Narrator hero hero hero narrator narrator. Theoretical poetics: concepts and definitions
Narration in work of art is not always conducted on behalf of the author.
The author is a real man who lives in real world. It is he who thinks through his work from the beginning (sometimes from the epigraph, even from the numbering (Arabic or Roman) to last point or dots. It is he who develops the system of heroes, their portraits and relationships, it is he who divides the work into chapters. For him, there are no “extra” details - if there is a pot of balsam on the window in the stationmaster’s house, then that is exactly the flower the author needed.
Examples of works where the author himself is present are “Eugene Onegin” a. Pushkin and " dead Souls» n. Gogol.
Difference between Narrator and Narrator
The narrator is the author who tells the story; he is a character in the artistic world. The narrator is the author who tells the story through the mouth of a character. The narrator lives in each specific text - this is, for example, an old man and an old woman who lived near blue sea. He is a direct participant in some events.
And the narrator is always above the storyteller; he tells the story in its entirety, being a participant in the events or a witness to the lives of the characters. The narrator is a character who is presented as a writer in a work, but at the same time he retains the features of his speech and his thoughts.
the narrator is the one who wrote the story. It can be fictional or real (then the concept of author is introduced; that is, the author and the narrator coincide).
the narrator represents the writer in the work. The narrator is often called a “lyrical hero.” This is someone to whom the writer trusts his own assessment of events and characters. Or these points of view - the author-creator and the narrator - may be close.
In order to present and reveal his plan in its entirety, the author puts on different masks - including the narrator and storytellers. The last two are eyewitnesses of the events, the reader believes them. This gives rise to a feeling of authenticity of what is happening. It’s as if the author, on the stage – on the pages of the work – plays alone the many roles of the performance he created. That's why it's so interesting to be a writer!
Who tells the story of Silvio?
To such a reception?
Pushkin was traveling to Boldino as a groom. However, financial difficulties prevented the marriage. Neither Pushkin nor the bride's parents had excess money. Pushkin’s mood was also influenced by the cholera epidemic in Moscow, which did not allow him to travel from Boldino. It was during the Boldino autumn, among many other things, that “Belkin’s stories” were written.
In fact, the entire cycle was written by Pushkin, but in the title and preface another author is indicated, the pseudo-author Ivan Petrovich Belkin, but Belkin died and his stories were published by a certain publisher A.P. It is also known that Belkin wrote each story based on the stories of several “persons.”
The cycle begins with a preface “from the publisher,” written on behalf of a certain a.p. Pushkinists believe that this is not Alexander Pushkin himself, since the style is not at all Pushkin’s, but somehow florid, semi-clerical. The publisher was not personally acquainted with Belkin and therefore turned to the neighbor of the late author for biographical information about him. The letter from a neighbor, a certain Nenaradovsky landowner, is given in full in the preface.
Pushkin presents Belkina to the reader as a writer. Belkin himself conveys the story to a certain narrator - Lieutenant Colonel I. L.P. (as reported in the footnote: (note by A.S. Pushkin.)
The answer to the question: who tells the story of Silvio - opens up like a nesting doll:
Biographical Pushkin (it is known that the poet himself once ate cherries during a duel, but did not shoot) →
Publisher a.p. (but not Alexander Sergeevich himself) →
Nenaradovsky landowner (neighbor of the deceased Belkin by that time) →
Belkin biographical (a neighbor spoke about him in detail, as best he could) →
Narrator (an officer who knew both Silvio and the lucky count) →
Narrators = heroes (Silvio, Count, “a man of about thirty-two, handsome”).
The narration is told in the first person: the narrator participates in the action; it is to him, a young army officer, that Silvio confides the secret of the unfinished duel. It’s interesting that the ending of her i.l.p. Silvio learns from his enemy. Thus, the narrator in the story also becomes the confidant of two characters, each of whom tells his own part of the story, which is given in the first person and in the past tense. Therefore, the story told seems reliable.
like this complex construction, a seemingly simple story.
“Belkin's stories” are not just a fun Pushkin work with funny plots. People who begin to play literary heroes find themselves at the mercy of certain plot patterns and become not only funny and amusing, but also risk actually dying in a duel...” it turns out that these “Belkin stories” are not so simple.
All other stories in the cycle are constructed in a similar way. Among other works, one can name the story “The Captain's Daughter,” which was written on behalf of a fictional character - Pyotr Grinev. He talks about himself.
Grinev is young, honest and fair - only from such a position can one appreciate the robber honor of Pugachev, recognized by the defenders of the state as an impostor, a “despicable rebel.”
V last chapter(“court”) Grinev talks about the events that occurred during his imprisonment, from the words of his loved ones.
One can also recall the ore panko, to whom Nikolai Gogol conveyed the story of the “enchanted place.”
The chapter “Maksim Maksimych” is constructed in exactly the same way from the “hero of our time” M. Lermontov.
