Olga Pavlova

Volzsky Humanitarian Institute (branch) of Volgograd State University, Russia

Theoretical and methodological aspects of the study of utopia as an ideal, the sociocultural myths and special genre of art

The utopia as an art form of verbalization of a social ideal is realized in various arts – depending on what type of art the utopian author considers as a reorganization basis of «the old world». It can be painting (V. Kandinsky), music (R. Wagner, A. Skryabin), architecture (L.B.Alberti, A.Philaret), theater (Vyach. Ivanov, N. Evreinov). Features of manifestation of a utopia in different types of art are deeply investigated by the Russian scientists. These are S.P. Batrakova, A.V. Vislova, N.A. Evsina, A.V. Ikonnikov, P.V. Kapustin, Yu.E. Revzina, S.V. Stakhorsky, A.A. Strigalyova's works, etc [1]. Even when it is a question of different types of art, literature in utopian design remains a dominant. Artists, painters, musicians before to address to an embodiment of the utopian project in the creativity, create the essay, articles, treatises in which carefully declare the utopian projects. And, as a rule, these works are executed on a joint of scientific, publicistic and art styles and therefore, on specifics of the genre embodiment gravitate to works of verbal art [2]. The reasons of such unique provision of literature in expression of a utopia consist both in features of a utopian ideal, and in specifics of structure of a literary utopia as special genre.

The structure of a literary utopia is easily recognizable, as at its poetics even from T. Mor's «reference» work there is a complex of constant signs. To number of invariant properties of utopian poetics the «frame» composition formed by construction «the text in the text», modeling a travel situation (a dream or vision) the hero belongs. This situation motivates opening of the ideal world and strengthens reliability illusion in its description that creates the game moment with art convention. It is necessary to carry to typological qualities of poetics of a classical literary utopia of the XVI − XVIII centuries also the «rarefied» plot and insignificance of dynamics of development of action, rhetorical dialogue in its plot-function; the special organization of a narration where as a narrator «the real inhabitant», telling about a utopian world order acts. In a delineation of the ideal world traditionally allocate such lines, as its spatial isolation, an autarchy, extra historicity and illusion of recurrence of course of time, reached by a detailed reconstruction of a regulation of life in the utopian state. These qualities of sociocultural model of the ideal world being to a structure utopia in art system, go back to mythological descriptions of the «islands of the blessed» and «Golden Age». The model of the state of a negative utopia has a sacral basis also: it is based on the values of the archetypal myth of the «Iron Age» and the Apocalypse. Myths about «gold» and «iron» centuries are included into structure of cosmogonic myths, accenting ambivalence of a utopia at level of sacral archetypes.

In spite of the fact that «the structure of a literary utopia is a little subject to modernization» [3], «the utopian at the same time both a vizioner, and the son of the era» [4]. Therefore the utopia model, genetically and structurally correlated with an archetype, historically evolves, and this process is caused by mental changes.

The utopia as the fact of art consciousness arises for the first time during the Renaissance era. The artistic vision of the world, a philological paradigm of thinking, demiurgic claims of the person realizing by the Artist Creator, – these features of a world perception caused a pan-utopian discourse of Renaissance to life. In the Renaissance, in a point of intersection of the idea of a worthiness of human history generated by Christianity and the concept of the state going back to cosmogonic representations as «political body» with a unifying and regulating approach to the person, – the «classical» literary utopia containing the description of spatial model of the ideal world (u-topos) is born. The utopian novels-travel of the XVI-XVIII centuries gravitating in the poetics to traveling records and the treatise (T.Mor's «Utopia», «The Sun City» T. Kampanella, «Hristianopolis» I.V. Andrey, «New Atlantis» F. Bacon, etc.).

