Partenaires

Sorbonne Paris IV CNRS


Rechercher

Sur ce site

Sur le Web du CNRS


Accueil du site

Résumés RES 73

AUCOUTURIER Michel

RES 73/4

The periodization of ’Soviet Literature’ reflections and proposals

The major problem any periodization of ’Soviet Literature’ has to face is the necessity of combining a purely literary periodization, based on the intrinsic évolution of its poetics and thematics, with a sociopolitical periodization, based on the graduai building up, and subséquent destruction, of a spécifie system where literature functioned within a state and party framework. Discussing proposais by such scholars as A. Drawicz, S. Poręmba, M. Čudakova, the author offers a periodization based onthe notion of ’literary génération’.

Периодизация « советской литературы » размышления ипредложения

Основной проблемой периодизации « советской литературы » является необходимость сочетать чисто литературную периодизацию, основанную на « имманентном » движении поэтики и тематики литературы с периодизацией социо-политической, основанной на постепенном созидании, а затем разрушении, специфической для идео- кратического строя системы функционирования литературы, как части государственно-партийного механизма. Обсуждая предложения, выдвинутые несколькими учеными (А. Дравицем, С. Порембой, М. Чудаковой), автор предлагает периодизацию, основанную на понятии « литературного поколения ».


BELAIA Galina

La résistance immanente du texte artistique

RES 73/4

La réévaluation de l’héritage soviétique est aujourd’hui le problème central de la culture russe. Pour l’instant, c’est surtout une attitude de rejet qui domine dans la critique littéraire. Cela dit, on continue à lire aujourd’hui les œuvres de Babel’ et Platonov, les vers de Mandeľstam, les récits de Zoščenko, écrivains qui d’une façon ou d’une autre ont éprouvé de la sympathie pour la Révolution. Il faut donc essayer de comprendre ce qui a rendu possible l’émergence et la pérennité de ces textes. L’A. considère la littérature soviétique comme un système dont la dominante est le mot-univoque, le mot-idéologème. Cependant, à la périphérie de la littérature officielle, il y avait des écrivains dont l’œuvre conciliait acceptation de la Révolution et recherche artistique et dont l’écriture était orientée vers le trope, figure qui, comme on sait, génère des mécanismes sémantiques riches. C’est à cette « résistance immanente du texte artistique » qu’est consacré pour une bonne part cet article.


CHUDAKOVA Marietta

RES 73/4

La question du « et » : l’écrivain soviétique comme combinaison spécifique entre vie et œuvre

Laissée en suspens par de nombreux théoriciens de la littérature dont les formalistes russes qui ont tracé cependant quelques pistes, la question des rapports entre biographie et création reste aujourd’hui un problème majeur de la critique, y compris pour l’étude de la littérature russe de la période soviétique. Un examen dépassionné des formes spécifiques prises par ce « et » chez plusieurs écrivains (Šoloxov, Bulgakov, Zoščenko) permet peut-être de mettre en évidence certaines spécificités de l’écrivain soviétique et jette en tout cas sur chacun des auteurs considérés un éclairage insoupçonné.


COOPER Brian
Russian Derivatives of the Arabic Jubbah

RES 73/1

In this short article an attempt is made to examine the importance of the Arabic word and its Egyptian variant jibbah as a source of borrowings, not only in some non-Indo-European languages but also in major language groups of Europe, such as Romance, Germanie and Slavonic, especially the last. Particular stress is laid on the main Russian words ultimately derived from the Arabic, namely šuba, zipun, župan and jubka, with much attention being devoted to their detailed etymologies and consideration of the intermediate languages by way of which the Arabic word may have entered Slavonic and specifically Russian. Some attention is also paid to the question of whether Russian šuba could itself have been an intermediary in the development of words for "raccoon" and "raccoon fur" in particular Germanic languages.


