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.
as an English speaker I should note there is some ambiguity about the phrase 'going back to', it can be used inclusively or exclusively but most commonly is used inclusively so what you said strongly implies that you also think Pushkin is highly overrated?
But even if you were using exclusively it would mean you thought that everyone after Pushkin was highly overrated. Are the people who were averagely rated to be rated poorly then? It seems unlikely to me that so much of a vast nation's literature, for so long, can be so overrated.
As you can see I was using the phrase of the parent comment which starts with 'A fairly substantial portion of the big names'... So I was referring to this "fairly substantial portion" while eexpressing my opinion that they are highly overrated.
>so what you said strongly implies that you also think Pushkin is highly overrated?
Yes. I think this one is especially highly overrated. When you read the poem of someone you willingly or unwillingly trying to read his mind and vision of the world. When I read this one I am simply disgusted. I have the feeling that he is just cold and cynical to the level that I can't stand it! And the general feeling of fakeness in his writings is to the level of realising that this human being simply doesn't understand a few concepts about this life. The same feeling you have when you are listening to some primitive music and you feel that author simply 'doesn't get it' in the first place.
I also can't help but notice some cheap/dirty tricks in his poetry when rhythm doesn't work. Even when I write some 'poetry' as a joke to entertain my friends even I manage to avoid such cheap tricks and then I think that surely some great poet must be able to do it too? Isn't it? I mean small kids when they are missing words to express their thoughts use those tricks to make some rhythm to work. In the poem 'Evgeny Onegin' I've counted a few of those and then I had to stop counting in order to somehow finish the poem.
Surely like any author he has something in his poems but I do have a feeling that this author is highly overrated.
>It seems unlikely to me that so much of a vast nation's literature, for so long, can be so overrated.
Sure, it seemed unlikely for me too in the beginning. But the more you read and explore the more likely it becomes. Especially when you explore nation's history. You discover a lot of fake there and then you realise that each and every Russian author has to deal with those lies somehow. And if such author wish to preserve some level of sincerely in this writings he has has very painful dilemma. Unresolvable for most of them if you ask me as long as they keep calling themselves 'Russians'. Because if you dig into the history enough you discover that the very term , well , has some ambiguity in it to say the least. One basic thing to notice: How 'Russians' end up being in Moscow while 'Rus' was known to be in Kiev? Thus they are culturally as related to the 'Rus' as 'Saw (some one)' related to 'Saw (as a tool)'. Thus I would also say that the whole 'culture' in my opinion is highly overrated because it is based on primitive fakes, lies, violence and very poor moral standards. Moral standards represent certain understanding of life and Rissian moral standards are not well developed to this very day because they lie and lie and lie. If you ask me 'why?' I would suggest that the enormous efforts to create "much of a vast nation's literature, for so long" were mostly wasted so far because most of the authors simply failed to understand or deliver certain basic concepts and I can't point out even one modern author that does! I wish that someone would show me this one because I would be happy to be wrong and surprised but I doubt it.
I'm very curious about this since I do not speak Russian, yet I have read many Russian authors in translation and generally think highly of their literary culture. Are names like Pushkin, Tolstoy, Chekhov considered overrated in Russia?
They are required reading at school. So many people are turned away from them just because all soul is sucked from them by school curriculum demanding you dissect their works and write non-sensical, highly formulaic essays like "Author's position and means of expressing of said position in the novel 'Crime and Punishment'" [1]
I tend to think that it is almost impossible to translate anything from one language to another. For this, translator have to be native speaker of both languages and live in both cultures simultaneously all the time.
There're many books that become much better or much worse after translation.
As of me: I've heard several times that Pushkin is overrated, but I always liked his poems and prose. I like Chekhov. I somewhat like Tolstoy. Never understood Dostoyevsky, but I think I've tried to read his books too early, maybe it's time to read them again.
“Non-Russian readers do not realize two things: that not all Russians love Dostoevsky as much as Americans do, and that most of those Russians who do, venerate him as a mystic and not as an artist. He was a prophet, a claptrap journalist and a slapdash comedian. I admit that some of his scenes, some of his tremendous farcical rows are extraordinarily amusing. But his sensitive murderers and soulful prostitutes are not to be endured for one moment—by this reader anyway.”
–Vladimir Nabokov. But of course he's being his usual contrarian self here; make of it what you will.
Considered by whom? Different people have different opinions. I find Dostoevsky's language, for example, quite difficult to read taking some time to get used to. And I don't like this soule digging kind of prose, but other people may love this.
This is of course my personal taste and I could care less what is the official POV on the subject. I do not like Tolstoy at all. Pushkin - I think he is a genius. Calling him overrated I think is not very sincere.
I think this one is especially highly overrated. When you read the poem of someone you willingly or unwillingly trying to read his mind and vision of the world. When I read this one I am simply disgusted. I have the feeling that he is just cold and cynical to the level that I can't stand it! And the general feeling of fakeness in his writings is to the level of realising that this human being simply doesn't understand a few concepts about this life. The same feeling you have when you are listening to some primitive music and you feel that author simply 'doesn't get it' in the first place.
I also can't help but notice some cheap/dirty tricks in his poetry when rhythm doesn't work. Even when I write some 'poetry' as a joke to entertain my friends even I manage to avoid such cheap tricks and then I think that surely some great poet must be able to do it too? Isn't it? I mean small kids when they are missing words to express their thoughts use those tricks to make some rhythm to work. In the poem 'Evgeny Onegin' I've counted a few of those and then I had to stop counting in order to somehow finish the poem.
Surely like any author he has something in his poems but I do have a feeling that this author is highly overrated.
> 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.
How do you know it's "correct"? Another hypothesis that fits is that you don't change your opinion when you get more information, you stick with your first instinct. Do others ever disagree with your assessments? What makes you right and them wrong?
For instance this way I have discovered: Marvin Minsky,Richard Feynman, Ray Kurzweil, Alan Kay and so on You can argue that I was incorrect but then I would not argue.
>What makes you right and them wrong?
Nothing makes me right. I am just satisfied with the results of this experimental technique so far .
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.
> 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.
> Maybe other people liked it, even if you didn't?
Never saw anyone who liked it. Everybody I asked about Doctor Zhivago, said it is graphomania (I don't know if it is customary to call bad books by this name in English, but we usually use this word).
> graphomania (I don't know if it is customary to call bad books by this name in English, but we usually use this word)
Great word! And as someone who knows a bit about English literature, I've never heard it before.
It's a common trope about widely respected, intellectual works, 'nobody really likes them'. (The following is not about you; I don't know you at all, of course:) Frankly, I think people can find them difficult, naturally, and an anti-intellectual response is an easy cover story that they know will be socially accepted. Lots of people like these works, including Dr Zhivago and Maria Stepanova. As I've grown older I've learned that if I don't like it then usually there's something I'm missing, which an opportunity for me to learn. As I've grown more sophisticated, I've learned why they are so admired - I just lacked the background to grasp it before. Certainly, reading these works in school was often impractical. Now, I'm sorry I don't have the time to read them all.
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.
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.