Empire, Tourism, Nostalgia: Joseph Brodsky and Travel Writing

Joseph Brodsky, one of the most influential Russian intellectuals of the late Soviet period, was born in Leningrad in 1940, emigrated to the United States in 1972, received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1987, and died in New York City in 1996. Brodsky was one of the leading public figures of Soviet emigration in the Cold War period, and his role as a model for the constructing of Russian cultural identities in the last years of the Soviet Union was, and still is, extremely important. One of Joseph Brodsky’s great contributions to Russian culture of the latter half of the twentieth century is the wide geographical scope of his poetic and prose works. Brodsky was not a travel writer, but he was a traveling writer who wrote a considerable number of poems and essays which relate to his trips and travels in the Soviet empire and outside it. Travel writing offered for Brodsky a discursive space for negotiating his own transculturation, while it also offered him a discursive space for making powerful statements about displacement, culture, history and geography, time and space—all major themes of his poetry. In this study of Joseph Brodsky’s travel writing I focus on his travel texts in poetry and prose, which relate to his post-1972 trips to Mexico, Brazil, Turkey, and Venice. Questions of empire, tourism, and nostalgia are foregrounded in one way or another in Brodsky’s travel writing performed in emigration. I explore these concepts through the study of tropes, strategies of identity construction, and the politics of representation. The theoretical premises of my work draw on the literary and cultural criticism which has evolved around the study of travel and travel writing in recent years. These approaches have gained much from the scholarly experience provided by postcolonial critique. Shifting the focus away from the concept of exile, the traditional framework for scholarly discussions of Brodsky’s works, I propose to review Brodsky’s travel poetry and prose as a response not only to his exilic condition but to the postmodern and postcolonial landscape, which initially shaped the writing of these texts. Discussing Brodsky’s travel writing in this context offers previously unexplored perspectives for analyzing the geopolitical, philosophical, and linguistic premises of his poetic imagination. By situating Brodsky’s travel writing in the geopolitical landscape of postcolonial postmodernity, I attempt to show how Brodsky’s engagement with his contemporary cultural practices in the West was incorporated into his Russian-language travel poetry and prose and how this engagement thus contributed to these texts’ status as exceptional and unique literary events within late Soviet Russian cultural practices.

"Four Ways of Writing the City" : St. Petersburg-Leningrad as a Metaphor in the Poetry of Joseph Brodsky

The present study discusses the theme of St. Petersburg-Leningrad in Joseph Brodsky's verse works. The chosen approach to the evolving im-age of the city in Brodsky's poetry is through four metaphors: St. Petersburg as "the common place" of the Petersburg Text, St. Petersburg as "Paradise and/or Hell", St. Petersburg as "a Utopian City" and St. Petersburg as "a Void". This examination of the city-image focusses on the aspects of space and time as basic categories underlying the poet's poetic world view. The method used is close reading, with an emphasis on semantical interpretation. The material consists of eighteen poems dating from 1958 to 1994. Apart from investigating the spatio-temporal features, the study focusses on exposing and analysing the allusions in the scrutinised works to other texts from Russian and Western belles lettres. Terminology (introduced by Bakhtin and Yury Lotman, among others) concerning the poetics of space in literature is employed in the present study. Conceptions originating from the paradigm of possible worlds are also used in elucidating the position of fictional and actual chronotopes and heroes in Brodsky's poetry. Brodsky's image of his native city is imbued with intertextual linkings. Through reminiscences of the "Divine Comedy" and Russian modernists, the city is paralleled with Dante's "lost and accursed" Florence, as well as with the lost St. Petersburg of Mandel'shtam and Akhmatova. His city-image is related to the Petersburg myth in Russian literature through their common themes of death and separation as well as through the merging of actual realia with the fictional worlds of the Petersburg Text. In his later poems, when his view of the city is that of an exiled poet, the city begins to lose its actual world referents, turning into a mental realm which is no longer connected to any particular geographical location or historical time. It is placed outside time. The native city as the homeland in its entirety is replaced by another existence created in language.

