About the statement that Aria is supposedly better than Iron Maiden (). About a sense of humor and wit

If the concept of the grotesque could be associated with the concepts this And Togo, this is also true for the concept of absurdity. According to Esslin (1961: xix), the word "absurd" can have two meanings - the one given to it in everyday speech, and the one associated with the so-called theater of the absurd. The first meaning is associated primarily with this-worldliness, and to understand the second meaning one must resort to the idea of other-worldliness. The fact is that when in everyday speech some phenomenon or action is characterized by the word “absurd”, it is meant that this phenomenon is simply absurd from the point of view of logic Everyday life. In other words, the essence of this phenomenon can be exhausted by the categories of everyday or this.

The situation is different when we need to explain the meaning of the word "absurd" in relation to the theater of the absurd or absurd art in general, since then we are dealing with questions that are fundamental to the very existence of man - the logic of everyday life is useless in solving these questions. Following Ionesco (see ibid.), we can say that the very existence of a person turns out to be absurd - meaningless or useless - if he is deprived of religious, metaphysical or transcendental foundations. In other words, trying to solve the question of the meaning of his existence - about the mystery of life - a person must inevitably move from the sphere of knowledge to the sphere of faith: he must free himself from the limitations of everyday thinking in order to see the transcendental reality. As Esslin writes (ibid.: 290-291), to modern man one has to feel the urgency of this question posed by life itself, stronger than their predecessors, for whom the truths of religion were not problematic - one can say that for them these truths moved from the sphere of the transcendental into everyday life, from Togo V This.

At first glance it may seem that thinking and creative quest in the theater of the absurd have nothing to do with religion - after all, it is characterized by grotesque forms and pessimism of the proposed answers. However, as Esslin writes (Esslin 1961: 292-293), by bringing into focus the question of the meaning of human existence and his position in the universe and showing his clash with the fundamental questions of existence, the theater of the absurd essentially touches on religious issues.

Ionesco offers a clear example of how the absurd or something surreal can arise in our everyday life: according to him, the idea of the play Bald singer, - where married couples engage in quasi-communication, “conversing” in empty phrases, - arose in him when he read the lists of words and phrases included in the self-instruction book in English. This clearly shows how the surreal is present in our everyday speech. (Styan 1981: 138-139.) However, according to Esslin (1961: 292), such a manifestation of the absurd does not correspond to the main idea of the theater of the absurd. He distinguishes two planes in which the absurdity of man is manifested in the concept of the theater of the absurd. Only the first of these plans constitutes social satire and criticism, demonstrating how ridiculous and pathetic a person is. This plan is expressed through the example of Ionesco. The second plan - which according to Esslin is more significant, although less obvious, than the first - lies precisely in what was said above about existential questions concerning the foundations human existence, and about the role of the theater of the absurd, which brings these issues into the spotlight. These plans, of course, interact with each other: we can say that what appears on the first, superficial level is a reflection of phenomena at a deeper level, the core of absurdity human life and existence.

It can be argued that purely epistemologically everyday thinking is absurd because it is based on assumptions that cannot be rationally justified. These assumptions are, first of all, the principles of causality and induction, but, as the philosopher Hume showed in the 18th century, the reliability of these principles cannot be proven based on observations of those specific phenomena in which these principles are manifested. For example, from the fact that the sun has risen every morning so far, it cannot be concluded that it will rise tomorrow. Accordingly, although a person knows that every time he threw a piece of paper into the fire, this piece was lit, he cannot deduce from this that it will be so the next time: he did not see the causal relation itself, but only the ones repeated in a certain order individual events. There are an endless number of similar examples from everyday life. The important thing is that Hume shows us how unattainable causality itself is, and relying in daily activities on the assumption of its existence, we proceed only from habit or skill, but not from strictly rational thinking. (See Saarinen 1985: 209-223.) In light of the above, it can be argued that when a writer depicts events or phenomena that seem absurd from the point of view of everyday logic, he is in fact superrational, since those incredible possibilities are realized in the world he created , the implementation of which, according to Hume, there is no fundamental obstacle. So, it turns out that those who consider a writer to be a creator of nonsense actually express in their reasoning less reasonableness and more absurdity than the given writer.

However, the matter is not so simple. Kant's reaction to Hume is as follows: on the one hand, Hume is right that causation itself cannot be directly observed or deduced from experience. However, on the other hand, according to Kant, it is causation that is one of the a priori forms of human experience, without indicating which it makes no sense to talk about how a person observes the environment: human observation is as much determined by the a priori category of causality as by the object of observation, independent of consciousness of the subject. In observation, the category of causality is even more important than the object, which has only a random character from the point of view of the subject, while causality is a necessary part of observation, since human consciousness by its nature actively uses causality in the process of observation.

In Kant's terminology, a priori forms of experience (e.g. time, space, causation) are called transcendental because they cannot be directly observed, but, on the other hand, their existence must be assumed since they form an essential part of the human mind and therefore influence in an essential way the the way a person imagines the world. Thus, “things in themselves” ( Dinge an sich) are fundamentally inaccessible to human knowledge - things are revealed in our experience only as “phenomena,” that is, through transcendental, a priori categories of the human mental mechanism.

Things in themselves are transcendental precisely because they go beyond the limits of what is cognizable by man. In terms of our work, we're talking about about the sphere Togo located behind obstacle. Kant agrees with Hume that causality cannot be said to belong to objective reality. However, Kant cannot accept Hume's assertion that the postulation of causation is unfounded, since, as already mentioned, it is an integral part of human experience, without which a person would not be a person: causality is not derived from experience, but is put into it by the human mind.

If we accept Kant’s assertion that all knowledge is conditioned by a priori forms of human experience, then the above idea of how the creator of the literature of the absurd reveals to the reader the falsity of his worldview, based on factually absurd assumptions, may seem somewhat implausible. Based on Kant, it can be argued that the absurdity of a certain phenomenon depends on whether it corresponds to the a priori forms of human experience. In other words, casual look thinking is still the highest authority that determines absurdity, for example, work of art. However, such a conclusion is premature, since the task of the creator of absurd literature can be seen as making the reader wonder why the described phenomenon seems absurd to him. IN best case scenario, having read an absurdist work, the reader deviates from his previous, perhaps naive, ideas about reality, at the same time realizing that his subjective considerations about the world can never achieve absolute truth - after all, the reader is subject to all restrictions human perception peace.

At the same time, one can ask, agreeing with Kant’s thought about the a priori forms of human experience, whether these forms are as indisputable and unconditional as Kant claims. In other words, we can leave open the answer to the question of what exactly these forms are, providing the opportunity for a constant search for the essence of a person. The writer can participate in this search, for example, by creating the image of a person who perceives the world radically differently than we do, but who is, nevertheless, a person.

