Пути и перепутья исторической поэтики
Paths and Crossroads of Historical Poetics

Summary/Abstract: The article discusses the current status of historical poetics. The priority of the discovery of this discipline belongs to A. N. Veselovsky (1838–1906). He named the new scientific discipline, formulated its concept, introduced new categories of poetics, and justified the research program. Despite the unconditional authority of the scientist, Veselovsky’s discovery was not immediately recognized. In the 1910s and 1920s, academic positivism was replaced by formal and sociological schools of poetics, which not only argued with each other, but simultaneously denied and developed the concepts of historical poetics. As a result of this controversy, prerequisites arose for the transition to the historical poetics of the formalists V. M. Zhirmunsky and V. Ya. Propp, sociologists M. M. Bakhtin and P. N. Medvedev. Until now, the role of the philosopher A. F. Losev in the development of historical poetics has been underestimated. Losev consistently developed divisions of poetics in his multi-volume historical aesthetics (“The History of Ancient Aesthetics,” etc.). In the 1950s and 1980s, the legacy of A. N. Veselovsky was rehabilitated, and the renaissance of historical poetics began. Since then, the evolution of historical poetics can be represented as a history of discoveries in the works of D. S. Likhachev, M. M. Bakhtin, S. S. Averintsev, M. L. Gasparov, A. V. Mikhailov and many others. In the 1980s and 1990s, universal historical poetics almost became the “display” research aria of the Language and Literature Department of the Academy of Sciences. There is more studies in the field of historical poetics than one can imagine. Thanks to Veselovsky, historical poetics has not become a teaching in our country, it was not merely a set of rules and techniques, it appeared as a free field of research. Its development requires initiative and discoveries. Of course, materials on historical poetics predominate. Original ideas, concepts, and interpretations are needed. The retrospective review and the evolution of historical poetics are encouraging.

• Details
• Contents