Preview

Voprosy literatury

Advanced search
Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Gusev, The Bishop [Arkhierey], The Death of Ivan Ilyich [Smert’ Ivana Ilyicha]: comparing stylistic systems

https://doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2019-1-107-120

Abstract

The author undertakes comparative analysis of A. Chekhov’s and L. Tolstoy’s stylistic systems in order to identify similarities and differences in their respective worldviews. The article quotes Chekhov’s repeated and unequivocal dismissals of Tolstoy’s ideas about progress, science, and the nation in his letters and notebooks, and references Chekhov’s covert polemic with Tolstoy in his short stories. For the purposes of the analysis, the author considers the stories dealing with the protagonist’s death (Gusev, The Bishop [Arkhierey], and The Death of Ivan Ilyich [Smert’ Ivana Ilyicha]). The study raises the issue of artistic means corresponding to the artistic agenda, and points out the writers’ contrasting attitudes to their characters: Tolstoy’s detachment as opposed to Chekhov’s self-identification. Another focus is on the tropes used to describe the characters’ inner life: Tolstoy’s specific and bodily, or ‘pagan’, imagery versus Chekhov’s lyrical motifs. Finally, the article disproves V. Nabokov’s criticism of Chekhov using ‘any odd’ word.

About the Author

T. A. Gordon
Hofstra University (NY)
United States

Tatiana A. Gordon - Doctor of Education.

1000 Hempstead Turnpike, Hempstead, 11549, New York



References

1. Belchikov, N., ed. (1974-1983). The complete works and letters of A. Chekhov (30 vols). Works (18 vols). Letters (12 vols). Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.)

2. Bloom, L. (1993). The transition from infancy to language: Acquiring the power of expression. New York: Columbia U. P.

3. Bykov, D. (2010). Calendar. Talks about the things that matter. Moscow: AST, Redaktsiya Eleny Shubinoy. (In Russ.)

4. Derman, A. (1929). A portrait of the artist Chekhov. Moscow: Mir. (In Russ.)

5. Eichenwald, Y. (1905). Chekhov: The crucial aspects of his work. Moscow: Nauchnoe slovo. (In Russ.)

6. Gromov, M. et al. (1977). Notes. In: N. Belchikov, ed., The complete works and letters of A. Chekhov (30 vols). Works (18 vols). Vol. 10: <Stories, novels> 1898-1903. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 331-488. (In Russ.)

7. Kapustin, D. (2010). Anton Chekhov’s ‘round the world trip’. Noviy Mir, 7, pp. 151-162. (In Russ.)

8. Katsnelson, S. (2001). The category of language and thinking. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoy kultury. (In Russ.)

9. Lelis, E. (2013). Subtext as a lingvo-aesthetic category in A. P. Che­khov’s prose. Izhevsk: Udmurtskiy un-t. (In Russ.)

10. Nabokov, V. (1998). Lectures on Russian literature. Translated by А. Kurt. Moscow: Nezavisimaya gazeta. (In Russ.)

11. Piaget, J. (1929). The child’s conception of the world. London: Routledge and K. Paul.

12. Protasova, E. (1999). The role of deminutus in child’s speech. In: Problems of child’s speech 1999. Proceedings of the All-Russian conference. St. Petersburg, 24-26 Nov. 1999. St. Petersburg: RGPU im. A. I. Gertsena, pp. 153-157. (In Russ.)

13. Zeitlin, S. (2000). Language and child: The child’s speech linguistics. Moscow: Vlados. (In Russ.)


Review

For citations:


Gordon T.A. Gusev, The Bishop [Arkhierey], The Death of Ivan Ilyich [Smert’ Ivana Ilyicha]: comparing stylistic systems. Voprosy literatury. 2019;(1):107-120. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2019-1-107-120

Views: 682


ISSN 0042-8795 (Print)