▲ 97 points
back
73 comments
For those who reads Russian this is the best her verse as rated at [1].
Утреннее солнце восходит утром –
Столько соблазнительных вероятий!
Что же ты, девка, ходишь по квартире,
Тапками стуча, пятки печатая?
Что тебе, голубка моя лебёдка?
Поворотись-ка, сними последнее,
В золотое зеркало полюбуйся,
Это и то вперёд выдвигая.
И чу! Я слышу глухое биенье.
Тепло бокам и шея удлинилась.
Ноги не радуют, но белым перьям
Многие подруги позавидуют.
Достаточно сделать движенье крылом –
В животе ухает; паркет остался
Далеко внизу; родные, простите,
Пишите мне до востребования.
– Бессмертная, навеки бессмертна я,
Стиксу не быть для меня преградою!
If she is the best living Russian poet and this is the best her verse, then the whole Russian poetry is in very poor quality. I find nothing fascinating here at all. Even rythm is broken but not in a good way. Just broken.
I've never heard of Maria (though can't say I'm an expert in poetry). That's why I decided to do some research and found this.
Hm, I had to read the lines three times, slowly, to reconstruct the image the author tried to convey. And this was the first layer. Apparently there is another one inside, but I presume this second layer resembles a Rorschach test: everybody is welcome to see what ever she/he wants to see. That's quite an achievement for those who care about pumping up readers' self-esteem. Especially if the readers see poetry as gymnastics for brain.
A fitting Feynman quote:
A poet once said, 'The whole universe is in a glass of wine.' We will probably never know in what sense he meant it, for poets do not write to be understood.
It's true. Poets don't write to be understood. They write to be felt.
A single sentence like that is rarely good poetry, and it doesn't make me feel all that much. But it wouldn't be any more interesting rewritten as "All of the laws of physics are expressed in a glass of wine just as much as in the rest of the universe", if that's what was "meant". It's just vapid.
But if it stuck in Feynman's mind, and yours, it means the poet was on to something. That's the important part. The poet said a thing and it connected, just as Feynman's nude drawings connected with him. They don't need to "mean" anything more than exactly what they are.
> And this was the first layer. Apparently there is another one inside
This is ascribing meaning to something that most likely doesn't have the ascribed meaning.
It reminds me of English poetry. I never understood the point of it. Blamed by bad English skills for that. But this verse looks just like English poetry just in Russian. Russian text written in a way to make it difficult to read, to hide the fact that the author had nothing to say, but had said nonetheless.
Or, maybe, not "to hide"? If it is an attempt to hide, then it would be a failed attempt. Maybe she had some other goals in her mind when wrote this?
Not all English poetry is like that. For example there is definitely music an rhythm in Longfellow's "The Song of Hiawatha" or William Blake's "The tiger" although I would dare to say that their versions translated to Russian are "better" sounding. This obviously could be just because of the English not being my native tongue.
".. if this person shows that example, then all of X is broken" -> use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning in the construction of an argument.
The argument is valid but not sound. The premises "best russian poet" and "best verse" taken from the parent are likely wrong.
i am no expert in contemporary poetry, however on the TV station "дождь"/rain they used to read modern poems right before the evening news program, and these poems make much more sense. However I didn't find a collection of these poems.
I haven't read much modern Russian poetry, but this really isn't that good. There are way better contemporary examples.
In my late teens I had tons of poetry of similar quality [1] Why am I not the greatest living Russian poet? :)
[1] https://old.dmitriid.com/projects/literary.html See "Абстрактизация", or even "В огОроде" (or anything else :)) )
I have no clue who said that Stepanova is a greatest poet, especially since the quoted poetry is complete garbage.
hm... So according to who she is "one of greatest"?
My second question is how is this hacker news relevant?
Apart from the guidelines wrt "intellectual curiosity" pointed to you elsewhere, perhaps you can grant her admission for discussion as:
She is the founder of Colta, the only independent crowd-funded source of information in Russia. The high-traffic online publication has been called a Russian Huffington Post in format and style, and has also been compared to The New York Review of Books for the scope and depth of its long essays.
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/mad-russia-hurt-me-into-...
The website is also mentioned in the OP article.
> the only independent crowd-funded source of information in Russia
How about Russian branch of Wikipedia?
Hacker News Guidelines
What to Submit On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
when I went to school in Russia the great writers were those whos portraits we had on the wall in literature class. I'm sure she was not among them )))
I've tried reading her book "in memory of memories" got stuck, but not in an unpleasant way, maybe will give it a try later;
> the great writers were those whos portraits we had on the wall in literature class
It's completely up to the authorities to define great writers?
As relevant as Eddie Murphy Coming to America perhaps.
> My second question is how is this hacker news relevant?
And the third question is, how is she on the front page? Are there that many readers of Hacker News who are interested in contemporary Russian poetry?
Russian hackers? :)
I guess they ran out of usual set of subjects about evil Russia and had decided that little diversity masqueraded as an art related would not hurt.
