Against the Machine

Russomania ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 343-432
Author(s):  
Rebecca Beasley
Keyword(s):  
French Literature ◽  
Russian Literature ◽  
October Revolution ◽  
Literary Response ◽  
Soviet Culture

The final chapter of Russomania explores how the war and the Russian revolutions of 1917 transform the role of Russian literature for British-based writers. The first part of the chapter examines debates about Russian and French literature in The Egoist, the home of imagist poetry. It focuses in particular on the emergence of style as a key criterion of literary modernity, championed by the editors Richard Aldington and T. S. Eliot, and the process of its rejection as materialist by Egoist contributors, John Cournos and John Gould Fletcher. Their aesthetics take on a particular, anti-Bolshevik pertinence in the wake of the October Revolution, which Cournos witnessed as a member of the Foreign Office’s propaganda bureau in Petrograd. The chapter surveys British knowledge of the Russian revolutions and early Soviet culture, and analyzes the literary response they elicited..

Zaytsev, B. (2018). Reflections of the Eternal. Unknown short stories, essays, reminiscences and interviews. Ed. by A. Lyubomudrov. St. Petersburg: Rostok. (In Russ.)

2021 ◽  
pp. 288-293
Author(s):  
L. M. Borisova
Keyword(s):  
Short Stories ◽  
French Literature ◽  
Russian Literature ◽  
October Revolution ◽  
The West ◽  
Treasure Trove ◽  
Literature And Religion ◽  
Emigre Literature

The review is concerned with a collection of hitherto unknown prose by B. Zaytsev that uncovers new aspects of his oeuvre. The collection covers literary variants of famous essays, hitherto unpublished short stories from before the October Revolution, and travelogues showing the writer's attitude to the spiritual and creative culture of the West. The reviewer points out the problem of the interaction between Russian literature and its European counterparts (particularly French literature) and defines the criteria (the Christian ideal and ‘common human compassion') used by Zaytsev for its assessment. Mentioned are the authors especially favoured by Zaytsev (F. Mauriac, A. Maurois, and G. Duhamel). Also noted is the writer's polemic with Western authors. The collection offers a treasure trove for scholarly reflections on literature and religion, as well as on Russian emigre literature versus Soviet and Western literatures.

Epilogue

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno and
Keyword(s):  
Sensory Processing ◽  
Multisensory Processing ◽  
Multisensory Perception ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Life Problems ◽  
Multisensory Interactions ◽  
Contemporary Work ◽  
New Perspective

Multisensory interactions in perception are pervasive and fundamental, as we have documented throughout this book. In this final chapter, we propose that contemporary work on multisensory processing is a paradigm shift in perception science, calling for a radical reconsideration of empirical and theoretical questions within an entirely new perspective. In making our case, we emphasize that multisensory perception is the norm, not the exception, and we remark that multisensory interactions can occur early in sensory processing. We reiterate the key notions that multisensory interactions come in different kinds and that principles of multisensory processing must be considered when tackling multisensory daily-life problems. We discuss the role of unisensory processing in a multisensory world, and we conclude by suggesting future directions for the multisensory field.

A New Hope

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoran Oklopcic
Keyword(s):  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
The People ◽  
Collective Self ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Way

As the final chapter of the book, Chapter 10 confronts the limits of an imagination that is constitutional and constituent, as well as (e)utopian—oriented towards concrete visions of a better life. In doing so, the chapter confronts the role of Square, Triangle, and Circle—which subtly affect the way we think about legal hierarchy, popular sovereignty, and collective self-government. Building on that discussion, the chapter confronts the relationship between circularity, transparency, and iconography of ‘paradoxical’ origins of democratic constitutions. These representations are part of a broader morphology of imaginative obstacles that stand in the way of a more expansive constituent imagination. The second part of the chapter focuses on the most important five—Anathema, Nebula, Utopia, Aporia, and Tabula—and closes with the discussion of Ernst Bloch’s ‘wishful images’ and the ways in which manifold ‘diagrams of hope and purpose’ beyond the people may help make them attractive again.

