Andrey NIKOLAEV
INTERPRESSCON-95:
RING ON THE TREE OF RUSSIAN FICTION
A month has passed since Interpresscon-95.
The applause died down, the trash and empty bottles were cleared away and dried out.
tears of farewell, other people are resting in the boarding house "Vostok-6",
nothing reminds us of a noisy talker named Sidorkon...
Alluvial subsided, minor troubles and inconsistencies were forgotten,
misunderstanding. The important thing remained in memory, for what, in fact,
and was carried out.
Let me clarify: this year the situation for the organizing committee was very unfavorable.
favorable for holding a conference. But it was decided to carry out -
at any cost, even with less creative content than
previous. Like how the current Russian championship is held
in football it’s a pitiful spectacle, the best players were taken away a long time ago, but
must be carried out, because if you interrupt, you will have to start again
extremely difficult. And it is unlikely that good traditions will be preserved.
But Interpresscon-95 was a success. At a minimum (according to current
circumstances) of the work of the organizing committee (I do not mean the actual
Sidorovich's work, it was carried out in an extreme situation, and
everything that was necessary was done, albeit in violation of reasonable
deadlines; I'm talking about routine creative preparation - events,
seminars, accompanying materials, etc.). Developments
last years turned out to beso powerful that they pulled out this horse too. Neither
which of the participants (except Bogush, but more about him later) did not appear
special claims, or these claims did not reach me. But I have
there are and should be worries and fears - we need to come up with something
for the future, in order to avoid the degeneration of Interpresscon into an ordinary
drinking like at Fancon. We need a new powerful creative filling
while maintaining, of course, all the successful developments of the past
years, including this year.
Now I’ll try to ask myself Michael’s sacramental question
Uspensky: why do horses ride? Possible answers:
but I clearly highlight three components:
1. Rest after righteous labors.
2. See people and show yourself.
3. Fix a certain point in the current process.
I'll decipher:
1. There’s probably no need to explain anything here. Best holiday -
communication, and everyone communicates as best they can - who sings songs in chorus under
guitar, who breaks dishes in a bar. What remains pleasant from all this
memory, without specific episodes, as a rule, but this is not
required. Everyone is on vacation, but some of the participants come only for
this - and where, tell me, can you still find so many good ones at once?
people?
Interpresscon has always coped with this task, and is worried
there is nothing to talk about here - rest is an individual matter, from the organizing committee
The only thing that needs to be done is to keep the bar open.
2. I mean a lot here. Both controversy and newknowledge-
impressions, and long tête-à-tête conversations on the sidelines, so necessary
required for a creative person, and concluding business contracts -
agreements. A significant part of the participants bet this for
yourself above everything. Me too, by the way. Seminars work for this.
There are a lot of things that need to be improved and improved,
The organizing committee has thought about this topic and will work on it. On the past horse
this had not yet resulted in general discontent, it created an impression-
It’s clear that there were a lot of seminars. But on the last day Bogush
said that reports were not enough for him personally: “You remember, on Ephra-
Moscow Readings in Nikolaev? Eight hours of work, without a break!
Then, I remember, I told Dima that, they say, even what we have is for
some in excess, but I got to thinking. Yes, let's make more interesting ones
reports, we will ensure, as last year, a strict schedule and
publishing abstracts in advance - people will come. They will come, that means they will
work. This is important. For everyone.
3. Here, perhaps, everything is clear too. Awards. They are important to me and
are needed not only to decorate the conference, so that there is good
This is a good excuse to get together, but also...
* * *
I don't have the chicken delight I did last year. Opi-
For some reason I’m no longer interested in going into detail about Interpresscon,
I'm getting old, right? But somehow present to readers what was happening
I think it is necessary. Therefore I dare to suggestfragments of the wall
grams, which most clearly illustrate, in my opinion, naturally,
con events.
So, the Grand Opening, a well-practiced and enjoyable event:
Alexander SIDOROVICH (St. Petersburg): Once again I want to congratulate everyone -
to begin with the opening of Interpresscon-95.
At the beginning I would like to say a few words about the history of Interpress.
con and mention the people who were involved in its creation and
without whom the current Interpresscon would hardly have taken place. This is Volodya
Larionov, who helped hold the first Inter-
presscon. This is Nikolay Orekhov, who was the sponsor of the second and
third Interpresscon. This is Leonid Petrov, who was sponsored
rum of the second Interpresscon. And many thanks to Mikhail Shavshin,
without whom this Interpresscon would hardly have taken place.
