Possibilities of Applying M.M. Bakhtin's Theory of Polyphony to the Analysis of Dramatic Works

Ma Mentsyu ORCID: 0000-0002-9381-6943 PhD in Philology Postgraduate Student, Department of the History of Russian Literature, Lomonosov Moscow State University 119991, Russia, Moscow region, Moscow, Leninskie Gory str., 1 2584786603@qq.com Other publications by this author

Introduction

In the book "Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics" M.M. Bakhtin speaks about the new – polyphonic – form of the novel created by Dostoevsky. Declaring the polyphony of Dostoevsky's novels, Bakhtin focuses on the following aspects:

1) in Dostoevsky's novels, the author's new artistic position in relation to the characters is a dialogic position. There is no absolute trial of the hero here, the author considers the heroes as equal interlocutors, the points of view of the heroes are freely revealed without final author's assessments.

2) there is a constant intense struggle in the hero's soul, and the author masterfully reveals his complex inner world.

3) the voices-consciousnesses of the heroes are in a state of equal dialogue, the whole novel is presented as an unfinished dialogue of several consciousnesses.

4) dialogicity is a characteristic of the word ("two-voiced word"). The essence of the two–voiced word is "the crossing and intersection in each element of consciousness and the word of two consciousnesses, two points of view, two assessments" ^{[1, p. 158]}.

M.M. Bakhtin does not fully agree with the opinion of A.V. Lunacharsky that Shakespeare is the predecessor of Dostoevsky in the field of polyphony. According to Bakhtin, "drama by its nature is alien to genuine polyphony" ^{[1, p. 43]}. He explains: "The concept of dramatic action, which resolves all dialogical confrontations, is purely monological. A genuine multiplicity would destroy the drama, because a dramatic action based on the unity of the world could no longer bind and resolve it. In drama, it is impossible to combine integral horizons in supra-horizon unity, because the dramatic construction does not provide support for such unity" ^{[1, p. 23]}.

However, many Chinese researchers do not pay attention to Bakhtin's statements about the drama. They actively apply Bakhtin's theories of polyphony to analyze various dramatic works. It would seem that the use of the Bakhtin terms "polyphony", "dialogue", "dialogism" gives the work great scientific support.

Below we will analyze the different points of view of Chinese researchers, and find out whether Bakhtin's theories of polyphony can be applied to the analysis of dramatic works.

The main part

As M.M. Bakhtin's theory of polyphony spread in China, many works devoted to the study of dramatic works in the aspect of polyphony appeared. Among these works, the most representative are the articles of researchers Wang Yaojin, Fan Yitin and Bei Tsinghua ^[2-4].

Thus, researcher Wang Yaojin in the article "Polyphonism and Shakespeare" objects to Bakhtin's opinion that "drama by its nature is alien to genuine polyphony" ^{[1, p. 43]}. He read Shakespeare's dramatic works in the light of Bakhtin's theory of polyphony, and concluded that Shakespeare's drama is characterized by polyphonism ^[2].

In his article , Wang Yaojin pays special attention to the following aspects:

Firstly, he finds out the socio-historical reasons for Shakespeare's polyphony, and believes that the polyphonism of Shakespeare's and Dostoevsky's works is largely due to the contradictions of the era.

Secondly, Wang Yaojin points out the contradiction of Bakhtin's ideas: "On the one hand, Bakhtin believes that the world depicted in the drama "should be made of one piece," and on the other hand, he admits that "the mystery is really multifaceted and to a certain extent polyphonic." In our opinion, Shakespeare's drama originates precisely from the mysteries, so it is characterized by polyphonism" ^{[2, p. 45]}.

Thirdly, the researcher analyzes the phenomenon of counterpoint in Shakespeare's dramas, and notes that Shakespeare's drama is based on the foundations of artistic counterpoint, this is "polyphony", which reveals the diversity of life.

In our opinion, it is difficult to agree with the views of researcher Wang Yaojin. The reasons are as follows:

Firstly, objective complexity has a great influence on the work of Shakespeare and Dostoevsky, but it is not the defining moment of the formation of a new artistic form. As Bakhtin notes, "new forms of artistic vision are being prepared slowly, for centuries, the epoch creates only optimal conditions for the final maturation and realization of a new form" ^{[1, p. 46]}.

