Symbol and allegory as types of artistic figurativeness. Historical-functional study of literature

Thesis

Sinyak, Elena Valerievna

Academic degree:

Candidate of Philology

Place of defense of the dissertation:

VAK specialty code:

Speciality:

Russian literature

Number of pages:

2. Chapter 1. The problem of the historical-functional study of a literary work

3. Chapter 2. The poem by N.V. Gogol "Dead Souls" in the estimates of pre-revolutionary literary scholars

4. Chapter 3. Poem by N.V. Gogol "Dead Souls" in the assessments of Soviet literary critics

5. Chapter 4. The poem "Dead Souls" in modern literary criticism

Introduction to the thesis (part of the abstract) On the topic "N.V. Gogol's poem "Dead Souls" in historical and functional coverage"

N.V. Gogol is known to everyone as the author of Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka, The Inspector General and other wonderful works, as a brilliant satirist, but he would never have taken the place that he occupies among Russian writers, if not for the poem Dead Souls. First conceived as funny joke"Dead Souls" became the work of the writer's whole life, and yet the first and part of the second volume that have come down to us is only a "porch" to the grandiose plan of the "palace" of the whole poem. By creating them, the author would like to own confession to destroy all his previous creations. Obviously, because only "Dead Souls" can show him as such a writer, as he thought to himself.

Biography of N.V. Gogol was the subject of research for many literary scholars and scientists, but even today it does not fully reflect the life of the writer. Almost all researchers agree that the author of the poem "Dead Souls" was a rather secretive person who was frank with people only as much as he considered necessary. One of the closest friends of the writer, Sergei Timofeevich Aksakov, says about him: “Very few knew Gogol as a person. Even with his friends he was not quite, or rather, always frank. In a word, no one knew Gogol completely. Some of his friends and acquaintances, of course, knew him well; but they knew, so to speak, in parts. Obviously, only the combination of this knowledge can make up a whole, complete knowledge and definition of Gogol ”(3, 204). These words of Aksakov most fully characterize the huge number of works about N.V. Gogol and his poem "Dead Souls" in particular, in which each of the authors defends his point of view, based on certain facts from the life of the writer or his words, and each of the researchers is right in his own way.

Work on the first volume of "Dead Souls" was started by Gogol back in 1835 in St. Petersburg, and even then the first chapters of the poem made an impression on A. S. Pushkin. The writer began to continue work on the poem already abroad. Here is what he writes to Zhukovsky: “Autumn in Vevey has finally come beautiful, almost summer. It became warm in my room, and I set about Dead Souls, which I started in Petersburg. This will be my first decent thing, a thing that will bear my name ”(27, 173).

Gogol always complained about his health, saying that he was not built like other people. He traveled a lot, because. moving and changing environments did him good. While in Paris, Gogol writes to Zhukovsky: “The “Dead” (“Souls”) flow alive. And it completely seems to me that I am in Russia: before me everything is ours, our landowners, our officials, our officers, our peasants, our huts, - in a word, all Orthodox Rus'." (27, 173). This letter is dated November 12, 1836, and mystical notes are already slipping in it, which will subsequently sound stronger and stronger: “Someone invisible is writing in front of me with a mighty rod.” In 1837, in Rome, Gogol was surprised by the news of Pushkin's death. Gogol writes: “My life, my highest pleasure died with him (with Pushkin). I did nothing, I did not write anything without his advice. Everything that is good in me, I owe it all to him. And my present work is its creation” (27,178).

Financial position of N.V. Gogol abroad left much to be desired: he was constantly forced to seek funds for himself from friends, in addition, his state of health worsened: “... I only feel worse: lightness in my pockets and heaviness in my stomach” (27, 193). In general, according to many researchers, Gogol's illness and his work, in particular the creation of "Dead Souls", were in the closest relationship. The nature of the writer's illness is not clear, but even at that time, doctors believed that its root was based in " severe nervous disorder”, to the same opinion come later in their works I.D. Ermakov and V.F. Chizh. On the one hand, the illness forced Nikolai Gogol to work harder; in his letters, the writer quite often speaks of his concern that he would not have enough time to finish his work. On the other hand, the disease stopped all his undertakings, forced him to constantly move from place to place.

In September 1839 Gogol returned to Russia. In the winter of the same year, the writer reads the first four chapters from the poem "Dead Souls", which were a great success: "The general laughter did not impress Gogol, but the expression of unfeigned delight, which was visible on all faces at the end of the reading, touched him. He was pleased” (27, 221). In the spring of 1840, Gogol read the fifth and sixth chapters of the poem to his close friends, which met with rave reviews from listeners.

In the summer of 1840, the writer again travels abroad. While in Rome, he is working on a poem: “... I am engaged in crossings, straightenings and even the continuation of Dead Souls” (27, 248). However, as before, after an attack of illness, mystical moods grow in him. At this time, Gogol's financial situation worsens again, he goes into debt, hoping to soon print the poem "Dead Souls" and return the money. Together with P.V. Annenkov, the author cleanly rewrites the poem. The writer's health never returns to normal abroad, and he returns to Russia in the autumn of 1841, having completed work on the first volume of the poem.

In Moscow, the poem does not pass censorship, so Gogol sends it to St. Petersburg. This event leads to an exacerbation of the writer's illness, because. he connects all his hopes for the future precisely with the seal of “Dead Souls”: “I was sick, very sick, and still sick internally. My illness is expressed by such terrible attacks, which have never happened to me before” (27, 278). The ill state of the writer also affects relationships with friends: “. Pogodin began to complain strongly about Gogol: about his capriciousness, secrecy, insincerity, even lies, coldness and inattention to the owners, i.e. to him, to his wife. (27, 280). S.T. Aksakov cites other cases of oddities in Gogol's behavior, which cannot be explained by anything other than illness.

The censorship removed Kopeikin from the poem, which, according to Gogol, was a great loss for him that cannot be made up, so the author decides to redo the story. After the poem does not meet obstacles from censorship and is given to the press. The first volume of Dead Souls was published in 1842. Gogol writes a continuation of the poem for the rest of his life.

Poem N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls" belongs to the greatest works Russian literature. Creativity N.V. Many studies have been devoted to Gogol and his poem in particular, considerable experience has been accumulated, diverse in interpretation and in need of reflection and study.

And at present, the work of N.V. Gogol is the subject of research. The authors of dissertations in the specialty of Russian literature refer to the individual works of the writer and to his entire work as a whole. There are also studies of a comparative nature, such as, for example, a dissertation for the degree of candidate of philological sciences Gorskikh N.A. “N.V. Gogol and F. Sologub: the poetics of the material world "(60) or the work of Bakshi N.A. "The hero is a" eccentric" in Austrian and Russian literature of the 19th century (Grillparzer, Gogol, Leskov, Rosegger)" (7). Creativity N.V. Gogol studies not only literary criticism. So, for example, the dissertation research of Lyalina A.V. “The evolution of the attitude of students to the work of N.V. Gogol in the School Course of Literature” (111) was completed at the Department of Methods of Teaching the Russian Language and Literature of the Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Herzen. Shcheglovoy L.V. written dissertation for the degree of doctor philosophical sciences"Problems of self-knowledge and cultural identity in Russian philosophy of the 30s - 40s of the XIX century (P.Ya. Chaadaev and N.V. Gogol)" (200).

To date, a huge amount of material has been accumulated about the poem "Dead Souls". Throughout the existence of the poem, the interest of literary critics in it has not weakened, and recently it has intensified even more, many interesting and original books have been published. Gogol left behind many mysteries to which no answers have yet been found: what is the role of illness in his work, his attitude to religion, the content and burning of the second volume of the poem. This is the reason for the constant interest of scientists in the writer's work, because there is still no study that would fully and comprehensively cover the poem "Dead Souls". Despite the differences in the views of researchers from Gogol's contemporaries to the Soviet era, two main principles can be distinguished.

Most of Gogol's contemporaries represented the author of the poem "Dead Souls" as a satirist, an accuser of social and human vices. The works of researchers of this era are very interesting and deep, for example, the works of V. G. Belinsky, on which many scientists rely. The perception of Gogol as a satirist writer dominated not only among the contemporaries of the author of the poem, it was adhered to after many generations of researchers, but in Soviet time this point of view was considered the only correct one. Literary critics considered and explained the artistic features of the poem, the system of images, the arrangement of characters, artistic techniques from this position. Gogol as a thinker, in the broadest sense of the word, the researchers did not recognize. The works of the author, written after the poem "Dead Souls", were forgotten, and only by the beginning of the twentieth century, the image of N.V. Gogol as a religious thinker, citizen, publicist, was somehow restored.

Scholars of the first quarter of the twentieth century argued about the nature and motives of Gogol's work. At this time, the writer is considered as a mystic, a religious fanatic, a person with a painful psyche. Researchers of this period claim that the creations of N.V. Gogol is the fruit of his sick imagination and illusions. The world of characters and images is beginning to be judged as not real, but invented by the writer himself, a fantastic and irrational mirage. But in this case, why are the images of the poem so real that they seem to come to life? Many researchers of this period talk about the magic of Gogol's images, which fascinate, like some kind of witchcraft power; after all, even the censor Nikitenko was so carried away by the poem that he first acted as a reader, and then studied it again as a censor. Among the studies of the beginning of the 20th century, however, there are very interesting works, for example, by Andrei Bely, whose theory of fictions is recognized by many literary critics our time.

Modern researchers take a different approach to the study of the poem "Dead Souls". Without denying Gogol the satirist, they study the author of the poem as a thinker, as a writer with a very complex and often contradictory artistic world. Literary critics first of all talk about the diversity of the poem and believe that this work combines philosophical, moral, satirical, social aspects. If at the same time any aspect is made dominant, then a complete analysis will not work. In the poem "Dead Souls" everything is in the liveliest connection and harmony.

The researchers of our time, who are also far from a consensus, are trying to consider the deep, not lying on the surface, properties of the poem. Currently, scientists are beginning to analyze the works of N.V. Gogol, written after the poem "Dead Souls", and do not consider them only as the fruit of the writer's creative crisis. This is the reason for the appearance in modern literary criticism many works analyzing various aspects of the writer's work, and unflagging interest in the poem "Dead Souls". Researchers see in Gogol not only a satirist, but also a religious thinker who is familiar with the works of prominent philosophers and religious figures. So many questions and problems are raised in the poem that even at present this work cannot be comprehended to the end.

Poem N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls" as a work of genius cannot be understood unambiguously. This was the mistake of the predecessors, who tried to find the relationship between the poem and the social situation or the state of mind of the writer, only the superficial aspects of the poem were considered. In the process of working on the poem, the author, by his own admission, comes to Christ, to those eternal, unshakable principles and foundations of human life, which, according to the writer, are undeservedly forgotten and obscured by new philosophical teachings. It is in the Bible that Gogol draws spiritual strength, he is convinced that everything that happens in life can be found in this book, and he asks his friends to read the Bible more often.

In the poem "Dead Souls" Gogol raises such deep questions of being, the title already speaks of this, like life and death, spiritual life and life without spirit. The author touched on eternal questions and eternal topics that do not depend on the momentary situation in politics and society, the key to understanding which the writer left in "" and " Author's confession". Until now, this key has not been found, and there were only attempts to find the solution to the "Dead Souls", so the study of the poem today is a wide field of activity for scientists. Modern researchers have taken a big step towards unraveling the secrets of the poem, many more generations of literary critics will find new aspects, interest in Gogol's work will not wane.

For a century and a half, the poem "Dead Souls" has been discovered by new generations of readers and literary critics. Each era gives its own interpretation of the ideas and issues raised in the poem. This makes it possible to consider this work from the point of view of the historical-functional approach.

