NATIONAL IDENTITY IN BRITISH LITERATURE

Альманах наукового товариства «Афіна» кафедри культурології та музеєзнавства Рівненського державного гуманітарного університету 6 Розділ I. ЄВРОІНТЕГРАЦІЙНІ ПРОЦЕСИ В УКРАЇНІ І СПРОБА ЇХ НАУКОВОГО ОСМИСЛЕННЯ УДК 820.0:316.75 NATIONAL IDENTITY IN BRITISH LITERATURE Ilaha Guliyeva NURADDIN – PhD in Philology. Department of Languages, the Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0833-6147 https://doi.org/ [email protected]k National identity has always been a central theme in British cultural and literary discourse. From its historical roots in religion and empire to its re-evaluation in the age of postcolonialism and globalization, the notion of Britishness has undergone constant transformation. Literature has served as both a mirror and a critical space where ideas of belonging, unity, and difference have been negotiated. Writers from the Romantic and Victorian eras reinforced traditional values and imperial pride, while modernist and contemporary authors questioned the coherence of national identity, reflecting cultural fragmentation and hybridity. In the twenty-first century, British literature continues to explore the complexities of multiculturalism, migration, and globalization, positioning identity as a fluid and contested construct rather than a fixed reality. Key words: British literature, national identity, Englishness, Britishness, postcolonialism, multiculturalism, hybridity, globalization. Introduction. The question of national identity in British literature has remained central to cultural and political discourse, reflecting the country’s ongoing struggle to reconcile tradition with transformation. The twentyfirst century, marked by globalization, migration, and political upheavals such as Brexit, has intensified the literary debate on what it means to be «British». Contemporary writers and scholars alike explore how narratives of belonging, memory, and heritage evolve within a multicultural and post-imperial society. Literature has thus become both a mirror and a laboratory for rethinking Britishness – a term that no longer signifies ethnic homogeneity, but rather the coexistence of diverse identities and histories within a shared cultural framework [10; 182]. As Sue Thomas observes, post-Brexit British fiction reveals the fragility of national coherence, presenting belonging as an open-ended process shaped by gender, ethnicity, and migration [8; 276]. This new cultural landscape compels writers to engage with the contradictions of British identity – between global cosmopolitanism and local rootedness, inclusivity and nostalgia, pluralism and political fragmentation. Similarly, James Procter emphasizes that the contemporary novel functions as a site of negotiation, where authors attempt to reconcile the fractured legacy of empire with the realities of a globalized society [5; 34]. Through such literary experimentation, British fiction assumes a mediating role between historical consciousness and modern plurality, demonstrating that identity is neither fixed nor inherited but constantly rewritten. Bernardine Evaristo’s and Zadie Smith’s works epitomize this evolution. Evaristo’s Girl, Woman, Other and her manifesto essays articulate a radical inclusivity that expands the boundaries of representation, positioning Black British experience at the center of national discourse [2; 41]. Smith, on the other hand, redefines «Englishness» as a dialogue of intersecting voices – personal, diasporic, and urban – that challenge the binary of insider and outsider [7; 19]. Their writing transforms the very grammar of British identity, showing that cultural hybridity is not a peripheral theme but the organizing principle of contemporary national literature. This reconfiguration of identity also resonates within recent theoretical studies. Simon Gikandi links the ethics of reading in global English to the moral dimensions of national identity, arguing that literature today operates as a form of ethical imagination that mediates between the local and the transnational [3; 150]. Likewise, Robert J. C. Young reconsiders British literature «after empire, after Brexit», proposing that decolonization is not merely a historical event but a continuous cultural and epistemological process [10; 184]. Such perspectives align with Rebecca Walkowitz’s notion of the «born-translated» novel, where contemporary British texts circulate in multilingual, multicultural contexts, embodying a new kind of cosmopolitan belonging [9; 22]. In this way, twenty-first-century British literature performs a double function: it preserves the memory of the nation’s past while simultaneously redefining the meaning of identity in an era of uncertainty. The interaction between literary imagination and social transformation ensures that Britishness remains an open concept – a space of negotiation shaped by diversity, hybridity, and creative re-interpretation [6; 67]. Discussion. The representation of national identity in British literature has historically reflected the country’s © Ilaha Guliyeva NURADDIN., 2025 Стаття поширюється на умовах ліцензії CC BY 4.0 Актуальні питання культурології. Випуск 24/2025 7 moral, religious, and political evolution, yet in the twenty-first century it has acquired a new urgency. The dynamics of migration, postcolonial reflection, and the social fragmentation following Brexit have compelled writers to reimagine what «Britishness» entails in an era defined by hybridity and global interdependence. The very concept of the nation, once rooted in empire and language, now unfolds as a narrative of plurality and negotiation, echoing the multilayered structure of the society it seeks to describe. Literature thus functions as both archive and experiment – a space where memory, belonging, and identity are continually tested, contested, and rewritten [10; 182]. 