What are the elements of composition in literary criticism? Chapter VI

General concept of composition. Composition and architectonics

The concept of “composition” is familiar to any philologist. This term is constantly used, often included in the title or subtitles of scientific articles and monographs. At the same time, it should be noted that it has overly wide tolerances of meaning, and this sometimes interferes with understanding. “Composition” turns out to be a term without boundaries, when almost any analysis, with the exception of the analysis of ethical categories, can be called compositional.

The insidiousness of the term lies in its very nature. Translated from Latin, the word “composition” means “composition, connection of parts.” Simply put, composition is way of construction, way of making works. This is an axiom understandable to any philologist. But, as is the case with topic, the stumbling block turns out to be the following question: the construction of what should interest us if we are talking about the analysis of composition? The easiest answer would be “the construction of the entire work,” but this answer will not clarify anything. After all, almost everything is constructed in a literary text: plot, character, speech, genre, etc. Each of these terms presupposes its own logic of analysis and its own principles of “construction.” For example, constructing a plot involves analyzing types of plot construction, describing elements (plot, development of action, etc.), analyzing plot-plot inconsistencies, etc. We talked about this in detail in the previous chapter. A completely different perspective on the analysis of the “construction” of speech: here it is appropriate to talk about vocabulary, syntax, grammar, types of text connections, the boundaries of one’s own and someone else’s word, etc. The construction of the verse is another perspective. Then we need to talk about rhythm, about rhymes, about the laws of constructing a verse series, etc.

As a matter of fact, we always do this when we talk about plot, image, the laws of verse, etc. But then the question naturally arises about own meaning of the term composition, which does not coincide with the meanings of other terms. If there is none, the analysis of the composition loses its meaning, completely dissolving into the analysis of other categories, but if this independent meaning exists, then what is it?

To verify the presence of a problem, it is enough to compare the “Composition” sections in manuals by different authors. We can easily see that the emphasis will be noticeably shifted: in some cases the emphasis is placed on plot elements, in others on the forms of organization of the narrative, in others on spatio-temporal and genre characteristics... And so on almost ad infinitum. The reason for this lies precisely in the amorphous nature of the term. Professionals understand this very well, but this does not prevent everyone from seeing what they want to see.

It is hardly worth dramatizing the situation, but it would be better if compositional analysis assumed some kind of understandable and more or less unified methodology. It seems that the most promising thing would be to see in compositional analysis precisely the interest in ratio of parts, to their relationships. In other words, composition analysis involves seeing the text as a system and aims to understand the logic of the relationships of its elements. Then the conversation about composition will truly become meaningful and will not coincide with other aspects of analysis.

This rather abstract thesis can be illustrated with a simple example. Let's say we want to build a house. We will be interested in what kind of windows it has, what kind of walls, what kind of ceilings, what colors it is painted in, etc. This will be an analysis individual parties. But it is no less important that all this together harmonized with each other. Even if we really like large windows, we cannot make them higher than the roof and wider than the wall. We cannot make windows larger than the windows, we cannot install a closet wider than the room, etc. That is, each part influences the other in one way or another. Of course, any comparison is sinful, but something similar happens in a literary text. Each part of it does not exist on its own; it is “demanded” by other parts and, in turn, “demands” something from them. Compositional analysis is, in essence, an explanation of these “requirements” of text elements. The famous judgment of A.P. Chekhov about a gun, which should fire if it is already hanging on the wall, illustrates this very well. Another thing is that in reality not everything is so simple, and not all of Chekhov’s guns fired.

Thus, composition can be defined as a way of constructing literary text, as a system of relationships between its elements.

Compositional analysis is a fairly broad concept that concerns various aspects of a literary text. The situation is further complicated by the fact that in different traditions there are serious terminological discrepancies, and the terms not only sound differently, but also do not mean exactly the same thing. Especially it concerns narrative structure analysis. There are serious differences between Eastern European and Western European traditions. All this puts the young philologist in a difficult position. Our task also turns out to be very difficult: to talk about a very voluminous and ambiguous term in a relatively short chapter.

It seems that it is logical to begin understanding composition by defining the general scope of this concept, and then move on to more specific forms. So, compositional analysis allows for the following models.

1. Analysis of the sequence of parts. It assumes interest in the elements of the plot, the dynamics of the action, the sequence and relationship between plot and non-plot elements (for example, portraits, lyrical digressions, author's assessments, etc.). When analyzing a verse, we will definitely take into account the division into stanzas (if there is one), we will try to feel the logic of the stanzas, their interrelation. This type of analysis is primarily focused on explaining how unfolds work from the first page (or line) to the last. If we imagine a thread with beads, where each bead of a certain shape and color means a homogeneous element, then we can easily understand the logic of such an analysis. We want to understand how the overall pattern of beads is laid out sequentially, where and why repetitions occur, how and why new elements appear. Such a model of compositional analysis in modern science, especially in the Western-oriented tradition, is usually called syntagmatic.Syntagmatics is a branch of linguistics, the science of the ways speech unfolds, that is, how and according to what laws speech develops word by word and phrase by phrase. We see something similar in this analysis of composition, with the only difference that the elements most often are not words and syntagmas, but similar pieces of the narrative. Let's say if we take famous poem M. Yu. Lermontov’s “Sail” (“The lonely sail is white”), then without much difficulty we will see that the poem is divided into three stanzas (quatrains), and each quatrain is clearly divided into two parts: the first two lines - landscape sketch, the second is the author's comment:

The lonely sail is white

In the blue sea fog.

What is he looking for in a distant land?

What did he throw in his native land?

The waves are playing, the wind is whistling,

And the mast bends and creaks.

Alas!.. He is not looking for happiness

And he’s not running out of happiness.

Below him is a stream of lighter azure,

Above him is a golden ray of sunshine,

And he, rebellious, asks for a storm;

As if there is peace in the storms.

To a first approximation, the compositional scheme will look like this: A+B + A1+B1 + A2+B2, where A is a landscape sketch, and B is the author’s replica. However, it is easy to see that elements A and elements B are constructed according to different logic. Elements A are built according to the logic of the ring (calm - storm - calm), and elements B are built according to the logic of development (question - exclamation - answer). Having thought about this logic, a philologist can see in Lermontov’s masterpiece something that would be missed outside compositional analysis. For example, it will become clear that the “desire for a storm” is nothing more than an illusion; a storm will also not give peace and harmony (after all, there was already a “storm” in the poem, but this did not change the tonality of part B). A classic situation for Lermontov’s artistic world arises: the changing background does not change the feeling of loneliness and melancholy of the lyrical hero. Let us recall the poem “In the Wild North” that we have already cited, and we can easily feel the uniformity of the compositional structure. Moreover, on another level, the same structure is found in the famous “Hero of Our Time.” Pechorin’s loneliness is emphasized by the fact that the “backgrounds” are constantly changing: the semi-wild life of the highlanders (“Bela”), the gentleness and warmth of the common man (“Maksim Maksimych”), the life of the people of the bottom - smugglers (“Taman”), the life and morals of high society ( "Princess Mary"), an exceptional person ("Fatalist"). However, Pechorin cannot blend into any background, he feels bad and lonely everywhere, moreover, he willingly or unwillingly destroys the harmony of the background.