In a chiliasm paradigm there is a secular version of the concept of development – concept about «progress of human reason» (Zh.A. Kondorse) that as a result leads to the exaltation of the achievements of a civilization, a science, equipment. With reference to a literary utopia the victory of these ideas means that the spatial model of the ideal world is replaced by an ukhroniya (u-chronos) which essence makes the project of the ideal state which is artly created on «real» geographical space, but removed in the future on an uncertain period. As the science during an era of Education and in the XIX century finds the status of wordly religion, in poetics of a literary utopia a big role elements of science fiction start to play («Year 2440» L.-S. Mercier, «The 3448th year» A.F.Veltman, «The 4338th year», «The city without a name» V.F. Odoevsky, etc.) . On the other hand, dialectically inevitably in the XVIII-XIX centuries there is a criticism of scientific and technical progress, the individualizing approach to the personality, defining need of differentiation of human possibilities and requirements arises. Thereof the positive utopia evolves in the negative. Among the first works containing elements of anti-Utopia, – «Candide» Voltaire, «Gulliver's Travel» J. Swift, «The city without a name» V.F.Odoevsky, etc.

Further evolution of a genre of a utopia goes in the area of its psychologizing, being promptly accelerated in the XX century. The negative utopia, which pathos – in protection of the personality then starts to dominate («We are» E.I. Zamyatin, «1984» J. Orwell, «Brave New World» O. Haksli, «Blinding darkness» A. Koestler, etc.).

In the light of the aforesaid we offer the utopia concept as «tertiary» genre. The utopia existing in literary process on «joint» of a science, philosophy and verbal creativity, can be interpreted as the «boundary» polycomponental genre formation which art system interaction of structure model of the ideal world and the art reality issued on «invariants» of genres forms, the most demanded during an era of creation of work. As the sociocultural model of the perfect world in a utopia «is tested» reality of work, utopian fiction is similar to scientific experiment. Therefore its intrinsic line is the phenomenon of «dim» convention reached by game creation-and-destruction of illusion of reliability. This game in reliability promotes that the «boundary» genre of a utopia can be read as «guide» to universe recreation. Taking into account a polystructural the utopia and anti-Utopia are treated not as various genres, and as the opposite valuable relations to the utopian world «projected» by uniform in the archetypal values by sociocultural model. Means, in the analysis of a literary utopia the polystructural isn't settled by ascertaining of interaction of various forms of convention in art system of a utopia as genre of verbal creativity, but understood as synthesis of a science, philosophy, art in structure of utopian fiction. In this regard, by analogy to the Bakhtin's term «secondary» genres, but at the same time accenting the fact of «pogranichnost» of the utopia existing in a paradigm of game of the art world and reality that visually displays synthesis of a science, philosophy and art in utopia structure, we suggest it to call a «tertiary» genre.

At the utopianism characteristic as such as consciousness researchers accent its such lines, as a structure (modelnost), integrity, a sistemnost. In the light of these installations the utopia appears as «the plan of certainly perfect state and social order» (H. Foygt) [5]; as a form of social criticism of the modern world from positions «dreams of fair life» (E.Blokh, M. Horkmayer, theorists of the Frankfurt school) [6]. In a utopia fairly see «the fine flowers of a social fantasy creating an image of the perfect world» [7]; «the alternative project of development of society» [8]; «conscious or unconscious any designing of an ideal» [9]; «the turned form of a positing of a public ideal» [10] or «irrational updating of an ideal» [11].

However orientation inherent in a utopia to an ideal is peculiar also to other forms of consciousness: the moral ideal is characteristic for morals, esthetic – for art, gnoseological – for a science. Besides, the treatment of a utopia as ideal extremely expands this concept for «in that case everyone who has a big ideal will be the utopian and sets before itself the far-reaching purposes» [12]. Therefore, it is necessary to define specifics of a utopian ideal accurately.

So, the utopia is the turned form of a social ideal in which the following characteristics are inherent:

1. Criticism of existing society.

2. Perfektibilizm as belief in approachibility of the absolute, perfection.

3. The Normativity, i.e. postulation of model of the ideal world as sample for «cash» reality.

4. An anti-historicism consisting in denial of cultural traditions not only real, but also last as «sick», disharmonious time, to please speculative model of the perfect world which embodies itself something complete in the development for perfection and means the history end.

