CC BY
27
• the formation of philosophical and religious views of V. Voino-Yasenetsky (Archbishop Luke) took place under the exclusive influence of his religious consciousness and true faith, the deepening of which was largely due to his own mystical experience;
• the philosophical and religious views of V. Voino-Yasenetsky (Archbishop Luke) were characterized by an expressive creationist orientation, justifying which he gravitated to the synthesis of scientific, philosophical and religious knowledge;
• combining medical and archpastoral activities and strictly adhering to scientific research methods V. Voino-Yasenetsky not only defended the fundamental compatibility of science and religion, but also pointed to the need for their rapprochement, believing that the divergence of religion and scientific and philosophical knowledge determines only the object and method of knowledge;
• but somewhat departing from the dichotomous teachings of the Orthodox Church about the afterlife of the spirit V. Voino-Yasenetsky created an original doctrine about the presence and coexistence in each person of the spirit, soul and body, according to which the spirit is immortal, while the soul dies with the body - a temporary temple of the Holy spirit - and can be consonant only given the correspondence to the spirit;
• without denying the expediency of scientific-rationalistic knowledge, V. Voi-no-Yasenetsky preferred mystical-intuitive comprehension of the world and under that review objectively (but not consciously!) continued the domestic cordocentric tradition, according to which the heart is the organ of higher knowledge, as well as the importance;
• comprehending the connection of evil and suffering, soul and body, as well as the nature of the miracle and the phenomenon of providence, V. Voino-Yasenetsky called people to spiritual perfection and in that way enriched epistemological ideas about human nature as «the image and likeness of God" and defined its ontological basic needs;
• analyzing various spiritual aspects in the context of clarifying the nature and functional relationship of the higher nervous system, brain and memory of man, as well as arguing that after leaving the body, the spirit will not only continue eternal and endless life, but will also be improved in the direction that it chose in earthly life V. Voino-Yasenetsky provided his reflections with a distinct humanistic orientation and Christological support;
Библиографический список
• separating the concept of «spiritual» and «spiritual» and understanding by spirituality the achievement of the highest quality integrity by a person and above all the victory of the spirit over its chaotic mental and bodily components V. Voino-Yase-netsky connected spiritual advancement with imitation of the precepts of Jesus Christ and his own example of selfless pastoral service testified loyalty and devotion to them throughout his suffering life;
• activity as one of the most representative ways of expressing philosophical and religious views of V. Voino-Yasenetsky confirms their rather wide thematic range, in the context of which the main place was occupied by the problems of the meaning of life, the need for spiritual improvement, morality, interaction between man and the world, science and religion, etc;
• combining medical and biological knowledge with the ideological and ethical values of Orthodoxy V. Voino-Yasenetsky as a doctor and theologian actualized the role of Christian ethics in the process of complex treatment of a person, which in its fundamental provisions is a snowdrift with the basic provisions of modern bioethics [7];
• The theoretical value of the study determined that the thesis allows to better understand the phenomenon of V. Voyno-Yasenetsky as a doctor and Archbishop Luke in the context of his philosophical and religious views, which had a peculiar attraction to synthesis of scientific, philosophical and religious knowledge, as well as improve the look at the problems that appeared as a challenge to the modern stage of civilization development [8]. Highlighted in the problematic discourse of interdisciplinary interaction of religion, science and philosophy at the stage of development, they make the reading of the scientific and theological heritage of the outstanding surgeon and Saint in the context of current trends characterized by the intensification of scientific, philosophical and religious reflection on a complex of issues of paramount spiritual importance (problems of faith and reason, nature and purpose of man, soul, spirit and body, etc.).
The practical value of the study lies in the fact that its materials and conclusions can be used when reading General courses in religious studies, philosophy and history of religion, as well as special courses on Christian ethics, history of Christianity in the Crimea, bioethics. In addition, the materials can be practically used by specialists who are engaged in the study of synergetics, as well as in solving issues of interfaith interaction.
1.
Глущенков В. Святитель Лука - взгляд в будущее. Панагия и белая мантия. Краматорск: Полтавская епархия, Спасо-Преображенский Мгарский монастырь, 2002.
Лисичкин В. Крестный путь Святителя Луки (Войно-Ясенецкого), исповедника, архиепископа Крымского. Available at: http://www.st-nikolas.orthodoxy.ru/ newmartyres/ luka/luka_zhitie.html
Марущак В. Жизнеописание Святого исповедника, архиепископа Симферопольского и Крымского Луки (Войно-Ясенецкого). Симферополь: Издательский отдел Симферопольской и Крымской епархии, 2000.
Поповский М.А. Жизнь и житие святителя Луки (Войно-Ясенецекого), архиепископа и хирурга. Санкт-Петербург: Сатисъ Держава, 2005.
Халезова Л. Внесок Валентина Фелксовича Войно-Ясенецького у формування сучасно'( бюетично'|' проблематики. 1стор1я релгй в Укра'ж науковий щорiчник. Ленинград: Логос, 2009: 963 - 969.
Khalezova L. The forming of religious believes of St. Luke (V. F. Voino-Yasenetsky). Релгя в життi стародавньо'i та сучасно'i людини: ¡сторичний та флософський аспек-ти: матерiали Мiжнародноi конференций Севастополь, 2010: 119 - 120.
Poloma М.М. The sociological Context of Religious Experience. Handbook of religious experience. Religious Education press. Birmingham, Alabama. 1995: 161 - 183. Wulff D.M. Phenomenological Psychology and Religious. Handbook of religious experience. Religious Education press. Birmingham, Alabama. 1995: 183 - 200.
References
1. Gluschenkov V. Svyatitel' Luka - vzglyad v buduschee. Panagiya i belaya mantiya. Kramatorsk: Poltavskaya eparhiya, Spaso-Preobrazhenskij Mgarskij monastyr', 2002.
