Verbal (artistic) image

The concept of the artistic image owes its birth to fiction, where language becomes both a means and an object of art. The language itself here is a work of art, i.e. it is “something, in itself, within itself possessing some substantial value” [1].

Artistic speech has its own value precisely because “it is not just a form, but also a certain content that has become a form of an image” [2]. It turns out that one content, expressed in a sound form (word), serves as a form of another content (image). In the series "idea - image - language" image is a form in relation to the idea and content in relation to a word (language). In general, the image is a meaningful form.

However, the very concept of “image” is a broader concept than the “artistic image”. The verbal image can be used in other types of literature, then its meaning can be defined as a form of visual representation of reality. The artistic image is distinguished by the fact that it is a method of concrete-sensual reproduction of reality from the standpoint of a certain aesthetic ideal [3].

Verbal images may accompany the language of science, for example, metaphoric terms ( mountain bottom, mountain range, river arm , etc.). Such images, due to the portable use of the word, are devoid of individual aesthetic features, i.e. they are non-artistic in nature, they only use “alien” meaning, which is transferred to another object. The basis of the artistic image is also the transfer of meaning, but this is not enough, you need something else that lies beyond both the literal meaning of the word and the figurative one.

The expression “burning shame” (as, by the way, “cold horror”) has a literal meaning and comes from a real feeling of warmth (the cheeks and ears are warming). Such imagery has a real meaningful basis. Another thing is the imagery in the Blok lines: “There was a face covered in a colorful lie”, “The pensive door laughed harlequin”, “The Queen has blue riddles”, where there is a paradoxical semantic relationship between the image-images, conveying something subtlely impressionistic, suddenly impressed. Here the shift and imposition of meanings in words are not supported by their real content. This ratio lies entirely in terms of "other" content.

Priest Grigory Dyachenko in his book The Domain of the Mysterious (M., 1900) wrote: “The external world finds an echo in the small world of the inner being in man, and then reproduces itself in various forms of artistic representation in image, tone and word, and, as a spiritual the image of this world is enlightening, spiritualizing, adorning and warming in relation to its external reality ”(p. 415). This spiritualizing, adorning, and therefore warming is something that communicates artistry to the image (that which the artist created is his spiritual reflection of the world).

A.F. Losev in “Philosophy of Name” writes: “In order to have an image of something, one must consciously separate oneself from another, for the image is a conscious focus on a different and conscious abstinence from this other, when the subject, using the material of another, is already trying to get by without this other ... "[4]. And further: “The name of a thing is a pronounced thing. The word thing is a thing understood. The name, the word of a thing is a thing understood, a thing manifested in the mind ”[5].

So it is planned in the word connection “name is a pronounced thing, the word of a thing is a understood thing”, expressed and understood, i.e. the word is the opposition of the objective essence and the subject perceiving this essence.

It is clear that different subjects can perceive the substantive essence in different ways. Especially if these subjects have artistic nature.

Interesting in terms of the disclosure of this topic are the following statements of A.F. Losev in the same book: “The word is the emergence from the narrow framework of a closed individuality. It is a bridge between the "subject" and the "object" [6].

“The name of the object is the arena of the meeting of the perceiving and perceived, or rather, the cognizing and the knowable. In the name there is some kind of intimate unity of dispersed spheres of being, a unity that leads to their joint life in one whole, no longer simply “subjective” or simply “objective” consciousness ”[7]. And further: “If we take the Greek word αληυεια. - “truth”, then in addition to the abstract and general meaning “truth” (as in Latin veritas or Russian “truth”) there is still a moment characteristic of the psychology of the Greek worldview, since literally this word means “unforgettable”, “unforgettable "And, therefore," eternal ", etc. The objective essence of this word is truth, but every nation and language, like every person from these nations, experiences this subject in different ways, highlights in it different, depending on their own interest and needs, moments. Thus, in Greek, “unforgettable” is emphasized, in Latin, the moment of trust, faith, etc. is emphasized.

All these differences in their own way make out and determine the general value of the objective essence of truth ”[8].