So, Kant's a priori forms of experience are on the edge of the knowable, allowing, as it seems to us, differing opinions about what these forms specifically represent. But what is clearly transcendental - going beyond the limits of the knowable - is, along with things in themselves, the world as a whole or God. According to Kant, it makes sense to talk about similar things that are beyond the boundaries of experience. They appear to humans as so-called ideas. pure reason. They are motivated by their role as general principles regulating human activities. Although Kant proceeds from the fact that the existence of God cannot be proven, he nevertheless argues that the idea of God is necessary for man as a moral being. However, if the transcendental, a priori forms of experience are ambiguous, as we suggested above, then the more one can doubt the validity of statements expressing the necessity of ideas concerning the transcendent. In other words, Kant seems to forget that when speech moves from human experience to transcendental ideas, we are no longer dealing with knowledge, but with faith. Therefore, the need to postulate the idea of God should arise, most likely, as a result of an irrational choice individual person, and not by rational inference, which every rational person must agree with. (See Saarinen 1985: 227-254.)

When discussing the role of the creator of absurd literature, it is necessary to turn to Hume and Kant, since, firstly, the reliability of the fundamental assumptions of everyday thinking and perception of the world is questioned. Secondly, from everything stated above, one can derive a more general and significant question for the art of the absurd about whether it is fair to postulate a certain principle that connects all people with each other and with the rest of the world, or whether a person is doomed to fundamental isolation.

Thus, we returned to Esslin’s idea of the task of the theater of the absurd: in his opinion, it is to bring a person face to face with that unknown area of reality that is incomprehensible to the human mind, and force a person to make his choice. This choice can be based not on conclusions, not on authorities, but only on a person’s faith. It can be argued that in To the old woman this is essentially the problem given choice: at first the story shows the people and events described in it as isolated, and then it turns out that they are all connected to each other universal principle, divine power.

Jaccard (1991b: 49-50) notes that the word “absurd” has generally undergone some inflation: it has been used in so many different meanings that it has lost its meaning. true meaning. Jacquard considers Camus's point of view to be correct, according to which the absurd refers to the fundamental gap between man and the world. He thus shares Esslin's starting point, but believes that the gap can be bridged.

However, if we accept Jaccard's position, it is difficult to understand how literary activity or communication is possible at all. After all, if someone tries to say or express with the help of literature that communication is impossible due to the said gap between man and the world, then he simultaneously implicitly affirms the possibility of communication, since the act of expressing a given thought presupposes some kind of participant in communication. Accordingly, if someone claims to understand from the content of a work that communication is impossible, he overlooks the fact that he would not understand this if communication were not possible. In other words, absurd art refutes itself if it tries to express the idea of the impossibility of communication.

So, the mentioned gap cannot be absolute, since otherwise it would be impossible to say anything about it. Another thing is the violation of the prerequisites of communication to generate the effect of absurdity. Then we are talking about communication of the second degree, since these prerequisites become the content of communication. However, all the premises cannot be violated at the same time, since, as Shukman notes (Shukman 1989: 70), this would lead to the fact that nothing would be intelligible. Schucman's conclusion corresponds to what has been said about the problems that the assertion of a total gap between man and the world leads to.

Comparing the concepts of grotesque and absurdity with each other, one can find that they are akin to each other, which is not surprising, given that both could be analyzed using Kharms’s concepts This And That. Both in the grotesque and in the absurd, we are talking about the fact that some element that determines the normal order of things is absent or changes radically: in the Kaiser’s grotesque this element is some kind of incomprehensible “it”, and in the Bakhtinian grotesque the whole order of things is turned upside down upside down. If we define absurdity as the absence of meaning, its relationship with the grotesque becomes clear, which is characterized precisely by the incomprehensibility of the alien element or order present in it. Bakhtin's grotesque is more dynamic than the Kaiser's, because in it there is an absurd absence usual meaning leads to a new meaning, which, however, is temporary, since later the carnival is replaced by a return to the old order of things. However, we can say that this process also enriches the meaning of the normal order of things, although outwardly everything remains the same.

Another circumstance that especially connects Bakhtin's grotesque with the absurd is the meaning of death. It was said earlier that for Bakhtin, death is a renewing force. Death is also central to the problem of the absurd, since the existential absurdity of life stems from the fact that limited life is This- inevitably faces the great unknown those- with death. At the same time, this absurdity of life served as an impulse for humanity creative power- after all, religions essentially arose precisely as an answer to the question posed by the absurdity of life, which ends in death. Concerning Old women, in it the problematic of death and the possibility of endless life - immortality - plays a central role.

Speaking about the absurdity in connection with the work of Kharms, it should be noted that Old woman is in no way a shining example absurd. On the contrary, the language of the story is completely understandable, the behavior of the characters is relatively normal, and even the movement of the old woman’s corpse can be rationally explained as a hallucination of the hero. Probably for these reasons, Vvedensky did not like the story, who reproached it for its lack of experimentalism (see Nakhimovsky 1982: 87). In fact, the rest of Kharms’s work can be considered more absurd than Old woman. For example, early poems are characterized by an incomprehensible language, the roots of which lie in the zaumi. In the 1930s years Harms moves more and more to prose, leaving language experiments aside: the prose language is clear and concise. However, the behavior of the characters, as well as the plot twists and turns, are often absurd. The effect of absurdity also occurs when narrative conventions are violated.

Kharms's absurdity comes closest to the Western theater of the absurd in the play Elizaveta Bam. It was staged for the first time in January 1928 at the famous OBERIU evening “The Three Left Clocks”. The program included, in particular, reading the article “OBERIU”, in which this play is considered as an example of Oberiut art (see. OBERIU 1970: 73-74). In the play, the absurdity manifests itself on many levels. Already the starting point of the plot contradicts the laws of logic: two men come to detain Elizaveta Bam for allegedly killing one of them. Further events unfold in the same illogical way: characters, whose identity is constantly fragmented, sometimes act in complete disagreement with what was assumed based on their original roles. In many cases, the content of the remarks is semantically absurd, for example: “the scissors are tired” ( Flight 1991: 191). In addition, the play contains talking instruments, as well as an incomprehensible spell (ibid.: 198-199).

The OBERIU declaration emphasizes that Oberiut art must express in a concrete way the essence of reality. If the works similar art seem incomprehensible from the point of view of everyday logic, then the point is in the shortcomings of this logic, and not in the fact that the art of OBERIU contradicts reality. (Cm. OBERIU 1970: 70-71.) Thus, behind the apparent absurdities Elizaveta Bam there must be a certain meaning.

