2659

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

Metaphorical projection of the image of sand in the philosophical picture of the world of F. Bacon is given for revealing the two fundamental gnoseological concepts such as philosophy and sciences.

Let`s consider the following example:

And therefore, if in my natural history, which has been collected and tested with so much diligence, severity, and I may say religious care, there still lurk at intervals certain falsities or errors in the particulars, what is to be said of common natural history, which in comparison with mine is so negligent and inexact? And what of the philosophy and sciences built on such a sand (or rather quicksand)? [1*].

On the analysis of the given above example one can determine the following conceptual characteristics of the constructs «history» and «philosophy», which are actively represented in connection with the object of wind:

our natural history – false, erroneous;

common natural history - negligent and inexact

philosophy and sciences – quicksand.

The mentioned above features and associative parallels demonstrate the comparison of two absolutely different types of histories:

1)natural history (for the followers of the author), which appeared in the result of rethinking the world history by the scientists of the Renaissance period (my natural history) and

2)natural (common) history, which is universally recognized interpretation of the world events made long time ago (common natural history) and that is being criticized by F. Bacon.

When describing the first type of history the features of “partiality”, “falsity” have been revealed, that is represented by the lexemes: certain falsities or errors.

The second type of history is verbalized by the lexemes: negligent and inexact, while for the verbal explication of the features of such gnoseological concepts as philosophy and sciences F. Bacon appeals to the image of sand, objectified by the lexemes: sand/quicksand.

Probably, it is the image of sand that possesses the related features that help to describe most exactly the state of philosophy and science and to demonstrate their highly unacceptable state.

To determine the features that are metaphorically transferred to the phenomena of

«philosophy» and «sciences» lexical analysis of lexemes sand/quicksand was carried out. According to the data of Merriam Webster dictionary, lexeme sand is determined as

follows: «a loose granular material that results from the disintegration of rocks, consists of particles smaller than gravel but coarser than silt, and is used in mortar, glass, abrasives, and foundry molds» [1**].

As the analysis of these definition shows, dominant features for the national mentality of the English people that the lexeme sand contains are physical characteristics of sand, such as: “flowability”, “granularity of structure”, “abrasiveness”.

Thus, the instability of the image of sand, its flowability, that is inconstancy and inability to act as foundation, support for some structure serve the basis of using this metaphorical image. By means of metaphorical transference of the features, revealed in the image of

“sand”, the following features of the concepts «philosophy» and «sciences» are actualized:

“baselessness”, “instability”.

54

Denotative features of the lexeme quicksand are demonstrated by the following definition: «sand readily yielding to pressure; a deep mass of loose sand mixed with water into which heavy objects readily sink» [1 **]. This meaning reveals the following semantic features of lexeme quicksand: “big mass”, “mixing with water”, “easy absorption of the heavy objects”.

Connotative meanings of the following lexeme are: «something that entraps or frustrates» [1**], that represents the feature incorporated in the structure of the semanteme quicksand:

“impossibility of actions”, “danger”, “lie”.

Lexical-and-semantic analysis of the lexeme quicksand showed that in the linguistic consciousness of the English people the image of quicksand, along with the features of its physical characteristics - its mass, consistency, ability of absorption of other objects - the features connected with the danger to freedom and life of person are contained, such as: “inability for action”, “danger”, “lie”.

On analysis of the associative connection of the object sand (quicksand) and gnoseological concepts philosophy and sciences in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon the connotation of “instability”, “unsteadiness”, “unreliability” of these phenomenon is found out. In the same manner as quicksand acts as unstable basis for some structures, that “sink”, are unstable, philosophy and sciences (in the condition that was criticized and unacceptable for F. Bacon and his followers) don`t make stable basis for foundation and development of the society and its new history.

The basis for the using of this metaphorical object:

“PHILOSOPHY/SCIENCES→ SAND”

served the following physical-and-mechanical characteristics of sand: instability of the structure of sand, its flowability, that is instability, inability to serve as a basis for some structure. By means of metaphorical transference of the object sand the following features of the concepts

«philosophy» and «sciences» are actualized: “baselessness, instability”.

