What do you think?
Rate this book
Yurkovsky/Zhilin Universe #3
Стажеры
Хронологически повесть является предпоследней из «Жилинского цикла», начинающегося со «Страны багровых туч» и заканчивающегося романом «Хищные вещи века», и последней, где читатель встречает большинство сквозных героев цикла: Быкова, Юрковского, Дауге, Крутикова и Жилина, а также появившийся в «Пути на Амальтею» фотонный грузовой космический корабль «Тахмасиб». Быков, нашедший свое призвание в космонавтике, остается капитаном «Тахмасиба». Юрковский — известный и заслуженно уважаемый планетолог, — занялся административной деятельностью, теперь он в ранге генерального инспектора Международного управления космических сообщений (МУКС) с самыми широ
358 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1962
5 people are currently reading
185 people want to read
About the author
Arkady Strugatsky
514 books1,888 followersThe brothers Arkady Strugatsky [Russian: Аркадий Стругацкий] and Boris Strugatsky [Russian: Борис Стругацкий] were Soviet-Russian science fiction authors who collaborated through most of their careers.
Arkady Strugatsky was born 25 August 1925 in Batumi; the family later moved to Leningrad. In January 1942, Arkady and his father were evacuated from the Siege of Leningrad, but Arkady was the only survivor in his train car; his father died upon reaching Vologda. Arkady was drafted into the Soviet army in 1943. He trained first at the artillery school in Aktyubinsk and later at the Military Institute of Foreign Languages in Moscow, from which he graduated in 1949 as an interpreter of English and Japanese. He worked as a teacher and interpreter for the military until 1955. In 1955, he began working as an editor and writer.
In 1958, he began collaborating with his brother Boris, a collaboration that lasted until Arkady's death on 12 October 1991. Arkady Strugatsky became a member of the Union of Soviet Writers in 1964. In addition to his own writing, he translated Japanese language short stories and novels, as well as some English works with his brother.
Source: Wikipedia
Arkady Strugatsky was born 25 August 1925 in Batumi; the family later moved to Leningrad. In January 1942, Arkady and his father were evacuated from the Siege of Leningrad, but Arkady was the only survivor in his train car; his father died upon reaching Vologda. Arkady was drafted into the Soviet army in 1943. He trained first at the artillery school in Aktyubinsk and later at the Military Institute of Foreign Languages in Moscow, from which he graduated in 1949 as an interpreter of English and Japanese. He worked as a teacher and interpreter for the military until 1955. In 1955, he began working as an editor and writer.
In 1958, he began collaborating with his brother Boris, a collaboration that lasted until Arkady's death on 12 October 1991. Arkady Strugatsky became a member of the Union of Soviet Writers in 1964. In addition to his own writing, he translated Japanese language short stories and novels, as well as some English works with his brother.
Source: Wikipedia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews
October 30, 2017
Atmosfera sa pocetka ove knjige je prosto savrsena! Ne znam kako da je opisem, neka mesavina Cowboy Bebop-a i pocetka trilogije Zaduzbine Isaka Asimova. Knjiga je pomalo ideoloski obojena, potencira se i velica se Sovjetski socijaliza dok se kaptalizam napada. To nije kljucno za ovo delo a i bice vam zanimljivo da citate o tome posebno sa ove distance kada se zna sta je proslost a sta vise nego brutalna realnost. Sa druge strane junaci knjige prolaze kroz par svemirskih avantura i na kraju dospevaju do Saturna gde neki od njih pronalaze svoj kraj u vidu crvene senke - NAKON OVE KNJIGE TREBA PROCITATI KNJIGU "PLANETA PURPURNIH OBLAKA." Dok se sve to desava Braca Strugacki ce vas podsetiti korz bezbroj dijaloga sta znaci biti dobar covek, zasto cast, zasto moral, kako napredovati kao covek..... Dobra knjiga!
April 29, 2019
Эта книга меня очень сильно рассердила!!!!!!!!! Степень лицемерия авторов просто запредельная. Не представляю, как дальше буду читать Arkady Strugatsky и Boris Strugatsky (хотел прочитать все их повести и романы)!
Не могу с уважением относиться к людям , которые считают, что наши все "настоящие", "чистые" люди, а западные все подлецы, которых расстреливать надо. К счастью, время всё расставило по местам!!!!!!!
P.S. Самое фантастичное и смешное было то, что все русские страшные трезвенники, а иностранцы только и думают, что о спиртном, и даже знают, что такое самогон!!!!!
Не могу с уважением относиться к людям , которые считают, что наши все "настоящие", "чистые" люди, а западные все подлецы, которых расстреливать надо. К счастью, время всё расставило по местам!!!!!!!
P.S. Самое фантастичное и смешное было то, что все русские страшные трезвенники, а иностранцы только и думают, что о спиртном, и даже знают, что такое самогон!!!!!
February 29, 2016
Скучно. Такое чувство, что не космические путешествия, а БАМ описывают. Ну и торжество капитализма убивает всю философию.
Read
May 26, 2016Good shit.
October 16, 2019
Menetrend szerinti űrjáratok? Elhiszem, akár holnaptól. Vákuumhegesztők a Jupiteren? Miért is ne, van az a pénz. Hajtóvadászat óriáspiócák után a Marson? Nem zárhatjuk ki, lehet, a dögök eddig végig a szondák háta mögött bujkáltak. De hogy a nemzetközi űrállomáson a kapitalista kocsmában van pia, a szocialista kocsmában meg csupa absztinens ül – hát ne etess, Sztrugackij testvér…
Amúgy hangulatos könyv ez a kozmosz pionírjairól, akik vérrel és verejtékkel fizetnek azért, hogy feltérképezzék a jövőnek a Naprendszert. (Ennél tovább nem mert akkor még szárnyalni a fantázia.) Akad benne jó pár megfejtetlen titok (megfejtetlenek is maradnak, de ez nekem speciel tetszett), és egy mesteri végkifejlet. Tulajdonképpen két alapkonfliktusra lebontható az egész regény: 1.) jaj, mi régi úttörők hogy megöregedtünk… basszus, lassan át kell adni helyünk a fiatalságnak… 2.) azt a fránya kapitalizmust annyira megfertőzte már az individualizmus meg a pénzsóvárság, hogy már csak az alkoholizmusban találnak vigaszt – bezzeg a szocializmusban a munka részegít! Sajnos túl gyakran bele is feledkeznek mindenféle ideológiai vitába a szocialista munkamorálról – ami szerintem amúgy is olyan, mint az unikornis vagy a kereszténydemokrata szavazó: szoktak ugyan hivatkozni rá, de én nem vagyok biztos a létezésében. Értem én, ez társadalombírálat akar lenni, de szerintem az nem társadalombírálat, amikor a másik rendszert ekézzük – az sokkal inkább pártpropaganda. Ráadásul ettől a sok dumától olyan érzésem volt, mintha az Űrgammák* sorozat valamelyik részét látnám: ülnek a srácok az irányítótoronyban, és kommentálják, miképpen robbant fel az aszteroida, hogyan lógtak meg az űrkalózoktól, satöbbi, a néző meg bízza magát a képzeletére. Félreértés ne essék, ez a kisköltségvetés-feeling tud nagyon jól állni egy műnek (pont Sztrugackijék maxolták ki a műfajt a Piknik az árokparton-nal, ami a sejtetés magasiskolája), de ebben az esetben elég sutának éreztem. Szóval Sztrugackijék tudnak ennél jobbat is.
* Emlékszik erre a méltán megboldogult sorozatra valaki? Tekinthető még a magyar kulturális közkincs részének? Rémlik Szulák Andrea, a magyar televíziózás egyik legdémonibb főgonosza, ahogy Maria Callasba oltott Darth Vaderként elénekli az ikonikus főcímdalt?
