the concept of classicism as a creative method presupposes by its content a historically determined way of aesthetic perception and modeling of reality in artistic images: the picture of the world and the concept of personality, the most common for the mass aesthetic consciousness of a given historical era, are embodied in ideas about the essence of verbal art, its relationship with reality , its own internal laws.
Classicism rules
1) The division of literature into strictly defined genres of works
a) high - ode, heroic poem, tragedy
b) low genres - comedy, satire, fables, the world of the poem, the novel.
2) The actors were divided into positive and negative.
3) In dramatic works (comedy, tragedy), the requirement of 3 unities dominated.
a) time (day)
b) places (should be the same place)
c) actions (one main plot, 5 acts)
3 unity were supposed to give the play a special clarity, harmony, clarity.
The doctrine of plausibility is an essential part of the classic theory of imitation. Lomonosov understands the requirement of verisimilitude as an internally conditioned correlation of the individual aspects of the work. Reality is cognized by the mind of the poet in the aspect of the possible and probable, because the world of the possible is more reasonable and ideal than the everyday world with its unforeseen accidents. Fiction is the means most appropriate to this circumstance of elevating the actual as separate to the possible and probable as general.
The principle of likelihood is a consequence of the Aristotelian and Renaissance understanding of the differences between history and poetry: the first refers to the truth of a single fact, and the second to its appearance, to a reliable similarity with it.
8. Genre theory of classicism. The system of genres of Russian classicism.
Two periods are rightly seen in the development of the Russian genre theory of classicism. The first period associated with the names of Lomonosov, Trediakovsky, Sumarokov is the time of creating a clear and organized system of genres, taking into account both the achievements of French genre theory and the state of national Russian literature. The second period is associated with the activities of Derzhavin, Kheraskov, Lukin and Plavilshchikov. It is marked by the beginning of the destruction of strict genre-typological characteristics, the formation of genres that were born at the junction of traditional ones, which created the prerequisites for entering another literary era. system of genres based on opposition: tragedy and comedy, ode to isatire
Poem and fable, etc. Each genre was assigned a certain range of phenomena, from which it was impossible to get out: “high” and “low” were never combined in one work.
Classicism favored poetic genres over prose ones. prosaic speech is practically oriented speech, in which much depends on chance, not foreseen by the mind. Prose occupied a limited and subordinate place: it was considered a means of journalism and scientific speech, she, in fact, fell out of the literary series. Only "secondary" and "low" according to the views of the classicists literature - the novel - could exist in the form of prose.
Classicists are characterized by the desire to create monumental works, with problems of great public resonance, to depict active heroes, full of vital energy and capable, thanks to their will and ability to mercilessly analyze the passions boiling in the soul, to rise to the resolution of complex, tragic conflicts. Hence the preference given by the theory of classicism to monumental genres in literature - epic, tragedy
.Genre division is hierarchical and for one more reason. epic has the greatest value, because, referring to the distant past, the poet in this kind of creativity will be able to recreate the most abstract situations, which will make it possible to give fiction the most plausible form. In epic form compared to tragedy more opportunities to achieve the perfect ideal - heroic character. Because the basis epic poem lies, as a rule, the legendary truth, which has the highest degree of poetic truth, then to achieve plausibility, only the internal consistency of the actions of the heroes and the events depicted is sufficient. Region tragedy- a historical era, which has a lower degree of truth, because it may meet an unintended, random event that violates the harmony of poetic fiction and the requirement of plausibility. That is why the truth tragedy appears to be less thorough than in epic poem. Comedy turns out to be even lower. epics And tragedy, because it is even more difficult to achieve plausibility in it. A simple experience of the public, a good knowledge of modern mores, can reveal the groundlessness of the plot of a comedy from the standpoint of plausibility.
The choice of means of emotional impact on a person was made dependent on the genre. IN tragedy is a pleasant horror and living compassion, in comedy- laughter in satire- anger in ode- delight. Each feeling had its own “language”, the content and purpose of the work should also correspond to its style.
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia
Faculty of Philology
Department of Russian and Foreign Literature
on the course "History of Russian literature of the 19th century"
Subject:
"Classicism. Basic principles. The originality of Russian classicism"
Completed by student Ivanova I.A.
Group FZhB-11
Scientific adviser:
Associate Professor Pryakhin M.N.
Moscow
The concept of classicism
Philosophical doctrine
Ethical and aesthetic program
genre system
Representatives of classicism
The concept of classicism
Classicism is one of the most important trends in the literature of the past. Having established itself in the works and creativity of many generations, putting forward a brilliant galaxy of poets and writers, classicism left such milestones on the path of the artistic development of mankind as the tragedies of Corneille, Racine, Milton, Voltaire, the comedies of Molière and many other literary works. The history itself confirms the viability of the traditions of the classicist artistic system and the value of the concepts of the world and the human person underlying it, primarily the moral imperative characteristic of classicism.
Classicism did not always remain identical to itself in everything, constantly developing and improving. This is especially obvious if we consider classicism in the perspective of its three centuries of existence and in various national variants, in which it appears to us in France, in Germany and in Russia. Taking its first steps in the 16th century, that is, at the time of the mature Renaissance, classicism absorbed and reflected the atmosphere of this revolutionary era, and at the same time it carried new trends that were destined to be energetically manifested only in the next century.
Classicism is one of the most studied and theoretically thought out literary movements. But, despite this, its detailed study is still an extremely relevant topic for a modern researcher, largely due to the fact that it requires special flexibility and subtlety of analysis.
The formation of the concept of classicism requires a systematic, purposeful work of the researcher based on attitudes towards artistic perception and the development of value judgments in the analysis of the text.
Russian classicism literature
Therefore, in modern science, contradictions often arise between the new tasks of literary research and the old approaches to the formation of theoretical literary concepts about classicism.
Basic principles of classicism
Classicism, as an artistic movement, tends to reflect life in ideal images, gravitating towards the universal "norm" model. Hence the cult of antiquity of classicism: classical antiquity appears in it as an example of perfect and harmonious art.
Both high genres and low ones were obliged to instruct the public, to elevate its morals, to enlighten feelings.
The most important norms of classicism are the unity of action, place and time. In order to more accurately convey the idea to the viewer and inspire him to selfless feelings, the author should not complicate anything. The main intrigue should be simple enough so as not to confuse the viewer and not deprive the picture of integrity. The demand for unity of time was closely linked to the unity of action. The unity of the place was interpreted in different ways. It could be the space of one palace, one room, one city, and even the distance that the hero could cover within twenty-four hours.
Classicism is formed, experiencing the influence of other pan-European trends in art that are directly in contact with it: it repels the aesthetics of the Renaissance that preceded it and opposes the Baroque.
Historical basis of classicism
The history of classicism begins in Western Europe at the end of the 16th century. In the 17th century reaches its highest development, associated with the flowering of absolute monarchy Louis XIV in France and the highest rise of theatrical art in the country. Classicism continued to fruitfully exist in the 18th and early 19th centuries, until it was replaced by sentimentalism and romanticism.
As an artistic system, classicism finally took shape in the 17th century, although the very concept of classicism was born later, in the 19th century, when an irreconcilable war of romance was declared on it.
Having studied the poetics of Aristotle and the practice of Greek theater, french classics proposed rules of construction in their works, based on the foundations of rationalistic thinking of the 17th century. First of all, this is strict observance of the laws of the genre, division into higher genres - an ode (a solemn song (lyrical) poem praising glory, praise, greatness, victory, etc.), tragedy (a dramatic or stage work that depicts an irreconcilable conflict of personality with opposing forces), epic (depicts actions or events in an objectively narrative form, characterized by a calmly contemplative attitude to the depicted subject) and lower - comedy (dramatic performance or composition for the theater, where society is presented in a funny, funny way), satire (a kind of comic , which differs from other types (humor, irony) by the sharpness of the denunciation).
The laws of classicism were most characteristically expressed in the rules for constructing a tragedy. From the author of the play, first of all, it was required that the plot of the tragedy, as well as the passions of the characters, be believable. But the classicists have their own understanding of plausibility: not just the similarity of what is depicted on the stage with reality, but the consistency of what is happening with the requirements of reason, with a certain moral and ethical norm.
Philosophical doctrine
Unlike the irrational Baroque, Classicism was rational and appealed not to faith, but to reason. He sought to balance among themselves all the worlds - divine, natural, social and spiritual. He stood up for the dynamic balance of all these spheres, which should not conflict with each other, but coexist peacefully within the boundaries and imperatives set by the mind.
The central place in Classicism was occupied by the idea of order, in the establishment of which the leading role belongs to reason and knowledge. From the idea of the priority of order and reason followed a characteristic concept of man, which could be reduced to three leading foundations or principles:
) the principle of the priority of reason over passions, the belief that supreme virtue consists in resolving the contradictions between reason and passions in favor of the first, and the highest valor and justice, respectively, lie in actions prescribed not by passions, but by reason;
) the principle of the original morality and law-abidingness of the human mind, the belief that it is the mind that is able to lead a person to truth, goodness and justice in the shortest way;
) principle social service, who argued that the duty prescribed by reason is the honest and selfless service of a person to his sovereign and state.
In socio-historical and moral-legal terms, Classicism turned out to be associated with the process of centralization of power and the strengthening of absolutism in a number of European states. He took on the role of ideology, defending the interests of the royal houses, seeking to unite nations around him.
Ethical and aesthetic program
The initial principle of the aesthetic code of classicism is the imitation of beautiful nature. Objective beauty for the theorists of classicism (Boileau, Andre) is the harmony and regularity of the universe, which has as its source a spiritual principle that forms matter and puts it in order. Beauty thus, as an eternal spiritual law, is opposed to everything sensual, material, changeable. Therefore, moral beauty is higher than physical beauty; the creation of human hands is more beautiful than the rough beauty of nature.
The laws of beauty do not depend on the experience of observation, they are derived from the analysis of inner spiritual activity.
The ideal of the artistic language of classicism is the language of logic - accuracy, clarity, consistency. The linguistic poetics of classicism avoids, as far as possible, the objective depiction of the word. Her usual remedy is an abstract epithet.
The ratio of individual elements of a work of art is built on the same principles, i.e. composition, which is usually a geometrically balanced structure based on a strict symmetrical division of the material. Thus the laws of art are likened to the laws of formal logic.
The political ideal of classicism
In their political struggle, the revolutionary bourgeois and plebeians in France, both in the decades preceding the revolution and in the turbulent years of 1789-1794, made extensive use of ancient traditions, the ideological heritage and external forms of Roman democracy. So, at the turn of the XVIII-XIX centuries. in European literature and art, a new type of classicism has developed, new in its ideological and social content in relation to the classicism of the 17th century, to the aesthetic theory and practice of Boileau, Corneille, Racine, Poussin.
