Registration Number
2115U007802, Article
popup.category
Стаття, Рецензовано
Title
Individual idea of the novel by M. Ostrovsky (AI translated)
popup.author
Сергійчук З. В. (Z. Serhiichuk)
Serhiichuk Z. V. (Z. Serhiichuk)
popup.publication
01-01-2015
popup.source_user
Національний університет "Острозька академія" МОН України
popup.source
https://eprints.oa.edu.ua/id/eprint/5579/
popup.publisher
Ви-во Національного університету «Острозька академія»
Description
Стаття порушує проблему реалізації індивіда-ідеолога в текстах художньої літератури, зокрема в романах Ф. Достоєвського та М. Островського. Авторка звертається до концепції внутрішньо-го діалогізмуМ. Бахтіна та вказує на персонажа тексту М. Островського «Як гартувалася сталь»
як такого, що є носієм ідеї загального блага, яку індивід приймає раз і назавжди ззовні. Натомість персонажі Ф. Достоєвського ідею загального блага творять самі, вона є вкрай індивідуалізованою, від того – нездійсненною власне, як благо загальне.
(The article raises the problem of the individual ideologist (person – word – language – self-awareness –
idea) in the texts of fiction by F. Dostoyevskyi («Brothers Karamazov», «Idiot», «Bisy» («Demons»), «Crime
and Punishment») and M. Ostrovskyi (the research deals with the novel «How the Steel Was Tempered»). The
author focuses on the comparison of the fictional concepts of both authors applying the perspective of the
M. Bakhtins doctrine of the internal dialogism; she points out that the character of M. Ostrovskyi’s «How the
Steel Was Tempered» is the bearer of the notion of common good which is once and for all admitted by the individual
from the outside. On the contrary the characters of F. Dostojevskyiexpress the idea of the common good
on their own, it (the idea) is extremely individualized thus the personal good never coincides with the common
good. That is why speaking about archetypical for the Christian society notion of self-sacrifice in sake of
others (Christ’s self-sacrifice who died as a man and was reborn as a God having defeated the death with life)
the author emphasizes the lack of implementation of the Dostojevskyi’s characters for whom the idea of common
good was deeply personalized even intimated and formed within the limits of EGO (soul, consciousness).
The protagonist of the novel by M. Ostrovskyi is stronger in this context because his notion of the common
good originated from the outside and was adopted by the character as his own (in fact, it is quite the opposite
concept). The other significant differences in interpreting the characters are: the capability to fully understand the self of the M. Ostrovskyi’s protagonist since the sight from aside equals the sight from inside (I-sight) which is the defining feature of the epical model of the narrative and totally coincides with the M. Ostrovskyi’s artistic concept; the peculiarities of the authorial style (distinctly publicistic style of the M. Ostrovskyi’s style with the actual, at the time linguistic and extra linguistic stereotypes), the focus of the text on the shaping of the public
– social – common opinion and call to action – to the establishment of the common good.)
popup.nrat_date
2026-05-01