All this becomes noticeable precisely during compositional analysis. Thus, sequential item analysis can be a good interpretative tool.

2. Analysis general principles construction of the work as a whole. It is often called analysis architectonics. The term itself architectonics is not recognized by all experts, many, if not most, believe that we're talking about just oh different faces meaning of the term composition. At the same time, some very authoritative scientists (say, M. M. Bakhtin) not only recognized the correctness of such a term, but also insisted that composition And architectonics have different meanings. In any case, regardless of the terminology, we must understand that there is another model for analyzing composition, noticeably different from the one presented. This model assumes a view of the work as a whole. It is focused on the general principles of constructing a literary text, taking into account, among other things, the system of contexts. If we remember our metaphor of beads, then this model should give an answer to how these beads look in general and whether they are in harmony with the dress and hairstyle. Actually, this “double” look is well known to any woman: she is interested in how finely the parts of the jewelry are woven, but she is no less interested in how it all looks together and whether it is worth wearing with some kind of suit. In life, as we know, these views do not always coincide.

We see something similar in literary works. Let's give a simple example. Let's imagine that some writer decided to write a story about a family quarrel. But he decided to structure it in such a way that the first part is the husband’s monologue, where the whole story looks in one light, and the second part is the wife’s monologue, in which all the events look different. In modern literature such techniques are used very often. But now let’s think about it: is this work monologue or is it dialogical? From the point of view of syntagmatic analysis of the composition, it is monologue, there is not a single dialogue in it. But from the point of view of architectonics, it is dialogical, we see polemics, a clash of views.

This holistic view of composition (analysis architectonics) turns out to be very useful, it allows you to escape from a specific fragment of text and understand its role in the overall structure. M. M. Bakhtin, for example, believed that such a concept as a genre is architectonic by definition. Indeed, if I write a tragedy, I All I’ll construct it differently than if I were writing a comedy. If I write an elegy (a poem imbued with a feeling of sadness), All it will not be the same as in a fable: the construction of images, rhythm, and vocabulary. Therefore, the analysis of composition and architectonics are related concepts, but do not coincide. The point, we repeat, is not in the terms themselves (there are many discrepancies here), but in the fact that it is necessary to distinguish principles of construction of the work as a whole and the construction of its parts.

So, there are two models of compositional analysis. An experienced philologist, of course, is able to “switch” these models depending on his goals.

Now let's move on to a more specific presentation. Compositional analysis from the point of view of modern scientific tradition assumes the following levels:

Analysis of the form of narrative organization.

Analysis of speech composition (structure of speech).

Analysis of techniques for creating an image or character.

Analysis of plot structure features (including non-plot elements). This has already been discussed in detail in the previous chapter.

Analysis of artistic space and time.

Analysis of the change in “points of view”. This is one of the most popular methods of compositional analysis today, little familiar to the beginning philologist. Therefore, it is worth paying special attention to it.

The analysis of the composition of a lyrical work is characterized by its own specifics and nuances, therefore the analysis of a lyrical composition can also be allocated to a special level.

Of course, this scheme is very arbitrary, and much does not fall into it. In particular, we can talk about genre composition, rhythmic composition (not only in poetry, but also in prose), etc. In addition, in real analysis these levels intersect and mix. For example, point of view analysis concerns both narrative organization and speech patterns, space and time are inextricably linked to imagery techniques, etc. However, in order to understand these intersections, you first need to know What intersects, therefore, from a methodological aspect, a sequential presentation is more correct. So, in order.

For more details, see, for example: Kozhinov V.V. Plot, plot, composition // Theory of Literature. The main problems in historical coverage. Types and genres of literature. M., 1964.

See, for example: Revyakin A.I. Decree. cit., pp. 152–153.

Analysis of the form of narrative organization

This part of compositional analysis involves an interest in how storytelling. To understand a literary text, it is important to consider who is telling the story and how. First of all, the narrative can be formally organized as a monologue (speech of one), dialogue (speech of two) or polylogue (speech of many). For example, a lyric poem, as a rule, is monologue, and a drama or modern novel gravitate toward dialogue and polylogue. Difficulties begin where clear boundaries are lost. For example, the outstanding Russian linguist V.V. Vinogradov noted that in the genre of skaz (remember, for example, “The Mistress of the Copper Mountain” by Bazhov) the speech of any hero is deformed, actually merging with the style of speech of the narrator. In other words, everyone starts talking the same way. Therefore, all dialogues organically flow into a single author’s monologue. This is a clear example genre narrative deformations. But other problems are also possible, for example, the very pressing problem your own and others' words when other people's voices are woven into the narrator's monologue. In its simplest form, this leads to the so-called non-author's speech. For example, in “The Snowstorm” by A. S. Pushkin we read: “But everyone had to retreat when the wounded hussar Colonel Burmin appeared in her castle, with George in his buttonhole and Withinteresting pallor(italics by A. S. Pushkin - A. N.), as the young ladies there said.” Words "with an interesting pallor" It is no accident that Pushkin puts it in italics. Neither lexically nor grammatically they are possible for Pushkin. This is the speech of provincial young ladies, evoking the gentle irony of the author. But this expression is inserted into the context of the narrator’s speech. This example of a “violation” of a monologue is quite simple, modern literature knows much more complex situations. However, the principle will be the same: someone else’s word, which does not coincide with the author’s, turns out to be inside the author’s speech. It is sometimes not so easy to understand these subtleties, but it is necessary to do this, because otherwise we will attribute to the narrator judgments with which he does not associate himself in any way, and sometimes he is hiddenly polemicizing.

If we add to this the fact that modern literature is completely open to other texts, sometimes one author openly constructs a new text from fragments of already created ones, then it becomes clear that the problem of monologue or dialogism of the text is by no means as obvious as it might seem in the literature. first glance.

No less, and perhaps even more, difficulties arise when we try to determine the figure of the narrator. If at first we talked about How many narrators organize the text, now you need to answer the question: a Who these narrators? The situation is further complicated by the fact that different models of analysis and different terms have been established in Russian and Western science. The essence of the discrepancy is that in the Russian tradition the most pressing question is: Who is the narrator and how close or distant he is to the real author. For example, is the story told from I and who is behind it I. The basis is the relationship between the narrator and the real author. In this case, there are usually four main options with numerous intermediate forms.

