achit, mozhet sluzhit' utesheniem. I vpolne vozmozhno, chto tak ono i est'. Konflikt vnutri zamknutogo prostranstva -- k primeru, doma -- obychno vylivaetsya v tragediyu, potomu chto sama pryamougol'nost' mesta sposobstvuet razumu, predlagaya emociyam lish' smiritel'nuyu rubashku. Takim obrazom, v dome hozyain -- muzhchina, ne tol'ko potomu, chto eto ego dom, no potomu eshche, chto v kontekste stihotvoreniya on predstavlyaet razum. V pejzazhe dialog "Domashnih pohoron" prinyal by drugoe techenie; v pejzazhe v proigryshe byl by muzhchina. Vozmozhno, drama byla by dazhe bol'she, ibo odno delo, kogda na storonu personazha vstaet dom, i drugoe, kogda na ego storone stihii. Vo vsyakom sluchae, imenno poetomu geroinya stremitsya k dveri. Itak, vernemsya k pyati strochkam, predshestvuyushchim razvyazke: k voprosu o gniyushchej ograde. "Dozhdlivyj den' i tri tumannyh utra / Sgnoyat lyuboj berezovyj pleten'", ona povtoryaet skazannoe nashim fermerom, kotoryj vnes lopatu i sidit na kuhne v bashmakah s kom'yami syroj zemli. |tu frazu takzhe mozhno pripisat' ego ustalosti i predstoyashchej emu zadache: vozvedeniyu ogrady vokrug novoj mogily. Odnako, poskol'ku eto ne gorodskoe, a semejnoe kladbishche, ograda, kotoruyu on upomyanul, vozmozhno, byla odnoj iz ego hozyajstvennyh zabot, s chem postoyanno prihoditsya imet' delo. I, veroyatno, on upominaet o nej, zhelaya otvlech'sya ot tol'ko chto zakonchennoj raboty. No, nesmotrya na vse usiliya, ego mysli zanyaty odnim, na chto ukazyvaet glagol "rot" (gnit'): eta strochka soderzhit namek na skrytoe sravnenie -- esli ograda gniet tak bystro vo vlazhnom vozduhe, kak zhe bystro grobik sgniet v zemle, takoj syroj, chto ona ostavlyaet "pyatna" na bashmakah? No geroinya vnov' soprotivlyaetsya obstupayushchim gambitam yazyka -- metafore, ironii, litotam -- i ustremlyaetsya k bukval'nomu znacheniyu, k absolyutu. Imenno za nego uhvatyvaetsya ona v "Kak ty soedinyal pleten' i to, / CHto bylo v zanaveshennoj gostinoj?" Udivitel'no, naskol'ko po-raznomu oni vosprinimayut "gnienie". Togda kak geroj govorit o "berezovom pletne", chto est' yavnoe uklonenie, ne govorya uzhe o tom, chto eto nechto, nahodyashcheesya nad zemlej, geroinya napiraet na to, "chto bylo v zanaveshennoj gostinoj". Ponyatno, chto ona, mat', sosredotochena -- to est' Frost zastavlyaet ee sosredotochit'sya -- na mertvom rebenke. Odnako upominaet ona o nem ves'ma inoskazatel'no, dazhe evfemistichno: "chto bylo v". Ne govorya uzhe o tom, chto ona nazyvaet svoego mertvogo rebenka ne "kto", a "chto". My ne znaem ego imeni, i, naskol'ko nam izvestno, on nedolgo prozhil posle rozhdeniya. I zatem sleduet otmetit' ee skrytyj namek na mogilu: "darkned parlor" (zanaveshennaya gostinaya). Itak, "zanaveshennoj gostinoj" poet zakanchivaet portret geroini. Sleduet pomnit', chto pered nami sel'skaya obstanovka, chto geroinya zhivet v "ego" dome -- to est' chto ona chelovek so storony. Postavlennaya tak blizko k "sgnoit", "darkned parlor" pri vsej svoej razgovornosti zvuchit inoskazatel'no, esli ne vychurno. Dlya sovremennogo uha "darkned parlor" imeet pochti viktorianskoe zvuchanie, navodya na mysl' o raznice vospriyatij, granichashchej s klassovymi razlichiyami. Dumayu, vy soglasites', chto eto ne evropejskoe stihotvorenie. Ne francuzskoe, ne ital'yanskoe, ne nemeckoe i dazhe ne britanskoe. YA takzhe mogu vas zaverit', chto ono nikoim obrazom i ne russkoe. I, uchityvaya, chto predstavlyaet soboj segodnya amerikanskaya poeziya, ono ravnym obrazom i ne amerikanskoe. Ono sobstvenno frostovskoe, a Frosta net v zhivyh uzhe chetvert' veka. Poetomu neudivitel'no, chto o ego strochkah rasprostranyayutsya stol' dolgo i v samyh neozhidannyh mestah, hotya on, bez somneniya, pomorshchilsya by, uznav, chto francuzskoj auditorii ego predstavlyaet russkij. S drugoj storony, nesoobraznost' byla by emu ne v novinku. Tak k chemu zhe on stremilsya v etom ochen' svoem stihotvorenii? On stremilsya, ya dumayu, k skorbi i razumu, kotorye, yavlyayas' otravoj drug dlya druga, predstavlyayut naibolee effektivnoe goryuchee dlya yazyka -- ili, esli ugodno, nesmyvaemye chernila poezii. Opora Frosta na ih sochetanie zdes' i v drugih mestah inogda navodit na mysl', chto, okunaya pero v etu chernil'nicu, on nadeyalsya umen'shit' uroven' ee soderzhimogo; vy razlichaete chto-to vrode imushchestvennogo interesa s ego storony. Odnako, chem bol'she makaesh' v nee pero, tem bol'she ona napolnyaetsya etoj chernoj essenciej sushchestvovaniya i tem bol'she nash um, kak i nashi pal'cy, pachkaetsya etoj zhidkost'yu. Ibo, chem bol'she skorbi, tem bol'she razuma. Kak by ni veliko bylo iskushenie prinyat' ch'yu-to storonu v "Domashnih pohoronah", prisutstvie rasskazchika isklyuchaet eto, ibo, esli personazhi stoyat odin za skorb', drugoj za razum, rasskazchik vystupaet za ih sliyanie. Inache govorya, togda kak real'nyj soyuz personazhej raspadaetsya, povestvovanie, tak skazat', venchaet skorb' i razum, poskol'ku logika izlozheniya