A obra distópica de Zamiátin sob um olhar Bakhtiniano

Abstract

This study aims to demonstrate, through a discursive-enunciative analysis, the predecessor character of the work We, by the Russian writer Yevgeni Ivanovich Zamyátin, in relation to dystopian literature of the 20th century. To this end, as a counterpoint to the novel We, the main corpus of this work, we chose three novels, in our view, emblematic of the dystopia of the 20th century: 1984 by George Orwell; Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury; and The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood. For the stylistic management of these literary works, we mobilize Mikhail Bakhtin's Theory of the Novel, enriched by adjacent conceptions attributed to the so-called “Bakhtin Circle”. Within the vast Bakhtinian theoretical framework, we call for two guiding concepts for the stylistic analysis of novelistic prose: heterodiscourse and chronotope. In this sense, the possibility of highlighting the updating of the Theory of the Novel itself formulated by Bakhtin represents an objective contiguous to the general proposition of the present work. Although the analytical literature on 20th century dystopian prose is profuse and diverse — as is the examination of the genre's editorial explosion, ascertained at the beginning of the 21st century —, we consider that the term “dystopia”, when linked to 20th century literature , still admits reflections of a discursive and enunciative nature. Therefore, we highlight a possible gap in the stylistic, scientific, methodological and, above all, sociological treatment of dystopian literary discourse. To achieve this endeavor, this study seeks to delve into an investigative methodology, with an interpretative dive into the works listed and consistent comparison with regard to the theoretical concepts proposed by this work. Therefore, this dissertation is a qualitative research, and its structure is divided into three chapters. The first chapter — “The Bakhtinian Theory of the Novel” — brings our particular view of the theoretical framework mobilized. The second chapter — “The chronotopic predecessor proposal of Us” — aims to delve into the dystopian novels listed through their spatiotemporal dimensions. The third chapter — “From Zamiátin to Atwood: heterodiscursivity in the dystopian novel” — intends to discuss the dialogism perpetrated by the social languages that populate the dystopian novels selected for this study. The results collected by this research point to the possibility of ratifying the predecessor aspect of Zamyátin's dystopian work through a discursive-enunciative perspective, that is, beyond a purely stylistic analysis. Furthermore, the present work indicates favorable conditions for the application of Bakhtin's Theory of the Novel with regard to a satisfactory reading of contemporary literature.