Mythopoetics of the hero's image in the novels of A. A. Astvatsaturov.

Khabirov Kirill Aleksandrovich ORCID: 0000-0002-8812-9073 Postgraduate student; Department of Linguistics and Literary Studies; Magnitogorsk State Technical University named after G. I. Nosov 38 Lenin ave., Magnitogorsk, Chelyabinsk Region, 455000, Russia, xvbirow@gmail.com

Rudakova Svetlana Viktorovna ORCID: 0000-0001-8378-061X Doctor of Philology Professor, Department of Linguistics and Literature, Nosov Magnitogorsk State Technical University 455000, Russia, Chelyabinsk region, Magnitogorsk, Lenin str., 38 rudakovamasu@mail.ru Other publications by this author

Introduction

In recent decades, the interest of researchers in the myth has increased. Myth is studied at the intersection of anthropology, cultural studies, psychoanalysis, philosophy and literary studies ^[13],[17]. The psychoanalytic interpretations of C. G. Jung ^[35] and his followers, who use his theory both in the field of psychoanalysis and in the study of mythological systems, are still relevant ^[26],[28].

A number of researchers are studying issues of mythological communication ^{[15],[27],[34],[33]}, It is based on a special "trust/distrust" code that can determine the structure of any social and cultural system ^[16]. Myth is considered a tool of conscious influence, while the communication space becomes mythological ^[27],[34], and myth acquires strength and power, implements its own logic and causal relationships ^[15].

Modern research also concerns the interaction of myth and new media, analyzing how myths are adapted and reinterpreted in digital culture: in films, computer games, Internet narratives and memes ^[32],[42].

The article reveals a tendency towards a multilevel dialogue between literature and myth, not so much as a source of plot schemes, but as a tool for forming new meanings in a postmodern, as well as post-secular cultural situation. In a number of works ^[36],[43], attention is focused on the process of remythologization: it is shown that modern writers do not just exploit myth, but paradoxically "return" myth to reality, creating new forms of sacralization through irony, parody of classical plots. Modern philologists analyze myths not only as a given of the classical tradition, but also as a living, flexible narrative that can be deconstructed, transformed and adapted in new cultural and social contexts. ^{[1],[4],[7],[8],[9],[31],[39],[40]}, show how myths are used to form (or destroy) collective and/or individual identity and memory ^{[24],[37],[38]}.

Modern research on myth focuses on its functional plasticity, interactivity, and the possibility of integration into new mediums and cultural contexts. In general, the myth is perceived not so much as a relic, but as a "living" means of artistic modeling, potentially capable of being a tool for critical, creative and therapeutic strategies.

Rethinking mythological archetypes is becoming relevant in the context of a metamodern cultural paradigm, in which the boundaries between serious and ironic, sacred and profane, stable and fragmented are blurring, and there is a shift from classical mythologism to new forms of mythopoeic writing focused on both deconstruction and reconfiguration of the lost semantic space.

Andrey Alekseevich Astvatsaturov is a writer, literary critic, translator and cultural figure, whose work occupies a special place in modern Russian prose. His name is well known in academic circles, and his works of art are valued for their intellectual richness, stylistic accuracy, and ironic reflection on cultural heritage (both domestic and Western).

An analysis of the research devoted to the work of A. A. Astvatsaturov suggests a growing interest in the work of this novelist of post-Soviet Russia. There is a marked tendency to consider the author's idiostylistics and language experiments of A. A. Astvatsaturov. T. O. Musatova ^[19],[20], F. F. Panteleeva ^[23], and J. Marcucci ^[41] explore various levels of language play in Astvatsaturov's texts, from phonetic and grammatical to lexical and word–formation. Special attention is paid to puns, accidents, the use of ambiguity, game semantics and the convergence of different levels of language structure. ^{[19],[20],[23]}. These works allow us to judge the high degree of linguistic creativity of Astvatsaturov's prose, the layering of his texts and the specifics of the author's style, close to postmodern strategies.

A number of studies are devoted to the study of genre and compositional features of A. A. Astvatsaturov's prose, primarily his autofixing practice. The articles by M. A. Serkina, A. S. Podkovalnikova ^[29] and A. D. Belogortsev ^[5] consider the specifics of Astvatsaturov's novels, in particular his works "People in the Nude": they note the complex composition, the combination of sketches and lyrical reflections, the organic combination of autobiographical and artistically fictional beginnings (pseudo-autobiography/autofiction). D. Belogortsev places Astvatsaturov's work in a wide context of genre experiments in new Russian and foreign prose, noting the author's analytical approach to the use of autofiction in his works ^[5].