COQUIN François-Xavier
Des décembristes aux marxistes : la notion de « masque » dans le mouvement révolutionnaire russe

RES 73/1

Appréciés de longue date par les Russes, masques et bals masqués acquièrent au XIXe siècle une dimension politique nouvelle : en raison du développement, sous Nicolas Ier, d’une police politique omniprésente, la dissimulation devient de mise pour camoufler ses véritables sentiments ou sonder ceux d’autrui, et le masque constitue, notamment après Netchaev, l’accessoire indispensable des opposants politiques, aussi bien populistes, que SR ou SD ; et Lénine en recommande l’usage, dans Que faire ?, à ses révolutionnaires de profession. Arme à double tranchant : cette pratique du masque et de la dissimulation engendrera méfiance et suspicion dans le camp révolutionnaire, ainsi qu’une hantise de l’adversaire masqué et des agents provocateurs, parmi lesquels Azef et Malinowski ne sont que les plus célèbres. Enfin, cette culture de la clandestinité ne sera pas plus étrangère à l’ascension de Staline qu’à la genèse du stalinisme.


DEPRETTO Catherine

RES 73/4

About some recent works on literary censorship in the Soviet Union (1917-1953)

The article is based on some récent works concerning literary censorship in the Soviet Union (1917-1953). It focuses on the major issues emerging in this field of research, situated at the crossroads of several disciplines and marked by historiographical debates about the nature of the Soviet régime. In this perspective, one must study more thoroughly the institu- tional history of the administration in charge of censorship in the USSR, the Glavlit (founded in 1922), in order to evaluate more accurately its role and importance. In the future, it seems necessary to show how censorship could be integrated into a history of the Russian literature of the Soviet period, not only as an element of this literature’s institutional workings, but also as a factor of internal evolution.


DOBRENKO Evgeny

RES 73/4

Surveiller - Punir - Surveiller : le réalisme socialiste comme produit excédentaire de la violence

Le présent article, centré sur les écrits journalistiques de Gor’kij, le livre sur l’histoire de la construction du canal mer Blanche - Baltique, et le Poème pédagogique de Makarenko, examine l’évolution, la fonction et la nature d’une des catégories centrales du discours politico-esthétique soviétique des années 1920-1930 : « re-forger » (perekovka). « Re-forger » est envisagé non seulement en tant que produit et légitimation de la terreur, mais aussi du point de vue de sa formulation dans le discours. Décrivant l’expérience soviétique selon les catégories de la société disciplinaire occidentale, la culture stalinienne introduit la société prédisciplinaire soviétique dans le discours occidental (voir Michel Foucault). Ce faisant, d’une part, la culture stalinienne donne forme aux bases du système soviétique et, d’autre part, elle organise les masses comme la plus fondamentale source de la terreur. L’A. examine également le glissement du discours sur la réhabilitation du début des années 1930 vers le discours pédagogique de la seconde moitié de la décennie, moment où les conditions de la Grande Terreur donnent forme à de nouvelles stratégies discursives de la violence.

Discipline — Punish — Discipline : Socialist realism as a surplus producr of violence

The article, focusing on Gor’kij’s journalism, the book on the history of the construction of the Belomor Canal, and Makarenko’s Pedagogical Poem, examines the evolution, function and nature of one of the central categories of Soviet politico-aesthetic discourse of the 1920s- 30s : « re-forging » (perekovka). « Re-forging » is considered not only as a product and legitimization of terror, but also from the point of view of its formulation in discourse. Describing the Soviet expérience in categories of Western disciplinary society, Stalinist culture inserted Soviet pre-disciplinary society into Western discourse (Michel Foucault). Thus on the one hand, tins formed the basis of the Soviet system, and on the other, Stalinist culture organized the masses as the most radical source of terror. The article also examines the shift from the discourse of rehabilitation at the beginning of the 1930s to the pedagogical discourse of the second half of the décade, when the conditions of the Great Terror formed new discursive strategies for violence.