As the results of the conducted research showed, to reveal the essence and to describe intellectual, gnoseological and moral-and-ethic concepts in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon the following objects of natural realias are used: gale, breeze, sand/quicksand. One of the objects most often used for description of different types of concepts in the world picture of F. Bacon is wind. This object represents cognitive features of the two types of concepts: the intellectual concept «opinion» and moral-and-ethical concept «hope».

Semantic-and-cognitive analysis of the lexeme gale reveled the following features of wind, serving as the basis of metaphorical representation and, consequently, being the basis for metaphorical projection of the image of wind on the phenomena: hope and opinion: on the one hand, wind is characterized by power, might, ability to influence something (gales of opinion), on the other hand – by the changes, dynamics, expectation of something positive (breezes of hope).

Addressing the images of nature the author considers not only their natural functions proper, but their features when being in different physical forms. Selectivity in the choice of forms of one and the same metaphorical image demonstrates F. Bacon`s peculiarity in perception of the world, that is specificity of his philosophical personality. On perception of naturamorphic objects F. Bacon acts as naturalist, attributing importance not only to the forms of natural phenomena, but to their power, vector orientation, the character of influence.

The use of the object of sand, namely, quicksand, is very significant. On metaphorical comparison F. Bacon also specifies its physical properties, that is its low density, indicating instability of sand surfaces, that is key feature on creating metaphorical projection on the phenomena philosophy and sciences.

55

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

Thus, when describing intangible phenomena F. Bacon actively addresses to the natural objects. Physical properties of naturamorphic objects: their power, movement, density, stability perform the function of cognitive basis for making associative parallels with the constructs of intellectual, gnoseological and moral-and-ethical spheres.

Metaphorical renominations of realias under consideration by means of their representation by these of those naturamorphic objects reveal ethnic-and-cultural specificity of person`s world-view [9].

When analyzing metaphorical projection of the mentioned above features on the objects of intellectual and gnoseological spheres the following features of cognitive structure of the corresponding concepts have been found out: power, might, dynamics. In the following concept of moral-and-ethical type – hope – the features of changes for the better have been represented. The concept history contains the following features: instability, unsteadiness, unreliability.

On analysis of naturamorphic metaphors as means of concepts` explication in the philosophical discourse of F. Bacon, the author demonstrates his physically-oriented philosophical personality, his scientific perception of the world, his selectivity and subtlety of scientistnaturalist. This fact may represent the specific character of world perception of F. Bacon, that reveals figurativeness of his thinking, inclination for referring to the objects of nature – that is natural and clear environment for people – for explanation of the complex phenomena of immaterial, spiritual and intellectual character.

Bibliographic list

1.Fomina Z.E. Urbanisticheskaja priroda i ee hudozhestvennoe otrazhenie v prostranstve juzhnogo goroda: real'noe i mnimoe (na materiale novelly G. Gesse "Die Fremdenstadt im Suden") / Z.E. Fomina // Nauchnyj vestnik Voronezh. gos. arh.-stroit. un-ta. Sovremennye lingvisticheskie i metodiko-didakticheskie issledovanija. – 2007. – vyp. 7. – s. 8-23.

2.Fomina Z.E. Metaforicheskie reprezentacii prirody v pojeticheskoj kartine mira Ingeborg Bahman i Sergeja E senina v aspekte ih differenciacii i universali-zacii / Z.E. Fomina // Nauchnyj vestnik Voronezh. gos. arh.-stroit. un-ta. Sovremennye lingvisticheskie i metodiko-didakticheskie issledovanija. – 2012. - vyp. 18. – S. 135-143.

3.Krotkov E.A. Specifika filosofskogo diskursa : logiko-jepistemicheskie zametki / E. A. Korotkov // Obshhestvennye nauki i sovremennost'. – 2002. – № 1. – S. 128–135.