Conclusions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Strecker
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
World Heritage Convention ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The World ◽  
State Obligations ◽  
Made In ◽  
Landscape Protection

The final chapter of this book advances four main conclusions on the role of international law in landscape protection. These relate to state obligations regarding landscape protection, the influence of the World Heritage Convention and the European Landscape Convention, the substantive and procedural nature of landscape rights, and the role of EU law. It is argued that, although state practice is lagging behind the normative developments made in the field of international landscape protection, landscape has contributed positively to the corpus of international cultural heritage law and indeed has emerged as a nascent field of international law in its own right.

scholarly journals «I see a Jew in me…»: the Jewish Studies of Leonid Frizman

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 270-281
Author(s):  
Konstantin Bondar ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Literature ◽  
Jewish Studies ◽  
Experimental Platform

The article discusses the role of Jewish topics in the scholarly heritage of Leonid Frizman, a Kharkov-born historian of Russian literature. Turning to Jewish Studies quite late in life, Frizman outlined potentially fruitful areas of research on a number of writers and created an experimental platform that allowed him to test and challenge widely accepted assumptions and arrive at new perspectives on various historical, literary and philosophical issues.

scholarly journals The First Production of The Brothers Karamazov on the Russian stage in the Mirror of the Press (Based on the Collections of the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature)

2020 ◽  
pp. 219-241
Author(s):  
Pavel E. Fokin ◽  
Ilya O. Boretsky
Keyword(s):  
Russian Literature ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Theatrical Production ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
The Brothers Karamazov ◽  
The Press ◽  
State Museum ◽  
History Of ◽  
Brothers Karamazov

The first Russian theatrical production of Dostoevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov premiered on the eve of Dostoevsky’s 20th death anniversary on January 26 (February 7) 1901 at the Theater of the Literary and Artistic Society (Maly Theater) in St. Petersburg as a benefit for Nikolay Seversky. The novel was adapted for the stage by K. Dmitriev (Konstantin Nabokov). The role of Dmitry Karamazov was performed by the famous dramatic actor Pavel Orlenev, who had received recognition for playing the role of Raskolnikov. The play, the staging, the actors’ interpretation of their roles became the subject of detailed reviews of the St. Petersburg theater critics and provoked controversial assessments and again raised the question about the peculiarities of Dostoevsky’s prose and the possibility of its presentation on stage. The production of The Brothers Karamazov at the Maly Theater in St. Petersburg and the controversy about it became an important stage in the development of Russian realistic theater and a reflection of the ideas of Dostoevsky’s younger contemporaries about the distinctive features and contents of his art. The manuscript holdings of the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature includes Anna Dostoevskaya’s collection containing a set of documentary materials (the playbill, newspaper advertisements, reviews, feuilletons), which makes it possible to form a complete picture of the play and Russian viewers’ reaction to it. The article provides a description of the performance, and voluminous excerpts from the most informative press reviews. The published materials have not previously attracted special attention of researchers.

scholarly journals «Мертвые Цари всегда должны по смерти своей быть судимы»: Посмертная судьба одного древнеегипетского обычая в русской и европейской словесности XVI – XIX вв. [“Dead Kings Must Always be Judged after Their Demise”: The Afterlife of an Ancient Egyptian Custom in the Russian and European Literature of the 16th to 19th Centuries]

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 9-47
Author(s):  
Maria Neklyudova
Keyword(s):  
Literary Criticism ◽  
French Literature ◽  
History Of Ideas ◽  
Ancient Egyptian ◽  
Diodorus Siculus ◽  
History Of ◽  
Generous Support ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right

In his Bibliotheca historica, Diodorus Siculus described a peculiar Egyptian custom of judging all the dead (including the pharaohs) before their burial. The Greek historian saw it as a guarantee of Egypt’s prosperity, since the fear of being deprived of the right to burial served as a moral imperative. This story of an Egyptian custom fascinated the early modern authors, from lawyers to novelists, who often retold it in their own manner. Their interpretations varied depending on the political context: from the traditional “lesson to sovereigns” to a reassessment of the role of the subject and the duties of the orator. This article traces several intellectual trajectories that show the use and misuse of this Egyptian custom from Montaigne to Bossuet and then to Rousseau—and finally its adaptation by Pushkin and Vyazemsky, who most likely became acquainted with it through the mediation of French literature. The article was written in the framework (and with the generous support) of the RANEPA (ШАГИ РАНХиГС) state assignment research program. KEYWORDS: 16th to 19th-Century European and Russian Literature, Diodorus Siculus (1st century BC), Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712—1778), Alexander Pushkin (1799—1837), Prince Pyotr Vyazemsky (1792—1878), Egyptian Сourt, Locus communis, Political Rhetoric, Literary Criticism, Pantheonization, History of Ideas.

