From the Poet of Stagnation to the Prophet of Revolution: Metamorphoses of Anton Chekhov’s reception

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
A. Stepanov
{"title":"From the Poet of Stagnation to the Prophet of Revolution: Metamorphoses of Anton Chekhov’s reception","authors":"A. Stepanov","doi":"10.21638/spbu09.2021.403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article traces the reception of Chekhov’s image and works from 1880–1900s, and its continuation in Stalinist culture. The transitional (from realism to modernism) nature of Chekhov’s works initially forced 19th century critics to negatively assess the “lack of ideology” and the “accidentality” of his poetics, and later to present Chekhov as an exponent of “longing for a common idea” and “a fighter against vulgarity”. The claims that Chekhov was outdated or, conversely, becoming relevant, were strictly correlated with the periods of stagnation/revolutionary activity. Similar patterns can be observed in Soviet criticism. In the 1920s, anti-Chekhovian moods were fairly characteristic for avant-garde artists, as well as representatives of the vulgar sociological method who criticized him harshly. After WWII, critics tried to present the “pessimistic” and sophisticated author as a bearer of Soviet dogmas and a predecessor of Soviet literature. For example, Vladimir Ermilov’s works used rhetorical strategies based on the opposition of “intuitive striving for freedom” vs “suppressive social reality”, which led Chekhov to the conclusion about the need for radical social changes. With the help of such rhetorical devices, the mournful “singer of stagnation” was transformed into a “prophet of revolution”. The task of connecting Chekhov to the humanistic tradition was solved by ascribing to him sympathy for the “little man” and “working man”. All such substitutions were done by equating the author’s and his heroes’ evaluative position. Many features of the “Soviet” Chekhov image can be traced back to Chekhov’s lifetime criticism, and therefore the outdated works of Soviet scholars can serve a clear example of cultural recycling, in which seemingly abandoned old ideas are reworked anew.","PeriodicalId":41205,"journal":{"name":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Yazyk i Literatura","volume":"301 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta-Yazyk i Literatura","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2021.403","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article traces the reception of Chekhov’s image and works from 1880–1900s, and its continuation in Stalinist culture. The transitional (from realism to modernism) nature of Chekhov’s works initially forced 19th century critics to negatively assess the “lack of ideology” and the “accidentality” of his poetics, and later to present Chekhov as an exponent of “longing for a common idea” and “a fighter against vulgarity”. The claims that Chekhov was outdated or, conversely, becoming relevant, were strictly correlated with the periods of stagnation/revolutionary activity. Similar patterns can be observed in Soviet criticism. In the 1920s, anti-Chekhovian moods were fairly characteristic for avant-garde artists, as well as representatives of the vulgar sociological method who criticized him harshly. After WWII, critics tried to present the “pessimistic” and sophisticated author as a bearer of Soviet dogmas and a predecessor of Soviet literature. For example, Vladimir Ermilov’s works used rhetorical strategies based on the opposition of “intuitive striving for freedom” vs “suppressive social reality”, which led Chekhov to the conclusion about the need for radical social changes. With the help of such rhetorical devices, the mournful “singer of stagnation” was transformed into a “prophet of revolution”. The task of connecting Chekhov to the humanistic tradition was solved by ascribing to him sympathy for the “little man” and “working man”. All such substitutions were done by equating the author’s and his heroes’ evaluative position. Many features of the “Soviet” Chekhov image can be traced back to Chekhov’s lifetime criticism, and therefore the outdated works of Soviet scholars can serve a clear example of cultural recycling, in which seemingly abandoned old ideas are reworked anew.
从停滞的诗人到革命的先知:契诃夫接受的变形
这篇文章追溯了契诃夫的形象和作品在1880 - 1900年代的接受,以及它在斯大林主义文化中的延续。契诃夫作品的过渡性(从现实主义到现代主义)最初迫使19世纪的批评家对他的诗学“缺乏意识形态”和“偶发性”做出负面评价,后来又将契诃夫描绘成“渴望共同理念”和“反对庸俗”的代表人物。认为契诃夫已经过时,或者相反,正在变得相关的说法,与停滞/革命活动的时期严格相关。在苏联的批评中也可以观察到类似的模式。在20世纪20年代,反契诃夫的情绪是先锋派艺术家的典型特征,也是对他进行严厉批评的庸俗社会学方法的代表。二战后,批评家们试图将这位“悲观”而老练的作家描绘成苏联教条的承担者和苏联文学的先驱。例如,叶尔米洛夫的作品使用了基于“直观争取自由”与“压抑的社会现实”对立的修辞策略,这使得契诃夫得出了需要激进的社会变革的结论。在这些修辞手法的帮助下,这位悲伤的“停滞歌手”变成了“革命先知”。将契诃夫与人文主义传统联系起来的任务,通过赋予他对“小人物”和“工人”的同情而得以解决。所有这些替换都是通过将作者和他的英雄的评价地位等同起来来完成的。“苏联”契诃夫形象的许多特征可以追溯到契诃夫的一生批评,因此,苏联学者的过时作品可以作为文化循环的一个明显例子,在这个例子中,看似被抛弃的旧思想被重新加工。
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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书