The dissertation discusses the construction of women characters in Fedor Dostoevsky’s (1821-1881) novel The Idiot (1869), a work that has remained a conundrum for critics. Due to the dismissive comments of previous commentators who have largely overlooked the significance of women characters in Dostoevsky's work, the influence of the French literary tradition on Dostoevsky's characterization has been virtually ignored.
Dostoevsky's women, it turns out, owe much to their French sisters. This investigation into the Russian author's characterization of women reveals his understanding of the female psyche and the meaningful role he envisioned for women in Russia's "fatal moment."
Gustave Flaubert's Madame Bovary (1857) became a focal point for Dostoevsky as he wrote The Idiot. In his novel he polemicizes with the French writer about the roles and options of women in mid-nineteenth-century European and Russian society. Dostoevsky takes up four significant themes from Madame Bovary: the corrupting influence of novel reading, using literary paradigms to shape social behavior, the older woman as enforcer of social mores, and the image of the dead bride. In their personal lives and choices, both Nastas'ia Filippovna and Aglaia Epanchina draw from literary texts with strong societal implications to create what Iurii Lotman calls "behavioral texts" through which they communicate with those around them. This imitation creates a situation in which "art imitates life imitating art." When considered within the context of these themes from Flaubert's novel, Nastas’ia Filippovna’s and Aglaia's extravagant behaviors begin to make more sense.
Dostoevsky turns Flaubert's original critique of French bourgeois society back on European culture as a whole. In Dostoevsky's view, Emma Bovary represents what is wrong not only with European, bourgeois womanhood, but also with Western European values in general. When he marries these narrow concerns of women's freedom to his perennial questions about changing Russian national identity and the destiny of Russia, Dostoevsky’s sincere interest in the Woman Question comes to the fore, and an interesting new perspective on The Idiot emerges.
. Archetypal Patterns in Pushkin's Narrative and Dramatic Works (2 parts). Defended 2000.
Through a Jungian-based archetypal approach, an attempt has been made to identify the most important archetypal patterns in Pushkin's narrative and dramatic works. Four themes have been identified. The first, the loss of and longing for paradise, is concentrated in earlier works, such as the Southern Poems and Boris Godunov, but extends throughout Pushkin's body of works, culminating in "The Tale of the Golden Cockerel," in which the regressive longing for paradise is satirically denounced. The theme of the puer aeternus is the focus of Evgenii Onegin. In "Tazit" and The Little Tragedies, the two halves of the puer-senex archetype confront each other. The critique of the hero, perhaps the most philosophically significant of Pushkin's archetypal themes, finds expression in two recognized masterpieces, "The Bronze Horseman" and "The Queen of Spades." The "poor knight" is interpreted as the prototype of the creative aritist and Pushkin's alternative to the classic hero. The archetype of the quest begins and ends Pushkin's cycle of major works. Jungian writings on alchemical symbolism are applied to Ruslan and Liudmila, as well as Dubrovskii, and the concept of the trickster is used to elucidate Dubrovskii, which simultaneously looks back Dubrovskii, which simultaneously looks backward to the puer aeternus theme and forward to the initiatory pattern of The Captain's Daughter. Two of these themes have been identified as of particular importance for nineteenth- and twentieth-century Russian literature: the puer aeternus, which finds expression in the "superfluous man," and the critique of the West.
An attempt has been made to render thorough, coherent interpretations of the works examined and to relate the works primarily to other works which share the same dominant archetypal theme, and secondarily to works of other categories.
It is hoped that this work establishes that Pushkin is an archetypal writer par excellence and contributes to an understanding of the enduring value of Pushkin's works. It is also hoped that this work confirms the usefulness of the archetypal approach and encourages others to undertake their own archetypal explorations.
The theatre of Tadeusz Rozewicz is a continuously evolving form. The plays completed between 1959 and 1971 are open structures defying established theatrical conventions. Such works as The Card Index, The Laocoon Group, The Witnesses, The Interrupted Act, A Funeral Polish Style or On All Fours consist of loosely interrelated episodes not advancing any distinct story line. Some of the scenes do not even directly correspond to the principal movements of the plays: they are self-contained mini-dramas providing parallels to and contrasts with the main action. The plays' dramatic focus is further de-centralized by making several characters share equal importance. But the characters are passive antiheroes rather than protagonists in the traditional sense. These decomposed individuals and mechanical puppet-like figures are fitting symbols of an alienated world.
Lacking a story line and fully developed characters, the movement of the plays is carried largely by language. Yet monologues and dialogues of Rozewicz's antiheroes are most often nothing but a collection of prefabricated cliches that are repeated over and over again. Hence language becomes a symptom of the alienation of man. It is not only that people cannot communicate anything to one another, but they simply have nothing essential to say. Their intellects have been corrupted by the onslaught of meaningless phrases. No wonder then that costumes, sets and props, lighting, nonverbal sound, and actors' movement and gestures frequently communicate more than the characters' nonsensical gibberish. In fact, in such plays as Birth Rate and The Old Woman Broods, the spoken word is no longer the indispensable element of the dramatic structure.
