31/1030: Response in Responsibility

Damn. I can’t seem to keep up with my work.  But I really wanted to respond to a Denkanstoss  I had in class yesterday.

In my intro to Russian kultursemiotik class, the instructor handed out a sort selection of “Kunst und Verantwortung” in German. The philosophical points about the unity and fragmentation of a person are something I’ll return to, but what struck me was the uses of the words “Schuld” and “Verantwortung.” Both terms, guilt and responsibility, are cultural and religious. We are all guilty, according to the Abrahamic religions, and we must answer for those sins somehow. To combine these concepts with our relation to art is not a new idea for me, since I’ve participated in postcolonial looks at “Paradise” stories and since reading exile literature, but the significance of the word “Verantwortung” is new to me.

bakhtin

Selection from “Art and Answerability” from the Liapunov translation in Early Philosophical Essays (1990) 

As may already be indicated by the choice in Liapunov’s translation versus my translation, the root of the word used in the original word in Russian is “answer. ” Consider ответ versus  ответственность. The same thing happens in all the languages I know.

Antwort – Verantwortung

response – responsiblity

réponse – responsabilité

Obviously, this makes sense, since to claim responsibility means to “answer for” something. However, this idea of the reader’s response being important comes most to light in the English. While Bakhtin and his contemporaries were more structuralists, interested in the relation between form and content, Bakhtin also seemed to be in line with the reader-response theorists of the 60s and 70s. In a way, one can interpret Bakhtin’s first published essay to argue that the reader is responsible for the success of the art.

“[…] der Mensch muss wissen, dass an der Unfruchtbarkeit der Kunst seine eigene Anspruchlosigkeit sowie die mangelnde Ernsthaftigkeit seiner Lebensprobleme Schuld sind” (93 from the class handout of the text in German).

 

By not being demanding of the art, we lose the right to having access to it. If we do not examine our own lives, we are unable to examine art properly. Bakhtin says “[a]rt and life are not one, but they must become united in myself– in the unity of my answerability” (2 of the English 1990 text). We can only expect to find out lives in art and art in life if we accept and response to their unity.

I haven’t decided yet how that corresponds with my PhD, but since I am looking at Bakhtin for my thesis, this can’t be totally irrelevant.

Disclaimer: this series is a collection of brainstorms and free-writes that are a part of my planning for actual text in my dissertation. Therefore, I am giving myself the liberty to make mistakes, make assumptions (call me out on offensive ones, though!), not tie up loose ends, and generally not make any sense. 

Copyright 2016 Dorothea Trotter: because these writings are planning for actual text in my dissertation, some of this will appear in my dissertation. I hold the right to the words in this post and require that interested parties ask for permission before copying the words or ideas too closely. Obviously, the date of posting is the date of copyright and I reserve the right to challenge suspected plagiarism in my future dissertation submission using these blogs as proof of originality.

 

Advertisements

Wassa Schelesnova (1935)- Maxim Gorki

Last night I saw an excellent play. It started off a bit clumsily, sort of too suddenly giving the audience little time to quiet down. But it was artfully stage-designed and overall very well done. Continue reading to see if this is something you’d be interested in attending.

I was especially impressed by the stage-design. A single red couch in the middle of a black stage that was at an incline, meaning the back of the stage was higher than the front and that the actors were basically leaning into the audience. I was worried the actors would fall into us any moment. In the background, behind super high double glass doors, a fake body of water glimmered with the occasional sparkle in fake sunlight that changed throughout the play to give the impression of passing time. I was spent a lot of time looking at the construction of the room on the stage, inclusive two doors, the double glass doors in the back, a safe door and a revolving door (again, I was surprised it didn’t slide on the incline onto the audience).

I also appreciated the ways the actors’ shadows appeared on the walls throughout the play. The design was very artfully, very well done with a lot of attention to detail. Auch ihrem Ehemann Sergej (Markus John) begegnet Wassa Schelesnowa mit kühler  Distanz und gnadenlosem<br /> Pragmatismus

The acting was good too, though my favorite actor was the one who played the brother of Wassa and the uncle of her two daughters. He seemed to me to be the best actor of the group, probably the reason he was given the lead male role. He played a drunk belligerent most of the time, but it reminded me of Chekhov, where the drunk character makes some of the most insightful comments about the other characters and people in general. He also provided most of the entertainment in what was otherwise a serious play.

