DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2021.6.36354

Abstract: The problem of choreographic interpretation of the novel “Anna Karenina” by L. Tolstoy in the modern ballet theater is relevant: in the past twenty years, several outstanding choreographers have selected this theme for their performance. The subject of this article is the interpretation of the character of Levin by John Neumeier. The goal consists in revealing the expressive elements and peculiarities of choreographic language used by the ballet master in staging this role, as well as in juxtaposing them with the original literary text. The article employs comparative and analytical methods, overt observation (in the process of working with Neumeier on the role of Kitty), Neumeier's lectures prior to the Moscow premiere of “Anna Karenina” (from the author's archive), and materials from video archives of the theatre. Detailed semantic analysis of stage direction and choreographic language of the role of Levin became the basic instrument for determining the traits of Tolstoy’s hero, which Neumeier derived from the literary source. Tolstoy’s reasoning on the topics that require in-depth philosophical reflection, which were inscribed into the artistic fabric of the novel, are instilled in the role of Levin. Creating the choreographic interpretation of this character, Neumeier did not pursue the original verbatim. However, the choreographer strongly emphasizes the difference between Levin and other characters. Determination of the staging techniques used for this purpose define the novelty of the research results, which can be applied in the further study of Neumeier's works. This includes explicit monologue, Stevens' songs as musical background, bare feet of the dancer, series of symbolic leitmotivs of bodily movements, arbitrary bodily movements that resemble improvisation, usage of costume details. Levin's monologues represent a performance within a performance, philosophical-symbolic choreographic meditation that is not connected with the overall plotline. Such solution, despite all apparent differences, conceptually brings together the choreographed character of Levin and the original text. Interpretation of this role is one of the key components in interpretation of L. Tolstoy's novel by J. Neumeier, which encompasses the author’s innovative staging solutions.

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2021.6.36322

Abstract: This article analyzes the creative path of G. P. Shchedrovitsky and the programs for reforming different fields of knowledge (mindset, science, pedagogy, design, etc.). The author claims that Shchedrovitsky formed the approach towards studying the indicated fields of knowledge under the influence of the works of A. A. Zinoviev and L. S. Vygotsky, Marxist doctrine, Scientist attitudes of that time. However, there was a different perspective on the reforms in the three key periods and programs of the Moscow Methodological Circle – creation of the theory of reasoning, theory of activity, and concept of mental activity. In the first period, it was deemed that the reforms will be successful if the reformers follow the method of reasoning developed by Marx in “Das Kapital”; in the second period – if the subjects and fields of knowledge under reform will be viewed as transformed in the context of philosophical, scientific, and practical reasoning; as well as activity (including mental activity). within the framework of which these subject and fields were created, will be subsequently reconstructed. The author examines the peculiarities of implementation of Shchedrovitsky’s reforms and assesses this work negatively. Namely because from the author’s perspective, Shchedrovitsky, on the one hand, did not give due attention to the structure and life of the studied complex phenomena, while on the other hand, designing them as the ideal objects, which is a necessary condition for philosophical and scientific research, he first and foremost fulfilled his personal values and attitudes, ascribing corresponding values to the ideal objects. The author believes that this is an expected outcome, since Shchedrovitsky's methodology for creating the ideal objects did not suggest ascertainment of the structure and life of the corresponding real phenomena.

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2021.6.36356

Abstract: The subject of this article is the evolution of Marxism in our country. Reflecting on the problems articulated by V. I. Tolstykh, the author discusses the professional convention as one of the mechanisms for transforming Marxist doctrine from the theory of revolutionary reform of society into the ideology, which justifies the totalitarian regime. This convention implies the right to misunderstanding and the right to ignorance. The first has two key tasks: 1) isolate the narration from profane interest, and 2) isolate the narration from “theoretical and political mistakes”. Misunderstanding as a latent component of social cognition and fundamental ignorance as limitation of the subject horizon of the theory of the “developed socialism” played a crucial role in metamorphoses of the Marxist thought in Russia. The following conclusions were made: either the philosopher confronts the world as a cognizing subject subordinated only to the interests of cognition, or he subordinates cognition to the interests of the world, primarily social. In the first case, the language must appropriately express what did not exist in mentality, language, and culture prior to it, while in the second case, the language is a means to safely glide over the surface of being, ensuring the faultlessly built theoretical scheme. In this case, philosophy, without explaining the world, gives the recipes for adaptation, survival, apology, and acceptance. The conflict of benefits and principles is resolved by aligning them, so that the theoretician formulates his position as sincerely ministering to the interests (of the party, doctrine, fundamental principles) of power. The author outlines two positions in defending the right to misunderstanding: the first suggest complication of language for preserving the authorial position; the second is the creation of theoretical schemes focused not on the real problems, but own logic. Misunderstanding as one of the strongholds of the thought is bounded up with ignorance. This allowed narrowing down the object horizon of science (theory), excluding the urgent problematic arbitrarily.

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2021.6.36196

Abstract: This article sheds light on the well-known enigma of the treatise “Consolation by Philosophy” by Severin Boethius: why in the conditions of being condemned to death the Christian thinker turns not to prayers or Bible, but to philosophy. Based on the analysis of sources, the author of the article indicates two essential points in the treatise, which in his opinion did not receive due attention in the existing research: 1) the treatise features a detailed sequence of “healing” the philosopher with its own justified semantic saturation and fully fits in comprehension of the role of philosophy in cleansing the soul of the believer and bringing person to genuine Christian righteousness; 2) this path begins with releasing the soul from sorrows and sufferings and ends with discussing the delicate theological questions. The conclusion is drawn that the entire structure of the treatise “Consolation with Philosophy” by Severin Boethius quite organically fits into comprehension of the role and tasks of philosophy in bringing a person to Christian righteousness, which at that time have been developed in Christian patristics. Such interpretation of the question at hand imparts a new sounding to the famous treatise and allows dovetailing the S. Boethius in the traditions of the early Christian patristics and giving an extended assessment to his works.

DOI: 10.7256/2454-0757.2021.6.36130

Abstract: This article analyzes the emergence of the aesthetic category of taste, which dates back to 1620s–1630s, as well as the factors of its emergence. The author correlates the aesthetic category of “taste” with one of the categories of gallant aesthetics “fineness”, which becomes the key requirement for the behavioral pattern of a secular person, as well as for the lifestyle of French aristocracy of the XVII century overall, emphasizing the social conditionality of the concept of taste. From the sphere of secular communication and everyday life, the categories of “fineness” and “fined taste” flow into the sphere of art, which unfolds the discussion on the subjectivity of taste and the tyranny of rules. The problem of taste remains relevant, as we see the blending of edges of this concept, denial of the hierarchy of aesthetic values in modern art. The question of the development of criteria for assessing the artworks is still as urgent as in the XVII century. At the same time, it is impossible to speak of the development and transformation of the aesthetic category of “taste” if the origins of its emergence are unfathomable. The dispute around the crucial for aesthetics dichotomy “taste” and “rules” has blazed up in France in the late XVII century. In this discussion, “fine taste” is opposed not to the concepts of “no taste” or “bad taste”, they are analogous to taste since being subjective. The concept of “taste” was opposed to the rule, which instigated the dispute of the aesthetic thought of the XVII century.