The first option is a neutral narrator(it is also called the narrator proper, and this form is often not very accurately called third person narration. The term is not very good, because there is no third party here, but it has taken root, and there is no point in abandoning it). We are talking about those works where the narrator is not identified in any way: he does not have a name, he does not take part in the events described. There are a huge number of examples of such organization of storytelling: from the poems of Homer to the novels of L.N. Tolstoy and many modern novels and short stories.

The second option is the author-narrator. The narration is conducted in the first person (this narration is called I-form), the narrator is either not named at all, but his closeness to the real author is implied, or he bears the same name as the real author. The author-narrator does not take part in the events described, he only talks about them and comments. Such an organization was used, for example, by M. Yu. Lermontov in the story “Maksim Maksimych” and in a number of other fragments of “A Hero of Our Time.”

The third option is a hero-narrator. A very often used form when a direct participant talks about events. The hero, as a rule, has a name and is clearly distanced from the author. This is how the “Pechorin” chapters of “A Hero of Our Time” (“Taman”, “Princess Mary”, “Fatalist”) are constructed; in “Bel” the right of narration passes from the author-narrator to the hero (remember that the whole story is told by Maxim Maksimovich). Lermontov needs a change of narrators to create a three-dimensional portrait of the main character: after all, everyone sees Pechorin in their own way, the assessments do not coincide. We encounter the hero-narrator in “The Captain’s Daughter” by A. S. Pushkin (almost everything is told by Grinev). In short, the hero-narrator is very popular in modern literature.

The fourth option is the author-character. This option is very popular in literature and very insidious for the reader. In Russian literature, it manifested itself with all clarity already in the “Life of Archpriest Avvakum”, and literature of the 19th century and especially the twentieth century uses this option very often. The author-character bears the same name as the real author, as a rule, is close to him biographically and at the same time is the hero of the events described. The reader has a natural desire to “believe” the text, to equate the author-character with the real author. But the insidiousness of this form is that no equal sign can be used. There is always a difference, sometimes colossal, between the author-character and the real author. The similarity of names and the proximity of biographies in themselves do not mean anything: all events may well be fictitious, and the judgments of the author-character do not have to coincide with the opinions of the real author. When creating an author-character, the writer, to some extent, plays with both the reader and himself, this must be remembered.

The situation is even more complicated in lyric poetry, where the distance between the lyrical narrator (most often I) and the real author is difficult to feel at all. However, this distance is maintained to some extent even in the most intimate poems. Emphasizing this distance, Yu. N. Tynyanov in the 1920s, in an article about Blok, proposed the term lyrical hero, which has become commonly used today. Although the specific meaning of this term is interpreted differently by different specialists (for example, the positions of L. Ya. Ginzburg, L. I. Timofeev, I. B. Rodnyanskaya, D. E. Maksimov, B. O. Korman and other specialists have serious discrepancies), everyone recognizes the fundamental discrepancy between the hero and the author. A detailed analysis of the arguments of different authors within the framework of our short manual is hardly appropriate; we only note that the problem point is the following: what determines the character of the lyrical hero? Is this the generalized face of the author that appears in his poetry? Or only unique, special author’s features? Or lyrical hero is possible only in a specific poem, and lyrical heroat all just doesn't exist? These questions can be answered differently. We are closer to the position of D. E. Maksimov and in many ways the concept of L. I. Timofeev, which is close to it, that the lyrical hero is the generalized self of the author, one way or another felt in all creativity. But this position is also vulnerable, and opponents have compelling counterarguments. Now, we repeat, a serious conversation on the problem of the lyrical hero seems premature; it is more important to understand that the equal sign between I It is impossible to put in a poem and the real author. The famous satirist Sasha Cherny wrote a humorous poem “To the Critic” back in 1909:

When a poet, describing a lady,

He will begin: “I was walking down the street. The corset dug into the sides,”

Here, of course, do not understand “I” directly,

What, they say, is a poet hiding under the lady...

This should also be remembered in cases where there are no generic differences. The poet is not equal to any of his written selves.

So, in Russian philology, the starting point when analyzing the figure of the narrator is his relationship with the author. There are many subtleties here, but the principle of the approach is clear. The modern Western tradition is a different matter. There, the typology is based not on the relationship between the author and the narrator, but on the relationship between the narrator and the “pure” narrative. This principle at first glance seems vague and needs clarification. In fact, there is nothing complicated here. Let's clarify the situation with a simple example. Let's compare two phrases. First: “The sun is shining brightly, a green tree is growing on the lawn.” Second: “The weather is wonderful, the sun is shining brightly, but not blindingly, green Tree on the lawn is pleasing to the eye.” In the first case, we have just information in front of us, the narrator is practically not shown, in the second we can easily feel his presence. If we take as a basis “pure” narration with the formal non-interference of the narrator (as in the first case), then it is easy to build a typology based on how much the presence of the narrator increases. This principle, originally proposed by the English literary critic Percy Lubbock in the 1920s, is now dominant in Western European literary criticism. A complex and sometimes contradictory classification has been developed, the supporting concepts of which are actanta(or actant - pure narration. Although the term “actant” itself presupposes an agent, it is not identified), actor(the object of the narrative, deprived of the right to interfere with it), auditor(“the character or narrator who intervenes” in the narrative, the one whose consciousness organizes the narrative.). These terms themselves were introduced after the classical works of P. Lubbock, but they imply the same ideas. All of them, together with a number of other concepts and terms, define the so-called narrative typology modern Western literary criticism (from the English narrative - narration). In the works of leading Western philologists devoted to the problems of narration (P. Lubbock, N. Friedman, E. Leibfried, F. Stanzel, R. Barth, etc.), an extensive toolkit has been created with the help of which one can see various shades of meaning in the fabric of narration, hear different “voices”. The term voice as a significant compositional component also became widespread after the works of P. Lubbock.

In a word, Western European literary criticism operates in slightly different terms, while the emphasis of analysis also shifts. It is difficult to say which tradition is more adequate to the literary text, and the question can hardly be posed in such a plane. Any technique has strengths and weaknesses. In some cases it is more convenient to use the developments of narrative theory, in others it is less correct, since it practically ignores the problem of the author’s consciousness and the author’s idea. Serious scientists in Russia and the West are well aware of each other’s work and actively use the achievements of the “parallel” methodology. Now it is important to understand the principles of the approach.

See: Tynyanov Yu. N. The problem of poetic language. M., 1965. pp. 248–258.

The history and theory of the issue are presented in sufficient detail in the articles of I. P. Ilyin devoted to the problems of narration. See: Modern foreign literary criticism: Encyclopedic reference book. M., 1996. pp. 61–81. Read original works by A.-J. Greimas, who introduced these terms, will be too difficult for a beginning philologist.

