Russian literature
Mythopoetic textual interpretation as a probable solution to adecuate definition of literature appears in russian philology within the 70-s on the crossroads of a number of paradigms of humanities. Sharing the essential options of poststructuralism, Mythopoetical criticism goes to make use of virtually some methodological orientations of latest linguistics, semiotics and the examine of culture. This approach to textual content helps to explain the extent of deep semantics which stays inaccesible for traditional literary history. Nevertheless, some traits of this methodology appear to be strange and doubtful, because it principally chooses innovative approach of interpretation. That’s why Mythopoetical criticism turned very fruitful for a lot of scholars of russian literature of their intentions to depart the obsolete schemes of analysis. The famous representatives of Mythopoetics are both within the Western scholarship (for example, Erzy Faryno, Wolf Schmid, Aage Hansen-Love, Igor Smirnov, Mikhail Weiskopf) and in the Russian (equivalent to Vladimir Toporov as a predecessor of the movement and several other scholars of youngest generation – Goncharov family, Tupa & so on). In my view it’s necessary to understand the entire circle of Mythopoetical questions in historical, typological and sensible aspect. It is a widespread function of the 1′st part.
Althoguh this trend of criticism is rich of different sensible analyses of singular texts, there is no any trace on a strict theoretical conception, which might kind the premise of all. In this sense there might be useful to examine the history of technique’s development, as a result of it was extremely eclective from the very beginning. The first part of my work is devoted to the historical survey of methodology and its evolution.
The second half presents an attempt of practical adaptation of theoretical constructions to the concrete material. For this process I’ve chosen the material of Soviet Literature in the twenties and early thirties. Regularity of my choise is accounted for very particular sort of conciousness in early Soviet culture which revived some archaical models in fashionable context very actively. As it’s recognized, the poetry of this era is more rare object of literary research
against the so-called Socialist Realism of the 30 – 40-s. Within the second part of dissertation I decide to look at a lowest, or, speaking extra exactly, fundamental mythopoetical degree of the texts together with key-motives and common structures of plot.
Let me enumerate my objects of interpretation. There are proletarian poetry of the 20-s and fragmentary of the 30-s; the lengthy poem “The Land of Muravia” by Alexander Tvardovsky; short stories by Andrei Platonov and the novel-in-verse “PUSHTORG” by llya Selvinsky. I attempted to organize this material typologically in order to envelop all primary spheres where mythopoetical parts are function. The purpose of my examine is to emphasise the fundamental mythopoetical extracts in Soviet Literature of the talked about interval, to search out semantic universals similar to archaic models.
Further, I would prefer to mark out some derivates of probably the most widespread state of affairs in conventional society – I mean the ritual of passage from one world to another displayed in the many encoding structures. In present work there are three incarnations of this plot – specifically vegetative, animalistic, industrial. This mythological situation units out instead of Revolution, the central event of the epoch and its turning point. Early Soviet poets settle for and describe Revolution as a momentary destruction of the old world and rapid creation of the new. That is why the models of mythological consciousness, especially, cosmogonical plots, turn into actual in the process of writing.
Source: http://proletcult.narod.ru/
You can to make translation this page with free translation software
No tags for this post.