Fantasy in the story of a wild landowner. Fairy tales by M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. Real and fantastic. Depiction of the real and magical worlds in the fairy tale “The Black Hen, or the Underground Inhabitants”
In the satirical works of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin there is a combination of the real and the fantastic. Fiction is a means of revealing the patterns of reality.
Fairy tales are a fantastic genre. But the tales of Saltykov-Shchedrin are permeated with the real spirit of the time and reflect it. Under the influence of the spirit of the times, traditional fairy tale characters are being transformed. The hare turns out to be “sane” or “selfless”, the wolf - “poor”, the eagle - a philanthropist. And next to them appear unconventional images brought to life by the author’s imagination: an idealistic crucian carp, a wise minnow, and so on. And all of them - animals, birds, fish - are humanized, they behave like people, and at the same time remain animals. Bears, eagles, pikes administer justice and reprisals, conduct scientific debates, and preach.
A bizarre fantasy world emerges. But while creating this world, the satirist simultaneously explores types of human behavior and various types of adaptive reactions. The satirist mercilessly ridicules all unrealistic hopes and hopes, convincing the reader of the meaninglessness of any compromise with the authorities. Neither the dedication of a hare sitting under a bush on a “wolf resolution”, nor the wisdom of a gudgeon huddled in a hole, nor the determination of an idealistic crucian carp who entered into a discussion with a pike about the possibility of establishing social harmony peacefully, can save you from death.
Saltykov-Shchedrin especially mercilessly ridiculed the liberals. Having given up struggle and protest, they inevitably turn to meanness. In the fairy tale “Liberal,” the satirist named a phenomenon he hated own name and branded him for all time.
Intelligibly and convincingly, Saltykov-Shchedrin shows the reader that autocracy, like a hero born from Baba Yaga, is unviable because it is “rotten from the inside” (“Bogatyr”). Moreover, the activities of the tsarist administrators inevitably boil down to “atrocities.” Crimes can be different: “shameful”, “brilliant”, “natural”. But they are not due to the personal qualities of the Toptygins, but to the very nature of power, hostile to the people (“Bear in the Voivodeship”).
The generalized image of the people is embodied with the greatest emotional force in the fairy tale “The Horse”. Saltykov-Shchedrin rejects any idealization of folk life, peasant labor, and even rural nature. Life, work, and nature are revealed to him through the eternal suffering of the peasant and the horse. The fairy tale expresses not just sympathy and compassion, but an understanding of the tragic hopelessness of their endless labor under the scorching rays of the sun: “How many centuries he carries this yoke - he does not know; He doesn’t calculate how many centuries he will have to carry it ahead.” The suffering of the people grows to a universal scale, beyond the control of time.
There is nothing fantastic in this tale, except for the symbolic image of eternal work and eternal suffering. A sober thinker, Saltykov-Shchedrin does not want and cannot invent a special fabulous power that would ease the suffering of the people. Obviously, this strength lies in the people themselves? But will she wake up? And what will its manifestations turn out to be? All this is in the fog of the distant future.
According to N.V. Gogol, “a fairy tale can be a lofty creation when it serves as an allegorical garment, clothing a lofty spiritual truth, when it tangibly and visibly reveals even to a commoner a matter that is accessible only to a sage.” M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin valued the accessibility of the fairy tale genre. He brought both the commoner and the sage the truth about Russian life.
The combination of fantastic and real elements helps the satirist to more clearly express the idea of the fairy tale. The beginning of the fairy tale, despite the traditionally fairy-tale turns: “In a certain kingdom, in a certain state,” “He began to live and get along,” is quite real. Talking about how the landowner completely robbed the peasants (“There was no splinter to light the light, there was no rod to sweep the hut with”), the writer gives a figurative picture of the real life of the post-reform peasantry. Gradually thickening the colors, making the images more and more fantastic (peasants fly in swarms like bees; the landowner grows hair and runs on all fours), Shchedrin shows to what logical end the unbearable living conditions of the people in post-reform Russia should lead. The fairy tale “The Wild Landowner” also has a specific political orientation: its edge is directed against reactionary circles that condemned even modest government reforms. The stupid landowner was inspired in his anti-people activities by the reactionary newspaper Vest. “Several times he weakened, but “as soon as he feels that his heart begins to dissolve, he will immediately rush to the newspaper “Vest” and in one minute become hardened again. This allowed the landowner in Shchedrin’s fairy tale to harass the peasants, acting only “according to the rule,” and forced the peasants to admit that “even though their landowner is stupid, he has been given a great mind.” The writer emphasizes that the creator of all values is the people, and if they are placed in conditions leading to their extinction, then this will inevitably lead to the death of the state. Thus, the absurd story of a wild landowner evokes in the reader the idea that the entire social system based on the exploitation of the people has no right to exist. Peace is impossible between workers and exploiters, just as predatory animals cannot avoid feeding. meat. The wolf, says the satirist in the fairy tale “Poor Wolf,” cannot be generous, because due to his build he cannot eat anything “except meat.” And in order to get meat food, he cannot do otherwise than deprive a living creature of life.” It is impossible to re-educate wolves, eagles and pikes - predators must be destroyed. It is impossible to re-educate the nobles so that they do not exploit the working people - the power of the exploiters must be overthrown. But hares cannot destroy wolves, and crucian carp cannot destroy pikes. People are another matter. In the tale of two generals, the “huge man” could easily deal with both generals, but he obediently serves them: “he picked ten of the ripest “blocks” for the generals, and took one sour one for himself, and even twisted a rope himself, which the generals used for the night tied him to. tree so he doesn't run away. This age-old slavish obedience of the people outrages the satirist. In the fairy tale “Christ’s Night,” the writer, ostensibly on behalf of Christ, tells working people that the hour of their liberation is approaching: “This desired hour will strike, and light will appear, which darkness will not defeat. And you will throw off the yoke of melancholy, grief and need that depresses you.” “You will overthrow,” the writer tells the people; neither God nor anyone else will bring liberation. But in order for the people to rise up to fight for freedom, they must realize their interests. The satirist saw the main task of the advanced intelligentsia in educating the people and instilling class consciousness in them. The fairy tale “Crucian carp the idealist” exposes naive ideas about the possibility of achieving any social changes through peaceful preaching: crucian carp wanted to convince the pike to give up fish food, but the pike swallowed him without even listening to the inspired speech addressed to her. In the fairy tale “Liberal” Shchedrin reveals the treacherous role of liberals... in the history of the revolutionary struggle. This fairy tale is recalled by V.I. Lenin in the book “What are “friends of the people” and how do they fight against the Social Democrats?”: “This liberal begins by asking the authorities for reforms “if possible”; continues by begging for “well, at least something,” and ends with the eternal and unshakable position “in relation to meanness.” The fairy tale “The Horse” is imbued with ardent sympathy for the working people and hatred for parasites and empty dancers. The writer embodied the folk proverb “A workhorse is on straw, but a fool is on oats” in vivid artistic images. The toiler Konyaga is contrasted with four idle dancers: a liberal, a Slavophile, a populist and one of the bourgeois predators. Each of the Empty Dancers explains the Konyaga’s extraordinary