Георгий Степанович Кнабе – философ, филолог, историк культуры. К столетию со дня рождения (20.08.1920 – 30.10.2011)
‘Philosopher’, ‘philologist’, ‘cultural historian’ – these names are separated by commas in the title of the present paper, suggesting that philosophical treatises and works on philology and cultural history pertain each to its own domain and can be analyzed separately. This is not completely true, or even not true, at all. In particular, when speaking of G.S.Knabe, one should rather join these words by equality signs or hyphens. His works, whether dedicated to philosophy, semiotics, everyday life history, to literature or music, discuss so wide a variety of issues that it is hardly appropriate to subsume them under any narrow label. Knabe’s memoires and his published correspondence show all these issues to be a part of his everyday reflections and concerns. Knabe’s method born out of his innermost experience was to immerse in today’s history and to expand the limits of the notion of culture from ‘exalted’ to ‘routine’, while strictly adhering to provable judgements and relying on lively communication with colleagues and friends.
The psychology of royal imposture in Russia is directly connected with the question of the attitude to the Tsar, i. e. the special way in which royal power was understood. Pretenders made their appearance in Russia only after there were Tsars, and this is connected with the sacralization of the Tsar. The notion that the royal power was established by God accounts for the distinction (actual in Russia) between "righteous" and "unrighteous" Tsars. Hence the most striking pretenders crop up precisely at those moments when the natural order of succession has been broken and when the actual occupier of the throne could in fact be regarded as a pretender.
This is a collection of essays on the semiotics of history, a product of the 30 years collaboration of the two co-authors. All the articles are devoted to the history of the Russian culture, treating it not as an isolated phenomenon, but as an integral part of the world culture. Semiotic analysis of various fonts allows to define both universal and pecular characteristics in the history of Rusian culture.
This book is the second volume of the international book series New Perspectives in Reading 19th-Century Russian Literature. The series in 2008 set for purpose to investigate into the historical, theoretical and methodological aspects of the possibilities for new approaches to reading 19th-century Russian literature in various contexts of world literature, literary theory and semiotics of culture. The essays of the first volume were dedicated to the theme Russian Text of the 19th Century and Antiquity. The authors of the present collection of essays – from Austria, Estonia, Hungary, the Netherlands, Russia, and the USA – put in center stage important issues of cultural dynamics, seen in various contexts of intertextuality, intermediality and the interdiscoursive practice of aesthetic communication. Special attention is made to the poetics and semiotics of textual, medial and cultural frontiers involving both conceptual reelaboration of relevant theoretical issues and concrete literary and cultural case studies.
The present study simultaneously belongs to literary studies and to social history, including the history of culture and of political ideas. Indeed it concerns attitudes about the tsar in Russia during various periods of Russian history, and the linguistic - and more generally speaking, semiotic - means in which these attitudes were manifested. Obviously, this is connected to the history of political views. It is demonstrated how differing attitides toward the tsar correlate with various stages of Russian political and cultural history; how diverse aspects of Russian cultural life converged around this question; and how in different periods the very same texts could be interpreted as having very different content, relating to the interests of the particular time.
The political preconditions for the sacralization of the monarch in Russia were twofold. On the one hand, this was the transference onto the tsar of Moscow the functions of the Byzantine basileius, that could be realized both in the conception of Moscow as the Third Rome, which was contrasted to Byzantium, and in the later Byzantanization of the Russian state and ecclesiastical life (beginning in the reign of Aleksei Mikhailovich). On the other hand, this was the tsar’s assimilation of the functions of head of the church (beginning with the reign of Peter I). The very combination of these two essentially contradictory tendencies only became possible in the conditions of Baroque culture, insofar as texts that were authoritative for cultural consciousness could be reconceptualized in any direction within a Baroque framework.
The book presents a collection of articles dedicated to the typological characteristics of the Russian culture in its historical development. Some articles deal with the specific Russian cultural concepts (such as "intelligentsia") other with interpretation of certain concepts (such as "Europe" or "monarchic power") in the specific Russian context. All the articles has a theoretical character with particular illustrations from Russian cultural texts. They are intended to demonstrate a general model which could be applied to other material. A large part of the book is devoted to the semiotic approach to icons. The same approach as a matter of principle can be applied to a different material and this is demonsrtated by all kinds of typological comparisons.
The prospects of various interdisciplinary researches, the problem of the unity of scientific knowledge, the possibility of translating methods from one discipline to another, the impact of digitalization on various fields of scientific knowledge, the acceptability of general approaches to science management, in particular, to the evaluation of scientific productivity are debated in the discussion on the limits of methodological convergence of natural-scientific and social-humanitarian knowledge. The debaters Н.N. Knyazeva, G.L. Tulchinsky, V.G. Kuznetsov and N.M. Smirnova comment on each other’s positions, point out the strengths and weaknesses in proponents’ justification, agree on a number of issues, and indicate the main theses and arguments for each position, groping for prospects for further development of the discussed issues.
The paper analyzes the functioning of the short past passive participles in the predicative position in West Russian Chronicles. The main focus is on the participles which are used without an auxiliary in the past tense and denote the past action. For an adequate analysis of these forms, it is necessary to use the material of both the Old Russian language and the Ukrainian, Belorussian and Polish languages. The analyzed forms can be used in the same two functions as in Old Russian: for denoting a resultative or an aoristic action. At the same time, -no-/-to- forms, which are almost grammaticalized and function as impersonal finite forms as in the Ukrainian and Polish languages, were found in the West Russian Chronicles. The emergence of these forms is caused, apparently, by the original ability of the past passive participles to be used without auxiliary in aoristic contexts. The discovery of these functions of the passive participles demonstrates the parallelism in the history of their development with two other participles: -ъš-/-vъš- and l-forms.
Within a brief historical period, BRICS as an inter-State association has become an influential player in the world economy and politics. BRICS is a primarily political entity, and in that regard, the BRICS grouping correlates with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). However, not all the expectations placed on the SCO by the founding countries at the time of its creation in 2001 have been met so far. The question is to what extent expectations may be fulfilled in case of BRICS.
The article identifies the effect of personalization of politics: its definition is given, the determinants and possible consequences are considered. That effect is illustrated by some features in the Asian and European style of modern political leadership.