Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial collegium > Editorial board > List of peer reviewers > Review procedure > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Legal information
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

MAIN PAGE > Journal "Litera" > Rubric "Character in literature"
Character in literature
Tikhonenko V., Abramova N. - Character Stands against Canons. Existential Views of Chang Yong-hak «Myth about Sangrip» pp. 53-58


Abstract: Changes in the post-war Korean society are reflected in the Korean literature. There is an interesting opportunity to study the psychological portrait of the imperfect Korean in his time in the story of Chang Yong-hak «Myth about sangrip». The evolution of the protagonist of the Inhoo, as the image contrary to the traditional values of the Korean people, where respect for mother as a "Saint" as well as indisputable moral Canon. This Canon is recognized and broken by hero. The analysis of the story clarifies that the author's position that the basis of morality not a set of traditional laws and regulations of Korean society, but on the respect and understanding of other people's feelings, having reckon others more than your own. The methodology of the research involves the comparative analysis of the novel in context of the contemporaries of the writer. The image of a contradictory character, unconventional shows in the story by writer, suggests that distinguishes Chang Young-hak from modern Korean literature of the postwar period and helped to bring the story beyond the traditions.
Borozdina M. - Nikolay Chaev: The Shadow of Alexander Ostrovsky or His Rival? pp. 108-114


Abstract: This study is devoted to the problems of perception of drama of the second half of the XIX century. Russian Theater of 1850–1870s traditionally considered the theater of A. N. Ostrovsky. The object of the research is the “tendentious drama” by N. A. Chayev, one of the potential rivals of the great playwright. The aim of the work is to confirm the hypothesis put forward that Chayev (as, incidentally, other “dramatists of the Ostrovsky era”) had his own view on the development of the artistic form of the genre and really competed with an outstanding playwright. In work methods of cultural-historical and structural-typological directions of literary criticism are applied. The methodological basis of the study consists of the works of E. G. Kholodov, L. M. Lotman, and A. I. Zhuravleva. The paper presents a comparative analysis of the liberal-accusatory dramaturgy of Chaev and Ostrovsky, on the basis of which a peculiar rivalry between two dramatists in the area of the “tendentious drama” style is revealed. N. Chaev is trying to offer a different from A. Ostrovsky, an improved artistic form of a “tendentious” play. The scientific novelty of the research is due to the fact that this issue is being raised in the domestic literary criticism for the first time. The author’s special contribution consists, firstly, in the appeal to the works of N. A. Chayev, which is little studied, and secondly, in the development and deepening of the problem “A. N. Ostrovsky and N. A. Chaev.
Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.
"History Illustrated" Website