Нарратив в литературе и историиНа материале дневниковой прозы А. Герцена 1840-х гг. 1 Аннотация: В статье последовательно рассмотрены основные категории нарратологического анализа, такие как точка зрения, факт, событие, нарратив, фабула и сюжет, мотив. Раскрывается связь нарратологических феноменов события и мотива. Показано, что фабула и сюжет являются системно противопоставленными аспектами интерпретации нарратива как исходной коммуникативной реальности повествовательного произведения. Различие между историческим и литературным нарративом заключается в том, что событийная канва исторического нарратива образуется как результат осмысления зафиксированых фактов, тогда как событие в литературном нарративе, погруженное в мир вымысла, образуется на основе мотива как основной единицы повествовательного языка литературы. Развернутые теоретические положения используются при анализе дневниковой прозы А. Герцена. Показывается, что дневники А. Герцена носят характер документально-исторического и автобиографического нарратива: Герцен не «придумывает», не «вымышляет» те или иные события своей жизнион до-мысливает и интерпретирует их, пытаясь доискаться их смысла, их связи с прошедшим и настоящим, с истиной жизни.The article describes the main categories of narratological analysis, such as point of view, fact, event, narrative, plot and story, motif. It is shown that the plot and story are contrasted aspects of interpretation of narrative. The difference between the historical and literary narrative is that the outline of events of historical narrative is formed as a result of understanding of the facts, while the event in a literary narrative, immersed in the world of fiction, is formed on the basis of motif as the basic unit of narrative language of literature. Detailed theoretical principles used in the analysis of prose diary by A. Herzen. Herzen's diaries have the character of a documentary-historical and autobiographical narrative: Herzen not «invents» the events of his life -he interprets them, trying to find their meaning, their connection with the past and present, with the truth of life.

Mamin-Sibiryak belonged to several cultural and educational public organizations, was familiar with many representatives of the provincial intelligentsia, who became the prototypes for a cycle of his essays called “Beloved People” (1896). The essays are devoted to the Ural local historians, most often nonprofessional scientists, who collected bit by bit information about the history and culture of the Urals: P. M. Vologodsky, N. K. Chupin, V. N. Shishonko and some others. The characters of the essays are ambiguous. On the one hand, they are enthusiasts, selfless workers, driven by love for science and their native land, evoking the author’s ardent sympathy. On the other hand, the figures of the Ural chroniclers and archaeologists are given in an ironic light, their apartments filled with papers, archaeological finds, etc., bring to mind Plyushkin’s house from Gogol’s poem. Their bitter feeling of their uselessness to society, their loneliness is a running motif of the cycle, associated with Mamin’s “beloved” heroes. They are elected or chosen (“beloved” in the ancient meaning of the word) for a high mission — to be enlighteners of the province, to save its historical memory. But the “deaf swamp” of provincial life is drawing them in, they themselves feel their marginality and cultural gap not only along the line of “the capital and the province”, but also in relation to their Ural countrymen. Nevertheless, Mamin emphasizes the deep connection of his characters with their land and its people, the city “crowd”, which “chosen ones” they are. Therefore, the last essay of the cycle affirms the idea of the high mission of a “worldly person”, who knows all the needs of his native city, who cares about others more than about himself.

This article focuses on the images of Nizhny Tagil in the contemporary poetry of the Urals. The phenomenon of “Nizhny Tagil poetic school” or “Nizhny Tagil renaissance” emerged in the early 2000s when young poets of Evgeny Turenko’s circle entered the poetry scene. This “school” lasted for about a decade but made a mark in the history of literature. The paradoxical imagery of the native city in its representatives’ poems stems from the fact that Nizhny Tagil is mostly portrayed as a “negative locus” or as a kind of “negative space”, in D. Davydov’s words. This is observed primarily in the poems of E. Turenko himself; in the poetry of his students, whenever the city is mentioned, it is shown from a negative perspective or altogether replaced by the town of Kushva. A different image of the city is presented in the poetry of Ekaterina Simonova, who also emerged from the Nizhny Tagil school and is now living in Ekaterinburg. The image of Tagil in her poems is closely connected to the themes of memory, family, and the lineage of the poetess, to which she feels a personal belonging. This is the reason why in her poetic world objects are so important; they keep traces not only of memories and past lives, but also the impressions of close people to whom she gives voice in her poems. Capturing the history of everyday life, Simonova creates poetic novellas in which life-stories of different people flow into one another. Nizhny Tagil here is portrayed as a place to which the lyrical heroine constantly returns, its mental map is revealed through the trajectory of the heroine’s movements and her constant peering into herself as the “other”. It exists in the achronic dimension, it is truly an “eternal city”, serving as a reference point during her encounters with other cities and people.