Although Elizaveta Bam sharply different from Old women degree of their absurdity, these works have some important points of contact. If driving force The plot of the play is the accusation of Elizaveta Bam for a murder that she did not commit, then in To the old woman The hero's actions are motivated by the fear that he will be accused of killing the old woman, although she died a natural death. In addition, the structure of both texts is circular: the initial and final episodes Elizabeth Bam are almost identical, and in To the old woman the circularity arises as a result of the fact that at the beginning the old woman holds a pointless watch, symbolizing timelessness or eternity, and at the end of the story the hero turns to the eternal God - the circularity of the story is further emphasized by the round shape of the dial. At the same time, the round shape may indicate the previously discussed teaching of Kharms, according to which the circle or zero is the basis from which everything can be explained. At the same time, zero means emptiness or absence, which in this regard is appropriate to interpret as the absence of meaning, that is, absurdity. Arguing that the circle symbol expresses the idea of the absence of meaning in the works under consideration, the following clarification must be made: we are talking about an apparent rather than a complete absence of meaning - otherwise it would be impossible to study these texts.

So although Old woman- one of the least absurd works of Kharms, one can point out a number of absurd elements, which will be further classified at three different levels: firstly, the sphere of the hero’s experiences with all the comic absurdities will be considered; secondly, we will talk about the manifestation of the absurdities of Soviet reality in the text; thirdly, the metaphysical absurdity of the story, which is associated with existential questions about human existence, will be considered.

Notes

Esslin examines specifically the Western theater of the absurd, but his analysis can also be applied to the work of Kharms.

For Kant, causality is one of the categories of reason, and the a priori forms of purely sensory intuition are time and space.

In philosophical terminology, that which is within experience - that is, the opposite of the transcendental - is immanent.

Schucman examines Kharms's absurdity precisely from the point of view of communication.

As an innocent victim, Elizabeth can be compared to Christ. Developing this analogy, we can pay attention to the fact that although the two men detaining Elizabeth are police officers, they behave like criminals. Thus, they can be compared to the two villains hanged next to Jesus. One of the men, however, unexpectedly falls in love with Elizabeth, saying that she has an “extremely pleasant appearance” ( Flight 1991: 180). Accordingly, while one of the villains slandered Jesus, the other took pity on him, asking him to accept him into heaven (Luke 23:39-43). Elizabeth's mother behaves like Judas - she pushes her daughter into the hands of the men who are detaining her, accusing her of murder ( Flight 1991: 203). If Peter, when detaining Jesus, cut off the right ear of the high priest's servant with a sword (John 18:10), Elizabeth's father does the same: in a duel he kills one of the men detaining Elizabeth, who, however, then again appears in the play ( Flight 1991: 203, 205). Accordingly, Jesus healed the ear that Peter had cut off (Luke 22:50). And finally, in the play they have dinner ( Flight 1991: 191), which can be considered analogous to the Last Supper.

Thickening :

a) with mixed word formation;

b) with modification.

Using the same material:

c) whole and parts;

d) rearrangement;

e) minor modification;

f) the same words, used in a new sense and having lost their original meaning.

Ambiguity:

g) designation of a proper name and thing;

h) metaphorical and material meaning of words;

i) play on words;

j) double interpretation;

k) ambiguity with a hint.

Our approach is the opposite of Freud's. S. Freud had previously formulated several theoretical positions, and he used his classification to confirm them, “adjusting” the facts to preconceived concepts. And the construction of our classification is purely inductive. The basis is the study of human verbal and verbal behavior, and above all - creativity recognized masters sharp words, that is, writers - satirists and humorists.

Studying and comparing various jokes and witticisms shows that the work of wit uses a limited number of formal techniques. Below we will look at them and try to find out whether these techniques can cover all manifestations of human wit or will there remain some part that cannot be classified or formalized? What principles should form the basis of classification?

In the story “Up in Michigan,” Hemingway talks about a maid in the Smith house: “Mrs. Smith, a very large, clean woman, said that she had never seen a neater girl than Liz Coates.” And the reader gets the impression of a girl of almost incredible cleanliness: if her owner, and besides, a clean woman herself, praises her so much, it means it’s not in vain.

And here is how Isaac Babel characterizes one of his heroes: “... Papa Krik, an old bandit, who was known among the bandits as a rude man.”

The similarity between the two quoted phrases is striking. But what is it? Apparently, grammatical analysis will not reveal it.

In fact, you can come up with dozens of phrases that contain the same parts of the sentence - subject, predicate, definitions, etc., but which will differ from the two above. Content analysis also does not allow us to find out what the similarities are.

The similarities are revealed as a result of a logical analysis of the train of thought. This is neither a grammatical analysis nor an analysis of the content, but a certain intermediate level.

False Contradiction

One of the most common techniques is the so-called false opposition, pseudocontrast. The statement is constructed in such a way that its final part seems to contradict the beginning in form, but in fact strengthens it and develops it . Let's look at this humorous phrase Dickens said about the heroine of one of the writer's novels.

“She had a yellowish-pale complexion, which, however, was compensated by a bright blush on her nose.”

At first, the heroine’s unsightly appearance is emphasized, but the form of the statement is such that we expect some kind of compensation in the future. And indeed, our expectation seems to be justified: the bright blush really contrasts with yellow face, however, the indication that this blush is on the nose suddenly and sharply enhances the impression of the heroine’s ugliness and causes a comic effect.

The same technique is used in the comic aphorisms “it’s better to overeat than not sleep enough” or “we will eat a lot, but often,” and Shchedrin’s well-known characterization of Foolov’s mayor Ferdyshchenko: “with a not very broad mind, he was tongue-tied.”

One of the best implementations of this technique is the phrase of Ostap Bender: “Nobody loves us, except the criminal investigation department, which also does not love us.”

At the Black Sea Film Factory, where Ostap brought his script, “the commandant was sitting in the entrance. He strictly demanded a pass from everyone entering, but if they didn’t give him a pass, then he let him in anyway.”

In the story “Second Lieutenant Kizhe” by Yu. Tynyanov, Lieutenant Sinyukhaev played cards with his orderly:

“When the lieutenant won, he would hit the orderly on the nose with the block. When the lieutenant lost, he did not slap the orderly on the nose.”

Heinrich Heine is credited with the following answer to the question of whether he liked the poems of a certain H.: “The poems of the poet H., whom I have not read, remind me of the poems of the poet W., whom I also have not read.” Again, this is a false contrast.

False gain

False enhancement is, to a certain extent, the opposite of pseudocontrast or false contrast. The final part of the statement confirms the initial part in form, but in essence refutes and destroys it. So, G. Heine, answering the question whether Mrs. N. was beautiful, said that she looked like the Venus de Milo: just as old and just as toothless.

J.C. Jerome has this humorous phrase: “Everything has its shadow sides, as the husband whose mother-in-law died said when they demanded money from him for the funeral.” The last remark (about money for funerals) radically changes the meaning of the entire previous statement, although in form it is a continuation of it.

