“I Do not Believe in Anarchy.” To the Question of the Ideological Foundations of Egor Letov’s Works

Q2 Arts and Humanities Kritika i Semiotika Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.25205/2307-1737-2020-2-388-400
M. Martynov
{"title":"“I Do not Believe in Anarchy.” To the Question of the Ideological Foundations of Egor Letov’s Works","authors":"M. Martynov","doi":"10.25205/2307-1737-2020-2-388-400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The name of Egor Letov (1964–2008), one of the most famous Russian punks today, has a stable association with anarchism in the mass consciousness, with a protest against any form of power. Some of Letov’s texts and phrases (for example, “Kill the state in yourself!”) have acquired the character of precedent – they are identified and function as anarchist texts without necessarily referring to the original source. At the same time, there are elements in Letov’s works that are difficult to reconcile with an anarchist worldview, and in general, Letov’s anarchism is not obvious. For example, the theme of death, which is one of the key themes in Letov’s works, is hardly associated with anarchism, which takes the side of life. The main purpose of the article is to clarify Letov’s attitude to anarchism, to show the role and place of the anarchist worldview in his works. The author concludes that Letov’s works is either not anarchist enough (a turn towards nationalist views) or, on the contrary, too anarchist (a form of total protest). This situation is conditioned by structural peculiarities of anarchist theory. Classical anarchism has a Manichaean structure (S. Newman), as subject and power in it are clearly separated. Letov’s creativity is not anarchist in this Manichaean sense, which requires unambiguity and clarity of its elements. Despite the evasion of Manichaean binaryism, Letov’s texts are able to keep the link with anarchism. Letov’s anarchism has broader grounds and expresses a total protest against reality, which condenses freedom into a conventional communication framework, makes it predictable, and protects it from waste.","PeriodicalId":36800,"journal":{"name":"Kritika i Semiotika","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kritika i Semiotika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25205/2307-1737-2020-2-388-400","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The name of Egor Letov (1964–2008), one of the most famous Russian punks today, has a stable association with anarchism in the mass consciousness, with a protest against any form of power. Some of Letov’s texts and phrases (for example, “Kill the state in yourself!”) have acquired the character of precedent – they are identified and function as anarchist texts without necessarily referring to the original source. At the same time, there are elements in Letov’s works that are difficult to reconcile with an anarchist worldview, and in general, Letov’s anarchism is not obvious. For example, the theme of death, which is one of the key themes in Letov’s works, is hardly associated with anarchism, which takes the side of life. The main purpose of the article is to clarify Letov’s attitude to anarchism, to show the role and place of the anarchist worldview in his works. The author concludes that Letov’s works is either not anarchist enough (a turn towards nationalist views) or, on the contrary, too anarchist (a form of total protest). This situation is conditioned by structural peculiarities of anarchist theory. Classical anarchism has a Manichaean structure (S. Newman), as subject and power in it are clearly separated. Letov’s creativity is not anarchist in this Manichaean sense, which requires unambiguity and clarity of its elements. Despite the evasion of Manichaean binaryism, Letov’s texts are able to keep the link with anarchism. Letov’s anarchism has broader grounds and expresses a total protest against reality, which condenses freedom into a conventional communication framework, makes it predictable, and protects it from waste.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“我不相信无政府状态。”论列夫作品的思想基础问题
叶戈尔·列托夫(1964-2008)是当今俄罗斯最著名的朋克之一,在大众意识中,他的名字与无政府主义有着稳定的联系,反对任何形式的权力。列托夫的一些文本和短语(例如,“杀死你内心的国家!”)已经获得了先例的特征——它们被认定为无政府主义文本,并且在没有必要参考原始来源的情况下发挥作用。同时,在列托夫的作品中也有一些难以与无政府主义世界观调和的元素,总的来说,列托夫的无政府主义并不明显。例如,死亡这一主题是列托夫作品中的一个重要主题,它与站在生命一边的无政府主义几乎没有联系。本文的主要目的是阐明列托夫对无政府主义的态度,展示无政府主义世界观在其作品中的作用和地位。作者的结论是,列托夫的作品要么不够无政府主义(转向民族主义观点),要么相反,太无政府主义(一种彻底抗议的形式)。这种情况是由无政府主义理论的结构特点所决定的。古典无政府主义有一个摩尼教的结构(S. Newman),因为主体和权力在其中是明显分离的。列托夫的创造力不是摩尼教意义上的无政府主义,这需要其元素的明确和清晰。尽管回避了摩尼教的二元主义,但列托夫的文本能够保持与无政府主义的联系。莱托夫的无政府主义有更广泛的基础,表达了对现实的全面抗议,现实将自由浓缩为传统的交流框架,使其可预测,并保护其免受浪费。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Kritika i Semiotika
Kritika i Semiotika Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
Dynamic Processes in Russian Emotive-Evaluative Vocabulary Far Eastern Futurists and the Satirical Leaflet “Blokha” (“Flea”) (Vladivostok, 1920) Metadrama in V. Mirzoev’s Works Evaluation as a Source of Deontic Modality Adverbs of Evaluation: Correlation of Semantic and Syntactic Properties (The Case of General and Hedonistic Evaluation)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1