Abstract
The article discusses the problem of addressivity (Bakhtin’s adresovannost’) in the diaries of Soviet citizens, based on an understanding of the diary as an uncertain genre balanced between privacy and publicity. On the one hand, diarists can address a You who is, paradoxically, both absent and present: a virtual addressee whose presence reveals the need for dialogue. On the other hand, the addressee can take the form of a We who is particularly meaningful for the diarist. The word We here refers to a community that the diarist considers significant, which can be termed recognition groups. The diarist enters into an internal dialogue with these recognition groups, imitating their discourse. The variety of such forms of addressivity is demonstrated through the analysis of three diaries of young people in the Soviet period: Nikolai Belousov (1913-2002, diary written in 1937-1939), Nina Lugovskaia (1918-1993, diary written in 1932-1939) and Maria Germanova (1922-1997, diary written in 1941-1942).References
Bakhtin 1979: M. Bakhtin, Problema rechevykh zhanrov // M. Bakhtin, Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva, Iskusstvo, Moskva, 1979, s. 237–280.
Belousov 2016: N. Belousov, Dnevnik tokaria Belousova (1937–1939 gg.), Common place, Moskva, 2016.
Cardell 2014: K. Cardell, Dear World. Contemporary Uses of the Diary, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 2014.
Cardinal 1990: R. Cardinal Unlocking the Diary, «Comparative Criticism», 1990, 12, pp.71–87.
Germanova 2010: M. Germanova, Fragmenty dnevnika (22 iiunia 1941 g.–14 ianvaria 1942 g.), «Russkii mir», 2010, 4, s. 258–285.
Hassam 1987: A. Hassam, Reading Other People’s Diaries, «University of Toronto Quarterly», LVI, 1987, 3, pp. 435–442.
Khell'bek 2017: I. Khell'bek, Revoliutsiia ot pervogo litsa. Dnevniki stalinskoi epokhi, Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, Moskva, 2017.
Khorkhordin 2002: O. Khorkhordin, Oblichat' i litsemerit'. Genealogiia rossiiskoi lichnosti, Evropeiskii un-t v Sankt-Peterburge-Letnii sad, Sankt-Peterburg-Moskva, 2002.
Kozlova 2005: N. Kozlova, Sovetskie liudi. Stseny iz istorii, Evropa, Moskva, 2005.
Kozlova et al. 1996: N. Kozlova i I. Sandomirskaia, Ia tak khochu nazvat' kino, Gnozis, Moskva, 1996.
Lejeune 2009: Ph. Lejeune, On Diary, ed. by Jeremy D. Popkin and Julie Rak, University of Hawaii Press, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2009.
Lugovskaia 2010: N. Lugovskaia, Khochu zhit'. Dnevnik sovetskoi shkol'nitsy, RIPOL klassik, Moskva, 2010, <https://nicebooks.ru/books/dokumentalnye-knigi/biografii-i-memuary/31894-ninalugovskaya-xochu-zhit-dnevnik-sovetskoi-shkolnicy.html>, poslednee poseshchenie: 11.05.2019.
Nikolaev 2010: O. Nikolaev, Dnevnik sel'skoi uchitel'nitsy vremeni nemetskoi okkupatsii, «Russkii mir», 2010, 4, s. 251–257.
Pinskii 2018: A. Pinskii, Predislovie // Posle Stalina: pozdnesovetskaia sub’ektivnost' (1953–1985), pod red. A. Pinskogo, Izdatel'stvo Evropeiskogo universiteta v Sankt-Peterburge, Sankt-Peterburg, 2018, s. 9–38.
Riker 2010: P. Riker, Put' priznaniia. Tri ocherka, Rossiiskaia politicheskaia entsiklopediia (ROSSPEN), Moskva, 2010.
Rosenwald 1988: L. Rosenwald, Alan Emerson and the Art of the Diary, Oxford University Press, New York, 1988.
Savkina 2007: I. Savkina, Razgovory s zerkalom i Zazerkal'em. Avtodokumental'nye zhenskie teksty v russkoi literature pervoi poloviny XIX veka, Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, Moskva, 2007.
Sherman 1996: S. Sherman, Telling Time. Clocks, Diaries and English Diurnal Form, 1660–1785, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago- London, 1996.
Smith 1998: S. Smith, Performativity, Autobiographical Practice, Resistance, in Women, Autobiography, Theory. A reader, ed. by S. Smith and J. Watson University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin, 1998, pp. 108–115.
Zalizniak 2010: A. Zalizniak, Dnevnik: k opredeleniiu zhanra, «Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie», 2010, 106, s. 162–180.