Ways and milestones: Russian literary criticism in the twentieth century Segal Dmitry Mikhailovich
CHAPTER III Formal school. Shklovsky. Eichenbaum. Tynyanov
formal school. Shklovsky. Eichenbaum. Tynyanov
The situation developed in such a way that the so-called academic schools of literary criticism turned out to be in the face of their recognized representatives in political opposition to the new government. Therefore, new young forces entered the social and academic arena, designated in the usage of that time as the “formal school of literary criticism”, “formalists”, “opoyazovtsy”, according to the name OPOYAZ, the acronym of the association to which these scientists were part (Society for the Study of Poetic Language). These are Viktor Borisovich Shklovsky (1893–1984), Boris Mikhailovich Eikhenbaum (1886–1959), Boris Viktorovich Tomashevsky (1890–1957), Yuri Nikolaevich Tynyanov (1894–1943). These were participants in the philological seminar of S. A. Vengerov, who studied with him at Petrograd University.
They were joined from Moscow by linguists Roman Osipovich Yakobson (1896–1982), Grigory Osipovich Vinokur (1896–1947) and folklorist Pyotr Grigoryevich Bogatyrev (1893–1971).
The formal school of literary criticism is the most original and talented response of Russian literature to the upheavals of history expressed in the wars and revolutions of the early 20th century. It is also the most original contribution of Russian science to the humanities. The paradox of history was that it was precisely academic literary criticism, which grew out of populist criticism, whose representatives so unanimously rejected the Bolshevik coup of 1917, became, after some twenty years, an absolutely adequate exponent of the Stalinist party line in literature, and the formal school, many of whose members willingly accepted Bolshevism and, in any case, were ready to intercede for the revolution, turned out to be ousted from academic and existential everyday life. Of course, much in the fate of the formal school was determined by the accidents of the biography and personality of its most brilliant leader, V. B. Shklovsky, who at some historical period became involved in the resistance to the Bolsheviks of the active wing of the Socialist-Revolutionary Party, who fought against them with weapons in their hands. It is worth adding to this some statements by the same Shklovsky that political ideology plays no role in the analysis of a work of art, in order to understand that, as a social phenomenon, formalism was perceived by the communists from the very beginning as a sharply hostile phenomenon.
Moreover, it is impossible to understand the internal structure and dynamics of the formal school without taking into account the cardinal fact that, starting from 1921, namely from the publication of the article by L. D. Trotsky "The Formal School of Poetry and Marxism", the formal method and the formalists were a concentrated and continuous attack from the Marxists, as well as various adherents of the past populism, academic literary criticism and even religious philosophy.
In the end, especially after the so-called dispute about formalism in 1924, OPOYAZ was liquidated, and formalism was ousted from magazine and newspaper literary criticism, the formalists left - some in academic literary criticism, like B. V. Tomashevsky and B. M. Eichenbaum, acto like a v.b. Shklovsky and Yu. N. Tynyanov, in fiction. V. B. Shklovsky, in the last two decades of his long life, found new strength in himself and returned to literary criticism of the direction in which he was engaged during the OPOYAZ period. Of course, one should also note the fact that the displacement of formalism was accompanied by an increasing public discrediting of both the method, the formalists themselves and their works, and, in the end, the word itself, which around 1948 had become a synonym for a political curse like “ counterrevolutionary."
With all this, one should keep in mind the fact that, firstly, none of the prominent representatives of the formal school in literary criticism was repressed, which cannot be said about their opponents. All representatives of the sociological school (B. S. Pereverzev, I. Grossman-Roshchin), not to mention the early draft Marxist critics (G. Gorbachev, G. Lelevich), were arrested and many were shot. Moreover, most of the formalists (in the years of the so-called "high Stalinism" former Formalists) did not fall under the heading banned from publication (the period of persecution associated with the campaign against cosmopolitanism, which began in 1948, ended with the death of the tyrant in 1953). They were somehow able to return to their studies, and in the case of V. B. Shklovsky, as we have just indicated above, one can observe a new, very fruitful period. Finally, the end of the fifties is the beginning of the flourishing of structural linguistics, along with which came a new interest in formalism. Accordingly, the ideas and methods of the formal school are receiving a new impetus, both in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, and in the West.
Interestingly, such a development did not take place in the case of schools and trends that at one time struggled with the formal school. All sociological, including Marxist, trends in the study of literature in the Soviet Union were anathematized as politically harmful (“Trotskyism”, “Bukharinism”, etc.), but they were not known in the West. Accordingly, Western Marxists, Marxoids, Litsociologists, Genderists and Genderists, Thiermondists, and so on, and so on, and so on. they invented their bicycles, each in their own way and in their own way, each time clumsily and blunder. After the fall of communism in the Soviet Union, this direction did not experience a renaissance, not even a mini-renaissance. In essence, the same should be said about another direction, hostile at one time to the formal school, about religious-philosophical criticism. It continued throughout the years of Soviet power, but not in the Soviet Union (except for isolated examples and in the underground, such as, for example, the works of the philosopher J. Golosovker on Dostoevsky or the works of the philosopher A.F. Losev), but in emigration. But most of these works had a clear bias towards criticism of life, and not criticism of literature, therefore, again with rare exceptions, such as the works of A. L. Bem on Dostoevsky, there was no continuous literary schools of this kind. It seems that the renewed religious-philosophical tradition of reading literature in the new Russia is also occupied so far with more criticism of life than of literature.
It seems to me that this is connected, among other things, with the specifics of the development and reception of the ideas of the formal school. Let us take a closer look at how the ideas, method, and general approach of the Russian formal school in literary criticism differed from the entire complex of trends that opposed it. Let's start with the opposite. What do all these “anti-formalist” approaches have in common? What they have in common is the emphasis on the moment of will, conscious choice - whether in the creation of literature, in its reception, or in its study, evaluation. A Marxist critic, a philosophically thinking religious writer who deals with literature, a literary historian who studies it as part of the socio-cultural process - they all approach literature, firstly, from the outside, from the standpoint of a certain non-literary series, and secondly, having a clearly formulated system of views. regarding the current state of literature in the social field, in the circle of religious values, or among other related cultural phenomena. These directions are based on the fact that all phenomena associated with literature are an expression of the conscious will of the author, who, in turn, expresses the ideas or values of his social group or environment (or, say, the will of Providence). Accordingly, any events in the field of literary evolution are also the result of someone's conscious decisions, someone's volitional choice.
The formal approach to the study of literature does not negate all this. But the formalists chose a certain opposite point of view, namely, a position based on an empirically quite obvious and universal phenomenon. unconsciousness processes occurring during the functioning of the human language as a communicative system. The formal approach in literary criticism interprets literature as “another” (but very important and completely unique!) system of language functioning, in which the moment of the unconscious is very important and appears along with the completely objective aspects of conscious choice.
It must be borne in mind that, taken historically, the formal method in literary criticism developed not as a coherent deductive theory, but rather as a search for certain "resonating points" in the field of literature. The discovery of such and the establishment of connections between them gradually made the outline of the whole theory more transparent, as well as those modes of the field of literature, where the "unconscious" was transposed into the "conscious" and vice versa - in other words, the transition of purely "linguistic", systemic relations into value judgments, and the latter - into unconsciously acting factors, often transforming the values themselves.
Historically, the entry into the arena of the formal school was marked by the appearance in the press in the 1910s of two manifesto articles written by Viktor Shklovsky, "The Resurrection of the Word" and "Art as a Method". Shklovsky was the last of the formalists who could, already in the 80s of the XX century, after all the blows of fate, the vicissitudes of literature and literary theory, set out in his "Selected in two volumes" (Moscow, ed. "Fiction", 1983) the way he sees his approach to literature in the context of other theoretical searches, both formalists and their opponents. In its most general form, V. B. Shklovsky’s approach to literature remained unchanged, despite all the variations of the provisions he consciously formulated - from the outrageous formalism and “anti-ideological nature” of early articles through the functionalism of the middle stage to a kind of quasi-reconciliation with Marxism in the era of “high Stalinism” and the return to the formalist narrative at the end. This approach can be formulated as follows: literature and a literary work are not defined by what the author sees in them, nor by what the "first glance" of the average reader or critic sees in them. This "not what you think - literature" (to paraphrase F. I. Tyutchev's poetic line about "nature") underlies all the scientific ideas of the formal school.
Let us note here that a similar hermeneutic construction was present at that time at the basis of the most diverse and very influential scientific and parascientific trends and schools, starting from the so-called positive sociology (Auguste Comte) and all its later ramifications, various branches of anthropology, Marxist escapades in economics, history, etc., including also the analytical psychology of Freud and his disciples, and even quite exotic theo- and anthroposophy. For all of them, including structural linguistics that is just beginning to take shape, a theoretical and empirical separation of the so-called surface (empirical, everyday, external, fetishized, etc., etc.) reality and the reality of deep, genuine, true, real , unmasked, etc. In linguistics, this division will play an important theoretical role in distinguishing “language” and “speech” from F. de Saussure, the so-called. "ethical" and "emic" level of units in American descriptive linguistics, superficial and deep levels in the generative theory of N. Chomsky. In Marxism, it is involved in the division of the so-called. "productive forces" and "production relations", where the latter, in the so-called. exploitative societies, distort the true structure of the former.
