Victor Shklovsky (b. 1893) was a Icading figurc in the school of literary and linguistic theory known as Russian formalism, which flourished in the immediately pre- and post-revolutionary period in Russia. Two groups of scholars and studcnts wcrc involvcd-thc Moscow 1 jllguistic Circlc, whosc most famous mcmbcr was R()man Jak()bs()n (scc bcl()w, pp. 31-61) and thc Opaya.z group bascd in St Pctcrsburg, which was m()rc intcrcstcd in litcrary criticism, and whose leader was Shklovsky. I3oth brroups wcrc c()mmittcd to thc study and support of experimental, avant-garde litcraturc and art. Shklovsky's 'Art as Technique', first publishcd in 1917, was dcscribcd by Horis f:ikhenbaum, another member of the ()p(~yaz gr()UP, as 'a kind ()f mallifcst() ()f thc I;()rmal Mcthod'. Shkl()vsky's cssay bcgills with a p()lcmic against thc Symb()list sch()ol ()f poets and critics, cspccially thcir chicf thcorctical spokcsman Potcbnya. Russian symbolism was evidently not identical to the French symbolist movement ofthe late nineteenth century, which had such a profound effect on English and American modernist writing, though they clearly had a common origin in Romantic poetics. In any case, it is not necessary to be familiar with Russian symbolism in order to appreciate the more fonnal, less idealist character of Shklovsky's approach tq the question of what makes poetry poetic. In a significant asidc, Shklovsky praiscs anothcr writcr, Jakubinsky, for producing 'onc of thc first cxamplcs of scicntiflc criticism'. This drcam (or mirage), of making the study of literature an exact science, inspired the tradition that ran from the Russian formalists, via the Prague School of the 1930s, to the exponents of 'structuralism' in Western Europe in the 1960s and 70s. It had its equivalent in England and America in the efforts of the New Critics, from I. A~ Richards to W. K. Wimsatt, to make literary criticism a more precise and objective discipline. There is an obvious parallel between Shklovsky's distinction between poetic and prose language and I. A. Richards' distinction between emotive and referential language (see I. A. Richards, 'The Two Uses of Language', Section 9 in 20th Century Ljterary Critjcism). c Shklovsky's cruciaIly important concept of defamiliarization (ostranenje, 'making strange') is, however, essentiaIly structuralist in that it treats literary techniquet as Saussure had treated language, as a 'system of differences'. What startles üs into a new way of seeing is a new way of saying, and we can only appreciate the novelty of that against what is habitual and expected in any given context. " The focus of Russian formalists upon the medium rather than the message of

r' . 'i::c:Cr Art as techniqut' I Scc Ruma,n Jakubson, 'Ihc Mctaphoric and Mctonymic Polcs', bclow pp. 57-61. l:!ritish philusophcr(1820-1903).

Pott:bnya'~ c,()nclll~j()n, whi<.'h can b<.' t()rmlllale<.1 'r()t:lry t:quals imagery,' gave ri~c l() Ihc wh()lc th<..()ry thal 'i/\1agl.'ry l.'(IUal~ sy/\1boli~m,' lhallhc image may serve a~ Ihc invariabl<: (Jr<:Ji<.'atc ()r vari()lis subj<:<.'l~, ('l.hi~ c()nclusi()n, because it <:xrrcs~<:<.1 idca.'i si/\1il¡¡r t() th<: lhc()ri<:~ ()r tht: Symb()li~l~, inlrigut:d s()me of tht:ir l<:adil1g r<:prc~enl¡¡liv<:8.-A11Jrt:y llely, Mert:zhkov8ky a11J hi8 'ett:rnal c()mpanions' a11d, i11 tact, formcd the basis of the theory of Symbolism.) The c()nclusio11 st<:m~ p¡¡rtly trom tht: fact th¡¡l Potebnya did not disti11guish between the languagc of pOt:lry a11d thc languagt: of prosc. Consequently, he ignored the fact that (here are t\\.o aspects of imagery: imagt:ry as a practical means of thi11ki11g, as a means of placingobjects within ca(egories; and imagery as poetic, as a mea11s of rei11forcing an impression. I shall clarify with an example. I want (o attract the attention of a young child Who is ea(ing bread and butter and ge(ting the butter on her fi11gers. I call, 'Hey, butterfingers!' This is a fig\lre of speech, a clearly prosaic trope. NoW a diffcren( example. The child is playing wjth my

glas~c~ ~íld'dri)rs-(I~m. [ call, 'Hcy, but(crfi11gers!'K This figure of ~pccch is ¡¡ P()~(i9,(!.~)-pc:. (Ill th<.' tir8! <:xample, 'bU(lerfi11gers' i~ /\1ct()nymic; in the scc()nd, meiáph()ric-bul this i~ 11()( whal I W¡¡l1l I() slrcss.)" P()ctic im¡¡!1;cry i~ a mC¡II1~ ()f cr<:¡¡till!l; Ihc slr()l1g<:8l r()~siblc imrrcssion. .As a l'I("th()J il is, Jcr<:11Jillg lir(11l il,.. rllr(J()s<:, 11(,!ilil('.r m()r<: Il()r I<:s.\¡ (,.~~;~!} (¡lllcr r()<:ti(,. l<:ch11i4l1CS; il i.\¡ Ilcilhcr l'I()re 11()r I(".'i... l!ft'c(.:l¡V<: i1l;!I\ ()rJi11;tI)' ()r 11cg;iliv<: p¡¡r¡¡II<:li~m, c()mp¡¡ri.'i()II, r<:pl'tili()11, b¡¡I¡¡IlCCli ~trllclur<:, hypcrbol<:, thc c()mm()llly ¡¡(.:ccptcd rhet()ric¡¡1 tigllr(,.s. ¡¡11d ;III th()'it! mcth()J~ which cmrh¡¡siz<: lh<: cm()tÍ<)II¡¡1 etl"<:(.:1 ()f ¡¡Il cxrrcs~ioll {iIICIllJi11g w(),\ls (ir <:VC11 ¡¡rticlll¡¡t<:J s()u11ds).(1 13l11 p()<:(ic im¡¡gcry ()Illy <:xl<:r11ally rcscmble~ <:ither th<: ~t()ck i/\1¡¡g<:ry ()f fablt:s and b¡¡ll¡¡d~ or thi11ki11g i11 images-<:.g., the examplc i11 Ovsyaniko-Kulikovsky's Langual!e aJ/4 /Jrt i11 which a little girl calls a b,all a littlt: W!:1~.~!:!:!}eJQ!l,- Poeric imagery-ls.butol1e()f the dcvites ofpOC(ic languagt:. Prosc imagcry is a means of abstraction: a littlc watcr/\1elon in~tcad of a lamr~hadc, or a little watermelon insteaJ of ¡¡ he¡¡d, is ollly thc abSlr¡¡cti()11 of one ()f the objt:ct's ch¡¡racteristics, that of rol1ndllCSS. It i~ IlO (,litterel1t fr()m s¡¡yillg (hat th<: hcaJ ¡¡nd thc melo11 are bOlh r()und. 'l'hi." is wh¡¡t is m<:;¡llt, but il h¡¡s no(hillg t() do with p()etry.