Secondly, although Bakhtin in Dostoevsky's Problems of Poetics speaks of the multiplicity of the mystery, he immediately notes that "this multiplicity and polyphony of the mystery is purely formal, and the very construction of the mystery does not allow the multiplicity of consciousnesses with their worlds to unfold meaningfully" ^{[1, p. 24]}.

Thirdly, it is impossible to put an equal sign between counterpoint and polyphony. Counterpoint may or may not lead to a more concrete relationship of dialogues. For example, in the drama "King Lear" there is a phenomenon of counterpoint, but there are no equal dialogical relations between the characters and their worlds. In it, only the full-fledged voice of the main character, all other characters appear in his perception.

Some other researchers question Bakhtin's opinion that "Shakespeare's voices are not points of view on the world to the same extent as Dostoevsky's" ^{[1, p. 43]}. They believe that Shakespeare's heroes can be called ideologue heroes. Chinese researchers also note that being a special way of revealing internal conflict, the internal monologue of Shakespeare's heroes is very similar to the monologue-confession of Dostoevsky's heroes. Therefore, they conclude that signs of polyphony are noticeable in Shakespeare's dramatic works ^[5-6].

Indeed, Shakespeare's artistic material was valuable to Dostoevsky and had a great influence on him. The heroes of the two writers have a lot in common.

For example, the image of Raskolnikov is in many ways similar to the image of Hamlet. Both Hamlet and Raskolnikov will take the world catastrophically. Both of them hate the whole world, because this world does not suit them. The whole world seems to Hamlet only a "cluster of vapors", none of the people pleases him. The same thing happens with Raskolnikov. Raskolnikov thinks about people like this: "Here they are all scurrying back and forth along the street, and after all, every one of them is a scoundrel and a robber by nature..." (and he will tell Sonya that in this terrible world a seven-year-old is depraved and a thief) ^{[7, p. 493]}. Both heroes cut themselves off from all other people because of their deep inner loneliness. Raskolnikov is afraid of any meeting. Everything around him is "nonsense" and "rubbish", because he wants to "encroach" on some special case. And Hamlet believes that the traditional foundations of the world have been destroyed by all surrounding people. He seeks to restore these foundations.

Hamlet and Raskolnikov are still tormented by the question of what will happen after death. Let us recall Hamlet's monologue "to be or not to be" and Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov's reasoning that in the next world there may be only a small room, like a village bathhouse, and spiders in the corners. Hamlet is not sure if there is an afterlife and whether it can be even worse than life. Uncertainty about what will happen after death is the main reason that Hamlet does not dare to commit suicide. Raskolnikov, on the other hand, does not believe in a future life, but he still retains an exalted idea of eternity. Hearing Svidrigailov's judgment about eternity as a "bath with spiders," Raskolnikov exclaimed with a "painful feeling." Because at the moment of the conversation, he just believes in "spiders", but at the same time he is afraid of such faith.

Stavrogin is also partly Hamlet. "Stavrogin is also a mystic, a medium who sees ghosts, like Hamlet talking to the shadow of his father. He, like Hamlet, has a touch of the other, the otherworldly, which causes a sense of time lapse. From unsolvable mental anguish, both heroes seek to commit suicide, but even here they stop in doubt" ^{[8, pp. 161-173]}.

In addition, the "passionate" characters of Shakespeare and Dostoevsky also come closer. It is not difficult to note the closeness between Rogozhin and Othello. As L. Grossman notes: "This national image [Rogozhin] of a broad and courageous nature was given by Dostoevsky with an orientation to his favorite Shakespearean hero – Othello. <...> It is no coincidence that the appearance of Parthenes is close to the type of the Venetian Moor – he is also exceptional in his passion and hatred" ^{[9, pp. 425-426]}.

Some common features can be found in the "criminal" heroes of both writers, for example, Raskolnikov and Macbeth. Both heroes are not native villains. Criminals are made by their terrible plan, an "ugly dream" associated with the murder of a person. Both Raskolnikov and Macbeth strive to become bigger than they are. After visiting Alyona Ivanovna, Raskolnikov gradually thought about the crime. He honestly gives a negative assessment of his own plan: "Oh, my God! How disgusting it all is! And really, really I... no, it's nonsense, it's ridiculous! – he added decisively. – And could such a horror have occurred to me? What filth, however, is my heart capable of! The main thing: dirty, dirty, disgusting, disgusting!" ^{[7, p. 11]}. It would seem that after that all thoughts of murder should go out of his head, but this does not happen. A similar situation is happening with Macbeth. Before committing the murder, Macbeth is torn between loyalty to the rightful ruler and loyalty to his desires. Macbeth understands his duty: "He [Duncan] can rely on me doubly: I am a subject and I am related; the owner should stand as a guard at the door, and not sharpen a knife behind the door" ^{[10, p. 196]}. But for the sake of personal ambitions, the hero takes the path of evil.

So, the heroes of Dostoevsky and Shakespeare have many similar features. But in our opinion, only Dostoevsky's heroes are ideologists in the full sense of the word. In his novels, Dostoevsky seeks to solve the cardinal issues of human self-determination in the world and reveal the spiritual, moral and ethical essence and depth of the human soul. All the leading characters of Dostoevsky are carriers of the idea. They are all absorbed in the idea. For example, proud, arrogant, embittered, "turned away from God and people" Raskolnikov creates his own theory, entitled "I am a trembling creature or I have rights" ^{[7, p. 343]}. To test his theory, Raskolnikov even decides to commit murder. Kirillov is a man of great ideas. He radically raises and solves the question of suicide, making it the cornerstone of his philosophy of life. Stavrogin is a really complex, restless image. The most contradictory ideas get along in it. He inspires people around him with different ideas. People infected with his "ideas" bow down to him.

Almost all of Dostoevsky's ideological heroes have a contradictory nature. In their soul, two equal "I" are always fighting. The internal dialogue of various voices in the minds of the characters is reflected in internal monologues.

It is important to note that in Dostoevsky's polyphonic novels, internal dialogue performs complex functions. The internal dialogue and the principles of its construction "served as the basis on which Dostoevsky initially introduced other real voices" ^{[1, p. 282]}. The inner dialogue of the hero is inextricably linked with the external compositionally expressed dialogue and the great dialogue of the novel, and all these types of dialogue are mutually conditioned and flow into one another, resulting in a poetic system of a fundamentally new, polyphonic novel.

Comparing the works of Dostoevsky and Shakespeare, we can notice that the conditions for the formation of artistic canvases are sometimes the same, but the ideological and "technical side" are unequal. Therefore, we fully agree with Bakhtin's opinion that "it is absolutely impossible to talk about the fully formed and purposeful polyphony of Shakespeare's dramas" ^{[1, p. 43]}.

Speaking of polyphony, Chinese researchers apply it not only to Shakespeare, but also to A.P. Chekhov.

Contrary to Bakhtin's opinion that drama cannot be multi-world, Chinese researchers believe that as the drama develops, Chekhov's "new drama" overcomes the monological unity of the world and is multi-world. At the same time, the most discussed works are "The Seagull" and "The Cherry Orchard".

Thus, in the article "Analysis of the polyphony of Chekhov's dramatic work "The Seagull", Liu Yayue notes: "There is no absolute protagonist in "The Seagull", each person independently reveals and justifies his rightness, and the author does not have the privilege of a single point of view. In addition, in his play Chekhov tries to soften the plot and highlight philosophical conflicts. <...> He strives to reveal the psychology of the characters and depict the interweaving and collision of different ideas. <...> Thus, "The Seagull" is characterized by polyphonism" ^{[11, p. 61]}.

Researchers Zhu Yanyan and Feng Yun in the article "The Polyphony of Life: The Cherry Orchard in the light of Bakhtin's theory of Polyphony" indicate: "In the Cherry Orchard there are a variety of characters: landowners-nobles Ranevskaya and Gaev, a representative of the capitalist class Lopakhin, representatives of the younger generation Anya and Petya, as well as servants with different characters. Each character freely expresses his point of view. The whole work is presented as a kind of symphony" ^{[12, p. 127]}.