1. Historical Context and the Transformation of Britishness. The historical evolution of British literature reveals that ideas of national identity have never been static but have continually adapted to changing political and cultural circumstances. From the Protestant moralism of the seventeenth century to the imperial confidence of the nineteenth, literature served as a mirror for the shifting notion of what it meant to belong to a collective «we». Yet in contemporary scholarship, this linear trajectory has been reinterpreted as a dynamic process of cultural negotiation rather than a simple continuity of values. As Max Saunders notes, literary history in Britain demonstrates «the imagined futures» of a society constantly reinventing itself through art and narrative [6; 67]. Early canonical writers such as Milton and Shakespeare constructed Britishness through theological and heroic imagery; their works turned history into a moral allegory that defined virtue as a national characteristic. But with industrialization and empire, that moral identity expanded outward – incorporating the rhetoric of progress and civilization, and simultaneously concealing class divisions and colonial domination beneath the language of destiny. The Victorian age, often described as the zenith of British power, embodied the paradox of pride and anxiety. Alfred Tennyson and Rudyard Kipling portrayed Britain as both chosen and burdened – a nation tasked with guiding others while preserving its own moral core. Modern criticism, however, has exposed the fissures behind that selfassurance. Postcolonial readings reveal that empire generated not unity but multiplicity, introducing new cultural voices that would later redefine the literary canon [10; 184]. As the twentieth century unfolded, writers like Virginia Woolf and T. S. Eliot reflected the disintegration of collective faith; their modernist sensibility articulated fragmentation and alienation as the new condition of national consciousness. Robert J. C. Young reinterprets this moment as an early phase of decolonization – not yet political but already epistemological – where the very idea of British civilization was questioned from within [10; 185]. In this sense, literature’s historical function shifted: from affirming the nation’s stability to interrogating its boundaries. By the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, this questioning had evolved into a redefinition. British identity became inseparable from the multicultural experiences of its citizens, many of whom trace their roots to former colonies. As Sue Thomas explains, contemporary British fiction after Brexit demonstrates that national belonging is now «a space of contestation rather than consensus», shaped by voices of women, immigrants, and regional communities [8; 276]. The works of Hilary Mantel, Kazuo Ishiguro, and Bernardine Evaristo embody this transformation, translating historical continuity into a dialogue between memory and diversity. For Evaristo, particularly, literature becomes an act of inclusion – a re-mapping of Britain’s narrative landscape to reflect the plurality that has long existed but rarely been acknowledged [2; 41]. This movement from myth to multiplicity marks the defining feature of British literature today: an identity no longer imposed from above but reimagined from within, through a chorus of intersecting experiences and evolving voices. Although the twentieth century fractured the certainties that once sustained British identity, it also generated a remarkable aesthetic diversity that allowed literature to absorb the contradictions of its own history. The post-war decades witnessed the erosion of imperial confidence and the rise of new ethical and philosophical sensibilities. Writers such as George Orwell, Doris Lessing, and Salman Rushdie transformed the political anxieties of the nation into narrative experimentation, turning fiction into a forum for debating the meaning of power, class, and moral responsibility. This period signified not merely a loss of imperial authority but the democratization of national storytelling: the center could now be challenged from the margins, and voices once silenced could redefine the collective imagination. As Max Saunders argues, Britain’s literary tradition became «a palimpsest of futures» – each generation overwriting the previous narrative while leaving its traces visible beneath [6; 69]. This metaphor captures how Britishness evolved not through abrupt ruptures but through cumulative reinterpretations that preserved memory even as they transformed it. The collapse of the empire also reconfigured the moral geography of the nation itself. As migration intensified, the boundaries between “native” and «foreign» grew porous, and the British novel began to imagine identity as an exchange rather than a possession. Simon Gikandi notes that this cosmopolitan turn in literature reshaped the ethics of reading by requiring engagement with difference and accountability to the global Other [3; 151]. Such a view transforms Britishness from a fixed origin into a moral practice – an ongoing negotiation between self and world. In this context, postcolonial and diasporic writers did not Альманах наукового товариства «Афіна» кафедри культурології та музеєзнавства Рівненського державного гуманітарного університету 8 simply add new themes to the literary canon; they redefined the very notion of canonicity. The British literary space became a dialogic arena where the language of belonging was rewritten in multiple registers – from the hybrid vernacular of Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children to the intersecting narratives of Evaristo’s Girl, Woman, Other. The result is a body of literature that not only chronicles historical transformation but also enacts it, performing identity as a living, collective process that resists closure [10; 186]. 