Cell 103: Comrade Mayakovsky

By Cem Bulut

As we embark on our journey together, we must first establish the following point: Throughout this book, we will pay attention to two points while indirectly narrating the life of the Russian poet Vladimir Mayakovsky in a period of political turmoil. Firstly, although one hundred per cent objectivity is technically impossible, we will adopt a formal objectivity, at least in appearance, as a writing style, and avoid sentence structures that seem to aim to glorify or denigrate him. Secondly, from the beginning of the book, we will try to keep the subject limited to Mayakovsky's life as much as possible, to leave the reader alone with the poet's own struggles by keeping the notes containing comments or personal evaluations at zero point if possible, by specifying sources only at some points and by referring to related historical events.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Cem Bulut
• Release date: Jun 30, 2024
• ISBN: 9798227278081

Book preview

CEM BULUT

CELL 103: COMRADE MAYAKOVSKY

Author: Cem BULUT

PREFACE WORD

As we embark on our journey together, we must first establish the following point: Throughout this book, we will pay attention to two points while indirectly narrating the life of the Russian poet Vladimir Mayakovsky in a period of political turmoil. Firstly, although one hundred per cent objectivity is technically impossible, we will adopt a formal objectivity, at least in appearance, as a writing style, and avoid sentence structures that seem to aim to glorify or denigrate him. Secondly, from the beginning of the book, we will try to keep the subject limited to Mayakovsky's life as much as possible, to leave the reader alone with the poet's own struggles by keeping the notes containing comments or personal evaluations at zero point if possible, by specifying sources only at some points and by referring to related historical events.

For Turkish readers of Mayakovsky, it has almost become a habit to point out the similarities and differences between Mayakovsky and Nazım Hikmet due to certain characteristics of these two poets. The Turkish socialist realist poet Nazım Hikmet is certainly one of the most important figures in our literary history. However, due to the self-descriptive nature of his poems and the fact that the similarities between Mayakovsky and Nazım Hikmet are already a subject that has been frequently and abundantly treated in Turkish literature, we will not deal with this subject at length in the preface. We believe that reading Mayakovsky directly, without going through Nazım Hikmet, will create a clearer perception, a perception that is not twisted by hitting a surface, and a healthier artistic approach. Nazım Hikmet's ideas and i-n-d-i-v-i-d-u-a-l criticism of Mayakovsky can be easily found in many sources. After reading our book, you will be able to clearly understand why we wrote the word individualist in the previous sentence in this way. Undoubtedly, Nazım Hikmet, who met Mayakovsky face to face many times, got to know him closely, and even, unbeknownst to many people, was present in the room when he went out in public for the last time before his death, could have made much more detailed and subjective evaluations if he had wanted to. There is nothing that can be done except to respect his preference and the style he adopted. Mayakovsky also preferred not to express an opinion about his colleagues when asked about his thoughts on poets like Hlebnikov who lived in his period.

When analysing Mayakovsky's actions, thoughts and works, it should be taken into account that the poet experienced World War I and the post-war environment, one of the most marginal periods of the world, and that he was an active individual in the revolutions of 1905 and 1917 in Russia. Mayakovsky, who began his artistic life with painting, became one of the pioneers of the Cubist school by opposing the classical understanding of art, and later assumed the role of the pioneer of the Futurist movement in Russia. Although the expression opposing may seem exaggerated at the first stage, we think that it is appropriate since the attitudes of the futurists have a structure that deliberately realises polarisation. Although artistic movements ending with isms in today's conditions look like a piece of the past, in the polarised world of the period, many artists, both painters and literary figures, were positioned within the framework of movements and published manifestos in abundance. In addition to this, we can state that Russian futurism did not have a long tail, and that there was no noteworthy second example except for the group that Mayakovsky was a part of. The theories of art developed by the poet with his friends such as Burlyuk, Hlebnikov and Kruchyonkh were especially expressed in the manifesto Slap on the Public Taste written in 1912. After the revolution, Mayakovsky partially moved away from the avant-garde method and turned to writing less sophisticated, political poetry. Here we can see the traces of the critic Osip Brik, who was the poet's mentor in the 20s. As an advanced critic and writer with close ties to the Russian Cheka, Brik had an important influence on Mayakovsky's poetry. There are many key figures in Mayakovsky's life, to know him one must know Lili and Osip Brik, Yesenin, even Lenin, Burlyuk. Burlyuk said about him: Mayakovsky's memory is like a road in Poltava - everyone leaves a galosh there. Although we know with certainty that Osip Brik led him to become political, Mayakovsky stated many times that he made this choice himself and that he was responsible for it, and at this point he differed from poets and writers of the period such as Yesenin and Pasternak. We hear from eyewitnesses that Mayakovsky and his close friend Yesenin had long, violent discussions lasting hours on the point of being political, and that they could not come to a consensus as a result of these discussions, which often included a lot of insults and even actions such as throwing glasses.

