THE MAIN DISTINCTIONS AND PARALLELS BETWEEN HISTORICAL AND FICTIONAL NARRATIVES: A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYZING CONTEMPORARY UZBEK PROSE

This theoretical study systematically analyzes the fundamental relationship between historical and fictional narratives, providing a specific application to the context of contemporary Uzbek literature. It argues that while these two forms have traditionally been distinguished by their primary commitments to empirical truth and imaginative invention, they share important commonalities as constructed narratives. Through a comparative analysis, the article identifies key differences: the historical narrative’s contract with verifiable past events, its limitations on evidence, and its explanatory purpose, and the fictional narrative’s autonomy, aesthetic/moral goals, and contract with reality. At the same time, it demonstrates fundamental similarities: both rely on the use of tropological language and storytelling techniques to transform raw material into coherent, meaningful narratives. Drawing on the theories of Hayden White and Gérard Genette, the analysis concludes that historical and fictional narratives are best understood as neighboring modes of discourse that create a dialogic space occupied by genres such as historical fiction.[1] This theoretical framework is then used explicitly as an important tool for analyzing Ulugbek Hamdam’s famous novel “Muvozanat” and demonstrates that the novel’s power comes from a skillful synthesis of historical loyalty and artistic creativity to interrogate national memory and universal philosophical dilemmas. [1] Ricoeur, P. (1984). Time and Narrative, Vol. 1. University of Chicago Press. – 288 P.