330 SEER, 8o, 2, 2002 Each of the last two chapters finds similarities between a writer and a painter. Pamela Chester finds in Tsvetaeva's prose and Goncharova's landscape paintings 'a sense of constricted space', an 'anti-Eden' tendency, not common in male artists but noted in two female predecessors, Maria Bashkirtsevaand Evgeniia Tur. Whether or not the illustrationsquite prove this, the essay itself, not constricting its attention to analysis, encompasses a wide ephocal landscape in which Tsvetaeva and Goncharova are rightly prominent. As distinctfrom symbolic constriction,AndrewWachtelwriteson 'MeaningfulVoids',arguingthatthe Sovietexperience hasbeen bestexpressed in the faceless human figuresMalevich produced after I928 and the faceless charactersin Platonov's Chevengur (I 928) and Kotlovan (I 930). All these imply a 'worldin which bodies arepresentbut minds have no place' (p. 255), the new obligatory happiness being linked with psychological emptiness. This is cogently demonstrated, yet an attractive quality of the essay is that, while forceful, it is declarativelytentative (see p. 265), so that alternative,perhaps simultaneously valid, interpretationsare provoked: for example, should 'no face' notimply 'no mind'?It might signify,in Platonov, a socially unmediated merging of mind with environment, oriented less to the Soviet scene than to the hope for a new kindof existence altogether. Wachtel'scontributioncomes second to last, but I would have placed it last to create a frame: its facelessness theme so eloquently balances Barsht's concern with Dostoevskii'sadmirationfor the face. Wachtel even reproduces the Perovportraitof Dostoevskiias that of a face which, unlikeMalevich'sand Platonov's depictions, can be read psychologically. We recall, moreover, Barsht's telling us how fascinated Dostoevskii was by the one Repin bargehaulerwhose face could notbe seen! University ofEssex ANGELA LIVINGSTONE Russell, Robert. Zamiatin's 'We'.CriticalStudies in Russian Literature.Bristol Classical Press, Bristol and London, 2000. vi + 13I pp. Notes. Bibliography .Index. ?7.95 (paperback). ZAMIATIN's novel Weholds a special place not only in Russian, but also in world literature,in that it marksthe beginning of a new genre of anti-utopia, which went on to achieve spectacular growth in the course of the twentieth century. The novel shared the fate of many other great worksof literatureof the period: it was banned, and any reference to it in Soviet criticism was impossible for a period of seventy years. Its author was more fortunate than many of his contemporaries, as he was given permission to move abroad permanently in 1931. Wehas been fairlywell known in the Westsince itspublication in a number of languages in the nineteen-twenties, and particularlysince it was acknowledged by George Orwell as a majorinfluenceon his I984. There is, therefore, a considerable history of western criticism on the novel. Part of Robert Russell's book's great merit as an introduction to Weand to Zamiatin is the author's broad familiarity not merely with western criticism, but with the more recent examinationsbypost-Soviet critics,andwith contemporaryviews REVIEWS 33I of the work from I920S Russia, before almost all reference to the novel was outlawed entirely. Western commentators have tended to focus upon Weas being an anti-utopian and anti-collectivistnovel only in general terms, and as a premonition of Stalinism, overlooking the resonances which the novel has always had for Russian critics, of the very particularperiod in which it was written (that is, the Russia of War Communism, revolutionaryrhetoric and the Civil War). Russell's book begins with some brief explanation of the somewhat convoluted historyof the emergence of varioustexts of Wein print, and some commentary on the various English translations, before embarking on an extensive overview of the trendsin criticismof the novel. The entire spectrum of views is covered, includingreferenceto the novel's social,historical,cultural and philosophical origins in utopia and anti-utopia, science fiction, the modernist aesthetic, early Bolshevik ideology, Proletkul't and the Russian Civil War, and the influence of such figures as Andrei Belyi, Dostoevskii, Hegel, Nietzsche and Frederick Taylor. There are also sections on the mathematics in We,on speculation regarding the use of onomastics in the constructionof the names of the novel's characters,on the narrativestructure and on feministinterpretationsof the novel. The second chapter is devoted to specifically contemporary references in Zamiatin's novel. These include the modelling of the Benefactor (blagodetel...
Read full abstract