THE AMBIGUITY OF INTERTEXT: TEXTUALITY OF HISTORY IN PAVLO ZAHREBELNYI’S NOVEL “I, BOHDAN (CONFESSION IN GLORY)”. PART TWO

M. Nazarenko
{"title":"THE AMBIGUITY OF INTERTEXT: TEXTUALITY OF HISTORY IN PAVLO ZAHREBELNYI’S NOVEL “I, BOHDAN (CONFESSION IN GLORY)”. PART TWO","authors":"M. Nazarenko","doi":"10.33608/0236-1477.2022.06.34-50","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the novel “I, Bogdan” ‘historical authenticity’ is achieved through intuitive, romantic penetration of the author/narrator into the ‘nation’s spirit’ — and through the citatory narrative on the verge of cento, which the narrator emphasizes time and again. The fictional, subjective image of the hetman is presented as the only true one. The author of the novel follows two historiographical traditions, within which the fiction is not just authentic but real and true — of course, if consistent with existing narratives. These are premodern and romantic traditions. Unsurprisingly, Zahrebelnyi is happy to use the texts created both in the premodern framework (fragments of “Cossack chronicles”) and in the framework of (pre)romanticism (“History of Ruthenians”; “Zaporozhian Antiquities” by Izmail Sreznevskyi). These texts are ‘created’ and not ‘falsified’, because for their authors the reconstruction of the possible was not falsification but only filling gaps. For the author of the novel “I, Bogdan”, as well as for the romantics, the criterion of truth is compliance with the national spirit. Researchers have repeatedly noted that the novel creates the combined voice of the ‘hero-author’: it is the voice of the people themselves, on whose behalf his representative can speak. \nZahrebelnyi, when using historical sources, often turns to the palimpsest technique, rewriting or simply quoting without reference studies on Ukrainian history, especially by Mykola Kostomarov and Mykhailo Hrushevskyi, making certain ideological changes, and sometimes radically inverting the meaning of the quoted passages. Hidden intertext, therefore, may deny the explicit ideology of the text. It is obvious that the ‘encyclopedia of the model reader’ of the novel was much larger than the ‘encyclopedia’ of the empirical Soviet reader. So, in fact, the only possible ‘model reader’ was the author himself. This is a very modernist notion, and at the same time, the illusion of complete clarity on a superficial level moves Zahrebelnyi’s book closer to the poetics of postmodernism.","PeriodicalId":370928,"journal":{"name":"Слово і Час","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Слово і Час","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33608/0236-1477.2022.06.34-50","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the novel “I, Bogdan” ‘historical authenticity’ is achieved through intuitive, romantic penetration of the author/narrator into the ‘nation’s spirit’ — and through the citatory narrative on the verge of cento, which the narrator emphasizes time and again. The fictional, subjective image of the hetman is presented as the only true one. The author of the novel follows two historiographical traditions, within which the fiction is not just authentic but real and true — of course, if consistent with existing narratives. These are premodern and romantic traditions. Unsurprisingly, Zahrebelnyi is happy to use the texts created both in the premodern framework (fragments of “Cossack chronicles”) and in the framework of (pre)romanticism (“History of Ruthenians”; “Zaporozhian Antiquities” by Izmail Sreznevskyi). These texts are ‘created’ and not ‘falsified’, because for their authors the reconstruction of the possible was not falsification but only filling gaps. For the author of the novel “I, Bogdan”, as well as for the romantics, the criterion of truth is compliance with the national spirit. Researchers have repeatedly noted that the novel creates the combined voice of the ‘hero-author’: it is the voice of the people themselves, on whose behalf his representative can speak. Zahrebelnyi, when using historical sources, often turns to the palimpsest technique, rewriting or simply quoting without reference studies on Ukrainian history, especially by Mykola Kostomarov and Mykhailo Hrushevskyi, making certain ideological changes, and sometimes radically inverting the meaning of the quoted passages. Hidden intertext, therefore, may deny the explicit ideology of the text. It is obvious that the ‘encyclopedia of the model reader’ of the novel was much larger than the ‘encyclopedia’ of the empirical Soviet reader. So, in fact, the only possible ‘model reader’ was the author himself. This is a very modernist notion, and at the same time, the illusion of complete clarity on a superficial level moves Zahrebelnyi’s book closer to the poetics of postmodernism.
互文的歧义:札雷伯尼小说《荣耀的告白》的历史文本性。第二部分
在小说《我,波格丹》中,“历史的真实性”是通过作者/叙述者对“民族精神”的直觉的、浪漫的渗透,以及叙述者反复强调的、接近于cento的引用式叙事来实现的。虚构的、主观的酋长形象被呈现为唯一真实的形象。小说的作者遵循两种史学传统,在这两种传统中,小说不仅是真实的,而且是真实的——当然,前提是与现有的叙述相一致。这些都是前现代和浪漫的传统。不出所料,Zahrebelnyi乐于使用前现代框架(“哥萨克编年史”的片段)和(前)浪漫主义框架(“鲁塞尼亚人的历史”;《扎波罗热古物》(伊兹梅尔·斯列涅夫斯基)。这些文本是“创造的”而不是“证伪的”,因为对它们的作者来说,对可能的重建不是证伪,而只是填补空白。对于小说《我,波格丹》的作者,以及浪漫主义者来说,真理的标准是符合民族精神。研究人员一再指出,小说创造了“英雄作者”的联合声音:这是人民自己的声音,他的代表可以代表他们说话。Zahrebelnyi在使用历史资料时,经常采用重写法,在没有参考乌克兰历史研究的情况下重写或简单引用,特别是Mykola Kostomarov和Mykhailo hrushhevskyi,进行某些意识形态的改变,有时甚至彻底颠倒引用段落的含义。因此,隐藏的互文可能会否定文本的显性意识形态。很明显,小说的“模范读者的百科全书”比经验主义的苏联读者的“百科全书”要大得多。所以,事实上,唯一可能的“模范读者”就是作者自己。这是一个非常现代主义的概念,与此同时,表面上完全清晰的幻觉使扎赫雷伯尼的书更接近后现代主义的诗学。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信