Suchergebnisse

All literature can be understood as text; it can be interpreted, but not all literature asks to be. Text describes a literary work as it moves within and between cultures; it implies interpretation and the readers' active participation. To use the termtextis to make assumptions that are not universal. While literature can bridge the many cultures that create and read it, it can also be confined to a specific frame within its own culture. It can resist bridging, just as it resists independent interpretation. Literature as performance, as an example, is intended for one time and one place. Performance looks at the literary work inside its intended environment. The meaning of the work is predicated by the occasion and conventions of its reading; the audience is asked not to insinuate its own interpretation but to participate in the one provided. Performance can be a physical realization of text in time and space; and, even when an actual performance does not take place, the term suggests an important way of reading.

This anthology offers a rich array of documents, short fiction, poems, songs, plays, movie scripts, comic routines, and folklore to offer a close look at the mass culture that was consumed by millions in Soviet Russia between 1917 and 1953. Both state-sponsored cultural forms and the unofficial culture that flourished beneath the surface are represented. The focus is on the entertainment genres that both shaped and reflected the social, political, and personal values of the regime and the masses. The period covered encompasses the Russian Revolution and Civil War, the mixed economy and culture

With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Caspian Sea and its natural resources became a source of contention for Russia, Iran, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan. The underlying issue is paradoxical in light of its misleading simplicity – is the Caspian a sea or a lake? Throughout the article, we present proof that this question does matter and the answer should be given in the near future unless the world wishes to witness a cascade of conflicts. Even though the establishment of an international legal regime would place the region within the purview of UNCLOS and the international rule of law, thus ensuring safety and stability, the littoral states have pursued their own economic and political interests, resulting in a plethora of competing legal positions. As we evaluate the main points of disagreement and their respective impact on the status quo, the history of the region plays a prominent role. Consequently, the bordering countries choose to adhere to prevailing methods of dealing with issues of similar complexity: power competition over the resources of small states, negotiation and power politics instead of international rule of law, and protection that disguises coercion. Will the littoral states ever abandon the temptation of hostile geopolitical games and embark on a process of peaceful, open negotiations? This article seeks to help resolve this dilemma while analysing the failure of public international law to amend the situation, the legal chaos reigning in the region arising from the need to exploit the resources and construct pipelines to export them, and how the post-Soviet sphere has experienced a weakening of public international law as its doors open to the global petroleum market.