Another notable trend in the research of A. A. Astvatsaturov's prose is the analysis of the characteristics of his character and the specifics of the narrative. Thus, P. V. Sokolova examines the features of Astvatsaturov's main characters, reveals their connection with the type of "little man", analyzing the transformations of this type in the conditions of the late Soviet and post-Soviet times ^[30]. B. V. Kovalev and A. P. Zhukov compare the methods of describing the "alienated person", the landscape, interpersonal relationships and communication in the novel by A. A. Astvatsaturov "Do not feed and do not touch the pelicans" (2019) and in the work of the Uruguayan novelist H. K. Onetti "Short Life" ^[12]. M. T. Nasr examines the work of A. A. Astvatsaturova in the context of the Russian intellectual novel of the XXI century, noting that the work "Do not feed and do not touch the pelicans" turns out to be at the junction of postmodernism and digimodernism. It is M. T. Nasr who draws attention in his research to the features of A. A. Astvatsaturov's narrative model – conceptuality, myth-making and active involvement of the reader in the game with the text ^[21].

It is possible to note the interest of researchers in internal dialogue as the most important element of the narrative structure of the novels of A. A. Astvatsaturov and his contemporaries. Pelevina, M. Elizarova) ^[22].

There is an obvious tendency to create scientific works that take into account the "borderline" of A. A. Astvatsaturov's work between postmodernism and new literary trends, as well as to interpret his texts as examples of vivid intellectual prose in which artistic play is combined with a cultural and philosophical understanding of reality.

In the novels of A. A. Astvatsaturov, mythological symbolism is manifested in hidden structures and ironic allusions. The heroes of his novels are characters devoid of the traditional heroic aura, living in the space of a cultural rift: between the memory of the great and the feeling of everyday triviality.

In recent decades, the mythopoeic method has been actively used in the analysis of works in which mythology serves not so much as a narrative tool as a way of understanding the existential and socio-cultural problems of our time. The purpose of our work is to identify the features of rethinking and integrating ancient mythologies into the modern Russian novel, and to examine how the myths of Sisyphus and Odysseus, devoid of traditional heroic pathos, acquire new philosophical and existential meanings through the author's ironic and humorous distancing. One of the important tasks of the research is to find out how a new mythopoetics is formed through humor, irony and literary play.

Mythopoetics is viewed ambiguously in modern philology. On the one hand, this concept is used to denote a specific subject of study – various manifestations of the mythological, archetypal in works of art (plot, motifs, images, etc.). On the other hand, the term mythopoetics defines one of the popular methods of philological analysis used to study the embodiment of myth (and its components) in a work of fiction. In our work, we will use the concept of mythopoetics, taking into account both interpretations.

A. A. Astvatsaturov is one of the brightest writers of modern literature, actively working with the mythological component. In his works, mythological symbolism is presented implicitly, it is hidden behind the actions of the characters. This allows us to consider Astvatsaturov's novels in line with the mythopoeic approach.

The history of mythopoetics in Russia dates back to the 1930s. V. J. Propp became the researcher who laid the foundations of mythopoetics in Russian-language science ^[25]. His works, in particular the book "Morphology of a Fairy Tale" (1928), where he proposed a method for analyzing mythological elements through the structure of folk tales, became an important stage in the study of the structure of myth. Propp's approach to the analysis of mythologized plots has shown an impact on further studies of the mythological structure. In Western literature, mythopoetics gained popularity in the 1960s and 1970s, when researchers began to pay attention to myth as a key element of post-structuralist and postmodern literature. One of the significant representatives of Western mythopoetics was K. Levi-Strauss, whose works on the structural analysis of myth ("Structural Anthropology", ^[15] "Primitive Thinking" ^[14]) influenced the development of mythopoetics in literary theory. K. Levi-Strauss considered myth to be the "language" of culture, which is based on certain structural principles and the unconscious mechanisms through which a person perceives the world.

