891 Ostindoeuropäische, keltische Literaturen
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (9)
- Part of a Book (9)
- Review (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (19)
Keywords
- Literatur (3)
- Barbar <Motiv> (2)
- Topographie <Kulturwissenschaft> (2)
- Zugehörigkeit <Motiv> (2)
- Absurde Literatur (1)
- Ajtmatov, Čingiz (1)
- Albahari, David (1)
- Anti-Utopie (1)
- Archipelag GULag (1)
- Asien <Motiv> (1)
Le poète, philosophe et helléniste Vjačeslav Ivanov (1866-1949) est considéré comme l'un des représentants les plus importants du symbolisme russe et comme une des grandes figures intellectuelles et artistiques de la Russie du début du xxe siècle. Il a été influencé aussi bien par les idées de Nietzsche que par celles des slavophiles. C'est en combinant ces deux traditions qu'il forme sa conception du dionysien. Cette dernière fait partie intégrante de son concept de "'idée russe" et joue un rôle important dans la mise en place de sa doctrine de la sobornost'. Chez Ivanov, le dionysien trouve sa réalisation dans les Scythes. Cette identification reprend la conception classique des "Scythes comme barbares russes", mais assume également l’idée nietzschéenne du dionysien comme moment barbare. On a donc affaire à une réinterprétation créative du Dionysos nietzschéen dans l'esprit de la renaissance slave. Sur la base de trois oeuvres d'Ivanov datant de périodes différentes, l'article met en évidence comment Ivanov construit la figure du Scythe et les raisons pour lesquelles son symbolisme prend la forme d'un discours de la totalité aux ambiguïtés parfois proches du totalitarisme.
In 1937, when Bulgakov was working on Master i Margarita and suffering from rejection by the theatre community, an old friend appealed to him: "Вы ведь государство в государстве. Сколько это может продолжаться? Надо сдаваться, все сдались. Один вы остались. Это глупо." And indeed "государство в государстве" ("a state within a state") is an appropriate way of describing a man who was feverishly working on a modernist novel at the height of socialist realism. The very fact that Master i Margarita was written in the oppressive environment of the 1930s makes it a unique modernist work, for it emerges as a protest against socialist realism and a defense of artistic freedom. In this respect the modernist qualities of Bulgakov's novel acquire a new dimension because Master i Margarita becomes a kind of artistic devil, fulfilling the traditional diabolic role of opposing authority. This is why Woland, as a character, is the metonymic expression of the novel's revolt.
One of the most striking and unsettling elements in Venedikt Erofeev's novel "Moskva-Petuški" is the ending where Venja, the protagonist-narrator, is murdered by four mysterious executioners in the stairway of a downtown Moscow building. [...] The last sentence turns the entire preceding narrative into a paradox: the narrator indicates that he could not have told his story, since he ceased to exist as a consciousness ("soznanie") as soon as the action stopped. The fact of Venja's death itself does not necessarily cancel out his ability to tell about the events leading up to his demise: literature knows a number of beyond-the-grave narrators, e.g., the murdered Olivia in Anne Hebert's "Les fous de Bassan" or the dead samurai Tekehiko in Akutagawa Riunosuke's "In a grove". What makes Venja's narrative paradoxic is his own reference to the end of his cogitative activity. at the moment of death the hero ceases to think and should, logically, lose the ability to narrate. Normally, a dead narrator acquires his/her ability to narrate by supernatural means, e.g., via life after death, as in "Les Fous de Bassan" or through a medium, as in "In a Grove". Such postmortem loquacity may also remain unexplained. In "Moskva-Petuški", however, the dead narrator seems to stress that his death appears as the ultimate end: a point where everything, including time and consciousness, stops.
Vsevolod M. Garshin's story "Four Days" ("Четыре дня") made the author famous when it was published in 1877. Intended as a strong anti·war statement and based on a true incident during the Russian-Turkish war (1877-78), "Four Days" is the interior monologue of a wounded soldier left for dead on an empty battlefield. His last name, Ivanov, which is traditionally considered to be the most common one in Russia, may suggest the idea of "everyman" in order to generalize the protagonists terrible experience on the battlefield into a broad anti-war message. The protagonist finds himself pinned down next to 0the body of a Turkish soldier whom he had killed just before being wounded. Forced to look at the corpse for a long time, Ivanov experiences terrible guilt, since he has never killed before. After four days of physical and mental agony, during which Ivanov reassesses his formerly idealistic attitude toward war and ends up condemning it as something far from glorious and noble, the protagonist is found by his regiment, and, unlike his real-life prototype, he survives (Henry. 47). Throughout the text we do not lave the confines of the protagonist's mind; as a result, the intense, relentless focus on his mental and physical anguish created by the interior monologue: immobilized by his wound, he becomes a prisoner of his own mind; as a result, the intense, relentless focus on his mental and physical anguish created by the interior monologue technique enhances the "horrors of war" effect intended by the author. At the same time the war-related situation and setting provide motivation for the wounded man's interior monologue: immobilized by his wound, he becomes a prisoner of his own mind and its therefore forced by circumtances to think through his entire predicament and its causes.
