• A
  • A
  • A
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
Regular version of the site
Of all publications in the section: 233
Sort:
by name
by year
Article
Лейбович О. Л. Новое литературное обозрение. 2012. Т. 4. № 16. С. 470-489.

In his article "The Party Organization of the Stalin Plant Has Been Gripped by Psychosis..." Oleg Leibovich (Perm State Institute of Art and Culture) uses archival materials to reconstruct the conflict between an engineer/Communist Party member, on the one hand, and the authorities, on the other. The place of the conflict: a brand-new enterprise for the manufacture of aviation motors, Plant No. 19in Perm. The subject of the conflict: the right to a personal inter¬pretation of people and events, contested by the Party organization. The time of the conflict: the repressive ideological campaign in August1936 (the Trial of the Sixteen in Moscow). The content of the conflict was determined by a clash of two cultures: rational and individualistic, on the one hand, and patrimonial, on the other. Common sense confronted ideological formulas and was defeated.

Added: Jan 31, 2013
Article
Козлов С. Л. Новое литературное обозрение. 2012. № 114. С. 352-353.
Added: Nov 19, 2012
Article
Кабацков А. Н., Лейбович О. Л. Новое литературное обозрение. 2016. Т. 2. № 142 (6/2016). С. 325-348.

In the context of the historical concepts of the ensla vement and emancipation of social groups (S.M. Solovyov — A.D. Gradovsky), Kabatskov and Leibovich examine the evolution of the social status of the university lecturer in Russia over the past century. They use the term ‘slave’ [nevol’nik] to descri be the dependent position of the assistant professor; the word encapsulates administrative tyranny, the spread of ‘subject’ mentality in university contexts and the curtailment of opportunities for professional self-realization. The authors present the university administration as the main agent of assistant professors’ enslavement — administrators simultaneously represent bureaucratic power and their own social ambitions.  

Added: Dec 29, 2015
Article
Левченко Я. С. Новое литературное обозрение. 2016. Т. 141. № 5 (1). С. 410-427.

Levchenko examines the problem of domination
and subjugation in the specific way it manifested in films about Stalinism and its consequences as shot by the Lenfilm studio, which enjoyed a period of cre- ative blossoming in the 1980s. These examples of working with totalitarian experience demonstrate
the expected adherence to contemporary norms, but also systematic attempts to overcome the fixed boundaries of Soviet cinematic language, including by questioning the workings of the mechanisms of memory and forgetting in post-Soviet culture.

Added: Dec 8, 2016
Article
Кучерская М. А. Новое литературное обозрение. 2016. № 4. С. 172-180.

The article considers an episode when we find Les­kov mythologizing the circumstances of his literary debut. By omitting in his autobiographical notes the first and the patronymic names of a local landlord and a neighbor of his relatives, Feodor Ivanovich Selivanov, who found Leskov’s letters worthy of publication, Leskov thereby opened a possibility of ascri­bing all that praise to Ilya Vassiljevitch Selivanov, a famous writer of his time. 

Added: Mar 13, 2017
Article
Лекманов О. А. Новое литературное обозрение. 2011. № 108. С. 394-395.
Added: Dec 12, 2011
Article
Мохов С. В. Новое литературное обозрение. 2019. Т. 155. № 1.

/////

Added: Sep 21, 2018
Article
Левченко Я. С. Новое литературное обозрение. 2014. Т. 128. № 4. С. 125-143.

The present paper is devoted to the transformations of Russian Formalist Theory of Literature just after its declared cancelling in the well-known odious article "A Monument for Scientific Error"published by Victor Shklovsky in the December, 1930. Many researchers (from Richard Sheldon to Alexander Galushkin) share the opinion that the article was an ostensible gesture which permitted the former formalists to remain faithful for their previous research and ethical principles. The author of the present paper insists that Victor Shklovsky has realized even more provocative project, having turned his theoretical statements into multiple genres of literature (i. e. belle-lettres, manuals for creative writing, children's tales, etc). The paper considers these "transponing" examples in detail.

