Search results

The paper examines a polemic that rose after the publishing of Vytautas Kubilius' book 20th Century Literature in 1995: the main topics, forms, and development; the positions and professional, institutional, and generation dependence of its participants, their arguments and rhetoric. The number and fervour of reviews was evidence of the importance and influence attached to Kubilius' work, but at the same time it highlighted different approaches to literature (an artistic composition or a social phenomenon performing aesthetic, social and political functions), its historic process (homogeneous or multiplex), expectations of literary studies (uncompromisingly objective or subjective, Soviet vs Western, with priorities given to aesthetics or attention to social functions). The polemic displayed a particular sensitivity to various interpretations of Lithuanian literature of the Soviet period and the problematic place of the post-Soviet critic. The paper also considers the way the history of literature written by Kubilius could be read and interpreted after a decade of its publications, especially the possibility of a different estimation of his attention to historical contexts and ideological aspects in the perspective of contemporary literary studies.

The paper examines a polemic that rose after the publishing of Vytautas Kubilius' book 20th Century Literature in 1995: the main topics, forms, and development; the positions and professional, institutional, and generation dependence of its participants, their arguments and rhetoric. The number and fervour of reviews was evidence of the importance and influence attached to Kubilius' work, but at the same time it highlighted different approaches to literature (an artistic composition or a social phenomenon performing aesthetic, social and political functions), its historic process (homogeneous or multiplex), expectations of literary studies (uncompromisingly objective or subjective, Soviet vs Western, with priorities given to aesthetics or attention to social functions). The polemic displayed a particular sensitivity to various interpretations of Lithuanian literature of the Soviet period and the problematic place of the post-Soviet critic. The paper also considers the way the history of literature written by Kubilius could be read and interpreted after a decade of its publications, especially the possibility of a different estimation of his attention to historical contexts and ideological aspects in the perspective of contemporary literary studies.

The paper analyses four characters ofliterary fairy tales: The Adventures of Pinocchio by Carlo Collodi, The Golden Key or The Adventures of Buratino by Alexei Tolstoy, The Magic Inkpot by Mykolas Sluckis and A Tale of the Forest by Eduardas Mieželaitis. Their common feature, at first sight, is only a wooden body; however, some similar inner characteristics should be noticed. All those characters represent the child's behaviour and mentality. The most influential work is The Adventures of Pinocchio; the didactic nature of the work can be traced in other works, although didacticism is softened and modified. The adventurous plot of the works is also their common characteristic. A Tale of the Forest by Mieželaitis represents the new stage of development of the Lithuanian Children's literature. Children's literature in the 1980s, by using the so called Aesop's language, dared to raise more complicated, even politically dangerous ideas. The protagonist of the work partly represents resistance and revolt. The "birth" of the character is also different: he was not simply carved of a piece of wood; he is an offspring of a lonely woman and a mythic creature, who mainly represents Nature. That is why the character is more metaphorical, more sophisticated, compared with Pinocchio and Buratino.

The paper analyses four characters ofliterary fairy tales: The Adventures of Pinocchio by Carlo Collodi, The Golden Key or The Adventures of Buratino by Alexei Tolstoy, The Magic Inkpot by Mykolas Sluckis and A Tale of the Forest by Eduardas Mieželaitis. Their common feature, at first sight, is only a wooden body; however, some similar inner characteristics should be noticed. All those characters represent the child's behaviour and mentality. The most influential work is The Adventures of Pinocchio; the didactic nature of the work can be traced in other works, although didacticism is softened and modified. The adventurous plot of the works is also their common characteristic. A Tale of the Forest by Mieželaitis represents the new stage of development of the Lithuanian Children's literature. Children's literature in the 1980s, by using the so called Aesop's language, dared to raise more complicated, even politically dangerous ideas. The protagonist of the work partly represents resistance and revolt. The "birth" of the character is also different: he was not simply carved of a piece of wood; he is an offspring of a lonely woman and a mythic creature, who mainly represents Nature. That is why the character is more metaphorical, more sophisticated, compared with Pinocchio and Buratino.