beret verh nad individual'noj dinamikoj -- nu po krajnej mere dlya chitatelya. A mozhet byt', i dlya avtora. Stihotvorenie, drugimi slovami, igraet rol' sud'by. Polagayu, k braku takogo roda stremilsya Frost ili, vozmozhno, naoborot. Mnogo let nazad, letya iz N'yu-Jorka v Detrojt, ya sluchajno natknulsya na esse docheri poeta, napechatannoe v rejsovom zhurnale amerikanskih avialinij. V etom esse Lesli Frost pishet, chto roditeli proiznosili rech' na vypusknom vechere v shkole, gde oni vmeste uchilis'. Temu rechi otca po povodu etogo sobytiya ona ne pomnit, no pomnit, chto ej skazali temu materi. |to bylo chto-to vrode "Razgovor kak odna iz zhiznennyh sil" (ili "zhivyh sil"). Esli, kak ya nadeyus', vy kogda-nibud' najdete ekzemplyar "K severu ot Bostona" i prochtete ego, vy pojmete, chto tema |linory Uajt -- po suti, glavnyj strukturnyj priem etogo sbornika, ibo bol'shaya chast' stihotvorenij iz "K severu ot Bostona" -- dialogi, to est' razgovory. V etom smysle my imeem delo -- kak v "Domashnih pohoronah", tak i v drugih stihotvoreniyah sbornika -- s lyubovnoj poeziej, ili, esli ugodno, s poeziej oderzhimosti: ne stol'ko s oderzhimost'yu muzhchiny zhenshchinoj, skol'ko argumenta kontrargumentom, golosa golosom. |to otnositsya i k monologam, ibo monolog est' spor s samim soboj; voz'mite, k primeru, "Byt' ili ne byt'..." Poetomu poety tak chasto obrashchayutsya k dramaturgii. V konechnom schete yavno ne k dialogu stremilsya Robert Frost, a kak raz naoborot, hotya by potomu, chto sami po sebe dva golosa nemnogo znachat. Slivayas', oni privodyat v dvizhenie nechto, chto, za neimeniem luchshego slova, mozhno nazvat' prosto "zhizn'yu". Vot pochemu "Domashnie pohorony" konchayutsya tire, a ne tochkoj. Esli eto stihotvorenie mrachnoe, um ego sozdatelya eshche mrachnee, ibo on ispolnyaet vse tri roli: muzhchiny, zhenshchiny i rasskazchika. Ih ravnocennaya real'nost', vzyataya vmeste ili porozn', vse zhe ustupaet real'nosti avtora, poskol'ku "Domashnie pohorony" -- lish' odno stihotvorenie sredi mnogih. Cena avtonomnosti Frosta, konechno, v okrashennosti etogo stihotvoreniya, iz kotorogo vy, vozmozhno, vynosite v konechnom schete ne syuzhet, a ponimanie polnoj avtonomnosti ego sozdatelya. Personazhi i rasskazchik, tak skazat', vytalkivayut avtora iz chelovecheski priemlemogo konteksta: on stoit snaruzhi, emu otkazyvayut vo vhode, a mozhet, on vovse i ne hochet vhodit'. Takov rezul'tat dialoga, inache govorya, zhiznennoj sily. I eta osobaya poziciya, eta polnaya avtonomnost' predstavlyaetsya mne chrezvychajno amerikanskoj. Otsyuda monotonnost' etogo poeta, ego medlitel'nye pentametry: signal dalekoj stancii. Mozhno upodobit' ego kosmicheskomu korablyu, kotoryj po mere oslableniya zemnogo prityazheniya okazyvaetsya vo vlasti inoj gravitacionnoj sily -- vneshnej. Odnako toplivo vse to zhe: skorb' i razum. Ne v pol'zu moej metafory govorit lish' to, chto amerikanskie kosmicheskie korabli, kak pravilo, vozvrashchayutsya. 1994 Come in As I came to the edge of the woods, Thrush music -- hark! Now if it was dusk outside, Inside it was dark. Too dark in the woods for a bird By sleight of wing To better its perch for the night, Though it still could sing. The last of the light of the sun That had died in the west Still lived for one song more In a thrush's breast. Far in the pillared dark Thrush musik went -- Almost like a call to come in To the dark and lament. But no, I was out for stars: I would not come in. I meant not even if asked, And I hadn't been. Vojdi! Podoshel ya k lesu, tam drozd Pel -- da kak! Esli v pole byl eshche sumrak, V lesu byl mrak. Mrak takoj, chto pichuge V nem ne sumet' Polovchej usest'sya na vetke, Hot' mozhet pet'. Poslednij zakatnyj luch Pogas, kogda Pesn' zazheg nadolgo V grudi drozda. YA slushal. V kolonnom mrake Drozd ne issyak, On slovno prosit vojti V skorb' i mrak. YA vyshel vecherom k zvezdam, V lesnoj proval. Ne vojdu, dazhe esli by zvali, -- A nikto ne zval. Perevod A. Sergeeva Home Burial He saw her from the bottom of the stairs Before she saw him. She was starting down, Looking back over her shoulder at some fear. She took a doubtful step and then undid it To raise herself and look again. He spoke Advancing toward her: "What is it you see? From up there always? -- for I want to know." She turned and sank upon her skirts at that, And her face turned from terrified to dull. He said to gain time: "What is it you see?" Mounting until she cowered under him. "I will find out now -- you must tell me, dear". She, in her place, refused him any help, With the least stiffening of her neck and silence. She let him look, sure that he wouldn't see, Blind creature; and awhile he didn't see. But at last he murmured, "Oh", and again, "Oh". "What is it -- what?" she said. "Just that I see". "You don't", she challenged. "Tell me what it is". "The wonder is I didn't see at once. I never noticed it from here before. I must be wonted to it -- that's the reason. The