The art of classicism of the era of the bourgeois revolution was strictly rationalistic, i.e. required a complete logical correspondence of all elements of the artistic form to an extremely clearly expressed plan.
Classicism XVIII-XIX centuries. was not a homogeneous phenomenon. In France, the heroic period of the bourgeois revolution of 1789-1794. preceded and accompanied by the development of revolutionary republican classicism, which was embodied in the dramas of M.Zh. Chenier, in the early painting of David, etc. In contrast, during the years of the Directory and especially the Consulate and the Napoleonic Empire, classicism lost its revolutionary spirit and turned into a conservative academic direction.
Sometimes under the direct influence of French art and the events of the French Revolution, and in some cases independently of them and even preceding them in time, a new classicism developed in Italy, Spain, the Scandinavian countries, and the USA. In Russia, classicism reached greatest height in the architecture of the first thirds of XIX V.
One of the most significant ideological and artistic achievements of this time was the work of the great German poets and thinkers - Goethe and Schiller.
With all the variety of variants of classic art, it had much in common. Both the revolutionary classicism of the Jacobins, and the philosophical and humanistic classicism of Goethe, Schiller, Wieland, and the conservative classicism of the Napoleonic Empire, and the very diverse - sometimes progressive-patriotic, sometimes reactionary-great-power - classicism in Russia were contradictory creations of the same historical era.
genre system
Classicism establishes a strict hierarchy of genres, which are divided into high (ode, tragedy, epic) and low (comedy, satire, fable).
ABOUT? Yes- a poetic, as well as musical and poetic work, distinguished by solemnity and sublimity, dedicated to some event or hero.
Tragé? diya- a genre of fiction based on the development of events, which, as a rule, is inevitable and necessarily leads to a catastrophic outcome for the characters.
The tragedy is marked by severe seriousness, depicts reality most sharply, as a clot of internal contradictions, reveals the deepest conflicts of reality in an extremely intense and rich form, which acquires the meaning of an artistic symbol; It is no coincidence that most tragedies are written in verse.
epic? I- generic designation of major epic and similar works:
.An extensive narrative in verse or prose about outstanding national historical events.
2.A complex, long history of something, including a number of major events.
Comé? diya- a genre of fiction characterized by a humorous or satirical approach.
Satire- a manifestation of the comic in art, which is a poetic humiliating denunciation of phenomena using various comic means: sarcasm, irony, hyperbole, grotesque, allegory, parody, etc.
Ba? taking off- a poetic or prose literary work of a moralizing, satirical nature. At the end of the fable there is a brief moralizing conclusion - the so-called morality. The actors are usually animals, plants, things. In the fable, the vices of people are ridiculed.
Representatives of classicism
In literature, Russian classicism is represented by the works of A.D. Kantemira, V.K. Trediakovsky, M.V. Lomonosov, A.P. Sumarokov.
HELL. Kantemir was the ancestor of Russian classicism, the founder of the most vital real-satirical direction in it - such are his well-known satires.
VC. Trediakovsky, with his theoretical works, contributed to the establishment of classicism, but in his poetic works the new ideological content did not find an appropriate artistic form.
In a different way, the traditions of Russian classicism manifested themselves in the works of A.P. Sumarokov, who defended the idea of the inseparability of the interests of the nobility and the monarchy. Sumarokov laid the foundation for the dramatic system of classicism. In tragedies, under the influence of the reality of that time, he often refers to the theme of the uprising against tsarism. In his work, Sumarokov pursued social and educational goals, preaching high civic feelings and noble deeds.
The next prominent representative of Russian classicism, whose name is known to everyone without exception, is M.V. Lomonosov (1711-1765). Lomonosov, unlike Kantemir, rarely ridicules the enemies of enlightenment. He managed to almost completely rework the grammar based on the French canons, and made changes to the versification. Actually, it was Mikhail Lomonosov who became the first who was able to introduce the canonical principles of classicism into Russian literature. Depending on the quantitative mixing of words of three kinds, this or that style is created. So there were "three calms" of Russian poetry: "high" - Church Slavonic words and Russian.
The pinnacle of Russian classicism is the work of D.I. Fonvizin (Brigadier, Undergrowth), the creator of a truly original national comedy, who laid the foundations within this system critical realism.
Gavriil Romanovich Derzhavin was the last among the largest representatives of Russian classicism. Derzhavin managed to combine not only the themes of these two genres, but also vocabulary: in "Felitsa" the words "high calm" and vernacular are organically combined. Thus, Gavriil Derzhavin, who developed the possibilities of classicism to the maximum in his works, became at the same time the first Russian poet to overcome the canons of classicism.
Russian classicism, its originality
A significant role in the shift of the genre dominant in the artistic system of Russian classicism was played by a qualitatively different attitude of our authors to the traditions of the national culture of previous periods, in particular to national folklore. The theoretical code of French classicism - "The Poetic Art" of Boileau demonstrates a sharply hostile attitude towards everything that in one way or another had a connection with the art of the masses. In attacks on the theater of Tabarin, Boileau denies the traditions of folk farce, finding traces of this tradition in Molière. The sharp criticism of burlesque poetry also testifies to the well-known anti-democratism of his aesthetic program. There was no place in Boileau's treatise to characterize such a literary genre as a fable, which is closely connected with the traditions of the democratic culture of the masses.
Russian classicism did not shy away from national folklore. On the contrary, in the perception of the traditions of folk poetic culture in certain genres, he found incentives for his enrichment. Even at the origins of the new direction, undertaking the reform of Russian versification, Trediakovsky directly refers to the songs of the common people as a model that he followed in establishing his rules.
The absence of a gap between the literature of Russian classicism and the traditions of national folklore explains its other features. Thus, in the system of poetic genres of Russian literature of the 18th century, in particular in the work of Sumarokov, the genre of the lyrical love song, which Boileau does not mention at all, suddenly flourishes. In Epistle 1 on Poetry, Sumarokov gives a detailed description of this genre along with characteristics of recognized classicist genres, such as ode, tragedy, idyll, etc. Sumarokov includes in his Epistle a description of the fable genre, while relying on the experience of La Fontaine . And in his poetic practice, both in songs and in fables, Sumarokov, as we will see, often directly focused on folklore traditions.
The originality of the literary process of the late XVII - early XVIII century. explains another feature of Russian classicism: its connection with the artistic system of the Baroque in its Russian version.
Bibliography
1. Natural-legal philosophy of classicism of the 17th century. #"justify">Books:
5.O.Yu. Schmidt "The Great Soviet Encyclopedia. Volume 32." Ed. "Soviet Encyclopedia" 1936
6.A.M. Prokhorov. Great Soviet Encyclopedia. Volume 12. "Publishing house" Soviet Encyclopedia "1973
.S.V. Turaev "Literature. Reference materials". Ed. "Enlightenment" 1988
Tutoring
Need help learning a topic?
Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
"Class!" - we talk about what arouses our admiration or corresponds to our positive assessment of an object or phenomenon.
Translated from Latin, the word classicus and means "exemplary".
Classicismcalled art style and aesthetic direction in European culture of the XVII-XIX centuries.
What about as a sample? Classicism developed the canons according to which any work of art should be built. Canon- this is a certain norm, a set of artistic techniques or rules that are mandatory in a certain era.
Classicism is a strict trend in art, it was only interested in the essential, eternal, typical, random signs or manifestations were not interesting to classicism.
In this sense, classicism performed the educational functions of art.
Buildings of the Senate and Synod in St. Petersburg. Architect C. Rossi
Is it good or bad when there are canons in art? When you can only like this and nothing else? Do not rush to a negative conclusion! The canons made it possible to streamline the work of a certain type of art, to give direction, to show samples and to sweep aside everything insignificant and not deep.
But the canons cannot be an eternal, unchanging guide to creativity - at some point they become obsolete. This is what happened at the beginning of the 20th century. in the visual arts and in music: the norms that had taken root over the course of several centuries had outlived their usefulness and were torn apart.
However, we have already jumped ahead. Let's return to classicism and take a closer look at the hierarchy of genres of classicism. We will only say that as a certain trend, classicism was formed in France in the 17th century. A feature of French classicism was that it asserted the personality of a person as highest value being. In many ways, classicism relied on ancient art, seeing in it an ideal aesthetic model.
Hierarchy of genres of classicism
In classicism, a strict hierarchy of genres is established, which are divided into high and low. Each genre has certain characteristics, which should not be mixed.
Consider the hierarchy of genres on the examples of various types of art.
Literature
Nicolas Boileau is considered the greatest theorist of classicism, but the founder is Francois Malherba, who reformed the French language and verse and developed poetic canons. N. Boileau expressed his views on the theory of classicism in the poetic treatise "Poetic Art".
Bust of Nicolas Boileau by F. Girardon. Paris, Louvre
In dramaturgy had to be respected three unities: the unity of time (the action must take place within one day), the unity of place (in one place) and the unity of action (there must be one storyline in the work). The French tragedians Corneille and Racine became the leading representatives of classicism in dramaturgy. The main idea of their work was the conflict between public duty and personal passions.
The goal of classicism is to change the world for the better.
In Russia
In Russia, the emergence and development of classicism is associated primarily with the name of M.V. Lomonosov.
M. V. Lomonosov at the monument "1000th Anniversary of Russia" in Veliky Novgorod. Sculptors M.O. Mikeshin, I.N. Schroeder, architect V.A. Hartmann
He carried out a reform of Russian verse and developed the theory of "three calms".
"The theory of three calms" M.V. Lomonosov
The doctrine of the three styles, i.e. The classification of styles in rhetoric and poetics, which distinguishes between high, medium and low (simple) styles, has been known for a long time. It was used in ancient Roman, medieval and modern European literature.
But Lomonosov used the doctrine of three styles to build a stylistic system Russian language and Russian literature. Three "styles" according to Lomonosov:
1. High - solemn, majestic. Genres: ode, heroic poems, tragedies.
2. Medium - elegies, dramas, satires, eclogues, friendly compositions.
3. Low - comedies, letters, songs, fables.
Classicism in Russia developed under the influence of the Enlightenment: the ideas of equality and justice. Therefore, in Russian classicism, an obligatory author's assessment of historical reality was usually assumed. This we find in the comedies of D.I. Fonvizin, satires A.D. Cantemir, fables by A.P. Sumarokova, I.I. Khemnitser, odes to M.V. Lomonosov, G.R. Derzhavin.
