“地狱中的俄耳甫斯”:鲍里斯·波普拉夫斯基小说《天堂归来》中俄耳甫斯与欧律狄刻神话的转换

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Imagologiya i Komparativistika-Imagology and Comparative Studies Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.17223/24099554/14/4
I. I. Nazarenko
{"title":"“地狱中的俄耳甫斯”:鲍里斯·波普拉夫斯基小说《天堂归来》中俄耳甫斯与欧律狄刻神话的转换","authors":"I. I. Nazarenko","doi":"10.17223/24099554/14/4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study aims to interpret Boris Poplavsky’s novel Home from Heaven (1935) through the prism of the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice to identify the author’s concept of love, art, and the structure of reality. The novel Home from Heaven contains allusions that refer to the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice. The grounds for comparing the myth and the novel plot are seen in the fact that, in his poetic legacy, Poplavsky uses the metaphor of Orpheus in hell to express his own attitude. Poplavsky’s polemic with the ancient myth, with the understanding of the nature of love and the creative genius is revealed and explained by a change in axiology. The principle of allusions to the well-known myth is determined: it is not a manifestation of collisions of the myth in modern times, but a travesty of the mythological plot. In Home from Heaven, Oleg, the modern Orpheus (aspiring writer), does not descend into the realm of the dead for Eurydice, but he himself tries to return to the earthly reality from the “metaphysical hell”, escapes from God with the help of the female love of Eurydice (Tanya and Katya). Poplavsky’s image of the universe is the opposite of the ordered mythological model of the world: “heaven” is the world of culture and the subconscious, which correlates with the lower, infernal space of eternal torment. It is concluded that the modern man sees “hell” (not Hades) both in the metaphysical sphere of the spirit (culture) and in the earthly reality (in the sphere of eros). The correspondence of the modernist aesthetics to the semantics of the plot of the novel is justified: the modern Orpheus, like the ancient one, cannot save love and be saved by love in the “hell” of being. Poplavsky’s inversion of the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice clarifies his concept of love. A harmonious love relationship between people, uniting them into one whole, is impossible because people are prisoners of their consciousness and cannot fully open its content to others. Oleg discovers that, in order to achieve harmony, it is necessary to “build” a house on the “earth” and in the “heaven”, combining the physical with the spiritual. The modern Orpheus, having accepted the fate of the writer, fulfills his mission: having discovered the “hell” of culture and of his own consciousness, having plunged into the “hell” of the earthly reality, he does not succumb to the false art of Eurydice and discovers the true Eurydice—the Word. He returns to God within himself, to culture, but he knows about reality and unites the “heaven” and the “earth” in the “home” of his own creativity, thereby overcoming the total “hell”. According to Poplavsky’s concept, however, the modern Orpheus cannot claim the role of a medium, a prophet, and art is unable to reveal the future. Art does not transform reality, does not grant immortality to the creator, and is itself not immortal, but destroyed by time. Therefore, the epistemological (cognition of being and self-knowledge) and communicative (transfer of spiritual experience to representatives of future generations) functions of art remain.","PeriodicalId":55932,"journal":{"name":"Imagologiya i Komparativistika-Imagology and Comparative Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Orpheus in Hell”: The Transformation of the Myth of Orpheus and Eurydice in Boris Poplavsky’s Novel Home from Heaven\",\"authors\":\"I. I. Nazarenko\",\"doi\":\"10.17223/24099554/14/4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The study aims to interpret Boris Poplavsky’s novel Home from Heaven (1935) through the prism of the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice to identify the author’s concept of love, art, and the