Issues of civilizational and cultural processes in the context of modern globalization are currently almost the most relevant. They range from a changing form of democracy and citizen participation in governance to issues related to “just war” and humane intervention, problems associated with empire and postcolonialism. Globalization is the historical process of transforming the world into a single system with unified characteristics. The essence and prospects of globalization are evaluated abroad very ambiguously. According to the transformists, globalization is deeply transforming world politics, state power and society. Modernity originally arose from colonialism in the same way as civilization itself, even at a more fundamental level, arose from the idea of pre-mining. Some would like to forget about this key moment of conquest — or “surpass” it, as Enrique Dussel does, suggesting an easy pseudo-solution to the problem through the “New Trans-Modernity” Discovery of the Two Americas. A similar trick is also done by Scott Lash in his book “Other Modernity: Different Rationality” — a completely absurd title, if you take into account his commitment to the world of technoculture. Another forced failure is the book “Alternative Modernity”, in which Andrew Finberg remarks that “technology is not any specific value that a person chooses or does not choose, but only a challenge that encourages development and an infinite number of worlds". New civilization processes of globalization are changing the parameters of the relationship between the North Caucasus national culture and literature and the world.
Keywords: Globalization and culturemother tongueethnicity
So, the world is divided into globalists and anti-globalists.
A new concept has emerged that is sometimes called the global politics of a global society (Axford, 2005). This world policy is based on uniting the world into a completely open political field with some relatively closed internal enclaves, while humanity as a whole is equivalent to society in the context of transnational interdependence (Goldblatt, Perraton, & Jonathan, 1999).
Since we are dealing with a qualitatively new global society that no longer faces any opposition, new horizons are opening up for cultural studies. The theoretical tools of classical schools are gradually losing their relevance, and inevitably new culturological analyzes are included.
According to some, the world has completed a super-cycle of active globalization in economic policy, and now the trends of de-globalization are growing (Oreshkin, 2019).
For others, the time will pass and all politicians with their ideas of globalization may be forgotten. And the very ideas of globalization will be blown away by the wind. But the main human values will remain: Good, Reasonable, Eternal will remain, and will serve people, those who will survive (Levi, 2018).
The principle of network interaction leads to the fact that global moderation (quasi-order, New World Order / World Government) is processed outside the state itself, while leaving chaos, anarchy and disintegration of hierarchy within it. The democratization of domestic politics was carried out by strengthening the position of supranational institutions (for example, the European Court of Human Rights, the International Court of Justice) (Meyer, Boli, Thomas, & Ramirez, 1997).
Concerning literature, opinions are more optimistic: modern planetary thinking corresponds to the globalization of world culture. A dialogue of literatures in the context of the globalization process of the world, in the conditions of the technogenic world, leads to their even better interaction. “Literary interactions deepened the relationship so strongly and qualitatively that universal literature began to emerge. This process did not end in the twentieth century. He moved to the XXI century. A new stage began. The new century already in its beginning turned out to be equipped with rapidly developing means of electronic communication (such as the Internet, enriched with the creation of programs allowing to get acquainted with the text written in any language). After all, “globalization in the literature has a new solid basis, which was not previously available. In the form of movements, movements and contacts among themselves huge masses of people from different countries. Here is a new material basis, which gives rise in literature to plots that had never before occurred to anyone in principle (Levi, 2018).
Based on the foregoing, the authors set the task for the first time by comparative historical method and literary analysis to sort out contradictory judgments and answer some questions, namely: will globalization not absorb Russian culture together with national cultural spaces? Is globalization useful for Russian national writers? Is national literature necessary for globalization? As a result, the authors come to some scientific conclusions.
A positive example of the impact of globalization on modern processes in national literature is the convergence and fusion of closely related literatures, literatures of closely related peoples: Kabardian, Circassian, Adygei and Adyghe (Circassian) foreign countries. It will be a question, in this case, of the Kabardian and Circassian literature. Is it alone, independent?
The roots of the problem go back to deep Soviet times.
The historical conditions in Russia were such that on the territory of Russia the Adyghe people found themselves divided in three different autonomous entities: Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachay-Cherkessia and Adygea. One way or another, these are three state formations in which Kabardians, Circassians and Adyghes live with the same self-designation “Adyg”. From the height of time, rethinking the history of literature, one should proceed from the realities that have evolved to date. For example, the basis of written Kabardian and Circassian literature is completely one language. There are two points of view on this issue.
According to the first point of view, Circassian literature is close to Kabardian literature to such an extent that it is possible to compile single dictionaries, encyclopedias, textbooks. Another concept is that Circassian literature positions itself as a completely independent, separately taken literature, having its own history. A supporter of this concept is a well-known scientist-literary critic, researcher of modern Circassian literature and folklore of L.A. Beketova. According to the figurative expression of the scientist, Circassian literature exists "under the roof of the Adyghe literatures". Circassian literature cannot "like a matryoshka, be inside Kabardian literature". As the researcher writes, this literature positions itself as quite independent among the Adyg literatures, which include the Kabardian and Adyghe literature (Bekizova, 2014).
As is well known, from century to century, whether it is “Kabardian”, “Circassian” or “Adigheus”, to the question: “Who are you?”, The answer was one: “I am Adyghe” - “Сэ сы адыгэщ”.
Our opinion coincides with the opinion of the majority of Adighe (Circassian) scholars on the indissolubility of literatures – Kabardian and Circassian. It is appropriate to recall the words of Fadeev (1939): "The native language, peculiar to each nation, the spirit and the structure of speech, which has absorbed the folklore for centuries, that irresistible national character, psychological and emotional characteristics of the people, which create the unique color and smell of each art" (p. 37). All the features of the language listed by Fadeev completely coincide in Kabardian, Circassian and Adyghe literature.
The globalization of world space has caused another problem in literature: should a writer fear globalization? Should a real writer have to be deeply national and international at the same time, is he obliged to love his homeland and at the same time love all of humanity, should he be a patriot and a “citizen” of the Universe?
The issue rests on national revival as a special type of culture and literature, with its own social, ideological and aesthetic features, with its own national-patriotic, ethno-differentiating and ethno-consolidating function. This is the problem of the national self-affirmation of all national literature in the geocivilization space of the literatures of the peoples of Russia. After all, globalization processes and the uniqueness of intercultural relations in the course of the revival of national culture and literature consist not only in convergence, but also in dissociation from other cultures, in particular, Russian. Speaking about reputation in intercultural interaction in the period of globalization, we should recall Berdiaev (1990), according to his characteristic – if there is a national one, then it becomes the decisive cultural self-identification of the “national person”. Complementarity of the national idea and the idea of cultures and literatures of different nations in the period of globalization, according to Sultanov (1996), their convergence-repulsion creates in the post-Soviet space the main value-sense spectrum. Here the known danger of “bending the stick” lies. “The national idea, enlightened by the experience of culture and literature, cannot express, in the opinion of Sultanov (1996),
the worldview of self-satisfied and narcissistic. In reality, cultural foundations, the cultural “configuration” of a national idea in literature, and in the post-Soviet in particular, is always a task, not a given, it is always a problem, not an axiom, and the essence of the efforts of modern writers and writers in general should be apparently, in a constant clarification of the links of these not coinciding, but interlocking spheres. (pp. 64-65)
For the reader the main thing is the degree of talent, artistic experience and skill. For example, we will provide such writers as Asker Evtykh, Kosta Khetagurov, Ali Shogentsukov, Alim Keshokov; Elberd Malbakhov, Mohamed Emkuzhev.
Do not forget that the value of a work of national origin is not exhausted. In our opinion, there is no literature devoid of universal accents and landmarks, because otherwise it would simply not be possible to communicate between cultures in the same way as the whole culture would be unified and globalized if it were freed from national identity, not to mention originality of the individual.
The works of national authors are of interest to the whole world because, while remaining deeply national, they at the same time carry the traits of all people, regardless of their nationality, language or religion.
Does globalization prevent a writer from being deeply national, if it is initially incorporated in him, is, figuratively speaking, an integral part of himself, his blood? How to name today those authors who write in two different languages, say, Kabardino-Circassian and Russian? Or those who are ethnically - Kabardian, but today he writes in Russian or English: is he Circassian, Russian or English, is he an American writer? Or is he a world writer, a citizen of the world?!
In the national republics of Russia, the Russian language is intensively developing (one of the state languages of the North Caucasian republics) – the language of interethnic communication and a single cultural space. He unites the writers of the republic in the cultural and intellectual community. This does not mean that the native language should be forgotten. But there are problems associated with the development of the national language in the republics of the North Caucasus.
