首页 > 最新文献

Solov’evskie issledovaniya最新文献

英文 中文
V.I. Lamansky. Historical letters on the attitude of Russian people to their tribesmen. The letter VI 维-伊-拉曼斯基关于俄罗斯人对其部落成员态度的历史信件。信件 VI
Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.106-112
A.V. Malinov
{"title":"V.I. Lamansky. Historical letters on the attitude of Russian people to their tribesmen. The letter VI","authors":"A.V. Malinov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.106-112","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.106-112","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139150101","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Who is “R-n”: about one of the addressees of A.A. Blok's reviews of poets (one hundred years after their first publication by P.N. Medvedev) 谁是 "R-n":A.A. Blok 诗人评论(P.N. Medvedev 首次发表后一百年)的收信人之一
Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.161-178
N. V. Loshchinskaya
The article examines the circumstances associated with the use of “cryptonyms” in the publication of A.A. Blok's resolutions on poets, carried out by P.N. Medvedev in 1923.The surname of the paleontologist and writer A.N. Ryabinin, one of the applicants for joining the Petrograd branch of the All–Russian Union of Poets, is revealed. For the first time, the full handwritten text of the collective document stored in the RO IRLI with the resolutions of the members of the Admissions Committee (A.A. Blok, M.L. Lozinsky, N.S. Gumilev, M.A. Kuzmin) about his book of poems “After the Thunderstorm” (1918) is introduced into scientific circulation. The emphasis is placed on the aesthetic principles of Blok's evaluation of the reviewed poems. The characteristics of scientific, literary and social activities of A.N. Ryabinin are compared with Block's ideas about the creative potential of the Russian scientific and technical intelligentsia and its role in the transformation of Russia. The positive reaction of A.M. Remizov to the work by A.N. Ryabinin is analyzed, aspects of their possible creative contacts are outlined.
文章探讨了 1923 年 P.N.梅德韦杰夫(P.N. Medvedev)在出版阿-阿-布洛克(A.A. Blok)关于诗人的决议时使用 "隐名 "的相关情况。文章揭示了申请加入全俄诗人联盟彼得堡分部的古生物学家和作家阿-尼-里亚宾宁(A.N. Ryabinin)的姓氏。首次将保存在俄罗斯国际文学研究所(RO IRLI)的集体文件的手写全文以及入会委员会成员(A.A. Blok、M.L. Lozinsky、N.S. Gumilev、M.A. Kuzmin)关于其诗集《雷雨之后》(1918 年)的决议引入科学流通。重点是布洛克对所评论诗歌的美学评价原则。A.N. Ryabinin 的科学、文学和社会活动特点与布洛克关于俄罗斯科技知识分子的创造潜力及其在俄罗斯变革中的作用的观点进行了比较。分析了A.M. Remizov对A.N. Ryabinin作品的积极反应,概述了他们之间可能的创作联系。
{"title":"Who is “R-n”: about one of the addressees of A.A. Blok's reviews of poets (one hundred years after their first publication by P.N. Medvedev)","authors":"N. V. Loshchinskaya","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.161-178","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.161-178","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the circumstances associated with the use of “cryptonyms” in the publication of A.A. Blok's resolutions on poets, carried out by P.N. Medvedev in 1923.The surname of the paleontologist and writer A.N. Ryabinin, one of the applicants for joining the Petrograd branch of the All–Russian Union of Poets, is revealed. For the first time, the full handwritten text of the collective document stored in the RO IRLI with the resolutions of the members of the Admissions Committee (A.A. Blok, M.L. Lozinsky, N.S. Gumilev, M.A. Kuzmin) about his book of poems “After the Thunderstorm” (1918) is introduced into scientific circulation. The emphasis is placed on the aesthetic principles of Blok's evaluation of the reviewed poems. The characteristics of scientific, literary and social activities of A.N. Ryabinin are compared with Block's ideas about the creative potential of the Russian scientific and technical intelligentsia and its role in the transformation of Russia. The positive reaction of A.M. Remizov to the work by A.N. Ryabinin is analyzed, aspects of their possible creative contacts are outlined.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"86 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139151847","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Final «Historical Letters» by V.I. Lamansky (preface to the publication) 维-伊-拉曼斯基最后的 "历史书信"(出版物序言)
Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.097-105
A.V. Malinov
The article introduces the publication of the fragments of the sixth “Historical Letter on the Attitude of the Russian People to their Tribesmen” and the conclusion prepared by Vladimir Ivanovich Lamansky, a Slavophile and professor at St. Petersburg University. It is noted that other works of the scientist, on which he worked in the following years, remained unfinished. The facts allowing to indicate the date of writing the “Historical Letters” are given: 1859–1862, work interrupted by Lamansky's trip abroad (1862–1864). It is suggested that the “Historical Letters” were a continuation of the research direction outlined by Lamansky in his master's thesis “On the Slavs in Asia Minor, Africa and Spain” (1859), i.e. they were the result of his archival and desk work. The trip to the Slavic lands enriched the scholar with real knowledge of the Slavic peoples, their history and current situation, which made many of the arguments in the “Historical Letters” irrelevant. There are two subjects that Lamansky touched upon in his “last” letters, and which were further developed in his research and work. Firstly, these are the works in the field of national ethnography: his long-term leadership of the ethnographic department of the Russian Geographical Society, the organisation of the Slavic Congress and the Ethnographic Exhibition in 1867, the publication of the ethnographic journal “Zhivaya starina” (1890), the project of the of the ethnographic department of the Russian Museum (1899). Lamansky's statements on ethnography as fatherland studies or ethnology are presented, revealing his understanding of ethnographic science. Secondly, this is a historiosophical interpretation of the Oriental Question, considering it as an episode of interaction between two civilisations: the Greco-Slavic and the Romano-Germanic. The incompleteness of the “Historical Letters” is pointed out, which is reflected in the gaps in their publication.