2. Lisichkin V. Krestnyj put' Svyatitelya Luki (Vojno-Yaseneckogo), ispovednika, arhiepiskopa Krymskogo. Available at: http://www.st-nikolas.orthodoxy.ru/ newmartyres/luka/luka_ zhitie.html
3. Maruschak V. Zhizneopisanie Svyatogo ispovednika, arhiepiskopa Simferopol'skogo i Krymskogo Luki (Vojno-Yaseneckogo). Simferopol': Izdatel'skij otdel Simferopol'skoj i Krymskoj eparhii, 2000.
4. Popovskij M.A. Zhizn'izhitie svyatitelya Luki (Vojno-Yasenecekogo), arhiepiskopa i hirurga. Sankt-Peterburg: Satis' Derzhava, 2005.
5. Halezova L. Vnesok Valentina Feliksovicha Vojno-Yasenec'kogo u formuvannya suchasnoi bioetichnoi problematiki. Istoriya religij v Ukra'ini: naukovij schorichnik. Leningrad: Logos, 2009: 963 - 969.
6. Khalezova L. The forming of religious believes of St. Luke (V. F. Voino-Yasenetsky). Religiya v zhitti starodavn'oi ta suchasnoi'lyudini: istorichnij ta filosofs'kij aspekti: materiali Mizhnarodnoi konferencii. Sevastopol', 2010: 119 - 120.
7. Poloma M.M. The sociological Context of Religious Experience. Handbook of religious experience. Religious Education press. Birmingham, Alabama. 1995: 161 - 183.
8. Wulff D.M. Phenomenological Psychology and Religious. Handbook of religious experience. Religious Education press. Birmingham, Alabama. 1995: 183 - 200.
Статья поступила в редакцию 24.02.20
УДК 821.161.1(092)
Guz N.A., Doctor of Sciences (Philology), senior lecturer, Professor, Department of Russian language and Literature, Shukshin Altai State University
for Humanities and Pedagogy (Biysk, Russia), E-mail: gna@city.biisk.ru
DAILY LIFE IN THE ART WORLD OF GONCHAROV. The author sets a goal to consider the image of daily life in the art world of I.A. Goncharov. The analysis is preceded by a brief excursion into the history of the scientific study of this phenomenon by representatives of philosophy, sociology and literary criticism, which allows us to state the breadth of the range of different approaches and the lack of a universal formulation of the concept. The cultural-historical, semiotic and typological methods were used in the present work. As a result of the study we have made the following conclusions. Daily life as an object of the description is extremely important for the writer, who had a penchant for the reconstruction of mature native life forms. In the novels of I.A. Goncharov the image of daily life is represented primarily by everyday and spatiotemporal realities. On the one hand, daily life in its components is part of the image of the character, on the other hand, the image of daily life as a whole has aesthetic and axiological self-sufficiency.
Key words: Goncharov, art world, novels, daily life, everyday realities, narrator, historicism.
Н.А. Гузь, д-р филол. наук, доц., проф., ФГБОУ ВО «Алтайский государственный гуманитарно-педагогический университет имени В.М. Шукшина» (АГГПУ имени В.М. Шукшина), г. Бийск, E-mail: gna@city.biisk.ru
ПОВСЕДНЕВНОСТЬ В ХУДОЖЕСТВЕННОМ МИРЕ И.А. ГОНЧАРОВА
Автор ставит целью рассмотреть образ повседневности в художественном мире И.А. Гончарова. Анализу предшествует краткий экскурс в историю научного исследования этого феномена представителями философии, социологии, литературоведения, что позволяет констатировать широту диапазона различных подходов и отсутствие универсальной формулировки понятия. В работе использовались культурно-исторический, семиотический, типологический методы. Результатом исследования стали следующие выводы. Повседневность как предмет изображения чрезвычайно важна для писателя, тяготевшего к воссозданию устоявшихся, коренных форм жизни. В романах И.А. Гончарова образ повседневности представлен, прежде всего, бытовыми, а также пространственно-временными реалиями. С одной стороны, в своих компонентах повседневность является частью образа героя, с другой, образ повседневности в целом обладает эстетической и аксиологической самодостаточностью.
Ключевые слова: Гончаров, художественный мир, романы, повседневность, быт, автор, историзм.
Daily Life in the Art World of Goncharov
The category of daily life is studied today in philosophy, history, sociology, cultural studies, psychology, linguistics, literary criticism and other social and human sciences. There is no unambiguous and universal definition of this phenomenon because of such a wide range of specificity of approaches and methods.
If we retrace the existence of the word "daily life" in the Russian language, we can notice a certain evolution of its semantics. In V. Dahl's explanatory dictionary, daily means constantly, repeating each and every day [1, p. 147], and the related word "everyday" means what has been done or happened in one day. At the same time, Dahl points at a new shade of the meaning: "everyday" is moving closer to "for everyday use", which brings a new meaning: accustomed, acquired, accepted, ordinary, simple, common, occurring most often, nearly always [2, p. 637], In the dictionary of S.I. Ozhe-gov the words "daily" and "everyday" are also close, whereby for the first time the word "daily routine" appears as a synonym for daily life, however "daily routine" means "a general way of life and daily life" [3, p. 59, 62, 429].
The dictionary of the modern Russian literary language issued in 1950 introduces emotionally "lowering" epithets into the characteristic of daily life: hopeless, gray, unsightly, boring [4, p.668]. The same dictionary issued in 1991 removes these negative definitions, leaving the interpretation of everyday life as monotonous and joyless [5].
Today, the most common synonyms of daily life are weekdays; little things of life; everyday routine; daily life; normal daily routine; mediocrity; humdrum life; prosiness; the trivial round; dailiness; commonness; prose of life - that is far from being a complete series of synonyms for the word "daily life".