Rozewicz emphasizes experimental in form even further by refusing to place his plays in acknowledged dramatic genres. Instead, he chooses to write, to use his own terms, so-called comedies, comedies not for the stage or biographies of plays. But this experimentation is not art for art's sake. Rather, it grows form the relativistic and skeptical vantage point from which Rozewicz observes post-war reality.
The three plays that were completed in the mid and late 1970s, White Marriage, Departure of a Hunger Artist and Into the Sand. . ., herald Rozewicz's return to more closed theatre forms. There is a more definite story line. The dramatic structure is not as episodic or open-ended as before. The characters are no longer antiheroes "of no face, age or occupation." At least one of them, Bianka in White Marriage, can be seen in a process of growth. Dialogue functions as a means of expressing the characters' ideas and emotions rather than a deafening noise filling the void.
Many of these changes may be difficult to discern by theatre goers. Most obviously, there is less room for improvisation and direct audience participation in these plays than in the earlier works. But there is still a great deal of Rozewicz's open dramaturgy in the three most recent plays. How is a theatre director deal with Rozewicz's "Discourse on Hunger Artists," "Post Script: From My Desk," and other commentaries in the form of elaborate stage directions in Departure of a Hunger Artist? Or how is he or she to present the story of Walus that is often dominated by other movements in Into the Sand…, In fact, the critics' complaints about the structure of this play are the best indication that Rozewicz's closed forms may not be so closed after all.
Yet one hopes that Rozewicz will never write a play that will satisfy everyone. So far, there is no indication that Rozewicz has become another Laurenty: He is still called a nihilist and an iconoclast by some, and a great artist by others. And his plays continue to challenge theatre companies and audiences in Poland and abroad to examine their notion of the theatre. If one sees the theatre only as a place to spend a pleasant evening, then he or she is obviously disappointed in Rozewicz's plays. His is a truly living theatre that stimulates its audience to think and act decisively and that provides important insights into the individual self, the culture, and the society at large. It is a theatre that requires an intellectual effort on the part of the spectators: it wants an active and critical audience rather than passive consumers.
The dada-surrealist experiment was one of the most significant literary and artistic currents of the twentieth century. Dada and surrealism demanded nothing less than a radical re-examination of traditional aesthetic values and methods. Whether or not one agrees with the movement's aims and practices, its innovations and accomplishments provide a valuable and fascinating subject of study.
Dada, the immediate precursor and progenitor of surrealism, emerged from the cataclysmic horrors of the First World War. The dada venture was an eruption of irrationality that assailed all traditions-aesthetic, cultural, and moral. Its participants generated a vehemently anarchical attitude which avowedly sought the abolition of art and the destruction of beauty. Tristan Tzara, one of the founders of dada, proclaims in his Manifeste Dada 1918 (Dada Manifesto 1918): ". . .there is a great work of negation and destruction to be accomplished." The dadaist phenomenon was, in brief, a shrill, often incoherent howl of protest, and its art was characterized by a belligerent revolt against logic and established values. The main centers of dadaist activity in the years 1916-1922 were Zurich, New York, Berlin, Cologne, Hanover, and Paris.
In 1924 surrealism superseded the feverish tumult of dada and was officially christened in Paris with the publication of a manifesto. The rupture with dada can be traced back to 1922 when Andre Breton, the new movement's originator and chief theorist, grew dissatisfied with dada's destructive spirit and looked for a new direction. Under Breton's guidance, surrealism replaced negation and chaos with a coherent, constructive program. Stimulated Freud's psychological research, Breton and the surrealists strove to explore in systematic fashion the deeper reality of the unconscious, dreams, and the liberated imagination. In surrealist art, the irrational and the illogical become not merely subversive, but marvelous and enchanting as well. Art was not destroyed; it was revolutionized. The heroic period of surrealism, years of intese experimentation and innovation in literature and the arts, continued nearly up to the Second World War, the movement exists nominally even into the present. Some of the most prominent surrealist poets and painters have included Louis Aragon, Andre Breton, Salvador Dali, Robert Desnos, Paul Eluard, Max Eluard, Max Ernst, Joan Miro, Benjamin Peret, and Philippe Soupault.
Hundreds of versts away from these avant-garde activities of the Western European capitals, in twentieth-century Russia, the writers Osip Mandel'stam, Velimir Xlebnikov, Nikolaj Zabolockij, and Daniil Xarms were never members of any surrealist group ever existed on Russian soil, as it did, for instance, in Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. Nevertheless, individual works of aforementioned Russian authors can be studied as significant examples of surrealist writing. The purpose of this dissertation is to demonstrate not only that it is possible to speak of a surrealist mode expression in Russian literature, but also that such an approach can yield valuable insights into difficult and often chaotic literary creations. Through a detailed examination of selected works of Mandelstamm, Xlebnikov, Nikolaj Zabolockij, and Daniil Xarms were never members of any surrealist cenacle. In fact, no official surrealist group ever existed on Russian soil, as it did, for instance, in Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. Nevertheless, individual works of the aforementioned Russian authors can be studied as a significant examples of surrealist writing. The purpose of this dissertation is to demonstrate not only that it is possible to speak of a surrealist mode of expression in Russian literature, but also that such an approach can yield valuable insights into difficult and often chaotic literary creations. Through a detailed examination of selected works of Mandelstam, Xlebnikov, Zabolockij, and Xarms, we will see that an autochthonous brand of Russian surrealism did exist, however unconscious or unofficial.