Author. Narrator. Hero AUTHOR. NARRATOR. HERO. IN prose And poems L. means. the place belongs to the narrator, whether the story is told in the name of an unnamed narrator or in the first person. L.'s narrator either sets out the plot or introduces it into action, recreating the external situation (“Demon”, “Mtsyri”, “Tambov Treasurer”), and serves the creatures. form of manifestation of the author's position. However, identifying the narrator with the author often leads to a narrowing of the problems of the work, especially L.’s poems, which with this approach turn out to be closed within the individual romantic consciousness of Ch. hero (“Mtsyri”, “Demon”). But Lermont. the poems are not reduced to the plot and spiritual “adventures” of the hero: his fate seems, although important, but in a certain sense a “private” phenomenon that must be included in the universal world. Thus, the existence of the Demon intersects with the course of earthly life (nature, the life of the Gudal family, wedding, funeral, battle; it is no coincidence that the description of the horse takes up an entire chapter). Similarly, Pechorin’s life intersects with the orbits of the lives of many people, even those who hardly know him. The fate of Mtsyri is included in the events of the Caucasus. war, and the story of the heroes of “Tambov Treasurer” is not only in the provinces. everyday life, but also in the circle of interests of the reading public. Mtsyri’s confession is preceded by a prologue in the form of an untitled narrative, combining the position of an external observer (“And now a pedestrian sees”) and a narrator delving into thoughts about the fate of Georgia (five verses of the first chapter); the latter unexpectedly uses the verb “bloomed” in the past tense. The effect of being ahead of time is necessary for L. in order to take a position that is historically justified, a position in which the security of Georgia would already be a fait accompli and, because of this, could be an argument explaining the actions of the Russians. army. The hero’s word in the poem, in contrast to the epically detached word of the narrator, is extremely confessional, but with a specific meaning. vocabulary, style, verse there is no sharp line between them, which indicates a certain spiritual unity of all carriers of the word in the poem. The decision is romantic. conflict - in dying words Mtsyri and in the last verse of the poem: “And I will not curse anyone”; but this is the author’s word, a direct expression author's position . It is important that such a decision must be made by the hero himself. This reveals the author’s attitude to the words of the hero and the narrator. The positions of the narrators and the hero in the poem have local significance; Only the author's position is comprehensive. In “The Demon,” the narrator has unlimited knowledge of the past and future, earthly and heavenly, and because of this, the dispassionateness of his “observing” position: the narrator’s word reflects the absence of a hierarchy of values (which the author establishes), the entire temporal world for him lies on the same value plane . For him, the suffering of the Demon and the galloping horse are equal in description. The narrator's word is descriptive and descriptive. In the last chapter of the epilogue, the author’s word sounds, colored with a majestic, regal, imperturbable tonality, as if absorbing the characteristic character of the word of the hero and narrator and standing above it. A certain convergence between the hero’s word and the narrator’s word is revealed in Chapter. VII, where the words of the Demon become the words of the poet himself: “Since the world lost paradise, / I swear, such a beauty / Has not bloomed under the sun of the south.” The epilogue of the author-narrator, separated from the completely completed line of spiritual “quests” of the demonic. hero, indicates the local nature of the “told” plot, which, according to the narrator, has become a story “terrible for children” (another century ahead of its time), and at the same time the universal nature of the “conclusions” stemming from the relationship between the tragedy that once unfolded and the passage of time . (The description of Gudal’s house, which has fallen into disrepair, is not a decline, but a removal of the former.) In “Tambov Treasury”, author. the position is expressed in a combination of two styles in the narrative - high and low, which, however, do not exist separately. The same is the basis of the conflict of the poem, dramatic and anecdotal at the same time. This also determines the composition with its interruption of plans, lyrical. digressions - sometimes in the spirit of lofty dreams (XLII), sometimes in the tone of philistine reasoning (XI, XIII). The poem is held together by the author's ironic lighting, which permeates all levels of the narrative. Here the principle of the relationship between the author and the narrator corresponds to the stylistic principles of depicting reality. This is not observed in other poems. In the novel “Hero...” the change in points of view of the author, narrator and hero is directly revealed in the composition of the work. The nameless narrator actually acts as an arbitrator between Maxim Maksimych and Pechorin (in the preface to Pechorin’s journal). This is confirmed by the preface. from the author: it has the same position regarding the hero. The composition of the novel is subordinated to the task of identifying the essence of the hero: first - the preliminary story of Maxim Maksimych, then - Pechorin's explanatory journal, between which the figure of the narrator appears. The narrator's opinion about Maxim Maksimych is not without a romantic tint. enthusiasm - has long been accepted by researchers as artistically objective and final, due to the identification of the narrator with the author. In the novel, the “story” is told on behalf of the narrator, Maxim Maksimych, Pechorin and the author of the first preface (see Style). The difference in the positions of the narrating characters determines the diverse coverage of the phenomena of reality, creating in meaning. the degree of impression of self-expression of life is a fact indicating the strengthening of realism. positions in Russian prose of the 40s 19th century Auto. L.’s position in “Hero...” also manifests itself in relation to word hero. In the novel there is a sharp line between the word internal and external. Int. the word - the hero's word about himself and to himself - is truthful and sincere. For L. (as opposed to F.M. Dostoevsky), the word that sounds in the dialogue turns out to be external; it lacks sincerity, it is only a means to an end. External, i.e. dialogical in form, the word in essence is not such, it tends to become monological, since it is a form of self-affirmation of the hero. The inner word, monologue in form, is essentially dialogical: it is in the word addressed to himself that Pechorin correlates thoughts about the value of his own. personality with the opinions of others about him. It is precisely this, taking into account someone else’s point of view. the word contains the hero’s self-condemnation, containing the power of his merciless reflection in relation to himself and the surrounding reality. In the unfinished novels “Vadim”, “Princess Ligovskaya”, prose. In the sketches “I want to tell you”, “Shtoss”, the author’s position is manifested directly and openly in commenting and assessing the feelings of the characters, author. characterization of persons and events, interference in the thoughts of the characters. In “Hero...” these narrative techniques are replaced by alternation or comparison of positions of the narrator, author and heroes. In general, the author. position in large industries L. can be defined as transpersonal: in “Hero...” he stands above the modern. society; in poems, through the narrator, the author takes a position of superiority over heroes and events due to foreknowledge: historical in “Mtsyri” and universal in “Demon”. The hero’s word is the most important, but not the only one. means of expression understanding the course of events on the scale of society, history or all of humanity.
Lit.: Vinogradov V.V., The problem of authorship and the theory of styles, M., 1961; his, About the theory of art. speeches, M., 1971; Bakhtin M. M., On the methodology of literary criticism, in the book: Context. 74, M., 1975; his, Problem of the text, “VL”, 1976, No. 10; The author's problem in art. lit-re, v. 1, Izhevsk, 1974; Kozhinov V.V., The author’s problem and the writer’s path, in the book: Context. 77, M., 1978; Eikhenbaum(12), p. 221-85.