To which literature should the Russian-language works of national authors be counted: Kabardian or Russian? Today there are many authors writing only in their native language. There is another category of authors who have little or no knowledge of their mother tongue. There is a third category of authors who work simultaneously in two languages or writing in their native language, and in Russian, and successfully translating their texts into another language, i.e. engaged in self-translation.
Nowadays it has become especially noticeable that all over the world the tendency of globalization of culture began to prevail over the tendency of its identification. Vladimir Nabokov once said: “It’s not the point of kinship that interests me, but the point of difference, the degree of the writer's belonging to the universal” (Dolinin, 1991, p. 40). Both Vladimir Nabokov and Joseph Brodsky – are they Russian or American writers, are they writers of the world? The trilogy "Caucasus" of the Circassian foreign writer Mokhii Kandur is written in English, then translated into Russian, and only then into Kabardino-Circassian; “The Shield of Tibard by Kabardian Tengiz Adygov” is written in Russian, “the Frightful Way to Oshkhamakho” by Kabardian Elberd Malbakhov in Russian. Who are they: Russian writers or Circassian (Circassian)? Is it right today to identify a writer in terms of his geographical or ethnic affiliation? (Alkhasova, 2015).
For example, Mohamed Emkuzhev’s novels “The Flood” and “Kadar Night, or Which Is Right”, are written in magnificent Russian. But is it right for Yemkuzhev to be called a Russian writer, when every line, every letter is imbued with the Adyg spirit, the Adyg mythology, the Adyg archetypal?! If the national is expressed talent, therefore, it is - common to humanity, universal.
According to Professor Nafi Grigorievich Dzhusoity: “In a multinational state, the language of the most developed and numerous nation naturally becomes the language of interethnic everyday and cultural communication. Writing communication takes place in this language...”
Poems of K.L. Khetagurov ("Fatima", "Weeping Rock", "Before the Court", "Who Lives Fun", "This Man") depict the life, life and character of the Ossetian people, but written in Russian. Of course, they belong to the Ossetian literature (as cited in Valieva. 2017).
Essay by K.L. Khetagurov "The Person" contains the richest ethnographic material. It is distinguished by the completeness and reliability of information, an exhaustive explanation. No researcher of the Ossetian ethnography can do without this work, although it is written in Russian (as cited in Valieva, 2018).
An ethnographic essay "In the Ossetian aul" by Inal Kanukov is written in Russian, but is imbued with a national Ossetian spirit. In this work, the life, way of life of the Ossetians, their customs are described in detail. Thanks to the essay of Inal Kanukov "Highlanders-Migrants", Russian-speaking readers were able to see pictures of the resettlement of part of the Ossetians to Turkey. The stories of Batyrbek Tuganov, also written in Russian (“Hanifa”, “Konokrad”, “Shepherd Bade”, “According to Adat”), are imbued with the mountain spirit of the Caucasus. Events are described when the adats of ancestors came into conflict with secular law (“By adat”) (Mamieva, 2016).
Purpose of the Study
All processes in Russian literature, one way or another, relate to, influence and are reflected in the works of authors of indigenous nationality, in particular, in the works of writers of the North Caucasus: Adyghe, Chechen, Ossetian, etc. Currently there are heated debates about whether globalization brings harm or benefit.
About the undoubted harm brought by globalization, says now a considerable part of cultural studies and literary critics. Many are outraged by the dominance of American films and the American pseudo-culture. Today, issues of revival and preservation of national identity in the North Caucasus national culture and literature are relevant. Does globalization contradict them?
Anti-globalists say that national identity can be crushed by a multi-toned roller called “Globalization”. The authors for the first time pose the task of sorting out contradictory judgments and answering some questions.
The world is fragile, so it is necessary to preserve the gentle shoots and roots of different national cultures. Here is how the modern Adyghe poet Koshubaev (2002) writes: “And we are on this side of the river: Both dogs, and sorcerers, and murderers. / And we can’t buy off our sins, / And we don’t have anywhere to leave others” (p. 113).
In our opinion, these verses have an answer to the question: should globalization be taken as a serious phenomenon of the whole society?
On this basis, it is necessary to clarify the essential aspect of the problem, namely: the relationship between the global and the national in the narrow literary sense.
When performing this work, we used the methods of observation, analysis and synthesis, as well as the comparative historical method of research.