little graveyard where my people are! So small the window frames the whole of it. Not so much larger than a bedroom, is it? There are three stones of slate and one of marble, Broad-shouldered little slabs there in the sunlight On the sidehill. We haven't to mind those. But I understand: it is not the stones, But the child's mound --" "Don't, don't, don't don't," she cried. She withdrew, shrinking from beneath his arm That rested on the banister, and slid downstairs; And turned on him with such a daunting look, He said twice over before he knew himself: "Can't a man speak of his own child he's lost?" "Not you! -- Oh, where's my hat? Oh, I don't need it! I must get out of here. I must get air. -- I don't know rightly whether any man can." "Amy! Don't go to someone else this time. Listen to me. I won't come down the stairs." He sat and fixed his chin between his fists. "There's something I should like to ask you, dear." "You don't know how to ask it." "Help me, then." Her fingers moved the latch for all reply. "My words are nearly always an offense. I don't know how to speak of anything So as to please you. But I might be taught, I should suppose. I can't say I see how. A man must partly give up being a man With womenfolk. We could have some arrangment By which I'd bind myself to keep hands off Anything special you're a-mind to name. Though I don't like such things ‘twixt those that love. Two that don't love can't live together without them. But two that do can't live together with them." She moved the latch a little. "Don't -- don't go. Don't carry it to someone else this time. Tell me about it if it's something human. Let me into your grief. I'm not so much Unlike other folks as your standing there Apart would make me out. Give me my chance. I do think, though, you overdo it a little. What was it brought you up to think it the thing To take your mother-loss of a first child So inconsolably -- in the face of love. You'd think his memory might be satisfied --" "There you go sneering now!" "I'm not, I'm not! You make me angry. I'll come down to you. God, what a woman! And it's come to this, A man can't speak of his own child that's dead." "You can't because you don't know how to speak. If you had any feelings, you that dug With your own hand -- how could you? -- his little grave; I saw you from that very window there, Making the gravel leap and leap in air, Leap up, like that, like that, and land so lightly And roll back down the mound beside the hole. I thought, Who is that man? I didn't know you. And I crept down the stairs and up the stairs To look again, and still your spade kept lifting. Then you came in. I heard your rumbling voice Out in the kitchen, and I don't know why, But I went near to see with my own eyes. You could sit there with the stains on your shoes Of the fresh earth from your own baby's grave And talk about your everyday concerns. You had stood the spade up against the wall Outside there in the entry, for I saw it." "I shall laugh the worst laugh I ever laughed. I'm cursed. God, if I don't believe I'm cursed." "I can repeat the very words you were saying: Three foggy mornings and one rainy day Will rot the best birch fence a man can build. Think of it, talk like that at such a time! What had how long it takes a birch to rot To do with what was in the darkened parlor? You couldn't care! The nearest friends can go With anyone to death, comes so far short They might as well not try to go at all No, from the time when one is sick to death, One is alone, and he dies more alone. Friends make pretense of following to the grave, But before one is in it, their minds are turned And making the best of their way back to life And living people, and things they understand. But the world's evil. I won't have grief so If I can change it. Oh, I won't. I won't!" "There, you have said it all and you feel better. You won't go now. You're crying. Close the door. The heart's gone out of it: why keep it up? Amy! There's someone coming down the road!" "You -- oh, you think the talk is all. I must go -- Somewhere out of this house. How can I make you --" "If -- you -- do!" She was opening the door wider. "Where do you mean to go? First tell me that. I'll follow and bring you back by force. I will! --" Domashnie pohorony On snizu lestnicy ee uvidel -- Ona iz dveri vyshla naverhu I oglyanulas', tochno by na prizrak. Spustilas' na stupen'ku vniz, vernulas' I oglyanulas' snova. On sprosil: -- Na chto ty tam vse vremya smotrish', a? Ona ego uvidela, ponikla, I strah smenilsya na lice toskoj. On dvinulsya naverh: -- Na chto ty smotrish'? -- Ona v komok szhimalas' pered nim. -- CHto tam, rodnaya? Daj ya sam vzglyanu. -- Ona ego kak budto ne slyhala. Na shee zhilka vzdulas', i v molchan'e Ona pozvolila emu vzglyanut'. Uverennaya, chto slepoj ne mozhet Uvidet'. On smotrel i vdrug uvidel I vydohnul: -- A! -- I eshche raz: -- A! -- CHto, chto? -- ona sprosila. -- -- Da, uvidel. -- Net, ne