endurance and vitality in their own way. That is why he is so tenacious, says Pustoplyas the liberal, that “he has permanent job a lot of common sense has accumulated.” The liberal calls Konyaga’s obedience “common sense”: “He realized that ears do not grow higher than the forehead, that you can’t break a butt with a whip...” The Second Empty Dance, repeating the absurd rantings of the Slavophiles, explains Konyaga’s indestructibility by the fact that “he has in himself the life of the spirit and the spirit of life wears". The liberal populist assures that Konyaga’s strength lies in the fact that he has found “real work” for himself, which gives him “peace of mind.” “Work hard, Konyaga! resist! rake it in!” - he encourages Konyaga. And the fourth Pustoplyas believes that it’s all a matter of habit: “Whoever is assigned to what task, does that work.” And so that Konyaga does not stop working, Pustoplyas advises “to cheer him up well with a whip.” All four are happy that Konyaga is working for them, and none of them is trying to alleviate his bitter fate. The most evil satire on cowardly intellectuals, frightened by the rampant reaction and the defeat of the Narodnaya Volya, is the fairy tale “The Wise Minnow.” The hero of this tale was “an enlightened gudgeon, moderately liberal, and very firmly understood that living life is not like licking a whorl.” The entire aimless, “disgraceful” existence of this frightened man in the street is filled with continuous fear and is aimed at preserving his miserable life. “You have to live in such a way that no one notices,” he told himself, otherwise you’ll just disappear,” the whole “philosophy” of the minnow comes down to this simple wisdom. Following this philosophy, he hid in a hole and lived there trembling all his life. But even this pathetic minnow realized at the end of his life that his life was completely useless. “What joys did he have? Who did he console? Who did you give good advice to? Who did you say a kind word to? whom did you shelter, warm, protect? who has heard of him? who remembered its existence? And he had to answer all these questions: no one, no one.” If at the beginning of the fairy tale the writer calls the gudgeon smart without directly revealing the ironic meaning of this word, then later the “wisdom” of the gudgeon turns into meaningless stupidity; and even other fish talk about the gudgeon: “Have you heard about the dunce who doesn’t eat, doesn’t drink, doesn’t see anyone, doesn’t share bread and salt with anyone, and only saves his hateful life?” The fairy tale “The Wise Minnow” makes fun of everyone who hopes to hide in their hole from the storms of life. The general meaning of the tale is emphasized by the author himself: “Those who think that only those minnows can be considered worthy citizens who, mad with fear, sit in holes and tremble, believe incorrectly. No, these are not citizens, but at least useless minnows.” The tale contrasts the hateful life of cowardly inhabitants with the happiness of another life, illuminated by high civic ideals, but the satirist is forced to speak about them only in hints.
M. E. Saltykov Shchedrin is a Russian satirist who created many wonderful works. His satire is always fair and truthful, he hits the mark, revealing the problems of his contemporary society. The author reached the heights of expressiveness in his fairy tales. In these short works, Saltykov Shchedrin denounces the abuses of officials and the injustice of the regime. He was upset that in Russia they primarily care about the nobles, and not about the people, for whom he himself came to respect. He shows all this in his works, building a plot based on a fairy tale. The author’s turn to the fairy tale was not accidental, but was dictated by serious creative tasks and carried an important ideological load. No matter how whimsical and boundless the flight of imagination of M. E. Saltykov Shchedrin may be, it is never arbitrary and meaningless. It is always connected with reality and feeds on this reality. Shchedrin's fiction is not an escape from reality and its problems. With its help, he tries to reflect this reality. In other words, Saltykov Shchedrin's fairy tales are always realistic. The author’s grotesque is realistic not because the fantastic in his book is combined with the reliable, believable, but because this combination correctly reveals the essential aspects of real reality. Already at the very beginning of the tale, Saltykov Shchedrin places his heroes - two generals - in conditions in which they simply cannot survive on their own, without anyone's help. The fairytale beginning “once upon a time” promises the most incredible events. Throughout the work, the author uses stable expressions usually used in fairy tales: at the behest of the pike, at my will; whether long or short; a day passed, another passed; he was there, drinking beer, honey, it flowed down his mustache, but didn’t get into his mouth; neither can I describe it with a pen, nor tell it in a fairy tale. The striking features of the tale are various fantastic events. The very fact that the generals ended up on a desert island is fabulous, but the description of life on it has quite realistic features. The generals, being completely helpless, discovered a way out of the current situation. “What, Your Excellency... if only we could find a man,” suggested one general. And they did not have the idea that he simply should not be there, since the island is uninhabited. They are sure that “there is a man everywhere, you just have to look for him!” He’s probably hidden somewhere and is shirking work!” In many fairy tales, the appearance of a magical assistant allows the heroes to cope with various difficulties. One has only to remember the Gray Wolf, Sivka the Burka, the Little Humpbacked Horse... But here the case is completely different. There is no need to reward generals who are incapable of anything; they have neither an impossible task nor a kind heart... All their thoughts are only about themselves. By settling a man next to them, Saltykov Shchedrin seems to be arguing with the fairy tale. There is an assistant, but who is it for? Saltykov Shchedrin shows the injustice of the life of the Russian people, solving all the problems of their masters, who do nothing but sit back and push others around.
For Shchedrin, the fantastic itself is a form of expression of the truth of life. The fantastic nature of many scenes and details of the story “The Tale of How One Man Fed Two Generals” does not mean at all that the scenes and details arose completely by accident, subject to the arbitrariness of the writer’s imagination. They are built according to strictly defined laws. The fairy tale, which is the basis of most of the stories of M. E. Saltykov Shchedrin, is an effective form of artistic generalization of reality, capable of revealing the deep contradictions of life and making them clear and visible. A fairy tale differs from a work that depicts life within the framework of life's verisimilitude, in that its elements are actions, deeds and incidents that are completely fantastic. To demand from the author an everyday plausible motivation for fantastic actions or events means to demand the impossible. The world of a fairy tale is built according to its own laws, which are not identical to the laws of ours. real life: in him such actions are completely normal that are incredible in ordinary life. The tales of M. E. Saltykov Shchedrin are full of regret that the Russian people are powerless, patient and downtrodden. It is on the peasants that the power of the masters rests, while the men watch and look after them. “The man now collected wild hemp, soaked it in water, beat it, crushed it - and by evening the rope was ready. The generals tied the man to a tree with this rope so that he would not run away...” This is incredible, but this is the reality of that time. In his work, the author preserves the spirit and style of the Russian fairy tale, fights against the evil of Russian life, the stupidity of the rulers, the dumbness of the Russian people, cowardice and vulgarity.
M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin created more than 30 fairy tales. Turning to this genre was natural for the writer. Fairy-tale elements (fantasy, hyperbole, convention, etc.) permeate all of his work. Themes of fairy tales: despotic power (“The Bear in the Voivodeship”), masters and slaves (“The Tale of How One Man Fed Two Generals,” “The Wild Landowner”), fear as the basis of slave psychology (“The Wise Minnow”), hard labor (“Horse”), etc. The unifying thematic principle of all fairy tales is the life of the people in its correlation with the life of the ruling classes.
