关于诗歌及其他的争论

Q4 Arts and Humanities Voprosy Literatury Pub Date : 2024-06-07 DOI:10.31425/0042-8795-2024-3-122-133
E. Pogorelaya
{"title":"关于诗歌及其他的争论","authors":"E. Pogorelaya","doi":"10.31425/0042-8795-2024-3-122-133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is written in response to I. Plekhanova’s study published in the same issue of Voprosy Literatury, which calls A. Dolgareva’s poetry an undoubtedly leading phenomenon of contemporary poetry. E. Pogorelaya also acknowledges key defining characteristics of Dolgareva’s output: preference for lively colloquial language, references to personal experience and the reader’s civic stance, reliance on plots and archetypical images and motifs, as well as a leaning towards the Soviet literary tradition and Soviet past as the last era of stability and relative normalcy. Polemizing with Plekhanova and other admirers of Dolgareva’s poetry, the author points out that the backbone of her poetics is drawn from 2010s’ Internet poetry, e. g., A. Kudryasheva’s works. The author argues that Dolgareva’s free and unrestricted, if not haphazard, treatment of the language is rooted in that background and that her works share a lot of similarities with those by authors from the Internet. Therefore, Pogorelaya suggests a more critical and reflective approach to Dolgareva’s oeuvre, stressing that it is primarily written with a specific reference group in mind and mirrors the group’s emotional charge.","PeriodicalId":52245,"journal":{"name":"Voprosy Literatury","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A dispute about poems and beyond\",\"authors\":\"E. Pogorelaya\",\"doi\":\"10.31425/0042-8795-2024-3-122-133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article is written in response to I. Plekhanova’s study published in the same issue of Voprosy Literatury, which calls A. Dolgareva’s poetry an undoubtedly leading phenomenon of contemporary poetry. E. Pogorelaya also acknowledges key defining characteristics of Dolgareva’s output: preference for lively colloquial language, references to personal experience and the reader’s civic stance, reliance on plots and archetypical images and motifs, as well as a leaning towards the Soviet literary tradition and Soviet past as the last era of stability and relative normalcy. Polemizing with Plekhanova and other admirers of Dolgareva’s poetry, the author points out that the backbone of her poetics is drawn from 2010s’ Internet poetry, e. g., A. Kudryasheva’s works. The author argues that Dolgareva’s free and unrestricted, if not haphazard, treatment of the language is rooted in that background and that her works share a lot of similarities with those by authors from the Internet. Therefore, Pogorelaya suggests a more critical and reflective approach to Dolgareva’s oeuvre, stressing that it is primarily written with a specific reference group in mind and mirrors the group’s emotional charge.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52245,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Voprosy Literatury\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Voprosy Literatury\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2024-3-122-133\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Voprosy Literatury","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2024-3-122-133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章是对 I. Plekhanova 在同一期《Voprosy Literatury》上发表的研究报告的回应,该研究报告称 A. Dolgareva 的诗歌无疑是当代诗歌的领军现象。E. Pogorelaya 也承认多尔加雷娃作品的主要特征:偏爱生动的口语化语言,提及个人经历和读者的公民立场,依赖情节和原型形象及主题,以及倾向于苏联文学传统和苏联过去,将其视为最后一个稳定和相对正常的时代。作者与普列汉诺娃和其他多尔加雷娃诗歌的崇拜者针锋相对,指出多尔加雷娃诗歌的骨干来自 2010 年代的网络诗歌,如 A. 库德莉亚舍娃的作品。作者认为,多尔加列娃对语言的自由、无拘无束(如果不是杂乱无章的话)的处理正是源于这种背景,她的作品与网络作家的作品有很多相似之处。因此,波戈雷拉娅建议对多尔加列娃的作品采取一种更具批判性和反思性的方法,强调其作品主要是为特定的参照群体而写,反映了该群体的情感冲动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A dispute about poems and beyond
The article is written in response to I. Plekhanova’s study published in the same issue of Voprosy Literatury, which calls A. Dolgareva’s poetry an undoubtedly leading phenomenon of contemporary poetry. E. Pogorelaya also acknowledges key defining characteristics of Dolgareva’s output: preference for lively colloquial language, references to personal experience and the reader’s civic stance, reliance on plots and archetypical images and motifs, as well as a leaning towards the Soviet literary tradition and Soviet past as the last era of stability and relative normalcy. Polemizing with Plekhanova and other admirers of Dolgareva’s poetry, the author points out that the backbone of her poetics is drawn from 2010s’ Internet poetry, e. g., A. Kudryasheva’s works. The author argues that Dolgareva’s free and unrestricted, if not haphazard, treatment of the language is rooted in that background and that her works share a lot of similarities with those by authors from the Internet. Therefore, Pogorelaya suggests a more critical and reflective approach to Dolgareva’s oeuvre, stressing that it is primarily written with a specific reference group in mind and mirrors the group’s emotional charge.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Voprosy Literatury
Voprosy Literatury Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
110
期刊最新文献
Shapiro, J. (2022). 1599, A year in the life of William Shakespeare. Translated by E. Lutsenko. Afterword by E. Lutsenko. Ed. by Y. Fridstein. Moscow: Tsentr knigi Rudomino. (In Russ.) A railway modernity. Izmalkovo train station in Ivan Bunin’s work Evocations of Nekrasov’s trench prose in Elena Rzhevskaya’s novellas Klim Samgin and an encyclopaedic genius of the era. On Gorky’s God-building pursuit Smirnova, N. (2023). Literary fragment and unfinishable text: Conception and reading. Moscow: Kanon-Plyus. (In Russ.)
×
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