Who is Yu Lotman? Yuri Lotman is extraordinary and bright. Introduction to semiotics

08.07.2024

Reviews of the book The True, Mad, Guilty Moriarty l The True, Mad, Guilty

Life at Full Power - Jim Lauer, Tony Schwartz

Famous pirates of the Caribbean, next to whom the movie Jack Sparrow is just a boy

2003). Like his older sisters, Yuri Lotman studied in Petrishul for a year. Then he entered the philological faculty of Leningrad University.

Military service

At the University of Tartu, far from official Soviet science, he quickly grew into an outstanding scientist; in 1963 he received the title of professor and for many years headed the department of Russian literature (1960-1977). Having early become interested in semiotics and structuralism, applying these new sciences to the study of Russian culture, Yu.M. Lotman, managed to unite around himself many independent-minded scientists and became the generally recognized founder of the Tartu-Moscow semiotic school, which received wide international recognition. In post-Soviet Russia, his name became one of the few that was not tainted by ideological collaboration with the totalitarian regime.

As a culturologist, Russia is indebted to Yu.M. Lotman with in-depth studies of domestic traditions, spiritual life and way of life, mainly the 13th-19th centuries, in particular such figures as Radishchev, Karamzin, the Decembrists, Pushkin, Lermontov, and many others. Here the main merit of Yu.M. Lotman is that he contributed to the cleansing of these names from the propaganda ideological makeup that was applied to them for decades by official Soviet science. However, the scientist’s main contribution to cultural studies was his works on Russian culture in all its manifestations from the perspective of semiotics, as well as the development of his own general theory of culture.

Problems of semiotics

Yu.M. Lotman considers semiotics as an open sign system and structure, which includes, in addition to the main “stamping” component - natural language - many other sign systems, which are, in particular, all types of art. At the same time, culture for Lotman is both a “text” that always exists in a certain “context”, and a mechanism that creates an endless variety of cultural “texts”, and a long-term collective memory that selectively transmits intellectual and emotional information in time and space.

At the beginning of January 1970, KGB authorities conducted a search in Y. Lotman’s apartment in connection with the case of Natalya Gorbanevskaya. He was prohibited from traveling abroad (L. Stolovich. “Memories of Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman. Structuralism with a human face”).

In 1977, Yu.M. Lotman was elected a corresponding member of the British Academy of Sciences; in 1987 - member of the Norwegian Academy of Sciences; in 1988 - academician of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences and member of the Estonian Academy of Sciences.

In the late 1980s, he created a series of educational television programs “Conversations about Russian Culture.” During "perestroika" he participated in the political life of Estonia. In October 1988, he was elected to the Board of Commissioners of the Estonian People's Front (Press Center of the People's Congress).

In 1993, Yuri Lotman became a laureate of the Academic Prize named after. A.S. Pushkin for his research - “Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. Biography of the Writer" and "Novel by A.S. Pushkin "Eugene Onegin".

Before his death, having already lost his sight, the scientist dictated to his students his last work - “Culture and Explosion” (M., 1992), in which he tried, from a semiotics position, to outline the differences between “explosive” sociocultural processes in Russia, with its contradictory dichotomous culture, and Western civilization with a smoother and less destructive development.

Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman died in Tartu on October 28, 1993. He was buried in the Raadi cemetery in Tartu.

Awards

Medal "For Military Merit".
Order of the Red Star.
Medal of Honor".
Order of the Patriotic War, II degree.

Family

Father - Mikhail Lvovich Lotman (-) - lawyer;
Mother - Sara Samuilovna (Alexandra Samoilovna) Lotman (-1963) - dentist;
Sisters:

- Inna Mikhailovna (married Obraztsova) (-1999), musicologist and composer, Petrishule graduate of the year; - Lidia Mikhailovna Lotman (-2011) - literary critic, employee of the Pushkin House, graduate of Petrishule of the Year; - Victoria Mikhailovna Lotman (-2003) - doctor, Petrishule graduate of the year.

Wife - Zara Grigorievna Mints (-1990). - In March of this year, Yu. Lotman married his colleague at the University of Tartu, Z.G. Mints. She was also a literary critic, a specialist in the study of Russian symbolism and the work of Alexander Blok, and a professor at the University of Tartu. Three sons were born into the Lotman family:

- Mikhail Yurievich Lotman (b.) - professor of semiotics and literary criticism at Tallinn University, member of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) in 2003-2007, chairman of the Tartu city council since 2011; - Grigory Yuryevich Lotman (b.) - Estonian artist; - Alexey Yuryevich Lotman (b. 1960) - biologist, member of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) in 2007-2011.

Proceedings

Lectures on Structural Poetics (1964);
Articles on the typology of culture: Materials for the course on the theory of literature. Vol. 1 (1970);
The Structure of Literary Text (1970);
Analysis of poetic text. The Structure of Verse (1972) (monograph);
Articles on the typology of culture: Materials for the course on the theory of literature. Vol. 2 (1973);
Semiotics of cinema and problems of film aesthetics (1973);
A. S. Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin”: Commentary (1980);
Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin: biography of the writer (1981);
Culture and Explosion (1992);
Lotman Yu. Conversations about Russian culture. Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (XVIII - early XIX centuries). (1993);
Dialogue with the Screen (1994; together with Yu. Tsivyan).