At the end of the XVIII century. the tendency to see in art the main force of human education intensified. In this regard, a literary trend arises sentimentalism, in which feeling (and not reason) was declared the main thing in human nature. The French writer Jean-Jacques Rousseau called for being closer to nature and naturalness. This call was followed by the Russian writer N.M. Karamzin - let's remember his famous "Poor Liza"!
But in the direction of classicism, works were created in the 19th century. For example, "Woe from Wit" by A.S. Griboyedov. Although in this comedy there are already elements of romanticism and realism.
Painting
Since the definition of "classicism" is translated as "exemplary", then some kind of model is natural for it. And supporters of classicism saw it in ancient art. It was the highest example. There was also a reliance on the traditions of the high Renaissance, which also saw a model in antiquity. The art of classicism reflected the ideas of a harmonious structure of society, but reflected the conflicts of the individual and society, the ideal and reality, feelings and reason, which testify to the complexity of the art of classicism.
The artistic forms of classicism are characterized by strict organization, balance, clarity and harmony of images. The plot should develop logically, the composition of the plot should be clear and balanced, the volume should be clear, the role of color should be subordinated with the help of chiaroscuro, the use of local colors. So wrote, for example, N. Poussin.
Nicolas Poussin (1594-1665)
N. Poussin "Self-portrait" (1649)
French artist who stood at the origins of classicism painting. Almost all of his paintings are based on historical and mythological subjects. His compositions are always clear and rhythmic.
N. Poussin "Dance to the Music of Time" (circa 1638)
The painting depicts an allegorical round dance of Life. It circles (from left to right): Pleasure, Diligence, Wealth, Poverty. Next to the two-headed stone statue of the Roman god Janus sits a baby blowing soap bubbles - a symbol of the fleeting human life. The young face of the two-faced Janus looks to the future, while the old face is turned to the past. The winged, gray-bearded old man, to the music of which the round dance is spinning, is Father Time. At his feet sits a baby who holds an hourglass, reminiscent of the rapid movement of time.
The chariot of the sun god Apollo rushes across the sky, accompanied by the goddesses of the seasons. Aurora, the goddess of dawn, flies ahead of the chariot, scattering flowers in her path.
V. Borovikovsky “Portrait of G.R. Derzhavin" (1795)
V. Borovikovsky “Portrait of G.R. Derzhavin, State Tretyakov Gallery
The artist depicted in the portrait a man whom he knew well and whose opinion he valued. This is a formal portrait, traditional for classicism. Derzhavin is a senator, a member of the Russian Academy, a statesman, this is evidenced by his uniform and awards.
But at the same time, this is a famous poet, passionate about creativity, educational ideals and social life. This is indicated by a desk littered with manuscripts; luxury ink set; shelves with books in the background.
The image of G. R. Derzhavin is recognizable. But inner world it is not shown. Rousseau's ideas, which have already been actively discussed in society, have not yet appeared in the work of V. Borovikovsky, this will happen later.
In the 19th century Classicism painting enters a period of crisis and becomes a force holding back the development of art. Artists, preserving the language of classicism, begin to turn to romantic subjects. Among Russian artists, first of all, it is Karl Bryullov. His work came at a time when classical works of form were filled with the spirit of romanticism, this combination was called academism. In the middle of the XIX century. the young generation gravitating towards realism began to rebel, represented in France by the Courbet circle, and in Russia by the Wanderers.
Sculpture
The sculpture of the era of classicism also considered antiquity as a model. This was facilitated, among other things, archaeological excavations ancient cities, as a result of which many sculptures of Hellenism became known.
Classicism reached its highest incarnation in the works of Antonio Canova.
Antonio Canova (1757-1822)
A. Canova "Self-portrait" (1792)
Italian sculptor, representative of classicism in European sculpture. The largest collections of his works are in the Louvre in Paris and in the Petersburg Hermitage.
A. Canova "Three Graces". Saint Petersburg, Hermitage
The sculptural group "Three Graces" refers to the late period of creativity of Antonio Canova. The sculptor embodied his ideas of beauty in the images of the graces - ancient goddesses personifying female charm and charm. The composition of this sculpture is unusual: the graces stand side by side, the two extreme faces face each other (and not the viewer) and the girlfriend standing in the center. All three slender female figures merged into an embrace, they are united by the interweaving of hands and a scarf falling from the hand of one of the graces. Canova's composition is compact and balanced.
In Russia, the aesthetics of classicism include Fedot Shubin, Mikhail Kozlovsky, Boris Orlovsky, Ivan Martos.
Fedot Ivanovich Shubin(1740-1805) worked mainly with marble, sometimes turning to bronze. Most of his sculptural portraits are in the form of busts: busts of Vice-Chancellor A. M. Golitsyn, Count P. A. Rumyantsev-Zadunaisky, Potemkin-Tavrichesky, M. V. Lomonosov, Paul I, P. V. Zavadovsky, a statue of Catherine II legislators and others.
F. Shubin. Bust of Paul I
Shubin is also known as a decorator, he created 58 marble historical portraits for the Chesme Palace, 42 sculptures for the Marble Palace, etc. He was also a bone carver of the Kholmogory carved bone.
In the era of classicism, public monuments became widespread, in which the military prowess and wisdom of statesmen were idealized. But in the ancient tradition, it was customary to depict models naked, while the norms of morality modern to classicism did not allow this. That is why figures began to be depicted as naked ancient gods: for example, Suvorov - in the form of Mars. Later they began to be depicted in antique togas.
Monument to Kutuzov in St. Petersburg in front of the Kazan Cathedral. Sculptor B.I. Orlovsky, architect K.A. Tone
Late, Empire classicism is represented by the Danish sculptor Bertel Thorvaldsen.
B. Thorvaldsen. Monument to Nicolaus Copernicus in Warsaw
Architecture
The architecture of classicism was also focused on the forms of ancient architecture as standards of harmony, simplicity, rigor, logical clarity and monumentality. The basis of the architectural language of classicism was the order, in proportions and forms close to antiquity. Order- a type of architectural composition that uses certain elements. It includes a system of proportions, prescribes the composition and shape of the elements, as well as their relative position. Classicism is characterized by symmetrical axial compositions, restraint of decorative decoration, and a regular system of city planning.
London's Osterley Park mansion. Architect Robert Adam
In Russia, representatives of classicism in architecture were V.I. Bazhenov, Karl Rossi, Andrey Voronikhin and Andrey Zakharov.
Carl Barthalomeo-Rossi(1775-1849) - Russian architect of Italian origin, author of many buildings and architectural ensembles in St. Petersburg and its environs.
Rossi's outstanding architectural and urban planning skills are embodied in the ensembles of the Mikhailovsky Palace with its adjacent garden and square (1819-1825), Palace Square with the grandiose arched building of the General Staff and triumphal arch(1819-1829), Senate Square with the buildings of the Senate and the Synod (1829-1834), Alexandrinsky Square with the buildings of the Alexandrinsky Theater (1827-1832), the new building of the Imperial Public Library and two homogeneous long buildings of Theater Street (now the street of the architect Rossi).
The building of the General Staff on Palace Square
Music
The concept of classicism in music is associated with the work of Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven, who are called the Viennese classics. It was they who determined the direction of the further development of European music.
Thomas Hardy "Portrait of Joseph Haydn" (1792)
Barbara Kraft "Posthumous portrait of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart" (1819)
Karl Stieler "Portrait of Ludwig van Beethoven" (1820)
The aesthetics of classicism, based on confidence in the rationality and harmony of the world order, embodied these same principles in music. It was required from her: the balance of parts of the work, the careful finishing of details, the development of the main canons of the musical form. During this period, the final formation sonata form, the classical composition of parts of the sonata and symphony was determined.
Of course, the path of music to classicism was not simple and unambiguous. There was the first stage of classicism - the Renaissance of the XVII century. Some musicologists even consider the Baroque period as a particular manifestation of classicism. Thus, the works of I.S. Bach, G. Handel, K. Gluck with his reformist operas. But the highest achievements of classicism in music are nevertheless associated with the work of representatives of the Viennese classical school: J. Haydn, W. A. Mozart and L. van Beethoven.
Note
It is necessary to distinguish between concepts "music of classicism" And "classical music". The concept of "classical music" is much broader. It includes not only the music of the period of the era of classicism, but also the music of the past in general, which has withstood the test of time and is recognized as exemplary.
"A. A. SMIRNOV LITERARY THEORY OF RUSSIAN CLASSICISM Moscow Contents Preface Introduction 2–6 Chapter 1. Preconditions for the theory of classicism in Russia...»
-- [ Page 1 ] --
A. A. SMIRNOV
LITERARY
RUSSIAN
CLASSICISM
Foreword
Introduction 2–6
Chapter 1. Background of the theory of classicism in Russia 6–11
Chapter 2. Classicism on the Social Significance of Poetry 11–22
Chapter 3. Classicism on the specifics of poetic creativity 22–57
Chapter 4. Classicism on the cognitive significance of art 57–77 poetry Chapter 5 The category of genre in the theoretical system of classicism 77–127 Chapter 6 Problems of poetic style in the theory of Russian 127–142 classicism Chapter 7.
The fate of the literary theory of classicism at the turn of 142–169 XVIII–XIX centuries.
Conclusion 170–200 References cited 201–207 Bibliography 208–226
FOREWORD
The purpose of this book is to serve as a special guide for students of the philological faculties of universities in their work on general and special courses on the history of Russian literature of the 18th century. It can also be used by senior students when studying literary trends in special seminars. These tasks define general construction and presentation method.The question of the literary theory of Russian classicism is included in the current program on the history of Russian literature for the philological faculties of universities.
In existing textbooks intended for undergraduate students, the theory of Russian classicism is presented as briefly as possible, reflecting the state of that stage of its scientific research, which was typical of the 1940s and 1950s.
Over the past time, an extensive literature has appeared, which made it possible to comprehend the topic in a new way and proceed to its further development. This circumstance, as well as the insufficient knowledge of the methodology for comparative historical analysis of national literary theories, explains the creation of this manual. The book grew out of many years of scientific research and development. methodological developments the author, as well as his teaching activities at the Department of the History of Russian Literature, Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov, where they received the first approbation of both individual sections of the manual and its general concept.