Or take this quote from Mark Twain from the book “Innocents Abroad”:

“Apparently, I have enormous reserves of intelligence - sometimes it takes me a week to use them.”

Of the satirical writers, Sinclair Lewis was especially willing to use this technique. The following passage from the novel Arrowsmith illustrates this:

“Martin... was a typical full-blooded Anglo-Saxon - in other words, in his veins flowed German and French blood, Scottish, Irish, a little, perhaps, Spanish, probably in some dose and that mixture that is called Jewish blood, and a lot dose of English, which in turn is a combination of ancient British, Celtic, Phoenician, Romanesque, Germanic, Danish and Swedish origins.”

It is impossible to vouch for the accuracy of this phrase from the point of view of ethnography, but there is no doubt that the author laughs at the absurd, from his point of view, concept of “pure-blooded Anglo-Saxon”: by the form of construction of the phrase, as if deciphering it, he essentially denies it.

Reduction to the Absurd

This includes witty answers built on reducing to the point of absurdity some thought of the interlocutor, when at first they seem to agree with it, and then, at the very end, with a short clause they change the entire meaning of the previous phrase. Several examples of such answers are given Freud .

The officer, seeing a fabric dyer at work, mockingly asked him, pointing to his snow-white horse: “Can you dye it too?” “Of course I can,” was the answer. “If only it can withstand the boiling point.”

This technique is used not only in verbal exchanges, but also in literary polemics. In particular, it is readily used by reviewers and critics. Having taken some dubious thesis of his opponent, the reviewer does not refute it, but develops it, freeing it from the verbal husk, exposing its essence, slightly exaggerating and sharpening it, and thereby, as a rule, inflicting a sensitive prick on his opponent.

Reduction to the absurd is sometimes achieved by hyperbole or exaggeration , and not only in polemics, but also in oral and written storytelling.

Of the Russian writers, N.V. Gogol most willingly used this technique.

In “Dead Souls” you can find many phrases, like the following:

“The tavern servant was lively and fidgety to such an extent that it was impossible to even see what kind of face he had.”

Reduction to the absurd can be achieved not only through exaggeration or hyperbole. Along with it, it is also very common understatement technique , deliberate softening - euphemism . Take, for example, the French proverb: “If someone is stupid, it will last for a long time.” Everyone knows that stupidity does not go away or be cured and that fools remain so until their death. But in this form, the statement would simply be a statement of fact. And the understatement, which is obviously absurd, makes the saying witty. The same applies to the English definition of boxing: exchange of opinions through gestures.

There is a peculiar form of euphemism when a concept is expressed through the negation of the opposite concept. For example, instead of beautiful they say not bad, instead of interesting - not uninteresting, instead of good - not bad. This form of understatement can also be taken to the point of absurdity and thereby turned into a technique of wit:

“In the janitor’s room there was the smell of rotting manure, spread by Tikhon’s new felt boots. Old felt boots stood in the corner and the air was also not ozonized (“Twelve Chairs” by I. Ilf and E. Petrov).

The ad absurdum technique was widely used by the ancient satirist Lucian. His satirical dialogue “Zeus Convicted” is entirely built on the point of absurdity.

The wit of the absurd

Similar to the technique of reduction to absurdity is a technique that is best called the wit of absurdity.

For example, famous phrase uttered by one militant atheist.

He ended his lecture on atheism with this effective statement: “The question of whether there is a God must be answered positively: yes, there is no God.”

Let us remind the reader of a popular anecdote at the beginning of the century about a picky visitor to a confectionery shop who ordered a cake with the inscription “Greetings from the Caucasus,” three times demanded to redo the inscription because it did not seem beautiful enough to him, and when asked by the pastry chef whether to pack the cake in a box, he answered, “ no need, I’ll eat it right here.”

This reception - wit of absurdity - used not only in everyday jokes, but also in literature, especially often in the genre of literary parody. It has much in common with the method of reduction to absurdity, but there are also differences. Reduction to the point of absurdity is achieved, as a rule, by exaggeration, or hyperbole. And the wit of absurdity inherent in the situation itself, contrary to common sense and everyday experience .

Reading famous fairy tale In Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland, the reader laughs many times, not always realizing it, at the wit of the absurdity.

Take, for example, the story of Cheshire cat, who almost always had a smile on his face. Sometimes the smile disappeared and only the face remained; but it happened that the face disappeared, and then only a smile remained.

About a hundred years ago, in one of the legislative commissions discussing the possibility of abolishing corporal punishment (roz), a certain liberal lawyer, not without cynicism, remarked:

“Whipping a man is disgusting, but what can we offer him in return?”

These lines still make you smile, and at one time this wit was considered one of the “highlights of the season.”

What is its meaning? Usually, when something is taken away from a person, he is deprived of something, he has the right to demand compensation, the provision of some other values, benefits, advantages. But corporal punishment was hardly one of those benefits, deprived of which a man would want to receive something else. However, the construction of the phrase and the thought expressed in this form are based on the assumption that the abolition of the rods must be somehow compensated for the peasant, otherwise, perhaps, he will not agree with it. This assumption contradicts common sense, it's ridiculous. Therefore, we attribute the lawyer’s statement to the wit of absurdity. But the absurd assumption is contained in this phrase not explicitly, in the form of a hint, even transparent. So here is a combination of two techniques.

Let us give another example of the wit of absurdity. When the press spread false rumors about Mark Twain's death, he issued this denial:

“Rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated.” It hardly needs explaining that it was the absurdity of the formulation that made it witty.

Common sense varies different people depending on the" life experience, development, education. Hence the unintentional wit of people who invade areas of knowledge that are alien to them without appropriate preparation. It can be funny, for example, for a doctor to listen to non-specialists talk about medical topics.

This form of wit is used very often in literature. Perhaps one of the most famous stories in this regard is “Letter to a Learned Neighbor,” all built on the “accidental” wit of the statements of a semi-wild steppe landowner; The apotheosis of the story was the phrase, which later became popular and entered into our everyday life: “This cannot be, because this can never happen.”

The section “You Can’t Invent It on Purpose” (in the Krokodil magazine), popular among readers, consists almost entirely of unintentional witticisms, the essence of which is “the wit of absurdity”:

“Sailor Ivanov was removed from work for systematic drunkenness during the voyage and performed official duties.”

There is such an episode in Yuri Tynyanov’s story “Second Lieutenant Kizhe”. Lieutenant Sinyukhaev was mistakenly considered dead. And when he reported for duty, the Minister of War had to write a report to the Tsar:

“Lieutenant Sinyukhaev, who died of a fever, turned up alive and filed a petition for reinstatement on the lists.”

Emperor Paul 1 wrote the highest resolution on this report: “... to refuse for the same reason.”

