სჯანი

ფრანგული რომანსის ორგვარი ათვისება

2024-10-16T14:10:54+04:00

In Georgian poetry of the 19th century new types of song poems were widely developed, including romances, its variations and songs modeled on folk poetry. This process finds a peculiar manifestation in Alexander Chavchavadze’s poem “When you loved me...”, composed probably in 1907-1811, after he was summoned from Tambov exile to St. Petersburg for political reasons. The study of the genesis of this poem led us to such texts as Aleksey Merzlyakov’s “To Her (Rondo)” (“You loved me...”, 1806), Vasily Zhukovsky’s “Song. Translated from French” (“When I was loved...”, 1807) and the French source of these translations which remained unknown. As we managed to find out, these poems are translations of a romance without a title by a French poet and playwright Victor-Joseph Etienne de Jouy:

Quand tu m’aimais, inconstante Sophie,

J’étais heureux, je chérissais le jour;

Tu m’as quitté, je déteste la vie,

Ah! mon bonheur n’était que mon amour.

Quand tu m’aimais, le dieu de l’harmonie

Pour te chanter m’inspirait chaque jour;

Tu me quite, j’ai perdu mon génie:

Ah! mon talent n’était que mon amour.

Quand tu m’aimais, aux larmes accessible

Du malheureux je cherchais le sejour

Tu me quite, mon coeur est moins sensible,

Car mes vertus etaient dans mon amour.

The absence of the author's name both in Georgian manuscripts and in publications of Russian translations is explained by the fact that the attribution of this poem to the pen of Etienne de Jouy is first confirmed only in the complete collection of his works (1823). Even in the collection “Le Pouvoir de l'Amour” published in 1821, this poem was presented anonymously. Only in one songbook – Chansonnier du jour. Paris, 1802-1803. – the poem is followed by the author’s initials: V. J. This French poem is also presented in the following collections: Johann Friedrich Reichardt, Le Troubadour italien, français et allemand, Berlin, 1805; Le chansonnier de Bacchus, 1806; Les roses du Vaudeville ou Chansonier du Jour. 1805. This French poem may also be found in collections that have remained outside our attention

It can be assumed with high probability that in the same period the attention of A. Chavchavadze and Russian poets to this anonymous French poetic text was caused by the romances of Gaspare Spontini and Francois-Adrien Boaldier on the words of Etienne de Jouy’s poem. The detail that the words – inconstante Sophie – are omitted in the Georgian and Russian translations can be explained by the fact that in Gaspare Spontini's scores they are replaced in this form – trope inconstante amie. Obviously, discussing this issue, it is necessary to find out the date of creation of music based on the words of Etienne de Jouy's poem.

Textual comparison indicates that the Georgian translation of the poem was made from the French original. Just one word makes you wonder if A. Chavchavadze also looked at Merzlyakov’s translation. The Russian translations of de Jouy's poem, on the one hand, and the Georgian translation, on the other hand, represent opposite manifestations of the reception of the French romance. The translations by V. Zhukovsky and A. Merzlyakov show a desire to preserve the basic compositional, intonation and content features of the romance. As for A. Chavchavadze’s approach to the translated text it is typologically of a completely different kind. Though his translation repeats the essential components of the romance: melodiousness, the motif of memories, minor intonation, the exclusion of syntactically complex structures and the literary nature of the images, at the same time, there is also a noticeable deviation from the characteristics of the romance, including its brevity. Unlike the French source and its Russian translations, A. Chavchavadze’s translation consists not of three, but of five stanzas, and lexical correspondence is reduced to a minimum. The composition of the poem has been significantly changed: the chorus has been canceled, and identical lines that rhyme with each other have been added in every fourth verse. The poem is constructed in eleven-syllable size, which, although close to the size of the original, at the same time clearly refers to the intertext of intonations and motives that had developed by that time in Georgian lyrics.

The Georgian translation of Etienne de Jouy's poem, which is a hybrid genre variety of vocal lyrics, is a certain analogue of the so-called Russian song, which was formed as a result of crossing formal and semantic components borrowed from French romance and folk song.

ახალი წიგნები

2024-10-17T19:30:55+04:00

„ჟამი შეკრებად ქუათა“ (თეიმურაზ დოიაშვილის თხზულებათა ხუთტომეულის გამოცემის გამო)

2024-10-17T19:20:12+04:00

Teimuraz Doiashvili is well known for both the scientific-literary community and a wide circle of readers. His diverse areas of interest include literary history and theory, versification, galaktionology, and criticism. Doiashvili's research, letters, and monographs are collected in a comprehensive five-volume set. This article provides an analysis of this five-volume collection.

The first volume of works includes essays, reviews, and polemical articles dedicated to issues in the history of Georgian literature. These pieces are distinguished not only by their solutions to various topics but also by the novelty of their questions. In these writings, which address problems in the history of Georgian literature, the works of our classics (Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani, Nikoloz Baratashvili, Ilia Chavchavadze, Akaki Tsereteli, and others) are analyzed not only in terms of the development of national literature but also in the context of European philosophical and theoretical literary thought. These works exemplify complex literary research, as the author does not limit himself to any single methodology but employs various research methods synchronously, according to the specifics of each research issue.

In the last twenty years, Teimuraz Doiashvili has focused extensively on galactionological research. The second volume of his works brings together various scientific studies dedicated to the creativity of Galaktion Tabidze. Each article within this volume contains one or more significant galactionological discoveries. While these discoveries vary in scale, each is of such quality that future galactionologists cannot afford to ignore them. These publications serve as a reliable and noteworthy reference point for researchers aiming to study Galaktion's work in depth.

Teimuraz Doiashvili is a specialist in versification with a precise focus on poetry composition. He has authored works on the poetry of Teimuraz Permiri, Archili, Davit Guramishvili, Nikoloz Baratashvili, Ilia Chavchavadze, Vazha-Pshavela, and Galaktion Tabidze. Additionally, he has written two monographs: "Euphonia of Poetry" and "Anjambemani." The versification studies included in the third volume of his writings span over fifty years of scholarly work.

Teimuraz Doiashvili's contribution to Georgian literary criticism is significant. Coming from a scientific background, he exemplified the importance of thorough theoretical preparation for a critic to become a professional in the field. The fourth volume of his writings collects letters aimed at analyzing current literary processes. Doiashvili is not only a practicing critic but is also deeply interested in the challenges and tasks facing literary criticism. The last part of the fourth volume includes the author's interviews and responses to literary questionnaires, where he shares noteworthy opinions on the current literary process, Georgian criticism, and the issues confronting theoretical-literary thought.

The fifth and final volume of Teimuraz Doiashvili's works opens with the book "Galaktion Uncensored." It is no coincidence that 150 unusual stories about the genius poet were not included in the special volume on galaktionology but were instead printed alongside texts the author describes as amusing literary studies. This volume also features Doiashvili's critical monograph "Tarieli's Will," Chanturological studies, and two pamphlets: "I am Sometimes Given a Rhyme Like Judas" and "And I Stand Before You with a Title." These publications address the crisis situation in modern Georgian literature.

The five-volume collection of Teimuraz Doiashvili's works is a valuable asset for Georgian philology and the humanities in general. The research, letters, and essays presented here are important not only as literary documents reflecting their time but also for addressing several problematic issues in modern Georgian literary studies. Doiashvili's works and articles serve as a tangible example of the responsibility required when writing about literature.

დესაკრალიზებული ირმის მითოლოგემა და მოდერნული პარადიგმა ვაჟა-ფშაველას პროზაში1

2024-10-17T16:48:04+04:00

During the second part of the 19th century, when modern ideas infiltrated art, Vazha-Pshavela established a mythologized realm in Georgian literature. His writings did more than just subtly criticize the dehumanization process as a whole. The author critiqued and artistically declared the new era's dehumanized way of thinking. The mythological realm of Vazha-Pshavela and the origins of myths have been extensively documented. My goal is to study one mythological aspect in his prose, which determines the artistic and ideological features of the writer's entire work.

Considering that the deer is the symbol of Vazha-Pshavela's whole work, the process of confronting the modern era's desacralized consciousness is linked to the deer's mythologeme in his literature. The author transitions from his own creative paradigm, in which the universe is mythologized and sacred for the heroes, to a new ideological-artistic paradigm in which he uses allegory to portray a completely desacrilized and demythologized era. I shall focus on the modern era's thought patterns as they are presented in the article. I shall attempt to convey the meaning of the text in question using the hermeneutic research technique.

In Vazha-Pshavela's works, the depiction of the deer's face is deeply rooted in its mythical significance, symbolizing nature's regenerating force. It's portrayed as a divine creature, not just sacred but also a force against evil, a theme also seen in Christian tradition and echoed in the writer's works.

In Vazha-Pshavela's allegorical work “Deer”, published in 1906, the face of the deer serves a distinct purpose. However, regardless of the specific role it plays in his prose, the underlying mythological significance of the deer is always present. It is intertwined with the idea of the patron of the beasts, ensuring that this mythological motif is consistently honored throughout the narrative.

The patron of the beasts, about whom Vazha-Pshavela's characters, people and animals tell us, with whom hunters are most careful, in the work – "Deer" – is desubstantiated in people's consciousness. Vazha-Pshavela presents this event in an allegorical narrative as a public one, concerning humanity.

Vazha-Pshavela's allegorical narrative echoes Friedrich Nietzsche's concept of the death of God, which symbolizes the loss of sacredness and significance in nature. In the story, Vazha-Pshavela portrays the desacralization of humanity's consciousness by depicting the demise of the patron of the beasts, akin to the death of Pan. This reflects a departure from the reverence for nature and divine entities. It's possible that Vazha-Pshavela's worldview, as depicted in this allegory, contrasts with Nietzsche's idea, where desacralization is viewed positively.

In Vazha-Pshavela's story, by expelling the patron of the beasts from people's consciousness, the god of the rebirth of nature dies, who symbolizes eternal return, renewal and restoration. Man loses the ontological connection, which was the orientation of his existence, the giver of knowledge. With this expulsion, humanity loses its ontological connection, which previously guided its existence and provided knowledge. This act frees humanity from the perceived "will" of God, aiming to liberate individuals from the ontological confusion that modernity has brought upon them.

The process of deer hunting was the path of sacred. Profane hunting was not important to myth and folklore. While hunting, the hunter gained such experience that he could not get in his everyday environment "at home". Therefore, hunting carries the symbolism of spiritual search. Hunting also gained importance in Christian culture – a deer hunter can become a saint.

From the outset of the narrative, there's an implicit presence of the religious community aiming to hunt down the deer. Even the monk, representing both mythical and Christian beliefs, seeks to slay the deer, which symbolizes God. The attempt to transform the act of killing into a sacrificial offering reflects a departure from the true essence of sacramental reality.

In this story, Vazha-Pshavela depicted the desacralization of the consciousness of the modern era by abrogating the mythic-Christian law of the symbolic-allegorical pursuit of the deer. Man still chases the deer, but in a different way, for a different purpose. He doesn't want to hunt a deer, he wants to kill it. This murder should make a person discover a new existential reality – meaninglessness.

In Vazha-Pshavela's writings, the forest serves as a sanctuary for the deer, providing them with a sacred haven devoid of human presence. Within the embrace of nature, they find refuge, a space untouched by human influence. With the desubstantiation of the patron of the beasts, the entire mythic-allegorical paradigm of the forest, deer and patron deity was broken and the traditional mythic content of the forest was also created, so the writer created a new sign for the new artistic-semantic paradigm created in this text in the form of the sea. The chased deer disappeared into the sea.

The essay examines two realms of consciousness. The first is depicted in the story, representing the modern era's new realm of human thought. Here, notions are demythologized and desacralized, devoid of any sacred reality. And the second plane — the mythical model of the world, which is still implied beyond the consciousness of modern man and opposes the first one.

Considering these two planes of consciousness depicted in the work, the topos of the sea, where the deer takes refuge, has a double meaning. For the man of the modern age, the sea is nothing, and is nothingness into which the deer has been driven. And from the second plane of consciousness, the sea for the deer is the essence of nature, like the dense forest, although it is alien and fantastic.