In every sphere of human activity, practice, in every sphere of communication, the corresponding theory posited its own reason for this observed discord, the divergence between the visible and the real. All these reasons can be modo grosso classified into two groups: one, which sees the source of an obvious inability to decipher reality in the great complexity of those structures in which a person is included as a social being (here I would include all sociological and other functional theories of human society and behavior), and the other, which sees the reason for this in history and its indirect, winding, hidden path. In principle, however, the need to distinguish between these two levels (superficial and deep) and the objective reason for their constant discrepancy underlies any fundamental methodological scientific approach. Many of the approaches that argued with the formal school considered themselves to be completely scientific and even the only scientific, such as, for example, Marxism. The question of opposition unconscious and conscious. which we here put forward as a fundamental distinguishing principle between the formal school and other schools of literary criticism, has received such primacy only in the theory of linguistics. In the earliest works of the pioneer of the formal school, Viktor Shklovsky, it is he who is the starting point of all discussion about elimination and so on.
As for the distinction between the superficial and deep levels, here indeed the dissimilarity between the formal school and other schools is absolutely fundamental. All other literary schools proceeded from the explicit or implicit premise that literature is an ideological phenomenon (hence directly accessible to observation and research), behind which lies a deeper reality, be it social, understood either in the spirit of Marxism as a class struggle, or in in the spirit of positivism as a structure of social interactions, be it psychological, understood in the spirit of various theories about the structure of personality, or metaphysical in the spirit of one or another religious and philosophical theory. The most common was in those years (twenties - early thirties of the XX century) eclectic literary criticism of a historical plan. It was an outline of the history of a certain period in the development of literature or a biography of a particular writer, built on a historical principle, and all those essential factors of the deep plan that we have just mentioned were involved either as a background, or as elements of explanation, motivation, etc. etc. etc.
As a curious distinguishing feature, according to which the then Russian, and then the Soviet literary criticism differed from most Western European schools, is the relative poverty in Russian literary criticism of studies of a purely biographical plan. This moment may not come out so clearly if we consider Russian literary criticism only from within ourselves. Then, of course, we will notice that in all periods there were studies that in one way or another affected the biography of a poet or writer. But if we consider this material against the background of literary studies that were written and published, for example, in Germany, France and England, we will see that in Russia, firstly, the so-called solid, that is, academically fundamental, but at the same time intended for the general reader biographies great Russian poets and writers. Yes, Merezhkovsky wrote about Gogol, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, but these books did not at all consider these creators as living people, participants in the historical process, whose biography influenced the picture of their work. Secondly, those biographical works that came out interpreted biographical details in the highest degree carefully, selectively, with a large share of some kind of internal, and sometimes external, censorship. This cannot be compared with those detailed biographies of Goethe or Schiller that appeared in Germany, or even with Romain Rolland's books about Beethoven. It can be said that in Russian there is not a single complete and academically substantiated biography of Pushkin or Lermontov, Dostoevsky or Tolstoy. Those attempts to create such biographies that were made here and there (the works of Shklovsky and Eikhenbaum about Tolstoy, the modern books of I. Volgin about Dostoevsky, etc.), for all their academic or popular success, can in no way be recognized either as all-encompassing or according to - really fundamental in terms of depth of historical research, neither biographically detailed and bold.
In Russian literary criticism of such a historical nature, as well as in Russian historiography, the point of view prevails to this day, according to which the role of an individual in history always remains in the background compared to the role played by the so-called objective processes, no matter what they are - material or ideal. And if it is clear that in history this or that figure (for example, Stalin, Lenin or Peter I, or Ivan the Terrible) played some exorbitantly important role, then there will always be historians who will prove and show what this role actually expresses some important underlying deep historical process.
Against this background, the attempt of the formal school in literary criticism to rethink the problem of superficial and deep levels in literature was and is a remarkable exception to this general rule. Russian formalism was, in essence, a phenomenon of the same plan as the philosophy of knowledge of the Marburg school of G. Cohen and P. Natorp and the phenomenology of E. Husserl in the sense that he, like the indicated philosophical trends, set as his goal to consider literature ( resp. knowledge, language) exclusively from the point of view of itself (resp. knowledge, language). Accordingly, the distinction between the surface (resp. conscious) and deep (resp. unconscious) levels in literature had to take place exclusively within the literary work itself, and if we were talking about phenomena more voluminous, larger than one work, say, the work of one writer, or even a whole literary movement, then within the literary process. If the problem of separating the surface and deep plans within the very building blocks from which the work was built was raised, then the focus should have been directed to the literary use of language, to how literature modifies language, subordinates it to its tasks.
So, the formal school in literary criticism has chosen as its cornerstone the postulate of the need to study literature in terms of literature itself. The main task of such a study was to detect, firstly, significant discrepancies between the superficial and deep levels of literature, secondly, a meaningful interpretation of such discrepancies in terms of literature itself, and, thirdly, derivation based on such interpretations of something that could be call it rules or laws unconscious(or, in other words, linguistic or structural) the level of literature. It must be emphasized that all the formalists persistently pointed out that their theory was in no way prescriptive. that is, prescribing such rules (according, for example, to some philosophically given aesthetics), and descriptive that is, describing those real "events" that occur in literature. Accordingly, the goal of the formal method in literary criticism was not a systematic description of everything that was and is in some separate literature, but, if you like, unraveling the complex line (or even lines) along which the development of literature proceeded, the restoration of those implicit, but important and self-contained principles on which literature was built and is being built, deciphering the code of the writer's creativity and his poetic language, a code that is not at all set from the outside according to the laws prescribed by society, but is developed by each writer and often for each work individually. "Deciphering" this code will help, ultimately, to understand what is good about a given writer or a given work, in terms of the recipient, addressee of literary "communication" or in terms of the literary system itself, what is its "literary quality", what makes this work a work literature. Thus, according to the postulates of the formal school, literariness becomes the main, fundamental problem of literary criticism.
Until now, from my point of view, the most clear and voluminous presentation of the basic principles and evolution of the formal school is given in the remarkable article of one of its founders B. M. Eikhenbaum (1886–1959) “The Theory of the “Formal Method”” of 1924, which for the first time was published in 1926 in translation into Ukrainian and was included in the book of B. M. Eikhenbaum "Literature", published in 1927. It was in this work that the basic principles of the formal method were first set forth precisely as a developing, evolving method, and not a ready-made scheme. This evolution depends, first of all, on the evolution of the concept of literariness as applied to different stages and different periods of literary development. And the main thing is the separation of the principles of defining literaryness from adjacent and always present moments rooted in the very material literature, which by its nature is taken from any areas of life, practice, speculation, etc., etc. Here is what B. M. Eikhenbaum wrote about this, referring to the opinion of P. O. Jacobson, another founder of the formal method, whose linguistic thirty years later, his works served as the foundation of a structural school in literary criticism, which became the direct successor of Russian formalism:
“The principle of specification and concretization of literary science was the main one for the organization of the formal method. All efforts were made to end the previous situation, in which, according to A. Veselovsky, literature was "res nullius". This is precisely what made the position of the formalists so irreconcilable in relation to other "methods" and so unacceptable to the eclecticists. In denying these "other" methods, the Formalists actually denied and continue to deny not methods, but an unprincipled confusion of different sciences and different scientific problems. Their main assertion was and is that the subject of literary science as such should be the study of the specific features of literary material that distinguish it from any other, even if this material, by its secondary, indirect features, gave a reason and the right to use it as auxiliary in other sciences. . This was formulated with complete certainty by R. Jakobson (“The Newest Russian Poetry”, Prague, 1921, p. 11): “... the subject of the science of literature is not literature, but literariness, that is, what makes a given work a literary work” ” .
Now, before turning to the analysis of the concept of "literariness" and the evolution of this concept in the constantly changing field of literature, changing both actually, here and now, and virtually, that is, post factum as a constant change in the picture of past literature under the influence of the evolution of literary criteria, let's try to trace picture of the evolution of the most formal method according to Eichenbaum. This evolution proceeded from experiencing and postulating at first some general principles that should separate the sphere of the poetic (literary) from the sphere of the practical (ordinary). These principles were not localized where the former, psychologically oriented aesthetics supposed them to be (namely, in imagery), but in what this aesthetics traditionally called form. But already from the very first performances of the future opoyazovites, it was not the static form in its finished and predetermined form that came to the fore, but the use of the form, the experience of the form, the change in the types of this experience (mainly its weakening). Hence the fundamental idea of Viktor Shklovsky about the resurrection of the word, that is, the renewal of the experience, the perception of the word. Actually, the awareness of the form, the awareness of its dynamics is a manifestation of literariness. Later, Roman Yakobson will formulate this position of Eikhenbaum as part of a more general theory of the communication process, where "experiencing the form" will become "emphasis on the plane of expression", "orientation to the message", and "literary" - "poetic function".
Further, B. M. Eikhenbaum proceeds to a theoretical understanding of specific works of the Opoyazovites devoted to certain aspects of the poetics of verse and prose, in particular, to the works of Viktor Shklovsky on the theory of prose and his works on the poetics of Akhmatova’s verse and Gogol’s prose (meaning Eikhenbaum’s famous article How Gogol's "Overcoat" was made. Here, on the one hand, he brings to the fore the methodologically common that was in these specific studies, each of which became a discovery in the study of the poetics of this or that author, and on the other hand, fundamentally opposes the principles of the study of prose and poetry. Methodologically, a common point is the allocation of the concept of "reception" as a central one in the formal method. It is the dynamic technique that should replace the concept of "formal element".
