Отражение речевой стихии времени в произведениях Михаила Зощенко

In his works Mikhail Zoshchenko presented a brilliant sense of the common language which developed in Russia after the revolution of 1917, i.e. in a period of turbulent political changes and numerous social contradictions. The phenomenon of this writer is based on the constant interest of both readers and researchers in the specific language of his works. This is reflected in numerous statements by Zoshchenko’s characters. In their responses, dialogues and monologues there are a number of orthoepic, spelling, grammatical, word-forming, semantic, stylistic and syntactic deficiencies. The deviations concern the principles of inflection, declination, generic belonging, an illogical and non-normative expression relationships. The issues above are analysed in the present article. In Zoshchenko’s works, along with normative language, there coexist phenomena that are far from literary standards. His texts reflect the spoken language, which, like real communication, differs much from the normalized literary language. In order to show the spiritual and moral transformation of a man, Zoshchenko revealed and judged various distortions and defects in the post-revolutionary life of Russia. The writer chose for this short forms of narration – the short story, a tale, a sketch, a humoresque. The language of Zoshchenko’s works is characterized by the crossing of various semantic and stylistic structures. In one context, inherently incompatible words and expressions are combined. This technique generates many semantic and stylistic shifts. In fact, Zoshchenko reflected the language that was spoken by many people in the post-revolutionary period. The writer tried to represent much of the speech of that time and use it humorously.

ORIGIN OF THE TERM "SATIRE" IN FICTION

The article provides an in-depth analysis of the history of the origin of the term satire types of satire, definitions of the term satire in encyclopedias and scientific dictionaries. Representatives of satire in Russian, English and Uzbek literature are also mentioned. The article also includes opinions of famous scholars on satire, as well as their translation into Uzbek. The genre of satire has evolved since ancient times and covered almost all types of fiction. The satirist writers exposed the social events of the period in which they lived with humor and satire. They put the final conclusion on their works to readers themselves. Satirical works delight readers, they are immortal. In ancient Roman literature, Quintus Horace Flaccus, Detsim Junior Juvenile, Menippus Gadarsky elevated satire, while in English literature Daniel Defoe, Jonathan Swift, in American literature Mark Twain left a deep imprint in the hearts of readers with their works. In Russian literature, the works of Nikolai Gogol, Mikhail Saltikov-Shchedrin, Mikhail Zoshchenko further flourished the genre of satire. In Uzbek literature, the first examples of satire appeared in folklore, and later flourished in written literature. In the genre of satire, our ancestors Alisher Navoi, Turdi, Makhmur, Gulkhani, Haziq, Muqimi, Zavkiy created. Hamza Hakimzoda Niyazi, Abdulla Kodiri, Ghazi Yunus, Sofizoda, Gafrur Gulam, Abdulla Kahhor, Said Ahmad, Nemat Aminov, Sadulla Siyoev also contributed the further development of satire. The purpose of the article is to analyze the status of satire as a genre, the system of artistic interpretation of satirical works, the specific artistic expression of the moral and philosophical worldview and the stages of formation and development of this genre, its dynamics and its new forms, comparative-historical, comparative-typological analysis. Theoretical methods were used: comparative analysis, synthesis, comparative induction, deduction, and comparative-historical analysis. In results the genesis of the satire genre, the historical, theoretical and poetic foundations of the satire genre and the stages of its formation were established. The most common types of satire were analyzed. Conclusion 1. The folklore roots of satire and the peculiarities of satirical images in oral folklore have been identified. 2. The problem of the genesis of the genre of satire was considered on the basis of world artistic-philosophical, socio-cultural thinking. 3. The problem of the genre of satire is covered in the comparative literary aspect. 4. The peculiarities of the classification and types of the genre of satire were determined.

