Department of Comparative Literature

33 Pages·2015·1.49 MB·English

The Politics of Estrangement:
Tracking Shklovsky’s Device through
Literary and Policing Practices
CristinaVatulescu
SocietyofFellows,Harvard
Abstract CriticshavefrequentlyaccusedRussianFormalismofsupportinganapo-
liticalseparationofartfromlife.AsacentralFormalistterm,estrangement(ostranenie)
often bore the brunt of this accusation.Taking issue with this critique, this essay
focusesontheentangledrelationshipbetweentheaestheticsandpoliticsofestrange-
mentandarguesthatanattentivelookatthehistoryofestrangementrevealsitsdeep
involvementwithrevolutionaryandpolicestatepolitics.Thisessaytracesestrange-
ment’sconflicteddevelopmentthroughVictorShklovsky’soeuvreandbeyond,inthe
workofNicolaeSteinhardtandJosephBrodsky,andalsoinsecretpoliceinterroga-
tionandreeducationpracticesandinCIAmanuals.
InSentimentalJourney,Shklovskywrotethatduringthecivilwar,lifeitselfwasmade
strangeandbecameart.Shklovsky’smemoirsshedlightontheeffectsofthisrevolu-
tionaryestrangementontheself.Furthermore,thememoirsreenactedthisunsettling
estrangement by incorporating elements of official Soviet genres, such as the trial
deposition, the interrogation autobiography, and the letter to the government. As
IamgratefultoSvetlanaBoym,JulieBuckler,EstherLiberman,KikiPop-Eleches,Amy
Powell,MeirSternberg,JurijStriedter,WilliamMillsToddIII,andtheanonymousreviewers
ofPoeticsTodayforreadingdraftsofthisessayandprovidingtheirfeedback.Earlierversions
ofthisessaywerepresentedatHarvardUniversity(2004),YaleUniversity(2005),andthe
UniversityofCaliforniaatSanDiego(2005);Ithankmyaudiencesforhelpfulcomments.
ResearchforthisessayhasbeensupportedbythegenerosityoftheDavisCenterforRus-
sianandEurasianStudiesSummerTravelGrantandDissertationCompletionFellowship.I
alsothanktheConsiliulNationalPentruStudiereaArhivelorSecuritătii(NationalCouncil
,
fortheStudyoftheSecuritateArchives)andinparticularCsendesLadislauforgrantingme
accesstomaterialsfromtheformerSecuritatearchives.
PoeticsToday27:1(Spring2006).Copyright©2006bythePorterInstituteforPoeticsand
Semiotics.
36 PoeticsToday27:1
Shklovskysuggests,theeffectsofrevolutionaryestrangementontheselfwerecer-
tainlynotlimitedtothetherapeuticvalueofrefreshingperceptionthatiscommonly
ascribedtoartisticestrangement.Indeed,estrangementoftheselfwasakeydevice
insecretpoliceinterrogationandreeducationpractices;assuch,itwasinstrumental
inthepoliticizedfashioningofthesubjectduringSoviettimes.Intheirconfronta-
tionswiththispolicestatebrandofestrangement,writerslikeJosephBrodskyand
NicolaeSteinhardtfurtherprobeditsmethodsandthenappropriateditslessonsfor
theirownends,developingself-estrangementasanewartofsurvival.
InterrogatingEstrangement
Theforemosttheoristsofliteraryestrangement,BertoltBrechtandVictor
Shklovsky,sharedapreoccupationwithbeinginterrogated.
Ioftenimaginebeinginterrogatedbyatribunal.
‘‘Nowtellus,Mr.Brecht,areyoureallyinearnest?’’
WalterBenjamin,1977
I give my deposition. I declare. I lived through the revolution
honestly.