Moreover, even among a single people, the objective essence of a name (word), in particular, the word “truth”, can change. Thus, in the Russian language the word "truth" is closely related to the word "truth", but at the same time they are contrasted. Already in the middle of the 19th century, the difference between truth and truth in the Russian public consciousness was conceptualized (among other European nations, one word corresponds to this pair: English. Truth, French. Vérité, German Wahrheit) [9]. This is reflected in the Dahl dictionary: Truth from the earth (the heritage of the mind of man), and the truth from heaven (the gift of benevolence). Truth relates to mind and intelligence, and truth to love, law and will. According to Dal, thus, the truth is connected with the earthly, and the truth - with the heavenly, eternal, with the divine moral law. However, in the modern Russian consciousness, the ratio of the components of this pair, “the truth is true,” has changed somewhat. Now truth is connected, rather, with the eternal and unchanging, and the truth - with the earthly, changeable and social, cf .: "The truth is one, but there are many truths." Truth expresses the order of things in the world, law, and the truth is a specific case.

Reasoning A.F. Losev about a different perception of the objective essence of the word give the opportunity to penetrate deeper into the essence of the figurative word. In this case, apparently, it is necessary to especially emphasize in the word the moments associated with the perception of its subject essence, corresponding to the “own interest and needs” of the personality-creator of the artistic text. It is important that the word as such in its essence provides great opportunities for this. Although, of course, unlimited they can not be called. The limit, the limit of reflection in the word of artistic "self-interest" can be considered the internal motivation of the word-image. Otherwise, the verbal image acquires a self-sufficient value, as, for example, among imagistinists, when the image was shielded by everything, a part swallowed the whole (VG Shershenevich, AB Mariengof, AB Kusikov).

The artist of the word, relying on these properties of the word, as it were, translates objects of the sensually world into internal spiritual images, in which his truth is revealed, corresponding to his aesthetic ideal.

And the world which is sensual for different artists can turn its different sides. One has more developed auditory images, the other has color images, and the third has a subject-sensory perception that is hypertrophied. This is how your world of images is created. For example, the poetic language of A. Blok was often created by sound sensations. In this regard, even the spelling helped him if he influenced the pronunciation ( Under the embankment, in an unmown ditch, lies and looks, like a living one, // In a color scarf, on an abandoned spit, beautiful and young [10]). When Blok stopped hearing the “music of the revolution”, he stopped talking ... Color images feed M. Tsvetaeva's poetry. Known, for example, the significance of pink color [11] for its perception: pink is associated with youth, romantic mood. The use of naming of household details, household items often helps Yesenin in creating clear concrete images:

About the red evening thought the road

Rowan bushes foggy depth.

Hut-old woman jaw threshold

Chews fragrant crumb silence.

Or:

At the quiet hour, when the dawn is on the roof,

Like a kitten, washes a mouth,

Mild talk about you i hear

Water singing with the wind honeycomb.

………………………………… ..

The world is mysterious, my ancient world,

You fell silent like the wind and crouched.

That squeezed the neck of the village

Stony hands highway.

The subject-sensory perception is also characteristic of the N.V. Gogol ( head of radish down; A rare bird reaches the middle of the Dnieper ... ).

Thus, a diverse sensually being world can serve as a material for creating a diverse world view, giving an opportunity to get a peculiar picture of the world, seen by the eyes of this artist and recreated by this artist. Different vision gives rise to a different figurative system, the seen image of the world is embodied in a peculiar image of style. Individual imagery can manifest itself through an increase in the sense of sound, color, etc.

Imagery can be created and far from figurative means. Most often, this is what distinguishes authors with a restrained manner of writing, in which the style of external detail plays the most important role. For example, A. Chekhov in the story “The Lady with the Dog” the definition of “gray” is used every time literally ( gray eyes; gray dress; inkwell, gray from dust; gray fence; gray cloth blanket ). However, in the general context of the story, this ordinary gray color acquires a special significance; the gray meaning becomes a figurative meaning, turning into a symbolic meaning - it is an image of everydayness, inconspicuousness, hopelessness [12].

The heroes of the story cannot get beyond this “gray color,” they suffocate in it, it becomes their way of life [13]. So a new meaning is born, the word-sign is removed in a word-image. “Verbal art is speech only by means, and by result literature is an image, albeit a speech one” [14].

If we accept the definition of an artistic image as a method of specifically sensory reproduction of reality in accordance with the chosen aesthetic ideal, we can set the following goal in the development of ideas related to the study of figurative speech. Is it possible at least a conditional classification of verbal images, an attempt to purely theoretically differentiate this complex concept - the concept of image? There are such attempts. Usually this question interests the authors, investigating the very mechanism of creation, the creation of a literary text. This is B.M. Eichenbaum, B.V. Tomashevsky, Yu.N.Tyanyanov, Yu.M. Lotman, V.V. Kozhinov, D.N. Shmelev and others.