Indeed, in Chekhov's plays there is no one main character in principle: several characters are always depicted in front of the viewer, who in turn attract the audience's attention. Each hero has his own theme, each speaks for himself. This is Chekhov's innovation. But, in our opinion, Chekhov's drama is far from polyphonic: in Chekhov's dramas, the author's position is obvious, the characters appear to us completed by the author's consciousness. In the play "The Seagull", the author conveys his views on the theater and new forms in art through the mouth of Treplev. And in the play "The Cherry Orchard" the author clearly shows that the death of the noble class was historically natural. Moreover, although in Chekhov's plays the dialogue between the characters is incomplete, and none of the characters "knows the real truth", but the conclusion about its incompleteness is still "the author's completed opinion" ^{[13, p. 243]}.

Some other researchers believe that the polyphony of Chekhov's drama is manifested in its genre specifics.

Thus, Liu Yayue notes that Chekhov's dramatic works mix several principles: comedic, dramatic, lyrical and tragic, therefore Chekhov's dramatic works are polyphonic ^{[11, p. 60]}.

Researcher Chen Hui considers Chekhov's multilinear drama as polyphonic. In the article "Artistic features of Chekhov's dramas", she notes that the plot polyphony, the prosaic semantic structure of dramas and many everyday scenes laid the foundation for the innovation of Chekhov's dramaturgy ^{[14, p. 140]}.

Such interpretations do not exactly correspond to the idea of the creator of the theory of polyphony. Multithemicity, genre polyphony are not grounds for analyzing the polyphonism of works.

The researchers of the theory of polyphony pay special attention to the dramatic works of Gao Xingjian.

Gao Xingjian is a well-known playwright of experimental theater in China. He always strives to expand the possibilities of drama. In his opinion, polyphonic thinking can be used in the construction of dramatic works. It often happens that in his plays many characters speak at the same time, with different volume and pitch. Gao Xingjian strives to give his works polyphony not only "in form", but also "in meaning".

For example, the main characters of the play "Bus Situation" are people who came from different socio-age strata of Chinese society. All of them are waiting for a regular bus at the same bus stop. These heroes have a common goal – to go to the city. But the bus they want to leave on never stops. Ten years of waiting have passed. Everyone, except the silent one, remains in the same place. While waiting for the bus, the characters talk to each other. With the help of the characters' dialogues, problems of a national scale (corruption, "blat", poor-quality services), everyday problems of an individual and problems of moral values are raised. Each hero freely expresses his opinion about these problems. The author does not condemn anyone, he seems to withdraw. The dialogues reveal the traditional conflict of generations, the conflict of everyday and beautiful, creativity and materiality, the conflict of expectations and reality.

Gao Xingjian's dramatic experiments are of great interest to modern Chinese researchers. According to some, polyphony gives Gao Xingjian's drama a special uniqueness ^{[15, p. 117]}. Others question Gao's experimental dramas, consider his dramatic experiments unsuccessful. Thus, in the article "The Polyphony of Gao Xingjian's Dramatic Works", the famous Chinese critic Lin Kehuan notes: "At the end of the play "Bus Situation", when seven performers speak at the same time, the audience listens only to noise, and not to the so-called "polyphony"" ^{[16, p. 35]}.

In our opinion, Gao Xingjian uses the term "polyphony" in a more general meaning based on the interpretation of the musical term, and Bakhtin's theory of polyphony is not applicable to his drama. Although Gao Xingjian's experimental dramas are not very mature, but they certainly contribute to the development of creative ideas of modern Chinese playwrights.

Conclusion

So, in our opinion, it is impossible to apply Bakhtin's theory of polyphony to the analysis of dramatic works, and we fully agree with Bakhtin's opinion that "only Dostoevsky can be recognized as the creator of genuine polyphony" ^{[1, p. 23]}.

According to Bakhtin, the polyphony of Dostoevsky's novel is manifested at all its levels: in the great dialogue of the novel as a whole, in the inner dialogue of the hero, in the author's dialogical position in relation to the heroes, in a two-voiced word. It is obvious that in the above-reviewed dramatic works, the voices of the characters do not meet the Bakhtin condition of autonomy.

As a literary and artistic technique, "polyphonism" grew precisely on the basis of "monologism", and it cannot be placed above "monologism": each method has its own merits. Moreover, the heyday of world literature is due to a number of outstanding "monologue" works. Therefore, it is not necessary to try to interpret all the works based on Bakhtin's theory of polyphony.