For the second year we are holding Interpresscon together with Nikolai Yutano-
vym. There was some financial support for Interpresscon with
from the publishing house "Terra Fantastica", and many thanks to them and
Nikolai Yutanov.
I finish and give the floor to Boris Natanovich Strugatsky.
Boris STRUGATSKY (SPb): Dear friends! I don't know about you, but I
happy to meet you all again. I must admit that
There have been several moments in recent months when it seemed that
Everything is about to fall apart. These were very unpleasant moments. But blah-
Thanks to the persons listed above, and also thanks to our dear
mu SashaSidorovich, who, as always, said nothing about himself and
which we must always remember, thanks to all of them we are still
met again, as has happened more than once.
There is already a definite tradition that B. Strugatsky did not
immediately gives out rewards hastily, after which everyone runs to the buffet, and
for some time it kills listeners, but mainly probable
candidates for the title of laureate, while testing himself with one
on the one hand, a kind of sadistic pleasure, and on the other hand, with
thinking in horror: what if some decision was made?
wrong? Because doubts always remain.
I must admit to you that, generally speaking, making a choice from
It’s not easy to have seven, ten, and even more so eighteen candidates. I'm very
I envy you all and myself as a member of Interpresscon when I
I can name three names, when I can name three works,
and not limit yourself to just one. It's very difficult. And when
me a few months ago, the co-editors of the magazine "Two Hundred" Berezh-
Noy and Nikolaev addressed a number of questions regarding technology
selection of the laureate, I was forced to refuse such an interview. And
not because there is something secret in this work of mine, but because
more sacred. I assure you, there is nothing. But it seems to me that everything
We, adults already, are playing a certain game, and the more confusing it is,
The twist of this game is that the more incomprehensible they are, the more interesting it is. And if II’ll reveal some of my little secrets, my techniques,
which are used, the program with which I throw away
random numbers, then all this will probably become uninteresting. to me
sometimes I heard that choosing Strugatsky is very easy
predict. Maybe. But if I gave in addition this
interview, then this choice would become completely predictable, and what
anyway, interest would have disappeared completely.
I can tell you that the current Interpresscon is remarkable because
that in almost all nominations there is no clearly defined
leader, what usually happened before. I'm just delighted
from that stream, literally a stream, not just good, but excellent
works that came, so to speak, for discussion. With one
On the other hand, I am happy, but on the other hand, it is very difficult to choose.
Well, judge for yourself: I’ll take something as an example... no,
I can’t take this as an example, because in this way I would violate the dr-
the maturgy of what is happening. Just take my word for it that
never before have there been so many candidates for first place before
me, and never before have I experienced such difficulties. And even if
If I gave an interview to Berezhny and Nikolaev, then they would probably come to me
would like to violate their own canons and their own es-
theoretical techniques, because I was faced with a situation that
never happened before.
I, based onthis, I can predict in advance what awaits us
very strong range of opinions. As you remember, last year
the fall was, so to speak, one hundred percent. Coincidence
opinions of B. Strugatsky and Interpresscon participants in general. I'm afraid
that this year there may be no coincidences at all. Just because
that Strugatsky himself rushed about in search of the most worthy candidate
date. And I’m not one hundred percent sure that this search is for me.
was a success. So we can predict a strong range of opinions.
I report to you that I suffered. I report to you that
this torment was healthy, it was not pathological. It was great
ditch torment, useful, which benefits the cause and which
is a consequence of the good things going on in our fantastic
literature. And in general, we can formulate such a small theo-
remka: the more difficult the choice, the better things are in our fantasy
tick. Unfortunately, it’s the other way around too.
Without much difficulty I made a choice in the nomination “Criticism and Publication”
licistics". Although there were some excellent works there, but
only one thing seemed suitable to me in all respects: and according to
its quality and its essence, so to speak. Poe-
It is with great pleasure that I present the prize for the best production.
teaching criticism, journalism and literary criticism in the field of fantasy
tiki, published in 1994, which is awarded... Vyaches-lava Rybakova for the collection “Spinning in Search of Meaning.”
Applause. The winner goes up on stage and receives "Bron-
I call the Snail."
Vyacheslav RYBAKOV (St. Petersburg): What can be said here? I'm happy
and am proud that the selection of articles that I tried to organize in
book, and which turned out to be a book, in my opinion, because it
represents, in my opinion and in the opinion of its publishers, the stages
my understanding of the topic and meaning of our activities, I received this
high reward. I am very grateful to Boris Natanovich. Thank you
to him and everyone.