If we choose as a starting point any specific criterion in the approach to the definition of the “image”, then we can outline some differentiation. In particular, it is possible to discern a gradation, degree in a figurative system, for example, a sequence in the ascent from a concrete meaning to an abstract and generalized one. In this case, three steps of ascent can be identified: an indicator image (using the literal, direct meaning of a word); image-trope (figurative meaning); image-symbol (generalized value on the basis of private figurative).

At the first stage, the image is often born as a result of the “revitalization of the inner form of the word” (expression by A. Potebni). This is an indicator image, a developer of meaning.

At the second stage there is a rethinking. This is a system of tropes, based on metaphorization. And finally, the images-symbols, which are images that go beyond the context, usually fixed by the tradition of use.

So, if you go back to the given example from Chekhov, you get the following:

the indicator image is gray;

image-trope - the image of ordinary ordinary people;

the image-symbol is the image of everydayness, inconspicuousness, hopelessness.

Other examples: the image of "cotton air" in O. Mandelstam: air-wool, air-chaos, air-airless - all this is a constant motive of poems from the beginning of the 20s ( I breathed milky stars of dust, a space mantle ); in the 30s, images of fur, wool, adequate to death, inability to breathe, i.e. again we have some ascent from a concrete visual image to a symbolic one.

V.V. Vinogradov wrote: “The meaning of a word in a work of art is never limited to its direct nominative-objective meaning. The literal meaning of the word here is cluttered with new, different meanings (as well as the meaning of the described empirical fact grows to the degree of a typical generalization). In a work of art there are no, and in any case there should not be words unmotivated, passing only as a shadow of unnecessary objects. The selection of words is inextricably linked with the way of reflecting and expressing reality in a word ... In the context of the entire work, words and expressions, being in closest interaction, acquire various additional semantic nuances, are perceived in a complex and deep perspective of the whole ”[15].

It is interesting to compare two translations of Heine's poem, where different concrete images are used - cedar and pine.

Him Fichtenbaun (cedar - the word male. Kind).

Tyutchev:

In the north, gloomy, on a wild rock,

Cedar is lonely under the snow it whitens,

And he sweetly fell asleep in the darkness,

And his storm nurtures his sleep.

About the young palm dreams him.

Lermontov:

In the north, wild stands alone

On the bare top of a pine.

And slumber swaying, and snow flowing

Dressed like a riza she is.

And she dreams all that in the valley far

A beautiful palm tree is growing.

So, two translations of Heine's poem - Tyutchev (cedar) and Lermontov (pine). L.V. Scherba believes that the masculine form creates an image of masculine love for a distant, inaccessible woman. Lermontov, with his “pine”, removed this meaning of the image, turning the strong masculine love into beautiful, indistinct dreams, he removed from the image all his love aspirations, i.e. impoverished image [16].

It seems that such a replacement can be “read” in a different way: the removal of the “love aspiration” does not meaningfully impoverish, but enriches this image, in which case the image-symbol of loneliness as a state appears. Image-indicator - pine; image-trope - a lonely person; image-symbol - loneliness.

The most common way to create an image is to move from a specific meaning (visibility, visual, picture-like initial moment of movement) to the transference and abstract. Many literary works, especially poetic, are built entirely on this process; it, the process, becomes a compositional device.

For example, in V. Soloukhin's poem “Cranes”: first referring to specific, living cranes ( Cranes, you probably don’t know How many songs are folded about you, How many are up when you fly, Looks misty-eyed! ), But gradually these particular cranes are replaced by cranes - symbols of the human dream, often unrealizable dreams: Cranes ... Littered by work, Away from overcast fields, I live with a strange zapobya - To see cranes in the sky ... This meaning echoes the famous folk expression: crane - in the sky , tit - in the hands .

Or more. About the poem of E. Yevtushenko “The Grave of a Child”. The grave of a child actually met during the trip leads to thoughts about how often we bury our love:

We sailed on the evening Lena,

Caressing, full of love,

With the quietest love of a daughter

Oh shore sullen she.

……………………………………

But the card is in the hands of the captain.

Rustling, rubbed through,

And she whispered something,

What is in it surrendered.

And we dry, quietly

Said the captain, dimmed:

"At Cape Grave Child

We are going through now. "

…………………………………….

... And something got up at the throat,

This is not to say -

After all, the word "child" - so bitter

With the word "grave" link.

