… metaphor. I said: nothing, they will learn. And actually, the first time all were addressed, but then they became accustomed.


But me- that (as poet) at that time they did not print. And about [metametafore] spoke everyone which [vzbredet] into the head. Whereas I by “the [metametaforoy]” implied one: when internal and external they change by places, well, that whether, “they are castled”. I named this phenomenon “reversing”.

[K].[K].: This already then, when I worked at the doctoral dissertation, they asked me: and it is not possible whether to name this phenomenon any other word, because “reversing” it sounds too physiologically. I answered: if you please! Thus appeared word “they [insaydaut]”.

[M].[B].: But, I will be repeated, is possible [metametametafora] and further multiplication of the prefixes “by meta-”?

[K].[K].: The clear matter, that, where four measurements, there are the fifth, and the sixth and so forth is of course more right to say n-dimensional metaphor.

Furthermore, in the word “of [metametafora]” is contained one additional very interesting thing. Metaphysics of Aristotle – this is not simple that follows afterward physics, but also that which on that side of physics, does not yield to physical laws. Analogously metaphor initially made sacral, deep sense. Unfortunately, subsequently metaphor they began to examine simply as rhetorical figure. By term “[metametafora]” I returned to metaphor its metaphysical sense. Not randomly we called [metametaforu] “[misterialnoy] metaphor”. But [misterialnaya] metaphor – this two words, it is long. But [metametafora] – is compressed and is capacious.

[M].[B].: The different hemispheres of the brain answer for the theoretical generalizations and the poetry. How you do succeed in working in the such different regions?

[K].[K].: Undoubtedly, I first wrote something and only then he comprehended. When in 1958 I wrote the poem “infinite”, in which appeared first [metametafora]: “I left to itself through-towards- from and left under erecting above”, to me there was only 15 years, but this verse transferred my most secret sensations. By the way, this was soon after the letter of my cousin grandfather – the artist of Pavel [Chelishchev]. In this letter there was reproduction of one of its pictures, during which were mixed front and backgrounds.

[K].[K].: Pavel [Chelishchev] did not use this expression, he only once assumed that the angels so see. But its letter and reproduction, undoubtedly, acted on me, although it is now complicated to say, to what degree. Most likely, they simply corresponded to my internal experience, but in order to comprehend this experience, long years were required.

[K].[K].: It was silent. [K]. [К].: Она молчала. It very importantly was held. Later I became friends with his widow, and it is here with it – it did not come out. I sent to it another letter with reminding about our encounter in [Shklovskogo] and poem “infinite”, in which there were the lines: “Where blue was covered fern and at the right time the rivers of century we stopped were the encounter of lizards on the stone-”. [Kirsanov] me nothing it answered. I do not condemn him, I also answer not what letters. Here give god to be governed with your matters. But soon appeared its poem “tracks on the sand”, in which there were the words: “I – Cretaceous period. /In the depth is imprints of shells on me. /My palm,/I is that only the impression of antediluvian sheet”. It seemed me that here is the specific echo, the roll-call. Generally poem “tracks on the sand” is very similar to the poem “infinite”, which I to it sent.

[K].[K].: Yes, I said that avant-guardist on its anthropology of another, than ordinary people. I had in mind, of course, not anatomical structure… Although you know, honestly speaking, and outwardly avant-guardists differ also! Here I had a happiness to associate from the twisted, [Shklovskim], [Kirsanovym] – they all were characterized by.

Present [Kirsanova], which sits in [TSDL] (is, where, until now, visible the made it inscription: “After eating dish of eight lampreys,/do not imagine, that is eaten the octopus”). Mr. in the English suit, in the cuff-links, which rarely on anyone you will see. Still, it was “[vyezdnyak]”, and we – “[nevyezdnye]”! It was always received as the center, around which swarmed literary servants.

But twisted they did not always release in [TSDL], it thrust certification, but they repulsed it. It always was into some to skullcap, to Tolstoyan with the embroidry, into some sandals. In my opinion it is simple [pridurivalsya]. But nevertheless, when it sat, everything indicated that it the main thing, and all around small fry. This was evidently.

And Victor [Shklovskiy] – small person with the enormous skull. When it shouted: “Shut ventilator! Here it blows! I do not want to die of the inflammation of lungs!” – this was entirely differently, than if someone another the same the very said. He spoke this as avant-guardist.

[M].[B].: Why into the periods of political temperature drop do cause alarm precisely vanguard flows, and realistic – are fit to the court?

[K].[K].: I think, that this is connected with the observation of Plato, that on musical harmony depends the political system and therefore it is not possible to change it in no case. By some their inside, by womb, with backside the leaders of the country this perceive. Them, of course, irritated and irritates the not so much meaningful side, as absence of the smooth well-worn track of Pushkin's poetics, which is accessible to all – as to the moron, whom has third of bend, so also to super-developed essence like [Khodasevicha].

