Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} Soul by Andrei Platonov Andrei Platonov: the Genius Who Supported Communism but Mocked the Soviet System

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} Soul by Andrei Platonov Andrei Platonov: the Genius Who Supported Communism but Mocked the Soviet System Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} Soul by Andrei Platonov Andrei Platonov: The genius who supported communism but mocked the Soviet system. Nobel Prize-winning poet Joseph Brodsky described Platonov as an “outstanding writer of our time”, and one of the major figures of 20th century literature, placing the blue-chip Soviet author alongside Marcel Proust, Franz Kafka, Robert Musil, William Faulkner and Samuel Beckett. But here is the thing, Platonov was someone who supported the Bolshevik Revolution and joined the Communist Party while his multi-layered, richly detailed books showed no mercy, exposing the totalitarian society built around a lie. Platonov’s characters buried themselves in communism but found no relief. Early career. The son of a railway worker was born in the town of Voronezh in 1899. Platonov was originally Andrei Klimentov. He created his pen name in 1920 to pay homage to his father, Platon Klimentov, who had some inventions to his credit. The oldest in a family of eleven children, Andrei took his first job as an errand-boy. He was 13. Around that age, he also began writing poetry. Following in his father’s footsteps, the teen worked as an engineer’s assistant for the South-Eastern railway, a symbol of Soviet industrial might at the time. One of Platonov’s most recurrent images, pointing metaphorically toward the theme of revolution and utopia, became that of the train or locomotive. Andrei Platonov, 1925. Like many other young people of his generation, Platonov welcomed the Revolution of October 1917 with palpable enthusiasm. When the Civil War broke out, he was a locomotive driver assistant on trains delivering ammunition to the Red Army. Who would have ever thought that, three decades later, the most Soviet - and most sincere of all Soviet writers - would end up being written off as a pariah, persecuted by the Soviet regime? The only Soviet genius who genuinely believed in the communist utopia eventually became its victim. Platonov’s love-hate relationship with the literature. Platonov’s first book, Electrification, came out in 1921. Throughout the 1920s, his stories were published in major Soviet literary journals. He started to gain momentum on the local literary scene, worked as a journalist and took part in public talks on philosophical and political issues. Despite initial success, literature was never the be-all and end-all for Platonov, though. After graduating from a polytechnical institute, he worked as an electrical engineer, introducing electricity into local agriculture in the wake of the deadly drought, which struck Povolzhye in 1921. Having witnessed the consequences of the man-made famine, Platonov said he could no longer enjoy a “contemplative activity”, literature. Several of his stories of the 1920s featured starving and impoverished peasant characters. In an effort to prevent similar droughts in the future, the writer took a job with the Voronezh branch of the land management agency. He excavated some 763 ponds, dug 315 wells, built several bridges and dams and installed three electrical stations. By the late 1920s, Platonov curtailed his involvement with electrical engineering in favor of writing. The novelist moved to Moscow where his literary career was doomed to derail. The ambivalence of the writer. While Platonov was himself committed to the aims of the Soviet plan for building a socialist society, his novels and stories maintained a parallel life, mocking the bureaucratic disasters of the Soviet ideology. This dualism was dangerous, and eventually cost Platonov his career. Vintage Classics, 2010. The “right” Soviet writers were expected to celebrate the achievements of industrialization and collectivization, not vocally criticize the system. This was surely a red flag for Joseph Stalin, who famously addressed Platonov as “bastard” in the margins of the Krasnaya Nov’ magazine, where Platonov’s novel For Future Use was published. Paradoxically enough, this does not mean that Platonov was an enemy of the communist utopia, Soviet regime, collectivization, etc. He masterfully used the language of Soviet utopia as a weapon. Unlike most of his peers, such as Isaak Babel, Yury Olesha, Evgeny Zamyatin, Mikhail Bulgakov and Mikhail Zoshchenko, who chose to play with the malleability of language, Platonov resigned himself to the raw language of his era, sometimes sacrificing the intricacies of plot and stylistic twists. The most notable works. The author isn’t called the master of “socialist realism” for nothing. His magnum opus, Chevengur, (Platonov’s only completed novel) is a behind- the-scenes look at Soviet life during the New Economic Policy, masterminded by Vladimir Lenin in the 1920s. It’s one of those books you’ll have to read again and again to understand the idea behind it. Chevengur is a utopian town where communism is being