A work of art as an integrity. A work of art as a whole

Even at first glance, it is clear that a work of art consists of certain sides, elements, aspects, etc. In other words, it has a complex internal composition. Moreover, the individual parts of the work are connected and united with each other so closely that this gives grounds to metaphorically liken the work to a living organism. The composition of the work is thus characterized not only by complexity, but also by orderliness. A work of art is a complexly organized whole; From the awareness of this obvious fact follows the need to understand the internal structure of the work, that is, to isolate its individual components and realize the connections between them. Refusal of such an attitude inevitably leads to empiricism and unsubstantiated judgments about the work, to complete arbitrariness in its consideration and ultimately impoverishes our understanding of the artistic whole, leaving it at the level of primary reader perception.

In modern literary criticism, there are two main trends in establishing the structure of a work. The first comes from the identification of a number of layers or levels in a work, just as in linguistics in a separate utterance one can distinguish a phonetic, morphological, lexical, syntactic level. At the same time, different researchers have different ideas about both the set of levels itself and the nature of their relationships. So, M.M. Bakhtin sees in a work primarily two levels - “fable” and “plot”, the depicted world and the world of the image itself, the reality of the author and the reality of the hero*. MM. Hirshman proposes a more complex, basically three-level structure: rhythm, plot, hero; in addition, “vertically” these levels are permeated by the subject-object organization of the work, which ultimately creates not a linear structure, but rather a grid that is superimposed on the work of art**. There are other models of a work of art that present it in the form of a number of levels, sections.

___________________

* Bakhtin M.M. Aesthetics verbal creativity. M., 1979. P. 7–181.

** Girshman M.M. Style literary work// Theory of literary styles. Modern aspects of study. M., 1982. S. 257-300.

A common disadvantage of these concepts can obviously be considered the subjectivity and arbitrariness of identifying levels. Moreover, no one has yet attempted justify division into levels by some general considerations and principles. The second weakness follows from the first and consists in the fact that no division by level covers the entire richness of the elements of the work, or even gives a comprehensive idea of ​​its composition. Finally, the levels must be thought of as fundamentally equal - otherwise the very principle of structuring loses its meaning - and this easily leads to the loss of the idea of ​​​​a certain core of a work of art, connecting its elements into a real integrity; connections between levels and elements turn out to be weaker than they really are. Here we should also note the fact that the “level” approach very little takes into account the fundamental difference in quality of a number of components of the work: so, it is clear that the artistic idea and artistic detail– phenomena of fundamentally different nature.

The second approach to the structure of a work of art takes such general categories as content and form as the primary division. This approach is presented in its most complete and well-reasoned form in the works of G.N. Pospelova*. This methodological tendency has much fewer disadvantages than the one discussed above; it is much more consistent with the actual structure of the work and is much more justified from the point of view of philosophy and methodology.

___________________

*See, for example: Pospelov G.N. Problems literary style. M., 1970. P. 31–90.

We will begin with the philosophical justification for distinguishing content and form in the artistic whole. The categories of content and form, excellently developed in Hegel's system, became important categories of dialectics and were repeatedly successfully used in the analysis of a wide variety of complex objects. The use of these categories in aesthetics and literary criticism also forms a long and fruitful tradition. Nothing prevents us, therefore, from applying such well-proven philosophical concepts to the analysis of a literary work; moreover, from the point of view of methodology, this will only be logical and natural. But there are also special reasons to begin the dissection of a work of art by highlighting its content and form. A work of art is not a natural phenomenon, but a cultural one, which means that it is based on spirituality, which, in order to exist and be perceived, must certainly acquire some material embodiment, a way of existing in the system of material signs. Hence the naturalness of defining the boundaries of form and content in a work: the spiritual principle is the content, and its material embodiment is the form.

We can define the content of a literary work as its essence, spiritual being, and form as the way of existence of this content. Content, in other words, is the writer’s “statement” about the world, a certain emotional and mental reaction to certain phenomena of reality. Form is the system of means and techniques in which this reaction finds expression and embodiment. Simplifying somewhat, we can say that content is what What the writer said with his work, and the form - How he did it.

The form of a work of art has two main functions. The first is carried out within the artistic whole, so it can be called internal: it is a function of expressing content. The second function is found in the impact of the work on the reader, so it can be called external (in relation to the work). It consists in what the form has on the reader aesthetic impact, because it is the form that acts as the bearer of the aesthetic qualities of a work of art. Content in itself cannot be beautiful or ugly in a strict, aesthetic sense - these are properties that arise exclusively at the level of form.

From what has been said about the functions of form, it is clear that the question of convention, so important for a work of art, is resolved differently in relation to content and form. If in the first section we said that a work of art in general is a convention in comparison with primary reality, then the degree of this convention is different for form and content. Within a work of art the content is unconditional; in relation to it, one cannot ask the question “why does it exist?” Like the phenomena of primary reality, in art world content exists without any conditions, as an immutable given. It cannot be a conditional fantasy, an arbitrary sign, by which nothing is implied; in a strict sense, the content cannot be invented - it directly comes into the work from primary reality (from the social existence of people or from the consciousness of the author). On the contrary, the form can be as fantastic and conditionally implausible as desired, because by the convention of the form something is meant; it exists “for something” – to embody content. Thus, the Shchedrin city of Foolov is a creation of the author’s pure fantasy; it is conventional, since it never existed in reality, but autocratic Russia, which became the theme of “The History of a City” and is embodied in the image of the city of Foolov, is not a convention or a fiction.

