Issue:

№ 13 2022

УДК / UDK: 821.111.0
DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22455/2541-7894-2022-13-148-176

EDN:

https://elibrary.ru/UTANTC 

Author: Temur Kobakhidze
About the author:

Temur Kobakhidze (1953–2022), Doctor Hab. in Philology, Professor, Institute of American Studies, Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Chavchavadze str., 1, 380028 Tbilisi, Georgia.

E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Abstract:

The paper attempts to build an integral system of myth and determine its poetic function in the literature of the first half of the 20th century. There are a huge number of approaches to the study of myth as an unconscious symbol, but a myth becomes a literary phenomenon only when it is purposefully used by the author as part of his creative vision. Remythologization or the conscious return of literature to the original sources and archetypes in the work of W.B. Yeats, T.S. Eliot, J. Joyce, and others are part of the poetic innovation of an entire literary era. The article briefly traces the history of remythologization, and the name of T.S. Eliot stands out as the first to state and fix a new attitude to myth (“‛Ulysses’, Order, and Myth”, 1923). Myth, according to Eliot, is not an unconscious “force” of the writer's creative imagination, but is conceived as a poetic category, as a means of recreating the aesthetic orderliness of a work from the chaotic reality. Conscious mythologization is also conditioned by the need to synthesize several heterogeneous creative structures in a single artistic whole. The reader conceives the presence of a myth in a literary work through the association of imagery with extra-textual plots, thereby fulfilling the author's intention. The paper, using the example of Four Quartets by T.S. Eliot and “The Wheel” by W.B. Yeats, shows how the suggestive archetypes and the variety of reader associations contribute to the timeless perception of the text (reading does not last in time, it is extremely generalized, cyclical, integral). All poetic means of remythologization are aimed at such a synchronous perception of the artistic time and space of the work, which acquires a mythologically universal character, becomes an artistic model of the world.

Keywords: Myth, remythologization, universal symbols, archetypes, T.S. Eliot, Four Quartets, W.B. Yeats, mythopoetic structure.
For citation:

Kobakhidze, Temur. “Myth and European Poetic Thinking in 1920–1940s (Considering the Methodological Aspect).” Literature of the Americas, no. 13 (2022): 148–176. https://doi.org/10.22455/2541-7894-2022-13-148-176

References:

Averintsev 1973 — Averintsev, Sergei. “Analiticheskaia psikhologiia K.G. Iunga i zakonomernosti tvorcheskoi fantazii” [“C.G. Jung’s Analytical Psychology and the Laws of Creative Fantasy”]. Voprosy literatury, no. 3 (1973): 113–143. (In Russ.)

Block 1952 — Block, Haskell M. “Cultural Anthropology and Contemporary Literary Criticism.” Cultural Anthropology and Contemporary Literary Criticism, vol. XI, no. 1 (Sept. 1952): 46–54.

Bodkin 1963 — Bodkin, Maud. Archetypal Patterns in Poetry. London: Oxford University Press, 1963.

Chase 1949 — Chase, Richard Volney. Quest for Myth. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1949.

Feder 1971 — Feder, Lillian. Ancient Myth in Modern Poetry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1971.

Frye 1967 — Frye, Northrop. Anatomy of Criticism. New York: Atheneum, 1967.

Karalashvili 1980 — Karalashvili, Revaz. Problemy Tvorchestva Germana Gesse [ Works by Hermann Hesse]. Tbilisi: Tbilisi State University Press, 1980. (In Russ.)

Knight 1947 — Knight, George Wilson. The Crown of Life. Essays in the Interpretation of Shakespeare’s Final Plays. London: Methuen, 1947.

Kozlov 1984 — Kozlov, Alexander. Mifologicheskoe napravlenie v literaturovedenii SShA [ Mythological Method in the US Literary Studies]. Moscow: Vysshaia shkola Publ., 1984. (In Russ.)

Levi-Stross 1972 — Levi-Stross, Clod. “Iz knigi Mifologichnye. I. Syroe i varenoe”[“From the Book Mythologiques. I. Le Cru et le cuit”]. In Semiotika i iskusstvo metriia [Semiotics and Artmetry], edited by Iu.M. Lotman, V.M. Petrov, 25–49. Moscow: Mir Publ., 1972. (In Russ.)

Losev 1969 — Losev, Alexei. “Problema Rikharda Vagnera v proshlom i nastoiashchem” [“The Problem of Richard Wagner in the Past and Present”]. Voprosy estetiki [ Questions of Aesthetics]. Issue 8, 67–196. Moscow: Iskusstvo Publ., 1969. (In Russ.)

Lotman 1970 — Lotman, Yuri. Struktura khudozhestvennogo teksta [Structure of the Artistic Text]. Moscow: Iskusstvo Publ., 1970. (In Russ.)

Meletinskii 1976 — Meletinskii, Eleazar. Poetika mifa [The Poetics of Myth]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1976. (In Russ.)

Myth and Literature 1966 — Myth and Literature, edited by J.B. Vickery. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1966.

Still 1921 — Still, Colin. Shakespeare’s Mystery Play: A Study of the “Tempest” Book. London: C. Palmer, 1921.

Toporov 1973 — Toporov, Vladimir. “Poetika Dostoevskogo i arkhaichnye skhemy mifologicheskogo myshleniia (‛Prestuplenie i nakazanie’)” [“Poetics of Dostoievsky’s Work and Archaic Schemes of the Artistic Thinking (‛Crime and Punishment’)”]. In Problemy poetiki i istorii literatury [Questions of Poetics and Literary History], 91–109. Saransk, 1973. (In Russ.)

Veiman 1975 — Veiman, Robert. Istoriia literatury i mifologiia [Literary History and Mythology]. Moscow: Progress Publ., 1975. (In Russ.)

Zarubezhnaia estetika 1987 — Zarubezhnaia estetika i teoriia literatury XIX –XX vv. Traktaty, stat'i, esse [Foreign Aesthetics and Literary Theory XIX–XX cc. Tractates, Articles, Essays]. Edited by G.K. Kosikov. Moscow: Moscow State University Press, 1987. (In Russ.)