文章介绍了第六部《关于俄罗斯人民对其部族的态度的历史信件》片段的出版情况,以及斯拉夫爱好者、圣彼得堡大学教授弗拉基米尔-伊万诺维奇-拉曼斯基编写的结论。值得注意的是,这位科学家在随后几年创作的其他作品仍未完成。历史书信 "的写作时间可根据以下事实确定:1859-1862 年,拉曼斯基出国旅行(1862-1864 年)中断了工作。有人认为,"历史书信 "是拉曼斯基在其硕士论文《论小亚细亚、非洲和西班牙的斯拉夫人》(1859 年)中提出的研究方向的延续,即是他的档案和案头工作的成果。对斯拉夫土地的考察丰富了这位学者对斯拉夫民族、其历史和现状的真正了解,这使得 "历史书信 "中的许多论点变得毫无意义。拉曼斯基在 "最后 "几封信中提到了两个主题,这两个主题在他的研究和工作中得到了进一步发展。首先是民族学领域的工作:他长期领导俄罗斯地理学会民族学部、组织 1867 年斯拉夫大会和民族学展览、出版民族学期刊《Zhivaya starina》(1890 年)、俄罗斯博物馆民族学部项目(1899 年)。本书介绍了拉曼斯基关于民族学是祖国研究还是民族学的论述,揭示了他对民族学的理解。其次,这是对 "东方问题 "的历史学解释,将其视为希腊-斯拉夫和罗马-日耳曼两种文明之间互动的插曲。指出了 "历史书信 "的不完整性,这反映在其出版的空白上。
{"title":"Final «Historical Letters» by V.I. Lamansky (preface to the publication)","authors":"A.V. Malinov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.097-105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.097-105","url":null,"abstract":"The article introduces the publication of the fragments of the sixth “Historical Letter on the Attitude of the Russian People to their Tribesmen” and the conclusion prepared by Vladimir Ivanovich Lamansky, a Slavophile and professor at St. Petersburg University. It is noted that other works of the scientist, on which he worked in the following years, remained unfinished. The facts allowing to indicate the date of writing the “Historical Letters” are given: 1859–1862, work interrupted by Lamansky's trip abroad (1862–1864). It is suggested that the “Historical Letters” were a continuation of the research direction outlined by Lamansky in his master's thesis “On the Slavs in Asia Minor, Africa and Spain” (1859), i.e. they were the result of his archival and desk work. The trip to the Slavic lands enriched the scholar with real knowledge of the Slavic peoples, their history and current situation, which made many of the arguments in the “Historical Letters” irrelevant. There are two subjects that Lamansky touched upon in his “last” letters, and which were further developed in his research and work. Firstly, these are the works in the field of national ethnography: his long-term leadership of the ethnographic department of the Russian Geographical Society, the organisation of the Slavic Congress and the Ethnographic Exhibition in 1867, the publication of the ethnographic journal “Zhivaya starina” (1890), the project of the of the ethnographic department of the Russian Museum (1899). Lamansky's statements on ethnography as fatherland studies or ethnology are presented, revealing his understanding of ethnographic science. Secondly, this is a historiosophical interpretation of the Oriental Question, considering it as an episode of interaction between two civilisations: the Greco-Slavic and the Romano-Germanic. The incompleteness of the “Historical Letters” is pointed out, which is reflected in the gaps in their publication.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"23 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139150157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
From Dialogue to Polylogue (review of the book: Comparative Philosophy: From Comparative to Intercultural Philosophy / co-edited by M.T. Stepanyants. Moscow: Nauka; Vost. lit., 2022. 399 p.) 从对话到多对话(书评:比较哲学:从比较哲学到跨文化哲学 / M.T. Stepanyants 合编。莫斯科:Nauka; Vost. lit.399 p.)
Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.179-193
A.B. Bocharov
The article presents a review of the book “Comparative Philosophy: from comparative to intercultural philosophy”, published in the series “Comparative Philosophy”. The thesis about the value of intercultural philosophy in the context of conceptology is presented. The hypothesis formulated states that intercultural philosophy expands the methodological and theoretical framework of philosophical research and can be evaluated as a frontier phenomenon. It is noted that the main thesis of intercultural philosophy consists in the rejection of West-centrism, in the criticism of the traditional historical and philosophical narrative. It is proposed to consider intercultural philsophy as an alternative to West-centrism, as it rejects the monologism inherent in western philosophy and insists on the polylogicity of philosophy. Intercultural philosophy insists on the rootedness of thinking in culture. He believes that intellectual influences and conceptual borrowings are a natural, normal situation in philosophy. However, borrowing can lead both to the fruitful development of the philosophical tradition, and to the loss of the integrity of culture, a decrease in its creative potential, and the ability to reproduce. Intercultural philosophy is aimed at explication of positive forms of intercultural interaction. It suggests a new model of the historical and philosophical process, the main method of which is a polylogue, although the followers of intercultural philosophy are still debating whether intercultural philosophy is a new direction or a new methodology. Russian philosophy can also be revised and reinterpreted. N.Y. Danilevsky, V.S. Solovyov, Slavophiles, etc. can be considered intercultural thinkers. The methodological basis of the study was the comparative and hermeneutic methods.