Perhaps difficult to choose best samples wit of absurdity.

It must be said that the structure of this technique is quite complex - it includes very different modifications. It is necessary to define precisely what is absurdity? The criteria for absurdity, however, are not so difficult to find. In the simplest case, the absurdity lies in the fact that the statement contains mutually exclusive elements, but the form of the statement is such that they are completely compatible. Take, for example, an announcement about a party in a city garden: “Admission is free, children have a discount.” In Victor Keen’s notebooks there is the following entry (about his beloved boss): “We hope that premature death will soon snatch him from our ranks.” Although the method of absurdity here is not immediately apparent, in essence, here too there is a combination of two logically incompatible statements.

Sometimes the absurdity lies in an illegitimate conclusion, which is based not on premises, not on initial data, but on minor details of the situation.

Mixing styles or “combining plans”

First, we will give an example, and then we will analyze its structure. The expression “food of the gods” is well known - this is what they say when they want to praise the taste of a dish. This expression is somewhat pompous and belongs, so to speak, to the “high style”. The word “grub” is colloquial; it is almost never used in the so-called intelligent society. Therefore, the combination of the words “food of the gods” in “The Golden Calf” by I. Ilf and E. Petrov is unexpected, witty and funny. Here we have a mixture of speech styles. Among the varieties of this technique is the discrepancy between the style of speech and its content, or the style of speech and the environment where it is pronounced.

A.K. Tolstoy in “History of the Russian State” says about the Tatar invasion and princely feuds as follows:

The service was bad

And the children, seeing that,

Let's tease each other

Who how and what into what.

The Tatars found out"

But they think, don’t be afraid,

We put on bloomers,

We arrived in Rus'.

The same technique is used - the contrast between the dramatic elements, the tragic events of Russian history and the deliberately simplified, everyday vocabulary, that is, a mixture of styles.

A. K. Tolstoy also used a mixture of styles in another of his satirical poems - in a message to the chairman of the press committee M. Longinov, who banned the publication of Darwin's books in Russia.

Is it true what I hear?

They say Ovamo and Semo,

It makes Misha very sad

Like Darwin's system?

Come on, Misha, don’t complain

Without a tail, yours...

So you have no offense

In what was before the flood.

And one more thing for you

Here I will add, dear one:

Not the Chinese wall

We are separated from people.

Science with Lomonosov

Having laid the germ within us,

Gets to you without knocking

past all your slingshots.

Sheds streams of light on the world

And, watching how in the azure darkness

God's planets are moving

Without censorship instructions,

Shows us how the same force

All dressed in different flesh

Entered the realm of the mind,

Without asking the committee.

The address “revered” is, of course, irony. But, perhaps, the main means that gives these lines a satirical sound are words full of internal pathos about the power of science, contrasting and highlighting the pallor and inexpressiveness of the official-bureaucratic terminology of a stupid official (“God’s planets walk without censorship instructions”).

Another variety of this technique is pseudo-profound thinking, that is, the use of pompous expressions, complex verbal structures and grammatical expressions to express trivial truths, flat thoughts, and vulgar maxims.

An unsurpassed example of this kind of wit was and remains the aphorisms of Kozma Prutkov and some of his parodies:

I'm in deep thought

Lyazimakh once said:

What a sighted person sees with a healthy eye,

A blind person cannot see even with glasses.

The idea of this quatrain is extremely simple; no one doubts that a sighted person sees better than a blind person. Such statements have zero information value. There is absolutely no need to refer to the bearer of the sonorous ancient Greek name - Lysimachus. The combination of a thoughtful form with insignificant content, the contrast between them - this is the structure of this quatrain, which determines its wit.

Mixing styles, consciously or unconsciously, is used very widely by many people: for example, sometimes it is quite ingenious to transfer military-strategic terminology to the area of love or family relationships. However, in recent years, such a transfer has turned into a cliche, has lost its freshness and surprise - it has simply become vulgar.

Literary critics, in polemical excitement, wanting to hurt their opponents, transfer church terminology and the terminology of funeral rites into the field of literary criticism.

The effect of wit is also achieved in cases where extremely modern events are described in an outdated language, with an abundance of Slavicisms or even a chronicle style. And vice versa - small everyday facts are presented in an intricate “scientific language”, with a huge number of Latin terms.

The same effect is obtained if you retell in modern “stylish” jargon any work of classical literature or folk tale(“Wolf, with terrible force frail through the forest, I met a woman in a stunning red hat” - M. Rozovsky).

“The Aeneid” by I. P. Kotlyarevsky is one of the magnificent examples of “mixing style”; Mark Twain’s book “A Yankee at King Arthur’s Court” and M. Bulgakov’s comedy “Ivan Vasilyevich” are based on a mixture of styles.

“My Memoirs” by Academician A. N. Krylov is distinguished, among other advantages, by its sparkling wit. This book repeatedly uses the technique of discrepancy between speech style and the surrounding environment. Let's take this episode, for example. Having received an official document from the Minister of the Navy demanding an explanation regarding some absurd and illiterate anonymous denunciation, the indignant A.N. Krylov conveyed to the Minister of the Navy: “If His Excellency wants to delve into Mr...., then let him look for Mr. ... clean.” The contrast between the prim, official atmosphere of the Navy Ministry, the address “Your Excellency” and the crude naturalism of the subsequent words is the essence of this answer.

Elsewhere, A. N. Krylov tells how he achieved financial allocations for the construction of a sewer system for the Tsarskoye Selo Observatory. To overcome the bureaucratic inertia of the Ministry of Finance, Krylov indicated in his report that there was a threat to the health of His Imperial Majesty, and to the minister’s perplexed question he answered: “That’s right, g... liquid and solid flows directly into the river that feeds the palace water supply.” And here, too, the whole point of the answer is in the contrast between the ceremonial pomposity of the words about august health and the subsequent simple word. It is curious that in the repeated editions of the book, well-behaved editors replaced the “indecent” words, and immediately all the piquancy of Krylov’s demarches disappeared. In the above poem by A.K. Tolstoy, the unpronounceable rhyme for the word “flood” is witty only thanks to the contrast, thanks to the “mixing of styles.”

Without such a contrast, there can be nothing witty in rude, swear words, and people who are prone to frequent use of swear words, as a rule, lack wit and a sense of humor. Conversely, the effect can be achieved by silence, a hint of an abusive or illegal word. This is the next trick of wit.

It is possible that some purists will find the examples given to be insufficiently aesthetic and smelly. However, we did not consider it possible to bypass the category of jokes, which occupies great place in the general flow of speech production of this type. And if the above-mentioned hints offend the taste of certain adherents of decency, then we will note in our justification that all examples were taken by us from very respectable literary sources.

