{"title":"Anthropology of the private world in N. V. Gogol’s Little Russian novels about modernity","authors":"V. V. Bashkeeva","doi":"10.25587/2222-5404-2023-20-4-39-50","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The relevance of the article is connected with the application of the method of literary anthropology, the study of anthropological forms, for the first time undertaken to a set of N. V. Gogol's Little Russian novels about modernity: \"Ivan Fyodorovich Shponka and His Auntie\", \"The Old World Landlords\", \"The Tale of How Ivan Ivanovich Quarreled with Ivan Nikiforovich\". The problematic question is how a special narrator and a special world are related. The aims and objectives are connected to the analysis of the narrator's image and images of the characters primarily from the verbal portrait’s point of view, which makes it possible to cover important aspects of the writer's humanistic vision. The emphasis is on how the particular narrator creates a private world with all its subjects and details. The peculiarities of the narrator's image are considered as immersed in everyday life and material things, close to an ordinary common man of Mirgorod. The question is raised about the complication of this image, which, however, did not lead to the wholeness and completeness of the image. The private world created by the special narrator is dominated by special laws that determine the portrayal of the characters. The destruction of the boundaries between human and non-human, external and internal, philistine and divine, leads to the destruction of the world’s hierarchical structure. Another consequence of this is the likening of everything to everything else, the tendency to depict the mass, the similar, the echoing, including the accentuation of imaginary pairing. The singular tends to pairing, the paired tends to the mass-shaped. The destruction of the boundaries between the external and the internal leads to the dominance of corporeality, regardless of whether man is shown as flesh or as form. One can speak of Gogol's dominance of the face over the countenance (Florensky), the dismemberment of the body into parts, the autonomisation and independent life of these parts. An excessive importance is given to the character's costume, which can replace the hero. The traditional description is replaced by an expressive representation of the hero in two variants: representation-in-general and representation-in-the-moment.","PeriodicalId":208899,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik of North-Eastern Federal University","volume":" 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik of North-Eastern Federal University","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25587/2222-5404-2023-20-4-39-50","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The relevance of the article is connected with the application of the method of literary anthropology, the study of anthropological forms, for the first time undertaken to a set of N. V. Gogol's Little Russian novels about modernity: "Ivan Fyodorovich Shponka and His Auntie", "The Old World Landlords", "The Tale of How Ivan Ivanovich Quarreled with Ivan Nikiforovich". The problematic question is how a special narrator and a special world are related. The aims and objectives are connected to the analysis of the narrator's image and images of the characters primarily from the verbal portrait’s point of view, which makes it possible to cover important aspects of the writer's humanistic vision. The emphasis is on how the particular narrator creates a private world with all its subjects and details. The peculiarities of the narrator's image are considered as immersed in everyday life and material things, close to an ordinary common man of Mirgorod. The question is raised about the complication of this image, which, however, did not lead to the wholeness and completeness of the image. The private world created by the special narrator is dominated by special laws that determine the portrayal of the characters. The destruction of the boundaries between human and non-human, external and internal, philistine and divine, leads to the destruction of the world’s hierarchical structure. Another consequence of this is the likening of everything to everything else, the tendency to depict the mass, the similar, the echoing, including the accentuation of imaginary pairing. The singular tends to pairing, the paired tends to the mass-shaped. The destruction of the boundaries between the external and the internal leads to the dominance of corporeality, regardless of whether man is shown as flesh or as form. One can speak of Gogol's dominance of the face over the countenance (Florensky), the dismemberment of the body into parts, the autonomisation and independent life of these parts. An excessive importance is given to the character's costume, which can replace the hero. The traditional description is replaced by an expressive representation of the hero in two variants: representation-in-general and representation-in-the-moment.
这篇文章的意义在于首次将文学人类学的方法--人类学形式的研究--应用于果戈理(N. V. Gogol)的一系列关于现代性的俄罗斯小小说:"伊万-费奥多罗维奇-什庞卡和他的姑妈》、《旧世界的地主》、《伊万-伊万诺维奇如何与伊万-尼基福罗维奇争吵的故事》。问题的关键在于一个特殊的叙述者和一个特殊的世界是如何联系在一起的。目的和目标与主要从语言肖像的角度分析叙述者的形象和人物形象有关,这就有可能涵盖作家人文视野的重要方面。重点在于特定的叙述者是如何创造一个包含所有主题和细节的私人世界的。叙述者形象的特殊性被认为是沉浸在日常生活和物质生活中,接近米尔戈罗德的普通人。我们对这一形象的复杂性提出了疑问,然而,这并没有导致形象的完整和完整。特殊叙述者所创造的私人世界受特殊法则的支配,这些法则决定了人物形象的塑造。人与非人、外在与内在、庸俗与神圣之间界限的破坏导致了世界等级结构的破坏。这导致的另一个后果是将万物比作万物,倾向于描绘大量的、相似的、呼应的事物,包括强调想象中的配对。奇异趋向于配对,配对趋向于大众化。外部和内部界限的破坏导致肉体的主导地位,无论人是以肉体还是以形体的形式出现。可以说,果戈理的面孔比容貌(弗罗林斯基)更重要,身体被肢解成各个部分,这些部分具有自主性和独立的生命。人物的服装被赋予了过分的重要性,它可以取代主人公。传统的描写被英雄的表现形式所取代,表现形式有两种:一般表现形式和瞬间表现形式。