One of the aspects of this approach is to consider the dynamics of opinions from the moment of writing the work to the moment of research and disclosure of the modern sound of the poem. There is another task of the historical-functional approach - the study of the peculiarities of the perception of a work by a particular reader's environment.

One of the first scientists involved in the historical-functional approach in Russian literature was Academician M.B. Khrapchenko, who expressed the idea of ​​considering the reader's interpretation as a task literary criticism. The theoretical base, the main tasks of the method were formulated by Professor, Doctor of Philology L.P. Egorova at work Functional Literature Study”, section of the book “Problems of the functional study of literature. Classical Literature and Modernity” (152, 16-47). However, the idea of ​​the method was not further developed, and it was unfairly forgotten. At present, interest in the historical-functional approach is growing, as modern literary scholars are rethinking the entire classical heritage, in particular N.V. Gogol's poem "Dead Souls". Only this method has an apparatus that makes it possible to consider and explain the dynamics of opinions, starting with Gogol's contemporaries and ending with the literary critics of our time.

Working on the historical-functional approach, Soviet scientists paid much attention to the problem of interpretation. There are two fundamentally different points of view on understanding the essence of a literary work.

One of them says that initially the work does not represent a value, but is filled with meaning when read. given text a reader who, on an equal footing with the writer, participates in creativity. Supporters of this point of view believe that literary images are abstract and exist only in the mind of the reader, who subjectively interprets them depending on their cultural, aesthetic and other views.

Another point of view assumes that a literary work is not constructed in the mind of the reader, but is interpreted, and it cannot be considered, detached from reality (past or present). A literary work is valuable in itself, because carries a charge of the ideas of the writer, who reveals his spiritual world and conveys the moral and social ideas of his time, and the reader can already interpret them in accordance with his worldview.

From this point of view, the poem "Dead Souls" is the richest material for research. The images of the poem are far from being an “empty vessel”, which Gogol calls for readers to fill, but are vitally real, although, of course, many details of life and everyday life are left in the past. They can be interpreted in accordance with our modernity, for example, the image of Chichikov, a clever and assertive businessman, is of particular relevance. The images of the poem are so real that the reader encounters them practically every day, but at the same time, these images and details have changed: instead of “dead souls”, other goods are now in use, officials serve in other institutions.

The social structure of society has changed technical progress introduced a lot of new things into everyday life, the consciousness of people has changed, and the understanding of the images of the poem has changed accordingly. Modernity has made adjustments to the nature of the interpretation of the content of the work of N.V. Gogol. Literary critics distinguish several levels in it: social, aesthetic, spiritual. Our contemporaries I.A. Vinogradov, V.A. Voropaev, S.A. Pavlinov highlight the spiritual and philosophical aspects of the poem.

The poem "Dead Souls" itself, as a work of genius, lives in time, but time affects the work, making its own adjustments to its interpretation, depending on social and historical events, the poem is interpreted differently, and indeed all of Gogol's work as a whole. Each generation of scientists finds exactly what they want to see and what reflects their ideas, so there will not and cannot be an unambiguous and single interpretation"Dead Souls". Based on more or less weighty arguments, one can only express an opinion that reflects one of the many aspects of the poem. Each era focuses on some semantic level: the writer's contemporaries and scientists of the Soviet period focused on satire and social content, literary critics of the first quarter of the twentieth century - on the religiosity and mysticism of the writer, our contemporaries - on spiritual sense poems.

Such various interpretations are possible within the framework of the historical-functional study of literature, for which the theory of interpretation is one of the most important components. The historical-functional approach allows the opinions of, for example, Vasily Rozanov and Vladimir Voropaev to coexist simultaneously: from the point of view of the first, Gogol is almost an antichrist, and from the point of view of the second, a martyr. All researchers express only their own rather subjective point of view, and the historical-functional approach accommodates everything, since it studies the life of a literary work in different eras.

A work of art is revealed to readers gradually, the interpretation of a literary text changes over time. Each era interprets the text in its own way, and any, even the most daring interpretation, enriches knowledge about the work, and the more interpretations are analyzed, the closer the comprehension of the meaning of the work.

All of the above allows you to determine the goals and objectives of the study. The objectives of this study are, on the one hand, to study the possibilities of historical and functional analysis of literature, and on the other hand, a new look at the work of N.V. Gogol and the poem "Dead Souls" in particular. The choice of the poem "Dead Souls" is not accidental, because. in this case, another goal is pursued - to make a feasible contribution to the further study of N.V. Gogol. Achieving the set goals requires solving a number of tasks:

To study the theoretical foundations of the historical-functional approach to understanding literature, to identify its capabilities and scope, as well as its advantages over other methods of analysis literary works;

Consider the possibilities of applying the method on the text of the poem by N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls", to analyze the studies on "Dead Souls" accumulated since the appearance of the poem, because within the framework of the historical-functional approach, this material, like the poem itself, becomes the subject of study;

Use in the work the theoretical apparatus of the historical-functional method in order to identify the possibilities of the method for literary criticism in general and Gogol studies in particular;

Summarize the results.

Research material. The tasks set required the study of an extensive literary material. Work analysis, dedicated to creativity N.V. Gogol and the poem "Dead Souls" in particular, allows us to show the effectiveness of the historical and functional study of a literary work.

The methodological and theoretical basis of the dissertation are the provisions of the leading Russian literary critics, among them the works of M.M. Bakhtin, L.P. Egorova, D.S. Likhacheva, N.V. Osmakova, M.B. Khrapchenko, as well as the latest achievements in the field of hermeneutics as a science of understanding texts, presented in the works of H.-G. Gadamer and P. Ricoeur.

A hermeneutic approach to the problem of understanding texts and, accordingly, a historical-functional approach to the study of literary works has been carried out.

The scientific novelty of the work is due to the consideration of the poem by N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls" using the historical-functional method, which implies a number of distinctive features:

Allows the researcher to avoid a one-sided view of the work;

The object under study becomes more complicated, because in addition to the text of a literary work, works devoted to its study also play this role;

It becomes possible to consider how the text functioned at one time or another, to trace the dynamics of the reader's interpretation;

Brings the interpreter to more high level perception of a literary work, in this case the poem "Dead Souls";

Does not limit the literary critic to the rigid framework of a particular method, because the process of interpretation is endless.

The practical significance of the dissertation research lies in the possibility of using a multilateral approach to the perception of the poem by N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls" and the writer's work in general, testing on a concrete example the rather abstract ideas of historical-functional analysis and the possibility of applying the historical-functional approach to the work of other writers. Work structure:

1. Introduction

Dissertation conclusion on the topic "Russian literature", Sinyak, Elena Valerievna

Conclusion

In this paper, some problems related to the perception of N.V. Gogol and his poem "Dead Souls". The author of this work used a historical-functional approach to the study of literature to solve the set tasks. Let us consider sequentially how this work was carried out and what results were obtained, as well as what practical value research results.

Poem N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls" has been analyzed for almost one hundred and fifty years, but it is still of interest to researchers, since none of the works can claim to be complete. How can this be explained? According to one of the most authoritative foreign researchers of Russian literature, Karl R. Proffer, this comes from the fact that the poem lends itself to interpretation and is focused on almost all categories of readers (153, 18). Indeed, since its publication, the poem has been analyzed a huge number of times, but each of the studies, nevertheless, is unique. Often at different times, and at the same time, diametrically opposed points of view were expressed, the authors of which provided sufficient arguments to believe them.

How can judgments exist simultaneously, for example, V.G. Belinsky and V.Ya. Bryusova, N.G. Chernyshevsky and N. Kotlyarevsky? This can only be within the framework of the historical-functional approach to literature. This approach is interesting in that it allows you to accommodate almost all reasonable interpretations of a literary work, because considers the functioning of the work, i.e. its impact on the reader and his reaction to the work. Although the historical-functional approach appeared in the Soviet literary criticism, now enriched him with the theory of interpretation (Paul Ricoeur) and theoretical basis on modern philosophical thought (H.-G. Gadamer).

The historical-functional approach presents the researcher with opportunities that, for example, the historical-genetic approach to the study of literary works or the comparative historical analysis of a literary work, are deprived of. is a logical extension of these approaches. Exploring the poem by N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls", many literary critics tried to find the key to its solution in the biography of the writer, contemporary to him social order, psychoanalysis of the personality of the writer, but in this way the problem is illuminated only from any one point of view. The analysis of "Dead Souls" requires an integrated approach that will incorporate all points of view on this work. But the historical-functional approach does not end there, either. after some time, a new interpretation of the poem will appear, which will enrich the existing ones with new views.

Not all works should be analyzed using the historical-functional approach, because one of essential conditions that make it possible to use it is the time distance of researchers from the time of creation of the work. Attempts to consider, with the help of a historical-functional analysis, a work contemporary to us will not be successful, because the result will simply be one of the possible interpretations of this work. For the full-scale application of the historical-functional approach, a literary work passes the test of time, however, some works are analyzed by researchers almost constantly, others are forgotten for some time. In the case of the poem by N.V. Gogol "Dead Souls" almost all generations literary scholars in the twentieth and the critics in the nineteenth centuries put it under scrutiny. The greater the time difference, the wider the range of interpretations that can be analyzed using the historical-functional approach, to identify dominant trends, dependencies on historical events, and to consider the evolution of interpretation.

Thus, the process of analyzing a literary work with the help of a historical-functional approach is an endless process that makes sense as long as the reader interprets the work and expresses his thoughts about it. This process does not have any specific result, but each newest interpretation of a literary work brings readers closer to the truth.

In this work, the time since the publication of the poem in 1842 is conditionally divided into four periods, each of which has characteristic features that are unique to this period.

The first period is the time from the moment the poem appeared until the end of the 19th century. During this time, the interpretation of the poem has practically not undergone any significant changes. In this era, literature played the role of the most progressive force in Russian public life. critical thought of this time, she most often turned to solving the problem of the role of literature in the life of society, its impact on society.

Critics of that time, V.G. Belinsky and N.G. Chernyshevsky, believed that literature should influence the existing society. The poem "Dead Souls", and especially its first volume, reflect the life of landowners and officials of that time. Creating images of Sobakevich, Korobochka, a collective image of the city, the image of city ladies, N.V. Gogol reflects reality so reliably that for Belinsky and Chernyshevsky he becomes a person who embodies their social ideas in fiction.

Supporters of progress and enlightenment, they considered that the poem is a protest against the vile Russian reality, and N.V. Gogol shares their views. The writer spoke to this more than once, but in “ Selected places from correspondence with friends has bluntly stated that his poem is not a satire.

However, carried away by their own ideas, these researchers did not hear what the author himself was saying about his work, so they considered the appearance of Gogol's spiritual prose to be a creative crisis. Thus, the theory of two Gogols appears. Before " Selected places from correspondence with friends» Gogol - a comrade-in-arms of progress, the founder of a new literary direction; after - a writer who is in a creative and ideological crisis. In addition to the above researchers in this era, two more trends in Gogol studies can be distinguished, which also represented various social parties. Representatives of the official nationality, such as F.V., had a negative attitude towards Gogol's work. Bulgarin, N.I. Grech, Senkovsky (Baron Brambeus). Another direction is the Slavophiles, the most significant figure of which was K.S. Aksakov , close friend Gogol. They approved of the writer's activities, but were also inclined to attribute their own social ideas to him.