Articles and studies on Russian literature

“The Queen of Spades” and the theme of cards and card games in Russian literature of the early 19th century;
"Images of natural elements in Russian literature - A.S. Pushkin. F.M. Dostoevsky. A.A. Blok";
"Russian literature of the post-Petrine era and Christian tradition";
About “Ode Selected from Job” by Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov;
"Alexander Nikolaevich Radishchev - poet-translator";
"Poetry - s";
Andrei Turgenev's poem “To the Fatherland” and his speech at the Friendly Literary Society;
A.F. Merzlyakov as a poet;
Voeikov’s satire “Madhouse”;
“The Gardens” of Delisle translated by Voeikov and their place in Russian literature;
Who was the author of the poem “On the Death of K. P. Chernov”;
Outsider of the Pushkin era;
Unknown text of A. I. Polezhaev’s poem “Genius”;
Lermontov's poetic declaration (“Journalist, Reader and Writer”);
Lermontov. Two reminiscences from Hamlet;
From the commentary to the poem “Mtsyri”;
About the poem “Sail” by M. Yu. Lermontov (1990) (together with Z. G. Mints);
Notes on Tyutchev's poetics;
The poetic world of Tyutchev;
Tyutchev and Dante. To the formulation of the problem;
“Man of Nature” in Russian literature of the 19th century and the “Gypsy theme” in Blok (1964) (together with Z. G. Mints);
Blok and folk culture of the city;
About the deep elements of artistic design (Towards the decipherment of one incomprehensible place from the memories of Blok);
At the turning point;
Poetic tongue-tiedness of Andrei Bely;
Poems of early Pasternak. Some issues of structural text study;
Analysis of B. Pasternak’s poem “Deputy”;
“Blackbirds” by B. Pasternak;
Between a thing and emptiness (From observations on the poetics of Joseph Brodsky’s collection “Urania”) (1990) (together with M. Yu. Lotman);
Ways of development of Russian prose - ies;
Clio at the Crossroads (1988);
Andrei Sergeevich Kaisarov and the literary and social struggle of his time (1958);
“The Tale of Igor’s Campaign” and the literary tradition of the 18th - early 19th centuries;
About the word “paporzi” in “The Tale of Igor’s Campaign”;
About the opposition “honor” - “glory” in secular texts of the Kyiv period;
Once again about the concepts of “glory” and “honor” in the texts of the Kyiv period;
“Ringing to the ancestral glory”;
On the concept of geographical space in Russian medieval texts;
Literature in the context of Russian culture of the 18th century:
1. The role and place of literature in the consciousness of the era;
2. About life that did not fit into literature, and literature that became life;
3. Literature and the reader: life according to the book;
4. Classicism: term and (or) reality;
5. The life of the text in the space between the artist’s brush and the audience’s vision.
“Riding to the Island of Love” by V.K. Trediakovsky and the function of translated literature in Russian culture of the first half of the 18th century;
Ways of development of Russian educational prose of the 18th century;
Archaic enlighteners;
Reflection of the ethics and tactics of the revolutionary struggle in Russian literature of the late 18th century:
1. The debate about the immortality of the soul and questions of revolutionary tactics in the works of Radishchev;
2. Radishchev and the problem of revolutionary power;
3. Radishchev's political thinking and the experience of the French Revolution;
From the comments to “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow”;
An unknown reader of the 18th century about the “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow”;
In a crowd of relatives (About the book by Georgy Storm “The Hidden Radishchev. The Second Life of “Travels from St. Petersburg to Moscow””);
“Sympathizer” of A. N. Radishchev A. M. Kutuzov and his letters to I. P. Turgenev;
The idea of historical development in Russian culture of the late 18th - early 19th centuries;
The problem of nationality and the path of development of literature of the pre-Decembrist period;
Writer, critic and translator Ya. A. Galinkovsky;
Matvey Aleksandrovich Dmitriev-Mamonov - poet, publicist and public figure;
P. A. Vyazemsky and the Decembrist movement;
“Two words from an outsider” - an unknown article by P. A. Vyazemsky;
The main stages in the development of Russian realism (1960) (together with B.F. Egorov and Z.G. Mints);
The origins of the “Tolstovian trend” in Russian literature of the 1920s;
On Russian literature of the classical period (Introductory remarks);
“Fatalist” and the problem of East and West in Lermontov’s works;
Artistic space in Gogol's prose;
About Khlestakov;
Mayor about enlightenment;
About Gogol's "realism";
The plot space of the Russian novel of the 19th century;
Two oral stories by Bunin (On the problem of “Bunin and Dostoevsky”);
“Man, there are many of them” and “an exceptional personality” (On the typology of Russian realism of the first half of the 19th century);
House in The Master and Margarita;
Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin;
Pushkin. Essay on creativity;
The ideological structure of "The Captain's Daughter";
On the structure of the dialogical text in Pushkin's poems (The problem of author's notes to the text);
The ideological structure of Pushkin’s poem “Angelo”;
Dedication of "Poltava" (Addressee, text, function);
Pushkin and “The Tale of Captain Kopeikin” (On the history of the design and composition of “Dead Souls”);
Experience in reconstructing Pushkin's story about Jesus;
The idea of the poem is about the last day of Pompeii;
From reflections on the creative evolution of Pushkin ();
From the history of the controversy surrounding the seventh chapter of Eugene Onegin (1963);
On the compositional function of the “tenth chapter” of Eugene Onegin (1987);
Sources of Pushkin’s information about Radishchev (-);
Pushkin and M. A. Dmitriev-Mamonov;
Two "Autumns"; Nikolai Mikhailovich Karamzin;
The evolution of Karamzin's worldview (-);
Poetry of Karamzin;
Features of realpolitik in Karamzin's position. (On the genesis of Karamzin’s historical concept);
“Letters of a Russian Traveler” by Karamzin and their place in the development of Russian culture (1984) (together with B. A. Uspensky);
Columbus of Russian history;
“On ancient and new Russia in its political and civil relations” by Karamzin is a monument to Russian journalism of the early 19th century;
Political thinking of Radishchev and Karamzin and the experience of the French Revolution.