E. M. Meletinsky, reflecting on mythopoetics, noted that myth and mythological consciousness have their own logic, which goes beyond the rationalistic approach and is not limited only to the historical context ^{[17, p. 442]}. Mythopoetics, according to this scientist, has something that goes beyond the purely historical or cultural perception of myth, and this element has a "positive meaning", it is not only necessary for the study of myths, but also helps to better understand their impact on human consciousness and culture.

Interest in mythopoetics is also associated with a growing attention to the unique processing of mythological images in a changing cultural paradigm. Traditionally, myths are perceived as immutable archaic structures, as the basis of human culture, but in recent decades, as postmodernism has been replaced by metamodernism, mythology has begun to play a different role. Mythopoetics, having ceased to be a tool for analyzing the past, has become an active means of understanding new existential and socio-cultural problems. Mythologems adapted to modernity are becoming dynamic, which opens up new horizons for their research in literary studies.

Materials and methods

To analyze the works of A. A. Astvatsaturov, primarily their mythopoeic structure, the mythopoeic method, the method of descriptive analysis and the method of generalization were used.

The mythopoeic method is focused on analyzing the functioning of myths in a modern work, their transformation in the context of metamodernism and allows us to detect the influence of myths on the plot and symbolic structure of a literary text, as well as consider them as dynamic, changing elements capable of adapting to new cultural and philosophical contexts. In this work, the mythopoetic method allows us to analyze the features of A. A. Astvatsaturov's work with the myths of Sisyphus and Odysseus, and these mythological heroes are considered as images that combine with new meanings reflecting the experiences and aspirations of modern man.

In addition, classical methods were used in the work – the method of descriptive analysis and the method of generalization. The complex application of these methods makes it possible not only to study mythological images and motifs, but also to penetrate into the deeper layers of the text, revealing the hidden meanings of the works of A. A. Astvatsaturov.

1. The Modern Odyssey

One of the key mythological images reinterpreted by A. A. Astvatsaturov in his literary practice is Odysseus, a hero whose travels and returns have traditionally been viewed as a metaphor for human destiny and the search for meaning in life. In the works of A. A. Astvatsaturov, the image of Odysseus acquires a new postmodern perspective, going beyond the traditional mythological context.

The classic Odysseus is a hero striving to return home after long wanderings, each of his trials serves as a metaphor for the human struggle with external and internal forces ^{[18, II, pp. 243-246]}. In Astvatsaturov, the image of Odysseus transforms into a character for whom travel and return lose their heroic pathos and become part of everyday life. The modern Odysseus in Astvatsaturov's works is a man who does not need to look for his home in the physical sense, his "home" has already been found, and all travel serves, rather, to maintain stability and comfort. Instead of striving for epic achievements, Astvatsaturov's hero finds himself absorbed in the need to repeat daily rituals, a kind of "business trips". These rituals realize a peculiar profane aspect of myth, in which the epic gives way to repetition as a mechanism for maintaining identity.

The main character of the novel "Skunskammer", like a new Odyssey, sets off, but not on a journey by sea, but into the labyrinths of his own home, family history and the urban topography of St. Petersburg-Leningrad. His odyssey is not a journey home, but an attempt to sort himself out, to find his "homeland", his foundation, in a fragmented world devoid of a single center of meaning, which reflects the postmodern deconstruction of classical myth.

The story of Odyssey Astvatsaturov becomes a narrative not about struggle and overcoming, but about how a person can peacefully coexist with his familiar environment. In this case, the hero's journey is not liberation or gaining new meaning, but the need to maintain the current state, a kind of ritual that may not have a great purpose, but provides emotional comfort and stability. This approach to rethinking the mythological hero makes it possible to understand the irony in Astvatsaturov's work, which forces the reader to perceive the myth of search and return as an absurd but necessary continuation of everyday life, devoid of tragedy and heroism, but imbued with reflection on the place of man in this world.

Combining serious mythological themes with irony allows the writer to present ancient myths in a new light. Characters who used to embody fear, alienation, and tragedy are becoming part of everyday life, and their appearance in the text is accompanied by irony: "Meanwhile, the homeless man stands next to him and begins to sway back and forth, seemingly not really knowing what he wants here. Finally, he says in a drunken, floaty voice:

– Hey, bro, can you help me with a little something?

"I don't have any money,– I reply.

