***** A DAMN DOZEN OF INDEPENDENT QUESTIONS FOR ANDREY STOLYAROV, *****
*************** TO THE JURY MEMBER OF THE "WANDERER" PRIZE *****************
1. Until now, I believed that fandom is the totality of all
those who love science fiction, that is, a certain association of Russian fans
and the CIS, however, Sergei Berezhnoy explained to me that this is not so. Fandom
is an association of individuals who “re-radiate” information about science fiction.
It couldn't be clearer. Personally, I believe there is no fandom now
no, he actually disappeared into the events of the previous ten years
anniversary, there are only different groups of people united by Interpressco-
nom". Moreover, each group believes that it is the real
fandom. So be it. Probably in the future, when the fan movement
will be reborn and a gigantic show machine will emerge, spinning the tit-
rages, then fandom will appear as the mechanism of this machine - creating
literary opinion and forming reader demand. Until then
no. Fandom didn’t have any influence on me as a writer.
etc. In general, it should probably be borne in mind that writers are divided
on fandom-addicts whose literary name is created exclusively
fandom, from within, and who consciously or intuitively learn this
they exist, and writers whose literary interests, among other things, lie
and beyond the world of fantasy. It's neither bad nor good, it's
- a fact, and, probably, you need to treat this as real
in fact, thenthere is, taking into account, but - without any negative
emotions.
2. It is immediately clear that the author of the question has no idea about
actual relationships in a professional environment. We're leaving -
agree with Boris Natanovich on many fundamental points. This
The discussion began around 1983 and continued without interruption.
continues to this day. Moreover, the parties’ own positions are bringing closer
They were angry very little. For example, B.N. Strugatsky believes that writing
good fantasy is generally not possible: knights and dragons are a given
craftsmanship, I believe that fantasy is a promising genre,
you just need to create it using the means of realistic literature.
The aesthetic differences, as you can see, are very significant. overcome
they are apparently impossible. Another thing is that in some elementary
On some things, our points of view practically coincide. However, how
they coincide, in my opinion, and among many actively working writers -
TV. But here we are talking about elementary issues. Fandom,
Apparently, he should know that any of those who write jealously guard their
independence, and therefore there are significant differences among writers
but more than similarities. This is the strength and weakness of writers at the same time.
exactly. Moreover, this will probably always be the case, because disagreement is
one of the stimulants of creativity.
3. This is an absolutely wild assumption. As I just explained
Neil, we disagree with Boris Natanovich on a number of issues.Take, for example, the report I read at Interpresscon. There
Quite a lot of debatable points. However, those two opponents
who set the tone during the discussion, spoke in such an absurd
and even in an insulting form, that Boris Natanovich was simply ex-
expected to answer them - while emphasizing, of course, agreement, and not dis-
walking. It was, in my opinion, a pedagogical measure. I hope that everything
those present noticed this. And I hope that everyone present
also correctly understood the essence of the report we read: there is a con-
the conflict between literature and its imitation, this conflict is eternal,
it is impossible to exclude it from literary life, it is only necessary to give it
give him, if possible, a civilized appearance: distancing the artistic
social and ethical will probably make it possible to get rid of war as
forms of conflict. All this was demonstrated using the example of the famous
confrontation with Young Guard fiction, none of the existing
The author did not mean those in the audience, and, probably, it was necessary
have a very strong desire to fight in order to see in the report non-
which is completely different. Both named opponents seem to
had the desire and with their speeches illustrated the documentary
okay - better than the author himself risked doing.
4. If this opinion exists, then they probably share it
only complete idiots. With rare exceptions, the literature does not
there are "figures number one". These may beonly Lev To-
Lestoy or, for example, Solzhenitsyn. And within the limits of fantasy, of course -
Yes, Strugatsky brothers. These, however, are geniuses that arise from unpredicted
apparent frequency, the rest are content with the “first row of literature”
tours". Moreover, literature is not a sport; there are several different
different places, and therefore it is wrong to ask: who is first, Hemingway
or Faulkner? They are both the first. The situation is exactly the same in Fanta.
stick. Here, in my opinion, there are about a dozen leading names. And I would like
immediately emphasize that in the very desire to be among the first there is no
special crime. This is what any of the writers wants, including
the "voice-over" you mentioned. Actually, that's why he took it
“voice” that such a desire prevailed over everything else
tal. This is an extremely important point. The thirst for championship follows
melted down exclusively into literature. But as soon as the author
it begins to seem that someone is bothering him - is it someone personally,
literary mafia or world Zionism - it should be said right away
to myself: “no.” Because then envy begins, and if you give it
her will, will devour any author whole - as she already devours
"voice-over" and how it will devour many more of those who could not say
say “no” to yourself in time.