Translations

Jurij Lotman. Kultūros semiotika: straipsnių rinktinė / sudarė Arūnas Sverdiolas; iš rusų kalbos vertė Donata Mitaitė. Vilnius: Baltos lankos, (Vilniaus spauda). XV, 366, p. (Atviros Lietuvos knyga: ALK, ISSN 1392-1673). Tir. 2000 egz. ;
"Aleksandr Sergejevitš Puškin" (monograafia). Tõlkinud Piret Lotman. Eesti Raamat, Tallinn 1986; 2., täiendatud trükk: Varrak (kirjastus), Tallinn 2003, 332 lk; ; 3. trükk: Varrak 2006, 332 lk; ;
"Kultuurisemiootika: tekst - kirjandus - kultuur." Tõlkinud Pärt Lias, Inta Soms, Rein Veidemann. Olion, Tallinn 1991, 422 lk; ; 2. trükk: Olion 2006, 360 lk; ;
"Semiosfäärist". Koostanud ja tõlkinud Kajar Pruul. Järelsõna “Semiootika piiril”: Peeter Torop. Sari Avatud Eesti Raamat, Vagabund, Tallinn 1999, 416 lk; ;
"Kultuur ja plahvatus." Tõlkinud Piret Lotman. Järelsõna: Mihhail Lotman. Varrak, Tallinn 2001, 232 lk; ; 2. trükk: Varrak 2005, 232 lk; ;
“Vestlusi vene kultuurist: Vene aadli argielu ja traditsioonid 18. sajandil ja 19. sajandi algul” I-II. Tõlkinud Kajar Pruul. 1. köide: Tänapäev, Tallinn 2003, 368 lk; ; 2., parandatud trükk 2006, 368 lk; . 2. köide: Tänapäev, Tallinn 2006, 288 lk;

Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman born February 28, 1922 in Petrograd. In 1939, he entered the philological faculty of Leningrad University - his choice of profession was largely influenced by the circle of friends of his older sister. His teachers at the university were famous professors and academicians - G.A. Gukovsky, M.K. Azadovsky, A.S. Orlov, I.I. Tolstoy, and student Lotman wrote his first course work with V.Ya. Proppa. In October 1940, Yuri Lotman was drafted into the army, and after the start of World War II, the artillery regiment in which he served was transferred to the front. He fought through all four war years, ending the war in Berlin.
Having been demobilized at the end of 1946, Yuri Lotman returned to study at the university and already in his student years conducted active and fruitful research work. In 1950, he graduated from the university with honors, but because of his nationality he could not enroll in graduate school - the country was fighting with all its might against “cosmopolitans.” Therefore, Yuri Lotman got a job as a teacher at the department of Russian language and literature at the Tartu Teachers' Institute, and later he headed this department. In 1952, he defended his PhD thesis on the creative relationship between Radishchev and Karamzin, after which he published a number of works about these writers. In 1954, Lotman was invited to the position of associate professor at the University of Tartu, where he lectured. His entire subsequent life was connected with the University of Tartu - after defending his doctoral dissertation “Ways of development of Russian literature of the pre-December period,” he became a professor, headed the department of Russian literature for many years, and wrote almost all of his scientific works.
A significant part of Lotman’s scientific heritage is devoted to the study of the work of A.S. Pushkin, and the pinnacles of his research were the books “A.S. Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin.” Commentary” and “Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. Biography of the Writer.” The scientist’s sphere of interests also included semiotics and structuralism; Lotman’s work in this area received worldwide recognition, and his name is among the creators of literary structuralism. His earliest publications addressing these issues date back to the first half of the 1960s, and among the most famous and significant studies are “Cinema Semiotics and Problems of Film Aesthetics”, “Analysis of Poetic Text”, “Structure of Literary Text”.
Despite a serious illness and loss of vision, Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman continued to engage in science until the last days of his life, and in 1992 the scientist’s last book, “Culture and Explosion,” was published, in which he in his own way developed I. Prigogine’s ideas about the special patterns of random processes . Yuri Lotman died in Tartu on October 28, 1993.
Information from the site http://www.alleng.ru
Yu.M. Lotman
Main works
Monographs:
1. Andrei Sergeevich Kaisarov and the literary and social struggle of his time // Academic journal. Tart.state university. Tartu, 1958. Vol. 63. (also see “Karamzin”, St. Petersburg, 1997. P.637-804.)
2. Lectures on structural poetics // Academic journal. Tart.state university. Tartu, 1964. Issue 160. / Works on sign systems. T.1 (also see "Yu.M. Lotman and the Tartu-Moscow semiotic school", M., 1994. P.17-263.)
3. The structure of a literary text M., 1970 (also see “On Art”, St. Petersburg, 1998. P. 14-281.)
4. Articles on the typology of culture 1: Materials for the course on the theory of literature Tartu, 1970.
5. Analysis of poetic text L., 1972.
6. Semiotics of cinema and problems of film aesthetics Talinn, 1973 (also see “On Art”, 1998. pp. 288-373.). [The text is available on the Internet in the Moshkov library]
7. Yuri Lotman, Yuri Tsivyan Dialogue with the screen Tallinn, 1994.
8. Selected articles in three volumes Tallinn, Alexandra Publishing House, 1993.
9. Culture and explosion M., 1992. (also see "Semiosphere", St. Petersburg, 2000.)
10. Inside thinking worlds. Man-text-semiosphere-history M., 1996. (also see "Semiosphere")
11. Novel in verse by Pushkin “Eugene Onegin” Tartu, 1975.
12. Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin: biography of the writer L., 1982.
13. A.S. Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin”: Commentary L., 1983.
14. At the school of poetic word: Pushkin. Lermontov. Gogol M., 1988.
15. The Creation of Karamzin M., 1987 (also see "Karamzin", 1997. P.10-311.)
16. Conversations about Russian culture: life and traditions of the Russian nobility (XVIII - early XIX centuries) St. Petersburg, 1996.
17. Universe of the Mind: a semiotic theory of culture L. 1990. (See “Inside the thinking worlds”)
Articles:
1. On the problem of values in secondary modeling systems // Academic Zap. Tart. State University, 1965. Issue. 181. / Proceedings on sign systems, vol. 2, pp. 22-37.
2. On the problem of the typology of culture // Academic Zap. Tart. State University, 1967. Issue. 198. / Proceedings on sign systems, vol. 3., pp. 30-38.
3. On the problem of text typology // Abstracts. report at the second Summer School on secondary modeling systems Tartu, 1966. P.83-91.
4. Abstracts to the problem “Art in a series of modeling systems” // Academic journal of Tart. State University, 1967. Vol. 198. / Proceedings on sign systems, vol. 3., pp. 130-145.
5. Literary criticism should be a science // Issue. lit., 1967. No. 1. pp. 90-100. (also see "On Russian Literature", St. Petersburg, 1997. pp. 756-765.)
6. On the semiotic mechanism of culture (Collaborated with B.A. Uspensky) // Academic journal of Tart State University, 1971. Vol. 284. / Proceedings on sign systems, vol. 5, pp. 144-166. (also see "Selected Articles", vol. 3, 1993, pp. 326-344.
7. Myth-name-culture (Collaborated with B.A. Uspensky) // Academic journal of Tartary State University, 1973. Issue 308. / Proceedings on sign systems, vol. 6., pp. 282-303. (also see "Selected Articles", vol. 1, 1993, pp. 58-75.
8. Semiotics of culture and the concept of text // Proceedings on sign systems, vol. 12., pp. 3-7 (also see “Selected articles”, Tallinn, 1993. vol. 1. pp. 129-132.
9. About the semiosphere // Proceedings on sign systems, Tartu, 1984. No. 17. P.5-23. (also see "Selected Articles", Tallinn, 1993. vol. 1. pp. 11-24.)
10. On the dynamics of culture // Proceedings on sign systems, Tartu, 1992. No. 25. P.5-22. (also see "Semiosphere", St. Petersburg, 2000.)
11. Lotman Yu.M. The problem of the sign in art (abstract of the report). // Lotman Yu.M. About art. St. Petersburg, 1998.
12. Lotman Yu.M. Phenomenon of Culture, TZS No. 10, 1978.
13. Lotman Yu.M. Culture as collective intelligence and problems of artificial intelligence. // Lotman Yu.M. Semiosphere of St. Petersburg. 2000.
14. Lotman Yu.M. The place of cinema in the mechanism of culture. TZS No. 8 1977.
15. Lotman Yu.M. Winter notes about summer schools. // Y.M. Lotman and Tartu-Moscow semiotic school M., 1994.
16. Lotman Yu.M. A.M.Pyatigorsky, Theses. Kääriku, May 10-12, 1968. Tartu, 1968.
17. Lotman Yu.M. On the metalanguage of typological descriptions of culture TZS No. 4 Tartu, 1969.
18. Lotman Yu.M. On the construction of a typology of culture. // Abstracts of reports at the second summer school on secondary modeling systems, August 16-26, 1966, Tartu, 1966. P.82-83.
19. Lotman Yu.M., Uspensky B.A. On the semiotic mechanism of culture. Proceedings on sign systems No. 5, 1971.
20. Lotman Yu.M. The problem of “teaching culture” as its typological characteristic. // TZS No. 5, Tartu, 1971.
21. Lotman Yu.M. The problem of the similarity between art and life in the light of the structural approach. // Lotman Yu.M. About art. St. Petersburg, 1998, pp. 378-386.
22. Lotman Yu.M. Poetry of the 1790-1810s. // Lotman Yu.M. About poets and poetry St. Petersburg, 1996.
23. Lotman Yu.M. Dynamic model of a semiotic system. // Lotman Yu.M. Semiosphere, St. Petersburg, 2000.

