Evseev Boris Timofeevich [Moscow, 10.11.1951] – prose writer, poet.
Father – Russian, a worker of culture; mother – Ukrainian, school teacher. He received a musical education in GMPI them. Gnesinyh in Moscow (1971-1974), graduated from the MIC at the Litinstituta them. AM Gorky (1995). He taught music (1974-1991), worked as a columnist in the Literary Gazette (1992-1999) and deputy editor in the weekly book review (1999-2001). Member of the Union of Russian Writers and Russian PEN-club. Since 1978 he lives in the suburbs: pos. Zarechny Sergiev Posad district.
Although, according to Yevseev himself, the passion for writing poems and stories was captured as a child, he seriously engaged in literary creativity only during his “Gnessin” student body. However, all the printed bodies, where Yevseyev addressed him since 1974, reject his works as “distorting Soviet reality”, “modernist”, “permeated with the spirit of reactionary-religious philosophy.” And only in the early 90’s he managed to publish a small selection of poems under the general title “The time of lies has already passed, the time of truth has not arrived” (almanac “Poetry Day”, 1990) and the story “Orpheus” about the tragic fate of a girl forced to make bread playing the flute in the underground passage (“Soglasie” magazine, 1991, No. 6). Basically,
From 1992 to 1995, Yevseyev published three poetry collections, including “Six-wing” (Almaty, 1995), enthusiastically accepted by the poet and critic M. Kudimova, who, in the author’s world outlook, singled out the teleological dominant as defining features of his problems and pathos, wrote: “The binary structure of the world, according to Yevseyev, is unfair and tyrannical… He fights for unity” (Kudimova MS, 6).
Indeed, all aspects of Yevseev’s creativity are permeated with the idea of total unity. But if Orpheus still has a noticeable spontaneous development of various literary traditions, represented in particular by the names of L. Andreev and J. Updike, then in Nikolay Mokrom, a story about the hunt for a deserter unfolding in front of the hero (“Soglasie”, 1992 , No. 1) and the subsequent works of Yevseyev imperiously declares his own orientation toward the specifics of the word as an aesthetic object. Artistic means and techniques (metaphors, epithets, inversion, grotesque, poetic etymology, etc.) are increasingly used and purposefully used by them not as a function of deviating from the “overwritten” semantic or stylistic norm, but in the object-nominative. Portable values seem to be chopped off as superfluous to give space to the original, the original – the true face of things in their purity from the casual connections of the essence. Therefore, “Nikola Mokryi” is a story not only about a tragedy experienced in a distant childhood, not only a dream that was engraved in memory, or a real vision of Nicholas the Wonderworker who refused forgiveness to a man who, following the duty of an officer and citizen, transgressed in the peace time of God commandment: “Thou shalt not kill!”. At the same time, the narrative also speaks of the triumph and break in popular morality, of the perseverance and savagery of the Russian people, of the revolution that has been grinding, of the war that has carried through them feelings of compassion and justice, unrestrained freedom and breadth of soul, but has failed to equip its life, the title itself. After all, if you remember that the common “Nicola” comes from “Nicholas”,
This undeclared Russianness, the ability to convey in a word the interpenetration of the socio-historical, metaphysical and metaphorical (allegorical) meanings of national existence, and allows Yevseyev to be included in the soil, and the style of his literary writing is called phenomenological. Particularly striking are the properties of this style, among which – the paradoxical nature of images, grotesqueness, the reification of the poetic language, an unusual combination of realistic and modern elements – was manifested in the collection “Baran” (2001). It included the best stories published in the journalistic periodicals of 1992-1999: “Nikola Mokryi”, “Narrow Life Ribbon”, “Roth”, “Sit down, Write. Die”, “Kutum” and of course – the story “Ram “and the story” Yurod “, Became a sign in the literary process of the turn of the century. Both works can be defined as the search for a fulcrum in a situation where the breakdown of the old way – relationships, beliefs, traditions – gives rise to the feeling of a new but not yet matured being. In the “Yuroda” novelist “in fact opens in Russian literature the theme of the last people of the last times – people who for ever lost their foothold in morality, in God, in ideals, even illusions, in themselves, finally… the main philosophical, religious and existential theme of the XXI century. ” (Krasnikov GS 4).
The title of the story coincides with the one that was cited in it by V. Zhukovsky’s ballad, a century and a half ago. Entering the thinking system of the modern writer, the famous ballad comes into dispute with a sad statement of the current decline in culture, tastes and customs in the once great country. Thus, in conjunction with the title, the semantic kernel of the work is formed, focusing on the reader’s attention to the question of “the great times of Russia, the thunder of its parades, the light hectic of balls, the vague and solemn cannon volleys, the joyful chatter of military relia – tions. times that can not be returned, but which, even for brief moments, can replace the lunar, old-fashioned time of our century with their iris and flesh “(Night review Literary studies, 2001. No. 3. 86). But the artistic statement...