There are techniques specially developed for poetry, and techniques of prose construction. To specially poetic methods should be considered those that serve to modulate, form the entire poetic work at once as a kind of whole, all elements of which at the same time (simultaneously) are present before the inner eye (in the field of perception) of the creator (reader/listener). All types of rhythm, phonic instrumentation, melody, parallelisms and other syntactic figures, repetitions, semantic figures such as formulas, riddles (kennings), equations, and so on, belong to this kind of techniques. It should be emphasized that when we are talking about all kinds of figures, we mean the so-called. cliched figures. The very potency for figurative speech characterizes human speech in general. This is what P. O. Jacobson would later call the "poetic function" of communication.
To specially prosaic techniques belong to those that serve to modulate, form a prosaic text sequences (chains). be it a sequence (chain) plot, related to serial ( successive) presentation, telling some narrative narrative links, episodes, moments, or sequence composition, consisting of prosaic parts (chapters, compositional associations) that perform a functional task in the design of the narrative as a unity (for example, beginning, culmination, completion). This should include all the techniques associated with compositional fixation, division of prosaic succession (sequence), for example, framing, including iterative, that is, secondary and other multiple framing; highlighting different types of linkage, for example, stringing, juxtaposition, true or virtual (reconstructed) causal relationship, various kinds of elision (deliberate omissions and exclusions) of narrative or compositional segments and, conversely, their intentional expansion, spreading and pulling, forcing (including genuine or virtual tension - suspense), deliberate violation of the narrative or compositional sequence, etc., etc.
This list of techniques and their division into poetic and prosaic ones was compiled by me not only on the basis of the final article by B. M. Eikhenbaum, but also taking into account the numerous works of V. B. Shklovsky, Yu. N. Tynyanov and other “formalists”. I would like to single out the next class of "techniques" also on the basis of the considerations of B. M. Eikhenbaum, but already, in a sense, in some contradiction with his postulates. We are talking about the so-called "skaz", which the "formalists" considered a typically prose device, moreover, a prose device that begins to be used relatively late, starting - grosso modo - with the appearance of pre-romantic and romantic prose, such as Tristram Shandy by L. Stern , stories by E.T.-A. Hoffmann, etc.
I believe that we can talk about a technique common to both prose and poetry. Acceptance in this case is generally selection of author's speech as opposed to using unmarked, underlined author's speech. Ignorance, underlining is understood solely as following the dominant stylistic register for a given genre or type of literature.
Fixing research attention on the type of author's speech shifts the direction of our review to another important aspect of literary dynamics - to literary evolution. The dynamic aspect of the concept of "reception" was that the author has the freedom to choose a device in the process of creative construction of his literary object. This freedom, as the formalists and, above all, V. B. Shklovsky, believed, was internal freedom, connected with how the author felt the available possibilities for choosing methods, and these possibilities naturally concentrated where the methods provided the greatest efficiency, the greatest satisfaction, the highest return. V. B. Shklovsky believed that such a “return” is achieved where the reception is felt as new (or better, unexpectedly new, unexpectedly new and wonderful!) Against the background of the context of other elements or moments of this work or other works of the same author, or in general, a certain set of other works that should constitute exactly background for this move, resp. works. Accordingly, perception, reception of the work, resp. its analysis or description must always be dynamic and take into account this interaction of techniques that takes place if a given work has literary.
Literary evolution is understood by Shklovsky and Eikhenbaum as a process of changing one (outdated) system of literary forms for another, and not, as previously believed, in the interpretation of "pre-formalists", as a change of forms due to the need to express new content. Content, in the understanding of Shklovsky and Eikhenbaum, is “material” that never enters literature as such, in a “raw” form, but only after it is “mastered” by it, “digested” in accordance with the inherent nature of this literature. formal system. The main polemical content of the theory of literary evolution of the formal school was directed against what this school called "primitive historicism", that is, against the assertion that the new historical content associated with the change of social and cultural elites, with the destruction of the former socio-cultural structures , hierarchies and relationships and the creation and approval of new ones, necessarily requires for its expression new literary structures, rules and values, which are derived from non-literary historical changes.
What happens “really” is extremely difficult to determine. Here, perhaps, there are more arguments in favor of those who argued that the emergence of new social conditions entails conservatism and reactionaryism in poetics. On the one hand, it is difficult to ignore the fact that the change in the historical situation, historical "scenery" is directly reflected in literature. Thus, in the Russian literature of the 19th century, the Patriotic War of 1812 and the numerous Caucasian wars that soon followed, as well as the December uprising of 1825, and the increasingly aggravated situation around the “peasant question” found their place. On the other hand, however, then as all these historical situations, conflicts and changes are reflected in the literature and, moreover, what kind of the historical collisions that have taken place, it does not reflect, apparently, indicates that the causal relationship between history and literature is not at all simple, not unidirectional, and not at all automatic.
The "Formalists" proposed to consider the history of literature as the history of literature sui generis, that is, as the history of literary forms, literary devices, literary genres, and, accordingly, the history of poetics (or poetics). In many ways, the works of V. Ya. Propp and O. M. Freidenberg discussed above were attempts to create such “historical poetics”. Especially the works of the latter were imbued with the pathos of the connection between the poetics of oral folk art, the poetics of ancient and ancient literatures and the poetics of literature of later periods right up to the present day. Opoyazovites, especially Shklovsky, Eikhenbaum and Tynyanov, paid great attention to the analysis of the history of literary (especially poetic) genres and another aspect of literary evolution - the process of intra- and inter-literary contacts and influences, one of the active loci where the process of literary change can begin. In the course of these very interesting and fruitful attempts to understand the specifics of the historical process in literature, the "formalists" developed a number of concepts and conceptual approaches that made it possible to feel the specifics of literature as a historical existence. I will try to summarize these approaches here, as I see them now, in the context of the past tense and the conditions of the time, as well as within the framework of some modern preferences.
First of all, it should be noted that for the Formalists, the picture of literary evolution, as well as of literary development and literary existence in general, was not at all a picture of peaceful, a picture of tolerant coexistence. In their polemic against the traditional academic theory of literature, the Formalists always sneered at what seemed to them the usual proposition that younger writers learn from older writers, improve their artistic methods, and even younger ones, in turn, learn from them. No, the formalists said, the history of literature is not a biblical genealogy: "Abraham begat Isaac, Isaac begat Jacob, etc." According to the theory of literary evolution of the formal school, this evolution is a struggle, a genuine war for survival, in which writers seek to establish their creative method, their creative prestige, reputation, rank in the official or unofficial table of ranks in a fierce struggle with their "brothers in the shop" , colleagues, close and distant, and most importantly - with those who preceded them either directly, synchronously, or historically. Moreover, even if this war is not waged openly and the protagonists themselves do not even suspect about it (although this is extremely unlikely), then it is waged in the souls and minds of those to whom literary works are addressed and through these works. It is interesting that these two “military campaigns”, although largely independent of each other, intersect only from time to time, nevertheless, the more time passes, the further the “today’s” point of view is from that shared by the participants, whether the antagonists or observers themselves, the more a certain final picture of the confrontation emerges and the true rank of those who tried their hand in it becomes clear and obvious.
It is more or less obvious that the Russian Formalists concentrated on literary fight not without the influence of the relevant theories about the struggle of the species of Darwin and the class struggle of Marx, which were very popular at that time. At the same time, it must be said that it is precisely this aspect of the formal method that has remained rather outlined in a general form than worked out in depth. The main aspects of the literary struggle and literary evolution were considered by the formalists in terms of the relationship and interaction of types and genres of literature. Here the formalists operated with concepts rooted in the spatio-temporal model of literature. The spatial aspect was connected with the fact that literature itself was considered as some rather abstract space, the coordinates of which were literary concepts and the writers themselves. This space is organized, firstly, as any socio-semiotic space is organized, that is, it has a significant and marked in the semantic plan Centre and periphery. extending up to borders literary space. The center, periphery and boundaries of the literary space are occupied by literary genres, literary texts and writers in their function as organizers of the literary space. According to the ideas of the formal school, rooted, perhaps, in some postulates of positive sociology, there is a constant struggle between the “inhabitants” of the literary space, in which the “inhabitants” of the borders strive to get inside, and those who are on the periphery strive to oust from the center of those who are currently there, and take their place ourselves. The right to occupy the center is acquired by those who manage to justify it not only by a purely “power” policy, but, mainly, by those who find themselves in an advantageous position in the course of literary process. which is temporal aspect of literature. In other words, those who stay in the literary process longer than others get a chance to occupy the center of the literary space. This is how the important coordinates of the process of literary evolution emerge: the division of its participants into senior and junior. Accordingly, they talk about senior and junior lines of literary development, o senior and junior genres, about senior and junior literary generation, etc. The division into older and younger is not only a function of time, age, generation. Formalists also included here the most important idea of the degree canonization this or that literary line, this or that genre, this or that tradition. Thus, older genres meant genres that had passed a greater degree of canonization than others that were considered junior genres.
Literary evolution, according to the Formalists, consisted in the displacement of formerly canonical, older genres outside the literary center, where formerly non-canonical genres seek to penetrate. Interesting examples of such a change in literary status in the history of Russian poetry and prose can be found in the works of the Russian formal school. So, for example, an analysis of the poetry of the early nineteenth century showed that the previously "home" and non-canonical genre of friendly messages becomes one of the central lyrical genres in the poetry of the poets of Pushkin's time, combining together the signs of lyrical, confessional and oratorical, even political poetry. In prose, it was noted that the development of the Russian novel, especially in Dostoevsky, also went through the inclusion in the structure of the novel of previously completely non-canonical and "low" narrative genres, such as a police novel, stories about an urban social "day", etc. Concerning poetry In the 20th century, it is worth recalling the opinion of the same Eikhenbaum that Blok's lyrics were also based on the development of a completely peripheral and grassroots tradition of urban and gypsy romance.
