Gerald Janecek's previous book, Sight and Sound Entwined (2000), neatly brought together the themes of his other two books: The Look of Russian Literature (1984) and ZAUM: The Transrational Poetry of Russian Futurism (1996). His important new book on Russian literary conceptualism is another continuation of these studies of Russian avant-garde experimentation. Like ZAUM, Everything Has Already Been Written definitely aims to be a reference for its subject. That is most welcome, since there are few English-language sources on Russian conceptualist poetry, despite the significance of this mode of writing and the abundance of materials on Russian conceptualist visual and performance art. Furthermore, as Janecek notes in his succinct introduction and conclusion, “Moscow” conceptualism further developed certain avant-garde positions, including the performative thrust of Russian Futurism and Oberiu and their play with the borders of what counts as art.
The introduction outlines the history of conceptual art before concentrating on the notion of literary conceptualism, which, Janecek writes, was less prominent in the west than visual, installation, and performance art. While Janecek does not attempt an exhaustive review of non-Russian conceptual literary trends, this section might have been enriched by a mention of groups like Oulipo or the LANGUAGE poets. Otherwise, the introduction establishes several guiding notions for the study, like the idea that language is itself an inherently conceptual medium. Janecek also suggests, intriguingly, that the Russian Orthodox icon—with its scripted relationship between the viewer and the object, and disregard of the individual artist (“genius”)—might have prepared the ground for a conceptualist relationship to art; he likewise points to the equally stylized forms, collective authorship, and ideologically-charged language of socialist realism as an important background for conceptualist experiments. Throughout, Janecek does an admirable job of noting the specifically Russian and Soviet aspects of his subject without pressing the point too hard.
One of the book's triumphs is Chapter 1, which discusses the “proto-conceptualist” Lianozovo poets. Janecek gives brief profiles of each poet and readings of exemplary poems, demonstrating the eclectic play with style, register, and “Sovietese” that will become central to later conceptualist literature. Half of this chapter treats the work of Vsevolod Nekrasov, whom Janecek calls “one of the most important and innovative twentieth-century poets” and the “most important predecessor to Moscow Conceptualism” (33). Janecek discusses several Nekrasov poems that employ classic conceptual techniques (including readymades, quotations, assemblage, semantic isolation, visual configuration, and seriality) and/or point toward tendencies more fully developed by later poets. Nekrasov also embodies the typically conceptualist conflation of the roles of artist, critic, and theoretician, and Janecek duly outlines some of Nekrasov's theoretical positions on his own writing and that of his contemporaries. Janecek also matter-of-factly addresses Nekrasov's prickly character and how this shaped reception of his work.
The rest of the book is divided into three long chapters treating major conceptualist figures: Lev Rubinstein, Dmitri Prigov, and Andrei Monastyrsky. The pairing of Rubinstein and Prigov is familiar, as they share an interest in the relationships within and between texts, as well as the active role of the audience/reader and techniques like quasi-quotation. Janecek meanwhile contrasts Rubinstein's painstakingly precise, relatively minimal output and Prigov's monumental production of thousands of texts. He notes that while Rubinstein is in many respects a textbook conceptualist poet, Prigov's protean oeuvre and idiosyncratic artistic personality (“D.A.P.”) shows a complicated relationship to poetry, parody, and conceptualism itself.
The final chapter opens with a brief history of performance art in the west and in Russia, before segueing into a detailed account of Monastyrsky's work and the long-running Collective Actions project. (Echoing the introduction's foray into icons, this section offers an aside on Zen Buddhism; Janecek justifies both in his conclusion with reference to a certain mystical streak in Russian culture overall). This chapter is a departure from the theme of literary conceptualism, but fills out the title's promise of “poetry and performance” and suggests performance as a logical development of what conceptual poetry was often trying to do.
There is a certain unintentional irony to some of Janecek's exhaustive close readings: the poets he covers play with the style of dry bureaucratic-style writing, but—as Janecek himself acknowledges—humor and irony are key elements of their work. Audience participation in conceptual art often hinges on the “ah-ha” moment, getting the joke. But of course, the best way to kill a joke is to explain it. Nevertheless, this is an important, well-conceived account, chock-full of accessible information useful to research scholars and students alike.