I

, J 'hl: l;¡w ()r thc l:col1omy or crl:;¡tivl: l:t'I()rt is ;¡lso gel1l:ralJy accl:ptl:J. ll-lerbcrt] Spencerj¡ wrote: On scckillg for somc cllle to thc law lIl1dcrlying these current maxims, wc may Sl:l: shaJowed torth in many or them, the importance of cconomizing the reaJer)s or the hearer's attention. To so present ideas that they may be apprl:hendl:d with thc Icast possiblc mental cffort, is the dcsidl:ratllm t()w¡¡rds which m()~t ()r thl: rulc~ above quoted p()il1t. ... 11l:l1cl:, c¡¡rryil1g ()lIt thl: ml:t¡¡ph()r that 1¡¡l1gll¡¡gl: i:; thl: vl:hicll: of thought) thcrl: :;l:l:m:; rl:a~()11 t() think th¡¡t il1 ¡¡IJ casl::; thl: t'riction and incrtia of the vehicle deduct from it:; ctficicl1cy; and that in composition, the chief) if

not thc s()lc thin~ t() hc d(mc, is t() rcdllcc this tricti()n and inertia to the smallcst p()ssihlc am()lint.IO And R[ichardl Avcnarills: If a soul possess inexhaustihle strcngth, then, of course, it would be indifferent to how much might be spent from this inexhaustible source; only the necessarily expended time would be important. But since its forces are limited, one is led to expect that the soul hastens to carry out the apperceptive process as expediently as possible-that is, with comparatively the least expenditure of energy, and, hence, with comparatively the best result. Petrazhitsky, with only one reference to the generallaw of mental effort, rejects [William] Jamcs's thc()ry ()f thc physical hasis ()f cmoti()n, a thc()ry which contra- dicts his own. Evcn Alcxandcr Vcscl()vsky acknowlcdgcd thc principlc of the economy of crcativc effort, a thcory espccially appealing in the study of rhythm, and agrced with Spcnccr: ' A satisfact(,ry stylc is prcciscly that style which dclivcrs thc ~rcatc.'il am()lillt ()f (h(,li~hl ill thc f"cwcst w()rds.' And Andrcy Bely, dcspitc

thc 1:lct Ihat ill his hc(lcr pa~c.'i hc ~avc nllmcr()lis cxamplcs ()f 'rough- cncd' rhythm II and (particlilarly in thc cxamplc.'i fr()m I~aratynsky) showcd the difficultics inhcrcnt in poctic cpithcts, als() th()u~ht it ncccssary t() spcak of the law ()f thc CC()J1()my (J crcativc cf1()rt in his h()()k I z-a hcroic cff()rt t() create a thc()ry of art hascd (m linvcrificd tact.'i fr()m anti4l1atcd sourccs, on his vast knowledge of thc tcchniqucs of poctic crcativity, and on Krayevich's high school physics text. These ideas about the economy of encrgy, as well as about the law and aim o~~~vity, are perhaps true in their application to 'practic~l~ langI,Jage~ ~e, however, cxtcnded to poetic langI,Jagc. Ilcncc thcy do not distingI,Jish p.r2P=- ~~-~een the laws of practicallangI,Jage and the laws o(po~tic langI,Jag~. The fact that Japancsc poetry has sounds not f()und in conversational Japancse was hardly thc first factual indication of thc dif1crcnccs bctwcen poctic and cveryday languagc. Lco Jakubinsky has obscrvcd that thc law of thc dissimilation of liquid sounds does not apply to poctic langI,Jagc.13 This suggestcd to him that ~ lan~~e tolerated the admission ofhard-to-pronounce conglomerations of similar s6.üñds.lnh¡s articl'1;:one of the first examples of~cientific ¿rlt-iCJsiñ,.hCTndicates -¡;;ifüCt;;cly the contrast (I shall say morc about this point later) between the laws of poetic langI,Jagc and the laws of practical langtlage.14 We must, then, speak about the laws of cxpcnditure and economy in poetic langI,Jagc not on thc basis ()f an analobry with pr()sc, hut on thc basis of the laws of poctic languagc. If we start to cxamine thc gcncrallaws of pcrccpti()n, wc sec that as perception becomes habitual, it becomes automatic. Thus, for example, all of our habits retreat into the area of the unconsciously automatic; if one remembers the sensations of holding a pen or of speaking in a foreign langI,Jage for the first time and compares that with his feeling at performing the action for the ten thousandth time, he will agree with us. Such habituation explains the principIes by which,

.t~ t~.~

~...,... """

I

Shklovsky Arias le,1mique

jn ordin¡¡ry spéech) wc Icavc phr¡¡scs unfinjsht.d ¡¡nd words half cxpressed. In this proccss, idc¡¡lly rc:aljzcd iJI al~.c:br¡¡, thil1gs arl.: rL'placc:d by symbols. Complcte words arc l1ot cxprcssc:d in rapid spc:cch; thcir initial sounds arc barcly perccjved. Alcxandc:r Pogodif1 ()O"crs thc cxamplc: of a boy cof1sidcring thc scntence 'The Swíss nl()Uf1lains arl. bL'¡llItiflll) ín thc: fl)ml of a sc:ril:s of Ic(tcrs: 1; S, m, a, b.15 'I.his ch.lr¡¡ctl:ri.,;lil. ()r lhollb'h( f1o1 ()nly suggcsts thl: mC(hod of algcbra, bu~ I:vc:f1 pr()mpts Ihc: choicc: of sYll1bols (Icttcrs, c:spccially il1i(ii11 l~ttcrs), -Hy-t-h~-.- 'algcbri1il.:' m~tholl of lhollght Wl. i1ppr~llcnd ol>j~ct., ()nly as shapcs with jmpre-~j-s~ cxtC:l1sions; wc do n()l SL'e lhcm in Ihcir entircty bu( rather rccognjze them by (hc:ir mi1in l.h¡¡r:lctl.:ri~lics. Wl: sce lh(' Objccl i1S lhollgh i( were enveloped jn a si1ck. Wc: know wh¡¡( jl i~ by í(s cOn(ig.llr¡¡(jon, bll( Wl' sl:e only jts silhouette. The objcct, pcrceivcd thllS jn the mal1ncr of prose perccp(jon, tades and does not leave cven a first impressjon; ultjmatcly eyel1 {hc essence of what it was js forgot~en. Such perceptjon explajl1s why we taij to hear the prose word in jts en(jrety (see Leo Jakubinsky's artjclcl6) ¡¡nd) hcllce) \\'hy (along wjth other sljps of [he [onguc) we tajl [O pronounce jt. Thc procc!)s of 'algebriza[jon,: [~~ oye!:~ automatization of an object, permj(s the greatest economy