5. Logocentrism as the world of a utopia is the world of idea, the sign reality arising owing to a game ontologization of creativity of a word. Logocentrism caused such line of utopian consciousness, as an ideocracy. Worship idea as to an idol generates irrational updating of the rationalistic project of the perfect world. In a fetishization of an ideal there is a basis of metamorphoses of utopian consciousness from esthetic forms of an embodiment to the sphere of sociocultural myths.

6. Rationalism – the property of a utopian ideal correlating with a logocentrism and at the same time defining in a utopia, on the one hand, a factorial and engineering approach to «cash» reality, and with another – specific understanding of the person. The rationalistic treatment of essence of a human nature according to which the person is initially reasonable and capable to subordinate the passions mind is inherent in a utopia, and in its formation the big role is played by «human environment» (society). Therefore features of its personality are easy for «counting» and studying, so, and to correct in the necessary direction, it is equal as possibly to «calculate» and change unhealthy conditions of social «environment».

In the light of the aforesaid the characteristic version for a utopia of a social ideal appears as an ideal project, the plan of perfect society, i.e. as the sociocultural model demanding the fastest embodiment in reality which is perceived by the utopian-ideokrator as the plastic environment changing thanks to his efforts in the direction set and necessary for it.

In the utopiological concepts studying correlation communications of a literary utopia and the myth, four directions of interpretations are clearly visible. To facilitate ordering, we will conditionally call these directions as «metaphorical», «archetypal», «unconscious» and «mythological».

1. The researchers being supporters of the «metaphorical» direction identify the concepts «utopia» and «myth», using them in value ‘the doubtful story, fiction’ (A.F. Lyubimova, O. N. Nikolenko's works, etc.) [13].

2. Representatives of the «archetypal» direction analyze poetics of a literary utopia through a prism of mythological structures of its figurativeness understood in a paradigm of concept С.G. Jung – as archetypes, or manifestations collective unconscious. Such approach allows to find the mythological model of the world based on chronotopical structure of a utopia, and to consider utopia poetics as a desanctification of archetypal structures (F. Ainsa, S.A. Goncharov, G. Günter, B.V. Dubin, E.M. Meletinsky, A.I. Reytblat, A.P. Strigalyov, O. M. Freydenberg's publication, etc.) [14].

3. The scientists working in a methodological framework of the «unconscious» direction, consider a utopia in psychoanalytic aspect, revealing in structure of this genre patterns «individual unconscious», Z. Freud understood in traditions (works of D. Bleych, B. Cook, A.K. Zholkovsky, etc.) [15].

4. In a paradigm of the «mythological» direction a utopia treat as the literary myth or «a sociocultural mythologeme». It allows to expand as much as possible a research material, to leave on level of a sociocultural context in judgment of poetics of a utopia (B.A. Lanin, N.T. Pakhsaryan, M. Eliada's research, etc.) [16].

The utopia and the myth differ in several moments. If the myth – a product of collective creativity, and utopia – result of individual creative process. The myth is irrational, the utopia represents logic designing of model of the perfect world. The myth is sacral, whereas the utopia is based on belief in boundless possibilities of the person and his reason. At last, the utopia arises owing to the rebellious relation to «cash» reality whereas the myth is deprived of critical measurement, it fixes the conformal relation of the person to social reality. These distinctions of a utopia and the myth are lawful only in case of treatment of a utopia as specific genre of individual cultural creativity and don't consider level of life of a utopia as sociocultural mythologeme.