I thought about all the buried,

About all, buried in all.

“Love is also a child.

To bury him is a sin.

But twice my spade was thrust

Under my late tears,

And who did not dig himself

The grave of his own love? "

………………………………………

We sailed along this cape,

Along the gloomy rocky communities,

Like along the bare meaning

Their irretrievable losses ...

Approximately the same in the work of Ch. Aitmatov “The White Ship”: the white boat is a concrete image of a real boat and an artistic image of an impossible dream, an image turning into a symbol. Here the birth of the image follows the line of the collision of the real and the surreal plan.

By the way, the triad image-indicator-image-trope-image-symbol can be supported theoretically, by identifying the very nature, type of information contained in these images: the direct value is factual information; figurative meaning (tropes) - conceptual information; rethought generalizing meaning (symbol) - subtext, deep information.

So, the highest degree of imagery is a symbol. The birth of symbolic meaning is a complex process. A symbol image can be the result of a particular figurative work or cycle of works, it can even “leave” the work that produced it to be used in other works by other authors. And then he becomes unambiguous and that is why it becomes universal and recognizable, i.e. лишается индивидуальности в применении, в какой-то степени уже включаясь в семантическую структуру слова. Символы бывают разные, они многолики и многогранны.

Символ традиционный – устойчивый, одноплановый и однозначный художественный образ, закрепленный традицией употребления. К таким относятся символы классические, символы национальные, символы библейские. For example:

олива, оливковая ветвь – символ мира;

порфира (багряница) – символ монаршей власти;

радуга – символ надежды (ср.: радужные мечты);

померанец (флердеранж) – античный символ чистоты, целомудрия;

роса – славянский символ грусти;

хлеб-соль – русский символ гостеприимства.

Общелитературные, классические символы традиционны и однозначны и потому понятны, не вызывают разночтений. Перифрастический стиль, с риторическими «чисто классическими украшениями» мог оказаться «темным» только для непосвященных. Он рассчитан на элитарность. Но сам по себе такой стиль и конкретно такие символы не вызывают разночтений. Они каноничны для определенного вида литературы. Их аллегория привычна. Слово в классицизме по преимуществу «готовое» слово, подсказанное нормами риторики[17].

Например: вместо «от востока до запада» следует писать: «От тех, кто первые видят, как краснеет Аврора, до того предела, где Фетида принимает в свои волны сынаГипериона». Или у И. Бродского: Я покидаю город, как Тезей – свой лабиринт, оставив Минотавра смердеть, а Ариадну – ворковать в объятьях Вакха.

Подобный стиль (с классическими образами-символами) не воспринимается как плод особого мироощущения[18]. Это скорее вопрос техники, продукт определенного искусства. Такой стиль для подготовленного читателя смысловых разночтений, как правило, не провоцирует. Такие образы-символы – это элементы стилевой системы классицизма.

У писателей-романтиков появляются свои образы-символы.

Так, «способы изображения» вытекают из «способов созерцания», характерных для той или иной эпохи, литературного направления[19].

Еще примеры. Полноценное восприятие средневековой литературы требует историко-культурных знаний, в частности умения расшифровывать аллегории, символы, которые становятся стилевой доминантой данного «художественного видения». Это особый «образ мира». В «Божественной комедии» Данте, например, есть строки:

Земную жизнь пройдя до половины,

Я очутился в сумрачном лесу,

Утратив правый путь во тьме долины...

Переводчик М.Л. Лозинский так объясняет иносказание Данте: «Заблудившийся в порочном мире человек, руководимый Разумом (Вергилием), восходит к земному раю, чтобы затем, наставляемый откровением (Беатриче), вознестись к раю небесному»[20].

Для чтения и понимания подобных произведений требуется знание условностей, свойственных данному стилю. Например, в той же «Божественной комедии» символичными оказываются многие детали изображения: путь от леса к холму – т.е. от грехов к добродетели – преграждает рысь («сладострастие»), лев («гордость»), волчица («корыстолюбие»). Иносказательна сама композиция, использующая сакральное число «три» (девять кругов – число, кратное трем; три части загробного мира – ад, чистилище, рай).