"America Would Lose Its Soul" : The Immigration Restriction Debate, 1920-1924

Vuosien 1830 ja 1924 välillä Yhdysvaltoihin muutti noin 35 miljoonaa eurooppalaista. Tämä niinkutsuttu "maahanmuuton vuosisata" päättyi varsin äkillisesti kun Yhdysvallat päätti rajoittaa maahanmuuttoa 1920-luvulla. Vuosina 1921 ja 1924 säädetyt lait asettivat kansallisuuteen perustuvat kiintiöt kaikille eurooppalaisille maahanmuuttajille; vuoden 1924 laki myös lopetti kokonaan japanilaisten maahanmuuton. Tämä työ tutkii näihin kiintiölakeihin johtanutta maahanmuuttajavastaisuuden kasvua sekä etenkin lakien ympärillä käytyä keskustelua. Pääpaino on kongressissa esitetyissä maahanmuuton vastaisissa argumenteissa. Nämä jakautuivat karkeasti ottaen kolmeen kategoriaan: maahanmuuton vastustajat sanoivat, että siirtolaisten vaikutus taloudelliseen tilanteeseen oli epäsuotuisa, siirtolaisten rodullinen ja kulttuurinen "laatu" oli huonontunut, ja siirtolaiset olivat radikaaleja ja bolshevismiin taipuvaisia. Erityistä huolta herätti maahanmuuttajien vaikutus Amerikan kulttuuriseen, rodulliseen ja poliittiseen yhtenäisyyteen. Huoli kansakunnan yhtenäisyydestä oli tulosta paitsi siirtolaisten määrästä myös amerikkalaisessa yhteiskunnassa tapahtuneista muutoksista. Erityisen tärkeitä olivat työväenliikkeen vaikutusvallan kasvu ja teollisuusjohtajien pyrkimys pysäyttää se. Maahanmuuttajien "bolshevismi" olikin käyttökelpoinen argumentti paitsi maahanmuuttajia myös amerikkalaisia työläisiä vastaan: teollisuusjohtajat painottivat että lakot ja työväenliike olivat tulosta siirtolaisten mukanaan tuomista "epäamerikkalaisista" ajatusmalleista, eivät yhteiskunnan epäoikeudenmukaisuudesta. Kongressin keskustelun lisäksi työssä käsitellään myös eri yhteiskunnallisten ryhmien ja vaikuttajien kantaa siirtolaisuuteen. Keskusteluun maahanmuutosta vaikuttivat etenkin eugenistit ja muut sosiaalitieteilijät, jotka väittivät itä- ja eteläeurooppalaisten olevan rodullisesti anglosakseja huonompia. Tämän väitteen vaikutusvaltaa lisäsivät yhteiskunnassa vallalla olleet ennakkoluulot, ja monet yhdistykset ja liikkeet (mm. Ku Klux Klan ja erilaiset isänmaalliset järjestöt) olivatkin tärkeitä rajoittamisen kannattajia. Keskustelu maahanmuutosta painottui ideologisiin ja tunteellisiin kysymyksiin, mutta rajoitusten taustalla oli myös konkreettisempia tekijöitä. Yhteiskunnan teollistuminen ja kaupungistuminen olivat pienentäneet siirtolaisista koituvaa taloudellista hyötyä: siirtolaisia ei enää tarvittu raivaamaan uusia viljelysmaita, kun taas tuotannon koneistuminen vähensi työvoiman tarvetta huomattavasti. Pitkän aikavälin taloudellisten tekijöiden roolin merkitys käy ilmeiseksi kun otetaan huomioon, että muut maahanmuuttomaat (esim. Kanada ja Australia) eivät juuri rajoittaneet siirtolaisuutta tänä aikana vaikka niissäkin esiintyi runsaasti rodullista ja kulttuurista maahanmuuttajavastaisuutta. Pääsyy rajoitusten vähäisyyteen näissä maissa oli juuri maahanmuuttajien tuoma taloudellinen hyöty, sekä teollisena työvoimana että maanviljelijöinä. Vaikka kiintiölakiehdotusten ympärillä käytiin kiivasta väittelyä, kongressi kuitenkin hyväksyi lait varsin suurella enemmistöllä. Siirtolaisia itseään lukuunottamatta varsin harvat näkivät lait haitallisina, kun taas useat erilaiset ryhmät katsoivat hyötyvänsä maahanmuuton rajoittamisesta. Avainsanat: siirtolaisuus, maahanmuutto, Yhdysvallat, 1920-luku, kiintiölait, maahanmuuton rajoittaminen