[M].[B].: But more frequently it is necessary to hear, which to write verses in the spirit of futurists, [oberiutov] or [lianozovtsev] is simpler than classical.

[K].[K].: This only seems. The same they speak about [Shenberga], Shostakovic – that so each can. On the contrary, exactly of [gladkopis] it is easy to master. All advance guards managed very well classical verse. Take Khlebnikov's the same: “You the goddess of the youth of eyebrow are bent in the languor you it is excellent at night lying on the scattered straw”. Or: “Shaman the encounter also of Venus was so it was brief and clear: /It entered into the entrance of cave,/to the impulses of happiness spring”. If you please, as much as desired.

[K].[K].: To me was always contrary idea itself, that it is possible anything to criticize. You will focus attention, I almost never no one criticized. Assert your! I am completely agreeable with Mayakovskiy: “From the passion of coachman and taciturn laundress unprepossessing child as a result emerged. Child is not garbage, you will not throw out on the wheelbarrow. Mother cried and she named its criticisms…” (I cite on the memory). What this after the stupid idea from the side to judge poet, nevertheless, good, poor, average? Poets require not the judge, but the critic- interpreter, [ponimatele].

[K].[K].: I- that it was glad in 1991, when all writer unions collapsed. He thought, as good, it is noticeable, and the critics none it will be. But then I see, they everyone crowded around the new plots, the rewards of every kind.

In Russia in the 19th Century was affirmed the dictatorship of estimators, apex of which became the caddish articles of Belinskiy, in which it teaches Gogol, [Lermontova] and others, as them to write. This was completely inherited by Soviet system. It is remembered, in the criticism Of [ermilova] on the dacha there was the inscription: “Carefully, evil dog”, and from below whose- that the signature: “and unprincipled”. But this is not compulsory, there were fundamental critics. But what difference? I do not understand as generally persons, who does not record verses, not written significant works, it can come out as the estimator.

[K].[K].: This is very thin thing. From one side, without the hierarchy nothing there will be – either cultures or lives nor civilizations. From the other side, artificial hierarchy contradicts culture, and life, and civilization. To me, that lived life under the conditions of false hierarchies, this especially one can see well.

[K].[K].: This is, of course, also bad, but it is better than false hierarchy. Let us say, the 19th Century for us is associated with the names of Pushkin, [Tyutcheva] and so on. But perhaps it is possible to decide, who of them is more main? This resembles the dispute of children in The [chukovskogo]: “- To me dad himself said… – To me mom herself said… – But indeed dad is very mom… Pope is much very”.

My Pushkin – this Khlebnikov. And how much me not they told that in the poetry the 19th Century was great, I consider that the 20th century. The 19th Century is great in the prose, and in the poetry we then still learned in Byron and other European poets. Here is symbolism, futurism – this is immense. I completely cannot understand, as it is possible to say after this: back to Pushkin.

[K].[K].: Sometimes I think that my verses – this is more authentic I than I, that sits now before you. Not poetry is an application to the biography, but biography – bright note to the poetry. Certainly, it is interesting that Pushkin nevertheless attained intimate proximity with Anna [Kern], but this is interesting only because was written “II remember strange instant…”. But if this poem was not written, then what difference: well it attained, well it did not attain! But as note to the poem this is interesting. Although calm down- that Pushkin borrowed in Zhukovskiy: “I Muza young, was, he met in the sublunary side…”. Thus it came out that the original faded next to the reminiscence.

[K].[K].: This so is natural for me as respiration. But division between the skills, of course, eating. We in the youth were fascinated by [tsvetomuzykoy]. My friend Damascus steel Of [galeev] was the founder of this motion. It also for some reason was pursued. Generally to understand, why something was pursued, is impossible. And then I understood that the boundary is very clear. If I look, I do not hear. Music departs. If I hear music, then I do not see image.

But then I learned, which, occurs, there is a formula of inverse proportional dependence between the simultaneous sensations: when man hears, he does not see, while when it sees – it does not hear. But then I caught itself in the theater, that if I hear music, I will not see that he occurs on the scene, and vice versa.

Word in this respect possesses the surprising collective, focusing property. In the word is music, and color, and means, and figure, both the intonation and sense, and folly – everything in it exists. In this sense I thank god, that the main matter of my life – poetry, because this is independence. Operator cameras are not necessary to me, it is not necessary to worry about the illumination, it is not necessary actor to persuade not to have a drink before the premiere. To me it is sufficient notebook and pencil. And more than anything it is must.

Источник: Источник: k-kedrov.livejournal.com
 Copyright © 2009 Сео блог. All Rights Reserved. Все права защищены.