Shklovsky,1923
Brecht’sandShklovsky’sconversationswithimaginaryinterrogatorsseem
toechoeachother,asifShklovskyansweredthequestionthatBrechtfeared
hisinterrogatormightask.Infact,BrechtwasconversingwithWalterBen-
jamin, who recorded Brecht’s words in a diary entry from July 6, 1934,
together with a possible clue to this puzzling fascination with interroga-
tions.Benjamin(1977:88)laconicallynotedthat,inthesameconversation,
Brechtassertedthat‘‘themethodsoftheGPU[Sovietsecretpolice]’’were
1
based on ‘‘certain kinds of estrangement’’ (Entfremdung). In the same pas-
sage,Brechtusedthesameword,Entfremdung,todescribeKafka’sfiction.
Brecht’swordsassumethattherearedifferentkindsofestrangement,such
2
assecretpoliceestrangementandartisticestrangement. Buthisprovoca-
1. TheSovietsecretpoliceunderwentmanynamechanges(Cheka,GPU,OGPU,NKVD,
NKGB,MGB,MVD,KGB);hencethedifferentacronymsthatappearinthevariousquota-
tionsthatrefertodifferentmomentsofitshistory.
2. BrechtcoinedhisfamoustermVerfremdung(estrangement)duringhisvisittoMoscowin
1935.Beforethat,andthusatthetimeofhisconversationwithBenjaminin1934,‘‘hehad
used Entfremdung (distancing) for the defamiliarization necessary to stop an event from
seemingnatural,readilyacceptable:inhisnativedialect,entfremdenandverfremdenare
synonymous’’ (Hayman 1983: 189). After 1935, Brecht used Entfremdung specifically for
estrangementintheMarxist-informedsenseofalienation,anegativephenomenonthatartis-
ticestrangement(Verfremdung)wasdesignedtoexposeandresist.Bychangingtheprefix
oftheexistingnounEnt-toVer-fremdung,Brechtemphasizedthedifferencebetweenhisnew
termandMarx’snegativeterm;butbychoosingtokeepthesameroot,heremindedusof
theirfundamentalconnection.Entfremdung’s‘‘deformation’’intotheartisticVerfremdung
Vatulescu • TrackingEstrangementthroughLiteraryandPolicingPractices 37
tivemusingspointtoaquestionheleftunanswered:Whatistherelationship
betweenthetwoestrangements?Couldthefascinationthatthetwotheo-
ristsofartisticestrangementshowedforinterrogationshavesomethingto
dowiththese‘‘certainkindsofestrangement’’practicedbythesecretpolice?
To grapple with these questions, I will first turn to the work of Victor
Shklovsky,whohadfirsthandknowledgeofthemethodsoftheSovietsecret
police,havinghimselfundergoneanumberofinterrogations.Theconnec-
tionsbetweenthepoliticsandaestheticsofestrangementinthecontextof
Shklovsky’sworkhavebeenlongoverlookedorevendenied,eventhough
theyhavebeenthoroughlyanalyzedinthecontextofBrecht’swork.Thus
FredricJameson(1974:58)arguedthatthe‘‘purpose’’ofBrecht’sestrange-
ment is ‘‘political in the most thoroughgoing sense of the word; it is, as
Brechtinsistedoverandover,tomakeyouawarethattheobjectsandinsti-
tutions you thought to be natural were really only historical: the result
of change, they themselves henceforth became in their turn changeable.’’
Bycontrast,Jamesoncharges,Shklovsky’stheoryofestrangement,which
arguedthatthegoalofartistodefamiliarize,makestrange,orpresentthe
worldfromunusualanglesandthusrefreshourroutine-dulledperception,
suffersfromahistoricityandessentialism,sinceitisbasedonthebeliefthat
objectsexistina‘‘unitary,atemporalway’’priortobeingtemporarilymade
3
strangebytheartist(ibid.:71).
