{"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.