Here, however, it makes sense to somewhat expand the context of what is being discussed, and try to consider all these moments of literary development in a more voluminous perspective.
First, I want to take a closer look at the very concepts of literary evolution and literary struggle, and in this connection analyze the ideas about the literary process, its components, in particular, literary genres and literary existence.
Secondly, I want to do all this, considering how the very essence of literary time is reflected in the picture of literary evolution. I'll start with this.
If we include in the dimension of literary time everything that historically preceded the appearance of literature, and especially written literature, as a system that recognizes itself and describes itself, that is, everything that is connected with oral folk art, then it will be necessary to admit that, despite all the shifts in one way or another (that is, the development of ideas about folklore as a self-evolving or, conversely, unchanging system), literature as such is developing faster than folklore. Here literary time is more dynamic than in folklore. However, one should simultaneously ask oneself the question: does this change of literary time lead to the complete abolition of all its earlier signs? We have to admit that the great tradition of oral folk art that precedes written literature does not disappear with the emergence and establishment of the latter. The question is in what relationship are these two lines, two traditions in the real literary process, and to what extent each of them is included in another wider tradition, which includes not only literature, but also many other systems of behavior, interaction, production and so on. An important question arises in this connection about how dependent or independent of each other the literary and cultural traditions are and how they behave when intersecting with the corresponding traditions of other peoples, that is, are there any filters here, and if they exist, then how they are structured.
Let us try, as far as possible, to trace certain problems, difficulties and prospects that arise here. First of all, it should be noted that the Formalists were absolutely right in regard to their fundamental principle, namely, that all moments and problems of literature should be considered exclusively within and in the context of the literary field. In other words, social relations, interactions, contradictions and conflicts within what can be called the "field of life", "the field of everyday existence" are of one completely specific character, while the matrix of such relations in the field of literature is completely specific and does not exist at all. with a grid of the previous, social field in a causal relationship. The same, mutatis mutandis, applies to the links between the field of literature and the field of culture and the field of culture and the field of sociality.
Let us repeat once again that changes and breaks in the field of sociality, including military victories, defeats, revolutions, conquests, invasions, etc., etc., do not necessarily entail changes in the field of literature. Moreover, even changes in the field of culture, usually slower and more profound than changes in the field of sociality, do not always entail changes in the field of literature. Is it possible to assert, as the Formalists did, that everything depends only on changes in the so-called “literary life”, the way of social communication of writers with each other? What is canonization and how is it determined who is younger and who is older? The answers to these questions depend on which tradition they are asked in relation to, and, above all, whether we are talking about the tradition of oral verbal creativity or the tradition (traditions!) of written literature. Within the tradition of oral folk art, the question of canonization does not arise at all, as well as the question of the “seniority” or “juniority” of this or that literary line, say, poetic or prose, because folklore is already structured functionally in its very existence, and these functional types of folklore as a whole are universal (some global geographic variations are possible, reflecting the existence of culture). They are commonly and not very accurately referred to as genres, although "genre" is more recent terminology found in written literature.
The functional types of folklore are very diverse. They include types closely associated with the performance of a particular ritual rite, such as collective funeral and wedding songs, songs accompanying collective ritual dances, shamanic chants and much more, purely poetic types associated with individual lyrical everyday life (for example, the so-called "own songs" among the Siberian peoples, ballads, lyrical songs), types of poetic narrative associated with collective history (epics, heroic songs), types of narrative prose, as a rule, individual, but organized for collective performance and listening (reception) (all kinds types of fairy tales, legends, bylichki, memorials, etc.). They do not compete with each other in any way, and in cases where culture somehow strongly determines the function and pragmatics (for example, in the case of the imposition of ritual prohibitions), it can be said that the purely literary “poetic”, according to P. O. Jacobson, aspect of literature suffers. . Moreover, it is precisely such works that, as a rule, fall out of the folklore tradition, which, generally speaking, is unusually stable and constant, on the one hand, and absolutely universal in everything that the formalists defined as the "constructive side", the structure of literary devices, etc., on the other hand. Only the folklore “material” itself is locally specific: realities, names, relationships, attributes (color, qualities, etc.). Therefore, folklore works, firstly, are unusually adaptive; they can easily roam from culture to culture (easier than elements of material or socio-behavioral culture, although these latter are not at all nailed to their loci and speakers), sometimes even in their original linguistic form (if there is a situation of bi - or multilingualism), and secondly, they are preserved in literature even after the real folklore culture disappears (as a rule, under the influence of urbanization and modernization).
In general, this layer of the literary tradition always demonstrates a rather large independence from the current social field and even from the current culture. It would seem that it is folklore that should truthfully reflect the customs and realities of the culture in which it was created, but this is not at all the case. Firstly, the aforementioned universality of folklore verbal devices and signs makes it a “mirror” not given culture, and this stage culture, a given stage in the development of the imagination of mankind or some large part of it. Secondly, and this is probably especially important, the texts of such folk literature “reflect” not real social rules and prohibitions, but rather reflections and reasoning about them, and very often not in the spirit of their approval, propaganda and preferences, but in terms of finding an alternative, posing a question, suggesting something completely different, and even criticizing.
This text is an introductory piece. From the book ABC of Shamboloids. Muldashev and all-all-all author Obraztsov Petr Alekseevich From the book Life and Work of Dmitry Merezhkovsky author Merezhkovsky Dmitry Sergeevich From the book Russian poets of the second half of the XIX century author Orlitsky Yuri BorisovichB. Eikhenbaum From the article “Ya. Polonsky"<…>Polonsky has genuine lyrical short stories, still somewhat naive in structure, but already completely defined in terms of the artistic task set in them: "Letter" and "Recollection". In the first (he, in separation from her, writes to her
From the book The Artistic World of Gogol author Mashinskiy Semyon IosifovichChapter Five Theater - "Great School" and "Department" 1C childhood Gogol was in love with the theater. As a boy, he used to attend amateur performances by D. P. Troshchinsky. Each such performance became a holiday and left a deep imprint in the memory and heart of the future.
From the book Literary Conversations. Book One author Adamovich Georgy Viktorovich< Виктор Шкловский >Viktor Shklovsky had the potential to become a real writer. But he always lacked tact in his thoughts, in the manner of expressing them, in the very syntax of his phrases. Diseases develop over the years. Now it is very difficult to read Shklovsky. He recently wrote an article on
From the book Fantasy and detective - genres of modern Anglo-American fiction author Zharinov Evgeny ViktorovichChapter V "School of the cool detective" in the age of universal communication and control In the 20s of our century, the detective genre, as defined by its historians J. Simmons, H. Heycroft, W. Kittredge and S. Krause, experienced its "golden age". One of the most famous American
From the book Volume 2. "Problems of Dostoevsky's creativity", 1929. Articles about L. Tolstoy, 1929. Recordings of a course of lectures on the history of Russian literature, 1922-1927 author Bakhtin Mikhail Mikhailovich From the book Literature of Fact: The First Collection of Materials from LEF Workers author author unknownV. Shklovsky. In conclusion, M. Gorky in "Reader and Writer" gives a number of considerations about the benefits of literacy. The same article contains several reproaches about Lef. Gorky says that we are trying to confuse young writers by preaching uselessness
From the book Merciful Road author Sorgenfrey Wilhelm AlexandrovichV. Shklovsky. "103 Days in the West" by B. Kushner We have many travel books. Starting from the "walks" of monks and diaries of the first Russians abroad, through travels to the holy places of Norov and Muravyov, to today's travels to industrial countries. One of the least
From the book History of the Russian Novel. Volume 1 author Philology Team of authors --V. Shklovsky. People and beards. : Pugachev and Russian literature. And
From the book Ways and milestones: Russian literary criticism in the twentieth century author Segal Dmitry Mikhailovich4. Viktor Shklovsky This daring dead man Is not accustomed to having difficulty: Somehow he climbed onto an armored car And, thinking for a moment, Invented a formal
From the book Theory of Literature. History of Russian and foreign literary criticism [Anthology] author Khryashcheva Nina PetrovnaCHAPTER VI. "A HERO OF OUR TIME" (B. M. Eikhenbaum) 1 In Russian literature of the 1930s, the movement from large verse genres to prose was clearly defined - from poems of various types to short stories and novels. Pushkin wrote the last chapters of Eugene Onegin already in anticipation of this
From the author's bookCHAPTER VI Formation of a new literary criticism. Jacobson, Ivanov, Toporov. Tartu school (Lotman, Mints). Followers Now we will have to move from an era marked by new attacks on literature, science and art (the struggle against "cosmopolitanism" and
From the author's bookformal school
From the author's bookV.B. Shklovsky Art as a technique
From the author's bookB.M. Eikhenbaum How Gogol's "Overcoat" was made 1<…>The composition becomes completely different if the plot itself, as an interweaving of motives with the help of their motivation, ceases to play an organizing role, that is, if the narrator somehow pushes himself to the fore, as
Formal schools in literary criticism.
Literary criticism of the second half of the 19th century was characterized by an interest in the content side of literature. The largest research schools of that time - cultural-historical, spiritual-historical, mythological - paid very little attention to the form of a work of art. The work for them was not so much an aesthetic object as a "document of the era", "expression" of the spirit of the era, etc.
At the turn of the century, impressionistic criticism also became widespread. Its representatives were not seriously interested in either the content or the form of the work. For them, the main thing was to offer their impressions of what they read to the public.