Hint

In one of E. Kazakevich’s novels there is the following phrase: “Go to..., and he named a very popular address in Russia.” Readers always smile at this point. If Kazakevich had cited the abusive expression verbatim, there would have been nothing funny about it. And the allusion - even if very transparent - to a phrase that is not customary to be uttered in society, although widely known, is undoubtedly witty.

In Caldwell’s story “An Incident in July,” a worker, remembering one girl, says this: “It turned out that she was not away, and even more so.” And here it would be possible to see directly and clearly what the sexually aggressive girl wanted. However, the writer found the form of a transparent hint without resorting to clarification.

S. N. Sergeev-Tsensky successfully applied the same technique in “Sevastopol Strada”. A non-commissioned officer of one of the cavalry regiments had a beautiful racing stallion named Perun. (Officers, of course, gave magnificent names to horses.) But the soldiers, not privy to the intricacies of ancient Slavic mythology, changed this nickname, adding only one letter. What kind of letter this is and what word it turned out to be is left to the reader to guess. However, this is not difficult to do. The technique used is a hint. His wit is further enhanced by the fact that the sonorous name of the ancient Slavic god contrasts very strongly with the rude common word that is obtained by adding a single letter. So here is a combination of two methods of wit that mutually reinforce each other, and the overall wit only benefits from this.

One should not think that a hint is witty only if there is some obscenity behind it - far from it. But in general, the greatest effect of a hint is obtained when they hint at something prohibited:

“Mr. X. is quite stubborn,” the official said of one high-ranking statesman. “Yes,” answered his interlocutor. “This is one of the four Achilles heels.” If he had simply called X an ass, it would have been unwitty. But the combination of stubbornness with four legs leaves no doubt about the content of the hint. Similar hints are used in jokes and other works of folklore (and not only folklore) in difficult eras of tyranny and oppression, when there are no other forms for expressing public opinion, since it is dangerous to speak directly, and one has to resort to circumstance.

(They say that Demosthenes spoke with a stone in his mouth. “Also a hindrance to me!” - Stanislav Lec.)

But a hint is a technique of wit. It turns out that censorship sometimes unwittingly becomes the satirist’s ally, forcing him to sharpen his arrows more sharply and subtly.

In Russian literature M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin was consummate master seemingly harmless, but in fact a murderous hint. Let us remember, for example, we eat “The History of a City,” where the character, words and state activities of the stupid city governors represent the most poisonous allusions to the reign of the Russian crowned princes and to many significant events in Russian history.

There are also waves of caustic allusions in Dante’s “Divine Comedy,” and Voltaire’s philosophical stories, and France’s “Penguin Island,” and Capek’s “War with the Newts.”

Double interpretation

Before moving on to the next appointment, let's talk about a case that occurred in one of the provincial psychiatric hospitals. The head doctor of the hospital, a man not very young, not very smart, but extremely talkative, very often held medical meetings to discuss issues that were not worth a damn. No one wanted to go to meetings, but there was nothing to be done: since the authorities ordered it, then be patient! And they endured.

But one day, during another idle meeting, Doctor K., a serious man and at the same time somewhat mischievous, came to the podium. - “What does our hospital need to finally overcome its shortcomings? - he began in a very pathetic tone. “We need titans!!!” - he continued in a thunderous voice, and then calmly explained that he meant providing the sick with boiled water. The effect was magnificent, although Dr. K. did not deserve the praise or approval of his superiors.

In the above example, the double meaning of the word titanium is perfectly played out. The oratorical temperament and pathos of Dr. K. led listeners to the idea that we were talking about a titanic man; it was this meaning of the word that was perceived by the audience. The unexpected transition to the second meaning - a cauldron for boiling water - turned out to be sudden and witty.

The technique of double (or multiple) interpretation is extremely widely known and is constantly used in various modifications. Its simplest variety is a pun based on the use of homonyms, that is, words that have several different meanings.

This game can be extended to words that do not all match, but only part of their sounds. Sometimes a group of short words sounds similar to one long one. At the same time, the very manipulation of choosing such words - if it is unexpected and original - causes pleasure and laughter among listeners. The poet D. D. Minaev was a virtuoso of such word games:

The realm of rhymes is my element,

And I write poetry easily.

No delay or delay.

I go line by line.

Even to the Finnish brown rocks

This includes witty answers built on reducing to the point of absurdity some of the interlocutor’s thoughts, when at first they seem to agree with it, and then, at the very end, with a short clause they change the entire meaning of the previous phrase. Several examples of such answers are given Freud.

This technique is used not only in verbal skirmishes, but also in literary polemics. In particular, it is readily used by reviewers and critics. Having taken some dubious thesis of his opponent, the reviewer does not refute it, but develops it, freeing it from the verbal husk, exposing its essence, slightly exaggerating and sharpening it, and thereby, as a rule, inflicting a sensitive prick on his opponent.

Reduction to the absurd is sometimes achieved by hyperbole or exaggeration, and not only in polemics, but also in oral and written storytelling.

Of the Russian writers, N.V. Gogol most willingly used this technique.

In “Dead Souls” you can find many phrases, like the following:

“The tavern servant was lively and fidgety to such an extent that it was impossible to even see what kind of face he had.”

Reduction to the absurd can be achieved not only through exaggeration or hyperbole. Along with it, it is also very common understatement technique, deliberate softening - euphemism. Take, for example, the French proverb: “If someone is stupid, it will last for a long time.” Everyone knows that stupidity does not go away or be cured and that fools remain so until their death. But in this form, the statement would simply be a statement of fact. And the understatement, which is obviously absurd, makes the saying witty. The same applies to English definition boxing: exchange of opinions using gestures.

The ad absurdum technique was widely used by the ancient satirist Lucian. His satirical dialogue “Zeus Convicted” is entirely built on the point of absurdity.

The wit of the absurd

Similar to the technique of reduction to absurdity is a technique that is best called the wit of absurdity.

Here, for example, is a well-known phrase uttered by one militant atheist.

He ended his lecture on atheism with this effective statement: “The question of whether there is a God must be answered positively: yes, there is no God.”

Let us remind the reader of a popular anecdote at the beginning of the century about a picky visitor to a confectionery shop who ordered a cake with the inscription “Greetings from the Caucasus,” three times demanded that the inscription be redone because it did not seem beautiful enough to him, and when the pastry chef asked whether to pack the cake in a box, he answered, “ No need, I’ll eat it right here.”

This reception - wit of absurdity- used not only in everyday jokes, but also in literature, especially often in the genre of literary parody. It has much in common with the method of reduction to absurdity, but there are also differences. Reduction to the point of absurdity is achieved, as a rule, by exaggeration, or hyperbole. And the wit of absurdity inherent in the situation itself, contrary to common sense and everyday experience.