of perceptive effort. Ei{her objcc[s are assjgned only one proper feature-a number, for example= or cls~ th~y fllf1c[i()n ¡¡S thOllgh by f()rmllla anll do n()( ~vcn appcar in cognjtion: I W¡¡S cl~¡¡nil1p; ¡¡ ro()m ¡¡l1ll, ml.:i1llllcring ¡¡bOlll, ¡¡pproachcd (hc djval1 al1d collllln't rcm~mbcr whcth~r ()r not I h¡¡d dUSICd jt. Since thcse movemcn(s arc h¡¡bj[llal ¡¡nd lmC()nscjous) I collld not remember and felt (h¡¡t il W¡¡S impossibl~ to r~ml.mbcr-so (hat if I hall dlls(cd j( and turgot-that is, h¡¡d ¡ICII:J lll11.:0l1SCiollSly, thcl1 it wa~ thc samc as if I had not. If some conscjous persol1 had bccn wa(ching, {hcn [he fac[ could be established. If, however, no one was looking, or looking on unconsciously, jf the whole complex lives of many people go 01} unconsciously, then such lives are as if they had never been.17 And so Ijfe is rcckoned as. nothing. Habitualization devours works, clothes, flIrnj{Ur~, one's wjf"c, ¡¡nd thc tcar of war. 'If the Wholc complex Ijves of many p~opll: b'() ()n lmC()J1Sl.iollsly, Ihcn SllCh livcs arc as if thcy h¡¡d f1cvcr bcen.' And ¡¡rt ~xísls th¡¡l ()'1C: 111¡¡y rl:c()Y~r lhl: ..'l.'ISi1tion of lifc; jl I:xists to makc onc fccl thin"rs, to m¡¡kc th~ stonc S(()I~y. 'l.h~ pllrp()SC ()f art is to impart thc scnsation of things as thcy are pcrceivcll and not as they i1re known. :Ih.t?-l~-<;.Qpiqy.e-oLarJ is to make objccts 'unfamili¡¡r " to m¡¡ke forms diffl.cult tQ increase.the-.1lifflculty and Icngth of pcrception b~caus~ thc proccss of perception is.an ae~tQ~-Uc end in i{sclf¡¡nd mllst bc prolongell. Ar( is a lpay ofexpL'ri,'11cing (hL' artfulness ofan objL".',. the object is n(J( imp()rtant.' 'rhe rangc ()f poctic (¡¡rtistic) work l'xtl.nds trom th~ sensory t() thc cognitive, from i)ol:try \o pros~, fi-Olll thl: CUlICrl.:lc to {hc ¡¡bstr,ll;l: from C.:I.:I"V;lntcs' Don

( Thc tr¡lIlslatiol1 of this crucial al1d {)ficl1 quotcd ~cl1tel1cc by Lel11on and Rcis has beel1 criticized by Robcrt Schotcs, who offcr~ his OWI1 vcrsiol1: 'III ¡¡rt, it i~ our cxpcricncc of thc proccs~ of col1structiol1 that COUl1ts. l1ot thc lil1ishcd product.. .).,rncluralism i/I,i4jerllluft (1974}.R~81"

, \ II Shklovsky A~ as t~~~.'l-~ Quixote-scholastic and poor nobleman, half consciously bearing his humiliation in thc court of thc dukc-to thc br()ad bllt cmpty I)on Quixote of Turgenev; tr()m (:harlemag¡lC t() thc namc 'king' lin Russian '(:harlcs' and 'king' obviously derive from thc samc root, ~.()r(¡{I. .I.hc mcaning ()f a work broadcns to the extent that arttlllness and artistry diminish; thlls a tablc symb()lizcs morc than a poem, and a provcrb m(Jrc than a tablc. (:(Jnsc4l1cntly, thc Icast sclf-c()ntradictory pa~. ()f

Potcbnya's thc()I). is his trcatmcnt ()f thc t;lhlc, which, tr()m his point ofview, he investigatcd th(Jr()ughly. IJlIt sincc his thc(,ry did n()t pr()\'idc t()r 'ex'Pressive' works of art, he could not finish his h()(Jk. As wc kn()w, N()/es ()II /he Theory oJ Li/era/ure was published in 1905, thirtccn ycars attcr Potebnya's death. Potebnya himself completed only thc scction ()n thc tablc.lx After we see an object several times, we begin to recognize it. The .-Qbiect is -- in front of us and \\.e know about it, but we do not see itl9-hence we cannot -say--anYthing significant about it. Art removes objects from the automatism...g.f. pel:~~Q!!.o!lin se\,eral ways. Here I want to illustrate a way used repeatedly by I~eo Tolstoy, that \\Titer \\'ho, for Merezhko\'sky at least, seems to present things as if he himself saw them, saw them in their entirety, and did not alter them. IQIs!9Y makes the familiar seem strange by not naming the familiar objec.t~ He describes an objcct as if he werc sccing it ti)r the first timc, an event as if it..lVere happening tor th(.' first timc. In dcscrihin!-, s()mcthing he av()ids the accepted naiñ-es-of its parts and instcad namcs c<)rrcsp()nding parts ()f ()thcr ()bjccts. For example, in 'Shame' Tolstoy 'detamiliarizcs' the idea of t1ogging in this way: 'to ~trip people who have brokcn the law, to hurl them to the tloor, and to rap on their bottoms with switchcs,' and, ati(.'r a ti:w lincs, 't() lash ab()ut ()n thc naked buttocks.' Thcn hc rcmarks: Just why precisely this stupid, savage means of causing pain and not any other-why not prick the shoulders or any part of the body with needles, squeeze the hands or the feet in a vise, or anything like that? I apologize for this harsh example, but it is typical of Tolstoy's way of pricking the conscience. The familiar act ()f tlogging is made unfamiliar both Qy the dc~<,:~!ptjon and by thc pr()p()sal tl) chang(.' its ti)rm with()lIt changing its nal~ 'í'olst()y uscs this tcchni4l1c (,f 'd(.'f;lmili¡¡rizali(,n' c<mst¡¡ntly. .I.hc narrator of 'Kholstomcr,' ti)r cxamplc, is a h()rsc, and it is th(.' h()rs(."s p()int (If vicw (rather than a person's) that makes the content of the story sccm untamiliar. Herc is how the horse regards the institution of private pr()perty: I understood well what thcy said about whipping and Christianity .But then I was absolutely in the dark. What's the meaning of 'his own,' 'his colt'? From these phrases I saw that pc()ple th()ught there was some sort ()f c()nnccti()n bctwccn mc and thc st¡¡hlc. f\t thc timc I simply c()uld not undcrstand thc connectiun. Only much latcr, whcn thcy scparatcd me from the other horses, did I begin to understand. Uut even then I simply could not see what it meant when they cal\ed me 'man's property.' The words 'my horsc' rcfcrrcd to mc, a living h()rsc, and sccmed as strange to me as the words 'my land,' 'my air,' 'my water.'