GÜNTHER Hans

RES 73/4

L’adieu au canon soviétique

On peut comparer la culture de la période soviétique à un massif montagneux qui, lorsque l’on se trouve au pied, semble écrasant. Ce n’est qu’à une certaine distance que l’on peut avoir une vue d’ensemble. Le fait que jusqu’à présent il n’existe pas d’histoire générale de la littérature russe du XXe siècle semble indiquer que l’on est encore assez proche de l’ère soviétique. Lorsque nous tentons d’écrire une histoire de la littérature russe, le canon du réalisme socialiste, qui a interrompu le cours « normal » de l’évolution de la littérature en Russie, ne peut être ignoré car il sert d’arrière-plan à nombre d’oeuvres littéraires. Il est, par exemple, difficile de comprendre les œuvres d’un auteur comme Andrej Platonov sans prendre cet arrière-plan en considération. Dès avant la fin du régime soviétique, les « artistes soc », les conceptualistes et les postmodernistes en avaient pris à leur aise avec les emblèmes du réalisme socialiste, suggérant par là un adieu, sans colère ni nostalgie, aux ruines de la mythologie soviétique.

Farewell to the soviet canon

The culture of the Soviet period can be compared with a huge mountain massif which gives you an oppressive feeling if you stay very close to it. Only from a certain distance can you get an overview on the landscape. The fact that up to now no comprehensive history of Russian literature of the 20th century exists, seems to show that we are still close to the Soviet era. When we try to write a history of Russian literature the canon of Socialist Realism which has disrupted the ’normal’ évolution of literature in Russia cannot be simply ignored because it functions as a background for many works of literature. For instance, it is hard to under- stand the works of an author like Andrej Platonov without taking this background into considération. Already before the end of Soviet rule ’Sots artists’, conceptualists and post- modernists had been treating the emblems of Socialist Realism with a certain ease, thus suggesting a farewell to the ruins of Soviet mythology without anger or nostalgia.


HELLER Leonid

RES 73/4

Шаг вперед, два шага назад, или как мы изучаем социалистический реализм

Настоящая статья представляет собой рефлексию над методологией подхода к социалистическому реализму. Крах советской политической системы создал атмосферу смены парадигмы и в исследованиях советской культуры. Однако, этой ситуации не сопутствуют ни открытие радикально новых фактов, не укладывающихся в старые « тоталитаристские » концепции, ни появление новых теорий. В статье дается комментарий к ряду более или менее гласных предпосылок, мешающих обновить подход к социалистическому реализму. Критике подвергаются как позиция « описательства », негласно отрицающая постулат о системном характере советской культуры, так и позиции атомистов и холистов, понимающие этот постулат односторонне. Статья обосновывает целесообразность системного анализа, ухитывающего сложность объекта изучения и пользующегося достижениями теорий о комплексных процессах, и предлагает « программу исследований », включающую области и элементы периферийные, но составляющие неотъемлемую часть системы и необходимые для ее функционирования.

One step forwards, two steps backwards, or how socialist realism is studied

In this paper questions are asked about the methodology of the current approaches to socialist realism. The end of the Soviet political system created an atmosphere of ’change of paradigm’ in the vast field of Russian and East-European studies. Nevertheless, no facts impossible to understand within the framework of the old ’totalitarian’ theories have been discovered, and no new global theory radically changing our vision of the Soviet system has been proposed. The author analyzes here a séries of presuppositions which seem to underlie the methods of Soviet cultural studies, preventing them from renewing themselves. The issue of systemicity is central to the argument. A critique is made of the ’descriptionisť position negating this systemie nature of the Soviet culture and of the atomistic and holistic positions, both accepting the systemie postulate but failing to produce a methodology cohérent with it. The paper is bound to initiate a search for an analysis capable of taking into account the complexity of the cultural phenomenon (perhaps the récent theories of complex phenomena from other sciences could help in this search) ; it proposes a ’research program’ which focalizes on the aspects and constituents which may be marginal, but are essential at the same time for the functioning of the system.


