Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Iowa, 2006. / Supervisor: Judith Liskin-Gasparro. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 181-189).

This thesis is concerned with the thoughts of the Russian writer Ivan Turgenev (1818-83) on the development of the arts in his native country and the specific problems facing the Russian artist. It starts by considering the state of the creative arts in Russia in the early nineteenth century and suggests why even towards the end of his life Turgenev still had some misgivings as to whether painting and music had become a real necessity for Russian society in the same way that literature clearly had. A re-appraisal of "On the Eve" (1860) then follows, indicating how the young sculptor Shubin in this novel acts as the author's alter ego in a number of respects, in particular by reflecting Turgenev's views on heroism and tragedy. The change in Shubin's attitude towards Insarov, whom the sculptor at first tries to belittle before eventually comparing him to the noble Brutus in Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar", can be said to anticipate Turgenev's own feelings about Bazarov in "Fathers and Children" (1862) and the way that this 'nihilist' attained the stature of a true tragic hero. In this chapter, too, the clichéd notion of Turgenev's alleged affinity with Schopenhauer is firmly challenged - an issue that is taken up again later on in the discussion of "Phantoms" (1864) and "Enough!" (1865). Other aspects of Turgenev's portrayal of Shubin are used to introduce the remaining chapters, where the problems of dilettantism, originality, nationalism and Slavophilism - among the most acute problems which Russian artists had to contend with in Turgenev's eyes - are explored through various works of his, especially the novel "Smoke" (1867), as well as by reference to his observations of such contemporaries as Glinka, the painter Ivanov, Tolstoi, and the composers of the 'Mighty Handful'. The springboard for the final chapter on the tragic fate befalling so many Russian artists is once again Shubin, whose voluntary exile in Rome at the end of the novel allows for certain parallels to be drawn with Gogol'. Despite Turgenev's own 'absenteeism' from Russia, for which he was much reproached, it is emphasized in the conclusion that healways remained devoted to the cause of Russia's civic and cultural development, especially in the realm of the arts, whose national, and at the same time universal, value he upheld so compellingly in his Pushkin speech of 1880.

No description available.

A study of the German influence on the Russian Revolution in 1917, including the German-Bolshevik conspiracy and the treaty of Brest-Litovsk.

Beginning in the mid 1980s the practices of Soviet youth became a scene of heightened academic interest as western scholars eagerly turned their attention to the changing ‘subcultural’ realities of youth in the wake of the relaxations introduced under Perestroika and Glasnost. Unfortunately, despite this growing interest, the Russian punk community has remained, predominantly on the periphery of scholarly inquiry. One can surmise, however, that a dominant reason for this has been the over-reliance on New Subcultural Theory, which marks many of these studies and which seeks to understand ‘subcultures’ in terms of their homogeneous values and symbolic resistance to a socio-structural Other within a rigid and vertical cultural model. This paradigm, when coupled with prominent western themes exhibited in the behaviour of Russian punks, has led to a somewhat anomalous understanding of this group’s existence and has championed the apparent drive within the academy to discredit both the punk community and its membership as little more than cultural mimics. By drawing on data collected from a Russian punk internet forum located at http://offtop.ru/punkforum, this exploratory grounded theory study investigates (1) how the community exists as a discursive space (2) how individual participants construct and put forward their self-presentation and, (3) to what extent may we consider that these presentations of self both construct, and are constructed by the community? The overall concern of the study is to consider whether a conceptual break from the notion of ‘subculture’ permits a fuller understanding of how individual members’ identities are both constructed by, and construct this particular punk community. The findings suggest that while members exhibit some general commonalities, there is significant diversity among them as well. A key finding is how members become “authentic” in relation to the punk idea, while taking part in the construction of that idea and the group as a whole. This presents a significant departure from the notion of ‘subculture’ and from common-place ideas about punk, namely that being punk involves little more than a style of dress and behaviours. Thus, this exploratory study implies that this Russian punk community is a dynamic discursive space within which identity must continuously be negotiated and renegotiated through language.

