The role of english fiction in the formation of national thinking

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Azerbaijan University of Languages

The role of english fiction in the formation of national thinking

Gahraman A. F.

Гахраман А. Ф. РОЛЬ АНГЛІЙСЬКОЇ ХУДОЖНЬОЇ ЛІТЕРАТУРИ У ФОРМУВАННІ НАЦІОНАЛЬНОГО МИСЛЕННЯ

Стаття присвячена ролі англійської літератури, її істотному впливу на формування цивілізації. Роль і значення англійської літератури в сучасному світі не вичерпані. Її не можна асоціювати виключно з історією культури. Англійська література завжди була співзвучна духу народу, ритму народних рухів, боротьбі за ліберальні цінності. Не випадково сьогодні одним з найактуальніших понять в гуманітарних науках є поняття «інший». Англійська література залишається «іншою» по відношенню до світу в цілому і продовжує проповідувати ті істини, які філогенетично сформували Англійський менталітет. У даній статті показано, що поняття «інший» і «толерантність» слід розглядати в тісному зв'язку. Художня література-один з фундаментальних способів пізнання світу людиною. Якщо національний менталітет-це не просто красива фраза, а реальна, за якою стоять якісь суттєві поняття, то його особливості повинні так чи інакше відображатися в художній літературі. Феномен художньої літератури дивний сам по собі. Філогенетичне розуміння цього явища не дозволяє однозначно кваліфікувати його як гносеологічне чи естетичне. Саме тому дослідники визначають різноманітні якісні характеристики літератури, відзначаючи, що вона має пізнавальне, виховне та естетичне значення. Ми не випадково використовували слово «дивний» для опису феномена художньої літератури. У літературознавстві, як відомо, існує термін Остраненіе, введений формалістами. У світлі остранения, що сприймається не як окремий прийом, а як сутність художнього твору, цей вид мистецтва цілком можна розглядати як різновид відображення або рефлексивного мислення. Світ, створений художником слова, заснований на нескінченності життя, але його творча уява перетворює цю нескінченність життя відповідно до власного бачення. Образи, створені письменником, також мають прототипи в реальності, але як продукт творчої уяви або творчого мислення вони можуть бути набагато більш точними, адекватними відображеннями дійсності, ніж мертві зліпки.

Ключові слова: євроцентризм, ідеологія, Боротьба за ліберальні цінності, маніфестовані реалії, Англійський менталітет, тоталітаризм, колективна підсвідомість, фікція, менталітет, толерантність.

The article is devoted to the role of English literature, its significant influence on the formation of civilization.The role and significance of English literature in the modern world has not been exhausted. It cannot be associated solely with cultural history. English literature has always been in tune with the spirit of the people with the rhythm of popular movements, with the struggle for liberal values. It is no coincidence that today one of the most relevant concepts in humanities is the concept of “other. ” English literature remains “different” to the world as a whole and continues to preach those truths that have phylogenetically shaped the English mentality. This article shows that the concepts of “other” and “tolerance” should be considered in close connection. Fiction is one of the fundamental ways for humans to comprehend the world. If the national mentality is not just a beautiful phrase, but a real one, which has some essential concepts behind it, then its features should be reflected in fiction one way or another. The phenomenon of fiction is strange in itself. Phylogenetic understanding of this phenomenon does not allow us to unambiguously qualify it as epistemological or aesthetic. That is why researchers define a variety of qualitative characteristics of literature, noting that it has cognitive, educational and aesthetic significance. It was not by chance that we used the word strange to describe the phenomenon of fiction. In literary criticism, as is known, there is a term defamiliarization, introduced by the formalists. In the light of defamiliarization, perceived not as a separate technique, but as the essence offiction, this type of art may well be regarded as a kind of reflection or reflective thinking. The world created by the artist of words is based on the infinity of life, but his creative imagination transforms this infinity of life in accordance with his own vision. The images created by the writer also have prototypes in reality, but as a product of creative imagination, or creative thinking, they can be much more accurate, adequate reflections of reality than dead casts.