Amúgy hangulatos könyv ez a kozmosz pionírjairól, akik vérrel és verejtékkel fizetnek azért, hogy feltérképezzék a jövőnek a Naprendszert. (Ennél tovább nem mert akkor még szárnyalni a fantázia.) Akad benne jó pár megfejtetlen titok (megfejtetlenek is maradnak, de ez nekem speciel tetszett), és egy mesteri végkifejlet. Tulajdonképpen két alapkonfliktusra lebontható az egész regény: 1.) jaj, mi régi úttörők hogy megöregedtünk… basszus, lassan át kell adni helyünk a fiatalságnak… 2.) azt a fránya kapitalizmust annyira megfertőzte már az individualizmus meg a pénzsóvárság, hogy már csak az alkoholizmusban találnak vigaszt – bezzeg a szocializmusban a munka részegít! Sajnos túl gyakran bele is feledkeznek mindenféle ideológiai vitába a szocialista munkamorálról – ami szerintem amúgy is olyan, mint az unikornis vagy a kereszténydemokrata szavazó: szoktak ugyan hivatkozni rá, de én nem vagyok biztos a létezésében. Értem én, ez társadalombírálat akar lenni, de szerintem az nem társadalombírálat, amikor a másik rendszert ekézzük – az sokkal inkább pártpropaganda. Ráadásul ettől a sok dumától olyan érzésem volt, mintha az Űrgammák* sorozat valamelyik részét látnám: ülnek a srácok az irányítótoronyban, és kommentálják, miképpen robbant fel az aszteroida, hogyan lógtak meg az űrkalózoktól, satöbbi, a néző meg bízza magát a képzeletére. Félreértés ne essék, ez a kisköltségvetés-feeling tud nagyon jól állni egy műnek (pont Sztrugackijék maxolták ki a műfajt a Piknik az árokparton-nal, ami a sejtetés magasiskolája), de ebben az esetben elég sutának éreztem. Szóval Sztrugackijék tudnak ennél jobbat is.
* Emlékszik erre a méltán megboldogult sorozatra valaki? Tekinthető még a magyar kulturális közkincs részének? Rémlik Szulák Andrea, a magyar televíziózás egyik legdémonibb főgonosza, ahogy Maria Callasba oltott Darth Vaderként elénekli az ikonikus főcímdalt?
May 7, 2017
What distinguishes the work of Arkady and Boris Strugatsky from most Western sci-fi authors is that they tend to be far more imaginative. Take a book like Space Apprentice: There are dozens of American novels with the same general plot, but the Strugatsky brothers create more interesting characters and situations.
Take the character of Yurkowski, the Inspector General, who is perhaps on his last trip. As a scientist, he practically wrote the book about the Rings of Saturn. He forces a situation in which he takes a small ship into the rings and, along with his navigator, disappears.
Most of the book is seen through the eyes of Yura, a young welder who has been "adopted" by the Takhmasib, Yurkowski's ship. The crew attempts to bring him along to greater knowledge and more acute judgment in a series of situations -- but then the end of the book is all Yurkowski's tragic exploration of the rings.
I have never read a bad book by the Strugatsky brothers, and this is one of the best.
Take the character of Yurkowski, the Inspector General, who is perhaps on his last trip. As a scientist, he practically wrote the book about the Rings of Saturn. He forces a situation in which he takes a small ship into the rings and, along with his navigator, disappears.
Most of the book is seen through the eyes of Yura, a young welder who has been "adopted" by the Takhmasib, Yurkowski's ship. The crew attempts to bring him along to greater knowledge and more acute judgment in a series of situations -- but then the end of the book is all Yurkowski's tragic exploration of the rings.
I have never read a bad book by the Strugatsky brothers, and this is one of the best.
July 15, 2020
Самая слабая, на мой взгляд, книга Жилинской трилогии. Как минимум, потому что я рассчитывала узнать, кто такой Жилин, увидеть какое-то развитие персонажа, но нет. Почему не Быковская тогда?
Удивлена также, что сами Стругацкие видели первую книгу (СБТ) как самую слабую и полную ненужной пропаганды. В Стажерах она явно режет глаз, как фанерный дом посреди города. Иностранцы- главные антигерои на протяжении книги, помимо, пожалуй, жестокого космоса,- стереотипичны, шаблонны и неправдоподобны. Взять хотя бы совершенно ни с того поющего Йодль швейцарца. Повержены в пух и прах какими-то приемами, свойственными сказкам и Болливуду.
Поведение главных героев наоборот неправдоподобно примерное, из-за чего они перестают быть живыми людьми, которым хочется сопереживать, и книга читается как-то механически.
Удивлена также, что сами Стругацкие видели первую книгу (СБТ) как самую слабую и полную ненужной пропаганды. В Стажерах она явно режет глаз, как фанерный дом посреди города. Иностранцы- главные антигерои на протяжении книги, помимо, пожалуй, жестокого космоса,- стереотипичны, шаблонны и неправдоподобны. Взять хотя бы совершенно ни с того поющего Йодль швейцарца. Повержены в пух и прах какими-то приемами, свойственными сказкам и Болливуду.
Поведение главных героев наоборот неправдоподобно примерное, из-за чего они перестают быть живыми людьми, которым хочется сопереживать, и книга читается как-то механически.
July 1, 2020
It pains me to give the Strugatskys a single-star rating but this book is simply FUCKING BORING. It seems like they didn't even want to write it. I struggled to get 2/3 of the way through it, and I'm giving up. I thought "Hard to Be a God" was their lousiest work, but I had no trouble reading it to completion. The Strugatskys are probably my favorite science fiction writers, most of their novels mean a great deal to me, and the woodenness and weakness of this one is almost bizarre. Oh well, no writer(s) can be perfect all the time.
December 23, 2015
Z toho, co jsem od Strugackých četl je tahle nejvíc ideologicky zatížená. Zatímco třeba u Planety nachových mračen se to dá snést díky ději, tady je ideologie podstata knihy.
I tak ale stojí za přečtení. Člověk pak může přemýšlet o tom, "kde udělali soudruzi chybu".
I tak ale stojí za přečtení. Člověk pak může přemýšlet o tom, "kde udělali soudruzi chybu".
August 3, 2021
Sajnos csalódás volt ez a könyv-mindazon érdekes témák ellenére, melyek felvetődtek a Mars meghódítása, a Szaturnusz gyűrűjének kutatása kapcsán. Azaz lehet, az új kiadás árnyalja a képet, aki elolvasná a fivérek minden művét, annak érdemes azt megszereznie.
Az elején feltételeztem, hogy részben fricska és vicc volt-részben a cenzorok „elaltatása” a kommunista ember kemény absztinenciájáról szóló rész, de később megint olyan fejezet jött, amit szomorú volt olvasni- a szocializmus, kommunizmus győzelméről.*
Érthető persze, hogy volt némi naiv hite a tudósoknak, Sztrugackijéknak is/ csak azt a Bélát tudnám feledni!!
Folytatom az életművük olvasását, mert a jobb részek arról szólnak, mennyire nehéz lehet a Marson telepet létesíteni, és bizony-bizony az emberiség nem érzi jól magát a „meghódított” bolygókon, űrállomásokon.
*Reálisan nézve igencsak nehéz helyzetben voltak anno a Szovjetunióban az írók, művészek tudósok-mármint az értékes, értelmes tagjaik-milyen lehetőségeik is voltak?
Olyan fantázia-remekűveket írni, mint Bulgakov. Megírni a lágereket, de aztán elhagyni az országot, mint Szolzsenyicin. Küzdeni, mint Szaharov, a tudós? Mindegyik nehéz volt.
A Sztrugackij fivérek-szintén képzett tudósok is-a sci-fi világába menekültek, a kozmoszban járó, szabadként élni vágyó emberekről írtak-akik nem szuperhősök, hanem nagyon is földi lények.
Az elején feltételeztem, hogy részben fricska és vicc volt-részben a cenzorok „elaltatása” a kommunista ember kemény absztinenciájáról szóló rész, de később megint olyan fejezet jött, amit szomorú volt olvasni- a szocializmus, kommunizmus győzelméről.*
Érthető persze, hogy volt némi naiv hite a tudósoknak, Sztrugackijéknak is/ csak azt a Bélát tudnám feledni!!
Folytatom az életművük olvasását, mert a jobb részek arról szólnak, mennyire nehéz lehet a Marson telepet létesíteni, és bizony-bizony az emberiség nem érzi jól magát a „meghódított” bolygókon, űrállomásokon.
*Reálisan nézve igencsak nehéz helyzetben voltak anno a Szovjetunióban az írók, művészek tudósok-mármint az értékes, értelmes tagjaik-milyen lehetőségeik is voltak?
Olyan fantázia-remekűveket írni, mint Bulgakov. Megírni a lágereket, de aztán elhagyni az országot, mint Szolzsenyicin. Küzdeni, mint Szaharov, a tudós? Mindegyik nehéz volt.