These charges against estrangement are part of a larger critique of
Shklovsky’sFormalistschoolforwhathasbeenlongseenasitschampioning
ofanautonomousartdivorcedfromlife,history,andpolitics.Thiscritique
wasalreadywellinplaceinthe 1920sandrangedfromseriousstudiesby
suchmajorfiguresasLev(Leon)Trotsky(1924)andMikhailBakhtin(Bakh-
tinandMedvedev1985[1928])toinflammatorydenunciationsinthepress
proclaimingthat‘‘morepromisingmembers[oftheFormalistschool]will
have to undergo a thorough reeducation in the tough elementary school
of marxism. . . . They will have to go to an ideological canossa. . . . We
oughttosend[them]toforcedlaborundergoodsurveillance’’(Gorbachev
4
1930; quoted in Erlich 1965 [1955]: 138). At best, the more judicious of
thesecriticsrecognizedthat,bythelate1920s,Formalismevolvedtoward
doesnotbreakitstiestoitsformerpoliticalpast;rather,itmakesitbetterfittoexposethe
negativeeffectsofthepoliticalterm.InBrecht’sworkafter1935,estrangement(Verfrem-
dung)worksasavaccineagainstalienation(Entfremdung)developedbyusingtheelements
ofthatalienationasantibodies.
3. ForJameson’saccountofShklovsky’sestrangement,see‘‘TheFormalistProjection’’(in
Jameson1974),especially50–75.
4. For a detailed account of the relationship between Marxist and Formalist critics, see
‘‘MarxismversusFormalism’’inErlich1965[1955]:99–117.
38 PoeticsToday27:1
5
a more politically aware sociological criticism. Shklovsky, however, was
seenasaretrogradeexceptionandwasaccusedofstickingtohisownver-
sion of ‘‘canned formalism’’ (Bakhtin and Medvedev 1985 [1928]: 69). As
thecornerstoneof hisliterarytheory,estrangementborethebruntofthis
accusation.However,itisnotclearwhetheritisestrangementthatisahis-
toricalorthecritics’accountofit.NotingthatShklovsky’sprolificworkhas
beenasetofvariationsonthethemeofestrangement,moststudiesnever-
thelessneglectthedifferencesamongthesevariationsortheirdevelopment
overtime;instead,theynarrowlyfocuson‘‘ArtasDevice’’(‘‘Iskusstvokak
priem’’),anarticlebyShklovskypublishedin1917,whenhewastwenty.In
thisessay,Iwillarguethat,inthedecadefollowing‘‘ArtasDevice,’’Shklov-
sky’s estrangement underwent profound transformations that were intri-
cately bound with the major political events of his time—the revolution,
thecivilwar,theascendancyofthesecretpolice,andthefirstmajorSoviet
showtrial,the1922trialoftheSocialistRevolutionaries(SRs).
A number of critics have previously challenged the common charge
against estrangement as a device of art for art’s sake.Thus,Victor Erlich
(1965[1955]:179)arguedthat,‘‘asopposedtoapureartforart’ssakedoc-
trine, Shklovsky came to define poetry not in terms of what it is but in
terms of what it is for’’; he showed a ‘‘rather unexpected preoccupation
with the uses of poetry and therapeutic value of creative deformation’’
on our routine-dulled perception of the world. Jurij Striedter (1989: 24)
further expanded our understanding of estrangement by arguing that the
first aspect of estrangement, ‘‘unmistakable in the passages from Tolstoy
discussed by Shklovsky,’’ was ‘‘ethical—and directed toward cognition of
the world.’’ Estrangement ‘‘corrects the reader’s relationship to the world
aroundhim’’by‘‘impedingthekindofperceptionautomatizedbylinguistic
and social conventions, forcing the reader to see things anew’’ (ibid.: 23).
SvetlanaBoym’s(1998:243)study‘‘EstrangementasaLifestyle:Shklovsky
andBrodsky’’furtherchallengedthenotionofestrangementasanapoliti-
calartisticdevicebyananalysisofestrangement‘‘asawayoflife’’singularly
fittedtotheexperienceofexileandpoliticaldissent.
