Russian formalism, as a movement, rose to prominence at a time of great artistic changes, when experimentation and the avant-garde were brought to the forefront of literature and introduced new stories. structures and styles. Russian formalism can therefore be interpreted as a reaction to the chaotic literature of its time, the early 20th century, particularly in the way it attempted to define the notion of literarity through a more modernized scientific method. The formalists attempted to contain literature, to provide it, through a more objective scientific method, with defined rules and parameters that gave it order and form. Literacy, for the formalists, was something achieved through the use of a certain method in a text, and was not an innate quality given to a work of fiction, prose, or poetry. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay It could be argued, however, that although Russian formalism provided an orderly method for understanding the chaotic literature of its time, this method is incapable of fully understanding the literature. By identifying literature through a fixed definition, Russian formalism ignores several genres of what is considered canon literature and makes literature an art form based solely on abstract methods and obscure styles. In his "Introduction to the Formal Method", Boris Eichenbaum wrote: "that the object of literary science, as literary science, should be the study of the specific properties of literary material, of the properties which distinguish this material from any other type of material »1. Eichenbaum, considered by many to be a representative of Russian formalism, thus defines literary science as the investigation of what makes an element literary. What elements of a text make it literary and distinguish it from another text that is not? We can safely assume that, because Eichenbaum introduces this idea in an essay entitled "Introduction to the Formal Method", Russian formalism can be considered a literary science, and that Russian formalism thus becomes a method used to distinguish literary science. non-literary. Eichenbaum writes that Russian formalism distinguished the literary from the non-literary by recognizing "the opposition between 'poetic' language and 'practical' language." (250) Practical language, as defined by formalists, is simply language that has "no autonomous value and [is] simply a mere means of communication." (250) Practical language is therefore a language whose sole purpose is to transmit information; it is a communication tool. The conversation of our daily lives ("Hello, how are you?" "I'm fine.") is an example of practical language because it is simply communication from one person to another, consisting only of an exchange of information and jokes. , and has no symbolic meaning. Moreover, everyday conversation is not literary because of its lack of autonomy. Conversation, the formalists suggested, is not independent of the linguistic precedent of the interlocutor; it is recognized by them and treated without being truly appreciated for its subtleties and nuances. Practical language, the formalists asserted, does not make a text literary. Textbooks, non-fiction magazines, pamphlets and recipe books are therefore classified as non-literary texts because they convey information only and have no autonomous value; there is no meaningsymbolic to a recipe, it is just a means by which to transfer the steps of preparing a tasty meal, and the language it uses does not challenge the reader's perception of the meal. The opposite of practical language is poetic. language, something that, according to Eichenbaum, is created by the process of estrangement. Estrangement, for Eichenbaum, is the process of distorting the familiar into something unfamiliar, making the ordinary extraordinary. A recipe, in a clear and simple form, is a non-literary text because it consists only of practical language. However, if we were to write a recipe using a variety of techniques and devices (metaphor, allegory, diaspora, etc.), then we could make the recipe literary because it has been alienated and made poetic, with the reader forced by the 'unknown. mix of images and descriptions to understand the meal differently. For formalists, this is what makes a text literary, and therefore places it in the sphere of art. As Eichenbaum writes: “Art is conceived as a means of breaking the automatism of perception, and the aim of the image is not to make a meaning more accessible to our understanding, but to arouse a particular perception of one thing, to bring it is a question of “seeing”, and not only of “recognizing”. (251) A text is therefore made literary when its language is alienated and thus forces the reader to perceive the content differently, allowing them to become more aware of its meaning. This definition of literature can easily be applied to modernist texts, such as James Joyce's Ulysses. In Ulysses, Joyce used various techniques to record how human consciousness accurately perceives reality, these techniques including inner monologue, free indirect speech, and, most famously, stream of consciousness. These techniques clearly distance the language and force