文章评述了 "比较哲学 "丛书中出版的《比较哲学:从比较哲学到跨文化哲学》一书。文章阐述了跨文化哲学在概念学中的价值。提出的假设认为,跨文化哲学拓展了哲学研究的方法论和理论框架,可以被评价为一种前沿现象。跨文化哲学的主要论点是反对西方中心主义,批判传统的历史和哲学叙事。建议将跨文化哲学视为西方中心主义的替代方案,因为它反对西方哲学固有的一元论,坚持哲学的多义性。跨文化哲学坚持思维植根于文化。他认为,思想上的影响和概念上的借用是哲学中自然的、正常的情况。然而,借用既可能导致哲学传统的丰硕发展,也可能导致文化完整性的丧失、创造潜力的减弱和再生产能力的下降。跨文化哲学旨在阐释跨文化互动的积极形式。它提出了一种历史和哲学进程的新模式,其主要方法是多论题,尽管跨文化哲学的追随者们仍在争论跨文化哲学究竟是一种新方向还是一种新方法。俄罗斯哲学也可以被修正和重新诠释。N.Y.达尼列夫斯基、V.S.索洛维约夫、斯拉夫派等都可以被视为跨文化思想家。研究的方法论基础是比较法和诠释法。
{"title":"From Dialogue to Polylogue (review of the book: Comparative Philosophy: From Comparative to Intercultural Philosophy / co-edited by M.T. Stepanyants. Moscow: Nauka; Vost. lit., 2022. 399 p.)","authors":"A.B. Bocharov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.179-193","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.179-193","url":null,"abstract":"The article presents a review of the book “Comparative Philosophy: from comparative to intercultural philosophy”, published in the series “Comparative Philosophy”. The thesis about the value of intercultural philosophy in the context of conceptology is presented. The hypothesis formulated states that intercultural philosophy expands the methodological and theoretical framework of philosophical research and can be evaluated as a frontier phenomenon. It is noted that the main thesis of intercultural philosophy consists in the rejection of West-centrism, in the criticism of the traditional historical and philosophical narrative. It is proposed to consider intercultural philsophy as an alternative to West-centrism, as it rejects the monologism inherent in western philosophy and insists on the polylogicity of philosophy. Intercultural philosophy insists on the rootedness of thinking in culture. He believes that intellectual influences and conceptual borrowings are a natural, normal situation in philosophy. However, borrowing can lead both to the fruitful development of the philosophical tradition, and to the loss of the integrity of culture, a decrease in its creative potential, and the ability to reproduce. Intercultural philosophy is aimed at explication of positive forms of intercultural interaction. It suggests a new model of the historical and philosophical process, the main method of which is a polylogue, although the followers of intercultural philosophy are still debating whether intercultural philosophy is a new direction or a new methodology. Russian philosophy can also be revised and reinterpreted. N.Y. Danilevsky, V.S. Solovyov, Slavophiles, etc. can be considered intercultural thinkers. The methodological basis of the study was the comparative and hermeneutic methods.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"6 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139151991","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
V.Y. Bryusov, N.F. Fedorov and the Fedorovians of the 1900s-1920s: The Question of Meaning and Goals of Art. Article one. What were Bryusov and Fedorov Arguing about in the House of Yu.P. Bartenev V.Y. Bryusov、N.F. Fedorov 和 1900-1920 年代的 Fedorovians:艺术的意义和目标问题》。第一条.布留索夫和费多罗夫在尤-巴捷涅夫家中争论什么?
Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.113-131
A. G. Gacheva
The article is the first part of the study of the problem of spiritual and creative dialogue between the founder of Russian symbolism V.Y. Bryusov and the philosopher of common cause N.F. Fedorov. In the works of Russian and foreign researchers, this dialogue was studied by V.Y. Bryusov, in terms of the poet's interest in cosmic themes, in the context of his theory of scientific poetry. In this study, the focus is on the question of the meaning and purpose of art. For the first time, with the involvement of new, including archival sources, the reaction of N.F. Fedorov to the meeting with V.Ya. Bryusov, held on April 20, 1900 in the house of Yu.P. Bartenev, is considered, it is shown how the ideological dispute that arose during this meeting was reflected in the late work of the philosopher. The content of the dispute and the interrelation of its two themes – the possibility/impossibility of overcoming death and the attitude to the ideas of F. Nietzsche are revealed. Fragments of articles and notes written by N.F. Fedorov, in which his dispute with V.Y. Bryusov is mentioned, are analyzed. N.F. Fedorov's perception of decadence is reconstructed, the philosophical complex of which, as well as the ideas of the new religious consciousness, the philosopher associated with the spiritual crisis of the fin de siècle era, contrasting them with the idea of active Christianity, man's cooperation with God in history. It is shown how N.F. Fedorov's liturgical aesthetics is formed in the polemic with Nietzschean aesthetics and decadence aesthetics, in the center of which is the image of art as an extra-temple liturgy. The relation of N.F. Fedorov to the current of symbolism, to which he opposed the religious understanding of the symbol, is considered.