LIVAK Leonid
Toward the History of Russian Literature in Exile : the “Heroic Period” of Young Russian Poetry in Paris

RES 73/1

The definitive history of Russian émigré literature in France is yet to be written. Until present, all works describing the development of Russian literature on French soil in the inter-war period have followed the same methodological convention according to which Russian literature in exile was born in Berlin, while Paris did not become its capital until roughly 1925. It has been argued that, thanks to the fluidity of political demarcations and the popularity of the Soviet avant-garde among younger Russian literati in Paris between 1921 and 1924, one must exclude this chapter of artistic activity in exile from the study of Russian émigré literature. Due to this methodological approach, the literary life of Russian exiles in Paris has been implicitly treated as nonexistent until 1924. The present article argues that the Paris period of 1921-1924 was as important for the evolution of Russian émigré literature as its Berlin period, since the Paris period produced a large number of major émigré literary figures. It is impossible to comprehend the general evolution of Russian émigré literature in all its complexity, as well as the artistic trajectories of many exiles, without taking into account this Paris period called by Dovid Knut “the heroic period of young émigré poetry”.


MANDZUKA-CAMEL Olga

RES 73/1

Les’ Kurbas — Creator of the Modern Ukrainian Theater

Les’ Kurbas born 25 February 1887 in Sambir, Galicia (Western Ukraine). An outstanding organizer and director of Ukrainian avant-garde theater, actor, and pedagogue. In 1907-1908 he studied philosophy at the University of Vienna and also drama. Graduating from Lviv University in 1916, he worked as an actor in the troupes of the Hutsul Theater (1911-1912) and Ruska Besida Theater (1912-1914), founded and directed the Ternopil Teatralni Vetchory Theater (1915-1916) and worked in the Sadovsky Theater in Kiev (1916-1917).
After the February Revolution of 1917, Kurbas reorganized an actors’ studio he had founded in 1916 into the Molodyi Theater (1917-1919) in Kiev. With the Molodyi Theater productions, which included the first production in Ukrainian of a classical Greek play, Sophocles’ OEdipus Rex, Kurbas revolutionized Ukrainian theater, elevating it in style, esthetics, and repertoire from the provincial to the level of modern Western European theater.
In 1922, having become convinced of its use as a powerful political instrument, he founded the Berezil’ artistic association in Kiev.
It was at the Berezil’ Theater in both Kiev (1922-1926) and Kharkov (1926-1923) that Kurbas’s creative genius became most evident. There he perfected his rigorous system for the intellectual and technical training of actors. One of the basic principles of his system was that the stage image, although it is created by the actor’s emotions, voice, gestures, and temperament, must be objectivized and remain separate from the actor’s frame of mind and personal experiences. With over 300 actors and staff members, 6 actors’ studios, director’s lab, design studio, and theater museum, the Berezil’ association became the focal point of theater in Ukraine.
At Berezil’, Kurbas broke down the old forms of Ukrainian theater and, after a long period of searching and enthusiastic experimentation with German Expressionist theater and the theories of Constructivism, succeded in his productions of Mykola Kuliš’s plays in creating a unique Ukrainian Expressionist theater.
Kurbas broke completely with traditional Ukrainian realistic, ethnographic theater to present spectacles that forced the audience to think instead of simply watching passively. This intellectualism was combined with a brilliant synthesis of rhythm, movement, and avant-garde theatrical and visual devices, including montage. He managed to gather around himself the best actors, directors, set designers (e.g. V. Meller), and play wrights (e.g. M. Kuliš) in Ukraine.
In 1933, Kurbas, his ideas, and his dynamics, innovative, and often controversial productions were condemned as nationalist, formalist, and conterrevolutionary. In October he was dismissed as the director of Berezil’ and all of his productions were banned from the Soviet Ukrainian repertoire. He moved to Moscow, where he was arrested in December and imprisoned on the Solovets Islands. He was shot in 1937.