Decoding the 1920s: A Reader for Advanced Learners in Russian

The materials presented in this book were developed for an advanced-level content-based Russian language course at Portland State University entitled “Russian Literature of the Twentieth Century: The 1920s.” Literature of this period is a major part of the Russian canon, but is notoriously difficult for learners of Russian to read in the original, due both to its stylistic complexity and the relative obscurity of its historical, political, and cultural references. And yet, this decade is crucial for understanding Russia – not only in the Soviet period, but also today. This was the period, when Mikhail Zoshchenko, Isaak Babel, Mikhail Bulgakov, and Andrei Platonov meticulously documented the birth of the “New Soviet Man,” his “newspeak” and Soviet bureaucratese; when Alexandra Kollontai, a Marxist revolutionary and a diplomat, wrote essays and fiction on the “New Soviet Woman”; when numerous satirical works were created; when Babel experimented with a literary representation of dialects (e.g.,Odessa Russian or Jewish Russian). These varieties of language have not disappeared. Bureaucrats still use some form of bureaucratese. Numerous contemporary TV shows imitate the dialects that Babel described. Moreover, Bulgakov’s “Heart of a Dog” gave rise, due largely to its film adaptation, to catch-phrases that still appear throughout contemporary Russian media, satirical contexts, and everyday conversation. Thus, the Russian literature of the 1920s does not belong exclusively to the past, but has relevance and interpretive power for the present, and language learners who wish to pursue a career in humanities, media analysis, analytical translation, journalism, or international relations must understand this period and the linguistic patterns it established.

“Now on Zoshchenko”: Adamovich, Teffi and “the anxiety of influence”

Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, Mikhail Zoshchenko was one of the most popular Soviet writers. His literary works were published and actively discussed in the USSR, and by the Russian Diaspora abroad. Zoshchenko’s name started to appear in the writings of an émigré critic Georgy Adamovich at the very beginning of his literary career. This article reconstructs the evolution of Adamovich’s opinions about Zoshchenko’s literary talent. In particular, the author analyzes a forgotten review of Zoshchenko’s novel “M.P. Siniagin (Memoirs of Michel Siniagin)”, that appeared in the Paris newspaper “Poslednie Novosti” on March 12, 1931, and has been never reprinted since. The Adamovich’s review prompted Teffi (Nadezhda Lokhvitskaia-Buchinskaia) to send him a private letter — published here for the first time — in which she formulated her understanding of Zoshchenko’s artistic manner (“He isn’t a writer. He is a humorist”), perhaps dictated by “jealousy” towards another satirist and “the anxiety of influence” in her own literary work.

The Serapion Brothers in the assessment of the critics of the russian diaspora

The author of the article studied the assessment of the literary group Serapinovy brothers by the critics of the Russian diaspora – Georgy Adamovich and Alexander Yashchenko. Adamovich was called the best critic of emigration, he enjoyed a well-deserved prestige. All critical articles by Georgy Adamovich are distinguished by their objectivity. He deeply understood the essence of works of art. This allowed the critic to accurately predict the further paths of the creative development of the author, about whom he wrote. The article reconstructs the presence of Georgy Adamovich at the meetings of the Serapion brothers in those years when he was still in Russia. The critic's articles also indicate his rejection of folklore, the stylization of that part of the serapions who called themselves „eastern” and followed the folk tradition. The critic gives a positive assessment to the writers who were guided by Western literature. In his articles, Georgy Adamovich gives an objective assessment to the poets of the literary group Nikolai Tikhonov and Elizaveta Polonskaya. The fate of these poets testifies to the fact that the critic understood exactly the prospects of their development. The author of the article investigated the reception by Alexander Yashchenko of the Russian literary group. Alexander Yashchenko was the publisher and main critic of the New Russian Book magazine, which was published in Berlin. The author of the article determined that Yashchenko was interested in the literary life of Russia and understood the laws of the literary process of the 1920s. Alexander Yashchenko, in an article on the development of Russian literature from 1917 to 1922, calls the writers of the Serapion Brothers literary group as an important phenomenon of this period. The critic examines the work of Vsevolod Ivanov, Mikhail Zoshchenko and Konstantin Fedin. He objectively evaluates their works, points out the possibilities of creative development. The author of the article notes that criticism of Alexander Yashchenko is characterized by depth and objectivity. Back in 1922, the critic saw that the work of Yevgeny Zamyatin influenced the writers of the Serapion Brothers literary group. Scientists drew attention to this only at the end of the twentieth century.