The Influence of G.R. Derzhavin’s Creative Work on the Formation of a Median Culture in Russia
Ivan Kokovin
This article is a critical attempt to understand the phenomenon of Derzhavin’s infl uence on the ideologies of the median culture in Russia. The research methodology is based on the concept of A.S. Ahiezer. He proposed a “mediational methodology for the socio–cultural analysis of Russian society”, in which there are categorial concepts: ‘inversion’, ‘mediation’, ‘median culture’, ‘inversion trap’, etc. The main issue for Derzhavin was the question of self–determination of the individual in the context of serving the state system. In these conditions, individuals will have to leave the fi eld of ‘inversion’ traditional thinking through ‘mediation’, the search for mediation. Derzhavin, engaged in serving the autocratic state, sought to avoid the extremes of the binary approach.
The author tried to analyze the phenomenon of Derzhavin’s poetic and prose vocabulary in order to discover elements of the median culture in the writer’s texts. It is important for the author to show Derzhavin’s poetic space fi lled with binary oppositions that are intricately related to each other. This space, in turn, is connected to the socio–cultural space of Russian Classicism in general. The author presents his methodology for studying the Russian Enlightenment of the XVIIIth century.
Derzhavin’s work is presented as a focus on developing a new type of relationship with the government. The poetic discourse is a response to a system of historical challenges, the main one being the challenge of binary consciousness. The deployment of mediation practices in some cases determines the specifi c structure of his literary work. The author shows how all of this relates to the poetics of Russian classicism and the state ideology of autocracy. The new forms of social organization in the 18th century involved the struggle for personal liberation including from state violence. Speaking about the relationship between the individual and the state, Derzhavin enters into internal polemic with the revolutionaries on the one hand and the court conformists on the other.