Results found: 2

Search results

Search:
in the keywords: DMITRI

Sort By:

Limit search:

DIMITRIJ … ĎALŠÍ

100%

Hlaváčová A.

Slovenské divadlo (Slovak Theatre)

2012

vol. 60

issue 2

126 – 141

The author is opening a question of False Dmitri dramatic representation from the neglected religionist point of view. She argues against the simplification of the problem to dichotomy Latin – Byzantine (transposed to national terms as Polish – Russian) while such a reduction after the Council of Florence (1439) is almost absurd on the Slavic territory. Having introduced a subtle distinction between universal (Florentine) and local (Brest-Litovsk) Unions, she proposes to attribute it to historic characters and eventually, depending on particular drama, even to dramatic person. Arguing that the tragic conflict might have resulted from the misunderstanding of the Poles engaged in Brest-Litovsk Union (under Roman jurisdiction, 1595) and Dmitri (1605-6) being still a partisan of Florence (all byzantine-rite Christians under the jurisdiction of Constantinople), she rejects the possibility that Dmitri’s role had been purely instrumental in hands of foreign politics. Consequently, she favours Dmitri as bearer of noble truly ecumenical idea, but tragically compromised by the revelation of his false personal identity. Dmitri actually believed in possibility of ending the Time of troubles and opening Russia new horizons by liberating the Constantinople. His assassination witnesses for the limits of the role of an individual in a historical process and gives him new life in drama and on the stage. The study ends with the closer look on the most recent dramatic interpretation of Dmitri written by the Ukrainian-born dramatist V. Klim – example witnessing for the actuality of the topic.

GODUNOVSKÉ ÚVAHY. MOŽNOSTI INSCENOVANIA HISTORICKEJ DRÁMY

75%

Hlaváčová A.

Slovenské divadlo (Slovak Theatre)

2012

vol. 60

issue 3

287 - 304

The aim of the present paper, written after the 19th Pushkin festival in Pskov, is to explore Pushkin’s drama Boris Godunov that had never been staged despite its importance and attractiveness for Slovak culture and history. The author tries to prove her statement by analysing Pushkin’s play from the perspective of religious history. She shows that the problem is usually simplified to the struggle of Latin/byzantine, resp. Polish/ Russian conflict, omitting other possibilities. In accordance with Pushkin’s understanding of history, she sees the pretender Dmitri (Otrepiev) as a representative of the third – unionist – tendency. By founding the Moscow patriarchate (1589), Boris Godunov accomplished the process started by the refusal of the Union of Florence by Vasili II., the Blind. Reaction to it had been the local Brest-Litovsk Union (1595) changing Constantinople jurisdiction for that of Rome – thus, inevitably strengthening the Latin cultural influence over the byzantine Christendom. But Dmitri’s unionism is not purely defensive if we consider his plan to liberate the city of Constantinople. Classifying Dmitri´s tragic position in history as both utopian and visionary, the author draws attention to the last image of Pushkin´s drama where we encounter Dmitri quietly sleeping – and with him the idea of Florence. Faithfull to history, Pushkin never directly confronts the antagonist heroes of his play Boris and Dmitri, as we could expect from the title of drama, but he weights their positions employing an extremely radical symmetry of situations to express the archetypal positions of Russian society: nationalist and universalist. Drama is composed of suggestive scenes but at the same time, in its composition remains impartial and so its significance lay in the vibration of the question posed. Consequently, Pushkin’s compassion for Godunov’s tragic death, yet at the same time overt sympathy to Dmitri, had not been staged for reasons of ideology and the lack of general historical knowledge, respectively.

Refine search results

2 Slovenské divadlo (Slovak Theatre)

2 Hlaváčová A.

2 2012

Search results

DIMITRIJ … ĎALŠÍ

GODUNOVSKÉ ÚVAHY. MOŽNOSTI INSCENOVANIA HISTORICKEJ DRÁMY