Let us note to ourselves that the difference in the degree of convention between content and form provides clear criteria for classifying one or another specific element of a work as form or content - this remark will be useful to us more than once.

Modern science proceeds from the primacy of content over form. In relation to a work of art, this is true for both the creative process (the writer looks for an appropriate form, even if it is still vague, but already existing content, but in no case vice versa - he does not first create a “ready-made form”, and then pours some content into it) , and for the work as such (the features of the content determine and explain to us the specifics of the form, but not vice versa). However, in a certain sense, namely in relation to the perceiving consciousness, it is the form that is primary, and the content secondary. Since sensory perception always precedes the emotional reaction and, even more so, the rational understanding of the subject, moreover, it serves as the basis and basis for them, we perceive in a work first its form, and only then and only through it the corresponding artistic content.

From this, by the way, it follows that the movement of analysis of a work - from content to form or vice versa - is not of fundamental importance. Any approach has its justifications: the first - in the determining nature of the content in relation to the form, the second - in the patterns of reader perception. A.S. said this well. Bushmin: “It is not at all necessary... to begin the study with the content, guided only by the one thought that the content determines the form, and without having other, more specific reasons for this. Meanwhile, it is precisely this sequence of consideration of a work of art that has turned into a forced, hackneyed, boring scheme for everyone, becoming widespread in school teaching, in textbooks, and in scientific literary works. Dogmatic transference of the correct general position literary theory on the methodology of concrete study of works gives rise to a sad template”*. Let us add to this that, of course, the opposite pattern would be no better - it is always mandatory to begin the analysis with the form. It all depends on the specific situation and specific tasks.

___________________

* Bushmin A.S. The science of literature. M., 1980. pp. 123–124.

From all that has been said, a clear conclusion arises that in a work of art both form and content are equally important. The experience of the development of literature and literary criticism also proves this position. Decreasing the importance of content or completely ignoring it leads in literary criticism to formalism, to meaningless abstract constructions, leads to forgetting the social nature of art, and in artistic practice oriented towards this kind concept, turns into aesthetics and elitism. However, no less Negative consequences also has a disdain for the artistic form as something secondary and, in essence, optional. This approach actually destroys the work as a phenomenon of art, forcing us to see in it only this or that ideological, and not an ideological and aesthetic phenomenon. In a creative practice that does not want to take into account the enormous importance of form in art, flat illustrativeness, primitiveness, and the creation of “correct” but not emotionally experienced declarations about a “relevant” but artistically unexplored topic inevitably appear.

By highlighting form and content in a work, we thereby liken it to any other complexly organized whole. However, the relationship between form and content in a work of art also has its own specifics. Let's see what it consists of.

First of all, it is necessary to firmly understand that the relationship between content and form is not a spatial relationship, but a structural one. The form is not a shell that can be removed to reveal the kernel of the nut - the contents. If we take a work of art, then we will be powerless to “point with our finger”: here is the form, but here is the content. Spatially they are merged and indistinguishable; this unity can be felt and shown at any “point” of the literary text. Let’s take, for example, that episode from Dostoevsky’s novel “The Brothers Karamazov”, where Alyosha, when asked by Ivan what to do with the landowner who hunted the child with dogs, answers: “Shoot!” What does this “shoot!” represent? – content or form? Of course, both are in unity, in unity. On the one hand, this is part of the speech, verbal form works; Alyosha's replica takes specific place in the compositional form of the work. These are formal matters. On the other hand, this “shooting” is a component of the character of the hero, that is, the thematic basis of the work; the remark expresses one of the turns in the moral and philosophical quest of the heroes and the author, and of course, it is an essential aspect of the ideological and emotional world of the work - these are meaningful moments. So in one word, fundamentally indivisible into spatial components, we saw content and form in their unity. The situation is similar with a work of art in its entirety.

The second thing that should be noted is the special connection between form and content in the artistic whole. According to Yu.N. Tynyanov, relations are established between artistic form and artistic content that are unlike the relations of “wine and glass” (glass as form, wine as content), that is, relations of free compatibility and equally free separation. In a work of art, the content is not indifferent to the specific form in which it is embodied, and vice versa. Wine will remain wine whether we pour it into a glass, cup, plate, etc.; content is indifferent to form. In the same way, you can pour milk, water, kerosene into the glass where the wine was - the form is “indifferent” to the content that fills it. Not so in a work of fiction. There the connection between formal and substantive principles reaches highest degree. This is perhaps best manifested in the following pattern: any change in form, even a seemingly small and particular one, inevitably and immediately leads to a change in content. Trying to find out, for example, the content of such a formal element as poetic meter, poeticists conducted an experiment: they “transformed” the first lines of the first chapter of “Eugene Onegin” from iambic to trochaic. This is what happened:

Uncle of the most honest rules,

He seriously fell ill

Made me respect myself

I couldn't think of anything better.

The semantic meaning, as we see, remained practically the same; the changes seemed to concern only the form. But the naked eye can see that one of the essential components content - emotional tone, mood of the passage. It went from being epically narrative to playfully superficial. What if we imagine that the entire “Eugene Onegin” is written in trochee? But this is impossible to imagine, because in this case the work is simply destroyed.