Shklovsky Art as technique

But the words madc a strong impression on me. I thought about them constal1tly, and only aftcr the most diverse experiences with people did I understand, tlnally, what they meant. They meant this: In life pcople are guided by words, 110t by deeds. It's 110t so much that thcy 10ve the possibilily of doil1g or 1101 doil1g som(;thil1g as jt js th(; possjbiljt)' of speakil1g wilh words, agrecd on among themsclves, about various topjcs. SlIch ar(; Ihc word,'i 'my' al1d 'mil1c,' whicf¡ If¡cy apply to dificr(;llt th~~.. ~!(;alllr(;s, obj(;CI~, alld (;V(;ll I() 1.ll1d, p(;opl(;, al1d )1()r~~.~.:-'I'h(;y agr~J])al ()Jlly (;I1C may say \mil1c' ab()UI Ihis, thal, or the othcr thing. And the onc Who says 'mill(;' ab()UI thc grcatcst l1umbcr of thil1gs is, accordil1g t6thc gaml.: whicf¡ Ihl.:y'vc a~.rc(;d lo amol1g' thcmsclvcs, thc OI1C thcy consjder If¡~ (11()St l1appy. I dol1)1 know thc p()il1t ()f all this, but it's truc. l"or a 1()l1g limc I trícd lo (;xplain it lo mysclf in «.:rms of somc kind (;f -~eal gain, bllt I had 10 r<.:jcct (hal <.:xplanati()n becaus(; il was wrol1g.

l\1any of thosc, t()r instaI1Cl., Who called me thcjr own never rode on me-although others did. Al1d so wjth those who fed me. Then again, the coachman, the veterinarians, and the outsiders in general trcated me kindly, yct thoSC Who callcd me th<.:ir own did not.-!!!~!-~~~~~g widel1cdthe SCopC of my observations, I satjsfied myself that the noti~!! '~'not on)y in relation to us horses, has no othcr b.~~is ~~n a n~rrow numan instjnct which is called a sense ofor right to prjvate prope!'tY. A man says 'this hous<.: is minc' al1d nevcr livcs in it; hc only worries.about its constructjol1 al1d llpk<.:ep. A mcrcf¡ant says 'my shop,' 'my dry goods sf¡or,' t'or il1stanc<.:, al1d docs no1 cv<.:n wcar clothes made trom the better clolh h<.: kc<.:ps ill his OWI1 shop. '1'11l.r<.: arl. pcoplc wJ¡() call a Iracl of land thl.:¡r OWI1) but Ih<.:y ncvcr sct cycs ()n il ;¡nd 11l.Vl.:r (¡¡kl. ¡¡ s(r()ll ()11 it. '1'l1(;rl.: ¡¡rl.: pcoplc who call othcrs IJ¡(;ir own, y<.:1 I1(;VCr S(;(; IJ¡(;m. And Ihc wholc relationshir betwccn them is that the so-callcd 'own<.:rs' Ircat thc oth<.:rs uniustly. Thrre are people who call Women their own, or their 'wjves', but their WomCI1 liv<.: with oth~r m~l1. f\l1d r~oplc slrivc 110t l'or th~ good il1 life, but for goods they cal1 call thcir own. I am now convinccd that this is tJ1e essential difi'erence between people and Ollrselv<.:s. And tJ¡eret'ore, 1101 ~v<.:n consid<.:ril1g thc otJ¡cr ways in wJ¡ícf¡ wc ar<.: SUp(;rio'r, blll l"onsid<.:ril1g jUS( IJ¡¡S 011<.: virlu<.:, w~ can " brav~ly claim to stal1d l1igl1er thal1 men on th<.: Jadd~r of living creatures. j1'h~ actions of men, at least those with whom I have had dealings, are gujded by lvords-oUrs, by deeds. The horse js killcd bcforc th<.: end of the story , bllt thc manner of the narrative, jt technjque, does not change: Much latcr thcy rllt Scrrllkhovsky's body, whjch had experjenced the worlu) whicJ¡ hau (;at<.:n and drllnk, illtO thc groul1d. Thcy COllld protitabty scl1d n(;ithcr his hiu~, l1or J¡is tlesh, nor hís bones anywhere. But sjnce his dcad body, wJ¡ich had gone abol,tt jQ.~e wor!9.",f?r." twenty

Shklovsky Art as technique

years, was a great burden to everyone, its burial was only a superfluous ¡' embarrassment for the people. For a I()ng time no ()ne had needed him; for a I()ng time hc had been a burden ()n all. But ncvertheless, the dead who buried thc dcad f()und it nccessary to dress this bloatcd b()dy, which immediatcly hcgan t() r()t, in a g()()d unifilrm and g()()d ho()ts; to lay it in a g()()d ncw coftill with ncw tasscls at thc f(lur

corncrs. thcll to rlacc this IlCW coftill ill JIl()thcr (If IcJd Jlld shir it t(1 Moscow; thcrc to cxhumc ancicnt h(mcs alld at just that Sr(lt, t(1 hiJc this rutrcfyillg hody, swarlllillg with lllag~(lls, ill its IlCW ullif(lrlll allJ clcall h()(IIS, allJ t(1 c()Vcr it ()Vcr c()mplctclv wilh Jirt. l'hus wc scc that at thc CIlJ (If thc Stllry .1(llstoy C(mtillllcs to uSc thc tcchllique cvcn th()ugh thc m()ti\'ati()Jl t()r il Ithc rCaS(11l f(lr its lisci is g(lnc. III 'rJ;ar-al'i~Pea(:e .1(llst(ly uscs thc sJmc tcchIli4UC ill dcscrihillg wholc hJttles JS if ~íles W~()IllClhill~ IlCW. .I'hcsc Jcscrirtiolls arc tIlO hm~ tll 4uotc; it w()uld bc ncccssary to cxtract J c(lllsidcrahlc rJrt of thc f()ur-volumc nI)vci. But Tolstoy uses the same method in describing the drawing ro()m and the theater: The middle of the stagc consistcd of Ilat hoards; hy the sides sto()d painted pictures rcrrcscnting trecs, alld at thc hJck a lincn cl()th was stretched d()wn to the Iloor boards. Maidens in red b()dices and white skirts sat on the middle of the stage. One, very fat, in a white silk dress, sat apart on a narrow bench to which a green pasteboard box was glued tr()m hchind. Thcy wcrc all singing somcthing. Whcn thcy had finishcd, thc mJidcll ill whitc Jrrr()Jchcd thc rromrtcr's hox. A man in silk with tight-fitting pJnts ()n his tat legs arrroachcd hcr with a plumc and hcgan to sing Jnd sprcJd his Jrms iJ1 dismay. 'rhc mJn iJ1 thc tight pants finishcd his SOJ1g Jhmc; thcJ1 thc girl sang. ¡\ficr that hoth rcmaiJ1cd silent JS thc musil. rcs()uJ1Jcd; anJ Ihc lllaJ1, ()hvi(lusly wailillg t(1 hcgiJ1 siJ1ging his part \vith hcr JgJin, hcgJJ1 t() rull his fillgcrs ()\,cr thc hJJ1d ()f thc girl in the white dress. They finishcd their s()ng togethcr, and everyone in the theater began to clap and sh()ut. But the mcn and women on stage, who rcprescJ1ted I()vcrs, stJrtcd t() h()w, smiliJ1g JJ1d rJising their haJ1ds, In the sccond act there were picturcs representing monuments and openings in the linen cloth representing the moonlight, and they raised IJmr shadcs ()J1 J framc. As thc musiciJJ1s started to rlay the bass horn 'I JJ1d countcr-hass, a largc Ilumhcr of pc()rlc ill hlack maJ1tlcs pourcd onto 'I the stagc Ir()m right aJ1d Icfi. 'l'hc pcoplc, with somcthing likc daggcrs in .! their hands, started to wave their arms. Then still more people carne ¡j running out and began to drag away the maiden who had been wearing a " white dress but who now wore one of sky blue. They did not drag her "i off immediately, but sang with her for a I()ng timc before dragging her away. Three times they struck on something metallic behind the side , scenes, and evcryonc got down on his knces and hegan t() chant a prayer. It Sevcral timcs all of this activity WJS iJ1tcrrurtcd hy cllthusiastic sh()uts from thc spectators.

