Download PDF: http://studlit.ru/images/2019-4-2/Shervashidse.pdf
Keywords: rhythmical prose, intuitivism, positivism, artistic cognition, inexpressible, mysticism, syncretism, vibration, nationalism, foundation, ancestor’s cult.
For citation:

Shervashidse V.V. Paul Claudel’s Cosmism and Maurice Barres’s Egotism. Studia Litterarum, 2019, vol. 4, no 2, pp. 144–161. (In Russ.)

DOI: 10.22455/2500-4247-2019-4-2-144-161

Author: Vera V. Shervashidse
Information about the author:

Vera V. Shervashidse, DSc in Philology, Professor at the Department of Russian and Foreign Literature, Russian Peoples’ Friendship University, Miklukho-Maklaya St. 6, 117198 Moscow, Russia.

E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Received: February 18, 2019
Published: June 25, 2019
Issue: 2019 Vol. 4, №2
Department: World Literature
Pages: 144-161
DOI: 10.22455/2500-4247-2019-4-2-144-161
UDK: 821.133.1
BBK: 83.3(4Фра)51

Abstract

The article examines the poetics of Paul Claudel and Maurice Barres developed in the transitional time and representing different variants of the threshold or transgressive consciousness. The article is concerned with comparison of Barres’ and Claudel’s work. Inventor of the new poetic language, Claudel destroyed the canons of French poetry and drama. He was called a cosmic poet who conveyed the unity of the universe and the vibrations of cosmos with the help of the verse.” However, Claudel’s innovations were ahead of time and did not fit into the cultural context of his time. In contrast to Claudel, Barres after the publication of his trilogy The Cult of the Self became “the sovereign of thoughts” of his generation. Contemporaries saw fascinating history in the work of Barres that reproduced the drama of European consciousness. The title of the trilogy referred to the romantic tradition. Parodying romantic discourse, Barres destroyed the pathos of romantic and decadent exclusivity. The last representative of the 19 th century, Barres contributed to the destruction and to the decline of romanticism. He established the continuity of the new art in relation to romanticism, claiming that “romanticism is not only approved, but also justified, that is, completed in a timely manner.” A comparative analysis of Barres’s and Claudel’s poetics reveals differences in their methods.

References

1 Bakhtin M. K estetike slova [On the aesthetics of the word]. Kontekst — 1973 [Context — 1973]. Moscow, 1974, pp. 258–280. (In Russ.)

2 Bodler Sh. Tsvety Zla [The flowers of evil]. Moscow, Ripol Klassik Publ., 1997. 959 p. (In Russ.)

3 Bozhovich V. Deistvie i vzaimodeistvie iskusstv: Frantsiia kontsa XIX — nachala XX v. [The action and interaction of arts: France at the end of the 19 th — the beginning of the 20 th century]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1987. 319 p. (In Russ.)

4 Viar D. Literatura podsoznaniia. Problemy sovremennogo frantsuzskogo romana [Problems of the modern French novel]. Inostrannaia literature, 2012, no 11, pp. 257–273. (In Russ.)

5 Voloshin M. Klodel’ v Kitae [Clodel in China]. Klodel’ P. Poznanie Vostoka [The knowledge of the East]. Moscow, Enneagon PRESS Publ., 2010, pp. 369–399. (In Russ.)

6 Zemskov V. Odnoglazyi Ianus. Pogranichnaia epokha — pogranichnoe soznanie [One- eyed Janus. Boundary era — boundary consciousness]. Kanuny i rubezhi. Tipy pogranichnykh epokh — tipy pogranichnogo soznaniia [Eve and frontiers. Types of boundary epochs — types of boundary consciousness]. Moscow, IWL RAS Publ., 2002, pp. 6–21. (In Russ.)

7 Klodel’ P. Poznanie Vostoka [The knowledge of the East]. Moscow, Enneagon PRESS Publ., 2010. 400 p. (In Russ.)

8 Kosikov G. Poeziia frantsuzskogo simvolizma [The poetry of French symbolism]. Moscow, Izd-vo MGU Publ., 1983. 512 p. (In Russ.)

9 Lotman Iu. Semiosfera [Semiosphere]. St. Petersburg, Iskusstvo Publ., 2010. 704 p. (In Russ.)

10 Shopengauer A. Mir kak volia i predstavlenie [The world as will and representation]. Moscow, Azbuka-Attikus Publ., 1995. 312 p. (In Russ.)

11 Eikhenbaum B. O misteriiakh Polia Klodelia [About the mysteries of Paul Claudel]. Severnye zapiski, 1913, no 9, pp. 121–137. (In Russ.)

12 Anglès A. Le dialogue de Paul Claudel et André Gide. Bulletin de la Société de Paul Claudel. № 89. Paris, 1983. 124 p. (In French)

13 Barres M. Le jardin de Bérénice. Paris, Bouquin. 1991. 128 p. (In French)

14 Barres M. Mes Cahiers. En XII vol. Paris, Plon-Nourrit, 1936. Vol. V. 716 p. (In French)

15 Barres M. Sous l’oeil des barbares. Paris, Bouquin, 1994. 151 p. (In French)

16 Barres M. Un Homme libre. Paris, Bouquin, 1990. 189 p. (In French)

17 Bompaire-Evesque C. Barres et Claudel: Une incompréhension réciproque // Revue d’Histoire littéraire de la France. 2004/1. Vol. 104, pp. 93–117. (In French)

18 Claudel P. Mémoires improvises. Paris, Gallimard, 1969. 370 p. (In French)

19 Domenach J.-M. Barres par lui-même. Paris, Le Seuil, 1954. 191 p. (In French) 20 Gard М. Les Mémorables.1918–1945. Paris, Gallimard, 1999. 305 p. (In French) 

21 Gautier Th. Albertus ou l’Ame et le Péché. Paris, Paulin, 1833. 139 p. (In French)

22 Godo E. P. Claudel, la vie au risque de la joie. Paris, Gallimard, 2005. 351 p. (In French)

23 Houriez E. L’inspiration scripturaire dans le théâtre et la poésie de Paul Claudel. Besanson, Presses universitaires, 2004. 248 p. (In French)

24 Lesort P.-A. Paul Claudel par lui-même. Paris, Le Seuil, 1963. 192 p. (In French)

25 Maurras Ch. La vision du moi de Maurice Barres. La Revue independante: poetique, litteraire, artistique, 1891, vol. 19, no 54–55, avril–juin, pp. 194–208. (In French)

26 Ponton R. Un auteur bourgeois: Maurice Barres. Paris, Le Seul, 1990. 244 p. (In French)

27 Regnier H. “Lettre à Claudel”, 1r Janvier 1891. Cahiers Paul Claudel I. Paris, Gallimard, 1970. 147 p. (In French)

28 Stendhal. Souvenirs d’egotisme. Paris, Gallimard, 1993. 187 p. (In French)

29 Whitman J.-M. Barres romancier. Paris, Honore Champion, 2000. 219 p. (In French)