Valentina Golondzowski-Brougher
. Vsevolod Ivanov's Mystery of Mysteries. Defended 1973.Liteary critic, poet, journalist, and translator, Apollon Grigor'ev was paid little tribute in his lifetime. With the exception of a few efforts to give him his due undertaken by the well-known philosopher and critic, Nikolaj Straxov (1828-1896), and, somewhat later, by the leading symbolist poet of the Silver Age, Aleksander Blok (1880-1921), he has remained little known, if at all, to students of Russian literature and literary criticism. While Grigor'ev's works were not completely forgotten, they were not, on the whole, studied seriously. This neglectful treatment notwithstanding, one could state with a reasonable amount of certainty that Grigor'ev as a literary critic was, if not the greatest, then certainly one of the greatest literary critics around the middle of the nineteenth century. His place in literary criticism, however, has not been secured even though he made important contributions.
The reasons for the neglect of, and sometimes contempt for Grigor'ev's literary achievement are manifold; some of them will be pointed out in this study. For now, however, suffice it to say that in a short but significant record, "Sorrowful Thoughts About the Despotism and Voluntary Slavery of Thought," Grigor'ev writes: "I like England very much but I cannot stand Anglomania just as I cannot stand any mania, because mania is slavery." He, who hated the word "slave" from his childhood till the end of his tragic life, had unreservedly clung to one consistent line of thought, nemely opposition to the despotism dominating the mainstream of Russian literary criticism of this time (the socio-utilitarian school). Grigor'ev's opposition to the prevailing trend in Russian literay criticism was strong enough for him to have been considered an outcast by his contemporaries of the opposite camp. Bearing in mind on the one hand such trends in literature., and on the other, the fact that Grigor'ev's work has not yet received much needed attention and discussion, the present study is an attempt to demonstarate some of his important contributions to criticism and the theory of literature.
To treat Grigor'ev's critical and journalistic writings thoroughly would take many volumes. Therefore, the scope of this study will be limited. It would certainly be gratifying to analyze fully all the various facets of Grigor'ev's oeuvre; however, for such an enormous and difficult task the time has not yet come. Therefore, following this short Introduction, Chapter Two--Grigor'ev's Biography as Related to His Literary Creativity--has the aim of partially presenting Grigor'ev's early formative years, and his relationship to his parents. Then Grigor'ev's years at Moscow University are examined; there he obtained his degree at the faculty of Law, but more importantly, it was at Moscow University that he developed the philosophical orientation which was to bear strongly upon the literary criticism of his more mature years.
Another purpose of the second chapter is to present Grigor'ev's numerous emotional involvements which strongly influenced his poetry as well as his Bohemian way of life--both of which in turn also influenced his literary creativity on a whole. Moreover, this chapter aims to introduce the reader to Grigor'ev's pecuniary problems which reveal him to be a very impractical person, but one who, nevertheless, did not alow this deficiency to interfere with his course in the pursuit of letters and litearture. Finally, Grigor'ev's literary debut in poetry will be discused briefly, as will his collaboration in various journals.
In Chapter Three--External Invluences on Grigor'ev--the impact of authors on the critic will be dealt with. This chapter has the purpose of demonstrating his broad culture, as evidenced in his interpretations anduse of Shakespeare's works: Hamlet, A Midsummer Night's Dream, and Romeo and Juliet. Grigor'ev's interest in literary-critical concepts, which he based on historic analysis will be presented, as well as his use of Shakespeare and Gogol' (because in the latter Grigor'ev saw the historical starting point in Russian belles lettres); also discussed are his contrasting of Shakespeare with Byron, and his comparisons of Shakespeare, Gogol', Goethe, and Pushkin in whom Grigor'ev saw the highest creative ideal. Grigor'ev's use of Shakespeare in his search for organic types of the heroic, positive herowe, which was to become his major concern in the exposition of his "organic criticism, is treated as well.
A short digression on Grigor'ev's critics will be included so as to indicate other sources on which Grigor'ev drew, and which he read in the original, particularly works in English, German, French and Italian. The ultimate purpose of this brief chapter is to familiarize the reader with Grigor'ev's love for the theater, which induced him to translate several of Shakespeare's works as well as the works of other leading European playwrights.
Chapter Four--Apollon Grigor'ev as a Literary Critic--the most important chpter of this study, is devoted to his literary development. The following articles are discussed: "Russian Literature in 1851," "Russian Belletristic Literature in 1852," and "Ostrovskij's Comedies and Their Significance in Literature and On the Stage." Analysis of these three articles, generally recognized as the cornerstone on which Grigor'ev based his lesser-known "organic" criticism on which Grigor'ev's sgnificance as a literary critic rests. These articles are: "On truth and Sincerity in Art," "Art and Morality; New Reflections Regarding an Old Question," "A Critical Look at the Bases, Significance and Devices of the Contemporary Criticism of Art," "A View of Russian Literature Since Puskin's Death," "and "The Paradoxes of Organic Criticism," which is subtitled "An Organic View and Its Basic Principle."