Analysis of speech composition

Analysis of speech composition presupposes an interest in the principles of speech structure. Partially it intersects with the analysis of “one’s own” and “alien” words, partially with the analysis of style, partially with the analysis of artistic devices (lexical, syntactic, grammatical, phonetic, etc.). We will talk about all this in more detail in the chapter. "Artistic speech". Now I would like to draw attention to the fact that the analysis of speech composition is not limited to description techniques. As elsewhere when analyzing a composition, the researcher must pay attention to the problem of the relationship of elements, to their interdependence. For example, it is not enough for us to see that different pages of the novel “The Master and Margarita” are written in different stylistic manners: there is different vocabulary, different syntax, different rates of speech. It is important for us to understand why this is so, to grasp the logic of stylistic transitions. After all, Bulgakov often describes the same hero in different stylistic keys. A classic example is Woland and his retinue. Why style drawings change, how they are related to each other - this, in fact, is the task of the researcher.

Analysis of character creation techniques

Although in a literary text, of course, every image is somehow constructed, compositional analysis, as an independent one in reality, is applied, as a rule, to character images (i.e., to images of people) or to images of animals and even objects that metaphorize the human being (for example, “Kholstomer” by L. N. Tolstoy, “White Fang” by J. London or M. Yu. Lermontov’s poem “The Cliff”). Other images (verbal, details, or, on the contrary, macrosystems such as the “image of the motherland”), as a rule, are not analyzed using any more or less intelligible composition algorithms. This does not mean that the elements of compositional analysis are not used, it only means that there are no at least somewhat universal methods. All this is quite understandable in view of the vagueness of the very category of “image”: try to find a universal technique for analyzing the “construction”, for example, of the linguistic images of V. Khlebnikov and the landscapes of A. S. Pushkin. We will only be able to see a few general properties, which have already been discussed in the chapter "Artistic image", but the analysis methodology will be different each time.

Another thing is the character of a person. Here, in all its infinite variety, we can see repeating techniques that can be isolated as some generally accepted supports. It makes sense to dwell on this in a little more detail. Almost any writer, when creating a person’s character, uses a “classical” set of techniques. Naturally, he does not always use everything, but in general the list will be relatively stable.

Firstly, this is the behavior of the hero. In literature, a person is almost always depicted in actions, in actions, in relationships with other people. By “building” a series of actions, the writer creates a character. Behavior is a complex category that takes into account not only physical actions, but also the nature of speech, what and how the hero says. In this case we are talking about speech behavior, which is often fundamentally important. Speech behavior can explain a system of actions, or it can contradict them. An example of the latter can be, for example, the image of Bazarov (“Fathers and Sons”). In Bazarov’s speech behavior, as you remember, there was no place for love, which did not prevent the hero from experiencing love-passion for Anna Odintsova. On the other hand, the speech behavior of, for example, Platon Karataev (“War and Peace”) is absolutely organic to his actions and life position. Platon Karataev is convinced that a person should accept any circumstances with kindness and humility. The position is wise in its own way, but threatens with impersonality, absolute merging with the people, with nature, with history, with dissolution in them. Such is Plato’s life, such (with some nuances) is his death, such is his speech: aphoristic, full of sayings, smooth, soft. Karataev’s speech is devoid of individual features; it is “dissolved” in folk wisdom.

Therefore, the analysis of speech behavior is no less important than the analysis and interpretation of actions.

Secondly, this is a portrait, landscape and interior, if they are used to characterize the hero. Actually, a portrait is always somehow connected with the revelation of character, but the interior and especially the landscape in some cases can be self-sufficient and not be considered as a method of creating the character of the hero. We encounter the classic series “landscape + portrait + interior + behavior” (including speech behavior), for example, in “ Dead souls"N.V. Gogol, where all the famous images of landowners are “made” according to this scheme. There are talking landscapes, talking portraits, talking interiors (remember, for example, the Plyushkin pile) and very expressive speech behavior. Another peculiarity of the dialogue is that Chichikov each time accepts the interlocutor’s manner of speaking and begins to speak to him in his language. On the one hand, this creates a comic effect, on the other, which is much more important, it characterizes Chichikov himself as an insightful person, a well-feeling interlocutor, but at the same time sharp-witted and calculating.

If in general view try to outline the logic of development of landscape, portrait and interior, then you can notice that a laconic detail is replacing a detailed description. Modern writers, as a rule, do not create detailed portraits, landscapes and interiors, preferring “talking” details. The artistic impact of detail was already well felt by writers of the 18th and 19th centuries, but there details often alternated with detailed descriptions. Modern literature generally avoids details, isolating only some fragments. This technique is often called "close-up preference." The writer does not give a detailed portrait, focusing only on some expressive feature (remember the famous twitching upper lip with a mustache of Andrei Bolkonsky’s wife or Karenin’s protruding ears).

Third, a classic technique for creating character in modern literature is internal monologue, that is, an image of the hero’s thoughts. Historically, this technique is very late; literature until the 18th century depicted the hero in action, in speech behavior, but not in thinking. A relative exception can be considered lyricism and partly dramaturgy, where the hero often uttered “thoughts out loud” - a monologue addressed to the viewer or without a clear addressee at all. Let us remember the famous “To be or not to be” by Hamlet. However, this is a relative exception because it is more about self-talk than about the process of thinking as such. Depict real the process of thinking through language is very difficult, since the human language is not very suitable for this. It is much easier to convey in language what What man does than that What he thinks and feels. However, modern literature is actively looking for ways to convey the feelings and thoughts of the hero. There are a lot of hits and a lot of misses here. In particular, attempts have been and are being made to abandon punctuation, grammatical norms, etc., in order to create the illusion of “real thinking.” This is still an illusion, although such techniques can be very expressive.

In addition, when analyzing the “construction” of character, one should remember rating system, that is, about how other characters and the narrator himself evaluate the hero. Almost any hero exists in the mirror of evaluations, and it is important to understand who and why evaluates him this way. A person beginning a serious study of literature should remember that narrator's assessment cannot always be considered the attitude of the author to the hero, even if the narrator seems to be somewhat similar to the author. The narrator is also “inside” the work; in a sense, he is one of the heroes. Therefore, the so-called “author’s assessments” should be taken into account, but they do not always express the attitude of the writer himself. Let's say a writer can play the role of a simpleton and create a narrator for this role. The narrator may evaluate the characters straightforwardly and shallowly, but the overall impression will be completely different. In modern literary criticism there is a term implicit author- that is, the one psychological picture author, which develops after reading his work and, therefore, created by the writer for this work. So, for one and the same writer, implicit authors can be very different. For example, many of Antoshi Chekhonte’s funny stories (for example, the “Calendar” full of careless humor) from the point of view of the author’s psychological portrait are completely different from “Ward No. 6”. All this was written by Chekhov, but these are very different faces. AND implicit author"Ward No. 6" would have taken a completely different look at the heroes of "The Horse's Name." A young philologist should remember this. The problem of the unity of the author's consciousness is the most complex problem of philology and the psychology of creativity; it cannot be simplified by judgments like: “Tolstoy treats his hero in such and such a way, because on page, say, 41, he evaluates him in such and such a way.” It is quite possible that the same Tolstoy in another place or at another time, or even on other pages of the same work, will write completely differently. If, for example, we trust each assessment given to Eugene Onegin, we will find ourselves in a complete labyrinth.