The reaction to impressionism and various kinds of positivist approaches to literature was a rapid development, starting from the 10s. XX century, formal methods in literary criticism. Interest in form was combined in them with the desire to be scientific methods.
Russian formal school.
Having existed for a short time (from the mid-10s to the mid-20s), this school nevertheless had a great influence on the literary thought of the twentieth century. The ideas put forward by the Russian Formalists gave the initial impetus to the development of such research methods in many countries.
The Russian Formalists comprised two groups. The first called itself the "Society for the Study of Poetic Language" (OPOYAZ), the second - the "Moscow Linguistic Circle". Many well-known linguists and literary scholars were members of these groups and sympathizers with them. Among them are V.Vinogradov, G.Vinokur, R.Yakobson, Yu.Tynyanov, V.Shklovsky, B.Eichenbaum, B.Tomashevsky and a number of others.
Fundamental in the approach of the Russian Formalists to a work of art (above all, to a poetic work) was the assertion that it is the form that makes poetry poetry, determining the specifics of the latter. The content of the poem can be retold without using rhyme, rhythm, that is, destroying its form, but the poetic impression also disappears. Poetry disappears.
Thus, poetic form, poetic language, was given paramount importance.
These were radical new views on poetry. Prior to this, the form was understood more as a servant of the content. And although the most prominent literary thinkers from Aristotle to Belinsky paid great attention to the form of the work, it was only in the 20th century that its true cult flared up. And the beginning of this was laid by Russian scientists.
One of the founders of the formal method, V. Shklovsky, put forward the thesis “art as a device”, which was then adopted by other formalist literary critics. "Reception" was understood as the main tool for creating a work of art. With the help of various poetic devices consciously used by the authors of works, objects and phenomena of reality turn into a fact of art. Techniques can be traditional and innovative. The Russian Formalists paid much attention to the latter.
One of the most important artistic "techniques" formalists considered "estrangement" (from the word "strange"). This concept was first introduced by V. Shklovsky in the book "The Resurrection of the Word" (1914) and was further developed in his article "Art as a technique" (1917). In the work, according to V. Shklovsky, familiar things should appear in an unexpected, unusual, "strange" light. Only then will they attract the reader's attention, destroying the "automatism of perception." Thus, estrangement is understood as a universal and most important artistic device.
Irony, paradox, the use of unusual (domestic or regional) words, etc. can destroy the automatism of the reader's perception. In a broader sense, the violation of the habitual and expected is expressed in the struggle between the "older" and "junior" lines in literature, that is, in the struggle between tradition and innovation.
Obviously, the text understood in this way carries an internal intensity and stimulates a similar tension in the reader's perception. In more detail, the problem of tension within a poetic text will be developed by American "new critics", who will look for a struggle between various artistic elements in a work of art. For example, K. Brooks defines paradox as a universal artistic means (“technique”) that determines the specifics of poetry.
Vadim Rudnev
The formal school is an informal name for a group of Russian literary critics and linguists who united in the late 1910s. in St. Petersburg and Moscow on common methodological grounds and, in essence, made a science of world significance out of literary criticism, preparing Prague structural linguistics, Tartu-Moscow structural poetics and all European structuralism as a whole.
The main ideological inspirer of F. sh. was Viktor Borisovich Shklovsky. History of F. sh. begins with his 1914 article "The Resurrection of the Word" and officially ends with his 1930 article "A Monument to a Scientific Mistake", in which he hastened to retreat from the positions of F. sh. due to the changed political atmosphere. Shklovsky was an extremely complex figure in Russian culture. During the First World War, he commanded a company of armored cars, and in the 1930s. chickened out and betrayed his offspring - F. sh. Nevertheless, he was one of the brightest representatives of Russian verbal culture and always remained so - both as an adept and as a traitor. When in the mid-1910s he came to study at the seminary of the famous literary historian Vengerov, who invited him to fill out a questionnaire. In this questionnaire, Shklovsky wrote that his goal was to build a general theory of literature and prove the futility of the Vengerov seminary.
Formalism was at first a very noisy trend, as it developed in parallel with Russian Futurism and was a kind of scientific avant-garde (see avant-garde art).
"Where did 'formalism' come from?" wrote Boris Viktorovich Tomashevsky, one of the leaders of the F. sh., poet and Pushkinist, in a peculiar obituary of the F. sh. Courtenay. This will be decided by the biographer of the deceased. But there is no doubt that the cries of the baby were heard everywhere. "
In St. Petersburg-Petrograd F. sh. gave the famous OPOYAZ - the Society for the Study of Poetic Language, which brought together linguists and literary critics E. D. Polivanov, L. P. Yakubinsky, O. M. Brik, B. M. Eikhenbaum, Yu. N. Tynyanov.
MLK arose in Moscow - the Moscow Linguistic Circle, which included S. I. Bernshtein, P. G. Bogatyrev, G. O. Vinokur, B. I. Yarkho, V. M. Zhirmunsky, R. O. Jacobson, future organizer of the Prague Linguistic Circle, creator of functional structural linguistics.
F. sh. sharply dissociated itself from the old literary criticism, the specification of literary criticism, the study of the morphology of a literary text, was declared the slogan and meaning of its activity. Formalists turned literary criticism into a real science with their own methods and methods of research.
Sweeping aside the reproach that F. sh. does not deal with the essence of the letter. tours, but only by literary devices, Tomashevsky wrote: “You can not know what electricity is, and study it. And what does this question mean:“ what is electricity? then it will catch fire. "When studying phenomena, an a priori definition of essences is not at all necessary. It is important to distinguish between their manifestations and be aware of their connections. Formalists devote their works to such a study of literature. It is as a science that studies the phenomena of literature, and not its "essence", they think of poetics ". And further: “Yes, formalists are “specialists” in the sense that they dream of creating a specific science of literature, a science associated with branches of human knowledge adjacent to literature. sociology, that is the task of the Formalists. But in order to be aware of oneself in the environment of the sciences, one must be aware of oneself as an independent discipline."
What did the leaders of F. sh. study? The scope of their topics and interests was huge. They built a theory of plot, learned to study the short story and the novel, successfully studied poetry using mathematical methods (see the system of verse), analyzed rhythm and syntax, sound repetitions, created reference books of Pushkin and Lermontov's poetic meters, were interested in parody (see intertext), folklore , literary life, literary evolution, the problem of biography.
Early formalism (primarily in the person of Shklovsky) was rather mechanistic. According to the memoirs of Lidia Ginzburg, Tynyanov said about Shklovsky that he wanted to study a literary work as if it were a car and could be disassembled and reassembled (cf. similar methods of analysis and synthesis in generative poetics). Indeed, Shklovsky considered a literary text as something similar to a game of chess, where the characters are pieces and pawns that perform certain functions in the game (cf. the concept of a language game in the late Wittgenstein). This method of studying literature was best suited to works of popular fiction. And this was another merit of F. sh. - involvement of mass culture as the most important object of study.
Here is how, for example, Shklovsky analyzes the compositional function of Dr. Watson in Conan Doyle's stories about Sherlock Holmes (in the chapter "Novella of Secrets" of the book "On the Theory of Prose"): "Doctor Watson plays a double role; firstly, he tells us about Sherlock Holmes must convey to us his expectation of his decision, he himself does not participate in the process of Sherlock's thinking, and he only occasionally shares half-solutions with him (...).
Secondly, Watson is needed as a "permanent fool" (...). Watson misunderstands the meaning of the evidence and thus gives Sherlock Holmes the opportunity to correct him.
Watson's motivation for false clues.
The third role of Watson is that he leads the speech, gives remarks, that is, as if he serves as a boy who gives Sherlock Holmes a ball for the game.
An important concept of the methodology of F. sh. was the concept of acceptance. Shklovsky's program article was called: "Art as a technique." B. V. Tomashevsky in a textbook on the theory of literature, oriented to the methods of F. sh., wrote: “Each work is deliberately decomposed into its component parts, in the construction of a work, methods of such construction differ, that is, ways of combining verbal material into verbal units. These devices are the direct object of poetics.
The most striking and famous technique highlighted by Shklovsky in Leo Tolstoy and in all world literature is estrangement, the ability to see a thing as if for the first time in life, as if not understanding its Essence and purpose.
A brilliant researcher of the plot was formally not affiliated with F. sh. Vladimir Yakovlevich Propp (see also the plot), who created a wonderful scientific trilogy about the origin, morphology and transformation of a fairy tale. Here is what he wrote: “The characters of fairy tales (...) do the same thing in the course of action. This determines the ratio of constant values to variable values. The functions of the characters are constant values, everything else can change.
1. The tsar sends Ivan for the princess. Ivan leaves
2. Tsar "Ivan" curiosity. Ivan"
3. Sister "brother" medicine. Brother "
4. Stepmother "stepdaughter" by fire. stepdaughter"
5. Blacksmith "labor" cow. Laborer "
And so on. Sending out and going out in search are constants. The sending and departing characters, motivation, etc. are variable quantities.
F. sh. developed a theory of poetic language. Here is how, for example, Yu. N. Tynyanov distinguished between verse and prose: "The deformation of sound by the role of meaning is the constructive principle of prose. The deformation of meaning by the role of sound is the constructive principle of poetry. Partial changes in the ratio of these two elements are the driving factor of both prose and poetry."
In the book "The problem of poetic language" Tynyanov introduced the concept of "unity and tightness of the verse series." This was a hypothesis, later confirmed statistically. In different poetic meters, words that are different in the number of syllables and the place of stress have different combinatorics. For example, in iambic 3-foot it is impossible to combine the words "people came" or "white wine" (inside the line).