STRUGATSKY: So, let's continue our game. Now I will have
opportunity to demonstrate to you the monstrous situation in
which I found myself when I had to make a choice about
small form. You look: Lukyanenko, “Fugu in Uniform” - superior
a similar story, which I hear from all sides exclusively
positive feedback, and I myself experienced great pleasure from it
having read. Mayevsky, "Saturday of Hopes". I'm afraid that many people don't...
tali of this story, published in the almanac "Worlds". This is for-
a remarkable story, extremely unexpected and strange, although
it would seem that it was written on a topic that has long been familiar and has been used many times
used. Panchenko, “Dogs and Murderers” - in the story, it would seem,
there is not much that is new, but it is written so energetically, passionately
It’s scary, and I would even say ominous, that I was racking my brain: yes or no,yes or no? And I'm still breaking it. Salomatov, "Cape of a Dead Dog".
I read somewhere an interview with Salomatov, in which he said that he
He’s not a science fiction writer, he just writes realistic prose. Truly
yes. I have always maintained that the best examples of realistic prose
- it’s always fantasy. And Boris Stern, “Koschey the Immortal - poet
demons." Well, Stern is Stern! What can we add to this? Stern
- this is Stern!
And here I am, out of five great stories... I'm not talking about the other...
hi, there are wonderful works there too, but these things produced
the most powerful impression on me... Well, I suffered, suffered...
Suffered...
Prize, gentlemen, for the best work of small form in the region
fiction, published in 1994, is awarded to... Boris
Stern for the story "Koshey the Immortal - Poet of Demons."
Applause. The winner goes up on stage and receives "Bron-
I call the Snail."
Boris STERN (Kyiv): Guys, in the seventy-first year I wrote
his first story, it was so schoolboyish, frivolous,
but cheerful. Well, who should I send it to? To the Strugatsky brothers! I found out the address
Boris Natanovich, sent him the story, and he himself went into the army.
Boris Natanovich answered me in Odessa that, they say, it’s okay, we’ll try
publish... Nothing came of it... The letter was forwarded to me
I immediately called the unit near Leningrad, and Boris Natanovich
says: today is Saturday evening, I’m leaving on Mondayto Poland,
that means tomorrow, Sunday. We need to show up and talk... Because
that I really want to talk to Boris Strugatsky. bosses
no longer, everyone has gone home. I go to the foreman and say: Vasily
Vasilyevich, I need to go to St. Petersburg. He answers, looking at me: I don't
I can give you leave for sixty-three kilometers
(Peter is sixty-three kilometers from Lebyazhye),
this would be desertion, I can give you a leave of absence
same, through the fence. But if you think that you should see
Boris Strugatsky, then take this responsibility upon yourself. But he
knows nothing, is not responsible for anything - you’ll leave in the morning, in the evening
you'll come. Okay. In the morning, at about five o’clock, I was still a fool, through the fence,
by train, I arrive in St. Petersburg. I meet with Boris Nathanich...
In military uniform, all like that... I feel... well, how can I explain it to you?
thread? We feed the cat... And then, it was my first time in St. Petersburg. And I'm all
I walked around St. Petersburg for a day. Vasily Vasilyevich, the foreman, told me:
don't drink! No beer, no vodka, nothing! But there are sales on every corner!
And I walk... and drink. I walk around St. Petersburg and drink. Why didn't I get caught?
I’m driving, and why I wasn’t made a deserter is unknown. But I still-
I finally came back, I finally climbed over the fence and I...
STRUGATSKY: Borenka, you have become an excellent writer. I'm happy
I am proud to present you with this prize.
Here you go. And now the average form. About the samethe very situation.
Anatoly Kim, "Village of Centaurs" - it's a classic, one might say -
Well, Russian literature! Moiseev, "Rescuer". Never here
this thing was mentioned, and, by the way, it is an excellent story,
excellent, published in the Ural Pathfinder. Slapovsky,
"War of the Goonies." Slapovsky gave several things, including
novel, which will be discussed later. "War of the Goonies" is great
thing. Uspensky, "Dear Comrade King". Well, Uspensky, Mr.
di, Mikhail Uspensky, a wonderful story! Shchegolev Sasha, "Night
forever." One of the best things I've read recently
time. And so I had to make a choice... I ask for your sympathy -
vat. I made it.