Analysis of plot construction features

In the chapter “Plot” we dwelt in some detail on different methods of plot analysis. There's no point in repeating myself. However, it is worth emphasizing that plot composition– this is not just the isolation of elements, schemes or analysis of plot and plot inconsistencies. It is important to understand the connection and non-coincidence of storylines. And this is a task of a completely different level of complexity. It is important to feel behind the endless variety of events and destinies their logic. In a literary text, logic is always present in one way or another, even when outwardly everything seems to be a chain of accidents. Let us recall, for example, the novel “Fathers and Sons” by I. S. Turgenev. It is absolutely no coincidence that the logic of Evgeny Bazarov’s fate surprisingly resembles the logic of the fate of his main opponent, Pavel Kirsanov: a brilliant start - fatal love - collapse. In Turgenev’s world, where love is the most difficult and at the same time the most decisive test of personality, such similarity of destinies may indicate, albeit indirectly, that the author’s position is noticeably different from both Bazarov’s and the point of view of his main opponent. Therefore, when analyzing the composition of the plot, you should always pay attention to the mutual reflections and intersections of plot lines.

Analysis of artistic space and time

No work of art exists in a space-time vacuum. Time and space are always present in it in one way or another. It is important to understand that artistic time and space are not abstractions or even physical categories, although modern physics answers the question of what time and space are very ambiguously. Art, on the other hand, deals with a very specific space-time coordinate system. G. Lessing was the first to point out the importance of time and space for art, which we already discussed in the second chapter, and theorists of the last two centuries, especially the twentieth century, proved that artistic time and space is not only a significant, but often a defining component of a literary work.

In literature, time and space are the most important properties image. Different images require different space-time coordinates. For example, in F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment” we are faced with an unusually compressed space. Small rooms, narrow streets. Raskolnikov lives in a room that looks like a coffin. Of course, this is not accidental. The writer is interested in people who find themselves at a dead end in life, and this is emphasized by all means. When Raskolnikov finds faith and love in the epilogue, space opens up.

Each work of modern literature has its own space-time grid, its own coordinate system. At the same time, there are some general patterns of development of artistic space and time. For example, until the 18th century, aesthetic consciousness did not allow the author’s “interference” in the temporal structure of the work. In other words, the author could not begin the story with the death of the hero and then return to his birth. The time of the work was “as if real.” In addition, the author could not disrupt the flow of the story about one hero with an “inserted” story about another. In practice, this led to the so-called “chronological incompatibilities” characteristic of ancient literature. For example, one story ends with the hero returning safely, while another begins with loved ones grieving for his absence. We encounter this, for example, in Homer's Odyssey. In the 18th century, a revolution occurred, and the author received the right to “model” the narrative without observing the logic of life-likeness: a mass of inserted stories and digressions appeared, and chronological “realism” was disrupted. A modern author can build the composition of a work, shuffling episodes at his own discretion.

In addition, there are stable, culturally accepted spatiotemporal models. The outstanding philologist M. M. Bakhtin, who fundamentally developed this problem, called these models chronotopes(chronos + topos, time and space). Chronotopes are initially imbued with meanings; any artist consciously or unconsciously takes this into account. As soon as we say about someone: “He is on the threshold of something...”, we immediately understand that we are talking about something big and important. But why exactly on the threshold? Bakhtin believed that chronotope of the threshold one of the most widespread in culture, and as soon as we “turn it on”, its semantic depth opens up.

Today the term chronotope is universal and simply denotes the existing space-time model. Often in this case, “etiquette” they refer to the authority of M. M. Bakhtin, although Bakhtin himself understood the chronotope more narrowly - namely how sustainable a model that appears from work to work.

In addition to chronotopes, we should also remember the more general models of space and time that underlie entire cultures. These models are historical, that is, one replaces the other, but the paradox of the human psyche is that an “outdated” model does not disappear anywhere, continuing to excite people and giving rise to literary texts. There are quite a few variations of such models in different cultures, but several are basic. Firstly, this is a model zero time and space. It is also called motionless, eternal - there are a lot of options here. In this model, time and space become meaningless. It is always the same there, and there is no difference between “here” and “there,” that is, there is no spatial extension. Historically, this is the most archaic model, but it is still very relevant today. Ideas about hell and heaven are based on this model, it is often “turned on” when a person tries to imagine existence after death, etc. The famous chronotope of the “golden age”, which manifests itself in all cultures, is built on this model. If we remember the ending of the novel “The Master and Margarita,” we can easily feel this model. It was in such a world, according to the decision of Yeshua and Woland, that the heroes ultimately found themselves - in a world of eternal good and peace.

Another model - cyclic(circular). This is one of the most powerful space-time models, supported by the eternal change of natural cycles (summer-autumn-winter-spring-summer...). It is based on the idea that everything is returning to normal. Space and time are there, but they are conditional, especially time, since the hero will still return to where he left, and nothing will change. The easiest way to illustrate this model is Homer's Odyssey. Odysseus was absent for many years, the most incredible adventures befell him, but he returned home and found his Penelope still as beautiful and loving. M. M. Bakhtin called such a time adventurous, it exists as if around the heroes, without changing anything either in them or between them. The cyclical model is also very archaic, but its projections are clearly perceptible in modern culture. For example, it is very noticeable in the work of Sergei Yesenin, in whom the idea of ​​the life cycle, especially in adulthood, becomes dominant. Even the well-known dying lines “In this life, dying is not new, / But living, of course, is not new” refer to ancient tradition, to the famous biblical book of Ecclesiastes, which is entirely built on a cyclical model.

The culture of realism is mainly associated with linear a model when space seems endlessly open in all directions, and time is associated with a directed arrow - from the past to the future. This model dominates in the everyday consciousness of modern people and is clearly visible in a huge number of literary texts of recent centuries. Suffice it to recall, for example, the novels of L.N. Tolstoy. In this model, each event is recognized as unique, it can only happen once, and a person is understood as a constantly changing being. Linear model opened psychologism in the modern sense, since psychologism presupposes the ability to change, which could not be either in the cyclic (after all, the hero should be the same at the end as at the beginning), and especially not in the zero time-space model. In addition, the linear model is associated with the principle historicism, that is, man began to be understood as a product of his era. The abstract “man for all times” simply does not exist in this model.

