The article shows, that in "Christmas Carol in Prose", "Hauted", "Little Dorrit" and others works by Charles Dickens the most important element of the human soul is the memory, and the most important form of the human existence is the time. The renunciation from the memory is connected with the falling out of time and causes the poverty of love.
The article deals with one storyline of the novel Anna Karenina that stands as the key for the research into the significance of anglomania in the novel.
The 1850-1870s in Russian culture is the times of most intensive formation of the image of the UK as a highly complex combination of real and mythological elements.
The novel Anna Karenina, which Tolstoy himself called the novel about modern life, sets forth the fashion for everything ‘English’ in Russian high society in the 1870s with almost documentary precision.
The episode the article deals with is Anna Karenina's reading of an English novel. The article looks at different theories of the origin of the novel and suggests a particular novel as the source for the English novel in Anna Karenina.
Article argues that the knowledge of the particular English novel contributes not only to the research of anglomania in Anna Karenina and other Tolstoy's works but also gives a significant insight into the study of the characters in the novel.
The collection contains scientific articles and messages reflecting a wide range of problems of modern Russian study of life and creative works of Dickens: Dickens and the Victorian age, "Russian Dickens", the new in Russian Dickensiana, Dickens and problems of translation.
Abstract: the article addresses the interrelations between Wyndham Lewis’s notion of the visual in literature and the poetics of his novel, “Tarr” (1918). Commonly accepted definition of visuality in Lewis’s literary texts as analogy between their certain poetic characteristics and the features of modern painting is supplemented by an analysis of the author’s philosophical criticism of the 1920–1930s concerning “philosophy of the eye” and “external method” in literature. Considering surface poetics in “Tarr” and its main artist-character’s representation in the view of visual philosophy allows to define the relationship between the novel as a unity and Lewis’s artistic theory as deeply problematic and one far from being an illustration.
The article analyzes how modernism is represented in two Wyndham Lewis’s autobiographies, «Blasting and Bombardiering» (1937) and «Rude Assignment» (1950). The author’s reflection on modernism is considered within the context of his critical attitude towards the autobiographical in modernist novel and taking into account the changes in his autobiographical intentions from one book to the other. The article concludes that in Lewis’s far from experimental use of autobiography the latter acts as a means of definition, popularization and justification of his conception of modernism considered to be, just as his autobiographies, an act of detachment rather than exploration of subjectivity.
The essay draws on Wyndham Lewis’s literary criticism written in response to some of the major modernist writers between the late 1920s and mid–1930s, which is considered here both as development of his initial critical writings about modern painting and as evidence of a change in his evaluation of the whole modernist practice.
The argument begins by outlining three reasons that make Lewis’s critical oeuvre a valuable object of modernist studies. Firstly, Lewis is a critic who, even in his literary criticism, continuously maintains the point of view of a visual artist, providing commentary upon the significance of the visual in modernist writing, a feature strikingly illustrated in his own fiction. Secondly, Lewis’s criticism thoughtfully and revealingly puts the artist in a specifically modernist position towards modernity, demanding from the former both engagement with and critical distance from the latter. Thirdly, Lewis merits attention by virtue of much better known modernist writers, such as Ezra Pound, James Joyce, and T.S. Eliot, whom he relentlessly criticizes on a number of grounds, offering a uniquely perceptive (if not always fair) first-hand account of their work.
In his early art criticism Lewis was mostly concerned with the limitations he saw in European avant-garde painting, which he considered a challenge to be overcome by truly modern English art, of both visual and verbal kind. If modernist painting at large is defined as a thoroughly grounded in modernity constructive response to overwhelming Impressionist mimesis, Vorticism as the most viable form of modernism is supposed to avoid the dangers (including that of romanticizing modern industrial conditions, limiting oneself to pointless experimentation, or retreating from modernity into purely subjective vision) the artist going in this direction faces. This criticism with the aim of self-identification emphasizes, above all, transformative power that modernist art should gain from the type of detached engagement with modernity proposed for it.
Lewis’s literary criticism, being part of an ambitious project of all-grasping cultural criticism, clearly follows the same oppositional strategy, but with even a bigger determination to distance oneself from “advanced” literature in the post–World War I world. Lewis interprets work of Pound, Joyce and Eliot as different forms of betrayal of two fundamental principles that form the basis of his conception of modernism, namely that, just like visual art, in order to be creative, modernist literature has to deal with the present rather than the past and be an expression, rather than suppression (voluntary or involuntary), of the individual. At the same time, the centrality that criticism gains in Lewis’s output since the late 1920–s indicates his not at first overt reevaluation of the modernist enterprise as it reflects at least a partial failure of creative (as opposed to critical) intelligence in whose name it was created in the first place.
The present article continues the investigation of the Soqotri verbal system undertaken by the Russian-Soqotri fieldwork team. The article focuses on the so-called “weak” and “geminated” roots in the basic stem. The investigation is based on the analysis of full paradigms (perfect, imperfect and jussive) of more than 170 “weak” and “geminated” Soqotri verbs.