Rossijskaja Karelija i karely v imperskoi politike Rossii, 1905-1917

Russian Karelians were one of the small peasant nations of the Russian Empire that began to identify themselves as nations during the late imperial period. At that historical moment Russian Karelia fell between an economically undeveloped empire and the rapidly modernizing borderland of Finland. The economic and cultural lure of Finland drew Karelians into the Finnish camp. This attraction was seen as a challenge to Russia and influenced the straggle between Russia and Finland for the Karelians. This struggle was waged from 1905 to 1917. This work is focused on the beginning stage of the struggle, its various phases, and their results. The confrontation extended into different dimensions (economic, political, ideological, church and cultural politics) and occurred on two levels: central and regional. Countermeasures against local nationalisms developed much earlier both in Russia and in other empires for use were also used in the Russian Karelian case. Economic policies were deployed to try to make relations with Russia more alluring for Karelians and to improve their economic condition. However, these efforts produced only minimal results due to the economic weakness of the empire and a lack of finances. Fear of the economic integration of the Karelians and Finns, which would have stimulated the economy of the Karelia, also hindered these attempts. The further development of the Orthodox Church, the schools and the zemstvos in Karelia yielded fewer results than expected due to the economic underdevelopment of the region and the avoidance of the Finnish language. Policizing measures were the most successfull, as all activities in Russian Karelia by the Finns were entirely halted in practice. However, the aspiration of Russian Karelians to integrate their home districts with Finland remained a latent force that just waited for an opportunity to push to the surface again. Such a chance materialized with the Russian revolution. The Karelian question was also a part of Russian domestic political confrontation. At the and of the 1800s, the Russian nationalist right had grown strong and increasingly gained the favor of the autocracy. The right political forces exploited the Karelian question in its anti-Finnish ideology and in its general resistance to the national emancipation of the minority peoples of Russia. A separate ideology was developed, focusing on the closeness of Karelians to the "great Russian people." Simultaneously, this concept found a place in the ultramonarchist myth of the particularly close connection between the people and tsar that was prominent in the era of Nicholas II. This myth assigned the Karelians a place amongst the "simple people" faithful to the tsar.

Double-Edged Imitation : Theories and Practices of Pastiche in Literature

This study concentrates on the contested concept of pastiche in literary studies. It offers the first detailed examination of the history of the concept from its origins in the seventeenth century to the present, showing how pastiche emerged as a critical concept in interaction with the emerging conception of authorial originality and the copyright laws protecting it. One of the key results of this investigation is the contextualisation of the postmodern debate on pastiche. Even though postmodern critics often emphasise the radical novelty of pastiche, they in fact resuscitate older positions and arguments without necessarily reflecting on their historical conditions. This historical background is then used to analyse the distinction between the primarily French conception of pastiche as the imitation of style and the postmodern notion of it as the compilation of different elements. The latter s vagueness and inclusiveness detracts from its value as a critical concept. The study thus concentrates on the notion of stylistic pastiche, challenging the widespread prejudice that it is merely an indication of lack of talent. Because it is multiply based on repetition, pastiche is in fact a highly ambiguous or double-edged practice that calls into question the distinction between repetition and original, thereby undermining the received notion of individual unique authorship as a fundamental aesthetic value. Pastiche does not, however, constitute a radical upheaval of the basic assumptions on which the present institution of literature relies, since, in order to mark its difference, pastiche always refers to a source outside itself against which its difference is measured. Finally, the theoretical analysis of pastiche is applied to literary works. The pastiches written by Marcel Proust demonstrate how it can become an integral part of a writer s poetics: imitation of style is shown to provide Proust with a way of exploring the role of style as a connecting point between inner vision and reality. The pastiches of the Sherlock Holmes stories by Michael Dibdin, Nicholas Meyer and the duo Adrian Conan Doyle and John Dickson Carr illustrate the functions of pastiche within a genre detective fiction that is itself fundamentally repetitive. A.S. Byatt s Possession and D.M. Thomas s Charlotte use Victorian pastiches to investigate the conditions of literary creation in the age of postmodern suspicion of creativity and individuality. The study thus argues that the concept of pastiche has valuable insights to offer to literary criticism and theory, and that literary pastiches, though often dismissed in reviews and criticism, are a particularly interesting object of study precisely because of their characteristic ambiguity.