Yu. Tynyanov was, in his scientific consciousness, subtler and deeper, although more "intricate" than Shklovsky. Apparently, therefore, Tynyanov advanced already at the stage of mature formalism, when "morphology" had already been worked out and it was necessary to study more subtle and complex problems of the interaction of literary genres and the processes of evolution of literature, the connection of literature with other social practices. But it was already the sunset of the classical F. sh.
The fate of members and participants of the F. sh. were different. But all of them somehow contributed to world philology. Shklovsky lived the longest. He died in 1983 as a fairly respectable writer, the author of a biography of Leo Tolstoy in the ZhZL series and very interesting "tales about prose" where his old ideas were rehearsed. Y. Tynyanov became a writer and created a wonderful novel about Griboyedov "Death of Vazir-Mukhtar". He died in 1943 from multiple sclerosis. V. Propp lived to world fame, influencing the French structuralists who studied the laws of the plot. Claude Lévi-Strauss himself dedicated a special article to it, to which Propp (apparently for political reasons) responded with nonsensical polemical remarks.
The most brilliant was the fate of R. Jacobson. He emigrated to Prague, created there together with N. Trubetskoy (see phonology) the Prague Linguistic Circle and headed one of the classical branches of linguistic structuralism (see structural linguistics). After moving to the USA, he became a professor at Harvard University, participated in the creation of a universal phonological system, visited the Soviet Union several times and died at a ripe old age in 1982 by a world-famous scientist, whose collected works were published during his lifetime.
Literary ideas of F. sh. adopted by structural poetics, primarily Yu. M. Lotman and his school.
Bibliography
Reader on theoretical literary criticism / Comp.
I. Chernov. - Tartu, 1976. - T. 1.
Shklovsky V. On the theory of prose. - L., 1925.
Tomashevsky B.V. Theory of Literature (Poetics). - L., 1926.
Eikheibaum B.M. About prose. - L., 1970.
Tynyanov Yu.N. Poetics. History of literature. Cinema. - M., 1977.
The plot is the actual side of the narrative, those events, cases, actions, states in their causal-chronological sequence, which are assembled and formalized by the author in the plot.
Generative poetics is a branch of structural poetics that emerged in Russia in the late 1960s. under the influence of generative linguistics, as well as the theoretical ideas of S. M. Eisenstein and the morphology of the plot of V. Ya. Propp.
Deconstruction is a special strategy in relation to the text, which includes both its "destruction" and its reconstruction.
Semiotics is the science of sign systems, one of the specific interdisciplinary sciences of the 20th century, along with cybernetics, structural poetics, cultural studies, and virtualistics. Semiotics is based on the concept of a sign.
Motive analysis is a kind of post-structuralist approach to a literary text and any semiotic object. Introduced into scientific use by Professor of Tartu University Boris M. Gasparov in the late 1970s.
Estrangement is one of the universal methods of constructing a literary text, discovered by Shklovsky in Tolstoy and in world literature.
The text within the text is a kind of hyperrhetorical construction, characteristic of the narrative texts of the 20th century. and consisting in the fact that the main text has the task of describing or writing another text, which is the content of the entire work.
Polymetry (or polymetric composition). When poetry faced the task of describing poetic meters, sometimes texts written in several meters came across. They didn't know what to do with them.
Intertext is the main type and method of constructing a literary text in the art of modernism and postmodernism, consisting in the fact that the text is built from quotations and reminiscences to other texts.
Rhythm is the universal law of the development of the universe. The 20th century contributed a lot to the study of biological and cosmological rhythms, rhythms in art and in a line of poetry.
Parody is a type of literary satire, a satire on a literary style, with the help of which an attack is made on a class-hostile ideology. P.'s forms and its role are various. It exposes the hostile class by compromising its literature.
Poetry is a section of poetics that studies the properties of poetic speech and the principles of its analysis.
The attitude of structuralism to materialistic dialectics (from the position of which we consider the problem proposed in this paper) is mainly negative. His epistemology is teleological and is one of the newest types of "pure idealism".
Neo-mythological consciousness is one of the main trends in the cultural mentality of the 20th century, starting with symbolism and ending with postmodernism. Neo-mythological consciousness was a reaction to the positivist consciousness of the nineteenth century.
Formal schools in literary criticism.
Literary criticism of the second half of the 19th century was characterized by an interest in the content side of literature. The largest research schools of that time - cultural-historical, spiritual-historical, mythological - paid very little attention to the form of a work of art. The work for them was not so much an aesthetic object as a "document of the era", "expression" of the spirit of the era, etc.
At the turn of the century, impressionistic criticism also became widespread. Its representatives were not seriously interested in either the content or the form of the work. For them, the main thing was to offer their impressions of what they read to the public.
The reaction to impressionism and various kinds of positivist approaches to literature was a rapid development, starting from the 10s. XX century, formal methods in literary criticism. Interest in form was combined in them with the desire to be scientific methods.
Russian formal school.
Having existed for a short time (from the mid-10s to the mid-20s), this school nevertheless had a great influence on the literary thought of the twentieth century. The ideas put forward by the Russian Formalists gave the initial impetus to the development of such research methods in many countries.
The Russian Formalists comprised two groups. The first called itself the "Society for the Study of Poetic Language" (OPOYAZ), the second - the "Moscow Linguistic Circle". Many well-known linguists and literary scholars were members of these groups and sympathizers with them. Among them are V.Vinogradov, G.Vinokur, R.Yakobson, Yu.Tynyanov, V.Shklovsky, B.Eichenbaum, B.Tomashevsky and a number of others.
Fundamental in the approach of the Russian Formalists to a work of art (above all, to a poetic work) was the assertion that it is the form that makes poetry poetry, determining the specifics of the latter. The content of the poem can be retold without using rhyme, rhythm, that is, destroying its form, but the poetic impression also disappears. Poetry disappears.
Thus, poetic form, poetic language, was given paramount importance.
These were radical new views on poetry. Prior to this, the form was understood more as a servant of the content. And although the most prominent literary thinkers from Aristotle to Belinsky paid great attention to the form of the work, it was only in the 20th century that its true cult flared up. And the beginning of this was laid by Russian scientists.
One of the founders of the formal method, V. Shklovsky, put forward the thesis “art as a device”, which was then adopted by other formalist literary critics. "Reception" was understood as the main tool for creating a work of art. With the help of various poetic devices consciously used by the authors of works, objects and phenomena of reality turn into a fact of art. Techniques can be traditional and innovative. The Russian Formalists paid much attention to the latter.
One of the most important artistic "techniques" formalists considered "estrangement" (from the word "strange"). This concept was first introduced by V. Shklovsky in the book "The Resurrection of the Word" (1914) and was further developed in his article "Art as a technique" (1917). In the work, according to V. Shklovsky, familiar things should appear in an unexpected, unusual, "strange" light. Only then will they attract the reader's attention, destroying the "automatism of perception." Thus, estrangement is understood as a universal and most important artistic device.
Irony, paradox, the use of unusual (domestic or regional) words, etc. can destroy the automatism of the reader's perception. In a broader sense, the violation of the habitual and expected is expressed in the struggle between the "older" and "junior" lines in literature, that is, in the struggle between tradition and innovation.
Obviously, the text understood in this way carries an internal intensity and stimulates a similar tension in the reader's perception. In more detail, the problem of tension within a poetic text will be developed by American "new critics", who will look for a struggle between various artistic elements in a work of art. For example, K. Brooks defines paradox as a universal artistic means (“technique”) that determines the specifics of poetry.
Formal schools in literary criticism.
Literary criticism of the second half of the 19th century was characterized by an interest in the content side of literature. The largest research schools of that time - cultural-historical, spiritual-historical, mythological - paid very little attention to the form of a work of art. The work for them was not so much an aesthetic object as a "document of the era", "expression" of the spirit of the era, etc.
At the turn of the century, impressionistic criticism also became widespread. Its representatives were not seriously interested in either the content or the form of the work. For them, the main thing was to offer their impressions of what they read to the public.
The reaction to impressionism and various kinds of positivist approaches to literature was a rapid development, starting from the 10s. XX century, formal methods in literary criticism. Interest in form was combined in them with the desire to be scientific methods.
Russian formal school.
Having existed for a short time (from the mid-10s to the mid-20s), this school nevertheless had a great influence on the literary thought of the twentieth century. The ideas put forward by the Russian Formalists gave the initial impetus to the development of such research methods in many countries.
The Russian Formalists comprised two groups. The first called itself the "Society for the Study of Poetic Language" (OPOYAZ), the second - the "Moscow Linguistic Circle". Many well-known linguists and literary scholars were members of these groups and sympathizers with them. Among them are V.Vinogradov, G.Vinokur, R.Yakobson, Yu.Tynyanov, V.Shklovsky, B.Eichenbaum, B.Tomashevsky and a number of others.
Fundamental in the approach of the Russian Formalists to a work of art (above all, to a poetic work) was the assertion that it is the form that makes poetry poetry, determining the specifics of the latter. The content of the poem can be retold without using rhyme, rhythm, that is, destroying its form, but the poetic impression also disappears. Poetry disappears.
Thus, poetic form, poetic language, was given paramount importance.
These were radical new views on poetry. Prior to this, the form was understood more as a servant of the content. And although the most prominent literary thinkers from Aristotle to Belinsky paid great attention to the form of the work, it was only in the 20th century that its true cult flared up. And the beginning of this was laid by Russian scientists.