Reading Lewis Carroll's famous fairy tale “Alice in Wonderland,” the reader laughs many times, not always realizing it, at the wit of the absurdity.

Take, for example, the story about the Cheshire cat, who almost always had a smile on his face. Sometimes the smile disappeared and only the face remained; but it happened that the face disappeared, and then only a smile remained.

About a hundred years ago, in one of the legislative commissions discussing the possibility of abolishing corporal punishment (roz), a certain liberal lawyer, not without cynicism, remarked:

“Whipping a man is disgusting, but what can we offer him in return?”

These lines still bring a smile, and at one time this wit was considered one of the “highlights of the season.”

What is its meaning? Usually, when something is taken away from a person, he is deprived of something, he has the right to demand compensation, the provision of some other values, benefits, advantages. But corporal punishment was hardly one of those benefits, deprived of which a man would want to receive something else. However, the construction of the phrase and the thought expressed in this form are based on the assumption that the abolition of the rods must be somehow compensated for the peasant, otherwise, perhaps, he will not agree with it. This assumption is counterintuitive and absurd. Therefore, we attribute the lawyer’s statement to the wit of absurdity. But the absurd assumption is contained in this phrase not explicitly, in the form of a hint, even transparent. So here is a combination of two techniques.

Let us give another example of the wit of absurdity. When the press spread false rumors about Mark Twain's death, he issued this denial:

“The rumors about my death are greatly exaggerated.” It hardly needs explaining that it was the absurdity of the formulation that made it witty.

Common sense varies from person to person depending on life experience, development, and education. Hence the unintentional wit of people who invade areas of knowledge that are alien to them without appropriate preparation. It can be funny, for example, for a doctor to listen to non-specialists talk about medical topics.

This form of wit is used very often in literature. Perhaps one of the most famous stories in this regard is “Letter to a Learned Neighbor”, all built on the “accidental” wit of the statements of a semi-wild steppe landowner; The apotheosis of the story was the phrase, which later became popular and entered into our everyday life: “This cannot be, because this can never happen.”

“Sailor Ivanov for systematic drunkenness during the voyage will be removed from work and perform official duties.”

“Lieutenant Sinyukhaev, who died of a fever, turned up alive and filed a petition for reinstatement on the lists.”

Emperor Paul 1 wrote the highest resolution on this report: “... refuse for the same reason.”

It is perhaps difficult to select better examples of the wit of absurdity.

Sometimes the absurdity lies in an illegitimate conclusion, which is based not on premises, not on initial data, but on minor details of the situation.

Mixing styles or “combining plans”

23/02/10
What? How is this better? As a person who has been studying music for 4 years, I will say - nothing like that! This band is a disgrace to metal! They leave only at the expense of what they stole from the same Maiden and Priest! The musicians I know tried to play their parts. These are games for dummies! I saw and heard it myself! All stolen songs are faked with pseudo-philosophical texts and simplified to the point of impossibility. For example, compare Maiden's The Wicker Man and the Aryan chimera. Earth and sky! The Chimera song is so simplified that it makes one feel ashamed of Maiden. And Aria’s sound is not metal at all. More like Russian rock. And even though the vocalists sing high notes, this does not save the group. Compare Steve Harris and Aria's bassist, Nicko McBrain and Manyakin (Udalov) and everything will become clear to you.

Reckless Rebel, 23/02/10
I respect Aria, this is really high-quality music, no matter if it's plagiarized or not. But in Russia, in principle, there is no for a long time there will be no group that will be able to surpass its Western counterpart. It’s just not the same level, not the same quality, not the same technique. And Aria is no exception. Iron Maiden- legends of international class, one might say, modern classic. This is the standard of heavy music, which Aria looked up to. Aria is glorified only in her own country and neighboring countries. This already says a lot.

Old Orc, 23/02/10
Well, I wouldn't say that Maiden is no more difficult to play than Aria! Okay, even so. But Maiden was played by the original, and Aria was just a copy. If they think that scolding Aria for stealing is a sign of good manners, then I’ll ask this question - copy and remake, passing it off as your own - honestly? In addition, the Hero of Asphalt is a copy of Iron Maiden - Powerslave. There are many copies of paintings by other artists in art galleries, but for some reason none of the copywriters became famous as a great painter.

Old Orc, 20/05/10
Antifreeze, I didn’t create the topic...) you don’t have to believe me, that’s, of course, your right. But ARIA STOLE MADE A LOT, and this is a fact that is confirmed. You've never heard, for example, KiSh group accused of plagiarism - there is no basis for this. As for Berkut, I spoke positively about both vocalists of Aria, but it would be better if he sang in a more decent group. Honestly I don’t understand what’s so good about this group? (except for the vocalists) In my opinion, just another 100,000,000th Maiden clone and nothing more.

Old Orc, 20/05/10
As for the lyrics, why should they take first place in music? I don't pay attention to them at all. By the way, which one deep meaning in Aria's songs? It simply doesn't exist. The song Follow Me is about a horseman who will kill souls. Take my heart - some pop snot. Blood of Kings is about how the king will come and punish everyone. Well, what’s so interesting and ingenious about this? And one more thing - I’m not trolling here, but I just can’t stand copywriting groups like Aria and Katharsis

Old Orc, 20/05/10
http://www.2clip. ru/1/Aria+Everything/1/3sU. 2HIHTpxY/. Aria and Everything-All-Everything. Part_1. html - here you go. I don't know how authoritative this video is for you, Antifreeze, but I think it's pretty clear. No, guys, excuse me then. I didn't know it would hurt me SO MUCH such statements your musical tastes. Why I don’t like it when they say that Aria is better than Maiden, I already wrote above. I don’t want to quarrel with anyone, I just see the angry influx of a green wave. But I said my opinion about Aria and I’d better not write any more, otherwise I’ll be bombarded with belligerent messages.

Traindriver, 20/05/10
This statement is already absurd, only because Aria is a clone of Maiden, and almost without exception, the copy always loses to the original. And in in this case too, judge for yourself. Maiden play in general better than Aria, more professionally, the duo of Aria guitarists (it doesn’t matter which sample is 1987 or 2005) is noticeably inferior in virtuosity, inventiveness and speed to even one of Maiden’s guitarists (it also doesn’t matter Murray, Smith or Gers), and Dickinson easily copes with parts that are too difficult for Kipelov or Berkut to perform. The stage appearance of the musicians is also clearly distinguishable. If Maiden is a classic model, it was always five smiling, friendly and affable guys, dressed in sneakers and casual clothes, and with a well-chosen cartoon funny and terrible at the same time Eddie, as a talisman. So Aria, in order not to establish herself with the brutality and uncompromisingness of her music, for shocking and moody reasons, only portrays the image of serious guys, with a stony expression on their faces =>

Traindriver, 20/05/10
=> and dressed in black. The image is also plagiarized, though from the Metallica group. In fact, there are only a few moderately professional musicians who graduated from domestic school vocal-instrumental ensembles, retrained, in the wake of the cult of passion in the USSR metal music youth, in a parody ensemble on New wave British heavy metal. And this parody is nothing more than an antics. Since even a discreet person can see the advantage of Virgo, both in power and virtuosity, professionalism, ingenuity, quality of recording and originality. Well, it remains to add what BM said, because Aria without M. Pushkina is hardly capable of writing more or less worthy texts, and in Maiden it seems that only McBrain did not write texts.

