From: aps@sonia.math.ucla.edu (Alexei Stolboushkin)
Subject: soc.culture.soviet, discussions, etc.
Organization: UCLA Mathematics Department
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 06:17:25 GMT

In article <93008.100028BAV2@psuvm.psu.edu>, BAV2@psuvm.psu.edu writes:

>And I speak not only about offensive words and phrases, but about the
>general air of disrespect to everybody, when a discussion about the name
>of Tolstoy's novel quickly leads to insults from both sides, when it is
>...
 ... and later:
>
>Have you ever thought why we - with a superior education system (just
>compare it to the American one!), a best literature history in the world
>(except, maybe, Hebrew or old Chineese), a lot of talented people etc -
>why we are in such a condition now? Is there any influence of this
>lifestyle?

apart from this phenomenon (which, as Yuri Mukharsky teaches us, may also
be attributed to some other nations living in a certain prosperity),
there has to be some other cause of the downfall.

Indeed, Pushkin has written many epigrams, expressing quite a disrespect
to their targets, and the Empire did not ruin from that. Even some
four-letter words were in his active dictionary (remember:
				V Akademii Nauk
				Zasedaet knyaz' Dunduk.

				Govoryat, ne podobaet
				Dunduku takaya chest'.
				Pochemu zh on zasedaet?
				Potomu, chto .... est'.)

Vspominaetsya kommentarij Bitova k ego zhe romanu ``Pushkinskij dom'',
a imenno k fraze ``...rugal poslednimi slovami Sof'yu Vlas'evnu...'':
	``V pis'me k drugu na vopros, kak on zhivet,
	  Pushkin otvechal, chto de zhivet-to on nichego, da vot
	  tol'ko Zhozefina Pavlovna myerznet. V kommentarii k hetomu
	  pis'mu skazano: ``Zh.P. - neizvestnaja znakomaja Pushkina''
[all quotations are given from memory, sorry for possible mistakes]


What one really can learn from reading this newsgroup, is that an
unexpectedly high percentage of its participants disrespect the
logical argumentation. A good example is the Tolstoy discussion
you have mentioned.

I found it very instructive to logically analyze the answers from
my opponent, let's call him M. (let me know if it also sounds
insulting for your distinctive ear).


So my original posting initiated the discussion was:

A.>as a matter of fact, all English translations I ever seen are
A.>``War and Peace'', while Leo Tolstoy used MIP (and not M I/I P) in the
A.>original; just another illustration to my recent posting on Soviet vs.
A.>Russian language.

One may either agree to the claim that Tolstoy used ``i'', or
disagree, and in the latter case a certain evidence ought to
be provided.

Let's see what the answer says (some meaningless stuff omitted):

M.>I explain. Tolstoy indeed wanted to title his novel as War and World,
M.>with MuP through izhitsa. Nevertheless, the novel was printed
M.>under the title War and Peace, MuP through u. Apparently Tolstoy
M.>did not mind, because in all editions afterwards the title
M.>was War and Peace.
M.>
M.>As Bulgakov's hero said, "pozdravlyayu vas, grazhdanin, sovramshi"

Looks very informative. As a Russian proverb says, ``Postavil
tochki nad izhitsami''.

However, the first claim that ``Tolstoy wanted to title his novel as
War and World'' is a pure imagination. Indeed, there is no any
scientific evidence known at the moment that Tolstoy WANTED
to title this his novel this or that way, he actually DID title it
``Vojna i Mip`'', whether or not he wanted it. (Also, ``world''
is not the exact translation; one may like to read more on that
in, say, Bocharov's ``Mir v romane Tolstogo "Vojna i mir"'', if
I remember the title correctly).

The last claim that ``...Tolstoy did not mind, because in all editions
afterwards the title was War and Peace'' is by itself true, but
this is purely because the antecedent of the implication is false.
In other words, it is also true that ``Tolstoy was a member of
the Politburo of CPSU, because in all editions afterwards the title
was War and Peace''. This sillogism used here by M. is known in
logic under the name of sophism.

But what is even more interesting, is that none of the claims (true
or false) contradicts the initial claim from my posting.
Thus this M.'s posting, though very emotional, misses the very point
of the whole discussion.


This inability to logically reason, commonly refered to as ``Russian
Soul'' (remember: ``Umom Rossiyu ne ponyat'...''), is possibly a better
candidate to the role of the cause of the Russian downfall, if you
are looking for one.

Also, it raises the question, whether the Soviet ``education system''
is really as good as some people are used to say.

--Alexei

<P.S. for M. only> In case you shell answers, I am have a suggession:
first give us a hole banch of fackts about the Turgenev's novel
``Mu-Mu'', and than concentreit on my englisH. Should work.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet