The Mythology of Time in Modern Foreign period dramas: between Retrotopia and Metamodern Sensibility

Prepared with the support of RFBR grant No. 20-011-00297The category of time is one of the most important for understanding the specifics of cinema from the moment of its emergence as a special "temporal art".

This is exactly what J. Deleuze pointed out at the time, emphasizing that "cinema is the only experience in which time is given as a perception" ^{[1, p.332]}. To an even greater extent, the category of time is important for understanding TV series, which today are considered as factors of socialization, broadcasting norms and ways of everyday existence in modern society ^[2]. According to Inna Kushnareva's research, the development of modern serial film production has become a kind of response to the emergence of new video broadcasting technologies (cable, satellite television, DVD, Internet cinemas). "Visuality began to play an independent role on television, ceasing to be an appendix to the scenario text" ^{[3, p. 12]}. No less significant in this regard was the cultural function of serials in the conditions of increasingly accelerating social rhythms and the growth of the nonlinearity of social processes ^{[4, 5]}. In this case, modern TV series turn out to be a kind of conductors of the "global epidemic of nostalgia", which received in the work of Z. Bauman's name is "retrotopia" - a kind of utopia, the meaning of which is to change the collective view from an uncertain future to the past ^[6]. Developing this idea, the German scientist emphasized that such retrotopias allow modern society to find "a solid foundation that provides and, possibly, guarantees a modus of stability and therefore a fairly high self-confidence" ^{[6, p.8]}. Along the way, the series create their own special mythology of time, which has become the subject of this article. The purpose of this article is to analyze the specifics of the mythologization of time in the modern TV series in the context of the transition from the paradigm of postmodernism to a new metamodern sensuality. The emphasis on mythologization in this case is justified, since the very process of creating and working with multiple temporalities in cinema is inspired by mythologizations and remythologizations, uses myth as a means of gaining a new experience of temporality ^{[7, p.123]}. What layers of temporality can be distinguished in modern serial production? What techniques and techniques of mythologization are used in this case? As it seems, theoretical answers to these questions can be given only in the context of the analysis of specific cases – in our case, two foreign TV series: "Downton Abbey" and "The Crown".

Modern TV series in the focus of research The serial boom of recent years could not but cause close attention of researchers to this area of mass culture.

Without pretending in this article to a broad historiographical overview of all foreign and domestic literature about modern TV series, based on current research, we will try to identify the main trends in the transformation of modern TV series. Firstly, a common thought for modern researchers of TV series is the idea of increasing their cultural function as factors of socialization and orientation in modern practices of everyday life ^{[2, 8, 9, 10]}. Secondly, along with the transformation of the technical component of the production of modern serial production comes a new understanding of working with the plot. "The further away, the more noticeable is the predominance of the horizontal structure (when the plot develops from episode to episode) of the narrative over the vertical one (when each episode contains a complete plot, often independent of previous and subsequent events in any way)" ^{[2, p.24]}. Her thought is complemented by Irina Kushnareva, who, following Jason Mittel, talks about the so-called "narrative complexity". We are talking about redefining the episodic form under the influence of the serial narrative: "episodes do not always turn out to be a complete and closed unit, as it was supposed to be in a traditional television series. Rather, the episodic structure creates a support for a cross-cutting plot, which increasingly comes to the fore <...> the emphasis is shifted from the relationship of the characters to plot construction, so that the new product is associated as little as possible with the compromised genre of television soap" ^{[3, p.16]}. Thirdly, researchers talk about a change in the paradigm itself in the production of the plot of the series, when the postmodern irony and sarcasm, the departure from acute social topics, is replaced by a metamodern understanding of the series with its appeal to the "new sensuality" (openness, sincerity, honesty, striving for depth of feelings), which does not remain indifferent to the social problems and difficulties of modernity ^{[11, 12, 13, 8, 14]}. Fourth, the very understanding of the main character changes: the trickster comes to replace unambiguously positive or negative characters. Russian researcher Eva Rapoport emphasizes that the goals of such characters "are by no means sublime, but quite local (include survival and the pursuit of relative well-being, as a London resident from the outskirts understands it for himself), which, however, does not negate their ability to "teach" the viewer something good" ^{[2, p.29]}. Fifth, the modern TV series is even more focused on the requests of the audience and its reactions when the viewer himself "votes" for the extension of the series. Reducing the distance between the viewer and the screen, at the same time, is carried out with the help of an increasing number of special effects and a continuous change of impressions ^{[8, 15, 3, 16]}.

Despite the fact that the problems of temporality in the modern media environment ^[17], as well as in cinema ^{[7, 18, 19]} have already received extensive research, the appeal to the problems of time in the modern series demonstrates the need for further analysis. The greatest attention of researchers in recent years has been focused on the mode of the past in the modern TV series, which is quite understandable, taking into account the trends of retrotopia in modern culture. In the context of the growth of public nostalgia, it is the past that turns out to be a good prospect for a modern TV series to master the emotions of the audience, which is true for both the Russian ^{[20, 21, 22, 23]}, so it is for international contexts ^{[10, 25, 26]}. According to M.N. Lipovetsky, modern retrotopias blur the distinction between a social contract and utopia: "they represent the affective utopia of the past as a myth about the origin of modern society. Like a social contract, retro-series also implicitly focus not on the past, but on the present, explaining and justifying its mechanisms" ^{[21, p.297]}. In this case, the interest of researchers in various forms of depicting the past in serial production is part of the general trend of memory studies and public history, which have long been productively studying representations of the past on television and in cinema ^{[24, 27, 28, 29, 30]} and wider media memory ^{[31, 32, 33, 34]}. However, as the analysis of the contents of a number of foreign and domestic collections devoted to the topic of representation of the historical in cinema and television shows, the problem of time in the series turned out to be beyond research. This allows us to hope that the research presented in this article will allow us to take the next step towards studying the features of the mythology of time in the modern TV series.

On the way to understanding the temporal mythology of the series: methodological perspective

Anyone who undertakes to write about the mythology of time in modern popular culture must determine his theoretical understanding of modern mythology, the representation of time in which is clearly different from archaic mythology.

This does not mean that archaic mythological ideas about time are useless for us. However, studies of the modern myth clearly show its specificity ^[15], the understanding of which, in our opinion, is best described by the theoretical views of R. Barth, H. Blumenberg and K. Bottici. As you know, in his book "Mythology", R. Barth noted that "... the myth is a communicative system, a message. Hence it is clear that it can be neither a thing, nor a concept or an idea: this is a form, a way of designating... the myth hides nothing and demonstrates nothing – it deforms; its tactics are neither true nor false, but a deviation" ^{[35, p.289]}. For Barth, myth is a connotative system where form captures meaning ^{[35, p.275]}. Another important aspect of modern mythology, noticed by R. Barth, is the understanding of its discursive nature. The modern myth is no longer a collection of big stories explaining the world, but just a discourse, a corpus of phrases, a set of stereotypes that do not always fit even into the narrative as such. Sergey Zenkin, the translator of Roland Barthes' works into Russian, points out another important feature, subtly noticed by the French thinker: "Modern myths serve not to resolve, not to eliminate contradictions, but to "naturalize" them, "neutralize" and justify them; remaining primarily a nominal discourse, not a verbal one" ^{[36, p.19]}.

The most important feature of the theoretical model of myth presented in the book by Hans Blumenberg is the radicalization of the thesis about the dynamic and particularistic nature of modern myth. In his opinion, a myth is not a static object that is given to us once and for all, but a process of ongoing processing of the basic narrative core or some archaic mythologeme ^{[37, p.32]}. The variability of the myth and its pluralism looks like the circulation of a mythological message from the narrator to the recipients, then to potential re–narrators and, finally, again to the narrators.

Italian researcher Chiarra Bottici believes that the meaning of modern myths is to provide answers to fundamental human needs. These myths not only give things meaning, but also give them significance ^{[38, p.124]}. Moreover, she suggests to see in social mythology, which she considers on the example of a political myth, a communicative process, defining it as work on a common narrative that attaches importance to political conditions and the experience of a social group. From this point of view, we can see not only how the myth is "produced", but also how it is perceived. It is also important for us that the broadcast narrative in the form of a myth be perceived as a belief and, as K. Bottici notes, have a dramatic form, a certain plot configuration.

The Russian philosopher V.N. Syrov, highlighting the essential features of modern myth, points to its narrativity, archetypality, symbolism, rituality: "to the extent that certain entities acquire a narrative appearance, tend to formulate archetypes, are filled with symbolic meaning and are embodied in rituals, they are mythologized. Then the mythological consciousness will be such a consciousness that is able to perceive the surrounding world and act in it only through the prism of the above-described features" ^{[39, p.74]}.

Attempts have already been made in Russian studies to adapt the theoretical ideas of R. Barth, H. Blumenberg and K. Bottici to the theoretical aspects of understanding the mythologization of time. Thus, in the work of A.G. Ivanov, it is emphasized that modern mythological temporality is understood as being constituted through the affirmation and coverage of all modes of time within the framework of endowing them with "mythological imagery" (from a simple narrative to a panegyric narrative and further to a chain of events in the form of a storyline). According to him, modern practices of mythologizing time preserve some archaic elements of the sacralization and personification of time (the time of the origin, the time of the hero's action). This sacred time no longer breaks away from the profane as in an archaic myth, but rather turns out to be woven into separate modes of time, where the most striking example of the mythologization of time in relation to the past turns out to be social memory, to the future – utopia, and the mythologization of the mode of the present turns out to be associated with mytho-ritual practices in public life ^{[40, p.83]}. Considering the specifics of the mythologization of time, he suggests distinguishing at least two possible situations: "a) first, an event is mythologized <...> and after or almost immediately, the time accompanying this event is mythologized; b) time (time of day, time of year, time of epoch) is mythologized by itself, without correlation with historical facts (this is usually possible in artistic creativity)" ^{[40, p.85]}. Highlighting the characteristic features of temporal structures in the modern media environment, D.S. Artamonov and S.V. Tikhonova rightly point to a high degree of subjectivity, multidimensionality, polyfigurativeness, efficiency and connectivity ^{[34, p.190]}.

However, the above features of temporality in the modern myth are only a general theoretical framework and require further detail. And here, the works of domestic researchers devoted to the temporal structures of modern cinema, which, in our opinion, are also relevant in relation to TV series, are very valuable. So, in her monograph "Time in cinema", N.E. Marievskaya proposed the following theoretical framework: a) horizontal time of the film (linear historical time, nonlinear time, cyclic time in the film); b) vertical time of the film (temporality of audiovisual means of a cinematic frame, time of memories and dreams in the film, time of ecstatic states, the presence of symbols of eternity); c) the time of the characters and their experiences; d) the temporality of the viewer's perception of the film ^[7]. As it seems, each structure of temporality turns into its own special specifics of mythologization, creating bizarre situations of games with time in the series. In this case, we are talking about the superposition of times, hypertrophy of any one mode of time, various options for "working" with the duration of time (breaks in time modes, breakage of storylines, long pauses, slowing down or accelerating the rhythms of action). Finally, the direction of time (parallel time series, flashbacks), the peculiarity of the rhythms of the plot and individual episodes, the features of the denouement (including situations of its absence) may also have their own specifics of mythologization.

In her work, N.E. Marievskaya also shows us the mechanism of the deployment and change of temporal modes in cinema, which, according to her, turns out to be connected not only with the plot as a whole, but also with the switching between logical modalities that characterize the situation and the behavior of the characters. Following V.P. Rudnev, she interprets the plot itself as a transformation of logical modalities unfolding in time: aletic (necessary – possible – impossible), deontic (due – permitted – forbidden), axiological (valuable – indifferent – non–valuable), epistemic (knowledge – belief - ignorance) ^{[7, p.135]}.

The next stage is already an analysis of the specifics of mythologization and remythologization of the structures of temporality unfolding within the framework of the plot, which involves an analysis of the very discursive environment of the series. In this case, the well-established methodology of critical discourse analysis continues to be very valuable. One of the most developed models of critical discourse analysis is rightfully considered the methodology of Siegfried Yeager. The German theorist uses the definition of discourse given by Jurgen Link, noting that discourse is "an institutionally consolidated language that defines the structure of social actions and, thereby, influences the relations of power in society" ^{[43, p. 34]}. In this article we will not describe in detail the description of the scheme of the method of discourse analysis of Z. Yeager and F. Mayer, since it is well represented in the authors' publications themselves ^[43], and has also been repeatedly described and applied in the Russian scientific literature ^{[41, 42]}. We will only point out that the main task of this method is the analysis of typical textual and figurative-symbolic fragments (fragments of discourses), represented in the symbolic space of a communication message and containing various types of references to the same topic. As Z. himself writes . Yeager, this general theme acts as a kind of discursive strand ^{[43, p.38]}. Methodology of Z. Yeager and F. Mayer assumes a structural analysis that allows you to identify the main topics, their headings and subheadings, elements of the transmitted structural values of each block of information, as well as elements of the values transmitted in the series not directly. Further, the series is analyzed within the framework of rhetorical means and relevant information messages (types and forms of argumentation and argumentative strategies, logic and composition, implications and insinuations, collective symbolism and metaphors in language). The final procedure is the comparison of the studied information sources, the identification of ideological influences and the selection of typical fragments of discourse that make up the discursive thread.