A Sztrugackij fivérek-szintén képzett tudósok is-a sci-fi világába menekültek, a kozmoszban járó, szabadként élni vágyó emberekről írtak-akik nem szuperhősök, hanem nagyon is földi lények.
July 17, 2022
This is the Strugatskis' most: a) communist b) mediocre story. It's perfectly okay, but the Strugatskis haven't tried at all to make something special, they just made a book about a young space welder who gets hitchhiked by some famous space explorers and goes through random-ass adventures, and learns about the evils of capitalism in space or something. The ending is also really tonally different from the rest from the book, being straight-up tragic. It's a mild spoiler but chances of you reading this book are so small it's no risk.
March 21, 2015
Could be so much better if with all description of space exploration, friendship and adventures they didn't mix disturbing propaganda of socialism and communism.
August 29, 2019
Не ��тоит читать эту книгу, если вы не готовы разочароваться в Стругацких
June 6, 2015
review of
Arkady & Boris Strugatsky's Space Apprentice
by tENTATIVELY, a cONVENIENCE - June 4, 2015
I've often stated that my personal canon of Science Fiction writers is (in alphabetical order by last name:
Ballard, J. G.
Delany, Samuel R.
Dick, Philip K.
Jeury, Michel
Lem, Stanislav
Savchenko, Vladimir
Strugatsky Brothers
but that list is problematic b/c I've only found & read one thing each by Jeury & Savchenko. Then there're people whose work I've read more recently than those folks who almost make it to the list who may've made it to the list if I'd read their work earlier &/or in a different mood:
Bear, Greg
Brunner, John
Eagan, Greg
Kornbluth, C. M.
Le Guin, Ursula K.
Pohl, Frederik
Slonzewski, Joan
Tiptree, Jr, James (Sheldon, Alice)
but the whole thing's misleading b/c I don't necessarily like every work I've read by the above-listed authors & there're many authors some of whose works I like as much as some of the works of the authors listed above. In other words, forget about canonization, even my own.
& that brings me to Arkady & Boris Strugatsky's Space Apprentice. This is the 1st bk I've read by them that I didn't think was totally great. In the Introduction, written by Theodore Sturgeon in 1980, it's written:
"There are, naturally, cavils, if one looks for nits to pick. During the recent Voyager encounter with Saturn, it took nearly 90 minutes for commands to reach the vehicle, and the same interval for its pictures to return, a limitation which the authors overlook at their own convenience, presenting us with instantaneous communication to anywhere from anywhere." - p x
Another little cavil that Sturgeon didn't point out for the simple reason that he wrote 20 yrs before the 21st century is: "Do you know how many people there are on Earth, Yura? Four billion!" (p 72) Alas, the population's supposedly reached 7 billion as of this writing &, nah, we're still not sending people into outer space. Oopsie!
Sturgeon partially defends them by adding: "One must be quick to add, however, that for the time it was written, this book's conjectures are truly remarkable, especially the description of a close inspection of the Saturnian ring system." (p x) One might conclude from that that the bk was written in 1744 or some-such but it was 1st published in Russia in 1962 so I'm not really impressed.
Given the name, Space Apprentice, & it's subject matter, I hereby compare it to Robert Heinlein's Space Cadet (my review's here: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3... ). Space Apprentice has a bit of a Soviet ideological bone to pick, as I'll touch upon later, & it's interesting to see how Heinlein fares as their American 'ideological counterpart'. For one thing, Space Cadet was published in 1948, 14 yrs earlier than Space Apprentice, & it seems to me that it's a little more successful on the hard science end. For another thing, Heinlein is actually anti-racist & diplomatic. I quote from my review:
""Matt noticed two boys with swarthy, thin features who were wearing high, tight turbans, although dressed otherwise much like himself. Further down the walk he glimpsed a tall, handsome youth whose impassive face was shiny black." - p 7
"These are the Space Cadets. Heinlein recognizes that astronauts must be judged on merit alone if the promise of the future is to bear fruit."
Unfortunately, the country Heinlein 'represents' was far from Heinlein's future depiction of it at the time he was writing & has STILL got a long way to go. In the Strugatsky Brothers's future, communism was 'won out'. An American named Sam in a space colony is playing chess w/ a Russian & having an ideological debate. Sam is speaking 1st:
"["]Yes, yes, communism as an economic system is winning, that's obvious. Where are they now, the famous empires of the Morgans, Rockefellers, Krupps, and Mitsui, and Mitsubishi? They all went broke and they're all forgotten. There are just a few remnants left, like out Space Pearl, a solid establishment producing luxurious mattresses for an elite clientele...and even they must mask themselves in slogans of general social consciousness. Check again. And several million stubborn hotel owners, real estate agents, and grim craftsmen, they're all doomed too. They're surviving only because both Americas still have currency. But here you are at a dead end. There is a power that even you cannot overcome—I mean philistinism, the obliqueness of the petty person. The middle-class type cannot be conquered with might because it would have to be exterminated physically to do so. And it can't be conquered by ideas, because the bourgeoisie is organically incapable of absorbing ideas." ""Have you ever been in any communist states, Sam?"
""I was, and I saw philistines there."
""You're right, Sam. We still have them, too, for now, and you've noticed them. But you didn't notice that we have many fewer than you do, and that they have a low profile. We don't have rampant philistinism, Sam. In a generation or two, they'll be gone completely.""
[..]
""You say in two generations? How about in twenty thousand generations? Take off your rose-colored glasses, Bela! They're all around you, these petty people.["]"
[..]
"["]Man is cattle by nature. Give him a filled food trough, no worse than his neighbor's, let him stuff his belly, and give him the opportunity to laugh once a day over some simple-minded show. You're going to say, 'We can offer him more.' But what does he need more for? He'll reply, 'Mind your own business.' A petty, small-minded, indifferent head of cattle."" - pp 135-136
Unfortunately, I'm more in agreement w/ the cynical capitalist than I am w/ the hopeful communist here. In my personal experience, all-too-many people think no further than their own personal comfort, most people aren't visionaries. Even more unfortunately, the people who are visionaries aren't necessarily envisioning something that's ultimately good for humanity-in-general. Dictators throughout the ages have been visionaries, or, at least, their kissin' cousins, megalomaniacs, & their 'visions' usually involve genocide somewhere along the way. In the Strugatsky novel, tho, Sam is an undercover agent, a saboteur of sorts:
""I'm the inspector general from IACC," he said. "The name is Yurkovsky."
"Bela rose. The engineer also stood up respectfully. A huge tanned man in a baggy jumpsuit came in behind Yurkovsky. His glance skimmed Bela and rested on the engineer.
""Please excuse me," the engineer said and left. The door shut behind him. After taking a few steps down the corridor, the engineer stopped and whistled thoughtfully. Then he took out a cigarette and lit it. So, he thought, the ideological battle on Bamberga is entering a new phase. We'll have to take measures immediately." - pp 138-139
The visiting inspector tries to talk some sense into the capitalism-ensnared workers:
"["]Using the demands for these stones, the company is getting rich."
""And so are we," someone shouted from the crowd.
""And so are you," Yurkovsky agreed. "But here's the point, in the eight years that the company has existed on Bamberga, close to two thousand men have completed three-year work contracts. Do you know how many of the ones who returned are still alive? less than five hundred. The average life span of a returned worker is under two years.["]" - p 147
Even tho I don't think this is one of the Strugatsky Brothers's best bks, they still address subjects like the above a bit more than many others. Then there's this exchange between a retired astronaut & his ex-wife:
"["]You've worked your whole life. You've developed your intelligence all your life, bypassing simple earthly pleasures."
""I never bypassed earthly pleasures," Dauge said. "I enjoyed them too much, I fear."
""Let's not argue," she said. "From my point of view, you did. And I spent my life extinguishing my intelligence. I spent my whole life nurturing my base instincts. And which of us is happier now?"
"I am, of course," Dauge said.
"She looked him over frankly and laughed. "No," she said. "I am! At best we are both equally unhappy.["]" - p 9
Vision vs hedonism are certainly NOT mutually exclusive in my bk. I like that there's so much class consciousness, it becomes Soviet humor:
""Yes, monsieur," the administrator said, folding her hands on the desk.
"Yura laughed. "You see, I'm not a monsieur," he said. "I'm a plain Soviet comrade."
