Recording Russia: Trying to Listen in the Nineteenth Century by Gabriella Safran (review)

IF 0.2 3区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY SLAVONIC AND EAST EUROPEAN REVIEW Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1353/see.2023.a897289
D. Offord
{"title":"Recording Russia: Trying to Listen in the Nineteenth Century by Gabriella Safran (review)","authors":"D. Offord","doi":"10.1353/see.2023.a897289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"family itself, and in particular on the contrasting treatment of brotherhood in the English and Russian novel. Part Two turns to ‘the historical factors that shaped the marriage plot’ (p. 21), with three chapters devoted to ideas about gender roles, the nature of courtship, and a particular Russian interest in the shortcomings of marriage as an institution. The two chapters constituting Part Three set aside conventional understandings of the family to address alternative models of kinship that go beyond blood and marriage, embracing instead ‘new kinds of family configurations’ (p. 23). If Berman’s overarching methodological claims lend her work its heuristic clarity, then her individual readings evince greater complexity and nuance. Alongside adroit and thoughtful readings of canonical family novels by Austen, Dickens and Trollope on the English side, and Tolstoi, Dostoevskii and Turgenev on the Russian, there are discussions of less familiar authors, particularly women. If female novelists have long been central to the English novel and its reputation, then Berman — generously building on the work of earlier generations of pioneering feminist critics — continues the important task of restoring writers such as Khvoshchinskaia and Tur to the canon. Some of the most productive readings proposed by Berman are those in which she draws on queer theory in order to arrive at a more complex and reflective understanding of relationship within and beyond the nuclear family. As she writes in her conclusion, ‘the nineteenth-century family novel can be a conservative story of marriage and reproductive fertility, but it can also be a story of breaking with the past and embracing the messy and unfinalizable present’ (p. 233). It is, perhaps, this gently disruptive spirit that best characterizes The Family Novel in Russia and England, 1800–1800. At a time when ‘traditional values’ are vigorously promoted by politicians around the globe and the nuclear family is vaunted as the essential building block of stable societies, Berman’s study reminds us of the messy contingency of human relations and the power of fiction to allow us to imagine alternative ways of understanding what really constitutes fellow feeling.","PeriodicalId":45292,"journal":{"name":"SLAVONIC AND EAST EUROPEAN REVIEW","volume":"101 1","pages":"152 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SLAVONIC AND EAST EUROPEAN REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/see.2023.a897289","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

family itself, and in particular on the contrasting treatment of brotherhood in the English and Russian novel. Part Two turns to ‘the historical factors that shaped the marriage plot’ (p. 21), with three chapters devoted to ideas about gender roles, the nature of courtship, and a particular Russian interest in the shortcomings of marriage as an institution. The two chapters constituting Part Three set aside conventional understandings of the family to address alternative models of kinship that go beyond blood and marriage, embracing instead ‘new kinds of family configurations’ (p. 23). If Berman’s overarching methodological claims lend her work its heuristic clarity, then her individual readings evince greater complexity and nuance. Alongside adroit and thoughtful readings of canonical family novels by Austen, Dickens and Trollope on the English side, and Tolstoi, Dostoevskii and Turgenev on the Russian, there are discussions of less familiar authors, particularly women. If female novelists have long been central to the English novel and its reputation, then Berman — generously building on the work of earlier generations of pioneering feminist critics — continues the important task of restoring writers such as Khvoshchinskaia and Tur to the canon. Some of the most productive readings proposed by Berman are those in which she draws on queer theory in order to arrive at a more complex and reflective understanding of relationship within and beyond the nuclear family. As she writes in her conclusion, ‘the nineteenth-century family novel can be a conservative story of marriage and reproductive fertility, but it can also be a story of breaking with the past and embracing the messy and unfinalizable present’ (p. 233). It is, perhaps, this gently disruptive spirit that best characterizes The Family Novel in Russia and England, 1800–1800. At a time when ‘traditional values’ are vigorously promoted by politicians around the globe and the nuclear family is vaunted as the essential building block of stable societies, Berman’s study reminds us of the messy contingency of human relations and the power of fiction to allow us to imagine alternative ways of understanding what really constitutes fellow feeling.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
加布里埃拉·萨夫兰的《记录俄罗斯:尝试聆听十九世纪》(书评)
家庭本身,尤其是英俄小说中对兄弟情谊的对比处理。第二部分转向“塑造婚姻情节的历史因素”(第21页),共有三章专门讨论性别角色、求爱的性质以及俄罗斯人对婚姻制度缺陷的特殊兴趣。构成第三部分的两章抛开了对家庭的传统理解,讨论了超越血缘和婚姻的替代亲属关系模式,转而包括“新型家庭结构”(第23页)。如果伯曼的总体方法论主张使她的作品具有启发性的清晰度,那么她的个人阅读则表现出更大的复杂性和细微差别。除了对奥斯汀、狄更斯和特洛洛普(英语版)以及托尔斯泰、陀思妥耶夫斯基和屠格涅夫(俄语版)的经典家庭小说进行熟练而深思熟虑的阅读外,还有一些不太熟悉的作家,尤其是女性的讨论。如果说女性小说家长期以来一直是英国小说及其声誉的核心,那么伯曼——在前几代先锋女权主义评论家的作品基础上慷慨地发展——继续承担着让赫沃什钦斯卡娅和图尔等作家回归正典的重要任务。伯曼提出的一些最有成效的解读是,她借鉴了酷儿理论,以便对核心家庭内外的关系达成更复杂、更具反思性的理解。正如她在结论中所写,“这部19世纪的家庭小说可以是一个关于婚姻和生育能力的保守故事,但也可以是一部打破过去、拥抱混乱和无法确定的现在的故事”(第233页)。也许正是这种温和的破坏性精神,才是1800–1800年俄罗斯和英国家庭小说的最佳特征。当“传统价值观”受到全球政客的大力提倡,核心家庭被誉为稳定社会的重要组成部分时,伯曼的研究提醒我们,人际关系的混乱偶然性和小说的力量让我们能够想象其他方式来理解什么才是真正的同胞情感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
SLAVONIC AND EAST EUROPEAN REVIEW
SLAVONIC AND EAST EUROPEAN REVIEW HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: The Review is the oldest British journal in the field, having been in existence since 1922. Edited and managed by the School of Slavonic and East European Studies, it covers not only the modern and medieval languages and literatures of the Slavonic and East European area, but also history, culture, and political studies. It is published in January, April, July, and October of each year.
期刊最新文献
London Through Russian Eyes, 1896–1914: An Anthology of Foreign Correspondence ed. by Anna Vaninskaya (review) Russia's Entangled Embrace: The Tsarist Empire and the Armenians, 1801–1914 by Stephen Badalyan Riegg (review) Stalin as Warlord by Alfred J. Rieber (review) Maria Renata Mayenowa and the Forgotten Legacy of Polish Theory of Literature and Poetics Klimat: Russia in the Age of Climate Change by Thane Gustafson (review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1