As we have already written earlier, we have chosen two TV series as the sources of our research, which have gained huge popularity both abroad and in Russia. We are talking about the series "Downton Abbey" (2010-2011, Julian Fellowes, ITV) and the series "The Crown" (2016-2020, Peter Morgan, Netflix). The reasons for our sample were the appeal of the series to the past of one country (in our case, Great Britain), high ratings of international news agencies, a dramatic plot, as well as a metamodern approach in depicting things, situations and the life dynamics of the characters. Since the discourse analysis of all seasons of the series was a difficult task, for our analysis we concentrated on one series in each episode, which allowed not only to compare them with each other, but also to analyze individual techniques and tactics of mythologization.

"Downton Abbey": the mythology of an imaginary past

The historical drama television series "Downton Abbey", created by Julian Fellowes and broadcast on British television from September 2010 to December 2015, is the leader in the number of nominations among non-American TV shows in the history of the Emmy Awards. The series covers the historical period from 1912 to 1926 and is dedicated to the life story of the Crowley aristocrat family in the era of a number of landmark historical events of the 20th century: the wreck of the Titanic liner, the First World War, the Irish War of Independence, the British general election of 1923, the Amritsar massacre and the Beer Hall Putsch in Germany. The main plot of the series unfolds as a story of attempts by members of the Crawley family to keep the abbey in the family's ownership in the absence of a male heir. In parallel, the series shows the daily life of family servants living with them under the roof of an abbey in English Yorkshire in the era of accelerating scientific and technological progress at the dawn of the XX century ^[44].

The TV series "Downton Abbey" is a classic example of a modern conservative drama reflecting trends and moods regarding a new direction of cinematography in the West associated with a new interpretation of heritage (post-heritage film) ^[25]. This series is also a reflection of the trend of "marketing and consumption of British heritage as a tourist attraction" ^{[45, p.301]}. Despite the fact that the series spawned the creation of an entire "Downton industry", the Crowley family itself, as well as the abbey itself, do not have any historical prototypes. The real name of the abbey is Highclere Castle, which is the property of the Earls of Carnavon and is located not in Yorkshire, but in the south–east of England in the county of Hampshire ^[44].

The overall mythological narrative of the series is associated with the presentation of three main aspects. Firstly, the series actualizes the theme of nostalgia for the English aristocratic tradition of the late XIX – early XX centuries, and with it the idealized image of England and the "Englishness" of the era of Edward VII and George V ^[10]. Secondly, the series focuses on the mythological idyll of an aristocratic estate, which is actively developing in the era of scientific and technological progress ^[44]. Thirdly, throughout all six seasons, the series shows class relations between "ideal" masters and "ideal" servants, equally in love with the abbey and striving for its prosperity and development ^{[9, p.320]}.

At first glance, we have a linear composition of plot construction. We don't see flashbacks in the series. We will also not find in the series the time of memories, illusions and dreams of the characters. The time of the series moves strictly linearly, from the past to the present and the future, where each episode turns out to be logically completed and at the same time opens up the prospect for the next episode. The events of the series unfold against the background of historical time, which, however, is not dominant and is hardly noticeable in most episodes. The time of progress is felt much more strongly in the series, which is constantly reminded of modern things and equipment in the abbey for the beginning of the XX century. At the same time, the series gives a clear sense of the presence of the meta-time, which turns out to be a kind of abbey time, or rather the mythological chronotope of the abbey, which turns out to be above the goals and desires of individual characters. And in this case we are talking not only about members of the aristocratic Crowley family. Quite understandable, for example, is the mission of Lord Grantham and his eldest daughter Mary to save the abbey and search for a successful marriage option for Mary in order to restore the hereditary rights to the estate. However, even among the servants, we see no less zealous service both in the case of positive (Carson, Mr. Bates) and in the case of negative characters (the chambermaid AuBryne, the senior footman Thomas). Moreover, the attempts of some of the characters in the series to break with life at the abbey and start a new life (Matthew Crowley, senior footman Thomas, Mr. Bates) eventually still lead them to the estate, personifying the elements of cyclical time.

