Chronotopes of Affectivity in Literature. On Melancholy, Estrangement, and Reflective Nostalgia

The introductory chapter by Laura Salmon (Chronotopes of Affectivity in Literature. On Melancholy, Estrangement, and Reflective Nostalgia) outlines in greater detail the relationship between reflective and restorative nostalgia to8 Sara Dickinson gether with other key terms that underlie our study. Specifically, Salmon provides justification for the linkage of reflective nostalgia, toska, and melanxolija to the Russian case studies and related problems of Russian identity discussed in this volume. Drawing from the field of cognitive sciences, she defines ‘feelings’ as ‘secondary emotions’ or ‘cultural constructs’ that result from our reflections on emotion, from our conscious awareness and processing of brute emotional impulses. That feelings can be chronic, i.e. repeated and characteristic of a given individual, and also shared, or common to multiple individuals, means that they are important for the establishment of both personal and group identity, be it national, ethnic, religious, political, or other. Salmon also provocatively superimposes Yuri Slezkine’s contrast between dominant “Apollonian” cultures and marginalized “Mercurian” cultures (Slezkine 2004) onto Boym’s distinction between “restorative” and “reflective” nostalgias. Nostalgia for Boym (2001: XVI) is “the symptom of our age” as is the pervasive influence of Mercurian culture for Slezkine. The liminal condition epitomized by the Jew’s role in Western society, in other words, entails a forceful apprehension of marginal status that is ultimately ‘reflective’ and thus ‘flexible’, subjective, ironic, and non-ideological. Mercurians, like reflective nostalgics, are both aware of their difference and celebrate it; indeed, Salmon argues, in such cases, an ongoing and self-conscious state of melancholic reflection constitutes one’s essence.