E. A. Vedenyapina Lermontov Encyclopedia / USSR Academy of Sciences. Institute rus. lit. (Pushkin. House); Scientific-ed. Council of the publishing house "Sov. Encycl."; Ch. ed. Manuilov V. A., Editorial Board: Andronikov I. L., Bazanov V. G., Bushmin A. S., Vatsuro V. E., Zhdanov V. V., Khrapchenko M. B. - M.: Sov. Encycl., 1981
See what "Author. Narrator. Hero" is in other dictionaries:
- “A HERO OF OUR TIME” (1837 40), L.’s novel, his pinnacle creation, the first prose. social psychological and philosopher novel in Russian lit re. “A Hero of Our Time” absorbed a variety of creatively transformed in the new historical. and national... ... Lermontov Encyclopedia
- “DEMON”, poem, one of the central works. L., the poet returned to work on the Crimea throughout almost his entire career. life (1829 39). Based on the biblical myth of a fallen angel who rebelled against God. To this image, personifying the “spirit of denial”... Lermontov Encyclopedia
Lermontov's STYLE is perhaps the most difficult, but at the same time promising problem of modern times. Lermontov studies. Attempts to define L.'s style, either as romantic, or as realistic with elements of romance (see Romanticism and realism), then as... ... Lermontov Encyclopedia
POEM, one of the central genres of L. poetry, important for understanding Russian. romanticism in general. During the period of 1828 41 L. created approx. 30 P. He himself was published. three P.: “Song about... the merchant Kalashnikov” and “Tambov Treasurer” in 1838, “Mtsyri” in 1840. “Hadji ... ... Lermontov Encyclopedia
RUSSIAN LITERATURE OF THE 19TH CENTURY and Lermontov. 1. Lermontov and Russian poetry of the 19th century. L. is the heir of the Pushkin era, who began directly from that milestone, which was designated in Russian. poetry by A. S. Pushkin. He expressed the new position of the letter, characteristic... ... Lermontov Encyclopedia
LERMONT STUDIES, the study of Lermontov’s life and work. The first attempts to comprehend Lermontov’s work began in his lifetime of criticism, with the publication of “Poems by M. Lermontov” (1840) and “A Hero of Our Time” (1840, 1841). In the 40s prose and poetry L... Lermontov Encyclopedia
Romanticism and realism in the works of L. ROMANTISM AND REALISM in the works of L., one of central problems Lermontov studies; its insufficient development is explained by the complexity and lack of differentiation of the very concepts of “romanticism” and “realism”, in total... ... Lermontov Encyclopedia
PROSE by Lermontov. Lit. L.'s path began in the late 1820s. during the period of poetic dominance. genres in Russian lit re. Having started as a poet, L. comes to prose relatively late; his prosaic experiments, reflecting the process of formation of Russian. prose as a whole, were one... Lermontov Encyclopedia
STYLIZATION and tale. C. emphasized imitation of someone else's style, felt as belonging to a certain culture, typologically sharply different from the contemporary one of the author. IN in a broad sense the concept of S. is used to designate a number of relationships. phenomena:... ... Lermontov Encyclopedia
PLOT in Lermontov's lyrics. Lit by S. in lyric poetry is often considered as a reflection of the process of development of feelings and is called lyric. plot; in this sense, we can talk about lyrical. Lermont's story. poems that do not contain a plot... ... Lermontov Encyclopedia
The narrator, unlike the author-creator, is outside only the depicted time and space in which the plot unfolds. Therefore, he can easily go back or run ahead, and also know the premises or results of the events of the present depicted. But its possibilities are at the same time determined from beyond the boundaries of the entire artistic whole, which includes the depicted “event of the storytelling itself.”
The “omniscience” of the narrator (for example, in “War and Peace”) is included in the author’s plan in the same way as in other cases - in “Crime and Punishment” or in Turgenev’s novels - the narrator, according to the author’s instructions, does not at all have complete knowledge about reasons for events or inner life heroes.
In contrast to the narrator, the narrator is not on the border of the fictional world with the reality of the author and reader, but entirely within the depicted reality.
All the main points of the “event of the story itself” in this case become the subject of the image, the “facts” of fictional reality: the “framing” situation of the story (in the short story tradition and prose oriented towards it in the 19th-20th centuries); the personality of the narrator: he is either connected biographically with the characters about whom he is telling the story (the writer in “The Humiliated and the Insulted,” the chronicler in Dostoevsky’s “Demons”), or in any case has a special, by no means comprehensive, outlook; a specific speech manner attached to a character or depicted on its own (“The Tale of How Ivan Ivanovich Quarreled with Ivan Nikiforovich” by Gogol, miniatures by I. F. Gorbunov and early Chekhov).
“The image of the storyteller” - as a character or as a “linguistic person” (M. M. Bakhtin) - necessary hallmark this type of depicting subject, the inclusion in the field of depiction of the circumstances of the story is optional. For example, in Pushkin’s “The Shot” there are three narrators, but only two storytelling situations are shown.
If such a role is assigned to a character whose story bears no signs of either his outlook or his speech manner (the inserted story of Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov in Fathers and Sons, attributed to Arkady), this is perceived as a conventional device. Its purpose is to relieve the author of responsibility for the accuracy of what is told. In fact, the subject of the image in this part of Turgenev’s novel is the narrator.
So, the narrator is a personified subject of the image and/or an “objectified” speaker of speech; it is associated with a certain socio-cultural and linguistic environment, from the perspective of which (as happens in the same “Shot”) the other characters are portrayed. On the contrary, the narrator is depersonalized (impersonal) and in his outlook is close to the author-creator.