Shklovsky

4.11 as technique

The third act ¡s described: But suddenly a storm blew up. Chromatic scales and chords of diminished sevenths were heard in the orcheslra. Everyone ran about and again they dragged one of the bystanders behind the scenes as the curtain fell. In the fourth act, 'There was somc sort of devil who sang, waving his hands, until thc boards wcrc moved OU( from under him and he dropped doWn.20 In Re.\u".ecli()1I Tolstoy describes (he city al1d the court in the same way; he uscs a !;imilar tcchl1iquc il1 \Krcu(zcr Sol1ata' when hc describes marriage-'Why, I if pcoplc hayc an atlil1ity 01' sOl1l!;, I1IliS( they slccp (oge(her?' Uut he did not I dct¡II11jliari:t,1: 0111y (hoSC thil1gs III: Slll:l:rl:d i1t: Pil:rre stood up from his new coI1lrades al1d madI: his way betwl:en thc l'amptires to tlll: o(ller sidc of thc roaJ whcrc, jt scl:mcd, thc captivc s01diers wert held. rll: wal1ted to talk with thcm. l'he French sentry stoppl:d him ()11 (hc roaJ and ordl:rcd him l(j retum. Pierre did so, but 110( (0 the camptirl:, nol to lIis comradcs, bu( to an abandoned,

unhamessed carriage. On the ground, near the wheel of the carriage, he sat cross-legged in the Turkish fashion, and lowered his head. He sat motionless for a long time, thinking. More than an hour passed. No one disturbed him. Suddenly he burst out laughing with his robust, good natured laugh-so loudly that the men near him looked around) surprised at his conspicuously strange laughter. 'Ha, ha, ha,' lallghed Pierrc. And he bcgan to talk to himself. 'The s()ldicr djJII)( allow I1II: l(j pa,~s. l'lIl:y l'auglll I1II:, barrl:J I1II:. Mc-mc- I1IY iI1lI1lortal soul. rla, ha, ha,' hl: laughed with tl:ars starting in his eyes. Pierre glanceJ at the sky) into the depths of the departing) playing stars. ' And all this is mine, all this ¡s in me, and all this is I,' thought Pil:rre. ' And all this they caught and put in a plankl:d enclosure.' I-le smiled and went off to his comrades to lie down to sleep.21 Anyone who knows Tolstoy can find several hundred such passages in his work. His method of seeing things out of their normal context is also apparent in his last works. Tolstoy described the dobrmas and rituals hc attacked as if they wl:rl: linfamiliar) substituting everyday meanings tor the customarily religious meanings of the words common in church ritual. Many persons were painfully wounded; they considerl:d it blasphl:my to presl:nt as strange and monstrous what they acccptcd as sacrcd. Thcjr rcacti()n was due chief1y to the technique through whjclll'olstoy pcrccived and reported his environment. And after turning to what he had long avoided) Tolstoy tound that his perceptions had unsettled his faith.

Thc tcchniquc of dcfamiliarization is not ToIstoy)s aJonc. I citcd Tolstoy bccausc his work is gcncrally known. Now, haying cxplaincd rhc narurc of this techniquc, let us try t() determine th(,' arpruximatc limits uf its appliL'atiull. J pcrsullally 1\:l:1 that dcj'amiliarizati()n is jound almost cvcrywhl:rc jorm is found. In othcr wofd~~cthc difi~tí(;.'c'cbetwcen

Shklovsky

Potebnya's point of view and ours is this: An image is not a permanent referent for those mutable complex.ities of life which are revealed through it; its purpose is not to make us perceive

meaning, but to create a special perception of the object-it creates a 'vision' of the object instead (if serving as a means for knowing it.

The purpose of imagery in crotic art can bc studicd evcn more accurately; an \ erotic object is usually prcsentcd as if it werc scen for the first time. Gogol, in 'Christmas Evc,' pr()vidcs thc following cxamplc: I Ilcrc hc appr()achcd hcr m()rc c]()scly, c()lIghcd, smilcd at hcr, t()lIchcd hcr plump, harc arm with his fingcrs. and l:xprcsscd himsl:lf in a way that showl:d both his cunl1il1g and his c()ncl:it. , And what is this you havc, magnificcnt S()]okha?' and having said this, he jumped back a ]ittlc. '\\11at? An arm, Osip Nikiforovich!' she answered. 'Hmmm, al1 arm! He, he, he!' said thc sl:crctary cordially, satisficd with his bcginning. He wandcred about the room. , And what is this you have, dearest Solokha?' he said in the same way, having approached her again and grasped her light1y by the neck, and in the very same way he jumped back. , As if you don't see, Osip Nikiforovich!' answered Solokha, 'a neck, and on my neck a necklace.' 'Hmm! On the neck a necklace! He, he, he!' and the secretary again wandered ahollt thc r()()m, rllhbing his hands. 'And what is this y()U havl:, il1c()mparahll: S()lI,kha?' ...lt is nI)t kn()wn to what the sccretary would strctch his long fingcrs now. And Knut Hamsun has the following in 'Hul1gcr': 'Two white prodigies appeared from beneath hcr blousc.' Erotic subjects may also be prcscnted figurativcly with the obvious purpose of leading us away from their 'recognition.' Hence sexual organs are referred to in terms of lock and key22 or quilting tools23 or bow and arrow, or rings and marlinspikes, as in thc Icgend of Stavyor, in which a marricd man does not recognize his wifc, who is disguiscd as a warri()r. Shc pr()poscs a riddlc: 'Remembcr, Stavyor, do you rccall How we litt1c ones walkcd to and fro in thc strcct? You and I togcther somctimcs playcd with a marlinspike- You had a silver marlinspike, But I had a gilded ring? I found myself at it just now and then, ,+ But you fell in with it cvcr and always.' Says Stavyor, son of Godinovich, '\\11at! I didn't play with you at marlinspikcs!' Thl:11 Vasilisa Mikulichna: 'S() hc says. Do you rcmcmbl:r, Stavyor, do you rccall, Now must you know, you and I together learned to "'

~!'c "",' iw , ,i

Shklovsky Art as technique

Mine was an ink-well ()f silvcr, AllJ y()Ur~ a pcn ()f g()IJ? Hut 1 just moi~teneJ it a littlc now and then, And I ju~t moi~tcneJ it l'vcr and always.'24 111 a JiOcrcl1t vcr~i()11 of thc Ic¡.:.cI1J WI.: linJ a key t() thc riJdlc: 11l'rc the tormidablc CI1V()y Vasilyushka I{aiscd Itl'r skirts to thc vcry l1avcl, ¡\nd thcl1 thl' yolll1g Stavyor, s()n ()f (.iodilluvich, RCC()¡'r¡lizcd hcr gildcd ring ...2S But dcl¡lmiliarizatiol1 is not only a tcchnique 01' the crotic riddlc-a technique of euphemism-it is also the basis and poim of all riddles. Every riddle pretends .to show its subject cither by words which specify or d~scribe it but which, during the telling, do not seem applicablc (thc type: 'black and white and 'red'-read- all ovcr)' or by meal1s of odd bllt imitative ~ounds ("Twas brillig, and the slithy toves/l)id gyrc and gimblc il1 thc wabc'(I).2(¡ Evcn crotic imagcs not intendcd as riddles are defamiliarized ('boobies,' 'tarts,' 'piccc,' ctc.). In popular imagcry thcre is generally something equivalem to 'tramplil1g thc grass' al1J 'brcakin!,' thl' g1ll'ldcr-rosc.' Thc tcchniquc of dcfamiliariz- ¡llioll is abs()lutl'ly l'll'ar il1 tltc.. wiJcsrrc..aJ imagl'-a m()tif of crotic aOcctation- in whil'lt a bc..ar .111J ()(hl'r willl bcasts (or a c.lcvil, wi(h a diOcrcl1t rcason fi)r 11()llrccogni(ion) do not rl'l'()gnizc a man.27