Ten years after writing "Spotted dog running along the seashore" ("Пегий пес, бегущий краем моря") Chingiz Aitmatov said that this novella was his favorite. Perhaps this is because it represents the essence of Aitmatov's artistic world view. The term "essence" is appropriate here because the setting and the characters of the novella are totally removed from the modem world and from history itself. Unburdened by the need to relate his artistic goals and philosophical interests to any specific socio-political context - a requirement made all the more problematic for an author writing within the Soviet literary system - Aitmatov was free to develop his favorite themes in a kind of "tabula rasa" medium. Thus, it was with absolute directness that the author could face questions dominating much of his fiction: the moral soundness of age-old values, the need for continuity in social development, the necessity of humanity's hannonious coexistence with nature, and the positive ethical value of myth.
In his lifetime Daniil Charms only succeeded in publishing two of his poems for adults. Publicly he was a children's author: a job in the Soviet Union which traditionally attracted many writers whose literature for adults was either rejected by the official literary system or had to be hidden altogether if its creators wanted to avoid trouble.
In fact up to the present day it is still Charms the children's author who is best known and loved, although finally under new historical and political conditions the writer for adults has also been allowed to make his debut. However, whatever he wrote, Charms' work was always dominated by an absurdist world view, a view that usually denied all dogma or ideology. His only aim seems to have been to present a world upside down and play around with literary and other conventions, i.e. more than anything else he wanted to be different, acting as a sort of literary "punk".
Although Charms and his associates were preceded by European absurdist authors, such as A. Jarry (1873-1907), it is very difficult to establish any relationship of influence between examples of Western European absurdism and Daniil Charms. Nonetheless, Charms' work, as well as that of Jarry, Ionesco and Beckett, all share the "grotesquely comic as well as irrational" (Abrams 1981: 1) quality of the absurdist movement in its larger modernist context.
Im Folgenden werden zunächst punktuell symbolische und literarische Codierungen des Schwarzmeerraumes aus russischer bzw. sowjetischer Perspektive skizziert, um dann erneut auf Brodskys Entwurf einer mentalen Topographie in "Flucht aus Byzanz" zurückzukommen. Die (sowjet-)russischen Erfahrungen und Einschreibungen konnotieren den gesamten Essay. Brodskys antiöstliches Pathos erweist sich vor dem autobiographischen Hintergrund als eine antiimperiale Geste, als Abrechnung mit der Unfreiheit des Sowjetimperiums.
Ausgehend von Šalamovs Poetik und mit Blick auf die Positionen von Solženicyn und Semprún sollen im Folgenden einige Aspekte des vielschichtigen Problemfeldes 'Überleben und Schreiben' diskutiert werden. Dabei geht es mir, das sei betont, nicht um einen Vergleich zwischen dem sowjetischen GULag und den nationalsozialistischen Konzentrations- beziehungsweise Vernichtungslagern. Ein solcher Vergleich war auch von keinem der drei Autoren intendiert, selbst wenn sich deren Refl exionen mitunter auch auf die europäischen Terrorpraktiken des 20. Jahrhunderts insgesamt erstreckten. Die Art und Weise, wie das Überleben in literarischen Texten thematisiert wird, hängt eng mit der Frage nach den poetologischen Konsequenzen zusammen, nach Möglichkeiten und Grenzen des Sprechens über das Erlebte, nach der Modellierung des Lagers in fiktionalen Räumen. Mit Ausnahme von Solženicyns 'Archipel GULAG', in dem gestützt auf zahlreiche mündliche und schriftliche Berichte von Überlebenden der "Versuch einer künstlerischen Untersuchung" des GULag-Systems als Ganzes unternommen wird, handelt es sich bei den nachfolgenden Beispielen um literarische Darstellungen des Lagers aus der Perspektive eines Einzelnen. Die literarische Rekonstruktion des im Lager Erlebten verlangte jedem Schreibenden ethische und ästhetische Entscheidungen ab.
When Gorki wrote his play "The Barbarians" (1906), he probably did not intend to raise such an intricate problem as the relationship between the barbarian, the savage and the civilized. Neither did he envisage talking about this triadic relation in reference to its political, historical and philosophical meaning. He proceeded as a writer and managed to construct a peculiar literary figure of the "barbarian" in its multiple aspects, and as related to other figures, such as the savage, in the first place. In this paper I argue that Gorki's intrinsically literary venture consisted in trying to make collide two categories that never normally enter in a dual relationship, but are always mediated by the category of the "civilized". The objective of this paper is to examine the consequences of this forced dualism, which without imposing any idea of civilization, however, ends up by setting it as a problem for further meditation and, without giving any solution, invites the reader to pursue his reflection.