"The administrator also laughed. "To tell the truht, I thought so. But I didn't want to risk it. We get foreigners here who get very upset when they're called comrades."
""Weirdos," Yura said." - p 16
"Weirdos"! That's funny. It's touches like that & the following that 'saved' this bk for me:
"Zhilin didn't reply. He stood Yura in front of him, stepped back one step, and asked in a horrible voice, "Do you drink vodka?"
""No," Yura replied in fright.
""Do you believe in God?"
""No."
""A true interplanetary soul!" Zhilin said in satisfaction. "When we get on the Takhmasib I'll let you kiss the starter key.""
Those were the days. Wd Pussy Riot have been arrested then? Yeah, probably.. but it wd've been for some other stupid reason. Yep, those were the days — the attitude toward radiation was, perhaps, a bit 'lax'? Well, maybe not 'lax' but maybe in a somewhat infantile stage:
""I'm asking you, what is this?" Yurkovsky said.
""Gamma-radiophage," Kostya explained. He turned to Yura. "Eat up, young man," he said. "You just received four roentgens, and you have to do something about it."
""Yes," Yurkovsky said, "that's true."" - p 122
"Well, what can I do with him, Bela thought. Convince him that drinking is bad for him? He knows that himself. When he gets up, he'll stay in the mine fourteen hours a day to make up his losses, and when he gets back to Earth, he'll have black radiation paralysis and he'll never have children, or if he does, they'll be deformed." - p 134
I'm reminded of having recently witnessed filmmaker Kathryn Bigelow's K-19, The Widowmaker supposedly based on a real Soviet nuclear sub in 1961 (just the yr before this bk) that was rushed thru in its production b/s of a threat from US nuclear subs. The result being a nuclear accident in wch the crew suffered horribly & many died young. I'm further reminded of Frederik Pohl's bk Chernobyl w/ its attribution of disaster cause being the rushing thru of bad concrete to meet quota. Then again, let's not forget 3 Mile Island: https://youtu.be/WFnEj9c35fE .
Arkady Strugatsky was a specialist in Japanese literature who translated such works into Russian. Hence, I speculate that this is his touch:
"Mikhail Antonovich, just off duty, climbed into Bykov's chair with a sigh to read The Tale of Genji" - p 165
"He was picturing, of course, the distant hero in strange garb and strange coif, with an unneeded sword in his belt, slender and mocking, a Japanese Don Juan—just as he had appeared from the pen of the woman genius—in a luxurious and filthy Japanese palace, setting out to travel invisibly across the world until translators of genius would be found for him. And Mikhail Antonovich sees him now as though there was no gap of nine centuries and a billion and one-half kilometers between them" - p 166
Now, if The Tale of Genji was written in the early years of the 11th century & this story is taking place 9 centuries later that wd put it in the early yrs of the 20th century & NOT the 21st century as I think was intended. Whatever.
The Strugatskys don't spare us depictions of human nastiness, regardless of how positivist their politics sometimes are:
""Who are you?" the blond man asked.
""I..." Yura said, "I'm from the Takhmasib."
""Ah," the man said with disgust. "Another favorite?"" - p 179
"["]Yes, disgusting. I didn't expect this of you young people. How easy it was to make you revert to your prehistoric condition, to put you on all fours—three years, one glory-hungry maniac, and one provincial intriguer. And you bent over, turned into animals, lost your human image. Young, merry, honest people...you should be ashamed of yourselves!"" - p 190
Why are animals always getting such a bad rep? As far as I know there aren't "glory-hungry maniac"s OR "provincial intriguer"s among any animals other than humans. All in all, a good read, but I have to wonder whether it's the Soviet answer to Heinlein's Space Cadet w/ both 'suffering' a bit from oversimplifying the respective nationalistic dreams.
Arkady & Boris Strugatsky's Space Apprentice
by tENTATIVELY, a cONVENIENCE - June 4, 2015
I've often stated that my personal canon of Science Fiction writers is (in alphabetical order by last name:
Ballard, J. G.
Delany, Samuel R.
Dick, Philip K.
Jeury, Michel
Lem, Stanislav
Savchenko, Vladimir
Strugatsky Brothers
but that list is problematic b/c I've only found & read one thing each by Jeury & Savchenko. Then there're people whose work I've read more recently than those folks who almost make it to the list who may've made it to the list if I'd read their work earlier &/or in a different mood:
Bear, Greg
Brunner, John
Eagan, Greg
Kornbluth, C. M.
Le Guin, Ursula K.
Pohl, Frederik
Slonzewski, Joan
Tiptree, Jr, James (Sheldon, Alice)
but the whole thing's misleading b/c I don't necessarily like every work I've read by the above-listed authors & there're many authors some of whose works I like as much as some of the works of the authors listed above. In other words, forget about canonization, even my own.
& that brings me to Arkady & Boris Strugatsky's Space Apprentice. This is the 1st bk I've read by them that I didn't think was totally great. In the Introduction, written by Theodore Sturgeon in 1980, it's written:
"There are, naturally, cavils, if one looks for nits to pick. During the recent Voyager encounter with Saturn, it took nearly 90 minutes for commands to reach the vehicle, and the same interval for its pictures to return, a limitation which the authors overlook at their own convenience, presenting us with instantaneous communication to anywhere from anywhere." - p x
Another little cavil that Sturgeon didn't point out for the simple reason that he wrote 20 yrs before the 21st century is: "Do you know how many people there are on Earth, Yura? Four billion!" (p 72) Alas, the population's supposedly reached 7 billion as of this writing &, nah, we're still not sending people into outer space. Oopsie!
Sturgeon partially defends them by adding: "One must be quick to add, however, that for the time it was written, this book's conjectures are truly remarkable, especially the description of a close inspection of the Saturnian ring system." (p x) One might conclude from that that the bk was written in 1744 or some-such but it was 1st published in Russia in 1962 so I'm not really impressed.
Given the name, Space Apprentice, & it's subject matter, I hereby compare it to Robert Heinlein's Space Cadet (my review's here: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3... ). Space Apprentice has a bit of a Soviet ideological bone to pick, as I'll touch upon later, & it's interesting to see how Heinlein fares as their American 'ideological counterpart'. For one thing, Space Cadet was published in 1948, 14 yrs earlier than Space Apprentice, & it seems to me that it's a little more successful on the hard science end. For another thing, Heinlein is actually anti-racist & diplomatic. I quote from my review:
""Matt noticed two boys with swarthy, thin features who were wearing high, tight turbans, although dressed otherwise much like himself. Further down the walk he glimpsed a tall, handsome youth whose impassive face was shiny black." - p 7
"These are the Space Cadets. Heinlein recognizes that astronauts must be judged on merit alone if the promise of the future is to bear fruit."
Unfortunately, the country Heinlein 'represents' was far from Heinlein's future depiction of it at the time he was writing & has STILL got a long way to go. In the Strugatsky Brothers's future, communism was 'won out'. An American named Sam in a space colony is playing chess w/ a Russian & having an ideological debate. Sam is speaking 1st:
"["]Yes, yes, communism as an economic system is winning, that's obvious. Where are they now, the famous empires of the Morgans, Rockefellers, Krupps, and Mitsui, and Mitsubishi? They all went broke and they're all forgotten. There are just a few remnants left, like out Space Pearl, a solid establishment producing luxurious mattresses for an elite clientele...and even they must mask themselves in slogans of general social consciousness. Check again. And several million stubborn hotel owners, real estate agents, and grim craftsmen, they're all doomed too. They're surviving only because both Americas still have currency. But here you are at a dead end. There is a power that even you cannot overcome—I mean philistinism, the obliqueness of the petty person. The middle-class type cannot be conquered with might because it would have to be exterminated physically to do so. And it can't be conquered by ideas, because the bourgeoisie is organically incapable of absorbing ideas." ""Have you ever been in any communist states, Sam?"
""I was, and I saw philistines there."
""You're right, Sam. We still have them, too, for now, and you've noticed them. But you didn't notice that we have many fewer than you do, and that they have a low profile. We don't have rampant philistinism, Sam. In a generation or two, they'll be gone completely.""
[..]
""You say in two generations? How about in twenty thousand generations? Take off your rose-colored glasses, Bela! They're all around you, these petty people.["]"
[..]