It is important to understand that in the minds of modern man all these models do not exist in isolation; they can interact, giving rise to the most bizarre combinations. Let's say, a person can be emphatically modern, trust the linear model, accept the uniqueness of every moment of life as something unique, but at the same time be a believer and accept the timelessness and spacelessness of existence after death. Exactly the same in literary text may be reflected different systems coordinates For example, experts have long noticed that in Anna Akhmatova’s work there seem to be two parallel dimensions: one is historical, in which every moment and gesture is unique, the other is timeless, in which every movement freezes. The “layering” of these layers is one of the hallmarks of Akhmatova’s style.

Finally, modern aesthetic consciousness is increasingly mastering yet another model. There is no clear name for it, but it would not be wrong to say that this model allows for the existence parallel times and spaces. The point is that we exist differently depending on the coordinate system. But at the same time, these worlds are not completely isolated; they have points of intersection. The literature of the twentieth century actively uses this model. Suffice it to recall M. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”. The master and his beloved die in different places and for different reasons: The master is in a madhouse, Margarita is at home from a heart attack, but at the same time they are they die in each other's arms in the Master's closet from Azazello's poison. Different coordinate systems are included here, but they are interconnected - after all, the death of the heroes occurred in any case. This is the projection of the model of parallel worlds. If you carefully read the previous chapter, you will easily understand that the so-called multivariate the plot—a largely twentieth-century invention of literature—is a direct consequence of the establishment of this new space-time grid.

See: Bakhtin M. M. Forms of time and chronotope in the novel // Bakhtin M. M. Questions of literature and aesthetics. M., 1975.

Analysis of the change in “points of view”

"Point of view"– one of the core concepts of the modern teaching of composition. You should immediately warn against most typical mistake inexperienced philologists: understand the term “point of view” in its everyday meaning, they say, each author and character has their own point of view on life. This is often heard from students, but it has nothing to do with science. As a term of literary criticism, “point of view” first appeared at the end of the 19th century in an essay by the famous American writer Henry James on the art of prose. This term was made strictly scientific by the already mentioned English literary critic Percy Lubbock.

“Point of view” is a complex and voluminous concept that reveals the ways of the author’s presence in the text. In fact, we are talking about a thorough analysis installation text and about attempts to see one’s own logic and the presence of the author in this montage. One of the largest modern experts on this issue, B. A. Uspensky, believes that the analysis of changes in points of view is effective in relation to those works where the plane of expression is not equal to the plane of content, that is, everything said or presented has second, third, etc. d. semantic layers. For example, in M. Yu. Lermontov’s poem “The Cliff,” the speech, of course, is not about a cliff and a cloud. Where the plans of expression and content are inseparable or even identical, the analysis of points of view does not work. For example, in jewelry or abstract painting.

To a first approximation, we can say that “point of view” has at least two spectrums of meaning: firstly, it spatial localization, that is, determining the place from which the narration is being told. If we compare a writer with a cinematographer, then we can say that in this case we will be interested in where the film camera was: close, far, above or below, and so on. The same fragment of reality will look very different depending on the change in point of view. The second range of values ​​is the so-called subjective localization, that is, we will be interested in whose consciousness the scene is seen. Summarizing numerous observations, Percy Lubbock identified two main types of narrative: panoramic(when the author directly shows yours consciousness) and stage(we are not talking about dramaturgy, it means that the author’s consciousness is “hidden” in the characters, the author does not openly manifest himself). According to Lubbock and his followers (N. Friedman, K. Brooks, etc.), the stage method is aesthetically preferable, since it does not impose anything, but only shows. This position, however, can be challenged, since the classic “panoramic” texts of L. N. Tolstoy, for example, have enormous aesthetic potential for impact.

Modern research focused on the method of analyzing changes in points of view convinces that it allows us to see even seemingly well-known texts in a new way. In addition, such an analysis is very useful in an educational sense, since it does not allow “liberties” in handling the text and forces the student to be attentive and careful.

Uspensky B. A. Poetics of composition. St. Petersburg, 2000. P. 10.

Analysis of lyrical composition

The composition of a lyrical work has a number of distinctive features. Most of the perspectives we have identified there retain their meaning (with the exception of plot analysis, which is most often inapplicable to a lyrical work), but at the same time, a lyrical work also has its own specifics. Firstly, lyrics often have a strophic structure, that is, the text is divided into stanzas, which immediately affects the entire structure; secondly, it is important to understand the laws of rhythmic composition, which will be discussed in the chapter “Poetry”; thirdly, the lyrics have many features of figurative composition. Lyrical images are constructed and grouped differently than epic and dramatic ones. A detailed conversation about this is still premature, since understanding the structure of a poem comes only with practice. To begin with, it is better to carefully read the sample tests. Modern students have at their disposal a good collection “Analysis of One Poem” (L., 1985), entirely devoted to the problems of lyrical composition. We refer interested readers to this book.

Analysis of one poem: Interuniversity collection / ed. V. E. Kholshevnikova. L., 1985.

Bakhtin M. M. Forms of time and chronotope in the novel // Bakhtin M. M. Questions of literature and aesthetics. M., 1975.

Davydova T. T., Pronin V. A. Theory of literature. M., 2003. Chapter 6. “Artistic time and art space in a literary work."

Kozhinov V.V. Composition // Brief literary encyclopedia. T. 3. M., 1966. pp. 694–696.

Kozhinov V.V. Plot, plot, composition // Theory of literature. The main problems in historical coverage. Types and genres of literature. M., 1964.

Markevich G. Basic problems of the science of literature. M., 1980. pp. 86–112.

Revyakin A.I. Problems of studying and teaching literature. M., 1972. pp. 137–153.

Rodnyanskaya I. B. Artistic time and artistic space // Literary encyclopedic dictionary. M., 1987. pp. 487–489.

Modern foreign literary criticism. Encyclopedic reference book. M., 1996. pp. 17–20, 61–81, 154–157.

Theoretical poetics: concepts and definitions: Reader for students of philological faculties / author-compiler N. D. Tamarchenko. M., 1999. (Topics 12, 13, 16–20, 29.)

Uspensky B. A. Poetics of composition. St. Petersburg, 2000.

Fedotov O.I. Fundamentals of the theory of literature. Part 1. M., 2003. pp. 253–255.

Khalizev V. E. Theory of Literature. M., 1999. (Chapter 4. “Literary work.”)

Composition is the arrangement of parts literary work in a certain order, a set of forms and methods of artistic expression by the author, depending on his intention. Translated from Latin language means “composition”, “construction”. Composition builds all parts of the work into a single, complete whole.

It helps the reader to better understand the content of the works, maintains interest in the book and helps to draw the necessary conclusions in the end. Sometimes the composition of a book intrigues the reader and he looks for a sequel to the book or other works by this writer.