本文是研究俄罗斯象征主义创始人弗-亚-布留索夫与共同事业哲学家尼-菲-费多罗夫之间精神与创作对话问题的第一部分。在俄罗斯和外国研究者的著作中,弗-亚-布留索夫以其科学诗歌理论为背景,从诗人对宇宙主题的兴趣角度对这一对话进行了研究。这项研究的重点是艺术的意义和目的问题。在新资料(包括档案资料)的参与下,首次对 N.F. 费多罗夫在 4 月与 V.Ya. 布留索夫会面时的反应进行了研究。Bryusov 会晤时的反应进行了探讨,并展示了这次会晤中出现的思想争论是如何在这位哲学家的晚期作品中得到反映的。文章揭示了争论的内容及其两个主题的相互关系--战胜死亡的可能性/不可能性和对尼采思想的态度。对 N.F. 费多罗夫撰写的文章和笔记片段进行了分析,其中提到了他与 V.Y. 布留索夫的争论。分析了 N.F. 费多罗夫对颓废的看法,其中的哲学思想以及新宗教意识的思想,哲学家将其与四世纪末的精神危机联系在一起,并将其与积极的基督教思想、人在历史中与上帝的合作进行了对比。这说明了尼-费多罗夫的礼仪美学是如何在与尼采美学和颓废美学的论战中形成的,其核心是作为圣殿外礼仪的艺术形象。尼-菲-费多罗夫与象征主义思潮的关系得到了探讨,他反对对象征的宗教理解。
{"title":"V.Y. Bryusov, N.F. Fedorov and the Fedorovians of the 1900s-1920s: The Question of Meaning and Goals of Art. Article one. What were Bryusov and Fedorov Arguing about in the House of Yu.P. Bartenev","authors":"A. G. Gacheva","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.113-131","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.113-131","url":null,"abstract":"The article is the first part of the study of the problem of spiritual and creative dialogue between the founder of Russian symbolism V.Y. Bryusov and the philosopher of common cause N.F. Fedorov. In the works of Russian and foreign researchers, this dialogue was studied by V.Y. Bryusov, in terms of the poet's interest in cosmic themes, in the context of his theory of scientific poetry. In this study, the focus is on the question of the meaning and purpose of art. For the first time, with the involvement of new, including archival sources, the reaction of N.F. Fedorov to the meeting with V.Ya. Bryusov, held on April 20, 1900 in the house of Yu.P. Bartenev, is considered, it is shown how the ideological dispute that arose during this meeting was reflected in the late work of the philosopher. The content of the dispute and the interrelation of its two themes – the possibility/impossibility of overcoming death and the attitude to the ideas of F. Nietzsche are revealed. Fragments of articles and notes written by N.F. Fedorov, in which his dispute with V.Y. Bryusov is mentioned, are analyzed. N.F. Fedorov's perception of decadence is reconstructed, the philosophical complex of which, as well as the ideas of the new religious consciousness, the philosopher associated with the spiritual crisis of the fin de siècle era, contrasting them with the idea of active Christianity, man's cooperation with God in history. It is shown how N.F. Fedorov's liturgical aesthetics is formed in the polemic with Nietzschean aesthetics and decadence aesthetics, in the center of which is the image of art as an extra-temple liturgy. The relation of N.F. Fedorov to the current of symbolism, to which he opposed the religious understanding of the symbol, is considered.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"58 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139149706","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The First Edition of “The Justification of Good” (1897): Contemporaries’ Response. Part 4 善的正当性》(1897 年)第一版:同时代人的回应。第四部分
Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.006-022
B.V. Mezhuev
The article continues the systematic review and analysis of newspaper and magazine responses to the first edition of the main work of V. Solovyov on moral philosophy “Justification of Good” (1897). The fourth part of this series of articles examines critical attacks on this book by representatives of the left, presumably Populist camp of the Russian press and public thought. It describes in detail critical responses of such authors as the regular columnist of the newspaper “Novosti”, literary critic Evgeny A. Solovyov, an anonymous review published in the journal “Russian Thought”, the reviews by the positivist philosopher Pavel V. Mokievsky in “Russkoe bogatstvo” and by the religious idealist Akim L. Volynsky in the “Severnyi vestnik”. It is noted that the main tone of criticism from the left was the assertion that the philosopher took the position of a conformist acceptance of the state and the church in their existing forms. Based on the consideration of all the above responses, the article concludes that none of the aforementioned critics tried to understand the essence of V. Solovyov's views. For most of the left-wing critics, any correlation of philosophy with religion, at least in its traditional forms, was unacceptable. It is argued that certain objections of V. Solovyov's critics on the left against his concept of moral philosophy were not without persuasiveness, which the philosopher had to take into account in the second edition of his work.
文章继续系统回顾和分析了报纸和杂志对弗-索洛维约夫道德哲学主要著作《善的正当性》(1897 年)第一版的反应。本系列文章的第四部分探讨了俄罗斯新闻界和公众思想界左派(大概是民粹主义阵营)代表对该书的批判性攻击。文章详细描述了《新消息报》固定专栏作家、文学评论家叶夫根尼-索洛维约夫(Evgeny A. Solovyov)等作者的批评回应、发表在《俄罗斯思想》杂志上的匿名评论、实证主义哲学家帕维尔-V-莫基耶夫斯基(Pavel V. Mokievsky)在《Russkoe bogatstvo》上发表的评论以及宗教理想主义者阿基姆-L-沃林斯基(Akim L. Volynsky)在《Severnyi vestnik》上发表的评论。值得注意的是,左派批评的主要基调是断言哲学家的立场是顺从地接受现有形式的国家和教会。基于对上述所有回应的思考,文章得出结论,上述批评者都没有试图理解弗-索洛维约夫观点的实质。对大多数左翼批评家来说,哲学与宗教的任何关联,至少是传统形式的关联,都是不可接受的。本文认为,左翼批评家对弗-索洛维约夫道德哲学概念的某些反对意见并非没有说服力,哲学家在其著作的第二版中必须考虑到这些反对意见。
