Your shopping cart is empty.
Log in

























Библиотека журнала      
"Филологические науки"


Все подробности в разделе
"Книжная полка"




“Literary study is a relatively young discipline still...”: reflections over the dictionary of Russian literary critics of the XX century

S.A. Dubrovskaya, O.O. Nesmelova, O.E.Osovskiy
80,00 Р 


Dubrovskaya Svetlana A.,

Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor

Ogarev Mordovia State University



Nesmelova Olga O.,

Doctor of Philology, Professor

Kazan Federal University



Osovskiy Oleg E.,

Doctor of Philology, Professor

Evseviev Mordovia  State Pedagogical  Institute



The first volume of the dictionary “Russian Literary Critics of the XX Century” (2017) has already become a noticeable phenomenon in Russian humanities. The plan proposed by the editors is based on the wide coverage of the names of the participants in the literary process of the XX century. It made it possible to implement a type of a model of the personal history of Russian literary criticism as a study about the literature “in persons”. A similar approach of the dictionary together with the effort of a significant group of authors has caused the emergence of the volume, impressive in terms of both capacity and content. Though it contains articles from “A” to “L” only, advantages of this large-scale research project are essential. It is high comprehensiveness of the presented personalities, an urge to combine scientific approach with the interest paid to the live details of the biography, as well as extremely valuable bibliographic information, which includes references to archives and other sources. Another advantage is the ability of authors to walk away from the rigid restrictions of traditional vocabulary and encyclopedic format and to support relative freedom in describing the personality, scientific contribution of characters, techniques and methods of presenting the study material. The dictionary “Russian Literary Critics of the XX Century” is a bridge from the classic “Brief Literary Encyclopedia” and “Literary Encyclopedic Dictionary” on the one side to the new reference and biographical publications of the Internet era on the other. However, the main purpose of the article is finding an answer to the question if a new reference publication can induce new research perspectives and approaches. The authors of the present article suggest using the Bakhtin’s concept of “small time” to outline the individual literary spaces in the scientific filter by introducing the concept of “Bakhtin’s filter” of the dictionary space, based on the fact that M.M. Bakhtin’s personality is approached in the book as a crucial one for the history of Russian literary studies and within the scientific and everyday dialogues of a considerable number of personalities described in the first volume. According to the article, the personalities of the first volume are consist of “spiritual” and actual teachers and mentors of Bakhtin’ contemporaries or part of his “circle”; prominent scholars, who had a dialogue with him for more than half a century; representatives of younger generations somehow connected with the outstanding thinker, and his opponents. This approach can play an important role in the creation of personal literary encyclopedias or guides such as “Tynyanov”, “Lotman”, “Averintsev” ones, and other dictionaries.

Keywords: Russian literary studies of the XX century, dictionary “Russian Literary Critics of the XX Century”, personalities of scholars, biographical studies, M.M. Bakhtin, “Bakhtin’s dimension” of the philological universe, the history of science.




1. Krasil’nikov R.L. Russkie literaturovedy XX veka: biobiblio-graficheskii slovar’. T. I: A–L / sost. A.A. Kholikov; pod obshch. red. O.A. Klinga, A.A. Kholikova. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriia, 2017. 532 s.

2. Markov A.V. Russkie literaturovedy XX veka: biobibliograficheskii slovar’. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriia, 2017. T. I: A–M / sost. A.A. Kholikov; pod obshch. red. O.A. Klinga, A.A. Kholikova. 532 s.

3. Peshkov I.V. Vpered v XX vek, ili velichie nesopostavimogo. Re-tsenziia na knigu: Russkie literaturovedy XX veka: biobibliograficheskii slovar’. T. I: A–L / sost. A.A. Kholikov; pod obshch. red. O.A. Klinga, A.A. Kholikova. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriia, 2017. 532 s.

4. Poddubtsev R.A. Vseobshchaia perepis' literaturovedov: o novom biobibliograficheskom slovare // Russkaia literatura. 2019. No. 1. S. 240–241.