Of course, such an experiment with form is a unique case. However, in the study of a work, we often, completely unaware of it, carry out similar “experiments” - without directly changing the structure of the form, but only without taking into account certain of its features. So, studying in Gogol’s “ Dead souls“mainly Chichikov, landowners, and “individual representatives” of the bureaucracy and the peasantry, we study barely a tenth of the “population” of the poem, ignoring the mass of those “minor” heroes who in Gogol are not secondary, but are interesting to him in themselves to the same extent as Chichikov or Manilov. As a result of such an “experiment on form,” our understanding of the work, that is, its content, is significantly distorted: Gogol was not interested in history individuals, but the way of national life, he created not a “gallery of images”, but an image of the world, a “way of life”.

Another example of the same kind. In the study of Chekhov's story “The Bride,” a fairly strong tradition has developed of viewing this story as unconditionally optimistic, even “springtime and bravura”*. V.B. Kataev, analyzing this interpretation, notes that it is based on “incomplete reading” - the last phrase of the story in its entirety is not taken into account: “Nadya... cheerful, happy, left the city, as she thought, forever.” “The interpretation of this is “as I believed,” writes V.B. Kataev, - very clearly reveals the difference in research approaches to Chekhov’s work. Some researchers prefer, when interpreting the meaning of “The Bride,” to consider this introductory sentence as if it were non-existent”**.

___________________

* Ermilov V.A. A.P. Chekhov. M., 1959. P. 395.

** Kataev V.B. Chekhov's prose: problems of interpretation. M, 1979. P. 310.

This is the “unconscious experiment” discussed above. The structure of the form is distorted “a little bit” - and the consequences in the field of content are not long in coming. A “concept of unconditional optimism, “bravura” of Chekhov’s work emerges recent years”, whereas in fact it represents “a delicate balance between truly optimistic hopes and restrained sobriety regarding the impulses of the very people about whom Chekhov knew and told so many bitter truths.”

In the relationship between content and form, in the structure of form and content in a work of art, a certain principle, a pattern, is revealed. We will talk in detail about the specific nature of this pattern in the section “Holistic consideration of a work of art.”

For now, let us note only one methodological rule: For an accurate and complete understanding of the content of a work, it is absolutely necessary to pay as close attention as possible to its form, down to its smallest features. In the form of a work of art there are no “little things” that are indifferent to the content; By famous expression, “art begins where “a little bit” begins.”

The specificity of the relationship between content and form in a work of art has given rise to a special term specifically designed to reflect the continuity and unity of these aspects of a single artistic whole - the term “content form”. U this concept There are at least two aspects. The ontological aspect asserts the impossibility of the existence of a contentless form or unformed content; in logic, such concepts are called correlative: we cannot think of one of them without simultaneously thinking of the other. A somewhat simplified analogy can be the relationship between the concepts of “right” and “left” - if there is one, then the other inevitably exists. However, for works of art, another, axiological (evaluative) aspect of the concept of “meaningful form” seems more important: in this case, we mean the natural correspondence of form to content.

A very deep and largely fruitful concept of meaningful form was developed in the work of G.D. Gacheva and V.V. Kozhinov “Content literary forms" According to the authors, “any art form is<…>nothing more than hardened, objectified artistic content. Any property, any element of a literary work that we now perceive as “purely formal” was once directly meaningful." This meaningfulness of the form never disappears; it is actually perceived by the reader: “turning to the work, we somehow absorb into ourselves” the meaningfulness of the formal elements, their, so to speak, “ultimate content.” “It’s precisely about content, about a certain sense, and not at all about the meaningless, meaningless objectivity of the form. The most superficial properties of form turn out to be nothing more than a special kind of content that has turned into form.”*

___________________

* Gachev G.D., Kozhinov V.V. Content of literary forms // Theory of literature. The main problems in historical coverage. M., 1964. Book. 2. pp. 18–19.

However, no matter how meaningful this or that formal element is, no matter how close the connection between content and form, this connection does not turn into identity. Content and form are not the same thing, they are different aspects of the artistic whole that are highlighted in the process of abstraction and analysis. They have different tasks, different functions, and, as we have seen, different measures of convention; There are certain relationships between them. Therefore, it is unacceptable to use the concept of substantive form, as well as the thesis about the unity of form and content, in order to mix and lump together formal and substantive elements. On the contrary, the true content of the form is revealed to us only when we are sufficiently aware fundamental differences these two sides of a work of art, when, therefore, the opportunity opens up to establish certain relationships and regular interactions between them.

Speaking about the problem of form and content in a work of art, one cannot help but touch upon, at least in general terms, another concept that actively exists in modern science about literature. It's about about the concept of “internal form”. This term actually presupposes the presence “between” the content and form of such elements of a work of art that are “form in relation to elements of more high level(image as a form expressing ideological content), and content – ​​in relation to lower levels of structure (image as the content of compositional and speech form)”*. Such an approach to the structure of the artistic whole looks dubious, primarily because it violates the clarity and rigor of the original division into form and content as, respectively, the material and spiritual principles in the work. If some element of an artistic whole can be both meaningful and formal at the same time, then this deprives the very dichotomy of content and form of meaning and, importantly, creates significant difficulties in further analysis and comprehension of the structural connections between the elements of the artistic whole. One should, of course, listen to the objections of A.S. Bushmina against the category of “internal form”; “Form and content are extremely general correlative categories. Therefore, the introduction of two concepts of form would require correspondingly two concepts of content. The presence of two pairs of similar categories, in turn, would entail the need, according to the law of subordination of categories in materialist dialectics, to establish a unifying, third, generic concept of form and content. In a word, terminological duplication in the designation of categories produces nothing but logical confusion. And in general definitions external And internal, allowing the possibility of spatial delimitation of form, vulgarize the idea of ​​the latter”**.