{"title":"The First Edition of “The Justification of Good” (1897): Contemporaries’ Response. Part 4","authors":"B.V. Mezhuev","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.006-022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.006-022","url":null,"abstract":"The article continues the systematic review and analysis of newspaper and magazine responses to the first edition of the main work of V. Solovyov on moral philosophy “Justification of Good” (1897). The fourth part of this series of articles examines critical attacks on this book by representatives of the left, presumably Populist camp of the Russian press and public thought. It describes in detail critical responses of such authors as the regular columnist of the newspaper “Novosti”, literary critic Evgeny A. Solovyov, an anonymous review published in the journal “Russian Thought”, the reviews by the positivist philosopher Pavel V. Mokievsky in “Russkoe bogatstvo” and by the religious idealist Akim L. Volynsky in the “Severnyi vestnik”. It is noted that the main tone of criticism from the left was the assertion that the philosopher took the position of a conformist acceptance of the state and the church in their existing forms. Based on the consideration of all the above responses, the article concludes that none of the aforementioned critics tried to understand the essence of V. Solovyov's views. For most of the left-wing critics, any correlation of philosophy with religion, at least in its traditional forms, was unacceptable. It is argued that certain objections of V. Solovyov's critics on the left against his concept of moral philosophy were not without persuasiveness, which the philosopher had to take into account in the second edition of his work.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"30 40","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139148246","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
“Second after Aquinas ...”: Hans Urs von Balthazar on the Philosophical Aesthetics of V.S. Solovyov "阿奎那之后第二人......":汉斯-乌尔斯-冯-巴尔塔扎尔论 V.S. 索洛维约夫的哲学美学
Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.081-096
M. V. Maksimov
The analysis of the book by the Swiss philosopher and theologian H.U. von Balthazar “Vladimir Solovyov”, dedicated to the reconstruction and interpretation of the aesthetic teachings of V.S. Solovyov, is presented. The main themes of Balthazar's work are considered, defining its structure in accordance with the author's vision of the main stages of Solovyov's work: “Visionary and textual form”, “Logic and Metaphysics”, “Ethics and Ecclesiology”, “Aesthetics and Apocalypticism”. The author notes the harmony and consistency of Balthazar's concept, the logic of interpretation of the most important provisions of Solovyov's aesthetics, based on the corpus of his writings, as well as on research Russian and foreign literature. The essential characteristics of Balthazar's consideration of the aesthetics of the Russian philosopher are revealed: the disclosure of its ontological, eschatological and theological aspects. The historical and philosophical origins of Solovyov's ideas, parallels and consonances of the conceptual positions of Solovyov's aesthetics and the largest representatives of domestic and foreign philosophy: Plato, Plotinus, Maxim the Confessor, Schelling, Hegel, Schopenhauer, E. von Hartmann are determined. Balthazar's position on Solovyov's teaching about Sophia in the context of сhristological and trinitarian theology is presented. The assessment of the comparison of Solovyov's method of unity with the methods of studying Dilthey's “forms of spirit” and Spengler's “forms of culture” is given. The researcher's attention is noted to the problems of Solovyov's creative dialogue with outstanding Russian thinkers F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, K.N. Leontiev. The conclusions about the significance of the philosophical and theological reconstruction of Solovyov's aesthetics, carried out by Balthazar, for foreign and Russian Solovyov studies are formulated.
瑞士哲学家和神学家巴尔塔扎尔(H.U. von Balthazar)的著作《弗拉基米尔-索洛维约夫》致力于重建和解释弗-索洛维约夫的美学教义,对该书进行了分析。书中探讨了巴尔塔扎尔作品的主要主题,并根据作者对索洛维约夫作品主要阶段的看法确定了其结构:"幻想和文本形式"、"逻辑学和形而上学"、"伦理学和教会学"、"美学和启示录"。作者根据索洛维约夫的著作以及俄罗斯和外国文学研究,指出了巴尔萨扎尔概念的和谐性和一致性,以及索洛维约夫美学最重要条款的解释逻辑。揭示了巴尔塔扎尔对俄罗斯哲学家美学思考的基本特征:揭示其本体论、末世论和神学方面。索洛维约夫思想的历史和哲学渊源,索洛维约夫美学概念立场与国内外哲学代表人物的相似性和一致性:柏拉图、普罗提诺、忏悔者马克西姆、谢林、黑格尔、叔本华、E. von Hartmann。介绍了巴尔塔扎尔在基督论和三位一体神学背景下对索洛维约夫关于索菲亚的教导所持的立场。对索洛维约夫的统一性方法与狄尔泰的 "精神形式 "和斯宾格勒的 "文化形式 "研究方法的比较进行了评估。研究者注意到索洛维约夫与俄罗斯杰出思想家 F.M.陀思妥耶夫斯基、L.N.托尔斯泰、K.N.列昂季耶夫进行创造性对话的问题。巴尔塔扎尔对索洛维约夫美学进行的哲学和神学重建对外国和俄罗斯的索洛维约夫研究具有重要意义。
{"title":"“Second after Aquinas ...”: Hans Urs von Balthazar on the Philosophical Aesthetics of V.S. Solovyov","authors":"M. V. Maksimov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.081-096","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.081-096","url":null,"abstract":"The analysis of the book by the Swiss philosopher and theologian H.U. von Balthazar “Vladimir Solovyov”, dedicated to the reconstruction and interpretation of the aesthetic teachings of V.S. Solovyov, is presented. The main themes of Balthazar's work are considered, defining its structure in accordance with the author's vision of the main stages of Solovyov's work: “Visionary and textual form”, “Logic and Metaphysics”, “Ethics and Ecclesiology”, “Aesthetics and Apocalypticism”. The author notes the harmony and consistency of Balthazar's concept, the logic of interpretation of the most important provisions of Solovyov's aesthetics, based on the corpus of his writings, as well as on research Russian and foreign literature. The essential characteristics of Balthazar's consideration of the aesthetics of the Russian philosopher are revealed: the disclosure of its ontological, eschatological and theological aspects. The historical and philosophical origins