uvidel. CHto tam, govori! -- I kak ya do sih por ne dogadalsya! Otsyuda ya ni razu ne glyadel. Prohodish' mimo, gde-to tam, v storonke, Roditel'skoe kladbishche. Podumat' -- Vse umestilos' celikom v okne. Ono razmerom s nashu spal'nyu, da? Plechistye, prizemistye kamni, Granitnyh dva i mramornyj odin, Na solnyshke stoyat pod kosogorom... YA znayu, znayu: delo ne v kamnyah -- Tam detskaya mogilka... -- Net! Ne smej! -- Ruka ego lezhala na perilah -- Ona pod nej skol'znula, vniz sbezhala I oglyanulas' s vyzovom i zloboj, I on, sebya ne pomnya, zakrichal: -- Muzhchina chto, ne smeet govorit' O sobstvennom umershem syne -- tak? -- Ne ty. Kuda devalas' shlyapa? Bog s nej. YA uhozhu. Mne nado progulyat'sya. Ne znayu tochno, smeet li muzhchina. -- |mi! Hot' raz ne uhodi k chuzhim. YA za toboj ne pobegu. -- On sel, Utknuvshis' podborodkom v kulaki. -- Rodnaya, u menya bol'shaya pros'ba... -- Prosit' ty ne umeesh'. -- Nauchi! -- V otvet ona podvinula zasov. -- Moi slova vsegda tebya korobyat. Ne znayu, kak o chem zagovorit', CHtob ugodit' tebe. Naverno, mozhno Menya i pouchit', raz ne umeyu. Muzhchina s vami, zhenshchinami, dolzhen Byt' malost' ne muzhchinoj. My mogli by Dogovorit'sya obo vsem tvoem, CHego ya slovom bol'she ne zadenu, -- Hotya, ty znaesh', ya uveren, eto Nelyubyashchim nel'zya bez dogovorov, A lyubyashchim oni idut vo vred. -- Ona eshche podvinula zasov. -- Ne uhodi. Ne zhalujsya chuzhim. Kol' chelovek tebe pomoch' sposoben, Otkrojsya mne. Ne tak uzh ne pohozh YA na drugih lyudej, kak tam u dveri Tebe mereshchitsya. YA postarayus'! K tomu zhe ty hvatila cherez kraj. Kak mozhno materinskuyu utratu, Hotya by pervenca, perezhivat' Tak bezuteshno -- pred licom lyubvi. Slezami ty ego ne voskresish'... -- Ty snova izdevaesh'sya? -- Da net zhe! YA rasserzhus'. Net, ya idu k tebe. Vot dozhili. Nu, zhenshchina, skazhi: Muzhchina chto, ne smeet govorit' O sobstvennom umershem syne -- tak? -- Ne ty. Ty ne umeesh' govorit'. Beschuvstvennyj. Vot etimi rukami Ty ryl -- da kak ty mog! -- ego mogilku. YA videla v to samoe okno, Kak vysoko letel s lopaty gravij, Letel tuda, syuda, nebrezhno padal I skatyvalsya s vyrytoj zemli. YA dumala: kto etot chelovek? Ty byl chuzhoj. YA uhodila vniz I podnimalas' snova posmotret', A ty po-prezhnemu mahal lopatoj. Potom ya uslyhala gromkij golos Na kuhne i, zachem sama ne znayu, Reshila rassmotret' tebya vblizi. Ty tam sidel -- na bashmakah syraya Zemlya s mogily nashego rebenka -- I dumat' mog o budnichnyh delah. YA videla, ty prislonil lopatu K stene za dver'yu. Ty ee prines! -- Hot' smejsya ot dosady i bessil'ya! Proklyat'e! Gospodi, na mne proklyat'e! -- YA pomnyu slovo v slovo. Ty skazal: "Dozhdlivyj den' i tri tumannyh utra Sgnoyat lyuboj berezovyj pleten'". Takoe govorit' v takoe vremya! Kak ty soedinyal pleten' i to, CHto bylo v zanaveshennoj gostinoj? Ty otgonyal bedu! Nikto iz blizhnih Ne v silah podojti tak blizko k smerti, CHtoby pomoch' v neschast'e: esli ty Smertel'no bolen, znachit, ty odin I budesh' umirat' sovsem odin. Konechno, blizhnie pridut k mogile, No prezhde, chem ee zaroyut, mysli Uzhe vernulis' k zhizni i zhivym, K obydennym delam. Kak mir zhestok! YA tak ne ubivalas' by, kogda by Mogla hot' chto popravit'. Esli b! Esli b! -- Ty vygovorilas'. Tebe polegche? Ty ne ujdesh'. Ty plachesh'. Dver' zakroem. Zachem naprasno beredit' sebya? |mi! Ty slyshish'? Kto-to na doroge. -- |h ty... V slovah li delo? YA poshla -- YA ne mogu byt' zdes'. Kogda b ty ponyal... -- Raz tak -- stupaj! -- Ona otkryla dver'. -- Kuda ty sobralas'? Skazhi! Postoj! YA siloj vozvrashchu tebya. Silkom! * Perevod A. Sergeeva -------- Koshach'e "Myau" I YA by ochen' hotel nachat' etot monolog izdaleka ili po krajnej mere predvarit' ego zayavleniem o svoej nesostoyatel'nosti. Odnako sposobnost' dannoj sobaki uchit'sya novym tryukam ustupaet ee zhelaniyu zabyt' starye. Poetomu pozvol'te mne perejti pryamo k delu. Mnogoe izmenilos' na sobach'em veku, no ya polagayu, chto izuchenie yavlenij eshche imeet smysl i predstavlyaet interes, tol'ko poka ono vedetsya izvne. Vzglyad iznutri neizbezhno iskazhen i imeet chisto mestnoe znachenie vopreki ego prityazaniyam na status dokumenta. Horoshim primerom yavlyaetsya bezumie: mnenie vracha vazhnee mneniya pacienta. Teoreticheski to zhe dolzhno otnosit'sya i k "tvorcheskim sposobnostyam"; esli by tol'ko priroda etogo yavleniya ne isklyuchala vozmozhnosti ih nablyudeniya. Sam process nablyudeniya stavit zdes' nablyudatelya, myagko govorya, nizhe yavleniya, kotoroe on nablyudaet, nezavisimo ot togo, raspolozhen li on snaruzhi ili vnutri dannogo yavleniya. Tak skazat', zaklyuchenie vracha zdes' tak zhe nesostoyatel'no, kak i bujstvo pacienta. Kommentirovanie men'shim bol'shego, bezuslovno, ne lisheno obayaniya skromnosti, i na nashem krayu galaktiki my vpolne privykli k procedure takogo roda. Poetomu ya nadeyus', chto moe nezhelanie govorit' ob®ektivno o tvorcheskih sposobnostyah svidetel'stvuet