After the death of N.V. Gogol, the next generation of researchers also admires the poem "Dead Souls", and the Gogol trend in literature becomes dominant and develops in the work of F.M. Dostoevsky, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, N.A. Nekrasov, I. S. Turgenev. The works of each of these writers have their own artistic features, techniques, but they are all united by the fact that they show the reader real life. Thus, they continue Gogol's traditions in literature. Criticism of this time, presented in this work in the person of A.N. Pypin, the founder of the cultural and historical study of literature in Russia, can already afford to look at the work of N.V. Gogol from the height of time, information about the life of the writer, which his contemporaries did not have, is available. If Belinsky and Chernyshevsky actually rejected the later works of the writer, then Academician A.N. Pypin, famous researcher and cousin of N.G. Chernyshevsky, considers them as a natural development of Gogol's work. However, he also considers Gogol's direction in the development of literature the most promising at that time.

Summing up some results, we can say that this period in the interpretation of the poem by N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls" was characterized by the consideration of the writer as the founder of a new literary trend, and the poem as a work of satirical reflection of the Russian reality of that time. Until the end of the century, Gogol's direction in literature was the most promising and interesting. The spiritual prose of the writer and the second volume of the poem were practically not considered by the critics of that time. I would like to note one more, as it seems, important detail: the contemporaries of the author of the poem "Dead Souls" wrote their critical reviews and articles passionately and emotionally, often giving little reason for their opinions, this ardor is gradually changing to strict scientific approach, which reaches its apogee in the work of Pypin " Characteristics literary opinions twenties to fifties».

The first quarter of the twentieth century was the time when there was a radical change in the interpretation of N.V. Gogol and his poem "Dead Souls", and in society as a whole, the attitude towards the literary heritage of the nineteenth century is changing. This is an era when the old foundations in life, in religion, in literature are denied, and new ones, like everything new, have not yet been formed. Indicative in this respect is the work of Valery Bryusov, in which he practically simply denies the significance of N.V. Gogol for Russian literature. Dmitry Merezhkovsky considers the death of the writer and his spiritual crisis to be the result of the incapacity of Christianity to give answers to Gogol on the questions that he himself raises in his poem. Gogol, seeing the insolubility of the problems he raised in a work of art, creates " Selected places from correspondence with friends”, which are absolutely not accepted by readers. The result is a spiritual crisis and death. A slightly different point of view is held by Vasily Gippius, Nestor Kotlyarevsky and psychoanalyst Ivan Ermakov, but all researchers of this time are looking for mystical overtones in the writer's work, and the roots of the tragedy that led him to death are looking for in Gogol's religiosity. In general, this era is characterized by a reassessment of the significance of N.V. Gogol for Russian literature and an attempt to analyze the spiritual prose of the writer, which, however, was not crowned with success. In addition, I would like to note that at that time tendentiousness and a destructive approach to the literary heritage were a thing, so to speak, "fashionable".

The works of this period, in our opinion, are very subjective and reflect exactly what is happening in the country and the world: the demolition of everything old and attempts to plant a new one that does not yet exist. Everything old breaks; no one even thinks about the fact that if everything is broken, there will be nothing to build a new one on, and literature in this sense is no exception. The abundance of currents and directions in it can hardly be called progress, most of the newfangled phenomena did not take root and left nothing behind, but the poem by N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls" survived this shock.

The Soviet era interprets Gogol's work from only one angle. Initially, the poem "Dead Souls" is actually considered only as an angry protest of a progressive writer against serfdom and "vile Russian reality. Further, this trend softens somewhat, but is present throughout this period. In general, this period can be characterized as the time of the existence of the generally accepted form of interpretation of Dead Souls, at least from a substantive point of view.

With development literary criticism as a science, the creativity of N.V. Gogol is considered as a set of techniques, methods, style, artistic features of the writer's works, while the semantic aspect of his poem remains at the level of satire on Russian reality in the first half of the nineteenth century. Thus, all the attention of literary critics is riveted to the form of the work. During this period, the writer again returns to the pedestal of the founder of the realistic trend in Russian literature. Thus, with some one-sided perception by Soviet literary critics Gogol's work, the development of literary criticism as a whole contributed to the emergence of interesting and relevant works to this day. The last years of the Soviet era were marked by the fact that works appeared that stand out from the general mass and represent interesting phenomena, which are relevant to this day, such is, for example, the work of Yu.V. Mann, Gogol's Poetics. Variations on a theme. This work is of a completely different level both in its structure and content, it does not contain the traditionally analyzed gallery of negative types of landowners and officials, and the poem "Dead Souls" is regarded as a complex, dynamic structure, innovative for its time in form and content and far from unambiguous. Thus, this work represents a transitional process from the Soviet era to the present.

The current stage in the study of N.V. Gogol is in many ways similar to the first quarter of the twentieth century - the same abundance of currents and opinions. Pluralism in literature and art makes it possible to express almost any point of view about the poem "Dead Souls" and the writer's work in general. From the point of view of the historical-functional method of studying literature, today's researcher stands at a higher level of knowledge than his predecessors. In modern literary criticism, one can conditionally distinguish three areas in which researchers work: the conceptual and logical interpretation of the poem (A. Lazareva), artistic interpretation (A. Turbin, S. Pavlinov, etc.) and the interpretation of the poem within the framework of Christian worldview(V. Voropaev, I. Vinogradov, I. Esaulov). The general trend in modern literary criticism is as follows: scientists do not deny the works of their predecessors, but try to make a new contribution to the study of the poem.

I would like to note the interest of foreign literary critics in the poem "Dead Souls" and all the work of N.V. Gogol, which is clearly reflected in the work of E.K. Tarasova, in 2004, the book of the famous French writer and member of the French Academy Andre Troyat "Nikolai Gogol" (181) was published in Russia, which is biographical in nature, but clearly illustrates the interest of foreign literary critics and readers in Russian literature and in particular in the work of Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol . His works are translated into other languages, read, analyzed. Thus, one can rightfully declare that the poem belongs to N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls" to the "world" literature, tk. even foreign literary critics can interpret the poem, i.e. to carry out not only temporary but also linguistic translation of the text of the poem.

The poem "Dead Souls" and the works devoted to it are a subject that explores the historical-functional approach to the analysis of literature. The researcher who works within this approach is in a privileged position in relation to other researchers. It is quite clear that he has at his disposal all the material accumulated in the analyzed work, and he works for the researcher in an explicit and implicit form. In an implicit form, various interpretations of the poem "Dead Souls" bring the researcher's consciousness to a new level of understanding, and in an explicit form, this is expressed in the fact that he avoids one-sided interpretation of the text, seeing the exaggerations and mistakes that were made before him. Of course, the interpretation of the poem will remain a purely individual matter for each; as mentioned above, the interpretation of the text is based on the prejudices and worldview of the interpreter. But in any case, the interpretation of one researcher and the interpretation of another researcher working in the framework of historical-functional analysis will differ greatly, because. the first is guided in his work, in fact, only by the poem itself, and in the hands of the second is an extensive material of the works of his predecessors, which he can analyze and compare.

As shown above, researchers often denied the work of their predecessors or did not take them into account at all, considering their own opinion the only right and true one. It is possible to avoid such a mistake only within the framework of the historical-functional approach, since this method can organically accommodate diametrically opposed points of view, explaining such a discrepancy by the specifics of the era in which the researcher worked. In Soviet times, there was a generally accepted form of interpretation of the ideological content of "Dead Souls", so the researchers did not work in this direction, because. there was no such possibility; V.G. Belinsky and N.G. Chernyshevsky considered Gogol a supporter of progress and a critical attitude to reality - this is also a feature that may not be relevant at the present time, but at that time it was the basis for the study of the poem.

I would like to note one more feature of the historical-functional approach: despite the seeming universality, in each individual case, whether it is the study of a separate work or the work of a writer as a whole, this method acquires individuality and cannot be redrawn to suit another work or writer . Why is this happening? A single work or work of a poet or writer has an individuality that depends on many factors: the historical era, the mood in society, the author's belonging to any of its parts, etc. It is quite natural that literary interpretation is also subjective and historically conditioned. Thus, the historical-functional analysis is aimed at a specific literary work and allows the researcher to avoid a biased and one-sided view of the work under study.

The poem "Dead Souls" reflects the spirit of that era, contemporary Gogol's Russia, which is represented not only by its negative traits. Russia is presented as it is at some stage of its development, and N.V. Gogol completed the task that he set for himself - to create his own " Divine Comedy". The poem fulfilled its task at that time - it became the arena where the best contemporaries of Gogol fought, thereby it initiated the struggle and movement forward, and literature after

Gogol, but based on Gogol's traditions, became that contribution to world culture, which to this day is the pride of Russia. The poem also fulfilled another task that Gogol set for himself: the vulgarity of a vulgar person, the everyday life and routine of life, i.e. in fact, the ordinary life of an ordinary person, thanks to the "Dead Souls", became known to a huge part of society and made them think about it. Thus, with the help of the poem, Gogol brought into the everyday life of each of its readers a part of that divine beauty, to which he himself went throughout his life and work on the poem.

Although the work on the poem was not completed, and even the second volume that has come down to us is not the last edition, N.V. Gogol achieved his goal by expressing in "Dead Souls" " substantial» the quality of the Russian people. Throughout its history, our country has known many examples of self-sacrifice, and the enormous depth of falling into chaos. Take, for example, the pre-Gogol period of history: during the war of 1812, many nobles themselves burned their estates so that nothing was left for the enemy, and during the Schism, fanatical elders doomed entire villages to death from fire along with people. So Gogol in his poem created unbearably disgusting characters and abstractly beautiful Kostanzhoglo, Murazov and Ulinka. Although the author himself considered the second volume of the poem to be weak and not clear enough, in conjunction with the first volume, the poem perfectly reflected the features of life. Russian people, most of which is immersed in constant hibernation, and a small part is active and creates the future of Russia.

In conclusion, I would like to say that the poem by N.V. Gogol's "Dead Souls" is a truly Russian national work that has become the personification of its era and survived it, because. the potential of the poem and the possibility of its interpretation ensured its proper place in the "world" literature. The contribution that the poem makes to the study of Russian reality, the history and life of the Russian people in the first half of the nineteenth century can hardly be overestimated. And this is by no means just a statement of the ugliness of the Russian reality of that time, but a call to change this reality by joint efforts and deserve the high rank of Russians.

List of references for dissertation research candidate of philological sciences Sinyak, Elena Valerievna, 2005

1. Abramovich G.L. Introduction to Literary Studies. M., 1979.

2. Aikhenvald Yu. Gogol // Silhouettes of Russian writers. M., 1994.

3. Aksakov S.T. The story of my acquaintance with Gogol. Sobr. op. M., 1909. V.2.

4. Aksakov S.T. Collected works in 4 volumes. M., 1856.

5. Annenkov P.V. Literary Memories. M., 1960.

6. Annenskaya A. Gogol, life and literary activity// Karamzin, Pushkin, Gogol, Aksakov, Dostoevsky: biographical sketches. Chelyabinsk, 1997.

7. Bakshi N.A. Hero "eccentric" in Austrian and Russian literature of the 19th century (Grillparzer, Gogol, Leskov, Rosegger): Abstract of the thesis. dis. for the competition scientist, Ph.D. philologist, sciences (10.01.03) / RSUH. M, 2002.

8. Bazhenov N.N. Illness and death of Gogol // "Youth", 1999, No. 5. pp.74-84.

9. Bakhtin M.M. Questions of Literature and Aesthetics: Studies of Different Years. M., 1975.

10. Yu.Bakhtin M.M. Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics. Ed. 2nd, revised. and additional M., 1963.

11. Bakhtin M.M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. M., 1986.

12. Belinsky V.G. Collected Works: In 4 vols. M., 1898.

13. Bely A. Mastery of Gogol. M., 1934.

14. M. Bely A. Symbolism as a worldview / Comp., entry. Art. and approx. L.A. Sugay. M., 1994.

15. Berdyaev N. A. Philosophy of creativity, culture, art: In 2 vols. M., 1994.

17. Borev Yu.B. The role of literary criticism in artistic process. M., 1979.

18. Borev Yu.B. Theory of artistic perception and receptive aesthetics, methodology of criticism and hermeneutics // Theories, schools, concepts (Critical analyzes). Artistic reception and hermeneutics. M., 1985. S.3-68.

