The tacit admission of failure contained in the final pages of the attempt by Remizov (the artist) to harness the destructive force of the revolution to creative effect is compounded if we recall that they were written after Remizov (the man of everyday life) had sought refuge in the west. In order to conclude my account of byt I must consider the further consequences of the revolution for my theme. Beforehand, however, I should recapitulate the (anti-)plot so far, and so assess progress made towards completing the tasks I set myself: (i) to depict the defining cycle in the development of byt in order to account for its resonance in twentieth-century Russian culture; (ii) to determine in this light the special nature of Russian modernist narrative; (iii) to trace its cultural roots.

I have focussed throughout on byt as a literary-cultural construct. I began by stressing that, rather than being the product of an indigenous Russian tradition, the phenomenon's complex of negative connotations reflect a vigorous dialogue between two different epistemological systems, both of which exert influence in East and West (though in differing degrees). One – predominant in, but by no means exclusive to the Catholic and Protestant cultures of western Europe – is reflected in the economy of the sign with its dualistic hierarchies of matter and essence, particular and universal, its espousal of the logic of self-identities and oppositions and its emphasis on absence and mediation.