<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">voplit</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Вопросы литературы</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Voprosy literatury</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">0042-8795</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Avtonomnaja nekommercheskaja organizacija Redakcija zhurnala kritiki i literaturovedenija «Voprosy literatury»</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.31425/0042-8795-2023-3-13-35</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">voplit-633</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>ИСТОРИЯ ИДЕЙ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>HISTORY OF IDEAS</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Эрих Ауэрбах: «Историческая топология» в эпоху постистории</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Erich Auerbach: Historical Typology in the era of post-history</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Махлин</surname><given-names>В. Л.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Makhlin</surname><given-names>V. L.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Виталий Львович Махлин, кандидат филологических наук, доктор философских наук</p><p>117418</p><p>Нахимовский проспект, д. 51/21</p><p>Москва</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Vitaly L. Makhlin, Candidate of Philology, Doctor of Philosophy</p><p>117418</p><p>51/21 Nakhimovsky Av.</p><p>Moscow</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">vitmahlin@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>Институт научной информации по общественным наукам Российской академии наук</institution><country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences&#13;
of the Russian Academy of Sciences</institution><country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2023</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>13</day><month>06</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>0</volume><issue>3</issue><fpage>13</fpage><lpage>35</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Avtonomnaja nekommercheskaja organizacija Redakcija zhurnala kritiki i literaturovedenija «Voprosy literatury», 2023</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2023</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Avtonomnaja nekommercheskaja organizacija Redakcija zhurnala kritiki i literaturovedenija «Voprosy literatury»</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Avtonomnaja nekommercheskaja organizacija Redakcija zhurnala kritiki i literaturovedenija «Voprosy literatury»</copyright-holder><license xlink:href="https://www.voplit.com/jour/about/submissions#copyrightNotice" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>https://www.voplit.com/jour/about/submissions#copyrightNotice</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://www.voplit.com/jour/article/view/633">https://www.voplit.com/jour/article/view/633</self-uri><abstract><p>   Статья — попытка с опорой на комментированное издание переводов работ Э. Ауэрбаха «Историческая топология», во-первых, проанализировать причины трудностей чтения и понимания историко-филологического мышления Ауэрбаха; во-вторых, описать современную ситуацию в литературоведении и других гуманитарных дисциплинах; в-третьих, прокомментировать принципы исследования, которыми руководствовался Ауэрбах в своем понимании историзма и историчности.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Following the Russian publication of a comprehensive commented collection of Auerbach’s works entitled Historical Topology [Istoricheskaya topologiya] (2022), the article discusses the problems of the German philologist’s legacy both in retrospect and with a look into the future. The choice of the angle comes from the fact that Soviet scholars were cut off from the wealth of the scholarly-humanitarian, historical-cultural, and philosophical traditions and factors that (especially those typical of Germany) largely defined Auerbach’s historical-philological thinking and, by the same token, that a certain inaccessibility of his books and articles has long frustrated contemporary Russian philologists and other scholars in the humanities. Given the renewed interest in Auerbach’s theory and method in the West in the last decades (upon the end of the modern era in the last century), the author concludes that his practical reconsideration of the traditional meaning of historicism and historicity and especially his understanding of what falls under the modern term of interdisciplinarity indicates considerable research and learning potential for humanities scholars.