19. Borev Yu.B. Aesthetics. 4th ed. M., 1988.

20. Bryusov V. Incinerated. To the characterization of Gogol. 2nd edition. M., 1910.

21. Weil P., Genis A. Native speech: Lessons in native literature. Ed. 3rd. M., 1999.

22. Weil P., Genis A. Russian God: Gogol // "Star", 1992, No. 1.

23. Weisskopf M. Gogol's plot. Morphology. Ideology. Context. M., 1993.

24. Weiskopf M.Ya. Gogol's plot: Morphology. Ideology. Context. 2nd ed. M., 2002.

25. Vvedensky Are. I. Public Self-Consciousness in Russian Literature. Critical Essays. SPb., 1900.

26. Veselovsky A. Etudes and characteristics in 2 vols. Ed. 4th. M., 1912.

27. Veresaev V. Gogol in life. M.-J1., 1933.

28. Vinogradov V.V. About the language of fiction. M., 1959.

29. Vinogradov I.A. Gogol Artist and Thinker: Christian Foundations of the Worldview. M., 2000.

30. Vinogradov I.A. Alexander Ivanov in letters, documents, memoirs. M., 2001.

31. Vinogradov I.A. Artistic worldview N.V. Gogol in the second half of the 840s: Author. dis. for the competition scientist, Ph.D. philologist, sciences: (10.01.01) / Ros. AN. Institute of world literature. them. A.M. Gorky. M., 1995.

32. Voitolovskaya E.L., Stepanov A.N. N.V. Gogol. Seminary. Leningrad, 1962.

33. Questions of the theory and psychology of creativity in 2 volumes. Kharkov, 1911.

34. Voropaev V.A. In the holy city // Word. M., 1999.

35. Voropaev V.A. N.V. Gogol: life and work. To help teachers, high school students and applicants. Ed. 2nd. M., 1999.

36. Voropaev V.A. The schemnik is broken in spirit. Life and work of N.V. Gogol in the light of Orthodoxy. M., 1994.

37. Voropaev V.A. About Gogol and his main book // " Literature at school", 1989, No. 2.

38. Voropaev V.A. Father Matthew and Gogol. Perm, 2000.

39. Voropaev V.A. A century and a half later. Gogol in modern literary criticism. "Moscow", 2002, August.

40. Voropaev V.A. The last days of Gogol's life and the problem of the second volume of "Dead Souls" // " Questions of Literature", 1986, No. 10.

41. Voropaev V.A. The last book Gogol (" Divine Liturgy”) // Russian Literature, 2000, No. 2.

42. Time and fate of Russian writers / Otv. ed. N.V. Osmakov. M., 1981.

43. Gadamer G.G. The relevance of the beautiful / Per. with him. M., 1991.

44. Gadamer H.-G. Truth and Method: Fundamentals of Philosophical Hermeneutics: Per. with him. / Common ed. and intro. Art. B.N. Bessonov. M., 1988.

45. Garin I.I. Mysterious Gogol. M., 2002.

46. ​​Gippius V. Gogol. M., 1999.

47. Glyants V.M. Gogol and the Apocalypse. M., 2004.

48. Gogol collection. Collective monograph. SPb., 1993.

49. Gogol in Russian criticism and memoirs of his contemporaries. M.-L., 1951

50. Gogol as a phenomenon of world literature. Sat. Art. based on the materials of the international scientific conference dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the death of N.V. Gogol / ed. Yu.V. Manna. M.: IMLI RAN, 2003.

51. Gogol N.V. In the memoirs of contemporaries. M., 1952.

52. Gogol N.V. In the memoirs of contemporaries and correspondence. Comp. Kallash V.V. M., 1924.

53. Gogol N.V. in Russian criticism. M., 1953.

54. Gogol N.V. Spiritual prose. Sun. Art. Voropaeva V.A. M., 1992.

55. Gogol N.V. 1809-1852. To the centenary of death. Materials to help libraries. M., 1952.

56. Gogol N.V. Materials and research. In 2 vol. M., 1936.

57. Gogol N.V. Materials and research. M., 1995.

58. Gogol N.V. Complete works in 14 volumes. Acad. sciences of the USSR. M., 1937-1952.

59. Goldenberg A.Kh. "Dead Souls" N.V. Gogol and traditions of folk culture: A textbook for a special course. Volgograd, 1991.

60. Gorskikh N.A. “N.V. Gogol and F. Sologub: the poetics of the material world ": Abstract of the thesis. dis. for the competition scientist, Ph.D. philologist, sciences (10.01.01) / TSU. Tomsk, 2002.

61. Gukovsky G.A. Gogol's realism. M.-J1., 1959.

62. Gus M.S. Gogol and Nikolaev Russia. M., 1957.

63. Gus M.S. Living Russia and Dead Souls. M., 1981.

64. Dante A. Divine Comedy / Translation from it. M. Lozinsky. Perm, 1994.

65. Dovlatov S. Collected Works: In 4 vols. St. Petersburg, 2003.

66. Dolganov V.A. Gogol's traditions in the poetics of M.M. Zoshchenko: Abstract. dis. for the competition scientist, Ph.D. philologist, sciences: (10.01.01) / Samar. state ped. un-t. Samara, 2001.

67. Evtikhiev A.S. Gogol in criticism of the Russian diaspora: Abstract of the thesis. dis. for the competition scientist, Ph.D. philologist, sciences: (10.01.01) / Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov. M., 1999.

68. Egorova L.P. Literary interpretation as the main way of studying a work of art // Philology at the turn of the millennium. Materials of the international scientific conference. Issue. 3. Rostov-on-Don: Russian State University, 2000. S. 8-10.

69. Egorova L.P. Parameters of literary interpretation: comments on the program of scientific research // Philological Sciences. Stavropol: SGU, 1997. S. 3-7.

70. Egorova L.P. Fundamentals of literary interpretation // Russian classics of the XX century: Limits of interpretation: Collection of materials of a scientific conference. IRLI RAS - SSU. Stavropol, 1995. S. 3-9.

71. Egorova L.P. Technology of Literary Research: Study Guide. Stavropol: SGU, 2001.

72. Ermakov I.D. Essays on the analysis of N.V. Gogol (Organicity of Gogol's works). M.-Pg., 1924.

73. Ermakov I.D. Psychoanalysis of literature. Pushkin. Gogol. Dostoevsky. M., 1999.

74. Ermilov V. Genius of Gogol. M., 1959.

75. Ermilov V.N.V. Gogol. 2nd edition. M., 1953.

76. Erofeev V. Rozanov against Gogol // In the labyrinth of damned questions. Essay. M., 1996.

78. Ivanitsky A.I. Gogol. Morphology of land and power. M., 2000.

79. Ilyin I.A. Lonely artist. Articles, speeches, lectures. M., 1993.

80. History of Russian literary criticism: Proc. for universities / V.V. Prozorov, O.O. Milovanova, E.G. Elina and others; Ed. V.V. Prozorov. M., 2002.

81. Kalinin M.I. On the mastery of Marxism-Leninism by art workers // M.I. Kalinin. On the tasks of the Soviet intelligentsia. M., 1939. S. 50.55.

82. Karandashova O.S. The artistic space of the “Ukrainian collections of N.V. Gogol ("Evenings on a farm near Dikanka", "Mirgorod"): Author. dis. for the competition scientist, Ph.D. philologist, sciences (10.01.01) / TSU. Tver, 2000.

83. Karasev J1.B. Nervoso fasciculoso: (On the internal content of Gogol's prose) // Questions of Philosophy, 1999, No. 9. pp. 42-65.

84. Kartashova I.V. Gogol and Wakenroder // V.-G. Vakeroder and Russian literature of the first thirds of XIX century / Ed. I.V. Kartashova. Tver, 1995. S.71-93.

85. Kartashova I.V. Gogol and romanticism. Kalinin, 1975.

86. Kartashova I.V. Romanticism in the work of Gogol // Russian romanticism / Pod. ed. ON THE. Gulyaev. Textbook allowance. M., 1974. S. 140-169.

87. Katsis JI., Rudnev V. Two truths about Professor Ermakov. // Logos. M., 1995, no. 5. S.350-354.

88. Kozhinov V. On the methodology of the history of Russian literature (On the realism of the 30s of the XIX century) // “ Questions of Literature", 1968, No. 5.

89. Kolobaeva L. “ No psychology”, or Science Fiction of psychology? (On the prospects of psychologism in Russian literature of our century). " Questions of Literature", 1999, No. 2. pp. 3-20.

90. Kotlyarevsky N. Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol. 1829-1842. Essay on the history of Russian novel and drama. 3rd edition. SPb., 1911

91. Brief literary encyclopedia. In 8 volumes (V.9, add.) / Main. ed. A. A. Surkov. M.: Sov. Encyclopedia. 1962-1978.

92. Krementsov L.P. Reading as creativity. M., 2003.

93. Krylov A. Two deaths N.V. Gogol // New Youth, 1999, No. 35(2). pp. 164-171.

94. Kuznetsov A.N., Potapovsky A.M. Genre designation " Tale of Captain Kopeikin» // Philological Sciences, 1999, No. 2. pp.11-15.

95. Kulish P.A. Notes on the life of Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol, compiled from the memoirs of his friends and acquaintances and from his own letters / Enter. Article and comment. I.A. Vinogradov. M., 2003.

96. Lavretsky A. Belinsky, Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyubov in the struggle for realism. M., 1968.

97. Lazareva A.N. Spiritual experience of Gogol. M., 1993.

98. Literary movement of the Soviet era: Materials and documents. M., 1986.

99. Literary encyclopedic dictionary / Under the general. ed. V.M. Kozhevnikov, P.A. Nikolaev. M.: Sov. Encyclopedia, 1987.

100. Literary heritage. T.58. Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol. Acad. sciences of the USSR. M., 1952.

101. Likhachev D.S. Literature. Reality. - Literature. L., 1981.

102. Likhachev D.S. Essays on the philosophy of artistic creativity. SPb., 1999.

103. Lotman Yu.M. Textbook on Russian literature for high school. M., 2001.

104. Lyalina A.V. The evolution of the attitude of students to the work of N.V. Gogol in the school literature course: Abstract of the thesis. dis. for the competition scientist, Ph.D. teacher, sciences (13.00.02) / RSPU im. A.I. Herzen. SPb., 1999.

105. Malenkov G.M. Report to the 19th Party Congress on the work of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks. M., 1952. S. 73.

106. Mann Yu.V. In search of a living soul. Ed. 2nd. M., 1987.

107. Mann Yu.V. Encounter in the Labyrinth (Franz Kafka and Nikolai Gogol). " Questions of Literature", 1999, No. 2. pp. 162-186.

108. Mann Yu.V. Gogol. Works and days: 1809 1845. M., 2004.

109. Mann Yu.V. On the Grotesque in Literature. M., 1966.

110. Mann Yu.V. "Great is my creation." // "Centuries will not be erased." Russian classics and their readers. M., 1989.

111. Mann Yu.V. Understanding Gogol. M., 2005.

112. Mann Yu.V. Poetics of Gogol. Variations on a theme. M., 1996.

113. Mann Yu.V. "Through laughter visible to the world." Life N.V. Gogol. 18091835. M., 1994.

114. Marantsman V.G. Reader's work. From the perception of a literary work to analysis. M., 1986.

115. Margolis Yu.D. Book N.V. Gogol " Favorite places from correspondence with friends»: the main milestones in the history of perception. SPb., 1998.

