Search

Search Results

• The chronotope of O. E. Mandelshtam’s Poems about the Unknown Soldier

  Sergei Shul’ts

  Views:

  27

  The chronotope of O.E. Mandelstam’s Poems about the Unknown Soldier has at least three levels: (1)  the level  of internal time-space as immanent to the subject, the author-hero; this is the level of subjective refraction of events in individual consciousness/thinking; (2) the  level of external time-space: the historical and natural beginning of world life (historical and physical cosmos) in their correlation; here worldly life is presented as if outside any of its perception from the outside, “by itself”; and (3) the mythical-symbolic dimension shining through the other two; the events here are interpreted in their parabolical content, including in the aspect of the philosophy of culture and intertextuality as a kind of “new mythology”.

• Gogol’s Vij and L.N. Tolstoy’s War and Peace in V.V. Mayakovsky’s Poem War and Peace

  Sergei Shul’ts

  Views:

  277

  Representing himself in his poem War and Peace in the form of a fictional "absolute unit" - the new Vij - Mayakovsky demonstrates the infernality of a new type, in comparison with Gogol's one. Mayakovsky's ideacontrasts with Tolstoy's pacifism and the idea of "eternal peace" (the novel War and Peace). Unlike Tolstoy, refusing to notice and recognize the real diversity in the manifestations of man and the human principle, Mayakovsky reduces all people, their thoughts and concerns to their personal ideas.

• Non-blame and/or Forgiveness: Observations about L.N. Tolstoy’s Theology on the Background of the Philosophy of I. Kant and M.M. Bakhtin

  10 p.

  Sergey Shults

  Views:

  188

  The problem of correlation of non-blame and forgiveness in L. Tolstoy’s world is put in the context of Kant’s and Bakhtin’s philosophy. The author comes to the conclusion that for L. Tolstoy non-blame is above forgiveness.

• B. Spinoza, N.V. Gogol, J. Baudrillard: On the Debate about Theocentrism and Anthropocentrism

  13 p.

  Sergey Shults

  Views:

  193

  Interest in the problem of man, in the structure of the world and in its foundations is brought together, with all the difference, Spinoza, Gogol, Baudrillard. In the lineup of authors, three main attitudes are revealed. Spinoza: all that exists is theocentric; one must strive to comprehend God and His "extensions" (not creatures!) in the form of the world and man. Gogol: comic-romantic criticism regarding intramural irrationality with the author's aspiration for an eschatological perspective. Baudrillard: immersion in the pan-social as the only being, although it has (starting from the Renaissance) an empty foundation. According to Spinoza, man, nature, the world, in general, everything in reality is an extension of God. Not "creation"! - it is a continuation, practically an integral part of God, some "doubles", although those with less "good."  It turns out that God is not able to separate himself from what is around him, what is in the outside world and everything that is not He considers himself to be. Gogol, on the other hand, strove to portray man as really different in relation to God and at the same time capable of changing (the concept of “Dead Souls”). Isn’t the “apocalypse of our time” outlined by Baudrillard? Its unchanging Marxist-Freudian jargon is intended only to serve the immediate intention of reforming social reality. The Baudrillard concept is marked by post- and neo-romantic skepticism regarding the nature of man and society. The extra-Marxist (and non-Freudian) in Baudrillard - his bet on "reversibility", on the "gift" (in the terminology of Moos and his followers) of the "gift", ie installation on a "symbolic exchange" between communicants in all spheres of existence. Thus, Baudrillard comes to recognize the linkage "modern / postmodern" and to recognize the benefits of modernity. The transformation of “dead souls” is a path that Gogol also thought about realizing on different grounds and which opposes the complacency of Spinozist machines.

• Harms – Gogol – Dostoevsky (“Old Women” – “Vij” – “Crime and Punishment”)

  14 p.

  Sergey Shults

  Views:

  173

  In terms of historical poetics and intertextuality, parallels are drawn between "Old Woman"
  by D. Harms, "Vij" by N. Gogol and "Crime and Punishment" by F. Dostoevsky. As far as the
  three authors are concerned, their common features are revealed, together with the transformation
  of the motives of the ugly infernal old woman, which are depicted in the context of
  mythopoetics, historiosophy and social history by the three authors. Concerning the texts produced
  by their followers the term “post-text” is introduced, which is meant to include the dialogical
  connotations of literary evolution. The role of “vertex composition” (a term coined by
  V.M. Zhirmunsky) in works of Modernism/ Avant-garde is also touched upon.