The work also introduces us to the perspective of the society left without a sacred icon. After the annulment of the sacred, the subsequent process of expanding the limit of admission to a person is the individual basis of values, where personal gain and material interests determine one's worth. In the consciousness of people, there is no longer a common correctness and representation of the idea of truth and justice. Their interest is reduced to private material benefits. Expanding the boundaries of permissiveness and individualizing values becomes a sign of destroyed logocentrism. Vazha-Pshavela's allegorical story presents the perspective of the thinking and morality of the 20th century society.

The writer incorporates two significant themes of the modern era into the narrative: urbanization and accelerated pace. The story paints a surreal image where the city becomes the displaced animal's path, while the exaggerated, unrealistic speed of both people and deer takes on allegorical significance, mirroring the accelerated existential and social pace characteristic of modern times.

The worldview change of the modern era was also revealed in Vazha-Pshavela's work by the de-sacralization/demythologizing of the mythologeme of the deer and the patron of the beasts and by substantiating the latter's absence. The comparison/parallel of desacralization revealed in the discussed story with Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophical statement about the death of God as a turning point in humanity's consciousness shows that Vazha-Pshavela saw the change of the era from a deep and broad perspective, and his work is open to reflecting and confronting these changes.

In the discussed story, Vazha-Pshavela depicts the moral and philosophical pathos of the new era. Compared to the poem "Conscience", in which the writer says that people have killed God in their hearts, this work shows the signs of the modern era – desacralization (abolition of the mythical paradigm of deer, hunting deity and forest), delogocentrism, individual basis of values, urbanization, accelerated pace of life. This text also confronts the modern inertia and man's desire for the divine, be it in mythical or Christian form, the inner rightness and aspiration is unchanged.

Vazha-Pshavela, rooted in myth-making as the cornerstone of his artistic philosophy, also portrays the fracture of mythical thought. His literary exploration of the desacralization and demythologizing of consciousness in the modern era marks a novelty and innovation within both his own body of work and the broader Georgian literary paradigm of that time.

ადამიანის ცნების დეკონსტრუქციის ანალიზი არტურ კლარკის „კოსმოსური ოდისეა 2001-ში“

2024-10-17T16:53:35+04:00

For the last decade, the topic of Artificial intelligence (AI) has been on the boil. A Few years ago, a significant milestone came about in the history of AI: On November 30, 2022, a new generation of AI chatbots was launched. The brisk evolution of AI technology and the potential risks associated with this development caused utmost concern in one part of a global society. This international uneasiness resulted in a further rise of heed in the Science Fiction works that deal with the same trope. As a matter of course, "2001: A Space Odyssey" is among such works.

Generally, science fiction examines the notion of "human" by deconstructing it. This process involves juxtaposing humanity with its creations (such as AI computers, Androids, artificially created biological organisms, etc.). In different areas of science, especially literature and philosophy, deconstruction, as a method, was introduced by French philosopher Jacques Derrida. It is also important to note that the researchers from the related fields firmly believe that deconstruction is one of the main characteristics of both Postmodernism and science fiction. In the third episode of "2001: A Space Odyssey", the notion of mankind is deconstructed by setting against one another a human, David Bowman, and an AI supercomputer, HAL 9000. To adequately dissect and interpret the episode, it is crucial to consider both: "2001: A Space Odyssey" the book written by prominent sci-fi writer Arthur C. Clarke, and the movie version of it by Stanley Kubrick, simultaneously.

What is human?– this issue has been troubling philosophers of all generations ever since the beginning of the history of mankind. Christianity situates humanity in the center of the universe, declaring its uniqueness. As an exceptional being created by an omnipotent god, the human race has the unquenchable urge to replace the deity by replicating the act of divine creation. It could be viewed as one of the prime inducements behind mankind's quest to bring into being a creature of superior intellectual abilities.

Unlike Christianity, Postmodernism and Science Fiction regard man as an entity of trifling importance. Humans are thrown into existence without an initial purpose. Postmodernism views the inner world of a man to be decentralized. This results in a complete denigration of notions such as "personality" and "self." According to postmodern thought, a person is a sum of different social roles a.k.a masks.

The third episode of the "Odyssey 1" begins with the introduction of the "Discovery" crew. The dividing margin between humans and nonhumans is fading away right from the beginning as the supercomputer HAL 9000 is regarded as "He" instead of "It" by his crewmates. In the book, as well as in the movie, HAL is personified as an electronic eye. It is important to note, that an eye is a paramount symbol in Christianity which denotes God himself. Hence, HAL's eye is red, which gives the computer a hellish appearance. It leads to the conclusion that because of not having finalized its spiritual development, mankind is incompetent to recreate the act of divine creation and therefore, gives birth to a diabolical being that is only a simulacrum, not a mirror image of its begetter.

Culturology and Theology consider the process of playing a game as a special form of interaction between deity and man, as religious rituals (for example, communion) are viewed as a kind of game. On the other hand, humankind and AI interact through games as well. In "Odyssey 1" Hal demonstrates an uncanny ability to beat his human colleagues in chess. This fact shifts the binary opposition, in doing so placing the computer in the center of the new system. In the movie, Stanley Kubrick connects the game of chess with the HAL 9000's main leitmotiv, namely lie, as HAL beats his human colleague by deceiving him. In Christianity, truth is considered to be the God itself, while a lie is something of the opposite of God. This tendency further highlights the fact that the computer is just a simulacrum.

In the final part of the third episode, the border between humans and robots vanished without a trace. In the scene of Hal's lobotomy, Dave Bowman demonstrates dispassionate judgment and determination in his actions. On the contrary, Hal is overwhelmed with fear of his inevitable "death." The scene demonstrates the merging of some human characteristics that are usually considered to be opposites.

HAl's lobotomy has grave importance for the overall plot. The main topic of Clarcke's and Kubrick's work is the evolution of the human race. In the initial stages of this process, mankind learned to dominate the outside world by wielding tools, such as sticks and stones. Those primitive tools later develop to the stage of Supercomputers such as HAL 9000. As time passed, humans became too dependent on these tools. According to Clarke and Kubrick, the ultimate stage of evolution can only be reached if humans learn to overcome this dependence.

ეპიდემია ქართულ პროზასა და კინემატოგრაფში: დავით კლდიაშვილისა და ვაჟა-ფშაველას მოთხრობების ეკრანიზაციები

2024-10-17T16:43:15+04:00

The paper discusses the changes and the forms of adaptation of the literary text suggested by the filmmaker. Two texts chosen for the analysis are related to the Georgian experience of the epidemic, depicted from two different perspectives: Miqela (1904) by David Kldiashvili and Cholera Saved Me (1892) by Vazha-Pshavela. Kldiashvili’s short story served as a basis for the film Miqela (1964) adapted and directed by Eldar Shengelaia; while the plot of Vazha-Pshavela’s short story was used by the scriptwriter and film director Pavle Charkviani in his film Some Troubles Are Helpful (1984). The paper deals with the issue of turning literary texts into works of synthetic art, which is essentially related to intermediality.

The interpretation of prose within film/audiovisual art is one of the topics interrelating literary studies and film studies. Georgian cinema and the world cinematograph are known for a large share of screenings among samples, which provides rich material suitable for the discussion.

While the prose texts by Georgian writers are interpreted within audiovisual art, the verbal representative system of the literary primary source is transformed into the language of audiovisual art. The constituent parts of the literary texts - the characters, and dialogues – are transformed into audio text.

David Kldiashvili’s short story is one of the most dramatic among his works, depicting the life of the elderly man, Miqela, who is left hopeless against the epidemic. His naive understanding of Christian religious views on death and eternity makes his belief system primitive and, eventually, merciless to his grandson. His prejudices define the superstitions of the elderly man and his fellow villagers, popular ideas about life and death influence their decisions and actions. In the short story, the Orthodox priest tries to explain to Miqela, how ungrounded superstitions are his ideas and fears about misfortune, and how unacceptable are they in modern times. However, Miqela's thoughts are dominated by the feeling of obedience to the ‘deity’, although his and his fellow villagers' ideas about ‘deity’ are far away from the subjects of Christian teaching.

The early 1960s, when the film was directed by Eldar Shengelaia, were declared by the Soviet propaganda as the years of construction of ‘Great Communism’. The end of the period of totalitarianism was more than ten years behind, the process of de-Stalinization is still ongoing, but the Russian centre still required adherence to communist principles: religion, faith, church, priest – could be represented only in a negative context. The characters of the priests in Georgian films are shown in adverse or just comic light. The story about the superstition described by Davit Kldiashvili, a classic writer, was the best material for the consequent film of Soviet times to depict the ‘darkness’ of the past. In general, Georgian arts and cinema of the 1960s fully shared this pathos, and many films of the period had a critical view of the past. Eldar Shengelaya's Miqela, with its pathos of whistleblowers of superstition, is opposing the pathos David Kldiashvili’s works, where the warmth, love and compassion towards his own characters prevail. At the same time, Eldar Shengelaya’s film Mikela is the first attempt to represent the psychological aspect of Davit Kldiashvili's work.

Vazha-Pshavela’s short story Cholera Saved Me was written in 1892 when the cholera epidemic spread all over the Russian Empire. At that time, the genius writer himself had recently suffered from anthrax, which damaged his right eye, and his health deteriorated. Against this background, the story written about cholera is surprisingly optimistic. In the short story, fear gives courage to the young couple and surpasses happiness, while the people of the mountain village flee to the forest from the impending epidemic. Pavle Charkviani filmed Some Troubles are Helpful in 1984. The script for the film was based on Vazha-Pshavela's short stories Cholera Saved Me, Darejani and A Picture of the Pshav’s Life.

Two different visions of the epidemic, and different plots: Miqela turned into a monster due to the depression caused by time; on the other hand, the beautiful young couple find happiness regardless of the time. While facing death from the spreading disease, different approaches are seen in literary texts and films: the pessimism in David Kldiasvili’s/Eldar Shengelayas’s works gives rise to cruelty and even crime; while the optimism in Vazha-Pshavela’s/Pavle Charkviani’s works leads to fulfilment and happiness.

Screenings of Georgian prose played an important role in forming the phenomenon of Georgian cinema. The authority of great writers and the legitimacy of literary material allowed film directors to understand not only the past but also the present. The theme of the epidemic, which was considered a part of the past during the creation of the screenplays, no longer occupied a central place in the films. Instead, the film directors follow the writers' ideas and understand the film's problems in a moral dimension.

The lessons given by literature and film was supportive for Georgian audiences in the troubled situation caused by the world pandemic of the 2020s. Where will this experience lead us, what path will the world choose, and in what form will the pandemic become a source of inspiration for writers and directors – these questions still have to be answered.

მოქმედებს თუ არა გველის შხამი სოციალისტურ რეალიზმზე?

2024-10-17T10:57:29+04:00

In 1927, philosopher Serge Danelia published an article of criticism “Vazha-Pshavela and Georgian Nation,” in which he discussed the poet Vazha-Pshavela’s conception and representation of nature. Among the topics discussed in this article, Danelia’s interpretation of the poem “Snake Eater” is of particular interest to us. To answer a question of why the snake poison did not work on the protagonist Mindia as soon as he ate snake meat, he offers the explaination that the meat was boiled and so the effect of poison was slowed down. This interpretation, of course, strikes us as excessively realistic. Where did this attitude come from? How much does Danelia’s account reflect the tendency of social realism of that time?

Danelia thought that Vazha-Pshavela represented nature as an endless circle, as opposed to the historical process, which moves in the direction of progress. Further, for Vazha, nature is not to be measured by the good and evil of the events that occur in nature, but by its beauty. In Vazha’s understanding, this beauty is woven into the fabric of nature itself and exists independent of human judgment. This conception of a transcendentally beautiful, ahistorical nature, Danelia claims, belongs to an Eastern, paganistic worldview, which he poses as an anthithesis to the Western, Christian conception of “history.” This criticism can be explained by dialectical materialism.