116. Mashinsky S.I. Gogol and revolutionary democrats. M., 1953.

117. Mashinsky S. "Dead Souls" by N.V. Gogol. M., 1978.

118. Mashinsky S.I. The Artistic World of Gogol: A Guide for Teachers. Ed. 2nd. M., 1979.

119. Merezhkovsky D.S. Gogol and the devil. M., 1906.

120. Merezhkovsky D.S. Gogol. Creativity, life and religion. SPb., 1909.

121. Mildon V.I. Aesthetics of Gogol. M., 1998.

122. Mints Z.G. Alexander Blok and Other Writers. St. Petersburg, 2000.

123. Mikhed P. On the riddle of N.V. Gogol // Questions of Literature, 1999, no. 2. S.330-340.

124. Mordovchenko N.I. Belinsky and Russian literature of his time. M.-L., 1950.

125. Mochulsky K.V. Great Russians 19th writers century. SPb., 2000.

126. Mochulsky K.V. spiritual path Gogol // Gogol. Solovyov. Dostoevsky. M., 1995.

127. Nabokov V.V. Lectures on Russian literature. Chekhov, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Gorky, Tolstoy, Turgenev. M., 1999.

128. Nekrasov N.A. Complete Works and Letters. M., 1950. T.9.

129. Nekrasov N.A. Collected works. Guise, 1930. V. 5.

130. Nechkina M. V. Function artistic image in the historical process. M., 1982.

131. Nikitenko A.V. Diary in 3 volumes. Leningrad, 1956.

132. About literature. Selected articles and letters. M., 1952.

133. Ovsyannikov-Kulikovskiy D.N. Literary and critical works: In 2 volumes. M., 1989. V.1.

134. Ogorodnikov Yu.A. Literature as art. M., 1998.

135. Ortega y Gasset X. "Dehumanization of Art" and Other Works: An Essay on Literature and Art. Collection. M., 1991.

136. Osmakov N.V. Psychological direction in Russian literary criticism: D.N. Ovsyannikov-Kulikovsky. M., 1981.

137. Pavlinov S.A. The Story of My Soul: Poem by N.V. Gogol's Dead Souls. M., 1997.

138. Pavlinov S.A. The path of the spirit: Nikolai Gogol. M., 1998.

139. Panaev I.I. Literary Memories. M., 1950.

140. Options literary interpretations: a program of complex scientific research. Stavropol: SGU, 1997.

141. Paramonov B. Gogol, killer of animals//Star, 2000, No. 2. pp. 213-217.

142. Pereverzev V.F. Gogol, Dostoevsky. Research. M., 1982.

143. Pereverzev V.F. At the origins of Russian realism. M., 1989.

144. Polotskaya E.A. The Cherry Orchard: Life in Time. M., 2003.

145. Problems of functional study of literature. Classical Literature and Modernity. Stavropol, 1975.

146. Proffer Carl R. The simile and Gogol's Dead Souls. Paris, 1967

147. Prutskov N.I. N.V. Gogol and our modernity. L., 1952.

148. Prutskov N.I. Russian literature of the 19th century and revolutionary Russia. M., 1979.

149. Way to Gogol: Collection. Comp., vst.st., preparation of the text by T.A. Kalganova. M., 1997.

150. Pypin A.N. Characterization of literary opinions from the twenties to the fifties. Historical essays. Ed. 4th. SPb., 1909.

151. Remizov A.M. The fire of things // Complete works in 10 volumes. V.7. M., 2001. S. 135-362.

152. Ricoeur P. Conflict of interpretations: Essays on hermeneutics. M., 1995.

153. Rozanov V.V. Incompatible contrasts of life. Literary and aesthetic works of different years. M., 1990.

154. Rozanov V.V. Collected Works: The Legend of the Grand Inquisitor F.M. Dostoevsky. Lit. essays. About writing and writers / Ed. ed. A.N. Nikolyukin. M., 1996.

155. Rozanov V.V. Collected Works: Among Artists / Common. ed., comp. and vst. Art. A.N. Nikolyukin. M., 1994.

156. Russian literature in the historical and functional coverage / Otv. ed. N.V. Osmakov. M., 1979.

157. Russian aesthetics and criticism of the 40-50s of the XIX century / Prepared. text, comp., vst. Art. and note. VC. Kantor and A.L. Ospovat. M., 1982.

158. Savodnik V. Essays on the history of Russian literature of the XIX century. 4.1. Ed. 11th. M „ 1917.

159. Saltykov-Shchedrin M.E. Full composition of writings. M., 1937. T. 8.

160. Samarin Yu.F. Articles. Memories. Letters / Comp. T.A. Medovicheva. M., 1997.

161. Skomyansky M.G. On the historicism of Dead Souls // Izv. AN. Ser. lit. and yaz. M., 1998. T.57, No. 6. S.24-31.

162. Dictionary literary terms / Ed.-compilers L. Timofeev and S. Turaev. Moscow: Education, 1974.

163. Smelyansky A.M. Mikhail Bulgakov at the Art Theatre. 2nd ed., add. M., 1989.

164. Smirnova E.A. Gogol's poem "Dead Souls". L., 1987.

165. Modern foreign literary criticism: concepts, schools, terms. Encyclopedic. directory. M.: Intrada - INION, 1996.

166. Sokolov S. Having opened wide open - inspiring // Sokolov S. Palisandria: A novel. Essay. Performances. St. Petersburg, 1999. S.357-359.

167. Solovyov Vl. On Christian Unity. M., 1994.

168. Stepanov H.JI. N.V. Gogol. Creative way. Ed. 2nd. M., 1959.

169. Tarasova E.K. N.V. Gogol in German Literary Studies (7090s of the 20th century). M., 2002.

170. Theory of Literature. The main problems in historical coverage. Image, method, character. M., 1962.

171. Terts A. In the shadow of Gogol. M., 2001.

172. Tolstoy JI.H. Full composition of writings. M., 1949. T. 60.

173. Toporov V.N. Myth. Ritual. Symbol. Image: Studies in the field of mythoepic : Selected. M., 1995.

174. Troyat A. Nikolai Gogol. M., 2004.

175. Turbin V.N. Heroes of Gogol: A book for students. M., 1983.

176. Turbin V.N. Pushkin. Gogol. Lermontov. On the study of literary genres. M., 1978.

177. Turgenev I.S. Literary and everyday memories. Gogol // Turgenev I.S. Collected works. T.Kh. M., 1949. S. 237-245.

178. Frank S.L. Passions, pathos and baphos in Gogol // Logos. M., 1999, issue. 2. S.80-88.

179. Fridlender G.M. Gogol: the origins of accomplishment (Article 1) // Russian Literature, 1994, No. 2.

180. Fridlender G.M. Gogol: the origins of accomplishment (Article 2) // Russian Literature, 1994, No. 4.

181. Fukson L.Yu. Problems of interpretation and value nature of a literary work: Abstract of the thesis. dis. for competition scientist, degree of Doctor of Philology, Sciences: (10.01.08) / Ur. state ped. un-t. Yekaterinburg, 2000.

182. Khalizev V.E. Theory of Literature: Textbook. 4th ed., rev. and additional M., 2005.

183. Khrapchenko M.B. "Dead Souls" N.V. Gogol. M., 1952.

184. Khrapchenko M.B. Nikolay Gogol. literary path. The Greatness of a Writer. M., 1984.

185. Khrapchenko M. B. Creative individuality writer and the development of literature. 2nd edition. M., 1972.

186. Khrapchenko M.B. Collected works in 4 volumes. M., 1980.

187. Khrapchenko M.B. Creativity Gogol. Ed. 2nd. M., 1956.

188. Chernyshevsky N.G. Essays on the Gogol period of Russian literature. M., 1953.

189. Chernyshevsky N.G. Complete works in 15 volumes. T.Z, T.4. M., 1947.

190. Chizh V.F. Disease N.V. Gogol: Notes of a psychiatrist / Comp. N.T. Unanyants. M., 2001.

191. Chukovsky K. Gogol and Nekrasov. M., 1952.

192. Shults S.A. Gogol. Personality and art world. A guide for teachers. M., 1980.

193. Shcheglova L.V. Problems of self-knowledge and cultural identity in Russian philosophy in the 30-40s of the XIX century. (P.Ya. Chaadaev and N.V. Gogol): Abstract of the thesis. dis. for the competition scientist, the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Sciences / MPGU. M., 2000.

Please note the above scientific texts posted for review and obtained through recognition of original texts of dissertations (OCR). In this connection, they may contain errors related to the imperfection of recognition algorithms.
IN PDF files dissertations and abstracts that we deliver, there are no such errors.

Literature has always been "culture-centric", as the term itself indicates (lat. literature - written from litera- letter): a set of written and socially significant texts, in a narrower sense - only fiction, kind of word art. Therefore, within the framework of culture, the importance of artistic activity as its ancient and fundamental component is great. Literature has the most essential features of art, which were formed at its birth and preserved in all its forms.

Unlike other forms of art, literature performs a special intermediary function (mediator) due to the verbal form, i.e. it can combine the artistic and system-logical forms of human exploration of the world. It can give this property to some synthetic types and genres of art - theater, opera, song, etc.

Literary history as a science - one of the sections of humanitarian knowledge about literature, including the philosophy of literature (i.e. the definition of goals, objectives, guidelines, ontology, epistemology, axiology of literature), the aesthetics of literature (understanding the beautiful), the ethics of literature (understanding the moral ideal), sociology, poetics , psychology, pedagogy, the economics of literature and a number of other areas, all of which intersect and do not exist separately from one another.

The history of literature appears today as a relatively new science, numbering no more than two centuries. However, for thousands of years, mankind in one way or another recorded information about its development. Legends about ancient rulers, sages, singers, storytellers - Tutankhamun, Orpheus, Homer, Confucius and Zarathustra were circulated orally and then written down. The biographies of the Provencal troubadours (XIII century) and the first biography of Shakespeare (N. Row, 1709) are largely based on legends. The real, the documentary organically mixed with the fantastic, the story appeared in the personalities of the authors, the main thing was not separated from the secondary.

In parallel, another source of the science of literature developed - poetics as normative theory (Aristotle, Horace, N. Boileau and others). In particular, since the time of Aristotle, the belief in the immutability of the eternal laws of literary creativity has dominated, special attention was paid to genre classification and style codification.

The third important source of literary history is literary criticism, reached high altitudes already by the 18th century.

The pinnacle of the realization of the possibilities of the history of literature as a science at the end of the 20th century. can be considered the "History of World Literature", prepared by a team of famous Russian scientists (M.: Nauka, 1983-1994).

To the main literary methods of studying the literary process should include:

• - bibliographic method, created by Sh.-O. Sainte-Bevom, who interpreted a literary work in the light of the biography of its author;
• - cultural-historical method, developed by I. Ton in the 1860s, consisted in the analysis of an array of works based on the identification of the determination of literature - the rigid action of three laws ("race", "environment" and "moment") that form culture;
• - comparative historical method (currently comparative studies, based on this method, is experiencing a new take-off) was established by the end of the 19th century;
• - sociological method, which took shape in the first decades of the 20th century, had a huge impact on the science of literature, when literary phenomena were considered as derivatives of social processes. The vulgarization of this method ("vulgar sociologism") became a famous brake on the development of literary criticism;
• - formal Method, proposed by domestic literary critics (Yu.N. Tynyanov, V.B. Shklovsky, etc.). singled out as main problem the study of the form of the work. On this basis, the Anglo-American "new critique" 1930-1940s, and later - structuralism, in which quantitative indicators of research are widely used;
• - system-structural method, akin to structuralism, formed in the works of the Tartu school (Yu.M. Lotman and others); the largest structuralists (R. Barth, J. Kristeva and others) in their later works switched to positions post-structuralism (deconstructivism), proclaiming the principles of deconstruction and intertextuality;
• - typological method declared itself in the second half of the 20th century: unlike comparative studies, which studies contact literary interactions, representatives of this method considered similarities and differences in literary phenomena not on the basis of direct contacts, but by elucidating the degree of similarity in the conditions of cultural life;
• - historical-functional And historical genetic methods declared themselves at the same time: the first put in the center the study of the features of the functioning of literary works in the life of society, and the second - the discovery of the sources of literary phenomena;
• - historical-theoretical method, formed in the 1980s, has two aspects: on the one hand, historical and literary research acquires a pronounced theoretical sound; on the other hand, science affirms the idea of ​​the need to introduce a historical moment into the theory. The method made it possible to reveal a significant amount of data in order to present the development of culture as a change of stable and transitional periods.