Traindriver, 20/05/10
AntiFrizzz I consider professionalism to be the degree of not only virtuosity in playing instruments, but also erudition in different styles and techniques, imagination for improvisation and creative baggage, if you do not have blind fanaticism for Aria, you should clearly notice who is doing who here. McBrain never wrote, neither lyrics nor music. This role in the group is given mainly to its leader and ideological the inspirer, Steve Harris, as well as frontman Dickinson and guitarists Smith and Gers (Murray also wrote little). And I don’t care about your opinion. I have long gone through the stage of crazy fanaticism and youthful rocker maximalism in my life, and in principle I have a general attitude towards the work of both groups calmly. And statements about my supposed backwardness from fashion and admiration for *old farts*, as you wish, are signs of the opinion of a person who has not yet come out of his teenage show-off *ultrafashionability*. *Modern is cool, old stuff sucks* - stereotypes that didn’t bother me 10-15 years ago, and even more so now.

Traindriver, 20/05/10
Antifreeze. I repeat, you still have passions. In general, I have a soft spot for both of these bands, who rips off whom, and who is cooler, since I stopped being an orthodox fan of heavy metal a few years ago, I don’t listen to it as often as before, but I write more out of nostalgia years of my youth. Dickinson is truly no longer the same as he was 20-25 years ago, when he took exorbitant notes from the sub-contractave, and perverted the lion’s roar in the choruses. But Kipelov, even in his youth, did not even reach today’s Dickinson, and his range is already narrower. In general, Valery, as I already wrote, was not originally a heavy metal singer and achieved some results only due to many years of practice in a group, and work on himself. Regarding the fact that in Maiden today everything is based only on professionalism, you right Disc 1992 there was the last one that contained any fresh ideas and a spark. Then there was Dickinson’s departure, return, and a crisis that has remained to this day. However, it is not characteristic of them alone, but of all old heavy bands.

Hellbent, 20/05/10
Maiden's concert "Rock In Rio" deprives rabid fans of Aria of the meaning of life. Warning: if you value your “Aryan” fandom, never listen (or watch) to it! The murder is on all fronts: the set list, the performance of the musicians, Bruce’s vocals and his ability to work with the public (which Valery is completely devoid of and what Arthur is so absurdly trying to copy), the sound! Not every fan of Aria will live to see "Hallowed Be Thy Name" - and then it will be a total mess!

Hellbent, 20/05/10
I just can’t understand why Dream Theater, Metallica, Therion, Six Feet Under, Children Of Bodom, Rage, Dark Tranquility, In Flames, Arch Enemy, Iced Earth, Grave Digger and dozens more, let’s say, not the latest in the world heavy music teams record tributes to some kind of “Shmeidan”, and not to the “Russian Deep Purple"? (Damn, I think I'm about to embarrass myself: Rammstein themselves covered the aria, shhh!). Well, the coup de grace: Nicko McBrain is the author of the song " New Frontier" (co-written with Bruce and Steve)!

purple, 26/09/10
I’ve never even heard of this... but it’s definitely a maidon roll

Rock4ever, 17/10/10
Because putting forward such an absurd and ridiculous assumption is the same as saying that soy meat is better than real meat, and a rubber woman is better than a living one. If Iron Maiden is figuratively compared with branded vinyl representing NWOBHM, then Aria is just its MP-3 copy, albeit with a good bitrate. And a copy is never better than the original. P.S. May Aria's young fans not be offended by me.

Kishi, 15/11/10
Well, the Iron Maiden band is not among my favorites, simply because I don’t particularly appreciate this genre of music, but excuse me, than a domestic clone, put on stage by seasoned producers, who has not learned to create music in such a way that thoughts of plagiarism do not come to mind, vassal depending on Margarita Pushkina, could it be better than the original source? The fact that it transforms the heavy genre into the category of something Russian folk thieves' round dance? Sorry, the merit is small, and your attempts to justify the team at all costs look ridiculous.

Dead Knight, 15/11/10
It's no better, they plagiarized the Irons' tracks. I don’t like Aria at all, no matter the new one or the old one, but Kipelov somehow pulled it out, and the group only causes me irritation. They have no new ideas, they play the same thing 20 times, even some songs are similar to each other in playing technique. In short, Iron Maiden is 1000 times cooler than Aria, no matter what the fans shout

Heavenly Knight, 29/03/11
I can’t stand both of them, like all heavy metal, but I think sensibly: Aria is a sad plagiarism of Virgo, since they ripped off a lot of songs from the latter, and even took advantage of the Craddles (!), they never created their own style - this eternal boring style of songs makes you sleepy, you don’t feel any aggression or life in their songs, even Iron Maiden stole the style of the group’s name, while the Iron Maiden is the father of heavy metal for many decades - and Aria to them the soles are not suitable, in my opinion.

Archivist, 11/11/11
Yes, in general, Aria, Iron Maiden, and Judas Priest play obviously formulaic music, but Judas Priest and Iron Maiden are at least musicians in their own right. What is Aria? 1. Repurposed VIA performers are far from best quality? 2. Pretentious texts, poor rhymes, all not written by oneself. 3. In terms of technicality, they are inferior to Western musicians; the so-called melody is simply a banal copying of the Russian folk round dance. In short, choice trash.

Loki De La Fer, 12/04/13
No I do not think so. I think both groups deserve respect.

My Fucking Blasphemy, 27/12/13
I agree that Aria copied Iron Maiden and Judas Priest. The first one was more painful. Ours can hardly come up with anything of their own, and a copy, as we know, is always worse than the original. And this is not a stereotype, this is really true. Although there were cases when copies were almost impossible to distinguish from the original. And even in painting. But not in music. I have nothing against Aria (I especially like Kipelov), but I listen to the Maidens and Priests more readily.

Kilroy, 30/03/17
Aria is a domestically produced copy of Iron Maiden. And a copy cannot be better than the original, maybe only extremely in rare cases, but not in Russia. Aria, compared to Maiden, is a more commercial group, they had a full-time poetess who did not play in the group, while Maiden composed everything themselves. And if the musicians don’t compose themselves, then it can hardly be called full-fledged rock.