Thus, despite the linear passage of time in the series, there is always a sacred temporality of the abbey itself, which turns out to be not only the locality of the series, but also clearly personified, which fits perfectly into the traditional mythology of family memory with its "ancestral nests" and "ancestral homes". Another aspect of the sacralization of time in the series is the peculiar mythology of tradition, which is present in each episode as the daily routine of the abbey, which cannot be disturbed (meals, conversation in the living room, a walk, reception by Lord Grantham of visitors in the study). Finally, an interesting aspect of the sacralisation of the time of the series is the presence of a special episode in each season dedicated to the celebration of Christmas at the abbey, which has always been broadcast on television on December 25 from 2011 to 2015. Thus, the Christmas time in the series and the Christmas time of the viewer of the series were correlated, enhancing the effect of emotional impact.

The non-linear time of the series unfolds as a set of points ("motivating events") in each episode, when the viewer is waiting for an unknown and uncertain future that does not follow from the contradictory situation of the episodes. Such non-linearity, as is known, is common for the plot of a cinematic work and does not represent something new ^{[7, p.92]}. At the same time, the structures of nonlinear temporality unfold in the series within several layers. The first layer represents the temporality of the events of the members of the Crowley family. The second and no less important (both from the point of view of the plot and from the point of view of timing) layer is the temporality of the events of the servants' lives. And here we are faced with the mythologization of the duration of time itself, since the time of the members of the Crowley family is always presented as episodes with slow conversations in the living room, the rooms of the abbey and the park area near it. The servants' time, on the contrary, is presented in the series as a series of hasty actions in order to prepare for meals, social receptions or cleaning the premises. Even more interestingly, the episodes of the time of the Crowley family and the time of the servants alternate one after another and this order is maintained throughout all seasons of the series. Within the framework of these two temporalities, we also find a third temporality – the time of the unfolding of the biographies of individual characters of the series, where we can observe the switching of modalities and changes in the characters, values and behaviors of the heroes and antiheroes of the series. So, within the time frame of the Crawley family, we see the evolution of all three of Lord Grantham's sisters, gaining new facets of their personalities. Within the framework of the servants' time, we see a difficult and long path in the creation of the families of Mr. Bates and Anna, as well as Carson and Miss Hughes. The series also shows the moral rebirth of negative characters (senior footman Thomas, maid Aubrain).

No less interesting is the analysis of the features of vertical time in the discursive environment of the series. In this case, time for us turns out to be the time of individual frames, phrases of characters, their arguments and the surrounding symbolic context. This allows us to agree with domestic researchers who continue to point out the huge potential of using the concept of "chronotope" in relation to cinematic art ^[19]. Turning to the vertical time in the series, we see that here metamodern sensuality reaches its culmination, unfolding before the viewer layers of cultural memory imprinted in the symbols and images of the series. The results of the discourse analysis of selected series and episodes allow us to talk about a kind of hierarchy of symbols of the romanticization of the English past. The main symbol forming the mythological feeling of immersion in the inner time of the series, of course, are the numerous images of the abbey itself, which arise not only at the beginning of each series, but also framing individual episodes. Frequent use of the image of the abbey allows you to achieve a sense of the presence of the viewer, inviting him to aestheticize English aristocratic life. We find the next layer of vertical time in the interior of the abbey itself, against which the main plot of all six seasons unfolds. Here we see not only halls and living rooms, Lord Grantham's study, but also bedrooms and historical furniture. No less important are the things of the Crowley family (clothes, personal items, memorabilia, books), as well as cooking practices ^[46]. At the same time, a separate group of things is formed by objects indicating the openness of the abbey to progress. It is significant here that the first episode of the first season begins with the visualization of the most modern things at that time: a locomotive, a telegraph, an iron. At the same time, the maids discuss the appearance of electricity in the abbey (season 1, episode 1).

Indicative in the series is the traditional – modern dichotomy, which runs through the dialogues of Lord Grantham and chief butler Carson, where the former turns out to be a supporter of various innovations, and the latter is an apologist for tradition. In one of the dialogues, Carson doubts the possibilities of Mr. Beiste – a retired military man and an old friend of Lord Grantham – to work as the count's personal valet because of his lameness. For Carson, the abbey tradition itself is important in this case. However, Lord Grantham tells him that times are changing and that traditions need to be revised (season 1, episode 1).