Yu. M. Lotman: towards the modern concept of text. Text as a dynamic semiotic system.

The problem of “alien word” (“alien speech”) and dialogism in M. M. Bakhtin.

Intertext and intertextuality.

In the dynamics of the development of semiotics over the past fifteen years, two trends can be discerned. One is aimed at clarifying the initial concepts and defining generation procedures. The desire for accurate modeling leads to the creation of metasemiotics: the object of study is not texts as such, but models of texts, models of models, etc. The second trend focuses attention on the semiotic functioning of a real text. If, from the first position, contradiction, structural inconsistency, combination of differently structured texts within a single text formation, semantic uncertainty are random and “non-working” signs removed at the meta-level of text modeling, then, from the second, they are the subject of special attention. Using Saussurian terminology, one could say that in the first case, speech interests the researcher as the materialization of the structural laws of language, and in the second, the focus of attention is precisely those semiotic aspects of it that diverge from the linguistic structure.

Just as the first tendency is realized in metasemiotics, so the second naturally gives rise to the semiotics of culture.

The formation of cultural semiotics - a discipline that examines the interaction of differently structured semiotic systems, the internal unevenness of semiotic space, the need for cultural and semiotic polyglotism - has significantly shifted traditional semiotic ideas. The concept of text has undergone a significant transformation. The original definitions of a text, emphasizing its single signaling nature, or the indivisible unity of its functions in a certain cultural context, or any other qualities, implicitly or explicitly implied that the text is an utterance in any one language. The first hole in this seemingly self-evident idea was made precisely when considering the concept of text in terms of the semiotics of culture. It was discovered that in order for a given message to be defined as "text", it must be at least twice encoded. So, for example, a message defined as “law” differs from a description of a certain criminal case in that it simultaneously belongs to both natural and legal language, forming in the first case a chain of signs with different meanings, and in the second - some complex sign with a single meaning. The same can be said about texts like “prayer”, etc.

The course of development of scientific thought in this case, as in many others, repeated the logic of the historical development of the object itself. As one can assume, historically, a statement in a natural language was primary, followed by its transformation into a ritualized formula, encoded in some secondary language, a text e. into a text. The next stage was the combination of some formulas into a second-order text. A special structural meaning was obtained in such cases when texts in fundamentally different languages were combined, for example, a verbal formula and a ritual gesture. The resulting second-order text included subtexts located at the same hierarchical level in different and mutually incompatible languages. The emergence of texts such as “ritual,” “rite,” and “action” led to the combination of fundamentally different types of semiosis and, as a result, to the emergence of complex problems of recoding, equivalence, shifts in points of view, and the combination of different “voices” in a single textual whole. The next heuristic step is the appearance of literary texts. Polyphonic material receives additional unity when retold in the language of this art. Thus, the transformation of ritual into ballet is accompanied by the translation of all different structural subtexts into the language of dance. The language of dance conveys gestures, actions, words and shouts, and the dances themselves, which at the same time are semiotically “doubled.” The multi-structure is preserved, but it is, as it were, packaged in a monostructural shell of a message in the language of this art. This is especially noticeable in the genre specificity of the novel, the shell of which – a message in natural language – hides an extremely complex and contradictory controversy of various semiotic worlds.