introduced at a record pace. The result is a catastrophe that Platonov, who witnessed Stalin’s collectivization, describes with the devilish wit. The novel was actually scheduled for publication when Soviet censors withdrew it at the last minute for ideological reasons, claiming it rocked the boat, jeopardizing the idea of building socialism. Platonov argued he had written his novel with “different intentions” but no one listened. It was never published as a whole until 1988. Andrei Platonov, 1947. His next tour de force, The Foundation Pit, is a dark and disturbing novel which reads like Kafka, but chronicles the benefits of Soviet communism. A group of humans is digging out the foundation for a building in the middle of nowhere for all to live happily one day. Platonov depicts hunger and death as he portrays workers, engineers and peasants exempt from all the good feelings as they continue their never- ending work and stagger around like empty-minded zombies from George Romero’s horror movies. The Foundation Pit, written between 1929-1930, is a scorching satire on Stalinism and the oppressive bureaucratic system that destroys hope, faith and humanity. While appearing to back proletariat with its class struggle and socialism, Platonov shows the real face of collectivism, devoid of human emotions and sentiments, bringing to mind George Orwell’s 1984. In fact, the fates of the two writers intertwined in a strange way. Tuberculosis claimed Orwell’s life in 1950, when he was only 46. Platonov would die of the same disease the following year. Reading Platonov is sort of a challenge hard to stomach. His language is irritating, even disturbing, striking some readers as complex or difficult to understand, but here is why. Platonov’s concerns are well justified. Again, they deal with the spiritual future of the nation under the Soviet system. During WWll, Platonov worked as a war correspondent for Krasnaya Zvezda (Red Star) Soviet newspaper and managed to publish some of his short stories. After the war, however, his work vanished into obscurity again. One of his unfinished masterpiece novels, Happy Moscow, saw the light of day only in 1991. For some reason, Platonov was never arrested or put in a jail cell. What’s worse, his fifteen-year-old son Platon was arrested on false charges and sent to the Gulag. The boy was released two years later, in 1940, but died of the tuberculosis he had caught in a Stalinist labor camp. Andrei Platonov contracted tuberculosis from his son, and succumbed to illness in 1951, aged 51. If using any of Russia Beyond's content, partly or in full, always provide an active hyperlink to the original material. THE CONCEPT OF "SOUL" IN ANDREI PLATONOV'S SHORT NOVEL DZHAN. The subject of the research is the concept of “soul” — one of the most important semantic components of Andrei Platonov’s artistic world. The concept of “soul” is one of the core ones in the history of culture and it includes the complex religious, philosophical, ethical, spiritual and mental content. The concept of “soul” is consistently present in Platonov's works — from the first to the last ones — where it represents individual and personal, collective and national and world (cosmic) existence. The lexeme “soul” marks a zone of confl ict between the writer and philosopher and militant atheism and historical materialism of revolutionary ideology. Th e author and his heroes search for a “sincere socialism” (The intimate person, Doubting Makar). The Soviet critics saw “foolishness for Christ” in these searches (A. Gurvich). Platonov starts actualizing the “soul” concept in his short novel Dzhan (1932–1935) with the title, since a Turkic word “dzhan” means “soul” in Russian. Th is concept plays an important role in the artistic representation of an intimate life of the dzhan people and the main character Nazar Chagatayev. Conceptual analysis of the short novel Dzhan includes the following components: – defining semantic space of the “soul” concept in the novel, as well as its structure and functions; – describing reference situations the “soul” concept points at in a work of art; – studying the novel’s sphere of concepts (connections between the “soul” concept and the concepts of “mind”, “heart”, “happiness” and “life”); – detecting mythological and Evangelical implications in the contexts which are directly connected with the concept of “soul”; – defining convergences and divergences of the concept of “soul” in Platonov’s short novel Dzhan and its cultural semantics, which can be traced back to the Evangelical text. Andrey Platonov’s “Soul” Andrey Platonov brings out grand claims in others. Most excellent writers do this, but Platonov perhaps belongs in a special league. His chief translator Robert Chandler, in the introduction to the new Platonov collection Soul announces: "All Russians consider Pushkin their greatest poet; in time, I believe, it will become equally clear that Platonov is their greatest prose writer." The writer Penelope Fitzgerald is on record calling his short story "The Return" one of the "three great works of Russian literature of the millennium." Let us be clear right off: these claims are absurd.