'I.he lack of rccognition in thc f()ll()wjng talc is quitc typical: A pl'aS;ll1t wa~ ploWil1!,' a ficld with a picbalJ Inar~. A bcar approachcd him al1d askcd, .Unclc, what's madc this marc picbald for you?' 'I did the piebalding myself.' 'But how?' 'Let me, and 1'11 do the same for yoll.' Thc bc;¡r ¡Igrccd. Thc peasant ticd his fcct t()gct11er with a ropc, took thc pl()ughshare t...om thc two-wheclcd plough, hC¡ltcd it on thc firc, and ;¡pplicd it t() his t)¡¡nk~. 11l' m;¡dc.. thc bear picbald by ~c()rching his fur c.i()wn to thc.. hidl' with tltc h()1 pl()uglt.'iharc. 'I'he m¡111 lInticd thc bcar , \\'hich WCJlt of]. ¡¡llc.1lay JoWI) IlnJl'r ¡¡ trl'l'. 1\ magpil' f)cw ¡It thc pcasal1t to pick at thc mcat ()n his shirt. J Ic caught hcr and br()kc ()nc of her Jl'gs. Thc m;¡gpie Ilcw off to perch in thc samc trec under which thc bc;¡r was lying. Thl'l1, aftcr thc magpie, a horscfly 1¡¡I1Jcc.l 011 thc marc, ~at c.lOWI1, al1d bl'gan lu bitc. l'hc pl'a~am caught thc t)y, took ¡¡ stick, shovcJ it up its rl'ar, al1d )et it go. Thc l1y wem to thc trce whcrc thc bear and th\c' magpic werc. Thcre all thrce sat. Thc pC;IS¡¡m'S wilc c..¡¡ml' t() bril1g his dinl1cr to thc ficld. ')'hc man and his wilc linishcJ thcir c.lil111Cr ill thc li.csh air, and hc bcgan t() wrcstJc with hcr on tJ1c grollnd.

" Thc quotation i~ from thc po cm 'J..bl'rwo¡;ky' in l.cwis Carroll'~ 'I"fIJII¿l#Iih( LIJIJJ:in't!CíásS; and /ph((/ /Ili(( ¡;/II lid //¡(n' (1872).

Shklovsky

The bear saw this and said to the magpie and the fly, 'Holy priests! The peasant wants to pichald s()me()nc again.' The magpic said, 'N(), hc wants t() brcak s()mc()nc's Icgs.'

The fly said, 'No, he wants to shovc a stick up someonc's rump.'2¡¡ The similarity of tcchnique herc and in .r()lstoy's 'Kholstomcr,' is, I think, obvious. Quite oftcn in litcraturc thc scxual act itsclf is dcfamiliarized; for example, the Decamer()/l rcfcrs t() 'scrapil1g ()lIt a harrcl,' 'catchil1g nightingalcs,' 'gay wool- bcating work,' (thc last is l1()t dcvcl()pcd il1 thc plllt). I)cfamiliarization is oftcn used in describing thc scxllal ()rgans. A whole series of plots is based on such a lack of recognition; for example, in Afanasyev's I/ltimate Ta/es the entire story of 'The Shy Mistress' is based on the fact that an object is not called by its proper name-or, in other words, on a game of nonrecognition. So too in Onchukov's 'Spotted Petticoats,' tale no. 525, and also in 'The Bear and the Hare' from lntimale Ta/es, in which the bear and the hare make a 'wollnd.' Such constructions as 'the pestle and thc mortar,' or 'Old Nick and the infernal regions' (Decameron), are also examples of thc technique of defamiliariz- ation. And i~ my article on plot construction I writc about defamiliari~ati!>-n...in- psychólogical parallclism. 1-lcrc, thcn I rcpcat that thc pcrccption of disharmony miharm(mi()lIS C()f1tl:xt is imp(lrtal1t in paralll:lism. 'I.hl: pllrpOSC of parallcljsm, Ijkc thc gcl1cral pllrposl: (If imagcry, is t(1 tral1sf"cr thl: lIsllal pcrccptj(¡n oran obíc¿t jnto thc sphcrc of a I1l:W pcrccpti()l1-that js, to makc a lIniqllc.scma-nñC ffiOdificatjbl1. - --rn- StUdyTngpoctic specch jn its phol1ctic and Icxical strllcture a~ wcll as in jts charactcristic distrihllti()n ()f w()rJs al1J il1 thl: charactcristic thollght structures compoundcd from the words, wc fil1J cvcrywhl:rc thc artistic tradcmark-that is, we find material obviously created to remove the automatism of perception; the author's pu¡pose is to create the visjon which results from that deautomatized perception,~-~~-~reated 'artistically' so that its pcrccption js impeded and thc grcatcst po~sihlc cffcct is pr()dllccJ throllgh thc slll\\'ncss of thc pcrccption. As a result of this lingcril1g, the ohject is pcrccivcd rnlt in its extensjon in space, bllt, so to spcak, il1 its -~ol1til1l1ity,)ThllS 'pol:tic languagc' brjvcs satisfaction. According to Arist()tlc, poctic lal1gllagc mllst appcar strangl: and wondcrflll; and, in fact, it is ofil:11 actllally f(lrcign: thc SlIml:rial1 lISl:J hy thc Assyrians, thl: 14atin of Europe durjng thc Mjddlc Agl:s, thc Arabisms of thc Pcrsians, thc Old Bulgarian of Russian Ijtcrature, or the clcvated, almost litcrary language of folk songs. Thc commol1 archaisms of pol:tic lal1bTUagc, thl: il1tricacy of thc swcet new stylc [d()/ce sti/ IIU(Il'()1,2" thl: ohscurl: styll: or thl: la11gllagl: of Arnaut l)al1icl wjth the 'roughl:ncd' Ihartej forms which mal.e pr(l/lu/lciati()/l dijjjcu/t-thcsc arc used in much thc samc \\.ay. I.c() .Jakuhil1sky has Jl:monstratcd thl: principlc of phonetic .roughcning' ()f p()l:tic ]a11!{llagl: in thl: particlllar ca.'il: ()f thl: rcpctition or idcnt- jcal sounds. .rhc l~nbTUagc of poctry i¡¡, thl:n, a Jifiicult, roughc11C~. imp~-e!L- language. In '~-fcw spccial jnstanccs thc languagc of poctry approxjmatcs the -language of prose, but this does not violate the principlc of 'roughened' form-:--

