What is Defamiliarization in Russian formalism?

The Russian Formalists’ concept of “Defamiliarization”, proposed by Viktor Shklovsky in his Art as Technique, refers to the literary device whereby language is used in such a way that ordinary and familiar objects are made to look different. Thus literary language is ordinary language deformed and made strange.

What are the main features of Russian formalism?

Rhyme, syntax, consonants, and plot were some of the more important poetic/literary devices that Russian Formalists emphasized within analyses that emphasized the important point that meaning is drawn from arrangement of words within the work itself and not from words associations with external sign referents.

What is literature according to Russian formalism?

“Literary works, according to this model, resemble machines: they are the result of an intentional human activity in which a specific skill transforms raw material into a complex mechanism suitable for a particular purpose” (Steiner, “Russian Formalism” 18).

What is Defamiliarization example?

For example, Tolkien’s work “The Lord of Rings” may be considered in terms of defamiliarization usage. All characters of the story represent some archetypes of people; dwarfs are the laborers, the brave and hard-working class wishing to retain their right for freedom and free toil.

What is an example of formalism?

Examples of formalist films may include Resnais’s Last Year at Marienbad and Parajanov’s The Color of Pomegranates.

What is the difference between formalism and Russian formalism?

One key difference between Russian formalism and New Criticism is that the New Critics examined literary language as a way to explain or illuminate the artistic value of the text, whereas the Formalists looked at literary language to understand how, in linguistic terms, it produced meaning.

Who is the father of Russian formalism?

Viktor Shklovsky

What is the effect of defamiliarization?

Like all such devices, defamiliarization draws the reader’s attention to something you consider important in terms of affect. In other words, you use defamiliarization to shove the reader into a piece of text meaning and tell them “Here, look at this. It reveals a lot”.

How is defamiliarization used?

Defamiliarization is a literary technique in which the process of writing is itself focused on more than any particular plotline. This technique involves exploring the differences between literature and reality and is used by writers to help identify their efforts as the works of literary art that they are.

How do you criticize formalism?

Reading as a Formalist critic

1. Must first be a close or careful reader who examines all the elements of a text individually.
2. Questions how they come together to create a work of art.
3. Respects the autonomy of work.
4. Achieves understanding of it by looking inside it, not outside or beyond.
5. Allow the text to reveal itself.

What did Viktor Shklovsky mean by defamiliarization?

The Russian Formalists’ concept of “Defamiliarization”, proposed by Viktor Shklovsky in his Art as Technique, refers to the literary device whereby language is used in such a way that ordinary and familiar objects are made to look different. It is a process of transformation where language asserts its power to affect our perception.

What is the definition of defamiliarization in literature?

Defamiliarization also includes the use of foreign languages within a work. At the time that Shklovsky was writing, there was a change in the use of language in both literature and everyday spoken Russian. As Shklovsky puts it: “Russian literary language, which was originally foreign to Russia,…

Can a story plot be defamiliarized by Russian Formalists?

Narrative plots can also be defamiliarized. The Russian formalists distinguished between the fabula or basic story stuff of a narrative and the syuzhet or the formation of the story stuff into a concrete plot. For Shklovsky, the syuzhet is the fabula defamiliarized.

What do you need to know about Russian formalism?

Formalism’s scientific language and methodical aspirations are discussed. Crucial formalist distinctions between plot and story, practical and poetic language, and literature and literariness are clarified. Your browser does not support the video tag.