The first conclusion. Globalization promotes the introduction of the culture and literature of the peoples of the North Caucasus to the all-Russian and global literary process.
Time puts a new focus on accents, and therefore it is more correct to determine: to what extent a particular writer is a man of the world, and to what degree – belongs to a particular nationality. Determining the nationality of the writer according to the language in which he writes is largely outdated. The truth is that the language of the writer plays an important, but, nevertheless, mediated role.
It is not convincing to divide ethnic Adyghe, Chechen, Ossetian, Dagestan and other writers of the North Caucasus into “Russian writers” and “non-Russian writers,” by classifying their works according to the language:
The second conclusion. This begs the answer to the above question: should writers protest against globalization? This is a serious problem, but it is literature that brings people and cultures together, helps to identify points of contact, proves the relationship of souls and common interests of all people on Earth.
The third conclusion. Complementarity of the national ideas and ideas of cultures and literatures of different peoples of Russia in the period of globalization, their “rapprochement-repulsion” create in the post-Soviet space the main value-semantic spectrum.
In our opinion, the national spirit of this or that work should be perceived, in whatever language it functions. And this is the main point.
- Alkhasova, S. M. (2015). The key role of the ethnocultural brand in the modern literary process of the North Caucasus region. Culture and Space. Book III. Rostov-on-Don: Pyatigorsk, SKAGS.
- Axford, B. (2005). Theories of Globalization. In Defense of Globalization. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Bekizova, L. A. (2014). The image of a person in the ethno-artistic tradition of Circassians (Adyghe). The Bulletin of the Adyghe State University, ser. 2: Philology and Art History, VAK.
- Berdiaev, N. (1990). The philosophy of inequality. Moscow: Ima-press.
- Dolinin, A. T. (1991). Nabokov and Blok. In Texts of the reports of the scientific conference "A. Blok and Russian post-symbolism" (рp. 36–44).
- Fadeev, A. A. (1939). Literature and life. Moscow: Soviet Writer.
- Goldblatt, M., Perraton, A., & Jonathan, D. (1999). Global Transformation. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Retrieved from: https: //cyberleninka.ru/article/n/obraz-cheloveka-v-etnohudozhestvennoy-traditsii-cherkesov-adygov
- Koshubaev, J. (2002). Logos without a name. Poems. Nalchik: Elbrus.
- Levi, V. (2018). Izba-Chitalnyay. Literary and art portal. Retrieved from: https://www.chitalnya.ru/ commentary/16897/chitalnya.ru
- Mamieva, I. V. (2016). Lavrovsky "trace" in the understanding of K.L. Khetagurov problems of the intelligentsia and the people. The Bulletin of the Kalmyk Institute for Humanitarian Studies, RAS, 3, 137–142.
- Meyer, J., Boli, J., Thomas, G., & Ramirez, F. (1997). World Security and the Nation-State. American Journal of Sociology, 6(2), 171–190.
- Oreshkin, M. (2019). Oreshkin on globalization on the forum in Davos. Retrieved from: https://ria.ru/20190124/1549818359.html. RF 2019-01-24T10: 38Z. DAVOS (Switzerland), 24 January – RIA Novosti.
- Sultanov, K. K. (1996), "Labyrinths of couplings". Ethnic – national – artistic. The Collection "History of National Literatures", 2, 150.
- Valieva, T. I. (2017). Costa Khetagurov and Christian Enlightenment. The humanities: scientific priorities of scientists. In Collection of scientific papers on the results of the International Scientific Conference (рp. 10–13). Perm.
- Valieva, T. I. (2018). Problem-thematic originality of essays by I. Kanukov. Philology. Questions of theory and practice, 12-2(90), 230–233.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
21 January 2020
Print ISBN (optional)
Sociolinguistics, linguistics, semantics, discourse analysis, science, technology, society
Cite this article as:
Alkhasova*, S., Kudzoeva, A., & Asaeva, N. (2020). The Point Of Kinship And The Point Of Difference. In D. Karim-Sultanovich Bataev, S. Aidievich Gapurov, A. Dogievich Osmaev, V. Khumaidovich Akaev, L. Musaevna Idigova, M. Rukmanovich Ovhadov, A. Ruslanovich Salgiriev, & M. Muslamovna Betilmerzaeva (Eds.), Social and Cultural Transformations in the Context of Modern Globalism, vol 76. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 80-86). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.12.04.12