What brings Saltykov-Shchedrin’s fairy tales closer to folk tales? Typical fairy tale beginnings (“Once upon a time there were two generals...”, “In a certain kingdom, in a certain state, there lived a landowner...”; sayings (“at the command of a pike,” “neither to say in a fairy tale, nor to describe with a pen.” ); phrases characteristic of folk speech (“thought-thought”, “said-done”); syntax, vocabulary, spelling close to the folk language. As in folk tales, a miraculous incident sets the plot in motion: two generals “suddenly found themselves on a desert island "; by the grace of God, "there became a peasant throughout the entire domain of the stupid landowner." Saltykov-Shchedrin also follows the folk tradition in fairy tales about animals, when he ridicules the shortcomings of society in an allegorical form.
Differences. Interweaving the fantastic with the real and even historically accurate. “A Bear in the Voivodeship” - among the animal characters, the image of Magnitsky, a well-known reactionary in Russian history, suddenly appears: even before the Toptygins appeared in the forest, Magnitsky destroyed all the printing houses, students were sent to be soldiers, academicians were imprisoned. In the fairy tale “The Wild Landowner,” the hero gradually degrades, turning into an animal. The hero’s incredible story is largely explained by the fact that he read the newspaper “Vest” and followed its advice. Saltykov-Shchedrin maintains his form at the same time folk tale and destroys it. The magical in Saltykov-Shchedrin’s fairy tales is explained by the real; the reader cannot escape reality, which is constantly felt behind the images of animals and fantastic events. Fairy-tale forms allowed Saltykov-Shchedrin to present ideas close to him in a new way, to show or ridicule social shortcomings.
“The Wise Minnow” is an image of a frightened man in the street who “is only saving his cold life.” Can the slogan “survive and not get caught by the pike” be the meaning of life for a person?
Chapter II. Fairytale and science fiction
“...The myth hypothesis is so convenient! - wrote A. N. Veselovsky in 1873. - Commonplaces, motifs and situations repeated here and there, sometimes at such distances and in such circumstances that there is no visible, traceable connection between them - what are these if not myths, if not fragments of some common myth? You only have to take this point of view once, and recreating this myth and explaining it is an easy matter...”
The irony of A. N. Veselovsky regarding panmythologism, as we have seen, is still topical today. Therefore, it was important to put the myth in its rightful place, to conduct a preliminary analysis of the relationship between ancient and new myth and science fiction.
The results of this analysis confirm the idea that the study of science fiction is fruitful in terms of folk fairy tales, and not myth. At the same time, strictly distinguishing fairy tales from myths, we will naturally take into account the importance of ancient mythological elements in the evolution of fairy tale semantics itself.
The problem of the magical and fairy-tale roots of science fiction can be solved in two interrelated aspects. The first involves the study of folklore and fairy-tale motifs in the works of specific science fiction writers, the second involves a comparison of the poetic systems themselves, allows us to talk about the fairy-tale basis of science fiction as an artistic whole, about the genre correlation and, to a certain extent, the genre continuity of fairy tales and science fiction in the field of poetry. As the researchers note, in literary criticism, “the analysis of the continuity of genre development is aimed at identifying the most stable features of the genre, at discovering connections between various genre systems, connections that are often hidden from the direct participants in the literary process.” This task, it seems, is also very relevant for the analysis of folklore and literary connections, because “with genre differentiation, which is equally characteristic of folklore and literature, there are some genres that are common to both types of poetic art.”
What is common that folk fairy tales and literary science fiction have in common?
First of all, the very presence of fiction. “A fairy tale is characterized primarily by poetic fiction - this position has long become an axiom in folklore.” “Fiction, an orientation toward fiction,” writes E. V. Pomerantseva, “is the primary, main feature of a fairy tale as a genre.” E. V. Pomerantseva’s term “fictional mindset” has become widely popular. At the same time, as the Bulgarian researcher L. Parpulova notes, “in Soviet folklore studies there has been a debate for many years regarding the role of the “fictional attitude.” L. Parpulova sees one of the most important reasons for the dispute in the ambiguity of the content included in this term. This is probably natural, since it is connected with the complexity of the very problem of the relationship of fantastic fiction to reality, which is not by chance called by some researchers “the central problem of the science of fairy tales.”
It is important for us, following the researchers who share the point of view of E. V. Pomerantseva, to emphasize at least two meanings of the ambiguous term: “an attitude towards fiction” means, firstly, that they do not believe in a fairy tale, therefore “a fairy tale is a deliberate and poetic fiction . It is never presented as reality.” Secondly, and this is related to the first, the “fictional mindset” can be interpreted as a fantasy mindset.
Let's consider both meanings of the term. The idea that a fairy tale does not require listeners to believe in the events depicted is sometimes disputed. V. E. Gusev believes that the “principle of disbelief” is “a subjective principle that draws attention to an insignificant feature of the genre, and most importantly, it is very unstable and uncertain.” It seems that V. Ya. Propp is more right, emphasizing that “this feature is not secondary and not accidental.” This sign, one might assume, is not accidental for a number of reasons. First of all, attempts to prove that back in the 19th century. the bearers of fairy tales believed in their reality, rather lead to the opposite result. It is significant that N.V. Novikov, who specifically examines the evidence of collectors and experts on folklore of the 19th century, comes to a cautious conclusion: “There is no doubt that the view of the East Slavic peoples on fairy tales in the 19th - early 20th centuries. was distinguished by its inconsistency: they believed it and did not believe it.” It seems to us that if they “believe and do not believe” in something, it still means “they do not believe” (rather, they “trust”), because any doubt kills absolute faith. But that's not the point. It is necessary to distinguish between belief in fairy-tale events as a fact of personal perception of a particular listener and belief in the reality of what is depicted as an artistic attitude that accumulates the experience of the collective, which is, if we follow the terminology of P. G. Bogatyrev, an “active-collective fact.” In the first case, of course, you can believe in a fairy tale, just as children believe in fairy tales.
However, the belief in fairy-tale events and images that is possible in some cases is inadequate to the artistic structure of the fairy tale. A child who literally believes in fairy tale characters perceives the fairy tale not aesthetically, but mythologically, and in the “age of fairy tales” this is wonderful. But, having become an adult, he must say goodbye to his childhood faith. And if he does not develop an aesthetic attitude towards the fairy tale, does not accept the “attitude towards fiction” as a prerequisite for the fairy-tale world, the fairy tale will cease to be interesting and will become synonymous with the word “falsehood” for him. Denial of a fairy tale as “nonsense” is the flip side of literal belief in fairy-tale events: when faith leaves (and it sooner or later leaves), for a person who does not accept fantasy, the fairy tale turns into “nonsense” and “fiction.”