The scientific basis for studying the category of daily life appeared only in the 20th century. E. Husserl, the founder of philosophical phenomenology, pointed at the need to study prosiness, specified it as a "world of life," with internal orderliness and sense [6]. His follower A. Schutz came to the conclusion that daily life is the "supreme reality", and other aspects of reality are only its derivatives. [7] T. Luckman and P. Berger also called daily life "the highest (paramount) reality" [8, p. 29]. The theory of daily life was further developed by representatives of the Annals School (M. Blok, F. Braudel, L. Fevre), whereby the methodology of the study of daily life turned the spotlight on people mentality. So, F. Braudel in the first volume of the study "Material Civilization: Economics and Capitalism of the XVth-XVIIIth centuries. Structures of Daily Life: Possible and Impossible" appealed to the study of the mental structures of daily life that have remained constant for a long time (for centuries) [9].
The problems of daily life occupy a significant place in the works of M. Heidegger. It is his understanding that everyday worries represent an unworthy standard of living, since it suppresses the creative element.
Representatives of postmodernism J.-F. Lyotard, J. Baudrillard, J. Bataille place a premium on the mosaic nature of daily life, which is the basis for studying it from any position and in any aspects.
In Russia, daily life and daily routine was described in the 19th century in the works of I.E. Zabelin, K.A. Ivanov, N.I. Kostomarov, A.B. Tereshchenko. In modern science, the most significant are the works of E.V. Zolotukhina-Abolina, I.T. Kasavin, S.P. Schavelev, V.D. Leleko, S.N.Ikonnikova, L.G. Ionin and G.S. Knabe.
E.V. Zolotukhina-Abolina represents "daily life" as "an empirical, perishable life, a transient existence, full of bodily feelings, emotional stress and various sufferings inherent both with the body and the soul" [10, p. 98]. I.T. Kasavin and P. Shchavelev define daily life as "a static image of the world in which creative, innovative processes are artificially suspended and only stable, unquestioned foundations of human life (traditions, rituals, stereotypes, categorical systems) are specified" [11, p. 13]. V.D. Leleko sees in daily life "an independent, prevalent and dominant sphere of reality, the characteristic features of which are "practical nature, pragmatic interest orientation, material and body stability, physicality as well as awake and active consciousness" [12, p. 16]. According to the researcher, it "determines the nature, quality, essence of human life, is the supreme authority, sense-making center and evaluation criterion of other life spheres" [12, p. 15].
In literary criticism, the study of daily life has begun relatively recently, although terminologically unmarked works had appeared earlier, the brilliant example are the works by Yu. Lotmann. Modern researchers focused on the category of daily life in literary works. The greatest contribution to the study of this phenomenon was made by K.A. Vorotyntseva, who considered daily life both in the aspect of narrative poetics
and in the aspect of character reality. The researcher defines daily life as "the whole of bodily practices, details of daily routine, interior, fashion, everyday behavior and private family life" [13, p. 276]. K.A. Vorotyntseva analyzes the category of daily life in the prose of A.C. Pushkin, N.V. Gogol and F.M. Dostoevsky from the position of "daily routine - existence".
For M.V. Selemeneva daily life is "the course of life itself", it is "the sphere of things, events, relations, which is the source of the creative, cultural, historical, moral and philosophical content of life" [14, p. 196]. The projection of such a formulation on the urban prose of Yu. Trifonov leads the researcher to the conclusion that daily life is "a natural habitat in which there is also a daily routine surrounding on all sides and the sphere of intellectual and spiritual and moral strivings," it "receives into itself both high and insignificant "[14, p. 201].
The phenomenon of daily life in literary works has been also considered by T.D. Kuzmina , N.O. Osipova , I.V. Samorukova.
The purpose of the present article is to consider the image of daily life in the art world of I.A. Goncharov as well as the forms of its expression and their functions. The theoretical and methodological basis of the work is the study of the under-mentioned authors, as well as cultural, historical, semiotic and typological methods.
The range of reflection (reconstruction) of daily life in literary works is very wide: from a small number of details or occasionally mentioned circumstances to detailed descriptions of everyday life of the character in various aspects of daily life. The narrative literature of I.A. Goncharov is a fertile ground for the study of daily life. I.A. Goncharov was a supporter of the evolutionary and slow social development. His artistic method involved description of native and conventional life forms. And this is directly related to daily life. What is it expressed in? First of all it is expressed in the reconstruction of daily routine. Goncharov was often called a writer on matters of everyday life that had a judgy meaning. But daily routine is one of the most significant attribute patterns of culture in general and the micro-environment of human life. Wittgenstein wrote: "The most important aspects of things are hidden because of their simplicity and daily life (They are not noticed, because they are always within sight.) In other words: what we do not notice, by being once seen, turns out to be the most exciting and powerful" [15, p. 244].
Currently, the artistic value of the description of daily routine is out of question. "The vision of a great writer cannot be comprehensive - it is always a visual angle," noted L. Ginzburg [16, p. 91]. Consequently, if the author describes in detail the micro-environment that surrounds his characters, then daily life is organically included in the "view of the world" created by him. Many domestic thinkers considered the personality rootedness in everyday life as his/her involvement in the standard and the highest values of being".
The appeal of I. Goncharov to everyday reality over the course of more than a century-long history of the existence of his works has been assessed ambiguously: from hypertrophy of this side of creativity with the verdict "writer on matters of everyday life" as a negative characteristic - to ignoring it on the whole. On the other hand, the description of the "material world" was often considered as a continuation of Gogol's traditions. In this regard, we find convincing the position of P.E. Bukharkin, who "separates" the creative manners of the writers: "Despite the visible closeness of Goncharov's Flemish style and Gogol's style, we deal with different phenomena [17, p.124]. In the description of everyday details the researcher sees a judgy thought of the writer. In Goncharov's works, the reproduction of the same way of life is defined by P. E. Bukharkin as the striving to "closely connect and show the unity of the man and the world around" and he concludes that such "uniformity" "brings Goncharov closer to Pushkin's prose" [17, p. 125].
It seems that the objective assessment of the role of the description of the micro-environment in the works of Goncharov can be found in the position of A.V. Druzhi-nin, who linked the writer's creative manner with the Flemish style. It was the Flemish style that contemplated the artist's attentive and sympathetic, even loving attitude to everyday reality, its careful representation and the implementation of the ideological and aesthetic plan.
