Viktor Shklovsky argues that the primary function of defamiliarization (ostranenie) in literature is to:
ACommunicate the author's emotions more vividly through unusual imagery
BRestore perception by prolonging the act of seeing, making the familiar appear strange and newly experienced
CMake difficult ideas accessible by translating them into everyday language
DDraw attention to the author's technical craft as a mark of artistic quality
Shklovsky's claim is specifically cognitive and anti-habitual: art exists to counteract automatized perception — the deadening of experience that comes from routine familiarity. Defamiliarization does not add emotional decoration (option A) or clarity (option C); it does the opposite — it slows down processing, reactivates the senses, and makes perception an end in itself rather than a transparent means to meaning. Option D misframes craft as a prestige signal; Formalists were interested in devices as instruments of the defamiliarization effect, not as evidence of skill for its own sake.
Question 2 Multiple Choice
A detective novel opens at the moment of crime discovery, then gradually reconstructs events through clues and testimony, withholding the killer's identity until the final chapter. A Formalist analyst would describe this structure as:
AThe fabula — the chronological sequence of story events as they actually occurred
BThe sjuzhet — the deliberate arrangement and withholding of narrative information to control the reader's knowledge
CDefamiliarization — making the familiar crime seem strange through formal manipulation
DLiterariness — the property that distinguishes this text from a police report of the same events
The fabula is the raw chronological sequence of events (crime, motive, discovery, investigation, revelation). The sjuzhet is how those events are arranged and presented in the actual narrative — in this case, starting at discovery and withholding the cause. The novel's distinctive structure is entirely in the sjuzhet: it is the construction of the story, not the story itself. Option C (defamiliarization) concerns the effect on perception, not narrative sequencing. Option D (literariness) is the broader property that all these devices contribute to.
Question 3 True / False
For Russian Formalists, a prose paraphrase that accurately conveys the themes and ideas of a poem captures what is essentially literary about the poem.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: False
The Formalists held that the literary work resides precisely in what a paraphrase cannot capture: the formal operations of rhythm, meter, device, defamiliarization — the way language is arranged to resist automatic processing. A paraphrase passes through the poem to its 'meaning' and in doing so destroys the very thing that makes the poem literary. Content (what is said) is distinguished from form (how it is said and felt), and the Formalists insisted that form is where literary value lies — not because form is decorative but because it is the instrument of the defamiliarization effect.
Question 4 True / False
Defamiliarization, as Shklovsky defines it, makes literary language harder to process — slowing down perception rather than facilitating efficient communication.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: True
This is precisely Shklovsky's claim. Practical language is designed for efficiency: we pass through it to the referent without attending to the language itself. Literary language is designed to resist this — it foregrounds itself, creates rhythmic expectations that slow processing, forces detours through metaphor, and makes the reader feel the process of signification. The prolongation of perception is not a defect but the mechanism by which art restores sensation. Automatization is the enemy; difficulty (in the specific sense of requiring attention) is the point.
Question 5 Short Answer
What is the distinction between fabula and sjuzhet in Russian Formalist theory, and why did the Formalists insist that analyzing sjuzhet is where the specifically literary work happens?
Think about your answer, then reveal below.
Model answer: Fabula is the raw material of a story: the events as they would appear in chronological order if fully reconstructed. Sjuzhet is the actual narrative construction — how events are ordered, delayed, disclosed, and withheld in the text as written. The Formalists insisted on this distinction because it shows that narrative form is not merely a container for pre-existing content: the way a story is constructed (beginning in medias res, withholding information, shifting perspectives) is itself a set of literary devices that do work on the reader. Analyzing sjuzhet means analyzing the text as a formal construction rather than as a vehicle for a paraphrasable story.
A detective novel and a police report can share the same fabula but are entirely different objects because their sjuzhets differ radically. This distinction was enormously influential for structuralist narratology and remains a foundational tool for analyzing how narrative form generates meaning. The Formalist insight was that asking 'what happened?' is the wrong question — the right question is 'how is what happened told, and what does the telling do?'