Shklovsky Art as technique

l-[cr si~tcr was called Tatyana. l;'or thc;: first time wc;: shall Wiltully brigh(c;:ll (hc;: dc;:lil:ate Pages of a I¡ovel wi(h such a namc. wrotc Pushkil1. 'rhc u~ual poetic lal1guage f()r Pushkin's col1temporaries was the ~lcgal1t ~tyl~ ()f J)crz)¡avil1; bu( Pu~hkiJl'~ ~lyl~, b~causc;: it s~c;:m~d trivial thel1, was lil1C;:'Il)cclC;:dly diOicull f()r thc;:m. Wc;: ~)¡()uld r~member Lh~ C()IISL~rl1atiol1 ()f Pu~)¡kil1'~ col1lC;:mp()raric;:s ()vc;:r L)¡c;: vulb'arily of )¡is expressiol1s. Ilc used the popular lal1guag~ a~ a ~pecial dcvicc f()r prolol1brjl1g ancl1liol1, ju~t as hi~ col1tem- porari~s gcl1crally used Russial1 words in their usually French speech (see Toistoy's c;:xamples in War and Pe(t('f). Just 110W a ~li)) more c)¡aracteristic phenomenon is undc;:r way. Russian literary lal1guage, which was oribrjna))y foreign to I{ussia, has so permeated the language of the people that it has blended with their conversation, On the other hand, literature has now begun to show a tendency towards the use of dialects (Remizov, Klyuyev, Essel1il1, al1d othc;:rs,jO so ul1equal in talent and so alike in lal1guage, are intentiona))y provil1cíal) al1d of barbarisms (which gave rise to the Severyanin group31). And currently Maxim Gorky i~ changing his diction from the old literary language to the l1ew literary co))oquialism of Leskov.32 Q~ speech al1d lit~rary lal1g1,clagc have thc;:reby chal1g~d places (see the work of V.yach(.sl¡¡v Ival1()v all<l m;lny ()(hc;:r~). AI1<l

fiil¡llry) a I;lr(Jl1glcndc;:llcy, Icd by K)¡Ic;:onik()v, 1(! crc;:¡,«: a I¡L'W alld pr(Jp<:rlypo~tiL' 1;lllgllal:\e h¡¡~ C;:-~I!~!.B:~(!:..lo-!JlC lighl (Jf lhc;:sL' UL'vclopmc;:I1Ls w~ call dL'f¡nc;: poctry as (lItt'lluatedt!prtu~~t!:--~peech. Poetic spL'~¿h }~ fiJnnt'd .\"pt't'ch. Pros~ is (Jrdinary spe~ch-~col1omical, easy, propL'r, th(' g()uuc;:~s ()f pr()~~ Ide(t pr()s(t¡:1 i~ a goddcss of th~ accurate, facile type, of lhl. 'dirL'Cl' c;:xprc;:.~~iol¡ (Jf .¡ \../¡ilu. I ~)¡¡¡II di~cu:)s rollg/¡L'I1C;:d f()rm and retar- d¡¡Liol1 ¡¡S Lhc gc;:l1cral la/v ()f art al grc;:ater lc;:ngtll il1 an article on plot constructi()I1.33 Nevertheless, thepositiQQQ(those who urgetbe idea of the t;.~<?1:!°~Y of~~~:ti!;; el1ergy as somcthil1g whivh exi~(s il1 al1d even distingtlishes P9~tic la-~~ ~~c;:m~, at first glance, (C;:l1abl('tor (he rroblem 01 rhythm. Spel1c~r's description ofrhythiiiwoufd s~em (o b~ absolutcly incontestable: .Just as (he body in rec~iving a scri~s of varying concu~sions, must keep th~ muscl~~ rcady () mc~( (hc;: mosl vi()lcl1t ()f lh\..m, as l1ot kn()wil1g when such may com~: so, thc;: mil1d in rc;:cc;:ivil1g ul1an.al1gc;:d articulations, must keep its perspcctives active enough to rccognizc thc Icast easily caught sounds. And as, if the concussions recur in definite order, the body may husband its forces by adjusting the resistance needful for each concussion; so, if the ~y))ables be rhythmically arranged, the mind may economize its energies by anticipating the attention required for each syllable.34 'rhis apparcl1tly conclllsivc ()bscl"VatioJ¡ s\lflers from the common fa))acy, the contu~ion of thc laws of poctic and pr()~aic langllage. .n 1"e Phil()s()phy ()f Style Spel1r;;er failcd utterly to distinguish bctween them. g¿t }\h~thm rrt:lY'.ha"e two ..¡-.- -

Shklovsky Art as techniqUt

functions. The rhythm of prose, or of a work song like 'Dubinushka,' permits the members of thc work crew to do their nccessary 'groaning together' and also eases the work by making it automatic. And, in fact, it is casier to march With music than without it, and to march during an animatcd conversation is even easier, for the walking is donc unconsciously. Thus the rhythm of prose is an impo~tant a~tomatizing elcmcnt; thc rhythm ()f roetry is not. -T~~!~~~rfi!~ ~Vc-t no~~.singlc <;Ql\,1mQ Qfa-Gr~k-tcmplc !;ta11ds.cxact)yin its. proper order;

.Eocti~-!hythm is similarly dis()rdc!cd rhythm: Attcmrts t() systcmatizc.thcirrcgÚ::-- )árnícs havcbccn madc, and such attcmpts arc part of thc currcnt problcm in ~the th~ory of rhythm. lt is ()hvi()us that thc systcmati;t.ati()1l will not work, for ¡; reality the problem is not one of complicating the rhythm but of disordering the rhythm-a disordering which cannot be predicted. -~~o~!d ~e di~~rd.~~!,~j-2.f ~~~ -~ecome a convention, it would be ineffective as a deviceforllie rQ!lg~::. ~~!~-~l~~.age, But I will not discuss rhy1hm in more detail since I inteQd to write a book about it.3S