of Solovyov's ideas, parallels and consonances of the conceptual positions of Solovyov's aesthetics and the largest representatives of domestic and foreign philosophy: Plato, Plotinus, Maxim the Confessor, Schelling, Hegel, Schopenhauer, E. von Hartmann are determined. Balthazar's position on Solovyov's teaching about Sophia in the context of сhristological and trinitarian theology is presented. The assessment of the comparison of Solovyov's method of unity with the methods of studying Dilthey's “forms of spirit” and Spengler's “forms of culture” is given. The researcher's attention is noted to the problems of Solovyov's creative dialogue with outstanding Russian thinkers F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy, K.N. Leontiev. The conclusions about the significance of the philosophical and theological reconstruction of Solovyov's aesthetics, carried out by Balthazar, for foreign and Russian Solovyov studies are formulated.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"336 6‐7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139152511","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
“Real Deed of an Artist” and Philosophy of Art: Solovyev – Fyodorov – Chekrygin "艺术家的真实行为 "与艺术哲学:索洛维约夫 - 费奥多罗夫 - 切克里金
Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.132-146
E.M. Titarenko
The article is dedicated to the aesthetic views of an artist and philosopher V.N. Chekrygin (1897–1922). His ideas are compared to the philosophy of art of V.S. Solovyev and N.F. Fyodorov. Theoretical heritage of the artist is analyzed, it reflects understanding of the tasks of creativity, history and language of the visual art. The research is based on the texts of Chekrygin: “A Manifest of the Painters (1920)”, “The Program of One-year Course on Art Philosophy” (1920), “About Upcoming New Era of the All-European Art” (1921), “About Convocation of the Resurrecting Museum’ (1921), and his epistolary art. Little-known materials from the archive are considered. Studying aesthetic works of Fyodorov and Solovyev allows to make comparative-typological research of the artist and philosopher of art. The connection is shown between Chekrygin’s ideas and aesthetic tradition of the Russian religious philosophy. Signs of aesthetics of Christian universalism can be seen in his project of a new era of the art. The idea of the project of “living art” of Chekrygin is opposed to the research of avantgarde art and it was inspired by the ideas of conciliarity and theurgy. It is shown that philosophical-aesthetic ideas of the artist are close to the philosophy of art of V.S. Solovyov and even more to the doctrine of the aesthetic supramoralism of Fyodorov. The research discloses particularities of the aesthetic ideas of the artist, which are permeated with the spirit of eschatological anxiety. Chekrygin shows the way that modern art should follow referring to the topics of theophany, to the process of contemplation of the space evolvement and the creation of the church-museum of the universal resurrection. It is proved that the artist creates the image of the final ideal of art conceiving the philosophical ideas of Solovyov and Fyodorov. It is proved that the artist remains in line with modernism discourse at the same time creating the outlines of the art of the future.
这篇文章专门论述了艺术家兼哲学家 V.N. 切克里金(1897-1922 年)的美学观点。他的观点与 V.S. Solovyev 和 N.F. Fyodorov 的艺术哲学相比较。对这位艺术家的理论遗产进行了分析,它反映了对创作任务、历史和视觉艺术语言的理解。研究以切克里金(Chekrygin)的著作为基础:画家宣言(1920 年)"、"艺术哲学一年课程计划"(1920 年)、"关于即将到来的全欧艺术新时代"(1921 年)、"关于复活博物馆的召集"(1921 年)以及他的书信艺术。研究了档案中鲜为人知的资料。通过研究费奥多罗夫和索洛维耶夫的美学作品,可以对艺术家和艺术哲学家进行类型学比较研究。切克里金的思想与俄罗斯宗教哲学美学传统之间的联系得到了体现。在他的艺术新时代计划中可以看到基督教普遍主义美学的迹象。切克里金 "活的艺术 "计划的思想与前卫艺术的研究相反,它受到协和与神学思想的启发。研究表明,该艺术家的哲学-美学思想与 V.S. Solovyov 的艺术哲学相近,与 Fyodorov 的美学超道德主义理论更为接近。研究揭示了艺术家美学思想的特殊性,其中渗透着末世论的焦虑精神。切克里金(Chekrygin)指出了现代艺术应遵循的道路,即以神谕为主题,沉思空间演变的过程,以及创建普遍复活的教堂博物馆。事实证明,艺术家根据索洛维约夫和费奥多罗夫的哲学思想创造了艺术最终理想的形象。事实证明,艺术家在创造未来艺术轮廓的同时,始终与现代主义话语保持一致。
{"title":"“Real Deed of an Artist” and Philosophy of Art: Solovyev – Fyodorov – Chekrygin","authors":"E.M. Titarenko","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.132-146","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.132-146","url":null,"abstract":"The article is dedicated to the aesthetic views of an artist and philosopher V.N. Chekrygin (1897–1922). His ideas are compared to the philosophy of art of V.S. Solovyev and N.F. Fyodorov. Theoretical heritage of the artist is analyzed, it reflects understanding of the tasks of creativity, history and language of the visual art. The research is based on the texts of Chekrygin: “A Manifest of the Painters (1920)”, “The Program of One-year Course on Art Philosophy” (1920), “About Upcoming New Era of the All-European Art” (1921), “About Convocation of the Resurrecting Museum’ (1921), and his epistolary art. Little-known materials from the archive are considered. Studying aesthetic works of Fyodorov and Solovyev allows to make comparative-typological research of the artist and philosopher of art. The connection is shown between Chekrygin’s ideas and aesthetic tradition of the Russian religious philosophy. Signs of aesthetics of Christian universalism can be seen in his project of a new era of the art. The idea of the project of “living art” of Chekrygin is opposed to the research of avantgarde art and it was inspired by the ideas of conciliarity and theurgy. It is shown that philosophical-aesthetic ideas of the artist are close to the philosophy of art of V.S. Solovyov and even more to the doctrine of the aesthetic supramoralism of Fyodorov. The research discloses particularities of the aesthetic ideas of the artist, which are permeated with the spirit of eschatological anxiety. Chekrygin shows the way that modern art should follow referring to the topics of theophany, to the process of contemplation of the space evolvement and the creation of the church-museum of the universal resurrection. It is proved that the artist creates the image of the final ideal of art conceiving the philosophical ideas of Solovyov and Fyodorov. It is proved that the artist remains in line with modernism discourse at the same time creating the outlines of the art of the future.