"["]Man is cattle by nature. Give him a filled food trough, no worse than his neighbor's, let him stuff his belly, and give him the opportunity to laugh once a day over some simple-minded show. You're going to say, 'We can offer him more.' But what does he need more for? He'll reply, 'Mind your own business.' A petty, small-minded, indifferent head of cattle."" - pp 135-136
Unfortunately, I'm more in agreement w/ the cynical capitalist than I am w/ the hopeful communist here. In my personal experience, all-too-many people think no further than their own personal comfort, most people aren't visionaries. Even more unfortunately, the people who are visionaries aren't necessarily envisioning something that's ultimately good for humanity-in-general. Dictators throughout the ages have been visionaries, or, at least, their kissin' cousins, megalomaniacs, & their 'visions' usually involve genocide somewhere along the way. In the Strugatsky novel, tho, Sam is an undercover agent, a saboteur of sorts:
""I'm the inspector general from IACC," he said. "The name is Yurkovsky."
"Bela rose. The engineer also stood up respectfully. A huge tanned man in a baggy jumpsuit came in behind Yurkovsky. His glance skimmed Bela and rested on the engineer.
""Please excuse me," the engineer said and left. The door shut behind him. After taking a few steps down the corridor, the engineer stopped and whistled thoughtfully. Then he took out a cigarette and lit it. So, he thought, the ideological battle on Bamberga is entering a new phase. We'll have to take measures immediately." - pp 138-139
The visiting inspector tries to talk some sense into the capitalism-ensnared workers:
"["]Using the demands for these stones, the company is getting rich."
""And so are we," someone shouted from the crowd.
""And so are you," Yurkovsky agreed. "But here's the point, in the eight years that the company has existed on Bamberga, close to two thousand men have completed three-year work contracts. Do you know how many of the ones who returned are still alive? less than five hundred. The average life span of a returned worker is under two years.["]" - p 147
Even tho I don't think this is one of the Strugatsky Brothers's best bks, they still address subjects like the above a bit more than many others. Then there's this exchange between a retired astronaut & his ex-wife:
"["]You've worked your whole life. You've developed your intelligence all your life, bypassing simple earthly pleasures."
""I never bypassed earthly pleasures," Dauge said. "I enjoyed them too much, I fear."
""Let's not argue," she said. "From my point of view, you did. And I spent my life extinguishing my intelligence. I spent my whole life nurturing my base instincts. And which of us is happier now?"
"I am, of course," Dauge said.
"She looked him over frankly and laughed. "No," she said. "I am! At best we are both equally unhappy.["]" - p 9
Vision vs hedonism are certainly NOT mutually exclusive in my bk. I like that there's so much class consciousness, it becomes Soviet humor:
""Yes, monsieur," the administrator said, folding her hands on the desk.
"Yura laughed. "You see, I'm not a monsieur," he said. "I'm a plain Soviet comrade."
"The administrator also laughed. "To tell the truht, I thought so. But I didn't want to risk it. We get foreigners here who get very upset when they're called comrades."
""Weirdos," Yura said." - p 16
"Weirdos"! That's funny. It's touches like that & the following that 'saved' this bk for me:
"Zhilin didn't reply. He stood Yura in front of him, stepped back one step, and asked in a horrible voice, "Do you drink vodka?"
""No," Yura replied in fright.
""Do you believe in God?"
""No."
""A true interplanetary soul!" Zhilin said in satisfaction. "When we get on the Takhmasib I'll let you kiss the starter key.""
Those were the days. Wd Pussy Riot have been arrested then? Yeah, probably.. but it wd've been for some other stupid reason. Yep, those were the days — the attitude toward radiation was, perhaps, a bit 'lax'? Well, maybe not 'lax' but maybe in a somewhat infantile stage:
""I'm asking you, what is this?" Yurkovsky said.
""Gamma-radiophage," Kostya explained. He turned to Yura. "Eat up, young man," he said. "You just received four roentgens, and you have to do something about it."
""Yes," Yurkovsky said, "that's true."" - p 122
"Well, what can I do with him, Bela thought. Convince him that drinking is bad for him? He knows that himself. When he gets up, he'll stay in the mine fourteen hours a day to make up his losses, and when he gets back to Earth, he'll have black radiation paralysis and he'll never have children, or if he does, they'll be deformed." - p 134
I'm reminded of having recently witnessed filmmaker Kathryn Bigelow's K-19, The Widowmaker supposedly based on a real Soviet nuclear sub in 1961 (just the yr before this bk) that was rushed thru in its production b/s of a threat from US nuclear subs. The result being a nuclear accident in wch the crew suffered horribly & many died young. I'm further reminded of Frederik Pohl's bk Chernobyl w/ its attribution of disaster cause being the rushing thru of bad concrete to meet quota. Then again, let's not forget 3 Mile Island: https://youtu.be/WFnEj9c35fE .
Arkady Strugatsky was a specialist in Japanese literature who translated such works into Russian. Hence, I speculate that this is his touch:
"Mikhail Antonovich, just off duty, climbed into Bykov's chair with a sigh to read The Tale of Genji" - p 165
"He was picturing, of course, the distant hero in strange garb and strange coif, with an unneeded sword in his belt, slender and mocking, a Japanese Don Juan—just as he had appeared from the pen of the woman genius—in a luxurious and filthy Japanese palace, setting out to travel invisibly across the world until translators of genius would be found for him. And Mikhail Antonovich sees him now as though there was no gap of nine centuries and a billion and one-half kilometers between them" - p 166
Now, if The Tale of Genji was written in the early years of the 11th century & this story is taking place 9 centuries later that wd put it in the early yrs of the 20th century & NOT the 21st century as I think was intended. Whatever.
The Strugatskys don't spare us depictions of human nastiness, regardless of how positivist their politics sometimes are:
""Who are you?" the blond man asked.
""I..." Yura said, "I'm from the Takhmasib."
""Ah," the man said with disgust. "Another favorite?"" - p 179
"["]Yes, disgusting. I didn't expect this of you young people. How easy it was to make you revert to your prehistoric condition, to put you on all fours—three years, one glory-hungry maniac, and one provincial intriguer. And you bent over, turned into animals, lost your human image. Young, merry, honest people...you should be ashamed of yourselves!"" - p 190
Why are animals always getting such a bad rep? As far as I know there aren't "glory-hungry maniac"s OR "provincial intriguer"s among any animals other than humans. All in all, a good read, but I have to wonder whether it's the Soviet answer to Heinlein's Space Cadet w/ both 'suffering' a bit from oversimplifying the respective nationalistic dreams.
August 6, 2024
This penultimate novel of the Bykov, Dauge, Yurkovski & Krutikov team's mini-cycle in the 11-book pre-Noon cycle is a bit queer :P in more ways than one.
Analysing it not only in the framework of the Soviet science fiction of the time, but the general Atomic Age fiction, this book encapsulates not only the usual tropes of the Atomic Age space exploration, but the philosophical questions (and bad answers to them), which would later recur in other, more modern media.
This is also a book where we fully see the ambivalent attitudes to women, and the dawning of understanding that Soviet attitudes of gender equality weren't necessarily sufficient for achieving it in real life - frequently resulting in the establishment placing "useful" of "rightful breeding" (that is - born of proletarian parents, promoting which is, even after a superficial examination is as bad as promoting aristocracy) uncontroversial, but therefore - fundamentally antifeminist figures like Valentina Tereshkova, as the idealized Zinochka (?) in the chapter about the research space station, over there under the Iron Curtain, as they were placed in UK with the similarly establishment-controlled and antifeminist and generally socially-catastrophic person of the "feminist icon" Margaret Thatcher.
The book starts with a rather dry but regrettable dialogue between the disaffected Dauge, one of the original team, now banned from space travel, and his ex-wife, who's described as "vapid" ... the dialogue is almost a textbook move-by-move play of the modern "pseudoprogressives" and the modern incels, of Dauge accusing his ex-wife that her "petit-bourgeois" "lifestyle is vapid and useless" and receiving some jabs back of his life of achievement being rather meaningless without any joy of daily living in Dauge's life, which hits right on the nose.