• - "literary process" as the term appeared in the late 1920s. to characterize the historical existence, functioning and evolution of literature as a whole, perceived in the context of culture. Each period of literature gives rise to its own type of writer and his worldview, and also asserts his own specific image of a person;
• - genre (system of genres), which conveys the measure and character of conventionality in art, is a historically understandable type of form-content unity in literature;
• - artistic method - it is a system of principles of selection, evaluation and perception of reality; it is based on the concept of the world, man and art and the moral and aesthetic ideal;
• - direction - the most common typological association of writers of a certain era based on the similarity of the artistic method;
• - currents - a more subtle differentiation of writers into groupings within the same direction, literary phenomena that have not formed into directions;
• - style - characteristics of the form of the work (composition, language, ways of creating characters, etc.) and the aspect of the individual, special.

The history of literature is one of the ways study of cultural tradition. The modern theory of intertextuality, which considers any test as composed of pre-existing texts, has drawn increased attention to the problem of traditional literary creativity. The history of literature can thus be described in terms of personal models. Among the most fruitful can be named: the model of Homer (an example of imitation is Virgil's Aeneid), the model of Anacreon (anacreontics in world poetry of the 17th-19th centuries), the model of ancient playwrights-tragedians (tragedies French classicism), model of Dante's "Divine Comedy" ("Dead Souls" by N. Gogol), Petrarch's model (Petrarchism), Shakespeare's model (European romanticism, "Boris Godunov" by A. Pushkin), many personal models of the 20th century. (Joyce, Proust, Kafka, Camus, Hemingway, Brecht, etc.).

Along with the potential, imaginary reader (addressee), indirectly, and sometimes directly present in the work, the reader's experience as such is interesting and important for literary criticism. Really existing readers and their groups are characterized by very different, often dissimilar attitudes of perception of literature, requirements for it. These attitudes and requirements, orientations and strategies can either correspond to the nature of literature and its state in a given era, or diverge from them, and sometimes quite decisively. In receptive aesthetics, they are designated by the term horizon of expectations, taken from the sociologists K. Mannheim and K. Popper.

In this case, the artistic effect is considered as the result of a combination (most often conflicting) of the author's program of influence with perception, carried out on the basis of the reader's expectations horizon.

The essence of the writer's activity, according to H.R. Jauss, is to take into account the horizon of the reader's expectations, and at the same time to violate these expectations, to offer the public something unexpected and new. At the same time, the reader's environment is conceived as something deliberately conservative, while writers are thought of as habit breakers and renovators of the experience of perception, which, we note, is by no means always the case.

In the reader's environment, affected by avant-garde trends, authors are expected not to comply with rules and norms, not something established, but, on the contrary, recklessly bold shifts, destruction of everything familiar.

The horizons of readers' expectations are unusually diverse. From literary works they expect hedonistic satisfaction, shocking emotions, and admonitions and teachings, and the expression of well-known truths, and the expansion of horizons (cognition of reality), and immersion in the world of fantasies, and (which most corresponds to the essence of art of the eras close to us) aesthetic pleasure in organic combination with attachment to spiritual world the author, whose work is marked by originality and novelty. This last kind of reader's expectations can rightfully be considered the hierarchically highest, optimal setting of artistic perception.

The outlook, tastes and expectations of the reading public largely determine the fate of literary works, as well as the degree of authority and popularity of their authors.

“The history of literature is not only the history of writers, but also the history of readers,” noted N.A. Rubakin, a well-known bibliographer and bibliographer at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries.

The reading public, with its attitudes and predilections, interests and horizons, is studied not so much by literary critics as by sociologists, constituting the subject of the sociology of literature. At the same time, the impact of literature on the life of society, its understanding and comprehension by readers (in other words, literature in the changing sociocultural contexts of its perception) is the subject of one of the literary disciplines - the historical and functional study of literature (the term was proposed by M.B. Khrapchenko at the end 1960s).

The main area of ​​the historical-functional study of literature is the existence of works in a large historical time, their life through the ages. At the same time, it is also important to consider how the writer's work was mastered by the people of his time.

The study of responses to a work that has just appeared is a necessary condition for its comprehension. After all, the authors, as a rule, address, first of all, the people of their era, and the perception of literature by its contemporaries is often marked by the extreme sharpness of reader reactions, whether it is a sharp rejection (repulsion) or, on the contrary, ardent, enthusiastic approval. So, Chekhov seemed to many of his contemporaries "the measure of things", and his books - "the only truth about what was going on around."

The study of the fate of literary works after their creation is based on sources and materials of various kinds. This is the number and nature of publications, circulation of books, the availability of translations into other languages, the composition of libraries.

These are, further, written responses to what was read (correspondence, memoirs, notes on the margins of books). But the most significant in understanding the historical functioning of literature are statements about it that “go out to the public”: reminiscences and quotations in newly created verbal and artistic works, graphic illustrations and directorial productions, as well as responses to literary facts publicists, philosophers, art historians, literary critics and critics. It is to the activity of the latter, which constitutes invaluable evidence of the functioning of literature, that we turn.

V.E. Khalizev Theory of Literature. 1999

§ 3. real reader. Historical-functional study of literature

Along with the potential, imaginary reader (addressee), indirectly, and sometimes directly present in the work, the reader's experience as such is interesting and important for literary criticism. Really existing readers and their groups are characterized by very different, often dissimilar attitudes of perception of literature, requirements for it. These attitudes and requirements, orientations and strategies can either correspond to the nature of literature and its state in a given era, or diverge from them, and sometimes quite decisively. In receptive aesthetics, they are denoted by the term horizon of expectations taken from the sociologists K. Mannheim and K. Popper. In this case, the artistic effect is considered as the result of a combination (most often conflicting) of the author's program of influence with perception, carried out on the basis of the reader's expectations horizon. The essence of the writer's activity, according to H.R. Jauss, is to take into account the horizon of the reader's expectations, and at the same time to violate these expectations, to offer the public something unexpected and new. At the same time, the reader's environment is conceived as something deliberately conservative, while writers are thought of as habit breakers and renovators of the experience of perception, which, we note, is not always the case. In the reader's environment) affected by avant-garde trends, authors are expected not to comply with rules and norms, not something established, but, on the contrary, recklessly bold shifts, destruction of everything familiar. The horizons of readers' expectations are unusually diverse. From literary works they expect hedonistic satisfaction, shocking emotions, and admonitions and teachings, and the expression of well-known truths, and the expansion of horizons (cognition of reality), and immersion in the world of fantasies, and (which most corresponds to the essence of art of the eras close to us) aesthetic pleasure in organic combination with familiarization with the spiritual world of the author, whose work is marked by originality and novelty. This last kind of reader's expectations can rightfully be considered the hierarchically highest, optimal setting of artistic perception.

The outlook, tastes and expectations of the reading public largely determine the fate of literary works, as well as the degree of authority and popularity of their authors. The history of literature is not only the history of writers<…>but also the history of readers,” N.A. Rubakin, a well-known bibliologist and bibliographer at the turn of the 19th–20th centuries.

The reading public, with its attitudes and predilections, interests and horizons, is studied not so much by literary critics as by sociologists, constituting the subject of the sociology of literature. At the same time, the impact of literature on the life of society, its understanding and comprehension by readers (in other words, literature in the changing socio-cultural contexts of its perception) is the subject of one of the literary disciplines - historical-functional study of literature(the term was proposed by M.B. Khrapchenko in the late 1960s).

The main field of the historical-functional study of literature is the existence of works in a large historical time, their life through the ages. At the same time, it is also important to consider how the writer's work was mastered by the people of his time. The study of responses to a work that has just appeared is a necessary condition for its comprehension. After all, the authors, as a rule, address, first of all, the people of their era, and the perception of literature by its contemporaries is often marked by the extreme sharpness of reader reactions, whether it is a sharp rejection (repulsion) or, on the contrary, ardent, enthusiastic approval. So, Chekhov seemed to many of his contemporaries "the measure of things", and his books - "the only truth about what was going on around."

The study of the fate of literary works after their creation is based on sources and materials of various kinds. This is the number and nature of publications, circulation of books, the availability of translations into other languages, the composition of libraries. These are, further, written responses to what was read (correspondence, memoirs, notes on the margins of books). But the most significant in understanding the historical functioning of literature are statements about it that “go out to the public”: reminiscences and quotations in newly created verbal and artistic works, graphic illustrations and directorial productions, as well as responses to literary facts by publicists, philosophers, art historians, literary critics and critics. . It is to the activity of the latter, which constitutes invaluable evidence of the functioning of literature, that we turn.

From the book Historical Roots of a Fairy Tale the author Propp Vladimir

EAT. Meletinsky Structural and topological study

From the book of Chekhov at school author Gromov Leonid Petrovich

Kozlova L.A. The study of the views of A. P. Chekhov on art in the X grade Origins life force genuine art past in the impeccable truth of life - the main character of all the great works of writers, in the undivided fusion of their bright ideals of goodness, freedom, struggle and

From the book Theory of Literature author Khalizev Valentin Evgenievich

From the book Pushkin: Biography of the writer. Articles. Eugene Onegin: comments author Lotman Yuri Mikhailovich

§ 3. Contextual study The term "context" (from Latin contextus - close connection, connection) is firmly entrenched in modern philology. For a literary critic, this is an infinitely wide area of ​​connections between a literary work and facts external to it, both literary,

From the book Dracula author Stoker Bram

From the book History of Russian Literature of the 19th Century. Part 2. 1840-1860 author Prokofieva Natalia Nikolaevna

From the book Volume 4. Materials for biographies. Perception and evaluation of personality and creativity author Pushkin, Alexander Sergeyevich

Historical and heroic stories by A. A. Bestuzhev-Marlinsky Among romantic stories can be singled out as a special kind of story with a historical and heroic theme, and the material of these stories is taken from various aspects of life. Their place of action is also not strictly

From the book Theory of Literature. History of Russian and foreign literary criticism [Anthology] author Khryashcheva Nina Petrovna

The historical and literary family of the Kireevskys One has to live a lot in order to acquire a short thought in the soul: what talent, brilliance, especially the art of writing, causticity and wit of style, if under this magnificence there is not an ordinary creature, which we simply call

From the book History foreign literature late 19th - early 20th century author Zhuk Maxim Ivanovich

Historical and typological direction

From the book Technologies and Methods of Teaching Literature author Philology Team of authors --

From the book Ostrich - Russian bird [collection] author Moskvina Tatyana Vladimirovna

Historical and Literary Materials Hippolyte Taine History of English Literature Introduction. Section V (abbreviated) Occurrence<...>three different sources contribute to the original moral state: race, environment, and moment. By race we mean that

From the book Russian Symbolists: Studies and Researches author Lavrov Alexander Vasilievich

5.2.3. Studying dramatic work in literature lessons in middle and senior grades Plan for mastering the topic The place of drama works in literature programs. Peculiarities of Perception of Drama Works by Secondary and Senior Students

From the book The Formation of Literature author Steblin-Kamensky Mikhail Ivanovich

5.3. The study of the theory of literature as the basis for the analysis of a work of art Plan for mastering the topic Information of a theoretical and literary nature in school curricula (principles of inclusion in the school curriculum, correlation with the text of the work under study,

From the author's book

The real Vova on a wonderful roof new picture which took about ten years to create. Both time and money spent on a big complex

From the author's book

HISTORICAL AND LITERARY PLANS OF IVANOV-RAZUMNIK In 1923 Ivanov-Razumnik's book Peaks. Alexander Blok. Andrei Bely” is the last one in which he could give his interpretation of the phenomena of the latest Russian literature and formulate his critical assessments. After

The idea of ​​the All-One, close to the east, may have penetrated deeper into us than it seems at first glance. So, for example, V.N.