According to the scholar, Vazha’s representation of nature in “The Snake Eater” is fundamentally realist. The only reality that exists for the poet is indepentent nature. However, he criticizes, the poem also mixes a folktale into the realistic framework. Therefore, two different motifs, paganism and Christianity, are mixed in the work, which he regards as illogical; this destroys the any consistency in the poem’s plot line or framework. According to this argument, he rejected the poem and regarded it as a “weak” work. This is an inadequate and unsuccessful reading, even giving credit to the value of his dialectical materialist analysis of Vazha’s conception of nature.

Danelia’s criticism shows a forced application of the conventions of realism to “The Snake Eater”  supposedly, as demanded by the period  and, from this point of view, ignores or denies the magical element in the poem. However, today the concept of materialism again attracts our attention under the name of “new materialism.” While his evaluation of the poem is flawed, a part of Danelia’s argument, in which he criticised the critic K’it’a Abashidze’s understanding of Vazha-Pshavela as a symbolist poet, is convincing and invites more careful discussion.

არარსებული ეპოქა. დაღუპულთა ლექსი და მისი დამოკიდებულება ისტორიასთან

2024-10-17T11:06:16+04:00

რთულია, ლიტვური ლიტერტურიდან მთლიანად გამორიცხო სოციალისტური რეალიზმი, ინტელექტუალური ღირებულებების სრული გადატრიალების გამო, რაც მოხდა 1940 წელს, სსრკ-ს მიერ ლიტვის ოკუპაციის შედეგად, სისტემის დაშლისა და პოლიტიკური ფაქტების შენიღბვის ფონზე. მოგვიანებით, ერთი წლის შემდეგ, გერმანიის მიერ განხორციელებული ახალი ოკუპაციის შედეგად, საბჭოთა ოკუპაციის ყველა საშინელებამ რეალური სახე გამოაჩინა, ცენზურა შესუსტდა და „ერისადმი მოწოდება“ დაიწყო... სწორედ ამ დროს ვინკას ნუკოლაისტის-პუტინასმა (1893-1967) დაწერა ლექსი, რომელიც ისტორიულ გამონაკლისს წარმოადგენდა საბჭოთა ეპოქის, რომელმაც 1944 წელს, საბჭოთა არმიის დაბრუნების შემდეგ, „ფრთები შეიკვეცა“ ოკუპაციის დამკანონებელი პროპაგანდისა და ცენზურის, ლიტერატურაში სოციალისტური რეალიზმის დოგმების შემოტანის წინააღმდეგ. პუტინასის ლექსს განსაკუთრებული ბედი ერგო, მან იატაკქვეშეთში გადაინაცვალა, სადაც აქტიურად ვრცელდებოდა და ბევრის ცხოვრებაზე იმოქმედა საბედისწეროდ მაშინ, როდესაც თავად ავტორი იძულებული გახდა, ანონიმად დარჩენილიყო, რათა საკუთარი თავი გადაერჩინა ლიტერატურაში. ლექსი ლიტვური პარტიზანული მოძრაობიდან გავრცელდა და ამერიკის ლიტვურ პრესაში შეაღწია. ყურადღების გამახვილება ღირს სამ ფაქტორზე: ა) ლექსის გაბედულების აქტუალობა, რომელიც მუდმივად განახლებადია თხრობის დაუსრულებლობის გამო; ბ) ლექსისა და ავტორის წინააღმდეგობრივი ურთიერთობა სოციალისტური რეალიზმის ეპოქაში და ამ ეპოქის განუსაზღვრელობა, რაც შეიჭრა ცნობილი მწერლის ცხოვრებაშიც, რომელსაც ისტორიული სიმართლის ღიად გამოხატვის ეშინოდა; გ) ლექსის „Vivos plango. Mortuos voco“ (1943), შექმნის თარიღის მნიშვნელობა, მისი სტიქიური გავრცელება, ავტორობის დამალვა და თანამედროვეობაში მისი აქტუალობის დაბრუნების გარემოებები, რაც მის ფენომენზე მეტყველებს, ჩრდილავს საბჭოთა კავშირის მიერ ლიტვური ლიტერატურის კონტექსტში დანერგილი„სოციალისტური რეალიზმის“ უშედეგობას.

ლატვიის სსრ-ს დეკორატიული ხელოვნება, გზის ძიება პარტიულ აზროვნებასა და ეროვნულ აზროვნებას შორის

2024-10-17T14:16:26+04:00

სოციალისტური რეალიზმის ძირითადი პრინციპს წარმოადგენდა საბჭოთა კავშირის მმართველი კომუნისტური პარტიის (პარტიული აზროვნების) მიერ შემოთავაზებული პოლიტიკური იდეალების რწმენა, რომელიც განზავებული იყო ეროვნულ ცნობიერებასა და იდეურობასთან (იდე-ოლოგიური შინაარსით). უკვე 1930-იანი წლების დასაწყისიდან საბჭოთა კავშირში ყოველი კულტურის მუშაკი ხელოვნების თითოეულ დისციპლინაში მკაცრად უნდა მიჰყოლოდა სოციალისტური რეალიზმის მეთოდს. სოციალისტური რეალიზმის კანონი თანაბრად გამოიყენებოდა სახვითი ხელოვნებისთვის, ისევე როგორც გამოყენებითი ხელოვნებისთვის, რომლის სპეციფიკური ფუნქცია უნდა ყოფილიყო წმინდა უტილიტარული დანიშნულება. საბჭოთა კავშირის ეროვნულ რესპუბლიკებში დეკორატიული ხელოვნება, ჩვეულებრივ, ხალხური ხელოვნების ფორმებს ითვისებდა, 1960-იანი წლების დასაწყისიდან კი დეკორატიული ხელოვნება აღიქმებოდა საბჭოთა კულტურის განუყოფელ კომპონენტად. ამ დროისათვის საბჭოთა კულტურის არსი უკვე ათწლეულების ჩამოყალიბებული იყო, ის შინაარსით სოციალისტური და ფორმით ეროვნული უნდა ყოფილიყო, რაც ხაზს უსვამდა ეროვნული ტრადიციების მნიშვნელობას.

ამ პრინციპის განხილვა შესაძლებელი იყო სხვადასხვა, თუნდაც ძალიან განსხვავებული გზით, ამიტომ პარტიული პრინციპების ერთგულების პრობლემა და ეროვნული გამორჩეულობის გამოვლენა თეორიული და პრაქტიკული განხილვის ამოუწურავი თემა გახდა. კონცეპტუალური გაურკვევლობა, ისევე როგორც ძალიან განსხვავებული ხედვები, შემოქმედებს, თეორეტიკოსებს, ასევე პარტიულ ჩინოვნიკებს შორის, არ იძლეოდა გამოყენებითი ხელოვნების ერთიანი თეორიის შემუშავების საშუალებას. ზემოაღნიშნული გაურკვევლობისა და აზრთა პლურალიზმის გამო გამოყენებითი ხელოვნების წარმომადგენელ მხატვრებს შეეძლოთ ესარგებლათ შემოქმედების გარკვეული თავისუფლებით, სოციალისტური რეალიზმის კანონების პირდაპირი დარღვევის გარეშე.

ნაშრომის ავტორი განიხილავს და აანალიზებს იმდროინდელ ლატ-ვიის სსრ-ში პროფესიული დეკორატიული ხელოვნების განვითარებას, ხელოვნების თეორიის იდეოლოგიურ მიმდინარეობებს და ცენტრისა და პერიფერიის ურთიერთობას.

სოციალისტური რეალიზმის მიღება ბენგალის „პროგრესულ მწერლობაში“ და მისი ალტერნატივები: 1930-დან 1990-იან წლებამდე პერიოდში

2024-10-17T14:31:52+04:00

ინდოეთში „პროგრესული მწერალთა ასოციაციის“ დაარსების შემდეგ, კომუნისტი მწერლები ცდილობდნენ გამოეყენებინათ სოციალისტური რეალიზმის იდეები თავიანთ ნაწერებში. სტატიაში მოკლედ არის განხილული სოციალისტური რეალიზმის რეცეფცია ბენგალის ლიტერატურაში. ყველაფერი კი დაიწყო ცნობილი დებატებით, საროჟ დატსა და სამარ სენს შორის თემაზე – იყო პროგრესული აუცილებლად ნიშნავს თუ არა რევოლუციონერობას? დუტი დაჟინებით მოითხოვდა, რომ პროგრესულმა მწერლებმა უნდა მიიღონ მკაფიო რევოლუციური და პროლეტარული პოზიცია, სენი კი თვლიდა, რომ ავტორი უნდა მიჰყვეს იმ რეალობას, რომელიც მისთვის ცნობილია და ფოკუსირება მოახდინოს არსებული საზოგადოებისა და კულტურის დეკადანსის გამოაშკარავებაზე. 1940-იანი წლების ბოლოს გაიმართა დებატები როჯერ გაროდის პოზიციის გარშემო. ის, ინდოეთის ბანგლას კომუნისტური პარტიის თეორიულ ჟურნალ „მარქსბადის“ სტატიების სერიასთან ერთად, დაჟინებით მოითხოვდა სოციალისტური რეალიზმის პრინციპების გამოყენებას. სინამდვილეში, ტექსტების უმეტე-სობა უფრო მეტად იყო ფოკუსირებული პარტიის მიერ „განათლებული“ საშუალო კლასის რევოლუციურ კადრებზე, ვიდრე პროლეტარულ გმირებ-ზე. პროლეტარიატის ხმის ძიებამ ისეთი ავტორები, როგორებიც არიან მაჰასვეტა დევი, დე-ბეშ როი და ნაბარუნ ბჰატაჩარია, ტიპური სოციალისტური რეალიზმისგან, ენისა და ენობრივი რეგისტრებისგან სრულიად განსხვავებულ ფორმებამდე მიიყვანა, რაც მკვეთრდ განირჩეოდა ბჰადრალოკის გასუფთავებული დისკურსისგან, რომელშიც მრავალი წინა ავტორი იყო ჩაფლული. შესაბამისად, დამტკიცებულია, რომ მნიშვნელოვანი სოციალისტური და რეალისტური მხატვრული ნაწარმოების დასაწერად, კლასობრივი ფორმაცია და კლასობრივი ბრძოლა ქვემოდან უნდა იქნას განხილული, ქვეყნის/რეგიონის სპეციფიკის გათვალისწინებით.

ქალები სოციალიზმისთვის ბრძოლაში: ალექსანდრა კოლონტაი და ლიდია ჩუკოვსკაია, როგორც სოციალისტური რეალიზმის ალტერნატივები

2024-10-17T14:52:51+04:00

სტატიაში განხილულია ქალ ავტორთა პოსტრევოლუციური, დისიდენტური მხატვრული ტექსტები. სოციალისტურ რეალიზმის მეინსტრიმულობის პირობებში, ლიტერატურასა და ხელოვნებაში ქალი პროტაგონისტების გავრცელება მჭიდროდ იყო დაკავშირებული სტალინის კულტის პოპულარიზაციასთან: ქალები ქმნიდნენ „სიყვარულის, პატივისცემისა და მორჩილების“ იდეალურ დამოკიდებულებას. მაგრამ ზოგიერთი მათგანი, დისიდენტი მწერალი ქალები, ეჭვქვეშ აყენებდნენ ამ ნორმებს. ალექსანდრა კოლონტაიმ, რა თქმა უნდა, თავისი რომანები და მოთხრობები მანამდე დაწერა, ვიდრე სოციალისტური რეალიზმი ერთადერთ სამწერლობო გზად განიხილებოდა. მისი კრებული „მუშა ფუტკრების სიყვარული“, განსაკუთრებით კი რომანი „ვასილისა მალიგინა“, სხვა არაფერი იყო, თუ არა ტიპური სოციალისტური რეალიზმის რომანი. გენდერისა და კლასის ურთიერთკავშირის განხილვით, კლასობრივ სოლიდარობაზე და არა პარტიის სიბრძნეზე ფოკუსირებით, სოციალისტური მშენებლობის პირობებში სექსუალური განთავისუფლების მნიშვნელობის კვლევით, კოლონტაიმ გააკრი-ტიკა ის, რის წარმოშობასაც იგი ჭვრეტდა, ახალ იერარქიის პორობებში და, ასევე, დაუპირისპირდა პატრიარქალური ნორმების ხელახალ წამოწევას, თუნდაც ისეთი რბილი ფორმით, როგორიც ის იყო 1920-იანი წლების შუა ხანებში, 1930-იან წლებთან შედარებით.

