.png)
UDC 82.02:792
DOI https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.2.1-24.079
Shvets Anna V.,
Candidate of Philology,
Senior Lecturer of the Discourse and Communication Department
Lomonosov Moscow State University
e-mail: ananke2009@mail.ru
The article explores the phenomenon of creative behavior in the activities of avant-garde communities. Creative behavior becomes essential for understanding the avant-garde text, framing the text as a symbolic formation. It is argued that within the inherent focus on reader participation in avant-garde creativity, the realization of this pragmatic dominance is variable and depends on a complex set of institutional circumstances and the communicative pact between authors and the audience. Two avant-garde communities are chosen as examples: the pre-revolutionary avant-garde, the circle “Hylaea” led by D. Burliuk (“commercial project”), and the (post)revolutionary avant-garde, the society “Unovis” led by K. Malevich (“creative artel”). The specificity of recipient involvement in community actions depended on the established communicative pact, and this difference becomes apparent in the comparative analysis of the two productions of “Victory over the Sun” in 1913 and 1920. The receptive response in 1913 was largely determined by the following model of relations between the audience and the community: involvement through norm violation (scandal) and subsequent improvisation, as the scandal served as an advertising means to attract an audience due to the marginalization of the cubofuturists and the lack of access to literary resources. In 1920, the playful element of scandal is no longer present in the interaction scenario with the addressee (due to different institutional circumstances – external funding and the absence of the need to win over the audience). Therefore, the communication scenario was carried out as the interaction between a prophet-educator and a disciple-follower. The recipient’s receptive behavior also changed: either to engage in aesthetic action and dissolve in the collective subject or to observe the action from a distance without involvement.
Keywords: avant-garde, futurism, constructivism, literary scandal, Kruchenykh, Malevich.
References
1. Krusanov A.V. Russkii avangard: boevoe desiatiletie. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 1996. 319 s.
2. Markov V. Russian futurism: A history. Berkeley; Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1968. 467 p.
3. Medvedev P.N. Formal’nyi metod v literaturovedenii: kriticheskoe vvedenie v sotsiologicheskuiu poetiku // Freidizm. Formal’nyi metod v literaturovedenii. Marksizm i filosofiia iazyka: stat’i / M.M. Bakhtin. Moscow: Labirint, 2000. S. 186–349.
4. Lotman Yu.M. Poetika bytovogo povedeniia v russkoi kul’ture XVIII veka // Istoriia i tipologiia russkoi kul’tury / Yu.M. Lotman. St. Petersburg: Iskusstvo, 2002. S. 233–254.
5. Feshchenko V.V. Ideostilistika russkogo avangarda, ili O nekotorykh formakh ideologicheskogo tvorchestva v avangardnoi srede // Russian Literature. 2010. T. 67. No. 3–4. S. 319–355.
6. Kazakova S.A. Turne Vasiliia Kamenskogo po Kavkazu: k voprosu o tvorcheskom povedenii // Izvestiia Ural’skogo federal’nogo universiteta. 2017. T. 19. No. 3 (166). S. 228–236.
7. Kazakova S.A. Literaturnaia reputatsiia kubofuturistov v 1910-e gody // Russkaia literatura i zhurnalistika v predrevoliutsionnuiu epokhu: formy vzaimodeistviia i metodologii analiza: kollektivnaia monografiia / otv. red. i sost. A.A. Kholikov, pri uchastii E.I. Orlovoi. Moscow: IMLI RAN, 2021. S. 273–281.
8. Sirotkin N.S. Estetika avangarda: futurizm, ekspressionizm, dadaizm // Vestnik Cheliabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 1999. T. 2. No. 2. S. 119–128.
9. Rudnev V.P. Slovar’ kul’tury XX veka: kliuchevye poniatiia i teksty. Moscow: Agraf, 1997. 384 s.
10. Shapir M.I. Chto takoe avangard? // Daugava. 1990. No. 10. S. 3–6.
11. Kruchenykh A.E. Nash vykhod / sost., vstup. st. R.V. Duganov. Moscow: Literaturno-khudozhestvennoe agentstvo “RA”, 1996. 245 s.
12. Shvets A.V. Literaturnyi skandal v tvorcheskoi praktike kubo-futuristov i profili kommunikativnogo povedeniia retsipienta // Slovo.ru: Baltiiskii aktsent. 2021. T. 12. No. 4. S. 37–51.
13. Sarabyanov D.V. K ogranicheniiu poniatiia “avangard” // Poeziia i zhivopis’: sb. trudov pamiati N.I. Khardzhieva. Moscow: Iazyki russkoi kul’tury, 2000. S. 83–91.