4.Arutjunova N. D. Jazyk i mir cheloveka / N. D. Arutjunova. – 2-e izd., ispr. – Moskva : Jazyki russkoj kul'tury, 1999. – I–XV, 895 s. – (Jazyk. Semiotika. Kul'tu-ra).

5.Lakoff D. Metafory, kotorymi my zhivem / D. Lakoff, M. Dzhonson. – Mo-skva : Editorial USSR, 2004. – 256 s.

6.Lavrinenko, I. Ju. Specifika verbalizacii konceptov razuma i chuvstva v filosofskom diskurse F. Bjekona [tekst]: dissertacija na soiskanie uchenoj stepeni kandidata filologicheskih nauk: 10.02.04 : zashhishhena 25.06.14: utv. 01.02.15 / Lav-rinenko Irina Ju- r'evna. – Voronezh, 2014. – 311s.

7.Jenciklopedija simvoliki i geral'diki, URL: http://www.symbolarium.ru/index.php/%C2%E5%F2%E5%F0 (vremja obrashhenija: 03.08.13).

8.Jenciklopedii & Slovari, URL: http://enc-dic.com/biblepop/Pesok-4098.html, vremja obrashhenija: 29.08.13.

9.Strukova O.V., Fomina Z.E. Jetnokul'turnaja specifika renominacij ne-meckih toponimov v raznyh arealah Rossii (na materiale nemeckih toponimov Sa-marskoj, Leningradskoj i Permskoj oblastej) / O.V. Strukova, Z.E. Fomina // Na-uchnyj vestnik Voronezh.

56

gos. arh.-stroit. un-ta. Sovremennye lingvisticheskie i metodiko-didakticheskie issledovanija. – 2014. – vyp. 1 (21). – S. 116-129.

Analyzed sources

1*. Bacon F. The New Organon. – URL: http:// www. constitution.org/ bacon/ nov_ org. htm (data obrashhenija: 24.03.13).

2*. Bjekon F. Velikoe vosstanovlenie nauk, Novyj Organon. Jelektronnaja bib-lioteka modernlib.ru. URL: http://modernlib.ru/books/bekon_frensis/velikoe_vosstanovlenie_nauk_noviy_organon/read (vremja obrashhenija: 02.06.2016).

Dictionaries used

1**. Merriam Webster, URL: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gale, (vremja obrashhenija: 29.08.13).

57

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

UDC 821 (091)

Voronezh State University, Faculty of Philology, Department of Russian literature of XX and XXI centuries, the theory of literature and folklore

Post-graduate Student, 3 year Anzhela Igorevna Malysheva

e-mail: anjelabogatyreva@gmail.com

A.I. Malysheva

THE SPECIFICS OF ZAKHAR PRILEPIN'S VERBAL AND RHETORICAL MEANS IN HIS FICTIONAL AND PUBLICISTIC WORKS

The article concerns identification of the main motives of Zakhar Prilepin’s artwork, degree of their accentuation in the writer’s pieces of publicism and fiction as well as analysis of the verbal means and images used. The article is devoted to the up-to-date issue of writer’s mediatization. The article contains a reveiw of various scolars' opinions on fictional and publicistic discourse. The author of the article identifies and describes the distinctive features of the language and images the writer uses in his novels, short stories, and essays. The main body of the article is presented by the analysis of Zakhar Prilepin's linguistic identity and his media images compared to those of the main characters of his works. Based on the results of the research the main motives of Zakhar

Prilepin’s artworks are identified: fatherhood, homeland, and God. The writer’s texts of various styles feature fundamental differences as far as interpretation of these notions and their authorial evaluation are concerned. Fictional literature created by the writer is characterized by higher focus on nuances in the sphere of problem statement and solution.

Key words: Zakhar Prilepin, nonfiction, fiction, verbal means, rhetorical means, author's strategy, mediatization of literature, paternity problem.

