Dary buržuaznoj kul'tury [29-02-1936] - [D129]

Concise description of the directive:

Article by A. Selivanovsky against formalism in art (following the article in “Pravda” Sumbur vmesto muzyki).
Dary burzhuaznoy kultury. Again against Khlebnikov and Pasternak. Khlebnikov in particular anti-urbanist, too much primitivism. The new Soviet art must be simple and comprehensible, it must NOT lapse into primitivism, nor into naturalism tout-court, which are linked to the formalist sin. Take the example of Pushkin, Tolstoy and Shakespeare, Hugo, Heine, who are simple without being primitive. “Pravda” (art. 28.01.1936) sharply raised the question of formalism. In literature, formalism has suffered a number of severe blows in its time, but it is still alive and lurking. It is characteristic that today literary formalism usually seeks support in related artistic fields. At the Minsk Plenum, I have already spoken about N. Aseyev’s article Velemir, which was included as a discussion in no. 1 of “Literaturniy kritik”. The poet Aseyev is now infinitely far removed from the positions of formalism. But the critic Aseyev still wrote a formalist article. According to Aseyev, Velemir Khlebnikov combined the practical reason of Michurin and Tsiolkovsky, the cultural universalism of Leonardo da Vinci, the musicality of Mozart and the depth of Goethe. This is what Khlebnikov would be, if only his image, created by Aseyev, matched reality! Aseyev wants to support this image of Khlebnikov with some examples from the theoretical “treasures” of Khlebnikov, who wrote not only talented poems, but also rambling and eclectic articles.
The artist’s task is to make form directly intangible in the process of perception. It is here that Tolstoy’s genius is revealed. How far is this simplicity from naturalistic and aestheticising seriatinka!
No to Joyce and the Soviet epigones of Joyce.