These eight significant and related articles heve been selected in order to present the development of Grigor'ev's views on literature and art, their purpose and function in society and in the nation as a whole. Grigor'ev's gradual shifting from "historical" to "organic" criticism will be outlined. This will be followed by the presentation of his views and ideas in "organic"criticism; here the reader will learn not only of Grigor'ev's personal convictions and his credo in art and literature but also perceive the major trends and schools of that epoch. A brief exposition of the various interpretations of Puskin, Gogol', Lermontov, Turgenev, Ostrovskij, and a few other writers and poets will be discussed as viewed and interpreted by Grigor'ev and, on the other hand, by the then leading figure in litereary criticism, Vissarion Belinskij.
In order to put Grigor'ev into the context of the intellectual scene of his time, several approaches and interpretations of Grigor'ev's criticism and that of his opponents will be included. Furthermore, a brief history and the sources of the origins of "organic" criticism will be outlined as warranted by the primary and secondary sources used in this study.
Chapter Six--Grigor'ev as Journalist and Publicist--compements Chapter Two, and presents the nature and role of Pogodin's jornal Muscovite, and Grigor'ev's collaboration with it, together with other members of the so-called "Young Editors" ("Molodaja redakcija").
It aslo pays attention to Grigor'ev's cooperation with Dostoevskij's journals, Time and Epoch, and a brief account of his intentionto collaborate with the journal The Contemporary (Sovremennik).
The Conclusion will presentthe main features of Grigor'ev's character and some of his shortcomings as a writer and a critic, as conditioned by the difficulties inherent in hs personality. The reasons for the unpoparity of his criticism during his lifetime and down to the present will also be elucidated.
The author hopes that this study will lead to a better understanding of Grigor'ev as a man, and a literary critic--an unerstanding which Grigor'ev's insights into the inner working of literary works of art so richly deserves.
The dissertation considers V.I. Zhukovskii as one of the creators of Russian poetry of the "golden age," a founding father of Russian romanticism, and the greatest translator of his time.
The dissertation formulates and addresses five tasks: 1) to elaborate the criteria for the evaluation of artistic translation; 2) to reconstruct Zhukovskii’s “theoretical views” on translation; 3) to analyze his actual method and is historical evolution; 4) to reveal the roots and genealogy of Zhukovskii the translator on the basis of comparing it with practical and theoretical accomplishments of his Russian Predecessors; 5) to show the intrinsic ties of Zhukovskii’s achievements with romantic aesthetics. The basic method and core of the dissertation is a comparative analysis of original poetic texts (in English and German) and their poetic reconstruction by Zhukovskii (in Russian).
Zhukovskii synthesized two previously dominant trends in poetic translation - “free adaptation to Russian tastes” and “literal conveyance.” This synthesis became possible due to the romantic aesthetic which he acquainted the Russian reader with new achievements of Western European literature. They also significantly enriched the Russian poetic language.
Zukovskii the translator was most successful in his renderings of six Western poets: Thomas Gray, Robert Southey, Walter Scott, George Gordon Byron, Fridrich Schiller, and Wolfgang Goethe. Dealing with Gray, Zhukovskii elaborated a Russian version of the European genre of funeral elegy. Southey and Scott provided examples for the development of the Russian romantic ballad. Byron’s “Prisoner of Chillon” inspired Zhukovskii to create a Russian romantic lyrical epic poem. Schiller attracted his attention to medieval, chivalric and ancient imagery and themes, while Goethe suggested examples of new, pre-romantic lyrics.
Zhukovskii participated (from 1800 until 1850) in the four successive periods in the evolution of the Russian literary process: neo-classicism;;, sentimentalism, romanticism, and realism. His translations bear the influence of all these literary movements. Zhukovskii employed all three approaches to the originals, available and acceptable to him: 1) “free adaptation;” 2) preservation of the stylistic system of the original, though allowing some deviations form it; and 3) “precise translation.”
The first approach prevailed (although it did not exclude the others) in the early period of Zhukovskii’s creativity (1802-15); the second - in the middle period (1815-33); and the third - in the last period (1833-49). Thus, Zhukovskii’s translation palette cannot and should not be reduced to one particular method, strategy or principle.
The publication in 1976 of Valentin Rasputin’s novella Farewell to Matyora (Proshchanie s Materoi) was followed by heated discussion among Soviet literary critics. For the first time since he had won national renown approximately ten years earlier, Rasputin was subjected to a certain amount of negative commentary as well as praise, particularly because of questions raised about the ideological point of view informing the work, but also to some degree, because of the author’s handling of mythological and folkloric motives. One Soviet critic flatly states that “mythology and symbolism are not within the grasp of Rasputin’s talent.” Another critic finds Rasputin’s use of Folklore less objectionable, perhaps organic to the novella’s composition as a whole.
Throughout Rasputin’s works one encounters certain images and phenomena that cannot be completely explained on the basis of traditional Russian and even European cultural categories. These elements occur so frequently and, at times, assume such central importance that they cannot be simply glossed over as bits of exotica, perhaps provided local color for an otherwise recognizable Russian narrative. These often arcane images relate to what Rasputin would call the “spiritual world” (dukhovnyi mir of his fiction. This dimension of his works is at once related to Rasputin’s personal view-of-life and to the realm of Siberian mythology and folklore which is a unique blending of traditional Russian and Asiatic characteristics. Without understanding the origins and peculiarities of the Asiatic (or indigenous native) elements in Siberian lore, it is not possible to arrive at a correct interpretation of some of the key features of Rasutin’s literary world.