It was with the advent of this collection and the novel “The Night Review” (2001) that critics unanimously started talking about Evseev’s “piercing lyricism” (Korobov V. 2, Rostovtsev I. p.88); vitality and reliability of its heroes (Glushkovskaya LS 122-123); about the author’s belonging to the “rarest breed” of workers with the word “(Basinsky P. On the prose of Boris Yevseyev, P.5), but, coming together in general assessments, opinions were divided in the definition of the problem-thematic boundaries and focus of Yevseyev’s basic artistic ideas: L. Zvonareva saw the main advantage of the writer in posing the problem of choosing the current intelligentsia his path: “According to the writer,” the critic believes, “the intelligentsia now has only three ways: self-destruction, lackluster and foolishness” (3v. N. On the contrary,
The most significant work of Yevseyev – the novel “The Denied Hymns” (abbr., In the Friendship of Peoples, 2002, No. 11-12, full version – in the book of Ed., 2003) is devoted to the problem of the revival of Russia. .), denoting a turning point in the creative fate of the writer.
The plot of the novel I. is the hit of the hero – the great-grandson of the former homeowner and breeder, Vasily Vsevolodovich Nelepin – from a quiet province in October 1993. After the prologue (with the background of the novel), the reader gets pictures of the siege of the White House, the “chaos of shooting” in the scene of the shooting of peaceful of the inhabitants. In parallel, there is an alternative line, where the traditional for Russian literature of the XX century is being translated. the situation of moral testing – however, in a mystical and religious aspect. We are talking about laboratory studies of the hyperfine “matter of the soul” in a certain scientific organization that operates under the guise of a semi-commercial firm. Thus, in the sociohistorical space of the novel, containing a lot of plot lines (not only related to the activities of a strange company, but also the work of one of the Moscow newspapers, the life of the province, as well as the love story of the main characters, weave fantastic motifs. The historical and philosophical basis of the religious line is the motive of the trials of the Russian soul, its trials in the fire of political strife. The upper – and the highest, according to the writer’s philosophical plan – becomes in the novel a “through” story about the ordeals of the soul, whose visions arise in the subjects and are recorded by the researchers. Interaction of the sociohistorical and metaphysical lines; the introduction of Christian elements and the carnivalized devil’s – all this (as in the case of the “Night Watch”) brings together the “Forsaken Hymns” with the Bulgakov and other examples of Russian modernity. her trials in the fire of political strife. The upper – and the highest, according to the writer’s philosophical plan – becomes in the novel a “through” story about the ordeals of the soul, whose visions arise in the subjects and are recorded by the researchers. Interaction of the sociohistorical and metaphysical lines; the introduction of Christian elements and the carnivalized devil’s – all this (as in the case of the “Night Watch”) brings together the “Forsaken Hymns” with the Bulgakov and other examples of Russian modernity. her trials in the fire of political strife. The upper – and the highest, according to the writer’s philosophical plan – becomes in the novel a “through” story about the ordeals of the soul, whose visions arise in the subjects and are recorded by the researchers. Interaction of the sociohistorical and metaphysical lines; the introduction of Christian elements and the carnivalized devil’s – all this (as in the case of the “Night Watch”) brings together the “Forsaken Hymns” with the Bulgakov and other examples of Russian modernity.
According to P. Basinsky, “Renounced hymns” – “this is a very serious attempt to break into a new modern Roman.” That is, the novel is deep, informative, national (Russian, plain speaking), but also readable and enticing… “(Basinsky P The burden of the novel. A similar point of view is also maintained by A. Varlamov (Rumble., P.4). N. Pereyaslov, on the contrary, saw in Yevseyev’s novel verbosity and lengthiness, caused by the fact that “the motive power of his plot was not so much the logic of development of described events as… the self-will of the author himself” (Pereyaslov N. Life of magazines Day of literature. 2003. No. 1. C.8).
The question of the type of Yevseyev’s artistic thinking became no less debatable. For example, P. Basinsky (cited in S. 5-6) and V. Korobov (cited in P. 2), in fact, refer Evseev to the followers of classical realism; I. Rostovtsev (Cited S. 89) – romanticism; S. Vasilenko enrolls him in the representatives of the “new realism,” who took many of the techniques that modernism and postmodernism have worked out and postmodernism (Rumor buzzes, p. 4); A. Bolshakova, relying on the philological concepts of V. V. Vinogradov, GO Vinokur, M. M. Bakhtin, V. V. Kozhinov, considers it possible to talk about the formation in the work of Evseev neo-modernism, deeply Christian in its ontological essence (Bolshakov A. Phenomenology of the literary letter, pp. 5-6, 11, 113-114). Of course, all these points of view have the right to exist, since.
Evseev is a laureate of the National Artistic Award of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation and numerous journal awards. His prose and poems were translated into English, German, Arabic and other languages.