In constructing the work, the author follows the internal logic of those ideas and ideas that arose in the theoretical self-consciousness of Russian writers of the 18th century. First, the origins of the theory of classicism are traced in the poetics of F. Prokopovich. The central place is occupied by the analysis of the views of Lomonosov, Trediakovsky and Sumarokov on the role of poetry in public and state life. Two chapters of the manual are devoted to the consideration of the problems of the specifics of poetic activity (the problem of “imitation of nature”, the theory of fiction, the doctrine of plausibility) and the cognitive significance of creativity (the role of “mind” and “feelings” in cognition, the ratio of natural talent, talent and “rules”, traditions ) in the theoretical manifestos and declarations of Russian classicists. In special chapters, the originality of the categories of genre (criteria of “value”, grounds for their differentiation) and style (correlation of the language norm and speech use, criteria of perfection) is revealed. The final chapter is an overview of the general trends in the development of the theory of classicism at the turn of the 18th–19th centuries.
INTRODUCTION The subject of this work is the literary theory of Russian classicism, the leading trend in Literature XVII 1st century The theoretical self-awareness of the writers of that time, their understanding of their own creative principles organically included both the general philosophical justification of the specifics of literature and narrow stylistic problems.
The ideas and provisions of rhetoric, criticism, stylistics, poetics, and the history of verbal art coexisted in close unity. In an attempt to identify the specifics of literary and artistic creativity, writers and critics of the era of classicism consistently did not distinguish between literary theory and aesthetics. The difference between the aesthetic and the logical remained in the 18th century. quantitative - according to the degree of distinctness of knowledge.
The selection of the literary-theoretical principles of creativity and the type of artistic thinking corresponding to them as the subject of a special study is legitimate.
For many years both theory and history literary creativity existed within the framework of the programs of literary trends, which was especially clearly manifested in the Russian literary process of the 18th century. Poetry as an art is guided by special artistic principles, which, as they are realized, receive their formulation in author's manifestos and theoretical declarations, various kinds of recommendations that regulate the work of poets.
The process of formation of literary trends is directly related to the theoretical design of their aesthetic program. In the system of classicism, literary theory acquired a normative character: the theoretical substantiation of creativity was a necessary prerequisite for poetic practice. A literary work was considered a type of “scientific” creativity, which claimed universal significance and could not be limited to the expression of individual quests.
Consideration of the literary theory of Russian classicism as a special system of views on the nature, essence and tasks of poetry requires clarification not only of the content of individual problems, but also of their genesis. In this regard, many aspects of the literary theory of Russian classicism can be correctly understood against the background of similar phenomena in the European literary process. Since literary trends exist as factors of international development, it is necessary to take into account the interaction of various national poetic theories.
The paper will analyze such important monuments of the literary and aesthetic thought of Russian classicism as Lomonosov’s “Rhetoric”, his “Foreword on the Usefulness of Church Books in the Russian Language”, “A Word of Gratitude for the Consecration of the Academy of Arts”, “On the Current State of the Literary Sciences in Russia” . From the works of Trediakovsky for our topic highest value have his prefaces to Barclay's Argenide and Tilemachida, as well as the articles Opinion on the Beginning of Poetry and Poetry in General, Letter to a Friend on the Present Benefits of Citizenship from Poetry, Letter Containing a Discourse on a Poem.. .”, “On an ancient, middle and new Russian poem”, “Discourse on comedy in general”, “Discourse on ode in general”, “Speech on the purity of the Russian language”. The theoretical thought of Sumarokov received the most distinct expression in the articles “On unnaturalness”, “To “unreasonable rhymers”, “To typographic typesetters”, “Letter on reading novels”, “On poetry of Kamchadals”, “Criticism on an ode”, “Response to criticism ”, “On the extermination of foreign words from the Russian language”, “Opinion in a dream about French tragedies”, “Word for the opening of the Academy of Arts” and especially in his epistles about poetry and the Russian language. Essential material for understanding the literary theory of Russian classicism is contained in the article “On the Qualities of a Poet’s Reasoning” published anonymously in the journal “Monthly Works” 1.
There is often no coincidence between the form that the poetic theory takes as presented by the author and its actual content in the system, therefore the task of the work is not so much to describe the views of individual representatives of Russian classicism, but to reconstruct the system of ideas as a whole.
In pre-revolutionary literary criticism, the question of a special study of the literary theory of Russian classicism as a system was not raised. The negative attitude towards the national originality of Russian classicism manifested itself in the critical disputes of the era of romanticism and was reflected in the concept of the authors of university courses in the 19th - early 20th centuries. (A. N. Pypin, E. V. Petukhov, A. S. Arkhangelsky, A. M. Loboda) and textbooks for gymnasiums (P. V. Smirnovsky, V. F. Savodnik), who persistently pursued the idea of a non-original character Russian “pseudoclassicism”, “false classicism”.
The revision of the thesis about the imitation of Russian classicism began in the works of Soviet literary critics in the 1920s. In a special course on the history of Russian classicism, P. N. Sakulin stated: “We have the right to talk about Russian classicism, remaining
There are different opinions about the belonging of this work to Lomonosov.
L. B. Modzalevsky in his doctoral thesis names G. N. Teplov as the alleged author.
on the basis of only theoretical provisions 2 The fundamental importance for the entire Soviet science of literature of the XVIII century. had the works of G. A. Gukovsky, in which he deeply studied the national characteristics of Russian classicism. Problem specific features literary theories of Lomonosov, Trediakovsky and Sumarokov was put in the works of G. A. Gukovsky and P. N. Berkov of the 30s.
In the works of D. D. Blagoy, G. N. Pospelov, A. N. Sokolov of the 1940s and 1950s, the study of the national identity of Russian classicism was deepened and expanded. In close connection with the development of the history of Russian criticism, L. I. Kulakova analyzed the main stages in the development of aesthetic teachings in Russia in the 18th century. In the 60s, articles by G. A. Gukovsky of the 40s were published posthumously, in which he consistently characterizes Russian classicism as a peculiar type of aesthetic thinking and substantiates the need for a systematic study of the literary-critical and literary-aesthetic views of Lomonosov, Trediakovsky and Sumarokov.
Considering the controversial and unexplored problems of the literary process of the XVIII century. in domestic and foreign science, P. N. Berkov came to the conclusion that it was inappropriate to study literature “according to directions” and suggested removing even the term “classicism” itself. G. P. Makogonenko, without denying the progressive nature of classicism in Russia, believes that the main content of the historical and literary process of the 18th century. in Russia is the development of Enlightenment realism. A. A. Morozov, considering the baroque to be the leading trend in literature, refers many writers of the 18th century to it. 3 Most researchers are in favor of an in-depth study of Russian classicism.
According to K. V. Pigarev, in the characterization of the national identity of Russian classicism, much remains only approximately outlined. In an essay on the historiography of Russian literature of the 18th century. P. N. Berkov speaks of the need to “pay more attention to the analysis of the theoretical, aesthetic views of Russian writers of the 18th century.” . The authors of the generalizing work on the history of Russian literary criticism “The Emergence of the Russian Science of Literature” (71) point to the lack of development of the problem of links between the theory of Russian classicism and the initial stage of the emergence of the Russian science of literature.
In a detailed and in-depth study by G. V. Moskvicheva, devoted to the genre system of Russian classicism, it is noted that “the problem of Russian classicism, Here and below, the first number in brackets indicates the serial number under which the source is placed in the list of references, and the second - the page of the cited work ; Roman numeral denotes volume.
For a general summary of opinions on this issue, see the book: Chernov I. A. From lectures on theoretical literary criticism. Issue. 1, - Baroque, Tartu, 1976.
despite the significant achievements of modern science, and at present does not seem to be solved” . The insufficient development of aesthetic and literary concepts associated with the study of classicism is indicated by the author of the latest textbook on Russian literature of the 18th century. Yu.I. Minerals and.
The literary and theoretical views of the representatives of Russian classicism have not yet been studied enough, among modern scientists there is no unanimity of opinion on the issue of what determined the stability and integrity of the literary doctrine of Russian classicism, the content of the theoretical problems of this literary movement has not been fully defined, the goals and objectives that put by our theoreticians, and, finally, it remains unclear the degree of originality and the degree of traditionalism of their literary views.
We are faced with the task of explaining the connection and interrelation of the basic concepts and categories that the classicists operated on, and answering the question, what are the main features of the type of thinking that manifested itself in the leading principles of their literary program. We strive to show what brought the Russian classicists together and constituted a single platform for this literary trend, revealing the literary theory of Russian classicism as a consistent and complete system. It seems that the development of the theory of Russian classicism at the level of the system is a necessary methodological basis for the current stage of its study.
The study of any system offers the allocation of its main components, the establishment of stable mutual connections and relationships between them, the definition of backbone, leading principles. For us, it is important to focus on the internal logic and stable patterns of the literary and theoretical thought of Russian classicists. Abstraction from the specifics of particular problems does not mean going beyond the limits of specific texts expounding literary theory. The main task is to determine the new specific classic content of the literary theory of Lomonosov, Trediakovsky and Sumarokov.
In the concepts and terms of the literary theory of classicism, a historically specific type of perception of works of poetic art is fixed. And in order to correctly grasp its specificity, it is necessary to restore the corresponding features of the process of theoretical understanding of the facts of literary creativity.
The following should be immediately pointed out: the theoretical poetics of the 18th century, of course, could not fully explain everything that existed in the very literary practice of the writers of the 18th century, the analysis of which remains outside the scope of this work.
BACKGROUND OF THE THEORY OF CLASSICISM
(Poetics of F. Prokopovich) Classicism as a literary trend becomes a decisive factor in the development of Russian literature in the 40s of the 18th century. and exists as a historically developing whole until the 70s, when signs of pre-romanticism were clearly identified. By the end of the 10s - the beginning of the 20s of the XIX century. classicism ends its existence.The prerequisites for classicism on Russian soil arise at the end of the 17th - beginning of the 18th centuries. It was at the turn of the XVII-XVIII centuries. in "school" poetics, some of the main problems of the future literary theory of Russian classicism were outlined.
The result of the literary views of the representatives of the “school” poetics was the treatise by F.
Prokopovich "On Poetic Art", written in 1705, and published in Latin in 1786. The historical and literary significance of this work lies in the fact that it contains a number of provisions that precede the literary theory of Russian classicism. The orientation towards the systematization of previous works is combined in F.
Prokopovich with a persistent desire to “make his contribution to science”, “to add something to so many works of rich talents”4.
F. Prokopovich sees the main subject of poetry in “the depiction of human actions through poetic speech”, he singles out poetry from the sphere of general rhetoric and objects to Cicero about the differences in the tasks of the poet and orator. He further notes that “human feeling in the form of love was the first creator of poetry”; having arisen "in the cradle of nature itself", poetry is based on sensual frenzy. This distinctly Renaissance view leads him to prove the moral usefulness of poetry and the legitimacy of its existence as a special kind of creativity. The humanistic orientation is noticeable in the choice of authorities. If the neo-Latin authors (J. Pontan, A. Donat, J. Masen, G. Foss, to whom F. Prokopovich often refers) substantiated their conclusions with references to Christian learning, then Prokopovich directly refers to ancient authors who are well known to him from the time stay in Rome, when he had the opportunity to read the texts of ancient authors, not spoiled by the editing of the Jesuits.