The place and functions of everyday details are significant, but different in the novels of I.A. Goncharov. As the most significant, one can specify clothes, interior, food, a number of objects, everyday behavior and leisure. In "A Common Story", the description of the micro-environment occupies an insignificant place and is mainly associated with the inhabitants of Grachi. The writer's ignoring of any sign in the object characteristic can be significant as a preterition (or a minus-way in structural poetics).
In Goncharov's novel, the absence of a detailed daily life picture in the description of Petersburg life not only exists, but is also emphasized (impressions of Alexander and Evsei). Thus, daily routine is a very important component of the opposition "Petersburg - Province".
Clothes are associated with daily routine due to its functionality, as an attribute of a person's micro-environment. In "A Common Story", before Alexander's departure, his mother is packaging his underwear and dress. From her point of view, everything is of excellent quality, and should be enough for a long time. Alexander is of the same opinion (he will express it later). But Pyotr Ivanovich finds his nephew's clothes indecent for the "decent" Petersburg society. So the clothes become the refracting point of various aesthetic and social views, the origins of which are again in the central opposition of the novel. In the future, costume details are mentioned as social markers (a tail coat and nankeen pants of Lisa's father, Kostyakov's reasoning about gloves), as well as psychological ones (flirty outfits of Lisa who tries to catch the interest of Alexander, Elizabeth's home blouse, which speaks of indifference to her appearance and life).
Details of the wardrobe of the characters in "Oblomov" can be divided into two groups. One of them, small in number quantity, but extremely significant, includes the clothes of Ilya Ilyich, Zakhar and Mukhoyarov. The famous description of the dressing gown can be "read" not only as a visual image, but also as a characteristic of the era and character: this refers to the West-East (in other words: Europe - Asia) opposition, which was significant for the 19th century and the attachment to the character image of the "Eastern" complex of associations: Ilya Ilyich's longtime and permanent stay at home, idleness, craving for luxury and comfort, indifference to his appearance, shyness towards all kinds of fuss, fair chubbiness and the habit to hold the reins (order). In the light of all of these "folded" paintings and associations, we can say that the image of the dressing gown immediately acquires the status of a symbol and remains in it until the end of the novel: Oblomov's refusal of the dressing gown, and then - forever -returned affection for it symbolizes two periods of the character's life: an attempt to change his life and cycle. It is also important that Agafya Matveevna's washed and repaired the dressing gown, with her love and reconstructed, in a different way, of course, Oblomovka's idyll and - thereby - hastened the character's death. The dressing gown also depicts the financial situation of his owner: it looked miserable in the year when Tarantyev and Mukhoyarov had robbed Oblomov, and was replaced by a new one when Stolz "made it right". Such a detail as soft shoes develops the motives defined by the image of the dressing gown (love for comfort and lying). Equally symbolic is Zakhar's robe - a sign of loyalty to Oblomovka's hard and fast state of things, laziness, indifference to his appearance and disregard to hygiene: "a grey frock coat from where a piece of shirt was sticking out," a gray vest with copper buttons. "The dress was sewn for him according to the sample taken from Oblomovka. He liked the grey frock coat and vest because in this half-uniform dress he saw a faint memory of the livery that he had once worn ..." (4, 11). At the end of the novel "a decrepit, completely washed out overcoat, which lacked one flap" and other details speak for the sad state of Zakhar.
The costume details of the other characters are quite numerous and make up another group: Volkov's gloves and top hat, Penkin's frock coat, Akulina's tucked up skirt, a half-length fur coat of the yard-keeper, Mukhoyarov's shabby dress, Agafya Matveevna's modest dress and shawl at the beginning of Oblomov's acquaintance with her, and silk and wool dresses, as well "a hat, - just imagine, from the Sea", - in a few years. These details do not develop into a symbol, but simply manifest a character trait, occupation and social status. As a rule, they are individual and do not repeat or develop (the exception is the dress of Agafya Matveevna), but at the same time, due to their precision, they are the basis of the character's visual image. And their role in the poetics of the Goncharov's novel is due to the fact that the writer's images are mostly visual. By the way, Stoltz is completely deprived of costume details (the oilcloth raincoat, boots and gloves "settle" in a house in the Crimea as a memory of the past), they enter Olga's image outside her appearance: a forgotten glove and a possible conversation of the aunt and niece about her preference for one or another outfit. Obviously, the reason for this is that the description of Olga's appearance is dominated by the motive of the statue - the ancient canon of female beauty, a measure of her grace and harmony. This is an ideal idea, and clarifying it with the specifics of the costume of the 19th century would be aesthetically incorrect.
In "The Precipice" the description of clothes is presented more often and fully than in "Oblomov", but it refers mainly to female images. Outfits of Marfenka, who is not indifferent to them, have been described several times. These descriptions emphasize the simplicity and openness of the character's nature, her naturalness, the correspondence of her sort to the surrounding atmosphere and nature. The romantic poetics of the image of Vera correspond to such costume details as a cloak and black and white mantillas. Vera's clothes are in full accordance with her nature, as a rule, they hide her, Vera wrapped the scarf around her, put on a mantilla and a cloak. When it comes to colors, her clothes are achromatic and contrasting: white - black and light - dark.