Therefore, while agreeing with T. A. Chernysheva on the need to consider scientific fiction in the context of fairy-tale fiction, we cannot agree with her desire to consider this fairy-tale fiction as a consequence of people’s faith in its reality. This approach naturally leads to the conclusion that a fantastic image “retains relative independent value as long as there is at least a “flickering faith” (E. Pomerantseva) in the reality of a fantastic character or situation. Only in this case is the fantastic image interesting for its own content.” With the disappearance of faith, the fantastic image ceases to be interesting; it “becomes a form, a vessel that can be filled with something else... Similar processes are observed in a literary fairy tale. The fantastic images in it have already lost connection with the worldview, have lost their independent value, and “the interest in all stories of this type is maintained not by the fiction itself, but by non-fantastic elements,” as G. Wells wrote, developing his idea about fantasies that the authors do not intend to give out for reality." Is it necessary to prove that this is not so? It is only necessary to recall the famous Cheburashka from the literary fairy tale by E. Uspensky, whom the author, naturally, does not present as reality, in order to doubt the thesis that fiction, without faith in its reality, fantasy itself has “lost its independent value.”
Views of this kind can be considered as a relapse of the sharp contrast between the real and the fantastic and the negative assessment of the latter, characteristic of the criticism of the 30s. Thus, E. Shabad in 1929, speaking about the young reader, demanded: “Show (the child. - E.N.) an airplane and a radio, which are more wonderful than any fairy tale.” Even such a serious researcher as A. Babushkina wrote: “... In a folk tale, a purely magical moment... plays a secondary role.” From this a conclusion was drawn about the role of fantasy in literary genres associated with folk tales.
The absence of more or less defined criteria is a breeding ground for the preservation of such views. Very often such views are expressed in an implicit, indirect way, but there are also frequent cases of open negative assessment of fairy-tale fiction, since they no longer believe in it. Here is one of the most significant examples. E. V. Privalova in an article about L. Lagin’s fairy tale “Old Man Hottabych” notes: “In comparison with real miracles modern science and his techniques (old man Hottabych - E.N.) magical art has lost all value, all meaning.” This almost literally coincides with the conclusion of T. A. Chernysheva about the loss of the independent value of fantastic images in a literary fairy tale.
The question is, if fantasy and magic have lost all value, then why do we need a fairy tale? The logic based on the need to believe in the reality of the “really” fairy-tale world inevitably leads to its denial, since the installation of absolute faith is, as already noted, mythological, and thereby destroys fantasy.
So, the “fictional mindset” suggests that listeners do not believe in the literal reality of the events and characters depicted. This is most closely related to the understanding of the “fictional attitude” as an attitude toward fantasy.
“What is fantastic? - wrote I. Annensky in 1890. “Fictional, which does not happen and cannot exist.” This is probably the simplest and at the same time quite accurate definition of fantasy. This definition immediately allows us to emphasize that the term “fantasy” is much narrower than the term “fantasy” (although they are often confused). “Fantasy (more strictly, “productive imagination”) is a universal human ability that ensures human activity in perceiving the surrounding world.” Hegel called fantasy the “leading artistic faculty.” V. Wundt wrote about fantasy: “This process accompanies to a certain extent the entire content of consciousness.” Thus, “science fiction” occupies a much more modest place than “fantasy.” Fiction is not equal to artistic fiction; it is one of its varieties, associated with the depiction of what “does not happen and cannot be.” Indeed, if we proceed from the relationship between the real and the fantastic (and this is, of course, the most important aspect of the problem), then we will have to admit that “at the heart of the internal artistic and semantic structure of a fantastic image lies the inextricable contradiction of the possible and the impossible.”
However, not every impossible thing is fantastic. “Deformation caused by convention and, therefore, inherent in any text, should be distinguished from deformation as a consequence of fantasy... Fantasy is realized in the text as a violation of the norm of convention accepted in it.” By excluding from the concept of the fantastic various systems of artistic convention, which are also “impossible” in reality, we get two types of fantastic elements (in the broad sense of the word). One of them can be called magical, the other - actually fantastic.
Although the terms “magical” and “fantastic” are often used as synonyms, in folklore there are attempts to distinguish between them and to distinguish different types of fantasy. Thus, L. Parpulova speaks of “fantastically wonderful” and “fantastically strange”, considering the first to be the main genre-forming feature of a fairy tale. N.V. Novikov proposes to distinguish “two principles in a fairy tale - magical and fantastic, on which its poetic fiction actually rests. The magical beginning contains the so-called survival moments and, first of all, the religious and mythological views of primitive man, his spiritualization of things and natural phenomena... The fantastic beginning of a fairy tale grows on a spontaneous materialistic basis, remarkably correctly captures the patterns of development of objective reality and, in turn, contributes to the development this reality."
The researcher's separation of the magical and the fantastic, as well as the idea that both are present in a folk fairy tale, are very fruitful. However, the very principle of distinguishing between the magical and the fantastic raises objections. This principle is genetic. It is valid when studying the historical roots of fairy-tale fiction, but when studying its structure and ideological and artistic function it is still insufficient. Firstly, it is very difficult to detect in their pure form “survival” moments and “spontaneously materialistic” moments: they exist in ancient myth not separately, but together. Secondly, “the fairy tale itself is indifferent to the origin of its components - they live in it according to laws, the difference of which from the laws of reality is recognized and emphasized.” Thirdly, in the division of the magical and the fantastic, since the first is associated with “religious-mythological views”, and the second with “spontaneous-materialistic”, an unnecessary addition is introduced in this case evaluative point: willingly or unwillingly, the “materialistic” fantastic turns out to be more desirable (for example, already in literary fiction, in the author’s adaptations of folk tales, in literary fairy tales, etc.) than the “religious-mythological” magical. For example, N.V. Novikov attributes the motive of turning people into animals to the realm of magic, and, say, a flying carpet considers it a fantastic image. But aren’t there elements of the “spontaneous-materialistic” in this motif of transformation, and in the image of the flying carpet - elements that go back to ancient myth? From our point of view, a flying carpet is no less magical than fairy-tale motifs of a miraculous birth or transformation of a person into an animal.
I think a necessary condition distinguishing between the magical and the fantastic is a preliminary analysis of the very concept of “impossible”, from which fantasy comes. This is a complex concept. In each specific era, apparently, there is its own empirical “norm of the impossible.” In the Middle Ages, say, this norm was determined by a religious system of views, today - by a scientific one.
“Modern natural science,” notes academician I.M. Lifshits, “allows us to divide situations that contradict the laws of nature and are denied by science into two categories: situations impossible, which contradict the absolute laws of nature, and the situation incredible, which contradict the laws of nature, which are statistical in nature. I want to emphasize that when speaking about incredible events, we can practically mean their impossibility... Traveling back in time is an example of an impossible event,” while an example of an incredible event that does not contradict the absolute laws of nature is “the spontaneous accumulation of all the air in some -the hall in one of the corners.” Other authors offer a more detailed classification. Following this classification, we can distinguish several levels of the impossible: 1) fundamental (abstract) impossibility; 2) real impossibility (“incredible”, in the terminology of I. M. Lifshits); 3) technical impracticability; 4) practical inexpediency.
Fantasy, arising on the basis of the impossible first and second levels, gives us the magical. Fantasy, which arises on the basis of the second and third levels, is actually fantastic. Thus, the second level is transitional between the magical and the fantastic, and the fourth level is the level where the impossible turns into the possible and, accordingly, fantasy turns into non-fiction.