Further dynamics of literary texts, on the one hand, is aimed at increasing their integrity and immanent closure, and on the other, at increasing the internal semiotic heterogeneity, inconsistency of the work, and the development of structural and contrasting subtexts in it, tending towards increasing autonomy. Oscillation in the field of “semiotic homogeneity” – semiotic heterogeneity" constitutes one of the constituents of historical and literary evolution.

There may be cases of reduction of the meanings of the first row (natural language) - a prayer, a spell, a ritual formula may be in a forgotten language or may gravitate towards glossolalia. This does not negate, but emphasizes the need to recognize the text as a message in some unknown or mysterious primary language. The definition of a text given in terms of cultural semiotics only at first glance contradicts that accepted in linguistics, because even there the text is actually encoded twice: in natural language and in the metalanguage of the grammatical description of a given natural language. A message that satisfied only the first requirement was not considered as a text. So, for example, before oral speech became the object of independent linguistic attention, it was interpreted only as an “incomplete” or “incorrect” form of written language and, being an indisputable fact of natural language, was not considered as a text. Paradoxically, Hjelmslev's famous formula, which defined a text as “everything that can be said in Danish,” was actually understood as “everything that can be written in correct Danish.” The introduction of oral speech into the circle of linguistic texts implied the creation of a special metalinguistic adequate for it. In this regard, the concept of a text in a linguistic-semiotic context is comparable to the general scientific concept of a fact. Among its other important points, one should emphasize the tension between the tendency towards integration - the transformation of context into text (texts such as the “lyrical cycle”, “the work of a lifetime as one work”, etc. are formed) and disintegration - the transformation of text into context ( the novel breaks up into short stories, the parts become independent aesthetic units). In this process, the positions of the reader and the author may not coincide: where the author sees an integral, unified text, the reader may see a collection of short stories and novels (cf. Faulkner’s work), and vice versa (for example, Nadezhdin largely interpreted “Count Nulin” as an ultra-romantic work because the poem appeared in the same book with Baratynsky’s “The Ball” and both poems were perceived by the critic as one text). There are known cases in the history of literature when the reader's perception of a particular work was determined by the reputation of the publication in which it was published, and cases when this circumstance had no significance for the reader.

Complex historical and cultural collisions activate one trend or another. However, potentially in every literary text both of them are present in their complex mutual tension.

The creation of a work of art marks a qualitatively new stage in the complication of the structure of the text. A multi-layered and semiotically heterogeneous text, capable of entering into complex relationships with both the surrounding cultural context and the readership, ceases to be an elementary message directed from addresser to addressee. By discovering the ability to condense information, it acquires memory. At the same time, he discovers the quality that Heraclitus defined as “self-increasing logos.” At this stage of structural complexity, the text reveals the properties of an intellectual device: it not only transmits information embedded in it from the outside, but also transforms messages and develops new ones.

Under these conditions, the social and communicative function of the text becomes significantly more complicated. It can be reduced to the following processes.

1. Communication between the addresser and the addressee. The text performs the function of a message sent from the information carrier to the audience.

2. Communication between the audience and the cultural tradition. The text performs the function of collective cultural memory. As such, on the one hand, it reveals the ability to continuously replenish, and on the other, to update some aspects of the information embedded in it and temporarily or completely forget others.

3. The reader’s communication with himself. The text - this is especially characteristic of traditional, ancient texts characterized by a high degree of canonicity - actualizes certain aspects of the personality of the addressee. During such communication between the recipient of information and himself, the text acts as a mediator, helping to rebuild the reader’s personality, change its structural self-orientation and the degree of its connection with metacultural constructs.

4. Communication between the reader and the text. By exhibiting intellectual properties, a highly organized text ceases to be just a mediator in the act of communication. He becomes an equal interlocutor with a high degree of autonomy. For both the author (addressee) and the reader (addressee), it can act as an independent intellectual entity, playing an active and independent role in the dialogue. In this regard, the ancient metaphor of “talking with a book” turns out to be full of deep meaning.

5. Communication between text and cultural context. In this case, the text acts in a communicative act not as a message, but as its full participant, subject - source or recipient of information. The relationship of the text to the cultural context can be of a metaphorical nature, when the text is perceived as a substitute for the entire context, to which it is equivalent in a certain respect, or metonymic, when the text represents the context as a certain part - a whole. Moreover, since the cultural context is a complex and heterogeneous phenomenon, the same text can enter into different relationships with its different level structures. Finally, texts, as more stable and delimited formations, tend to move from one context to another, as usually happens with relatively durable works of art: moving to another cultural context, they behave like an informant moved to a new communicative situation - they actualize previously hidden aspects of one's coding system. This “recoding of oneself” in accordance with the situation reveals an analogy between the sign behavior of the individual and the text. Thus, the text, on the one hand, becoming like a cultural macrocosm, becomes more significant than itself and acquires the features of a cultural model, and on the other hand, it tends to carry out independent behavior, becoming like an autonomous personality.

A special case will be the issue of communication between text and metatext. On the one hand, this or that private text can play the role of a describing mechanism in relation to the cultural context, on the other hand, it, in turn, can enter into deciphering and structuring relationships with some metalinguistic formation. Finally, a particular text may include both textual and metatextual elements as private substructures, as is typical for the works of Stern, Eugene Onegin, texts marked by romantic irony, or a number of works of the 20th century. In this case, communication currents move vertically.