It's true that Marfenka says that her sister likes purple, but the only exception is the scene in which Rayskiy admires the abyss of Vera's taste: a scarlet ribbon in her black hair, boots sewn with a crimson stitch - red against black. Taking into consideration, on the one hand, the dual symbols of red and black, on the other, the fact that Vera is in a hurry to meet Mark, we can say that this combination creates special tension and anticipates the dramatic development of events. Tatyana Markovna's simple brown dress is in harmony with her modest everyday life, and the "noisy silk dress with a silver tint, Turkish shawl" worn on the day of Vikentyeva's reception helps create the face of that proud, prim and important noblewoman that Tatyana Markovna
wants to look like on such a gala day in order to comply with all customs supposed for proposal of marriage. Clothes require role-playing behavior and, having stopped playing, becoming simple and hospitable again, the elderly woman "shook off her shawl and bonnet." Sophia's closeness of mental movements to a stranger is emphasized by the absence of any details in her outfit that express personality or psychological state (as opposed to the description of her clothes that morning when Rayskiy quietly entered her boudoir: "She ... was not caught in the armor of a stiff dress, without lace ... a blouse spreads over the shoulders and falls with wide folds at the feet" (5, 136)). The abundance of ribbons, bows and ruffling of Kritskaya enhances her caricature. If the first novel only mentions Evsei's preferences for cleaning his boots, the second -Oblomov's slippers, then the third describes the shoes more than once. Red shoes of Marfenka and purple shoes of Vera correspond to the characters of the sisters. In dry weather Rayskiy noticed adhered dirt on Vera's boots, as a result this worsens the mystery surrounding the character. Such a detail is full of restrained, hidden drama: the dry chatter of the heels of Vera's boots. Vera does not walk noiselessly any more, her secret is revealed.
The interior as a coherent picture in "A Common Story" is absent, there are only its details in the description of the apartment of Pyotr Ivanovich and Alexander's room: a list of rooms, a desk and Sophocles' bust. The semantization of these details will accordingly characterize Pyotr Ivanovich as a person who is accustomed to comfort and order, on top of whose list is work and labor, and moving basis is sense and thought. And, of course, it is no coincidence that Alexander, overwhelmed by feelings, breaks the "bust of the classic" (sense is the supreme virtue in ancient Greece). Julia's questions to Alexander about the desired furniture and upholstery speak of her carefulness and at the same time of her narrow-mindedness.
The interior in "Oblomov" in an appropriate manner reflects the lifestyle, tastes and habits of the characters, but in different ways. So, the description of Ilya Ilyich's room represents a complex of ideas about him: mild nature, inability to insist on getting his own way, doing nothing, the uttermost narrowness of the lived-in space, "seeming" of life, stagnancy and desolation. In the same way, Zakhar is characterized by his closet: laziness, inability to handle things, some kind of anachronism in the existence of the character. Both of these descriptions are given at the beginning of the novel, where the connection with Gogol's traditions of creating the image is clearly in evidence. In "Oblomov's Dream", the interior is practically absent. In our opinion, this is due to the genre nature of the chapter. It is universally associated with the idyll. Based on the concept of the idyll of M. M. Bakhtin, E.I. Lyapushkina retraced this connection to the fullest (7). But, in our opinion, "The Dream" is also associated with the Russian epic, Russian epos, in particular. And the epic beginning excludes everyday details such as the interior. In the "dark living room" (the epithet emphasizes the lack of sun, light, proximity to sleep time and quiescence), a clock distinguishes itself, whereby it measures the circular time of the characters, but, in the context of the fragment (Ilya Ivanovych's rhetorical exercises in respect of time), clearly grows out of everyday details. It is symbolic that Ilyusha's "bed" is mentioned twice and according to the scheme of circular composition: he wakes up in this bed being a seven-year-old boy (the beginning of the chapter), and as a teenager he was forced to put to it after his "escape" in the winter (the end of the chapter). This interior item will change into a sofa and become one of the main components of the image of "oblomovism".
The house of Agafya Matveevna is descriebed in a different manner. It is small and full of sunshine all day long. The kitchen and household utensils are described in details - application area of housewife's hardworking hands: "Everything was placed with etageres full of utensils, large and small, round and oval dishes, gravy boats, cups, piles of plates, cast-iron, copper and clay pots. A wide range of huge fat and miniature teapots and several rows of porcelain cups with paintings, gilding, mottos, hearts in flames and Chinese" (4, 475 - 476). The listed objects do not possess the properties of a symbol, they do not form an independent coherent picture and their meaning is not beyond itself. They simply fill up the image of Agafya Matveevna and concretize it - and that's all.
The princely house near Verkhlevo is designed to convey the greatness and spirit of centuries-old history, estrangement from daily life, as well as the thought of a different culture (all this is emphasized in family portraits), therefore it is deprived of the interior. The interior of the house of Shtolts and Olga is described in details, but is not a completed picture. Of course, it gives an idea of the tastes and preferences of the owners, a number of objects reflect the history of their life, but this is not a harmonious series: Erara's outbuilding and desk, oilcloth raincoat and rare vases do not combine in the style and functional plans. There is a slight contradiction: it is emphasized that "their house was modest and small," but the further listing of everything that they brought there, creates the impression of overloading of its small volume, especially since this listing, repeat, does not produce a well-rounded visual image. In addition, the description of the interior of the Shtolts' house was given, in fact, at the end of the novel, when the characters had been long identified and manifested, and most importantly, they had come into view and appeared outside of everyday details. Finally, the main thing is that the description of the interior, in our opinion, organically fits either into the current time or a circular one, and in this case we are talking about a large interval (several years) of linear time, which creates a certain disunity of the characters and their micro-environment. And, obviously, it is not by accident that Olga's serious conversation with her husband takes place outside the walls of the house, in the garden, that is, the characters again manifest themselves outside the everyday space.
Descriptions of the interior of the house and rooms in the third novel are voluminous and numerous. Their function is the psychologization of the narrative. They don't "grow up to a symbol like the sofa or Oblomov's dressing gown" just because there are no images of such depth of communication and symbolism in "The Precipice" as Oblomov's image, but the trend is the same: the interior fully reflects the nature of the character replacing psychological comments.