What has remained so far in the shadows is the dark side of estrange-
ment, its entanglements with revolutionary and totalitarian politics.The
presentessayfocusesonthisMr.Hydeofestrangementwhilealsoaddress-
ingitsencounterswithartisticandsubversiveestrangement.Itracethecon-
flictedrelationshipbetweenthepoliticsandaestheticsofestrangementand
itsdevelopmentthroughShklovsky’soeuvreandbeyond,intheworkoflit-
5. AsWilliamMillsToddIII(1985:16)showed,thisrecognitionwastheexceptionratherthan
therule,andwithfewexceptions,theWesternreceptionofFormalismhaslikewisefocused
uponthemembers’earlyactivities.
Vatulescu • TrackingEstrangementthroughLiteraryandPolicingPractices 39
erary critic Nicolae Steinhardt and of Joseph Brodsky and also in police
interrogationandreeducationpractices.
TwoMastersofEstrangement:LevTolstoyandIvantheTerrible
Shklovskycoinedthetermostranenie(estrangement)inhis 1917 ‘‘ArtasDe-
vice,’’ashortessaythatbecamethebirthcertificateofartisticestrangement.
Therehearguedthatourperceptionoftheworldwassodulledbyroutine
thatwedonotfullyseeobjectsaroundusbutmerelyrecognizethem.‘‘Ifwe
examinethegenerallawsofperception,weseethatasitbecomeshabitual,
italsobecomesautomatic.Ifsomeonecomparedthesensationof holding
apenorspeakingaforeignlanguageforthefirsttime,withthesensationof
performingthissameoperationforthetenthousandstime,hewouldagree
withus’’(Shklovsky1990[1925]:5–6).Inthestrikinglanguagethatchar-
acterizedhim,Shklovsky(ibid.:5)wentontodenouncethisdullingeffect
ofautomatizationonourperceptionofthingsandpeople:‘‘Automatization
devoursworks,clothes,furniture,one’swife,andthefearofwar....Andso
lifeisreckonedasnothing.’’Artisticestrangementwashisantidotetothis
automatization. Shklovsky believed that the role of the writer was to jolt
thereadersoutoftheirroutine-dulledlivesbymakingthefamiliarappear
strange, offering different angles on life and thus restoring fresh percep-
tion. As Benjamin Sher (1990: xix) concisely put it, ‘‘ostranenie is a process
oractthatendowsanobjectorimagewith‘strangeness’’’by‘‘removingit
fromthenetworkofconventional,formulaic,andstereotypicalperceptions
andlinguisticexpressions.’’AccordingtoShklovsky,artistsuseavarietyof
techniquestoestrangetheirmaterial.Hisfavoriteexamplesofsuchtech-
niques are: calling attention to language and ‘‘complicating form,’’ thus
making‘‘perceptionlongand‘laborious’’’insteadofautomatic(Shklovsky
1990 [1925]: 6); presenting familiar material from the point of view of an
outsider,suchasananimal,achild,oraforeigner;foregoingtheconven-
tional names for things and describing them as if seen for the first time.
Theseestrangementtechniquespresentobjectsinanewlightand‘‘inten-
sify the sensation of things’’ (ibid.: 3). As a result, ‘‘the stone feels stony,’’
one’swifemorelovable,andwarmoreterrifying(ibid.:6).
Shklovsky’sdiscussionofestrangementin‘‘ArtasDevice’’reliesheavily
onexamples,manytakenfromtheworksofLevTolstoy.Butwhileestrange-
mentisanartisticdevice,itsobjectsappeartobeinvariablypolitical.Thus
ahorse’spointofviewestranged‘‘theinstitutionofprivateproperty’’(ibid.:
14). Shklovsky also dwelled onTolstoy’s estrangement of flogging, a then
common form of punishment that Tolstoy ‘‘made strange’’ by comparing
ittounusualtorturetechniques.Shklovskychosethefollowingquotefrom
40 PoeticsToday27:1
Tolstoy: ‘‘Just why this stupid, savage manner of inflicting pain and no
other: such as pricking the shoulder or some other such part of the body
with needles, squeezing someone’s hands or feet in a vise, etc.’’ (ibid.: 6).
