Study On Coolekovski's Literature Creation Psychology Content

Since the establishement of new China, Russia-Soviet literature theory has been one of academic center of Chinese scholars. Generally, our research has gone through a process from a theory centered by realism to a theory covers many other fields including formalism theory, and achieved fruitful results. However, our research is largely biased. According to different periods, the critics are often too concentrated on the hot issues, while for other research of critical theory, the research is very inadequate, leaving a lot of blanks. Therefore, to fill those theoretical blanks has become the great mission among Chinese Russia-Soviet literature theory circle.Russia-Soviet literature theory in 19th century are very rich in resources. Russian Academism had made prominent achievements in this period. Started later than our research, but it is still worthy of attention on the sector and draw lessons from, we need re-develop, further elaborate and re-consider it according to our request in new time. As representative figure of psychology, Coolekovski's unique psychological theory of literature laid the psychological theory academic status in the Russian literature theory academic circle. But up to now, no one care about Coolekovski's literary creation theory of psychology in Chinese academic circle. In view of this, I try to change this situation and accept this literary theory heritage.This thesis is the first doctoral dissertation aimed to study Coolekovski's literature creation theory of psychology in China. In this sense, this subject should be a initiating and valuable topic. Coolekovki's study realm is very broad. Except for theory of literature and art, linguistics, mythology, cultural history and psychology are also included. He intended to integrate these fields to establish literary history and cultural history based on literature creation psychology. In this paper, my study abides by Coolekovski's research ideas as a start, selects the focus point- literature creation psychology, to grasp Coolekovski's basic academic thought.I have read the first-hand Russian data about this topic and come to an independent opinion after thinking and summing up. I use system sorting and deep mining method to study Coolekovski's theory. I analyze the background from outside to interior layer-by-layer, clarify the concept, arrange the logic, reveal the connotation, analyze the insufficient. At last I explain in theory, summarize in macro, give it objective evaluation, so we can see the whole picture. The thesis try to unearth Coolekovski's unique insights and pioneering contributions, meanwhile, to discover the contemporary value of his theory from the development process of his psychology literature. Through my thesis, I'd like to attract Chinese scholars' attention about Coolekovski's study, also hope that this theis could give some enlightening to Chinese future development of literature psychology and then enrich Chinese literature psychology theory.Except for introduction and conclusions, the main of the thesis has five chapters.The first chapter introduced the formation and theoretical origin of Coolekovski's literature creation psychology. Begun with the relation between Coolekovski, Pozechbunia and Cultural-Historical School, this chapter elaborated the theoretical origin of his literature creation psychology, and further point out the change and deviation in his theory. On the one hand, Coolekovski finally finished and made clear his own research foothold under Pozechbunia's influence. His literature creation psychology inherited and developed Pozechbunia's theory. Using this theory, he studied language, thinking and literature creation psychology problems, and studied great Russian writers and poets' creation and works from a psychological point of view. On the other hand, the emergence and development of psychology school of Russian literary theory was based on Cultural-Historical School. Since Cultural-Historical School focused more on the external contact of literature, it exposed its limitation day by day, it made Coolekovski had to open a new path and advanced a new theory that scholars should pay attention to writer's personality and literature creation psychology. He absorbed the essence of Pozechbunia's theory and overcome the shortcomings at the same time. Not only considering the "environment" and other external factors, but also considering the artist's unique creative personality, temperament and other psychological characteristics, so he surpassed the history and culture school in some extent. Chapter two studied the historical context of Coolekovski's literature creation psychology. In mid and late 19th century, with rapid development of natural sciences, especially emergence of modern psychology, literature creation psychology gradually became a specialized subject, and soon achieved some results. Historically, the tendency of literacture towards literature psychology t is inevitable. We believe that this situation is due mainly to the following areas: First, literature and psychology have a natural contact; Second, from the late 19th century to the early 20th century, literary and artistic figures transferred to the mental spiritual; Third, humanism trend of thought outstood human subject of human, the life existence of human, that constitutes another subject to connect literary theory and psychology. Additionally, the Russian literature theory research in scientific and systematic sense began in mid-19th century when a large number of academicians concentrated on different fields of literature theory research. They obtained a number of world effect academic achievements in a short period, and formed the important academic shool tradition of Russian literature theory. The most influential Academisms are Myth School, Cultural-Historical School, Historical Poetics School and psychology school. On the whole, each of them has its own characteristics and limitations in the methodology. But they are not separate, and showing some kind of integrated and cross-impact situation. Coolekovski's literature creation psychology was bred and developed in such a historical context.Chapter three analyzed the basic category of Coolekovski's literature creation psychology. Coolekovski always had a preference of the basic categories that could cover the entire art creation world, which is hard to describe. The thesis deeply studied the five basic categories as word dissertation on the prose and poetry-style-type words, daily thinking and artistic thinking, observation art and experimental art, the subjective and objective creative writing, self-centered and non-self-centered theories, and further pointed out their features, functions, and the status