___________________

* Sokolov A.N. Style theory. M., 1968. P. 67.

** Bushmin A.S. The science of literature. P. 108.

So, in our opinion, a clear contrast between form and content in the structure of the artistic whole is fruitful. Another thing is that it is immediately necessary to warn against the danger of dividing these sides mechanically, roughly. There are such artistic elements, in which form and content seem to touch, and very subtle methods and very close observation are needed in order to understand both the fundamental non-identity and the close relationship of the formal and substantive principles. The analysis of such “points” in the artistic whole is undoubtedly the greatest difficulty, but at the same time – and greatest interest both in terms of theory and in the practical study of a particular work.

? CONTROL QUESTIONS:

1. Why is knowledge of the structure of a work necessary?

2. What is the form and content of a work of art (give definitions)?

3. How are content and form interconnected?

4. “The relationship between content and form is not spatial, but structural” - how do you understand this?

5. What is the relationship between form and content? What is “content form”?

Features of the work fiction taken into account in editorial analysis.

A work of fiction, an artistic object, can be viewed from two points of view - from the point of view of its meaning (as an aesthetic object) and from the point of view of its form (as an external work).

The meaning of an artistic object, contained in a certain form, aimed at reflecting the artist’s understanding of the surrounding reality. And the editor, when evaluating an essay, must proceed from an analysis of the “plane of meaning” and the “plane of fact” of the work (M.M. Bakhtin). Let's try to figure out what stands behind the concepts of “plane of meaning” and “plane of fact” of a work.

The plan of meaning of an artistic object captures the value and emotional aspects artistic creativity, conveys the author’s assessment of the characters, phenomena and processes that he describes.

It is clear that one of the main aspects of the editorial analysis of a work is the analysis of its meaning. We are talking about such evaluation criteria as relevance and topicality, originality and novelty, completeness of implementation, and, in addition, skill in implementing the author's plan. The latter focuses the editor's attention on the level of fact of the work.

The subject of a literary work, as already mentioned, is the connections and relationships of a person with the world around him, assessed, meaningful, felt by the artist and fixed by him in a certain artistic form. We can say that in an artistic object, an ethical, moral attitude towards the world is expressed in aesthetic form. This form is the external work, creating for the editor a blueprint for the fact of art. For his attitude to reality, the writer seeks a certain form, which is determined by his skill.

An artistic object is a point of interaction between the meaning and the fact of art. Art object demonstrates the world, conveying it in an aesthetic form and revealing the ethical side of the world.

For editorial analysis, such an approach to considering a work of art is productive, in which literary work explored in its connection with the reader. It is the influence of a work on a person that should be the starting point in evaluating an artistic object.

Really, artistic process presupposes a dialogic relationship between writer and reader, and as the final product artistic activity one can consider the impact of the work on the reader. Therefore, the editor needs to understand exactly which aspects and aspects of a literary work need to be considered in order for the analysis to be effective and consistent essential characteristics works of art.

When discussing the meaning of a work, one must keep in mind that we are not talking about the everyday understanding of the meaning in the common meaning of the content of the work. We are talking about the meaning of an artistic object in more general view. The meaning of a work is revealed in the process of perceiving art. Let's look at this in more detail.

An artistic object includes three stages: the stage of creation of the work, the stage of its alienation from the master and independent existence, the stage of perception of the work.

The adequacy of the editorial analysis is ensured by understanding the specifics of each stage.

So, the main thing is what a work of literature is created for - the meaning that the artist puts into the content of the work, for the implementation of which he is looking for a certain form.

As starting point the unifying principle of a work of artistic process, in editorial analysis it is necessary to consider the intent of the work. It is the concept that brings together all the stages of an artistic object. This is evidenced by the attention of the artist, musician, writer to the selection of appropriate expressive means when creating works that are aimed at expressing the master’s intention.

Some confessions and reflections on creative process the writers themselves also show that the artistic process is connected with the design.

But the concept of design not only characterizes the main meaning of the work. The intention is the main component of the impact of a work of art at the moment of its perception. L.N. Tolstoy wrote that when creating a work of fiction, the main thing is to present a wide variety of people and present everyone with the need to solve a vital question that has not yet been resolved by people and force them to act, to consider it, to find out how the question will be resolved. These words reflect most important characteristic the content of art is its ethical basis, which is the main component of the plan, since the plan is born in the “feeling soul of the artist” by the feeling of “cracks in the world” (Heine) and the need to tell another person about one’s experiences. Moreover, the writer not only expresses his experiences. He selects such means that should evoke in the reader the same assessment of character and action that the writer himself makes.