Prize for the best work of medium form in the field of fantasy
tiki, published in 1994, is awarded to... Alexander Shchego-
Leva for the story "Night Forever".
Applause. The winner goes up on stage and receives "Bron-
I call the Snail."
Alexander SHCHEGOLEV (St. Petersburg): In past years, when I was like now
I sat and waited: - me or not me, will they call or not? - I'm feverish -
I was preparing my speeches. Today I did not prepare a speech, although I am human and
not superstitious. Instead of speech, I’ll probably limit myself to one word,
I’ll say it modestly and without pretense: finally!
STRUGATSKY: And finally, a large form. Also very heavy
situation. Our people write wonderful novels. Kurkov, "Bikfordov
peace" is a great thing.Lazarchuk, “Soldiers of Babylon”, already, in my opinion,
mu, were awarded. Loginov, "The Many-Armed God of Dalaina" - thank God,
managed to include this thing in the lists. A wonderful novel, absolutely
unexpected. And look how huge the range is: from Kurkov,
"Bickford's World", works of an extremely, let's say, right-wing type,
to “The Many-Armed God...”, works of the extreme left type, pro-
the building is already so fantastic that it would seem to be passing
somewhere in the section of parables and folklore. Slapovsky’s novel “I am not me.”
Anyone who has not read has lost a lot, a wonderful thing. Well, Uspen-
cue, "Where we are not." Again - Uspensky is Uspensky.
It was hard for me to make a choice, maybe even harder than
in the previous nomination. I made it.
Prize for the best work of large form in the field of fantasy
tiki, published in 1994, is awarded to... Andrey Lazarchuk
for the novel "Soldiers of Babylon".
Applause. The winner goes up on stage and receives "Bron-
I call the Snail."
Andrey LAZARCHUK (Krasnoyarsk): Thank you. Sincerely and completely
I say: I didn’t expect it. I don’t know why. Thank you. I really
confused
STRUGATSKY: Well, I've exhausted my supply of "Snails", and you need
to say that I have firmly decided: I will ask Sasha Sidorovich and
in general, all the people on whom it depends, still give me the opportunity
the opportunity, at least occasionally, to give not just one “Snail” for each form, but
two. I wouldI felt much more free: I had a choice
very difficult. Thank you for your attention.
Andrey Nikolaev announces the winners of the Interpresscon award and
presents figurines. Speeches of the laureates:
Svyatoslav LOGINOV (SPb): Vox populi - vox dei. I've been for a long time
crawled along the slope towards this snail. Thank you.
When announcing the award for the story of Sergei Kazmenko
"Mark of the Dragon" the audience rises.
Sergey LUKYANENKO (Alma-Ata): What can I say? As I said
Boris Natanovich that the choice was extremely difficult for him, and so did
for me, when I looked at the list, it was clear that there was a lot of
many wonderful stories. And even for myself, with everything,
but every writer's ambition, I could not honestly put mine
story comes first. But if you think so, it's for me
a very big reward. Thank you.
Vadim KAZAKOV (Saratov): Thank you to everyone present for the benefit
penchant for my impudence, thanks to the world of books by the Struga brothers -
Tskikh, without whom this thing would not exist, thank you all, sorry
for your attention.
A small innovation on this horse - the "Star" award was awarded
yes fandom." I don’t see any point in dwelling on this in detail, I,
like everyone else, he clapped for Zavgorodny with all his heart.
But one detail worries me greatly.
Naturally, I'm talking about the Interpresscon award. I love her
this is understandable. And I want her to be better. Actually, I love
"BronzeSnail" and "Wanderer", but in the first case change and
nothing needs to be improved - any decision by B.N. accepted
as a given, since the prize is personally his, and in the second case I
I can't do practically anything. However, to "The Wanderer" I still
I'll be back.
And now about the Interpresscon award - our common award. Neod-
There have been repeated reproaches that we are giving to the wrong people. So what, I myself don’t
I’m always happy with the results, but there’s no complete happiness in life
it happens. It has been repeatedly suggested that the results
awards are possible... No, they cannot be falsified, I am attaching them here
Every effort is made so that even suspicion does not arise. And don't bother
kaet. But, so to speak, you can lobby. While they were speaking out
just guesses. Careful study of the lists of voters and
results of voting this year and previous years shows - so far
these are just assumptions. Yes, of course, the personality of the author sometimes influences
affects the results, is also influenced by a number of other factors that do not always have
attitude towards literature, for example, a successfully conducted propaganda campaign
campaign, as in the case of Dr. Katz. But, direct lobbying
there wasn't. It would seem that there is nothing to worry about?