This article deals with the tradition of portraying “miserable”, “minuscule”, “tiny”, “poor”, “downtrodden” people in Russian literature between the 1840s and the 1860s. F. M. Dostoevsky, through the main character of The Idiot, called them “a misère” with a “human soul” and considered “the restoration” of the “ruined” the main idea of the art of the entire nineteenth century. The starting point of the research is Poor Folk, Dostoevsky’s novel of the natural school period in which the writer reversed sentimentalist poetics following the new demands of literature, emphasising the socio-economic meaning of the “poor folk” concept. In the 1860s, Dostoevsky’s sentimental-naturalistic style changed, and his feuilletons from the Petersburg Dreams, the discourse of poverty began to sound ironic; it was partly due to Dostoevsky’s polemical tasks. There is a connection with N. A. Nekrasov’s poetry in the middle of the century. It traces the change in the modality in the depiction of the “miserable” and the lower strata of the population from sympathetic drama to irony and sarcasm, which accompanies not so much the images of the poor themselves as the presence of the theme in literature, its traditionally philanthropic and sentimental personification. The material of the analysis in the article is In the Street and About the Weather, Nekrasov’s poetic cycles of the 1850s–1860s, most vividly depicting the images of the “poor folk” in St Petersburg’s streets and “Petersburg slums”. The third writer to focus on the urban poor, inhabitants of the basement slums is F. M. Reshetnikov with his story Yashka (1868). This writer’s story of entering the sphere of literature was comparable with that of the first edition of Dostoevsky’s novel. Reshetnikov himself, judging by his letters and diary, sometimes resembled the “miserable” characters of his much more famous and successful contemporary. Starting from the traditional forms of the author’s emotional experience for the character thrown to the bottom of life, Reshetnikov’s naïve and simple-hearted writing imitated normality, the commonness of the terrible life of his characters, concealed the warmth and human pain that the reader was supposed to perceive. It brought his “miserable” wordless characters closer to the author, and therefore to the reader, opening new possibilities in the literature that would be developed by writers of the turn of the century.

The Asian component permeates all levels of Ostrovsky's fictional world and reflects the author's view of the problem of Russian identity while also letting us estimate the geopolitical claims of Russia's general public. The article examines various markers of Asia and "asiachina" (backwardness) in the works of the playwright. Such markers are the names of towns on the Volga river, taken by Ostrovsky from the ancient history of the region (Bryakhimov) or from the neighboring Central Asia (Khiva, Kokand, Bukhara), the peoples living in a particular area (the Berendei, the Kokands, the Kirghiz-Kaisaks, etc.). Especially frequent ethnonyms are Tatars (the "next door strangers" for Russians), and Turks (due to the frequent wars between Russia and Turkey). His plays often feature Asian surnames of aristocratic characters such as Gurmyzhskaya, Murzavetskaya, Ulanbekova, Mamaev, Kuchumov, etc. The "steppe" beginning of "nomadism", combined with harshness and despotism, characterizes the merchant class in the author's plays. In addition to the Tatar and Eastern (Iranian-Turkish) sources, the Finno-Ugric locus becomes the other pole of "inner Asia". It is associated with the symbolism of the "forest" (in the play ''Forest''), an alternative to the Asian-Turkic "steppe".