It is proved by

researchers that the utopian discourse proves at first in the sphere of art thinking – the esthetic relation to the world – and only then is realized in other areas of life of society. Being shown at first in the sphere of the esthetic relation to reality and art consciousness, this special genre of verbal creativity then «starts» to a producing of utopian projects, and both in other forms of consciousness, and in practical areas of life of mankind. The last already means that the utopian model apprehended as universal panacea of social and economic and spiritual and moral crisis, took control of mass consciousness. Differently, arisen in a subsoil of religious consciousness, the utopia – through an existence stage as esthetic phenomenon – comes back in the existence «into place» to mythological thinking, but already as a sociocultural mythologeme, through process of a remythologization of consciousness. About these metamorphoses of a utopia wrote F. Ainsa, E. Blokh, B. Groys, M. Laski, O.A. Matveychev, I.N. Nemanov, V.A. Chalikova, M. Epstein [17], etc.

These researchers note that to an era «predisposed» to pan-utopianism, two qualities are surely inherent: (1) it should be the period of sociocultural demolition and (2) this time should be characterized total aesthetic quality of life, the comprehensive game loosening borders between art reality and life. Similar qualities such pan-utopian eras of human history, as the Renaissance, Enlightenment, the Decadence and the Silver age possessed. This process is caused by that utopian, art and mythological types of consciousness are qualitatively similar in four points: (1) these are types of valuable consciousness, (2) in their basis there is a complete, synthetic model of the world, (3) this model is anthropocentric and figurative, (4) all three types of consciousness will be organized by creative force of a word. It is thought, this identity allows to explain, why a utopia, having embodied originally in an art (esthetic) form, then is perceived as «guide» to «recreation» of the imperfect world. But in order that it happened, in mentality of society there should be a remythologization of consciousness.

References

[1] Batrakova S.P. The Art and utopia. M.: Science, 1990; Vislova A.V. The Silver age as a theatre. M.: Science, 2000; Evsina N.A. The architectural theory in Russia in the second half of the 18th and early 19th centuries. M.: Science, 1985; Ikonnikov A.V. Architecture of the 20th century. Utopias and Reality. In 2 vol. M.: Progress-Tradition, 2001; Kapustin P.V. Utopia in the evolution of architectural design// Arhitekton, 2011. № 36; Stahorskiy S.V. The Russian theatrical utopia of the early 20th century: Thesis of Doctor of art sciences. M.: GITIS, 1993; Strigalyov A.A. «City of the Sun» of Campanella as an ideal world order // Feature models of the universe. M.: Science, 1997. Vol. 1. Р. 137−147.

[2]

For example, V.I. Kandinsky argued utopian avant-garde art in aesthetic articles (Kandinsky W. Point and Line to Plane. St. Petersburg.: ABC, 2001); theorist of theatricality as a «pre-aesthetic sense» and creator of theatrical and hedonistic utopia, director N.N. Evreinov also declared his views in numerous works of aesthetic (Evreinov N. Theatre for themselves: The 3 tons of St. Petersburg., 1915-1917; Evreinov N. The theater itself. Pg., 1923; Evreinov N. Theatre of the animals. Pg.: State Publishing House, 1923).

[3] Freidenberg O. Utopia / / Problems of Philosophy. In 1990. Number 5. P. 149.

[4] Polak F.L. Utopias and utopian thought. Boston, 1966. Р. 4.

[5] Voigt A. The social utopia. St. Petersburg., 1906. No. 18. P. 3.

[6] See more details about this: Schifer M. Science fiction als ideologiekritik?: Utopische Spuren in der amerikanen Science fiction hit., 1940 1955. Stuttgart: Metzler., 1977. S. 10.

[7] Svyatlovskiy V.V. Catalogue of utopias. State. publ M.-Pg.: Printing House, 1923. P. 4.

[8] Matveychev O.A. Utopia: the nature and place in culture / / Anthropology of Culture. Ekaterinburg: Ural Branch of RAS, 1997. P. 48.

[9] Batalov E. In the world of Utopia: Five conversations about utopia, utopian consciousness and utopian experiment. M. Politizdat, 1989. P. 19.