Demin in his work “Secrets of the Russian people.

In search of the origins of Rus' "connects the refrain of Russians with the concept of the Unified folk tales“Is it close, is it low, is it high” (“Neither far - nor close; neither high nor low”): “Neither high nor low, but everything is one essence: all things originated from the One and through the One.” Here the researcher rightly draws parallels with Taoist treatises and Upanishads:

Motionless, unified, it is faster than thought.

It moves - it does not move, it is far - it is close,

It is inside everything - it is outside everything.

Literature

1. Voloshin M.A. Faces of creativity. - L .: Nauka, 1989.

2. Krapivin V.V. Studios. Window to the East. "Kushitstvo" and "Iranian" in Russian prose of 1910-1930 // Literary studies. - 2000. - No. 1.

3. Eberman V. Arabs and Persians in Russian poetry // Vostok. - M.: world literature, 1923. - Prince. 3.

4. Kerouac D. Selected prose: in 2 volumes - Kyiv: AirLand, 1995. - V.2.

5. Watts A. The Way of Zen. - Kyiv: Sofia, 1993.

6. Malysheva G.N. Rock poetry by Boris Grebenshchikov // Essays on Russian poetry of the 1980s. - M.: Heritage, 1996.

7. Kuritsyn V. Extended day group // Pelevin V.O. Insect life. - M.: Vagrius, 1998.

8. Pelevin V.O. Chapaev and Void. - M.: Vagrius, 1996.

9. Jisei: Poems of death / comp. B.G. Trubnikov. - M.: AST; St. Petersburg: Ost, 2008.

10. Zhu I. Way of jo. - M.: AST; St. Petersburg: Ost, 2008.

11. Maslov A., Pomerantseva L. Taoism // Religions of the world. Encyclopedia. - M.: Avanta +, 1999. - T. 7.

12. Demin V.N. Secrets of the Russian people. In search of the origins of Rus'. - M.: Veche, 1999.

Chebonenko Oksana Sergeevna, Associate Professor of the Irkutsk State University of Communications, Candidate of Philological Sciences.

Chebonenko Oksana Sergeevna, а88оаа1е professor, Irkutsk State Transport University, candidate of philological sciences.

Email: [email protected]

UDC 82.02+821.161.1

V.V. Makarova

B. Akunin's comedy "The Seagull" in the context of historical and functional study

The expediency of applying intertextual analysis in line with the historical and functional study of a work of art is substantiated, the creative inclusion of intertext in the structure of the play "The Seagull" by B. Akunin is considered as a special tactic of postmodernist manipulation of reader's expectations.

Keywords Keywords: intertextuality, postmodernism, polemical interpretation, functioning of the classics, reader.

B. Akunin's Comedy "Seagull" in the Context of Historical and Functional Research

In the article the advisability of the use of intertextual analysis for historical and functional studying of classical works is grounded. The creative inclusion of intertext in the construction of B.Akunin’s play “Seagull”is comprehended as special tactics of a postmodernist manipulation with readers’ expectations.

Keywords: intertextuality, postmodernism, polemic interpretation, functioning of classical works reader.

Eastern (Hindu, Buddhist) religious and philosophical thought is inseparable from such categories and images as karma, Maya, the Chain of reincarnations, Brahma, Atman, Nirvana, the All-One, therefore, writers trying to convey to the reader the spirit of a different culture, one way or another turn to to the relevant concepts and definitions. It is thanks to close acquaintance with the fundamental ideas of Eastern philosophical and religious systems that the writer often comes to comprehend the essence of the category of the All-One as that which underlies Being. And V. Pelevin is one of those writers whose work deserves careful study precisely in the context of the Eastern worldview.

The fate of a literary work, its functioning in a large historical time are traditionally studied within the framework of the historical-functional approach in literary criticism. At the same time, researchers focus on, firstly, the history of the perception of the work and its interpretation since the appearance of the very first reader's assessments; secondly, the functioning of the work within literature as a system, i.e. its significance and degree of influence on the literary process. Well-established and generally productive, this methodology can now be rethought in terms of the theory of intertextuality, which was actively developed at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries.

The inclusion of the experience of intertextual analysis in the historical-functional study of literature naturally has its limitations: it often becomes impossible to use such a seemingly neutral term as “text” in relation to classical works. However, close attention to the figure of the reader, real and hypothetical, can be directly connected to the traditional methodology. Such a "connection" is absolutely natural and even necessary in the case when the subject of research is modern literature. In our opinion, it can be no less productive in the case of studying the functioning of classical works in the postmodern era.

N. Piéguet-Gros notes the dual nature of intertextuality, states “the existence of a constant tension between the definition of intertextuality as a process and / or object”, and also “as a phenomenon of writing and / or a consequence of one or another reading of the text” . For historical and functional study, the possibility of understanding intertextuality as a process of existence of one text in another, as well as the increased attention paid to the figure of the reader, is valuable.

Intertextual analysis, thus, becomes a way to identify the patterns of functioning of the original work through the study of its refractions in “quoting texts”. They can be defined as original creative interpretations of already created works. Unlike readers', critical and scientific interpretations, creative, or polemical (A.B. Esin), in-

interpretation does not translate a work of art into the conceptual sphere, but creates its figurative interpretation. In addition, the concept of "creative interpretation" perfectly reflects the principles of the approach to analysis we have chosen. contemporary works: emphasizes their secondary nature (of course, only within the framework of such a study), dependence on the precedent text. Reflecting on the limits of creative interpretation, A.B. Esin suggested recognizing it by detailed reminiscences from the predecessor's text. It is necessary to concretize the scientist's indication: "detailed reminiscences" can be included in a quoting text in different ways, whose intertextual nature does not always develop into a phenomenon of creative interpretation. In order for this to happen, the concentration of intertextual inclusions must reach a certain limit and "materialize" in the structural categories of the text, which, for example, is the category of character. Thus, in our opinion, it is legitimate to consider a work in which a borrowed literary hero is found to be a creative interpretation.

The analysis of the play by B. Akunin "The Seagull" is for us a step towards understanding the patterns of functioning of the immortal "The Seagull" by A.P. Chekhov in the context of the modern literary process. Not only the title became attractive to us (this method of nomination is widespread in postmodern literature), not only the outrageous publication under the same cover as Chekhov's play. In criticism, the literary character of Akunin's text and its experimental nature have been emphasized more than once. But, as is often the case in literary criticism, the concept of "literary" does not have a strict definition. In our opinion, it should be discussed in relation to a work in which the conscious orientation of the author to the precedent text is palpable and provable. This orientation corrects the usual (especially within the framework of the realistic method) heterogeneous scheme of creativity "life ^ work" to a homogeneous one: "work ^ work". Comprehended in this way, literariness approaches the concept of "creative interpretation", but is by no means identical to it. The very setting of the work on intertextuality acquires style-forming significance, thanks to which all the quoted material is built into a special literary code, similar in function to periphrasis.

the classical code of poetry of classicism). This code makes it difficult to perceive the text, as a result of which the installation of the work on intertextuality becomes synonymous with the "dark" style, a sign of complexity and belonging to elite literature, in which, according to G.N. Pospelov, “the desire to create works for selected, refined readers and disregard for readers who are not experienced in artistic subtleties, the “profane” and “crowd” are clearly visible.

The method of mastering and including intertexts in creative interpretation is fundamentally different, which serves as the basis for its special allocation. Despite the fact that the precedent text is the initial impulse of creativity, the game of search-attribution of “foreign words” does not become the highest meaning here. The inclusion of intertext for the author of a creative interpretation is an artistic technique - referring the reader to a familiar topic in order to then say his own word about it. At the same time, the fundamental work is usually not hidden (often already revealed in the title), the percentage of direct citation of the precedent text is reduced, which forms a uniform clear style of the work. Thanks to this, intertextual connections do not become an obstacle to the perception of creative interpretation, as a result of which it remains accessible to the widest range of readers. So, for example, Pushkin's "Stone Guest" (if we consider it as an interpretation of the Don Juan image and plot) can be successfully read even without textual acquaintance with the numerous Don Juans written earlier.

The ideological dispute with the predecessor comes to the fore in creative interpretation (hence A.B. Esin's term "polemical interpretation"), and the arena of such a dispute is usually a borrowed character. It is curious that the greatest number of disputes and discrepancies arises in connection with the interpretation of realistic characters. However, as noted by A.B. Yesin, a realistic image so attractive for discussion is usually greatly simplified, loses its ambiguity, becoming the object of creative interpretation. As an example, it suffices to recall the numerous interpretations of the image of the main character of Chekhov's story "Darling", a review of which is given in his article by V.B. Kataev. The colossal potential of the ambiguity of the image of Olenka Ple-

Myannikova, like many other Chekhov's heroes, allowed, on approximately equal grounds, L. N. Tolstoy to call Darling the ideal of femininity, and M. Gorky - "a gray mouse." In both cases, some features of the multifaceted image were placed at the center of interpretation, while others were simply ignored. As a result, instead of a voluminous Chekhovian character, readers were presented with a positively beautiful or comprehensively repulsive, but clearly simplified heroine. To answer the question “Have such metamorphoses occurred with the heroes of “The Seagull” by A.P. Chekhov under the pen of B. Akunin? ”, we will consider the general structure of his play.

B. Akunin entered the literature as the author of a detective story for the “choosy reader”, or rather, a multifaceted detective story in which everyone will be able to find what they want: someone will have a twisted plot, someone will discover a literary game or “some “tricks” designed personally for him. It seems that such a commercially successful orientation towards everyone, including the elite reader, was implied by the writer when creating The Seagull in 2000. However, for some reason, such expectations were not destined to come true. B. Akunin was one of the first in Russia who began to actively and purposefully use in his work the main strategies of postmodern writing, which are the multifaceted structure of the text (“not one bottom, but several”), installation on its entertaining (“you need to entertain the reader at a worthy level "") and game character ("one of the conditions of the game that I play with the reader is full change rules"). Together with an entertaining plot, good style and a charming character, these principles allowed Akunin's detective story to become a bestseller that really met the needs of a wide variety of reader circles. But in "The Seagull" the concentration of "postmodernist" devices reached a critical level, and the mindset of entertaining that remained at the same time did not allow the play to finally move into the category of "literary" works, it did not find recognition either among lovers of the literary game, or among fans of the Akunin detective story.

The writer seems to be complicating the play with intertextual elements and other techniques of "postmodern" writing, but complicating it not selflessly, with a constant eye on the slow reader. This creates the effect of the complexity of the work, enticing

mass reader with a false promise to introduce him to elite literature. Let's call this method of confusing the reader an equivocation.

