scholarly journals Исторический контекст тезиса «у нас нет литературы»

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 40-53
Author(s):  
Marina Zagidullina

The article is devoted to modern reconfigurations of the literary process and literature (as a kind of art), experienced in literary criticism as the decline of literature (the thesis “we have no literature” as a statement of the degradation of an art form). The article provides an overview of reflection on this process on Russian “thick journals” (with the emphasis on the position of the well-known Russian critic Anna Kuznetsova), as well as the author’s view on the general transitional state of Russian modern literature.

Author(s):  
Vyacheslav M. Golovko ◽  

The “idea of human” (“type of attitude to the world”) is considered as a relevant category of the conceptual apparatus of the modern science of literature. The aim of the work is to analyze the theoretical and methodological potential of this category on the basis of large typological units of the literary process, marked with the concepts of “historical and literary era”, “artistic and cognitive cycle”, “literary direction”, “big style”, “artistic method”. The research used the methods of a typological and complex study of literary works, which in the synthesis of literary criticism and philosophy determine the strategy of searches in the field of theoretical and methodological content of the “idea of human” category as the foundation of the literary and philosophical anthropology of cultural and historical eras. The historical and genetic links between the worldview aesthetic principles and the artistic practice of literary trends are problematized. The logic of the research reveals the concept “object – knowledge”, fundamental for epistemology, in the aspects of the structuring of the knowledge of the methodological semantics of the “idea of human” category and of the functioning of the definitions “generalized idea of human”, “type of attitude to the world”, “concept of human and reality”, “whole of human”, “human as a value”. The article shows that the “idea of human” as a philosophical and aesthetic interpretation of the nature and essence of human at a certain stage in the development of artistic consciousness, worked out by the whole culture (R.R. Moskvina, G.V. Mokronosov) and defining integrity and logical consistency of the artistic system, is a synergistically functional semantic core of the historical and cultural era, and this core contains the dialectical potential of “negation of the negation”. As a variable, the historical “idea of human”, in the perspective of the stage development of artistic consciousness, undergoes dramatic changes and is realized in the logic of the successive change of historical and cultural epochs and their philosophical paradigms, in the constant alternation of “realistic” and “mystical”, materialistic and idealistic methods of cognition and images of human and the world (D.I. Chizhevsky, A.M. Panchenko, and others). The conclusions are substantiated that the successive development of literary trends, creative methods and their axiological systems is conditioned by the dynamics of “types of attitude to the world”; that the functioning of the “idea of human” category in literary discourse is focused on argumentation of the ontological nature of fiction, on the identification of philosophical and aesthetic principles that determine the systematic nature and the successive change of artistic and cognitive cycles; that the evolution of the “idea of human” within the framework of one artistic and cognitive cycle is fixed by the dynamics of genre systems since, in the correlations of method, genre and style, “the idea of human” acts as a factor in genre formation.


Author(s):  
Michał Cierzniak

The author of the article refers to Derrida’s concept of play in the discourse of human sciences and Polish literary criticism: Anna Kałuża, Tymoteusz Karpowicz, and Stanisław Barańczak attempt to interpret poetry of Krystyna Miłobędzka, especially her book entitled gubione [lost]. The article focuses of issues such as speed and fluency in the context of modern literature.


PMLA ◽  
1961 ◽  
Vol 76 (3) ◽  
pp. 200-204
Author(s):  
Quentin M. Hope

Saint-Evremond has earned a place in the history of seventeenth-century dramatic criticism as a fervent admirer of Corneille and a hostile critic of Racine. His strong affinity for Molière is less well-known, because he wrote very little about him. Not considering himself a professional author, he never felt the need to give full expression to his opinions on literature, or on any subject. In his youth he was primarily a railleur; as literary criticism, his first work, La Comédie des académistes, is a pungent satirical attack on pretension, triviality, and excessive concern with minutiae of vocabulary and technique. The satirical impulse remains present, in a more subdued form, in most of his later works. He probes into the weaknesses of ancient and modern literatures more frequently than he celebrates their merits. His discussions of authors he particularly admires, Montaigne, Voiture, Malherbe, Cervantes, are very brief. Most of his critical essays are directed against aberrations in judgment, insufficiencies, and misconceptions. Dissertation sur Alexandre, Sur les caractères des tragédies, A un auteur qui me demandait mon sentiment d'une pièce où l'héroïne ne faisait que se lamenter, Discours sur les historiens français, Sur nos comédies, De la comédie italienne, Sur les opéras, Observations sur le goüt et le discernement des français—all these are essays emphasizing various weaknesses in modern literature and taste. Réflexions sur nos traducteurs and Du merveilleux qui se trouve dans les poèmes des anciens are equally critical of certain aspects of ancient literature, while De la tragédie ancienne et moderne is an attack on both. It is true that a large part of his criticism of the drama deals with Corneille, whom he admired more than any other author, but his defense of Corneille often takes the form of an attack against the corrupt modern taste which has turned against him. His searching and critical mind preferred to contradict a generally accepted opinion, to reveal the hidden weaknesses of a universally admired work, rather than to define the qualities of the authors it enjoyed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-79
Author(s):  
M.A. Chernyak ◽  
◽  
M.A. Sargsyan ◽  