ne o nedostatke skromnosti s moej storony, no ob otsutstvii nablyudatel'nogo punkta, dayushchego mne vozmozhnost' proiznesti chto-libo stoyashchee ob etom predmete. U menya net kvalifikacii vracha, v kachestve pacienta ya pochti util', tak chto net osnovanij prinimat' menya vser'ez. Krome togo, ya ne perenoshu sam termin "tvorcheskie sposobnosti", i chast' etoj nepriyazni rasprostranyaetsya na yavlenie, kotoroe etot termin, po-vidimomu, oznachaet. Dazhe esli by ya smog zaglushit' golos moih chuvstv, vosstayushchih protiv etogo, moi vyskazyvaniya na dannuyu temu v luchshem sluchae sootvetstvovali by popytkam koshki pojmat' sobstvennyj hvost. Uvlekatel'noe, konechno, zanyatie; no togda, vozmozhno, mne sledovalo by myaukat'. Uchityvaya solipsistskuyu prirodu lyubogo chelovecheskogo issledovaniya, eto bylo by naibolee chestnoj reakciej na ponyatie "tvorcheskie sposobnosti". So storony tvorcheskie sposobnosti predstavlyayutsya predmetom zavisti ili voshishcheniya; iznutri -- eto neskonchaemoe uprazhnenie v neuverennosti i ogromnaya shkola somnenij. V oboih sluchayah myaukan'e ili kakoj-to drugoj nechlenorazdel'nyj zvuk -- naibolee adekvatnaya reakciya na vsyakij vopros o "tvorcheskih sposobnostyah". Poetomu pozvol'te mne otdelat'sya ot serdechnogo trepeta i pridyhanij, soputstvuyushchih etomu terminu, to est' pozvol'te mne vovse otdelat'sya i ot samogo termina. Tolkovyj slovar' Vebstera opredelyaet creativity kak sposobnost' tvorit', poetomu pozvol'te mne priderzhivat'sya etogo opredeleniya. Vozmozhno, togda po krajnej mere odin iz nas budet znat', o chem on govorit, hotya i ne vpolne. Trudnosti nachinayutsya s "create" (tvorit'), kotoryj, ya polagayu, est' vozvyshennyj variant glagola "to make" (delat'), i tot zhe staryj dobryj Vebster predlagaet nam raz®yasnenie: "vyzvat' k sushchestvovaniyu". Povyshenie zdes' svyazano, veroyatno, s nashej sposobnost'yu provodit' razlichie mezhdu znakomymi i besprecedentnymi rezul'tatami ch'ego-libo delan'ya. Znakomoe, takim obrazom, delaetsya; neznakomoe, ili besprecedentnoe, tvoritsya. Ni odin chestnyj remeslennik ili izgotovitel' ne znaet v processe raboty, delaet on ili tvorit. On mozhet byt' ohvachen toj ili inoj neiz®yasnimoj emociej na opredelennoj stadii etogo processa, on dazhe mozhet podozrevat', chto izgotavlivaet nechto kachestvenno novoe ili unikal'noe, no pervaya, vtoraya i poslednyaya real'nost' dlya nego -- samo proizvedenie, sam process raboty. Process preobladaet nad rezul'tatom hotya by potomu, chto poslednij nevozmozhen bez pervogo. Poyavlenie chego-libo kachestvenno novogo -- eto vopros sluchaya. A znachit, net vidimogo razlichiya mezhdu delatelem i zritelem, mezhdu hudozhnikom i publikoj. Na vecherinke pervyj mozhet vydelit'sya iz tolpy v luchshem sluchae blagodarya bolee dlinnym volosam ili ekstravagantnosti naryada, no v nashe vremya tak zhe verno mozhet byt' obratnoe. V lyubom sluchae po okonchanii raboty "delatel'" mozhet smeshat'sya so zritelyami, dazhe perenyat' ih vzglyad na svoyu rabotu i zagovorit' na ih yazyke. Odnako maloveroyatno, chto po vozvrashchenii v kabinet, masterskuyu ili dazhe laboratoriyu on popytaetsya okrestit' inache svoi orudiya. My govorim "ya delayu", a ne "ya tvoryu". |tot vybor glagola otrazhaet ne tol'ko smirenie, no razlichie mezhdu cehom i rynkom, ibo razlichie mezhdu delaniem i sozidaniem mozhet byt' opredeleno tol'ko drugoj storonoj, zritelem. Zriteli, po sushchestvu, yavlyayutsya potrebitelyami, poetomu skul'ptor redko pokupaet raboty drugogo skul'ptora. Lyuboj razgovor o tvorcheskih sposobnostyah, kakim by analiticheskim on ni okazalsya, yavlyaetsya rynochnym razgovorom. Priznanie odnim hudozhnikom genial'nosti drugogo est', po sushchestvu, priznanie sily sluchaya i, vozmozhno, chuzhogo userdiya pri sozdanii obstoyatel'stv, dlya sluchaya etogo blagopriyatnyh. |to chto kasaetsya odnoj chasti opredeleniya Vebstera -- "make" (delat'). Teper' obratimsya k chasti "ability" (sposobnost'). Ponyatie "sposobnost'" proishodit iz opyta. Teoreticheski, chem bol'she nash opyt, tem uverennee my mozhem chuvstvovat' sebya v svoej sposobnosti. Na samom dele (v iskusstve i, ya dumayu, v nauke) opyt i soprovozhdayushchee ego znanie dela -- zlejshie vragi sozdatelya. CHem bol'shij uspeh soputstvoval vam ran'she, s tem bol'shej neuverennost'yu v rezul'tate vy prinimaetes' za novyj proekt. Skazhem, chem zamechatel'nej shedevr vy tol'ko chto proizveli, tem men'she veroyatnost', chto vy povtorite etot podvig zavtra. Drugimi slovami, tem somnitel'nej stanovitsya vasha sposobnost'. Samo ponyatie "sposobnost'" priobretaet v vashem soznanii postoyannyj voprositel'nyj znak, i postepenno vy nachinaete rassmatrivat' svoyu rabotu kak bezostanovochnoe usilie vymarat' etot znak. |to prezhde vsego verno v otnoshenii zanimayushchihsya literaturoj, v chastnosti poeziej, kotoraya, v otlichie ot drugih iskusstv, obyazana peredavat' razlichimyj smysl. No dazhe ukrashennaya vosklicatel'nym znakom, sposobnost' ne