5. Temirshina O.R. Russkie literaturovedy XX veka: biobibliograficheskii slovar’. T. I: A–L / sost. A.A. Kholikov; pod obshch. red. O.A. Klinga, A.A. Kholikova. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriia, 2017. 532 s.

6. Uriupin I.S. Letopis' otechestvennogo literaturovedeniia v litsakh // Filologicheskii klass. 2018. No. 2(52). S. 177–179.

7. Reitblat A. Polufabrikat // Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 2018. No. 6. URL: (data obrashcheniia: 10.04.2019).

8. Fedotov A.S. Literaturovedy kak literatory // Novoe litera-turnoe obozrenie. 2018. No. 6. URL: (data obrashcheniia 10.04.2019).

9. Kholikov A.A. Plod zanimatel'noi nauki. Iz razmyshlenii nad zhanrom biografii literaturoveda // Voprosy literatury. 2011. No. 1. S. 341–354.

10. Zapadnoe literaturovedenie XX veka: entsiklopediia / INION RAN. Moscow: Intrada, 2004. 560 s.

11. Kto est’ kto v rossiiskom literaturovedenii: biobibliograficheskii slovar’-spravochnik. Moscow: RAN. INION, 2011. 222 s.

12. Kling O.A. Russkoe literaturovedenie XX veka: istoriia v litsakh. Ot glavnogo redaktora // Russkie literaturovedy XX veka: biobibliograficheskii slovar’. T. I: A–L. Moscow; St. Petersburg, 2017. S. 5–7.

13. Bakhtin M.M. Sobranie sochinenii: v 7 t. T. 6. Moscow: Russkie slova-ri; Iazyki slavianskikh kul’tur, 2002. 780 s.

14. Bakhtin M.M. Besedy s V.D. Duvakinym. Moscow: Soglasie, 2002. 400 s.

15. Bakhtin M.M. Kratkaia literaturnaia entsiklopediia / gl. red. A.A. Surkov. T. 1. Moscow: Sovetskaia entsiklopediia, 1962. Stb. 477.

16. Bakhtin M.M. Bol’shaia sovetskaia entsiklopediia. T. 3. Moscow: Sovetskaia entsiklopediia, 1970. S. 55–56.

17. Kozhinov V.V. Bakhtin i ego chitateli. Razmyshleniia i otchasti vospominaniia // Dialog. Karnaval. Khronotop. 1993. No. 2–3. S. 120–134.

18. Venediktova T.D. Literatura kak opyt, ili “burzhuaznyi chitatel’ ” kak kul’turnyi geroi. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2018. 280 s.

19. Kholikov A.A. Issledovateli literatur narodov SSSR i Rossii na stranitsakh slovaria “Russkie literaturovedy XX veka”. T. 1 // Stephanos. 2017. No. 2 (22). S. 44–51.

20. Makhlin V. “Sovremennost’ ” v kruge ponimaniia. K semantike “novogo” v Novoe vremia // Voprosy literatury. 2013. No. 2. S. 11–19.

21. Bakhtin M.M. Sobranie sochinenii: v 7 t. T. 5. Moscow: Russkie slova-ri, 1996. 731 s.

22. Osovskii O.E. Nou-Khau biograficheskogo zhanra // Voprosy literatury. 2018. No. 3. S. 62–83.

23. Nesmelova O.O., Karasik O.B. Obraz Anny Frank v massovoi kul’ture: fiktsionalizatsiia lichnosti // Filologiia i kul’tura. 2014. No. 3 (37). S. 157–162.

24. Dubrovskaia S.A. “Gogol’ i Rable’ kak siuzhet otechestvennogo li-teraturovedeniia 1940–1980-kh gg. // Izvestiia Rossiiskoi akademii nauk. Ser.: Literatura i iazyk. 2014. T. 73. No. 6. S. 62–71.