Conrad Summenhart's theory of individual rights and its medieval background

This study focuses on the theory of individual rights that the German theologian Conrad Summenhart (1455-1502) explicated in his massive work Opus septipartitum de contractibus pro foro conscientiae et theologico. The central question to be studied is: How does Summenhart understand the concept of an individual right and its immediate implications? The basic premiss of this study is that in Opus septipartitum Summenhart composed a comprehensive theory of individual rights as a contribution to the on-going medieval discourse on rights. With this rationale, the first part of the study concentrates on earlier discussions on rights as the background for Summenhart s theory. Special attention is paid to language in which right was defined in terms of power . In the fourteenth century writers like Hervaeus Natalis and William Ockham maintained that right signifies power by which the right-holder can to use material things licitly. It will also be shown how the attempts to describe what is meant by the term right became more specified and cultivated. Gerson followed the implications that the term power had in natural philosophy and attributed rights to animals and other creatures. To secure right as a normative concept, Gerson utilized the ancient ius suum cuique-principle of justice and introduced a definition in which right was seen as derived from justice. The latter part of this study makes effort to reconstructing Summenhart s theory of individual rights in three sections. The first section clarifies Summenhart s discussion of the right of the individual or the concept of an individual right. Summenhart specified Gerson s description of right as power, taking further use of the language of natural philosophy. In this respect, Summenhart s theory managed to bring an end to a particular continuity of thought that was centered upon a view in which right was understood to signify power to licit action. Perhaps the most significant feature of Summenhart s discussion was the way he explicated the implication of liberty that was present in Gerson s language of rights. Summenhart assimilated libertas with the self-mastery or dominion that in the economic context of discussion took the form of (a moderate) self-ownership. Summenhart discussion also introduced two apparent extensions to Gerson s terminology. First, Summenhart classified right as relation, and second, he equated right with dominion. It is distinctive of Summenhart s view that he took action as the primary determinant of right: Everyone has as much rights or dominion in regard to a thing, as much actions it is licit for him to exercise in regard to the thing. The second section elaborates Summenhart s discussion of the species dominion, which delivered an answer to the question of what kind of rights exist, and clarified thereby the implications of the concept of an individual right. The central feature in Summenhart s discussion was his conscious effort to systematize Gerson s language by combining classifications of dominion into a coherent whole. In this respect, his treatement of the natural dominion is emblematic. Summenhart constructed the concept of natural dominion by making use of the concepts of foundation (founded on a natural gift) and law (according to the natural law). In defining natural dominion as dominion founded on a natural gift, Summenhart attributed natural dominion to animals and even to heavenly bodies. In discussing man s natural dominion, Summenhart pointed out that the natural dominion is not sufficiently identified by its foundation, but requires further specification, which Summenhart finds in the idea that natural dominion is appropriate to the subject according to the natural law. This characterization lead him to treat God s dominion as natural dominion. Partly, this was due to Summenhart s specific understanding of the natural law, which made reasonableness as the primary criterion for the natural dominion at the expense of any metaphysical considerations. The third section clarifies Summenhart s discussion of the property rights defined by the positive human law. By delivering an account on juridical property rights Summenhart connected his philosophical and theological theory on rights to the juridical language of his times, and demonstrated that his own language of rights was compatible with current juridical terminology. Summenhart prepared his discussion of property rights with an account of the justification for private property, which gave private property a direct and strong natural law-based justification. Summenhart s discussion of the four property rights usus, usufructus, proprietas, and possession aimed at delivering a detailed report of the usage of these concepts in juridical discourse. His discussion was characterized by extensive use of the juridical source texts, which was more direct and verbal the more his discussion became entangled with the details of juridical doctrine. At the same time he promoted his own language on rights, especially by applying the idea of right as relation. He also showed recognizable effort towards systematizing juridical language related to property rights.

Tiede ja tutkijan sosiaalinen vastuu : Joseph Ben-Davidin, Roger Sperryn ja Knut Erik Tranøyn käsitykset tieteestä ja tutkijan sosiaalisesta vastuusta