Key words: eurocentrism, ideology, struggle for liberal values, manifested realities, English mentality, totalitarianism, the collective subconscious, fiction,mentality, tolerance.

Introduction

Perhaps this is precisely the state of affairs that is reflected by the current phrase that everyone, many, if not all, can feel and know, but only geniuses can express it. Apparently, as a result of such an artistic and figurative depiction of reality, the artist manages to convey what is characteristic, not accidental, but important, essential. Thus, the greatest minds of mankind over the course of many centuries returned to the affirmation of the intelligible, its significance and significance, not at all less, and, perhaps, greater than the sensually perceived world.

In the development of the current attitude towards fiction, in our opinion, Eurocentrism has historically been of great importance. Moreover, Eurocentrism should be considered in this context as a completely logical process. The face of the modern world is determined by such phenomena as globalization and westernization. On the one hand, the world is becoming more and more virtually unified. On the other hand, such actual unity of the world is determined by the dominance of Western values. The question is why

Western values, Western lifestyle, Western mentality began to dominate the modern world? The answers to this question can be very different and primarily positive or negative, but it is impossible to deny the fact itself. The impossibility of denying the very fact of the priority of Western European culture creates a very simple model for the spread of such a priority, which in this case risks becoming a notorious priority. In other words, if Westernization dominates in the modern world, then in all areas of culture there is a tendency to establish the priority of the West.

The purpose of the article is to show peculiarities of English literature and its effect to philosophical thinking.

The main problem

Eurocentrism in philosophy and culture is a concept according to which the development of genuine values of science, art, philosophy, literature, etc. occurs only in Europe. The origins of E. can be seen in the contrast between the Greco-Roman civilization and the “barbarians.” In the middle centuries. E. was inherent in the ideology of Catholicism, which viewed Rome and the papacy as the spiritual center of the earth. Early bourgeois Europe also had a religious background and often masked the colonialist aspirations of the capitalist countries of Europe. E.'s ideas were characteristic of the philosophy of Hegel, who represented the Prussian Empire as the bearer of freedom and true culture, and the views of the French. E.'s ideas received a certain refraction in the theories of Spengler and Toynbee, which denied continuity and the possibility of connections between autonomous cultures. The concept of E. performs the ideological function of protecting the “European”, i.e. capitalist, civilization, apologetics of the bourgeois way of life, justification of neo-colonialism. A peculiar reaction to this concept was “Oriental-centrism”, which asserts the borrowed, uncreative nature of European culture, the theory of “negritude” about the superiority of the values of black culture, etc. Progressive thinkers in Europe, starting with the Enlightenment, had a negative attitude towards Europe and put forward ideas about a single universal human and cultural history. Continuing the line of Montesquieu, Voltaire, Herder, Goethe and others on the issue of general cultural progress, Marx and Engels noted that “the fruits of the spiritual activity of individual nations become the common property [6]. National one-sidedness and narrow-mindedness are becoming more and more impossible, and from the multitude of national and local literatures one world literature is being formed”. We cited this excerpt from the Internet because it characterizes the Marxist understanding of Eurocentrism, which is supposedly incompatible with Marx's ideology. However, it is not. For example, Wikipedia (Internet) states that “Notable Eurocentrism was also characteristic of Marx's concept, which left open the question of the relationship between the Asian mode of production and the European ones - ancient, feudal and capitalist”. In our opinion, this is not even the case. The essence of the problem is that Marx and Engels considered socialism to be possible only in the developed capitalist countries of the West. Eurocentrism as an ideology, thus, turns out to be the bearer of the falsity that is inherent in any genuine ideology. “Ideology is “false” (not “lying”!) consciousness; This is not a way of conscious deception, but a way of unconscious self-deception. The function of ideology is to imperceptibly, and therefore painlessly, replace in a person's mind the genuine, but “unsightly” motives of his behavior with illusory, but at least morally acceptable motivations for him. Fiction represents, perhaps, the most ideologically oriented type of reflection. Moreover, this consciousness can only be false against the background of others. For the ethnocultural community itself, this is a necessary specificity, that specificity into which reflection in the form of artistic images has resulted. What is important for fiction is its unconsciousness. Let us remember how Leo Tolstoy was accused of moralizing and, accordingly, a departure from the principles of artistry. They said that Tolstoy was truthful in his works of art, but when he began to philosophize, he was wrong in everything. The artist's mission is to create a world of artistic images that is adequately superimposed on reality. Moreover, the world of artistic images represents this reality as convex in all its features and guises. Here is what J.-P. Sartre writes about this, but in a different connection: “And from now on, any attempt to enslave readers is a threat to the very talent of the writer. If we take, for example, a blacksmith, then such a reality as fascism will affect his private life, but will not necessarily affect his work, but for a writer, fascism will affect both, and it will affect his work more than his life” [5, p. 63].

