Ludic Culture of the Russian Renaissance of the Turn of the 20th Century

Abstract

The article actualizes the concept of ludic culture and examines its specific features in the context of the Russian Renaissance of the turn of the 20th century. It explores experimental play in the form and subject matter of literary fiction, as well as in everyday behavior, the usage of literary pseudonyms, the creation of literary societies, meetings, groups; the observance of cult rituals as pretend play, perpetration of literary hoaxes – all of it based upon the provisions and statements formulated in the book Homo Ludens by J. Huizinga. Elements of play which permeated the culture at the turn of the 20th century affected all aspects of public life. It can be difficult to trace back the origin of the ludic Renaissance which stirred up the minds of artists, awakened the creative potential of writers, painters, theater workers, etc. However, it can be argued with a high degree of certainty that play culture extended its influence to other spheres of human life: economics, politics, law, sciences. Having fertilized these spheres of human activity with its creative energy, it endowed them with the potential to influence the formation and development of a talented personality. Cultural luminaries of the time did not attempt to turn play into a field of knowledge and use it analyze the behavior of other people, influence or control them. The phenomenon of play culture took on the features of spontaneity and freedom.

References

1. Bakhtin M. 1965. Tvorchestvo Fransua Rable i narodnaja kul’tura srednevekov’ ja i Renessansa [Rabelais and His World: carnival and grotesque]. URL: http://az.lib.ru/b/bahtin_m_m/text_1965_tvorchestvo_fransua_rable.shtml (accessed: 20.09.2021). (In Russ.)

2. Berdyaev N. 1990. Samopoznanie (opyt filosofskoj avtobiografii) [Self-Knowledge: An Essay in Autobiography]. Moscow, Mezdunarognye otnoshenia Publishing. (In Russ.)

3. Kartasheva N.V. 2013. Temporal’nye fenomeny russkoj kul’tury poslerevoljucionnogo desjatiletija [Temporal phenomena of the Russian Culture of the post-revolutionary decade]. Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 19: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 4, pp. 69–78. (In Russ.)

4. Kolobaeva L.A. 2000. Russkij simvolizm [Russian symbolism]. Moscow, MSU Publishing. (In Russ.)

5. Komkov O.A. 2009. O nekotoryh aspektah fenomenologii vostochnohristianskogo hudozhestvennogo teksta [On some aspects of the phenomenology of the Eastern Christian artistic text]. Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 19: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 4, pp. 58–73. (In Russ.)

6. Lann E. 2009. Literaturnaja mistifikacija [Literary hoax]. Moscow, Knizhnyj dom “LIBROKOM”. (In Russ.)

7. Obatnina Elena. 2001. Car’ Asyka i ego poddannye. Obez’ jan’ ja Velikaja i Vol’naja Palata A.M. Remizova v licah i dokumentah [King Asyka and his subjects. A.M. Remizov’s Monkey Great and Free Chamber: in persons and documents]. St. Petersburg, Ivan Limbah Publishing. (In Russ.)

8. Johan Huizinga. 1997. Homo ludens. Artikelen over de cultuurgrschiedenis. Stat’i po istorii kul’tury [Articles on cultural history]. Moscow, Progress, Tradicia. (In Russ.)

9. Hodasevich V. 1996. Muni. In Hodasevich V. Nekropol’ [Necropolis]. Moscow. (In Russ.)

10. Shershenevich V. 1990. Moj vek, moi druz’ ja i podrugi [My century, my friends and girlfriends]. Moscow. (In Russ.)