Science and the Scientist's Social Responsibility. Joseph Ben-David's, Roger Sperry's and Knut Erik Tranøy's Views of Science and the Scientist's Social Responsibility The aim of the study was to investigate, whether or not there is any connection between Jewish sociologist Joseph Ben-David's, American neuroscientist Roger Sperry's and Norwegian philosopher Knut Erik Tranøy's views of science and views of the scientist's social responsibility. The sources of information were their writings concerning this topic. Ben-David has a classical view of science. He thinks that the Mertonian norms of scientific activity, first written in 1942, are still valid in modern science. With the help of these norms Ben-David defends the view that science is morally neutral. Ben-David thinks that a scientist has a limited social responsibility. A scientist only reports on the new results, but he is not responsible for applying the results. In any case Ben-David's ideas are no longer valid. Sperry has a scientistic view of science. According to Sperry, science is the source of moral norms and also the best guide for moral action. The methods of natural sciences "show" how to solve moral problems. A scientist's personal views of science and social responsibility are not important. However Sperry's view is very problematic on the ethical side. Tranøy stresses the scientist's social responsibility. A scientist has common norms with the society from with he or she comes. This is why a scientist has the right, and also the responsibility, to discuss social and ethical questions between science and society. Tranøy's view has some ethical and practical problems, but it is valid in principle. Finally, Ben-David's, Sperry's and Tranøy's views of both science and the scientist's social responsibility have a connection: the view of science corresponds to the certain view of scientist's social responsibility. The result of this study is: Ben-David's, Sperry's and Tranøy's view of science have an ethical starting point as its fundamental presupposition, which include certain views of scientific knowledge, good and the scientist's ethical responsibilities. The connection between Ben-David's, Sperry's and Tranøy's views of science and views of the scientist's social responsibility means that their views of epistemology, meta-ethics and the scientist's ethical responsibilities have a connection to their views of the scientist's social responsibility. The results of this study can help the scientific community to organize the social responsibility of a scientist and deepen the conversation concerning the scientist's social responsibility.

Joseph A. Schumpeter's Theory of Social and Economic Evolution : a Reconstruction and Critique

The book presents a reconstruction, interpretation and critical evaluation of the Schumpeterian theoretical approach to socio-economic change. The analysis focuses on the problem of social evolution, on the interpretation of the innovation process and business cycles and, finally, on Schumpeter s optimistic neglect of ecological-environmental conditions as possible factors influencing social-economic change. The author investigates how the Schumpeterian approach describes the process of social and economic evolution, and how the logic of transformations is described, explained and understood in the Schumpeterian theory. The material of the study includes Schumpeter s works written after 1925, a related part of the commentary literature on these works, and a selected part of the related literature on the innovation process, technological transformations and the problem of long waves. Concerning the period after 1925, the Schumpeterian oeuvre is conceived and analysed as a more or less homogenous corpus of texts. The book is divided into 9 chapters. Chapters 1-2 describe the research problems and methods. Chapter 3 is an effort to provide a systematic reconstruction of Schumpeter's ideas concerning social and economic evolution. Chapters 4 and 5 focus their analysis on the innovation process. In Chapters 6 and 7 Schumpeter's theory of business cycles is examined. Chapter 8 evaluates Schumpeter's views concerning his relative neglect of ecological-environmental conditions as possible factors influencing social-economic change. Finally, chapter 9 draws the main conclusions.

Arvoja näkyvissä : Kaunokirjallisuuden etiikka Ludwig Wittgensteinin filosofian valossa

The goal of this dissertation was to study whether it is possible and meaningful to apply Ludwig Wittgenstein s distinction between saying (Sagen) and showing (Zeigen) to ethically oriented literary criticism. The following questions were used as the primary guidelines: 1. Is it possible, in the context of literary criticism, to put in practice Wittgenstein s ethical conceptions, which are quite theoretical and metaphysical by nature? 2. If so, what practical literary devices do authors use if they want to demonstrate their ethical values within the frame of a fictional work? 3. Does philosophy offer useful ethical consepts that open us new and interesting readings in fiction? The philosophical background of Wittgenstein s distinction is clarified in chapter I. This clarification is based on his main works, Tractatus logico-philosophicus and Philosophishe Untersuchungen, the published correspondence between Wittgenstein and Paul Engelmann, and selected Wittgenstein research and papers. Analyzing ethics and it s expression in Georg Trakl s poetry further elucidates Wittgenstein s concept of showing. The concept that a literary work is an act of an author was used as a starting point. The presumption was that analyzing this act of an author will reveal how ethical values can be demonstrated in literature. Categorizing an author s act at different levels of literary expression provides the structure of this study. In chapters IV - XIII literary devices useful for demonstrating ethics are examined and explained using examples from the works of Joseph Conrad, Charles Dickens, Nikolay Leskov, Ludwig Uhland, Eino Leino, Pentti Haanpää and Maria Jotuni. The concepts and views of researchers and writers such as Mihail Bahtin, Peter Juhl, E. D. Hirsch, Peter Lamarque and Stein Haugom Olsen are used. The concepts outlined in previous chapters are then applied in three case studies: Aeschylus s Oresteia trilogy, J-L. Runeberg s poem Sven Dufva and Sofi Oksanen s novel Puhdistus (Purge). On the whole, Wittgenstein s idea that ethical values can be demonstrated (shown) by means of literature is revealed as a fruitful point of departure for a more exact ethical reading, offering a new perspective on literary works.