Thus, the subject of art is not only a person, his connections and relationships with the world. The subject area of ​​the work also includes the personality of the book’s author, who evaluates the surrounding reality. Therefore, when analyzing a work, the editor first of all identifies and evaluates the artist’s intention—the plan for the meaning of the work.

The main qualities that determine the specificity of art are the properties artistic image, since it is the artistic image that distinguishes art into an independent sphere of activity. In art, an artistic image is a means of understanding the surrounding reality, a means of mastering the world, and also a means of recreating reality in a work of art - in an artistic object.

Consequently, when analyzing the plan of the fact of a work, the editor primarily considers the artistic image. Let's look at this in more detail.

A literary work appears before the editor as a result of artistic creativity, enshrined in a literary text.

Taking into account in the editor's work the specifics of the perception of a literary and artistic work and its influence on the individual

An artistic image as an expression of a certain figurative thought, ideas should be distinguished from scientific concept, which records the result of an abstract thought and conveys logical unambiguous judgments and inferences. The artistic image is characterized by sensual concreteness, organic inclusion of the author’s personality, integrity, associativity and ambiguity. As a result of the interaction of these properties, a “presence effect” is created, when the illusion of living, direct perception evokes in the reader a feeling of empathy, a sense of one’s own participation in events. This is the power of art’s influence on the human personality, his thought and imagination.

The editor needs to deeply understand all the properties of the artistic image, since they largely predetermine his approach to analyzing and evaluating the work.

The sensual concreteness of the image gives the depicted phenomenon clarity through the recreation of visible signs. When describing external or internal sides phenomena using words that evoke visual ideas, the reader seems to “see” the painted picture in detail. M. Gorky said that what is depicted should evoke a desire to “touch it with your hand.” Sensory concreteness is also achieved in the case when there is no visual equivalent of the phenomenon, but “intonation clarity” is used, which creates in the reader a feeling of extension in space, movement in time - slowed down or, conversely, accelerated, shows the dynamics of a person’s thoughts and experiences.

The organic involvement of the author’s personality is manifested in the fact that the artistic image carries information simultaneously about both the subject and the object of knowledge. The reader feels or understands the author's attitude towards this character, the event, as if he himself was present in the place described, he himself “sees” what is happening. The significance of this property of an artistic image is so great that it is in it that many researchers see the so-called “phenomenon of artistry” - a distinctive quality of art. This is precisely what makes emotional and evaluative moments an integral part of the processes of creating and perceiving an artistic image. It involves empathy and is addressed not only to the mind, but also to the feelings. Moreover, aesthetic emotion can also be caused by created by the image representation (landscape, face, action), and the verbal image itself as an aesthetic value (rhythm, alliteration, rhyme, etc.).

The ambiguity and associativity of an artistic image lies in its ability to excite the reader’s imagination, to mobilize many previously received impressions and ideas stored in the personal, individual consciousness of a person, providing ample opportunities for the subjective concretization of what is perceived. The direct idea of ​​an object or phenomenon is enriched by a worldview, life experience author and reader. An artistic image is supplemented by associations and memories, awakens the imagination, makes one “experience” the past event again and again, focusing on the internal attitude towards it. It is known that in a figurative context the same words have their own meaning for each reader. This largely depends on a person’s worldview, childhood memories, upbringing, education, and life experience.

All these properties of an artistic image appear not separately, but together and simultaneously, which allows us to speak of its integrity and synthetic nature.

The properties that make up the essence, the nature of an artistic image, largely determine the specificity of evaluation criteria, methodology, and methods of editorial analysis, in other words, the main features of the editor’s work on the text.

I THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL PREREQUISITES OF LITERARY ANALYSIS

1. A work of art and its properties

A work of art is the main object of literary study, a kind of smallest “unit” of literature. Larger formations in literary process– directions, currents, art systems– are built from individual works, represent a combination of parts. A literary work has integrity and internal completeness; it is a self-sufficient unit literary development, capable of independent life. A literary work as a whole has a complete ideological and aesthetic meaning, in contrast to its components - themes, ideas, plot, speech, etc., which receive meaning and in general can exist only in the system of the whole.

A literary work as a phenomenon of art

A literary work is a work of art in in the narrow sense words *, that is, one of the forms of social consciousness. Like all art in general, a work of art is an expression of a certain emotional and mental content, a certain ideological and emotional complex in a figurative, aesthetically significant form. Using the terminology of M.M. Bakhtin, we can say that a work of art is a “word about the world” spoken by a writer, a poet, an act of reaction of an artistically gifted person to the surrounding reality.

___________________

* ABOUT different meanings for the word “art” see: Pospelov G.N. Aesthetic and artistic. M, 1965. pp. 159–166.

According to the theory of reflection, human thinking is a reflection of reality, the objective world. This, of course, fully applies to artistic thinking. A literary work, like all art, is a special case of a subjective reflection of objective reality. However, reflection, especially at the highest stage of its development, which is human thinking, can in no case be understood as a mechanical, mirror reflection, as a one-to-one copy of reality. The complex, indirect nature of reflection, perhaps to the greatest extent, affects artistic thinking, where the subjective moment is so important, the unique personality of the creator, his original vision of the world and way of thinking about it. A work of art, therefore, is an active, personal reflection; one in which not only the reproduction of life reality occurs, but also its creative transformation. In addition, the writer never reproduces reality for the sake of reproduction itself: the very choice of the subject of reflection, the very impulse to creatively reproduce reality is born from the writer’s personal, biased, caring view of the world.