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"1 1‐6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139149241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Philosophical and aesthetic views of G.V.F. Hegel and V.S. Solovyov: on the question of influence 黑格尔和索洛维约夫的哲学和美学观点:关于影响问题
Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.040-055
A. S. Balabaeva
The article provides a comparative analysis of the aesthetic views of G.W.F. Hegel (based on the material of “Lectures on Aesthetics” prepared for publication by H.-G. Goto) and V.S. Solovyov. The presented history of the question of the influence of Hegelian philosophy on Solovyov's work demonstrates the prospects and productivity of research related to the issues of aesthetics of Solovyov and Hegel. In this regard, there is a need to summarize the results of the investigations on this topic, making a number of important clarifications and revealing previously intended points of convergence and divergence of the two philosophers. Both general aesthetic problems (the meaning of beauty in nature, the connection between beauty and the absolute idea) and applied issues of an art and literary nature (justification of the hierarchy of arts, features of lyrical poetry) are considered. A direct and hidden polemic of Solovyov with Hegel's ideas is revealed: the objection to the subjectivity of the perception of beauty in nature, the emphasis on the need to spiritualize substance under the influence of beauty. Clarifying the understanding of the role of art in history by Hegel and Solovyov makes it possible to more clearly trace the grandiose prospects for the development of art in the Russian philosopher, whose concept of theurgic creativity will later be adopted by younger symbolists. Speaking not only as a philosopher, but also as a poet, Solovyov criticizes Hegel's position on lyrical poetry as an expression of the individual subjective consciousness of the artist. It is demonstrated how the Hegelian dialectical method is implemented by Solovyov in characterizing the stages of development of Russian poetry of the XIX century. It is suggested that the dialectic of freedom and necessity was interpreted by Solovyov when presenting the theory of fate as the Providence of God.
文章对 G.W.F. 黑格尔(根据 H.-G. 后藤准备出版的《美学讲义》材料)和 V.S. 索洛维约夫的美学观点进行了比较分析。Goto)和索洛维约夫(V.S. Solovyov)的美学观点进行了比较分析。所介绍的黑格尔哲学对索洛维约夫作品影响问题的历史表明,与索洛维约夫和黑格尔的美学问题有关的研究具有广阔的前景和巨大的生产力。在这方面,有必要对这一主题的研究成果进行总结,对一些重要问题进行澄清,并揭示两位哲学家之前有意提出的共同点和分歧点。既考虑了一般美学问题(自然中美的含义、美与绝对理念之间的联系),也考虑了艺术和文学性质的应用问题(艺术等级的合理性、抒情诗的特点)。揭示了索洛维约夫与黑格尔思想的直接而隐蔽的论战:反对自然中美的感知的主观性,强调在美的影响下将物质精神化的必要性。厘清黑格尔和索洛维约夫对艺术在历史中的作用的理解,就能更清晰地追溯这位俄罗斯哲学家对艺术发展的宏大前景,而他的 "神学创造力 "概念后来被更年轻的象征主义者所采用。索洛维约夫不仅以哲学家的身份,而且以诗人的身份,批评了黑格尔关于抒情诗是艺术家个人主观意识表达的立场。索洛维约夫是如何运用黑格尔的辩证法来描述十九世纪俄罗斯诗歌发展阶段的。论文认为,索洛维约夫在提出命运是上帝的天意这一理论时,对自由与必然的辩证法进行了诠释。
{"title":"Philosophical and aesthetic views of G.V.F. Hegel and V.S. Solovyov: on the question of influence","authors":"A. S. Balabaeva","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.040-055","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.040-055","url":null,"abstract":"The article provides a comparative analysis of the aesthetic views of G.W.F. Hegel (based on the material of “Lectures on Aesthetics” prepared for publication by H.-G. Goto) and V.S. Solovyov. The presented history of the question of the influence of Hegelian philosophy on Solovyov's work demonstrates the prospects and productivity of research related to the issues of aesthetics of Solovyov and Hegel. In this regard, there is a need to summarize the results of the investigations on this topic, making a number of important clarifications and revealing previously intended points of convergence and divergence of the two philosophers. Both general aesthetic problems (the meaning of beauty in nature, the connection between beauty and the absolute idea) and applied issues of an art and literary nature (justification of the hierarchy of arts, features of lyrical poetry) are considered. A direct and hidden polemic of Solovyov with Hegel's ideas is revealed: the objection to the subjectivity of the perception of beauty in nature, the emphasis on the need to spiritualize substance under the influence of beauty. Clarifying the understanding of the role of art in history by Hegel and Solovyov makes it possible to more clearly trace the grandiose prospects for the development of art in the Russian philosopher, whose concept of theurgic creativity will later be adopted by younger symbolists. Speaking not only as a philosopher, but also as a poet, Solovyov criticizes Hegel's position on lyrical poetry as an expression of the individual subjective consciousness of the artist. It is demonstrated how the Hegelian dialectical method is implemented by Solovyov in characterizing the stages of development of Russian poetry of the XIX century. It is suggested that the dialectic of freedom and necessity was interpreted by Solovyov when presenting the theory of fate as the Providence of God.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"41 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139150360","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The image of Philostratus in the works of K.K. Vaginov: experience of deconstruction K.K. 瓦吉诺夫作品中的菲洛斯特拉图斯形象:解构经验