scholarly journals The First Production of The Brothers Karamazov on the Russian stage in the Mirror of the Press (Based on the Collections of the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature)

2020 ◽  
pp. 219-241
Author(s):  
Pavel E. Fokin ◽  
Ilya O. Boretsky
Keyword(s):  
Russian Literature ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Theatrical Production ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
The Brothers Karamazov ◽  
The Press ◽  
State Museum ◽  
History Of ◽  
Brothers Karamazov

The first Russian theatrical production of Dostoevsky's novel The Brothers Karamazov premiered on the eve of Dostoevsky’s 20th death anniversary on January 26 (February 7) 1901 at the Theater of the Literary and Artistic Society (Maly Theater) in St. Petersburg as a benefit for Nikolay Seversky. The novel was adapted for the stage by K. Dmitriev (Konstantin Nabokov). The role of Dmitry Karamazov was performed by the famous dramatic actor Pavel Orlenev, who had received recognition for playing the role of Raskolnikov. The play, the staging, the actors’ interpretation of their roles became the subject of detailed reviews of the St. Petersburg theater critics and provoked controversial assessments and again raised the question about the peculiarities of Dostoevsky’s prose and the possibility of its presentation on stage. The production of The Brothers Karamazov at the Maly Theater in St. Petersburg and the controversy about it became an important stage in the development of Russian realistic theater and a reflection of the ideas of Dostoevsky’s younger contemporaries about the distinctive features and contents of his art. The manuscript holdings of the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature includes Anna Dostoevskaya’s collection containing a set of documentary materials (the playbill, newspaper advertisements, reviews, feuilletons), which makes it possible to form a complete picture of the play and Russian viewers’ reaction to it. The article provides a description of the performance, and voluminous excerpts from the most informative press reviews. The published materials have not previously attracted special attention of researchers.

ПУШКИНСКИЙ ДОМ РАН КАК АКАДЕМИЧЕСКИЙ ЦЕНТР ИЗУЧЕНИЯ ТЕМЫ «ПРАВОСЛАВИЕ И РУССКАЯ КУЛЬТУРА». 1991–2021

2021 ◽  
pp. 14-23
Author(s):  
Алексей Маркович Любомудров
Keyword(s):  
Academic Development ◽  
Russian Literature ◽  
Russian Culture ◽  
New Information ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Religious Aspects ◽  
Official Status

Статья посвящена тридцатилетней истории изучения религиозных аспектов русской литературы под эгидой Пушкинского Дома. Детально описаны зарождение, цели и состав участников ежегодных конференций «Православие и русская культура», позволивших сказать новое слово об историческом взаимодействии веры и светского творчества. Становление исследований проходило в обстановке противодействия сил, занимавших позиции безоценочного релятивизма и откровенного антихристианства. В работе показано, как стихийно сложившийся в Институте русской литературы центр изучения православных парадигм отечественной словесности в 2008 году получил официальный статус и за годы своего существования подготовил десятки трудов, собраний сочинений классиков, сотни публикаций. Подчеркнута объединяющая и консолидирующая роль пушкинодомцев в академической разработке данной темы. The article is devoted to the thirty-year history of studying the religious aspects of Russian literature at the basis of the Institute of Russian Literature (Pushkin House). The origin, goals and participants of the annual conferences «Orthodoxy and Russian Culture», which provided new information about the historical interaction of faith and secular creativity, are described in details. The formation of the research took place in the atmosphere of confrontation between forces whose positions were relativistic and distinctly anti-christian. The work shows how the spontaneously established Center for the study of the Orthodox paradigm of Russian literature received its own official status in 2008. By the moment the Center has prepared hundreds of publications as well as collective works of classics. The unifying and consolidating role of researchers of Pushkin House in the academic development of subject mentioned above is emphasized.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document