The idea of anthropocentric essence of language is the key to modern linguistics. From the standpoint of the anthropocentric paradigm, a person learns the world through selfawareness, his theoretical and substantive work in it [1]. According to W. von Humboldt, language acts, on the one hand, as the result of activity of people, on the other - the result of the activitiy of the spirit of the creative personality. Language "expresses the worldview of the individual, but a person always depends on the people to which he belongs"[2]. Fundamental issues related to the comprehension of the problems of language and thinking, of language and society, of language and culture, of language and ethnos, of universal and cul- turally-specific, of transnational and national ethnic and cultural code, etc., add up to 21st century priorities of modern linguistic research [3; 4].

Language as a space of thought and as a "spirit house" (M. Heidegger) is reflected, above all, in the individual author's picture of the world of any author, in particular, in its artistic, journalistic, or in any other discursive realization.

Nowadays in the modern literature process a special attention is paid to the definitions of the literary discourse and the sociative discourse. The analysis and the notion of discourse have attracted the attention of a number of theorists such as T. A. van Dijk, P. Henry, J. Derrida, E. Benveniste, J. Guilhaumou, L. Hjelmslev, P. Sériot, M. Foucault, D. Schiffrin, N. Arutyunova, V. Karasik, Yu. Karaulov, A. Kibrik, G. Slyshkin, Yu. Stepanov. These researchers approached to the concept of ‘discourse’ from various perspectives, defining it as socio-cultural environment, dialogue, linguistic fact-text.

____________________

© Malysheva A.I., 2016

58

At this stage of the scientific developments the understanding of the literary discourse differs significantly. A. N. Bezrukov in his article called ‘Intersubjective Character of the Literary Discourse’ insists that the meaning originates at the moment of the metalinguistic functioning of the literary discourse, where the main event is not a collision, but emotions or reactions of characters and readers. The researcher points out: ‘The literary discourse is considered as a paradigmatic construction, characterized not only by a subjective component, but also by the beginning of intersubjective reception. The variation of meaning, ontological incompleteness and language game in the literary discourse are the main techniques of intersubjective semiotic process organization’ [5, p.23].

The definition of the literary discourse, defined by A. S. Gafarova is considered to be one of the most accurate. In the article called ‘Literary Text vs. Literary Discourse’

A. S. Gafarova analyzes the studies of Galeeva N. D., T. A. van Dijk, Domashnev A. I., Shishkin I. I., Goncharova E. A., Kulibina N. V., Timofeev L. I., Todorov Tz., Turaeva Z. Ya., Tyupa V. I., and Chetverikova O. V., and comes to a conclusion that the literary discourse is ‘a sociocultural interaction between the author and the target audience, involving into its area cultural, aesthetic, social values, encyclopedic knowledge, knowledge of the world, attitude to reality, system of belief, ideas, beliefs, feelings, and constituting by itself an attempt to change spiritual continuum of a person and cause a certain emotional reaction’ [6]. ‘The changing of the spiritual continuum of a person is one of the defining moments of fiction, which is the reader’s emotional response that is certainly implied in the literary publicism, but only fiction aims to find answers on the ontological questions.

The concept of the sociative discourse has less divergent interpretations. Thus, N. A.

Pavlushkina in the article ‘The Modern Magazine Publicism: forms of manifestation of the author’s intentions’ writes that ‘publicistic text brought to life by a particular situation and particular phenomena, connected with the events of the world around and exist in the timespace continuum’ [7, p.147]. The researcher highlights that the texts of the sociative discourse possess the dialogueness and the interactivity, they are open to different interpretations. In the sociative discourse the media process subjects are oriented on active interaction. N. A. Pavlushkina notes that in this case the relationships between the author and the target audience are utterly actualized and ‘a suggestive property of the marked discourse allows us to speak about publicism as a provocative discourse’ [7, p.148].

In the introductory article to the collector ‘Publicism in the modern society’ Misonzhnikov B. YA. writes that ‘Humanistic task of the publicism is being implemented dialectically multifaceted, including through the appealing to the artistic cognition of reality, which includes both discursive and intuitive ways of thinking’ [8, p.13]. It proves the need of the comparison of the contemporary writer’s fiction and publicistic creation who presents himself as a media figure. Misonzhnikov B. YA. believes that literary publicism is both a documentary and a literary work with ‘phenomenological potential capacity of a quality of beauty and inexhaustible energy’ [8, p.13].