The paper analyses four characters ofliterary fairy tales: The Adventures of Pinocchio by Carlo Collodi, The Golden Key or The Adventures of Buratino by Alexei Tolstoy, The Magic Inkpot by Mykolas Sluckis and A Tale of the Forest by Eduardas Mieželaitis. Their common feature, at first sight, is only a wooden body; however, some similar inner characteristics should be noticed. All those characters represent the child's behaviour and mentality. The most influential work is The Adventures of Pinocchio; the didactic nature of the work can be traced in other works, although didacticism is softened and modified. The adventurous plot of the works is also their common characteristic. A Tale of the Forest by Mieželaitis represents the new stage of development of the Lithuanian Children's literature. Children's literature in the 1980s, by using the so called Aesop's language, dared to raise more complicated, even politically dangerous ideas. The protagonist of the work partly represents resistance and revolt. The "birth" of the character is also different: he was not simply carved of a piece of wood; he is an offspring of a lonely woman and a mythic creature, who mainly represents Nature. That is why the character is more metaphorical, more sophisticated, compared with Pinocchio and Buratino.

The paper analyses four characters ofliterary fairy tales: The Adventures of Pinocchio by Carlo Collodi, The Golden Key or The Adventures of Buratino by Alexei Tolstoy, The Magic Inkpot by Mykolas Sluckis and A Tale of the Forest by Eduardas Mieželaitis. Their common feature, at first sight, is only a wooden body; however, some similar inner characteristics should be noticed. All those characters represent the child's behaviour and mentality. The most influential work is The Adventures of Pinocchio; the didactic nature of the work can be traced in other works, although didacticism is softened and modified. The adventurous plot of the works is also their common characteristic. A Tale of the Forest by Mieželaitis represents the new stage of development of the Lithuanian Children's literature. Children's literature in the 1980s, by using the so called Aesop's language, dared to raise more complicated, even politically dangerous ideas. The protagonist of the work partly represents resistance and revolt. The "birth" of the character is also different: he was not simply carved of a piece of wood; he is an offspring of a lonely woman and a mythic creature, who mainly represents Nature. That is why the character is more metaphorical, more sophisticated, compared with Pinocchio and Buratino.

The article is based on an idea that there are four different modes of understanding reality – practice, science, art and mysticism. Political liberalism demands separation of public and private beliefs. However, mystical understanding of reality is not a system of propositions and beliefs. This is why one can speak of a conflict between liberalism and mystical understanding of reality. Political liberalism imposes a certain understanding of reality on believers. Liberals propose to remove religious convictions from public life and not to treat them as a basis of politics. They forget that mystics have the biggest trouble namely with convictions. To turn the reality of God into words for them is always the hardest task. Mystics find God before words, concepts and discourses. Liberals reduce religion to convictions and demand from mystics to comprehend that, which in their opinion is not comprehensible. There is a tension between liberalism and people who have mystical experiences. Liberals narrow down religious experience to convictions. However, mystical experience is a much broader subject. Behind it stands an understanding of world that has its own standards of reality.

The article is based on an idea that there are four different modes of understanding reality – practice, science, art and mysticism. Political liberalism demands separation of public and private beliefs. However, mystical understanding of reality is not a system of propositions and beliefs. This is why one can speak of a conflict between liberalism and mystical understanding of reality. Political liberalism imposes a certain understanding of reality on believers. Liberals propose to remove religious convictions from public life and not to treat them as a basis of politics. They forget that mystics have the biggest trouble namely with convictions. To turn the reality of God into words for them is always the hardest task. Mystics find God before words, concepts and discourses. Liberals reduce religion to convictions and demand from mystics to comprehend that, which in their opinion is not comprehensible. There is a tension between liberalism and people who have mystical experiences. Liberals narrow down religious experience to convictions. However, mystical experience is a much broader subject. Behind it stands an understanding of world that has its own standards of reality.

The article is based on an idea that there are four different modes of understanding reality – practice, science, art and mysticism. Political liberalism demands separation of public and private beliefs. However, mystical understanding of reality is not a system of propositions and beliefs. This is why one can speak of a conflict between liberalism and mystical understanding of reality. Political liberalism imposes a certain understanding of reality on believers. Liberals propose to remove religious convictions from public life and not to treat them as a basis of politics. They forget that mystics have the biggest trouble namely with convictions. To turn the reality of God into words for them is always the hardest task. Mystics find God before words, concepts and discourses. Liberals reduce religion to convictions and demand from mystics to comprehend that, which in their opinion is not comprehensible. There is a tension between liberalism and people who have mystical experiences. Liberals narrow down religious experience to convictions. However, mystical experience is a much broader subject. Behind it stands an understanding of world that has its own standards of reality.

