В статье рассматривается книга двух швейцарских авторов, вышедшая в 2011 году и посвященная разоблачению российского мыслителя и ученого М.М. Бахтина.
There is no unambiguous perspective on Russia’a cultural and political processes of the second half of the 19th century. Their patterns are largely approached through the lens of the key figures that had a determining influence at a relevant period. Yevgeny Feoktistov was a writer, a journalist, a staff member of the magazines Sovremennik and Otechestvennye Zapiski, the editor of Russkaya Rech and Journal of the Ministry of National Enlightenment (1871–1883), later a censor, the privy councillor (since January 1, 1883), the head of the Central Administration for Printing Press for almost 13 years (1883–1896) (Russia’s censor-in-chief), a senator (from May 23, 1896 until his death), and part of Russia’s administrative elite. He came an impressive way of personal growth that brought him from the ranks of active liberals and Otechestvennye Zapiski journalists to the position of Russia’s censor-in-chief, who signed the order to close that same magazine twenty years later. His biography is partly captured in Ivan Goncharov’s novel The Same Old Story. This article investigates the modifications of linguistic peculiarities in Feoktistov’s essays and statements and draws his linguistic portrait, which doesn’t only explain the patterns of his behavior and everyday style but also sheds light on the shady sides of the events that Russia witnessed in the 1860s–1890s and shapes new optics of the elite circles Feoktistov was part of.
В статье анализируется концепция исследования города сквозь призму литературы, сформированная в трудах российского историка Николая Анциферова (1889-1958). На основе характеристики происхождения этой концепции рассматриваются стратегии анализа образа Санкт-Петербурга в трудах Анциферова и теория литературных экскурсий, сфрормулированная им в работах 1920х годов. В заключение рассматриваются направления рецепции и возможности актуализации наследия ученого в современном междисциплинарном контексте.
The longstanding friendship between Viktor Shklovsky and Roman Jakobson, which gave way to a gradual cooling of relations and finally arrived at a complete rupture, has for almost a century been the subject of numeral scholarly researches. The reality of personal conflict and the obviousness of the multiple psychological, biographical and historical causes that made this conflict inevitable have nearly completely obscured the persistent theoretical dimension of the evolving relationship between the two men. The story of their relationship may be interpreted as a history of the clash of two perspectives on the development of the humanities, as a history of clash of two metalanguages or of two ways to see the relationships between poetic language and language, between the subject and language, and between language and reality.