This study will concentrate on those aspects of Rasputin’s longer fictional works which reflect the Angara River basin and Lake Baikal area in Eastern Siberia where the author was born and raised. Besides his five novellas (povesti) -- Money for Maria (Den’gi dlia Marii), Borrowed Time (Poslednii srok), Live and Remember (Zhivi I pomni, Farewell to Matyora (Proshchanie s Materoi), and The Fire (Pozhar) - one short story, “The Old Woman” (Starukha), will be discussed because it contains a shamaness (shamanka).
The Irkutsk region where Rasputin has spent most of his life is populated not only by people of widely diverse origins, but most importantly, for our purposed, by representative of indigenous peoples such as Buriats, Tungus (or Evenks), and Iakuts. The mythological and folk element embodied in Rasputin’s works reflect the blending of the belief systems of these aboriginal peoples with imported Russian Culture, including Russian Orthodoxy, into a hybrid which shall be referred to as “Siberian culture.” The main purpose of this particular study will be to identify and to explain the artistic function of the non-Russian elements in the fabric of Valentin Rasputin’s longer fictional work.
The first chapter deals with Siberian shamanism per se as background necessary for an understanding of the following chapters. The following chapters concentrate on each of the most significant folkloric, traditional, and mythological phenomena in Rasputin’s major works. They are, in turn, chapter two, on old women (starukhi) in all of Rasputin’s novellas; chapter three, on the werewolf (oboroten’ in Live and Remember; chapter four, on the larch tree (listvennitsa) in Live and Remember and in Farewell to Matyora; chapter five, on the Master (Khoziain in Farewell to Matyora; and chapter six, on family relationships in all of Rusputin’s novellas. A brief final chapter summarizes the main conclusions reached in the dissertation.
Large numbers of Slavic written records are not found in the Slovak language terrritory until the 16th century. The largest group of these 16th century documents consists of administrative-legal texts (court records, town books, official letters, etc.) Some scholars investigating these documents claim that 16th century Slovak speakers continued the 14th -15th century practice of using closely related Czech as their written koine. These scholars hold that during the 16th century the appearance of Slovak features in such Czech texts is random and unsystematic. Others assert that the 16th century slovaks wrote in a language displaying distinct interdialectal Slovak norms (often termed "Cultural Slovak"). These scholars consider that, although based on or modeled after the Czech literary language (alongside Polish in the east), this language exhibits consistent use of distinctly Slovak features.
The present study undertakes a phonological investigation of a mid-16th century corpus of administrative-legal texts representing all four major Slovak dialect divisions (Moravian, West, Central and East Slovak). The reflexes of nine diacritic phonological developments are examined in the texts of the corpus to determine whether these texts exhibit interdialectal phonological norms and to ascertain the geographical scope and the linguistic basis of any attested interdialectal consistency.
The results of the investigation support the existence of a written interdialectal phonological norm in the West and Central Slovak texts. This norm appears to be more developed and stable in the West Slovak than in Central Slovak - perhaps illustrating regional variation within this "Cultural Slovak." The Moravian Slovak texts appear to make use of the written literary Czech phonological norm, while the East Slovak texts do not show consistent interdialectal distribution of reflexes for the majority of the investigated phonological developments.
The norm attested for West and Central Slovak seems to exhibit a mixed base of Czech and Slovak phonology. The exact degree to which each language system is responsible for the attested norm is uncertain, although it is reasonably clear that the literary Czech norm played a substantial role in the formation of a majority of the consistent phonological distribution patterns attested in the texts.
This study examines the art of Evgeny Popov (b. 1946). It focuses on his short stories and the novel The Soul of a Patriot, or Various Epistles to Ferfichkin (1983), thus discussing approximately twenty-five years of his writing career.
Although Popov has published his first story in 1962, it was only during the glasnost’ years that he became known to the general reader in the Soviet Union, and consequently developed into one of the most prominent contemporary authors in his country.
Among other things, the study discusses (1) the literary roots of Popov’s art (his indebtedness to Gogol, Zoshchenko, and Platonov, in particular), (2) his employment of contemporary Russian vernacular, (3) his subject matter, and (4) his views on his country’s and the Russian culture’s past and present.
Before writing the novel the Soul of a Patriot, Popov’s body of prose work consisted of short stories exclusively. Of the approximately 200 stories that he wrote during the period in question, about two dozen of the best and most representative were selected for a close discussion in this study. Two thirds of them were written during the 1960s-1970s and belong to what Popov has called “tragicomic” stories. The remaining stories emerged in the 1980s, i.e., during the “paraliterary” period in Popov’s work.
The introduction to the study discusses the poetics of the so-called “other” Russian prose, to which Popov belongs. Chapter One examines Popov’s “tragicomedy” as a closely interconnected and homogeneous body of texts. The stories are examined as Popov’s study of the contemporary language and the Soviet life during the period in which they were written. Chapters Two and Three focus on the “paraliterature”: the first discusses the short stories of the period, the second - the novel The Soul of a Patriot. The study ends with a brief conclusion, an alphabetical listing of Popov’s works, and a bibliography.
