MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1513344375

The Making of the State Writer: Social and Aesthetic Origins of Soviet Literary Culture

2004· article· en· W1513344375 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Елена Барабан

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueSoviet and Russian History
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIntelligentsiaIdeologyRealismState (computer science)Russian literatureLiteratureAestheticsMainstreamPoliticsSociologyHistoryLawPolitical scienceArt
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Evgeny Dobrenko. The Making of State Writer: Social and Aesthetic Origins of Soviet Literary Culture. Trans. Jesse Savage. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001. 512pp. $75.00, cloth.In his previous work on Socialist Realism, The Making of State Reader: Social and Aesthetic Contexts of Reception of Soviet Literature (Stanford, 1997), Evgeny Dobrenko showed how Soviet State made masses not only into consumers of Soviet mainstream literature but also into its creators. The Making of State Writer: Social and Aesthetic Origins of Soviet Literary Culture continues his study of literary process of and Soviet eras. He begins his investigation of social and aesthetic origins of Stalinist with question of why Soviet literature was occupied by graphomaniacs whose names were sometimes better known than their works. In posing this question, Dobrenko breaks away traditional interpretations of Soviet literature in ternis of social command (sotsial'nyi zakaz) and repression directed against those who did not want to toe Party line. He convincingly shows that Socialist Realism was as much a cultural revolution from below as from above: According to classical Stalinist definition, Soviet writers are 'engineers of human souls,' but they themselves are also product of social engineering (p. xviii). The Soviet reader contributed to creation of Socialist realist aesthetics by becoming Soviet writer (pp. xx-xxi).Dobrenko finds roots of Soviet ideological graphomania in attempts at creative writing by seventeenth- to nineteenth-century Russian serfs and workers. He shows how liberal intelligentsia of first half of 19th century promoted people (p. 5). Artistically inferior, this literature for village lackeys, as Belinskii described it (p. 11), was used to substantiate political agenda of intelligentsia. In second half of 19th century, raznochinets which Dobrenko situates between mass literature and high literature, developed themes that were later picked up by proletarian writers during Silver Age. These writers considered themselves followers of Nekrasov tradition in poetry (p. 71 ); in their works, they complained about the lot of poor and expressed masses' hatred for the rich ones (p. 69). After 1905 Revolution, hundreds of self-taught poets and writers of proletarian origin tried to emulate Gorky while making their way into politically engaged literature (p. 84). In decade preceding October Revolution, Pravda published poetry by autodidacts for propaganda purposes.With rise of Stalin, however, literature was increasingly used as a means of creating a dictatorial state. Dobrenko illuminates intricacies in development of Soviet literature to show how a new understanding of proletarian poetry was formed in 192Os and 193Os: Political which preserved an independent status for author (the absolute freedom of revolutionary culture) was separated Party-minded which no longer needed a poet who might challenge Party line. Dobrenko presents history of proletarian literature in 192Os as confrontation of political literature and Party-minded literature that was growing out of it. The Party-minded artist, a writer who condoned the absolute non-freedom ('necessity') of Soviet culture and became his own most severe censor (p. 102) appeared milieu of political poets and then replaced them. Dobrenko shows that same processes that shaped political and social life in country also defined development of literature. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,011
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,028

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0110,023
Communication savante0,0110,006
Science ouverte0,0010,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,255
Écart entre enseignants0,244 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2004
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Slavonic PapersMême sujetSoviet and Russian HistoryTravaux en français237 207