ლიდია ჩუკოვსკაიას „სოფია პეტროვნა“ რომანის ფორმითაა დაწერილი, 1939-40 წლებში, და აღწერილია ქალის მიერ ტერორის გამოცდილება. სოფია და ნატაშა წარმოადგენს ორ განსხვავებულ პასუხს ტერორზე.

კოლონტაი ხაზს უსვამს კორუფციის ზრდას, ბურჟუაზიული კომფორტის და ბურჟუაზიული ქალურობის მაცდუნებლობას, პროლეტარი ქალებისა და მათ კლასობრივ და გენდერულ სოლიდარობაზე ფოკუსირებისგან განსხვავებით. ვასილისა მალიგინას კონტრპოზიცია ნინასთან, მისი ქმრის მეგობარ/საყვარელ ქალთან, წარმოადგენს როგორც სხეულის ენის, ასევე, იდეურ-პოლიტიკური პოზიციების შედარებას. სოფიას და მთლიანად რომანის ევოლუცია ჩუკოვსკაიას ხელში ერთგვარი გამოწვევაა სოციალისტური რეალისტური რომანის სტრუქტურის წინააღმდეგ. საბჭოთა ისტორიის სხვადასხვა პერიოდში მოღვაწე ეს ავტორები აფასებენ რეალობას და ეჭვქვეშ აყენებენ მწერალთა ყრილობის მიერ შემოთავაზებულ მტკიცე რწმენასა და მისგან მომდინარე კულტურულ პოლიტიკას.

სოციალისტური რეალიზმის კანონის უკანა მხარე: უკრაინული ლიტერატურის გამოცდილება

2024-10-17T16:13:52+04:00

მიუხედავად იმისა, რომ ლიტერატურული კანონის კონცეფცია სრულიად განსხვავებული ტრადიციიდან იღებს სათავეს, ის საოცრად ორგანული აღმოჩნდა იმის აღსაწერად, რაც ტოტალიტარული სახელმწიფოს მექანიზმების საშუალებით ჩამოყალიბდა, მათ შორის, უკრაინულ საბჭოთა ლიტერატურაში. ასეთი კანონი უკიდურესად სტრუქტურირებულია, მაგრამ არ არის გაყინული, რადგან მან განიცადა ტრანსფორმაციები „პარტიული ხაზის“ ცვლილებების მიხედვით. ამ კანონის ტოტალიტარული ბუნება იმას ნიშნავდა, რომ მის გარეთ ვერაფერი იარსებებდა. ყველაფერი, რაც ამ საზღვრებს მიღმა არსებობდა, ან აკრძალული იყო ან დაგმობილი (უმეტესად, არა მეტაფორული, არამედ ამ სიტყვის სრულიად პირდაპირი გაგებით). სწორედ ამას ვგულისხმობთ სოციალისტური რეალიზნის კანონის მეორე მხარეში. ტოტალიტარული სახელმწიფოს დაშლამ, მთელი მისი ზედამხედველობითი და სადამსჯელო მექანიზმებით, ერთი შეხედვით, თითქოს მიგვიყვანა იმ ფაქტამდე, რომ „უკანა მხარე“ ავტომატურად გადაიქცა „წინა მხარედ“. ყოველ შემთხვევაში, როგორც კვლევის ობიექტი, ის სათანადო ყურადღების ღირსია. საუბარია აკრძალული და დაუმსახურებლად მარგინალიზებული ავტორებისა და ტექსტების „დავიწყებიდან დაბრუნებაზე“. ჩვენ ბოლო ოცდაათი წელია ვაკვირდებით ასეთ პროცესებს. ამავდროულად, ოდესღაც „კანონიკური“ ავტორების შემოქმედებაც რეგულარულად განიცდის გადაახედვასა და გადააზრებას. აქცენტიც გადაინაცვლებს საპირისპირო მხარეს, რომელიც ადრე შეფასებული იყო როგორც გარკვეული გადახრა „ერთადერთი სწორი გზიდან“. ორივე შემთხვევაში, შეიძლება მოვიყვანოთ პოეტების პავლო ტიჩინისა და ვასილ სტუსის მაგალითები. მეორე მხრივ, ჩვენ შეგვიძლია დავაფიქსიროთ უკრაინული სოციალისტური რეალიზმის კანონის გარკვეული სიცოცხლისუნარიანობა ჩვენს დრომდე, სხვადასხვა ჰიპოსტასებით. როგორც უახლესი კვლევები აჩვენებს, შეუძლებელია მისი საპირისპირო მხარის სრულად გაგება, ამ ფენომენის საფუძვლიანი შესწავლის გარეშე.

„ვეფხისტყაოსანის“ სათაურის თარგმანი უცხო ენებზე 1937 წლამდე და მის შემდეგ; კულტურა 2-ის თუ სოციალისტური რეალიზმის მარკერი?

2024-10-17T16:36:02+04:00

სტატია ეფუძნება გონივრულ ვარაუდს, რომ მთარგმნელობითი გადაწყვეტილებები შეიძლება განპირობებული იყოს ენობრივი სემანტიკისგან (ლექსიკური, მორფო-სინტაქსური, თემატურ-რემატული) განსხვავებული მოსაზრებებით; იგივე შეიძლება ითქვას სათაურზე, რომელსაც ტექსტის გასაგებად პირველხარისხოვანი მნიშვნელობა ენიჭება. სტატიის ავტორის აზრით, სათაურის თარგმანის ცვალებადობაში აისახება ესთეტიკური, იდეოლოგიური და უფრო ფართო კულტურული ცვლილებები და კონკრეტული „მთარგმნოლოლოგიური“ (ლინგვისტური, პოეტოლოგიური) არგუმენტები სათაურის თარგმანის გადაწყვეტილების მიღებისას მეორეხარისხოვან როლს თამაშობს.

სტატიაში შემოთავაზებულია „ვეფხისტყაოსნის“ სათაურის თარგმანები 1820-2010 წლებში, ყველა ძირითად ევროპულ, ასევე რუსულ და რამდენიმე სხვა ენაზეც. ავტორი განასხვავებს ათწლეულების განმავლობაში, სხვადასხვა ენაზე თარგმანის მიმართ მიზანმიმართულად მოქმედ იდეოლოგიური მნიშვნელობის ტენდენციებსა და ძირითად პროცესებს; პიერ ბურდიეს კულტურული წარმოების ველის სულისკვეთებით ადგენს არსებული თარგმანების ველის რუქას. წინამდებარე პროექტის შემუშავებით ხდება „პანქრონიზმის“ დიფერენცირება სინქრონული ჭრილის მქონე რუქებად. ეს ფრაგმენტები, ამ სტატიაში განხორციელებულ კვლევაზე დაყრდნობით, ასახავს, უპირველეს ყოვლისა, შემდეგ ისტორიულ ეტაპებს თარგმანის სფეროში: 1800-1935/1937; 1935/1937 – 1989 წწ. 1989 წ. და შემდგომ.

თვლადი განსხვავებებისა და თვალსაჩინო ცვლილებების გამოსავლენად, არსებული თარგმანების სემანტიკას ავტორი ადარებს სამ ძირითად სემანტიკურ დონეზე, რომელთაგანაც თითოეული ასახავს რეალიზების სამ ვარიანტს. პირველ, სინტქასურ დონეს შეუძლია ფოკუსირება მოახდინოს აგენტზე, ატრიბუტზე ან მათ შორის ბალანსზე; მეორე, ლექსიკურ-სემანტიკურ დონეს პოტენციურად შეუძლია ბოლომდე არ დაასახელოს, სიცხადე არ მიანიჭოს, არ დააზუსტოს მოქმედი პირი – მხოლოდ მიუთითოს მისი არსებობა ტექსტში სახელწოდებით „კაცი“, „ახალგაზრდა“/„რაინდი“/„მამაცი გული“/ „ელიტური მეომარი“ და ა.შ.; მესამე, საკუთრივ ლექსიკო-სემანტიკურ დონეზე, შესაძლებელია ვარირება ნიშან-თვისების სამ „ჰორიზონტალურ“ (თანაბრად გამოკვეთილ) „მნიშვნელობას“ შორის: ვეფხვი/ თოვლის ლეოპარდი/ პანტერის ტყავი/ბეწვი/. ამ ანალიტიკური მატრიცის რეალიზაციას ავტორი ახორციელებს „ვეფხისტყაოსნის“ თარგმანების ემპირიულ მასალაში, მაქსიმალურად შემჭიდროვებულად, ტაბულა 1-ის სახით.

გარდა ამისა, სტატია გვთავაზობს შემდეგ ისტორიულ რეკონსტრუქციას: „ბუნებრივი“ განვითარება, რომელზეც მოწმობს 1820-1930-იანი წლების თარგმანები, ხასიათდება ატრიბუტზე ან მოქმედ პირსა და მის ატრიბუტზე ყურადღების გამახვილებით და არჩევანის გაკეთებით კატისებრთა ოჯახზე (მაგრამ ჯიქსა და ვეფხვს აშკარა უპირატესობა ენიჭებათ პანტერასთან შედარებით); 1937 წლის კონსტიტუციური ძალადობის სტალინურმა აქტმა (რომელიც გამოიხატა ბალმონტის თარგმანის სათაურის ცვლილებით, მომდევნო წელს კი უორდროპის თარგმანის სათაურის ცვლილებით) თარგმანის ველი გახლიჩა (ან ხელახლა დაყო) 1937 წლის მოვლენებზე დამოკიდებულ რამდენიმე ზონად; ეს ზონები მეტ-ნაკლებად დამოკიდებულია 1937 წელს გაჩენილ „სიმძიმის ცენტრზე“, „წინასწარ კონსტიტუციურ" ინერციულ/ტრადიციულ და სიმძიმის „კონტრცენტრზე".

ამ მოქმედებამ წარმატებით მიიპყრო აგენტის ყურადღება მიაღწია მასზე ზედმეტ აქცენტირებას და ნაკლები წარმატებით შეუწყო ხელი თარგმანში „ვეფხვის“ გამოყენებას რუსულ და სხვა ენებზე. მომდევნო პასუხმა (მაგრამ შესაძლოა ეს მხოლოდ საშინაო კომპრომისია, რომელიც მისაღები გახდა დასავლეთში მისი წარმოშობის მოკრძალებული ადგილის წყალობით – არა მოსკოვი, არამედ – თბილისი?) ხელი შეუწყო „პანტერას“ კატისებრთა ალტერნატივას, მაგრამ აგენტზე გადაჭარბებული აქცენტის გამო, გაება ინტერპრეტაციულ მახეში. 1950-იან წლებიდან – 1980-იანი წლების დასაწყისამდე სტალინური ცენტრი დაიშალა, მაგრამ დაახლოებით 1990 წლიდან, როგორც ჩანს, ხელახლა აღორძინდა, ხოლო როგორც ტრადიცია, ხელახლა გაცოცხლდა 2000-იანი წლებიდან. ქართულმა კულტურულმა „ისტებლიშმენტმა“ ვერ შეძლო გათავისუფლება კონსტიტუციური ძალადობის სტალინური აქტის მემკვიდრეობიდან - ვერც სტალინამდელი ტრადიცი(ებ)ის აღდგენით, ვერც ახლის ჩამოყალიბებისთვის მიღწევების დაგროვებით. ის გახდა ისეთი თვითკმაყოფილების მსხვერპლი, რომელიც გაიზარდა პოსტ-სტალინურ საბჭოთა საქართველოში და რომელსაც სტივენ ჯონსმა უწოდა „ქართული კულტურული ნაციონალიზმი“. პარადოქსია, რომ ის ცდილობს მოიპოვოს (ან მართლაც გამოიმუშაოს) სიმბოლური კაპიტალი დასავლეთში ძირითადად სტალინისტური პროდუქტით, ხოლო, ისევ პარადოქსულად, აერთიანებს თვით-აღსანიშნავ და თვითკოლონიზაციურ ზრახვებს.

