The Radzinsky Temptation

[C. Jordan]

"Last night I recieved a phone call from Lev Paikovsky, professor of philosophy at the Military University of Tyumen. I immediately put on my thermal uniform, and drove through the snow...

"Who is Paikovksy, you said? Akademician Paikovsky is the author of 3 books, but is better known to be the "philosophical heir" to Anna Radzinsky. I assume everyone knows who Anna Radzinsky was? No?

"Anna Radzinsky was the author of 4 of the greatest novels of late 22nd Century Russian philosophy. Her best known is The Inner Well, in which she took a position that went completely against common sense. Individualism was a western vice, people believed; too much liberty always led to a Mafiya-state.

"But against what almost everyone agreed was so, Anna Radzinsky said: 'No, not always. Individualism leads to freedom and success and happiness. Collectivism leads us back to Sohvyet slavery, such as under Stalin; or worse, feudalism such as under Yekaterina the Great.'

"Yes, you have heard of 'us.' I assume you mean These are ideas which I will admit to you that I wish I'd had her ideas first.

"By the way, I neve introduced myself? Yefim Radzinsky. Yes, that is my name, though it may sound improbable. I suppose Anna is a very distant relative, but so distant as to be of no real importance. I never heard of Anna Radzinsky until I read The Inner Well for myself. So: you can imagine how much it can annoy me when people make a mistake and thank me for my writing.

"I have to admit the truth, of course. I had nothing to do with it.

"But I'm getting away from what I was telling you. Sorry about that. But I had to let you know that, yes, I am one of those people who admires Radzinsky. I don't agree with everything she said, but where she was right, she was impeccably right. I'm not one of her cultish clique of third-rate professors.

"This is why I drove out to meet Paikovsky. No, I'd never met him before, I only knew him by reputation. Most of my friends consider him to be the Party Chairman for those third-rate professors. Myself, I've reserved judgment until having met him.

"What is my judgment? Let me tell you the substance of our conversation. Then you decide.

"Dr. Paikovsky met me in his office. I had never been there. It was full of books in pristine unused condition, and the walls were covered with honorary doctorates from all across Russia.

"What we discussed for an hour is of no importance. Then Dr. Paikovsky said: 'I will come to the point, Mr. Radzinsky. You know that there are people who find shortcomings in the Anna Radzinsky's writing.'

"Yes, he emphasised 'the Anna Radzinsky.' He went on to ask if I were one of them.

"I said that I was. Unless you've read The Inner Well yourself, there's no point in listing all the faults I found in her writing. Only that there are several. And yes, I do admire that book in particular. The majority of it is impeccable. There are also flaws. That is not a contradiction.

"By the way, Paikovsky made that argument. He argued with me, on everything I said. But then he came to the point of why he'd invited me here.

"'So, if you don't like 17% of The Inner Well,' he said, 'then why don't you do something about it?'

"I asked him what he meant by that, and he said that as the philosophical heir of Anna Radzinsky, he gave me permission to re-write The Inner Well to my standards. I was free to eliminate whatever I considered to be wrong. I was free to add my own ideas, at my discretion.

"Yes, of course I thought he was joking. He said he would put it in writing, and have the written contract notarised, then I knew he was serious.

"He asked me to consider the difficulties of writing. To write something really well yourself takes a long time. It takes hard work. Why not take advantage of the fact that all the hard work had been done? Why not do it?

"I thought about his offer, and said that no, that was exactly the reason why I didn't want to re-write something that sombody else had written. He sneered and asked whether I was a masochist for hard work. I replied that no, I was only working hard because there was no other way to write a great book myself.

"He did not like hearing that at all. He scornfully wondered whether I was capable of writing a great book. I said I'd been working at it for about 7 years. It had taken the Anna Radzinsky longer than that to write The Inner Well.

"The argument went from the ridiculous to the obscene. He demanded to know how dare I compare myself to Radzinsky, just because of the coincidence in my last name. But no, I wouldn't discuss my writing with him. I'm not yet done. Once I'm done, then he'll be free to read it, or not; and he's free to say whatever he feels like.

"No, I won't repeat the obscenities, but I ended it by making an obscene remark about where Dr Paikovsky's might shove his cell phone. But then again, speaking of cell phones, I called my voice mailbox during the conversation, and therefore have it recorded. If you don't believe I'm telling the truth, I can play it for you, and then you can really decide for yourself.

"No, I don't think the story has an obvious moral. You should be seeing the moral message for youself, anyway, not asking me. But I have a theory of why Dr. Paikovsky would make me such an offer. It does sound preposterous for him to behave so. But here's my guess: there is an old story of the Devil and Saint Antony of Tyumen. Have you heard it? No?

"They say the Saint refused to do what the Devil said again and again, but finally he agreed to compromise on something trivial. Once he did that, he made a precedent for compromising, and his compromises grew from the small to the large, and eventually this was the undoing of the saint.

"Taken as a metaphor, I think Paikovsky might have been trying to tempt me to make a compromise towards corrupting myself. And if I'd re-written somebody else's book, what right would I have to compain if somebody re-wrote my book. If (say) Paikovsky decided he didn't like something I were to write, and re-wrote it to please himself, then he could. Why? Because I did the same myself. If I complain, I'm a hypocrite.

"Do I really think he'd do that? No, I'm only speculating about that. He might not be planning any such a thing. But you see, because I don't give him any right to take my writing without my permission, I'll be consistent and not do that to anyone else's writing. I would not do that with Paikovsky's writing, for another reason besides. I don't like Paikovsky's writing.

"Besides, the answer I gave him was better. I don't have enough time to write something myself AND re-write somebody else's work. And as for what I'm writing, I'll let you know what it's called when it's done.

"Have a good day, and don't forget the biscuits."