Recommended publications
  • CV, Full Format
    BENJAMIN PALOFF (1/15/2013) Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures 507 Bruce Street University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, MI 48103 3040 MLB, 812 E. Washington (617) 953-2650 Ann Arbor, MI 48109 [email protected] EDUCATION Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts Ph.D. in Slavic Languages and Literatures, June 2007. M.A. in Slavic Languages and Literatures, November 2002. Dissertation: Intermediacy: A Poetics of Unfreedom in Interwar Russian, Polish, and Czech Literatures, a comparative treatment of metaphysics in Eastern European Modernism, 1918-1945. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan M.F.A. in Creative Writing/Poetry, April 2001. Thesis: Typeface, a manuscript of poems. Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts B.A., magna cum laude with highest honors in field, Slavic Languages and Literatures, June 1999. Honors thesis: Divergent Narratives: Affinity and Difference in the Poetry of Zbigniew Herbert and Miroslav Holub, a comparative study. TEACHING Assistant Professor, Departments of Slavic Languages and Literatures and of Comparative Literature, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (2007-Present). Courses in Polish and comparative Slavic literatures, critical theory, and translation. Doctoral Dissertation Committees in Slavic Languages and Literatures: Jessica Zychowicz (Present), Jodi Grieg (Present), Jamie Parsons (Present). Doctoral Dissertation Committees in Comparative Literature: Sylwia Ejmont (2008), Corine Tachtiris (2011), Spencer Hawkins (Present), Olga Greco (Present). Doctoral Dissertation Committees in other units: Ksenya Gurshtein (History of Art, 2011). MFA Thesis Committee in English/Creative Writing: Francine Harris (2011). Faculty Associate, Frankel Center for Jewish Studies (2009-Present); Center for Russian, East European, and Eurasian Studies (2007-Present). Service: Steering Committee, Copernicus Endowment for Polish Studies (2007-Present).
    [Show full text]
  • Tolstoy, Khlebnikov, Platonov and the Fragile Absolute of Russian Modernity
    Three Easy Pieces: Tolstoy, Khlebnikov, Platonov and the Fragile Absolute of Russian Modernity The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:37945016 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Three Easy Pieces: Tolstoy, Khlebnikov, Platonov and the Fragile Absolute of Russian Modernity A dissertation presented by Alexandre Gontchar to The Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of Slavic Languages and Literatures Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts January 2017 ©2017– Alexandre Gontchar All rights reserved. Dissertation Advisor: William M. Todd Alexandre Gontchar Three Easy Pieces: Tolstoy, Khlebnikov, Platonov and the Fragile Absolute of Russian Modernity Abstract This dissertation shows how three Russian authors estranged and challenged the notion of human freedom as self-determination—the idea that meaningful self-authorship is possible in view of the finitude that every human being embodies under different aspects of his existence, such as the individual and collective awareness of the inevitability of death, as well as the narrative inclusion of any existential project within multiple contexts of history, culture, and language, all of which are always given already. At first glance to be free is to transcend these multiple limits.
