ON THE QUESTION OF THE HISTORY AND ROOTS OF LITERARY POSTMODERNISM (BASED ON THE MATERIALS OF THE APOLOGISTS OF THE ARTISTIC DIRECTION)

Abstract

Russian and world literature and culture history as a whole is now being rethought in line with the complete technical replacement of all natural with artificial. There is no exaggeration in this process. A new round (or stage) of literature, culture and art differs from all the previous ones by the probability of the disappearance of former aesthetic values and ideals. Russian critic, for example, the well-known modern critic Y.Borev, linking this issue, which is disastrous for all mankind, with the deep subconscious of the individual, was forced to state that “a person today can no longer withstand the pressure of the world and becomes a kind of post-human” [1, p.311]. And according to another authoritative apologist of literary postmodernism, B. Watels, “the omnipresence of modern technologies puts pressure on people's consciousness, while forming a special techno-culture, because in order to fully use the full power of these technologies, people should strive to change their consciousness as much as possible. Otherwise, they have a real risk of becoming post-humans” [5, p.53]. In these statements, we see how two critics of different nationalities come to a single decision. Russian literary postmodernism is linked by genetic ties with various technogenic processes and such a technical take-off did not exist in the previous decades, when modernism was gaining strength in the first place. In this regard, it is necessary to highlight the prefix “-post”, which over time has already taken on a fundamentally different meaning compared to modernism itself. Moreover, the very thinking of the people of the XXI century has changed dramatically. On the one hand, it turned out to be subordinate to technology in general. On the other hand, postmodernism, unlike its previous stages, has developed (although not in its final form) own signs and criteria of writing.