He analyzes the issue of the social significance of poetry in most detail: “The very subject that poetry usually deals with gives it great importance and value,” since it sings of great people and passes on the memory of them to posterity. Eradicating vices and promoting the development of social virtues, poetry inspires people to military and civil exploits, philosophy itself is “either born or nurtured by poetry.”
Poetry successfully performs cognitive and educational functions, according to Prokopovich, only thanks to the relationship between benefit and pleasure:
“A poem that pleases but does not benefit is empty and like a baby's rattle. That which seeks to be useful without pleasure will hardly be useful.” He severely reproaches Catullus and Ovid for their departure from "morality" and explains:
“If you want to understand what true pleasure is, call this pleasure healthy, not infectious.” He considers the unity of benefit and entertainment an indispensable condition for the social impact of poetry.
In the center of F. Prokopovich's theoretical treatise are the problems of imitation and fiction. He separates the imitation of nature from the imitation of literary models. In the latter, he traditionally sees one of the ways to improve skills, emphasizing the role of tradition, previous experience, the assimilation of which is active in poetry: “Thinking, having mastered the style of the writer, as if turns into his thinking and sometimes creates works similar to him with greater ease” ;
“imitation consists in some kind of coincidence of our thinking with the thinking of some exemplary author, so that even though we did not take anything from him and did not transfer it to our work, it would seem as if it were his work, and not ours: to such degree can be similar style!”. F. Prokopovich develops the ideas of Ronsard and Du Bellay about creative borrowing from ancient authors: “You can compose something on the model of Virgil, or develop it in the same way, or even borrow something from him. If the borrowing is discovered, then let it be more beautiful and better from the imitator than from the author himself.
In the problem of imitation of nature, F. Prokopovich essentially comes very close to the classicist understanding of the specifics of poetry, its specificity.
The origins of the theory of imitation on Russian soil can be traced in the poetics of the turn of the 17th-18th centuries. 5 The authors of this poetics did not differ in unity of views on the problems of imitation and fiction: poetry was interpreted either as a science expressing in poetic form the imitation of people's actions, or as the art of depicting fictitious acts.
Prior to this period, such questions did not arise in Russian literature. See: P. N. Berkov. Essay on the development of Russian literary terminology until the beginning of the 19th century. //Izv. USSR Academy of Sciences, ser. lang. i lit-ry, 1964, v. 23, people in verse, and fiction approached the imitation of the truth of a single fact.
"School" poetics freely and approximately conveyed Aristotle as interpreted by neo-Latin theorists of the 16th-17th centuries. J. Pontana, J. Mason, A. Donat, G. Foss and others.
Fiction was identified with imitation, sometimes with fiction. Imitation of models and imitation of nature differ indistinctly and formally. The understanding of fiction as fiction led to an increased cultivation of “curious” verse, which was given a significant place in the applied part of poetics; this can be seen as the influence of the Polish-German traditions of the Baroque. Fiction is perceived as a means to create a fascinating plot; without revealing the truth of the real, he loses his cognitive meaning and approaches the concept of “wonderful”.
F. Prokopovich reveals a holistic understanding of the problems of fiction and imitation: he develops the idea of creative imitation by comparing history and poetry, poetry and philosophy, poetry and rhetoric. He considers the poetic form to be an insignificant sign of the poetic and cites Aristotle's remark that if Empedocles and Herodotus had written their works in verse, they could not be called poets. F. Prokopovich sees the creative beginning of poetry in “imitation of human actions by means of fiction”, insisting on the idea that it is more correct to call a poet a “creator”, “writer” or “imitator”, since he “invents various experiences of the soul in the actors”. Therefore, “no matter how many poems you compose, they will all remain nothing but poetry, and it would be unfair to call them poetry.” Deprived of the "freedom to invent the plausible," history, "even written in verse," will remain history, not poetry.
Imitation is a specific side of poetic creativity, the main means of which is fiction, which contributes to the creation of an artistic image as a unity of the general and the individual. Already in the first book “On Poetic Art”, F. Prokopovich brings together the concepts of fiction and imitation: “To invent, or depict, means to imitate the thing, a picture or likeness of which is depicted.”
The historical composition differs from the poetic one in that poetry "sings of the fictional", reproducing things "through the image". The main difference between a historian and a poet is that “the historian tells about a real event, how it happened; with the poet, either the entire narrative is fictitious, or even if he describes the true, then he tells about it not as it happened and reality, but as it could or should have happened. It is fiction that performs the function of generalization in a poetic work and determines the creative nature of activity c. 3.
poet. But the sphere of fiction is not unlimited: only natural phenomena, excluding fantasy, can be its object. The author's fiction is also limited within the work - the poet must comply with the requirements of plausibility, achieve credibility: the poet "invents the plausible" even when there are cases that "did not happen in reality", and "nothing unusual or beyond the limits of probability" should be added to them ".
According to Prokopovich, “by poetic fiction, or imitation, one should understand not only the interweaving of plots, but also all the methods of description by which human actions, although genuine, are depicted, however, believably.” To achieve the same "credibility, which makes the narrative worthy of trust," is possible on the condition that "we will basically avoid three shortcomings: inconsistency, impossibility and contradiction." The unnatural, the unreasonable, and the uncharacteristic were excluded from the realm of art. Poetic fiction can be of two kinds: the fiction of the event itself and the fiction of the way in which this event is accomplished. In both cases, the tasks of the poet differ from the tasks of the historian: the first type of fiction includes the depiction of such events that never happened in reality and therefore did not become facts of historical reality, in the second form - a true event with the help of "fiction" of how it happened, changes considerably, and appears only as a possibility.
Fiction of the first type is divided into those that seem plausible and those that seem incredible, implausible. F. Prokopovich suggests using only the first type of fiction.
Although F. Prokopovich generally follows the late Renaissance theory of poetry, it is important to note in his theory something new, foreshadowing the signs of classicism - the desire to bring together fiction and imitation and, on this basis, to identify the specifics of poetry as an art.
If the comparison of poetry and history should reveal the specifics of art in relation to the individual, then the comparison of the poet and philosopher - in relation to the general:
“Poetry is also at odds with philosophy, because the philosopher analyzes the general in general and does not limit it to any features,” while the poet presents the general in the form of “special actions.” F. Prokopovich concludes: “Poetry is different from philosophy and history and somehow touches them as if with both hands.” Here, in fact, he outlines a classicistic understanding of the way human characters are typified: some human actions “seem to be arbitrary”, “others are considered as inevitable due to natural properties”. Referring to Aristotle, he calls "in certain individuals to note the common virtues and vices." So, for example, when depicting a ruler, it is necessary to reproduce only those aspects of his character that are inherent in him not as a private person, but as a ruler.
Each character must appear before the reader in a specific field of activity, while the private properties and habits of this or that person are excluded when creating the image: to wage war any brave commander, and this method ascribes to his hero. Loyalty to “nature” should not contradict the social position of the depicted person: this or that character is characterized “from the side of social duties”. The generalizing side of the artistic image is the superiority of poetry over history.
The requirement of plausibility in relation to character was called "decorama". 6 This term means that when depicting any character, the author should choose only what is decent and appropriate to the social position of this person: the poet should “carefully consider what corresponds to such and such a person, time, place and what suits this or that person, i.e. expression of his face, gait, appearance, dress, various body movements and gestures. F. Prokopovich is outraged by any violation of this rule. He sharply attacks the composition of a certain Canon “On the Bosnian mines”, where the king’s daughter begs her father to give her salt mines. Bizarre characters and situations in baroque works caused him a negative attitude.
F. Prokopovich adhered to the tradition of Aristotle on the issue of the relationship between art and reality (in terms of artistic knowledge), but in the interpretation of reality itself as a philosophical category, he differed significantly from him. If for Aristotle a sufficient basis for recognizing the fact of reality was its logical consistency, then for F. Prokopovich the reality of reality should be independent of the will of the poet.
An appeal to ancient poetics and the humanistic theories of the Renaissance, the desire to go beyond the creative practice of the Baroque, attempts to give a holistic and consistent answer to the question of the specifics of poetry - all this characterizes F. Prokopovich as a kind of theorist in the history of Russian poetic thought.
F. Prokopovich borrows the concept of decorum from J. Vida, who demanded that certain proportions be observed when depicting a character, indicating the age, gender, social rank and nationality of the hero, Cicero and Quintilian demanded the same from the rhetorician.
CLASSICISM ON THE PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE OF POETRY
In the XVIII century. the possibilities of Russian literary figures are expanding extraordinarily, their self-awareness is being formed, Russian literature is becoming the most important means of quickly and effectively disseminating the ideas of enlightenment and humanism.The affirmation of new ideas in the Petrine era, which reflected national interests and therefore had progressive significance, found its direct expression in the art of classicism. Writers realize their creative individuality and their tasks in a fundamentally new way.
Classicism freed the world of the individual from many traditions and conventions of frozen scholasticism, opening up new aspects of human nature, revealing the contradiction between the church's idea of the depravity of man and the humanistic idea of the natural nature of man's good and free will. In the era of classicism, not the dogma of Christian teaching, but the truth of reason, that is, the truth known by the human mind, determines the principles of depicting a person.
The classicists sought to find a humanistic justification for the goals and purpose of poetry, as opposed to the patristic and medieval opinion that poetry was untrue and invented. Within the framework of the so-called theory of the "seven free arts" of the Middle Ages, poetry was comprehended only as a versified rhetoric. Main argument humanists in favor of the existence of poetry - its necessity for virtue. Poetry is placed at the service of civil and national-patriotic goals. With her ability to entertain, she teaches virtue to more effect than philosophy.
The emergence of the concept of poetic individuality in Russian literature falls precisely on the era of classicism. This is the result of a new socio-economic and political situation - the people of the Middle Ages, with their transcendentally oriented worldview and economic dependence on the feudal lord, could not solve such a problem.
The central place in the poetics of Russian classicism was occupied by the question of the social significance of poetry. Leading Russian poets and XVIII V. persistently asserted the socially useful role of art, poetry was for them a means of implementing high civic ideals. The rationalistic substantiation of creativity led directly to the demand for public benefit, poetry was perceived as a special kind of moralistic philosophy. By its very essence, it is designed to have a moral impact on a person, contributing to the political and civic education of people. But edifying didacticism, which denies the possibility of expressing the poet's personal aspirations, is alien to Russian classicism.