The interiors of "The Precipice" are easy to "read", as they are created in the same way with the nature of the characters. Almost each interior of the third novel is a coherent and visually completed picture unique in its style: it shows identities at the level of semantization of the object line and the thinking of the characters: "Everything was miniature, cozy and funny in her room. Flowers on the windows, birds, a small icon-case over the bed, a lot of different boxes and small chests, where all good things, shreds, threads, silk and needlework were hidden. In the drawers there were amulets, double united nuts, in the folder there were a lot of dried flowers, on the windows there were colored stones and shells found in the sand on the Volga. A large wardrobe with dresses occupied the wall ... The bed was small, but cluttered with pillows ... English and French engravings, taken from the old house and depicting family scenes, hung on the walls" (5, 233 - 234). And there is a description of another room: "He crossed the threshold with curiosity, looked around the room and was out of his reckoning: there was nothing! A simple bed with a large curtain, a thin paper blanket and one pillow", "a simple wardrobe with dresses" (5, 234) ... No engravings, no books, no trifles, which could shed the light on the hostess's taste and inclinations". There is no doubt who of the characters of "The Precipice" lives in which room. Although, one detail, due to polysemy of the word, is immediately perceived as a symbol. To the amazement of Rayskiy, Marfenka replies: "- She has nothing. - What does it mean "nothing"? Where is the inkpot and papers? - It's all on the table - and she has the key" (5, 235). In the future, this symbolic detail - the key - is again outplayed in the conversation between the elderly woman and Rayskiy, emphasizing Vera's secrecy and isolation.
In the culture of everyday life of Goncharov's characters, food occupies a significant place: the motive of food, varying in its functions and meanings, passes through the entire trilogy. In fact, "A Common Story" begins with it: awaken up with the dawn, "they cooked in the kitchen, as if they were ten" ... Then the motive of the abundance of foodstuffs gains a moral status: dishes that Anna Pavlovna persuades her son to taste are one of simple-minded ways to show her love for him. The consumption of the same dishes by Anton Ivanovich beyond measure has a different meaning: food is the reason for existence for the flesh-eating guest; Anna Pavlovna's refusal of dinner is also a manifestation of love for her son. Agrafena's feeling for Evsei was manifested in the fact that "two huge slices of ham with bread" "were cooked long ago ... with her caring hand." The objective and imagery series is not accidental either: Evsei firmly occupied the first place both behind the stove and in the heart of Agrafena - the oven is almost sacred in the life of Grachi. This motive develops further: one of the most powerful impressions of Evsei of St. Petersburg was his surprise at the fact that Pyotr Ivanovich did not stoke the fire or cook food at home every day. Alexander's ideas about provincial hospitality are connected with the food motive: they will set the table, begin to grill about the guest's favorite dishes, and in St. Petersburg, on the contrary: "In the next room they ring with spoons and glasses: right here they would invite him, but they try to see him off with skillful hints. And there, come into without a problem: apart from the fact that they had had lunch, they would have dinner again for the benefit of their guest" (1, 67). The same trait in the understanding of Peter Ivanovich is called "abominably". So the motive of food in the variant of provincial hospitality, like in another scene the motive of taste and fashion, implements the central opposition of the novel.
The motive of food in St. Petersburg's life is not absent in principle, of course, it is much less marked, but its function is not less expressive: if food is included in the natural rhythm of human life in the province, then in St. Petersburg it is excluded from it, which indicates incongruity of St. Petersburg's and natural human life. Pyotr Ivanovich Aduev is going to have dinner at the wrong time when Alexander is talking about his drama. In Evsei's perception, one day gentlemen do not eat at all, another day they do not get up from the table the whole evening and night. Alexander, in a hurry to meet Nadia, does not connect the names of the dishes he ordered in the tavern with the contents and does not feel the taste of the food. The invitation to eat some lapper milk is given out at the wrong time. Lizaveta Alexandrovna is horrified by the amount of money spent "for the table". That is, the food motive associated with Petersburg manifests as arrhythmia in the lives of the characters. The invitation to eat some lapper milk is read in another way, as an illustration of Goncharov's concept of the world, where macro- and micro-processes as well as large-scale and completely imperceptible phenomena are equivalent, where spiritual and poetic values are balanced and corrected by everyday and prosaic things. In addition, this is a reminder that happiness is impermanent, that life is an eternal movement, state transition, which are often opposite to each other.
The motive of food penetrates Oblomov's type, like in "A Common Story", he is associated with the hypertrophic role of food in the life of the character and - already a new shade of the meaning - manifests negative signs. It arises with the reference to the leftovers of yesterday's meal - a picked bone on the table (the "reducing" aesthetic function), develops in the doctor's advice (not to overeat), the bills of the greengrocer and the butcher who horrified Oblomov, in inquiring the menu by Tarantiev and begging for an addition to dinner, as well as in the fact that with embarrassment Oblomov grabbed many crackers and biscuits at lunch by the Ilyinsky. All of the scenes listed above are psychologically and subjectively motivated, they reveal one or another trait
of the character, however, they have something in common: to be exact the food motive is accompanied by redundancy. Social and cultural ideas about food are associated with the feast as a norm, and the feast, for its part, with friendly favorability, love and joy. An indispensable attribute of the feast is refreshment. However, beyond the feast, over consumption is condemned. All of the above mentioned examples from "Oblomov" contain a food motive, accompanied by redundancy that means its negative mark. And in "The Dream" the food motive takes on a hypertrophic scale, food becomes both a goal and a meaning in a series of days. The motive of food approaches the motive of the feast (but does not pass into it), since food unites family members, from household considerations and menu discussions to food intake. The famous Oblomov's cake applies this spiritual bond to more people than the number of housemates: it is eaten up in the maids' room and servants' quarters until the leftovers reach Arkhip. A while back Y. Loshchits justly noted in the cake one of the images of heroic qualities.
The motive of food in the novel "The Precipice" is expressed very clearly and develops the semantic trends of previous novels. They talk a lot about food, and it is a subject of discussion, and not an author's description by contrast with "Oblomov". They mostly treat Rayskiy, and the list of dishes that he eats with great relish on the way, by his grandmother on the day of arrival, by the Kozlovs, Kritskaya, with Mark at night, is much more extensive than in "Oblomov", but the food motive has got neither symbolism nor redundancy, nor negative semantic trends, in connection with the image of Rayskiy. It is associated with the theme of "A Common Story", that is provincial hospitality. A significant, in comparison with previous novels, scale of the food motive is due to the broad picture of everyday life in the third novel as a whole.
