"Дыр бул щыл / убѣ ш щур..." А. Кручёных: скрытая логика вариаций

Анализируется генезис стихотворения Алексея Кручёных «Дыр бул щыл» и логика эволюции авторских версий до конца 1920-х гг., а также восприятие и трансформации этой футуристической миниатюры в русской культуре. Отмечается значение учета специфики литографического способа печати при первом издании заумного стихотворения («Помада», 1912/1913) для реконструкции и интерпретации творческих импульсов поэта-футуриста в момент экстатического экспромта. Объясняется причина того, что именно «Дыр бул щыл» стало манифестом заумной поэзии, несмотря на наличие более ранних текстов подобного рода. Автор заявляет об отсутствии конфликта интересов.

Genesis and evolution of Alexei Kruchenykh’s poem “Dyr bul shchyl” (1912/1913) and the logic of evolution of the later author’s lifetime variations, as well as its perceptions and transformations in Russian culture, are analyzed by methods of genetic criticism. The article emphasizes that it is necessary to take into account the specifics of the lithographic method of printing in the first edition of Kruchenykh’s abstruse verses for the reconstruction and interpretation of the creative impulses at the time of ecstatic impromptu. The article, using methods of textual and genetic criticism, states a significant textual variability of Kruchenykh’s notorious poem “Dyr bul shchyl” (1913) and points out the remaining challenge of the uninfluenced final authorial intention. The hidden logic of the poem’s textual transformations was revealed by the analysis of a compiled chronological table of version changes (1913-1927/28). The article describes, how in order to get the effect of phonetic poetry (“universal language” and “language of the Universe”) Kruchenykh attempted from older versions to newer versions, step by step to destroy / overmusicalize and “disword” words / blur the spontaneous “echo” of morphological, semantic, sound-symbolic and topic-comment (theme-rheme) structures. The article offers arguments in favor of the hypothesis that at a moment of ecstatic impromptu the phrase Dyr bul arose in the futurist’s emotion-related mind as unconscious allusions to the fate of Prince Dir / voivode Dyr / Dyri (f882), “oskyldr Dyri” (?). Dyr Prince of Kiev was probably one of the first Slavic rulers converted to Christianity under the name of Il’ya (Elias; the first Christianization of Rus’ by Patriarch Photius, datable to early 867). Nestor the Chronicler made a scant mention of him in The Tale of Bygone Years (Russian Primary Chronicle). The analysis of handwriting features of Kruchenykh’s lithographic work, as well as scanning of urban legends and media sensational report on archaeological discoveries and excavation of trace of early Christians who lived in Kiev before the arrival of Prince Rurik of Novgorod (882), argues in favor of this hypothesis. An explanation why this poetic miniature, the “Black square of Russian poetry,” became one of most notorious examples of transrational poetry (zaum), despite the existence of similar texts in Russian literary tradition prior to futurism (ritual gibberish, a song from Old Russian poems collected by Kirsha Danilov, as well as poetry of Andrei Bely and Velemir Khlebnikov) is offered. The author declares no conflicts of interests.