In other words, the writer fails to express his thoughts discursively. He, of course, has the ability to express his thoughts coherently. An artist cannot be denied this ability. The essence of the problem is different. A writer manages to influence mass consciousness only when he creates a world of artistic images. Disregarding specific individuals, we can generalize what has been said by saying that fiction as a form of reflection and a way of influencing the minds and feelings of the audience is a much more effective phenomenon than political and ideological discourse. Consequently, fiction presents the world from a completely different, unusual perspective, and the system of artistic images exaggerates the manifested realities. Eurocentrism believes that fiction originated in Western Europe, meaning prose by fiction. Consequently, we are talking about large epic canvases representing the world in its entirety. English literature has always been in tune with the spirit of the people, its pulse beat simultaneously with the rhythm of popular movements. In our opinion, the energy set by Chaucer can be traced throughout the development of English literature. It is a powerful stimulus for the development of theater in the person of W. Shakespeare, H. Marlowe, J. Gaywood, S. Daniel and other playwrights, T. More and F. Bacon, such realists as T. Smollett, J. Swift, D. Defoe, W. Scott, C. Dickens, R. Stevenson, T. Hardy, W. Thackeray,O. Wilde, the Bronte sisters, A. Conan Doyle [1]. Here, finally, we need to remember the great writers of the last century, such as J. Galsworthy, B. Shaw and many others. A great seafaring nation creates great literature, which imparts its creative power. Already in the 17th century, the British created a great humanitarian culture, as if there had been no barbarian centuries. The beginning of the 17th century can be considered as the post-Shakespearean era, when many of Shakespeare's innovations had already become canons.