Besidestorture,estrangementinTolstoysimilarlydebunkedconventional
viewsonmarriage,churchrituals,bourgeoisart,andwar—allhottopicsof
politicalcontroversyin1917.Indeed,theexamplesweresoweightedtoward
political criticism that Shklovsky felt obliged to ‘‘apologize for the harsh-
ness of [his] examples’’ (ibid.) and warn that writers do not defamiliarize
only those things they ‘‘sneered at’’ (ibid.: 17). However, despite this brief
theoreticaldisclaimer,hewentonamassingjarring,violentexamplesofan
estrangementthathebelievedTolstoydevisedinorderto‘‘gettothecon-
science’’ (ibid.: 13). His only other prose examples of estrangement came
from graphic erotic riddles; cited at the very end of the article, they read
likealastgestureofépaterlesbourgeoisafterprickingtheirconsciences.
In‘‘TheStructureof Fiction’’(1920),publishedthreeyearsafter‘‘Artas
Device,’’Shklovsky’s(1990[1925]:61–62)explanationofartisticestrange-
ment is brought even closer to the realm of politics: ‘‘In order to trans-
formanobjectintoafactofart,itisnecessaryfirsttowithdrawitfromthe
domainoflife.Todothis,wemustfirstandforemost‘shakeuptheobject,’
asIvantheTerrible‘sortedout’hismen....Anartistalwaysincitedinsur-
rections among things.Things are always in a state of revolt with poets.’’
Shklovskychosethevocabularyofpoliticalturmoil—insurrections,revolt,
andtyranny—inordertoexplainartisticestrangement:todefamiliarizeand
soclarifythemoreobscurephenomenon.Artistsaspiringtoestrangement
weregiventhemodelofIvantheTerribleinadditiontothatofTolstoy.
RevolutionaryEstrangementandtheExplosionoftheSelf
To understand Shklovsky’s shift toward a more politicized description of
estrangement,itisinstructivetoconsiderhisSentimentalJourney(Sentimen-
tal’noe puteshestvie [1923]), a book of memoirs that covers the period from
1917,theyearofboth‘‘ArtasDevice’’andtheOctoberRevolution,to1922.
The1917articleleftuswiththeimageofaniconoclasticyouth,whoused
estrangementashisversatileweaponagainststaleliterarycriticism,bour-
geois politics, and routine. Six years later, we find a radically different
authorandaradicallydifferentestrangement.Sinceinthewakeoftherevo-
lution‘‘therewasnoregularlifeofanykind’’(Shklovsky1970[1923]:134),
thewriterwasnolongerneededtoestrangeroutine.Thetheoristofartis-
tic estrangement was reduced to confessing: ‘‘I can’t put together all the
strangethings[vsetostrannoe]IhaveseeninRussia’’(ibid.:184).Thehelpless
exclamation‘‘itisstrange’’[stranno]punctuatesthenarrative.This‘‘strange-
Vatulescu • TrackingEstrangementthroughLiteraryandPolicingPractices 41
ness’’hasthesameeffectasartisticestrangement—itheightensperception.
‘‘The difference between revolutionary life and ordinary life,’’ Shklovsky
approvinglyquotesfromBorisEikhenbaum,‘‘isthatnoweverythingisfelt’’;
thecorollaryisthat‘‘lifebecameart’’[zhizn’stalaiskusstvom](ibid.:271).The
revolutionhasturnedlifeintoartinthesamewaythattheartisthitherto
used to turn material into art—by making it strange and thus capable of
intensifyingsensation.ThisstrangenesscomestodefinerevolutionaryRus-
sia for Shklovsky (1923: 201), who concludes his contemporary collection
of articles, The Knight’s Move (Khod konia), thus: ‘‘What a strange country
[Kakaya strannaya strana] . . . the country of electrification and Robinson
Crusoes.’’
