.png)
.png)
Email this article 
Traditions of Osip Mandelstam and reception of his works and author’s myth among Russian poets of modern times
https://doi.org/10.28995/2686-7249-2019-6-255-265
Abstract
Part of the contemporaries treated Osip Mandelstam’s poetics either as an example of the archaic trend or as a unique, significant phenomenon but with no place in the immediate cultural landscape. One thing that contributed to a special perception of Mandelstam was the development of a posthumous myth of the poet. This myth is still relatively active in contemporary Russian poetry and can generate some most unexpected forms of reception. At the same time, certain parts of Mandelstam’s poetic universe remain very productive, as well as his poetics as a whole (that was canonized as quintessential for contemporary poetry). Many active poets view Mandelstam as a figure pivotal for recreating the world of contemporary poetry or even the whole culture.
About the Author
D. M. DavydovRussian Federation
Danila M. Davydov, Cand. of Sci. (Philology), associate professor, bld. 26, Maronovskii lane, Moscow, Russia, 119049
References
1. Aizenberg, M. (1997), Vzglyad na svobodnogo khudozhnika [A Look upon a Free Artist], Moscow, Russia.
2. Aizenberg, M. (2018), Uron i vozmeshchenie [Damage and Reparation], Moscow, Russia.
3. Eremenko, A. (1991), Stikhi [Poems], Moscow, Russia.
4. Gandlevskii, S. (1995), Prazdnik [The Feast], Moscow, Russia.
5. Grigor’ev, V. (2000), Budetlyanin [The Budetlyanin], Moscow, Russia.
6. Kulakov, V. (1999), Poeziya kak fakt [Poetry as Fact], Moscow, Russia.
7. Kushner, A. (1990), Apollon v snegu: Zametki na polyakh [Apollo in Snow: Marginalia], Leningrad, Russia.
8. Levin, Yu.I., Segal, D.M., Timenchik, R.D., Toporov, V.N. and Tsiv’yan, T.V. (2006), “Russian semantic poetics as potential cultural paradigm”, in Segal, D.M., Literatura kak okhrannaya gramota [Literature as safe conduct], Vodolei Publishers, Moscow, Russia, pp. 181-212.
9. Nekrasov, V. (1991), Spravka [Reference], Moscow, Russia.
10. Satunovskii, Y. (2012), Stikhi i proza k stikham [Poems and Prose in Relation to Poems], Moscow, Russia.
11. Segal, D. (2006), “Russian semantic poetics twenty-five years later” in Segal, D.M., Literatura kak okhrannaya gramota [Literature as safe conduct], Vodolei Publishers, Moscow, Russia, pp. 213-252.
12. Shostakovskaya, I. (2004), Tsvetochki: Stikhi [Little flowers: Poems], Moscow, Russia.
13. Soshkin, E. (2005), Gorenko i Mandelstam [Gorenko and Mandelstam], Moscow, Russia.
14. Svyatopolk-Mirskii, D. (2002), Poety i Rossiya: Stat’i. Retsenzii. Portrety. Nekrologi [Poets and Russia. Essays. Reviews. Profiles. Obituaries]. Saint Petersburg, Russia.
15. Tynyanov, Y. (1977), Poetika. Istoriya literatury. Kino [Poetics. History of Literature. Cinema], Moscow, Russia.
16. Venclova, T. (2005), Stat’i o Brodskom [Articles about Brodsky], Moscow, Russia.
17. Yur’ev, O. (2014), Pisatel’ kak sotovarishch po vyzhivaniyu. Stat’i, esse i ocherki o literature i ne tol’ko. [Writer as co-survivor. Essays and studies on literature and otherwise], Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Supplementary files
For citation: Davydov D.M. Traditions of Osip Mandelstam and reception of his works and author’s myth among Russian poets of modern times. RSUH/RGGU Bulletin: “Literary Teory. Linguistics. Cultural Studies”, Series. 2019;(6(2)):255-265. https://doi.org/10.28995/2686-7249-2019-6-255-265
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