2. Contemporary Voices and the Reimagining of British Identity. In the twenty-first century, British literature has become a polyphonic arena in which national identity is continuously redefined through the interplay of memory, migration, and multicultural experience. The old binaries of center and periphery, native and foreign, have collapsed under the weight of global interconnectedness, leading to what Rebecca Walkowitz describes as the age of the «born-translated» novel – a mode of writing that is simultaneously local and transnational, rooted in British experience yet open to multiple cultural grammars [9; 22]. This linguistic and imaginative hybridity characterizes a generation of writers who perceive identity not as heritage but as movement, not as purity but as relation. The literary map of Britain now includes narratives written from Caribbean, South Asian, African, and Eastern European perspectives, transforming the notion of «Britishness» into an ever-expanding dialogue between histories, geographies, and sensibilities. Bernardine Evaristo’s Girl, Woman, Other epitomizes this transformation. Her interwoven narratives present Britain as a living archive of plural experience, where gender, race, and sexuality intersect to create a new, inclusive model of belonging [2; 41]. Evaristo’s approach challenges both the homogeneity of traditional Englishness and the tokenistic multiculturalism of late twentieth-century discourse. Instead, she constructs a panoramic vision of British life that insists on visibility, complexity, and empathy. Zadie Smith’s essays in Intimations complement this project by articulating a cosmopolitan ethics of coexistence – a recognition that the national narrative, to remain vital, must accommodate fragmentation and contradiction [7; 19]. Both writers employ formal innovation – the fluid syntax, fragmented dialogue, and hybrid voices – to mirror the social heterogeneity of the nation they portray. As Sue Thomas notes, such fiction «refuses the fantasy of cultural consensus» and instead presents identity as «a space of constant negotiation between individuality and collectivity» [8; 277]. James Procter’s analysis of post-Brexit literature provides a theoretical lens through which to understand this creative evolution. He argues that British fiction has become a laboratory for testing the viability of belonging in an age of polarization [5; 35]. The literary imagination, in his view, performs the political work that institutions often fail to achieve – offering symbolic resolutions to social fragmentation. This is evident in works like Hilary Mantel’s The Mirror and the Light, which revisits Tudor history not to glorify national myth but to explore the psychological undercurrents of power and faith that continue to shape British self-perception. Similarly, Kazuo Ishiguro’s Klara and the Sun extends the question of identity beyond human borders, reimagining empathy and consciousness as global ethical categories rather than national traits. These writers reveal that in a post-imperial, postindustrial society, literature is where the nation negotiates its future – not as an ideology, but as a lived moral question. Recent critical studies reinforce this moral dimension of contemporary British writing. Simon Gikandi interprets global English as a medium of ethical imagination, suggesting that the reader’s encounter with difference becomes a form of moral education [3; 152]. Rob Nixon and Sheila Jasanoff similarly position literature as a planetary practice that redefines belonging through ecological and ethical interdependence [4; 27]. In such readings, Britishness no longer functions as a closed category; it expands to include the global and the posthuman, blurring the boundary between the national and the universal. The rise of environmental fiction, migration narratives, and intersectional poetics signals that national identity in literature has evolved into a transdisciplinary discourse – one that connects history with futurity, and imagination with responsibility. Ultimately, the reimagining of British identity in contemporary literature represents both a continuation and a departure. It continues the historical tradition of using narrative as a means of self-definition, yet departs from the older frameworks of race, empire, and exceptionalism that once underpinned that tradition. As Robert J. C. Young emphasizes, «after empire, after Brexit», the act of writing itself becomes decolonizing – not through overt political rhetoric, but through the quiet reorientation of voice, perspective, and empathy [10; 185]. The British novel, once a vehicle for imperial confidence, now operates as a forum for plural belonging. Its characters traverse continents, its languages intersect, and its readers inhabit multiple frames of reference. In this