Compositional elements

Among such elements are narration, description, dialogue, monologue, insert stories and lyrical digressions:

1. Narration - main element compositions, the author's story, revealing the content of the work of art. Occupies most of the volume of the entire work. Conveys the dynamics of events; it can be retold or illustrated with drawings.
2. Description. This is a static element. During the description, events do not occur; it serves as a picture, a background for the events of the work. The description is a portrait, an interior, a landscape. Landscape is not necessarily an image of nature, it can be a city landscape, lunar landscape, description of fantastic cities, planets, galaxies or description fictional worlds.
3. Dialogue- conversation between two people. It helps to reveal the plot and deepen the characters of the characters. Through the dialogue between two heroes, the reader learns about the events of the past of the heroes of the works, about their plans, and begins to better understand the characters’ characters.
4. Monologue- speech of one character. In the comedy by A. S. Griboedov, through Chatsky’s monologues, the author conveys thoughts advanced people his generation and the experiences of the hero himself, who learned about his beloved’s betrayal.
5. Image system. All images of a work that interact in connection with the author’s intention. These are images of people fairy tale characters, mythical, toponymic and subject. There are awkward images invented by the author, for example, “The Nose” from Gogol’s story of the same name. The authors simply invented many images, and their names became commonly used.
6. Insert stories, a story within a story. Many authors use this technique to create intrigue in a work or at the denouement. A work may contain several inserted stories, the events in which take place in different time. Bulgakov in “The Master and Margarita” used the device of a novel within a novel.
7. Author's or lyrical digressions. Gogol has many lyrical digressions in his work “Dead Souls”. Because of them, the genre of the work has changed. This large prose work is called the poem “Dead Souls”. And “Eugene Onegin” is called a novel in verse because of the large number of author’s digressions, thanks to which the readers are presented impressive picture Russian life early 19th century.
8. Author's description. In it, the author talks about the character of the hero and does not hide his positive or negative attitude towards him. Gogol in his works often gives ironic characteristics to his heroes - so precise and succinct that his heroes often become household names.
9. Plot of the story- this is a chain of events occurring in a work. The plot is the content of a literary text.
10. Fable- all events, circumstances and actions that are described in the text. The main difference from the plot is the chronological sequence.
11. Scenery- description of nature, real and imaginary world, city, planet, galaxies, existing and fictional. The landscape is artistic device, thanks to which the character of the characters is revealed more deeply and an assessment of events is given. You can remember how it changes seascape in Pushkin’s “The Tale of the Fisherman and the Fish,” when the old man comes to the Golden Fish again and again with another request.
12. Portrait- this description is not only appearance hero, but also him inner world. Thanks to the author’s talent, the portrait is so accurate that all readers have the same idea of ​​the appearance of the hero of the book they read: what Natasha Rostova, Prince Andrei, Sherlock Holmes looks like. Sometimes the author draws the reader's attention to some characteristic feature hero, for example, Poirot’s mustache in Agatha Christie’s books.

Don't miss: in the literature, examples of use.

Compositional techniques

Subject composition

The development of the plot has its own stages of development. There is always a conflict at the center of the plot, but the reader does not immediately learn about it.

Subject composition depends on the genre of the work. For example, a fable always ends with a moral. Dramatic works of classicism had their own laws of composition, for example, they had to have five acts.

The composition of the works is distinguished by its unshakable features folklore. Songs, fairy tales, and epics were created according to their own laws of construction.

The composition of the fairy tale begins with the saying: “Like on the sea-ocean, and on the island of Buyan...”. The saying was often composed in poetic form and was sometimes far from the content of the fairy tale. The storyteller attracted the attention of the listeners with a saying and waited for them to listen to him without being distracted. Then he said: “This is a saying, not a fairy tale. There will be a fairy tale ahead."

Then came the beginning. The most famous of them begins with the words: “Once upon a time” or “In a certain kingdom, in the thirtieth state...”. Then the storyteller moved on to the fairy tale itself, to its characters, to wonderful events.

Techniques of a fairy-tale composition, a threefold repetition of events: the hero fights three times with the Serpent Gorynych, three times the princess sits at the window of the tower, and Ivanushka on a horse flies to her and tears off the ring, three times the Tsar tests his daughter-in-law in the fairy tale “The Frog Princess”.

The ending of the fairy tale is also traditional; about the heroes of the fairy tale they say: “They live, live well and make good things.” Sometimes the ending hints at a treat: “A fairy tale for you, but a bagel for me.”

Literary composition- this is the arrangement of parts of a work in a certain sequence, this is an integral system of forms artistic image. The means and techniques of composition deepen the meaning of what is depicted and reveal the characteristics of the characters. Each work of art has its own unique composition, but there are its traditional laws that are observed in some genres.

During the times of classicism, there was a system of rules that prescribed certain rules for writing texts to authors, and they could not be violated. This rule of three unities: time, place, plot. This is a five act structure. dramatic works. This speaking names and a clear division into negative and goodies. The compositional features of classicism are a thing of the past.

Compositional techniques in literature depend on the genre of the work of art and on the talent of the author, who has available types, elements, techniques of composition, knows its features and knows how to use these artistic methods.

Significantly influences the expression of his ideas. The writer focuses his attention on those who attract him to given time life phenomena and embodies them through artistic depictions of characters, landscapes, and moods. At the same time, he strives to connect them in such a way that they are truly convincing and really reveal what he wanted to show, so that they encourage the reader to think.

Belinsky constantly pointed out in his works that composition in literature significantly influences the revelation of the writer’s ideological plan. He believed that main idea The author must meet the following criteria: isolation and completeness of the whole, completeness, proportionate distribution of roles between the characters of the work of art. Thus, composition in literature is determined by the author’s positions: ideological and aesthetic. But idea and theme can only be harmoniously combined in a mature work.

The composition of the text is considered by literary scholars from different points of view. Moreover, they have not agreed on a general definition to this day. Most often, composition in literature is defined as a construction relating all its parts to a single whole. It is known that it has many components that writers use in their works to complete the image. life pictures. The main elements that make up a composition in literature are lyrical digressions, portraits, inserted episodes, epigraphs, titles, landscapes, and surroundings.

Epigraphs and titles carry a special load.

The title usually indicates the following aspects of the work:

Subject (for example, Bazhov " Malachite Box»);

Images (for example, George Sand “Countess Rudolfstadt”, “Valentine”);

Issues (E. Bogat “What moves the Sun and luminaries”).

An epigraph is a kind of additional title, which is usually associated with the main idea of ​​the work or hints at bright features Main character.

Lyrical digressions stand aside from storyline. With their help, the author has the opportunity to express his own attitude to the events, phenomena and images that he depicts. There are also lyrical digressions in which the experiences of several characters merge, but at the same time it is still clear that here the writer expressed his feelings and thoughts. For example, as in the digression about mother’s hands in the novel “The Young Guard” by Fadeev.

