26
Cosmin-Ștefan Dogaru
Damean, S. L. (2000).
Carol I al Rom niei: 1866-1881 [Charles I of Romania: 1866-1881].
Bucharest: Paideia.
Dogaru, C. Ș. (2016).
Charles I and the Romanian Two-Party System (1866-1914): History
Seen through Political Science Lenses. Bucharest: Editura Universității din București.
Duca, I. G. (1992).
Memorii (Vol. 1)
[Memories]. Bucharest: Express.
Ghițulescu, M. (2015).
Domnie și guvernare: organizarea și funcționarea instituției
guvernului n Rom nia. 1866-1940 [Rule and Government: The Organization and the
Operation of the Government Institution in Romania. 1866-1940]. Craiova: Aius.
Giurescu, C. C. (Ed.). (1939).
Cuv nt rile regelui Carol I (Vol. 1)
[Speeches of King Charles
I]. Bucharest: Fundația Pentru Literatură și Artă „Regele Carol II”.
Hitchins, K. (2004).
Rom nia. 1866-1947 [Romania. 1866-1947]. Bucharest: Humanitas.
Istoricul Partidului Na ional-Liberal de la 1848 şi p n ast zi [The History of the National
Liberal Party from 1848 until now]. (1923). Bucharest: “Independenţa”.
Kremnitz, M. (1995).
Regele Carol al Rom niei [King Charles I of Romania]. Iaşi: Porţile
Orientului.
Lindenberg, P. (2006).
Regele Carol I al Rom niei [King Charles I of Romania]. Bucharest:
Humanitas.
Neagoe, S. (Ed.). (1993).
Memoriile Regelui Carol I al Rom niei - de un martor ocular (Vol.
2) [The Memories of King Charles I of Romania, Written by an Eye Witness]. Bucharest:
Scripta.
Rosetti, R. (2013).
Amintiri. Ce am auzit de la al ii. Din copil rie. Din prima tinere e [What I
Have Heard from Others. From Childhood. From My First Youth Years]. Bucharest:
Humanitas.
Stanomir, I. (2005).
Libertate, lege şi drept. istorie a constitu ionalismului rom nesc
[Liberty, Law and Rights. A History of the Romanian Constitutionalism]. Iași: Polirom.
Tzigara-Samurcaș, A. (1939).
Din via a regelui Carol I.
M rturii Contemporane. Documente
Inedite [From the Life of King Charles I. Contemporary Testimonies. Original Documents].
Bucharest: Imprimeria Naţională.
Tzigara-Samurcaș, A. (1999).
Memorii (Vol. 2) [Memories]. Bucharest: Grai şi Suflet -
Cultura Naţională S. C. Lumina Tipo.
Problems of Formation of Russian Literature in the Post-Soviet Period
Svetlana Stomatova
1.
Introduction
The study of problems faced in Russian literature has lately been increasingly popular
especially towards the process of contemporary literature and it has been increasing in value
day by day. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the 1990’s, the society underwent a
great political, economic and cultural trauma; thus, as a part of life itself, literature was
undoubtedly affected from this situation as well. When it comes to the Post-Soviet period, it
can be perceived that a quite hard but equally necessary task falls to the literature researchers.
In accordance with this task, researchers have been trying to regrasp and reinterpret the
literary process ranging from the old Russian literary works to contemporary, post-modern
examples.
The development of Post-Soviet literature in Russia is directly connected to the
characteristics of postmodernism as a literary era. Towards the end of the twentieth century, it
can be observed that modernism was replaced by an artistic movement shaped by a different
conception of the world. This movement faces us as a product of an epoch in which the post-
industrial, or holistic world view has fallen to pieces and philosophical, economic and
political systems have changed. Although postmodernism is the general term of the artistic
tendency that surfaced after modernism and avant-gardism, the use of this term became
widespread in 1960’s, first referring to the tendency in architectural order, then effecting
literature and
other fields, as well.
Post-modernist works of literature do not have genuine and unique aesthetics of
ideological principles which the previous literary movements had in terms of characteristic
features. While the source of aesthetics/inspiration is the antique age in Renaissance and
classicism and the medieval age in romanticism, it is not possible to discuss such a
generalization in post-modernism. Making use of all the cultural periods, postmodernism is
marginalized in this manner, and it can be seen as a new movement that gives up handling
social goals on principle. In the works of postmodernism, which is also called
alternative
literature, it can be seen that there is no main theme and that it abolishes borders in spiritual
cultural areas such as philosophy, art and literature in terms of aesthetics. This means that
with the post-modernist era the borders between opposite concepts such as beautiful and ugly,
tragic and comic, destructive and creative have been effaced, and ideological objectivity has
become the goal to be practiced.
Definitely, we can talk about common stylistic features inherent in the particular art
period, however, we should not look for all those stylistic features in a particular work of art
or a particular artist. It is necessary to take into account the fundamental ideological and
psychological attitudes leading the writer during his work (according to his personal aesthetic
norms, world view, the degree of talent etc.). The world view should not take the form of the
concept because, in fact, it is anti-theoretical and because of that it gets various forms of
expression (Hassan, 2009).
If we talk about the features of the postmodern literature from this point of view, they
are:
1) loss of
belief in a human being,
2) denial of the possibility of knowing the world,
relativism,