Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin
RU EN






Today: 04.01.2026
Home Issues 2015 Year Issue №10 “THE SYSTEM OF INVENTED SIGNS IS TERNING THE WHOLE WORLD…”: POLEMIC OF A. V. MAKEDONOV WITH SEMEIOLOGISTS
  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Bulletin Archive
    • 2025 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2024 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2023 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2022 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2021 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2020 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2019 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 2018 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
    • 2017 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2016 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2015 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2014 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2013 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2012 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2011 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2010 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2009 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2008 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2007 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
    • 2006 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2005 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2004 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2003 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
    • 2002 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2001 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
    • 2000 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 1999 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 1998 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 1997 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
  • Search
  • Rating
  • News
  • Editorial Board
  • Information for Authors
  • Review Procedure
  • Information for Readers
  • Editor’s Publisher Ethics
  • Contacts
  • Manuscript submission
  • Received articles
  • Accepted articles
  • Subscribe
  • Service Entrance
vestnik.tspu.ru
praxema.tspu.ru
ling.tspu.ru
npo.tspu.ru
edujournal.tspu.ru

TSPU Bulletin is a peer-reviewed open-access scientific journal.

E-LIBRARY (РИНЦ)
Ulrich's Periodicals Directory
Google Scholar
European reference index for the humanities and the social sciences (erih plus)
Search by Author
- Not selected -
  • - Not selected -
Яндекс.Метрика

“THE SYSTEM OF INVENTED SIGNS IS TERNING THE WHOLE WORLD…”: POLEMIC OF A. V. MAKEDONOV WITH SEMEIOLOGISTS

Kotova E.L.

Information About Author:

The article deals with the aesthetic views of A. V. Makedonov – a famous literary critic and historian of the Soviet literature and post-Soviet periods. He was a supporter of the scientific concept of perceiving art as a constantly evolving knowledge of objective reality in the form of a second subjective-objective reality. The basic aesthetic views of Makedonov are connected with German classical aesthetics, particularly the philosophy of G.W.F. Gegel, the works of V. G. Belinsky and N. G. Chernyshevsky. In his works of the 1960–1980s, he was engaged in a polemic with Russian and foreign supporters of the theory of semiotics, in particular with Yu. M. Lotman. The researcher tried to prove that, despite a number of accurate statements, his opponents failed to determine the specificity of art as they tried to reduce all the originality of artistic creativity to the characteristics of different sign systems and as well as to reject the study of artistic image as a way to acquire knowledge about objective reality.

Keywords: art, aesthetic sign, image, model, A. V. Makedonov, Yu. M. Lotman

References:

1. Khanzen-Leve O. A. Russkiy formalizm. Formalizm: metodologicheskaya rekonstruktsiya razvitiya na osnove printsipa ostraneniya [Russian formalism: Methodological reconstruction of the development on the basis of the principle of estrangement]. Per. s nem. S. A. Romashko. Moscow, Yazyki russkoy kul'tury Publ., 2001. 672 p. (in Russian).

2. Emerson K. Literaturnye teorii 1920-kh godov: chetyre napravleniya i odin praktikum [Literary theories of the 1920-ies: four directions and one workshop]. Istoriya russkoy literaturnoy kritiki: sovetskaya i postsovetskaya epokha [The history of Russian literary criticism: the Soviet and post-Soviet era]. Pod red. E. Dobrenko i G. Tikhonova. Moscow, 2011. 792 p. (in Russian).

3. Kalinin I. Tartusko-moskovskaya semioticheskaya shkola: semioticheskaya model' kul'tury [Tartu-Moscow semiotic school: a semiotic model of culture]. Novoye literaturnoye obozreniye – New Literary Review, 2009, no. 98. URL: http://magazines.russ.ru/nlo/2009/98/ka6.html (accessed 5 May 2015) (in Russian).