    [Show full text]
  • Platonov and the Soviet Natural World in the 1930S Carly Tozian Faculty Advisor
    Tozian 1 Challenging Stalinist Exploitation: Platonov and the Soviet Natural World in the 1930s Carly Tozian Faculty Advisor: Professor James Goodwin Honors Thesis in Russian Studies 20 April 2021 Tozian 2 Introduction The 1920s and 1930s were not a time of literary liberty in the Soviet Union, nor were they a time for environmental protection. Under Stalin, the literary world and the natural world suffered similar prescriptions of exploitation. Stalin implemented policies such as the First Five Year Plan and the Belomor canal project which had detrimental effects upon the natural landscape. These plans were tailored for political and economic gain, no matter the cost of human or other life. In the literary sphere, writers were published only if they agreed to represent the progression of society into the ideal socialist world by adhering to the genre of Socialist Realism. For this reason, many works from well-known writers remained unpublished from the beginning of the1930s until Stalin’s death in 1953, chief among them, Andrei Platonov. Those of his works that were not published in his lifetime include The Foundation Pit, his short novel “The Juvenile Sea,” as well as other film scripts and plays. His novella “For Future Use” was published, but immediately received harsh criticism from other writers and even from Stalin (Pit 156-7). Through his unique style, Platonov “documented” the experiences he witnessed during the time of the First Five Year plan and the implementation of other Stalinist policies throughout his fictional works. I argue that Platonov fashions his own “real” socialist realist method in contrast to the prescribed one, which was committed to the party line.
    [Show full text]
  • Peter Weiss. Andrei Platonov. Ragnvald Blix. Georg Henrik Von Wright. Adam Michnik
    A quarterly scholarly journal and news magazine. March 2011. Vol IV:1 From the Centre for Baltic and East European Studies (CBEES) Södertörn University, Stockholm FEATURE. Steklov – Russian BALTIC temple of pure thought W O Rbalticworlds.com L D S COPING WITH TRANSITIONS PETER WEISS. ANDREI PLATONOV. RAGNVALD BLIX. GEORG HENRIK VON WRIGHT. ADAM MICHNIK. SLAVENKA DRAKULIĆ. Sixty pages BETRAYED GDR REVOLUTION? / EVERYDAY BELARUS / WAVE OF RELIGION IN ALBANIA / RUSSIAN FINANCIAL MARKETS 2short takes Memory and manipulation. Transliteration. Is anyone’s suffering more important than anyone else’s? Art and science – and then some “IF YOU WANT TO START a war, call me. Transliteration is both art and science CH I know all about how it's done”, says – and, in many cases, politics. Whether MÄ author Slavenka Drakulić with a touch царь should be written as tsar, tzar, ANNA of gallows humor during “Memory and czar, or csar may not be a particu- : H Manipulation: Religion as Politics in the larly sensitive political matter today, HOTO Balkans”, a symposium held in Lund, but the question of the transliteration P Sweden, on December 2, 2010. of the name of the current president This issue of the journal includes a of Belarus is exceedingly delicate. contribution from Drakulić (pp. 55–57) First, and perhaps most important: in which she claims that top-down gov- which name? Both the Belarusian ernance, which started the war, is also Аляксандр Лукашэнка, and the Rus- the path to reconciliation in the region. sian Александр Лукашенко are in use. Balkan experts attending the sympo- (And, while we’re at it, should that be sium agree that the war was directed Belarusian, or Belarussian, or Belaru- from the top, and that “top-down” is san, or Byelorussian, or Belorussian?) the key to understanding how the war BW does not want to take a stand on began in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • A Companion to Andrei Platonov's the Foundation
    A Companion to Andrei Platonov’s The Foundation Pit Studies in Russian and Slavic Literatures, Cultures and History Series Editor: Lazar Fleishman A Companion to Andrei Platonov’s The Foundation Pit Thomas Seifrid University of Southern California Boston 2009 Copyright © 2009 Academic Studies Press All rights reserved ISBN 978-1-934843-57-4 Book design by Ivan Grave Published by Academic Studies Press in 2009 28 Montfern Avenue Brighton, MA 02135, USA [email protected] www.academicstudiespress.com iv Effective December 12th, 2017, this book will be subject to a CC-BY-NC license. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. Other than as provided by these licenses, no part of this book may be reproduced, transmitted, or displayed by any electronic or mechanical means without permission from the publisher or as permitted by law. The open access publication of this volume is made possible by: This open access publication is part of a project supported by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book initiative, which includes the open access release of several Academic Studies Press volumes. To view more titles available as free ebooks and to learn more about this project, please visit borderlinesfoundation.org/open. Published by Academic Studies Press 28 Montfern Avenue Brighton, MA 02135, USA [email protected] www.academicstudiespress.com CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE Platonov’s Life . 1 CHAPTER TWO Intellectual Influences on Platonov . 33 CHAPTER THREE The Literary Context of The Foundation Pit . 59 CHAPTER FOUR The Political Context of The Foundation Pit . 81 CHAPTER FIVE The Foundation Pit Itself .
    [Show full text]
  • Fifty Works of Fiction Libertarians Should Read
    Liberty, Art, & Culture Vol. 30, No. 3 Spring 2012 Fifty works of fiction libertarians should read By Anders Monsen Everybody compiles lists. These usually are of the “top 10” Poul Anderson — The Star Fox (1965) kind. I started compiling a personal list of individualist titles in An oft-forgot book by the prolific and libertarian-minded the early 1990s. When author China Miéville published one Poul Anderson, a recipient of multiple awards from the Lib- entitled “Fifty Fantasy & Science Fiction Works That Social- ertarian Futurist Society. This space adventure deals with war ists Should Read” in 2001, I started the following list along and appeasement. the same lines, but a different focus. Miéville and I have in common some titles and authors, but our reasons for picking Margaret Atwood—The Handmaid’s Tale (1986) these books probably differ greatly. A dystopian tale of women being oppressed by men, while Some rules guiding me while compiling this list included: being aided by other women. This book is similar to Sinclair 1) no multiple books by the same writer; 2) the winners of the Lewis’s It Can’t Happen Here or Robert Heinlein’s story “If This Prometheus Award do not automatically qualify; and, 3) there Goes On—,” about the rise of a religious-type theocracy in is no limit in terms of publication date. Not all of the listed America. works are true sf. The first qualification was the hardest, and I worked around this by mentioning other notable books in the Alfred Bester—The Stars My Destination (1956) brief notes.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Platonov Revisited. Past and Present Views on the Land of The
    Platonov Revisited. Past and Present Views on the Land of the Philosophers Ben W. Dhooge & Thomas Langerak The disclosure of Platonov’s long forbidden and inaccessible oeuvre and the subsequent start- up and maturation of its scholarly study, by scholars worldwide, have been showing an irregular, bumpy and fragmentary course since the writer’s death in 1951. Early Platonov studies, from the mid-1960s onwards, centered around certain works, like ‘Такыр’ (Takyr), ‘Мусорный ветер’ (Rubbish wind), ‘Фро’ (Fro), ‘В прекрасном и яростном мире’ (The fierce and beautiful world), ‘Река Потудань’ (The Potudan River) or ‘Одухотворенные люди’ (Inspired people), all of which were considered acceptable by the Soviet authorities and Soviet printing houses and journals1 (or were altered even, to a greater or lesser degree, by them in order to make them acceptable2). The actual disclosure of Platonov’s most well- known works took place in the second half of the twentieth century, and initially even at different paces in Russia and abroad. While in Europe and the United States, Platonov’s Чевенгур (Chevengur) and ‘Котлован’ (The foundation pit) found their way to the public as early as in the 1960s and the 1970s3 and led to a series of scholarly publications on Platonov’s oeuvre, in Russia these masterpieces were published only in the perestroika era4. Of course, Platonov’s ‘major’ works had already been known before in certain circles (like people active in the samizdat), but often in an incomplete form. The publication of the novel and the novella – with the author’s postscript! – and the subsequent edition of other unknown and forbidden works, like ‘Антисексус’ (Antisexus) and Счастливая Москва (Happy Moscow), in enormous print runs in Russia gave a strong impulse to the existing scholarly study of Platonov’s work, both in Russia and abroad.