that it sit in the system of the literature creation psychology. Through the study of words itself, Coolekovski thought that the modern language could be divided into two types: the prose-style words and poetry-style words. He pointed out the art elements of all languages. He discovered that art features and art practices in the art thinking and daily thinking have many similarities. Between the two it exists very close psychological similarities. He tried to use the scientific methodology in the field of literature and art and divided the art into observation art and experimental art, so as to strengthen the scientific extent of the activities of the human soul. He studied the relationship between thinking, feeling and I and finally got the famous proposition of self-centered and non-self-centered, which became a unique formulation in the world's literary and artistic theory of psychology. These categories are Coolekovski's main research fruits.Chapter four mainly studied the structure of Coolekovski's literature creation psychology. Without a right recognition to the important issues of literature creation psychology, it will have a profound impact on the entire research of literature creation psychology. Under the guidance of question awareness and combined with Coolekovski's theory and criticism practice, the thesis summed up some important questions that he'd like to solve. To the entire literature creation psychology, the questions what he wanted to solve are limited, but these are important and can inspire us to think about more and deeper propositions of literature creation psychology from different angles. Coolekovski thought that the essence of art creating was to interpretate the infinite possibility. He regarded the basic psychological characteristics as an infinite process, it is not completed, but a never-ending. He clearly recognized that the unconscious in the literary creation had the most important meaning, it signified the deepen understanding of the unconscious. His analyze to Gogol's work "the Russia what we see from the charming beauty afar"-contained a profound creation theory of psychology: aesthetics distance is an indispensable psychological condition of literary creation. He attributed the creative freedom to the writer's inner freedom. Viewing from the creative psychology angle, this freedom is the best creative mood that exceeded from all sorts of inside and outside restrains. In Coolekovski's opinion, the practice of social value among the human kind various values is the first and most important. He also think that the literature is the substitute compensation of psychology of the social value that unable to realized. Chapter five investigated the critical practice of Coolekovski's literature creation psychology. The dissertation studied Coolekovski's theory from the angle of art critic practice. We think that Coolekovski's literature creative psychology not only focused on theory construction, but also on art critic practice. Coolekovski's thought could be divided into two phases. In the earlier stage, It mainly focused on microcreation psychology—analysis of Individual character psychology. When he analyzed the psychology of the classical writer's works, it interfered with three spheres- writer, works and reader. It added abundant perceptual materials and laid a good foundation for the scholars to further explore the analytic mode of literature psychology. It is unique that using the psychological method to criticize the author and works and then revealing the complex psychological connotations of art creation. But its limitation is also prominent. Coolekovski was conscious of that at his later stage of academic activities. He combined organically the psychology methods and methods of history and culture of the school and promoted the concept of psycho-social types, researched the process of literary history as an alternative psychology type process and social change. In the History of the Russian Intellectuals, social psychology is the most eye-catching. By analyzing the typical image of the spiritual life such as superfluous people of the Russian literature, Coolekovski reflected the Russian intellectuals' spirit process at the turning point of the 19th century from the history and culture view. Coolekovski's research did not drastically cut out the tie of history and culture, greatly exceeded the European and American contemporary art theory, have a very high academic value.The last chapter is concluding remarks. It summarized the characteristics, significance and limitations of Coolekovski's literature creative psychology. Coolekovski's theory had constantly presented its prominent characteristics in the revising and adjustment: the combination of empirical research with literature study; the science thought of combination of theory construction and practice examine; the overall awareness of combination of the macro-and-micro-depth grasp; the divided academic attitude of academic research and social passion. Generally, Coolekovski's theory has absolute active meaning for solving the problem of the creative psychology at that time, it is a necessary link that the literature creative psychology become mature and perfect, some of the arguments still have scientific value. Of course, not all of his theoretical viewpoints have maintained their value and unquestionable truth. Because his theory system are relatively scattered and have many miscellaneous clues, his exposition is self-contradicted sometimes. We should have a clear recognition and critical attitude to shortcomings, limitations and problems of his theory. In short, whether the value of Coolekovski's thought itself or his spirit as a scholar, they are all worthy of our attention and learning from them.China's literary psychological research has not fully carried out well. We should construct and develop the modern literary psychology. It is necessary to be based on the nation's deep roots and current practice of cultural creation, and must pay attention to the outside horizontal expansion of culture. We must equally treat to "other" culture. Among the exotic literary psychology resources, Russian's experiences and lessons are the most worthy of our careful summing up. In spite of Coolekovski's literature creation psychology can not be regarded as a system theory and his point of view that shining light of intelligence seemed to be somewhat fragmented and pieces, but it still left a lot of thinking clues for digging. Restoring Coolekovski's theory is not our ultimate goal, but we hope to use it as a reference to examine our own tradition of literary psychology. The author believes that the study of Coolekovski's literature creation theory can be achieved the effect of stones from other hills may serve to polish jade.