Tragedy of place in аuto-documentary reproduction
For the first time, the paper presents the analysis of the “Crimean Notes” written by S. Shil in
1921. The text itself and its author are not well known to the modern reader. The study re-
veals the structure of the author’s voice, with the participant, observer, and witness modes be-
ing distinguished. The function of each mode and the unifying creative task, i. e., the author’s desire to document the facts presented, are determined. As a participant and observer, Shil is
quite subjective in her assessments of real circumstances, while as a witness, an eyewitness to
an event, she adheres to an impartial assessment. The paper demonstrates the difference be-
tween female auto-documentary and S. Shil’s notes that show the absence of emotional satu-
ration, imaginary rather than real facts and impressions. The features of the memoirist’s per-
ception of the revolutionary events in Crimea, as well as the Russian exodus, are analyzed.
Shil’s changing position in relation to the revolution – from joyful hopes to disappointments –
is demonstrated. The small distance between the events that took place and their description,
the absence of a time gap between life and the text influence the author’s position. This dis-
tance deficit prevents the formation of the author’s “historical vision,” showing itself only
very rarely in the text. However, of obvious value is the factual material given in the notes is
a new addition to the already available auto-documentary corpus of works about the Crimea
during the revolution and the Russian exodus.
Afanasev A. K. S. N. Shil’ i ee “Krymskie zapiski” [Shil and her “Crimean Notes”].
In: Shil’ S. N. Krymskie zapiski. 1916–1921 [Crimean Notes. 1916–1921]. Moscow,
Novyy khronograf, 2018, pp. 8–16.
Barutkina M. O. Geniy mesta: Maksimilian Voloshin i Kimmeriya [Genius of place:
Maximilian Voloshin and Kimmeria]. Izvestia. Ural Federal University Journal. Series
2. Humanities and Arts. 2014, vol. 16, no. 3 (130), pp. 114–121.
Khrapunov N. I. Alushta kak “krymskiy ray” v opisaniyakh 18–19 vekov [Alushta
as a “Crimean paradise” in the descriptions of the 18–19th centuries]. Izvestia. Ural
Federal University Journal. Series 2. Humanities and Arts. 2014, vol. 16, no. 3 (130),
pp. 58–68.
Mikhaylova M. N. Sof'ya Nikolaevna Shil’ – literator, memuarist, literaturoved
[Sofya Nikolayevna Shil – literary scholar, memoirist, literary critic]. New Literary Observer. 2018, no. 5. URL: https://www.nlobooks.ru/ magazines/novoe_literaturnoe_obozrenie/153/article/20192/ (accessed: 25.12. 2020).
Shil’ S. N. Krymskie zapiski 1916–1921 [Crimean Notes. 1916–1921]. Moscow,
Novyy khronograf, 2018, 288 p.
Shil’ S. Serdtse Otchizny. Vo dni dukhovnogo i telesnogo golodaniya: Sevastopol’
1920/IX–1921/II [The heart of the Fatherland. In the days of spiritual and bodily hunger: Sevastopol 1920/IX–1921/II]. Moscow, Sabashnikovy Publ., 2020, 164 p.
Turoverov N. Stikhi. Kniga pyataya [Poems. Book 5]. Paris, 1965, 221 p.
Tsvetaeva A. I. Vospominaniya [Memories]. Moscow, Sov. pisatel’, 1983, 768 p.
Voloshin M. Koktebel’skie berega: Stikhi, risunki, akvareli, stat’i [Koktebel shores:
Poems, drawings, watercolors, articles]. Simferopol’, Tavriya, 1990, 248 p.
Vrangel’ P. N. Zapiski [Notes]. URL: http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/vrangel1/
15.html (accessed: 26.01.2021).
Zazubrin V. Zametki o remesle [Notes on the craft]. In: Zazubrin V. Obshchezhitie
[Dormitory]. Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk Publ. House, 1990, pp. 370–387.
Tragedy of place in аuto-documentary reproduction // Сибирский филологический журнал. 2021. № 1. Pp. 96–108. DOI: 10.17223/18137083/74/7.