NOTES 1. Alexander Potebnya, I:; :;apis(}k p(} /e(}rii .dm.eslll1.'/i [N,,/e.' ,m /he 17Ie(}l). ,!r Lall,~lIa¡(fJ (Kharkov, 1905), p JR 2. l¡'iJ., r. ()7. J I)milf) ()vsy;lllik(I-K,llik(,vsky (IX.1.,-1(12{1). ;I h.;IJill~ 1{,ISsi;111 s(h(II;lr. W;IS ;ll1l.;lrlv (Olllributor t() M;lrxi~1 rcri()tli(;lls ;lntl ;I lilcr;lry c(mscf\.;llivl., ;1111;1~"l1isti( t(I\V;lrtls thc tlclihcr;ltcly mcan- inglc~s r()cms of thc I..uturi~t!;. I;.J. ",)/f. 4. Potcbnya, 1:; :;api.",l. P(} /e(}rii sl,l1'es",)s/i, p. J 14. 5.I¡'iJ.,p.291. (¡. I..y()d()r Iyutchcv (IH().1-IX7.1), ;I r"ct, ;lllt1 Ni(h"I;ls (j,,!(()1 (IH()()-IX52), ;I m;lstcr "f rrose fiction and ~atirc, arc mcnti(lncd hcrc bCC;lII!;C thcir h(llti li!;C of im;l!!cry cannr)t bc ;lcc()unted for by Potebnya's theory. Shklovsky is arguing that writcrs trcqucntly gain their effects by comparing the commonplace to the exceptional rather than vice versa. EJ. II(}/e. 7. This is an a1lusion to Vyacheslav lvanov's B(}r(}zd.)I i /IIe:;hi [Furr(}ws alld B(}ulldaries] (Moscow, 1916), a major statemcnl of Svmb()li!;t thcor,. I,.J. ",,/f. R The Russian tc"1 inv()lvcs a rlay ,In thc wo~d tor .hat,' c()ll()quial for .clod,' .duffcr: etc. Ed. 1I(}le. 9. Shklovsky is herc doing tWo things of major thcorctical importancc: (1) he argues that different techniques serve a singlc function, and that (2) no singlc tcchniquc is a1l-important. Thc sccond pcrmit~ thc I..ormali~t~ t() bc c()nccrncd with any and a1l litcrary dcvicc~; thc fir~t pcrmit~ them t() discu~s thc dcvicc!; fr()m ;I !;in!!lc CI'".'ii~tcnt thcorctical r()siti.,I1. 1;(1. ""/f. 10. Hcrbcrt Srencer, "f:¡'e Phil(}.,,)ph)l ,1S!J'/f 1(llumboldt I.ibrary, V()I. XXXIV; Ncw York, 1882), pp. 2-3. Shklovsky's quotcd rcfcrencc, in Russian, prc~crvcs thc idca ()f thc original but ~hortens it]. 11. The Russian :;alro4)1(}n~)I mean!; .madc difticult.' Thc suggcstiOl¡ i~ that p()cms with .ca~y' or smooth rhythms slip by unnoticed; pocms that arc difticult or .roughcncd' forcc thc rcader to anend to them. Ed. '1(}le. 12. Simvo/izm, probably. E'd. n,,/e. 13. Leo Jakubinsky, .O zvukakh poctichcskovo yazyka' I.On thc S()und~ ()f Poctic Languagc'l, Sbtlr- niJ:i, I (1916), p. 38. 14. Leo Jakubinsky, .Sk()plcniyc odinak()vykh plavnykh v pr;lktichc!;k()m i p()ctichc~k()m yazykakh. ('The Accumulati()n ofldcntical Liquid~ in Practical and P()c1ic l.anguagc'l, S¡'"rniki, II (1917), pp. 13-21.

"i) ¡ ¡! "H

Shklovsky Art as technique

15. Alexander Pogodin, Y~)'k, kak Ivorcheslv() [La/1guage as Art] (Kharkov, 1913), p. 42. [The original sentence was in French, 'Les m()/1lag7'es de /a 5'u;sse sonl be//es,' with the appropriate initials.] 16. Jakubil1sky, Sbol71;ki, I (1916). 17. Lco Tolstoy's f);aIJI, Cl1try datcd Fcbruary 29, 1897. (Thc date is transcribcd incorrcctly; it should rcad March I, 1897.J

18. Alex¡¡ndcr Potcbnya, Iz /ekl~)' po le()r;; s/I/Ves/Iosl; [Leclurt:s 0/1 the Theory of La/1guage] (Kharkov, 1914). 19. Victor Shklovsky, Voskreshro!)'e s/I/Va [1ñt: Resurrect;o/1 of the W()rdl (Petersburg, 1914). 20. The Tolstoy al1d Gogol tral1slations arc ours. Thc passage occurs in Vol. II, Part 8, Chap. 9 of thc cdiliol1 of Wllr a/Id Pt:act: publishcd il1 13ostol1 by the Dana Estcs Co. il1 1904-1912. Ed. /lolt'. 21. Leo Tolstoy, Wllr a/Id Pellct', IV, Part 13. Chap. 14. l:.'d. n()te. 22. [Dimitryl Savodnikov. ¿lIgadJ:; r//ssJ:m!() //lIr()da [R;dd/t'.f or tht: R//ss;a// Pt'()p/e) (St. Petersburg, 1901), Nos. 102-107. 23. Ib;d., Nos. 588-591. 24. A. I~. (Iru".il1sky. cd., Pt:S/I;, s()bra/1l!)'t: P lavt'/J N. ~)'¡./Iil.0¡:ym IS(l/Igs C()/It'clt'd lry P. N. ~)'b/IiJ:(f!.) (Mo~(;ow. 1909-19IU), No.3U. 2S. fl,id., N(). ]71. 26. Wc havc ~upplicd familiar 1.:l1gli~h (;xamplc~ il1 placc ()f Shkl()vsky.~ w()rdplay. Shkl()vsky is saying Ihat wc (;rcate w()rd~ with 11() rcft.:rcl1ts or with ambiguou~ rclt.:rcnts il1 ordcr to torce anel1tion to the ohjects rcpresel1ted by the similar-sounding words. By making the reader go through the extra stcp of intcrprctil1g the l1onscns(; word. thc writer prevcnts al1 automatic rcsponse. A toad is a load. but 'tovc' lor(;cs OI1C to pausc and thil1k ab()ut thc bcast. Ed. /II}le. 27. I.:. R. I{omanov. 'Bc~strashny barin.. Vt'lik()r//ssJ:!),t' sJ:{¿zki (Zapiski Imperskovo Russkovo Geograf- i(;hcsk()v() Ob~chc~tva, XIJI, No. S2). Dch)russky sb()rl1ik, .Spravyadlivy soldal' (.Thc Intrcpid C;cntlcmall,' (;rt'(/1 R//S.fi(//I .1{¡It's (N()lcs ()f thc Impcrial I{u.o;siall C;cographi(;al S()ciety. XIJI. No. S2). Whitc Rus~iall Anthology. '1'hc Upright Soldicr. (1886-]912)J. 28. DlmilryJ S. Zclcnin. Vt'I;korussk!)'t' skazki Pt'mlskl!)' g//be171ii IGre¡¡1 Russ;a/1 Talt's of Ihe Pm/1i¡¡n PrI/Vinct' (St. Petcrsburg. 1913)1, No.70. 29. Dante, P//rgalori¡j, 24:56. Dantc refers to the new Iyric style of his contcmporarics. Ed. nole. 30. Alexy Remizov (1877-1957) is bcst kl1owl1 as a novclist al1d satirist; Nicholas Klyuyev (1885-1937) and Scrgey Essenin (1895-192S). wcrc .peasant pocts.' AII thrce were noted for Ihcir faithlul rcprodu(;tion of Russial1 dialc(;ts al1d (;olloquial lal1guagc. E.d. /I()It'. 31. A group notcd 1(lr its opulent al1d scnsuous versc stylc. E.d. n()I,.. 32. Nicholas Lcskov (183 I -1895). novclist and short story writcr, hclpcd popularize the ska;:, or yarn, and hence, because of the part dialect peculiaritics play in the skaz. also altered Russian literary language. Ed. note. 33. Shklovsky is probably referring to his Ra;:~()rlyvaniyt' syu.zheta [P/OI Deve/opmnllJ (Petrograd, 1921). Ed. /lole. 34. Spcnccr. [p. 169. Again the Russian tcxt is shortened Irom Spencer's original]. 35. We havc heel1 unablc to discovcr thc book ShkJovsky promised. E'd. note.

,(~ :t .'ck

1. " 1 "' ~ " .¡, " (

~~.." """'"

jr.l.

3