Two novels that seem like they should depend heavily on their context, but really do not.
The Twelve Chairs by Ilya Ilf and Evgeny Petrov (1928), tr. Anne O. Fisher, a serialized comic Soviet picaresque that transcends it genre, as they say. By “transcends,” I mean it is better than almost everything like it, Soviet or not. It must be, right? It is still funny, the characters make sense as people and are at the same time completely ridiculous, and the blatantly episodic satirical chunks are essentially universal while keeping their amusing specificity.
For example:
Ostap continually proclaimed speeches, addresses, and toasts. Everyone drank to popular education and to the irrigation of Uzbekistan. (186)
I do not have to know too much about early Soviet culture to think that these toasts are pretty funny, a sign about what has gone wrong. Eh, if it’s not funny, read something else.
The story is a comic classic: a former nobleman learns from his mother-in-law, on her deathbed, that in the Revolution she hid her jewels in one of his chairs. Which one? There are twelve possibilities, and the Revolution scattered some, and the events of the novel scatter the rest. The nobleman takes a con artist as a partner, Ostap in the above quote, and they’re off after the jewels.
I was impressed by Ilf and Petrov’s true sense of comedy, by which I mean that they systematically, gleefully, grind their characters to powder. They push the joke to its logical conclusion. The comedy gets a little dark, as they say.
Big targets beyond the greed at the novel’s core include journalism, corruption, the theater, priests, and the craze for chess, the latter being maybe a little Soviet-specific, but what time and place does not have an equivalent.
Sunflower by Gyula Krúdy (1918), tr. John Bátki. Another big hit, this time from Hungary, where readers apparently enjoyed wallowing in their nostalgia for a lost Romantic pre-war sense of something or another. This is probably lost on non-Hungarian readers, who will take it as ironic, and hilarious:
Mr Pistoli spent his days perfecting his ennui. (140)
Pistoli is an over-the-hill Casanova. The last third of the novel chronicles his last days, his final meetings with old flames, his death and dramatic funeral. Maybe he is more of a Don Juan. Krúdy, one of the most prolific writers in history, wanders among characters in the first part of the novel until for some reason he settles on this one as suitable for a longer story. I have seen reviewers online complain about this choice – they wish Krudy had picked one of the headstrong beauties of earlier chapters, not this old goat, but come on, look at this guy:
That night, with its besotted, harried ghosts and bulgy-eyed goblins, dragged on interminably, like a midnight train wreck, the morning after which the survivor takes stock of his remaining limbs.
The whiplash’s sting sent Mr Pistoli to seek refuge in one of his favourite activities: composing his will, perhaps for the twentieth time. He apportioned his extant and nonexistent belongings among women he had known or would have liked to know. (159)
The novel is a parody of Romanticism and the yearning for it.
Edwin Frank, editor of NYRB Classics, compares Sunflower to the work of Bruno Schulz and P. G. Wodehouse, and in both cases I think: almost. Krúdy, like Schulz, piles on the metaphors – see those goblins above, that train crash – and they are great fun, but where Schulz uses them to create something new, Krúdy is merely rearranging the tropes, as they say.
And instead of Wodehouse, substitute the odder, more baroque Ronald Firbank. I should write something about Firbank sometime. He is an extreme case.
One fine day Mr. Álmos-Dreamer up and died.
He did this every year after spending some time in Miss Eveline’s company, at times when love, the torments of lone wolves and the howling winds assailed him. At times like these, he started to play the violin in the house on this island frequented by the wind and storm-tossed birds. At such times his servant, with his brass buttons, shabby white gloves and antique spats, would retreat into a cubbyhole. (36)
Like Firbank – not like Schulz! – Krúdy is a writer who needs just a few sentences to sort his readers from everyone else. Those wolves, those spats – more of this? There is more.
