Article name Modern Traditionalist Prose in the Context of the Literary and Critical Discourse of “Patriotic” “Thick” Magazines
Authors Andreeva E.A. Postgraduate Student,
Bibliographic description Andreeva E. A. Modern Traditionalist Prose in the Context of the Literary and Critical Discourse of “Patriotic” “Thick” Magazines // Humanitarian Vector. 2019. Vol. 14, No. 5. PP. 98–109. DOI: 10.21209/1996-7853-2019-14-5-98-109.
UDK 821.161.1
DOI 10.21209/1996-7853-2019-14-5-98-109
Article type
Annotation Despite the attention of researchers to the phenomenon of modern traditionalist prose, the question of its critical reception remains unexplored. From the beginning of the emergence of “village prose”, nationally patriotic magazines strengthen its value position. The article presents an analysis of the approaches that are used by critics, “patriots” in the interpretation of the works of writers “villagers”. The material was the latest criticism of the magazines Nash Sovremennik (Our Contemporary), Moskva (Moscow) published in the 2000s and 2010s. As a result of the analysis, we identified four groups of approaches: biographical, historical and cultural, sociological and axiological. A biographical approach is fundamental to “patriotic” criticism. As part of it, the most significant facts of the biography and personal qualities of the writer which influenced his work are highlighted. The historical and cultural approach provides an answer to the question of what place the modern traditionalist prose and its individual authors occupy in the literary process. The approach in which reality is the “key” to the interpretation of the work shows how the described in the work corresponds to reality and reveals one of the fundamental principles of “patriotic” criticism: a work of art should highlight the problems of the people and the state. The axiological approach reveals the actual values that are realized in the works under consideration: agape, feeling of nature, native culture, reliance on Orthodox values, industriousness, morality and spirituality. The above approaches work to strengthen the position of writers “villagers” in the literary field and to uphold their views in the ideological field.
Key words modern traditionalist prose, writers “villagers”, literary and critical discourse of “patriots”, interpretative approaches
Article information
References 1. Blass, F. V. Hermeneutics and criticism. The art of understanding the works of classical antiquity and their literary assessment. M: LENAND, 2016. (In Rus.) 2. Borev, Yu. B., Stafetskaya, M. P. Cultural and sociological problems of criticism. In Belaya, G. A., editor Actual problems of the methodology of literary criticism. M: Science, 1980: 62–136. (In Rus.) 3. Valyanov, N. A. Chronotope of the house in the poetics by M. A. Tarkovsky. Bulletin of the Krasnoyarsk State Pedagogical University. V. P. Astafieva, no. 1, pp. 174–179, 2017. (In Rus.) 4. Valyanov, N. A. Art world of M. A. Tarkovsky: space, time, hero. Cand. filol. sci. diss. Voronezh, 2018. (In Rus.) 5. The history of Russian literary criticism: the Soviet and post-Soviet era. M: New literary review, 2011. (In Rus.) 6. Kovtun, N. V. Trickster in the vicinity of late village prose. Respectus Philologicus, no. 19, pp. 65–81, 2011. (In Rus.) 7. Kovtun, N. V. “Idyllic man” at the crossroads of history in Kovtun, N. V., editor, Russian project of the correction of the world and artistic work of the XIX‒XX centuries. M: Flint-Nauka, 2011: 