Looked at her poetry. Obviously I am not an expert in the area but being well read I think I am sane enough to see that calling her "the greatest" is based on anything but value of her writings. To me her style could be summarized by the following verse:
Я поэт, зовусь я Цветик
От меня вам балалайка
my thoughts exactly. No rythm, nothing fascinating. Looks like her "big name" is result of good connections in proper circles.
Most of art seems to have gone this way. Contemporary art museums are full of random nonsense few people find any pleasure in, anything to be curious about, or anything to become excited by. So much architecture is just ugly, like some kind of experiments gone bad. It's pretty depressing that people accept that there's something there, while they themselves can't see it. They trust the experts, be it experts in architecture, art, or poetry. The result is crap that can't hold up to stuff created 300 years ago, but that still gets recognized as work if genius. Example: Beeple's art has sold for more than any Rafael.
I really misread this at first and thought it said Maria Sharapova, and was curious if the tennis star had gotten into poetry (and why not, she has her own candy line). Was all set to read poems about aces and faults and volleys.
Not surprising at all. Wikipedia is also "confused":
This is ironic that this story is posted by @lermontov who is actually one the greatest Russian poets. She is not.
I believe the term is eponysterical https://maxdesign.com.au/news/eponysterical/
I love the shameless promotion.
This is the first time I hear about Maria Stepanova, albeit I dont read as much of modern non-fictional/sci-fi literature in Russian
Before opening the link I made a guess: "99.9% probability that she's in opposition to Russian government and that is the real reason for calling her "best Russian poet".
Opened the article, wasn't disappointed. My guess was 100% correct.
I also laughed at mention of "independent TV channel Dozhd". Independent, really? It's funded by British government to disseminate anti-Russian propaganda and create a dissent among population of Russia.
I've never heard about Maria, but now I'm pretty sure that's her only literary achievement is critics of Russia present and past. It's the only thing that interests the West now and sells well on the West.
A fairly substantial portion of the big names in Russian literature--going back to Pushkin, no?--have found themselves crossways with the government of their days. Judging poetry in translation I leave to the bolder, and I do not know Russian. But what you have said gives me no reason to suppose that she is not a good poet.
There are lots of great artists but popularity is somewhat controlled by a handful of gatekeepers. I'd tend to agree with anticodon's point that people that are elevated tend to be in line with the agenda of those gatekeepers.
As a russian speaker I wish to add that " the big names in Russian literature--going back to Pushkin" are highly overrated in my opinion. So I am not surprised about this one too. And usually I can spot good quality of a person by a few minutes of listening just to find out later that I was correct. It has happened many times already to be sure about it. I am using this all the time. I listen to a person for some time and if mhy intuitions says it's good then I digg more. Works like magic.
Pasternak was given Nobel prize for "Doctor Zhivago". When reading the book I was disappointed a bit: why give such a high prize for such a boring book. Only about 15-20 years later I understood that Nobel Prize is mostly about politics, not literature.
I don't know if Maria is a good poet. I'm not a big fan of poetry. Opened a couple of her old poems (on stihi.ru) and wasn't impressed.
But since almost half of the article is devoted to how it is important to be in opposition to the current Russian government and how it's a good thing to vilify Russian past (especially Soviet past), I tend to assume that she's an ordinary poet (maybe not bad but definitely not exceptional like the article claims) that is just being used as an ideological weapon against Russia.
It's hard to make money if you're a poet. I guess it's hard to make money now if you are any kind of writer. People don't read anymore. And I guess poets never made enough money.
But if you're a Russian poet/writer and you write about how you hate current and past Russian government, how it "oppresses" everyone around, you have a non-zero chance to receive awards and grants from western funds. Your works would be also promoted worldwide for free. I guess it is the main source of motivation for such authors.
When I saw this link here I've made special effort to find her words condemning occupation of Ukraine including Crimea and didn't find it anywhere. So perhaps she is not too much of "crossways with the government". If I've missed it somehow, please share the link.
TIL about Stepanova, presumably one of our greatest living poets. I took a look at her works, and like most modern poetry, they lack fluidity. I want the verse to glide off the tongue and into the ear and off the tongue again.
And it's not just rhyme or rhythm that I am talking about, Stepanova herself is criticised for following the traditions of Russian poetry. Dulce et Decorum est by Wilfred Owen has a stumbling rhythm, the lines desperately trying to catch up to the expected rhyme. And yet it's a pleasure to read, while Stepanova's poetry is a chore.
I think rules in art, once established well enough will always begin to be broken consistently. Once that breaking of the rules becomes completely consistent again you will start to get back your fluidity from newly minted rule-breakers.
Avant-garde poets used to say, that a modern poet should be free from any rules and restrictions except for one: write good poetry.
The second part is often forgotten nowadays.
I think that's fair, but would like to add the concept that 99.9% of the 'new' art is shite. Over time, the court of public opinion will winnow out the few things worth keeping.
That doesn't mean that people shouldn't hack out new territory, it's just that very little of it is of lasting value.
Sure, some find beauty even in ruins...
Are you reading her poetry in Russian?
Yes.