The present study aims to bring together under the auspices of a single, broad topic diverse approaches to the humanities that have been pursued in the Russian-speaking world over the course of this century. I have taken on this often daunting task in an attempt to identify and characterize a loosely unified movement which has coalesced over the past 20 years or so. I have endeavored to describe this trend as it has been represented by the several scholars I have interviewed and in the literature I have read. To my knowledge this is the only study of the movement to have been attempted in the United States, which may leave issues related to my own methodology and choice of terms open to question. I will try to anticipate some of these potential questions and discuss them briefly here.
I have elected to call the trend which I describe as an anglicization of its Russian name; thus, "culturology" is a direct equivalent off kult'urologiia. This option seemed preferable to that translation equivalent, such as "Cultural Studies," or even the more generic "culture studies," which have their own distinct meanings, bound up in the western context.
I also speak of a "culturological movement" and "culturological orientation," by which I mean to indicate that beyond the sphere of culturology per se, where the central premises of the approach have been debated and worked out, a number of related methods and ideas have been applied throughout the humanities. Many which have impact on the arts and sciences, or the "socio-cultural factors" which have impact on the arts and sciences, or the "socio-cultural context" in which these exist. On the basis of my research and conversations with scholars, I consider the assessment of these factors and contexts to also be a feature of what I refer to as culturology.
The term "post-structuralist" in the title of my project should be understood in a temporal, rather than a comparative sense. The development of structuralism was discontinuous and often considered equivalent to the structural practices now widely considered to be passe in the West. I use the term "post-structuralist" to refer to the time period of, roughly, the 1970s through the 1990s, without intending to underscore a definitive break with an earlier structuralist era. Similarly, the term "theory" cannot be considered precisely equivalent in East and West, even as regards theories of literature. A preliminary comparison of approaches to the theory of culture appears in the conclusion to this study.
In an effort to demonstrate interconnections among several trends of thought over the course of a tempestuous century, one must address voluminous quantities of detail before arriving at even a modest level of generalization. In this process I have availed myself fully of the more or less accepted (but nonetheless imperfect) practice of speaking about "schools" and "movements" as if they were unified entities, largely disregarding significant divergences among the individual practitioners and minimizing the importance of changes over time. Thus, for example, I regard the early Victor Shklovsky and the late Iury Tynianov as equal representatives of Russian Formalism; the early Vladimir Toporov and the late Iury Lotman as equal representatives of Soviet semiotics. This approach aims to emphasize commonalties and facilitate the identification of general patterns. At the same time, I recognize that it is equally valid for other purposes to emphasize the diversity and elaboration of detail, from which standpoint unified schools and movements may appear, at best, as schematic compromises with reality.
My aim is to provide an introduction to the culturological movement and its recent history, and so I have not attempted to discuss any of the individual scholars, much less individual works, definitively. Rather I have selected points for discussion which reveal the broad outlines of the movement.
Since I discuss Mikhail Bakhtin as one of the key predecessors of culturology, the sticky problem of disputed texts inevitably arises. I have attempted to resolve this issue on an individual basis for each of the disputed works I cite. I have chosen to follow the example set by Albert Wehrle, editor and translator of the English edition of The Formal Method in Literary Scholarship, in designing Pavel Medvedev along with Bakhtin as an author of his work. In recognition of both men's contributions to its creation and publication. This seems appropriate in light of the fact that Medvedev's heirs continue to insist upon his authorial role. The Voloshinov texts - Marxism and the Philosophy of Language, Freudianism and "Discourse in Life and Art"-are not so hotly disputed, inasmuch as Voloshinov's wife has disavowed his authorship entirely. Therefore, I have decided to refer to these works simply as Bakhtin's, even though the English translations bear Voloshinov's name. Naturally in quoting scholars who attribute these works to Voloshinov, I have preserved their use of his name.
Wherever possible, I have relied on existing translations, and I identify the translator in the first reference to each such work. In these references titles are given in translation. Wherever a title is cited in Russian, all translations from the work are my own.
Throughout this study I have employed the transliteration system used by the Library of Congress, omitting diacritical marks. An exception to this principle is my preference for the more popular system of transliterating personal and family names. For example, I have used Georgy rather than Georgii and Uspensky rather than Uspenskii. A potential for confusion arises in a few instances in which I have cited western scholars who use the international linguistic system of transliteration, with the result that in the midst of my discussion of Iury Lotman, a quotation may suddenly refer to Jurij Lotman. Have thought best to tolerate such minor discrepancies rather than give up a popular and readable style of transliteration for a more arcane one, which presents difficulties for the general reader whom I hopefully envision.
Using Mikhail Zagoskin’s An Evening on the Khopyor as a point of departure, this work disentangles the fantastic tale from other tale types popular during the Romantic period. Discussions of the gothic tale, the military tale, folkloric and society tales, as well as the kuenstlernovelle, show that the fantastic tale intersects thematically with all of these tale types, but is distinguished from them by the desire to preserve the reader’s disbelief in the ostensibly supernatural events being described. Arguing that the fantastic tale is structured as a game of wits between author and reader, a detailed discussion of Zagoskin’s cycle of tales, interlaced with examples from other authors, highlights the subversive role that narrative framing and unreliable character-narrators play in creating this hesitation. Defended with honors 2005.