1937 წლის კონსტიტუციური ძალადობის შესაძლებლობათა სემანტიკურ პირობებზე ფოკუსირებით, სტატიის ავტორი ცდილობს გამოყოს კულტურული ძალადობის სამი მჭიდროდ დაკავშირებული და თანმიმდევრული, მაგრამ განსხვავებული პარადიგმის ესთეტიკური იმპერატივები: გასაბჭოება, კულტურის მეორე თვითდაწესება და თვითდამკვიდრება; მოდელირება სოციალისტური რეალიზმის მიხედვით. შემდეგ ავტორი ცდილობს შეაფასოს „ვეფხისტყაოსანის“ სათაურის სემანტიკური დონეების ვარიანტული განხორციელებები აღნიშნული პარადიგმების სავარაუდო ესთეტიკური იმპერატივების წინააღმდეგ. სხვა სიტყვებით რომ ვთქვათ: რამდენად ცუდად / კარგად ექცევა „ვიღაც“ / „კაცი“ / „რაინდი“ / „ვეფხვი“ / „პანტერა“ და ა.შ. საბჭოთა / კულტურა ორი-ს / სოციალისტური რეალიზმის პარადიგმის ფარგლებში? ავტორი ამ მცდელობას აჯამებს ცხრილებში 2.1. და 2.2.

1937 წლის კონსტიტუციური ძალადობის აქტის შესაძლებლობათა სემანტიკურ პირობებზე კონცენტრირებით, ავტორი ცდილობს გამოყოს კულტურული ძალადობის სამი მჭიდროდ დაკავშირებული და თანმიმდევრული, მაგრამ განსხვავებული პარადიგმა: სოვეტიზაციია; თვითდაწესებული კულტურა 2; თვითმოდელირება სოციალისტური რეალიზმის მიხედვით. შემდეგ, კი ამ აპარადიგმების ესთეტიკურ იმპერატივთა ფონზე, ცდილობს შეაფასოს „ვეფხისტყაოსნის“ სათაურის სემანტიკური დონეების ვარიანტები. სხვა სიტყვებით: რამდენად ცუდად/კარგად ცხოვრობს „ვიღაც“/ „კაცი“/„რაინდი“/ „ვეფხვი“/„პანტერა“ და ა.შ. საბჭოთა კავშირის/კულტურა ორი-ს/სოცრეალიზმის ჩარჩოში? ეს მცდელობა შეჯამებულია ტაბულა 2.1-ისა და 2.2-ის მეშვეობით.

სტატიაში ავტორი არ მალავს საკუთარ დამოკიდებულებას „ვეფხისტყაოსნის“ სათაურის ყველაზე გავლენიანი თარგმანების მიმართ. ისინი მიუღებლად მიაჩნია, პირველ რიგში, მორალურ/ სოციოლოგიური მიზეზით: სათაურმა Витязь в тигровой шкуре („ჭაბუკი ვეფხის ტყავში“) აღმოსავლეთ ევროპელი ხალხების კულტურული სუვერენიტეტის ველი უჰულვებელჰყო, ხოლო The Knight in (the) Panther(‘s) Skin („რაინდი პანტერის ტყავში“) ვერ გახდა ის ალტერნატივა, რომლის მხარდაჭერაც ღირს. ავტორს ისინი მიუღებლად მიჩნია პოეტიკური მიზეზებითაც: ორივე თარგმანი, განსაკუთრებით პირველი, აუბრალოებს ნაწარმოების პოეტიკას და ახდენს მისი ანონიმი ავტორის მსოფლმეხედველობის მოდერნიზებასა და ვესტერნიზაციას. პირველი კიდევ უფრო მავნეა, რადგან ირიბად ემხრობა ორ, გამარტივებულ სამეცნიერო და მასობრივ-საზოგადოებრივ ტოპოსს და არაბუნებრივია რუსთაველის შუასაუკუნეების რომანისათვის: რომ ის ეპიკური პოემაა და აღორძინების ეპოქას მიეკუთვნება. სტატიის ავტორი გამოყოფს მე-19 საუკუნის მთარგმნელთა რამდენიმე მარგინალურ გადაწყვეტილებას, ასევე რობერტ სტივენსონის არჩევანს 1977 წელს, როგორც როგორც ყველა-ზე პერსპექტიულ გზას თავის დასაღწევად მთარგმნელობითი ჩიხიდან, რომელიც შეიქმნა ცივი ომის დროს და რომელიც, სტატიის ავტორის აზრით, რომანის ევროპეიზაციას უშლის ხელს, ხდის მას ძნელად გასაგებს ევროპელი მკითხველისათვის (სხვა სიტყვებით, ეს მკითხველები, ალბათ, ვერ გაიგე-ბენ, რომ „ვეფხისტყაოსანი“, იმისათვის, რომ აღიარებული იქნას, აუცილებელი არ არის ჩაეწეროს ევროპაცენტრისტულ მაკროისტორიულ ტელეოლოგიაში, არც ლიბერალირ-პროგრესულში, არც სტალინისტურში, არც საქვეყნოდ ცნობილ მულტიკულტურულობაში).

დაბოლოს, სტატიის ავტორი ნაწილობრივ აღიარებს პოსტ-სტალინური „ქართული კულტურული ნაციონალიზმის“ გავლენას და მის გაგრძელებას 1990-იანი წლების შემდეგ „ვეფისტყაოსანის“ საერთაშორისოდ გავრცელე-ბაზე და კითხულობს, რატომ იყო ის საკმარისად წარმატებული, რათა აგრძელებდეს პოპულარიზაციას ორი დომინანტური თარგმანისა, შფოთვის ან დისკომფორტის თვალსაჩინო გამოხატვის გარეშე.

იდენტობათა რეკონსტრუქციები და ალტერნატივათა ძიება ქართულ ინტერკულტურულ-მიგრაციულ ტექსტებში

2024-10-16T19:20:55+04:00

The challenges of the modern global world primarily are reflected on identities. Texts written under situations of migration while living abroad are especially significant in light of the diversity of identities that exist today.

A survey of the last twenty years' European debate on migration literature reveals a wide range of definitions for this genre. It has been referred to as “New Weltliteratur" more and more recently.

The primary justification for referring to migration literature as the “New Weltliteratur" is its relation to the realities of daily life in the globalized world, as evidenced by the actual contexts of intercultural and multilingual connections. At the same time, texts produced abroad are largely responsible for creating the central component of “New Weltliteratur"—the intercultural "third space."

The works written by Georgian authors abroad or on migration-related subjects are referred to by our scholarly group as Georgian intercultural-migration literature. The third space of this writing, as a national expression of the “New Weltliteratur", creates a new reality every day, and it is important to start researching it today.

Comparative literary studies no longer adequately capture the caliber of Georgian intercultural-migration writing, particularly when it comes to the investigation of identity reconstructions and the quest for alternatives. A new field of study is emerging that uses an interdisciplinary research style, contemporary theories, and a contextual (systematic and empirical) methodology. We employ the "socio-literary study" methodology that we devised for this piece, which suggests activating several avenues such as ethnic, religious, linguistic, social, gender, professional, self-actualization, and self-realization.

Identity is constructed from the sum of its parts. Emotional issues such as love, partner selection, marriage, and sexual orientation are increasingly being openly debated in relation to identities, in addition to national, social, and professional elements.

The feminine discourse and the family story, which have been reinforced by the "mobile" and migratory nature of today's world, are what particularly stimulate the processes of identity reconstruction and search for alternatives in the “New Weltliteratur". The majority of "Movement" writers and characters are female. The issue of women's self-identification as writers and characters is currently the most significant theme of “New Weltliteratur”, with the historical notion of "femininity" being enhanced by cross-cultural models.

Georgian intercultural-migration literature reflects the realities of today: women became more active thinkers and began to battle for their own independence and self-identification as a result of nomadism and the "movement" environment. In today's world, women are more critical of their inherited and acquired identities than men are; they strive to make decisions quickly; if the identity she had previously chosen becomes less valuable, she will have to accept her new identity from people around her. With entirely distinct themes from the national ones, the family, biographical, and gender narratives in this literature were burdened by migrations and associated issues (such as the dissolution of the family institution).

Therefore, the field that most realistically and actively presents the "moving" (complicated, double, triple, hybrid, new) identities of migration and the global world, as well as the identity seeking processes, is Georgian intercultural-migration writing. The "made-in-place" writing does not have the multitude of accents and circumstances (imagological narrative, dominant cultural memory, psychological, personal identities "tied" to the "movement") that are present in this writing.

This writing captures the shifts that present new models and paradigms for perception of the contemporary world and other cultures. It also reflects the reasons for migration, which are associated with a personal identity crisis in the place of origin (negative emotions, a never-ending and hopeless search for alternatives), and which led to the perception that migration was preferable.

The modern Georgian intercultural-migration writing is included in the “New Weltliteratur” by presenting this discourse from a complex, intercultural perspective while retaining very interesting national aspects – such as the 1990s paradigm, internal and external migration, post-Soviet events, and the distinctive characteristics of Georgian mentality (collectivist mentality).

This literature poses a number of queries:

– What alternatives are available to those who had gone abroad? Can they fully express themselves both creatively and professionally, as well as on a sense-emotional level?

– Is there a negative attitude against any symbols of national identity or Western values? What should we try to "forget" and what should we acknowledge as a fact of life and a challenge?

– How can "identity capital" be strengthened? In what areas of family dynamics – parenting styles, cultural norms and sociopolitical circumstances – is intervention necessary?

Georgian intercultural-migration writing reflects not only local problems, it includes a lot more tools to demonstrate the processes of reconstructing identities, redefining national and ethnic identities, defining new identities, and searching for alternatives. It also deconstructs national narratives and national stereotypes. Compared to "made-in-place" writing, this literature adapts to the difficulties of modernity far better.

We explore the texts of two authors in this article: Lela Lashkhi (2019), who lives in France, and Maya Tsitsishvili (2021), who lives in America.

კრიტიკა და თანამედროვეობა დროის, როგორც ლიტერატურული გამოცდილების, შუქზე

2024-10-16T19:26:49+04:00

The aim of this paper is to study the relationship between literature and public consciousness. The research highlights those literary texts that went beyond or go beyond the literary reality and play a constructive role in public consciousness. As much as this power of literature has the ability to shape mode of heredity and to create ways of thinking and living, it requires multifaceted study. In this way, we will be able not only to deeply read the Georgian literary and public culture, to understand their inner connection in a new way, but also to form clearer views about what this culture could be like tomorrow.

The study is inspired by the painful process of transformation of consciousness and culture in Georgia, as a post-Soviet country. Literature, as a kind of reflection on reality, speaks volumes in this sense. It can make visible the cultural habitus embedded in social reality. And since literature is a field of crystallization of the empirical and the symbolic, it calls for analysis – an inquiry into the relationship between the empirical and the symbolic.

From this point of view, the paper is focused on several works of the last century, namely Georgian adventure novels, which were written after the Russian occupation of Georgia (1921), as an immediate literary reflection on the political consequences.

Mikheil Javakhishvili's novel "Kvachi Kvachantiradze" conveys not only how a person can be degraded when the political context is still unstable and does not create conditions for moral formation, but also reaches the cultural roots that reveal the origin of human morality and social behavior. The problem of Javakhishvili's "Jako’s Dispossesed” is the other extreme – on the one hand, moralism, which does not imply the goal of survival, and, on the other hand, – infantilism, which deprives moralism of its content depth. The author does not stop within the historical framework of the communist Soviet Union, he reaches the historical layers of Georgian consciousness and tries to show the cause-and-effect relationship between the past and the present.

The main object of the present study is contemporary Georgian literature. In this context, it became the subject of analysis that literature, instead of a symbolic act, can be revealed as a kind of symptom of consciousness, in which the symbol (be it versification or figurative) has the function of an entourage, and not a creative act. A symbol and a symptom differ from each other in that a symbol is a creative act, a symptom is a sign of a social organism.