In this journey through the poet's life, there will undoubtedly be some points open to discussion. First of all, we should state that the relationship between Lili Brik-Osip Brik-Vladimir Mayakovsky was within the knowledge of all three people involved, that there was no behaviour such as lying or deception, that there was the consent of each person and that these people were people with actual capacity. Although the relationship is contrary to the value judgements of Russian society, in fact to the value judgements of all societies, we do not feel obliged to affirm or reject it for all these reasons. Although the relationship between Mayakovsky and Lili Brik is not rejected by anyone, including Marxist writers, it is generally mentioned briefly in biographies. This may be because even if we do not deny the unpleasant aspects of an idealised individual, we do not like to talk about them. Besides, as the loves in the lives of many poets define them, it would be impossible to fully understand Mayakovsky without analysing the relationship with Lili Brik and Osip.

The phenomenon of suicide is a complicated issue that has appeared in many philosophical and sociological texts. Evolutionary biology and psychology show us that every human being has an instinct to continue his/her life with impulses that exist a-priori. We also recognise that there is a general practice of not encouraging suicide. The most reasonable action to be taken by a person contemplating suicide is to seek medical help, taking into account the impact on his/her family and loved ones.

I can say that I personally accept the ideas of David Hume in his essay On Suicide. Suicide is not a moral problem, the approach to this phenomenon should be neutral. If the person has actual capacity, is aware of what he/she has done, and if the search for a solution has not yielded results, suicide should not be regarded as a shameful or honourable act, but as the act of an unfortunate person to end his/her suffering by ending his/her own life. As in Mayakovsky, this is an individual freedom, one's own choice. Therefore, in the course of our work, we will refrain from normative assessments and will present information obtained from eyewitnesses and documents.

We owe our knowledge of Mayakovsky's childhood to the Swedish historian and writer Bengt Jangfeldt's personal interviews with his family and friends, especially Lili Brik. Thanks to Bengt Jangfeldt's expertise in Russian history and his extra efforts, we have information that is difficult to obtain today. Bengt Jangfeldt is an important figure who devoted a significant part of his life to this subject, to writing a biography of Mayakovsky, and his Mayakovsky-A Biography is the basis of our knowledge on this subject.

In addition, Mayakovsky- A Poet in the Revolution, a more poetry and language-orientated work, was written by Edward J. Brown, professor of Slavic Language and Literature at Stanford University. In this work, in which poetry analyses are carried out by showing the language in which it was written - the Russian source - similarities with Russian idioms and songs of the period, which are impossible for us to know today, are explained. Although many sources other than these have been analysed by us and used at certain points, we can clearly state that the basis of our work is an approach based on Bengt Jangfeldt and Edward J. Brown. At this point, we should add as a note that there may be different opinions due to the subjectivity of art, the different motivations of the witnesses who narrate the events at some points, and naturally, it is impossible for the deceased Mayakovsky to speak on many issues. Although it is technically impossible for us to capture objective reality due to the projector structure of the human mind and the mechanism of transmission of historical events, we have no choice but to try to do our best by throwing the arrow a little higher. In addition, since many of the poet's friends and colleagues shared their memories of him, especially in 1930, these sources were undoubtedly a starting point for the materials we needed.

One last comment we have to make is on the speculation about Mayakovsky's death. It is natural that there is a tendency, especially in Trotskyist groups, to explain that Mayakovsky committed suicide because of the counter-revolution and that he was a victim of Stalinism. It should not be forgotten, however, that Lenin often met the poet's criticisms with maturity and in some cases expressed his agreement in writing. Stalin also did not make any negative comments about Mayakovsky, and after Mayakovsky's death, he replied to Lili Brik's letter asking that the poet should not be forgotten and that his name should not be erased from history by saying, Undoubtedly, Mayakovsky was the poet with the most extraordinary talents of that period. Stalin instructed the Communist Party cultural officials to keep Mayakovsky's legacy alive and many streets and cultural buildings in the Soviet Union were named after the poet. We do not intend to conclude from this that Mayakovsky approved of Stalin's regime; in the final chapters of our book we will analyse how the relations developed and ended. What we are sure of is that Mayakovsky was one of the first generation of Bolsheviks to embrace the revolution and that on the day of his death he said that he would die believing in the red flag. It is clear that Mayakovsky avoided direct contact with Stalin and never came to the point of swearing allegiance, which is why he was ostracised by the regime at the end of his life. This point is clear in Lunacharski's writings after the poet's death. 

Before listing the last lines of our preface, we must remind you of the intricate nature of translating poetry into other languages. Translations from second languages, both in poetry and philosophy, seem to create a situation of second creation of second creation. While it is possible to discuss whether it is possible to translate poetry into another language, the fact that the translation is not the mother tongue leads to unsatisfactory results. Without dwelling too long on these, we can state that we think that even a technically very well translated poem is doubtful whether it is the original poem or not. In the case of Mayakovsky, there is not much concrete data that can be characterised as very well translated in this way. Nevertheless, in order to have an idea, we will include certain translations with references to the names of the translators.