In light of the above, the text appears to us not as the implementation of a message in any one language, but as a complex device that stores diverse codes, capable of transforming received messages and generating new ones, like an information generator with the traits of an intellectual personality. In this regard, the idea of the relationship between the consumer and the text is changing. Instead of the formula “the consumer deciphers the text,” a more accurate one is possible: “the consumer communicates with the text.” He comes into contact with him. The process of deciphering a text becomes extremely complicated, losing its one-time and final character, approaching the familiar acts of semiotic communication between a person and another autonomous person.

Similar relationships arise, for example, between a literary text and its title. On the one hand, they can be considered as two independent texts located at different levels in the “text – metatext” hierarchy; on the other hand, they can be considered as two subtexts of a single text. The title can relate to the text it denotes on the principle of metaphor or metonymy. It can be realized using words of the primary language, translated into the rank of metatext, or using words of a metalanguage, etc. As a result, complex semantic currents arise between the title and the text it denotes, generating a new message.

(Yu. M. Lotman. Selected articles in three volumes.

T. I. Articles on semiotics and topology of culture.

Tallinn: Alexandra, 1992.P. 130 – 135)

Yura spent his childhood in St. Petersburg, and in a special place - on Nevsky Prospekt, 18.
In the 19th century, this house housed the confectionery shop of Wolf and Bérenger. Here Pushkin met with his second and went to a tragic duel. And this is not just a coincidence. For Lotman, this is a kind of sign of fate.
Yuri Mikhailovich studied at the former “Petershula”, a school on Nevsky Prospekt, where many subjects were taught in German at that time. He knew German brilliantly, which turned out to be extremely important in his future work.
By the way, even at school the nickname stuck to him Jurmich, and that’s what his friends then called him, and subsequently his students. ()

"Non-memoir":
“...I began a somewhat vague relationship with Zara Grigorievna. We met when I was in my 4th year. At this time I regularly earned money by painting large portraits of leaders in squares. What came out was only vaguely reminiscent of the samples from which I copied (especially at the beginning).
...One day, after a lecture, Zara Grigorievna and Vika Kamenskaya came up to me, and Zara Grigorievna suggested that for the upcoming scientific conference dedicated to Mayakovsky, I should decorate the hall, drawing, in particular, his portrait. I saved all my time for scientific pursuits, which I indulged in with the passion of an alcoholic reaching for a bottle. Participating in such events was not at all part of my plans. Stuttering severely (while working as a telephone artilleryman, I developed proper breathing and almost did not stutter, but when I found myself in civilian life after demobilization, I suddenly discovered that when talking with girls or strangers I stuttered as much as I had never done before; at a meeting of the circle I one day I had to interrupt the report and leave the stage), I explained to Zara Grigorievna that I paint only for money. Her Komsomol enthusiasm was dumbfounded by such cynicism, and she walked away from me with tears in her eyes, loudly saying: “You mustachioed bastard!” This was our first explanation.

(Drawing by Yu.M., the hare is Zara’s pet nickname)

...Later, our relationship improved, and on the eve of her state exam, I was invited as a consultant who was supposed to “pump up” Zara, Vika and Lyuda Lakaeva with information on the 18th and 19th centuries overnight (they were fans of D. E. Maksimov, studied Blok and nothing but Blok were considered worthy of knowing, but they knew Blok perfectly).
...I got married. Zara Grigorievna moved to Tartu (at the same time I had to overcome her desperate resistance: she did not want to leave her school and was going, as I sarcastically told her, “to build socialism in one separate class”).
The formalization of our relationship was completely in the spirit of Zara Grigorievna’s Komsomol maximalism. We went to the registry office to “register our relationship.” Neither I nor Zara Grigorievna expected that we would have to take off our coats there. But I was still wearing a “lecture” suit (in family parlance it was called “smoke and darkness” - its left sleeve was dripping with stearin, because in the evenings the lights were turned off and I had to work by candlelight). Zara Grigorievna had no festive dresses at all (philistinism!). And there was something “performing duties”, altered from the dress of Aunt Manya - a woman twice as tall and plump as Zara Grigorievna.
We came to the registry office. “They came” is not the right word: I literally dragged in the desperately resisting Zara Grigorievna, who said that, firstly, she was not going to move to Tartu and leave her Volkhovstroy schoolchildren, and secondly, that family life was generally philistine (Zara’s friend Grigorievna Luda summed up these speeches with a caustic formula: “Personal - back, public - forward!”). Waiting for us at the registry office was an exceptionally nice Estonian, who held this position under all successive regimes and, like most intellectuals of that age and time, spoke Russian very well. First of all, he struck us with a decisive blow, suggesting that we take off our coats. Zara Grigorievna was suddenly attacked by a fit of laughter (not at all hysterical, she really found this “philistine” procedure very funny). The head of the registry office looked at us sadly and said with deep understanding: “Yes, for the first time it’s really funny!”

sons:
Lotman, Mikhail Yuryevich (born 1952), professor of semiotics and literary studies at Tallinn University, member of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) in 2003-2007, chairman of the Tartu city council since 2011;
Lotman, Grigory Yuryevich (born 1953), artist;
Lotman, Alexey Yurievich (born 1960), biologist, member of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) in 2007-2011.

(In the photo: Yu.M. and Zara Mints in Hungary, 1984)

1952. He defended his PhD thesis at Leningrad University on the topic “A.N. Radishchev in the fight against the socio-political views and noble aesthetics of N.M. Karamzin.”
It should be emphasized that Yu. M. became interested in Karamzin’s work while still a student, and even then he saw that the significance of Karamzin’s legacy did not coincide with official assessments: reactionary, idealism, monarchism, and these were the labels assigned to the writer in the pre-war and early post-war periods. years.
The complex of Karamzin’s works by Yu. M. is one of the most significant in his heritage.
Yu. M. was one of the first to “rehabilitate” Karamzin, removing the ugly stigmas from him, the result of a primitive, vulgar sociological approach to our classic.
In parallel with the teachers' institute, Yu. M. began teaching at the University of Tartu, first as an hourly worker, and then in 1954 was invited to the full-time position of associate professor. His entire subsequent life was connected with this educational institution.

