Статьи

In the paper I state, that in the 12th chapter Röyhkä raises narration about life and death to metaphysical level. I present the literary means, by which Röyhkä rejects subjectivity typical for previous chapters. To achieve generalisation Röyhkä changes the main character from the artist to an average Finnish soldier, provides shifts of voices within the same character, emphasises nature as the place of sublime experiencing and creates allusions to classics of national and world literature. I point out compositional elements promoting generalisation of concepts of life and death. I defend the statement concerning raise of concepts of life and death to metaphysical level by implementing methods of compositional, poetical, textual and intertextual analysis. I discover that the novel can be divided into two parts. On the one side, there are chapters 1-11 and the 13th chapter telling about existential experiences of the artist feeling himself an outsider. On the other side, there is the 12th chapter, which focuses on metaphysical experience of a person participating in a war. I make a conclusion that the character of a Finnish soldier is necessary to generalise intensive life experience. It also helps Röyhkä to place the novel into the national and worldwide tradition of humanistic war literature. The study is of a current interest, because it presents the analysis of a literary work typologically belonging to high modernism but being exceptionally created in the era of postmodernism in 1987, thus becoming an unordinary artistic phenomenon. Modern authors, who rejected the philosophy of postmodernism, find themselves outside the core of literary process also in the age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which effects in marginalisation of their art revealing as unwillingness of big publishing houses to publish and literary agencies to sell literature of such authors. Marginalisation of non posthumanistic art deprives readers of access to literary works of this kind and decreases research demand among the academic community. This tendency endangers high modernistic literature in modern conditions, resulting in the fact, that highlighting and studying literary pieces, created as continuation of high modernistic tradition and thus presenting high, fundamental art, are currently needed. Along with the said above the conclusion in this paper is preceded by the chapter dealing with reception of Röyhkä’s literary work in Finland in the 21st century. I explain Röyhkä’s boundary location in the modern system of Finnish literature by the fact of hypothetical change of formation types of writers in the 2010s. The study is new, because the literary work by Röyhkä has been studied a little in Finland, and in Russia it is not studied at all, especially in the light of coexistence of modernistic and postpostmodernistic art traditions.