Sumarokov in his article “On Criticism” states: “Criticism benefits and repels harm, it is needed for the benefit of the people.” . The author of “On the Qualities of a Reasoning Poet” spoke indignantly about the poet who “will curse the desire to serve the people with science”. Kantemir assessed the meaning of poetic activity from a civic standpoint: “Everything that I write, I write as a citizen”, “almost every line contains some rule that is useful for establishing a life”.
Trediakovsky and Sumarokov focused their efforts on substantiating the moral goal of poetry, Lomonosov rushed towards the broad horizons of its social tasks. In the remaining unfinished review “On the current state of verbal sciences in Russia,” Lomonosov speaks from the first lines about the benefits and power of poetic word: “If an exercise is useful for human society in the verbal sciences, this is evidenced by (the word “European” has been crossed out. - A.S.) ancient and current peoples.
Keeping silent about so many well-known examples, let us imagine one France, about which one can rightly doubt whether it attracted other states to its veneration by its power or sciences, especially verbal, having cleansed and decorated its language with the diligence of skillful writers ”(13, VII, 581). From the standpoint of strict moralism, Anacreon is condemned in the article “On the Qualities of a Poet’s Reasoning,” who “only with his lyre made the Muses reproach about vile and supernatural deeds so sweetly speaking.” This article firmly and adamantly affirms the poet’s civic appointment: “If you know from the political rules already the position of a citizen, the position of a friend and the position in the house of the owner and all the articles that practice in philosophy teaches, then it is not difficult to decorate the richness of thoughts with poetry, if only the spirit in you is poetic. .. The entire content of poetry is comprehended from the point of view of its social impact , since the poet must “serve the science of the people”, “publish something instructive.” The ending of this article is especially remarkable, in which, with the utmost clarity, the author formulates his social and poetic credo with the words of Cicero: “I don’t see a poet in trifles I want to see him in the society of a citizen, measuring human vices with his finger.
The poet's public service, patriotic orientation, glorification of the glory of the fatherland - all these are the main criteria for evaluating a poetic creation. Lomonosov points to them in his dedication to “Rhetoric”: “The bliss of the human race, if much depends on the word, everyone can see enough. How would it be possible for scattered peoples to gather in hostels, build cities, build temples and ships, take up arms against the enemy and other necessary, allied forces requiring deeds, if they did not have a way to communicate their thoughts to each other? The successes of modern literature are significant precisely “in correcting human morals, in describing the glorious deeds of heroes, and in many political behaviors.” Russian literature, according to Lomonosov, will bring world fame to its state: “The language that the Russian power of the great part of the world commands, in its power, has natural abundance, beauty and strength, which is not inferior to any European language. And for that there is no doubt that the Russian word could not be brought to such perfection, which we are surprised at in others.
Lomonosov continues to develop thoughts about the glory and greatness of the Fatherland in the “Foreword on the Usefulness of Church Books”, where he speaks with admiration of those who “are zealous in glorifying the fatherland with natural language, knowing that with its fall, without skilled writers in it, the glory of everything will be eclipsed a lot.” people." Many peoples did not retain in their memory the outstanding events of national history, and “everyone plunged into deep ignorance”, since these events were not reflected in poetry due to the lack of “skilled writers”. A different fate of the peoples of Greece and Rome, whose world-famous writers conveyed to us their glorious history: “Through the sounds in distant ages, the loud voice of writers is heard, preaching the deeds of their heroes,” so that “late descendants, distant in great antiquity and distant places, listen to them with the same movement of the heart, as if their modern fellow earthmen” .
A great future also opens up before Russian literature: “Such happiness turned out to our fatherland from the enlightenment of Petrov ... in Russia, the verbal sciences will never let the Russian word fall into decay.” Enlightenment and the development of Russian literature are inseparable in achieving their patriotic goal.
Similar problems are found in Lomonosov's judgments about the fine arts and architecture. In the “Grateful Word for the Consecration of the Academy of Arts”, he notes: sculptural images, “reviving metal and stone, represent Russian heroes and heroines in gratitude for their merits to the fatherland, as an example and as an encouragement to posterity for courageous virtue”; the painters “will bring into the present burden the past Russian deeds to show the ancient glory of our forefathers”, in order to “give instruction in matters that are for the common good”.
Thus, Lomonosov approached the assessment public interest literature with broad national criteria that opened European horizons for her. Russian literature must become as great as the ancient literatures, but its usefulness will not be limited to a narrow national framework, it will have to outshine the glory of its neighbors and surpass their achievements. The basis of his confidence was the activity of the enlightened, the monarch, whose beneficial influence on culture was not questioned by Lomonosov.
Sumarokov also put forward the thesis about the social benefits of art, demanded the direct educational impact of poetry and dramaturgy on society, as a result of which a noble and virtuous nobleman will have a harmonizing effect on all social life. Any genre of literature acquires its right to exist only when it has certain civic-moral goals and objectives.
Sumarokov wants to substantiate his position philosophically. Arguing with the views of Rousseau in the article "On Superstition and Hypocrisy", he calls virtue the main science.
Sumarokov is alien to the republican pathos of Rousseau's moralism, since he advocates the subordination of human passions to the supreme power in the person of an ideal noble sovereign, and not for the fullness and freedom of disclosure of human feelings and passions. Sumarokov approached Western European morality in that education is the most important means social progress, but his understanding of the political and ideological content of this progress differs sharply: Sumarokov denies the virtue of sentimentalism and defends the ideals of stoicism, citizenship, and renunciation of personal passions.
Particularly indicative in this regard are his judgments about Beaumarchais's drama Eugene, in which the condemnation of the contradictory and inconsistent feelings and behavior of the protagonist comes to the fore. Sumarokov conducts this condemnation from the standpoint of stoic morality: “This rake and deceiver, worthy of the gallows for desecrating religion and the noble daughter whom he picaresquely deceived, deceives another bride, a noble maiden; he enters from idleness into idleness, refuses his bride and, suddenly changing his system again, marries his first wife a second time, but who can vouch for such a vile person; that he would not marry anyone else tomorrow if the government and the clergy did not exterminate him. This vile rake is not subject to weakness and delusion, but to shamelessness and atrocity.
Such an attitude towards the hero of Beaumarchais is understandable in the light of the demands that Sumarokov made to the theater. He needs a benefit directly displayed on the stage, an active influence on the viewer. So, in a letter to Catherine II, he motivates the need to create a permanent theater in Moscow as follows: “Here the theater is more necessary than in St. Petersburg, because there are more people and stupidities here. Moscow demands a hundred Molières, and in other cases I am alone in my exercises.
G. A. Gukovsky in his article “Russian Literary Critical Thought in the 1730s–1750s” connected the tendencies of Sumarok’s “moralism”, “cult of virtue” and “emotional sincerity” with the worldview of the early currents of sentimentalism. This statement requires some clarification.
There is no doubt that moralism is the most important side of the ideological content of both sentimentalists and classicists, but its specific content among the writers of these two trends is fundamentally different:
sentimentalism proceeded from subjective-individual, and classicism from civil-political ideals. So, in the article “For good or for worse, is a person born?”, full of hidden polemics with Rousseau, Sumarokov writes: “Not by nature, but by morality and politics, we are inclined to virtue. Morality and politics make us useful to the common good in terms of the enlightenment of the mind and the purification of the heart. Sumarokov insists - “morality without politics is useless, politics without morality is inglorious”. The writer is not only a moralist, but also an active politician, morality only contributes to the cause of civic education when it is inextricably linked with politics Sumarokov distinguishes painters and sculptors from artisans on the grounds that the visual arts, like the art of the word, carry out cognitive and educational tasks. In the “Speech for the opening of the Academy of Arts”, Sumarokov explains the social benefits of the fine arts in this way: “Bodily qualities” of great people, which “neither history nor poetry can explain”, “being inscribed in our minds”, “enliven the images of their spiritual qualities and give the desire to imitate them, because the subtlest qualities of the soul are hidden in the bodily forms. The role of such images is very great: they “multiply the heroic fire and love for the fatherland”, transmit “enlightenment to posterity in history; the power of contagion in imitation of glorious deeds, the delight of the curious, and the benefit of the world.” Likewise, "piitic expressions and their images serve the knowledge of nature, the imitation of great deeds, the aversion from vices and all that humanity requires for correction." The lofty mission of poetry, its social purpose impose strict requirements on the poet: he bears full responsibility for the verisimilitude of what is depicted and for the active influence on the reader.
Trediakovsky discussed the question of the public purpose of poetry even more passionately and with interest. From ancient times human history Poetry “has become more famous”: it “is prophesied true from the right, false from flatterers;
instructions are given on a virtuous life; laws are prescribed, in a word, all that is most important and great is embraced.” The purpose of poetry is "to make men better." The idea of utilitarian art is outlined in his preface to the book “Riding to the Island of Love”, where the reader is invited to enjoy the “wise moralizing” concluded “in almost every line”. In the article “Opinion on the Beginning of Poetry and Poetry in General,” Trediakovsky emphasized that from the moment of its inception, poetry “taught the way of life, showed the way to the virtues.”
The thought of the moral usefulness of poetry is a running theme in most of Trediakovsky's other discourses. The preface to "Argenida" states that "the author's intention in compiling such a great story is to offer a perfect instruction on how to act as a sovereign."
Developing this idea in the preface to the Tilemachida, he deliberately combines the moral and political benefits of poetry. Only in this unity will it be able to fulfill its civic purpose as a means of "teaching the truth" and arousing in us "hidden spiritual springs into mobility." Fenelon achieved extraordinary success because he combined "the most perfect politics with the most perfect virtue."
According to Trediakovsky, "the primary goal in the heroic creation is instruction," the epic poem was perceived by him as a kind of moralizing philosophy. Let us recall that Lomonosov took the same position in relation to the works of Fenelon, believing that they "contain examples and teachings about politics and good morals."
A special place among Trediakovsky's writings, in which the social meaning of poetry is considered, is occupied by his "Letter to a friend about the current benefits of poetry from citizenship." The course of his reasoning can be understood as follows. In ancient times, poetry “described the brave and glorious deeds of great people, instructed in virtue and corrected human morals, offered philosophical dogmas, laid down charters for receiving both true prosperity and peaceful coexistence from justice.” In subsequent times, it was supplanted by prose: “What a need there would be for poetry and verse now, when everything is corrected by prose.” At present, poetry is losing its significance, since unfavorable social conditions prevent the fulfillment of the high mission of the political and moral education of the people: if now all these lofty advantages were not taken away from poetry”; “Before, poetry was a necessary and useful thing, but now it is a comforting and cheerful pastime.” Therefore, he looks skeptically on the future development of poetry: from poetry, “there is truly neither the greatest need, nor the most noble benefit”, it is needed insofar as “as long as fruits and sweets are on a rich table for solid meals”. Having lost its moral and political significance, it becomes fun and entertains “through the struggle of witty inventions, through the skillful copulation and position of colors and colors, through the amazing harmony of strings, sounds and singing, through the delicious mixing of various juices and fruits by dissolving” . Notes of skepticism penetrate Trediakovsky's thoughts about the civil sound of poetry when he turns to modernity.