Thus, English fiction truly has a priority place in world literature. This situation is determined both by the history of the people, the history of civilization, and the history of culture and literature itself. The enterprise and energy of the people who discovered the lands, created new England on them, developed industry and science, and formed the very spirit of the discoverer, was adequately reflected in fiction. Even Robinson Crusoe can be considered a symbol of a pioneer, an example of a man who civilized the world. We see a different, fantastic embodiment of this image in Gulliver, who, both among the giants and among the Lilliputians, actually defends the English mentality. Even famous novels about pirates have a huge optimistic effect on the reader. All these images are extremely attractive, they teach initiative, cultivate will and character, and create a cult of an inquisitive mind. It is believed that this literature is intended for children and youth. But the great English writers did not have children in mind. The fact that the world gave them youth speaks volumes about the great educational power of English literature. Truly, the fiction produced by the English people is a tremendous civilizing force. All classical English literature reflects this people's struggle for human rights. And here it is appropriate to again recall the words of Voltaire: “I hate you, but I will give my life so that you can express and defend your opinion.” This is a completely special spiritual aspiration that defines the essence of freedom. It is in this context that the people's struggle for the rights of the individual should be understood. On the other hand, for example, habeas corpus, like many other clauses of human rights, reflects the principles of civil society. After all, by protecting the rights of each individual member of society, we to some extent reduce our rights, which is the main principle of civil society. Where another's freedom begins, my freedom ends.Finally, the struggle for liberal values and the affirmation of these values is widely reflected in English literature. One Soviet leader was once asked how he felt about liberal values, to which he replied that he had always been against any liberalism. The time of troubles had already begun, and the Soviet partocrat, on the one hand, did not want to look like some kind of Russian bear, a supporter of totalitarianism. But, on the other hand, he tried in every possible way to emphasize that nothing human was alien to the Bolsheviks. Perhaps the situation was not without a comical tone, but one should not deny the significance of its content.In our opinion, English literature, more than any other, reflects the essence of artistic creativity as the most important way of reflection. It may seem that there is nothing unusual here, but it is absolutely necessary to distinguish two directions, even two intellectual guidelines, in this area [2]. It is no coincidence that in world literary criticism and philosophy, debatesregarding the main purpose of fiction have continued for a long time. As you know, there were supporters of pure art and those who opposed them. In our opinion, this discussion itself was devoid of logical basis in the sense that fiction simply cannot, by its nature, be devoid of reflective content.If we accept our initial thesis that fiction cannot be formed and exist outside of reflection, outside the reflective consciousness of the individual, then it is right to question the thesis of pure art. Here it is appropriate to again raise the question of ideology in its broad aspect, i.e. the way R. Barth understood its content. There can be no discourse outside of ideology. After all, the formation of discourse occurs on an ideological basis. Consequently, the very absence of ideology is nothing more than ideology. The aesthetics of postmodernism affirms the need to include the position of the narrator in the model of perception of literary text and discourse. And there is a lot of justice in this. For example, the reception of Shakespeare in England has historically shaped Shakespearean discourse. In other words, the image of Shakespeare in the English mentality is adequate not only to the work of the great poet, but also to the discourse that was the historical and cultural reaction to this work. When we say Shakespeare, not only his work is actualized, but also everything that we have heard about him since childhood. Our enthusiastic responses to his work on a subconscious level accommodate the standard ideas of other people. In general, perhaps the collective thinking of the British is shaped by this ideology. In this regard, the thesis about the priority of Europe in the formation of such a method of reflection as fiction looks especially dubious. On the other hand, our idea of pure art turns out to be just as dubious. No matter how pure it may be, it must be ideologically colored and, as a result, represent some reflection on an event in intellectual life. After all, reflection is not only a thought about an event, but also a thought about a thought. English literature fully allows for its analysis as an integral discourse. Starting from its very first samples and up to the present day, it reveals a single ideology of perception and assessment of the surrounding life. We can safely say that it is characterized by the spirit of discovery, experimental exploration of the surrounding world, and the spirit of contradictions. If we try to use psychological terminology, then English literature by its nature is extroverted literature, it is directed outward. Its reflexive nature is associated with the analysis of one's own feelings of perception of the world. In this sense, the content and logic of English fiction is opposed to the logic and principles of postmodernism. It is known that the cornerstones of postmodernism are principles such as absolute relativism and epistemological mistrust. Both are in direct contradiction to the spirit of English literature that we are talking about.