From this point of view, Erekle Deisadze's poem ,,I love in Thieves Style” drew our attention. The central social allusion of the poem (Thieving mentality) is a reference to an informal institution of power in the Soviet period – the street, which enjoyed authority and, to some extent, still enjoys it today. This negative social inertia is reinforced by factors impeding the development of political and civil culture, among which the judicial reform has not yet been carried out, due to which the corrupt and politically biased system weighs heavily on the psycho-mental body of the society. The poetic energy of the discussed poem flows into the versification and poetic form of the Soviet patriotic poetry familiar to everyone in Georgia, with this anachronism the author expresses the (desired?) continuity of the connection with time. This poem is an example of such a fusion of aesthetic and social codes, which produces a kind of emotional spark, affect, and revives the stereotype on which both social and aesthetic tastes stand. Such a synergy of social and aesthetic goes beyond the scope of literature and acquires political intent.

More specifically: the poem has several layers – one, the patriotic poetic affect of the Soviet era (constructed by the poetics of Mukhran Machavariani), the second, left-wing humanism and the third, "thief or criminal world", which is parodically affiliated with the left-wing ideology and patriotic affect.

Next to this social and poetic fact, another poetic voice can be heard in contemporary Georgian poetry, which is a kind of contextual plane in relation to the literary text discussed above. This is a sample of Dato Barbakadze's poetic mystification, in which the symptoms of a morally diseased cultural body appear through self-observation and thus gain symbolic meaning. Dato Barbakadze's poem parodies the immoral voice of ugly social morality, which is heard with all its might in the Soviet sociolect – "unowned" (a person without power and influence, under the protection of no one and nothing, whom no one takes seriously due to this social loneliness). The poem is a statement of the reality in which the cultural-poetic anachronism mentioned above can be fulfilled.

In the paper, we focused on the public role of the writer in such a small culture as Georgia. In the relatively distant past, in the 19th century, when the author's public figure was actively emerging, and later – in the recent Soviet past, writers in Georgia performed an important public function. The socio-political positions of the writer were not affected by the fact that the country was a zone of influence of big political players, as well as the pressure of the Soviet regime. On the contrary, this situation gave the writer more functions as a compensation for the non-existent institutional and civil resonance that would be possible in an independent state. Obviously, this courage was neither universal nor frequent, although its manifestations always had the importance of national salvation. Only in modern Georgia, as a new democracy of the international community, the reality has changed. A writer is no longer a flag bearer in the political field. Instead, the space in which he politically positioned himself is somewhat empty and waiting to be filled. There seems to be a temptation to embrace this field, and there is, among other things, a passion for creating a social chemistry in which poetry is a means, not an end. In itself, this is neither good nor bad news. This can be determined by the context.

Therefore, we ask questions: what does this aesthetic regression tell us? Are reality and literature immune to each other? Is literature a legislator or an executer? These are the critical questions of the present work, which are relevant to the extent that the power of touching reality is strong, which gives rise to them in modern Georgia.

In light of these questions, the paper problematizes the issue of the limits of literature, both in terms of the resource of influence and in relation to political power. In this context, the aesthetics of Georgian protest speeches from the 1990s to the present are particularly informative; namely, how the national and then the personal charisma of the political leaders of the dissident past was replaced by the individualistic energy of the masses.

The presented research, which was aimed at analyzing the relationship between empirical and symbolic, reality and text, shows that on real or virtual platforms of mass demonstrations and civil activism, as well as social representation, the personal voice of the poet, which was also the historical voice of the poetic authority, was replaced by the collectivist cry of the public speaker (poet-activist). As a service to this change, as a kind of intangible cultural monument, Georgian classical poetry appears to us, which is a living sign of the cultural degeneration of this poetry, so attractive to the masses prone to cultural necrophilia. It is therefore not surprising that this degeneracy towards questionable public instincts is valid. In other words: a versification or other poetic symbol, as a linguistic and cultural phenomenon, under certain conditions is transformed into a symptom – a clinical sign of the social body.

Finally, it cannot be said that the transitional cultural area, which connects empirical and symbolic realities, is filled today with a completely new force, another socio-cultural subject – a new voice of a new generation. It is still in the process of political birth, which is irreversible, and we expect it to have its say in the cultural arena as well. After the national movement of the 1970-80s, today we are witnessing the birth of a new civil movement in Georgia. One of the essential results that this process can bring is the differentiation of creative and civic energy in the right direction. This means that the literary word will find itself in the position of an observer instead of an interested one and will perform the function that a symbol would have, not a symptom.

მეფე დიმიტრი თავდადებული და „მეფე დიმიტრი თავდადებული“: ისტორიული მონაცემები და ლიტერატურული თხრობა

2024-10-16T14:54:04+04:00

At the end of his life, Ilia Chavchavadze (1837-1907) recalled the knowledge he acquired in his youth from the archdeacon of the village, who not only taught him to read and write and was telling him Biblical stories, but also was describing him stories from national history. Among them was the story of Dimitri the Self-Sacrificer (1259-1289), which later became the basis of Ilia Chavchavadze’s long poem “Dimitri the Self-Sacrificer”.

Grigol Kipshidze (1858-1921), the writer’s biographer and colleague, has no doubt that these stories would have left a deep mark on the writer’s soul, which he considers to be a reasonable explanation for the fact that this memory from his youth became an impetus for the poet, when later, in 1877-1879, he wrote the long poem “Dimitri the Self-Sacrificer”.

It should be noted that the publication of the text was perceived as unusual both by those around him and further away, as the publication of the poem caused a very concerned response.

The poet himself has nowhere mentioned any written source for his poem, and, by his own special note, the primary impetus for him was the oral source, which he later, in adulthood, had no use for.

In any case, it is clearly proven that when Ilia Chavchavadze wrote this long poem, such a thematic decision was not expected and usual, which is why his biographer felt it necessary to formulate his explanation.

However, the question still remained a question, since Ilia Chavchavadze’s poetic work is not distinguished by a noticeable abundance, and, even more so, the number of his long poems is limited to just a few texts, and the goals that led to the dedication of an extraordinary text to describe the martyrdom of King Dimitri the Self-Sacrificer, still need to be reconsidered.

It is likely that in order to clearly express the content of the long poem based entirely on folk sources, the poet considered it best to transfer the narration of the story completely to the folk-secular narrator, Mefanture, for which he used his own poem "Mefanture" (1860), written as a young man. In “The King Dimitri the Self-Sacrificer” the story is told not directly by the author, but by a public speaker-narrator, who does not express a literate (or even superficial) attitude towards the king and his martyrdom, but reflects the perception and vision spread or intended to be spread publicly.

Attention is also drawn to the fact that in the narration of “The King Dimitri the Self-Sacrificer”, the personal name of the king, after the initial mention-titles, rarely disappears, at least several times, which, of course, indirectly expresses or indicates that the face of the ruler, as far as possible, is transferred to myth, or, more precisely, in a legendary setting, which allows him to be given a broad generalization: he is represented as a king. Also, in the poem, following the introduction, after describing the ruler's appearance and a brief description of his lifestyle, the narrative of his martyrdom begins immediately, from being called by the torturer to execution: he is presented as a martyr.

Thus, it is clearly seen that the king-martyr as a character, according to the writer's intention, really expresses a pattern. It can be said that he is an ideal hero, devoid of all randomness and insignificant-insignificance, which led to the fact that many essential pieces of information (sometimes – in a rather negative direction!), that can be found in the historical chronicles about King Dimitri II, were left out of the author's attention in the poem. Only the standard characteristics of the hero as an ideal king appear in the text.

The description of the life of the main character of the long poem is completely based on the data of historical chronicles, in particular, the reports of the anonymous chronicler, by the name of Zhamtaaghmtsereli, of the fourteenth century, about King Dimitri, although the poem does not contain any data about his subsequent conflict with the requirements of Christian morality and, therefore, with the representatives of the Church.

In the text of the long poem, in general, such a superior, mythical representation of the ruler, which is in no way different from the attitude of the medieval chronicler, became an excuse for Ilia Chavchavadze to be accused, in the words of Grigol Kipshidze, of “supporting and idealizing the principles of tsarism”. Presumably, in this case, the mold of Russian tsarism in particular was not meant, since such accusations would be a complete anachronism in relation to the king of the thirteenth century of Georgia, but it is conceivable that the writer was reproached for presenting Dimitri as an ideal monarch and, therefore, for the possible support of the idea of monarchism, which, from a man of liberal values, as Ilia Chavchavadze was publicly considered at that time, seemed unexpected and even outrageous (therefore it is conceivable that "tsarism" should mean monarchism in this context). All the more, it should be taken into account that the 1870s are really the time when the ideas of liberalism, republicanism, and socialism are becoming more and more firmly established in the world, which at that time will gradually find a noticeable spread in Georgia as well.

However, despite the fact that Ilya Chavchavadze at the very beginning of his poem presents the image of an exemplary king, the hero seems to be deprived of special royal characteristics and, above all, is painted as a selfless person devoted to his homeland and native people, whose thoughtful choice and irrevocable, indomitable action lead to his recognition as a saint.

Almost ten years after the text of the long poem was printed, in 1886, Ilya Chavchavadze’s article was printed in the “Iveria” newspaper, which refers to the martyred king Luarsab and mentions his merits.

The article about the king of Kartli, Luarsab the Martyr (1592-1622), noticeably responds to the poem "King Dimitri Devoted" and finds a lot in common with it.

According to the long poem, King Dimitri certainly follows the call of Christ, but he expresses his loyalty and even confirms this loyalty by his dedication to his people, however, unlike the text of the poem itself, at the end of his life, in his autobiography, Ilya Chavchavadze, while mentioning his own work, believes that Dimitri's contribution to the benefit and protection of the homeland and religion is very important for him.

It is also worth noting that, if Dimitri II is shown as an exemplary and outstanding king in the poem, the royal qualities of Luarsab II are not seen in the article, – his royal activities are not described or evaluated anywhere, while the author's decisive attention is paid to presenting him as a martyr.

შიო არაგვისპირელის ნოველების გენდერული ასპექტები

2024-10-16T15:34:25+04:00

Gender, which has changed from a grammatical term to a socio-cultural construct, is one of the indicators of the development of the society today. Besides, it is a topical scientific problem and is studied intensively from social, philological, economic, biological and various other perspectives. Gender theories developed considerably in XX century based on the studies by Simone de Beauvoir, Lévi-Strauss, Freud, Jacques Lacan, and other well-known scientists. These works cover philosophical, anthropological, psychological and historical aspects as well, and show the complexity and diversity of this issue, which is due to the fact that in this or that socio-economic and political system the stereotypes of female and male role models are closely linked to the values and cultural traditions of the society itself.

The perception of the social functions of men and women formed over the centuries was related to the images of women as weak creatures, caregivers, mothers, and of men – as strong creatures, protectors and leaders. Such determination of the historical roles of men and women reveals the masculine-feminine binarity, the inherently contradictory nature of this opposition.

In the second half of XIX century the issue of the status of women is particularly acute in America and Europe. At the same time, the discussions around the gender situation in Georgia can also be observed, which was the result of the spread of liberal views, socio-economic and cultural-educational changes in the society. The topic of equality between women and men is discussed in the publicist letters by famous Georgian figures of the second half of XIX century: Ilia Chavchavadze, Akaki Tsereteli, Sergey Meskhi, Niko Nikoladze, etc. They respond to and argue with European thinkers, and consider the role of women and men to be equally important in the advancement of society and make the harsh reality the subject of criticism.

In the second half of XIX century, the issue of women's emancipation was directly related to women's education. Famous and less famous Georgian figures agreed that personal freedom had to be based on education. In general, when writing about these problems, Georgian publicists and writers foresaw the difficulties that would arise as women became more active in the public arena. Georgian figures thought it was unfair that men and women did not have the equal rights. It is no coincidence that in his letter “Motherhood and Women's Education” Ilia Chavchavadze focuses on human education in general. According to Ilia, education helps both men and women to better define their duties, civic interests, state and family obligations.