Several consequences follow from this understanding of fantasy. First of all, since the impossible has a complex structure and is understood differently in different eras, the fantastic and magical are historically relative. What was previously or seemed “real” may become fantastic or magical in a later era. This is the fate of many mythological or medieval religious-mythological images. For medieval literature, for example, in hagiography, the image of the devil is not a fantastic image, but rather a mythological one, requiring faith in its reality. But even in folklore, “belief in the true existence of the devil began to fade back in the 19th century.” In the literature this happened much earlier. Actually, the historical and genetic study of the evolution of folk fiction clearly shows this process of historical expansion of the sphere of the fantastic.
So, the first consequence: the sphere of fantasy in the course of historical development is steadily expanding.
Could it be the other way around? Can an image, perceived in some era as fantastic, subsequently lose its fantastic character and become “real?” Such a process is generally considered possible, and associated with this is the widespread idea that “the realm of the fantastic is constantly conquered by the mind, which translates the fantastic into the real and brings into its domain the laws of nature.” This gives rise to the belief that the development of science and technology translates fairy-tale magic and fantasy into reality.
I think this is incorrect, although such judgments are often supported by references to M. Gorky. Indeed, M. Gorky said: “It’s already boring to hear about the “flying carpet” when an airplane is buzzing in the sky, and “fast boots” cannot surprise, just as neither the swimming of the “Nautilus” under water, nor “Journey” will surprise to the moon,” children know and see that all the fantasy of fairy tales is embodied in reality by their fathers...” However, immediately after these words M. Gorky is followed by a characteristic addition: “I am not against the fantasy of fairy tales...”. The second part of the quotation is sometimes not taken into account, and thus M. Gorky’s dialectically complex attitude to the problem of fairy-tale fiction is simplified.
When answering the question of whether today, say, the flying carpet remains a magically fantastic image or has already “embodied into reality,” it is worth thinking about what has been embodied. But only the “technical idea” itself, the idea of flight, came to fruition. But in the strict sense of the word, ideas cannot be fantastic or non-fantastic: they can be true or false. The idea of flight has always been a true idea in all eras. She came to life. But the image of a flying carpet, like the image of any other magically fabulous “wonderful object,” is not identical to its very idea. This is well known, and yet it is often overlooked, because fantasy - both folklore and literary - is characterized by a special “dependence of fictional situations and images on the idea.” The special importance of the idea underlying a fantastic or magical image sometimes makes it difficult to see their non-identity.
The content of the image of a fairy-tale flying carpet is immeasurably broader than a bare “technical” idea. But even if we compare the flying carpet with the scientific embodiment of the ancient idea of flight, then, according to the correct remark of E. D. Tamarchenko, “despite all the conveniences of modern airliners, they are still in one respect only a pale imitation of this aircraft popular fantasy: after all, a flying carpet can transport us to any place solely at our request.”
Let us add: not only in one respect, but in many others, it is worth remembering only “failure-free”, “free” and other wonderful qualities of a fabulous, wonderful carpet. The main thing is that the image of a flying carpet contains not only “technical” content, but also moral content. This is well felt by storytellers who are sensitive to the spirit of folk tales. As F. Knorre noted in his fairy tale “Captain Crocus,” “the people who created fairy tales about flying carpets did not just dream of flying. They dreamed of the main thing - that the nice, kind Ivanushka would learn to fly, and not an evil wizard or a bloodthirsty sorcerer.” Try to imagine this embodied in a “real” technical design: we will get something like an airplane that cannot be turned into a bomber - it simply will not fly, and will not fly even when there is a evil person etc. The fantasy of folk tales arose precisely as the maximum expression of a comprehensive folk ideal.
Science fiction imagery, like fairy tale imagery, also retains the “impossible” as the basis of fantasy. Technical ideas are translated into reality, but if the science fiction image is not reduced only to a technical idea, as was the case in the so-called “short-range” science fiction widespread in the 40s and 50s, which initially denied the “impossible” even at its lowest, fourth level, then the image remains fantastic. Juulverne's “Nautilus” is not limited to just one idea (initially not fantastic, but real) of scuba diving. We will talk about the content of this image in the next part, but for now we will only note that the fantasy associated with the “impossible” in Jules Verne’s novel rests and will always rest on the fact that the “Nautilus” sails on the sea of the 19th century. , and this is fundamentally important for the entire concept of the novel. Technology of the future in the world of the 19th century. - this is impossible and at the highest, the first of the above-mentioned levels of the impossible, no matter what submarines people build today.
So, the second consequence arising from our understanding of fantasy: a fantastic and especially magical image always remains such; in a new era, at best, the image may move from one level of the “impossible” to another, but it will still remain within the framework of the “impossible” " If he went beyond these limits, it means that from the very beginning he was not fantastic. The classic of Soviet science fiction I. A. Efremov is right; numerous articles, notes, and speeches are recognized today as a serious contribution to the development of “fantasy studies”: “You often come across statements on the pages of newspapers and magazines, sometimes in large works of art, that reality has surpassed all fantasy, life has surpassed the wildest fiction of writers, or reality has turned out to be much greater than dreams. It must be said with all certainty that this has never happened, and if it had happened, it would mean our sad fate - the lot of people who have stopped dreaming...”
Thus, we have characterized the very concept of fantasy. Historically, it was first formed in full in a folk tale, and historically, “paradoxically, fantasy is the first generation of realism.” After all, the image of the “impossible”, that which cannot exist in reality, presupposes the collapse of the mythological view of the world. It seems that the principle of fantasy, which we tried to characterize, unites any - both folklore and literary - types of fantasy. However, each of them has its own specifics.
What are features fairy-tale fantasy? First of all, the world of a fairy tale is a wonderful world.
A caveat needs to be made here right away. The term “miraculous” is also polysemantic, and is often used in relation to a fairy tale to mean “supernatural.” If we ignore the genesis of the corresponding motifs and images, the “supernatural”, in essence, has no relation to a fairy tale, therefore the terms “miracle”, “wonderful” cannot be interpreted in this case in an expanded sense. One can challenge the opinion of T. A. Chernysheva when, in search of the historical roots of the image of the “amazing” in science fiction, she equates the “miracle” of a fairy tale with the “miracles” of medieval literature: “So,” writes the researcher, “a whole series of works were created in the Middle Ages , different in material and genre, but united by a common property - they are all stories about the amazing and serve the unique and purely human need to be surprised, which developed significantly in this era. Such works, along with cosmographies, include religious legends and superstitious folk stories.” But, as is known, in the sphere of religion and in the sphere of superstition, “in a miracle, the feeling of surprise is also mystified.” Therefore, a miracle in medieval literature does not necessarily have to evoke this feeling at all: “... every appearance of a miracle in the world of nature shocks and horrifies... In the shock of a miracle, tenderness and fear merge.” In the folklore superstitious story, in the tale, it is not for nothing that researchers emphasize “its closeness to a nightmare and a dream.” There is probably no need to prove that these miracles have nothing to do with the miracles of fairy tales or the miracles of science fiction. Meanwhile, they are often mixed. So, for example, V. Nepomnyashchy, in a very interesting article, rightly directed against the “devaluation of the miraculous” in a modern literary fairy tale, suddenly unexpectedly declares: “Belief in the existence of the impossible and “incomprehensible to the mind,” an ineradicable thirst for mystery is vitally necessary for a person.” But in fairy tales, both folklore and literary, fantasy, which is based on depicting the “impossible,” does not fundamentally require faith in the events depicted. And one should not confuse the miraculous as a specific category of fairy-tale poetics and as a certain, relatively speaking, “epistemological” category. M. Luthi, for example, considers a miracle in a fairy tale to be simply “the most characteristic form of exaggeration.”