Statement of the problem. The interest of modern literary criticism to the problem of literature reflection is carried out mainly on the material of various metatexts, especially vividly represented in the turn of the century. The purpose of the article is to reveal author’s identity and artistic self-reflection in non-fiction texts. In this regard, the collection of articles entitled “How Do We Write”, compiled in 2018 by St. Petersburg writers Pavel Krusanov and Aleksander Etoev, is of particular interest. This book was written in reply to the book “How Do We Write” in 1930. The literary process of the 1920s, like, in many respects, literature of the new 21st century, was a period of renewal of various types and genres of artistic creativity, a period of the birth of new forms. Research results. Comparison of the two books, in which writers from different literary eras reflect on the nature of creativity, on the technology of literary work, on relationships with a reader, gives grounds to talk about the contours of a new textual criticism of the 21st century. Deformation of the canon, destruction of the boundaries of literature and aesthetic taste, and new forms of communication influenced the content and form of texts. Conclusions. With emergence of Internet reality, new sources of textual criticism appeared. The new literary reality dictates its own laws and creates new conditions for the development of publish- ing, writing, and reading relationships. Modern literature, like the literature of past years, reacts to cultural and historical events and to the development of the literary process, reflecting on the creation of the text and on the role of a writer here and now.


Author(s):  
Emiliya Ohar

The paper seeks to develop new avenues for a study of book journalism. Specifically, it deals with a problem of institutionalization of book journalism as a self-sufficient thematic direction in contemporary cultural journalism. More specifically, the article aims to explore a publicism of Kostiantyn Rodyk, the well-known Ukrainian cultural journalist formerly a book journalist. He is the former editor-in-chief of one of the most professional specialized magazine Knyzhnyk-Review (2000―2007s), the television and radio presenter, the founder and top manager of the annual National book rating Knyzhka Roku, columnist of the newspapers Den’ and Ukraina Moloda, author of the book series Ukrainian Best. Knyzhka Roku, some non-fiction books Actualna Literatura and Sizif XX. Knyzhka vs. polityka. The latter feature numerous essays dealing with actual publishing and literary process in Ukraine. We show that combined in one book; it created continuous nonfiction (publicist) meta-narrative or nonfiction (publicist) meta-text. The latter makes it possible to distinguish the most specific features of quality book journalism. The paper attempts to define concepts of the «book publicism» and «book journalism», highlight differences between book journalism and literary-critical journalism. The author proposes to consider book publicism as a generalized phenomenon uniting both texts and the process of their creation. On the contrary, we argue that book journalism is one of the possible mediatized practices. It is a discourse that implies both the creation and the public reflection on the products of journalistic activity. In the course of the textual analysis of publicism works of Kostiantyn Rodyk, we have identified essential features of his book, non-fiction criticism. Those were: a broad subject (so-called «book culture»); socio-communicative approach to comprehension of literary and publishing artifacts; multi-functionality (informing about new books and literary works by the Ukrainian and foreign authors as well as publishing houses; criticism; creating culture; worldview, aesthetic and artistic tastes shaping and so on); hypertextuality and cross-mediality; preference given to genres such as essay and review; masterful use of expressive stylistics and linguistic means of popularization of knowledge. We conclude that such specific features can be considered as criteria for quality book journalism, a benchmark for mastering creative writing about the «world of books». Key words: publicism, book journalism, literary criticism, Kostiantyn Rodyk, literary and publishing process, essay.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9.1 (85.1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Oksana Zelik ◽  