Before Interpresscon, a good friend called me and
said that a group of so-called “pushed” came to him and
through him he asks: can three people come on voting day?
twenty people and get ballots? I stated that the votefrom-
indoor - please let them come. How did I feel at the same time?
doesn't matter. I respect all people who truly love science fiction. But
thirty people! And, most importantly, the question is provocative. Do you want
vote - come and don’t ask. But, thank homeostatic
the universe, when studying the lists of voters of a large number
I did not find any names unknown to me.
Next. Why did I even start up? There is such a great pa-
Ren - Anton Pervushin. Few people know him yet. Indeed
not enough. His fame does not yet extend beyond St. Petersburg; he
attends seminars by Strugatsky and Balabukha and publishes good
tales in a youth newspaper. Even the members of the Strugatsky seminar did not
can always remember him. Why am I saying this? He arrived on opening day
digging surrounded by five friends. And according to the voting results, the pre-
mii "Fandom Star" took fifth place (with three first and four-
second on the ballot), beating such famous people as
Baikalov, Chertkov, Lukin, Vasiliev, Vershinin - these are among those in
hit the top ten. I have nothing against Anton Pervushin, not at all.
But I really see a threat, like some St. Petersburg science fiction writer
takes his entire club with him to the opening day, that is, voting
nia. And you don’t even need to ask for anything - the members of the club are your product.
they read it exactly, and the remaining positions of the lists are a grandmother in two
said. In such a situation, St. Petersburg science fiction writersfind themselves in you
in a suitable position - you can’t bring a club from Uryupinsk.
This rang a bell for us. Serious call. Even if
Anton honestly took the place due to him, the case opened up the
a problem that was previously taken... well, not very seriously, as
to something hypothetical, distant and unreal. Let's think.
A few more words on the voting procedure. This year we
introduced a new system. There seem to be no complaints. including me
- the results turned out to be much more interesting, they provide much more food for
deep thoughts. And it was more pleasant to vote. The only thing
remark and improvement for next year - it is necessary that the voter
did not write down candidates by hand, but that each position had
cells with numbers - cross out the one from your chosen one, the two
and three for the other two. For what? Well, first of all, it’s faster and easier,
secondly, under the current system, even for members of the counting commission -
these, but still the anonymity of the voter is violated - according to the handwriting
it is possible to identify someone, this year they already identified someone in a narrow circle.
There should be no such complaints.
And I also come to your court, gentlemen, with this problem: in this
year, it was possible not to enter second and third place. We are the management
were based on a number of understandable considerations. But the practice of the moment -
clearly showed: you sincerely wish victory to your chosen one - not
put anyone in second and third place, do not add pointscompetition
rents. Not everyone realized this, but many did. Nevertheless, many honestly
They definitely put the worthy ones in second and third places, but not all of them. Pro-
problem... And how to approach it - I don’t have the slightest idea
staging. "Interpresscon" is our prize, help with advice, yes-
Let's decide together.
Speaking about Interpresscon, naturally, one cannot help but say
about "The Wanderer". This year everything was carried out at a high level
- no doubt. There are no complaints about the organizers, there are only warm ones
words of gratitude. And the laureates are undoubtedly worthy. But I wouldn't-
creates a barrel of honey, without this... very... tar. Awards by
two positions caused confusion in the hall. And I also have a sharp
rejection, however, for other reasons. First about the first impression
smoldering. Nomination: "Editor/compiler". It would be natural
assume that the main contender is the only one
popular fiction magazine "If". Large audience (circulation
fifty thousand), monthly frequency, excellent design
tion, prose - on the level. However, the prize is awarded to the main
editor of the magazine "Day and Night" Roman Solntsev. To the editor of the journal
Nala, who periodically publishes fiction - and that’s all. But -
Lazarchuk, Uspensky, Gevorkyan, Pelevin, Lukyanenko, announced
Stolyarov... In the nomination "Criticism, Journalism" - the award was given to
Yes... "Zombifications" of Pelevin, if there is a valid one on the list -
flaxcritical, literary works of Rybakov and Lanin!
But, in the end, this is a matter for the jury, it is professional. U
I personally have no complaints about the choice of these particular laureates.