The article is based on an idea that there are four different modes of understanding reality – practice, science, art and mysticism. Political liberalism demands separation of public and private beliefs. However, mystical understanding of reality is not a system of propositions and beliefs. This is why one can speak of a conflict between liberalism and mystical understanding of reality. Political liberalism imposes a certain understanding of reality on believers. Liberals propose to remove religious convictions from public life and not to treat them as a basis of politics. They forget that mystics have the biggest trouble namely with convictions. To turn the reality of God into words for them is always the hardest task. Mystics find God before words, concepts and discourses. Liberals reduce religion to convictions and demand from mystics to comprehend that, which in their opinion is not comprehensible. There is a tension between liberalism and people who have mystical experiences. Liberals narrow down religious experience to convictions. However, mystical experience is a much broader subject. Behind it stands an understanding of world that has its own standards of reality.

The object of the research is the development of the temporary capital image in the literature. This study aims to analyze the tendencies of the literary mythopoetics of the interwar Kaunas caused by specific historical circumstances, and to track the shifts in reflection on the temporary capital in the Lithuanian literature brought about by changes in the historical, political, social and cultural situation of the 20th century and the beginning of 21st century.The method of mythopoetic analysis of a city applied for this research is directed to the recognition of characteristic symbolic images of temporary capital which have been crystallised in the collective consciousness and appear as literary texts. The historical-political circumstances had a decisive influence on the trends mythologizing the temporary capital in the 20 and 21st centuries in Lithuanian literature. The social and cultural issues facing temporary capital and interwar Lithuania in general took the form of framework for mythologised narrative about a pernicious City – one that stands in the path of the individual's life as a fateful challenge to be overcome in the search of identity. The mythopoetics of interwar Kaunas completely changed its direction in the postwar émigré literature: with the net of historical circumstances receding to the background and the tendency of mythologisation gaining strength, the social-cultural contradictions of independence period retreated to the background and the narrative of temporary capital fatefully converged with the reflection on the fate of the state it represented. Contrary to the narrative of the temporary capital which was idealised, reducing political and social contradictions in the diaspora literature, in the Soviet Lithuania the memory of the interwar Kaunas, as well as the whole of period of the independent Lithuanian, was ideologically demonised, bringing the vices of the bourgeois and authoritarian regimes to the first place. The contemporary myth of the temporary capital is generated by the antagonism between the independence and the Soviet occupation: the progressive, Western-oriented culture of the interwar Kaunas and the creative breakthrough of the artists and intellectuals of the temporary capital are contrasted with the cultural, intellectual and spiritual stagnation of the totalitarian system.

The object of the research is the development of the temporary capital image in the literature. This study aims to analyze the tendencies of the literary mythopoetics of the interwar Kaunas caused by specific historical circumstances, and to track the shifts in reflection on the temporary capital in the Lithuanian literature brought about by changes in the historical, political, social and cultural situation of the 20th century and the beginning of 21st century.The method of mythopoetic analysis of a city applied for this research is directed to the recognition of characteristic symbolic images of temporary capital which have been crystallised in the collective consciousness and appear as literary texts. The historical-political circumstances had a decisive influence on the trends mythologizing the temporary capital in the 20 and 21st centuries in Lithuanian literature. The social and cultural issues facing temporary capital and interwar Lithuania in general took the form of framework for mythologised narrative about a pernicious City – one that stands in the path of the individual's life as a fateful challenge to be overcome in the search of identity. The mythopoetics of interwar Kaunas completely changed its direction in the postwar émigré literature: with the net of historical circumstances receding to the background and the tendency of mythologisation gaining strength, the social-cultural contradictions of independence period retreated to the background and the narrative of temporary capital fatefully converged with the reflection on the fate of the state it represented. Contrary to the narrative of the temporary capital which was idealised, reducing political and social contradictions in the diaspora literature, in the Soviet Lithuania the memory of the interwar Kaunas, as well as the whole of period of the independent Lithuanian, was ideologically demonised, bringing the vices of the bourgeois and authoritarian regimes to the first place. The contemporary myth of the temporary capital is generated by the antagonism between the independence and the Soviet occupation: the progressive, Western-oriented culture of the interwar Kaunas and the creative breakthrough of the artists and intellectuals of the temporary capital are contrasted with the cultural, intellectual and spiritual stagnation of the totalitarian system.