Page 182 - Vinkler, Jonatan, Ana Beguš and Marcello Potocco. Eds. 2019. Ideology in the 20th Century: Studies of literary and social discourses and practices. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 182
Ideology in the 20th Century: studies of literary and social discourses and practices
limit at one stroke the freedom obtained to a certain extent from 1953 to
1965 (Šubin 2008, 143). This explains the ‘thawing’ of Georgian officials
towards Viktor Nozadze, who was officially invited to attend the jubilee
celebrations in Tbilisi. The wish of Georgian officials to enable “Georgia
to appear before the civilized world in a worthy manner” would to a cer-
tain extent be realized by an emigrant scholar attending the anniversary,
one whose name had passed beyond the boundaries of the narrow circle of
Georgian emigration by that time and attracted the attention of foreign
Kartvelian scholars.8 However, Nozadze refused to go to Georgia. Apart
from the more banal reasons, such as the telegram invitation being writ-
ten in Russian, his categorical refusal to arrive in Georgia should be ex-
plained by his ideological and worldview conflict with the Soviet regime.
In his article Dante—Rustaveli Nozadze distanced himself from the ‘of-
182 ficial Soviet’ viewpoint of the Rustaveli phenomenon, quoting an exten-
sive passage from the anniversary address of Givi Javakhishvili, chairman
of the Georgian SSR Council of Ministers:
The Georgian people note with profound gratitude that the anniversary of
Rustaveli is one more clear demonstration of the untiring care of the Com-
munist Party and the Soviet Government for the further development and
flourishing of the culture of the peoples of our country. This significant na-
tionwide event will enable us to present to the entire world not only the
greatness of Rustaveli, but also the grandiose changes and success attained
by the Georgian people in the sphere of national culture during the years of
Soviet rule (Javakhishvili 1966).
Thus it is only after Nozadze’s death, in the Perestroika years and in par-
ticular in post-Soviet Georgia, that one can speak of a significant change
in the reception of Nozadze’s work in Georgian literary criticism. In this
regard, the opening of the ‘special collections’ of the National Library of
Georgia was significant, as a result of which access was provided for Geor-
gian scholars to ‘prohibited literature’, including Viktor Nozadze’s works
concerning The Knight in the Panther’s Skin. As regards his writings,
which mainly appeared in emigrant periodicals, these were preserved to-
8 In this regard, the publication of the English-language scholarly journal Georgi-
ca (1935–1937) in London and the French-language journal Revue de Kartvélologie
(1957–1984) in Paris was significant, in which works of Georgian authors (including
Viktor Nozadze) were published alongside works of William Edward David Allen,
Edward Denison Ross, John F. Baddeley, Carl Ferdinand Friedrich Lehmann-Haupt,
David Marshall Lang, Robert Horne Stevenson, Gérard Garitte, and others, which fa-
cilitated internationalization of studies by Georgian scholars (Khintibidze 2003, 55).
limit at one stroke the freedom obtained to a certain extent from 1953 to
1965 (Šubin 2008, 143). This explains the ‘thawing’ of Georgian officials
towards Viktor Nozadze, who was officially invited to attend the jubilee
celebrations in Tbilisi. The wish of Georgian officials to enable “Georgia
to appear before the civilized world in a worthy manner” would to a cer-
tain extent be realized by an emigrant scholar attending the anniversary,
one whose name had passed beyond the boundaries of the narrow circle of
Georgian emigration by that time and attracted the attention of foreign
Kartvelian scholars.8 However, Nozadze refused to go to Georgia. Apart
from the more banal reasons, such as the telegram invitation being writ-
ten in Russian, his categorical refusal to arrive in Georgia should be ex-
plained by his ideological and worldview conflict with the Soviet regime.
In his article Dante—Rustaveli Nozadze distanced himself from the ‘of-
182 ficial Soviet’ viewpoint of the Rustaveli phenomenon, quoting an exten-
sive passage from the anniversary address of Givi Javakhishvili, chairman
of the Georgian SSR Council of Ministers:
The Georgian people note with profound gratitude that the anniversary of
Rustaveli is one more clear demonstration of the untiring care of the Com-
munist Party and the Soviet Government for the further development and
flourishing of the culture of the peoples of our country. This significant na-
tionwide event will enable us to present to the entire world not only the
greatness of Rustaveli, but also the grandiose changes and success attained
by the Georgian people in the sphere of national culture during the years of
Soviet rule (Javakhishvili 1966).
Thus it is only after Nozadze’s death, in the Perestroika years and in par-
ticular in post-Soviet Georgia, that one can speak of a significant change
in the reception of Nozadze’s work in Georgian literary criticism. In this
regard, the opening of the ‘special collections’ of the National Library of
Georgia was significant, as a result of which access was provided for Geor-
gian scholars to ‘prohibited literature’, including Viktor Nozadze’s works
concerning The Knight in the Panther’s Skin. As regards his writings,
which mainly appeared in emigrant periodicals, these were preserved to-
8 In this regard, the publication of the English-language scholarly journal Georgi-
ca (1935–1937) in London and the French-language journal Revue de Kartvélologie
(1957–1984) in Paris was significant, in which works of Georgian authors (including
Viktor Nozadze) were published alongside works of William Edward David Allen,
Edward Denison Ross, John F. Baddeley, Carl Ferdinand Friedrich Lehmann-Haupt,
David Marshall Lang, Robert Horne Stevenson, Gérard Garitte, and others, which fa-
cilitated internationalization of studies by Georgian scholars (Khintibidze 2003, 55).