structure of reality. The novel Home from Heaven contains allusions that refer to the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice. The grounds for comparing the myth and the novel plot are seen in the fact that, in his poetic legacy, Poplavsky uses the metaphor of Orpheus in hell to express his own attitude. Poplavsky’s polemic with the ancient myth, with the understanding of the nature of love and the creative genius is revealed and explained by a change in axiology. The principle of allusions to the well-known myth is determined: it is not a manifestation of collisions of the myth in modern times, but a travesty of the mythological plot. In Home from Heaven, Oleg, the modern Orpheus (aspiring writer), does not descend into the realm of the dead for Eurydice, but he himself tries to return to the earthly reality from the “metaphysical hell”, escapes from God with the help of the female love of Eurydice (Tanya and Katya). Poplavsky’s image of the universe is the opposite of the ordered mythological model of the world: “heaven” is the world of culture and the subconscious, which correlates with the lower, infernal space of eternal torment. It is concluded that the modern man sees “hell” (not Hades) both in the metaphysical sphere of the spirit (culture) and in the earthly reality (in the sphere of eros). The correspondence of the modernist aesthetics to the semantics of the plot of the novel is justified: the modern Orpheus, like the ancient one, cannot save love and be saved by love in the “hell” of being. Poplavsky’s inversion of the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice clarifies his concept of love. A harmonious love relationship between people, uniting them into one whole, is impossible because people are prisoners of their consciousness and cannot fully open its content to others. Oleg discovers that, in order to achieve harmony, it is necessary to “build” a house on the “earth” and in the “heaven”, combining the physical with the spiritual. The modern Orpheus, having accepted the fate of the writer, fulfills his mission: having discovered the “hell” of culture and of his own consciousness, having plunged into the “hell” of the earthly reality, he does not succumb to the false art of Eurydice and discovers the true Eurydice—the Word. He returns to God within himself, to culture, but he knows about reality and unites the “heaven” and the “earth” in the “home” of his own creativity, thereby overcoming the total “hell”. According to Poplavsky’s concept, however, the modern Orpheus cannot claim the role of a medium, a prophet, and art is unable to reveal the future. Art does not transform reality, does not grant immortality to the creator, and is itself not immortal, but destroyed by time. Therefore, the epistemological (cognition of being and self-knowledge) and communicative (transfer of spiritual experience to representatives of future generations) functions of art remain.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55932,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Imagologiya i Komparativistika-Imagology and Comparative Studies\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Imagologiya i Komparativistika-Imagology and Comparative Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17223/24099554/14/4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Imagologiya i Komparativistika-Imagology and Comparative Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17223/24099554/14/4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在通过俄耳甫斯与欧律狄刻神话的棱镜解读鲍里斯·波普拉夫斯基的小说《天堂之家》(Home from Heaven, 1935),以确定作者的爱情观、艺术观和现实结构。小说《天堂之家》中有关于俄耳甫斯和欧律狄刻神话的典故。将神话与小说情节进行比较的依据在于,波普拉夫斯基在他的诗歌遗产中,用地狱里俄耳甫斯的比喻来表达自己的态度。波普拉夫斯基对古代神话、对爱的本质的理解和创造天才的争论,通过价值论的变化得到揭示和解释。确定了著名神话典故的原则:它不是现代神话碰撞的表现,而是对神话情节的一种嘲弄。在《来自天堂的家》中,现代俄耳甫斯奥列格(有抱负的作家)并没有为了欧律狄刻而堕入死亡的境界,而是自己试图从“形而上学的地狱”中回归世俗的现实,在欧律狄刻(Tanya and Katya)的女性爱情的帮助下逃离了上帝。波普拉夫斯基的宇宙形象与有序的神话世界模型相反:“天堂”是文化和潜意识的世界,它与永恒折磨的较低的地狱空间相关。结论是,现代人在精神(文化)的形而上学领域和世俗现实(爱神)的领域中都看到了“地狱”(而不是Hades)。现代主义美学与小说情节语义的契合是合理的:现代俄耳甫斯和古代俄耳甫斯一样,无法在存在的“地狱”中拯救爱情,也无法被爱情所拯救。波普拉夫斯基对俄耳甫斯和欧律狄刻神话的颠倒阐明了他的爱情观。人与人之间和谐的爱的关系,把他们团结成一个整体,是不可能的,因为人们是自己意识的囚徒,不能完全向别人开放它的内容。奥列格发现,为了达到和谐,必须在“大地”和“天堂”上“建造”一所房子,将物质与精神结合起来。现代的俄耳甫斯接受了作家的命运,完成了他的使命:他发现了文化的“地狱”和他自己意识的“地狱”,他陷入了世俗现实的“地狱”,他没有屈服于欧律狄刻的虚假艺术,而是发现了真正的欧律狄刻——世界。他回到自己内心的上帝,回到文化,但他了解现实,并将“天堂”和“地球”统一在他自己的创造力的“家”中,从而克服了整个“地狱”。然而,按照波普拉夫斯基的观念,现代俄耳甫斯不能担当媒介、先知的角色,艺术也不能揭示未来。艺术不能改造现实,不能使创作者不朽,艺术本身也不是不朽的,而是被时间毁灭的。因此,艺术的认识论(对存在和自我认识的认识)和交流(将精神经验传递给后代的代表)功能仍然存在。