One of the founders of the formal method, V. Shklovsky, put forward the thesis “art as a device”, which was then adopted by other formalist literary critics. "Reception" was understood as the main tool for creating a work of art. With the help of various poetic devices consciously used by the authors of works, objects and phenomena of reality turn into a fact of art. Techniques can be traditional and innovative. The Russian Formalists paid much attention to the latter.
One of the most important artistic "techniques" formalists considered "estrangement" (from the word "strange"). This concept was first introduced by V. Shklovsky in the book "The Resurrection of the Word" (1914) and was further developed in his article "Art as a technique" (1917). In the work, according to V. Shklovsky, familiar things should appear in an unexpected, unusual, "strange" light. Only then will they attract the reader's attention, destroying the "automatism of perception." Thus, estrangement is understood as a universal and most important artistic device.
Irony, paradox, the use of unusual (domestic or regional) words, etc. can destroy the automatism of the reader's perception. In a broader sense, the violation of the habitual and expected is expressed in the struggle between the "older" and "junior" lines in literature, that is, in the struggle between tradition and innovation.
Obviously, the text understood in this way carries an internal intensity and stimulates a similar tension in the reader's perception. In more detail, the problem of tension within a poetic text will be developed by American "new critics", who will look for a struggle between various artistic elements in a work of art. For example, K. Brooks defines paradox as a universal artistic means (“technique”) that determines the specifics of poetry.
End of work -
This topic belongs to:
Basic and auxiliary literary disciplines
We consider the nature of creative thinking inspiration on the example of studying the formation of self-awareness of the artist's individuality. Comparing .. The initial perception of the world corresponding to inclinations and inclinations determines .. We consider inspiration as a manifestation and realization of the artist's individuality, the synthesis of mental processes..
If you need additional material on this topic, or you did not find what you were looking for, we recommend using the search in our database of works:
What will we do with the received material:
If this material turned out to be useful for you, you can save it to your page on social networks:
| tweet |
All topics in this section:
Basic and auxiliary literary disciplines
Literary criticism is a science that studies the specifics, genesis and development of verbal art, explores the ideological and aesthetic value and structure of literary works, studies socio-historical
The specifics of art
Disputes about the specifics and essence of art, artistic creativity have been going on since antiquity. Aristotle associated the essence of artistic creativity with the innate "passion" of a person to imitate
World of Arts and Fiction
The world of arts and fiction is the cultural and spiritual heritage of mankind. Each nation is rich in its culture, which in vivid images reflects its mentality.
Types of artistic images
One of the most important functions of a literary image is to give the words the weight, integrity, and self-significance that things possess. The specificity of the verbal image is also manifested in
Epilogue
The final component of the work, the final, separated from the action deployed in the main part of the text. COMPOSITION OF A LITERARY WORK
Subjective organization of the text
In a literary work, one should distinguish between the object of speech and the subject of speech. The object of speech is everything that is depicted and everything that is told about: people, objects, circumstances, events, etc. Subject
Artistic speech and literary language
A literary image can exist only in a verbal shell. The word is the material carrier of imagery in literature. In this regard, it is necessary to distinguish between the concepts of "artistic
Poetic devices
Poetic techniques (tropes) are transformations of language units, which consist in transferring the traditional name to another subject area. The epithet is one of
Lexical resources of artistic speech
Fiction uses the national language in all the richness of its possibilities. It can be neutral, high or low vocabulary; obsolete words and neologisms; foreign words
Poetic figures
Syntactic expressiveness is another important linguistic means of fiction. Here, both the length and the melodic pattern of phrases are important, as well as the arrangement of words in them, and various kinds of phrases.
Rhythmic organization of artistic speech
strophic
A stanza in versification is a group of verses united by some formal feature, periodically repeating from stanza to stanza. Monostih - poetic
Plot, plot, composition
COMPOSITION DETAILS of the work: 1. PLOT OF THE WORK - a chain of events that reveal the characters and relationships of the characters
Additional
Prologue. The introductory part of a literary work, which anticipates the general meaning, plot or main motives of the work, or briefly recounts the events preceding the main
Composition of a literary work
The composition of a literary and artistic work plays an important role in expressing the ideological meaning. The writer, focusing on those phenomena of life that attract him at the moment,
The ideological and emotional orientation of literature. The concept of pathos and its varieties
The ideological world of the work is the third structural component of the content-conceptual level, along with the themes and issues. The ideational world is an area
epic genres
Epic literary genres go back to epic folklore genres, closest to fairy tales. From the point of view of genre form, a fairy tale has its own quite stable structure: a repetitive beginning
Epos as a kind of artistic creation. epic types. Characteristics of epic genres
The most ancient of these types of artistic creativity is the epic. The early forms of the epic arise even in the conditions of the primitive communal system and are associated with the labor activity of a person, with peace
Lyrics as a kind of artistic creativity. Lyric genres. The concept and disputes about the lyrical hero
Another kind of artistic creativity is lyricism. It differs from the epic in that it brings to the fore the inner experiences of the poet. In the lyrics in front of us is a lively excited che
Drama as a kind of artistic creativity. Characteristics of the genres of dramaturgy
The original kind of artistic creativity is drama. The specificity of drama as a kind of literature lies in the fact that, as a rule, it is intended to be staged. In drama re
The cognitive function of literature
In the past, the cognitive potential of art (including literature) was often underestimated. For example, Plato considered it necessary to expel all true artists from the ideal state.
The function of anticipation ("Kassandra's beginning", art as anticipation)
Why "Kassandra's beginning"? As you know, Cassandra predicted the death of Troy in the days of prosperity and power of the city. In art, and especially in literature, there has always been a “Kassandra principle”
educational function
Literature forms the system of feelings and thoughts of people. Showing heroes who have gone through severe trials, literature makes people empathize with them and this, as it were, purifies their inner world. AT
The concept of direction, flow and style in modern literary criticism
But for all the originality of creative individuals within artistic systems, special varieties are formed according to their common features. To study these varieties, most of all under
The concept of ancient literature
If Greece is the cradle of European culture, then Greek literature is the foundation, the foundation of European literature. The word "ancient" in translation from Latin means "ancient". But not every
The fate of ancient literature
The plots, heroes and images of ancient literature are distinguished by such completeness, clarity and depth of meaning that writers of subsequent eras constantly refer to them. Ancient stories find a new interpretation
Periodization and features of ancient literature
In its development, ancient literature has gone through several stages and is represented by classical examples in all literary forms: these are epic and lyrics, satire, tragedy and comedy, ode and fable, novel and
ancient mythology
The most important element of Greek culture was myths, i.e., legends, traditions, legends dating back to ancient times. They constitute the richest treasury of images and plots. reflected in the myths
Ancient epic. Homer
The greatest monuments of the most ancient period of Greek literature are the poems of Homer "Iliad" and "Odyssey". The poems belong to the genre of the folk-heroic epic, as they have a folklore, folk
The Rise of Drama in the Age of Pericles
5th-4th centuries BC. - a glorious era in the history of Greece, marked by the extraordinary rise of its literature and art, science and culture, the flowering of democracy. This period is called Attic, after Attica.
ancient theater
It is human nature to imitate. The child in the game imitates what he sees in life, the savage in the dance will depict a hunting scene. Ancient Greek philosopher and art theorist Aristotle all art
ancient tragedy
The suffering and death of people who are objectively worthy of a better fate, capable of many glorious deeds for the benefit of mankind, who have won immortal fame among their contemporaries and descendants, are experienced by us
Antique comedy
People tend to laugh. Aristotle even raised this trait inherent in people to a dignity that distinguishes a person from an animal. People laugh at everything, even the dearest and closest. But in one
Greek lyrics
There is a pattern in the development of Greek literature: certain historical periods are marked by the dominance of certain genres. The most ancient period, "Homeric Greece" - the time of the heroic e
Greek prose
The heyday of Greek prose falls on the Hellenic period (III-I centuries BC). This era is associated with the name of Alexander the Great. His conquests and campaigns in the eastern countries had a great influence on
The era of the Middle Ages
The Roman Empire collapsed in the 5th century. AD as a result of the uprising of slaves and the invasion of barbarians. Short-lived barbarian states arose on its ruins. The transition from the historically exhausted
A Word on Law and Grace by Hilarion
4. The most ancient Russian lives ("The Life of Theodosius of the Caves", the lives of Boris and Gleb). Lives of the Saints. Monuments of the hagiographic genre - the lives of the saints - also brought up
The Tale of the Devastation of Ryazan by Batu
6. The genre of oratorical prose is one of the main genres in the system of ancient Russian literature in the 13th century. represented by the "words" of Serapion. Five "words" of Serapion have come down to us. Main theme from
The concept of humanism
The concept of "humanism" was put into use by scientists of the 19th century. It comes from the Latin humanitas (human nature, spiritual culture) and humanus (human), and denotes an ideology, n
Epistle of the Archbishop of Novgorod Vasily to the lord of Tfersky Theodore about paradise "
The political struggle for primacy among the Russian principalities that took place during the period under review strengthens the journalistic orientation and topicality of the literary works created at that time.