"Non-memoir":
“...Our room, littered with books and not at all sparkling with neatness, evoked disgust in her [the owner of the apartment, a homely Estonian].
...we lived a very cheerful life: we worked a lot, wrote a lot and constantly met in a small but very close and very friendly circle. I completely transferred to the university, Zara Grigorievna worked at the teachers’ institute.”

1958 Publication of the first monograph - “Andrei Sergeevich Kaisarov and the literary and social struggle of his time.”

1960 Defense of his doctoral dissertation “Ways of development of Russian literature of the pre-Decembrist period.”

In 1963 Yu.M. received the title of professor; for many years (from 1960 to 1977) he was the head of the department of Russian literature; however, he remained its unofficial leader until his death, although the corresponding vigilant authorities by the 1970s. finally they realized that Lotman, together with the entire department, turned out to be no less dangerous for Soviet ideology than the “bourgeois” Estonian professors, and they tried to disperse the department; in particular, Yu. M. was removed from the head and transferred to the department of Estonian philology, to the department of literary theory. Fortunately, that was the end of the matter; Lotman still taught at the department of Russian language and literature.

Having become the head of the department of Russian literature at the University of Tartu, Yu.M., together with his wife, Z.G. Mints, and B.F. Egorov, attracted talented people and created a brilliant school for the study of Russian classical literature.

Lyubov Kiseleva:
When we talk about Lotman the manager, the problem of organizational gift becomes relevant. I’ll start with an episode that Yuri Mikhailovich loved to talk about and was proud of. R. O. Jacobson, having visited Tartu and Kääriku in the late 1960s, said that Lotman was an excellent organizer. At the same time, Yurmikh [as, with the light hand of B.F. Egorov, Lotman was called by everyone who knew him] always added with a sly grin that none of his friends and relatives, much less from the university authorities, would agree with this review, but what, they say that Yakobson is the only person who understood him correctly.

Throughout his life, Lotman studied Russian literature of the second half of the 18th – mid-19th centuries. (Radishchev, Karamzin, Decembrist writers, Pushkin, Gogol, etc.).
Lotman introduces into the purely literary sphere an active study of the facts of life and behavior of the corresponding eras, creating literary “portraits” of famous Russian people.

Awards

two Orders of the Patriotic War, II degree, Order of the Red Star (03/22/1945), medal "For Courage" (05/10/1944), medal "For Military Merit" (10/02/1944), medal "For the Defense of Moscow", medal "For Defense Stalengrad" and other medals.

Ranks

Positions

commander of the communications department of the 1st battery of the 68th Guards Army Cannon Artillery Regiment

commander of the communications department of the 3rd division of the 38th Guards Army Cannon Artillery Brigade, 61st Army, 1st Belorussian Front

Biography

Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman (February 28, 1922, Petrograd - October 28, 1993, Tartu) - Soviet literary critic, cultural critic and semiotician.

Born into a Jewish family. His father is Mikhail Lvovich Lotman (1882-1942), a graduate of St. Petersburg University in the faculties of mathematics and law, later a legal adviser at various publishing houses; mother - Sara Samuilovna (Alexandra Samoilovna) Lotman (née Nudelman, 1889-1963), dressmaker and seamstress, later a dentist; three sisters - composer Inna Mikhailovna Obraztsova (1915-1999), literary critic Lidia Mikhailovna Lotman (1917-2011) and doctor Victoria Mikhailovna Lotman (1919-2003).

He studied in Petrishul from 1930 to 1939, then entered the philological faculty of Leningrad University. Student Lotman wrote his first course work with V. Ya. Propp.

In October 1940, from his second year at university, he was called up for military service. Participant of the Great Patriotic War. He served as a signalman in the artillery. Guard sergeant, commander of the communications department of the 1st battery of the 68th Guards Army Cannon Artillery Regiment, commander of the communications department of the 3rd Division of the 38th Guards Army Cannon Artillery Brigade. He was shell-shocked and for military distinctions he was awarded the Order of the Red Star (03/22/1945), the Order of the Patriotic War II degree (05/17/1945), the medal “For Courage” (10/05/1944), the medal “For Military Merit” (02/10/1944). Demobilized in 1946. Member of the CPSU(b) since April 1943.

In 1950 he received a position as a senior teacher at the Pedagogical Institute in Tartu. In 1952 he defended his Ph.D. thesis “A. N. Radishchev in the fight against the socio-political views and noble aesthetics of N. M. Karamzin.” Since 1954 at the University of Tartu, in 1960-1977 - head of the department of Russian literature, since 1963 - professor. He defended his doctoral dissertation “Ways of development of Russian literature of the pre-Decembrist period” at Leningrad University in 1961.

Lotman is one of the first developers of the structural-semiotic method of studying literature and culture in Soviet science, the founder of the Tartu-Moscow semiotic school.

Corresponding Member of the British Academy of Sciences (1977), Member of the Norwegian Academy of Sciences (1987), Academician of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (1989) and Member of the Estonian Academy of Sciences.

At the beginning of January 1970, KGB officers conducted a search in Lotman’s apartment in connection with the case of Natalya Gorbanevskaya. He was prohibited from traveling abroad.

In the late 1980s, he created a series of educational television programs “Conversations about Russian Culture.”

During perestroika he took part in the political life of Estonia. In October 1988, he was elected to the Board of Commissioners of the Estonian Popular Front.

In 1993, Yuri Lotman became the laureate of the Academic Prize named after. A. S. Pushkin with the wording: for the work: “Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. Biography of the writer" and "A.S. Pushkin's novel "Eugene Onegin". A comment". On October 28 of the same year he died in Tartu and was buried in the Tartu Raadi cemetery.