Considering the realization of the writer’s thoughts in the literary and the sociative discourse, it is also necessary to address to the determination of the term the author’s ‘linguistic personality’. In the article ‘On the term ‘linguistic identity’: origins, problems, prospects of using’, written by Ivantsov E. V., it is explored the history of the use of the term among others gives the following A. A. Pushkin’s definition: ‘A person, who has the set of the discourse abilities that is the orientation and the planning speech and non-speech acts, developing the action plan in the form of speech communication, verification and correction (as required) of the speech acts could be called the linguistic personality’ [9, p.26]. Then E. V. Ivantsova gives a definition is that the native speaker, characterized on the basis of the analysis produced by him texts, could be considered as the linguistic personality and also ‘as the individual and the author of these texts with a special character, interests, social and psychological preferences and installations» [9, p.28].

59

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

Based on the foregoing, there is the need to study how a contemporary writer uses different discourses and forms of speech, what a linguistic personality he belongs to. These issues should be considered in the context of the mediatization of modern literature uses a variety of resources to support the dialogue with the audience. As the researches have fairly pointed out, nowadays ‘not only the literary text has the meaning, <…>; the choice of im- age-building practices, forms and manner of self-presentation is important’ [10].

Hence, publicism can and should be studied as an important part of the author’s strategy, understanding as ‘a form of identifying and describing the author’s consciousness, which manifest itself in a latent and explicit form of the intentionality in the interactive process with another consciousness’ [11]. Intense dialogueness is a core feature of modern writing publicism, where ‘the author directly expressed as a person who estimates’ and its content «gravitates to the object-relation in ethical definitions, expresses specific value attitude to something’ [12].

For this reason the aim of this research is to establish the central motives of Zakhar Prilepin’s creative activity. The level of nuances in publicism and literary works, including through the allocation of the using speech means and images. The data for study became the works ‘February’ (2014), ‘Love’ (2012), ‘Sankya’ (2009), ‘The Pathologies’ (2009), ‘The Black Monkey’ (2011), ‘Abode’ (2014), also the interview with Zakhar Prilepin and in particular his essays of various years notably included into the collection ‘Flying Burlaks’(2015) which were written in the first person singular. The topicality of this work is based on the need to comprehend the modern writer’s literary strategies, who sets out special relationships between his works of different genres and styles that is connected with peculiarities of the new time. The novelty of the research is to prove the direct correlation between the selected genre and the content, the accents of the author’s utterances.

The analysis will be about verbal and rhetorical means, which Zakhar Prilepin uses in his publicistic and literary works, also it will deal with the notional accents and derived images and motives by him. In the article a special attention is paid to how Zakhar Prilepin changes his point of view on the same problem, in terms of style and purpose of the text. It is also interesting to see the correlation between the author’s image and the autobiographical main characters in his literary works. In addition, the study touches upon the selection of axiological issues by the author and the deep of the addressing of it.

Zakhar Prilepin is not only a talented novelist, but also a journalist. There have been published a few collections of his publicism (‘I came from Russia’, ‘Terra Tartarara. It's personally about me’, ‘The Bookgazer’, ‘Flying Burlaks’, ‘Not a foreign revolt’). He does get his name in the mass media a lot and publishes notes in his Facebook. Some critics openly show their dissatisfaction with the fact that the writer doesn’t consider the literary communication to be the main form of the dialogue with the modern audience.

For example, Kirill Glikman [13] notes that Prilepin has become a brand and he is also not a ‘senior’ author yet. Alla Latynina [14] notes that Prilepin most frequently appears in the media as a new maker but not as a writer. Alisa Ganieva evaluates critically a publicistic controversy between the writer and the banker Aven, and later — the dispute between Prilepin and Minaev and so on.