The fact that languages can be subdivided into written and spoken components and that language varies according to geography and social class among other factors is a widely accepted principle of contemporary linguistic theory. However, the situation of modern day Czech is a special case in this regard.
In elaborating Czech grammars, Czech linguists speak of four language levels, that of the Literary Czech, Colloquial Czech, Common Czech and Territorial dialects. Basically speaking, Literary Czech for reasons of historical circumstance is an artificial code not reflecting the spoken speech of a single area in Czechoslovakia. Colloquial Czech is considered to be the spoken form of Literary Czech, and Common Czech is the inter-dialect based on the Central Bohemian dialect, which includes the capital Prague. Even more unusual than the degree of variance between written and spoken language in Bohemia, however, is the frequency and extent of the use of the spoken language variants in preference to the literary language. As Henry Kucera points out "it is not the fact that popular variants, or non-literary forms occur in conversational Czech, but rather the frequency in which they occur in the utterances of the vast majority of the speakers; not only in vocabulary or syntax, but also the morphology and phonological system."
The above mentioned situation, one in which the Literary language burdened by archaisms was an artificial code, and the popular variants dominated in spoken speech was one that has existed from the time of Dobrovsky right on up to the founding of the Prague Linguistic Circle (henceforth PLC). It was this situation that was one of the prime factors in the decision of the PLC to invoke a program of language cultivation; that is, a program of language planning with its goal of educating the people to such an extent and in such a way that the spoken form of the Literary language, the so-called Colloquial form, would make inroads into the spoken language, and even ultimately replace Common Czech as the favorite medium for spoken communication. The claim that there was such a language level as Colloquial Czech did not begin with the PLC, however. In 1902 in his Pravidla (Czech Orthography), Gebauer cited certain variants as being Colloquial Czech. He did not go into a lengthy explanation of what Colloquial Czech was or how it related in general to orthography, he merely let the examples stand for themselves. Since that time, the definition of Colloquial Czech has remained a somewhat hazy one. Even the Prague Linguistic Circle with its attention to detail in descriptive linguistics has not really dealt with this level of the language in a definitive way. Since the Circle was formed in 1929, certain broad statements have sufficed almost as given for Colloquial Czech. It has been sufficient to simply describe Colloquial Czech as being 'Literary Czech minus the archaisms' or as the 'spoken form of the Literary Language.' To some extent, it is likely that the PLC has considered such definitions sufficient for Colloquial Czech, because although they admit that it is a distinct level of the Czech language, in reality they consider it to be so closely tied to Literary Czech that the great abundance of time and effort spent in describing and defining Literary Czech has adequately described and defined Colloquial Czech as well.
As recent as 1966, however, Havranek stated the widespread use of Colloquial Czech that should have been attained at the expense of Common Czech if all was well with Colloquial Czech within the PLC model of language, has not been attained. Given the fact that the PLC has given a very important role to Colloquial Czech viewing it as a source for the spontaneous norm, as a bridge between Spoken/Common Czech and Literary Czech and as a prime ingredient in the eventual triumph of Literary Czech over the dialects and the inter-dialects such as Common Czech, it seems that Colloquial Czech needs to be considered in its own right. It needs to be considered in terms of its proper function and its phonological, syntactic, lexical and morphological content. Only when this has been done will it be possible to have an accurate picture of why Colloquial Czech is not function within the PLC model the way Circle predicted it would.
This dissertation therefore will first derive a definition of Colloquial Czech in terms of a synthesis of PLC statements, then consider in detail the linguistic content of Colloquial Czech in comparison with Common Czech and Literary Czech, and then tracing the derived definition and content analyze the current state of Colloquial Czech within the model of today's Czech by analyzing the Colloquial items in the dictionary, and also through an analysis of usage in live speech.
Most studies of the prose of lurii V. Trifonov (1925-81) have focused on either the social, paychological, or historical context in which his works originated. In some recent studies, Trifonov scholars have also suggested links between his views and Russian speculative thought of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries i.e., Aleksandr I. Herzen (1812-70), Vladimir S. Soloviev (1835-1900) and Nikolai A. Berdiaev (1874-1948). However, the metaphysical dimension of Trifonov's prose remains essentially unexplored.
In my analysis of Trifonov's cycle of Moscow Stories (1969-76), I attemp to fill a large gap in Trifonov criticism by exploring the metaphysical, or "universal," problems that dominate his prose. In my dissertation I argue that Trifonov's Weltanschauung, as reflected in his artistic vision and verbal art, is essentially a Christian one. I also maintain that Trifonov participates in the Russian cultural tradidtion of employing a work of narrative fiction as a vehicle for philosophical discourse. Trifonov emerges from this analysis as an important participant in the dialogue between religious and secular world views, and he clarly sides with those Russian thinkers who promote Christian values over athiestic ones.