ThenarratorofSentimentalJourneyisreducedtoregisteringtheeffectsof
thisrevolutionarybrandofestrangementontheravagedlandscapeandon
people.Theproseisoftenlimitedtolaconicnarration:
After the explosion, our soldiers, surrounded by enemies, were waiting for a
traintocomeforthem;whilewaiting,theybusiedthemselvesbypickingupand
puttingtogethertheshatteredpiecesoftheircomrades’bodies.
Theypickeduppiecesforalongtime.
Naturally,someofthepiecesgotmixedup.
Oneofficerwentuptothelongrowofcorpses.
Thelastbodyhadbeenputtogetheroutoftheleftoverpieces.
Ithadthetorsoofalargeman.Someonehadaddedasmallhead;onthechest
weresmallarmsofdifferentsizes,bothleft.
Theofficerlookedforaratherlongtime;thenhesatonthegroundandburst
outlaughing...laughing...laughing...
InTiflis—Iamreturningtomytrip—acrimewascommitted. (Shklovsky
1970[1923]:126)
Inthisscene,thetermsofShklovsky’s1920descriptionofestrangementare
sinisterlyliteralized.‘‘Theobject’’—thehumanbody—isshakenuptothe
point where it is permanently ‘‘withdrawn from the domain of life.’’ The
human body parts are thrown into a strikingly new configuration.While
patheticallytryingtorestoretheoldorderofthings,thesoldiersonlytop
offthehorrorbyassemblinganincongruoushumancollage.Theofficer’s
laughteratthehorrorofthedismemberedbodyisproofthattheultimate
endofartisticestrangement,thealterationofhabitualperception,hasbeen
outdone.
Whileobservingtheeffectsofrevolutionaryestrangementonotherpeo-
ple, Shklovsky himself was hardly spared its effect. He too became liter-
ally pulverized, twisted, and disjointed by an explosion that he describes
atlength(ibid.:216–19).Hisbodynotonlylookedunrecognizablystrange;
itwasliterallyshotthroughwithforeignbodies—littleshrapnelfragments
42 PoeticsToday27:1
thatjuttedoutthroughhisunderwearformonthsafter.SentimentalJourney
isablowupofthisexplosionscene.Throughout,Shklovskyusesexplosions
as his metaphors for the revolution. ‘‘I haven’t seen the October Revolu-
tion[inPetersburg];Ihaven’tseentheexplosion,iftherewasanexplosion’’
(ibid.:134).Acoupleofpageslater,herebukeshisowndoubtsandreiterates
theexplosionmetaphor:‘‘Ifyoudon’tbelievethattherewasarevolution,
goputyourhandin[Russia’s]wound.It’swide.Theholewaspiercedbya
three-inchshell’’(ibid.:142).Asabookofmemoirs,SentimentalJourneyreg-
isterstheimpactofthebigexplosion—therevolutionandthecivilwar—
notonlyonlandscapeandonpeoplebut,firstandforemost,ontheself.
ThememoirswerefinishedduringShklovsky’s1922–23exileinBerlin;
theyfollowhishectictrajectorythroughvariouscountriesravagedbywar
andrevolution.TheimpetusforthelaststageofShklovsky’s‘‘sentimental
journey’’wasprovidedbytheBolsheviksecretpolice,theCheka.Shklov-
skyfledSaintPetersburg,fearingthathewouldbearrestedtogetherwith
otherprominentSRs:hehadjoinedanundergroundorganizationplotting
to restore the Constituent Assembly, recently dispersed by the Bolsheviks
6
(Sheldon 1970: xiii). In Sentimental Journey, Shklovsky repeatedly reminds
usofhisdramaticinvolvementwithpolitics.Thusheproudlyrecountsthe
shock of a rival Marxist critic at seeing him in the midst of a street fight
duringthecivilwar.Afarcryfromthehackneyedportraitoftheapolitical
Formalist critic, Shklovsky is an armored car commander, then a wanted
fugitive.WefollowhimasheisconstantlyhoundedbytheCheka,narrowly
escaping arrests by jumping off trains and hiding his identity under vari-
ousfakepassports.Thedisintegrationoftheself,experiencedfirsthandin
theexplosion,isdevelopedintotheleitmotifofthememoir:‘‘Lifeflowsin
staccato pieces belonging to different systems. Only our clothing, not the
body,joinstogetherthedisparatemomentsoflife’’(Shklovsky1970[1923]:
184).Inthecourseofhistravels,Shklovskylosteventhatlastshellofiden-
tity,hisclothes.Theygotstolen,orheshedthemformoreorlesssuccessful
disguises.
