| After the "Blast", Future Life is Backward by Olga SteinTatyana Tolstaya's The Slynx is in some ways similar to Margaret
Atwood's Onyx and Crake. Tolstaya's takes us two hundred years into
a post-apocalyptic future, constructs a dystopia of communal life
in a village standing on the ashes of what used to be part of Moscow,
and reveals how the meanings of words atrophy given certain cultural
conditions-when what prevails is widespread ignorance and complete
intellectual impoverishment. In other respects, with its dark humour
in particular, The Slynx veers away from the Atwood mode, approaching
the paradoxical ambience of Joseph Heller instead. One might look
to Catch-22 for a satirical approximation, although the Slynx is a
different breed: Tolstaya is Russian; she relies on certain traditional
elements of story-telling, takes full advantage of her insider
knowledge of the national psyche, and is concerned with the accumulated
rot of a particular social and political order, that of Russia's
Communist era. Still, her adroit satire isn't parochial and her
message-that text, the written word, no matter how rich, will remain
inaccessible if the intellect isn't first groomed by a culture
itself well developed-is universal.
"The Blast" flattens everything, but 200 years later a
rudimentary-type communal life is reestablished. An extreme parody
of its much larger former self, this small Russian community exists
in utter misery.
Mice are the people's dietary mainstay, in addition to worms, and
a limited number of hardy, easily grown vegetables. The inhabitants
live in tiny huts or "Isbas", outfitted with wood-burning
stoves but no other conveniences, nearly freezing to death in the
winter months. In addition, many suffer "consequences"
of radiation in the form of unsightly physical mutations. And yet,
even this bundle of sorry have-not's is held together, fearful and
servile, by rules and ever accruing dictates which are the misconstrued
and hilariously misapplied vestiges of the Communist regime and its
endless red tape. Little has changed in other words. It's the same
old crap, but now it operates at higher levels of absurdity.
The "governmental approach," as well as every detail of
the mind-numbing routine of daily life in the village, is described
by the protagonist, Benedict, without the slightest irony. His
manner of life and the pitiless ways of those in positions of
authority make sense to Benedict, as they do to every other ignorant
member of his community who has never known anything different,
because his own uninformed, convoluted reasoning reflects to
perfection the cultural torpor of this small society. Archetypally,
he is the old Ivan, the standard issue hero of Russian folklore-uncouth,
untutored, but a happy-go-lucky "muzhik", who carries on
no matter what. But unlike the Ivan of old, he has undefined longings;
from time to time awareness overtakes him, and he suffers from a
kind of existential angst, the involuntary admission that his life
is crushingly empty-that he's unfulfilled.
Once married to the beautiful Olenka, daughter of the dreaded
"Head Saniturion" (the play on "sanitarium" and
ancient Rome's "centurion" is just one example of how
words have become mangled and original meanings lost or perverted),
Benedict discovers that while most inhabitants of the village are
dirt poor, there are some who possess luxuries he could never have
imagined. One of these luxuries is a library filled with
"oldenprint" (pre-blast) books and magazines, precisely
that which is forbidden to the general populace. The library and
its contents become an obsession for Benedict. He consumes every
book and journal, but while he reads ceaselessly, he reads
indiscriminately. He doesn't discern that some books have more
significance than others-that some are literary masterpieces and
others shlock, or that some of the publications are how-to manuals
while others address issues of philosophical, moral and political
importance. Having read everything, he decides to organize the
library, arranging material in accordance with his own methodology:
"....Popescu, Popka-the-Fool-Paint It Yourself, Popov, another
Popov, Poptsov, The Iliad, Electric Current, he'd read it, Gone
With the Wind, Russo-Japanese Polytechnical Dictionary, Sartakov,
Sartre, Sholokhov: Humanistic Aspects, Sophocles, Sorting Consumer
Refuse, Stockard, Manufacture of Stockings and Socks,. . .he'd read
that one, that one and that one..."
Trying to impress the village sage, Nikita Ivanich, Benedict tells
him he has been reading about Freedom, or more precisely about
"how to make freedom." He recites from Plaiting and
Knitting Jackets: "When knitting the armhole we cast on two
extra loops for freedom of movement. We slip them on the right
needle, taking care not to tighten them excessively." To this
another astute character, Lev Lvovich, responds by remarking:
"We've always known how to tighten things excessively around
here." The humour is vaudevillian, but the exchange also
demonstrates Benedict's complete inability to extract meaningful
ideas from books. They are comfort to him, and he prizes them above
everything and anyone else because he intuits their beauty and
because they enable him to escape the tediousness of daily life,
but despite his addiction to reading, books aren't a source of
enlightenment. On the contrary-and what amounts to a strange
twist-they become the instrument of his corruption. Initially
resistant to the idea, Benedict nevertheless allows himself to be
convinced by his father-in-law, Kudeyar Kudeyarich, that for the
sake of "preserving art and culture" he must take on the
responsibilities of a saniturion and help him "treat" the
ignorant and spiritually-bereft members of the community lest they
destroy whatever books are being hidden in their possession. The
crafty Kudeyar Kudeyarich is deceiving Benedict, merely dangling
the prospect of more books before him, but Benedict is vulnerable
where books are concerned. Not only is he desperate for more, he
genuinely deplores the thought that what he loves with such intensity
may be unwittingly damaged by those who wouldn't know better. He
becomes cruel, a terror onto others in his effort to "save
" books, unsparing of any man or woman he thinks may be keeping
one. Eventually, the same motivation leads him to the conclusion
that for the sake of art he must help Kudeyar Kudeyarich "overthrow
the government."
Tolstaya's satire is at its acerbic peak when, right after murdering
Fyodor Kuzmich, the head "Murza", the two dullards sit
down to compose barely literate decrees describing the rights of
the people. Power hungry and ruthless, but also primitive in his
thinking, Benedict's father-in-law is even less interested in the
people's well-being than the previous head of government, and
Benedict is untroubled by the fact that the change in authority is
a step backward for the ordinary folk. He is long past caring about
social justice. Any means are justified as long his fanatical aim
of saving "literature" and amassing books for himself is
realized.
Thus we witness Benedict's gradual transformation into an anti-hero.
It is no coincidence that the "consequence" he had been
born with was a small tail. He resembles a dog-limited in terms of
what he can learn and comprehend, and despite an inherently good
disposition, malleable, and capable of turning vicious. He is only
as good as his training, as good as the social framework within
which he finds himself. The same rule, Tolstaya seems to be suggesting,
applies to language and thought. The cultural field must be properly
tended or else what grows isn't worth harvesting. In her novel, the
dark age is what transpires in the future, but her Russia represents
a mutation which has already occurred. Nikita Ivanich, whose voice
is the only voice of reason, declares knowingly -
"Why is it that everything keeps mutating, everything? People,
well, all right, but the language, concepts, meaning! Huh? Russia!
Everything gets twisted up in knots."
The Slynx is a profound work. It is well served by Jamey Gambrell's
fine translation.
|