(According to Nodar Dumbadze's Novel "Tetri Bairagebi” (White Banners))

Keywords: Misinterpretation, Novel, Nodar Dumbadze, Literary criticism, Georgian literature.


In the current paper, we discuss the problems of misinterpretation of a text, on the example of one work by one writer. It is not new that on the basis of misinterpretation, it is possible to radically change the pathos of the work and the context of the problem. Finally, both the interests of the reader and the purpose of the author are harmed. The value perception of a work depends on the correct course of the critics when interpreting the text; therefore, it is necessary to concentrate on details and thorough analysis so that the author and the reader do not inadvertently confuse the main idea of ​​the work and each other. In this case, we will consider, as an example, Nodar Dumbadze's novel "Tetri Bairagebi (White Banners)", which has been the object of heterogeneous interpretation, and we will try to correct the wrong directions based on the reasoned answers and at the same time show the importance of precedent for such research.

After Nodar Dumbadze appeared on the literary field, he quickly gained the recognition. The writer left the indelible mark in Georgian literature of the twentieth century and took a decent place not only in Georgian, but in the world literary space. When the subject comes to the research of Nodar Dumbadze's creativity, it should be noted that it is very interesting, but in scientific criticism is presented with inadequately small-scale researches. It is true that a number of comments or reviews are created about his work, but the fact is that Nodar Dumbadze's creativity undoubtedly deserves much larger attention; moreover, the comprehensive and complex study of Nodar Dumbadze’s work has not been implemented yet. Therefore, it is natural that a number of issues that could be interesting subject of research unfortunately are left without the proper attention; as it seems certain group of self-expression seekers frequently benefit with the mentioned circumstance.

If we go through the processes in the certain dynamic of time, there is an impression that artificial reducing narrowing Nodar Dumbadze’s creativity scales continuously going on for a long period of time? Searching of the final aims of this action will take us far, but it is obvious that it is intentionally implemented and it is very disappointing, but this harmful action still exists in one part of the Georgian society, passivity of literary criticism also promotes misleading of the absolute majority of those.

Why occurs such purposeful changing of real emphasis of the work. We have written a number of reasons in the full version of the research and we will not continue more intentionally, but we will still strongly repeat, that there is a purposeful anti Dumbadze campaign, the roots of which generally we must search in the ugly, but established form, at the expense of infringing somebody’s authority to present the own. Moreover, it is important to note, that activating of these topics by the nonprofessionals, non-literates is a part of the strategy. As far as the critic cannot make such unreasonable and feeble assessments and if he makes this, the only thing he will do with it will be the fact that he will put himself in an awkward situation, very lightly speaking. And second it is already long time that criticism of literature has assessed Nodar Dumbadze (as an exceptionally original and high ranking writer) and does not consider something to dispute here, and the third one is that unprofessional can say any foolishness and he can call this the freedom of speech and democracy in the twenty-first century. Though we consider very important, to be given adequate and competent response to a harmful tendency by taking into account the principles of true values, exactly to that serves our research.