Thus, a work of art represents an indissoluble unity of the objective and subjective, the reproduction of real reality and the author’s understanding of it, life as such, included in the work of art and cognizable in it, and author's attitude to life. These two sides of art were once pointed out by N.G. Chernyshevsky. In his treatise “Aesthetic Relations of Art to Reality,” he wrote: “The essential meaning of art is the reproduction of everything that is interesting to a person in life; very often, especially in works of poetry, also comes to the fore as an explanation of life, a verdict on its phenomena”*. True, Chernyshevsky, polemically sharpening the thesis about the primacy of life over art in the fight against idealistic aesthetics, mistakenly considered only the first task - “reproduction of reality” - to be main and obligatory, and the other two - secondary and optional. It would be more correct, of course, not to talk about the hierarchy of these tasks, but about their equality, or rather, about the indissoluble connection between the objective and the subjective in a work: after all true artist he simply cannot depict reality without comprehending or evaluating it in any way. However, it should be emphasized that the very presence of a subjective moment in a work was clearly recognized by Chernyshevsky, and this represented a step forward compared, say, with the aesthetics of Hegel, who was very inclined to approach a work of art in a purely objectivist way, belittling or completely ignoring the activity of the creator.

___________________

* Chernyshevsky N.G. Full collection cit.: In 15 volumes. M., 1949. T. II. C. 87.

It is also necessary to realize the unity of objective image and subjective expression in a work of art. methodologically, for the sake of practical problems analytical work with the work. Traditionally, in our study and especially teaching of literature, more attention is paid to the objective side, which undoubtedly impoverishes the idea of ​​a work of art. In addition, a kind of substitution of the subject of research may occur here: instead of studying a work of art with its inherent aesthetic patterns, we begin to study the reality reflected in the work, which, of course, is also interesting and important, but has no direct connection with the study of literature as an art form. A methodological approach aimed at studying the mainly objective side of a work of art, wittingly or unwittingly, reduces the importance of art as an independent form of spiritual activity of people, ultimately leading to ideas about the illustrative nature of art and literature. In this case, the work of art is largely deprived of its living emotional content, passion, pathos, which, of course, are primarily associated with the author's subjectivity.

In the history of literary criticism, this methodological tendency has found its most obvious embodiment in the theory and practice of the so-called cultural-historical school, especially in European literary criticism. Its representatives looked for signs and features of reflected reality in literary works; “they saw cultural and historical monuments in works of literature,” but “the artistic specificity, all the complexity of literary masterpieces did not interest researchers”*. Some representatives of the Russian cultural-historical school saw the danger of such an approach to literature. Thus, V. Sipovsky directly wrote: “You cannot look at literature only as a reflection of reality”**.

___________________

* Nikolaev P.A., Kurilov A.S., Grishunin A.L. History of Russian literary criticism. M., 1980. P. 128.

** Sipovsky V.V.History of literature as a science. St. Petersburg; M. . P. 17.

Of course, a conversation about literature may well turn into a conversation about life itself - there is nothing unnatural or fundamentally untenable in this, because literature and life are not separated by a wall. However, it is important to have a methodological approach that does not allow one to forget about the aesthetic specificity of literature and to reduce literature and its meaning to the meaning of illustration.

If in terms of content a work of art represents the unity of reflected life and the author’s attitude towards it, that is, it expresses some “word about the world”, then the form of the work is figurative, aesthetic in nature. Unlike other types public consciousness, art and literature, as is known, reflect life in the form of images, that is, they use such specific, individual objects, phenomena, events that, in their specific individuality, carry a generalization. In contrast to the concept, the image has greater “visibility”; it is characterized not by logical, but by concrete sensory and emotional persuasiveness. Imagery is the basis of artistry, both in the sense of belonging to art and in the sense high skill: due to their figurative nature, works of art have aesthetic dignity, aesthetic value.

So, we can give the following working definition of a work of art: it is a certain emotional and mental content, “a word about the world,” expressed in an aesthetic, figurative form; a work of art has integrity, completeness and independence.

General properties of fiction

Fiction has whole line features that distinguish it from all other types of art and creative activity.

First of all, this is the use of language, or verbal language means. No other art in the world relies entirely on language, or is created using only its means of expression.

The second feature of fiction is that the main subject of its depiction has always been and remains a person, his personality in all its manifestations.

The third feature of fiction should be recognized that it is entirely built on the figurative form of reflecting reality, that is, it strives, with the help of living, concrete, individual and unique forms, to convey the general typical patterns of the development of society.

A work of art as a whole

A literary work of art as a single whole reproduces either a complete picture of life or a complete picture of experiences, but at the same time it represents a separate completed work. The holistic character of a work is given by the unity of the problem posed in it, the unity of the problem revealed in it ideas. Main idea of ​​a work or its ideological meaning - this is the idea that the author wants to convey to the reader, the reason for which the entire work was created. At the same time, there have been cases in the history of literature when the author’s intention did not coincide with the final idea of ​​the work (N.V. Gogol’s “Dead Souls”), or when whole group works united by a common idea (I.S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”, N.G. Chernyshevsky “What to do”).