Like in "A Common Story", the motive of food in "The Precipice" gains a moral status: grandmother and Marfenka's care for Rayskiy, Tatyana Markovna's generosity and kindness, who will feed anyone who comes to her house. The food marks social differences (spice cakes at a peasant wedding, noodles and beef by the Kozlovs), mood (caviar and champagne by Kritskaya) and tastes ("light soup and chicken in jelly" by Tita Nikonych). Food in Malinovka, as in Grachi and Oblomovka, is directly related to work: for the greater part they eat what has grown, matured, has been nourished, obtained with great pains, brought up, and, as a result, dishes of Russian cuisine are served here. However, as already said, the food process in "The Precipice" is practically not described, with the exception of two scenes with Rayskiy, who was distinguished by the excellent appetite. The nature of the characters is specified, by the way, with their taste preferences: grandmother likes good tea and coffee, Marfenka likes sweets, Tit Nikonych likes light dishes, Vera eats expressly little, she can be grateful for a cup of coffee or milk. At a time when Rayskiy is in mood for something sweet, Mark asks for caramelized sugar. It is noteworthy that the food motive, as well as everyday details in general, winds down in the fourth and fifth parts of the novel, forced out by Vera's drama.
Everyday behavior is hardly expressed in "A Common Story", the exception is literally a few mise-en-scenes (accompanying service at Alexander's departure, Evsei's pastime in St. Petersburg, the fact of Lizaveta Aleksandrovna's housekeeping book), functions of which are different: plot, characterological, background function, etc. Everyday life is not something essential for the main characters. A completely different picture turned out in the second novel. Despite the fact that everyday life occupied a huge place in the daily routine of Ilya Ilyich, the everyday behavior of the character as such is hardly presented (he was described in a few words, with emphasizing of motives of rest, inaction and apathy) - this, obviously, would have grounded the Oblo-mov's image too much and disturb the balance between the poetic and prosaic sides of his nature. At the same time, the foregoing relates to a greater extent to the first three parts and to a lesser extent to the last one, where one and the same everyday life of Gorokhova is described in considerable detail. But the everyday behavior of the inhabitants of Oblomovka and Agafya Matveevna is a way of manifesting their essential qualities (Ilyusha's father's sitting at the window and his meaningless questions to house serfs, busy work of his mother and relentless work of Agafya Matvevna). In "The Precipice" the sphere of everyday behavior is expressed even more (of course, the number of characters has caught up). The particularity of the novel in the being studied aspect is, in our opinion, that the everyday behavior of people of the same circle develops through a series of conversational and descriptive details, into the coherent picture. This applies primarily to Tatyana Markovna, Marfenka, Vera, house serfs (Jacob, Vasilisa, Egorka, Marina, Saveliy). Undoubtedly, the artistic power of observation of Rayskiy has been due in no small part to.
Up to the present, we have only dealt with objectively expressed forms of daily life, but Goncharov also reproduces its nonmaterial aspects. It may be limited to them, but it may also be supplemented by spiritual aspects. In Grachi, this is a communication of neighbors, simple passions for sentimental Maria Gorbatova (embroidery of touching subjects, entertaining reading, the outsize role of memories). In St. Petersburg, this is the leisure of officials (mostly card-playing). In "Oblomov", the spiritual side of life is mainly connected with the image of Olga: music, theater, communication are included in her sphere. In "The Precipice" this sphere is expressed even more widely: Vera's daily life includes serious books, Marfenka's life includes cheap literature and charity, every family member receives life through the prism of aesthetic awareness.
The semantics of the word "daily" implies a connection with time. Goncharov's characters, consumed with daily routine, live in the circular time, when every day is like the day before and is supposed to be the same tomorrow. This is the everyday life of Alexander's mother, inhabitants of Oblomovka, Zakhar, Ilya Ilyich (with the exception of
the "dacha villagers") and Agafya Matveevna. Each of these characters is assigned to a specific space where they stay most of all (a manor house, a sleeping ledge, a sofa and a kitchen), and this is their everyday space.
Thus, noting the inextricable connection of material and spiritual everyday objective and nonmaterial realities with the essential features of Goncharov's images, it follows that everyday life is an organic part of the trilogy's art world and world view of the writer, and its description is the most important component of the poetics of the
Библиографический список / References
writer. The image of daily life in its structural components (clothes, interior, food, pastime, etc.) fulfills the function of the character sketch and becomes part of his image. At the same time, daily life appears as a whole, that has the undoubted aesthetic and axiological value associated with the national the state of life. The difference in the scale and expressiveness of the image of daily life in Goncharov's novels is explained by the genre specifics of "A Common Story" (dialogical conflict), as well as the romantic and baroque trends of "The Precipice".
1. Dahl V. Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language. Moskwa, 1989; V.
2. Dahl V. Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language. Moskwa, 1989; V.
3. Ozhegov S.I. Dictionary of the Russian Language. 8th Edition. Moskwa, 1970.
4. Dictionary of the Modern Russian Literary Language. Moskwa, 1950; V. 1, 8, 10.
5. Dictionary of the Modern Russian Literary Language: in 20 volumes. 2nd Edition, Revised and Enlarged Edition. Moskwa, 1991; V. 1.
6. Husserl E. Ideas for Pure Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy. Moskwa: House of Intellectual Books, 1999.
7. Schutz A. Selected Writings: The World Shining with the Meaning. Moskwa: Rospolit, Encyclopedia (ROSSPEN), 2004.
8. Luckman T., Berger P. Social Construction of Reality. Moskwa: Medium, 1995.
9. Braudel F. Material Civilization: Economics and Capitalism of the 15th-18th centuries. V. I: Structures of Daily Life: Possible and Impossible. Moskwa: Progress, 1986.