After that, barring the parable of the "bad capitalists", to which I'll return later in the review, a philosophical position and set of ideals, reminiscent and intersecting with extremist protestants - mennonnites, the catholic extreme of monastic orders, or kamikazes, is exposed which is by that point is portrayed as to be the ideal ideological mindset; as the ideal communist:
- doesn't drink or uses any mind-clouding chemicals
- doesn't pay attention to the wordly (as this is all described as petit-bourgeois)
- finds the only joys in life in working and serving humankind
- doesn't care about fame
- aspires to "die beautifully and gallantly" but doesn't chase death itself
This set of ideals, interestingly, isn't posited as unshakeable, and is in fact criticized later in the book, as outdated and in a way - inhuman, that is demanding a certain inhumanity of people who neither can, nor should be expected to follow them, considering that "material wealth" - or, as we understand it now - satisfaction of the basic human needs have been achieved in that fictional society.
Now, the criticism of the capitalist society in the parable of bad capitalists in the international city where "Russian" communists (not necessarily Russian, but amazingly identified as such by the "international city peace force & police") cohabit with the "Capitalists", is uneven. One side of it is the demonstrable , again, ultraorthodox Christian almost, dissolution - drinking and alluded to wh*ring "what is the meaning to meet with the women who only eat icecream and don't drink any alcohol, Johnny" - which is something - and in our actual modern eye is as innocent as dating, in reality - falls very flat, considering the contemporary postwar problems with cheap industrially-produced alcohol , and therefore - alcoholism, but in general is a universal problem - industrial capitalist societies of France and UK had to meet and address it before WW1, while the agrarian Russian empire and its descendent - the Soviet Union only had to do it after the civil war and closer to WW2 and afterwards.
However the problem of the "petit bourgeois" wanting to have their own life and having their own comforts and actual kindness, cuteness and beauty, which is dismissed in the person of Dauge's ex-wife, is asked - but never answered, and prophetically named as the main and most serious adversary to the regimes of "collective heroism"(actual historical Soviet communism) or even - "individual heroism" (Noon-communism) - not because the "commoner is stupid" - interesting this idea returning here and this idea being the expression of the authors' position of disgust towards the "base" layer of any society - the "uneducated worker" - but because the improvement of the society passes by the improvement of the life of the many aspiring to the normal life, rather than the few, aspiring for heroic deeds. This is curiously where the book again criticizes "heroism" but does so half-heartedly - because "the time for heroism is in the past now all lives are valuable", which sounds really hollow, after Yurkovski, in his capacity of the Chairman of the Space Exploration council visits the "Capitalist space mine" and threatens to court-martial and execute anyone unhappy with the stature of the curator-commisariat of the said Space Council as some kind of space OSHA, while making NO EFFORTS whatsoever to actually improve personal conditions of the workers that they claim to defend.
Maybe it's "space extraterritoriality" of capitalism, maybe it's because it's simply a fictional tale, I'm of the opinion that it's because at that point in time - 1961 - the Soviet Union was rather tied in its own right-wing conundrum whether to continue to use cheap penal labour in the mines - "the pickaxes" of Spartacus uprising or ... well -the pre-union miners in any capitalist country, and cheap uneducated central Asian labour in the fields - the Spartacus uprising "Hoes" - or the Confederate "Black citizen under the tutelage of the state" - the conundrum thankfully was resolved positively the very same year - the Engineer General of the Gulag's department ceased to exist, and earlier (1956) rights, notably right to move to the desired location, were given to the rural labourers, however in the book the 'capitalist' miners are told that they can "stay in place" until the all-powerful Space exploration council "decide to close your useless and dangerous mine anyway" .
A decidedly strange fruit of indecisive policy and - perhaps, the lack of knowledge of the why and how of the real capitalist society - namely the culture war and the subculture - still plaguing us to these days within modern political parties and voters voting against their own interest and for their own disenfranchisement - not only on the capitalist space station in the fictional 2020ies of the book - but here in 2016- 2024 in the 2 main countries where the action is set - USA and Russia .
Lastly, the queer coding, or the lack of it, and rather the unusual task of approaching Russian cultural sphere with the Western (or rather , I shall say Anglo-American) imagination and Western approach to literature analysis.
Krutikov is unmistakeably and in this Anglo-American eye, is queer-coded with his lifelong bachelorship, propensity to nice and showy clothing and distinctive tastes in food and drink, Yurkovski,being more akin to an old "sea and space explorer" with his only love being the sea/space is less so, but them dying together in a suit, well, while hugging each other, on a last mission of heroically suicidal scientific interest is well ... queer-coded as well. However, I think this whole sedimentary layer of wartime and early postwar literature, to which this science-fiction novel also belongs, written by men who often spent a big part of their lives in male-only environment of physical proximity and camaraderie, will need a better mind that mine to analyse.
Me? I just think they were potentially roommates in the sense frequently encountered in the historical research.
What an interesting and unusual book.
Analysing it not only in the framework of the Soviet science fiction of the time, but the general Atomic Age fiction, this book encapsulates not only the usual tropes of the Atomic Age space exploration, but the philosophical questions (and bad answers to them), which would later recur in other, more modern media.
This is also a book where we fully see the ambivalent attitudes to women, and the dawning of understanding that Soviet attitudes of gender equality weren't necessarily sufficient for achieving it in real life - frequently resulting in the establishment placing "useful" of "rightful breeding" (that is - born of proletarian parents, promoting which is, even after a superficial examination is as bad as promoting aristocracy) uncontroversial, but therefore - fundamentally antifeminist figures like Valentina Tereshkova, as the idealized Zinochka (?) in the chapter about the research space station, over there under the Iron Curtain, as they were placed in UK with the similarly establishment-controlled and antifeminist and generally socially-catastrophic person of the "feminist icon" Margaret Thatcher.
The book starts with a rather dry but regrettable dialogue between the disaffected Dauge, one of the original team, now banned from space travel, and his ex-wife, who's described as "vapid" ... the dialogue is almost a textbook move-by-move play of the modern "pseudoprogressives" and the modern incels, of Dauge accusing his ex-wife that her "petit-bourgeois" "lifestyle is vapid and useless" and receiving some jabs back of his life of achievement being rather meaningless without any joy of daily living in Dauge's life, which hits right on the nose.
After that, barring the parable of the "bad capitalists", to which I'll return later in the review, a philosophical position and set of ideals, reminiscent and intersecting with extremist protestants - mennonnites, the catholic extreme of monastic orders, or kamikazes, is exposed which is by that point is portrayed as to be the ideal ideological mindset; as the ideal communist:
- doesn't drink or uses any mind-clouding chemicals
- doesn't pay attention to the wordly (as this is all described as petit-bourgeois)
- finds the only joys in life in working and serving humankind
- doesn't care about fame
- aspires to "die beautifully and gallantly" but doesn't chase death itself
This set of ideals, interestingly, isn't posited as unshakeable, and is in fact criticized later in the book, as outdated and in a way - inhuman, that is demanding a certain inhumanity of people who neither can, nor should be expected to follow them, considering that "material wealth" - or, as we understand it now - satisfaction of the basic human needs have been achieved in that fictional society.
Now, the criticism of the capitalist society in the parable of bad capitalists in the international city where "Russian" communists (not necessarily Russian, but amazingly identified as such by the "international city peace force & police") cohabit with the "Capitalists", is uneven. One side of it is the demonstrable , again, ultraorthodox Christian almost, dissolution - drinking and alluded to wh*ring "what is the meaning to meet with the women who only eat icecream and don't drink any alcohol, Johnny" - which is something - and in our actual modern eye is as innocent as dating, in reality - falls very flat, considering the contemporary postwar problems with cheap industrially-produced alcohol , and therefore - alcoholism, but in general is a universal problem - industrial capitalist societies of France and UK had to meet and address it before WW1, while the agrarian Russian empire and its descendent - the Soviet Union only had to do it after the civil war and closer to WW2 and afterwards.
However the problem of the "petit bourgeois" wanting to have their own life and having their own comforts and actual kindness, cuteness and beauty, which is dismissed in the person of Dauge's ex-wife, is asked - but never answered, and prophetically named as the main and most serious adversary to the regimes of "collective heroism"(actual historical Soviet communism) or even - "individual heroism" (Noon-communism) - not because the "commoner is stupid" - interesting this idea returning here and this idea being the expression of the authors' position of disgust towards the "base" layer of any society - the "uneducated worker" - but because the improvement of the society passes by the improvement of the life of the many aspiring to the normal life, rather than the few, aspiring for heroic deeds. This is curiously where the book again criticizes "heroism" but does so half-heartedly - because "the time for heroism is in the past now all lives are valuable", which sounds really hollow, after Yurkovski, in his capacity of the Chairman of the Space Exploration council visits the "Capitalist space mine" and threatens to court-martial and execute anyone unhappy with the stature of the curator-commisariat of the said Space Council as some kind of space OSHA, while making NO EFFORTS whatsoever to actually improve personal conditions of the workers that they claim to defend.