Prilepin’s publicistic prose is a phenomenon more clearly than many others revealing the specifics of the position of the contemporary writer in the media scene: ‘Despite the monological mode and the lyric subjectivism, inherenting in the genre of essay in general, the author as if calls the readers for a strong and confidential talk. <…> Prilepin thinks over, polemizes, ask questions and allow readers, who are invisible participants and conversationalists of the intertextual conversation, to answer them’ [16].

Zakhar Prilepin consistently representing the same values in his literary works, realizes them in his literary and publicistic works in different ways. Thus, the basic constants of Prilepin’s world are the problems of writer’s destiny, fatherhood, family, race, motherland,

60

God. We’ll consider the author’s rhetoric, connecting with the motives of race and motherland in publicism and artistic creation.

Zakhar Prilepin pays a great attention to the problem of fatherhood in his stories, novels and tales. The father is a complex figure that determines the future of the main character.

In the story ‘February’ [1*] a symbolical father’s leaving in the ‘winter’ is a turning point in the narrator’s fate. At the same time, the question ‘Where exactly did the fate turn out?’ remains the central one in the plot. The narrator shows the reader two versions of his life, where the same events are presented from different points of view: as definitely negative and as definitely positive. Years later the main character put himself in his father shoes and he is assailed with doubts:

I decide what to do: to leave, don’t look back. Or come back — and take them on the hands. How can I guess what will work? [1*, p.91].

The reflections of the main character and the lack of the correct answer to the enduring (and the fateful question in the context of the work) question are symptomatic. The father in

Prilepin’s literary works always keeps at a distance from his sons and the motives of his actions are incomprehensible. For example, the narrator in the tale ‘Love’ [2]* describes his father with mixed feelings, insisting that he and his father have never been closed. The father seemed to be indifferent to his son and the grown-up son disrespects his parent and calls him ‘opoika’ (a heavy drinker). Nevertheless, the title of the story speaks for itself: the father and the son love each other very much and it is manifested in small details, for example, the main character hitches the hook to the standpipe as well as his father did. The indifference and the blind love are hard to see in the character’s uneven intonation:

My father <...> didn’t remember at all how I looked. And that the rachitis in a frog skin and with human eyes follows him around everywhere, didn’t care of him. [2*, p.128]

It responds to a dual opinion on fatherhood in the story ‘February’. «The wardrobe» is made of «Love» blames his father:

If only he had taught me anything [2*, p.132].

But the character acts as his father did, his behavior unconsciously has been taken over from his father. Many of these motives can be seen in the story ‘The Forest’ where Zakhar’s father image idealizes:

My father had the most beautiful hands in the world [2*, p.321].

Then the narrator lists a number of his father’s skills and concludes self-critically:

I didn’t know yet that I would have taken over no one of his skills. Probably I can pat myself on the head but there’s nothing pleasant in it [2*, p.321].

‘The Love’ also shows the idea that the son hasn’t learned anything from his father, who was indifferent to him:

He didn’t ask me to wash my face; whether I washed my hands or not he never asked as well. [2*, p.327].

61

Scientific Newsletter of Voronezh State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering

From the examples mentioned above it is possible to conclude that fathers in Zakhar Prilepin’s works live together with their sons but are not interested in their life, they are not willing to learn them something. But it only seems that sons feel the lack of love. For example, in the end of the story ‘The Forest’ the grown-up character puts himself in his father’s shoes, he even calls himself the same nickname — Zakhar, for a moment he returns into the past, seeing his son and himself at the same time on the river bank:

There was a boy standing in somebody’s jacket of the large size on the shore, in the moonlight it was noticeable that his bare legs were bitten/ eaten by mosquitoes. His chin was held high and working quietly. - Dad, - he calls me [2*, p.345].

The ploy of the story is focused on the boy with his father and the father’s fellow by the name of Korin. All of them are placed into the ‘enchanted’ foreign space, where they should reach ancient monasteries with help of the river. But the only person who is capable of doing it in the sacred meaning is the father. The main character is too small whereas Korin is too careless and naive. On this way the father rises to almost mythological, spiritual creation:

In my father’s voice I could hear that he noticed neither the mist, no the ripple, no the forest [2*, p.334];

The path was creeping away from under my feet as if it was alive. My father twisted its tail on his hand, if he’d known. Then it hadn’t gone away [2*, p.342-343].