The relationship of each character of the series with historical time is marked in the second season by their attitude to the First World War. So in the first episode of the second season, the unfolding plot shows the viewer a variety of forms of attitude to war, far beyond the limits of patriotic attitude. In this regard, it is important that each character not only demonstrates his attitude to the war, but also argues his desire to participate in it or evade it (memories of the military past for Lord Grantham, duty for Matthew Crowley, the need for the senior footman Thomas, unwillingness to defend England for the Irish driver Tom, fear for the footman Moseley, delight for William the footman, desire to be useful to Edith and Sybil Crowley).

Leaving aside a number of discursive threads of the series related to the presentation of the class world and interaction ^[9], the romanticization of "Englishness" ^[10], we will try to identify the main discursive thread in relation to the representation of temporal aspects in the series. A discursive analysis of the layers of horizontal and vertical time, as well as the time of the characters, makes it possible to see that through a metamodern immersion in the mythology of multiple temporalities, the series seeks to harmonize in the viewer's mind nostalgia for an imaginary past and an unstable future, on the one hand referring to the contingent, and on the other hand open to the positive sides of progress. In this sense, the series turns out to be a kind of symbolic platform for acquiring and aestheticizing an imaginary tradition of English everyday life, resisting all possible challenges of the time and at the same time open to progress. This tradition in the series just turns out to be a factor in the normalization of modern everyday life, showing that a "good life" is always possible in "difficult times".

"The Crown": mythologizing the multidimensionality of the present

The historical drama television series "The Crown" (The Crown), which was released in 2016-2020 on the Netflix channel and collected no fewer film awards and awards than the series "Downton Abbey" ^{[47, 49]}, at first glance, is another biopic telling about the life of Queen Elizabeth II. In fact, the series for four seasons (filming of the fifth and sixth seasons began in 2021 and 2022, respectively) unfolds before the viewer the life of the entire royal family against the backdrop of the most acute domestic and foreign policy events in the life of Great Britain from the late 1940s to the early 1990s. As you know, the main idea of Peter Morgan – the writer and producer of the series – was to present the private life of the Queen and members of the Windsor family against the background of significant historical events. At the same time, part of the series, on the contrary, sought to show how the events of the private life of the Windsors received a public frame and became part of the history of the country. This circumstance significantly distinguishes the creation of Peter Morgan from the series "Downton Abbey", since both the characters and the chronology of events are not fictional. In this situation, it is important for us to evaluate the series in terms of the categories "accuracy" and "authenticity" ^[48]. According to Laura Saxton, the category "accuracy" reflects the correspondence of a work of art to historical authenticity and completeness of facts, while the category "authenticity" indicates "the impression of accuracy and the extent to which readers believe that representation is connected with the past" ^{[48, p.127]}. In her research, she shows that the release of the seasons of the series correlates with the growth of requests for information about members of the royal family on the corresponding Wikipedia pages ^{[48, p.134]}. She emphasizes: "In many ways, the Crown is traditional in its approach to authenticity: Elizabeth's private relationships with her husband, sister, children and prime ministers constitute a "gap" in our knowledge of her: while a completely imaginary image of this gap acquires authenticity through the accurate recreation of known details" ^{[48, p.133]}. Thus, the representation of the images of the royal family turns out to be a kind of remythologization, since, without receiving real information about the life of the queen and her entourage, we find ourselves in the space of meanings created by the series, which we consider as authentic (in the meaning of L. Saxton) and complete with our own interpretations. In this case, we see a good example of how the myth-making of the creators of the series meets with mythologization on the part of the viewer, creating a seemingly holistic picture of the public and private life of the royal family. It is characteristic that the concepts of "private life" and "intimacy", which play a key role for the plot of the series, on the one hand act as agents of demystification (giving publicity to topics that were previously hushed up), and on the other hand, they themselves actually create a space of remifologization.