Лесь Курбас — сoздатель украинского авангардного театра

Лесь Курбас (1887-1937) вошел в историю украинской культуры как театральный деятель, талантливый реформатор сцены, актер, режиссер-новатор, педагог, теоретик театра. Родился в актерской семье в Галиции (Западная Украина). Учился на философском факультете Венского университета (1908-1909).
На сцене дебютировал как актер в Гуцульском театре Г. Хоткевича (1910), затем в театре Руська Бесіда (1912-1914). В 1915 году организовал собственную труппу Тер- нопольские театральные вечера. В Киеве работал в театре М. Садовского (1916).
В 1917 г. Курбас организовывает и возглавляет Молодой театр, который несет на себе влияние немецкого экспрессионизма. Был непосредственно связан с практикой современного ему европейского театра. Опираясь на традицию лучших европейских образцов, Курбас осуществил реформу украинского театра и создал не только новую драматургическую форму но и насытил ее новым идейным содержанием, придающим его спектаклям подлинно национальный характер. Курбас поставил много ярких остроактуальных спектаклей, в которых отразился революционный дух времени, такие как Гайдамаки, Октябрь, Джимми Хиггинс, Газ, с высоким мастерством воплотил ряд произведений драматической европейской классики.
В 1922 году Курбас основывает новый театр с весенним названием Березиль (март). В 1926 Березиль вместе с труппой как лучший украинский театр переводят из Киева в Харьков, в то время столицу Украинской республики. Тут он знакомится с драматургом Миколою Кулишом, творчество которого имело огромное значение в развитии национальной литературы и театра. В ряде пьес на современные темы, Кулиш поднимал философские, политические и национальные проблемы. Его пьесы вошли в репертуар политического театра Березиль. Главную заслугу драматурга составляют его социальные сатирические и политические пьесы (Народный Малахий, Мина Мазайло) в которых автор представляет и высмеивает мещанство, советскую действительность и затрагивает национальный вопрос. В начале октября 1933 г. пьесы Кулиша были запрещены. Курбас был снят с должности художественного руководителя и директора театра Березиль. Главным обвинением против мастера стала позиция украинского националиста. 25 декабря 1933 г. Курбас был арестован. Его выслали сначала в Медвежьегорск, а потом на Соловки. Великий украинский режиссер погиб в 1937 г. во время массовых расстрелов в период культа личности Сталина. Театр Березиль был ликвидирован. В области театрально-драматургического искусства украинский реформатор оказался по-революционному смелым реалистом. Он воспитал целую плеяду выдающихся актеров и режиссеров, его теоретические взгляды не утратили актуальность до настоящего времени.


NIQUEUX Michel

RES 73/4

What texts ? Soviet classics revision after revision

’Soviet classics’ (of Socialist Realism) became classics at the price of successive rewritings, including stylistic and ideological corrections made by the author or the editors. The examination of the various editions of Čapaev (D. Furmanov), Cement (F. Gladkov), Razgrom (A. Fadeev), Как zakaljalas’ stal’ (N. Ostrovskij) shows the need to put together critical editions of Soviet classics.


VIBERT Stéphane
La quête russe de l’universel : mouvement slavophile et hiérarchie de valeurs socio-communautaire (1825-1855)

RES 73/2-3

On the basis of concepts defined by L. Dumont in his comparative anthropology, this work gives a general idea of the hierarchy of values peculiar to the social whole, with a special emphasis on its relation to the Universal. The Slavophile thought under Nicholas I (1825-1855) represents an essential heuristic key to the influence of modern ideology on a pre-eminently holistic culture. The quest for the "Russian identity" urges the Slavophiles, under the influence of the Romantics, to re-define (re-invent ?) the outlines of the national tradition. The "Slavophile movement" establishes — rather than finds the answers — a field of idea-value problem, that will remain at the foundation of the Russian self-perception (conflict with Westernizers), whose continuation can be observed up to the 1917 Revolution.
The definition of narodnost’ (the spirit of the nation), justifying the historic mission of Russia, suggests a tension between the particular and the Universal, that is resolved by an appeal to a specific mode of community (sobornost’, the Church as the communion of the Saints, recognizing the mir as a social body) and of the individual (defined by tselnost’, "integrity" restored by faith objecting rationalism), thus exemplifying the superiority of the Orthodoxy as the Christian Truth preserved in its original purity. But the claim on the power of sacred mediation (against the "Occidental" treason of the Petersburg Empire) establishes a mystic collective entity (the Russian people) at the foundation of a culture at once “Orthodox” and “universal", integrating the two senses of the word pravda : a given Truth imbodied in Justice that is actually realised at the social level.