At a superficial level, the plot goes like this: Wassa Schelesnova is the wealthy owner of a Volga shipping company. She took over the company when her husband, a former officer in the navy, threatened to gamble it all away. She is the typical capitalist businesswoman; think Ayn Rand’s Dagny Taggart, but in pre-Soviet Russia. Her husband has just been accused of statutory rape (am I the only one surprised that this existed in Russia in 1910?), and to save the company from the court appearances, scandal, and court costs, she asks him to take his life or threatens to do it for him. This is the opening act which sets the frame for the rest of the actions that put on display the destructive powers of “steel” people in “stone” houses, as Maxim Gorki writes. Wassa has two daughters, one is slightly retarded in her mental development and the other is disturbed and bitter. Both are the “canvas” of Wassa’s destructive character. The tension of family versus business is already simmering before Wassa’s daughter-in-law, Rachel, appears. It is at this point that the deeper motivations of the play are revealed.

While waiting for the play to start (I picked up my UniFrei [free] ticket at 1920, so I had about forty minutes), I looked at the mini bookstore that was set up near the coat check. I found a lot of good books, including a journal about Elfriede Jelinek that included an article by one of my current professors! The one I spent the most time on was a collection of short stories/novellas by Gorki. I didn’t even get to look at the stories (that had been translated into German) before I was distracted by the foreword by Stefan Zweig (Schachnovelle, anyone?). Zweig starts his foreword by listing the prominent Russian writers: Pushkin, Gogol, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Chekhov, and then pointing out to the reader that these are all Russian “elite,” so to speak. They all belong to a class of Russians that control the ueberbau, as Max Weber or other Marxist critics would write. Zweig continues to describe Gorki’s heritage and notes that he is one of the first Russians to write “from and for” the people. So ja, that’s the way Gorki is remembered in German culture. I was surprised to look up Wassa Shelesnova when I got home last night and see that neither the play nor the playwright are very popular in the U.S., but when I think about how my father joked about the “dirty rotton commie pinko bastard” play, I remembered that the U.S. had a much different history with communism than the Germans. Anti-capitalism doesn’t really fly in most U.S. circles.

This brief interlude in talking about the play was to help explain my concurrent analysis. When Rachel, who was apparently illegally in Russia after a forced exile to Switzerland, appears back in Wassa’s life and wants to get her son Kolya back, who was placed in Wassa’s custody when Rachel left, the tension between family and business reaches its peak. This tension is heightened by Rachel’s blatantly socialist remarks about the destructive power of material wealth etc. What’s interesting, however, is that Wassa’s answers to Rachel’s outrage at Wassa’s behavior (she moves among her daughters like a matriarchial, prowling panther, and she absolutely refuses to give up Kolya) seems just as convincing about the destructive power of people. One of Rachel’s insults basically labels Wassa as an animal, and Wassa’s response is that “ha! You call me an animal? Well, you need to know, people are much worse! They are the worst.” So it’s not really clear whether Gorki was anti-capitalist or anti-socialist, or just anti-“modern” wo/man. I look at Gorki’s own words to help me find an answer:

Why I wrote? Because I saw people before me for whom the sole purpose in life was to suck the blood out of people, thicken it with kopecks, and then glue the kopecks to rubles. Yet, I still bow down to these people because without their incarnations of sense, fantasy, and innovation, I don’t feel or see anything in this world. And if it is necessary to speak of something holy in this world, then the only thing that is holy is the discontentment of people with themselves and the strive to be better than they are; holy is their own hate for the plunder of their survival that they created. – Maxim Gorki as translated by DT

In the end, it is the fight over Kolya, whom Wassa wanted to inherit the company to, that ends up killing Wassa (I’m sure it’s a generally unhealthy lifestyle of stress, a lot of drinking and little eating that did her in too). I suppose one can say that Gorki was mainly concerned with the role the accumulation of wealth plays in the “modern” wo/man, and how it ultimately just destroys him/her.

A great way for a poor college student to round out the evening. I found myself wondering about my own socialist tendancies, or at least my anti-materialism.  Whether I am that way because I don’t have a choice, or because I want to be, is a different, too personal question to discuss here.

I was really happy to have the opportunity to see a Gorki play, and I look forward to the next few months where I can see a lot more plays.