Oleg Larionov « Как писать историю русской сентиментальной литературы? Институции, жанры, практики »

Value of the Information & Strength of the Argument

The presentation offers a valuable reinterpretation of Russian sentimentalism, moving beyond individual authors to consider institutional and collective practices. The argument is solid, supported by specific archival evidence (e.g., the printer’s mark of the Assembly) and references to key scholars (Lotman, Zorin, Habermas, Reddy, Maza). The speaker carefully distinguishes his own thesis from existing interpretations and provides a nuanced view of the term ‘sentimentalism’ as a heuristic device. The argumentation is logical and well-paced, though the delivery was occasionally slow, which may affect engagement.

Scientific Rigor, Source Quality, Title Accuracy

The speaker demonstrates rigorous scholarship, citing primary sources (journals, memoirs) and secondary literature (Kochetkova, Vatsuro, Levin). He acknowledges the conditional nature of his claims and the need for further research. The title accurately reflects the content, which is a methodological reflection on writing literary history. The presentation is well-structured, with clear examples and references to specific documents. The speaker’s expertise is evident, and he engages critically with existing scholarship.

The title accurately reflects the content, which discusses how to write the history of Russian sentimental literature through institutions, genres, and practices.

8/10

The speaker is a doctoral researcher at Oxford with multiple publications on Karamzin and sentimentalism. The presentation is based on archival and bibliographic evidence, referencing specific documents and scholarly works. The argument is well-structured and cautious, acknowledging the conditional nature of the term 'sentimentalism'.

Markers derived by PSI from the transcript: the creator did not define chapters.

• 00:00Introduction by the chair, presenting Oleg Larionov and his academic background.
• 02:00Larionov begins his talk, outlining the problematic status of Russian sentimentalism in literary history.
• 10:00He introduces his thesis: a fundamental shift in the late 1780s-1790s towards public articulation of private experience.
• 20:00Discussion of the continuity between Novikov's journals and the sentimental journals of the 1790s, focusing on the Assembly of University Alumni.
• 30:00He presents evidence from memoirs and printer's marks to show that the same student assembly published both pre-sentimental and sentimental journals.
• 40:00He argues that meditative prose, not the travelogue or sentimental tale, was the most characteristic genre of Russian sentimentalism.
• 50:00He traces the genealogy of meditative prose to French poetic prose and English graveyard poetry, citing specific authors and works.
• 1:00:00He concludes by summarizing his argument and suggesting directions for future research.

• Московский журнал — Karamzin's journal, starting in 1791, as a key factor in the shift towards sentimental literature.
• Чтение для вкуса, разума и чувствований — A sentimental journal published by the Assembly of University Alumni, exemplifying the new literary trend.
• Покоющийся трудолюбец — A pre-sentimental journal published by the same Assembly, showing the contrast in content.
• Утренний свет — A journal associated with Novikov, illustrating the earlier period.
• Вечерняя заря — Another journal associated with Novikov, part of the series.
• Прибавление к Московским ведомостям — A journal supplement to the Moscow News, part of the same institutional context.
• Московские ведомости — The main newspaper of the time, to which the sentimental journals were supplements.
• Гимн солнцу — A prose poem by François-Philippe de Reyrac, cited as an example of French poetic prose.
• Бедная Лиза — Karamzin's famous sentimental tale, mentioned as a key text.
• Письма русского путешественника — Karamzin's travelogue, mentioned as a major sentimental work.
• Путешествие из Петербурга в Москву — Radishchev's work, mentioned as a major sentimental text.

• Ю. М. Лотман. Сотворение Карамзина — Lotman's work on Karamzin, which the speaker cites as an example of focusing on individual authors.
• А. Л. Зорин. Появление героя — Zorin's work on emotional culture, which the speaker mentions as shifting to cultural anthropology.
• Н. Д. Кочеткова. Литература русского сентиментализма — Kochetkova's monograph, which the speaker notes rejects chronological treatment.
• В. Э. Вацуро. Готический роман в России — Vatsuro's book, which the speaker cites for its characterization of Karamzin's prose.
• Ю. Д. Левин. Английская поэзия и литература русского сентиментализма — Levin's work on English influences, which the speaker cites for the emergence of meditative prose.

• П. Н. Берков. Проблема литературного направления — Berkov's earlier periodization of Russian sentimentalism, which the speaker criticizes as overly simplistic.