In the Moscow Stories, Trifonov concentrates on the role played by the intelligentsia in this tratiditional Russian dialogue between religion and secularism. In this interpretation, I take issue with those critics who believe that Trifonov's social criticism is limited merely to a truthful depiction of Stalinist and post-Stalinist totalitarian society. Instead, I argue that Trifonov in fact delves much deeper into Russian clutural history, and holds as ultimately responsible for the national moral decline not Stalinism, but the intelligentsia, Trifonov invokes Fyodor M. Dostoevsky's (1821-81) condemnation of Russian positivism. Even more important, however, is the fact that Trifonov alludes also to the metaphysical aspects of Dostoevsky's Christian philosophy which were most discouraged by official Soviet ideology.
Trifonov embraces not only Dostoevsky's ideas, but also his poetics, and cleverly elaborates on Dostoevsky's polyphonic narrative style and characterization. Trifonov also creatively employs the older writer's techiniques of parody and carnivalization, and adopts his use of archetypal devices, including the use of images of saints and devils. Trifonov's treatment of the archetypal pattern of parricide and his use of the recurrent motifs of death and resurrection indicate that he was also influenced by the writings of Nikolai F. Fedorov (1828-1903). In addition to his references to these Russian philosophers, I also explore Trifonov's allusions to other classic Russian authors, including Aleksandr S. Pushkin (1799-1837), Mikhail lu. Lermontov (1814-41), Ivan S. Turgenev (1818-83), Afanasy A. Fet (1820-92), Anton P. Chekhov (1860-1904), Aleksandr A. Blok (1880-1921), Boris L. Pasternak (1890-1960) and Mikhail A. Bulgakov (1891-1940).
The dissertation consists of an introduction, three chapters, and a conclusion. The introduction traces the history of the Russian clutural dialogue betwen religious and atheistic world views. Chapter One, Life, Death and Immortality: Plot, Invariant Motifs, and Archefabula,"considers the ideological funcitons of major componenets of Trifonov's plots: beginnings and endings, recurrent motifs, and archefabula. Chapter Two, "Path to Immortality and Path to Death: The Saint and the Devil Archetypes," examines the system of characters. This discussion concentareates on the idelogical functions of the archetypal paradigm of saint and devil. Chapter Three, "Murder or Resurrection? The Archetypal Pattern of Parricide and the Idea of Patrification," describes Trifonov's use of the archetypal pattern of parricide in his exploration of the cultural role of the Russian intelligentsia. The conclusion places Trifonov and his model of turn-of-the-century religious thought in the context of Soviet literature.
The purpose of this dissertation is to show the importance that irony played in the cultural and literary life of Russia in the 1960s-1970s, a time of shattered dreams and failed hopes. Faith in a better future, revived by a shortlived "thaw" in Stalinism, was finally gone and irony took the place of faith. In "What Is Socialist Realism" ("Cto takoe socialisticeskij realizm") Andrej Sinjavskij gives us a useful definition: "Irony (. . .) is the laughter of a superflous man at himself and at everything that is sacred in the world. (. . .) Irony is an unfailing compainion of the lack of fainth and doubt."
In the first chapter a summary discussion of different kinds of irony is given. For the sake of convenience the various forms of irony are subdivided into three groups: stylistic irony, structural irony and Weltanschauung irony.
The second chapter treats the concept of irony as developed in Russian literary criticism. The insufficiency of scholarship in this area is shown. Except for the symbolists, the works of Russian literary critics concentrate on stylistic and structural irony.
The third chapter treats manifestations of the Weltanschauung irony in the literature of the 1960s-1970s. For cultural, political, literary and other reasons, Estonian and Siberian literatures become focal points Weltanschauung irony. Works by Suksin, Zalygin, Popov, Guscin, Erofeev, Vetemaa, Valton, Kallas, Kruusvall are analyzed.
In the fourth chapter the presence of irony in Russian culture of the 1960s-1970s is examined. The chapter is divided into three parts: (1) ironic motifs in the Georgian film are analyzed; (2) the songs--ballads of the "bards" and their ironic undercurrents are discussed, in particular the works of Galic, Okudzava and Vysockij; (3) the genre of "estradnyj monolog: and the works of Mixail Zvaneckij in particular are examined; (4) the development of humorous forms in Russian media and culture is outlined.
The fifth chapter deals with a unique phenomenon in both the literary and cultureal life of Russia of the 1960s-1970s--the appearance of "Ironic prose," a particular subgenre of the humorous short story. The stories began to appear in the second half of the 1960s in the humor pages of Literaturnaja gazeta, Literaturnaja Rossija, the magazines Junost', Avrora, Teatr, Sovetskijekran, Studenceskij meridian and others. The origin of the genre, its thematic scope, ironic character, formal peculiarities and reasons for its decline in the endof the 1970s are discussed. The stories analayzed in the fifth chapter are supplied in the appendix to the dissertation.
The dissertation does not strive to embrace manifestations of irony in all aspects of literary culture in the Soviet Union of the 1960s-1970s; most notably it does not touch on drama--a field so rich in possibilities for the critic of irony as to constitute a separate study in itself. The discussion of irony in culture and literature (Chapters 3 and 4) are intended to serve as background for the in-depth treatment of irony in the short stories discussed in Chapter 5.
