3.8 Article

THE RHIZOME IN AND AROUND SAL'NIKOV'S THE PETROVS IN AND AROUND THE FLU

期刊

RUSSIAN LITERATURE
卷 138, 期 -, 页码 175-191

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ruslit.2022.11.012

关键词

Aleksei Sal'nikov; The flu; Contagion; Rhizome; Contemporary Russian literature

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the novel "Petrovy v grippe i vokrug nego" (2016), Aleksei Sal'nikov challenges the common perception of influenza as a dangerous infectious disease by highlighting its potential saving qualities. The novel explores the interconnectedness between the spread of the flu, the characters' relationships, and the structure of the text through the concept of rhizomatic logic proposed by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. This unconventional approach to storytelling has received criticism from critics due to its complexity.
As a rule, influenza is considered a dangerous infectious disease that spreads rapidly and chaotically. In his novel Petrovy v grippe i vokrug nego (The Petrovs in and around the Flu) (2016), Aleksei Sal'nikov undermines these notions by making a strong case for the salvific, albeit not immediately apparent, qualities of the flu. Much like the source of the viral infection that afflicts the Petrovs, the link between the events that aids the family's recovery is imperceptible to them. By considering various connections between characters and events represented in the novel, I demonstrate that the spread of the flu, the characters' interpersonal relations, and even the structure of the text are bound by the same rhizomatic logic, a concept proposed by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari. The rhizome theory, I maintain, begins to explain the complexity of the novel's structure, which is one of the main reasons for critics' dissatisfaction with the text. As I show, according to the novel's rationale, human relations and stories are more bound by biology than by human agency, free will, and personal choices.& COPY; 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据