The Tale of Temir-Aksak
The main genres of literature, as in previous periods, are chronicles and hagiography. The genre of walking is being revived. The genre of legendary and historical tales is becoming widespread,
historical narrative
In the XVI century. all-Russian chronicle writing became centralized: this chronicle writing was carried out in Moscow (most likely, by the joint forces of the grand ducal and metropolitan chancellery); chroniclers in other cities
Publicism (I. Peresvetov, A. Kurbsky, Ivan the Terrible)
In Ancient Russia there was no special term for the definition of journalism - just as there was none for fiction; the boundaries of the journalistic genre that we can outline, of course, are very arbitrary
Romanticism as a universal art system
Romanticism is a direction in the literature of the early 19th century. ROMANTISM. Several meanings of the word “romanticism”: 1. Direction in literature and art of the first quarter
Realism as a universal art system
Realism - in literature and art - a direction that strives to depict reality. R. (real, real) - thin method, trace
Principles of social realism
Nationality. This meant both the comprehensibility of literature for the common people, and the use of folk speech turns and proverbs. Ideology. Show
In literature
Lit-ra of socialist realism was an instrument of party ideology. The writer, in the famous expression of Stalin, is "an engineer of human souls." With his talent, he must influence the cheat
Modernism as a universal art system
The literature of the 20th century developed in an atmosphere of wars, revolutions, and then the formation of a new post-revolutionary reality. All this could not but affect the artistic searches of the authors of this time.
Postmodernism: definition and characteristics
Postmodernism is a literary trend that replaced modernity and differs from it not so much in originality as in the variety of elements, citation, immersion in
Blurring the boundaries between mass and elite art
This refers to the universality of the works of postmodern literature, their focus on both the prepared and unprepared reader. Firstly, it contributes to the unity of the public and badly
Features of Russian postmodernism
In the development of postmodernism in Russian literature, three periods can be conditionally distinguished: The end of the 60s - 70s. - (A. Terts, A. Bitov, V. Erofeev, Vs. Nekrasov, L. Rubinshtein, etc.) 70s - 8
Symbolism and acmeism
SYMBOLISM - a literary and artistic trend in European and Russian art of the 1870s-1910s, which considered the goal of art to be an intuitive comprehension of world unity through a symbol
Futurism in Russia
In Russia, futurism at first manifested itself in painting, and only then in literature. Artistic searches of the brothers David and N. Burlyukov, M. Larionov, N. Goncharova, A. Exter, N. Kulbin and
cubofuturism
The program of Russian futurism, more precisely that of its group, which at first called itself "Gilea", and entered the history of literature as a group of cubo-futurists (almost all Gilean poets - in one form or another
Ego-futurism. Igor Severyanin
Severyanin was the first in Russia, in 1911, to call himself a futurist, adding to this word another - "ego". It turned out - egofuturism. (“I am the future” or “I am in the future”). In October 1911, an organization was organized in St.
Other futurist groups
After "kubo" and "ego", other futuristic groupings arose. The most famous of them are “Poetry Mezzanine” (V. Shershenevich, R. Ivnev, S. Tretyakov, B. Lavrenev and others) and “Tsen
Futurists and the Russian Revolution
The events of 1917 immediately placed the Futurists in a special position. They hailed the October Revolution as the destruction of the old world and a step towards the future they aspired to. "Accept
What was the general basis of the movement?
1. Spontaneous feeling of "the inevitability of the collapse of junk." 2. Creation through the art of the coming upheaval and the birth of a new humanity. 3. Creativity is not imitation, but continuation
Naturalism as a literary movement
Along with symbolism, in the years of its appearance, naturalism was another no less common trend in bourgeois literature. Representatives: P. Bobory
Expressionism as a literary movement
EXPRESSIONISM (French expression - expression) - avant-garde trend in literature and art of the early twentieth century. The main subject of the image in expressionism is internal experiences.
Baedeker on Russian Expressionism
Terekhina V. October 17, 1921 in the Polytechnical Museum, under the chairmanship of Valery Bryusov, the "Review of all poetic schools and groups" was held. With declarations and poems were neoclassical
Declaration of emotionalism
1. The essence of art is to produce a unique, unique emotional action through the transmission in a unique form of a unique emotional perception. 2
Surrealism as a literary movement
Surrealism (French surrealisme - super-realism) is a trend in literature and art of the 20th century that developed in the 1920s. Originating in France on the initiative of the writer A. Breton, surre
On the unification of Oberiu
This is how the representatives of the literary group of poets, writers and cultural figures, organized at the Leningrad House of Press, called themselves, the director of which N. Baskakov quite benevolently
Alexander Vvedensky
A guest on a horse (excerpt) The steppe horse runs wearily, foam drips from the horse's lips. Night guest, you are not a hundred
Persistence of fun and dirt
The water in the river murmurs, cool, and the shadow from the mountains falls on the field, and the light goes out in the sky. And the birds are already flying in dreams. And a janitor with a black mustache *
Existentialism as a literary direction
Existentialism. In the late 40s and early 50s. French prose is going through a period of “dominance” of the literature of existentialism, the cat had an influence on art that is comparable only to the influence of Freud’s ideas. fold
Existentialism Russian
A term used to identify a collection of philosophies. teachings, as well as (in a broader sense) literary and other artistic movements spiritually related to them, the structure of categories, symbols and
self-destructive art
Self-destructive art is one of the strange phenomena of postmodernism. Paintings painted with paint fading before the eyes of the audience ... A huge eighteen-wheeled structure t
Figures of speech. trails
Means of figurative speech. Correctness, clarity, accuracy and purity are such properties of speech that the style of each writer should differ, regardless of the form of speech.
Trails (Greek tropos - turnover)
Quite a lot of words and whole phrases are often used not in their proper meaning, but in a figurative one, i.e. not to express the concept they designate, but to express the concept of another, which has some
Artistic speech and its components
Artistic speech (in other words, the language of fiction) partially coincides with the concept of "literary language". Literary language is a normative language, its norms are fixed
Systems of versification (metric, tonic, syllabic, syllabo-tonic)
The rhythmic organization of artistic speech is also connected with the intonational-syntactic structure. The greatest measure of rhythm is distinguished by poetic speech, where rhythm is achieved due to evenly
Dolniki. Accent verse by V. Mayakovsky
1. DOLNIK - a type of tonic verse, where only the number of stressed syllables matches in the lines, and the number of unstressed syllables between them ranges from 2 to 0. The interval between stresses n
G.S. Skripov On the main merits of Mayakovsky's verse
Why is the creative image of V. V. Mayakovsky remarkable and dear to us? His role in Soviet art and in the life of the Soviet people as an "agitator, bawler, leader" is well known and deserves
Meter, rhythm and size. Types of sizes. Rhythmic verse determinants
At the heart of poetic speech lies primarily a certain rhythmic principle. Therefore, the characteristic of a particular versification consists primarily in determining the principles of its rhyme.
Rhyme, ways of rhyming
Rhyme is the repetition of more or less similar combinations of sounds that connect the endings of two or more lines or symmetrically arranged parts of poetic lines. In Russian classical
Types of stanzas
A stanza is a group of verses with a specific arrangement of rhymes, usually repeated in other equal groups. In most cases, the stanza is a complete syntactic whole.
Sonnet comes in Italian and English
The Italian sonnet is a fourteen-line poem divided into two quatrains and two final three-line verses. In quatrains, either cross or ring is used
Philosophical and Literary Critical Thought in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome
Literary criticism as a special and developed science arose relatively recently. The first professional literary critics and critics appeared in Europe only at the beginning of the 19th century (Saint-Bev, V. Belinsky). D
The Development of Literary Critical Thought in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance
In the Middle Ages, literary-critical thought completely died out. Unless some of its reflections can be found in the short period of the so-called Carolingian Renaissance (late VIII - early IX century). In with
Literary-critical thought of the Enlightenment
Voltaire's compatriot Denis Diderot (1713–1784), without attacking the followers of Aristotle and Boileau, was already expressing something new in comparison with them. In the article "Beautiful" Diderot speaks of the relative
Biographical method of literary criticism
Mythological school, mythological and ritual-mythological criticism in literary criticism
In the nineteenth century, literary criticism took shape as a separate science dealing with the theory and history of literature and including a number of auxiliary disciplines - textual criticism, source study, bibliography.
Cultural and historical school. The main ideas of A. Veselovsky about the art of the word
Another outstanding literary critic, Hippolyte Taine (1828–1893), whose ideas and methodology were decisive for European literary criticism in the second half of the 19th century, considered himself a student of Sainte-Bev.
Comparative historical method of literary criticism
It is not surprising that the largest Russian literary critic of the 19th century, A. Veselovsky, who experienced the influence of the cultural-historical school in his youth, later overcame its limitations and became the founder of the or
Psychoanalytic criticism
This influential literary school emerged from the teachings of the Austrian psychiatrist and psychologist Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) and his followers. Z. Freud developed two important psychologists
Structuralism and the "new critique"
New Criticism The most influential school in Anglo-American literary criticism of the twentieth century, the origin of which dates back to the period of the First World War. Methods of literary criticism XX
Poststructuralism and deconstructivism
Poststructuralism An ideological trend in Western humanitarian thought that has had a strong influence on literary criticism in Western Europe and the United States in the last quarter of a century. Poststructurals
Phenomenological criticism and hermeneutics
Phenomenological criticism Phenomenology is one of the most influential trends in the 20th century. The founder of phenomenology is the German idealist philosopher Edmund Husserl (1859–1938), who aspired to
Contribution of Yu.M. Lotman in modern literary criticism
Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman (February 28, 1922, Petrograd - October 28, 1993, Tartu) - Soviet literary critic, culturologist and semiotician. Member of the CPSU (b)
Contribution of M.M. Bakhtin in the modern science of literature
Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin (November 5 (17), 1895, Orel - March 6, 1975, Moscow) - Russian philosopher and Russian thinker, theorist of European culture and art. Issle
Genres and internal dialogue of the work
Bakhtin saw in literature not only "organized ideological material", but also a form of "social communication". According to Bakhtin, the process of social communication was imprinted in the very text of the work. And