By choosing the sequence of connecting the listed elements, his own principles of “assembling” them, each author creates a unique work. And he uses the following:

• Ring composition, or framing composition. The writer repeats artistic descriptions, stanzas at the beginning of the work, and then at the end; the same events or characters at the beginning of the story and at the end. This technique is found in both prose and poetry.
• Reverse composition. When the author places the ending at the beginning of the work, and then shows how events developed, explains why it is this way and not otherwise.
• Using the technique of retrospection is when the writer places readers in the past, when the reasons for the events that happened in the past were formed. this moment. Sometimes retrospection is presented in the form of memories of the main actor or his story (the so-called “story within a story”).
• A compositional break in events, when one chapter ends at the most intriguing moment, and the next begins with a completely different action. This technique is more often found in works of the detective and adventure genre.
• Using exposure. It may precede the main action, or it may be completely absent.

Composition of a work of art

Composition- this is the construction of all elements and parts of a work of art in accordance with the author’s intention (in a certain proportion, sequence; compositionally designed figurative system characters, space and time, sequence of events in the plot).

Compositional and plot parts of a literary work

Prologue- what led to the emergence of the plot, previous events (not in all works).
Exposition- designation of the original space, time, heroes.
The beginning- events that give development to the plot.
Development of action- development of the plot from beginning to climax.
Climax- the moment of the highest tension of the plot action, after which it moves towards the denouement.
Denouement- termination of action in a given conflict area when contradictions are resolved or removed.
Epilogue- "announcement" further developments, summing up.

Compositional elements

Compositional elements include epigraphs, dedications, prologues, epilogues, parts, chapters, acts, phenomena, scenes, prefaces and afterwords of “publishers” (created by the author’s imagination of extra-plot images), dialogues, monologues, episodes, inserted stories and episodes, letters, songs (Oblomov’s dream in Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”, letters from Tatyana to Onegin and Onegin to Tatyana in Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin”); all artistic descriptions (portraits, landscapes, interiors).

Compositional techniques

Repeat (refrain)- the use of the same elements (parts) of the text (in poems - the same verses):
Protect me, my talisman,
Keep me in the days of persecution,
In days of repentance and excitement:
You were given to me on the day of sorrow.
When the ocean rises
The waves are roaring around me,
When the clouds burst into thunder -
Protect me, my talisman...
(A.S. Pushkin “Keep Me, My Talisman”)

Depending on the position, frequency of appearance and autonomy, the following compositional techniques are distinguished:
Anaphora- repeat at the beginning of the line:
Past the lists, temples,
past temples and bars,
past luxurious cemeteries,
past the big markets...
(I. Brodsky “Pilgrims”)

Epiphora- repeat at the end of the line:
My horse, don’t touch the earth,
Don’t touch my star’s forehead,
Don't touch my sigh, don't touch my lips,
The rider is a horse, the finger is a palm.
(M. Tsvetaeva “The Khan is full”)

Simploca- the next part of the work begins in the same way as the previous one (usually found in folklore works or stylizations):
He fell on the cold snow
On the cold snow, like a pine
(M.Yu. Lermontov “Song about Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich ...”)

Antithesis- opposition (works at all levels of text from symbol to character):
I swear by the first day of creation,
I swear by his last day.
(M.Yu. Lermontov “Demon”)
They got along. Wave and stone
Poetry and prose, ice and fire...
(A.S. Pushkin “Eugene Onegin”)

Compositional techniques related with time shifts(combination of time layers, retro jump, insert):

Retardation- stretching a unit of time, slowing down, braking.

Retrospection- returning the action to the past, when the reasons for what was happening were laid down currently narratives (the story about Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov - I.S. Turgenev “Fathers and Sons”; the story about Asya’s childhood - I.S. Turgenev “Asya”).

Changing “points of view”- a narration about one event from the point of view of different characters, character and narrator (M.Yu. Lermontov “Hero of Our Time”, F.M. Dostoevsky “Poor People”).

Parallelism- the arrangement of identical or similar in grammatical and semantic structure of speech elements in adjacent parts of the text. Parallel elements can be sentences, their parts, phrases, words.
Your mind is as deep as the sea
Your spirit is as high as the mountains
(V. Bryusov “Chinese poems”)
An example of compositional parallelism in a prose text is the work of N.V. Gogol "Nevsky Prospekt".

Main types of composition

1. Linear composition: natural time sequence.
2. Inversion (retrospective) composition: reverse chronological order.
3. Ring composition: repetition starting moment at the end of the work.
4. Concentric composition: plot spiral, repetition of similar events as the action progresses.
5. Mirror composition: a combination of repetition and contrast techniques, as a result of which the initial and final images are repeated exactly the opposite.

Composition (lat. sotropere - fold, build) - construction, arrangement and relationship of parts, episodes, characters, means artistic expression in a literary work. The composition holds together all the elements of the work, subordinating them to the author’s idea. Components of the composition: characters, ongoing events, artistic details, monologues and dialogues, portraits, landscapes, interiors, lyrical digressions, inserted episodes, artistic preliminaries and framing. V. Khalizev identifies such elements of the composition as repetitions and variations that become motifs, silences and recognitions. Exist Various types compositions. Yes, composition lyrical works can be linear (the poem “Winter. What should we do in the village? I meet...” by A.S. Pushkin), amoebaic (regular, symmetrical alternation of two voices or themes - Russian folk songs); it can also often be based on the technique of antithesis (the poem “Demon” by A.S. Pushkin); ring (coincidence of beginning and ending - S.A. Yesenin’s poem “Darling, let’s sit next to each other...”); hidden circular (the same theme is given at the beginning and at the end of the work - the theme of a snowstorm, both a natural phenomenon and the whirlwind of life in the poem “Snow memory is crushed and pricked...” by S.A. Yesenin). For prose works characterized by great diversity compositional techniques. There is a linear composition (the sequential unfolding of events and the gradual discovery of the psychological motivations for the actions of the heroes - the novel “ An ordinary story» I.A. Goncharov), ring composition (the action ends where it began - the story " Captain's daughter» A.S. Pushkin), reverse composition(the work opens with the last event, which gradually begins to be explained to the reader - the novel “What is to be done?” by N.G. Chernyshevsky), mirror composition (symmetrical images, episodes - the novel in verse “Eugene Onegin” by A.S. Pushkin), associative composition ( the author uses the technique of silence, the technique of retrospection, the technique of “story within a story” (the story “Bela” in “A Hero of Our Time” by M.Yu. Lermontov, the story “Asya” by I.S. Turgenev), dotted composition (characterized by intermittency in the description of events events and psychological motivations, the narrative ends unexpectedly, intriguing the reader, the next chapter begins with a different episode - the novel “Crime and Punishment” by F.M.