The proposed research is an attempt to analyze gonzo-criticism in the context of the modern Ukrainian literary process. The change of aesthetic orientations in the Ukrainian literary process had significant impact on the role and status of literary criticism. The analysis of gonzo-criticism is based on the example of texts of Tetiana Trofymenko, literary critic, cultural manager, lecturer, participant of various literary and artistic events. She taught at the universities of Kharkiv and Lviv, worked at the Kharkiv Literary Museum. The reviewer cooperated at various times with the magazine “SHO”, the sites “Novynarnia”, “MediaPort”, “ZAXID.NET”, “LitAktsent” etc. The article summarizes the views on gonzo journalism and approaches to its characteristics. The analysis of Tetiana Trofymenko’s reviews is conducted on the stylistic and genre levels taking into account the problem-thematic contexts, features of the presentation of works of art and compositional peculiarities. Gonzo is a special kind of criticism with the dominant subjective view on literature. Its main criteria are impressions and emotions of the critic, this style does not have clearly regulated rules but mainly depends on the author’s personality, his perception and understanding of the artistic work, the vision of text in the context of literary process, the author’s creativity, the ability to present his position vividly and convincingly. The critic conducts a dialogue with the reader, exchanges opinions, reflections and estimations with him. The characteristic features of review are personalized point of view, personal beginning, factuality, reasoned position of the author. The narrative in review is polythematic, because it aims to highlight a variety of facts, usually united by the author’s opinion. The author of the artistic review demonstrates to the reader an analytical work aimed at cognition, understanding, interpretation and evaluation of a literary work. The stylistic features of gonzo-criticism are analyzed in details. The attention is focused on the peculiarities of the presentation of fiction texts through the ironic, subjective view of the critic. The researcher found out that this style of literary criticism manifests in emotional expressions, the use of irony, sarcasm, and the critic offers an unexpected look at the literary work, shocks and provokes the audience.


Bohemistyka ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 437-457
Author(s):  
Jan VOREL

The article is focused mainly on aesthetic-philosophical constants of the work of art of Julius Zeyer. The author of the article tries to point out that Zeyer´s conception of art is tightly connected with artistic conceptions of the rising literary symbolistic generation: His aesthetic-philosophical system contains strong protest against rationalism, realism and naturalism in contemporary literature and underlines the way to subconscious roots of human existence; it turns away from rational understanding of the world and the mystical intuition of inner and organic life in modern literature. In the article the motifs of temple building and motifs of creating the organic picture of the world in Zeyer´s work of art are analysed. The article also contains main references to Zeyer´s work of art published by reputable names of the Czech and European literary criticism.


Author(s):  
Yelena N. Belyakova

In terms of newspaper-magazine reviews of Alexander Ostrovsky's works, published in the 1850s-70s, the problem of artistic text literary-critical evaluation is examined in the article. The author of the article assumes that artistic text evaluation is directly related to ideology and to the main request of time in terms of which, the text receives this assessment. According to Georgiy Fridlender, one of the most important tasks that Russian public life of the second half of the 19th century set for literature was to create an image of a viable and still positive hero. Alexander Ostrovsky in his work was oriented to answers to the most pressing social requests. Nevertheless, his works often did not satisfy his contemporaries, and sometimes insulted their moral feelings. An attempt to trace how the negative moral and ethical assessment of the playwright's creative work was conditioned and the role that newspaper and magazine criticism played in shaping the literary process is undertaken in the article.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexey Vdovin

This article studies the quantitative and qualitative status and cultural functions of modern literature in 46 Russian reading anthologies designed for two major types of high schools (“gymnasia” and “nonclassical secondary schools”) from 1843 to 1904. Such analysis is relevant due to an outdated understanding of the importance of Minister Dmitrii Tolstoy’s conservative reforms between the 1870s and 1880s. Using genealogical, institutional, and historical and functional methods to study the history of education, the author explores the function and consequences of both the exclusion of modern literature from the school curriculum and its presence in some readers. As a result, curriculum classicisation after the 1871 reform and the preservation of the literary curriculum were less unambiguous than was considered previously. The ban on the study of literature written after 1842 and the concurrent significant expansion of texts from Old Russian literature led to a paradoxical and unpredictable sacralisation of the “Russian classics” and discredited many important texts in the eyes of the younger generation. The article demonstrates that in such a situation, educational readers played an important role, being a buffer zone between a strictly limited curriculum and modern literature that was prohibited in class. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the content of the readers demonstrates that from 1860 to 1900, the share of texts by contemporary authors (i. e. those published 20–30 years before the publication of a reading book) increased from 4 to 35 %. Similarly, starting with 1861, the number of new readers on the educational market increased significantly. Qualitative analysis allows the author to identify the writers whose works were most frequently included in textbooks between the 1860s and 1890s. By the beginning of the 1900s, many fragments of frequently reproduced texts became canonical, were memorized, and, although they could not give a complete picture of the whole text, performed an important cultural function, attracting teenagers to modern texts and often still living authors. As a buffer zone between the official curriculum, the school historical and literary narrative, and the current literary process, readers thus made an important contribution to the canonisation of modern literature in Russian society in the 19th century, even in spite of the ministerial ban on its study.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 231-237
Author(s):  
Marhabo Ahadovna Khudoykulova ◽  

The article analyses the development of the controversial article genre of the early twentieth century that has been little examined in literary criticism, literary process and attitude to the poet, prose writers. The problem is clarified in the example of works of Chulpan, Oybek, Fitrat. A problematic article can be in the form of a scientific-theoretical discussion or research that focuses on the poetics of a work and illuminates the intended scientific phenomenon in a monograph, based on the aesthetics of artistic creation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document