Фольклор и литература: еще раз о методологии исследований (original) (raw)
Related papers
Магия – фольклор – литература. Введение в тему
Russian Literature, 2017
Literature and magic: how did these two entities coexist with each other during various periods of human history? What is magic? How was it ritually perceived in Europe? Which theoretical and scholarly approaches might assist us in devising its historical scope and literary ambiance? The introductory essay helps positioning a number of major conceptual issues regarding magic and its role in cultural and literary studies with special attention paid to Russian literature, spells, the supernatural and folklore. The essay offers a detailed historical overview of the main hermeneutical trends regarding magic, proceeding to Russian literature with special attention to Russian Symbolism (Aleksandr Blok and Valerii Briusov) and Russian Avant-Garde (Velimir Khlebnikov and Aleksei Kruchenykh). The introduction also positions the special volume’s papers within the broader context of magic and supernatural.
Сюжет - это симптом? Как фольклористы изучают городские легенды
Is plot a symptom? How folklorIsts study urban legends, 2019
The article is dedicated to history and methods of urban legend studies. The author narrates the brief history of urban legend studies and covers upon some theoretical discussions concerning the terms “urban legend” and “contemporary legend”. Systematic research upon current folklore narratives began only in the 1940s, with contemporary legend becoming firmly established as an acclaimed research interest in the 1960s. Since the 1970s the issue of social reasons for emergence and popularity of certain plots becomes the key question of legend research. To answer it, folklorists follow the psychoanalytic “hermeneutics of suspicion”. They suggest that every legend contains a “hidden message” which needs to be perceived as a symptom of emotional status of the group. The author highlights two types of such psychoanalytic interpretation. Some researchers believe that legend’s function is articulation of nonconscious anxieties and fears of the group (the mechanism of folklore articulation, in terms of this paper). Other researchers suppose that a legend provides the group with an opportunity to compensate its moral discomfort (mechanism of folklore compensation). Nevertheless, the results of such interpretation were often arbitrary. This drew criticism in the 1990s, leaving the community in search of alternative explanations of why legends persist. But the question “Why?” is still unanswered. The theorists of ostension leave aside the issue of why a group produces and transmits a certain plot and focus upon how exactly the former is affected by the latter.
О «новых» методах изучения истории русской философии
The article deals with methods of historical and philosophical research that are rarely used in contemporary works on the history of Russian philosophy: historical and philosophical reconstruction, reactualization/marginalization of philosophical content, intercultural methodology (polylogue philosophy), biography, and prosopography methods. The authors show the specificity of each method, their places in the practice of research, their heuristicics for the history of Russian philosophy, and significance for expanding historical and philosophical knowledge. The relevance of applying “new” methods is based on the following facts: the reissue of basic texts of Russian thinkers has been completed, there is active work in archives leading to the introduction of “marginal” texts, i.e. unfinished texts with unestablished meanings, into the scholarly circulation, and the range of historiographical literature with a rich variety of existing interpretational schemes has significantly increased in the last three decades. The use of “new” methods makes it possible to revise existing models of the history of Russian philosophy, to abandon the view of Russian philosophy as a series of influences and borrowings, and to propose a new periodization of the history of Russian philosophy. In particular, the method of “collective biography” reveals the dynamic side of the history of science, ways of forming scientific schools, intergenerational connections, and the influence of the non-philosophical context on scholarly work. The significance of methods for Russian philosophy covers a range of aspects: expanding verified historical and philosophical knowledge; showing the actual content of Russian philosophy that may be in demand in modern philosophy; forming a more comprehensive view on the historical and philosophical process concerning not only personalities, but also generations, schools, etc.; and the explication of the context (historical, biographical, social, cultural) as well as interpretation of ideas. Keywords: Russian philosophy, methodology, history of philosophy, reconstruction, polylogue, interculturality, context, reactivation, marginalization, collective biography, prosopography.
2020
В статье рассматриваются источники описания осеннего поминального обряда в Литве и Белоруссии в «Русских простонародных праздниках и суеверных обрядах» И.М. Снегирёва (1839). Выявляется, что, наряду с собственно этнографическими и историческими текстами, а также словарями славянских языков, Снегирёв использовал вторую часть драмы Адама Мицкевича «Дзяды» (1823) (предисловие, поэтические рефрены и отдельные мотивы). Кроме того, «Дзяды» Мицкевича послужили источником для других этнографических трудов, например, для статьи А.О. Мухлинского 1830 г. об обрядах в Новогрудском повете, которую Снегирёв также использовал. В свою очередь, Мицкевич отобразил в драме как личные этнографические впечатления, почерпнутые в детстве и юности, так и образы кабинетной «национальной мифологии», отраженные книжными источниками. При этом если Мицкевич сочетает мотивы и формулы, отсылающие к различным фольклорно-мифологическим дискурсам (с одной стороны, элементы реального обряда, направленного на коммуникацию с душами предков, с другой – формулы и мотивы быличек о «нечистых» покойниках), то Снегирёв идет еще дальше и совмещает эти разноплановые элементы в рамках одного «фольклорного» текста (обращения к вызываемым душам). Проведенный текстологический анализ позволяет выяснить пути заимствования и механизмы компиляции, поднимая проблемы, с одной стороны, восприятия источников авторами, стоявшими у истоков славянской этнографии, и специфики цитирования (что превращает изначальный авторский текст в подобие «общего» фольклористического знания), с другой – понимания литературной компиляции как метода передачи информации, когда исходный текст трансформируется, дабы быть приближенным к национальной традиции.
Фольклористика между текстом и контекстом [Folkloristics between Text and Context]
Вестник РГГУ. 2011. № 9. Серия "Филологические науки. Литературоведение и фольклористика". С. 42-57.
The article is devoted to the history of contextual approach in folklore studies. In the literature survey the author focuses on lively disputes about the text/context controversy between American folklorists in 1970–1980-s and analyses attempts of theoretical reflection on the topic by modern Russian researchers.