10. Zolotukhina-Abolina E.V. Daily Life and Other Worlds of Experience. Moskwa: ICC MarT, 2003.
11. Kasavin I., Shchavelev S.P. Analysis of Daily Life. Moskwa: Canon +, 2004.
12. Leleko V.D. Aesthetics of Daily Life. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State Academy of Culture, 1994.
13. Vorotyntseva K.A. Poetics of Daily Life in the Aspect of the Reality of the Character / K.A. Vorotyntseva. Criticism and Semiotics. Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk State University. 2010; № 14: 276 - 292.
14. Selemeneva M.V. Poetics of Daily Life in Urban Prose. Yu.V. Trifonova. Proceedings of the Ural State University. 2008; №. 59- p. 195 - 208.
15. Wittgenstein L. Philosophical Studies. Philosophical Works. Moskwa, 1994; P. 1.
16. Ginzburg L. On the Literary Character. Moskwa, 1979.
17. Bukharkin P.E. The Image of the World Revealed in the Word" (Stylistic Problems of "Oblomov"). From Pushkin to Blok. Problems of the Poetics of Russian Realism of the 19h Century. St. Petersburg, 1992.
Статья поступила в редакцию 12.02.20
УДК 808
Emel'yanova O.P., postgraduate, Moscow City Pedagogical University, University of Humanities; teacher, Bauman Moscow State Technical University
(Moscow, Russia), E-mail: olga_shkn@mail.ru
CONCEPT OF ARGUMENTATION DISCOURSE AND ITS SPECIFIC CHARACTER. The article describes persuasive techniques and their combinability specific to certain type of discourse. A scientific theory being developed by speculative assumptions towards the study subject must follow evidence-based approach: it is considered to include claims based on true premises and a set of consistent assumptions as well as follow designated strategies and corresponding argumentation practices that altogether provide relevant interpretation of the theory. The methods characterized in the article are viewed to be classified according to the criteria whether they refer to inductive/deductive and objective/subjective type as well as to their persuasive power. Although argumentation process is considered to be quite variable in its nature, the existing persuasive techniques and verification methods represent the trustworthy toolkit to validate the consistency of theoretic assumptions.
Key words: argumentation theory, institutional type, validity of utterance, language models.
О.П. Емельянова, аспирант, Московский городской педагогический университет, Институт гуманитарных наук, преп.,
Московский государственный технический университет имени Н.Э. Баумана, г. Москва, E-mail: olga_shkn@mail.ru
ПОНЯТИЕ И СПЕЦИФИКА АРГУМЕНТАТИВНОГО ДИСКУРСА
Научная концепция, развитие которой основывается на вероятностных предположениях в отношении объекта исследования, должна отвечать требованию доказательности, а именно строиться на базе логически непротиворечивых фактов и структурироваться в соответствии со стратегиями по мере возрастания их аргументативного потенциала, а также подтверждаться адекватными приемами убеждения, позволяющими в результате возвести гипотетическое утверждение в статус научной гипотезы. Способы убеждения классифицированы в настоящей статье в соответствии с аргументативным потенциалом и по таким критериям, как «индуктивный/дедуктивный», «объективный/субъективный». Существующая система аргументов представляет собой действенный инструментарий доказательства приемлемости гипотетических предположений.
Ключевые слова: теория аргументации, институциональный тип, вылидность высказывания, языковые модели.
Речевая деятельность человека представляет собой сложный комплекс явлений и составляет предмет исследования специалистов разных областей научного знания, прежде всего, теоретической лингвистики и прикладной лингвистики (психолинвистики, социолингвистики, лингвокультурологии). Широта исходного понятия предопределяет ситуацию неоднозначной трактовки терминов, входящих в понятийный аппарат. В частности, разные подходы сложились в интерпретации понятия дискурс.
Дискурс в предельно общем понимании представляет собой акт речевого общения между его участниками, реализуемый в конкретной коммуникативной ситуации и зафиксированный в устной или письменной форме. Согласно концепции М. Стаббса, под дискурсом следует понимать такие единицы языковой актуализации, которые в своей совокупности превосходят объем предложения, восходя к уровню устного коммуникативного обмена или письменного текста. Считается, что характерной особенностью дискурса является контекст как ситуация общения, в рамках которой раскрываются культурные, психологические и социальные условия и обстоятельства коммуникации [1].
Фокус разных областей научного знания концентрируется на различных показателях и компонентах дискурса. Важность представляет рассмотрение личностно ориентированного и статусно-ориентированного типов дискурса в их сравнении. Личностный дискурс предполагает общение людей, цель которого обусловлена очевидностью, обыденностью и, в известной мере, приземленностью
ситуации и, как следствие, использованием «сокращенного кода» общения. Тогда как институциональный тип дискурса есть коммуникация людей с точки зрения их принадлежности к определенным социальным группам или сложившимся в обществе институтам, в той или иной степени определяющим речевое поведение и «клишированность» речи их представителей, вынужденных общаться в соответствии с языковыми нормами социума. Здесь выделяют политический, юридический, медицинский, педагогический, спортивный, религиозный, научный, деловой и военный типы дискурса [2].
В определенных типах дискурса важным является убедить оппонента в правоте высказываемого суждения. Убеждение как форма воздействия на оппонента и способ внушения является предметом изучения таких наук, как психология, логика, философия, социология, риторика и ряда других. В качестве наиболее значимого приема убеждения выступает аргументация [3]. Вопросы, касающиеся приемов, форм и методов обеспечения валидности высказываемых суждений, являются объектом теории аргументации, обобщающей и систематизирующей знания, получаемые в области смежных научных дисциплин, изучаются как в отдельных дисциплинах, прежде всего, в философии, логике, психологии, лингвистике, так и в последнее время все чаще в рамках современных направлений - в теории коммуникации и дискурсологии. Все они предполагают построение платформы, позволяющей объяснить методы обоснования и опровержения утверждений, выбор этих методов в зависимости от участников коммуникативного про-