14. Huyssen A. After the great divide: modernism, mass culture, postmodernism. Bloomington; Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press, 1986. 244 p.
15. Bobrov S.P. Chuzhoi golos // Razvorochennye cherepa. Ego-futuristy. Vyp. IX. St. Petersburg: Peterburgskii glashatai, 1913. S. 6–8.
16. Unovis no. 1. Vitebsk 1920 / publ., podgot., komment. T.G. Goryachevoi. Moscow: Skanrus, 2003. 109 s.
17. Burliuk D.D. Fragmenty iz vospominanii futurista. Pis’ma. Stikhotvoreniia / publ., predisl., primech. N.A. Zubkova. St. Petersburg: Pushkinskii fond, 1994. 381 s.
18. Soiuz molodezhi // Entsiklopediia russkogo avangarda. URL: https://rusavangard.ru/online/history/soyuz-molodyezhi/ (01.12.2023).
19. Zdanevich I.M. Futurizm i vsechestvo: v 2 t. T. 2: Stat’i i pis’ma. Moscow: Gileia, 2014. 360 s.
20. Khardzhiev N.I. Stat’i ob avangarde: v 2 t. T. 1. Moscow: Literaturno-khudozhestvennoe agentstvo “RA”, 1997. 702 s.
21. Lektsiia F.T. Marinetti // Rannee utro. 1914.11 fevralia.
22. Matyushin M.V. Russkie kubo-futuristy (predislovie, redaktsii i kommentarii N.I. Khardzhieva) // Stat’i ob avangarde: v 2 t. / N.I. Khardzhiev. T. 1. Moscow: Literaturno-khudozhestvennoe agentstvo “RA”, 1997. S. 149–172.
23. Polyakov V.V. Knigi russkogo kubofuturizma: s prilozheniem kataloga futuristicheskikh izdanii. Moscow: Gileia, 2007. 550 s.
24. Roman Yakobson. Budetlianin nauki: vospominaniia, pis’ma, stat’i, stikhi, proza / sost., podgot. teksta, vstup. st. i komment. B. Yangfeldta. Moscow: Gileia, 2012. 304 s.
25. Shklovsky V.B. Sobranie sochinenii: v 3 t. T. 3: O Mayakovskom. Za i protiv. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1974. 814 s.
26. Shvets A.V. Razocharovannyi lornet, amerikanskie botinki, afishi: strategii interpretatsii rechevykh aktov futuristov // Novyi filologicheskii vestnik. 2021. No. 4. S. 172–188.
27. Pamiat’ teper’ mnogoe razvorachivaet: iz literaturnogo naslediia Kruchenykh / sost., poslesl., publ., komment. N.A. Guryanovoi. Berkeley: Berkeley Slavic Specialties, 1999. 498 s.
28. Livshits B.K. Polutoraglazyi strelets. Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo pisatelei v Leningrade, 1933. 300 s.
29. Peterburgskii listok. 1913. 31 marta (No. 88). S. 3.
30. Krusanov A.V. Futuristicheskaia revoliutsiia. Kn. 2. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2003. 607 s.
31. Shatskikh A.S. Vitebsk: zhizn’ iskusstva, 1917–1922. Moscow: Iazyki russkoi kul’tury, 2001. 255 s.
32. Khan-Magomedov S.O. Suprematizm i arkhitektura: (problemy formoobrazovaniia). Moscow: Arkhitektura-S, 2007. 519 s.
33. Chashnik I.G. K listovke // Unovis. Listok Vitebskogo Tvorkoma No. 1. Vitebsk, 1920.
34. Eizenshtein S.M. Izbrannye proizvedeniia: v 6 t. T. 5. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1968. 599 s.
35. Romm A.G. Vystavka v Vitebske 1921 g. // Iskusstvo. 1921. No. 4–6. S. 41–42.
36. Сlark K. Peterburg, gornilo kul’turnoi revoliutsii. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2018. 484 s.
37. Girin Yu.N. Ot misterii k tsirku: (teatr avangarda pervoi treti XX veka) // GII. Khudozhestvennaia kul’tura. 2013. No. 2 (7). URL: https://artculturestudies.sias.ru/2013-2/yazyki/590.html#39 (01.12.2023).
38. Berghaus G. Theatre, performance, and the historical avant-garde. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. XXII, 374 p.
39. Pobeda nad Solntsem // Entsiklopediia russkogo avangarda. URL: https://rusavangard.ru/online/history/pobeda-nad-solntsem/ (01.12.2023).
40. Shishanov V.A. Deklaratsii i deiatel’nost’ Unovisa v pechati Vitebska 1920–1922 gg. // Iskusstvo i kul’tura. Vitebsk, 2018. No. 2. S. 20–30.