Nevyrazimo prosto i prekrasno. Character and narrative construction in Vasilii Grossman’s 1930s short prose

This study offers a systematic re-evaluation of Vasilii Semënovich Grossman’s early prose of the 1930s, a period frequently overshadowed by his later works. While Grossman’s reputation today still rests largely on these “heretical” texts, his literary beginnings have often been treated as ideologically compromised and aesthetically minor. This research challenges such assumptions by examining Grossman’s short fiction of the 1930s not as a marginal prologue to his mature writing, but as a formative and formally complex phase that merits sustained critical attention. The primary corpus includes the collections Schast’e (1935), Chetyre dnia (1936), and Rasskazy (1937), supplemented by investigation of first editions, and archival holdings. The initial phase of the project involved assembling and cataloguing these materials, drawing on archival resources such as Fond 1710 (RGALI) and the Garrards’ collection at Harvard. Scholars have debated the question of rupture versus continuity in Grossman’s ideological and literary evolution, often framing the 1930s as a period of alignment with Socialist Realism and the Stalinist cultural project. This study argues that Grossman’s early fiction does not simply reflect Soviet ideological imperatives, but rather negotiates them through complex formal and discursive strategies. In doing so, it contributes to research that questions the coherence and stability of “Soviet literature” as a category. The research adopts a methodological approach grounded in narratology, discourse analysis, and the semiotics of character. Drawing on structuralist and cognitive theories of character (notably the work of Uri Margolin and Philippe Hamon), as well as discourse-oriented frameworks (Oswald Ducrot), the analysis focuses on two key formal dimensions: the construction of character as a site where aesthetic, ideological, and narrative pressures converge, and the use of focalisation, including language patterns and stylistic devices that shape the text’s enunciative layer. These elements are examined not only for their narrative function, but also for the implicit evaluative structures they encode and the tensions they expose within the stylistic demands of Socialist Realism. Rather than treating Grossman’s early texts as simple instances of conformity or deviation from state-sanctioned literary norms, the study reads them as sites of semantic negotiation. Ultimately, the study argues for a diachronic, textually grounded perspective on Grossman’s oeuvre, that bridges the boundary between his “early” (conformist) and “late” (mature and dissident) work. By focusing on the narrative and discursive mechanics of the 1930s prose, it not only recovers a neglected corpus but also demonstrates its relevance. In doing so, the research proves attentive to the interplay of aesthetics, ideology, and narrative form, and recognises the early Grossman as an active participant in the discursive formation and contestation of Socialist Realism.