Added: May 6, 2014
Article
Марасинова Е. Н. Новое литературное обозрение. 2019. Т. 155. № 1. С. 1-21.

The article is devoted to the moratorium on the death penalty, which was secretly introduced in Russia in 1741 and strictly observed throughout the reign of Elizabeth Petrovna. The paper examines the reasons and circumstances of the Empress's decision not to use death penalty, the ritual of the theatrical political death, the conditions of keeping  convicts sentenced to capital punishment, but pardoned. The phenomenon of a 20-year moratorium on the death penalty in Russia in the mid-18th century is explored on the basis of a representative collection of published and archival sources and is included in the wide socio-cultural and political context of Europe's public life of the period, which allows us to understand its significance in the historical perspective.

Added: Feb 10, 2019
Article
Самутина Н. В. Новое литературное обозрение. 2017. Т. 143. № 1. С. 246-269.
Added: May 31, 2016
Article
Козлов С. Л. Новое литературное обозрение. 2011. № 110. С. 84-91.
Added: Sep 12, 2012
Article
Лещенко П. В., Перцев А. В. Новое литературное обозрение. 2008. Т.  . № 94 .
Added: Nov 3, 2008
Article
Степанов Б. Е. Новое литературное обозрение. 2017. № 4. С. 110-120.

The object of this article is to discuss the proble­matics of the attractiveness of literary images in N.P. Antsiferov’s theory of literary excursions. At the heart of the idea of literary excursions lies the idea of the experience of the connection of a literary ima­g­e with a concrete spatial locus. Describing how a literary excursion utilizes various aspects of the aesthetics of realism and actualizes definite types of readerly experience, Antsiferov anticipates the resear­ch of literary imagination in popular culture.

Added: Jun 10, 2016
Article
Степанов Б. Е. Новое литературное обозрение. 2013. № 123. С. 323-325.

In this review the book "Historical Culture of the Russian Empire: Formation of Representation of the Past / Ed. A. N. Dmitriev. Istoricheskaya kul'tura imperatorskoi Rossii: formirovanie predstavlenii o proshlom / Otv. red. A.N. Dmitriev. M.: ID VShE, 2012" is examined. Author considers it as contribution to the studies of historical culture and discusses relevance of the different approaches for the description of this subject.

Added: Jan 23, 2014
Article
Болтунова Е. М. Новое литературное обозрение. 2017. Т. 2 (144). С. 154-173.

Through an analysis of the Boris Yeltsin Presidential Center, a memorial complex opened in Yekaterinburg in 2015, Boltunova examines the formation of memory of Russia's first president Boris Yeltsin and, more broadly, of the 1990s. The new museum's collection is interpreted in the context of American and Russian cultural and historical traditions. Boltunova pays particular attention to the memorial strategies that emerged during Russia's imperial period. She demonstrates how imperial-era standpoints became the foundation for the creation of the Soviet formation of memories about leaders, and addresses the question of how useful they proved for the formation of memories about Yeltsin.

 

Added: Apr 17, 2017
Article
Купцова О. Н. Новое литературное обозрение. 2015. № 6. С. 211-231.
Added: Dec 12, 2017
Article
Борисова Т. Ю. Новое литературное обозрение. 2011. № 108. С. 100-116.
Added: Oct 4, 2011
Article
Гасан Гусейнов Новое литературное обозрение. 2003. Т. 64.
Added: Mar 25, 2013
Article
Лихацкий А. А. Новое литературное обозрение. 2017.
In his article A. Lykhatsky examines the influence of editorial board on the process of reviewing in the Russian popular historical journal. „Golos Minyvshego” was chosen as the research object. The еditor of this journal, S. P. Melgunov, actively participated in the proces of selection of the reviews. One of the main aims of his editorial policy was exclusion of the scholar reviews from „Golos Minyvshego”. S. P. Melgunov considered review as an important instrument in the competition between different Russian popular historical journals. Due to that reason, he promoted the publication of reviews, which were designed for mass reader.
Added: Dec 14, 2016