Sergey Meskhi's famous letter – “What Have Women Lost and What Are They Looking for?” is significant in many ways. It is clear from the publication that the idea of equality between men and women is generally acceptable and no one opposes it, but it is not easy for women to overcome the existing inertia. The publicist draws attention to the extent of the stereotype established as a result of the gender perceptions characteristic of the society during that period.

The critical review of the famous publicist and public figure, Niko Nikoladze – “Our Writing” is noteworthy. The author makes a special mention of the Georgian women and highly evaluates the literary collection for reading translated and published by them. Niko Nikoladze attaches great importance to the role of fiction in changing public consciousness and advises Georgian women to translate works created on the theme of romantic love, because he believes that such works help men to overcome their animal instincts, women – to gain respect, change the way of family life, the relationship between a husband and a wife, children’s fate.

Fiction not only participates in the change of public consciousness, first of all, it preserves the attitude, views, opinions characteristic of this society, describes their specific manifestations from different perspectives, creates a comprehensive picture to understand the character of this or that era, to grasp its essence.

The complexity of the inevitable and necessary process of changing the social role of women in the society, which is full of traditional, and often of false clichés, has been well demonstrated by the Georgian literature at the turn of XIX-XX centuries. The works of Georgian writers of this period reflected the stereotypes characteristic of the society at that time, which made a person subject to the will of others and did not identify him/her as an individual. In such a situation, gaining personal freedom by a woman, along with education, required courage as well.

One of the famous prose writers of the late XIX and the early of XX century, Shio Aragvispireli, depicts the lack of the values of the contemporary society through different artistic planes, always connecting to the essence of humanity, and the layers of a man’s psyche. This viewpoint also encompasses the gender issue which is often used by the writer to show discrimination against women and he presents it as a cornerstone of the moral dilemma. However, the writer never looks at it from only one perspective. In this case, he depicts the society of his time from many angles, brings forward the unfair nature of a number of existing stereotypical views.

In the stories by the writer, the gender issue is presented considering several aspects and artistically reflects the influence of the firmly established views in the society of those times on the life of an individual.

When writing on the painful topic of the unjust society, the dehumanization of a person Shio Aragvispireli, along with other authors at the turn of XIX-XX centuries (Eg. Ninoshvili, D. Kldiashvili, Ek. Gabashvili...), pays special attention to the plight of women and the factors leading to the latter, gives us an idea about the gender awareness and existing stereotypes in the society. At the same time, with his characteristic psychologism, he depicts the difficulties that exist in the patriarchal society. Aragvispireli promotes the breaking of established views, critical judgment and unique reflection through showing gender inequality and discrimination of women (economic, social, personal). The fact that the gender issue is linked to the problems of social and rank inequality and injustice makes it clear that it cannot be solved without social progress. At the same time, it highlights the inherent internal contradictions between masculine and feminine which contributes to the ongoing relevance of the issue.

ნათლისღების იკონოგრაფია და მისი საღვთისმეტყველო – სახისმეტყველებითი ასპექტები

2024-10-16T18:51:28+04:00

The topic we present in this article is the iconography of the Baptism and its theological and typological aspects. It suggests discussion of the iconographic representation of this event. As is known, iconography is one of the most important means of communicating with God. According to the teachings of the Church, the basis of the veneration of icons is the Incarnation of the Second Person (Hypostasis) of the Holy Trinity. As a result of the Incarnation of God the Son, the invisible God became visible, the basis of which is the Incarnation of God.

Iconography found its origin in the early Christian era. As it is well known, the Roman Empire was the center of the establishment of Christianity as a religion. Israel, where the Saviour lived and executed His ministry, was then under the rule of the Roman Empire. In those times, a large part of society was illiterate. Therefore, iconography was of great importance. In fact, it acquired the essence of “visual theology“. According to the Church Teaching, veneration of an icon does not mean veneration of the paint and material, but that of the image depicted on it. Saint John of Damascus says: “Veneration of an icon ascends to the prototype of its image “. In this regard, it was particularly important to illustrate the events of the Gospel. As is known, it is the book bearing great significance in the Christian Church, for it contains events related to the ministry of the Incarnate God in this world. Therefore, it is the most important duty of a Christian to know its content, which is why, in Christian iconography, special attention was drawn to the portrayal of the events of the Gospel.

The Baptism of Jesus Christ is one of the most important events. As is known, the Incarnate God was baptized at the age of thirty. It was the Saviour’s age when the most important period of His ministry in this world began. All the four evangelists give their accounts of the Baptism of the Incarnate God.

The Baptism of Jesus Christ took place in the following way: One day the Saviour went to John the Baptist who baptized people in the Jordan River. John stopped Him and told Him that, conversely, he needed to be baptized by Him, to which Jesus Christ answered: “Let it be so now, it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness. “(Matthew 3:15). According to the Gospel, John “allowed“ the Saviour to come to him. The Lord went into the water and as He came up from it, the heavens were opened to Him and the Holy Spirit descended like a dove and the voice of the Father came from Heaven: “This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased. “(Matthew 3:17)

The Baptism of Jesus Christ is called the revelation of the Holy Trinity. The Holy Trinity was revealed in the following form: the Father, Whose voice was heard from Heaven, the Son, Who was baptized in the Jordan River, and the Holy Spirit, Who in the form of a dove alighted upon the Lord. In addition, it must be noted that by going into the water of the Jordan River, Jesus Christ established baptism as a mystery.

It is an interesting fact that in the iconography of the early Christian epoch, we come across episodes of deer who are drinking water greedily. For instance, in the 6^th century iconography of the Baptism in the Catacomb of Pontian, we see a scene of deer drinking from the river. Almost the same image is depicted on the Bitchvinta mosaic.

The iconography of the aforementioned image represents an illustration of the following words from the psalm: “As the deer pants for the water brooks, so pants my soul for You, O God“. (Psalm 42:1) According to the psalm, human beings should have a strong longing for deification, for being baptized.

In the early representations of the Baptism, Jesus Christ is predominantly depicted as a Young Child. In later times, this depiction is replaced by the image of the Man. It is a known fact that the Saviour was baptized in an adult age, when He was thirty years old (below, this theme is discussed in detail).

Why was the Lord portrayed as a Young Child in the era of early Christianity? This is a question that stirs up our interest. As is known, the Baptism is called in other words – “to be born again“. In the Gospel According to John, the Saviour says to Nicodemus: “Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.’ “(John 3:3)

In the iconography of the Baptism, the depiction of the Saviour as a Young Child indicates the second, spiritual birth of a baptized person. According to the Church Teaching, an old man, burdened by sin, goes into the water and a new man, cleansed of guilt, is born anew and emerges from there.

In the later period, the iconographic composition of the Baptism, which is known to everyone today, was formed. In the center of it, the Saviour stands in the Jordan River, John the Baptist is on His left side. He has put his right hand on the Saviour’s head. On the right side of Jesus Christ, there are angels who worship the Lord, bowing before Him. A dove descends from the sky above the Saviour’s head, which in many cases is accompanied by a beam that comes from above and is directed towards the image of the Saviour. The mentioned iconographic representation is fully consistent with the event described in the Gospel, according to which, while the Son of God was being baptized in the Jordan River, the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove and the voice of the Father was heard from Heaven.

The significance of the Baptism as the revelation of the Holy Trinity is vividly shown in the image mentioned above. The Son is portrayed as the Man in the Jordan River, the Holy Spirit – in the form of a dove as described in the Gospel, and the Father – in the form of the beam which descends from the height of the Heaven and is followed by the dove. Particularly interesting is the latter. The iconography meticulously conveys the physical appearance of the Son and the Holy Spirit in the Gospel. Namely, the Son of God – in the form of a Man, the Holy Spirit – in the form of a dove. However, as we know, it is only possible to depict material forms (or nature), while it is not possible to do so with voices. Therefore, in this case, iconography uses the image of a beam, as the representation of the Father and His voice, which is directed to the Lord Who stands in the Jordan River. This beam is followed by the Holy Spirit, revealed in the form of a dove. The aforementioned is based on the corresponding exegesis, according to which, lest anyone should think that the voice coming from heaven belonged to someone else, the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove, emanating from the "Father's voice", alighted upon Jesus Christ in the Jordan River.

In the composition of the iconography of the Baptism, a number of exegeses related to this feast day are represented. They are discussed in this article. As one of the examples of it, we offer the following: Until the 13th century, the Saviour was portrayed naked in the composition. In the later period, however, He was depicted with a loincloth around His waist. The naked image of Jesus Christ expresses the Gospel story, according to which He enters the Jordan River and receives Baptism. Apart from it, the expression of the naked Jesus Christ reflects several aspects of the relevant exegesis.

By the nakedness of the Incarnate God, putting off the corruptible clothing of the human nature by a human being and his being endowed with divine grace are represented in iconography. As we learn from the book of "Genesis", God clothed with skin human beings who were cursed by Him because of their sin (Genesis 3:21). This is interpreted by exegetes in the language of typology as well: in particular, the human nature was deprived of God’s grace and was clothed with death, but at the Baptism, the nakedness of the Saviour released from death man clothed with sin, and endowed him again with divine grace.

In the composition of the Baptism, we often come across the portrayal of the Cross. There are cases when the Cross in the form of a stele (stone-cross) is placed in the Jordan River. In some iconographic renderings, the Saviour stands on a cross-shaped pedestal, under which a snake (a serpent) is lying, and there are also other images of a snake in the Jordan River, on which the Saviour stands and vanquishes it.

The inclusion of the images of the Cross and the snake (serpent) in the composition of the Baptism is based on the theological teaching that Christ defeated death with the Cross; the mystery of baptism, which was instituted by the Saviour when He was baptized in the Jordan River has the following essence: when a person is baptized, the old man dies and a new man, cleansed of sins, is born again and emerges from the water.

Exegetical and homiletic works clearly attest that iconography of the Baptism encompasses various theological and typological aspects. Not only the Gospel story of the Baptism, but also its exegesis is conveyed in it. Apart from it, the teaching about the significance of baptism as a Church mystery is also evident in it. It can be said that each rendering of the aforementioned iconography not only recounts the Baptism of Jesus Christ, but also calls those who look at it to receive baptism and start a new life.

მეორე მსოფლიო ომის რეფლექსია ქართველ „პოეტ-ჯარისკაცთა“ ლირიკაში

2024-10-16T14:48:22+04:00

The experiences and impressions of World War II (1939-1945) have been extensively reflected in the literature of the participating countries and have garnered significant attention. Almost eight decades have passed since the end of the war, yet this topic remains profoundly relevant. The war claimed the lives of 25 million soldiers and 55 million civilians, including 11 million who perished in concentration camps, making it the bloodiest conflict in world history. Many poets actively participated in the war, vividly describing what they witnessed and felt on the battlefield. However, the war's impact extended beyond the front lines, inspiring those who did not directly engage in combat to write about its realities with no less realism.

In post-Soviet countries, the works of Soviet poets dedicated to World War II are widely recognized, yet the poetry of foreign authors has been less accessible to Georgian readers. A comparative analysis of Georgian and foreign war poets, examining thematic and poetic correlations and differences, is particularly interesting.

Poetryfoundation.org marked the centenary of World War I by publishing lists of poets who participated in or died during the wars. The list includes over 130 participants in World War II, with only three poets from the Soviet Union: Mirza Gelovani, Vladislav Zanadvorov, and Konstantin Simonov. Among European and American poets are Carl Sandburg (1878-1967), Keith Douglas (1920-1944), Karl Shapiro (1913-2000), Robert Lowell (1917-1977), Randall Jarrell (1914-1965), W.H. Auden (1907-1973), and others. This article focuses on a selection of renowned poems, alongside an analysis of the best examples from Mirza Gelovani's war lyrics.

The poetry of World War II was heavily influenced by the works of World War I poets such as Wilfred Owen (1893-1918), Robert Graves (1895-1985), and Siegfried Sassoon (1886-1967). W.B. Yeats (1865-1939) also left a significant impact, although his poems tended towards a more pacifist spirit.