It is the tension between the public and private sides of the life of the Queen and her family that creates those structures of temporality within which various methods of mythologization can be distinguished. As in the case of "Downton Abbey", we will try to identify the features of horizontal, vertical time, as well as the time of the characters. Horizontal time in the series is primarily determined by historical time, represented by a chain of events in the recent history of Great Britain. Unlike "Downton Abbey", in the series "The Crown" we encounter historical time not as a background, but as an important plot-forming element. At the same time, it cannot be said that the composition of time in the series is strictly linear. Firstly, this is due to the fact that each episode is dedicated to a single event, isolated from a whole decade of the royal family's life. Secondly, the events of public and private life turn out to be parallel to each other. This indicates that in this series we are dealing with a fragmentary composition of plot construction, when several (in this case two) time layers unfold simultaneously in front of us. In a number of series, flashbacks turn out to be an important element of the plot. So, the plot of the fifth series (the first season), related to the coronation of the young Elizabeth, begins with a flashback, where she is still a little girl helping her father in preparing his own coronation. It is significant that the last episodes of the fifth series, where we see the coronation ceremony, also refer to the memory of the queen's father. The expression of this is the word "immutable", which the queen pronounces at the coronation, and which was incomprehensible to her when she helped her father with the coronation speech. This completes a kind of cycle from father to daughter, where the continuity of family memory turns into the continuity of the monarchical tradition. However, we find the largest number of flashbacks in the character of the principle of Philip, which is associated with the tragic pages of his family history and childhood. This is especially evident in the 12 episodes (second season) and 24 episodes (third season). In another case, the flashback launches the plot of an entire series (episode 5, season 1), where, against the background of the Suez crisis, we see the unfolding crisis of Elizabeth and Philip's family relations.

The main temporal composition of the series is built around the idea of the multidimensional mode of the present, where the private is the reverse side of the public. And here we turn again to the ideas of K. Bottici, who in her work emphasizes that the construction of a mythological narrative is connected not just with giving things meaning, but giving them significance. In our case, such significance is given to the emotions and experiences of Elizabeth and members of the royal family, equivalent to the historical events of this era. The mythological reveals itself here in the very equalization of the private and the public. Such mythologization is not surprising, considering that the series is a biopic. However, this mythological does not stand out from real life, but is consciously embedded in its events and episodes.

Another way of mythologizing time in the series is the sacralization of rituals. However, we practically do not see the royal daily routine, social receptions and official ceremonies in the series. The sacred breaks into the series in the fifth episode (first season), which ends with the coronation. Indicative here is not even the image of the ritual, but the comments of the Duke of Windsor (King Edward VIII in abdication), who with Wallis Simpson and his friends ironically comments on the ceremony and the queen's abilities:

THE DUKE OF WINDSOR: Oil and oaths, scepter and power. Symbol on symbol! Mystical mysteries and liturgies intertwined in a complex tangle, where all the lines are so blurred that neither a priest, nor a historian, nor even a lawyer should even undertake to unravel it.

THE DUKE'S GUEST: This is madness.

THE DUKE OF WINDSOR: On the contrary! This is more than reasonable. Who needs ghostliness when there is magic. Who needs prose when there is poetry. Remove the veil and what will remain in front of us? An ordinary young woman with modest abilities and a poor imagination. But wrap it in gold and anoint it with oil, and see who is in front of you! Goddess! (The Crown, Season 1, episode 5, episode 19).

In parallel with these words, viewers see on the screen not only the solemn part of the ceremony itself, hear the solemn music, but also see the admiring face of Philip's principle, indicating that he understands the new status of his wife. His acceptance of Elizabeth's new status is the result of a change in the modality of his behavior, when attempts to gain his independent status at court are replaced by a certain understanding of his "mission" - to be with the queen. At the same time, the irony of the Duke of Windsor, as well as the parallel aestheticization of the coronation ritual, show that in this episode we see both a criticism of mythology and at the same time a remythologization of monarchical rituals for the viewer of the series.

The motif of the remythologization of the monarchy and its aesthetics is even stronger in the second season, where during the official photography of Princess Margaret, the Queen mother and court photographer Cecil reveal to the critically-minded Margaret the importance of ceremonial photographs of members of the royal family for the daily life of ordinary citizens:

QUEEN MOTHER: No one is interested in our complexity or our authenticity. All this is enough for people in their own lives. We help them escape from it.

CECIL: Exactly Your Majesty! Imagine for a moment. A young woman, ordinary herself. She's sitting in her little gray kitchen. She has so much work to do. She needs to wash the dishes. Oh, how she dreams of comfort. About hope. She wants to believe that there is more to life than chores. And she opens the magazine and sees a picture of Her Highness in it! And for one wonderful, magical moment, she becomes a princess herself. She rises above her pathetic reality, soaring into the world of fantasy. Later, she leaves her house wearing a scarf, for example, for which she has been saving for a long time. Now she's holding her head up high! She's a new person! And it's all thanks to you, Your Highness! (The Crown, season 2, episode 4, episode 8).

