Historical Fact and Literary Representation in Mukhtar Magauin’s Kipchak Aruy: A Survey-Based Study of Readers’ Comparative Perception
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1609.23Keywords:
fiction, historical interpretation, reader perception, Kazakh prose, survey researchAbstract
This research article examines readers’ perceptions of historical data and authorial interpretation in Mukhtar Magauin’s Kipchak Aruy. The primary objective of the research is to empirically assess readers’ ability to distinguish between historical evidence and fictionalized historical narrative, their level of trust in the author’s reconstruction, and the cognitive and emotional impact of the work. The study employed a quantitative cross-sectional survey design. A total of 157 respondents voluntarily participated in the research. Data were collected via Google Forms and analyzed using the R statistical software environment. The questionnaire was structured around a three-factor model: (1) familiarity with the literary work, (2) perception of historical evidence and fictional narrative, and (3) interpretation and evaluative response. The findings indicate varying levels of familiarity with the text among respondents. Nevertheless, the historical period depicted in the work was rated as highly comprehensible, and the integration of historical information with artistic imagination was largely perceived as authentic and convincing. The majority of respondents considered the author’s interpretation credible and evaluated the work as a text that both deepens historical knowledge and generates emotional engagement. Moreover, the literary text was widely perceived as a cultural medium that complements academic historiography. The results demonstrate that historical prose plays a significant role in shaping historical consciousness in readers’ minds and that the synthesis of historical evidence and literary reconstruction fosters interpretive openness and meaningful engagement.
References
Adaeva, E. S., & Sultanova, A. (2022). Conceptual field in a literary text (based on Mukhtar Magauin’s novel Kipchak Aruy). Bulletin of the Eurasian Humanities Institute, (1), 49-60.
Alpysbaev, Q. (2008). Historical work in Kazakh literature: Cognition and poetics. Almaty: Taimas Publishing House.
Asanov, Zh., & Tilemisova, Q. (2023). Artistic features and character development in M. Magauin’s novella Kipchak Aruy. Retrieved March 20, 2025, from https://www.rusnauka.com/10_NMIW_2015/Philologia/1_190511.doc.htm
Baharuddin, A. F. (2025). The Contribution of Literature-based Reading Instruction in Increasing Students’ Learning Performance: Perception and Impact. Language Related Research, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.29252/LRR.16
Boubekeur, S. (2021). Teaching short stories through the use of reader-response theory: Second-year students at Dr. Moulay Tahar University-Saida. Arab World English Journal, 12(2), 83-92.
Budagov, L. Z. (1969). Comparative dictionary of Turkish-Tatar dialects. Saint Petersburg.
Caldwell, D. (1986). German documentary prose of the 1970s (Wallraff, Frisch, Enzensberger, Kluge) [Doctoral dissertation]. The Ohio State University.
Chubaryan, A. O. (Ed.). (2014). Theory and methodology of historical science: Terminological dictionary. Moscow: Akvilon.
Duka, O. G. (2005). Discourse of historical science and identity. Diskurs-Pi, 5(1), 170-172.
Foley, B. (1980). History, fiction, and the ground between: The uses of the documentary mode in Black literature. PMLA, 95(3), 389-403. https://doi.org/10.2307/461880
Foley, B. C. (1986). Telling the truth: The theory and practice of documentary fiction. Cornell University Press.
Godime, E. (2024). Historiographic fiction or a documentary genre? Interdisciplinary Journal of Research and Development, 11(1), 133. https://doi.org/10.56345/ijrdv11n119
Górska, K. (2017). The work of Svetlana Alexievich in the context of the history of documentary fictional prose (“Boys in Zinc”). RUDN Journal of Studies in Literature and Journalism, 22(2), 291-301. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9220-2017-22-2-291-301
Ihnativ, I. (2018). Svitlana Alexievich’s documentary prose: Problems and genreology. Sultanivski Chytannia, (7), 199-214.
Jweid, A. N. A. A., & Al-Khamisi, F. A. (2024). Theoretical Insights of History, Morality, and Society as the Literary Trio of the Author-Reader Relationship. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 7(3), 53-58. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2024.7.3.6
Kabilov, A. D. (2011, April 15). Reality veiled in imagination. Retrieved from https://kazgazeta.kz/news/7229
Kishkenbaeva, Zh. K. (2017). Narrator and authorial position in fiction prose. Tambov University Review. Series: Philological Sciences and Cultural Studies, 3(2), 56-63.
Kovalova, O., & Shalman, T. (2024). Reading culture of teenagers in social media: A study of reading habits and perception of online literary and educational content by teenagers. Studies in Media and Communication, 12(2), 26-36. https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v12i2.6720
Magauin, M. (2007). Kipchak aruy: Short novels. Almaty: Atamura.
Mart, C. T. (2019). Reader-response theory and literature discussions: A springboard for exploring literary texts. The New Educational Review, 56, 78-87.
Ovcharova, E. (2013). The philosophy of history and the problem of genre in travel literature: Differentiating between documentary and literary texts. Retrieved March 25, 2025, from https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/39470201/Ovcharova_E_-_Gent2013-libre.pdf
Qasimli, I. (2019). The formation of documentary prose in the 19th century Ottoman literature. Eastern Studies Scientific-Theoretical Journal, 1(1). Retrieved April 16, 2025, from https://dergipark.anas.az/index.php/es/article/view/883
Rocha, R. C. (2024). Exploring the relation between literary works and reader reception: implications for moral reflection. Philósophos-Revista de Filosofia, 29(2). https://doi.org/10.5216/phi.v29i2.80150
Saddhono, K., Judijanto, L., Nuryanto, T., Anis, M. Y., Nasution, J., & Sallu, S. (2024, May). The AI based design layout for exploring the reader experience through technical interaction for learning literature. In 2024 4th International Conference on Advance Computing and Innovative Technologies in Engineering (ICACITE) (pp. 1489-1494). IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/ICACITE60783.2024.10617284 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10617284
Spirovska, E. (2019). Reader-response theory and approach: Application, values and significance for students in literature courses. SEEU Review, 14(1), 20-35.
Syzdykova, R. (1980). Words speak. Almaty: Mektep.
Toishanuly, A. (2020). Great sycamore. Retrieved April 6, 2025, from https://egemen.kz/article/219262-alyp-shynar
Toker, L. (1997). Toward a poetics of documentary prose – From the perspective of Gulag testimonies. Poetics Today, 187-222. https://doi.org/10.2307/1773432
Vice, S. (2003). Documentary fiction. In Holocaust fiction (pp. 43-70). Routledge.
Zhambek, S. (2018). Where do the origins of transgression in Kazakh literature lie? Retrieved March 10, 2025, from https://adebiportal.kz/kz/news/view/20191
Zilliacus, C. (1972). Documentary drama: Form and content. Comparative Drama, 6(3), 223-253. https://doi.org/10.1353/cdr.1972.0018