5. As an author, “The Snail” and “The Wanderer” are closest to me, then-
Well, they express the opinion of professional writers. The opinion of chi-
tatel, of course, is no less important, and, however, the readertoday is a delight
He reads a book, and tomorrow he forgets it. The opinion of the writers speaks of
literary quality of the work: does it have any
value other than commercial, or not, that is, here we are talking about
duration of artistic existence. And besides, awards
"Snail" and "Wanderer", in my opinion, have the most intelligible
award mechanisms: aesthetically independent and not subject to
ny random excesses.
In second place I would put “The Great Ring” and “Interpress-
con". It’s a strange thing: both in concept (fan award) and in execution
(extensive sample) The Great Ring Award could probably
become one of the most prestigious awards. But for some reason (in my opinion
look, of course), did not. Maybe she's missing something
entourage? External shine for an award is no less important than internal
ny. The prize, which is presented by Interpresscon, unfortunately, is
too lame and too vulnerable to criticism: aesthetic inconsistency
flatness (strange couple Zvyagintsev - Rybakov), obvious dominance
organizational accidents (last time about two dozen arrived
a man from nowhere and the prize was given to "Odysseus", this time
they didn’t arrive, and the “Tsarevich” Gravity Plane surfaced. But if they had arrived,
look, they would have voted for Perumov). A simple thing is possible here
and direct impact: costs a group of 10-15 people
come together and vote the right way, like hercan withstand
bring to the surface a rather mediocre science fiction writer. Or, say
Let us, on the contrary, “drown” a talented work. And finally I
I personally don’t understand: both in ’93 and ’94 this prize was given to production
conducting, which received only a third of the Interpresscon votes, that is,
two thirds of the participants probably did not consider them the best in the past
year, however, the award is presented on behalf of the entire convention. This
an obvious contradiction, and probably to the organizers of Interpresscon
it would have to be overcome somehow. However, if Interpresscon
This doesn’t bother me, and even less so does it bother me.
"Aelita" has faded, turning into a provincial award
rank. Apparently, it should be treated as such.
And the Belyaev Prize, in my opinion, is stillborn. Too much
the actions taken around it are incomprehensible, and it’s too imprecise
its literary initiators are representative. Probably this pre-
I have to wave my hand.
6. First of all, it should be clear: the opinion of the “Wanderers” is not
should not coincide with the opinion of Interpresscon. It's quite natural
but... Because "Interpresscon" reflects the reader's "delicacy"
works, and the literary prize "Strannik" - his artistic
special features. If both opinions coincided, then the “Country” award
nickname" probably wouldn't have been needed. "Gravilet" did not make it to the finals
due to an insignificant difference in points, that is, "Wanderers" rated
this piece is enoughhigh. Well, as for actually
final result, then it seems to me personally that Vyacheslav Rybakov
still have not managed to overcome some literary "adolescence"
ductility." The youthful pathos with which "Gravity Flyer" to Caesar was written
HIV", of course, is liked by fans and girls, which is good, because
significantly increases the circle of readers, but at the same time leads
and to the obvious superficiality of the narrative, which probably affected
in voting for the "Wanderer" award. In general, I care about Rybakov
don't bother: it will probably be one of the most read
authors in our country - probably much more popular than
Lazarchuk or, for example, Stolyarov.
7. There is no need for illusions: all the authors you mentioned work in the same
the same aesthetics as Lazarchuk-Stolyarov. Except maybe
Alexandra Tyurina. Tyurin - yes. Tyurin is a completely special na-
board Which, by the way, both promotes and
interferes. But the jury of the Wanderer Prize was composed precisely so that
“block” all existing trends in Russian science fiction. And me
It’s a shame, for example, that due to purely technical circumstances
it was impossible to include Mikhail Weller and Boris Stern on the jury.
But as soon as Estonia becomes a little civilized and as soon as Kyiv
artificial problems with Moscow will no longer arise, as they
both will receive appropriate invitations. I'm on anyway
I hope so. In generalat one of the May meetings the jury was
the concept of “slow expansion” was adopted: all talented writers
As books are published, they will receive invitations to serve on the jury
mission "Wanderer". And at the same time, the real candidates are
Most of the authors you listed were present. Just don't
hurry: democracy in literature also has negative characteristics.
tics. And once again for those who do not understand: the opinion of Interpresscon and
"The Wanderer" may not coincide, just as "Hugo" often does not coincide.
and "Nebula". This is a reality: awards exist in different arts.
natural coordinates.