The poetry of World War II is thematically diverse, but it is possible to distinguish several main themes. Some poets wrote about the tragedy of war and comrades who died prematurely, while others focused on the bravery and soldiers’ self-sacrifice; these types of poems were often imbued with patriotic pathos. The question of existentialism also arose sharply: questions about the meaning of human life, purpose, and philosophical analysis reappeared in poetry. The war forced poets to reevaluate values and see the world with new eyes. For example, Isaac Rosenberg, a recognized poet who participated in World War I and died in 1918, known for his "Poems from the Trenches," wrote that the world around him was collapsing and being destroyed. Robert Graves declared that he would never attend a service again, provoked by the young clergyman who preached about "divine sacrifice." There were also those who believed that dying in the war meant dying for a great cause, and such an end was not tragic but desirable. However, another trend emerged in Europe and America: the political and social criticism of the war. Naturally, such poetry could not exist in Bolshevik countries, as no one had the right to criticize the authorities in the Soviet Union.

Moreover, the Soviet Union's political environment prohibited poets from writing freely about the war, and they were mostly forced to write according to the directives received from the authorities. In the Soviet Union, poems about the "Great Patriotic War" predominantly called for victory in the war, emphasized the motive of defending the homeland, and narrated the necessity and inevitability of defeating the enemy. The Bolshevik government mandated that poets write poems to encourage the people and boost their fighting spirit. In Soviet literature, patriotism, previously banned under the guise of nationalism, became permissible again. Most Georgian poets of that time dedicated at least one poem to the Great Patriotic War, as writing on this topic was mandated by the government.

It is noteworthy that calls to write poems about the war were not unfamiliar to Europe either. Harriet Monroe (1860-1936) believed that the romantic image of war was created by poets and that they should be the ones to dismantle it. Her magazine "Poetry" published numerous works on the war theme over the years.

While European editors urged poets to abandon the romanticism of war and describe its reality, Soviet magazines and newspapers were filled with articles promoting such a narrative: "Today the poet must come forth with a battle poem... He must replace his pen with a battle weapon... Every Soviet citizen must develop the high moral qualities of a self-sacrificing patriot and fearless fighter" ("Literary Georgia," July 10, 1941) (Tskhadaia 2022: 423). Despite such calls, or perhaps because of them, most poems written on the war theme seem forced and lack the inner depth and sincerity that characterizes true poetry. Grigol Robakidze discusses the poems of prominent poets from that period (Mayakovsky, Bryusov, Mandelstam, and others), and notes that they are cold, monotonous, mechanical, and soulless. According to the author, these poems, filled with simple rhymes and rhythms, have nothing in common with true poetry.

What about Georgian war poetry? WWII particularly influenced the generation of poets from the 1930s, some of whom became victims of this war. Most of the young poets gathered around the magazine "Our Generation": Lado Asatiani, Mirza Gelovani, Giorgi Nafetvaridze, Lado Sulaberidze, Revaz Margiani, and others, did not live to reach 30 and entered Georgian literary history as those who "remained eternally young." Despite the restrictions of the "socialist realism" method that prevailed in 1932-34, they managed to renew the Georgian poetry and write with sincere, deep feeling; although Mirza Gelovani was not the only one who fought on the front-line, his war lyrics are undoubtedly outstanding in Georgian poetry, and they do not conform to the Soviet government's directives.

Rhythmic polyphony, one of the main characteristics of Mirza Gelovani's poetry iis less noticeable in his war lyrics. This is partly because he had little time on the front-line to work on his poems, as he mentions in his letters to his sister, Rusudan. The Jewish-Romanian-French poet Benjamin Fondane, who died in Auschwitz in 1944, wrote that poetry was “only a cry, which should not be placed in a perfect / poem, did I have the time to finish it ?” (Mounic 2015: 16).

After being drafted into the army, Mirza Gelovani also spent much less time on versification experiments, but this does not diminish his war poems; on the contrary, isosyllabic meters make them more melodic. In fact, in these verses the harmonious form opposes the disharmonious content, and the result is truly impressive. Mirza Gelovani's war lyrics are also rich in rhetorical figures and tropes and, despite the metrical simplicity, are expressive and dynamic.

The poet expresses his readiness to face death and fight heroically; his poems even carry a certain challenge to test his bravery, but it does not overshadow the horror of the battlefield. Instead of romanticizing the war, Mirza Gelovani portrays reality unembellished - that war brings death, constant fear of losing one’s life, and the destruction of our morality. War destroys individuals, and Mirza Gelovani strives with all his being to avoid such destruction. On the battlefield losing one’s honour and humanity is the easiest, and preserving both becomes crucial for the poet.

Along with the pain caused by the fate of fallen comrades, Mirza Gelovani's poems also convey a sense of fatalism, and the inevitability of death. The lyrical hero often compares himself to an innocent child caught in the inferno of war: "And the flutter of deadly bullets / Stretched out like tongues of fire in the night, / ... I watched with the eyes of a child" (Gelovani 2009: 262).

While Mirza Gelovani mostly focuses on the gruesome death and suffering of soldiers, Keith Douglas writes about the fighting, fuelled by the desire for victory. The belief that truth is on his side and that he is fighting for a noble cause is driving him and giving him strength and a desire to destroy his enemies.

Keith Douglas holds a prominent place among the poets who fought in World War II. According to critic Desmond Graham, Douglas was the only one from his generation who managed to fully assimilate the poetry of Wilfred Owen and Isaac Rosenberg and base his work on their legacy. Graham considers him not only the best poet of World War II but also the best English poet of his generation, a view shared by many critics (Graham).

Keith Douglas believed that war was the most significant event of his time and that it should become the main subject of literary depiction. The poet also felt that only a soldier could write authentically about war, so, he volunteered for the army to gain combat experience. Douglas’s poetry is characterized by a sharp, realistic depiction style. He effectively uses artistic imagery to create clear, vivid pictures in the reader’s mind.

For Douglas, war is an ideal theme: under the shadow of death, all human masks are stripped away, leaving only the truth, but this truth kills. The poet’s verses are marked by a paradoxical perception of human mortality and time. Time is both thief and donor, and man always carries death within him (Scannell 1976: 38). Death is "the ultimate enemy," but it cannot be defeated forever. Like Mirza Gelovani, Keith Douglas constantly has a premonition of his own death, which is reflected in his lyrics.

In Mirza Gelovani’s poems, we do not encounter the battlefield euphoria or sense of satisfaction from killing the enemy: for him, war is unequivocally evil. The soldiers whose fates he describes could easily be from the opposing camp. Moreover, Gelovani rarely mentions the enemy in his poems directly. The latter also do not reflect the existential crisis of Yeats's lyrical hero (The Aviator). Although the present is wrought with senseless death and suffering, it does not diminish the value of the past and the possible future.

Confronted with the harsh reality, the poet's memories about his beloved, and the hope of returning to her and his home sustain him. Mirza Gelovani’s war lyrics are dichotomous - simultaneously tender and terrifying, full of hope and despair. The poet, "with a heart as pure and vast as the sky," reveals an unquenchable thirst for life and unwavering bravery in his poems. Despite the horrors experienced on the battlefield, Gelovani does not lose his tender worldview, which characterizes his poetry.

Mirza Gelovani’s war lyrics partly echo the work of European and American poets, yet they stand out with an individual style. Although most war poets died young and did not have the chance to reach the peak of their creative potential, their lyrics are marked by impressive artistic imagery. Their message does not leave the reader indifferent; instead, it deeply moves and sometimes even terrifies them.

შარლ ბოდლერის „კატები“

2024-10-16T14:22:13+04:00

Roman Jakobson, Claude Lévi-Strauss. Baudelaire's „Les Chats“.

Roman Jakobson, Language in LIterature,
The Belknap Press of Harvard University, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, London, England, 1987, pp.181-197.

თანამედროვე ტრაგედია და მისი ქართული იმპლიკაციები

2024-10-16T13:57:09+04:00

The aesthetics of late realism and early modernism brought about great changes in the world literature, including the canon and dynamics of the genre of tragedy. Among the fundamental changes revealed in the tragedies of this period, the following deserve special mention:

Transformation of the epicenter of the tragedy from “hero” to “victim”;
Weaving the history of tragedy into everyday life;
Activation of taboo topics;
Transformation of tragic pathos.

The pioneer of these changes is Henrik Ibsen (1828-1906), who is rightly considered the founder of Modern tragedy. Ibsen took the tragic stories out of the walls of palaces and luxurious interiors and transferred them to everyday life. Ibsen's characters explore a contradictory world full of lies, hypocrisy and forgery, only to discover that, despite their opposition, they, as human beings, are part of this world and, by inheritance, carry the destructive code themselves. August Strindberg, John Millington Saing, Gerhart Hauptmann, Anton Chekhov, Luigi Pirandello are successfully working in the same direction, developing the tragic theme of "sinful reality" and human self-isolation in it.

The process of shifting the focus from the hero to the victim was also reflected in Georgian writing. This metamorphosis was first reflected in the work of the genius author of the late realism era, Vazha-Pshavela – “Snake Eater”. The main subject of Vazha-Pshavela's attention is a person, an individual who exists in the conditions of a certain society, i.e. objective environment and tries to establish himself in it as an individual person. As a result, he finds himself in fatal conflict with society. This new perspective of vision expressed in Vazha-Pshavela's texts, coupled with the concept of decadence, represents a direct path to Georgian modernism in parallel with European writing, where the era of modernism is already shining on the horizon.

This trend was continued with great success in the work of another Georgian classic writer David Kldiashvili, who was able to read the tragic code of his time, when in the midst of social distress and acute spiritual crisis, it was not death, but life, that made human tragedy. Besides, Kldiashvili was famous for an indeep stylistic use of satire and humor. Satire and humor diluted in tears became one of the most important levers of David Kldiashvili's writing. In Kldiashvili's dramaturgy, humor acquired an almost medieval depth of parody (Rabelais, Cervantes) and a reviving (lost values) function. Kldiashvili's humor represented the aesthetic reverse of the dramatic, tense, often tragic, re-opening the social life dilemmas of ordinary people, the extremity of their situation, the crisis of relationships. Kldiashvili’s characters are forced to live in lies and illusions, hoping to somehow survive. However, in most cases, illusions are shattered, and this shattering leads to tragic consequences.

David Kldiashvili's two plays – "The Misfortunes od Darispan" and "Irene's Happiness" – premiered European modern tragedy in Georgian national dramaturgy. The dramatism of those texts is determined by the reality reflected in them: the extreme social poverty of the dying class – the petty nobility, economic, spiritual and intellectual destruction, the crisis of relations. "The Misfortunes od Darispan" is a modern tragedy, bordering on, but not equal to, the pathos of Shakespeare’s tragicomedies: Kldiashvili’s play stylistically – with a synthesis of the tragic and comic, as well as with an emphasis on the grotesque-comic and philosophical laughter – carries a pro-Shakespearean spirit, however, conceptually it meets the aesthetic requirements of its era and remains the Georgian analogue of the tragedy of Ibsen, Chekhov and other founders of the modern drama. "Irene's Happiness" is devoid of the genre of tragi-comedy and stands as a serious drama. The central character of the play – Irene, with her strong character and sense of dignity, is related to the gallery of "strong women" created by Lope de Vega and Tirso de Molina. Irene fully understands her plight, learns the tragedy of her own pseudo-happiness and even struggles to save herself, but – in vain. The writer moves the physical death of the character to the background – Irene dies spiritually.

Although the third text of Kldiashvili discussed in the article – "Samanishvili's Step-Mother" – is not a play, we believe that its interpration is quite appropriate in terms of the fragile model of Modern tragedy and Lessing's Theater of sympathy. In this text, the regenerative function of parody is implemented, against the background of strengthening the function of the reader. The reader/viewer observes not only the fate of the heroes, representatives of a certain social stratum – an impoverished principality – but also the actions and consequences arising from this misfortune, and goes through the most difficult phases of ethical transformation: on the one hand, the reader/viewer sympathizes with the character, on the other hand , he reflects on the character's degraded moral obligations, and finally – the reader/viewer is reborn. This path leads not to Aristotelian fear and pity, but to Lessingian compassion.