Suchergebnisse

The personality and work of Academician S.S. Averintsev never ceases to occupy the imagination of philologists, culturologists, philosophers, theologians, historians and art historians. The humanities scientist, who had a vast outlook and an immense range of scientific interests, left his individual mark in many branches of knowledge. A specialist in ancient and Byzantine cultures, S. Averintsev constantly dealt with the problems of Russian culture, either directly or indirectly referring to its study, paying special attention to the place of Russian culture in world culture, its dialogue with the cultures that preceded it and adjacent to it – the Hebrew and other Middle Eastern cultures, with ancient, and above all ancient Greek, with Byzantine and Western European cultures. It is necessary to note the originality of the scientist's approach to comprehending and analyzing millennial cultures, which were considered by Averintsev each time as a whole, as giant megatexts, which, in the course of their analysis, can be "folded" by the researcher to several capacious metaphorical formulas that can be compared with each other and trace intertextual connections. between them. The identification of such generalizing "microformulas" of huge megatexts is possible only in the historical context of "great time", covering centuries and millennia of national and world history. Comparative-historical and typological analysis of cultural megatexts through their formulaic "clots" allowed Averintsev to carry out cultural-philosophical readings of any megatexts and trace in them allegorical allusions to the events of Russian culture and current modernity.

Yu.M. Lotman's creative path from philologist to philosopher was difficult and risky. The scientist resolutely moved away from the mossy traditions of Soviet vulgar sociological literary criticism and began to master modern methods of text analysis developed by structuralism and semiotics. Since structuralism and semi­otics were banned in Soviet science as products of bourgeois ideology, Lotman and his colleagues at the Tartu-Moscow School called the subject of their re­search "secondary modeling systems", to which they referred not only literary texts, but also texts of art, texts of behavior, city, history, etc. Thus, a culturologi­cal turn took place in the methodology of Lotman and his associates, which was expressed in the fact that the philosophy of culture became the theoretical basis of structural analysis, and the philosophy of history became the historical and cultural approach. With his works in the field of humanities, Lotman showed that the key to understanding and predicting history is culture, and for building a phi­losophy of history is the philosophy of culture. Lotman actually acted as a pro­found theorist and philosopher of culture on a par with such domestic thinkers as A.F. Losev, M.M. Bakhtin, or foreign ones like O. Spengler, A. Toynbee, K. Levi-Strauss, R. Barth or U. Eco.

The S. Prokofiev Theater is today considered one of the pinnacles of the world musical theater of the 20th century. This article is devoted to the opera theater of S. Prokofiev and its philosophical overtones. It is important to understand the features of the formation and development of such a theater as a whole, to comprehend the design of the Prokofiev theater as a system of separate theatrical works in the creative mind of the author. The logic of the composer's theatrical creativity, which in a peculiar way refracted the philosophy of Kant and Schopenhauer, required that each new work of this genre be created in contrast with the previous one. As a result, the entire array of Prokofiev's operas appears in the form of a system of philosophical antinomies embodied in the form of a cycle of opera dyads. Thus, Prokofiev managed to present in the form of binary macrostructures of his musical theater the inconsistency of the surrounding reality and the insolubility of ideological disputes about it, which are formed as a set of "theses" and "antitheses" that are not subject to synthesis. Considering the cycle of Prokofiev's operas as a system of semantic antinomies makes it possible to present the corpus of his musical and theatrical works as a single text (hypertext) - in all the variety of intertextual connections and philosophical overtones.