8. About such assumptions we can say: “insanity is getting stronger”
"et." I will also ask you a question. If it is declared that Interpress
con" is the most prestigious award in Russian science fiction, and
it is awarded only to authors who write in a strictly defined manner -
re, then isn’t this a direct attempt to announce this direction?
in science fiction the general and highest priority - and indirect -
an attempt to force other authors to write in the same manner?
And couldn’t this be regarded as suppression of creative freedom?
Any bonus is a certain kind of pressure, because,
When we receive a prize, we seem to say to ourselves and others: “This is the best
neck" - which naturally affects the literary
priorities. "The Wanderer" is no exception. "The Wanderer", in fact, is
mu and was called to life so thatbalance reader pressure
bonuses. Whether we like it or not, there will always be in literature
There are “bread” and “Snickers” directions. Depressing re-
The results of some science fiction awards suggest that reading
The body still gravitates towards Snickers. Snickers, of course, tastes better
but at the same time, in general, you can live without “Snickers”, but without “bread”
it is impossible. The professional award "Wanderer" is
defending "bread" in fiction. They demand Snickers from us, from
we are explicitly or implicitly awaiting purely entertaining literature. And so
here the “Wanderer” must say a firm “no”. Let the reader like
only Snickers are around, even if he is inclined to uncontrollably absorb
just not very high quality chocolate, even if the candy wrapper is beautiful
more than a burnt crust, but in literature there must also exist
“bread”, because without “bread” there will be no “Snickers” or lit-
ratures.
9. To those who have heard that "The Wanderer" is being hailed as a prize
a completely specific direction - a direction identified -
usually with Stolyarov’s works,” I advise you to consult a doctor:
them auditory hallucinations. Only clinical cretinism justifies
such statements. They have no real basis -
ut. If we look at the jury of the "Wanderer" award by area, then
literary it seems to be distributed as follows: Gevorkyan-Lukin-
Mikhailov - one direction, Rybakov-Strugatsky - bothit seems to me-
Xia, completely different, Lazarchuk-Stolyarov - the third direction. And
Bulychev and Uspensky stand apart, representing complete
completely independent phenomena in modern science fiction. Dominant
there is no one direction. And although other members of the jury
they would probably have distributed the authors differently, but the presented
in "The Wanderer" the spectrum is very wide and, in my opinion, reflects almost the entire
spectrum of Russian science fiction. And in general all the criticism of "The Wanderer"
comes down to only one thing: How dare they (the writers) do this? (Why
They didn’t consult me, I understand literature better than anyone else -
re?). The Wanderer's vociferous critics probably don't feel
that they actually defend the dictates of one (namely, their own)
literary opinion, its monopoly unconditional right
decide, the absolute of private taste in its worst manifestations - and what
all the arguments they so passionately express can be
turned against them. They should probably understand some elements
mental things: their opinion is not the only one, and their tastes are not
final and irrevocable. A writer is not a toy in the hands of a chi-
tatels, writers - may have their own literary opinion, and
your unconditional right to express this opinion. That's what it takes
understand the critics of "The Wanderer", and as soon as this is understood, then
everything will immediately fall into place.
10. When creating the jury of the "Wanderer" awardtaken into account
only literary considerations: the jury member had to exist
have been in the literature for a long time, have a significant number of published
jubilant works and have - be it greater, be it less -
a stable writing reputation. No other criteria in this case
did not appear. It would probably be easiest to take one person on the jury
of the current critics of "The Wanderer", for example, the same one already mentioned -
of the current "voice-maker" - I am sure that from a fierce opponent the pre-
Mia, he would immediately turn into her no less fierce protector.
Nick. But this would just be a political decision. In general,
creating the jury for the Wanderer Prize was easy: over the past ten
years, it became clear who was worth what - who wrote stories, novels and
novels, and who made a career or complained about difficulties. List
the proposed jury was composed of itself, and, as I understand it, seriously-
does not cause any significant complaints. The most valuable, from my point of view,
niya, here is pure personal independence: no matter how good
Rybakov treated me, but he will still vote like this,
as he considers necessary, and as I, in turn, would not respect
Lazarchuk, but if you don’t like the work, then vote
I will be against it. Anyone who personally knows the jury members will probably agree
It seems that neither collusion nor groupism are possible here. Personal honesty
the integrity of each ensures the collective integrity of the jury, and does not vi-
baby thisin my opinion, only someone who obviously doesn’t want it can
see.
I hope that "The Wanderer" will continue to remain on solid castings.
strategic positions that the jury will maintain mutual respect for each other
friend and that despite any pressure from the aesthetic
What independence of the "Wanderer" will remain unshaken. Because
that otherwise an unenviable fate awaits him - the fate of those
loose bonuses that are now agonizing before everyone’s eyes.
11. Two days before Interpresscon I called Igor Vsevolodo-
HIV, and he explained to me that now, unfortunately, he has difficult
family circumstances. If he can, then of course he will come.