VRINAT-NIKOLOV Marie

RES 73/1

Two Novels by Vera Mutafčieva , The Džem Affair and I, Anna Comnena : from History as a Hero to History as a Pretext

A renown writer and historian in Bulgaria, Vera Mutafčieva became the first in 1966 to save not just the historic novel but the novel in general from the rut narrowly traced by the socialist realism and the purely descriptive narration which altogether was characteristic of the Bulgarian novel since its origins. In 1991, she was also the first to publish a valuable novel just after the change of regime in Bulgaria. In a way one could say that, from History as a hero to History as a pretext, The Džem Affair and I, Anna Comnena mark out the history of the Bulgarian novel during almost half a century, that is from 1944 to 1991. Many common points connect the two works : an omnipresent game with History, whose borders are abolished due to a continuous dialogue between past and present, the dead and the living ; a polyphonic narration, a non-linear temporality and the fact that these two works obtain a particularly sharp meaning in relation to the context in which they appear. At the same time they are very different novels : with the first one, it is mainly a meditation upon History, the relationship between the individual and History, that the historian Vera Mutafčieva delivers. History is very present, in the speech of ail narrators (History even becoming a judge in its own court as staged through the work) even to the point of establishing a heroic status. In the second book, the most feminine that has yet been written in Bulgaria (a novel written by a woman, narrated by women, and whose main characters are women), it is rather a reflection on political power and the temptation that it exerts on the intellectuals, on the creation and the role of the intellectuals in a society, than a accreditation on motherhood, education, conjugal love, etc. Stretching throughout an emblematic journey, in particular that of a Bulgarian writer, these two works mark out in a certain way the trials and tribulations if not the avatars of socialist realism in Bulgaria.

VRINAT -NIKOLOV Marie

RES 73/1

Случаят Джем и Аз, Анна Комнина от Вера Мутафчмева : от историята-повод

Известна писателка и историчка-османистка, Вера Мутафчиева първа извежда през 1966 г. не само историческия, но романа изобщо извън тесните коловози на социалистическия реализъм и чисто описателното повествование, характерно общо взето за българския роман от самото му зараждане ; тя е и първата, която през 1991 издава стойностен роман след либерализирането на режима в България. Случаят Джем и Аз, Анна Комнина са жалони в близо петдесетгодишната история на българския роман от 1944 до 1991.
Много общи точки свързват двете книги : заличаване на границите между историческите епохи чрез непрестанен диалог между минало и настояще, живи и мъртви ; полифонично повествование, нелинейна темпоралност и фактът, че двете произведения придобиват особен смисъл в контекста, в който излизат на бял свят.
Същевременно, двата романа са твърде различни. Първият отразява предимно размишленията на историчката Вера Мутафчиева върху историята и отношението личност/история. Присъствието на историята е така силно в разказите на всички повествователи (тя заема дори ролята на съдия в своеобразното съдебно дело в романа), че можем да я възприемем като действащо лице. Втората книга, най « женската », писана до момента в България (авторката е жена, разказът се води от жени и главните героини са жени) е по-скоро размисъл на една преживяла много жена : отношение към властта и притегателното въздействие, което тя оказва върху интелектуалците, формиране и роля на интелектуалеца в обществото, майчинство, възпитание, брачна любов и др.
Жалони в емблематичния път на един самобитен български автор, двете произведения са и своеобразни жалони на превратностите — да не кажем превъплъщенията — на социалистическия реализъм в България.


WEINSTEIN Marc

RES 73/4

Прочтение Литературы факта с точки зрения поэтики

Сборник Литература факта (1929) чаще всего комментировался с точки зрения социологии литературы. Настоящая статья ставит себе задачу прочесть его с точки зрения поэтики, т.е. рассмотреть, насколько понятие факта и другие смежные понятия помогают определить единство и смысл русской литературы XX века (1900-1970) от Хлебникова до Солженицына.

The Literature of Fact : a tentative reading based on poetics

The collection The Literature of Fact (1929) has often been commented upon from a sociological or historical perspective. This article looks at it from the viewpoint of poetics and examines how the concept of fact and other closely-related concepts help to determine the sensé and unity of Modem Russian literature from Xlebnikov to Solženicyn.