“Wonderful” as a category of fairy-tale poetics, in our opinion, is synonymous with the concepts of “magical” and “fantastic”; more precisely, it expresses their unity and interpenetration. Of course, a magical miracle is a miracle in the proper sense of the word (the first level of the “impossible”), in contrast to the “ordinary miracle” of science fiction. And a fantasy world can be more or less wonderful.
The world of folklore fairy tales is doubly wonderful. In it both the fantastic and the truly magical find realization. Firstly, “in a fairy tale, the fantastic permeates its entire fabric, enters the hero’s life, determines his actions.” In this sense, we can talk about the general wonderful atmosphere of a folk tale, which embraces fairy-tale characters, fairy-tale time, and space. Secondly, folklore tales also know magical miracles performed by miraculous objects and helpers. The presence of these specialized magical miracles is a characteristic feature of a fairy tale, although, it should be noted that in terms of content for a folk tale, its general fantastic wonderful atmosphere is more relevant than the magical elements themselves, which acquire meaningful meaning primarily in the specifically concentrated expression of this fairy tale. atmosphere.
At the same time, the wonderful world of a fairy tale is distinguished by one extremely curious circumstance: the point of view of the hero and the point of view of the listener on the “possibility” or “impossibility” of this world do not coincide. The world of a fairy tale can be called wonderful precisely from the point of view of the listener. From the point of view of the hero, as has long been noted, “the element of the miraculous in a fairy tale constitutes an ordinary phenomenon that does not surprise anyone.” A modern researcher emphasizes that the world of a fairy tale “when looking at it “from the inside” (as if through the “eyes of the hero”) turns out to be completely non-wonderful.”
So, from the point of view of the hero, the world of a fairy tale is a completely ordinary, normal world, which has its own strict logic. The point of view of the hero (“from the inside”) and the point of view of the listener (“from the outside”) not only do not coincide, they are diametrically opposed and rigidly fixed. This point needs to be emphasized. The attitude of the heroes of a fairy tale to the world in which they live as ordinary, and not “wonderful,” leads to the emergence of a kind of illusion of authenticity, but - we emphasize - “inside” this world. “The method of presenting the “wonderful” as “real”, the implementation of fantasy - all these are the most characteristic moments of Russian fairy tale narration.” It is the attitude to the fairy-tale world (“from the inside”) as not wonderful, ordinary and normal that creates the possibility of “interweaving fantasy with everyday material,” which many researchers note. This interweaving of fantasy and everyday life also participates in creating the illusion of authenticity: “The very magical props of the fairy tale - spit, a drop of blood, a comb, a seedy nag and the like - inextricably connects the most incredible adventure with the most familiar pictures of the peasant outlook.” It should be noted that the interweaving of fantasy and everyday life does not lead to the destruction of the wonderful atmosphere of a fairy tale; A fairy tale can organically merge together fantastic and everyday realities, therefore “any division of fairy-tale events into “real” and “fantastic” contradicts the very nature of a fairy tale.” Everyday life, intertwined with fantasy, thereby becomes “impossible.”
Thus, the point of view of the hero of the fairy tale creates the illusion of authenticity, and the point of view of the listener comes from the installation of fiction. At the same time, the illusion of authenticity seems to compensate for the listener’s lack of literal faith in the events depicted. In this compensation, the fantasy of a fairy tale differs from the fantasy of a fairy tale: “... the global philosophical problems of a fairy tale, its moral criteria, and finally, the drama itself... could not be perceived by listeners if the genre itself bears the stamp of a deliberate non-fiction.” As D. N. Medrish notes, “in a fable and a shapeshifter there is a “yes and no,” but it does not know “if” - that same “if” that makes the world of a fairy tale so stable, integral and tangible.”
In short, the listener of a fairy tale does not believe into the real possibility of the events depicted and experience strengthens him in this position, and the hero of the fairy tale believes and his experience confirms the validity of this belief “inside” the tale. Points of view are opposite, like the poles of a magnet, but from this collision of the “faith” of the hero and the “disbelief” of the listener, something is born from which, in fact, artistic perception begins - confidence. The hero says “yes” (and he is right in his world), the listener says “no” (and from; he is also right in his own, real, world). From this collision of “yes” and “no”, “if” is born, not blind faith or its reverse side - blind disbelief, but trust in the fate of the hero in the world in which he lives is born. In this (and only in this) sense, we can accept the above-mentioned formulation of the listeners’ attitude to the fairy tale “believing without believing,” emphasizing once again that such an attitude has nothing to do with literal belief in the “impossible.”
Now we can give another definition of fantasy: it arises when there is a discrepancy, a divergence of points of view “from the inside” (through the eyes of the hero) and “from the outside” (through the eyes of the listener-reader) on the possibility or impossibility of the depicted artistic world. If these points of view coincide, fantasy disappears. Therefore, according to the fair remark of L. Parpulova, “a poetic or allegorical reading of the text kills the effect of fiction.”
In a fairy tale, the effect of fantasy is also supported by the fact that the points of view “from the outside” and “from the inside” are devoid of mobility; they are absolutely unambiguously fixed by the very conditions of the genre.
Another one characteristic magic-fairy-tale fiction has also been noted for a long time. A. I. Afanasyev wrote: “The miraculous of fairy tales is the miraculous of the powerful forces of nature; in its own sense, it does not at all go beyond the limits of naturalness.” Therefore, “fantasy and miracles in Russian folk tales are almost always alien to mysticism, otherworldly, they are fascinating, bright and cheerful.” The bright and cheerful character of fairy-tale fiction is fundamentally important and is directly related to the point of view of the hero of the fairy tale. The fabulous “impossible” is located within the world that is “possible” from the point of view “from the inside,” a world in which there is nothing supernatural.
The bright nature of fairy-tale fantasy is clearly manifested in its most important function, especially noticeable in the role played in the fairy tale by the magical elements themselves. “Paradoxical as it may be,” writes D.S. Likhachev, “magic in a fairy tale is an element of the “materialistic” explanation of the miraculous ease with which individual events, transformations, escapes, exploits, finds, etc. take place in a fairy tale.” . S. Yu. Neklyudov notes that a miracle, as a rule, occurs at the site of “a break in the plot syntagma, when two neighboring elements are separated by the absence of the necessary valence bond.”
In other words, magic helps create the logic of the fairy-tale world, explains this world, therefore, its function in a fairy tale is not irrational, but purely rational.
Although we, of course, have far from exhausted all the features of fairy-tale fiction, I think that what has already been said is enough to see its specificity. Thanks to the interaction of the rigidly fixed points of view of the hero and listeners on the possibility and impossibility of events in a fairy tale, a special “fairy-tale reality” is created, different from the actual one.