The second aspect of the problem of the social role of art was the relationship between useful and pleasant as the expected results of the impact of poetry on the reader.
The ideal of the Russian classicists was the organic combination of instruction and delight:
“Iroic piima also gives a firm instruction to the human race, teaching this to love virtue, but teaches not with a gloomy frown in her eyes or with an authoritative voice deafening in arrogance, but in a virtuous and touching face, amusing and amusing with songs” .
Russian classicists are deprived of severe rigorism in determining the results of poetic education, they have no desire to directly impose their opinion: poetry should “correct us by amusing”. Explaining the idea of D. Barkley in Argenide, Trediakovsky noted; “The author had such an intention, so that the reader’s heart, nowhere in this work of his on firmness, does not stop, if possible, with pleasantries and sweets, it would be amused.”
The art of this author lies in the fact that “he was able to lure readers to his book “so that they use it not as one that sternly instructs, but as if it amuses them with a game.” But the entertaining side does not exist without the didactic one: “In general, piites should not try to do anything else in their writings, either to benefit them, or to please the reader, or to give instruction to an honest and virtuous way of life” .
And Sumarokov put the poet’s achievement of a moral goal in the first place, although he also did not identify aesthetic perfection with moral edification: “And I think that my comedies can do no less corrections than they can bring fun and laughter.” The moralistic setting of the work does not remove the issue of entertainment, benefit and enjoyment are connected by necessity. In the “Speech on the opening of the Academy of Arts”, Sumarokov gives the following comparison in this regard: “Often, the eyes of herded animals are attracted by more flower-bearing than rich meadows. And if the meadows are both flower-bearing and fat, do they not have the power of attraction?” .
This issue was actively developed by one of the early Russian philosophers G. N. Teplov in the article “Discourse on the beginning of poetry”. He proposed to separate the sciences and arts on the grounds that the former appeal directly to the benefit, and the latter - sometimes to the benefit, sometimes "to a single amusement or sophistication of our mind, which then always serves as a guide to the knowledge of other things." Sharing the doctrine of poetry as a specific form of eloquence, Teplov sees in it a means that "can act in human hearts more than any other action." For a long time, eloquence was faced with the task of “softening” tyrants, “inciting society” to war and battle, “quenching passions”, “exciting” the “fire of love” with speech. It was in these tasks that eloquence began to approach poetry. At first, being "unregulated", poetry set as its main goal the satisfaction of passions, and then it began to serve the implementation of useful goals. The rules developed by the “wise men” contributed to the process of turning poetry from a means of expressing passions into a serious matter. state importance. The goals of civic education began to determine its meaning and purpose. “Pleasant” in poetry became a means of expressing its “usefulness”: “Poetry had a good reason to take root when it contained such useful things in itself with pleasantness, and the useful received a happy probability when it was depicted in such a pleasant style” . Moral edification should not be straightforward: the more perfection in the work, the more it “serves the rules in correcting the morals of the people”, since readers “receive benefit and amusement”, being “insensitively drawn to fun and amusements”. Like Trediakovsky, social function Teplov sees ancient literature in its usefulness for the formation of public opinion.
Russian classicists did not insist on a direct expression of the moralistic tendency, in their opinion, it should be present in the artistic image itself, but poetry does not have a “goal in itself”, its task is to develop and prescribe certain moral norms. The poet had a double task: in relation to the whole society to exercise political influence, and in relation to an individual to give pleasure and benefit. This was most clearly reflected in the main conflict of classic dramaturgy in the form of a sharp opposition between public duty and personal passions.
However, the Russian classicists did not clearly realize the essence of the contradictions between the individual and the absolutist statehood, which was explained by the insufficient degree of maturity of the social conflicts of the era. “Enlightened absolutism” was perceived by them as the main condition for harmony in the relationship between the individual and society, therefore, the actual social dependence of the classicist writer on state protectionism in the field of culture did not appear in the form of limiting the writer’s individual capabilities. Most of the theorists of Russian classicism shared a civil-moralistic point of view on art, which led them to an abstract understanding of human characters.
How do the arguments and conclusions of Russian theorists look like against the background of the European theory of poetry?
The question of what is pleasant and useful in poetry was raised in antiquity. Horace, in his Epistle to the Pisons, gave a clear answer to it: “Poets strive to bring either benefit, or pleasure, or to say what is immediately and pleasant and useful in life,” therefore, “general approval will be received by one who mixes useful with pleasant , equally entertaining and instructing the reader” .
In the Renaissance, the need to justify the independent significance of poetry led theorists to actively defend the thesis about the benefits of poetry, with the help of which humanists tried to neutralize the attacks from the scholastics, emphasizing that it was the didactic side of poetry that connects it with the needs of life: poetry teaches people to appreciate virtue and condemn vices. Renaissance theorists insisted that the poet must know many sciences, have a university education. The Aristotelian concept of catharsis in this era is given an exclusively moralistic meaning.
The pedagogical and moralistic concept of creativity dominates Scaliger:
the goal of the poet is “to teach while delighting”.
The moralistic goal of poetry is in the first place, and the pleasure derived from “poetry is only a means for this. Of the Italian theorists, only Robortello and Castelvetro defend the independence of pleasure from teaching: entertainment in itself is a source of benefit. The French classicists saw the main task of the poet in pleasing his readers. “The secret of success is to captivate the viewer with an excited verse,” Boileau recommends. In the preface to the first edition of the fables, J. Lafontaine stated: “The main and, perhaps, the only rule is that the reader will like the essay.” Racine also believes this principle is fundamental for the genre of tragedy: “The main rule is to please and touch, all others are developed only to fulfill it.”... In the words of Dorant from the 6th phenomenon of Molière's comedy “Criticism of the School of Wives”, the voice of the author is heard: “The most important rule is to please ". Reasonable pleasure is not an enemy, but an instrument of virtue.
A noticeable strengthening of moralizing tendencies occurs in the literary and aesthetic theories of the 18th century. Voltaire, Diderot, Jaucourt, Marmontel, La Harpe 7 believe that all forms of art serve exclusively useful purpose- to make people morally purer, nobler. In carrying out this task, the artist consciously presents virtue as pleasant and vice as disgusting. Each person has a special type of perception for this - to see how his ability to perceive the beautiful as beautiful and the ugly as ugly is preliminarily organized by nature.
Russian classicists, without falling into the extremes of didactism or hedonism, believed that their main task was to determine the political role of poetry. Lomonosov emphasized the social meaning of creativity, associated it with political good and benefit, saw in the poet a political preacher, whose vocation is to be the memory of Russian state glory, Sumarokov widely developed the theme of moral virtue, closely linking it with politics and condemning its interpretation by sentimentalists.
Teplov and Trediakovsky traced the change in the social role of poetry in different periods of its development. Trediakovsky noted the narrowing of the educational possibilities of poetry in the present. The general view of the role of the poet was summed up by the author of “On the Qualities of a Reasoning Poet”: “It is not enough that the poet wants to please when he cannot teach anything.”
The poet is both a moralist and a political mentor - this thesis, according to the classicists, is confirmed both by the entire history of the development of poetry, and by the very fact of its occurrence in certain social conditions. The moralistic task of the writer became his social task.
According to the views of Russian classicists, the art of the word recreates a rational artistic world, in which the author's ethical will is the determining principle, the possibilities of which are endless. The foundations of an optimistic view of the socially transformative meaning of poetry rested on three basic premises. First, on the idea of the omnipotence of nature, the classicists shared Leibniz's opinion that “people in Germany are Leibniz, Gottsched, Baumgarten, Sulzer; in Italy - Gravina, Muratori; in England - J. Dennis, A. Pop.
live in “the best possible world”; secondly, on the idea of the omnipotence of the cognitive abilities of the human mind - the world can be understood, comprehended, and it can be mastered as a result of knowledge; thirdly, on the idea of the omnipotence of the ethical will of people - the inner world of a person as a combination of good and evil principles can be changed for the better with the help of moral influence. Art is a specific sphere in which the norms and principles of human morality are immutably and finally crystallized.
The classicists closely associated the social purpose of poetry with the cognitive essence of the art of the word. The usefulness of poetry is due to the very fact that it fulfills a serious state task, which involves the reasonable use of time.
But “benefit” is not imputed as a duty, does not become equivalent to a duty or a lesson in edification, it leads the reader to “pleasure”, which stems from the joy of knowing the world around in the process of comprehending the meaning of a poetic work.
CLASSICISM ABOUT THE SPECIFICITY OF POETIC WORKS
Defending the social significance of poetry actively contributed to the assertion of its specificity. The central question of the poetics of classicism is the question of imitation, fiction, and the peculiarities of their correlation in art. The thesis about the imitation of nature was the first attempt to determine the specifics of poetry, the essence of the poetic, to reveal the features of artistic knowledge. Yu. N. Davydov, a researcher of the creative specifics of art, sees in the doctrine of imitation in art “a theoretical form of awareness, substantiation and justification of the process of shaping art into a specific and self-sufficient sphere” . A correct understanding of this side of the theory of Russian classicism is possible when compared with the interpretation of the concept of imitation in ancient and European literary and aesthetic theory. It is the analysis of the theory of imitation that helps to understand the specifics of the artistic ideal of the classicists.The concept of imitation in poetry (the nature of its philosophical justification) was the basis of European pre-romantic theories of poetry. It became the fundamental principle of the entire system of poetics, since the answer to the question: “What is imitation?” - reveals the nature of the relationship of art to reality, and each era tried to solve it in its own way.
In the theory of imitation, the characteristic comes to the fore creative process, the object and object of art are clearly distinguished. The main thing in this theory is the recognition of both the substantive correlation between the world of art and the world of nature, and the specific isolation of art.
The first form of imitation theory was the ancient doctrine of "mimesis".
Historically, it was filled with the most diverse meanings, but had two obligatory prerequisites: reality is recreated on its own initiative and has the highest degree of perfection.