Self-EstrangementandSelf-Effacement
Inhisquestforsurvival,Shklovskyengagedinvariousexperimentsinself-
presentation:heputonmasksandforeverdevisedcamouflages.Sometimes,
theseexperimentswentawry.Althoughtryingtomakehimselfinconspicu-
ous,heonceendedupwithvioletdyedhairandanoutfitthat‘‘beggedfor
arrest:’’ ‘‘I was absurdly dressed. In a poncho, a sailor’s shirt and a Red
6. SeealsoBoym1998:244–45.ForahistoryofthestrainedrelationshipbetweentheSRs
andtheBolsheviks,seeJansen1982.
Vatulescu • TrackingEstrangementthroughLiteraryandPolicingPractices 43
Armysoldier’shat’’(ibid.:153).Whenhefinallydidgetarrested,itwashis
literarytalentthatsavedhim:‘‘Theyletmeout.Iamaprofessionalracon-
teur’’ (ibid.: 141).This concoction of fake identities is a half-artistic, half-
criminal endeavor. It appropriates the lesson of revolutionary estrange-
ment—theself’sfragmentation,strangeness,andplasticity—andturnsitto
one’sownadvantage.Shklovskyassumedtherevolutionaryestrangement
of the self and moved beyond it toward a voluntary, controlled, and cre-
ativeself-estrangement.Inconcoctingthisnewkindofself-estrangement,
Shklovskyusedhisliterarytalentsforpoliticalpurposes.
Thishybridself-estrangementsecuredhissurvivalandofferedmischie-
vouspleasures.However,ShklovskyopenlyabandoneditinSentimentalJour-
ney:‘‘Accordingtomy[fake]passport,Iwasatechnician.[TheCheka]ques-
tioned me about my specialty. . . . I held my own very convincingly. It’s
pleasanttoloseoneself.Toforgetyourname,slipoutofyouroldhabits.To
thinkupsomeothermanandconsideryourselfhim.Ifithadnotbeenfor
mywritingdesk,formywork,IwouldhaveneverbecomeViktorShklov-
sky again. I was writing a book, Plot as a Manifestation of Style’’ (ibid.: 151).
Theenforcedself-fashioningofarunawayisoftenrestrictedtocamouflage,
anditsclosenesstoself-effacementhauntsthememoirs.Soonafterhewas
releasedfromtheChekainterrogation,Shklovskyinspectedhisfakepass-
portonlytobespookedbythediscoverythatthetechnicianhadbeendead
forawhile.Heendedthestorybyafirmreturntohisliterarypersona,pre-
sented here as the last haven of his endangered identity. However, this is
hardlyahappyendingtoShklovsky’sexperienceofrevolutionaryestrange-
ment.FordespitethisdeterminationtobecomeonceagainthecriticVictor
Shklovsky,therecouldhardlybeamoredramaticdifferencebetweenthe
iconoclasticcriticof‘‘ArtasDevice’’andthenarratorofSentimentalJourney.
Theformer,thetheoristandpractitionerofestrangement,self-confidently
put the whole world under iconoclastic question marks.The latter relin-
quishedhisrighttocommentupontheworldinfavorofself-presentation.