sense, literature continues to perform the work that politics struggles to achieve: it imagines community without uniformity, and identity without exclusion. Britishness, therefore, endures not as a relic of history but as a creative practice – an evolving conversation between past and present, self and other, art and society [6; 70]. The reconfiguration of British identity in recent literature also reveals an increasing awareness of temporality – how collective memory and historical trauma continue to shape cultural imagination. Max Saunders’s concept of «imagined futures» provides a useful framework for understanding this phenomenon, suggesting that the British Актуальні питання культурології. Випуск 24/2025 9 novel not only reflects the past but also anticipates moral and social possibilities yet to come [6; 68]. In contemporary fiction, characters often negotiate their identities through acts of remembrance: family histories, migrations, and silences become instruments of self-definition. Bernardine Evaristo, for instance, reconstructs the fragmented histories of women of color in Britain, transforming historical marginalization into narrative empowerment [2; 43]. Similarly, Zadie Smith’s essays expose the unease of a post-imperial consciousness that oscillates between pride in cultural legacy and discomfort with its exclusions [7; 21]. Through such self-reflexivity, modern British writers transform the novel into a moral time machine – one that travels simultaneously backward and forward, connecting ancestral memory with the ethical dilemmas of a globalized present. Another important shift lies in the aesthetic reorientation of British literature toward collective storytelling. In the era of social fragmentation and digital isolation, contemporary authors increasingly emphasize interconnection and shared experience. Sue Thomas observes that recent British fiction «reclaims community as an imaginative act», weaving together dispersed identities into forms of narrative solidarity [8; 279]. This narrative pluralism redefines authorship itself: the writer becomes less a solitary voice than a curator of perspectives, assembling stories that coexist rather than compete. The result is a form of literary citizenship grounded in empathy rather than ideology. Within this framework, Britishness evolves into what James Procter calls a «dialogic belonging» – a constantly negotiated agreement to coexist within difference [5; 37]. The vitality of modern British literature, therefore, resides not in affirming unity but in sustaining dialogue – a dialogue that keeps national identity open, inclusive, and imaginatively alive [10; 185]. Conclusion. The evolution of national identity in British literature reveals an ongoing dialogue between history and imagination, tradition and reinvention. From its early moral and imperial narratives to its contemporary postcolonial and multicultural expressions, Britishness has never been a static essence but a dynamic process of negotiation. Each literary period – whether Milton’s divine heroism, Dickens’s moral realism, or Evaristo’s intersectional inclusivity – has redefined what it means to belong to a nation whose identity is as diverse as its language. In this respect, literature does not simply reflect social reality; it creates the symbolic framework through which collective belonging is envisioned, challenged, and renewed [5; 36]. The shifts in literary representation from unity to multiplicity, from purity to hybridity, mark the transformation of Britain itself from an imperial center to a postcolonial mosaic. As contemporary critics suggest, Britishness in the twenty-first century operates less as a fixed national category than as a moral and imaginative practice. Simon Gikandi’s notion of an ethical reading of global English underscores that national identity today depends on our capacity to engage empathetically with difference [3; 150]. Likewise, Rebecca Walkowitz’s concept of the «born-translated» novel captures how the British literary field transcends linguistic and cultural boundaries to embody a transnational consciousness [9; 23]. These theoretical frameworks align with the creative strategies of writers such as Zadie Smith and Bernardine Evaristo, who transform diversity from a social condition into a narrative principle. Their works demonstrate that literature not only records pluralism – it performs it, crafting forms of storytelling that enact the coexistence of voices, memories, and desires within the same cultural space [2; 42]. At the same time, the continuing resonance of postcolonial critique ensures that British identity remains self-reflexive. Robert J. C. Young’s idea of «decolonizing the literary imagination» situates contemporary writing at the intersection of memory and accountability, reminding readers that the imperial past cannot be erased but must be reinterpreted through the lens of justice and inclusion [10; 186]. This interpretive responsibility extends beyond politics to ethics: as Rob Nixon and Sheila Jasanoff observe, literature functions as a planetary mode of thought, urging nations to imagine themselves as participants in a shared ecological and moral order [4; 29]. Within such a perspective, Britishness becomes less about sovereignty and more about solidarity, less about borders and more about connection. In conclusion, the trajectory of British literature – from the mythic to the multicultural, from insularity to interdependence – illustrates how national identity is continually reinvented through creative discourse. The modern British writer inherits not a singular tradition but a dialogue of pasts and futures, in which every narrative becomes an act of cultural translation. Britishness today stands not as an emblem of uniformity but as a living practice of difference – a testament to the power of art to imagine community anew [6; 70]. References 1. Easthope Antony, and Dominic McHugh. Re-imagining Britishness in Contemporary Literature. London : Routledge, 2022. 