The main idea of ​​the work is inextricably linked with its topic, that is, the life material that was taken by the author for depiction in this work. Understanding the topic can only be achieved by careful analysis of the literary work as a whole.

Topic, idea belongs to the category content works. Go to category forms works include such elements as composition, consisting of a system of images and plot, genre, style and language of the work. Both of these categories are closely related, which gave the opportunity to the famous literary scholar G.N. Pospelov put forward a thesis about the substantive form and formal content of a literary work of art.

All elements of the form of a work are associated with the definition conflict, that is, the main contradiction that is depicted in the work. Moreover, this can be a clearly expressed conflict between the heroes of a work of art or between an individual hero and an entire social group, between two social groups(A.S. Griboedov “Woe from Wit”). Or maybe it's real expressed conflict it cannot be found in a work of art, because it exists between the facts of reality depicted by the author of the work and his ideas about how events should develop (N.V. Gogol “The Inspector General”). Related to this is also such a particular problem as the presence or absence positive hero in the work. foreign literature syntax poetry

The conflict becomes the basis for constructing the plot in the work, since through plot, that is, the system of events in the work, reveals the author’s attitude towards the depicted conflict. As a rule, the plots of works have a deep socio-historical meaning, revealing the causes, nature and development paths of the depicted conflict.

Composition A work of art consists of a plot and a system of images of the work. It is during the development of the plot that characters and circumstances appear in development, and the system of images is revealed in the plot movement.

Image system in the work includes all the characters, who can be divided into:

• - main and secondary (Onegin - mother of Tatyana Larina),
• - positive and negative (Chatsky - Molchalin),
• - typical (that is, their behavior and actions reflect modern social trends - Pechorin).

National originality of plots and the theory of “wandering” plots. There are so-called "wandering" stories, that is, plots whose conflicts are repeated in different countries and in different eras(the story about Cinderella, the story about the stingy money lender). At the same time, recurring plots receive the coloring of the country where they are currently being embodied due to the peculiarities national development(“The Misanthrope” by Moliere and “Woe from Wit” by A.S. Griboyedov).

Plot elements: prologue, exposition, plot, development of action, climax, denouement, epilogue. Not all of them must be present in a work of art. A plot is impossible only without a plot, a development of action, a climax. All other elements of the plot and their appearance in a work of art depend on the author’s intentions and the specifics of the depicted object.

As a rule, they do not have a plot, that is, a system of events, landscape lyrical works. Sometimes researchers talk about the presence in them internal plot, inner world movements of thoughts and feelings.

Prologue- introduction to the main plot of the work.

Exposition- depiction of the conditions for the formation of the characters that existed before the conflict and the character traits that developed under these conditions. The purpose of the exposition is to motivate the subsequent behavior of the characters. The exposition is not always placed at the beginning of the work, it may be absent altogether, it may be located in different places of the work or even at its end, but always performs the same role - to introduce the environment in which the action will take place.

The beginning- depiction of emerging contradictions, determination of the conflict of characters or the problem posed by the author. Without this element, a work of art cannot exist.

Development of action- detection and reproduction artistic means connections and contradictions between people, the events that occur during the development of the action reveal the characters of the characters and give an idea of ​​​​possible ways to resolve the conflict. Sometimes the development of an action includes entire paths life's quest, characters in their development. This is also a mandatory element for any work of art.

Climax represents the moment highest voltage in the development of action. It is an essential element of the plot and usually leads to an immediate outcome.

Denouement resolves the depicted conflict or leads to an understanding of the possibilities of its solution if the author does not yet have this solution. Quite often in literature there are works with an “open” ending, that is, without a denouement. This is especially common when the author wants the reader to think about the conflict depicted and try to imagine what will happen in the finale.

Epilogue - This is usually the information about the heroes and their fate that the author wants to convey to the reader after the denouement. This is also an optional element of a work of fiction, which the author uses when he believes that the denouement has not sufficiently explained the depiction of the final consequences.

In addition to the above plot elements, there are a number of special additional elements of composition that can be used by the author to convey his thoughts to readers.

The special elements of the composition are considered lyrical digressions. They are found only in epic works and represent digressions, that is, depictions of feelings, thoughts, experiences, reflections, facts of the biography of the author or his characters, not directly related to storyline works.

Additional elements are considered to be: introductory episodes not directly related to the plot of the narrative, but used to expand and deepen the content of the work.

Artistic framing And artistic preview also considered additional elements compositions used to enhance the impact, clarify the meaning of the work, and precede it with episodes of future events that are similar in concept.

Quite significant compositional role can play in a work of art scenery. In a number of works, it not only plays the role of the immediate background against which the action takes place, but also creates a certain psychological atmosphere, serves to internally reveal the character of the character or ideological plan works.

Significant role in compositional construction plays and interior(that is, a description of the setting in which the action takes place), since it is sometimes the key to understanding and revealing the characters’ characters.

The integrity of a literary work as an ideological and artistic system. Its conceptuality and specific artistic completeness.