The homeless man stands, sways. For some reason, he doesn't leave. And suddenly he suddenly speaks out:

– We have to work! To work! Got it?! – He spits angrily into the dark water, and, staggering, begins to move towards the Palace Bridge" ^{[2, p. 61]}.

It is important that Astvatsaturov is characterized not by borrowing individual fragments of myths, but by reinterpreting them through irony, which becomes a specific feature of both his artistic method and philosophical approach. The main character of the novel "Skunskammer" has an unusual view of the world, which has an ironic explanation, because he wears a "special" helmet on his head: "Aha, a helmet," his father confirmed, "the helmet of the king of heaven berk" ^{[3, p. 202]}. The author deliberately parodies and modernizes the motives of the odyssey: long walks through the streets of the city, memories of various situations that happened to the hero or his friends, relatives become an analogue of Odyssey's sea voyages and trials. But instead of gods and monsters, strange people, absurd circumstances, curiosities and everyday difficulties of the city appear in the story of modern Odyssey. The world around the hero is an "island" of memory, a kind of museification, but at the same time it is a field for constructing personal mythology. The journey is reproduced in an ironic way, the main motif of the ancient myth of Odyssey – "nostos" (in Greek, return home) – turns into a motif of constant search and reflection on "home", and the hero's story is transformed into a kind of intellectual "quest": Odysseus Astvatsaturova is a kind of collector of cultural texts, fragmentary memories, references and quotations that add up to an endless "odyssey" of a postmodern personality, which must be reconstructed by a trained reader.

The main character of Astvatsaturov does not seek to escape from his reality and return to his "Ithaca", as, for example, the classic hero of the myth does, but, on the contrary, perceives each "trip" (business trip) as a necessary condition for maintaining the usual order. It can be argued that the hero of A. A. Astvatsaturov does not like traveling, they harm him, and the words of I. Brodsky from the poem "Landscape with a Flood" – "do not leave the room, do not make a mistake" - become his life principle ^{[6, p. 561]}. When he does leave his usual space, he feels empty: "You can't trust the thoughts that come to mind when you're locked up. That's what Lucy said. But I've never had any others. And if I had to leave the house, my head immediately went blank" ^{[3, p. 9]}. For this hero, the familiar is a sign of stability in life.

The main character of the novel "Skunskammer" does not perform feats, does not fight in the name of higher ideals, does not stand out with a pronounced will to act. This is not a hero-doer, this is a hero-observer, reflecting, mocking himself, his value is manifested not in the ability to transform the world, but in the ability to critically perceive and doubt.

The German friend of the main character of the novel "Skunskammer", whose name is Tom, turns out to be more connected with the stereotypical mythological image of Odysseus than the main character himself: "Sasha! You see, yesterday I decided to go to Magnitogorsk! – To Magnitogorsk? "Vanin clarified without any interest" ^{[3, p. 50]}; "You understand," Tom hastily explained. "Yesterday I was opening the atlas of Russia, and the word Magnitogorsk caught my eye. And I feel it pulling me like a magnet" ^{[3, p. 50]}.

In the novel "Autumn in Pockets," the narrative is structured as a "journey through the labyrinths of memory," where the main thing is not the external surroundings, but the inner experiences and memories of the hero. This journey resembles an "Odyssey", but "returning home" here turns into a metaphor for "returning" to oneself, childhood, and cultural roots. The hero of the novel, Alexander, finds himself in the space between the past and the present, between modern St. Petersburg and his hometown, like Odysseus between Troy and Ithaca, but this journey is physical and mental, it is ironically distanced, connected with repeated attempts of self-discovery of the hero.

Astvatsaturov consciously deconstructs the myth of Odysseus in Autumn in his Pockets: the hero of his novel often quotes classical texts, mocks the traditional image of Odysseus, perceived as a universal symbol of "eternal return" and a nomad hero, revising its meaning in modern realities. The author's postmodern irony is manifested in the fact that his modern Odyssey becomes not so much a hero or even an antihero as a hero-text, a kind of palimpsest of cultural allusions. The space of the novel "Autumn in Pockets" is filled with scattered fragments of memories, individual quotations, cultural references, all this creates the feeling that the hero is returning not to "Ithaca", but to a kind of museum of his own past, where objects and images have lost their former integrity and meaning. And here the motive of the hero's "return" turns out to be connected with the motive of the endless reassembling of the identity model from cultural and personal "fragments". The modern Odysseus ceases to be a hero of overcoming, becoming a figure associated with loss. This hero's life path is wandering among texts and things, his way home turns into an ironic dream or even into a memory of it.