Pub Date : 2023-12-28 DOI: 10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.147-160
D.L. Shukurov
The article examines the image of the ancient rhetorician Flavius Philostratus (II–III centuries) in the works of the St. Petersburg and Leningrad poet and writer Konstantin Konstantinovich Vaginov (1899–1934). Flavius Philostratus is a figure symbolizing the complex and contradictory transition from ancient culture to the Christian era. In Vaginov’s work, Philostratus also appears as a symbol of the passing Silver Age and the collapse of the ideals of creative youth. The purpose of the study is to show the hidden interpretative possibilities of the works of K.K. Vaginov, which relate to the general cultural context of the Silver Age and the ideas of its largest representatives: N.A. Berdyaev, P.A. Florensky, Vyach. Ivanov, F.F. Zelinsky, and authors from the inner circle of the writer. Some interpretive codes, which are implicitly present in the texts of Vaginov, allow the possibility of their hermeneutic interpretation followed by the deconstruction of the paralogical model of artistic reality of Vaginov’s works, as well as the deconstruction of the nomadically moving semantic center and hermetic artifact of this model: the image of Philostratus as a hypostatic and other-named character. The experience of deconstructing the paralogical model of artistic reality of Vaginov’s works and the “displaced” center of this model, the image of Philostratus, is justified by the methodological principle of complementarity, in which a formally absent element becomes conceptually significant in the interpretation, because it complements the entire system of meanings. In the works of K.K. Vaginov, such formally absent elements in the structure of other-named-hypostatic images-doubles of Philostratus are unnamed Dionysus, Apollo of Hyperborean, and Pythagoras.
本文研究了圣彼得堡和列宁格勒诗人兼作家康斯坦丁-康斯坦丁诺维奇-瓦吉诺夫(1899-1934 年)作品中的古代修辞学家弗拉维乌斯-菲洛斯特拉图斯(二至三世纪)的形象。弗拉维乌斯-菲洛斯特拉图斯是一个象征着从古代文化向基督教时代过渡的复杂而矛盾的人物。在瓦吉诺夫的作品中,斐洛斯特拉图斯也是白银时代逝去和创造性青年理想破灭的象征。本研究的目的是展示 K.K. 瓦吉诺夫作品中隐藏的解释可能性,这些可能性与白银时代的总体文化背景及其最大代表人物的思想有关:N.A. Berdyaev、P.A. Florensky、Vyach.伊万诺夫、F.F.泽林斯基以及作家圈内的作家。瓦吉诺夫文本中隐含的一些诠释代码使我们有可能对其进行诠释学解释,继而解构瓦吉诺夫作品中艺术现实的类比模式,以及解构这一模式中游牧式移动的语义中心和隐秘的人工制品:菲洛斯特拉图斯作为伪名和他名人物的形象。解构瓦吉诺夫作品中艺术现实的类比模式以及这一模式的 "移位 "中心--菲洛斯特拉图斯形象的经验,是以方法论的互补原则为依据的,在这一原则中,形式上不存在的元素在阐释中变得具有概念意义,因为它补充了整个意义系统。在 K.K. Vaginov 的作品中,菲洛斯特拉图斯的 "其他命名-歇后语图像-双人 "结构中的这种形式上缺失的元素是未命名的狄俄尼索斯、海伯波里的阿波罗和毕达哥拉斯。
{"title":"The image of Philostratus in the works of K.K. Vaginov: experience of deconstruction","authors":"D.L. Shukurov","doi":"10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.147-160","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.4.147-160","url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the image of the ancient rhetorician Flavius Philostratus (II–III centuries) in the works of the St. Petersburg and Leningrad poet and writer Konstantin Konstantinovich Vaginov (1899–1934). Flavius Philostratus is a figure symbolizing the complex and contradictory transition from ancient culture to the Christian era. In Vaginov’s work, Philostratus also appears as a symbol of the passing Silver Age and the collapse of the ideals of creative youth. The purpose of the study is to show the hidden interpretative possibilities of the works of K.K. Vaginov, which relate to the general cultural context of the Silver Age and the ideas of its largest representatives: N.A. Berdyaev, P.A. Florensky, Vyach. Ivanov, F.F. Zelinsky, and authors from the inner circle of the writer. Some interpretive codes, which are implicitly present in the texts of Vaginov, allow the possibility of their hermeneutic interpretation followed by the deconstruction of the paralogical model of artistic reality of Vaginov’s works, as well as the deconstruction of the nomadically moving semantic center and hermetic artifact of this model: the image of Philostratus as a hypostatic and other-named character. The experience of deconstructing the paralogical model of artistic reality of Vaginov’s works and the “displaced” center of this model, the image of Philostratus, is justified by the methodological principle of complementarity, in which a formally absent element becomes conceptually significant in the interpretation, because it complements the entire system of meanings. In the works of K.K. Vaginov, such formally absent elements in the structure of other-named-hypostatic images-doubles of Philostratus are unnamed Dionysus, Apollo of Hyperborean, and Pythagoras.","PeriodicalId":445879,"journal":{"name":"Solov’evskie issledovaniya","volume":"2 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139148819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Solov’evskie issledovaniya
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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