4. Strukturalizm: “za” i “protiv” [Structuralism: “for” and “against”]. Red. E. Ya. Basin, M. Ya. Polyakov. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1975. 469 p. (in Russian).

5. Kotova E. L. “Ya imeyu odno pechal'noye preimushchestvo…”: Peripetii sud'by A. V. Makedonova (1909–1994) [“I have one sad advantage”: the Vicissitudes of V. A. Makedonov’ fate (1909–1994)]. Izvestiya Smolenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – News of Smolensk State University, 2010, № 1 (9), pp. 40–58 (in Russian).

6. Bychkov V. V. Estetika [Aesthetics]. Moscow, Akademicheskiy proekt Publ., 2011. URL: http://www.erlib.com/Виктор_Бычков/Эстетика/1/(accessed 12 May 2015) (in Russian).

7. Makedonov A. V. Znak i obraz v estetike Gegelya [Sign and image in Hegel's aesthetics]. Estetika Gegelya i sovremennost' [Hegel's Aesthetics and Modernity]. Moscow, Izobrazitel'noye iskusstvo Publ., 1984. 272 p. (in Russian).

8. Zabolotskiy N. A. Izbrannye proizvedeniya v 2 t. [Selected worksin 2 vol.]. Moscow, 1972 (in Russian).

9. Uellek R., Uorren O. Teoriya literatury [theory of literature]. Perevod A. Zvereva, V. Kharitonova, I. Il'ina. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1978. 328 p. (in Russian).

10. Lotman Yu. M. Struktura khudozhestvennogo teksta [The structure of the poetic text]. Ob iskusstve [About art]. St. Petersburg, Iskusstvo-SPB Publ., 2005. 704 p. (in Russian).

11. Makedonov A. V. Analiz khudozhestvennogo masterstva [Analysis of artistic skill]. Sovremennaya literaturno-khudozhestvennaya kritika: aktual'nye problemy [Contemporary Literary Criticism: Current problems]. Pod red. Yu. Andreeva. Leningrad, Nauka Publ., 1975. Pp. 44–106 (in Russian).

12. Lotman Yu. M. Lektsii po struktural'noy poetike [Lectures on structural poetics]. Yu. M. Lotman i tartusko-moskovskaya semioticheskaya shkola [Yu. M. Lotman and the Tartu-Moscow school of semiotics]. Moscow, Gnozis Publ., 1994. 560 p. (in Russian).

13. Makedonov A. V. Sversheniye i kanuny: O poetike russkoy sovetskoy liriki 1930–1970-kh godov [The accomplishment and the eves: On the poetics of the Russian Soviet lyrics 1930–1970-ies]. Leningrad, Sovetskiy pisatel' Publ., 1985. 360 p. (in Russian).

14. Egorov B. F. O masterstve literaturnoy kritiki: Zhanry. Kompozitsiya. Stil' [About the art of literary criticism: Genres. Composition. Style]. Leningrad, Sovetskiy pisatel' Publ., 1980. 320 p. (in Russian).

15. Kotova E. L. “V iskusstve – vse sredstvo i vse tsel'”: osnovy kriticheskoy refl eksii A. V. Makedonova [“In art everythibg is the tool and all is purpose”: the fundamentals of critical refl ection of A. V. Makedonov]. Russkaya fi lologiya: Uchenye zapiski kafedry literatury i metodiki ee prepodavaniya SmolGU – Russian philology: Scientists note by the department of literature and its teaching methodology of SmolSU. Vol. 16. Smolensk, Svitok Publ., 2015. 336 p. (in Russian).

kotova_e._l._150_156_10_163_2015.pdf ( 432.11 kB ) kotova_e._l._150_156_10_163_2015.zip ( 425.47 kB )

Issue: 10, 2015

Series of issue: Issue 10

Rubric: THEORY OF LITERATURE

Pages: 150 — 156

Downloads: 1151

For citation:


2026 Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin

Development and support: Network Project Laboratory TSPU