Maybe it's "space extraterritoriality" of capitalism, maybe it's because it's simply a fictional tale, I'm of the opinion that it's because at that point in time - 1961 - the Soviet Union was rather tied in its own right-wing conundrum whether to continue to use cheap penal labour in the mines - "the pickaxes" of Spartacus uprising or ... well -the pre-union miners in any capitalist country, and cheap uneducated central Asian labour in the fields - the Spartacus uprising "Hoes" - or the Confederate "Black citizen under the tutelage of the state" - the conundrum thankfully was resolved positively the very same year - the Engineer General of the Gulag's department ceased to exist, and earlier (1956) rights, notably right to move to the desired location, were given to the rural labourers, however in the book the 'capitalist' miners are told that they can "stay in place" until the all-powerful Space exploration council "decide to close your useless and dangerous mine anyway" .
A decidedly strange fruit of indecisive policy and - perhaps, the lack of knowledge of the why and how of the real capitalist society - namely the culture war and the subculture - still plaguing us to these days within modern political parties and voters voting against their own interest and for their own disenfranchisement - not only on the capitalist space station in the fictional 2020ies of the book - but here in 2016- 2024 in the 2 main countries where the action is set - USA and Russia .
Lastly, the queer coding, or the lack of it, and rather the unusual task of approaching Russian cultural sphere with the Western (or rather , I shall say Anglo-American) imagination and Western approach to literature analysis.
Krutikov is unmistakeably and in this Anglo-American eye, is queer-coded with his lifelong bachelorship, propensity to nice and showy clothing and distinctive tastes in food and drink, Yurkovski,being more akin to an old "sea and space explorer" with his only love being the sea/space is less so, but them dying together in a suit, well, while hugging each other, on a last mission of heroically suicidal scientific interest is well ... queer-coded as well. However, I think this whole sedimentary layer of wartime and early postwar literature, to which this science-fiction novel also belongs, written by men who often spent a big part of their lives in male-only environment of physical proximity and camaraderie, will need a better mind that mine to analyse.
Me? I just think they were potentially roommates in the sense frequently encountered in the historical research.
What an interesting and unusual book.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 14, 2024
Դեռ չեմ հասկանում Ստրուգացկիների «կայֆը» ու փիլիսոփայությունը
Եղբայրների հինգերորդ գիրքն է, որ կարդում եմ, բայց դեռ չեմ հասկանում՝ ինչու են նրանց այդքան գովում: Բան չունեմ ասելու, դեռ մոտ քսան գիրք կա, կարող է շավ ավելի հետաքրքիր լինեն:
Քննարկենք այս գիրքը երկու ասպեկտով՝ գիտաֆանտաստիկա և գաղափարախոսություն:
Որպես գիտաֆանտաստիկա եսիմ ինչ չէր: Պատմությունը, խոշոր հաշվով, շատ հետաքրքիր չէր: Քիչ տեղեր է նշվում այս մասին, բայց որպեսզի այն գոնե մի քիչ հետաքրքիր Ձեզ, պետք է կարդացած լինեք եղբայրների նախորդ գրքերը, հատկապես Страна багровых туч և Путь на Амальтею: Գոնե մի քիչ ծանոթ կլինեք կերպարներին ու նրանց մոտիվացիային, հակառակ դեպքում, կարծում եմ, ինչ-որ անկապություն կլինի:
Պատմությունը, ինչպես ասացի, հետաքրքիր չէ, գումարած դրան ընդհանրական չէ: Ըստ էության ինչ-որ կարճ պատմությունների հավաքածու է, որոնք միավորվում են ընդհանուր կերպարներով: Մինչ սկսում ես հարմարվել մի պատմությանը, փորձում հասկանալ այն ու ընկղմվել սյուժեի մեջ, այն ավարտվում է ու սկսվում է հաջորդը:
Անցնենք գաղափարախոսությանը, որն իրենից ներկայացնում է մաքուր խորհրդային սոցիալիստական գաղափարախոսություն: Սոցիալիստները լավն են, կապիտասիտները փուֆ, թափելու բան: Սոցիալիստները առաջ են տանում աշխարհը, հերոսություններ անում, աշխատում, որովհետև սիրում են աշխատանքը, իսկ կապիտալիստները մենակ փողի մասին են մտածում ու մարդկությանն ընդհանրապես պետք չեն: Իսկ ես լսել էի, որ Ստրուգացկիներին հաճախ մեղադրում էին հակասոցիալիզմի մեջ: Եսի՞մ, մի տեսակ չի զգացվում:
Մի խոսքով, եթե չեք որոշել Ստրուգացկիների բոլոր ստեղծագործությունները կարդալ, այս մեկը հանգիստ կարող եք բաց թողնել:
Եղբայրների հինգերորդ գիրքն է, որ կարդում եմ, բայց դեռ չեմ հասկանում՝ ինչու են նրանց այդքան գովում: Բան չունեմ ասելու, դեռ մոտ քսան գիրք կա, կարող է շավ ավելի հետաքրքիր լինեն:
Քննարկենք այս գիրքը երկու ասպեկտով՝ գիտաֆանտաստիկա և գաղափարախոսություն:
Որպես գիտաֆանտաստիկա եսիմ ինչ չէր: Պատմությունը, խոշոր հաշվով, շատ հետաքրքիր չէր: Քիչ տեղեր է նշվում այս մասին, բայց որպեսզի այն գոնե մի քիչ հետաքրքիր Ձեզ, պետք է կարդացած լինեք եղբայրների նախորդ գրքերը, հատկապես Страна багровых туч և Путь на Амальтею: Գոնե մի քիչ ծանոթ կլինեք կերպարներին ու նրանց մոտիվացիային, հակառակ դեպքում, կարծում եմ, ինչ-որ անկապություն կլինի:
Պատմությունը, ինչպես ասացի, հետաքրքիր չէ, գումարած դրան ընդհանրական չէ: Ըստ էության ինչ-որ կարճ պատմությունների հավաքածու է, որոնք միավորվում են ընդհանուր կերպարներով: Մինչ սկսում ես հարմարվել մի պատմությանը, փորձում հասկանալ այն ու ընկղմվել սյուժեի մեջ, այն ավարտվում է ու սկսվում է հաջորդը:
Անցնենք գաղափարախոսությանը, որն իրենից ներկայացնում է մաքուր խորհրդային սոցիալիստական գաղափարախոսություն: Սոցիալիստները լավն են, կապիտասիտները փուֆ, թափելու բան: Սոցիալիստները առաջ են տանում աշխարհը, հերոսություններ անում, աշխատում, որովհետև սիրում են աշխատանքը, իսկ կապիտալիստները մենակ փողի մասին են մտածում ու մարդկությանն ընդհանրապես պետք չեն: Իսկ ես լսել էի, որ Ստրուգացկիներին հաճախ մեղադրում էին հակասոցիալիզմի մեջ: Եսի՞մ, մի տեսակ չի զգացվում:
Մի խոսքով, եթե չեք որոշել Ստրուգացկիների բոլոր ստեղծագործությունները կարդալ, այս մեկը հանգիստ կարող եք բաց թողնել:
April 22, 2019
Космическият заварчик Юрий Бородин изпуска полета на своята група до Сатурн и му се налага да търси друг начин да се добере дотам. Съдбата му дава шанс да пътува на борда на "Тахмасиб" със живите легенди на космонавтиката Биков, Юрковски, Жилин и Крутиков.
Първата половина на книгата я четох с голям интерес, напомняше ми много за "Пладне, XXII век"... а после Стругацки явно решиха да поекспериментират и се появиха някои по-странни теми, които ми стояха твърде наивно, нелепо или не на място - сред тях явна (и доста смехотворна) критика на капитализма, критика на разни управленски недъзи и т.н. Краят също ми се стори някак насилено драматичен и изсмукан от пръстите. Можеха да се постараят повече братята...