He understood it’s too dangerous to move on with the child at night and left his son at a hermit, living in the forest. The father went off in the same manner as the other one did in the story ‘February’:

He’d not waved a farewell, not noted, but just bowed down in front of the door, stepped forward and left [2*, p.341].

And that is the leaving, the opportunity to stay alone with the fear allows the main character to grow spiritually. For a moment he changed places with his own father. In the dream he saw his parent so scared and needing the support as the boy was.

Then my father looked up and looked at me so helplessly that I woke up in terror [2*, p.342].

In spite of the fear before wandering alone in the forest, the boy went looking for his father that was allow him to become a true man and took the child’s call ‘Dad’ so personally!

In the publicistic works Zakhar Prilepin very often tells about the role of father in children’s life. It is interesting to note how the author changes the intonation in these types of the text. In essays, articles and interviews Prilepin says with a preaching and judgmental tone:

How do they dare to say something their children? [3*, p.124]

(‘Praise of Bigotry’).

62

Abstractive parents the author overthinks his essay not assuming a controversial estimate. There’s no questions like: May be there is an excuse for their behavior? May be they are not those people we’ve thought at the first blush?

The writer reveals stupidity, duplicity, bad manners of the people he dislikes, who set a bad example to their children the whole life.

— Why do teachers complain about you? — exclaims his father. It’s time for complaining about himself the U. S. attorney, in the department against the economic fraud, in the Earthen Assembly as well as in the United Nations [3*, p.125].

The author finds a simple explanation for it: adults are aware of codes of conduct but they are unable to behave in a particular way. Prilepin gives ‘praise of bigotry’, if you can’t lead by personal example your children, at least tell them as it is supposed to be.

This position opposes to ‘the ideal fatherhood’ in the author’s fiction, where, for example, Egor Tashevsky, the main character in ‘The Pathologies’ remembers:

I want to say that my father didn’t teach me to swim on purpose <...>, he even explained nothing to me. But I still confident that is he taught me to swim [4*, p.38].

In his interviews Prilepin expresses the idea that the parent has to look after himself, his behavior. He should bring up his children by setting a good example for them.

Because only human example is a sample of the ideal upbringing. They see me round the clock — what else can I say them?! [5*];

And model of my father’s behavior is more important than calls like: ‘Son, be a man!’ It’s important so that the dissonance between rhetoric and practice doesn’t arise [6*].

To summarize, it is obvious that both in literary and in publicistic creation of Zakhar Prilepin your own role model is appeared to be more important than a direct moral teaching giving from a parent to a child. Many critics shave one view that Zakhar Prilepin’s persona is most often biographical, and the writer himself said it in his interviews more than once [6*, p.7*]. Against this background we can see the contrast between the author’s words in publicism and the main characters’ view on the family of Prilepin’s works.

Protagonists of novels and stories are most often perplexed people, who lost goals in life, looking for conformation of their values. For example, Sasha Tishin (‘Sankya’) is a fatherless child rebels and doesn’t have a specific aim of his revolution; Egor Tashevsky (‘The Pathologies’) is a miserable enamored, who is haunted by his girlfriend past, debate over marriage and love with God, he can’t to start a traditional family (in the end of the book he didn’t got married but adopted a child); The nameless character from ‘The Black Monkey’ is a person who has broken up his own family, he doesn’t know how to treat children. (even reading the ABC book to their children, the character is involved into the thoughts about his sensuous lover). Artyom (‘Abode’) is a patricide, crying for his father, whose hopes to start a family haven’t been realized.

All these characters are primarily the lost children (‘The Black Monkey’:

lost, tanged in parents’ hands [8*, p.7]).

They are trying to set out their own system of moral standards, arguing with the God, seeking the support at their race, fathers and grandfathers, but always fail. It leads either to the death (Sasha, Artyom) or to the madness, insanity (the nameless character from ‘The

63