In the works of A. A. Astvatsaturov, as in other texts of postmodern prose, attention is fixed on the hero reflecting and mocking himself, and this shows his correspondence to time. He does not perform feats in the traditional sense, and his actions are often minimal or nonexistent. This hero survives in chaos, retains his individuality in the flow of signs and information noise; for him, unlike the classic Odyssey, the main thing is not action, not a feat, but the search for meaning, the interpretation of what he and others have done. However, it is precisely in this passivity, unhurried reflection, and special sensitivity to language, history, and memory that a new type of heroism manifests itself – the heroism of resistance to superficiality, banality, and ideological automatism. The myth of the Odyssey in A. A. Astvatsaturov becomes an instrument of ironic reflection and postmodern play: the mythological hero, introduced by the author into the modern space, does not literally return home, but endlessly reconstructs his identity, sorting through cultural and personal "souvenirs" of the past. The return loses its heroic meaning, acquiring the character of a certain cultural gesture, which is an attempt to reassemble itself from fragments of a large narrative.

2. Rethinking the image of Sisyphus

The mythological image of Sisyphus, traditionally symbolizing meaningless, endless labor, is undergoing significant changes in the works of A. A. Astvatsaturov. In classical mythology, Sisyphus was punished for his cunning by having to forever push a stone up a mountain, from where it constantly rolled down, preventing the hero from reaching his goal. The image of Sisyphus and his punishments are vividly described by Homer in his poem The Odyssey: "I also saw Sisyphus being executed with a terrible punishment: / He dragged a heavy stone from below with both hands / uphill; straining his muscles, resting his feet on the ground, / He moved the stone upward; but he barely reached the top / With a heavy burden, driven back by an invisible force, A deceptive stone rolled down the mountain onto the plain / He tried to lift the weight again, straining his muscles, His body sweating, his head covered with black dust ^{[10, p. 178]}.

This myth of futility of effort and cyclical punishment was perceived as a metaphor for the absurdity of human existence. In the works of A. A. Astvatsaturov, the myth of Sisyphus acquires new semantic shades, going beyond the traditional perception of suffering and meaningless labor. Of course, Astvatsaturov also takes into account the interpretation of this myth, which was reinterpreted by A. Camus ^[11].

Camus in his work "The Myth of Sisyphus" considers Sisyphus as a symbol of human destiny, doomed to an eternal, senseless struggle with fate. Camus' hero realizes the absurdity of his existence, but does not capitulate to it, but accepts it and finds a certain freedom in this acceptance.

A. A. Astvatsaturov, inheriting this concept, endows his characters with similar features. They face the meaninglessness and chaos of the world around them, but they do not despair, but continue to act, looking for meaning, even in what they are doing. Unlike Camus, who presented the story of Sisyphus as a tragedy, Astvatsaturov fills Sisyphus' work with postmodern humor and self-irony. Sisyphean labor is no longer interpreted as punishment or a manifestation of meaninglessness. This is no longer a symbol of fruitless efforts, such work turns into a metaphor for stability and the need to maintain the usual order. For Astvatsaturov's characters, whose lives are a series of routine actions and daily responsibilities, Sisyphus' work becomes not something that must be overcome or eliminated, but something that supports the system of existence. The reinterpreted image of Sisyphus symbolizes not so much the absurdity of human efforts as the need for repetitive actions that create predictability in life.

The image of modern Sisyphus is most expressively represented in the novel Skunskamera, saturated with intertextuality and an ironic reinterpretation of traditional narratives. The myth of Sisyphus takes on a special meaning: the story is told on behalf of the hero, who is immersed in repetitive, seemingly meaningless rituals and actions devoid of visible results.: "Memories are usually given to me through force. Of course, I scatter letters with beads on pieces of paper, try to run, staying in place, and even fly away in my imagination towards the receding horizon, closed by typical buildings. But I stop too often and return to the present" ^{[3, p. 42]}. It is this "present" – one's own existence – that becomes the "stone" that returns the hero to his starting point over and over again, without giving him the opportunity to move on. The specifics of this existential struggle are reflected in the remark: "The present holds me very tenaciously, like a porn actor holds a porn actress, and it will never let me go" ^{[3, p. 42]}. The hero uses an ironic metaphor, emphasizing the meaninglessness of what is happening to him. There is a turning of the myth, which simultaneously marks a shift in existential optics and introduces irony in relation to established ideas.