garantiruet vozniknoveniya shedevra vsyakij raz, kogda ee primenyayut. Vse my znaem mnozhestvo isklyuchitel'no odarennyh hudozhnikov i uchenyh, kotorye proizvodyat neznachitel'noe. Besplodnye periody, pisatel'skij stupor, pora molchaniya -- sputniki prakticheski vseh izvestnyh geniev, da i menee zamechatel'nye svetochi setuyut na to zhe samoe. CHasto galereya nanimaet hudozhnika ili nauchnoe uchrezhdenie -- uchenogo tol'ko dlya togo, chtoby uznat', skol' neznachitel'nym mozhet byt' rezul'tat. Drugimi slovami, sposobnost' ne svoditsya ni k masterstvu, ni k energii individuuma, ni tem bolee k blagopriyatnosti obstoyatel'stv, finansovym zatrudneniyam ili srede. Esli by delo obstoyalo inache, u nas v nalichii bylo by gorazdo bol'she shedevrov, nezheli my imeem sejchas. Koroche, sootnoshenie lyudej, zanyatyh na protyazhenii tol'ko etogo stoletiya v nauke i iskusstve, i skol'-nibud' zametnyh rezul'tatov takovo, chto est' iskushenie priravnyat' sposobnost' k sluchajnosti. Pohozhe, sluchajnost' prochno obosnovalas' v obeih chastyah vebsterovskogo opredeleniya tvorcheskih sposobnostej. Nastol'ko prochno, chto mne prihodit v golovu, chto, vozmozhno, termin "tvorcheskie sposobnosti" oboznachaet ne stol'ko kachestvo chelovecheskoj deyatel'nosti, skol'ko svojstvo materiala, k kotoromu eta deyatel'nost' vremya ot vremeni prilagaetsya; i vozmozhno, urodstvo termina v konechnom schete opravdanno, poskol'ku on svidetel'stvuet o podatlivosti i ustupchivosti neodushevlennoj materii. Vozmozhno, Tot, kto imel delo s etoj materiej vnachale, ne zrya nazyvalsya Tvorcom. Otsyuda tvorcheskie sposobnosti. Vozmozhno, opredelenie Vebstera nuzhdaetsya v utochnenii. "Sposobnost' tvorit'", zaklyuchayushchaya v sebe tochno ne nazvannoe soprotivlenie, vozmozhno, dolzhna soprovozhdat'sya otrezvlyayushchim "...vojnu protiv sluchajnosti". Konechno, umesten vopros, chto pervichno: material ili ego sozdatel'? Otbrosiv lozhnuyu skromnost', na nashem konce galaktiki otvet ocheviden i zvuchit vysokomerno. Drugoj, i gorazdo luchshij vopros -- o ch'ej sluchajnosti my zdes' govorim: sozdatelya ili materiala? Ni gordynya, ni smirenie ne slishkom tut pomogut. Vozmozhno, pytayas' otvetit' na etot vopros, my dolzhny polnost'yu otkazat'sya ot kachestvennyh ocenok. No u nas vsegda bylo iskushenie sdelat' imenno eto. Tak chto davajte vospol'zuemsya sluchaem: ne stol'ko radi nauchnogo issledovaniya, skol'ko radi reputacii Vebstera. No boyus', chto nam trebuetsya primechanie. II Poskol'ku chelovecheskie sushchestva konechny, ih sistema prichinnosti linejna, to est' avtobiografichna. To zhe samoe otnositsya k ih predstavleniyu o sluchajnosti, poskol'ku sluchajnost' ne besprichinna; ona vsego lish' moment vmeshatel'stva drugoj sistemy prichinnosti -- kakim by zatejlivym ni byl ee risunok -- v nashu sobstvennuyu. Samo sushchestvovanie etogo termina, ne govorya uzhe o raznoobrazii soprovozhdayushchih ego epitetov (k primeru, "slepoj"), pokazyvaet, chto nashi predstavleniya i o poryadke i o sluchae, v sushchnosti, antropomorfny. Horosho, esli by oblast' chelovecheskih issledovanij byla ogranichena zhivotnym carstvom. Odnako eto yavno ne tak; ona mnogo shire, i k tomu zhe chelovecheskoe sushchestvo nastaivaet na poznanii istiny. Ponyatie istiny takzhe antropomorfno i predpolagaet so storony predmeta issledovaniya -- to est' mira -- utaivanie, esli ne otkrytyj obman. Otsyuda raznoobrazie nauchnyh disciplin, tshchatel'nym obrazom issleduyushchih vselennuyu, energichnost' kotoryh -- osobenno ih yazyka -- mozhno upodobit' pytke. Vo vsyakom sluchae, esli istina o veshchah ne byla dobyta do sih por, my dolzhny pripisat' eto chrezvychajnoj neustupchivosti mira, a ne otsutstviyu usilij. Drugim ob®yasneniem, konechno, yavlyaetsya otsutstvie istiny; otsutstvie, kotorogo my ne prinimaem iz-za ego kolossal'nyh posledstvij dlya nashej etiki. |tika -- ili, vyrazhayas' menee pyshno, no, vozmozhno, bolee tochno, poprostu eshatologiya -- v kachestve dvizhitelya nauki? Vozmozhno; v lyubom sluchae, k chemu dejstvitel'no svoditsya chelovecheskoe issledovanie -- eto k voproshaniyu odushevlennym neodushevlennogo. Neudivitel'no, chto rezul'taty neopredelenny, eshche menee udivitel'no, chto metody i yazyk, kotorye my ispol'zuem pri etom processe, vse bol'she i bol'she napominayut samu materiyu. V ideale, vozmozhno, odushevlennomu i neodushevlennomu sleduet pomenyat'sya mestami. |to, konechno, prishlos' by po vkusu besstrastnomu uchenomu, otstaivayushchemu ob®ektivnost'. Uvy, eto vryad li proizojdet, poskol'ku neodushevlennoe, po-vidimomu, ne vykazyvaet nikakogo interesa k odushevlennomu: mir ne interesuetsya svoimi chelovekami. Esli, konechno, my ne pripisyvaem miru bozhestvennoe proishozhdenie, kotoroe vot uzhe neskol'ko tysyacheletij ne mozhem dokazat'. Esli istina o veshchah dejstvitel'no sushchestvuet, togda, uchityvaya nash status pozdnejshih prishel'cev v mir, eta istina obyazana byt' nechelovecheskoj. Ona obyazana unichtozhit' nashi