However! I am a member of the nomination committee of “The Wanderer” and worked honestly
exactly like everyone else. We discussed the candidacy of Roman Solntsev
and were not included in the nomination with four votes against. Story
Pelevin was classified as a “small form” by the general decision of the nomination
no commission.
The attitude of the jury members towards the nomination committee is alarming.
Andrei Mikhailovich Stolyarov, who was present at one of the meetings,
members of the nomination commission of "Strannik" as an observer from
jury, stated that his novel “I am the Mouse King” was not included in the genre
rov fantasy lists solely for the reason that the teacher
Strugatsky decided to insert into the seven the story of Loginov’s favorite
"Honey of Life" I was outraged and said: the decision is general, if not
I like it - fire the entire commission, you invited us yourself, no one
did not suggest itself. Very serious, Boris Natanovich said that this
insulting him as a member of the commission and as its Chairman, accusing
a mixture of intrigue and incompetence. And what about now?
consider a situation where the jury at Sibcon makes two changes
tions, and both candidates, inserted by the will of the jury, become laureates -
mi? There is only one answer: the commission is incompetent. And if
honest, must come outfrom the commission himself. What I mean is very correct
and said quietly to Strugatsky immediately after the presentation. He replied: after
Let's talk.
Afterwards there was a banquet. But even before that I looked through the awards presented together
with an invitation card paper about the "Wanderer" award. I quote:
"The lists compiled by the nomination commission are sent to members
Literary Jury, who have the right to nominate in each category-
goria for one more candidate, which - for one reason or another
- could be missed by the commission, but is worthy to participate in
competition." The candidacy of Roman Solntsev was not passed, it
was discussed, which can be testified by the responsible secret
The Wanderer's container, obliged to keep the protocols. And another quote:
"The finalization of the nomination lists can be carried out immediately
the twentieth day of February of the year following the nomination year." Sib-
the con at which the modification took place was held, as is known,
from the nineteenth to the twenty-sixth of March...
The banquet was great - there was plenty of everything and great speeches
thanks to the founders. I especially want to emphasize - no matter what
laureates have not been named, there is no and cannot be a founder
no complaints. I’ll tell you about myself: when Sidorovich and I came up with
“Bronze Snail” - we immediately chose the jury - B.N. - and provide-
We focus only on the technical side; when we came up with the "In-
terpresscon" - then the jury was immediately selected, and wewe provide
technical side; no matter who gets the prize, we are not involved
we have relations, that is, we have, but on a common basis. Likewise
Nikolai Yuryevich Yutanov - putting a lot of money and effort, he did not
is relevant to the process of determining laureates, it can be prevented
The only thing to point out is that the girls at the awards ceremony are too tall
ki - I don’t really like those... or there’s juice at the buffet table
was like this, not my favorite...But no more. Responsible for the laureates
JURY. Once again I would like to thank Nikolai Yuryevich for
wonderful holiday.
After the first toasts at the banquet, when the guests have already risen from their seats
and quietly talking in compact groups, I approached Andrey
Gennadyevich Lazarchuk. And together, quietly, we talked for minutes
fifteen, in particular, touched upon the topic of awards in the nomination
"Editor-compiler". In vain, you, Andryusha, are indignant, -
Lazarchuk said. - If you knew how much blood it costs Solntsev
push the magazine, at what cost does he get it, and the works -
then excellent ones were published... (I do not vouch for the accuracy of the words,
but I vouch for the meaning). “Andrey Gennadievich,” I asked, “can I
I interpret your words to mean that the Wanderer Award is
this section is awarded for administration, and creative composition -
does not have a decisive meaning? I don’t remember that Lazarchuk
answered, but he looked at me as if I were the lastfool.
I really don't understand a damn thing about the award jury criteria.