In the essay “8/2”, R. Barth calls the equivocal method of mixing truth and falsehood, which at the same time maintains the reader’s interest in the riddle and restrains the “irreversibly forward movement of the language” towards the truth so that the story can be told artistically. It seemed to us fruitful to use this term to describe Akunin's strategy of dealing with the addressee. The role of equivocation is performed by the very intertextual device of the play, which brings this intratextual device to the metatextual level (the first “false trace” is the title, which refers the reader to the name of A.P. Chekhov). Intertext promises the reader some kind of truth and at the same time, gradually unfolding in writing, postpones its discovery. However, the truth (that for which the story must ultimately be told) never appears, which allows us to call the whole play a kind of equivocation. As a result, the inclusion of Chekhov's intertext remains the only meaning that justifies the telling of this story, the existence of this discourse.

B. Akunin openly indicates the work that served as the basis for his play. This immediately excludes the game, so beloved by postmodernists, based on the reader's recognition of "foreign" words. So, the precedent text is initially known. What does the author suggest to his reader instead of the attributive game? Changing the remarks, B. Akunin almost completely rewrites the last act of Chekhov's play, as if reminding the reader of the main events of the previous series, as a result, the reader expects to continue " famous history"," meeting with your favorite characters. However, before us is just an equivalence: Akunin's intertextual comprehension of the classical play is, in the last instance, a sequel. We do not know how the fate of Nina, Arkadina and Trigorin developed. All characters remain in their places. Moreover, it is difficult to talk about any kind of plot movement, and it was precisely the “coolly cooked plot” that ensured the popularity of Akunin's detective stories about Fandorin.

There is also a detective layer in The Seagull. However, despite the criminal plot (“Konstantin Gavrilovich is dead. Only he didn’t shoot himself. He was killed”) and all the formal signs of an investigation, the play is still impossible

call detective. The plot with the murder, in which all those present in the room are suspected, becomes a kind of stencil that determines both the scenario for the further development of events and the “form of drawing” of the images. The intrigue with the “unexpected” killer canonized by A. Christie, which is based on the principle of “presumption of guilt” of each character (including the narrator), is used by B. Akunin at the level of allusion as a sign of a detective. Filling the play with sham attributes of this genre (for example, the elegant trick of a criminal who blew up the air in order to stage Kostya's suicide), B. Akunin emasculates the very essence of the detective story: internal logic events is replaced by formalized logic. The most insignificant motive is enough for such brutal murder. As a result, the actions of the characters receive not psychological, not social, in short, not realistic, but purely literary - genre motivation (by analogy with A. Christie, anyone can be a killer). So, for example, in the 6th take, contrary to all common sense, Arkadina herself is guilty, having killed her son allegedly out of jealousy for her lover. No less absurd looks like a killer and Dr. Dorn (double 8th), who hated Kostya for his cruelty to animals. Before us is another equivalence created through an intertextual game: allusive inclusions of elements of a classic detective story activate the reader’s stereotypical thinking, and exactly at the time when he reads the play as a detective story, the author methodically, take after take, finally bringing the action to the point of absurdity, destroys this genre definition.

Note that intertextual connections are used by B. Akunin mainly with the aim of influencing the addressee. Addressing A.P. Chekhov, Akunin gives the play a "literary" gloss and thus attracts a discerning reader (or a reader who claims this status). Connecting the tradition of the classic detective story, he appeals, among other things, to his own reader, who was brought up on the New Detective project. However, in each of these cases of using the intertextual writing strategy, the reader's expectations are deceived, which we have designated by R. Barth's term equivalence. The intellectual reader will not find in the play a game of recognition of precedent texts; the reader waiting for the continuation of Chekhov's story will be deceived, just like the lover of detective stories.

Let's consider "The Seagull" by B. Akunin as a creative interpretation of the classical play. As we said earlier, the borrowed character will be at the center of such consideration. However, B. Akunin borrows not one hero, but the whole system actors and partly the plot scheme of "The Seagull" by A.P. Chekhov, offering readers his own vision of events. At the same time, the author's remarks are of great importance. If Chekhov's simple remarks, stating the action or mode of action of the hero, are completely devoid of descriptiveness and evaluativeness, and the author's presence in the play is reduced to a minimum, then Akunin greatly increases the number of remarks, refusing one-component Chekhov's sentences. Let's compare the last meeting of Nina and Kostya.

"The Seagull" A.P. Chekhov:

Someone knocks on the window closest to the table.

Treplev. What's happened? (Looks out the window.) Nothing is visible. (Opens the glass door and looks into the garden.) Someone ran down the steps. (Calls.) Who is here?

leaves; you can hear him walking quickly along the terrace; half a minute later he returns with Nina Zarechnaya.

Nina! Nina!

Nina puts her head on his chest and sobs in restraint.

The same scene in "The Seagull" by B. Akunin:

Someone knocks on the window.

Treplev. What's happened? (He grabs the revolver again, looks out the window.) Nothing is visible. (Opens the glass door and looks into the garden.) Someone ran up the steps. (Calls menacingly.) Who is there? (He rushes onto the terrace with the most formidable look. He returns, dragging Nina Zarechnaya by the hand. He recognizes her in the light, waves his hand with a revolver.)

Nina! Nina!

Nina puts her head on his chest and sobs in fright, looking sideways at the revolver.

The highlighted words in B. Akunin's text contain the author's (moreover, reduced) assessment of the hero. In combination with the rest of the remarks, they form a manner diametrically opposed to Chekhov's depiction of events and characters: “Treplev absentmindedly strokes (a revolver) like a kitten”; "more and more annoyed"; “having grabbed her (Nina) by the hand and forcibly holding her, he is no longer distracted, but excited”; “speaks faster and faster, and in the end almost frenziedly”; "shuddering, shaking in soundless laughter." Thus, the presence of the author-narrator is not hidden, but, on the contrary, sticks out. The ambiguity, the complexity of the behavior of the characters is destroyed by an unambiguous and, moreover, rude motivation.

A.P. Chekhov managed to portray the suicide of Kostya - an intelligent, young and, no doubt, talented person, as a conscious and almost inevitable act. And in this consciously chosen renunciation of life, on the one hand, there is a tragic meaning, reminiscent of

self-blinding ancient hero; on the other hand, spiritual pessimism understandable only to the twentieth century (it is no coincidence that Arkadina calls her son a decadent).

In Akunin, the hero’s proximity to suicide receives a completely philistine explanation - Kostya is crazy, unable to control his behavior, therefore both the characters and the narrator treat him with fear or contempt: “Sorin. Kostya has recently become simply insane - he is obsessed with murder ”; "Mandrel. This Treplev of yours was a real criminal, worse than Jack the Ripper. All Chekhov's images are subjected to a similar schematization on the pages of the new "The Seagull", which is easy to see thanks to the author's transparent position.

The play by B. Akunin as a whole can be considered as a creative interpretation of "The Seagull" by A.P. Chekhov. Contemporary Writer offers the reader his own vision of the characters, his own explanation of the climactic event of the classic "The Seagull". At the same time, the transformation takes place along the lines of simplifying the images and a general decrease in the potential for the ambiguity of the work; the most characteristic feature of the Chekhov hero, according to the author, is placed at the basis of understanding. So, Akunin's Arkadina is just an empty and ambitious actress.

B. Akunin, despite his loud statement: "... if you play with the great dead on their own field, then if you please, beat them", failed to approach the heights of Chekhov's "The Seagull". However, it was not by chance that the play of 2000 provoked a heated discussion among literary scholars and critics. And although this "The Seagull" was more often scolded than praised, its publication in Novy Mir can already be considered symptomatic. B. Akunin reflected the most popular in modern domestic literature the mechanism of inclusion of classical intertext.

Our intertextual analysis allows us to distinguish two ways of “quoting” Chekhov: firstly, it is a fairly common at all times borrowing of characters with their subsequent interpretation, and secondly, this is a provocative use of a famous work that has selfish (commercial) and/or artistic purposes . Thus, the study of intertextual relationships allows us to trace the patterns of refraction classical work within the "literature" system and can be productively used within the historical-functional approach to the analysis of works of art.

Literature

1. Piegue-Gros N. Introduction to the theory of intertextuality: Per. from fr. / total ed. and intro. Art. G. K. Kosikova. - M.: Publishing house LKI, 2QQ8.

2. Esin A.B. Polemical interpretation as a form of existence of the classics // Literary Studies. Culturology: Select. works. - M.: Flinta: Science, 2QQ2.

3. Kostova-Panayotova M. "The Seagull" by Boris Akunin as a mirror of "The Seagull" by Chekhov. URL:

http://magazines.russ.ru/ra/2QQ5/9/pa23.html

4. Novikov V. Philological novel. URL: http://magazines.russ.ru/novyi mi/1999/1Q/novik.html

5. Chernets L.V. How our word will respond. The fate of literary works: textbook. allowance. - M.: Higher school, 1995.

6. Kataev V.B. "Darling": a story about love // ​​Kataev V.B. The complexity of simplicity. Stories and plays by Chekhov. - M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1998.

7. Akunin B. "It's more fun for me and more interesting for the discerning reader ...". Interview. URL:

http://exlibris.ng.ru/person/1999-12-23/1 akunin.html

8. Bart R. S/Z / ner. from fr. G.K. Kosikov and V.P. Murat; node ed. G.K. Kosikov. - 3rd ed. - M.: Academic Project, 2QQ9.

9. Akunin B. Seagull. URL: http://www.akunin.ru/knigi/prochee/chaika

1Q. Chekhov A.P. Seagull // Chekhov A.P. Full coll. op. and letters: in 3Q vol. T. 13: Plays. - M.: Nauka, 198b.

Makarova Valeria Vladimirovna, Postgraduate Student, Department of the History of Russian Literature, Moscow State University.

Makarova Valeria Vladimirovna, postgraduate student, department of history of Russian literature, Moscow State University.

Tel.: +79258457Q29; e-mail: [email protected]

I.A. Romanov Poetics of transit and the main narrative types in the literature of the late 20th - early 21st centuries.

Some trends in the literary process of recent decades are considered in the context of a special transitive poetics. The features of this poetics are distinguished: a sense of unsteadiness, groundlessness of being, the dominance of a marginal hero, the presence of images-symbols that convey the semantics of transit, style play, etc. Within the poetics of transit, three main narrative types are considered: “ fantastic realism”, self-portrait, stylization.

Key words: poetics of transit, marginality, literary centricity, "fantastic realism", self-portrait, stylization.

Poetry of Transition and Main Narrative Types in the Literature of the Late XXth - Beginning of the XXIst Centuries

The article deals with some tendencies of literary process of the last decades of the XXth century in the context of special transition poetry. The features of this poetry are pointed out: feeling of unsteadiness; unbased being; domination of a marginal character; presence of images-symbols, conveying semantics of transition; stylistic play etc. Three main narrative types are considered within the poetry of transition: “fantastic realism”, self portrait, stylization.

Keywords: poetry of transition, marginality, literature centrality. “fantastic realism”, self portrait, stylization.

As you know, the word "transit" is used primarily in the transport industry and refers to the movement of goods from one geographical location to another. It is understood that the cargo that was originally at point A will sooner or later end up at point B. However, anyone familiar with the realities of domestic transport knows well that this cargo can get stuck on the road, go to the wrong place, or even get lost. In the latter case, the transit of cargo will stretch for an indefinite time, and perhaps for an eternity. In the situation of this lost cargo here

Russian society and Russian literature have been living here for more than a decade and a half.

The starting point of the movement (that very notorious point A) can be considered a collectivist paradise in which Russian society has been from time immemorial, changing only its verbal shells (sobornost, communality, communism). In Russian literature, with all the variety of created images, characters have always been evaluated based on their compliance or non-compliance with collectivist values ​​- whether it be the Orthodox canon in Dostoevsky or the patriarchal village life.