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>Э. Ауэрбах</kwd><kwd>М. Бахтин</kwd><kwd>Э. Курциус</kwd><kwd>К. Фосслер</kwd><kwd>Л. Шпитцер</kwd><kwd>Новое время</kwd><kwd>историчность</kwd><kwd>повседневность</kwd><kwd>практический семинар по мировой истории</kwd><kwd>романо-германская филология</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>E. Auerbach</kwd><kwd>M. Bakhtin</kwd><kwd>E. Curtius</kwd><kwd>K. Vossler</kwd><kwd>L. Spitzer</kwd><kwd>the modern era</kwd><kwd>historicity</kwd><kwd>the everyday</kwd><kwd>a practical seminar in world history</kwd><kwd>Romance and German studies</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Аверинцев С. С. Филология // Краткая литературная энциклопедия. В 9 тт. / Под ред. А. А. Суркова. Т. 7. М.: Советская энциклопедия, 1972. С. 973–979.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Averintsev, S. (1972). Philology. In: A. Surkov, ed., A brief literary encyclopae dia (9 vols). Vol. 7. Moscow: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya, pp. 973-979. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ауэрбах Э. Мимесис. Изображение действительности в западноевропейской литературе / Перевод с нем. А. В. Михайлова, Ю. И. Архипова. Предисл. Г. М. Фридлендера. М.: Прогресс, 1976.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Auerbach, E. (1921). Zur Technik der Frührenaissancenovelle in Italien und Frankreich: Dissertation. Heidelberg: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung. (In German).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ауэрбах Э. Филология мировой литературы / Перевод с нем. Ю. Ивановой, П. Лещенко, А. Лызлова, под ред. В. Л. Махлина // Вопросы литературы. 2004. № 5. С. 123–139.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Auerbach, E. (1976). Mimesis: The representation of reality in Western literature. Translated by А. Mikhaylov and Y. Arkhipov. Foreword by G. Fridlender. Moscow: Progress. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ауэрбах Э. Данте — поэт земного мира / Перевод с нем. Г. В. Вдовиной. М.; СПб.: Центр гуманитарных инициатив, 2016.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Auerbach, E. (2004). The philology of world literature. Translated by Y. Ivanova, P. Leshchenko, A. Lyzlov and V. Makhlin. Voprosy Literatury, 5, pp. 123-139. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ауэрбах Э. Историческая топология / Перевод с нем., предисл. Д. С. Колчигина. Под ред. Ф. Б. Успенского. М.: Дом ЯСК, 2022.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Auerbach, E. (2007a). Romantik und Reаlismus. In: K. Barck and M. Treml, eds., Erich Auerbach: Geschichte und Aktualität eines europäischen Philologen. Berlin: Kadmos, pp. 427-0438. (In German).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Бахтин М. М. Фрейдизм. Формальный метод в литературоведении. Марксизм и философия языка. Статьи. М.: Лабиринт, 2000.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Auerbach, E. (2007b). Über die ernste Nachahmung des Alltäglichen. In: K. Barck and M. Treml, eds., Erich Auerbach: Geschichte und Aktualität eines europäischen Philologen. Berlin: Kadmos, pp. 439-465. (In German).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Бахтин М. М. Собр. соч. в 7 тт. Т. 3 / Под ред. С. Г. Бочарова, В. В. Кожинова. М.: Языки славянских культур, 2012.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Auerbach, E. (2016). Dante: Poet of the secular world. Translated by G. Vdovina. Moscow, St. Petersburg: Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Виноградов В. В. Стилистика, теория поэтической речи, поэтика. М.: АН СССР, 1963.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Auerbach, E. (2022). Historical topology. Translated by D. Kolchigin. Ed. by F. Uspensky. Moscow: Dom YASK. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Гадамер Г.-Г. Актуальность прекрасного / Перевод с нем. А. В. Михайлова, В. С. Малахова, В. В. Бибихина и др. М.: Искусство, 1991.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bakhtin, M. (2000). Freudianism. The formal method in literary criticism. Marxism and the philosophy of language. Articles. Moscow: Labirint. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Жирмунский В. М. Новейшие течения историко-литературной мысли в Германии // Жирмунский В. М. Из истории западноевропейских литератур. Л.: Наука, 1981. С. 106–124.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bocharov, S. and Kozhinov, V., eds. (2012). The collected works of M. Bakhtin (7 vols). Vol. 3. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskikh kultur. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Замятин Е. И. О сегодняшнем и современном // Замятин Е. И. Я боюсь: Литературная критика. Публицистика. Воспоминания. М.: Наследие, 1999. С. 101–112.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Bode, E. (1995). Mimesis. In: R. G. Renner and E. Habekost, eds., Lexikon literaturtheoretischer Werke. Stuttgart: Alfred Kröner, pp. 238-240. (In German).