AUTOFICTION VS. LITERATURE OF TRAUMA

The present paper explores the genre of autofiction in the context of autobio- graphical and anthropological shifts of the twentieth century. By investigating the origins and defining characteristics of autofiction, we are able to differentiate it from traditional autobiography and to recognize its similarities with women's writing comparing it with the later literary mutations such as "documentary fiction" and "literature of trauma". While both autofiction and trauma literature deal with traumatic experiences, they differ in their representation of these events. Autofiction utilizes a symbolic interpretation of trauma that goes beyond a mere recounting of the event itself. The protagonist in auto- fiction engages in a process of self-analysis that challenges conventional perceptions and facilitates personal growth. In contrast, trauma literature typically focuses on a spe- cific traumatic event, often failing to capture fictional elements, flowing narration, and engagement with the unconscious that are characteristic of autofiction. Instead of using trauma as a catalyst for growth and change, trauma literature often attempts to restore a sense of normalcy by fitting the experience into pre-existing frameworks and reinforc- ing established identities. The paper also examines the evolution of the autofictional method in Russian literature of the 2000s - 2010s through a close reading of works by such authors as E. Limonov, R. Senchin, A. Kozlova, A. Snegirev, O. Breininger, O. Vasyakina, O. Starobinets, O. Likhunova, and others.