Без знания секретов расшифровки образов-символов невозможно прочитать и такое творение человеческого Логоса и Духа, как Библия. В частности, хрестоматийную фразу «Вкусить от древа познания добра и зла» прот. А. Мень[21] трактует так: познать значит «владеть», а добро и зло – это все, созданное Богом, все в мире. «Познать» добро и зло – значит «владеть» и тем и другим, следовательно, речь идет о притязании человека властвовать над миром независимо от Бога (именно за это Адам и Ева были изгнаны из Рая). Или еще сказано, что человек создан по образу и подобию Божьему. Если понять это буквально, можно прийти к кощунственному выводу о тождестве человеческого и божественного. «По образу» – это, конечно, имеется в виду духовная сторона человеческой личности (его душа – это божественное начало), а вот как распорядиться этой данностью, зависит уже от самого человека, его воли, эта сторона личности тяготеет к другой части данной формулы –к « по подобию», быть или не быть «подобным» зависит от длительного пути самосовершенствования или его отсутствия. Символичными стали многие библейские имена: Каин (каиново племя), Хам (хамство), Иуда (предательство) и др.

Так, образы-символы классические (античные), национальные, библейские, освоенные художественной литературой, становятся элементом этого или иного стиля. В личную авторскую стилистику они приходят в качестве готового материала, рассчитанного на однозначное восприятие. Диапазон вариантности прочтения их в контексте литературного произведения неширок. Они не приводят к смысловой многозначности и оригинальности. Принципиально такого типа символами являются и образы Логоса и Духа. Историк Г.П. Федотов в сочинении «О св. Духе в природе и культуре» расшифровывает их, в частности, так: «Мы, христиане, можем дать истинные имена божественным силам, действовавшим и, по апостолу Павлу, в дохристианской культуре. Это имена Логоса и Духа. Одно знаменует порядок, стройность, гармонию, другое– вдохновение, восторг, творческий порыв. Оба начала неизбежно присутствуют во всяком деле культуры. И ремесло и труды земледельца невозможны без некоторой творческой работы. Научное познание немыслимо без интуиции, без творческого созерцания. И создание поэта или музыканта предполагает суровый труд, отливающий вдохновение в строгие формы искусства. Но начало Духа преобладает в художественном творчестве, как начало Логоса – в научном познании»[22].

Другую категорию образов-символов составляют образы индивидуальные.

Индивидуальная символика может создаваться в рамках одного литературного произведения, может оказаться свойственной данному автору в определенных циклах произведений или вообще пронизывать все творчество данного автора. Но в любом случае она найдена и создана индивидуально, есть продукт авторского сознания и созерцания. Такие образы-символы включены в авторскую стилистику и отражают его мироощущение. Именно поэтому они могут быть неожиданными, многослойными и многозначными. И потому разными по степени своей определенности – неопределенности.

Авторский символ включается в прием, провоцирующий разночтения. Особенно это касается символа в контексте реалистического произведения. Возможность разночтения, а также возможность градации по степени определенности – неопределенности отличает авторский символ оттрадиционного, классического.

Примером может служить, в частности, загадочное «Оно» в конце «Истории одного города» Салтыкова-Щедрина. До сих пор ни в отечественной, ни в зарубежной литературе нет однозначного суждения на этот счет. Показательно в этом смысле название работы англ. ученого Дж. Фута «Реакция или Революция? Конец «Истории одного города Салтыкова» (Oxford Slavonic Papers. 1968. Vol. 1)[23].

In principle, the author's symbol is heterogeneous. Having arisen in a certain work, he can go beyond it and continue to live independently. But in this case from the work he makes the only content and with it is fixed in use. Such is the “Gulag Archipelago” by A. Solzhenitsyn –– the symbol of lawlessness, injustice, inhumanity. This is its generalized meaning, it is already a definite informative sign, although this symbol was born on specific historical material. It was he who became cross-cutting, mainly works. Moreover, outlined in the introduction to the book, this image continued to evolve in the future, and by the end of the first part “the insatiable Archipelago has already scattered to enormous proportions”.

The same nature of the “Pit” by A. Platonov is a symbol of hopeless construction of socialism on loose soil.

Another type of individual character images are symbols that live in their own context, the context of a given work, by a given author. And going beyond the work, such a symbol is destroyed, disappears.

Most often, such symbolism is woven on commonly used linguistic material, usually on the basis of ordinary, ugly speech means by building through images, a gradual increase in the meanings of words-images of symbolic qualities. As it was already shown, the subtle master of such a “buildup of meanings” - A.P. Chekhov. In the story "The Lady with the Dog," for example, the image of gray grows to a symbolic sound. A start was made by the “gray eyes” of Anna Sergeyevna and her “gray dress”. These subject-everyday details of the description, unremarkable in and of themselves, find a different, special content, being the dashed lines of a particular "gray" context:

How can I live now? I'll come home. How to look out the window - a long gray fence. With nails, - says Anna Sergeyevna at parting with Gurov.