"Wanderer"! With this bitter feeling, I sat down in my place, buried-
plunging into a plate with a juicy steak. After a few minutes, replace
tive my gloomy state, B.N. came up to me. We talked. I explained
lived his thoughts and feelings. Boris Natanovich said that he came up
dissuade me, but after listening, I am inclined to agree with me. But
asked me to wait a month with the decision to leave. A month has passed. And I
really calmed down and changed my mind: I will remain in the nomination
tion commission of "Strannik" until they kick me out, and I will work
honestly. (True, I immediately decided that I would push with all my might
in the ill-fated nomination “New World”, “Star”, “Neva” and “Argume-
nts and facts”, since they had already published fiction.) But that’s all
fell into place naturally - the nomination commission of the "Countries"
Nika" was disbanded in order to recruit a new one in the fall. At least in some way mine
the judgment coincided with the position of the jury - the commission, by mutual opinion,
turned out to be incompetent
To be honest, this Interpresscon gave me a lot personally - I
Drilled until he was hoarse, trying to decide on some issues of current
the general literary process and his attitude towards it. Food for
I have had enough thoughts and am very pleased. Since I could do it
I could have done it, so could every other guest of Sidorkon, who
wanted. I'll try to illustrate my words in my own words.least, citing a fragment of the transcript of the press conference of the laureates
all three awards:
Andrey NIKOLAEV (St. Petersburg): Question for Kazakov. Vadim Yuryevich, you
Do you consider One Flew Over the Frog's Nest a critical work?
Or is this still fiction?
KAZAKOV: I don’t consider it a critical work, artistic
I don’t consider it prose, I consider it a unique kind of literature.
research.
NIKOLAEV: Don’t you think that you create in this way
precedents, and sooner or later, instead of the criticism that is called for,
Alan Kubatiev is writing, we will receive stylized curves
tiku novels and short stories? And immediately a question for Stern. Boris Geda-
Lievich, do you consider “The Second of July of the Fourth Year” critical
a work?
STERN: This is a question for Somerset Maugham.
NIKOLAEV: Do you think this is a critical work or artistic
natural? Did you write a story?
STERN: I don't know. A story, a short story, a short story, a novel - this is for
I'm unknown. I don't know what it's called.
STRUGATSKY: Andrey, I think that you are tormenting Boris Ged in vain -
Lievich, because it was not he who inserted into the nomination for literature
rature criticism of your work, but we inserted, nomination
commission.
NIKOLAEV: Yes, Vadim Kazakov is the chairman. That's what I want
finish shouting.
STERN: I’ll add that I also translated “The Second of July on the Fourth
year" from English, which I don’t know at all. Soquestions
absolutely not for me.
LAZARCHUK: Andrey, I’m sorry that I’m interjecting, we’ve already
touched on this topic and determined that there are not only criticisms
and a work of art. We have criticism, journalism,
essayism, a lot of things that are not artistic in
fully, but they are talking about literature. And if a person is so capable
If he tries to express his opinion, then the flag is in his hands.
NIKOLAEV: Andrey Gennadievich, for example, do you think that
Lem's "Sum of Technology" is not a work of art?
LAZARCHUK: No, this is not fiction. "The amount of technology
gii" is pure essayism. This is a long essay. There is such a form
- essayism, when the writer writes a non-fiction work
and not about a work of art, but to some several answers
treated topics.
KAZAKOV: Andrey Anatolyevich, one more small note about
the one who included "The Second of July of the Fourth Year", "Zombification" and
my work is in the criticism category. Since the chairman
included in the nomination, and the members of the commission did not object, thereby my
personal responsibility turns into collective responsibility
ness. Or into collective irresponsibility, whatever. This
first. And secondly, about creating a precedent. In the good old
In England, the entire legal system rests perfectly on the system
precedents and not fall apart yetgoing. Well, God grant us
the same success.
NIKOLAEV: So you created a precedent - not the first, considering
the work of Dr. Katz, - which will lead to the replacement of artistic criticism
TV prose.
STRUGATSKY: Andrey, well, he won’t, honestly, he won’t,
I'm sure of it.
NIKOLAEV: Pelevin’s wonderful story receives a prize for
criticism!
STRUGATSKY: So what? Now, if he hadn't received the award...
NIKOLAEV: It turns out that we don’t need criticism. Not needed at all.
STRUGATSKY: Very necessary.
NIKOLAEV: It turns out that instead of literary criticism we need
prose, and in such quantities that we are ready to replace it and
criticism.
STRUGATSKY: This is all terminology. What difference does it make what you call it?
a beautiful piece created. Well, what's the difference?
NIKOLAEV: Why are there prizes? Initially? Not for
in order to reward, but in order to stimulate development
directions.
STRUGATSKY: No! No! No! Prizes exist exclusively
in order to please a good person. No more -
for whom the awards have no purpose, everything else is fiction. Incentive,
excitement... it's all fiction. Well, will a person really write
a good novel just because there's a prize coming up for it somewhere?
NIKOLAEV: Why do you think Dr. Katz wrote his work?
