Дорога в декабре

What if you would have a chance to take a look at the path of a revolutionist? Would you like to understand what thoughts do they have and what are their feelings? Is it a true patriotism or just a romanization of violence? I often had such thoughts and questions and that is why Prilepin's book Sankya became a good “food for thought” for me.
Before I started reading, I decided to look at the biography of Zachar Prilepin, whose real name is actually Yevgeny Lavlinsky. So, he was a founder of the movement “For Truth” which might even become a political party. This already created certain expectations, because I knew what this book ihas political context and didn’t want to be disappointed.
When it comes to a capture of administrative building you know that something serious is about to happen. This is what happens at the end of a book in the scene of the main confrontation between the group of the main characters and the representatives of law. I will stop here to give details and to avoid spoilers. So, I mentioned the “seriousness” of the moment as this is way the whole book was written. No irony or sarcasm, everything is serious from the very first page. That is why everything in the book is very realistic and even seems “familiar” and it corresponds to the features of the ideological novel.
The second feature of the ideological novel is a clear ideological message and characters that represent the ideas of that ideology. So, Pelevin writes about the party of “The Founders” and its members, one of which is a provincial guy and our main character- Alexander Tishin, or as his grandparents call him, Sankya. The main goal of this party is to get rid off the current government as all their actions are against “simple people” and “The Founders ” think that this has to be changed in order to build a better world. What about the characters? There is a clear ideological division on “us” and the “others”. “Us” are Sasha’s friends, members of “The Founders”, for example: Venya and Lesha; and everyone who supports their ideas. The “others” is a government and their representatives as they are the main evil, which needs to be destroyed.
What about the ideas represented in this book? So, there is a concept of negative identity. The main feature of this concept is the devision. I already mentioned the devision on “us” and “others”, but there is a more general one:adults and young generation. This book represents a huge misunderstanding and gap between generations. Because of this devision, young generation transfers the guilt to their enemies and tries to fight these enemies. However, not all of “The Founders” end up alive. This confrontation of common people and the government already emerged in Pelevin’s “Pacan”. There is a line that says:”Anyone who dares not to keep their mouth shut, will be helped shut up.”
At the beginning of the book I thought: Would I give this book to my younger brother, for example? Is this book a call to a revolution? After all, we don’t know how all these romanticized revolutionary actions can affect the impressionable young minds. By the end of the book, I had an answer. I don’t think that Prilepin is trying to provide a guidance on radical actions and is he is definitely not trying to inspire anyone to go to the streets and destroy everything around. Moreover, near the end of the book, Prilepin shows to the reader what a tragic outcome of such actions is(few members of “The Founders” are killed) and moreover he shows that they sometimes they just try to justify their illegal actions that have no value for the revolution. For example, there is an episode when Sasha robs a man and gets a thick wad of money. At some point of the book, the reader gets to these words “and again it became quiet and clear. Perfect weather to shoot someone.” At this point you realize that it is not just about “the Founders”, it is about all people.

Книги и фильмы, показывающие всю грязь человеческой сущности, я по-своему уважаю и не считаю жанр трэшового реализма чем-то плохим.⠀
⠀
Иногда полезно снять розовые очки и посмотреть на реальность под другим углом. «Грязь» с МакЭвоем, «Левиафан», «Географ глобус пропил» и т.д. – они хороши. Книга Захара Прилепина – нет.⠀
⠀
В «Черной обезьяне» сюжет отсутствует как таковой.

⠀
Но это абсолютно неинтересно. Герой не развивается. Сюжета, повторюсь, нет. Морали нет. Вопрос – зачем это было написано? Окей, некоторые пишут или снимают в жанре трэша ради самого трэша, но тогда должна быть атмосферность, чтобы ты был ей настолько потрясён, что плевать на всё остальное. Но её тоже нет.⠀
⠀
Причём я бы не сказала, что слог автора плох. Он легко читается, проблема в том, что читаешь-то ты полную бессмыслицу. Короче, не рекомендую. Даже в «50 оттенках серого» смысла больше, хотя это сложно себе представить.