When translating names from the Cyrillic alphabet into Turkish, it can be difficult because the alphabets are different and our ears are not used to it. It is possible to say Mayakofski instead of Mayakovski, it is also possible to write Chicago instead of Chicago. Since these are foreign words that are not Turkish, I believe that both spellings can be used. If the names of the people mentioned were previously heard a lot in our country (for example Lunacharski) or if they were easy to create in Turkish, such as -ki -ça, I preferred to write them in this way. For complex and difficult to pronounce names, I had to leave it as -sky-cha, which is closer to the English translation from the Cyrillic Alphabet.

Note When I read Muhsin Kızılkaya's article on Mayakovsky published in Habertürk newspaper, although I have objections on some points, I have no opposing opinion on the general logic of the article. It is known that Lili Brik liaised with Stalin through her brother, which is why the Briks' house was named the Moscow branch of the Cheka by Boris Pasternak, as we will explain in detail in the book. Besides, Mayakovsky was aware of this and Mayakovsky himself was not far from the Cheka. When the Cheka was first founded, many of the secret police of the Cerjinski era advocated a militant communism as much as a secular religion, and interestingly, they were also very fond of futurist poetry. Mayakovsky befriended certain Cheka members and even received a pistol as a gift from them and practised shooting. I criticise Stalin's repressive behaviour, the Kronstadt massacre under Lenin, and the execution of Nikolay Gumilyev in the book without hesitation. At the same time, I cannot find any motivation as to why Stalin or any other Bolshevik would kill any avant-garde poet. I would like to state that I will abstain from Muhsin Kızılkaya's theory originating from Orlando Figes unless there is conclusive evidence.

Vladimir Vladimirovich Mayakovsky was born in Baghdadi in western Georgia in 1893. In his autobiographical poem I, Myself he stated that his birth date was 7 June 1893 or 1894, contradicting the date known to his parents and the official record, but not before. The district was located near Kutaisi, the country's second largest city geographically after the capital Tbilisi and the third largest in terms of population. The population of Georgia at that time, apart from the main ethnic group of Georgians, included Armenians, Turks and Russians. Georgia, bordered on the east by Azerbaijan and on the west by the Red Sea, had been part of the Russian Empire since the 18th century. Father Vladimir Konstantinovich was a forest manager. The meaning of the surname Mayakovsky was due to the tall and imposing stature of his father's side, the word Mayak means lighthouse in Russian. His mother Alexandra Alexeyevna was of Ukrainian origin and had two older sisters, three and nine years older. His older brother Konstantin died of scarlet fever when he was three years old.

Mayakovsky's father, Vladimir Konstantinovich, was described as a broad-shouldered, cheerful, sociable and amiable man. His daughters reported that he was an energetic man, spoke in a bass voice, spoke vividly, told stories full of proverbs, puns and jokes, and embellished them with numerous anecdotes and anecdotes in Russian, Georgian, Tatar and Armenian, all of which he could speak fluently. It was also reported that the father, Vladimir Konstantinovich, was extremely sensitive and touchy, often and easily irritated. Mayakovsky's mother, on the other hand, was the opposite of his father both physically and mentally, a thin, small, calm and extremely patient woman. It was stated that their mother never raised her voice to her children in her life, thus balancing an aggressive-dominant father with a peaceful and mediating mother, which was common in the Mayakovsky family. Although little Vladimir physically resembles his mother, it can be said that he inherited his sudden explosiveness of character from his father.

Vladimir, Volodya Mayakovsky, as his family called him, spent his childhood in a mountain village of less than 1,000 inhabitants, in a valley between steep mountains, seeing bears, foxes, squirrels and various birds, and learnt to love animals and nature at an early age. In the poem Мальчишкой, When I was a child, the poet returns to this age and tells how, while his father scolded him and his mother scolded him for being useless, he would loaf around shirtless and shoeless, tanning first his back and then his belly in the sun. During his childhood, spent with his family and relatives who often visited him, Volodya excelled at memorising poems and playing word games. His mother told that Volodya loved and often organised a group game in which each person had to find many words beginning with a certain letter, and that he would complete their parts himself in place of those who left the game. Another piece of information about his childhood is that he was very keen on Dominoes, which could be considered one of the first signs of the gambling addiction that would later enter his life and which we will often talk about. The poet, who lived a cheerful childhood in a beautiful three-roomed mountain house, began to read books by writers such as Pushkin, Lermantov and Nekrasov at an early age.

Since there were no educational institutions in his hometown, Mayakovsky moved to Kutaisi with his mother when he was 7 years old and started school. After two years of preliminary education, he was admitted to the Russian state school called Gymnasium. This child, who showed great success especially in painting, attracted the attention of a painter in Kutaisi and started to take private lessons. His family started to think that Volodya would become an artist because of his special talent. The little boy, who was interested in poetry and painting, was not interested in music at all, never approached instruments and when asked to dance, he ran away to play with his friends.

It is known that Mayakovsky read classical writers such as Gogol, Lermontov, Pushkin, Chekhov and Jules Verne during his childhood. Although Kutaisi was a small city, the turmoil of the 1905 Revolution in Russia was clearly felt here, and the Bolsheviks were quite strong and numerous in this part of Georgia. In the biographies of S. Vladimirov and D. Moldavsky it is stated that Kutaisi was one of the underground centres of the Bolshevik Party. Mayakovsky was not directly involved in politics at this time because