The essence of the problem, in our opinion, lies in the very fact of distrust of old knowledge. And such distrust must necessarily be motivated by previous prosperity. When a calm and well-fed existence ends, society looks for the reasons for the end, still hoping for the restoration of the golden age. Only a few minds understand that a change of milestones has occurred, and nothing will return. Understanding the essence of changing milestones on a subconscious level stimulates a crisis of knowledge. In general, the mechanism of the crisis of fathers and children is triggered, but in the event of the end of the known world and the beginning of a completely new one, as was the case at the beginning of the twentieth century, not only the crisis itself becomes more severe, but also its understanding. Therefore, decadence is quite natural, since it is not a common aesthetic phenomenon. Decadence is first and foremost a state of mind. It is our deep conviction that postmodernism, which is talked about so much today, is not a modern phenomenon at all. The origins of postmodernism should be sought in the decadence of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The “Brilliant galaxy” of English writers, the expressive and eloquent pages ofwhose works revealed to the world more political and social truths than did all professional politicians, publicists and moralists combined, showed in their creations all layers of the bourgeoisie, starting with the highly respected rentier and holder securities, which looks at any business as something vulgar, and ending with a small shopkeeper and a clerk in a lawyer's office. Dickens and Thackeray, Miss Вго^ё and Mrs. Gaskell portrayed them as full of conceit, pomposity, petty tyranny and ignorance, and the civilized world confirmed their verdict. Here, by the way, we may recall that the novels of O. Balzac at one time revealed the essence of the economic foundations of the state more subtly than all the works on political economy combined. This is obvious evidence that fiction at all times performed one of its main functions - educational. That is why it can be considered one of the forms of social reflection. The writer grows into a representative of social thought, an exponent of the mood of the era. Postmodernism, with its epistemological mistrust, can be viewed in different ways. One thing is clear. In this phenomenon, unless it is sincere and does not have the character of a far-fetched game, the collective subconscious is manifested. If writers such as S. Butler appear in literature, therefore, the standards of national behavior change. No matter how original a writer is, he cannot be alone. Usually, a writer expresses the thoughts and sentiments of many. Many feel, but cannot say, the writer speaks for everyone.In the formation and development of English literature, researchers identify various stages, among which a special place belongs to romanticism and realism. Thus, it is noted that “English literature has come a long way of development, inherent in any national literature. It reached a particular peak in the 19th century, during the period of formation and development of romanticism. Representatives of the “Lake School” (Wordsworth, Coleridge, Southey) were the first in English literature to proclaim new principles of literary creativity, returning national features to it. The banner of romanticism was picked up by Byron, Shelley, Rossetti, Keats, giving readers an amazing, magical world full of honor, valor, beauty and nobility” [6]. It is very important that English literature not only fulfills its most important function of adequately reflecting the objective world, but preaches nobility and honor. At first glance, this combination also gives the impression of a paradox, but the paradox is seeming.The fact is that an objective reflection of the contradictions of reality educates in itself. Features of reality that cannot be analyzed in the works of economists, philosophers, politicians and educators are revealed in a completely unexpected way in the space of art work. An accurate reproduction of reality, moreover, a convex presentation of details is educational in itself. If reality causes disgust, then in a certain sense the aesthetic function of fiction is neutralized. As for the educational and cognitive functions of fiction, they are always sharpened. Moreover, even in the absence of clearly expressed reflection, a talented depiction of reality in all its contradictions not only equips the addressee with knowledge, but also educates him.

It is characteristic of English literature of the nineteenth century that an adequate representation of reality is accompanied by the proclamation of the principles of goodness and justice. The work seems to split into two. The depiction of life (and the more talented, the stronger) fosters aggression in a person. The world is merciless, therefore, a person must be fully armed, fight for his place under the sun without sentimentality. However, English literature preaches nobility, which is where its greatness lies. It is characteristic that the replacement of romanticism with realism also did not lead to a decline in morals in the space of fiction. Researchers point out: “But gradually realism began to replace romanticism, which spread in the second half of the 19th century, which is usually called “critical.” The rejection of modernity with its reduced moral criteria makes realism similar to romanticism, but if the romantics called the reader into a fictional world, then representatives of realism (Dickens, Thackeray, etc.) try to give pictures of the development of the individual and society, explore the cause-and-effect relationships of phenomena” [6].