    [Show full text]
  • Barrett Ziegler Platonov and His Communist
    Barrett Ziegler Platonov and his Communist Critiques: Not invited to the Party Andrei Platonov’s dedication to communist ideology should have made him a significant figure within the Party. His extensive technical training allowed him to write with knowledge on the current and future state of communist economics in the Soviet Union. His writings were often rooted in his exposure to common Soviet people and the Party’s economic projects. There was a “genuine” quality in his writing that lost him the Party’s favor and complicated his relationship with Joseph Stalin. Once, in a meeting with Party elite, Stalin called Platonov a “fool, idiot, and a scoundrel,” only to later call him “a prophet, a genius.” It is curious that such a “prophet” would not be published uncensored within his home country, within his own lifetime. Also odd is that such a disgraceful author would survive the Stalinist Purges with little harassment by the Party. Platonov’s communism evolved with the politics around him; he often tried to appeal to what the Party, and Stalin, wanted from him. His devotion to communism would make the Party’s ideology a type of religion to Platonov – and its patriarch: Stalin. But, he would be accused of departing from the approved communist ideology a number of times, most pointedly in Kotlovan and Schastlivaia Mockva, surrounding the development of his literary voice. The beliefs of Platonov and the communist Party were based on popular schools of thought present in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Most notable for Platonov were the futurist movement and the Proletkul’t, both founded by Alexander Bogdanov.
    [Show full text]
  • On the First Socialist Tragedy’ Occupies an Unusual Place in Platonov’S Oeuvre
    introduction to platonov The year 1934, his thirty-fifth, was a significant watershed in the life of Andrei Platonov. He had already written The Foundation Pit and Chevengur, the novels for which he is today best known, but neither had been published in full. Soviet readers knew him mainly for a few short stories and, above all, his semi-satirical account of collectivization, ‘For Future Use’, which had been met by a storm of official criticism when it appeared in 1931. For the next three years, Platonov was unable to publish anything. But in the spring of 1934, he was included in a brigade of writers sent to Turkmenistan to report on the progress of Sovietization, and the same year was asked to contribute to a series of almanachs. Under Gorky’s gener- al editorship, these were to celebrate the completion of the second Five-Year Plan in 1937; but they never appeared. The text reproduced here was written for one of these, titled ‘Notebooks’; it arrived on Gorky’s desk in early January 1935—a month after the assassination of Kirov, an event which unleashed a wave of purges that presaged the terror to come. Within a few days Gorky had rejected Platonov’s text as ‘unsuitable’ and ‘pessimistic’; in early March the organizing secretary of the Writers’ Union publicly denounced the unpublished article as ‘reactionary’, ‘reflecting the philosophy of elements hostile to socialism’. The text was probably written in the first half of 1934, after Platonov’s return from Central Asia; a notebook entry from mid-April—‘dialectic of nature in the Karakum desert’—makes clear he was already considering its key themes there.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonconformist Soviet Classics in Post-Soviet Perspective
    Russian Culture Center for Democratic Culture 2012 Rethinking the Canon: Nonconformist Soviet Classics in Post- Soviet Perspective Alexander Zholkovsky Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/russian_culture Part of the Other Languages, Societies, and Cultures Commons, and the Slavic Languages and Societies Commons Repository Citation Zholkovsky, A. (2012). Rethinking the Canon: Nonconformist Soviet Classics in Post-Soviet Perspective. In Dmitri N. Shalin, 1-28. Available at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/russian_culture/18 This Article is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Article in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Article has been accepted for inclusion in Russian Culture by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Rethinking the Canon: Nonconformist Soviet Classics in Post-Soviet Perspective Alexander Zholkovsky I. The Problem of Reinterpretation In the four-plus decades since Stalin's death, the Soviet literary canon has undergone a series of changes. Thus, Fedor Dostoyevsky, Konstantin Leontiev, and Apollon Grigoriev, seen in all their complexity, gradually resumed their pride of place in nineteenth-century literary history, while Gogol was allowed to be more of a conservative thinker and modernist stylist than during the period of High Stalinism.