In the novel "Autumn in Pockets" ^[2] by A. A. Astvatsaturov, the myth of Sisyphus is refracted through the prism of a postmodern worldview, where the themes of the absurdity of everyday life, the repeatability of life experience, and irony towards universal meanings become central. The hero of the novel, in his relentless struggle with the commonplace, is like Sisyphus. He fills his daily routine with reflection, self–irony, and pays attention to details (whether it's an autumn rain, an old sweater, or a ridiculous situation), turning the familiar into a subject of philosophical reflection - this is the path of modern Sisyphus. An important feature of Astvatsaturov's interpretation of the myth is the rejection of tragic and heroic pathos. The hero of the novel seeks not to overcome the absurdity of life through rebellion, but to come to terms with it, to see the source of personal meaning in the constancy of rituals.

In A. A. Astvatsaturov, Sisyphean labor ceases to serve as a tragic symbol of destruction and frustration. Instead, it turns into a kind of ritual, which, despite its cyclicity and repetition, ensures the stability of the hero's inner world and even a semblance of some kind of harmony. It's not about striving to free oneself from repetitive actions, but about recognizing their importance in maintaining the stability that makes the hero see meaning and value in his daily routine. Through this view of the myth of Sisyphus, Astvatsaturov opens up new horizons in understanding how a person can find meaning in the stability and ordinariness of his world, without changing it, but accepting it for what it is.

3. Ironic interpretation of duality

The theme of duality occupies a significant place in mythological thinking, acting as a universal way of expressing the ambivalence of human nature and ontological ideas about the world. Within the framework of mythopoetics, the figure of the doppelganger serves not only as a symbol of internal division, but also as an expression of deeper cultural and metaphysical meanings related to the nature of subjectivity, death, shadow, soul, and the boundaries of identity.

One of the most ancient and stable mythological representations is the idea of a doppelganger as a soul substance accompanying a person. In the Egyptian religious system, the figure of Ka (the spiritual double) was perceived as an entity inextricably linked with a person during life and continuing his existence after death ^{[18, II, p. 602]}. Similar views are found in the Greco-Roman culture, where the souls of the dead, residing in the underworld, retained recognizable features of a lifetime personality, being at the same time "others" and "their own". This paradoxical correlation of "I" and "not–I" is found both in ritual practices and in narratives, where the appearance of a shadow, reflection, or astral double is associated with a transition into otherness or a harbinger of fateful events.

In the myths of the Northern European tradition, for example, the idea of a doppelganger as an ominous symbol is particularly clearly traced. Thus, in Scandinavian mythology, the image of fylgja, a spiritual companion who takes the form of an animal or a human, anticipates tragic turns of fate, including death. The appearance of such a double in visions or dreams disrupts the order, introducing into the narrative an alarming element of instability and predestination. In A. A. Astvatsaturov, the theme of duality, like others, is conducted through the prism of bitter harsh irony.: "My parents called the red-haired butcher who worked in our grocery store "Osei Brodsky." No one knew his real name, but my mother once said at lunch that the butcher in the store on Torez was "just like Osya Brodsky." And the father, chuckling, agreed with her. Calling the butcher "Osei Brodsky" has become something self–evident in our house" ^{[3, p. 56]}.

Humorous forms of duality, including parody doubles, represent an important layer of mythopoetics, in which the classical idea of duality is transformed through the prism of irony, grotesque and comic inconsistency. The appearance of such characters is due not so much to an ontological fear of "otherness" or death, as to a game with cultural archetypes, their demythologization and symbolic devaluation. This approach is especially typical for literary and cultural systems prone to postmodern dilution of sacred meanings.

A parody double, unlike a tragic or sinister one, performs a different function: it exposes the conventionality of cultural and literary codes, reveals the template of heroic myths, destroys pathos, replacing it with everyday, sometimes absurd or comic realities. This is especially evident in modern literature, where traditional mythological plots and images (Odysseus, Sisyphus, Hercules, Prometheus, etc.) receive unexpected, often reduced or everyday incarnations.

