Viktor Shklovsky vs. Roman Jakobson: Poetic Language or Poetic Function of Language
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.
We investigate the parallelism between aesthetic experience and the practice of phenomenology using Viktor Shklovsky's theory of 'estrangement' (ostranenie). In his letter to Hugo von Hofmannsthal, Husserl claims that aesthetic and phenomenological experiences are similar; in the perception of a work of art we change our attitude in order to concentrate on how the things appear to us instead of what they are. A work of art 'forces us into' the aesthetic attitude in the same way as the phenomenological epoché drives us into the phenomenological one. The change of attitudes is a condition of possibility of aesthetic and/or phenomenological experience. Estrangement is an artistic device that breaks the routinised forms of perception: one sees the thing as new and does not just "recognise" it automatically. Shklovsky insists that it is possible if one experiences or feels the form of the work of art - in an affective and even sensuous way. We claim that this is similar to the phenomenological seeing, or intuition, which, according to Husserl, should be devoid of all understanding. Phenomenological epoché can also be described as a philosophical technique that aims to arrest the 'ready-made', 'taken for granted', 'pre-given' meanings in order to access a new meaning which is not yet stabilised, the "meaning-in-formation". It is not enough to turn from what appears to how it appears; one has to oscillate between these conflicting attitudes, or rather to keep them both at the same time thus gaining a kind of a 3D-vision of meaning in its becoming. This double life in two different attitudes (or, following a Husserlian metaphor, 'double bookkeeping') can be clarified in terms of Roman Jakobson's theory of antinomic coexistence between the poetic and communicative functions of language. The notion of 'double life in two attitudes' uncovers the role that ostranenie can play in the philosophical transformation of the subject based on variety and essential mobility of the affective components involved. Proposing a phenomenological interpretation of a passage from Samuel Beckett we show how the radicalisation of ostranenie can lead even to 'meta-estrangement': to estrangement of the everyday 'lack of estrangement'. We conclude with a remark on the productivity of this form of estrangement in the phenomenological context.
In this work, observations on the narrative organiza- tion of the text of Viktor Shklovksy’s epistolary novel Zoo, or Stories Not About Love (1923). The preva- lence of terms related to sight is revealed and com- mented upon, from which a preliminary conclusion is drawn that over the course of his short stay in Berlin, Shklovsky was fascinated by phenomena of visuality, which prepared him for his entry into film work upon his return to Soviet Russia.
The Russian Formalists’ opposition between story (“a phenomenon relating to the material”) and plot (“a phenomenon of style”) presents the latter as the aspect of the work that not only organizes “the totality of events,” but also organizes them intentionally in order to increase readerly tension. The recombination of story events into a plot (with its interruptions, retardations, and decoys) makes possible the emancipation of the narrator and the reader, and even the author, from “what happened in actuality.” This division between “the material of life” and its “artistic deformation and decomposition” is the basis for the Formalist theory of narrative
This article examines Shklovskii’s previously overlooked engagement with a discursive domain we currently tend to refer to as “world literature;” as such, it is an original contribution not just to understanding A Sentimental Journey, arguably the richest part of Shklovskii’s 1920s memoir trilogy, but also to honing a transnational approach to his writing. While Shklovskii’s work has already been discussed through the prism of mobility and nomadism, this article emphasises his active involvement in, and reaction to, early Soviet discourses and practices of “world literature.” It places Shklovskii’s commitment to the idea of world literature in the broader context of our present debates on the subject. To understand “world literature” as a specific construct, we must ask the unavoidable question about the location of “world literature” vis-à-vis language, which has important consequences for how we interpret the dispersed legacy of modern literary theory (founded, undoubtedly, by Shklovskii and the Russian Formalists); this would allow us to recognize the enduring relevance of Shklovskii’s understanding of literariness for current debates on world literature.
The present article contains a brief analysis of the early writings of Viktor Shklovsky - his short stories in futurist magazine "Spring"(Vesna) and especially to his prose poem "Saturnine Fate"(1914). Shklovsky's references to Symbolist aesthetics as well as traces of influence by Maxim Gorky and Leonid Andreyev are also considered.
The paper is focused on the study of reaction of italian literature critics on the publication of the Boris Pasternak's novel "Doctor Jivago". The analysys of the book ""Doctor Jivago", Pasternak, 1958, Italy" (published in Russian language in "Reka vremen", 2012, in Moscow) is given. The papers of italian writers, critics and historians of literature, who reacted immediately upon the publication of the novel (A. Moravia, I. Calvino, F.Fortini, C. Cassola, C. Salinari ecc.) are studied and analised.
In the article the patterns of the realization of emotional utterances in dialogic and monologic speech are described. The author pays special attention to the characteristic features of the speech of a speaker feeling psychic tension and to the compositional-pragmatic peculiarities of dialogic and monologic text.