Before we conjure up an idyllic image of a harmonic chorus of great mathematicians conversing magnificently on topics of utmost scholarly importance, let us read a bit more from the memoirs of the same seminar participants. The seminar has been described as “a kind of theater with a unique stage director playing the leading role in the performance and organizing the supporting cast”, “like one-man shows, sometimes successful, sometimes rough”, which “sometimes unfolded more like math improv”. The participants perceived it as a “surrealistic show”, which was “exciting but frightening”. They admitted that “Gelfand ignored niceties”; at the seminar, “speakers and participants were subjected to ruthless ridicule”, some-times reaching the proportions of “extreme inhumanity”.
The notion of civility, ingrained in the scientific myth since the Scientific Revolution, is thus called into question. The mixture of admiration and revolt, evoked by the Gelfand seminar, cries for an explanation. Did the style of the seminar merely reflect the eccentric personality of its leader, or did it indicate some broader cultural patterns? Did the seminar thrive despite its offensive style, or was the style part of the enigma? How does today’s perspective of the memoirists differ from the contemporary perceptions of the seminar? To start answering these equestions, we will place the Gelfand seminar in the social context of postwar Sovietmathematics.

[Читать дальше →]
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2gFPpm-Sl4YTmtXc0pQN2I4Mnc/view?pref=2&pli=1