A similar thing happens in the prose of A. A. Astvatsaturov. The parody hero in his works may be the same "traveler" as Odysseus, but his wanderings are limited to a business trip or a trip to the supermarket, thereby breaking the heroic vertical and creating the horizontal of everyday life (irony replaces the pathos of tragedy). A parody hero may look like Sisyphus, but the hero himself ceases to be perceived as tragic – all his actions resemble a series of algorithms, creating the effect of stability.

It is important to emphasize that parody doubling does not destroy the myth, but it does not just copy it.: it enters into a dialogue with him. In such texts, mythology is preserved as a cultural layer, but it is no longer dogmatic, but plastic, ironic, malleable. A parody double is a way of revealing not only the discrepancy between myth and reality, but also the very mechanism of myth–making, its vulnerabilities and internal contradictions.

Humorous doppelgangers are not just elements of the comic, but full–fledged participants in the mythopoeic process. They contribute to the transformation of myth, revealing its fluid nature, opening up a space for critical reflection and at the same time allowing you to maintain a connection with mythological thinking through humor, play and cultural self-irony.

In the novel Skunskammer, mythopoetics takes on a post-ironic rather than an archaic form. Humorous interpretation of cultural symbols does not destroy them, but only indicates their continued influence in a modified form. Through a series of microepisodes, A. A. Astvatsaturov creates a special mythology of memory, in which irony becomes an instrument of emotional distancing and at the same time a way to preserve the cultural code in a new, adapted form.

Conclusion

Mythological images in the works of A. A. Astvatsaturov acquire new, often ironic meanings, becoming metaphors of stability, comfort, and the usual order in life. The answer to the question of why reality appears in such an ironic mythological context is given by the hero himself: "Everything, not only our house, everything has become clownish, ridiculous, ridiculous – from bottles to members of parliament. Everyone except the clowns themselves, except paid satirists and comedians. These people suddenly got bored, for some reason they began to give the impression of being stupid people, although before, in Soviet times, they seemed very smart" ^{[3, p. 79]}.

The hero of A. A. Astvatsaturov notices that even professional satirists have become unbearably boring – and this becomes the key point: in conditions of total control, clowning and irony cease to fulfill their function. Where laughter used to be liberation or exposure, it is now unable to separate lies from the truth because all categories are mixed up. This is the essence of existential anxiety: one cannot believe, laugh, or resist, because the very possibility of discrimination has disappeared. The anxiety present is a reaction to the disintegration of symbolic reality, to the loss of distinction between the sacred and profane, between pathos and farce. In Soviet times, there were frameworks, albeit rigidly ideologized, but they created a myth structure in which the hero could function, even in opposition. After the disintegration, only the decomposition of symbols remains. And this does not cause laughter, but gives rise to heavy irony – one of the most stable mythopoeic registers of the post-Soviet novel.

Symbolism, directly or indirectly related to myths, is integrated into an ironic context. Due to this, a special perception of the various semantic layers of the work is set: "I remember the inscription "GLORY TO THE FRIENDSHIP OF PEOPLES!“on a huge shield, stuck, as I wanted to believe then, by the hand of some kind giant owner near the sidewalk on Maurice Thorez Avenue. Once, when I was seven years old, my parents took my friend Archie and me out for a walk. We all went out onto the avenue, and Archie's father, pointing with his thumb at the sign, said to my dad: – Lenya, pay attention! Wherever we extend the hand of friendship, people necessarily extend their legs" ^{[3, p. 26]}. What should seem to indicate the death of a myth – an attempt to ridicule, make it less significant – actually has a different effect.

The myth of Sisyphus loses its tragic component, turning into a metaphor of stability, repetitive actions are seen as a process that ensures not destruction, but harmony and predictability in the hero's life. The myth of Odyssey, according to Astvatsaturov, is transformed from a story based on the desire to discover new things into a symbol of ordinary everyday life, where travel and return are not a search for meaning, but rituals that maintain stability. Rethinking is connected not so much with the destruction of myths, but rather with their adaptation to a new cultural reality, in which heroism gives way to reflection, and feats to habit. This approach to myth allows the author not only to comprehend myths as universal cultural codes, but also to adapt them to a metamodern context. Through humor, irony and reinterpretation of classical images, the author shows how myths continue to live and change forms, opening up new horizons for understanding human reality and identity.