Realism, according to the well-known definition of V.G. Belinsky, is nothing more than the depiction of typical heroes in typical circumstances. Today, this classic definition is sometimes called into question. In particular, it is quite legitimate to assert that the subject of fiction can also be atypical. Of course, a writer can talentedly depict something that is not typical of life, but occurs and, therefore, has the right to manifest itself within the artistic space. But I still want to agree with the great critic [3]. After all, it is the typical that catches people's eyes. Another thing is that a brilliant writer with a heightened sense of perception is able to notice both the atypical and barely noticeable. He shows something that few people realize exists, but after getting acquainted with a literary work, people begin to see what is depicted in life. If so, if the writer really orients his addressee, then he still depicts the typical.In English realistic literature, despite the harsh nature of the pictures of life and revealing colors, the humanistic current also does not weaken. Moreover, “at the end of the 19th century, romantic works appeared again, this is due to the fact that the feeling of the tragedy of life prompted artists to seek peace of mind in an environment abstracted from major social problems. Such writers (Collins, Stevenson, Conan Doyle, etc.) began to be called “neo-romantics” [6]. In our opinion, in English literature there is a characteristic triune model consisting of romanticism, realism and neo-romanticism. The connecting factor within this model is the life-affirming spirit of this national literature. Romanticism, like realism, is inherent in the English people themselves. It is an essential constituent of the English national mentality and is only reflected in fiction. Literature did not invent it, it expresses it. In this regard, it is legitimate to raise one more issue. Literature does not exist outside of language [4]. The content of English literature, the expression that we admire, is expressed in language, presented in linguistic forms. It seems to us that the global significance of English literature must be considered in close connection with the English language. Or, conversely, the importance of the English language in the modern world, the actual function it performs as a world language should be regarded as a consequence of the priority of English literature. In our opinion, it was the great English literature, preaching the principles of democracy and liberalism, that provided the English language with a priority position in the world. It is also characteristic that English is officially only one of six international languages, along with Spanish, Arabic and, etc. But there is some kind of unspoken agreement in the world to speak English with foreigners. This situation is certainly motivated by the world's attitude towards the English mentality.

Conclusion

In our opinion, the role and significance of English literature in the modern world has not been exhausted. The significance of English literature cannot be associated solely with cultural history. We would not follow Huntington and talk about a clash of civilizations. But at the same time, it would be naive to deny the contrasts. After all, even in the modern world, the divergence of views on the essence of things, on priorities, on the path of cultural development are not the same. It is no coincidence that today one ofthe most relevant concepts in humanities is the concept of “other.” And English literature remains “different” to the world as a whole. Consequently, its role is not exhausted. She must continue to preach those truths that have phylogenetically shaped the English mentality. It is also not accidental that such a concept as “tolerance” is actualized in the modern world. In our opinion, the concepts of “other” and “tolerance” should be considered in close connection. It is the “other” and its reality, not ephemerality, that suggests the actualization of tolerance. After all, tolerance presupposes the presence of something not just different, but something that does not coincide in its essence with me, that contradicts me. In this case, the essence of tolerance is manifested in the fact that I discover in myself not just condescension towards others and the incomprehensible, but an understanding of the pattern and naturalness of the existence of something incomprehensible to me in this world. Tolerance represents one of the great principles of human coexistence in the world. Its content is entirely humanitarian and humanistic in nature. The history of our modern times says that the level of development of civilization is not at all a measure of morality. In the modern world there remains cruelty, despotism, violation of human rights, ignorance of creative initiative, a swamp of social life and slavery of the spirit. It is our deep conviction that fiction today successfully fights against everything that humiliates humanity. English literature is in the vanguard of this struggle. Postmodernism, of course, plays a huge role in the modern world, and primarily as an intellectual, spiritual and moral state. The epistemological mistrust discussed above, of course, constitutes the reality of the state of the psyche of modern man. However, postmodernism does not deny the humanistic role of fiction. Epistemological mistrust cannot break the “spell” of fiction. Fiction acts and influences a person on a subconscious level, including the mechanism of work of very ancient archetypes. And this is impossible to resist. Perhaps even because of this, fiction is even more in demand today, and great English literature is at the forefront of this struggle.

Bibliography

english literature civilization

English literature. URL: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/4815659.pdf

Fowler, R. Linguistic Criticism, New York: Oxford University Press. 1986

Marson, E.L Literature and its Study in A University Context, University of New England. 2009.

Radhika O'Sullivan. Literature in the Language Classroom. The English Teacher. Vol. XX. 1991.

Sartre J.-P. What is literature? Translated from the French by Bernard Frechtman. New York: 1950.

The Oxford Companion to English Literature, ed. Margaret Drabble. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Размещено на Allbest.ru