STRUGATSKY: Well, not for the prize... Andrey, believe me, I’m a professional
national writer, writing fortyyears. I have never written in my life
even a microscopic note, meaning some kind of bonus. Gono-
rar I meant, the prize - never. Do you have any other questions for the laureates?
Otherwise we will get into terminology again.
Mikhail YAKUBOVSKY (Rostov-nad-Donu): Maybe someone from la-
reats to explain in simple and accessible words as much as possible: what
is there turborealism?
LAZARCHUK: If you held my book in your hands, there on the flap
Briefly and, in my opinion, it is written quite clearly what it is. Tour
borealism is not science fiction. It's something like a duck, which...
Raya walks like a duck, which can be eaten like a duck, but which at the same time
time is not a duck. So, turborealism is like fantasy
tika, written by approximately the same people, but this is not science fiction.
An example from the opposite. Any historical novel is clearly fictional. At that
At the same time, it is treated as realistic prose. Any
industrial novel, a novel from modern life, clearly fictional,
because he describes events that did not happen. Exactly
we can also say that we live in a world consisting of imaginary
constructed images, we live in a fictional, described world. That's if
we imagine it this way, then we will not see the difference between
what science fiction writers and authors of historical novels write. We've been around for a very long time
tried to understand what we write, why it makes us so nervous when
we are treated like science fiction writers. It jerks me, hits menerves
I don't like this. Here. It turns out that turborealism is somewhat similar to
science fiction, but it is not science fiction in the full sense of it
words.
NIKOLAEV: Andrey Gennadievich, this is not a science fiction prize
contradicts receiving?
LAZARCHUK: They give, so I take.
NIKOLAEV: And to establish professional awards for phanta-
style, without creating science fiction, working in a different genre? This is not
contradicts your principles? That is, without writing fiction and not
planning to write it, you nevertheless take the liberty
award a professional award in the field of fiction.
GEVORGYAN, STERN, ASHMARINA, LAZARCHUK and others answered at the same time -
Of course, it was impossible to make out the replicas. It went on for a while
meaningless polemic. Finally, Strugatsky, with the power of the chairman,
Telly stopped this bazaar.
NIKOLAEV: If you don’t like science fiction, you can do it professionally
evaluate. Here's what I found out.
STRUGATSKY: Don't WRITE science fiction.
NIKOLAEV: If you don't like science fiction.
STRUGATSKY: No, no, no. DO NOT WRITE fiction. Fiction is possible
love, but don't write. And write turborealism. And love fantasy.
Andryusha, today you have fallen into some terminology.
Just like that. It's hard to figure everything out. Questions that
worries me, for some reason, it turns out, come down to terminological
showdown. At one of the meetings of the jury of “The Wanderer” (simply,
I'm sorry that I'm returning to this topic), Iasked to clarify the term
"fantasy", and other genres, in order to know who to include in the nominations
nations by genre. I was twisted into a ram's horn, bound and spat on:
“It’s impossible to formulate! - I was told, - let’s insert on a whim,
according to inner feeling: fantasy, this or that work or
no." I suggested that "I am the Mouse King" be included in the nomination
"The Sword in the Stone": "Not FANTASY!" - they answered me. And then Andrey
Mikhailovich accused us of intrigue - because of the "terminology"
confusion. I can give many such examples from my practice.
gesture...
But I'm happy. This is life. This is the meaning of Inter-
presscona. Say it and be heard. Hear - and think. Even
if at first you were ridiculed, your words will be remembered. Even if
Riva laughed - someone else’s words were not forgotten.
At the end of the article, it would be desirable to draw conclusions: the past
Interpresscon showed this and that, it points to such and such...
then reflections... Showed. Leads.
The main result: he recorded... what? I don't know, time will tell.
The main conclusion: we need to prepare for Interpresscon-96. Yesterday like
once started.
P.S. And yet I can’t resist, I’ll say about the holiday con-
cert. Great. When Berezhnoy said that he was dedicating the first song
in memory of Vitaly Ivanovich Bugrov, the hall stood up. Yuliy Burkin will perform
I drank with a new program, and now I drink several times every day
I'm watching the video. Greathe sings, and his songs are not with his mind, but
you understand with a feeling - thank you, Julius. And Lukin... I’ll say it like Stru-
Gatsky: Lukin is Lukin, what else can I add?! Thanks everyone
three for a wonderful concert. Thanks to everyone who favorably con-
The devil listened and applauded. Thanks to everyone who came to visit
Interpresscon. We are waiting for you next year.
Share your thoughts about the article