predstavleniya o prichinnosti, lozhny oni ili net, ravno kak i o sluchajnosti. To zhe samoe otnositsya k nashim dogadkam otnositel'no proishozhdeniya mira, bud' ono bozhestvennym, molekulyarnym ili i tem i drugim: zhiznesposobnost' ponyatiya zavisit ot zhiznesposobnosti ego nositelej. To est' nashe issledovanie -- v sushchnosti, chrezvychajno solipsistskoe zanyatie. Ibo edinstvennaya vozmozhnost' dlya odushevlennogo pomenyat'sya mestami s neodushevlennym -- eto fizicheskij konec pervogo: kogda chelovek, tak skazat', prisoedinyaetsya k veshchestvu. Odnako etu problemu mozhno neskol'ko rasshirit', voobraziv, chto ne odushevlennoe izuchaet neodushevlennoe, a naoborot. |to otdaet metafizikoj, i dovol'no sil'no. Konechno, nauku ili religiyu na takom fundamente postroit' trudno. Odnako vozmozhnost' etu ne sleduet isklyuchat' hotya by potomu, chto etot variant pozvolyaet ucelet' nashemu predstavleniyu o prichinnosti. Tem bolee predstavleniyu o sluchajnosti. Kakoj interes predstavlyaet konechnoe dlya beskonechnogo? Uvidet', kak poslednee vidoizmenyaet svoyu etiku? No etika, kak takovaya, soderzhit svoyu protivopolozhnost'. Ispytyvat' chelovecheskuyu eshatologiyu i dal'she? No rezul'taty budut vpolne predskazuemy. Zachem by beskonechnomu prismatrivat' za konechnym? Vozmozhno, iz-za nostal'gii beskonechnogo po svoemu sobstvennomu konechnomu proshlomu, esli ono kogda-libo u nego bylo? CHtoby uvidet', kak bednoe staroe konechnoe vse eshche soprotivlyaetsya sil'no prevoshodyashchim silam protivnika? Kak blizko konechnoe so vsemi ego mikroskopami, teleskopami, kupolami cerkvej i observatorij mozhet podojti k ponimaniyu ogromnosti etih sil? I kakova byla by reakciya beskonechnogo, esli by konechnoe okazalos' sposobnym raskryt' ego tajny? CHto moglo by predprinyat' beskonechnoe, uchityvaya, chto ego repertuar ogranichen vyborom mezhdu nakazaniem i pomilovaniem? I poskol'ku milost' est' nechto menee nam znakomoe, kakuyu formu ona mogla by prinyat'? Esli eto, skazhem, nekij variant vechnoj zhizni, raj, utopiya, gde nichto nikogda ne konchaetsya, kak sleduet byt' s temi, k primeru, kto nikogda tuda ne popadet? I esli by my mogli voskresit' ih, chto by proizoshlo s nashim predstavleniem o prichinnosti, ne govorya uzhe o sluchajnosti? Ili vozmozhnost' voskresit' ih, vozmozhnost' dlya zhivyh vstretit'sya s mertvymi i est' to, chto sostavlyaet sluchajnost'? I ne sinonimichna li vozmozhnost' konechnogo stat' beskonechnym prevrashcheniyu odushevlennogo v neodushevlennoe? I povyshenie li eto? A mozhet byt', neodushevlennoe kazhetsya takovym tol'ko na vzglyad konechnogo? I esli dejstvitel'no ne sushchestvuet razlichiya, krome neskol'kih do sih por ne raskrytyh tajn, to, kogda oni budut raskryty, gde vse my budem obretat'sya? Smogli by my perehodit' iz beskonechnogo v konechnoe i obratno, esli b u nas byl vybor? Kakovy byli by sredstva peredvizheniya mezhdu etimi dvumya bytovaniyami? Mozhet byt', in®ekciya? I kogda my utratim razlichie mezhdu konechnym i beskonechnym, ne vse li nam budet ravno, gde my? Ne stanet li eto po men'shej mere koncom nauki, ne govorya uzhe o religii? "Vy podpali pod vliyanie Vitgenshtejna?" -- sprashivaet chitatel'. Priznanie solipsistskoj prirody chelovecheskogo issledovaniya ne dolzhno, konechno, privesti k zapretitel'nomu zakonu, ogranichivayushchemu oblast' etogo issledovaniya. On ne budet dejstvovat': ni odin zakon, zizhdushchijsya na priznanii chelovecheskih nedostatkov, ne rabotaet. Bolee togo, kazhdyj zakonodatel', osobenno nepriznannyj, dolzhen, v svoyu ochered', postoyano soznavat' stol' zhe solipsistskuyu prirodu samogo zakona, kotoryj on pytaetsya protolknut'. Tem ne menee bylo by blagorazumno i plodotvorno priznat', chto vse nashi soobrazheniya o vneshnem mire, vklyuchaya idei o ego proishozhdenii, -- vsego lish' otrazhenie ili, luchshe, vyrazhenie nashego fizicheskogo "ya". Ibo to, chto sostavlyaet otkrytie ili, shire, istinu, kak takovuyu, est' nashe priznanie ee. Stalkivayas' s nablyudeniem ili vyvodom, podkreplennym ochevidnost'yu, my vosklicaem: "Da, eto istinno!". Drugimi slovami, my priznaem predlozhennoe k nashemu rassmotreniyu nashim sobstvennym. Priznanie v konechnom schete est' otozhdestvlenie real'nosti vnutri nas s vneshnej real'nost'yu: dopusk poslednej v pervuyu. Odnako, chtoby byt' dopushchennym vo vnutrennyuyu svyataya svyatyh (skazhem, razum), gost' dolzhen obladat' po krajnej mere nekotorymi strukturnymi harakteristikami, shodnymi s harakteristikami hozyaina. Imenno eto, konechno, ob®yasnyaet znachitel'nyj uspeh vsevozmozhnyh mikrokosmicheskih issledovanij, poskol'ku vse eti kletki i chasticy priyatno vtoryat nashemu samouvazheniyu. Odnako otbrosim lozhnuyu skromnost': kogda blagodarnyj gost' v konce koncov platit vzaimnost'yu, priglashaya svoego lyubeznogo hozyaina k sebe, poslednij chasto chuvstvuet sebya vpolne uyutno v etih teoreticheski chuzhdyh krayah, a inogda dazhe izvlekaet pol'zu ot prebyvaniya v derevne prikladnyh