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
“Orpheus in Hell”: The Transformation of the Myth of Orpheus and Eurydice in Boris Poplavsky’s Novel Home from Heaven
The study aims to interpret Boris Poplavsky’s novel Home from Heaven (1935) through the prism of the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice to identify the author’s concept of love, art, and the structure of reality. The novel Home from Heaven contains allusions that refer to the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice. The grounds for comparing the myth and the novel plot are seen in the fact that, in his poetic legacy, Poplavsky uses the metaphor of Orpheus in hell to express his own attitude. Poplavsky’s polemic with the ancient myth, with the understanding of the nature of love and the creative genius is revealed and explained by a change in axiology. The principle of allusions to the well-known myth is determined: it is not a manifestation of collisions of the myth in modern times, but a travesty of the mythological plot. In Home from Heaven, Oleg, the modern Orpheus (aspiring writer), does not descend into the realm of the dead for Eurydice, but he himself tries to return to the earthly reality from the “metaphysical hell”, escapes from God with the help of the female love of Eurydice (Tanya and Katya). Poplavsky’s image of the universe is the opposite of the ordered mythological model of the world: “heaven” is the world of culture and the subconscious, which correlates with the lower, infernal space of eternal torment. It is concluded that the modern man sees “hell” (not Hades) both in the metaphysical sphere of the spirit (culture) and in the earthly reality (in the sphere of eros). The correspondence of the modernist aesthetics to the semantics of the plot of the novel is justified: the modern Orpheus, like the ancient one, cannot save love and be saved by love in the “hell” of being. Poplavsky’s inversion of the myth of Orpheus and Eurydice clarifies his concept of love. A harmonious love relationship between people, uniting them into one whole, is impossible because people are prisoners of their consciousness and cannot fully open its content to others. Oleg discovers that, in order to achieve harmony, it is necessary to “build” a house on the “earth” and in the “heaven”, combining the physical with the spiritual. The modern Orpheus, having accepted the fate of the writer, fulfills his mission: having discovered the “hell” of culture and of his own consciousness, having plunged into the “hell” of the earthly reality, he does not succumb to the false art of Eurydice and discovers the true Eurydice—the Word. He returns to God within himself, to culture, but he knows about reality and unites the “heaven” and the “earth” in the “home” of his own creativity, thereby overcoming the total “hell”. According to Poplavsky’s concept, however, the modern Orpheus cannot claim the role of a medium, a prophet, and art is unable to reveal the future. Art does not transform reality, does not grant immortality to the creator, and is itself not immortal, but destroyed by time. Therefore, the epistemological (cognition of being and self-knowledge) and communicative (transfer of spiritual experience to representatives of future generations) functions of art remain.
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
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Ivan Bunin’s Middle East and Nikolay Gumilyov’s Africa: Travels Through the “Map” of Literary Techniques Motherland in the Philosophy of Eurasianism The Poetics of the Carnation: The Word and the Image in Russian Poetry From Trediakovsky to Brodsky (In the Context of European Tradition). Part One Altai Hydropoetics: Rivers Sleep of Reason: Existential Motifs in Vasily Shukshin’s Story “Thoughts”
×
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