SV’relationship of literature with other Sciences

Being an independent science, literary criticism, however, not lost SV’s ties with the Humanities, from whence they came, and the need for relationships which are constantly feels. For example, the definition of self-sufficiency of Ukrainian literature it is easy to verify SV’relations of literature with historical science, which had likewise won the right Ukraine at its own story. But this problem should be to look wider and deeper. Literary ideas, as you know, “in’will be contacted” with historic processes, or ahead of them, or walking with them up. In ancient times, for example, stages of social development peculiar impact on the formation and functioning of contemporary artistic styles (Dorian, Ionian, Corinthian), and romantic trends in European art at the end of the XVIII century. almost directly in’contacted manifestations “storm and stress” in public history, including such well-known events, as Coliivshyna in Ukraine, peasant rebellion led by Pugachev in Russia, The French revolution, the industrial revolution in England, etc. Of course, SV’the relationship between these phenomena and specific conditional, but its undeniable the evidence, as the undisputed should be considered as SV’obligations of any earthly stress and thaws with the relevant processes in the life space.

Literary criticism, in contrast to the art of thinking, in’autisa history is less active and always with a certain delay. The reason for this e derivative, the dependence literature from artistic creativity and historical shifts, which (dependence) capable to violate only the branch of literary studies, which is called criticism. Sometimes criticism can really get ahead new ideas in the arts and society, but you need’s Java in the literature extraordinary talent criticism. I think, the names Aristotle, Lessing, Hegel, Franc or Bakhtin in this case, is a convincing argument.

Not less close and organic should be considered as SV’obligations of literary studies with philosophy. She was actually the mother’s science of literature, and when in ancient times was born the most famous in Europe literary work of Aristotle “Poetics”, it has long rightly considered not only as the child of philosophy. In later periods, when literary criticism became increasingly developed as an independent science, his SV’ligaments philosophy did not porvalis, and even more deepened. The philosophical problem of reality and the essence of life itself, and equally interested in “clean” philosophers, and literary critics, trying to look at this issue not through the facts of life, but through figurative interpretation of his. It would be even better to say, what literary critics are looking for the grain of truth created by artists in the art world, which is not the reproduction of reality, and netantsevalnoy another reality. It differs from the first artistic Foundation, high degree of concentration of thoughts and feelings, unusual for real life, the generality.

Vivid examples of SV’relations of philosophy and literature gives the world the Renaissance and the following Baroque and romanticism. Philosophers in these times has considerably advanced in their movement to’clarifying the basic question of philosophy about the primacy of ideas or of being, and literary critics began to actively explore it at the level of the human soul and humanity in General, without which is inconceivable the object of their attention — fiction. Sometimes a philosopher and literary critic in this era was performed by one person. Who dare, for example, rose’to combine Hegel-philosopher and Hegel-in his famous literary critic “Aesthetics”? In more recent times D. Chizhevsky was both a researcher and philosophy, and literature.

Of course, aesthetics is also a science, and separate science. But without literature (more generally speaking — without the arts) it is unthinkable. So, literature stand’is also connected with aesthetics, which, being an independent science, still considered part of philosophy. To hold between them the final borders — not only ungrateful, and methodologically incorrect and. In the humanitarian cycle, all Sciences are interrelated’related, because have a common root — the human soul and the world, where she lives.

Controversial star’the relationship of literary studies with Economics. Such SV’ASCI until the middle of XIX in. none of the researchers of artistic creativity, it seems, real talk.. The pioneer here was the Marxism, which her coarse materialism voulgaridou and the idea of artistic creativity, and the methodology of its study.

According to the theory of Marx — Engels — Lenin — Stalin art belongs to “add-ons” (“basis” economy) and its essence is reduced to the reflection of, what happens in “basis”. Lenin even said, that art is forest, which immediately dismantled into firewood, as soon as communism will be built. Vertex and achievement of art was considered such works, in most truthfully, that is realistic, reflects all the nuances of “basis”. A Prime example for Marx here was the work of Balzac, with which he supposedly learned more about bourgeois economic relations, than all of the known economic works. Picked up this nonfiction (not scientific) judgment, all the Marxists have laid the Foundation of Marxist art history reflective principle: like really a the task of art is, as soon as art and copy economic, public, social and other relationships between people. And the science of art (including literary criticism) should explore, according to Marxists, depth, accuracy, the truth, the realism of this copy. To the highest meanings of life, to individual the world, created by the artist, the Marxists didn't care, this they considered to be the invention, and if on their way something similar happened, they just threw, and denied through repression destroyed. Therefore outside of spirituality was actually all really artistic culture of mankind. Because it, they say, not enough truthfully and not with class position reflected the economic life of society.

The scientific literature does not ignore the economic motives, that sound in literary works. Therefore, SV’the relation between literature and the economy supposedly is quite obvious. But for the literary critic of the economic motive in the work is not illustration, not a reflection “real” economic relations in society, but only one of the components of the art world, what's going on in im a writer’I search of world harmony, penetration into the mystery of the human soul and life in General. Let this judgment is perceived as a very General, but there's still more truth, than in the approval, that literature illustrates the economic basis.

Literary criticism is inextricably bound’in connection with the study of folklore and linguistics (linguistics). The first elements of literature observed even in folklore: in the legends about the features of word and song, in fairy tales about witches, a particular (healing, for example) word, in the thoughts about harpers and poets, what was called in the people by prebendary and could use words to cause anguish or joy, tears or laughter. All of this is the primitive form of literary criticism, and researcher of literature in their arguments always keeps on pam’s memory and relies on a.