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Медведев П. Н. Формальный метод в литературоведении. Л.: Прибой, 1928.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Fleischman, S. (1996). Medieval vernacular and the myth of monoglossia: A conspiracy of linguistics and philology. In: S. Lerer, ed., Literary history and the challenge of philology: The legacy of Erich Auerbach. Stanford: Stanford U. P., pp. 92-104.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Михайлов А. В. Избранное: Историческая поэтика и герменевтика. СПб.: СПГУ, 2006.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Gadamer, H.-G. (1991). The relevance of the beautiful. Translated by А. Mikhaylov, V. Malakhov, V. Bibikhin et al. Moscow: Iskusstvo. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Михайлов А. В. Актуальные проблемы современной теории литературы // Михайлов А. В. Статьи по теории литературы. М.: Дмитрий Сечин, 2018. С. 462–476.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Gadamer, H.-G. (1998). Erinnerungen an Erich Auerbach. In: G. Pickerodt and W. Busch, eds., Wahrnehmen. Lesen. Deuten: Erich Auerbachs Lektüre der Moderne. Frankfurt a. M.: Klostermann, pp. 13-14. (In German).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Плотников Н. С. Жизнь и история. Философская программа Вильгельма Дильтея. М.: Дом интеллектуальной книги, 2000.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Link-Heer, U. (2007). ‘Die sich vollziehende Standardisierung der Erdkultur’ — Auerbachs Prognose. In: K. Barck and M. Treml, eds., Erich Auerbach: Geschichte und Aktualität eines europäischen Philologen. Berlin: Kadmos, pp. 307-322. (In German).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Проблемы литературной формы: Сб. ст. О. Вальцеля, В. Дибелиуса, К. Фосслера, Л. Шпитцера / Перевод с нем. Под ред. и с предисл. В. М. Жирмунского. Л.: Academia, 1928.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Medvedev, P. (1928). The formal method in literary criticism. Leningrad: Priboy. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Пумпянский Л. В. К истории русского классицизма // Пумпянский Л. В. Классическая традиция. Собрание трудов по истории русской литературы. М.: Языки русской культуры, 2000. С. 30–157.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Mikhaylov, A. (2006). Selected works: Historical poetics and hermeneutics. St. Petersburg: SPGU. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Синтез современности: Руины ГАХН и постдисциплинарность / Под ред. Н. Сазонова, А. Хенниг. М.: Изд. Института Гайдара, 2021.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Mikhaylov, A. (2018). Topical issues of modern literary theory. In: A. Mikhaylov, Articles on literary theory. Moscow: Dmitry Sechin, pp. 462-476. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Уэллек Р., Уоррен О. Теория литературы / Перевод с англ. А. Зверева, В. Харитонова, И. Ильина. Вступ. ст. А. Аникста, коммент. Б. Гиленсона. М.: Прогресс, 1978.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Nichols, S. G. (1996). Philology in Auerbach’s drama of (literary) history. In: S. Lerer, ed., Literary history and the challenge of philology: The legacy of Erich Auerbach. Stanford: Stanford U. P., pp. 63-77.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit20"><label>20</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Шайтанов И. О. История с пропущенными главами: Бахтин и Пинский в контексте советского литературоведения // Вопросы литературы. 2011. № 3. С. 233–274.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Plotnikov, N. (2000). Life and history. Wilhelm Dilthey’s philosophic programme. Moscow: Dom intellektualnoy knigi. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit21"><label>21</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Auerbach E. Zur Technik der Frührenaissancenovelle in Italien und Frankreich: Dissertation. Heidelberg: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung, 1921.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Porter, J. I., ed. (2014). Time, history, and literature. Selected essays of Erich Auerbach. Translated by J. O. Newman. Princeton: Princeton U. P. Pumpyansky, L. (2000). On the history of Russian Classicism. In: L. Pumpyansky, The classical tradition. Collected works on the history of Russian literature. Moscow: Yazyki russkoy kultury, pp. 30-157. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit22"><label>22</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Auerbach E. Romantik und Reаlismus // Erich Auerbach: Geschichte und Aktualität eines europäischen Philologen / Hrsg. von K. Barck, M. Treml. Berlin: Kadmos, 2007a. S. 427–438.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Sazonov, N. and Hennig, A., eds. (2021). Synthesis of modernity: Ruins of GAKhN and postdisciplinarity. Moscow: Izd. Instituta Gaydara. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit23"><label>23</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Auerbach E. Über die ernste Nachahmung des Alltäglichen // Erich Auerbach: Geschichte und Aktualität eines europäischen Philologen. 2007b. S. 439–465.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Shaytanov, I. (2011). A story with missing chapters: Bakhtin and Pinsky in the context of Soviet literary studies. Voprosy Literatury, 3, pp. 233-274. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit24"><label>24</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Auerbach E. Time, history, and literature. Selected essays of Erich Auerbach / Translated by J. O. Newman. Ed. by J. I. Porter. Princeton: Princeton U. P., 2014.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Stierle, K. (1979). Altertumswissenschaftliche Hermeneutik und die Entstehung der Neuphilologie. In: A. Horstmann, H. Flashar and K. Gründer, eds., Philologie und Hermeneutik im 19. Jahrhundert. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, pp. 260-288. (In German).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit25"><label>25</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Bode E. Mimesis // Lexikon literaturtheoretischer Werke / Hrsg. von R. G. Renner, E. Habekost. Stuttgart: Alfred Kröner, 1995. S. 238–240.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Vinogradov, V. (1963). Stylistics, theory of poetic speech, poetics. Moscow: AN SSSR. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit26"><label>26</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Fleischman S. Medieval vernacular and the myth of monoglossia: A conspiracy of linguistics and philology // Literary history and the challenge of philology: The legacy of Erich Auerbach / Ed. by S. Lerer. Stanford: Stanford U. P., 1996. P. 92–104.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Weizbort, L. (2007). Erich Auerbach im Kontext der Historismusdebatte. In: K. Barck and M. Treml, eds., Erich Auerbach: Geschichte und Aktualität eines europäischen Philologen. Berlin: Kadmos, pp. 281-296. (In German).</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit27"><label>27</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Gadamer H.-G. Erinnerungen an Erich Auerbach // Wahrnehmen. Lesen. Deuten: Erich Auerbachs Lektüre der Moderne / Hrsg. von G. Pickerodt, W. Busch. Frankfurt a. M.: Klostermann, 1998. S. 13–14.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Wellek, R. and Warren, A. (1978). Theory of literature. Translated by А. Zverev, V. Kharitonov and I. Ilyin. Moscow: Progress. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit28"><label>28</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Link-Heer U. «Die sich vollziehende Standardisierung der Erdkultur» — Auerbachs Prognose // Erich Auerbach: Geschichte und Aktualität eines europäischen Philologen. 2007. S. 307–322.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Zamyatin, E. (1999). On the present and the modern. In: E. Zamyatin, I’m afraid: Literary criticism. Journalism. Reminiscences. Moscow: Nasledie, pp. 101-112. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit29"><label>29</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Nichols S. G. Philology in Auerbach’s drama of (literary) history // Literary history and the challenge of philology: The legacy of Erich Auerbach. 1996. P. 63–77.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Zhirmunsky, V., ed. (1928). Problems of the literary form: Collected papers by O. Walzel, W. Dibelius, K. Fossler, L. Spitzer. Translated by V. Zhirmunsky. Leningrad: Academia. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit30"><label>30</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Stierle K. Altertumswissenschaftliche Hermeneutik und die Entstehung der Neuphilologie // Philologie und Hermeneutik im 19. Jahrhundert / Hrsg. von A. Horstmann, H. Flashar, K. Gründer. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1979. S. 260–288.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Zhirmunsky, V. (1981). The latest trends of historical and literary thought in Germany. In: V. Zhirmunsky, From the history of Western European literatures. Leningrad: Nauka, pp. 106-124. (In Russ.)</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit31"><label>31</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Weizbort L. Erich Auerbach im Kontext der Historismusdebatte // Erich Auerbach: Geschichte und Aktualität eines europäischen Philologen. 2007. S. 281–296.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Weizbort L. Erich Auerbach im Kontext der Historismusdebatte // Erich Auerbach: Geschichte und Aktualität eines europäischen Philologen. 2007. S. 281–296.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