Organic unity of figurative form and emotional-generalizing content. The problem of their analytical differentiation, which arose in European aesthetics of the late 18th - early 19th centuries (F. Schiller, Hegel, Goethe). The scientific significance of such a distinction and its debatability in modern literary criticism (replacement of traditional concepts with “meaning”, “artistic semantics”, “literal content”, “text”, “discourse”, etc.). The concepts of “aesthetic idea” (I. Kant), “poetic idea” (F. Schiller), “idea of ​​beauty” (Hegel): semantic nuances of these terms, revealing the way of existence and the formative potential of artistic thought (creative concept). “Concreteness” as a general property of idea and image, content and form in a literary work. The creative nature of artistic content and form, the formation of their unity in the process of creating a work, the “transition” of content into form and form into content.

Relative independence of the figurative form, combining aesthetic expediency with “apparent randomness.” Artistic form as the embodiment and deployment of content, its “symbolic” (“metaphorical”) meaning and ordering role. Completeness of form and its “emotional-volitional tension” (M. Bakhtin).

The composition of an artistic form as a scientific problem; “internal” and “external” form (A. Potebnya). Aesthetic organization (composition) of the “artistic world” (depicted fictional reality) and verbal text. The principle of functional consideration of form elements in their meaningful and constructive role. Concept artistic technique and its functions. A formalistic interpretation of this concept, isolating the artistic form from the content. The subordination of the formal elements of the author’s creative concept. The concept of structure as the correlation of elements of the whole. The meaning of the terms “information”, “text”, “context” in the semiotic interpretation of fiction.

2. Content of the work of art

Poetic idea (generalizing emotional-figurative thought) as the basis of artistic content. The difference between a poetic idea and an analytical judgment; organic unity of the objective (subject-thematic) and subjective (ideological-emotional) sides; the convention of such a distinction within the artistic whole. The specificity of poetic thought, overcoming the one-sidedness of abstract thinking, its figurative polysemy, “openness”.

A category of artistic theme that allows one to correlate a poetic idea with its subject, with extra-artistic reality. Author's activity in choosing a topic. The connection between the subject of the image and the subject of cognition; differences between them. The combination of concrete historical and traditional, “eternal” themes in literature. The author's interpretation of the topic: identifying and understanding life's contradictions under certain angle vision. Continuity of problems in literature, their artistic originality. The value aspect and emotional orientation of the poetic idea, determined by the author’s ideological and moral attitude to the depicted contradictions of human life, is the “trial” and “sentence” of the artist. Varying degrees of expression of emotional assessment in the integrity of a work of art (depending on the programmatic and creative attitude of the author, genre and stylistic tradition). Artistic tendency and tendentiousness.

Category of pathos. The ambiguous use of the term “pathos” in the science of a writer: 1) “the poet’s love for an idea” (V. Belinsky), inspiring his creative plan; 2) the character’s passionate striving for a significant goal, prompting him to act; 3) the sublime emotional orientation of the poetic idea of ​​the work, due to the passionate and “serious” (Hegel) attitude of the poet to the subject of creativity. The connection between pathos and the category of the sublime. True and false pathos. " Pathos" and "mood" are types of poetic ideas.

Typology of poetic ideas as a theoretical and literary problem: thematic principle(social, political, religious, etc. ideas) and aesthetic principle(a figuratively embodied “system of feelings”, according to F. Schiller, conditioned by the relationship between the artist’s ideal and the reality he depicts).

Heroic in literature: depiction and admiration of the feat of an individual or a group in their struggle with natural elements, with an external or internal enemy. The development of artistic heroics from the normative glorification of the hero to his historical concretization. A combination of heroism with drama and tragedy.

Tragic in literature. The significance of ancient myths and Christian legends for understanding the essence of tragic conflicts (external and internal) and recreating them in literature. The moral significance of a tragic character and its pathos that encourages action. A variety of situations reflecting the tragic collisions of life. Tragic mood.

Idyllic is an artistic idealization of the “natural”, close to nature, way of life of “innocent and happy humanity” (F. Schiller), unaffected by civilization.

Sentimental and romantic interest in the inner world of the individual in the literature of modern times. V. Belinsky on the importance of sentimental sensitivity and romantic striving for the ideal in literature. The difference between the typological concepts of “sentimentality” and “romance” from the specific historical concepts of “sentimentalism” and “romanticism”. Sentimentality and romance in realism. Their connection with humor, irony, satire.

Critical orientation of literature. Comic contradictions are the basis of humor and satire, determining the dominance of the laughter principle in them. N. Gogol about the cognitive significance of laughter. Humor is “laughter through tears” in connection with the moral and philosophical understanding of the comic behavior of people. Using the term “humor” to mean light, entertaining laughter. The civil orientation of satirical pathos as an angry denunciation of laughter. The connection between satire and tragedy. Irony and sarcasm. Traditions of carnival laughter in literature. Tragicomic.

Compatibility and mutual transitions of types of poetic ideas and moods. Unity of affirmation and negation. The uniqueness of the idea of ​​a separate work and the breadth of its artistic content.

Epicness, lyricism, drama are the typological properties of artistic content. Lyricism as a sublime emotional mood that affirms the value of the inner world of the individual. Drama (dramatic) as a state of mind that conveys a tense experience of acute contradictions in social, moral, and everyday relations between people.

Epic as a sublimely contemplative view of the world, acceptance of the world in its breadth, complexity and integrity.

Interpretation content of a work of art (creative, critical, literary, reading) and the problem of the boundary between its reasonable and arbitrary interpretation. The context of the writer’s work, the intention and creative history of the work as guidelines for interpretation.