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Literary Theory and Criticism
    1. Literary Theory and Criticism A. History of Literary Theory and Criticism Plato, Republic, Book X ------ Phaedrus Aristotle, Poetics Horace, The Art of Poetry Longinus, On the Sublime Plotinus, On the Intellectual Beauty Dante Alighieri, Letter to Can Grande della Scala Sir Philip Sidney, An Apologie for Poetry Alexander Pope, An Essay on Criticism Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Essay on the Origin of Language David Hume, “Of the Standard of Taste” Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgement, Books II and III Friedrich Schiller, On Naive and Sentimental Poetry G.W.F. Hegel, Introduction to The Philosophy of Fine Art Wordsworth, Preface to Lyrical Ballads Victor Hugo, Preface to Cromwell (extracts) Charles Baudelaire, The Painter of Modern Life Friedrich Nietzsche, The Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of Music Matthew Arnold, The Function of Criticism at the Present Time Oscar Wilde, “The Critic as Artist” Stéphane Mallarmé, “Crise de vers” Leo Tolstoy What is Art? B. Contemporary Literary Theory and Criticism Formalism/Structuralism Roland Barthes, “Death of the Author” Wayne Booth,*“Pluralism and Its Rivalry” Roman Jakobson, from Linguistics and Poetics Ferdinand de Saussure, from Course in General Linguistics Victor Shklovsky, *“Art as Technique” Yuri Tynyanov, *“On Literary Evolution” Poststructuralism Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, Introduction: Rhizome Jacques Derrida, “Structure, Sign and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences” Michel Foucault, “What is an Author?” Julia Kristeva, *“Toccata and Fugue for the Foreigner” from Strangers to Ourselves Marxist Theory and Criticism Louis Althusser, “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses” Mikhail Bakhtin, *“Discourse in the Novel” Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art at the Age of Mechanical Reproducibility” Frederic Jameson, Postmodernism or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism (Ch.
    [Show full text]
  • The Novel at Work
    THE NOVEL AT WORK REFLECTIONS ON ART AND POLITICS IN SELECTED COUNTER-TOTALITARIAN NOVELS, 1920-70 Patricia Harris This thesis is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Murdoch University For books are not absolutely dead things, but do contain a potency of life in them to be as active as that soul was whose progeny they are; nay, they do preserve as in a vial the purest efficacy and extraction of that living intellect that bred them … Who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God’s image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were in the eye. (John Milton, Areopagitica, 1644) I declare that this thesis is my own account of my own research. It contains as its main content work that has not previously been submitted for a degree at any university. Patricia Harris Acknowledgements Words fail when you most want them to succeed, and this is no exception. So my following attempts to express my gratitude for the wisdom, support and friendship of those who have assisted me through this thesis remain paltry and inadequate. May I first acknowledge the extraordinary skills and support of my supervisory team. To Professor Helena Grehan, my principal supervisor, thank you many times over for the care and patience with which you have watched over this project; your willingness to read draft after draft of half-finished work; your acute yet sympathetic readings of my arguments; and your willingness to be there in total, when fits of anxiety threatened to throw me off course.
    [Show full text]