At the same time, compared to the heroes, he is a bearer of a more neutral speech element, generally accepted linguistic and stylistic norms. (The closer the hero is to the author, the fewer speech differences between the hero and the narrator. Therefore, the leading characters of a great epic, as a rule, are not the subjects of stylistically sharply distinguished insert stories: cf., for example, the story of Prince Myshkin about Marie and the stories of General Ivolgin or the feuilleton Keller in "The Idiot".)
The narrator’s “mediation” helps the reader, first of all, to obtain a more reliable and objective understanding of events and actions, as well as the inner life of the characters. The “mediation” of the narrator allows you to enter into the depicted world and look at events through the eyes of the characters. The first relates to certain advantages of an external point of view.
Conversely, works that seek to directly involve the reader in the character’s perception of events do without a narrator at all or almost without, using the forms of diary, correspondence, confession (“Poor People” by Dostoevsky, “Diary” extra person"Turgenev, "Kreutzer Sonata" by L. Tolstoy).
The third, intermediate option is when the author-creator seeks to balance the external and internal positions. In such cases, the image of the narrator and his story can turn out to be a “bridge” or a connecting link: this is the case in “A Hero of Our Time,” where the story of Maxim Maksimych connects the “travel notes” of the Author-character with Pechorin’s “magazine.”
The "attachment" of the narrative function to a character is motivated, for example, in " The captain's daughter” by the fact that Grinev is credited with the “authorship” of the notes. The character, as it were, turns into the author: hence the broadening of his horizons. The opposite course of artistic thought is also possible: the author turns into a special character, creating his own “double” within the depicted world.
This is what happens in the novel “Eugene Onegin”. The one who addresses the reader with the words “Now we will fly to the garden, / Where Tatyana met him,” is, of course, the narrator. In the reader’s consciousness, he is easily identified, on the one hand, with the author-creator (the creator of the work as an artistic whole), on the other, with the character who, together with Onegin, remembers “the beginning of a young life” on the banks of the Neva.
In fact, in the depicted world, as one of the heroes, there is, of course, not the author-creator (this is impossible), but the “image of the author”, the prototype of which for the creator of the work is himself as an “extra-artistic” personality - as a private person with a special biography (“But the north is harmful to me”) and as a person of a certain profession (belonging to the “perky guild”). But this issue should be considered on the basis of an analysis of another initial concept, namely “author-creator”.
Theory of Literature / Ed. N.D. Tamarchenko - M., 2004
1) Sierotwiński S.
2) Wielpert G. von. Sachwörterbuch der Literatur.
“Author(Latin auktor - personal patron; creator), creator, esp. lit. labor: writer, poet, writer. <...>Poetological the problem suggests an expansive but dubious equation of A. lyric. I am in the sense of the lyricism of the experience and the figure of the narrator in the epic, which, most often being fictional, fictitious roles, do not allow identification” (S. 69).
“Narrator (narrator)
3) Dictionary of Literary Terms / By H. Shaw.
“Narrator- one who tells a story, either orally or in writing. IN fiction may mean the alleged author of the story. Whether the story is told in the first or third person, the narrator in fiction is always assumed to be either someone involved in the action or the author himself” (p. 251).
4) Timofeev L. The image of the narrator, the image of the author // Dictionary literary terms. pp. 248-249.
"ABOUT. By. A. - the bearer of the author's (i.e., not related to the speech of a character) speech in a prose work.<...>Very often speech not associated with images characters, in prose it is personified, that is, it is transferred to a specific person-storyteller (see. Narrator), telling about certain events, and in this case it is motivated only by the traits of his individuality, since he is usually not included in the plot. But even if there is no personified narrator in the work, by the very structure of speech we perceive a certain assessment of what is happening in the work.”
“At the same time, the opus does not directly coincide with the position of the author, who usually leads the narrative, choosing a certain artistic angle of view on events<...>therefore, the terms “author’s speech” and “author’s image” seem less accurate.”
“Modern literary studies explores the problem of A. in the aspect author's position; at the same time, a narrower concept is isolated - “the image of the author,” indicating one of the forms of indirect presence of A. in the work. In a strictly objective sense, the “image of the author” is present only in the work. autobiographical, “autopsychological” (L. Ginzburg’s term), lyrical. plan (see Lyrical hero ), that is, where A.’s personality becomes the theme and subject of his work. But more broadly, by the image or “voice” of A. we mean the personal source of those layers of artists. speeches that cannot be attributed either to the characters or to those specifically named in the work. narrator (cf. The image of the narrator, vol. 9)".
“...a primary form of narration takes shape, no longer tied to the narrator (a strong tradition of short stories - right up to the stories of I.S. Turgenev and G. Maupassant), but to a conventional, semi-personalized literary “I” (more often “we”). With such an openly addressed “I” to the reader, not only elements of presentation and information are linked, but also rhetoric. figures of persuasion, argumentation, exposition of examples, extraction of morality...”. “Life-like realistic. 19th century prose<...>the consciousness of A. the narrator becomes unlimited. awareness, it<...>alternately combined with the consciousness of each of the heroes...”
6) Corman B.O. The integrity of a literary work and an experimental dictionary of literary terms // Problems of the history of criticism and poetics of realism. pp. 39-54.
“Author - subject(carrier) consciousness, the expression of which is the entire work or their totality.<...> Subject of consciousness the closer to A., the more it is dissolved in the text and invisible in it. As subject of consciousness becomes an object of consciousness, he moves away from A., that is, to a greater extent subject of consciousness becomes a certain personality with his own special way of speech, character, biography, especially to a lesser extent it expresses the author’s position” (pp. 41-42).
Narrator and narrator
1) Sierotwiński S. Słownik terminów literackich.
2) Wielpert G. von. Sachwörterbuch der Literatur.
“Narrator. Narrator (narrator), now in special narrator or presenter epic theater , who with his comments and reflections transfers the action to another plane and accordingly. for the first time, through interpretation, he attaches individual episodes of action to the whole” (S. 606).
3) Modern foreign literary criticism: Encyclopedic reference book.
“I. a. - English implied author, French auteur implicite, German. impliziter autor, - the concept of “abstract author” is often used in the same sense, - narrative authority, not embodied in art. text in the form of a character-narrator and recreated by the reader during the reading process as an implied, implicit “image of the author.” According to views narratology, I. a. together with its corresponding paired communicative authority - implicit reader- Responsible for providing art. communications total lit. works as a whole."
b) Ilyin I.P. Narrator. P. 79.
“N. - fr. narrateur, English reporter, German Erzähler - narrator, narrator - one of the main categories narratology. For modern narratologists who share in this case According to the structuralists, the concept of N. is purely formal in nature and is categorically opposed to the concept of “concrete”, “real author”. W. Kaiser once argued: “The narrator is a created figure who belongs to the whole of a literary work.”<...>
English- and German-language narratologists sometimes distinguish between “personal” narration (first-person narration by an unnamed narrator or one of the characters) and “impersonal” narration (anonymous third-person narration).<...>...Swiss researcher M.-L. Ryan, based on the understanding of the artist. text as one of the forms of “speech act”, considers the presence of N. obligatory in any text, although in one case he may have a certain degree of individuality (in the “impersonal” narrative), and in another he may be completely deprived of it (in “ personal" narration): "Zero degree of individuality arises when N.'s discourse assumes only one thing: the ability to tell a story." The zero degree is represented primarily by the “omniscient third-person narration” of the classic. novel of the 19th century. and the “anonymous narrative voice” of certain twentieth-century novels, for example, by H. James and E. Hemingway.”
4) Kozhinov V. Narrator // Dictionary of literary terms. pp. 310-411.
“R. - a conventional image of a person on whose behalf the narration in a literary work is conducted.<...>R.'s image (unlike narrator's image- see) in the proper sense of the word is not always present in the epic. So, a “neutral”, “objective” narration is possible, in which the author himself, as it were, steps aside and directly creates before us pictures of life<...>. We find this method of apparently “impersonal” narration, for example, in Goncharov’s “Oblomov”, in the novels of Flaubert, Galsworthy, A.N. Tolstoy.
But more often the narration is told from a certain person; in the work, among others human images, the image of R also appears. This could, firstly, be the image of the author himself, who directly addresses the reader (cf., for example, “Eugene Onegin” by A.S. Pushkin). However, one should not think that this image is completely identical to the author - this is precisely the artistic image of the author, which is created in the creative process, like all other images of the work.<...>the author and the image of the author (storyteller) are in difficult relationships" “Very often a work creates and special image R., who acts as a separate person from the author (often the author directly introduces him to the readers). This R. m. b. close to the author<...>and M.B., on the contrary, is very far from him in character and social status <...>. Further, R. can act both as just a narrator who knows this or that story (for example, Gogol’s Rudy Panko), and as an active hero (or even main character) works (R. in Dostoevsky’s “Teenager”).”
“The particularly complex form of the story, characteristic of latest literature, is the so-called improperly direct speech(cm.)".
5) Prikhodko T.F. The image of the narrator // KLE. T. 9. Stlb. 575-577.
"ABOUT. R. (narrator) occurs when personalized narration first person; such narration is one of the ways to implement copyright positions in art production; is important means compositional organization of the text.” “...direct speech of the characters, personalized narration (subject-narrator) and extrapersonal (3rd person) narration constitute a multi-layered structure that cannot be reduced to the author’s speech.” “An extrapersonal narrative, while not being a direct expression of the author’s assessments, like a personalized one, can become a special intermediate link between the author and the characters.”
6) Corman B.O. The integrity of a literary work and an experimental dictionary of literary terms. pp. 39-54.
“Narrator - subject of consciousness, characteristic mainly for epic. He is connected to his objects spatial And time points of view and, as a rule, is invisible in the text, which is created by exclusion phraseological point of view <...>“ (p. 47).
“Narrator - subject of consciousness, characteristic of dramatic epic. He, like narrator, is connected with its objects by spatial and temporal relations. At the same time, he himself acts as an object in phraseological point of view” (pp. 48-49).
II. Textbooks, teaching aids
1) Kayser W. Das sprachliche Kunstwerk.
“In individual stories told by a role-narrator, it usually happens that the narrator reports events as experienced by him. This form is called Ich-Erzählung. Its opposite is Er-Erzählung, in which the author or fictitious narrator is not in the position of a participant in the events. The third possibility of narrative form is usually the epistolary form, in which the role of the narrator is shared simultaneously by many characters or, as in the case of Werther, only one of the participants in the correspondence is present. As you can see, we are talking about modifying the first-person narration.
Nevertheless, the deviations are so deep that this option can be characterized as special shape: there is no narrator here who conveys events, knowing their course and final outcome, but only perspective dominates. Already Goethe rightfully ascribed a dramatic character to the epistolary form” (pp. 311-312).
2) Corman B.O. Studying the text of a work of art.
“ One’s own life, biography, inner world in many ways serve as source material for the writer, but this source material, like any life material, undergoes processing and only then acquires general meaning, becoming a fact of art<...>At the core artistic image The author (as well as the entire work as a whole) ultimately lies in the worldview, ideological position, and creative concept of the writer” (p. 10).
“In an excerpt from “ Dead souls» the subject of speech has not been identified. Everything that is described (the chaise, the gentleman sitting in it, the men) exists as if by itself, and we do not notice the speaker of the speech when directly perceiving the text. Such a carrier of speech, not identified, not named, dissolved in the text, is defined by the term narrator(sometimes called by the author).
In an excerpt from Turgenev's story, the speaker is identified. It is quite obvious to the reader that everything described in the text is perceived by the one who speaks. But the identification of the subject of speech in Turgenev’s text is limited mainly by its name (“I”).<...>We will further denote such a speaker of speech, which differs from the narrator primarily in name, by the term personal narrator.
In the third excerpt (from “The Tale of How Ivan Ivanovich Quarreled with Ivan Nikiforovich”) we see a new degree of identification of the subject of speech in the text.<...>For the speaker, the objects are Ivan Ivanovich and his amazing bekesha with smushkas. And for the author and reader, the subject of speech himself, with his naive pathos, simple-minded envy and Mirgorod narrow-mindedness, becomes the object.
A speaker who openly organizes the entire text with his personality is called storyteller.
A story told in a sharply characteristic manner, reproducing the vocabulary and syntax of the speaker and intended for the listener, is called a skaz” (p. 33-34).
3) Grekhnev V.A. Verbal image And literary work: Book for teachers.
“...this suggests a distinction between two main narrative forms: from author's face And from the narrator's point of view. The first type has two options: objective And subjective" "IN objectively author's In the narrative, the stylistic norm of the author’s speech reigns supreme, not obscured by any deviations into character speech.<...>“Subjective form author's narration, on the contrary, prefers to demonstrate manifestations of the author’s “I”, his subjectivity, not constrained by any restrictions, except perhaps those that affect the area of taste” (pp. 167-168).
“It includes three varieties<«рассказовое повествование» - N.T.>: storyteller's narration, conventional story, tale. They differ from each other in the degree of objectification and the measure of speech color. If the objectification of the narrator from the first type of narration to the last becomes less and less noticeable, then the degree of colorfulness of the word, its individualizing energy, clearly increases.<...> Storyteller's story one way or another attached to the character: this is his word, no matter how weakened the individualizing principle in it was.” “In Gogol’s stories “The Nose” and “The Overcoat”<...>as if some formless narrator is grimacing in front of us, constantly changing intonations<...>this subject is, in essence, a multitude of persons, an image of mass consciousness...” “..in the tale<...>Social and professional dialects sound more noticeable.” “The bearer of a tale, its speech subject, even if he is endowed with the status of a character, always fades into the shadows in front of his depicted word” (pp. 171-177).
III. Special studies
1) Croce B. Aesthetics as a science of expression and as general linguistics. Part 1. Theory.
[Regarding the formula “style is a person”]: “Thanks to such an erroneous identification, many legendary ideas were born regarding the personality of artists, just as it seemed impossible that the one who expresses magnanimous feelings should not himself in practical life be a noble and magnanimous person , or so that the one who often resorts to dagger blows in his dramas himself in a specific life is not the culprit of any of them” (p. 60).
2) Vinogradov V.V. Style " Queen of Spades” // Vinogradov V.V. Favorite works. About the language literary prose. (5. The image of the author in the composition “The Queen of Spades”).
“The subject of the narrative itself, the “image of the author,” fits into the sphere of this depicted reality. It is a form of complex and contradictory relationships between the author’s intention, between the fantasized personality of the writer and the faces of the characters.”
“The narrator in The Queen of Spades, at first not identified by either name or pronouns, enters the circle of players as one of the representatives secular society. <...>The story has already begun<...>the repetition of vaguely personal forms creates the illusion of the author’s inclusion in this society. Such an understanding is also encouraged by the order of words, which expresses not the narrator’s objective detachment from the events being reproduced, but his subjective empathy for them and active participation in them.”
3) Bakhtin M.M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity.
a) The problem of text in linguistics, philology and others humanities. Experience in Philosophical Analysis.
“We find (perceive, understand, sense, feel) the author in every work of art. For example, in a work of painting we always feel its author (the artist), but we never we see him the way we see the images he depicts. We feel it in everything as a pure depicting principle (depicting subject), and not as a depicted (visible) image. And in a self-portrait we do not see, of course, the author depicting it, but only the image of the artist. Strictly speaking, the image of the author is a contradictio in adiecto” (p. 288). "Unlike real author the image of the author created by him is deprived of direct participation in the real dialogue (he participates in it only through the whole work), but he can participate in the plot of the work and speak in the depicted dialogue with the characters (the conversation of the “author” with Onegin). The speech of the depicting (real) author, if there is one, is speech in principle special type, which cannot lie on the same plane as the speech of the characters” (p. 295).
b) From records of 1970-1971.
“Primary (not created) and secondary author (image of the author created by the primary author). Primary author - natura non creata quae creat; secondary author - natura creata quae creat. The image of the hero is natura creata quae non creat. The primary author cannot be an image: he eludes any figurative representation. When we try to figuratively imagine the primary author, we ourselves create his image, that is, we ourselves become the primary author of this image.<...>The primary author, if he speaks directly, cannot simply be writer: nothing can be said on behalf of the writer (the writer turns into a publicist, moralist, scientist, etc.)” (p. 353). “Self-portrait. The artist depicts himself as an ordinary person, and not as an artist, a creator of a picture” (p. 354).
4) Stanzel F. K. Theorie des Erzählens.
“If the narrator lives in the same world as the characters, then he is, in traditional terminology, an I-narrator. If the narrator exists outside the world of characters, then we're talking about in traditional He-narrative terminology. The ancient concepts of I- and He-narration have already created many misconceptions, because the criterion for distinguishing them, the personal pronoun, in the case of I-narration refers to the narrator, and in the case of He-narration, to the bearer of the narration, who is not the narrator. Also sometimes in He-narration, for example, in "Tom Jones" or in " Magic Mountain", there is a self-narrator. It is not the presence of the first person pronoun in the narrative (excluding, of course, dialogue) that is decisive, but the place of its bearer inside or outside the fictional world of the novel or story.<...>An essential criterion for both determining<...>- not the relative frequency of the presence of one of the two personal pronouns I or He/She, but the question of identity and resp. non-identity of the realm of existence in which the narrator and characters live. The narrator of "David Copperfield" is I-narrator (narrator), because he lives in the same world as the other characters in the novel<...>The narrator of "Tom Jones" - He is a narrator or an autorial narrator, because he exists outside the fictional world in which Tom Jones, Sophia Western live...” (S. 71-72).
5) Kozhevnikova N.A. Types of narration in Russian literature of the 19th-20th centuries.
“The types of narration in a work of art are organized by a designated or undesignated subject of speech and are clothed in appropriate speech forms. The dependence between the subject of speech and the type of narration is, however, indirect. In third-person narration, either the omniscient author or the anonymous narrator expresses himself. The first person may belong directly to the writer, or to a specific narrator, or to a conventional narrator, in each of these cases differing in a different degree of certainty and different possibilities.” “Not only the subject of speech determines the verbal embodiment of the narrative, but also the forms of speech themselves evoke with a certain certainty the idea of the subject, build his image” (pp. 3-5).
QUESTIONS
1. Try to divide the definitions that we grouped under the heading “Author and the image of the author” into two categories: those in which the concept of “author” is mixed with the concepts of “narrator”, “storyteller”, and those that aim to distinguish the first concept from the two others. What are the delimitation criteria? Is it possible to more or less accurately define the concept of “image of the author”?
2. Compare those definitions of the subject of the image in a work of art that belong to V.V. Vinogradov and M.M. Bakhtin. What content do scientists put into the phrase “image of the author”? In what case is he distinguished from the author-creator, on the one hand, and from the narrator and narrator, on the other? What criteria or concepts are used to differentiate? Compare from this point of view the definitions of M.M. Bakhtin and I.B. Rodnyanskaya.
3. Compare our definitions of the concepts “narrator” and “storyteller”: first, taken from reference and educational literature, and then from special works (exactly as you did with the definitions of the concepts “author”, “image of the author”) . Try to identify different ways and options to solve the problem. What place does the judgment of Franz K. Stanzel occupy among them?
Topic 18. Narrator, narrator, image of the author
I. Dictionaries
Author and image of the author
1) Sierotwiński S. "Author. The creator of the work” (S. 40). 2) Wielpert G. von. Sachwörterbuch der Literatur. “ Author(Latin auktor - personal patron; creator), creator, esp. lit. labor: writer, poet, writer. <...>Poetological the problem suggests an expansive but dubious equation of A. lyric. I am in the sense of the lyricism of the experience and the figure of the narrator in the epic, which, most often being fictional, fictitious roles, do not allow identification” (S. 69). “ Narrator (narrator)
II. Textbooks, teaching aids
1) Kayser W. Das sprachliche Kunstwerk. “In individual stories told by a role-narrator, it usually happens that the narrator reports events as experienced by him. This form is called Ich-Erzählung. Its opposite is Er-Erzählung, in which the author or fictitious narrator is not in the position of a participant in the events. The third possibility of narrative form is usually the epistolary form, in which the role of the narrator is shared simultaneously by many characters or, as in the case of Werther, only one of the participants in the correspondence is present. As you can see, we are talking about modifying the first-person narration. Nevertheless, the deviations are so profound that this option can be characterized as a special form: there is no narrator who conveys events, knowing their course and final outcome, but only perspective dominates. Already Goethe rightfully ascribed a dramatic character to the epistolary form” (pp. 311-312). 2) Corman B.O. Studying the text of a work of art. “ One’s own life, biography, inner world in many ways serve as source material for the writer, but this source material, like any life material, is subject to processing and only then acquires general meaning, becoming a fact of art<...>The basis of the author’s artistic image (as well as the entire work as a whole) is ultimately the worldview, ideological position, and creative concept of the writer” (p. 10). “In the excerpt from “Dead Souls” the subject of speech is not identified. Everything that is described (the chaise, the gentleman sitting in it, the men) exists as if by itself, and we do not notice the speaker of the speech when directly perceiving the text. Such a carrier of speech, not identified, not named, dissolved in the text, is defined by the term narrator(sometimes called by the author). In an excerpt from Turgenev's story, the speaker is identified. It is quite obvious to the reader that everything described in the text is perceived by the one who speaks. But the identification of the subject of speech in Turgenev’s text is limited mainly by its name (“I”).<...>We will further denote such a speaker of speech, which differs from the narrator primarily in name, by the term personal narrator. In the third excerpt (from “The Tale of How Ivan Ivanovich Quarreled with Ivan Nikiforovich”) we see a new degree of identification of the subject of speech in the text.<...>For the speaker, the objects are Ivan Ivanovich and his amazing bekesha with smushkas. And for the author and reader, the subject of speech himself, with his naive pathos, simple-minded envy and Mirgorod narrow-mindedness, becomes the object. A speaker who openly organizes the entire text with his personality is called storyteller. A story told in a sharply characteristic manner, reproducing the vocabulary and syntax of the speaker and intended for the listener, is called a skaz” (p. 33-34). 3) Grekhnev V.A. Verbal image and literary work: A book for teachers. “...this suggests a distinction between two main narrative forms: from author's face And from the narrator's point of view. The first type has two options: objective And subjective" "IN objectively author's In the narrative, the stylistic norm of the author’s speech reigns supreme, not obscured by any deviations into character speech.<...>“The subjective form of the author’s narrative, on the contrary, prefers to demonstrate manifestations of the author’s “I”, his subjectivity, not constrained by any restrictions, except perhaps those that affect the area of taste” (pp. 167-168). “It includes three varieties<«рассказовое повествование» - N.T.>: storyteller's narration, conventional story, tale. They differ from each other in the degree of objectification and the measure of speech color. If the objectification of the narrator from the first type of narration to the last becomes less and less noticeable, then the degree of colorfulness of the word, its individualizing energy, clearly increases.<...> Storyteller's story one way or another attached to the character: this is his word, no matter how weakened the individualizing principle in it was.” “In Gogol’s stories “The Nose” and “The Overcoat”<...>as if some formless narrator is grimacing in front of us, constantly changing intonations<...>this subject is, in essence, a multitude of persons, an image of mass consciousness...” “..in the tale<...>Social and professional dialects sound more noticeable.” “The bearer of a tale, its speech subject, even if he is endowed with the status of a character, always fades into the shadows in front of his depicted word” (pp. 171-177).
III. Special studies
1) Croce B. Aesthetics as a science of expression and as general linguistics. Part 1. Theory. [Regarding the formula “style is a person”]: “Thanks to such an erroneous identification, many legendary ideas were born regarding the personality of artists, just as it seemed impossible that the one who expresses magnanimous feelings should not himself in practical life be a noble and magnanimous person , or so that the one who often resorts to dagger blows in his dramas himself in a specific life is not the culprit of any of them” (p. 60). 2) Vinogradov V.V.“Queen of Spades” style // Vinogradov V.V. Favorite works. About the language of artistic prose. (5. The image of the author in the composition “The Queen of Spades”). “The subject of the narrative itself - the “image of the author” - fits into the sphere of this depicted reality. It is a form of complex and contradictory relationships between the author’s intention, between the fantasized personality of the writer and the faces of the characters.” “The narrator in The Queen of Spades, at first not identified by either name or pronouns, enters the circle of players as one of the representatives of secular society.<...>The story has already begun<...>the repetition of vaguely personal forms creates the illusion of the author’s inclusion in this society. Such an understanding is also encouraged by the order of words, which expresses not the narrator’s objective detachment from the events being reproduced, but his subjective empathy for them and active participation in them.” 3) Bakhtin M.M. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. a) The problem of text in linguistics, philology and other humanities. Experience in Philosophical Analysis. “We find (perceive, understand, sense, feel) the author in every work of art. For example, in a work of painting we always feel its author (the artist), but we never we see him the way we see the images he depicts. We feel it in everything as a pure depicting principle (depicting subject), and not as a depicted (visible) image. And in a self-portrait we do not see, of course, the author depicting it, but only the image of the artist. Strictly speaking, the image of the author is a contradictio in adiecto” (p. 288). “Unlike the real author, the image of the author created by him is deprived of direct participation in the real dialogue (he participates in it only through the whole work), but he can participate in the plot of the work and speak in the depicted dialogue with the characters (the conversation of the “author” with Onegin). The speech of the depicting (real) author, if there is one, is speech of a fundamentally special type, which cannot lie on the same plane as the speech of the characters” (p. 295). b) From records of 1970-1971. “Primary (not created) and secondary author (image of the author created by the primary author). Primary author - natura non creata quae creat; secondary author - natura creata quae creat. The image of the hero is natura creata quae non creat. The primary author cannot be an image: he eludes any figurative representation. When we try to figuratively imagine the primary author, we ourselves create his image, that is, we ourselves become the primary author of this image.<...>The primary author, if he speaks directly, cannot simply be writer: nothing can be said on behalf of the writer (the writer turns into a publicist, moralist, scientist, etc.)” (p. 353). “Self-portrait. The artist portrays himself as an ordinary person, and not as an artist, the creator of a picture” (p. 354). 4) Stanzel F. K. Theorie des Erzählens. “If the narrator lives in the same world as the characters, then he is, in traditional terminology, an I-narrator. If the narrator exists outside the world of characters, then we are talking about the traditional terminology of He-narration. The ancient concepts of I- and He-narration have already created many misconceptions, because the criterion for distinguishing them, the personal pronoun, in the case of I-narration refers to the narrator, and in the case of He-narration, to the bearer of the narration, who is not the narrator. Also sometimes in He-narration, for example, in “Tom Jones” or in “The Magic Mountain”, there is an I-narrator. It is not the presence of the first person pronoun in the narrative (excluding, of course, dialogue) that is decisive, but the place of its bearer inside or outside the fictional world of the novel or story.<...>An essential criterion for both determining<...>- not the relative frequency of the presence of one of the two personal pronouns I or He/She, but the question of identity and resp. non-identity of the realm of existence in which the narrator and characters live. The narrator of "David Copperfield" is I-narrator (narrator), because he lives in the same world as the other characters in the novel<...>The narrator of “Tom Jones” is a narrator or an autorial narrator, because he exists outside the fictional world in which Tom Jones, Sophia Western live...” (S. 71-72). 5) Kozhevnikova N.A. Types of narration in Russian literature of the 19th-20th centuries. “The types of narration in a work of art are organized by a designated or undesignated subject of speech and are clothed in appropriate speech forms. The dependence between the subject of speech and the type of narration is, however, indirect. In third-person narration, either the omniscient author or the anonymous narrator expresses himself. The first person may belong directly to the writer, or to a specific narrator, or to a conventional narrator, in each of these cases differing in a different degree of certainty and different possibilities.” “Not only the subject of speech determines the verbal embodiment of the narrative, but also the forms of speech themselves evoke with a certain certainty the idea of the subject, build his image” (pp. 3-5).
QUESTIONS
1. Try to divide the definitions that we grouped under the heading “Author and the image of the author” into two categories: those in which the concept of “author” is mixed with the concepts of “narrator”, “storyteller”, and those that aim to distinguish the first concept from the two others. What are the delimitation criteria? Is it possible to more or less accurately define the concept of “image of the author”? 2. Compare those definitions of the subject of the image in a work of art that belong to V.V. Vinogradov and M.M. Bakhtin. What content do scientists put into the phrase “image of the author”? In what case is he distinguished from the author-creator, on the one hand, and from the narrator and narrator, on the other? What criteria or concepts are used to differentiate? Compare from this point of view the definitions of M.M. Bakhtin and I.B. Rodnyanskaya. 3. Compare our definitions of the concepts “narrator” and “storyteller”: first, taken from reference and educational literature, and then from special works (exactly as you did with the definitions of the concepts “author”, “image of the author”) . Try to identify different ways and options to solve the problem. What place does the judgment of Franz K. Stanzel occupy among them?
