This essay analyzes the recent appearance in Russian letters of ultra-nationalist fantasies about the restoration of Russia’s imperial or totalitarian status. This new trend has its roots not only in the increasingly patriotic tone of Russian society and politics, but also in the dynamics of the literary field itself. ‘Imperialist writers’ such as Aleksandr Prokhanov and Pavel Krusanov have both revived and reacted against postmodern themes and motifs from earlier decades. Relying on the legacy of sots-art and stiob , the (...) ‘imperialists’ advance a new model in Russia’s postmodern tradition, one that is balanced on the very borderline between irony and ideological militancy. In playing the game of ambiguous fanaticism, these writers have been able to attract the attention of a broad and diverse public, and have moved from an intellectual periphery into the cultural mainstream. (shrink)
This text was already published in German Quarterly, 1 April 2010. We thank Bruno Duarte for letting us know about its existence. Boris Previsic, Hölderlins Rhythmus : Ein Handbuch, Frankfurt/Main, Stroemfeld, 2008, 320 p. Following an inductive approach, rather than advancing a set of claims, the primary ambition of the present study is a practical one : to create a « handbook » for the rhythmical analysis of Hölderlin's poetry by describing rhythmical features of individual poems. The - Recensions.
Ioulia Podoroga | : Dans cet article, je pose le problème des rapports entre philosophie et littérature à partir du cas de Boris Pasternak, dont la vie et l’oeuvre permettent d’envisager une nouvelle articulation entre les deux disciplines, en mobilisant un schème paradoxalement hégélien. Schème hégélien, car fait de trois mouvements, de sa pratique musicale vers la philosophie pour aboutir à une relève dans la poésie. Mais schème anti-hégélien, parce que la triade hégélienne est inversée : la philosophie est (...) le moyen-terme, mais qui reste central, dans l’acheminement vers l’accomplissement du système par la poésie. | : In this article I raise the problem of the relationship between philosophy and literature basing it on the case-study of Boris Pasternak’s writings, whose life and work enable us to envisage a new linkage between the two disciplines by mobilizing a paradoxically Hegelian scheme. Hegelian scheme because of its three movements : from his musical practice towards poetry via philosophy. But anti-Hegelian scheme, because the Hegelian triad is reversed : philosophy is the medium-term but still central in the movement towards the completion of the system by poetry. (shrink)
The collapse of the Soviet Union created unprecedented dilemmas for the leaders of the new independent Russia. Shedding the communist past, Boris Yeltsin embarked on an ambitious program to reorganize Russia‟s political and economic systems. Known as „shock therapy,‟ Yeltsin advocated a rapid transition from state planning to a market economy while simultaneously introducing democracy to Russia. Expecting a short period of hardship as economic reforms opened Russia to world markets, followed by prolonged growth and prosperity, Yeltsin‟s societal upheaval (...) left Russia a prostrate state, mired in a depression that left many longing for a return to socialism. (shrink)
In this interview, Boris Groys discusses his key cultural-theoretical ideas, positions his thought in relation to debates on the cultural economy and clarifies questions emerging from his work. The conversation focuses on his untranslated cultural-theoretical contributions, notably Über das Neue [On the New] and Topologie der Kunst [Topology of Art], but also touches on his writings available in English, for example Art Power. The interview contains three sections. The first revisits Groys’s challenge to the postmodern claim about the end (...) of cultural innovation. He problematizes this claim with reference to the current rise of digital archives and the loss of individual and collective memory. Groys goes on to elucidate the centrality of the ready-made method to cultural innovation. Cultural activity, he argues, constitutes a ritual which promises immortality in a world of perpetual change. Finally, Groys clarifies and illustrates the questions guiding his phenomenological investigation of the ‘scene of evidence’ and the ‘mode of suspicion’. The second section is dedicated to the topology of culture in 21st-century capitalism. Groys sets out from his observation of the privatization and fragmentation of archival space. Humanity is entering a ‘new virtual Middle Age’, where individuals are engaged in a series of self-installations, travelling through a string of heterogeneous valorizing spaces . The ‘chance’ of genuine art in these conditions lies in its withdrawal from exchange. As inexchangeable ‘commodity corpses’ demanding eternal preservation, artworks can provocatively indicate the possibility of a ‘life after capitalism’. His considerations also lead Groys to discuss his notion of Soviet Communism as an installation in pursuit of the wish to ‘step out of time’. The third section centres on the problems of politics and critique. Responding to a question about the political potential of art, Groys proposes consideration of the increasing intensity — presently illustrated by the conflict in the Middle East — with which politics acts in the realm of aesthetics. The interview closes with reflections on the possibility of intellectual resistance. Referring to Nietzsche and Adorno, Groys locates the potential of opposition in a resentful critique of time: a ‘rejection of everything’ and the insistence upon the possibility that what is will vanish. (shrink)
This paper considers the philosophical and political views of B. N. Chicherin. Chicherin was one of Hegel's better known followers in Russian philosophy. Chicherin transformed Hegel's ideas to such an extent that the main concept of his philosophy became the concept of the person, and the main problem was the description of the person's connection to the Absolute. Chicherin was also known as a representative of the liberal tradition in Russia. However, he criticized classical western liberalism for belittling the value (...) of the state. Chicherin's liberal theory was under construction in a dialectical combination of two principles: recognition of the absolute value of the person and its freedom and recognition of the necessity of a strong state for the solution of some general problems in the absence of which it will be impossible to realize the principle of freedom in all its completeness. (shrink)