In his analysis of Mikhail Bulgakov’s The Master and Margarita, Elliot Mason explores the biblical and mythological ancestry of two of the novel’s most under-studied demonic characters: Azazello and Korov′ev-Fagot. Both characters, it is argued, serve important thematic roles within The Master and Margarita, acting as symbols of the oppressed artist, creativity and judgement. Azazello and Korov′ev-Fagot are integral to an eschatological reading of the text, with Korov′ev in particular suggesting new areas of Faustian influence within The Master and Margarita. Azazello’s relevance to the novel is discussed in terms of his relationship with another of Bulgakov’s characters: the demon Abaddon. Through an examination of the biblical, literary and mythological development of the myth of the Azazel-figure throughout history, Mason argues a thematic, and perhaps even more tangible, connection between the two characters. In the context of Bulgakov’s novel, it is argued, Azazello and Abaddon are interrelated, and it is this relationship that sheds new light on the thematic importance of either character to The Master and Margarita. An examination of older, non-canonical biblical texts allows the connection between Azazel and Abaddon to be explored and applied to Bulgakov’s novel. It is argued that Bulgakov himself, upon reading the texts studied, came to many of the same conclusions, and that these conclusions resulted in the connectedness of Azazello and Abaddon within The Master and Margarita. The second chapter of Mason’s study is devoted to tracing the heritage of the character, Kovo′ev-Fagot. A number of references and clues within The Master and Margarita are suggestive of the fact that Bulgakov had a particular literary, mythological or contemporary figure in mind when he created the character. Despite these references, Bulgakovian scholars have so far been unable to identify precisely whom Bulgakov was drawing on as inspiration for Korov′ev. Using the information provided by The Master and Margarita, Mason argues for a reading of Korov′ev-Fagot as the biblical, mythological sea-beast, Leviathan. He further links the character with Mephistopheles, finding a connection between Leviathan and Mephistopheles in a lesser-known version of the Faust legend, which replaces the name of one with the other. An overview of Leviathan’s eschatological and thematic functions, as well as his relationship with Egyptian and Norse chaos serpents, is used in order to provide the demonological background of the figure to a potentially non-specialist audience. The themes explored in this section of the argument are then applied to The Master and Margarita itself, in order to better understand the intended role of Korov′ev-Fagot to Bulgakov’s work. The identification of Korov′ev-Fagot with Leviathan and Mephistopheles, as well as that of Azazello with Abaddon, serves as a foundation of information, compiled in order that future interpretations may hopefully draw from it.

Thesis (doctoral)--Rijksuniversiteit te Groningen, 1981. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 359-370).

A wealth of East Slavic folklore has been collected throughout Russia, Ukraine, and Belorussia over a period of more than a hundred years. Among the many examinations that have been conducted on the massive corpus of legends, fabulates, memorates, and charms is an attempt to gain some understanding of indigenous East Slavic religion. Unfortunately, such examination of these materials has been overwhelmingly guided by political agenda and cultural bias. As early as 1938, Yuri Sokolov suggested in his book, Russian Folklore, that some of Russia’s folk practices bore a remarkable resemblance to shamanic practices, commenting specifically on a trance like state which some women induced in themselves by means of an whirling dance. This thesis explains the historical bias against a comparison of East Slavic folklore with shamanism; offers a brief anthropological review of shamanism and conducts a minimal comparison of elements of Russian folklore with the sine qua non definitions of two experts on the subject of shamanism. / text

In his analysis of Mikhail Bulgakov’s The Master and Margarita, Elliot Mason explores the biblical and mythological ancestry of two of the novel’s most under-studied demonic characters: Azazello and Korov′ev-Fagot. Both characters, it is argued, serve important thematic roles within The Master and Margarita, acting as symbols of the oppressed artist, creativity and judgement. Azazello and Korov′ev-Fagot are integral to an eschatological reading of the text, with Korov′ev in particular suggesting new areas of Faustian influence within The Master and Margarita. Azazello’s relevance to the novel is discussed in terms of his relationship with another of Bulgakov’s characters: the demon Abaddon. Through an examination of the biblical, literary and mythological development of the myth of the Azazel-figure throughout history, Mason argues a thematic, and perhaps even more tangible, connection between the two characters. In the context of Bulgakov’s novel, it is argued, Azazello and Abaddon are interrelated, and it is this relationship that sheds new light on the thematic importance of either character to The Master and Margarita. An examination of older, non-canonical biblical texts allows the connection between Azazel and Abaddon to be explored and applied to Bulgakov’s novel. It is argued that Bulgakov himself, upon reading the texts studied, came to many of the same conclusions, and that these conclusions resulted in the connectedness of Azazello and Abaddon within The Master and Margarita. The second chapter of Mason’s study is devoted to tracing the heritage of the character, Kovo′ev-Fagot. A number of references and clues within The Master and Margarita are suggestive of the fact that Bulgakov had a particular literary, mythological or contemporary figure in mind when he created the character. Despite these references, Bulgakovian scholars have so far been unable to identify precisely whom Bulgakov was drawing on as inspiration for Korov′ev. Using the information provided by The Master and Margarita, Mason argues for a reading of Korov′ev-Fagot as the biblical, mythological sea-beast, Leviathan. He further links the character with Mephistopheles, finding a connection between Leviathan and Mephistopheles in a lesser-known version of the Faust legend, which replaces the name of one with the other. An overview of Leviathan’s eschatological and thematic functions, as well as his relationship with Egyptian and Norse chaos serpents, is used in order to provide the demonological background of the figure to a potentially non-specialist audience. The themes explored in this section of the argument are then applied to The Master and Margarita itself, in order to better understand the intended role of Korov′ev-Fagot to Bulgakov’s work. The identification of Korov′ev-Fagot with Leviathan and Mephistopheles, as well as that of Azazello with Abaddon, serves as a foundation of information, compiled in order that future interpretations may hopefully draw from it.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2008. / The entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file. Title from title screen of research.pdf file (viewed on August 25, 2008) Vita. Includes bibliographical references.