Peter Morgan's desire to see the public history of the monarchy through the prism of private life could not but have an impact on the vertical time of the series. At first glance, we also see images of Buckingham Palace and Balmoral Castle, street scenes in London. However, these frames mostly play a supporting role and act as a kind of background marking the actions in the episodes. The emotions of the characters themselves play a truly important role in the series. It is here that we see the greatest number of breaks in duration when the characters of the series pause in conversations and discussions. These moments are not accidentally shown in close-up and are almost always not accompanied by text. No less important in the construction of the vertical time of the series are the things surrounding the queen and her family. We are talking primarily about the official outfits of the Queen and Prince Philip, the interior of their offices and bedrooms. However, the emphasis on presenting images of the private life of the royal family draws the main attention to the Queen's daily life itself, which allows the viewer to see the queen and her family as ordinary people. This explains the presence in the episodes of a huge number of things and objects that are no different from the things of ordinary citizens of the country. This practice allows you to strengthen the emotional connection between the characters of the series and their viewers. In this case, the series clearly performs the cultural function of presenting the image of the queen and her inner circle, living the lives of ordinary people. As Maria Baumgartner's research has shown, the realization of this cultural function is carried out through a whole set of modalities of the category "intimacy": physical, verbal, spiritual and intellectual ^[50].

Another temporal structure unfolding in the series turns out to be the biographical time of the characters themselves. At first glance, we do not find a significant difference here in comparison with the storylines of other series and films, since each of the main characters changes internally throughout the series (Prince Philip, Princess Margaret, Prince Charles). Also, the dominance of the biographical time of Queen Elizabeth II in the series, which somehow turns out to be the main character of the series, is not surprising. Something else is noteworthy. In the numerous twists and turns of the events of private life, we do not see the mistakes of the queen herself. In this sense, the change of actors reflecting the fact of age-related changes in the characters in the case of her image does not correlate with her internal dynamics. The Queen does not just express an opinion that is obeyed. She almost always expresses the only correct opinion. That is why the switching of modalities in the development of her personal dynamics throughout all four seasons is practically not noticeable in the series. Such a situation creates a sense of a violation of the synchronicity of biographical dynamics even with Prince Philip, whose internal changes and experiences are much more noticeable.

The main discursive thread of the series "The Crown" is the representation of the multidimensional events of the life of the royal family, which is achieved through deep immersion and detailing of the daily private life of Elizabeth II and her entourage. In this sense, the series responds to the cultural need to correlate the everyday life of ordinary viewers and the everyday life of members of one of the most famous royal families in the world. However, this very presentation of the private life of the royal family against the background of historical events contributes to the formation of a more multidimensional image of the present, since the text passages of the film's characters and their actions are not only a response to historical events, but also respond to the demands of modernity. In other words, referring to the public and private contexts of the events of the past, the series raises the question of the current problems of the British monarchy in the present. In addition, by combining the public and private life of the royal family, the series contributes to the formation of a special temporality of the tradition of the British monarchy, the perception of which the viewer becomes more multidimensional.

As the conducted research has shown, modern historical drama series clearly reveal the features of the growth in popularity of retrotopia, which Z. Bauman wrote about. However, both in the case of "Downton Abbey" and in the case of "The Crown", we see not so much an appeal to the past as an effort to represent the current problems of modernity through an imaginary past. In one case, this happens through the harmonization in the viewer's mind of nostalgia for an imaginary English aristocratic past and an unstable future, in the aestheticization of the tradition of English everyday life, resisting all possible challenges of the time and at the same time open to progress. In another case, the presentation of the private life of the royal family of Great Britain against the background of historical events contributes to the formation of a more multidimensional image of the present, when the text passages of the characters of the film and their actions are not only a response to historical events, but also respond to the viewer's requests in the emotional representation of these events. In both cases, we are talking about the formation of a kind of mythology of time in the series, arising between the cultural demand for retrotopia and the development of modern technologies for the production of cinematographic products, which allows us to fully realize the intentions of modern metamodern discourse. The postmodern irony of the past is replaced by the need for deep immersion in the world of interaction between the past and the present, in the inclusion of artistic meanings of the past in modern historical culture. This allows us to consider the modern historical drama series not only as a "commercial project", but also as a tool for the development of historical culture, an instrument of cultural orientation in social space and time.