the reader to perceive the text differently. Take, for example, Joyce's description of his hero, Leopold Bloom, having a sexual fantasy set in a bathhouse: "He imagined his pale body lying there, naked, in a womb of heat, oiled with melting scented soap, gently. washed. He saw its trunk and its undulated and supported limbs, slightly raised upwards, lemon yellow: its navel, bud of flesh; and he saw the dark, tangled curls of his bush floating, the flowing hair of the stream around the father of thousands, a father of thousands limp, floating. flower. » It is clear to see how Joyce distances the image of Bloom masturbating in a bathhouse, dislocating his physiology and using metaphorical objects to represent body parts. Formalists would say that this is a good example of poetic language, that Joyce wrote something inherently literary due to the fact that it forces the reader to perceive the image differently than they would if he was really at the baths with Bloom. Perhaps then the formalist definition of literature is correct; literature is obtained through a process of distancing, of distortion of perception. Although this definition of literature can easily be applied to the more experimental and avant-garde works of the early 20th century, it is more difficult to apply to literature. in its entirety. It is possible that Russian formalism is a form of criticism that is best suited to certain genres and styles, but when applied to literature over time it can become irrelevant. If a text is only made literary by “breaking the automatism of perception,” then several areas of conflict arise. The genre of realism, for example, offers a challenge to this definition, with realism beingthe attempt to record everyday life as accurately as possible, to convince the reader of its reality and to attempt to get as close as possible to their experiences through a language they use. Elizabeth Gaskell's Mary Barton is considered an excellent example of the industrial novel, a form of realism specifically designed to relate to the everyday experiences of the Victorian working class. In the novel, Gaskell does not attempt to distort the reader's perception, but his goal is to document the plight of the factory workers of Manchuria. This section, from the first chapter of the novel, shows a definitive attempt to accurately convey the physiology of John Barton, the father of the titular heroine: “He was of below average height and slightly built; there was almost a stunted air about him; and his pale and colorless face gave you the idea that in his childhood he had suffered from a limited life resulting from bad times and improvident habits. His features were strongly marked, although not irregular, and their expression was extremely serious; resolved either for good or for evil, a sort of latent severe enthusiasm. » In many ways, this passage can be read as an example of practical language. Gaskell does not overtly attempt to distance the image of John Barton, but rather presents a man that we, as the reader, can easily imagine in our imagination. Metaphor and simile are not used to describe his body, as they are for Bloom's, and we are not forced to perceive human anatomy differently than we already do in our daily lives. Gaskell simply communicates to the reader the objective appearance of John Barton. This passage is representative of the style of the novel as a whole, and thus the question arises whether the novel can be, from a formalist point of view, considered literary. Realism is generally considered one of the major genres of literature, and many of the best writers in history are considered to have written realistic novels, with Gaskell included among Charles Dickens, George Eliot, and Gustave Flaubert. Dickens, Eliot, and Flaubert are generally considered major figures in the literary canon, but if they adhere to a genre that challenges the formalist method, two possibilities present themselves. First, if the formalist method is considered the correct way to judge whether a text is literary or not, then realism, through its overt use of practical language and lack of distancing, is a genre of literature that does not is not literature. Instead, it is simply the transfer of imagined information, fictional images that have no symbolic value and do not differ in any way from the reader's everyday life. The second possibility is the opposite of the first, and is perhaps the most feasible. of both: the method adopted by Russian formalism is impractical and cannot be applied to literature as a whole. If literature can only be defined as an art form where the normal is made strange, then much of what is considered literature should be ignored and stripped of the label "art." Efforts were made at both ends of a style spectrum to write with opposing intentions, to make literature as unfamiliar as possible on one side and as close to human experience as possible on the other. Often the two attempts are distorted and confused; Joyce's use of stream of consciousness can alienate the reader due to its abrasiveness, intensity, and remoteness, but Ulysses is often considered by critics to be as close to a realistic depiction of the.