Such a context brings the attentive reader to the perception of gray as a symbol of happiness, unhappiness, very good, but ordinary nonheroic people who are not able to go beyond their everydayness, their customs, even for the sake of their own happiness. In this chain of definitions, epithets, as it were, exposes the substantive essence of a gray color — the color of imperceptible, dull, indefinite. The definition of “gray” is complicated by the non-color meaning –the origin, invisibility. However, with the gray color is not so simple. And so the selectivity of A. Chekhov (the choice of color) in this case is not accidental.

Gray color means isolation, secrecy or restraint. This is often associated with an increased level of anxiety. In the Christian canons, the meaning of bodily death and spiritual immortality was fixed behind gray, so gray outside Chekhov's context already had a symbolic sound, but Chekhov led the reader individually to this meaning: through ordinary literal meanings to symbolic.

Color symbols help to convey the secret M. Tsvetaeva. She is dominated by pink symbolism - a symbol of youth, purity, tenderness, romance. Back in the verses of 1913, she wrote: “I was too pink and young for you”; "I, ever-pink, will be the palest of all." Later: "Pink outfit of a 70-year-old former beauty"; "Pink hall of the Palace of Arts on Povarskaya". Especially pink color warms it in everyday life and the severity of the 19th year. Dreams and regrets are connected with it: “No one gave a pink dress”.

Images-symbols are organic to many romantic works of A. Blok. They are the rallying point for entire cycles of poems. For example: poems about the Beautiful Lady (symbol of Eternal Femininity), about the snow mask (poems inspired by the relationship with actress Volokhova), about Carmen (actress Delmas).

In individual creativity, it is possible to deviate from well-known images, symbols, a special twist in their interpretation. For example, we all know that Motherland is always associated with the concept of mother - Motherland. However, for Blok this is the Wife ( Oh, Rus ... My wife), the Bride. Apparently, the concept of Eternal Femininity is highlighted here as well. A. Blok has intimate-personal images (wife, bride), and this intimate-personal is inseparable from the universal - the Eternal Feminine.

This echoes the image of Russia in A. Bely (Christ is risen):

Russia, my country - you are the one

clothed with the Sun Wife.

And also characteristic of the artistic text in terms of symbolism. This is personification. In the characters that "inhabit" the works of art, everything is compressed to the image, to the type, although it is shown quite concretely and individually. Many character characters are perceived as certain characters (Don Quixote, Don Juan, Faust, Carmen, Oblomov, Nozdrev, Plushkin), behind their names are some specific character traits, information, attitude to life. Heroes of literary works often live outside the book - beyond the boundaries of the author's text. This level of existence is called metatextual. This type of literary names become common, they serve as the basis for the formation of the names of the names of style, lifestyle, behavior, names of abstract concepts such as oblomovism , manilovshchyna, hamletism, quixotic.

So, the artistic image is a product of the artistic text, a consequence of a special understanding of the realities of the world, it is the embodiment of his creative knowledge. And if we are talking about the creative knowledge of the world, it means that this world is seen as transformed, subjectively perceived. And this in turn leads to the recognition of the mystery in the artistic word. “If everything is clear in a work of art, it loses its artistry. In a work of art, something must be secret ”(DS Likhachev). And this “something secret” is directly related to the artistic imagery, the metaphoricity of the artistic word. In principle, metaphor (figurative use of the word) is characteristic not only of fiction, but it is in fiction that it is occasional (individual). The individual author's metaphor (verbal image) is always created, not reproduced, and therefore it can be unpredictable, based on individual associations, in which the artistic secret lies. And solving the mystery (by the reader) is also a creative process. And the “reading” of the metaphor can be both superficial and deep. And it may also happen that the reader, in his perception and reading of the work, goes beyond what the author intended, or will be in a completely different plane (cf., for example, the interpretation of Tatiana’s image from “Eugene Onegin” by V. Belinsky and D. Pisarev ). So the mystery of the artistic word is revealed in different ways and from different sides. No wonder they talk about a different reading of the artistic text.

In other types of text, figurativeness does not go beyond the limits of a verbal image that performs an explanatory function (scientific and especially popular science literature) or evaluative (newspaper texts). In this and in another case, the figurative word is unambiguous and therefore does not represent any mystery.