280–311. (In Rus.) 8. The crisis of literary-centricity: loss of identity vs new opportunities. “Universal of culture”. Vol. V. M: Flint-Nauka, 2014. (In Rus.) 9. Razuvalova, A. Writers “villagers”: literature and conservative ideology of the 1970s. M: New literary review, 2015. (In Rus.) 10. Russian traditionalism: history, ideology, poetics, literary reflection. “Universals of culture”. Vol. VII. M: Flint-Nauka, 2016. (In Rus.) 11. Stepanova, V. A. Dualism as a formula of V. Rasputin’s worldview: the artistic system of expression. Cand. filol. sci. diss. Sankt-Peterburg, 2016. (In Rus.) 12. Kovtun, N. European “Nigdeya” and Russian “TUtopia” (On the issue of interaction). Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities and social sciences, no 1, pp. 539–556, 2008. (In Eng.) 13. Kovtun, N., Klimovich, N. The Traditionalist discourse of contemporary Russian literature: from the neo-traditionalism to “new realism”. The Art of Words / Umjetnost rijec, no 3/4, pp. 315–337, 2018. (In Eng.) Sources 14. Bayborodin, A. Victor Astafiev’s battlefield. Our Contemporary, no. 9, pp. 211–247, 2017. (In Rus.) 15. Barakov, V. Victor Astafiev and Nikolai Rubtsov. Moscow, no. 5, pp. 211–214, 2004. (In Rus.) 16. Bondarenko, V. Living. Our Contemporary, no. 6, pp. 278–283, 2003. (In Rus.) 17. Bondarenko, V. The rulers of the discourse. Our contemporary, no. 11, pp. 242–251, 2009. (In Rus.) 18. Volodikhin, D. Christian realism in Russian literature. Moscow, no. 2, pp. 181–192, 2008. (In Rus.) 19. Volodikhin, D. Fighter in linoleum shell. Moscow, no. 2, pp.190–193, 2009. (In Rus.) 20. Eskov, M. His prose can be treated. Moscow, no. 6. pp. 180–190, 2003. (In Rus.) 21. Koksheneva, K. “All the same love ...”. Our contemporary, no. 7, pp. 212–224, 2002. (In Rus.) 22. Koksheneva, K. The boundaries of fate. Moscow, no. 2, pp. 187–196, 2004. (In Rus.) 23. Koksheneva, K. Other seeders. Moscow, no. 3, pp. 178–192, 2006. (In Rus.) 24. Koksheneva, K. Lad familiar affairs. Moscow, no. 10, pp.184–188, 2007. (In Rus.) 25. Konorev, L. From the top of the ancient mound. Our Contemporary, no. 6. pp. 272–277, 2003. (In Rus.) 26. Konorev, L. “Call to holy and hard labor ..”. Our contemporary, no. 1, pp. 278–285, 2004. (In Rus.) 27. Kunyaev, S. Lawless comet. Moscow, no. 4, pp. 207–215, 2002. (In Rus.) 28. Kunyaev, S. Tolstoy will die. What then? Our contemporary, no. 1, pp. 262–277, 2004. (In Rus.) 29. Kunyaev, S. Both light and darkness. Our Contemporary, no. 5, pp. 209–217, 2004. (In Rus.) 30. Kurbatov, V. The light shines in the darkness. Moscow, no. 9, pp. 201–210, 2004. (In Rus.) 31. Lobanov, M. Millennial word. Our Contemporary, no. 9, pp. 234–249, 2000. (In Rus.) 32. Pavlov, O. New faces of Russian prose. Moscow, no. 6, pp. 169–174, 2002. (In Rus.) 33. Pavlov, S. Alchemical marriage with the East. Moscow, no. 4, pp. 176–186, 2003. (In Rus.) 34. Peryeva, I. Distraction from life. Moscow, no. 1, pp. 171–183, 2003. (In Rus.) 35. Semenko, V. Night shame. Moscow, no 5, pp.165–172, 2005. (In Rus.) 36. Spasskaya, E. Gori, burn clearly! Moscow, no. 6, pp. 190–194, 2003. (In Rus.) 37. Ubogiy, A. Russia itself. Our Contemporary, no. 1, pp. 258–268, 2008. (In Rus.) 38. Kharlamov, S. Remembering Vladimir Soloukhin. Our Contemporary, no. 7, pp. 228–234, 2004. (In Rus.) 39. Shurtakov, S. Direct word. Our contemporary, no 3, pp. 258–262, 2008. (In Rus.)
Full articleModern Traditionalist Prose in the Context of the Literary and Critical Discourse of “Patriotic” “Thick” Magazines