From Text to Being: The Transductive Symbolism of Andrei Bely as an "Ontosemiotic Operator"

The focus of the study is the operational layer of the prose of Andrei Bely, where the text functions as a mechanism that initiates an ontological rupture. The analysis draws on the philosophy of Gilbert Simondon and the semiotics of Yuri Lotman. This overarching worldview allows us to examine how the symbol loses its representative function and gains the status of an ontosemiotic operator. This transductive operator interacts with pre-individual tension, each time leaving this process unfinished. Rhythmic disruptions, color entropy, syntactical collapse, as well as figures of the double, the automaton, and the mask form a unified mechanism. This mechanism marks a failure in the process of individuation. Bely's text does not depict a crisis of subjectivity but rather presents it as an ongoing process of becoming. The proposed approach allows us to see Bely's prose not only as a literary monument but also as an active model of the crisis of becoming, which is now reproduced in algorithmic environments and on digital platforms. The methodology is based on a combination of processual ontology and semiotic-cultural approaches. It employs methods of interpreting philosophical and literary texts, conceptual analysis, and comparative modeling. Processual ontology and the semiotics of culture create a dual optics and allow for the description of the operational layer of Bely's prose. Despite the fact that for Simondon the sign or signification appears only in the later stages of the process of individuation, while for Lotman, conversely, the semiosphere precedes any act of signification and serves as a condition for the possibility of meaning, there is a fundamental difference between these positions. However, for the analysis of Bely, this difference is not an obstacle but a resource. We are not attempting to reduce one theory to another or declare them mutually consistent. Our approach is pragmatic. We will use the concept of "ontosemiotic operator" as a working metaphor that captures the dual nature of Bely's symbol. The symbol in Bely simultaneously resolves metastability and generates meaning at the boundary of the semiosphere. Where incompatibility arises between ontological and semiotic perspectives, we will view this as an indication of real tension within Bely's text itself, rather than as a deficiency in our methodology. In other words, the contradiction between Simondon's and Lotman's approaches becomes for us not a problem but a heuristic tool.