This paper discusses the legacy of Nikolai Antsiferov (1889–1958), a Russian historian who suggested a unique approach to urban studies in which literature played the key role. In the first section of this paper, the genesis of Antsiferov‘s conceptions of the study of urban history and the image of the city are outlined. The second section provides an analysis of his ideas on the literary image of St. Petersburg and the theory of literary-themed guided tours, which were articulated in his works of the 1920s. The finalsection of the article sheds light on the reception and legacy of Antsiferov‘s intellectual ideas in the modern humanities and assesses its significance in the modern context of interdisciplinarity.
The article introduces the new possibilities for the analysis of sociological views of Marx basing on the publication of his manuscripts, excerpts and epistolary heritage provided by the full academic edition of collected works of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels in the original languages (Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe, MEGA). It is shown that the manuscripts and original versions of “Capital” contain a number of ideas important for interpretation of sociological views of Marx (a commodity as the own result of the capital; private property as just a legal shell of the bourgeois economic relations; the logic and the stages of technological development on the basis of capital, etc.) which only fragmentary were reflected in the “Capital” itself. After the release of volume 1 (1867) Marx made several attempts to complete the “Сapital”, his preliminary versions of the books 2 and 3 show that he was evident of the core theoretical problems of the concluding parts of the book (such as the analysis of the reproduction of the total capital of the society and the explanation of the average rate of profit on the basis of the labour theory of value), but he never managed to solve them successfully. In the last period of his life Marx sparingly informed even his closest friends on the state and prospects of his work; many important ideas were not understood by them, including Engels who contributed to the formation of the orthodox “materialist understanding of history”. After Marx’s death, partly due to the complexity and difficulty of his theory, partly because of incompleteness of the drafts of the final parts of the “Capital” the Engels’ version of his ideas played an important role, influencing the largely popular interpretations of Marx’s theory. On their base, both the Historical Materialism and its criticism were formed. To enable an adequate perception of the heritage of Marx in the 21th century, the integration into the scientific discourse of those materials which became public only in the last decades is needed.
The aim of this paper is to examine Marina Tsvetaeva’s view of poet, poetry, and creativity. The novelty of the approach to the subject rests on singling out the key symbolic images and motifs which constitute the representation of the theme in question via “close reading” of M. Tsvetaeva’s work and describing their functioning as a system. The approach allows to discover the specifics of interpretation of creativity by the poetess. The motif of an artist as a chosen one turns out to be the key one. The gift of creativity is related in M. Tsvetaeva’s poetic universe with personified images of natural forces, Insomnia, Genius, Angel and Demon, which all manifest an ambivalence of the creative process and depict it as an “obsession”. The traditional images of lyre, Muse, gift of singing acquire non-trivial connotations in M. Tsvetaeva’s work. The motifs associated with the idea of creativity show that M. Tsvetaeva considers the poetic gift as an ability of “clear hearing” and “dreaming”, “fatal blessing” and “mysterious heat” (a simultaneous metaphor for the creative act and passion). The poet is viewed in M. Tsvetaeva’s artistic world as follows: heathen and warlock, seducer and seduced, sinner and saint, and also martyr doomed to drudge and rejected by the philistine crowd.