Family

In March 1951, he married Zara Grigorievna Mints (1927-1990), a literary critic, specialist in the study of the works of A. A. Blok and Russian symbolism, professor at the University of Tartu.

Sons:

Lotman, Mikhail Yurievich (born 1952), professor of semiotics and literary studies at Tallinn University, member of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) in 2003-2007, chairman of the Tartu city council since 2011;

Lotman, Grigory Yuryevich (born 1953), artist;

Lotman, Alexey Yurievich (born 1960), biologist, member of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) in 2007-2011.

Main works

Wikiquote-logo.svg Wikiquote has a page on the topic

Lotman, Yuri Mikhailovich

Lectures on Structural Poetics (1964)

Articles on the typology of culture: Materials for the course on the theory of literature. Vol. 1 (1970)

The Structure of a Literary Text (1970)

Analysis of poetic text. The Structure of Verse (1972)

Articles on the typology of culture: Materials for the course on the theory of literature. Vol. 2 (1973)

Semiotics of cinema and problems of film aesthetics (1973)

A. S. Pushkin’s novel “Eugene Onegin”: commentary (1980, 2nd ed. 1983)

Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin: biography of the writer (1981)

The Creation of Karamzin (1987)

At the school of poetic word: Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol (1988)

Culture and Explosion (1992)

Conversations about Russian culture. Life and traditions of the Russian nobility (XVIII - early XIX centuries). (1993)

Dialogue with the Screen (1994; together with Yu. Tsivyan)

Articles and studies on Russian literature

List of articles

Literary Studies Should Be a Science (1967)

On the Typological Study of Literature (1969)

Remarks on the Structure of Narrative Text (1973)

Canonical Art as Information Paradox (1973)

On the function of oral speech in the cultural life of the Pushkin era (1979)

Literary biography in historical and cultural context (Towards a typological relationship between the text and the personality of the author) (1986)

Mass literature as a historical and cultural problem (1991)

Translations

Jurij Lotman. Kultūros semiotika: straipsnių rinktinė / sudarė Arūnas Sverdiolas; iš rusų kalbos vertė Donata Mitaitė. Vilnius: Baltos lankos, (Vilniaus spauda). XV, 366, p. (Atviros Lietuvos knyga: ALK, ISSN 1392-1673). Tir. 2000 egz. ISBN 9955-00-091-0.

"Aleksandr Sergejevitš Puškin" (monograafia). Tõlkinud Piret Lotman. Eesti Raamat, Tallinn 1986; 2., täiendatud trükk: Varrak, Tallinn 2003, 332 lk; ISBN 9985307569; 3. trükk: Varrak 2006, 332 lk; ISBN 9985312767

"Kultuurisemiootika: tekst - kirjandus - kultuur." Tõlkinud Pärt Lias, Inta Soms, Rein Veidemann. Olion, Tallinn 1991, 422 lk; ISBN 545000480X; 2. trükk: Olion 2006, 360 lk; ISBN 9789985664841

"Semiosfäärist". Koostanud ja tõlkinud Kajar Pruul. Järelsõna “Semiootika piiril”: Peeter Torop. Sari Avatud Eesti Raamat, Vagabund, Tallinn 1999, 416 lk; ISBN 9985835379

"Kultuur ja plahvatus." Tõlkinud Piret Lotman. Järelsõna: Mihhail Lotman. Varrak, Tallinn 2001, 232 lk; ISBN 9985304780; 2. trükk: Varrak 2005, 232 lk; ISBN 998531008X

“Vestlusi vene kultuurist: Vene aadli argielu ja traditsioonid 18. sajandil ja 19. sajandi algul” I-II. Tõlkinud Kajar Pruul. 1. köide: Tänapäev, Tallinn 2003, 368 lk; ISBN 9985621239; 2., parandatud trükk 2006, 368 lk; ISBN 9985621239. 2. köide: Tänapäev, Tallinn 2006, 288 lk; ISBN 9985621239

"Filmisemiootika". Tõlkinud Elen Lotman. Varrak, Tallinn 2004, 172 lk; ISBN 9985308352

"Kunstilise teksti struktuur". Tõlkinud Pärt Lias, järelsõna: Peeter Torop. Sari Avatud Eesti Raamat, Tänapäev, Tallinn 2006, 574 lk; ISBN 9985623916

"Valik kirju". Koostanud ja järelsõna: Marek Tamm. Tõlkinud Jüri Ojamaa ja Maiga Varik. Loomingu Raamatukogu 2007, nr 8/9, 104 lk; ISBN 9789949428076

“Hirm ja segadus. Esseid kultuurisemiootikast.” Koostanud Mihhail Lotman, tõlkinud Kajar Pruul. Varrak, Tallinn 2007, 167 lk; ISBN 9789985314340

"Kultuuritüpoloogiast". Tõlkinud Kaidi Tamm, Tanel Pern, Silvi Salupere; toimetanud Silvi Salupere. Sari Avatud Eesti Raamat, Tartu University Press, Tartu 2011, 184 lk; ISBN 9789949195480

Memory

On October 6, 2007, a monument to Yu. M. Lotman was unveiled in front of the library building of the University of Tartu. Sculptor Mati Karmin, architect Andres Lunge.

2009: A memorial plaque was unveiled in Tartu on the house where Yu. M. Lotman spent the last years of his life.

Documentaries

2012: For the 90th anniversary of the birth of Yu. M. Lotman, a documentary film “The Space of Yuri Lotman” was shot (TV channel “Culture”, directed by Genrikh Zdanevich)

2013: “Happy like-minded people. Yuri Lotman and Zara Mints" (documentary film in the series "More than Love" of the TV channel "Culture", written and directed by Alena Surzhikova)

Who is Yu Lotman? Yuri Lotman is extraordinary and bright. Introduction to semiotics

Read also

Military service

Problems of semiotics

Awards

Family

Proceedings

Articles and studies on Russian literature

Translations

Awards

Ranks

Positions

Biography