He set the tone of his memoirs by declaring: ‘‘I don’t want to be a critic
of events: I only want to leave material for the critics. . . . I am making
of myself a case study for posterity’’ (ibid.: 24). Rather than teaching us
7
‘‘How Don Quixote Is Made,’’ Sentimental Journey confesses ‘‘HowViktor
Shklovsky Is Made.’’ The first admission is that Victor Shklovsky is not
self-made:
I’vegoneoffatangent,buteverythingthatorganizestheindividualisexternal
tohim.Heisonlythepointwherelinesofforceintersect(188).
Theforcesmovingmewereexternaltome.
7. ‘‘How Don Quixote Is Made’’ (‘‘Kak sdelan ‘Don Kikhot’’’) is the title of Shklovsky’s
famousFormalistreadingofCervantes’novel,includedinShklovsky1990[1925]:72–101.
44 PoeticsToday27:1
Theforcesmovingotherswereexternaltothem.
Iamonlyafallingstone[padaiushchiikamen’].
Astonethatfallsandcan,atthesametime,lightalanterntoobserveitsown
course.(133)
In‘‘ArtasDevice,’’‘‘thestonemadestony’’wasShklovsky’smemorable
exampleofanestrangedobject.HereitisShklovskyhimselfwhohasbeen
turned into a stone; in other words, the theoretician of estrangement has
becomeanobjectofestrangement.Whilethisself/stonedoesnotevenhave
thefreedomofafreefall,writingseemstopreservealastmarginoffree-
dom,thatofrecordingafallthattheselfhasnotcausedandthatitcannot
stoporofgoingoffonatangent.Theimageofthestonethatcanlightalan-
ternandrecorditsownfallispainfullyimprobable.Thisstrainisvisiblein
anotherimageoftheeffectsoftherevolutiononSaintPetersburg’sinhabi-
tants,whichfitswelltheauthorofSentimentalJourney:‘‘amanwhoseinsides
have been torn out by an explosion, but he keeps on talking’’ (ibid.). As
these images suggest, Shklovsky’s autobiographical persona is singularly
disconcertinginSentimentalJourney.Thisisnot,asMarxistcriticshavecom-
monlyaccusedtheFormalists,becauseheishidingbehindhisdevicesand
8
carefully constructed persona. Even as he reveled in the ingenuity of his
disguises,Shklovskywasactuallydivulgingthewell-keptsecretsofhisfake
personas. In Sentimental Journey, he took his masks off, one by one, aban-
doned his fake passports, and signed with his own name. As much as it
doesatravelogueoracollectionofimpressionsandbonsmots,Shklovsky’s
memoirsrecallsatrialdeposition.
DepositionandAutobiography:AnEstrangingEncounter
InhisintroductiontoSentimentalJourney,SidneyMonas(1970:xxxvii)briefly
suggestedthat‘‘thereis,inShklovsky’sstatementaboutthewar,something
that suggests he is preparing a case before an imagined revolutionary tri-
bunal,exculpatinghimselffromthechargesofchauvinism.’’Monasdidnot
pursuetheidea,deeming‘‘theother‘case’he[Shklovsky]alsoprepares,the
casestudyforposterity,’’‘‘moreinteresting’’(ibid.:xxxvii).Idisagree.While
theaddresstoposterityisacommonplaceofmemoirs,theaddresstothe
BolsheviktribunalsinglesoutShklovsky’sbrandofautobiographicalwrit-
ing.Shklovsky(1970[1923]:184–85)himselfrepeatedlyproposedthetrial
8. One of the many contemporary examples of such accusations is Georgii Gorbachev’s
assessmentofthedarlingof Formalistnarrativestudies,skaz:‘‘Themostimportantthing
inthe‘skaz’styleisthepossibilitytohideone’sauthorialfacefromthepublic,toexpress
someofone’sauthorialideas,whilenottakingresponsibilityforthempersonally’’(quotedin
Eikhenbaum1927:288).