Circumstances probably developed in such a way that Kir Bulychev came
didn't have the opportunity. I'm really sorry. And, however, no "ethical
nuances" were not discussed. Kir Bulychev did not express them and
subsequently. What didn't happen didn't happen. And therefore it is not worth creating
give false entities. Probably, you should not speculate for a person -
what he didn't say. This is simply indecent. I repeat: to me
It’s a shame that Kir Bulychev didn’t come, but I must admit, at times I
I even felt some relief. Because it was otherwise for me
I would be ashamed in front of him for that rude “assault” that is in all its disgrace
splashed out at Interpresscon. And it doesn’t matter what they shouted (other
words cannot be found) only five or seven people - their desire is not
to sort it out, but to trample it, it was quiteobvious. And apparently I
I would then have to apologize to Igor Vsevolodovich, as
I had to apologize to other people who came here for the first time,
explaining that our people, in general, are not bad, but, excuse me,
a couple of people went crazy. And let these “moved out” act
There was actually very little. The "screaming crowd" atmosphere they
created, is still unacceptable. Of course, I understand that hands
They itch, but there are no more enemies. Of course, I understand that it is much more interesting
It’s easier to criticize “Wanderers” than Pishchenko or Medvedev. Of course-
Xia, I understand that the desire to be visible can probably also be
the most exotic shapes. But the “irreconcilable opposition” follows
will probably take into account: if nine Russian science fiction writers undertake
are planning some actions, then, probably, behind this there is a very
serious circumstances. And, probably, these should first
the circumstances should be clarified, the motives and intentions should be clarified
knowledge of these writers, one should finally at least think - maybe
maybe then some of the questions would disappear by themselves. But why exactly?
What should not have been done was to immediately throw bricks, stir up
considering Interpresscon, by which the Russian fa-
ntastic.
12. The Regulations on the “Strannik” literary prize say:
“The literary jury of the “Strannik” award does not report to the institution
diator neither on the procedure nor on the results of the awardawards
"Wanderer". It would be naive to assume that since "Terra Fantas-
tica" finances the prize, then they will vote for it. This is absolute
nonsense. The Wanderer jury is independent. The sponsor provides the money,
but he cannot influence the results of the vote. It follows
be fully understood by everyone: fans, sponsors, readers, participants of "In-
terpresscona". And perhaps we should also keep in mind that
The Wanderer Prize is awarded to publishing houses by Russian authors -
mi. The publishing house can publish five hundred of Harrison's books and a prize
not get it, but it can publish five books by Russian science fiction writers and
qualify for an award. Of course, "Terra Fantastica"
did less than was expected of her, but she still did in
unlike others - who are just now beginning to become interested -
be Russian science fiction.
13. Sorry for the truth, but I have nothing else to do but sit
and think what exactly could have offended Yuri Fleishman? How do I know?
Maybe he didn't like the girls in the Wanderer show. Maybe
maybe he thinks they were dressed too lightly, which probably
and offended Yu. Fleishman, known for his chastity. Sorry, but
Fleishman is not a fandom yet. Excuse me, but only an idiot would
assume that Bulychev, Gevorkyan, Lazarchuk, Lukin, Mikhailov,
Rybakov, Strugatsky, Stolyarov and Uspensky agreed and decided
intentionally insult the fandom and fans. This is so stupidhead off
have to say this. Well, Comrade Fleishman doesn’t understand.
Well, please explain to him that he doesn’t understand. Only make
write it yourself without involving writers. It's a pity for the time
which you spend on such nonsense. And in general I have to say that
the questions posed here are named in vain
"uncomfortable". There is no inconvenience here: the questions are simply stupid.
It's very hard to believe that anyone is asking them seriously, and yet
it is more difficult to understand why the writers' responses were needed. Why se-
Serious people should analyze nonsense - maybe I’ll break through -
possessed by someone, but without real content. I won't be killed
I’m surprised by the lies and cretinism of the articles by Loginov and Patients, I
I have known Loginov for a long time as a stupid, vile and corrupt person.
Probably his friends match him, but something else surprises me:
Why didn’t anyone talk about the positive things that Interpress had achieved?
horse"? After all, in the end, the best con in recent times was held
years - and brilliantly organized, which is the merit of the team of A. Sido-
Rovich, and having literary content that is obvious, and
demonstrating external brilliance, which is for a con as for a literary
tour show is quite important. The work was colossal,
a basis was created on which to build a world of new fiction.
At the debriefing after Interpresscon, someone said: Nothing
oh, everything's inok, let's move on. I don't remember who exactly it was
said, but apparently this is the most correct decision
Share your thoughts about the article