Naturally, literature, especially in the first stages of its development, willingly turned to the specific folklore “fairy-tale reality”. But gradually, within the framework of literature, a different type of fantasy, different from fairy tales, is being formed. It is related to the magical and fairy-tale traditional understanding of fantasy as an image of the basically impossible, but it is distinguished by a different interpretation of this image. First of all, in literary fiction, unlike fairy-tale fiction, the rigid fixity of the points of view of heroes and readers is removed, they can appear in a variety of configurations, they can coincide and not coincide at the same time, they can appear at some moment and disappear, etc. Points of view are no longer determined by the conditions of the genre, embodying the experience of the collective, but by the writer’s peculiar “game” with the contemporary historical norm of the impossible, and ultimately are subordinated, first of all, to the creative plan of the writer, taking this norm into account. Various variations of the fantastic that arise as a result of this “game” of points of view are quite actively studied in modern literary criticism, perhaps most systematically in the works of Yu. V. Mann. The researcher considers the most productive of these variations to be “veiled (implicit) fantasy” that arose in the works of the romantics, who “developed the poetics of the fantastic to perfection, to the point of sophistication.” A typical example is given by fantasy in the works of Hoffmann, “when one and the same event receives both a fantastic form and a very real motivation.” Therefore, in Hoffman’s work, “the fantastic nature of the world is not openly declared, but it exists in a hidden form.” On this basis, what Yu. V. Mann calls the principle of parallelism between the fantastic and the real arises. In Russia, this principle found, according to the researcher, a brilliant expression in Pushkin’s “The Queen of Spades”: “The image in the “Queen of Spades” constantly develops on the verge of the fantastic and the real. Pushkin nowhere confirms the secret. But he never disavows it. At every moment the reader is offered two readings, and their complex interaction and “play” terribly deepens the perspective of the image.” Dostoevsky had every reason to call “The Queen of Spades” “the height of fantastic art”: the distance between the points of view of the hero and the reader on the possibility - impossibility of the events depicted in Pushkin’s story exists, but is constantly changing, and at some moments, paradoxically, it both exists and absent at the same time.
The consequence of the removal of the rigidly fixed, absolute, unambiguous folklore opposition of points of view in literary fiction is also the destruction of the magical-fairy-tale relationship between the general wonderful atmosphere and the elements of the actually magical. Outwardly, this is manifested in the absence in works that in one way or another embody the principles of veiled fantasy of actually magical elements such as fairy-tale miraculous objects, because for their appearance a rigid fixation of points of view is precisely what is necessary. And this, in turn, significantly changes the very nature of the fantastic atmosphere of the work.
Thus, in literature, in comparison with folk tales, by the middle of the 19th century. The structure of fiction itself is fundamentally changing. This leads to the widespread dissemination of various forms of weakened fantasy (parallelism is broken in favor of the real) and to a peculiar dissolution of fantasy in the realistic fabric of the work, to a form of relative fantasy that Yu. V. Mann expressively calls “non-fantastic.” There is a need for motivations for fiction that in one way or another remove its “impossible” character; various forms of psychologization of fiction and “explanations” of fiction with the inner world of the character are widespread. All this brings fantasy closer to reality and, to a certain extent, cancels it. I again remember I. Annensky: “The closeness of the fantastic and the real in creativity is based on the fact that creativity reveals to you primarily the spiritual world, and in this world there is no fantastic, supernatural in the real sense of the word.” Highly not accidental and significant known fact disputes and disagreements that exist in literary criticism regarding the very definition of certain works of writers of the 19th–20th centuries. like works of fiction. It is important for us to emphasize here not this or that resolution of these disputes (whether Pushkin, Gogol, Turgenev, Dostoevsky, A. Bely, L. Leonov, etc., have science fiction or not), but the surprising, if you think about it, fact of the existence of these disputes , which, better than anything else, convinces us of the fundamental difference between fantasy in realistic literature and folk tales. After all, in relation to a fairy tale, one can still argue about the degree of faith - disbelief of the listeners, but it is impossible to deny its fantastic character.
In light of the above, it becomes clear why the most common literary forms and motivations of fantasy in the world of fairy tales acquire a meaning diametrically opposed to the literary one. Such motivations include primarily wine and sleep. In literature, notes Yu. V. Mann, “wine usually played the role of a real medium of all miracles. Even in the most fantastic works, it was rarely possible without the hero missing a few glasses of wine before the appearance of the dead, ghosts, etc.” As for sleep, as we know, “anything can happen in a dream; sleep justifies the introduction of the most incredible miracles. Therefore, sleep is one of the most popular motifs in science fiction literature.”
Let us now see how these favorite forms of literary fiction are used in a fairy tale. They give, say, a shoemaker, one of the heroes of Afanasyev’s version of the fairy tale “Three Kingdoms - Copper, Silver and Gold,” the task of making wonderful shoes, “so that they will be in time by tomorrow, otherwise they will go to the gallows!” The shoemaker took the money and precious stones; goes home - so cloudy. Trouble! - speaks. - So what's now? Where can such shoes be sewn by tomorrow, and even without measurements? Apparently they'll hang me tomorrow! Let me at least take a walk out of grief with my friends. I went into the tavern.” A visit to the tavern has an effect on the fairy-tale hero, as well as on the heroes of numerous literary works; he comes home and falls asleep. Overnight main character, Ivan Tsarevich, living with a shoemaker in service under a false name, with the help of a wonderful pipe, makes such shoes that “they burn like heat,” and wakes up the owner: ““Yes, the shoes are ready.” - “Are you ready? Where are they?" - The owner ran and looked: “Oh, when did you and I do this?” - “Yes at night; Don’t you really remember, master, how we cut and sewed?” - “I fell asleep completely, brother, I remember a little!” (Af., No. 129).
Making wonderful shoes is a fantastic activity. But with the help of wine and sleep, it is motivated as real: the shoemaker “slightly” remembers how he supposedly cut and sewed. And there is clearly a smile hidden in this. It turns out that in a fairy tale, wine and sleep serve as motivation not fantastic, but real, or rather, pseudo-real: the fairy tale openly laughs at attempts to justify fantasy with the help of wine and sleep. From a magical-fairy-tale point of view, such and similar motifs have no relation at all to real fantasy, although a fairy-tale dream, as we will see in the next part, can be magical, but again in the sense opposite to the literary one.
In literature, not only the structure of fiction changes, but also its character. Already “in the aesthetics and artistic practice of romanticism, fantasy can express the phantasmagorical nature of life, and the “night side” of the human soul, and its subjection to the fatal forces of fate, and the externality of the ideal of reality, and the illusory nature of this ideal. In all cases, however, romantic fiction is agnostic.” Even in the works of Gogol, who, according to Yu. V. Mann, “reckoned with the romantic concept of fantasy,” its “evil” character is preserved: “His work does not know any good science fiction.” This mysterious and twilight character of literary fiction (it is not without reason that the favorite fantasy characters in literature are representatives of the “evil”, often unreal, principle) is diametrically opposed to the bright joyful pathos of the fantasy of a fairy tale. Accordingly, fantasy in literature often does not create the logic of a wonderful world, as is the case in a fairy tale, but, on the contrary, destroys the logic of the real world and reveals its illogicality. This is the most important function of literary fiction, completely opposite to the function of fairy-tale fiction. Therefore, “miracles” in classical and modern literature, as a rule, are aimed at destroying the natural, ordinary, everyday logic of the world in which the characters live, since “a miracle... is aimed not at the general, but at the specific individual, not at the universe , and on the “I”: to save this “I”, to extract it from under the material thickness of circumstances and causes.” A miracle in a fairy tale, as already mentioned, has a completely different character; it is a general property of the fairy-tale world and does not destroy, but creates a circumstantial and causal connection.
