Keywords: cultural retrospection, retrospective movements, prefix “neo”, neorealism, neo-romanticism, literary process
For citation:

Zuseva-Özkan V.B. Prefix “Neo” in the Cultural and Scientific Reflection. Studia Litterarum, 2019, vol. 4, no 4, pp. 28–43. (In Russ.)

DOI: 10.22455/2500-4247-2019-4-4-28-43

Author: Veronika B. Zuseva-Özkan
Information about the author:

Veronika B. Zuseva-Özkan, DSc in Philology, Leading Researcher, A.M. Gorky Institute of World Literature of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Povarskaya St. 25 a, 121069 Moscow, Russia.

ORCID ID: 0000-0001-9537-108X

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

Received: May 28, 2019
Published: December 25, 2019
Issue: 2019 Vol. 4, №4
Department: Literary Theory
Pages: 28-43
DOI: 10.22455/2500-4247-2019-4-4-28-43
UDK: 82.0
BBK: 83


The article considers the main vectors of the cultural and scientific reflection of the prefix “neo”. The author describes the notions of the cultural retrospection and of the retrospective movements in world literature, reveals their invariant features (recurrent character, high variability, controversiality, syntheticism, tendency to produce the third-order movements, self-reflexivity). The state of culture abundantly producing the retrospective movements is discussed in relation to the ideas of the “end of history” (F. Fukuyama), the “random cannibalization” of historical styles (F. Jameson), the “invalidation” of language (H. Lefebvre), the cultural recontextualization (L. Hutcheon), the “culturology of prefixes” (S. Zenkin). The author proposes ways of perceiving the “retrospective dimension” of the cultural theory based on various concepts of the literary process: filiational, i. e. focusing on interaction between tradition and the individual talent; systematic dynamic concept involving not the separate texts or authors but the whole artistic systems; receptive aesthetics; historical poetics.


1 Bakhtin M.M. Problemy poetiki Dostoevskogo [Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics]. Bakhtin M.M. Sobranie sochinenii: v 7 t. [Collected Works: in 7 vols.] Moscow, Russkie slovari Publ., Yazyki slavyanskoy kul’tury Publ., 2002, vol. 6, pp. 5–300. (In Russ.)

2 Beitson G. Ekologiia razuma: Izbrannye stat’i po antropologii, psikhiatrii i epistemologii [Ecology of mind], transl. by English D.Ia. Fedotov, M.P. Papusha. Moscow, Smysl Publ., 2000. 476 p. (In Russ.)

3 Blum Kh. Strakh vliianiia. Karta perechityvaniia [The anxiety of influence], transl. by English S.A. Nikitina. Ekaterinburg, Izd-vo Ural. un-ta Publ., 1998. 352 p. (In Russ.)

4 Broitman S.N. Istoricheskaia poetika [Historical poetics]. Teoriia literatury: in 2 t. [Theory of Literature: in 2 vols.], ed. by N.D. Tamarchenko. Moscow, Academia Publ., 2004. Vol. 2. 368 p. (In Russ.)

5 Evropeiskaia poetika ot antichnosti do epokhi Prosveshcheniia: Entsiklopedicheskii putevoditel’ [European poetics from antiquity to the Enlightenment: Encyclopedic guide]. Moscow, Izdatel’stvo Kulaginoi Publ., Intrada Publ., 2010. 512 p. (In Russ.)

6 Zamiatin E.I. O sintetizme [On syntheticism]. Zamiatin E.I. Ia boius’ [I am Afraid]. Moscow, Nasledie Publ., 1999, pp. 74–82. (In Russ.)

7 Zenkin S.N. Kul’turologiia prefiksov [The culturology of prefixes]. Zenkin S.N. Raboty o teorii [Works on Theory]. Moscow, NLO Publ., 2012, pp. 137–147. (In Russ.)

8 Zenkin S.N. Teoriia literatury: Problemy i rezul’taty [Theory of literature: Problems and results]. Moscow, NLO Publ., 2018. 362 p. (In Russ.)

9 Magomedova D.M. “Perepisyvanie klassiki” na rubezhe vekov: sfera avtora i sfera geroia [“Rewriting the classics” at the turn of the centuries: author’s sphere and character’s sphere]. Literaturnyi tekst: problemy i metody issledovaniia [Literary Text: Problems and Research Methods]. Moscow, Tver’, 2000, issue 6: Aspekty teoreticheskoi poetiki: k 60-letiiu N.D. Tamarchenko, pp. 212–218. (In Russ.)

10 Mamardashvili M.K. Lektsii o Pruste [Lectures on Proust]. Moscow, Ad Marginem Publ., 1995. 547 p. (In Russ.)

11 Mandel’shtam O. Slovo i kul’tura [Word and Culture]. Mandel’shtam O. Sochineniia: in 2 t. [Works: in 2 vols.] Moscow, Khudozhestvennaia literature Publ., 1990, vol. 2, pp. 167–172. (In Russ.)

12 Tiupa V.I. Paradigmy khudozhestvennosti (poniatie o literaturnom protsesse) [Artistic paradigms (the Notion of literary process)]. Teoriia literatury: in 2 t. [Theory of literature: in 2 vols.], ed. by N.D. Tamarchenko. Moscow, Academia Publ., 2004, Vol. 1, pp. 92–105. (In Russ.)

13 Shklovskij V.B. O teorii prozy [Theory of prose]. Moscow, Federatsiia Publ., 1929. 266 p. (In Russ.)

14 Eliot T.S. Traditsiia i individual’nyi talant [Tradition and the individual talent]. Zarubezhnaia estetika i teoriia literatury XIX–XX vv.: Traktaty, stat’i, esse [Foreign aesthetics and literary theory of the 19th and 20th Centuries], comp., ed. by G.K. Kosikov. Moscow, Izd-vo MGU Publ., 1987, pp. 169–176. (In Russ.)

15 Hesse H. Romantisch und Neuromantik. Hesse H. Schriften zur Literatur. Gesammelte Werke. Bd. 2. Frankfurt/Main, Suhrkamp Verlag, 1970. S. 105–113. (In German) 

16 Hofmannsthal H. von. Gesammelte Werke. Reden und Aufsätze III. Frankfurt/Main, Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, 1980. 662 S. (In German)

17 Hutcheon L. A Poetics of Postmodernism: History, Theory, Fiction. London, Routledge, 1988. 284 p. (In English)

18 Hutcheon L. The Politics of Postmodernism. London, Routledge, 1989. 195 p. (In English)

19 Jameson F. Postmodernism, or Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham, Duke University Press, 1991. xxii, 438 p. (In English)

20 Lefebvre H. Everyday Life in the Modern World / translated by S. Rabinovitch. New Brunswick, N.J., U.S.A., Transaction Books, 1984. xxiii, 206 p. (In English)

21 Le Néo: Sources, héritages et réécritures dans les cultures européennes / K. Martin-Cardini (dir.). Rennes, Presses unversitaires de Rennes, 2016. 558 p. (In French