nauk, vyhodya ottuda to s bankoj penicillina, to s bakom odolevayushchego gravitaciyu topliva. Drugimi slovami, chtoby priznat' chto by to ni bylo, vy dolzhny imet' chto-to, s pomoshch'yu chego vy mozhete eto priznat', chto-to, chto osushchestvlyaet priznanie. Orudie, kotoroe, kak my polagaem, proizvodit vsyu etu shtuku s priznaniem ot nashego imeni, -- nash mozg. Odnako mozg -- ne avtonomnaya edinica: on dejstvuet tol'ko sovmestno s ostal'noj chast'yu nashej fiziologicheskoj sistemy. Bolee togo, my vpolne soznaem sposobnost' nashego mozga ne tol'ko usvaivat' ponyatiya otnositel'no vneshnego mira, no i generirovat' ih; my takzhe soznaem otnositel'nuyu zavisimost' etoj sposobnosti ot, skazhem, nashih motornyh ili metabolicheskih funkcij. |togo dostatochno, chtoby zapodozrit' opredelennoe sootvetstvie mezhdu issledovatelem i predmetom issledovaniya, a podozrenie chasto rozhdaet istinu. |togo v lyubom sluchae dostatochno, chtoby navesti na mysl' o zametnom shodstve mezhdu predmetom otkrytiya i sobstvennym kletochnym sostavom otkryvatelya. Poslednee, konechno, ne lisheno osnovanij hotya by potomu, chto my plot' ot ploti etogo mira, po krajnej mere soglasno dopushcheniyu nashej zhe evolyucionnoj teorii. Togda neudivitel'no, chto my sposobny otkryt' ili ponyat' nekotorye istiny ob etom mire. Nastol'ko neudivitel'no, chto "otkrytie" kazhetsya prosto nepravil'nym upotrebleniem slova, ravno kak i "priznanie", "dopushchenie", "identifikaciya" i t. d. Prihodit v golovu, chto to, chto my obychno ob®yavlyaem otkrytiem, -- vsego lish' proekciya togo, chto u nas vnutri, na vneshnij mir. CHto fizicheskaya real'nost' mira, ili prirody, ili kak ego tam nazvat', -- vsego lish' ekran ili, esli vam nravitsya, stenka -- s nashimi sobstvennymi strukturnymi imperativami i nepravil'nostyami, napisannymi krupno ili melko na nih. CHto vneshnij mir -- shkol'naya doska ili rezonator dlya nashih idej i predstavlenij o nashej sobstvennoj, v bol'shoj stepeni nepostizhimoj tkani. CHto v konechnom schete chelovecheskoe sushchestvo ne stol'ko poluchaet znaniya snaruzhi, skol'ko vydelyaet ih iznutri. CHto chelovecheskoe issledovanie -- sistema zamknutoj cepi, v kotoruyu ne mogut vtorgnut'sya ni kakoe-libo Vysshee Sushchestvo, ni inaya razumnaya sistema. Esli b oni mogli, oni ne byli b tak zhelanny, hotya by potomu, chto Ono ili ona stali by odnim iz nas, a nas i tak hvataet. Im luchshe ostavat'sya v oblasti veroyatnogo, v sfere sluchajnogo. Krome togo, kak skazal odin iz nih: "Carstvo Moe ne ot mira sego". Skol' skandal'na ni byla by reputaciya veroyatnosti, ona ne zabrosit ni odnogo iz nih k nam, potomu chto veroyatnost' ne samoubijca. Obitaya v nashih umah, za otsutstviem luchshih mest, ona, bezuslovno, ne stanet stremit'sya razrushit' svoe edinstvennoe obitalishche. I esli my dejstvitel'no yavlyaemsya auditoriej dlya beskonechnosti, veroyatnost', nesomnenno, sdelaet vse vozmozhnoe, chtoby predstavit' beskonechnost' v vide nravstvennoj perspektivy, osobenno v raschete na to, chto v konce koncov my v nee vojdem. S etoj cel'yu ona dazhe mozhet prepodnesti messiyu, poskol'ku, kogda my predostavleny sami sebe, nam tugo prihoditsya s etikoj dazhe nashego, yavno ogranichennogo sushchestvovaniya. Po prihoti sluchaya messiya etot mozhet prinyat' lyuboe oblich'e, i ne obyazatel'no chelovecheskoe. On mozhet, k primeru, yavit'sya v vide nekoej nauchnoj idei, v forme nekoego mikrobiologicheskogo otkrytiya, osnovyvayushchego spasenie individuuma na universal'noj cepnoj reakcii, kotoraya potrebovala by sohrannosti vseh dlya dostizheniya vechnosti odnim i naoborot. Byvali i bolee strannye veshchi. V lyubom sluchae, chto by ni delalo zhizn' sohrannej ili pridavalo ej nadezhdu na prodlenie, etomu sleduet pripisat' sverh®estestvennoe proishozhdenie, poskol'ku priroda nedruzhelyubna i ne vselyaet nadezhd. S drugoj storony, esli vybirat' mezhdu naukoj i veroj, to my v vyigryshe s naukoj, poskol'ku verovaniya okazalis' slishkom razobshchayushchimi. YA hochu skazat', chto novyj messiya, esli on dejstvitel'no pridet, veroyatno, budet znat' neskol'ko bol'she o yadernoj fizike ili mikrobiologii -- i osobenno o virusologii, -- chem my segodnya. |to znanie, konechno, budet poleznej dlya nas zdes', nezheli v vechnoj zhizni, no v dannyj moment my mogli by dovol'stvovat'sya men'shim. V sushchnosti, eto moglo by stat' horoshej proverkoj dlya veroyatnosti ili -- uzhe -- dlya sluchajnosti, poskol'ku linejnaya sistema prichin i sledstvij vedet nas pryamo k vymiraniyu. Davajte posmotrim, dejstvitel'no li sluchajnost' -- nezavisimoe ponyatie. Davajte posmotrim, yavlyaetsya li ono chem-to bol'shim, chem prosto vstrechej s kinozvezdoj v zaholustnom bare ili vyigryshem v lotereyu. Konechno, eto zavisit ot summy vyigrysha: bol'shoj vyigrysh inogda podoben lichnomu spaseniyu. "Vy pod vliyaniem Vitgenshtejna", -- uporstvuet chitatel'. "Net, ne Vitgenshtejna, -- otvechayu ya. -- Vsego lish' Frankenshtejna". Konec primechaniya. III