Writing as Exorcism: The Personal Codes of Pushkin, Lermontov, and Gogol by Ilya Kutik (review)

Abstract

136 SEER, 86, I, 2008 animate or inanimate, abstract or concrete. Dr Ferm accepts that these factors are involved, but she goes on to show that the chief factor driving changes in verbal government is not the nature of the complements but changes in the semantics of the verbs which govern them. Thus, when Ha?eflTbCfl ceased to govern a genitive and took instead the preposition Ha plus an accusative, it was because HaAeflTbCfl had ceased to be associated with such verbs of expectation as 03KH.zja.Tband had become linked instead with verbs such as pacCHHTbiBaTb (pp. 23, 77-83), or again when npeAynpe^HTb switched from taking a complement in the dative to being followed by a direct object in the accusative, itwas because npeflynpcaHTb was no longer classed with such verbs as npenHTCTBOBaTb but with verbs such as npeflOTBpaTHTb (pp. 23, 223-25). In her Grammatika sovremennogo russkogoliteraturnogo iazyka (Moscow, 1970), N. Iu. Shvedova declined to 'examine the frequency, contextual constraints and stylistic characteristics of the varying forms [of verbal government]' (p. 496). It is greatly to Dr Ferm's credit that she should have chosen to investigate these complexities. Problems, inevitably, remain; but with her carefully researched and judicious book she has accomplished much. ImperialCollegeLondon C. L. Drage Kutik, Ilya.Writing asExorcism:The Personal Codes of Pushkin,Lermontov, andGogol. Studies inRussian Literature and Theory. Northwestern University Press, Evanston, IL, 2005. xiii + 152pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index. $69.95. In the second line of his Introduction, Gary Saul Morson calls this book an 'inspired, idiosyncratic study' (p.vii). Certainly, it is full of interesting specula tions about individual textsand theirauthors (most notably Pushkin, Lermon tov and Gogol', towhom the bulk of the text is devoted); and the heuristic methods and overall approach are most definitely unconventional. Indeed, Morson goes on to note that 'Kutik disclaims any intention to reveal themeaning of literary works' (p. x), although he does actually deal in literary meaning throughout, albeit in an unusual, indeed 'idiosyncratic', way. Kutik himself sums up his approach ('writingas exorcism') several times in the course of his short book. He says this, for example: 'this book is about personal exorcisms, the ones writers perform while fighting on paper their inner demons, fears, and even fate and death' (p. 3 ? his emphasis). Thus, it is argued, Queen ofSpades contains Pushkin's own personal code thathe used both to tryto exorcize his fear of going mad, as well as to thwart a piece of fortune telling that he would 'live long ifin the thirty-seventhyear of his lifehe could avoid disaster brought to him [...] by blond hair, or by a white man' (P- 23). Even if one were to reject this theory as nonsensical, Kutik's readings certainly provide intriguing insights into his threemain authors, as well as celebrated texts. The reading of Gogol''s use of pseudonyms, for example, is entertaining, while Kutik later draws some interestingand well substantiated parallels between Queen ofSpades and Lermontov's The Fatalist, and between REVIEWS 137 The Nose and Dead Souls, in which noses, or names based around noses, abound. Perhaps the nicest such insight is to see Mirgorod as a pr?figuration ofGogol "s love affairwith Rome, the city of 'urbi et orbi' (pp. 93-94). There are, though, certain problems with this book, some more serious than others.Kutik's actual topics of discussion, such as GogoF's obsession with his nose, or Pushkin's intensely superstitious nature, or his fear of going mad, are all pretty ancient history (and in the case of the last topicKutik seems to be unaware ofGary Rosensheild's excellent Pushkin and theGenres of Madness: The Masterpieces of 1833, which appeared two years before Kutik's book [Madison, WI, 2003]). More broadly, virtually all of his key claims are essen tiallyunprovable. As Kutik himself admits, thisbook is 'a series of speculative essays' (p. 118), and his speculations are signalled by some key choices of words. We read thatGogol' was 'most probably' (p. 7) afraid of the coinci dence of his name with that ofGog, though no evidence is adduced. Later, Kutik isnot shyof admitting thathe isusing guess-work: inQueen ofSpades 'we can guess the identityof the players...