Първата половина на книгата я четох с голям интерес, напомняше ми много за "Пладне, XXII век"... а после Стругацки явно решиха да поекспериментират и се появиха някои по-странни теми, които ми стояха твърде наивно, нелепо или не на място - сред тях явна (и доста смехотворна) критика на капитализма, критика на разни управленски недъзи и т.н. Краят също ми се стори някак насилено драматичен и изсмукан от пръстите. Можеха да се постараят повече братята...
March 25, 2021
"Ужасная" книга. Часть книги написана авторами в стиле "мы вынуждены". Главы, связанные с пропагандой коммунизма откровенно ужасны. Это картонная подделка, которую Стругацкие видимо должны были включить в состав книги. По крайней мере мне так хотелось бы верить. Спасают книгу только три места: рассказ про флюктуацию (абсолютно прекрасно), история конфликта в обсерватории Диона и концовка. Если бы не эти части, книга была бы провальной. Нужно ли вам читать эту книгу? Да, если вам нужна концовка истории Быкова и компании. Жалею ли я, что книга была мной прочитана? Нет.
July 19, 2012
At the end, they all died... But they have seen something unseen before, they have found what was thought of as unexistable. And probably 10-15, may be 20 years later they whould die any way, these two old space travellers, who was only allowed by medics for one more flight...
They died following their passion...
They died following their passion...
August 6, 2021
A simple plot. The future communist solutions in space are described as superior to the capitalist ones. No mystery, no suspense, no action. Relatively boring, except for what happens when one of the astonauts finds himself unable to resist the luring beauty of Saturn's glistening rings.
April 14, 2014
Перечитываю уже в третий раз. Не перестаю восхищаться мастерству и оптимизму писателей. Как и главных героев, книга учит читателя быть Человеком.
February 6, 2017
Догматично и назидательно до отвращения. Вот именно боясь такого я так долго и не читал Стругацких.
March 2, 2019
My rating: ★★
May 16, 2024
Только начал читать "Стажеров" и уже старые знакомые - Быков, Юрковский и Дауге. Причем последний провожает друзей в полет, а сам из-за здоровья остается на Земле, чем очень печалится. Встречает в аэропорту свою бывшую любовь, с которой не виделся 20 лет, у них происходит тяжелый разговор о том, что важнее - себялюбие и праздность или работа и самоотдача, авторы безоговорочно на стороне Дауге, но жалкий Дауге и красивая Маша все же показывают горечь всего положения вещей.
Вторым местом действия выступает Марс, единственный знакомый персонаж здесь - Опанасенко, десантник из первой новеллы Полдня. На Марсе основной проблемой выступают огромные, летающие пиявки, и несколько исследовательских колоний бьются как рыбы об лед как бы решить эту проблему, и решают наконец зачистить периметр. А еще обнаруживают следы внеземной цивилизации.
На земле тем временем, юный стажер-строитель Юрий Бородин опоздал на свой корабль, идущий на Рею, но ему удается попасть в экипаж Быкова и вместе с ним он таки отправляется в Космос.
В этой книге уже появляется сын Быкова - Григорий, возможно названный в честь Дауге.
"Какие люди вам больше всего не нравятся?" спросил стажер Бородин у Жилина - "Те, которые на задают вопросов, а думают, что все знаю", как-то это верно подмечено.
Космический планетолет "Тахмасиб" совершает перелет через ряд планет, спутников и систем уж очень это напоминает курсионный ход какого-нибудь лайнера) на каждой точке остановки с героями случаются пришествия похожие на короткие рассказы, на Марсе делали облаву на пиявок, на Эндории уничтожали толи планету толи еще что-то, на Диооне вывели на чистую воду директора, который за счет других разрабатывал свои темы, попутно интриговал мерзавец.
Очень интересны рассказы Ивана Жилина, которые сами по себе стали бы интересными, отдельными рассказами - "Гиганская флюктуация" и "След в первобытной пещере".
Концовка, конечно, печальна - Крутиков и Юрковский погибают, исследуя кольцо Сатурна, сюжетный поворот может и оправдан, вот только если Крутиков погиб как герой, как мне это представляется, то Юрковский погиб как фанатик, котором так и надо, ибо нефиг быть такими, если рискуешь, рискуй сам и не тащи за собой других. В общем это "громовержец", "Зевес" оказался обычным фанатиком, мне по крайней мере обидно за Крутикова.
Финальная фраза о том, что "Главное на Земле" подводит итог скорее всего под космическими путешествиями.
Вторым местом действия выступает Марс, единственный знакомый персонаж здесь - Опанасенко, десантник из первой новеллы Полдня. На Марсе основной проблемой выступают огромные, летающие пиявки, и несколько исследовательских колоний бьются как рыбы об лед как бы решить эту проблему, и решают наконец зачистить периметр. А еще обнаруживают следы внеземной цивилизации.
На земле тем временем, юный стажер-строитель Юрий Бородин опоздал на свой корабль, идущий на Рею, но ему удается попасть в экипаж Быкова и вместе с ним он таки отправляется в Космос.
В этой книге уже появляется сын Быкова - Григорий, возможно названный в честь Дауге.
"Какие люди вам больше всего не нравятся?" спросил стажер Бородин у Жилина - "Те, которые на задают вопросов, а думают, что все знаю", как-то это верно подмечено.
Космический планетолет "Тахмасиб" совершает перелет через ряд планет, спутников и систем уж очень это напоминает курсионный ход какого-нибудь лайнера) на каждой точке остановки с героями случаются пришествия похожие на короткие рассказы, на Марсе делали облаву на пиявок, на Эндории уничтожали толи планету толи еще что-то, на Диооне вывели на чистую воду директора, который за счет других разрабатывал свои темы, попутно интриговал мерзавец.
Очень интересны рассказы Ивана Жилина, которые сами по себе стали бы интересными, отдельными рассказами - "Гиганская флюктуация" и "След в первобытной пещере".
Концовка, конечно, печальна - Крутиков и Юрковский погибают, исследуя кольцо Сатурна, сюжетный поворот может и оправдан, вот только если Крутиков погиб как герой, как мне это представляется, то Юрковский погиб как фанатик, котором так и надо, ибо нефиг быть такими, если рискуешь, рискуй сам и не тащи за собой других. В общем это "громовержец", "Зевес" оказался обычным фанатиком, мне по крайней мере обидно за Крутикова.
Финальная фраза о том, что "Главное на Земле" подводит итог скорее всего под космическими путешествиями.
December 21, 2025
Перечитал только потому что компактные сюжеты идеальны пока для меня для чтения на сербском.
Возможно самая слабая книга Стругацких.
Очень примитивно и поверхностно, нравоучительно.
Хотя в общем есть фирменные рассуждения о том что жить потребителем просто скучно.
Причем авторы не навязывают - хочешь - живи, но смотри как можно интересно жить.
Но с чисто литературной точки зрения наверно это одна из немногих книг стругацких которую вообще не надо читать.
Возможно самая слабая книга Стругацких.
Очень примитивно и поверхностно, нравоучительно.
Хотя в общем есть фирменные рассуждения о том что жить потребителем просто скучно.
Причем авторы не навязывают - хочешь - живи, но смотри как можно интересно жить.
Но с чисто литературной точки зрения наверно это одна из немногих книг стругацких которую вообще не надо читать.
December 19, 2018
Последняя повесть из цикла "Полдень". В принципе, мало чем отличается от остальных, но чувствуется, что авторам тематика уже слегка надоела. Наверное, проблема утопий в том, что о них нечего особо писать. Герои героически преодолевают, иногда даже гибнут ради высоких целей познания, но вокруг все хорошо, коммунизм же.
October 31, 2019
Some thoughts I found important:
- Friendship, work, love. Those are 3 pillars on which a good life stands.
- A good life is not about living comfortably, it is about serving community. It is about doing interesting, difficult, and important work.
- Friendship, work, love. Those are 3 pillars on which a good life stands.
- A good life is not about living comfortably, it is about serving community. It is about doing interesting, difficult, and important work.
December 26, 2017
I could be a bit biased by Strugatsky, but his is very good book which I enjoyed immensely. The plot is fairly trivial, but grips me and I like to way he portrayed the story of the apprentice.
June 27, 2019
So yesterday and so naive ;)
March 9, 2025
я щас упаду и буду ебашиться башкой
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews