Марина Сергеевна Киселева, доктор философских наук, главный научный сотрудник, профессор кафедры истории и философии науки
главный научный сотрудник
Область научных интересов - интеллектуальная история, древнерусская книжная культура, методология гуманитарных наук, междисциплинарные проблемы изучения человека. Автор монографий «Учение книжное: текст и контекст древнерусской книжности» (2000), «Интеллектуальный выбор России второй половины XVII - начала XVIII века» (2011), ответственный редактор ряда сборников научных статей и автор около 200 статей по указанной научной проблематике
Marina Sergeevna Kiseleva, Doctor of Philosophy, senior research fellow, professor at the Department of History and Philosophy of Science
senior research fellow
Academic interests include intellectual history, ancient Russian book learning, the methodology of the humanities, inter-disciplinary problems of studying man. Author of monographs: Book Learning: Text and Context of Book Culture in Ancient Russia [Uchenie knizhnoe: tekst i kontekst drevnerusskoy knizhnosti] (2000), The Intellectual Choice of Russia in the Period from the 1650s to early 1700s [Intellektualniy vybor Rossii vtoroy poloviny XVII - nachala XVIII veka] (2011), executive editor of several collections of research papers and author of over 200 articles on the aforementioned topics.
В статье исследуется «время после» как «литературный факт» романа Ю. Тынянова «Смерть Вазир-Мухтара» (1927). Неудача декабристов 1825 года, являясь историческим фоном романа, делает понятной проблему постреволюции. Автор выявляет типы времени, их функции в разных главах романа; считает, что измена - главная его идейная тема; доказывает, что Грибоедов - внутреннее «я» героя романа, экзистенция трагической личности, выбирающая верность себе при сопротивлении «времени после». Автор полемизирует с критиками романа Тынянова.
The article deals with ‘the time after’ as a ‘literary fact’ in Tynyanov’s novel The Death of Vazir-Mukhtar [Smert’ Vazir-Mukhtara] (1927). The Russian nobles’ defeated coup at the time before coronation of Emperor Nicholas I in December 1825 serves as the book’s historical setting and elucidates the problem of the ‘post-revolution’. The author examines the different types of time (in chapters devoted to Moscow, St. Petersburg, Tiflis, and Persia, respectively) and their function in the novel. She suggests that it is the protagonist’s, A. Griboyedov’s, existential state that determines the time motif in the book. It is argued that the character divided into Griboyedov and Vazir-Mukhtar demarcates his ‘outer’ and ‘inner’ selves. The book’s ideological epicenter lies in the theme of betrayal. The author goes on to show that, despite the circumstances of the ‘time after’, and his loneliness, Griboyedov stays faithful to himself, no matter how hard it is; he remains a creator, a poet and a playwright, who penned the blacklisted Woe from Wit [Gore ot uma], a professional diplomat at the heart of the frustrated project to boost the trade and industry in the Caucasus, and a man of honour and duty to his friends and family. The paper cites a number of arguments, polemicizing with critics of Tynyanov’s novel.
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.