2. Evaristo Bernardine. Manifesto: On Never Giving Up. London : Penguin Books, 2021. 3. Gikandi Simon. «Global English and the Ethics of Reading». Modern Language Quarterly, 2022. 83, no. 2. Р. 145–166. 4. Nixon Rob, and Sheila Jasanoff. Literature and the Planetary Imagination. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2023. 5. Procter James. «Post-Brexit Literature: Rewriting British Identity in the Twenty-First Century». Journal of British Studies, 2024. 63, no. 1. Р. 33–58. Альманах наукового товариства «Афіна» кафедри культурології та музеєзнавства Рівненського державного гуманітарного університету 10 6. Saunders Max. Imagined Futures: Writing, Science, and Modernity in Britain, 1900–2020. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2020. 7. Smith Zadie. Intimations: Essays. London : Hamish Hamilton, 2020. 8. Thomas Sue. «Multiculturalism after Brexit: British Fiction and the Politics of Belonging». Contemporary Literature, 2024. 65, no. 3. Р. 275–299. 9. Walkowitz Rebecca L. Born Translated: The Contemporary Novel in an Age of Globalization. Updated edition. New York : Columbia University Press, 2021. 10. Young Robert J. C. «After Empire, After Brexit: Decolonizing the Idea of British Literature». Postcolonial Studies, 2023. 26, no. 2. Р. 181–197. УДК 820.0:316.75 НАЦІОНАЛЬНА ІДЕНТИЧНІСТЬ У БРИТАНСЬКІЙ ЛІТЕРАТУРІ Ілаха Гулієва НУРАДДІН – доктор філологічних наук, кафедра мов, Академія державного управління при Президенті Азербайджанської Республіки, Баку Національна ідентичність завжди була центральною темою британського культурного та літературного дискурсу. Від історичного коріння в релігії та імперії до переоцінки в епоху постколоніалізму та глобалізації, поняття британськості постійно трансформувалося. Література служила одночасно дзеркалом і критичним простором, де обговорювалися ідеї приналежності, єдності та відмінності. Письменники епох романтизму та вікторіанської епохи підкреслювали традиційні цінності та імперську гордість, тоді як модерністські та сучасні автори ставили під сумнів цілісність національної ідентичності, відображаючи культурну фрагментацію та гібридність. У ХХІ столітті британська література продовжує досліджувати складнощі мультикультуралізму, міграції та глобалізації, позиціонуючи ідентичність як мінливий та суперечливий конструкт, а не як фіксовану реальність. Ключові слова: британська література, національна ідентичність, англійськість, британськість, постколоніалізм, мультикультуралізм, гібридність, глобалізація.. Стаття отримана 20.02.2025 Стаття прийнята 19.03.2025 Стаття опублікована 22. 12.202 УДК 821.512.162 EYYUB ABASOV’S NOVEL ZƏNGƏZUR : THE ARTISTIC EXPRESSION OF HISTORICAL MEMORY Nurana Asadullayeva FIRUDIN – PhD in Philology, Scientific Secretary, National Museum of Azerbaijani Literature named after Nizami Ganjavi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2234-7956 https://doi.org [email protected] The literature of Azerbaijan from the 1920 s through the 1960 s constitutes a phase markedly different from earlier periods with respect to the dynamics of literary thought. This difference stems primarily from the fact that literature ceased to develop as a mere continuation of its predecessors and instead came to be oriented within a new socio-political process. After the establishment of the unified creative method known as «socialist realism», the praise of socialist ideas was expanded within artistic creation, and literature began to serve directly as an instrument of Soviet ideological propaganda. During the 1920 s and 1930 s this trajectory was enforced comprehensively by the official administrative apparatus and, to a lesser extent, again after the 1950 s. Following Nikita Khrushchev’s denunciation of the cult of Stalin at the 20th Congress of the Communist Party in 1956, a basis emerged for new perspectives to form both in public-political life and in cultural spheres. As in other areas of the country’s socio-political life, certain relaxations also began in the field of artistic literature. Key words: Azerbaijani literature, novel, Soviet ideology, Zəngəzur, Eyyub Abasov. One of the national-oriented matters that gained salience during this period was the attitude toward the massacres perpetrated by Armenians against Azerbaijanis in the Caucasus and in Azerbaijan at the beginning of the twentieth century. Although these events had been recorded in early twentieth-century archival documents and in Azerbaijani publicistic writings, restrictions were placed on writing about such topics after the Bolsheviks came to power. For example, Mammad Said Ordubadi’s book «Bloody Years», which recounted these events in vivid detail, was effectively placed under archival «suspension». The atrocities committed by Armenians in Baku, Shamakhi, Guba, Aghsu and elsewhere in 1918, and the extermination of more than one hundred thousand people, were attributed to the Azerbaijani Democratic Republic that had been active in 1918–1920, while © Nurana Asadullayeva FIRUDIN., 2025 Стаття поширюється на умовах ліцензії CC BY 4.0