Literary fiction fundamentally does not coincide with fairy-tale fiction, not only in its structure and character, but also in its historical aspect. Question about historical evolution various types Fantasy in literature has not yet been sufficiently studied, but the existing works state the constant removal of literature in its development from “fairy-tale reality.” Thus, studying the types of fantasy in Russian literature of the first half of the 19th century, I. V. Semibratova comes to the conclusion that it was “fantasy as a literary convention that turned out to be the most productive in the literature of subsequent times.”
However, the magical-fairy-tale type of fiction remains productive and has been steadily preserved to this day in those genres in which fantasy, as in a fairy tale, is a genre-forming factor.
These genres include primarily literary fairy tales and science fiction. The connection between literary fantasy and folk tales is obvious and has been noted many times. The connection between science fiction and fairy tale fantasy is still a matter of debate, although, as we have already said, the idea of this connection has been around for a long time.
Therefore, while disagreeing with T. A. Chernysheva on a number of points, we cannot agree with her opponents who deny the fruitful aspects of this concept. For example, E. P. Brandis, polemicizing with T. A. Chernysheva, says that in science fiction of the “fantasy” type, a fairy-tale structure is indeed revealed, “but attempts to transfer the same structure to science fiction with more rigid motivations immediately cause difficulties.” It seems to us that, if we talk about the structure of science fiction, then, on the contrary, difficulties arise precisely when the magical and fairy-tale specifics are not taken into account. Thus, Yu. Khanyutin, reflecting on the problems of science fiction, quotes from Tsvetan Todorov’s monograph “Introduction to Fantastic Literature”: “Fiction is the doubt experienced by a person who knows the laws of reality in the face of an event that seems at first glance supernatural,” and further comments on this quote: “This definition is interesting and very controversial. If only because it excludes from fantasy all science fiction, where, as a rule, there is no room for ambiguity...” Yu. Khanyutin is absolutely right when he says that Ts. Todorov’s definition excludes all science fiction from the sphere of the fantastic, but he is wrong, when he therefore considers the formulation of the French literary critic controversial: after all, this formulation is a generalization of the experience of fantasy in the romantic and realistic literature of the 19th–20th centuries. and corresponds to the principle of parallelism between the real and the fantastic, which Yu. V. Mann speaks about. In Ts. Todorov’s definition, we are talking about the psychological perception of this form of veiled fiction.
So, it turns out that the definition of fantasy, which arises on the basis of the experience of classical literature, “excludes” scientific fiction. But it also “excludes” fairy-tale fantasy. And this is natural, because science fiction in its specifics (structure and character) is close to the latter. The structure of science fiction can be understood on the basis of the experience of fairy-tale fiction, rather than literary fiction.
From the book Life by Concepts author Chuprinin Sergey IvanovichFAIRY-TALE FICTION This phrase seems like a tautology - kind of like butter. But nevertheless, it is used - at least since it was included in the famous “Young Guard” series “Library modern fiction» a special, 21st volume was included
From the book Features of the language and style of prose by the Strugatsky brothers author Telpov Roman Evgenievich From the book Some Problems of the History and Theory of Genre author Britikov Anatoly FedorovichWhat is science fiction? When in 1924 Korney Chukovsky painted a portrait of Alexei Tolstoy, highly appreciating the magnificent figure of the Red Army soldier Gusev in "Aelita" ("an extremely generalized image, brought to the size of a national type"), he responded with skepticism,
From the book The World Through the Eyes of Science Fiction Writers. Recommendation bibliographic reference author Gorbunov Arnold MatveevichSCIENCE FICTION IN OUR COUNTRY “The main line in the development of literature and art is strengthening connections with the life of the people, a truthful and highly artistic reflection of socialist reality, an inspired and vivid disclosure of the new, advanced and passionate
From the book Science and Science Fiction author Efremov Ivan AntonovichSCIENCE FICTION ABROAD The modern generation of people has a huge responsibility - to prevent the outbreak of a world fire, to protect humanity from death in a nuclear disaster. Appeal to the reader’s reason and conscience, explain everyone’s involvement in
From the book Volume 6. Articles and reviews. Far and near author Bryusov Valery YakovlevichEfremov I. A Science and science fiction The general interest in the literature of the science fiction genre, the exorbitant circulation of its publications and the demand for it, both in libraries and in the book trade, are very characteristic of our time. It so happened that science fiction, for a long time
From the book In the Labyrinths of a Detective author Razin Vladimir From the book The Nature of Fiction author Chernysheva Tatyana ArkadyevnaChapter 5. Detective + fantasy. What's the result? So synthetic literary genre, as a fantastic detective story, has had no luck at all in our critical literature. In such comprehensive studies of science fiction as the books by A. Britikov “Russian Soviet
From the book What is Fantasy? author Kagarlitsky Yuliy IosifovichChapter 10. Detective + science fiction + mysticism. What do you eat it with? The unwritten rules of writing detective novels require not to use otherworldly forces in solving crimes. But rules are made to be broken. From such internationally recognized masters
From the book Magical and Fairytale Roots of Science Fiction author Neyolov Evgeniy MikhailovichChapter I. On the classification of fiction. Science Fiction and Grotesque The difficulty of solving the “mysteries” of science fiction lies in the fact that when trying to understand the essence of this phenomenon, the epistemological and aesthetic aspects of the problem are often combined. By the way, in various explanatory
From the book History foreign literature late 19th – early 20th century author Zhuk Maxim IvanovichChapter III. Romanticism and fantasy Both in artistic practice and in the theoretical judgments of romantics, fantasy occupies a significant place. Regardless of the difference in political, philosophical and aesthetic positions of the romantics of various national schools, all of them simply do not
From the author's bookChapter IV. New science fiction and modern myth-making Transition to new system fantastic imagery was not, of course, a self-sufficient and isolated phenomenon. It was part of a broader process that took place in European culture during the period from the second
From the author's book From the author's bookChapter I. Myth and science fiction Every folklore image, like the two-faced Janus, is turned both backward and forward: on the one hand, it is connected with the past and this past is explained because it is a product of the historical development of a particular genre; with another
From the author's bookHistorical time fairy tale and science fiction. Spatial images dominate in the fairy-tale chronotope. The universal nature of fairy-tale symbolic images of space is explained general properties folklore thinking with its
From the author's bookScientific literature French literature1. Andreev L.G. The Rimbaud phenomenon // A. Rimbaud. Poetic works in verse and prose: collection. M., 1988.2. Balashov N.I. Rimbaud and the connection between two centuries of poetry // A. Rimbaud. Poems. M., 1982.3. Bachelis T.I. Notes on symbolism. M., 1998.4. Bozhovich V.I.