Page:Knight (1975) Past, Future and the Problem of Communication in the Work of V V Khlebnikov.djvu/193

185 APPENDIX 'B'.

Khlebnikov and the 'Slap' Manifesto.

In the preceding pages it has been assumed that his "Futurism" was an essential aspect of Khlebnikov‘s literary personality and psychology. Despite his uniqueness and originality, he shared to a significant degree the attitudes and aims of such colleagues as Kayakovsky, Kruchenykh and others prominent in the pre-war "Cube—Futurist" movement. His "primitivism" did not cut him off ideologically (as Poggioli would have it) from his fellow—Futurists, all of whom (in contrast to the Italians) were to some degree inspired by the idea of the "primitive" in art. It is true that Khlebnikov was not an "urbanist" or an admirer of the machine—age, but his championship of "inventions" was genuine, and in the preceding pages it has been argued that his "electronic" enthusiasms may have made him more, not less, of a "futurist" in technological matters than most of his contemporaries.

Those who would draw a clear—cut distinction between Futurism and Khlebnikov usually refer to the "urbanist" tone and flavour of the "Slap" manifesto in support of their case. Whether Khlebnikov participated in writing this has been much discussed. Kruchenykh wrote that he did:


 * I remember only one instance when Khlebnikov, Mayakovsky, Burlyuk and myself were all writing a piece together-—it was the manifesto for the book Slap to the Public's Taste.

The writing took a long time; we discussed every sentence, every letter...
 * I remember my phrase: "perfumed lechery of Belmont." Khlebnikov's amendment, "aromatic lechery of Belmont," was not accepted...
 * "To stand on the rock of the word "We"" and "From the heights of sky—scrapers we look at their littleness"