[10] Shestakova I.S. Social utopia as a converted form of social ideal: Summary of the candidate of philosophical sciences. Urals. State. Univ. Yekaterinburg: Ural State Univ, 1996. P. 12.

[11] Novikov A.A. On the paradoxes of the ideal // The ideal, utopian and critical reflection. M.: ROSSPEN, 1996. S. 143.

[12] Shatsky E. The Utopia and tradition. M.: Progress, 1990. P. 29.

[13]

See, for example: Lyubimova A.F. Category of nature in the twentieth century dystopia // Problems of method and poetics in the foreign literature XIX-XX centuries. Perm: University , 1995. P. 156–165; Nikolenko O.N. From utopia to dystopia: On the work of Andrei Platonov and Mikhail Bulgakov. Poltava: University, 1994.

[14]

See, for example: Ainsa F. Reconstruction of Utopia. Moscow Institute of World Literature Academy of Sciences, 1999; Goncharov S.A. Mythological imagery of literary utopia // Bibliography and folklore. Volgograd, 1990. S. 39–48; Günter G. Genre problems of utopia and Platonov's «Tchevengur» // Utopia and Utopian thinking: an anthology of foreign literature. Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1991. P. 252−276; Dubin B.V., Reitblat A.I. Social imagination in the Soviet science fiction of the 20th years (review) // Socio-cultural utopias of the twentieth century. M. INION, 1988. №. 6. P. 14−48; Meletinsky E.M. On the literary archetypes. Moscow, 1994; Meletinsky E.M. The Poetics of Myth. Moscow: Oriental Literature, 2000; Strigalyov A.A. «City of the Sun» of Campanella as an ideal world order // Feature models of the universe. M.: Science, 1997. Vol. 1. Р. 137–147; Freidenberg O.M. Myth and literature of antiquity. M. East. l-ra, 1987; Freidenberg O.M. Utopia // Problems of Philosophy. 1990. № 5. P. 148−167.

[15]

See, for example: Bleich D. Utopia: The psychology of a cultural fantasy. Ann. Arbor., 1984; Cook B. Nausea and Utopia // Human. 2001. № 2. P. 61–71; Zholkovsky A.K. Zamyatin, Orwell and Hvorobyev: about dreams of new type // Zholkovsky A.K. Wandering dreams and other works. M: Science, 1994. P. 167–190.

[16]

See, for example: Lanin B. Life in anti-Utopia: state or family? // ONS. 1995. № 3. P. 149–160; Lanin B. E. Zamyatin's heritage and modern Russian anti-Utopia // Acta Slavica Japonika. 2011. Vol. XXIX. P. 49−63; Pakhsaryan N. T. Myth, pastoral, utopia: to a question of differentiation and interaction of literary concepts // Myth. Pastoral. Utopia. M: МGОPU, 1998. P. 12–24; Eliade M. The myth about eternal return. M: Ladomir, 2000; Eliade M. Aspects of the myth. M: Academic project, 2001.

[17] Ainsa F. Utopia reconstruction. Essay. M: IMLI Russian Academy of Sciences, 1999; Bloch E. Principle of Hope // Utopia and Utopian thinking: an anthology of foreign literature. Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1991. P. 49–78; Groys B. Utopia and deception. M.: Znak, 1993; Art: Art and the reality of a utopia. Kiev: Nauk. Dumka, 1992; Lasky M. Utopia and Revolution // Utopia and Utopian thinking: an anthology of foreign literature. Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1991. P. 170–209; Matveychev O.A. Utopia: the nature and place in culture // Anthropology of Culture. Ekaterinburg: Ural Branch of RAS, 1997. P. 47–68; Neman I.N. Social utopianism and social thought // Methodological problems in the history of philosophy and social thought. M.: Thought, 1977. P. 195–113; Chalikova V.A. The utopia is born from a utopia. London, 1992; Epstein M. Postmodernism in Russian literature. M., 2005.