In ancient times, the concept of imitation was not so much aesthetic as general philosophical in nature, the very concept of “imitation”, according to A.F. Losev, was born during the formation of the anthropologism of Socrates and had a wide content, being associated with the concepts of imagination, passions, valor, harmony.
In the general theory of beauty, the doctrine of “mimesis” is one of the main ones. The main task of the philosopher, according to Plato, is to determine where the truth is, and where its visibility is. Perceptual knowledge forms only an opinion. Knowledge is acquired with the help of certain concepts, which are based on a supersensible idea, which includes the idea of the visible world of dynamic things. According to Plato, the essence of art is imitation, and that is why it forms not knowledge, but only an opinion; the purpose of art is to have a moralizing effect on people (in his ideal state, he leaves those poets who sing praises to the gods and great people). Not only poetry, but the whole world in Plato's theory of ideas is an imperfect imitation of an ideal prototype, since the whole universe is the result of a process of imitation of eternal models; All creation proceeds by imitation.
Imitation is an essential side of art, the result of imitation is either copies that are similar to the prototypes, or phantasms that are not similar to them. In this regard, Plato distinguishes between imagination and fantasy and prefers such imagination, due to which the similarity of the prototype and copy is achieved. The doctrine of imitation helps to understand Plato's view of the specifics of the creative act. The demiurge in the dialogue "Timaeus" is devoid of creativity, he is close in function to an artisan, declaring an act of creativity, but not realizing it. Plato emphasizes the role of a model, a prototype, an eternal idea. Man cannot enrich being with the creativity of the new, he only changes its form. The art of imitation takes people “far from the truth,” he claims.
Plato - and evaluates it negatively.
If Plato denies the ability of the poet to reproduce the truth and allows only the possibility of transmitting its appearance, then Aristotle recognizes the inherent value of art.
Aristotle also considers imitation universal, but in the realm of art it creates new item. Aristotle separated art from the sphere of crafts and sciences. Imitation is the starting point of poetry as well. If in life the general is hidden in the concrete-sensual, then in poetry it is revealed and realized. Since poetry reveals the general as necessary and possible, it has a cognitive meaning. Rejecting the accidental, poetry approaches science, gives knowledge, highlights the meaning and causes of facts. Although the relationship between the general and the individual in Aristotle is unclear (the individual really exists, and the general is only conceived), he combines the principles of recreating nature and poetic creativity; for both are subject to the law of imitation. Life is an object of poetry not in appearance, but in essence - according to the principle of imitation. Poetry exists in the ideal realm of the possible, between the abstractly necessary and the factually accidental.
In the teachings of Aristotle, one should distinguish between the object and the subject of imitation: not in relation to nature and in relation to man. According to the studies of A.F. Losev, Aristotle is often incorrectly credited with the statement that the object of imitation is nature. In the ancient era, the idea of nature as a creative force was not developed, the creative impulses of which “awake the artist’s thought, it was about imitation of the cosmos, and the “idea of personal creation” is alien to him. Only in the Renaissance, the principle of imitation was understood “as the principle of personal creativity” in poetry, when the artist himself creates the form, while in ancient times the finished form is realized in matter... By imitating the cosmos, the poet realizes the unrevealed possibilities of reality.
Art seeks to fill in what remains unfinished, unrevealed, insufficient. But Aristotle also excludes creative imagination from the psychology of the poet.
The problem of imitation is connected in Aristotle with the peculiarities of subjective perception, poetry. When recreating characters and circumstances, the poet must take into account the possible assessment of what is depicted by the reader: “The poet’s task is not to talk about what happened, but about what could happen, and about the possible according to apparent probability or according to necessity”; “impossible, but seemingly probable, should be preferred to the possible, not credible”; “for poetry, the impossible is preferable, credible than the untrustworthy possible.”
These thoughts will find their further development among the classicists in the theory of probabilistic likelihood as a result of imitation. The doctrine of imitation was widely known in antiquity, but the Aristotelian tradition did not receive any noticeable development. Quintilian believed that any imitation is artificial. Cicero limited imitation to questions of composition and style. In Roman rhetoric, the idea of imitation of models was put forward as a means of developing oratory style.
Horace's poetics is indicative in this respect. In the "Epistle to the Pisos" he almost completely ignores the doctrine that held that poetry is imitation, dwelling on the "rhetorical", "technological" side of imitation.
The second important stage in the development of the theory of imitation is the Renaissance.
The poetic theories of this time are primarily cognitive in nature:
a poet is first of all a cognizing subject, and then a creator who begins to compete with nature. The theorists of the Renaissance emphasized the opposition between reality and appearance, sensually perceived nature and its inner essence, and found out the peculiarities of imitation by comparing poetry with history and philosophy. The conclusions drawn by them from these comparisons were different: Piccolomini sharply separated the truth of poetry from the truth of history, Castelvetro combined these two types of knowledge, Robortello and Fracastoro emphasized the ideal moment of imitation, Minturno identified imitation with the fulfillment of the moralistic function of poetry.
According to most Italian theorists, the poet, although he “improves”, idealizes nature, but does not deviate from its laws, which in art are correlated with the requirement to observe verisimilitude. This raises the question of fiction. This concept in the Renaissance is only outlined, being closely related to the term of rhetoric "invention".
The idea that the poet must embody exists in the object itself, has no existence outside the thing, therefore art is not something separate from nature. The poet feels like a partner of nature, does not separate himself from it. Nature begins to be perceived in its dynamic development, it becomes a stimulus for poetic creativity. Nature and poetry are perceived as one in the sense that they are the results of creation as a process of improvement. And for the poet, nature only has the value of a model when he wants to improve and surpass it.
Of particular interest is the theory of Scaliger - one of the immediate predecessors of the classicists, Scaliger repeatedly declares his commitment to the ideas of Aristotle; but, in fact, gives a Renaissance version of the theory of imitation. If Aristotle focuses on the very process of creativity, then Scaliger in his system assigns the main place to the public. Poetry, in his opinion, is one of the types of rhetoric that can most actively influence the listener and, with the help of an entertaining plot, carry out a moralistic tendency.
In a special chapter of the seventh book, Scaliger discusses the question of the features of poetic imitation. He denies the validity of Aristotle's judgments that not all imitation serves to create a poetic work and that the poetic form is not the main thing in poetry. Scaliger, in contrast to Aristotle, argues that "the purpose of poetry is not imitation, but rather entertaining teaching, with the help of which a person can achieve the perfection of actions, which is called virtue." Defining poetry as an instructive doctrine, Scaliger identifies fiction with fiction, opposes it to truth: “Poetry does not stand out due to imitation, since not every poem is imitation and not every person who imitates is a poet;
poetry does not stand out from other fields because of the use of fiction, or lies, since poetry does not lie, the same poetry that lies always lies and is therefore a special kind of poetry, and not poetry in general. Finally, imitation is contained in any kind of speech, since words are images of things. The goal of the poet is to instruct, while at the same time giving pleasure.
Poetry, according to Scaliger, differs from history in that it adds fiction to the truth of a real fact. 8 Lucretius is a good philosopher, but not a poet, since the task of the latter is not to reveal the truth of natural nature. "The poet imitates human actions and deeds only in order to visibly and clearly express a moralistic idea. The meaning of poetic creativity is to influence the audience by any means. Asking further the question whether Lucan can be called a poet, Scaliger answers in the affirmative: since Lucan writes in poetic form, then it is she who distinguishes him from Livy, who used prose for the purposes of historical narration. If Herodotus, Scaliger develops his thought, sets out plots in poetic form, then his work will become historical poetry, not history. Poetry is imitation in the form verse, which is the hallmark of the poet.The right to be called a poet belongs to those who use the poetic form, and not fiction.The poet is not a creator of fictions, but a compiler of verses: operates with fictitious objects, but from the “making” of poetry.
That rhythmic force, which is expressed in verse, arose simultaneously with human nature” (108, I, 2).
Why is Scaliger so sharply at odds with Aristotle in interpreting the problem of imitation while maintaining strict reverence for the merits of the ancient thinker as a whole?
The fact is that for Scaliger, nature in its real manifestation is imperfect, in it the beautiful is mixed with the ugly, and only the ancients achieved such perfection, which allows the moralistic idea to be carried out most consistently. So,
Virgil created, as it were, a second nature, in comparison with which the real seems to be devoid of true greatness, that is, not reality, but the world of art, is declared the object of imitation. Scaliger's theory of "second nature" is a new justification for the requirement to imitate the ancient as eternal patterns. The poet creates a new reality as if he is equal to God in his abilities, he creates in his work something that surpasses nature, replenishes it where it has shown its imperfection. From the Aristotelian definition of the subject of poetry - “the task of the poet is to speak not about what happened, but about what could happen, and about the possible according to apparent probability or according to necessity” - Scaliger concludes that one should imitate not what is, but what what should be. The poet depicts really existing objects according to the laws of the possible and necessary, as a result of which he, as it were, elevates nature: “Poetry is poetry because it reproduces not just objects of the empirical world, but also non-existent objects that it represents as if they were real, or as if they could or should be so.”
Only in the laws of nature does its perfection emerge: “In the very norms and proportions of nature lies its perfection.” Nature appears in the works of ancient authors returned to its own laws and freed from shortcomings. In terms of scale and diversity, the “ancients” created, as it were, “a “second nature”, ideal and perfect, and Virgil has a special merit in its creation: “We are not able to draw our examples from nature as from the treasury of Virgil’s ideas” .
So, Scaliger saw the true goal of poetry in a delightful instruction, identifying the goal with the essence. The Aristotelian theory of imitation turned out to be reduced to the requirement to select samples from the works of ancient authors, and primarily from Virgil.
The next stage is the era of classicism. Already Scaliger stood up for the supremacy of the mind in poetry, for following the rules of creativity. This trend became dominant during the formation of French classicism in the 17th century. Thoughts about the decisive role of subjective perception in poetry, outlined by Aristotle and continued by the Italian humanists, come to the fore among the French classicists.
The main problem is how to coordinate creativity with the opinion of the public. “You have the right to add a lot of fictions to the truth” sounded in a new way.
the thesis of imitation of nature. Under nature, they begin to understand only the inner world of a person, his psychology and passions, the expression of feelings. The concept of imitation is associated with the birth of the classic ideal: nothing is beautiful if it is not true, but only what is in nature is true.
On the basis of this ideal, the meaning of a work of art and the attitude towards “ancient” authors are determined, which indicate the right path to imitation, because they were able to correctly see what was perfect in nature and recreate it in their work. Therefore, if the French poet imitates the ancients, he uses the best means to express the perfection and "truth" of nature. The problem of imitation among the classicists was not quite consistently reduced to how and with what degree of plausibility one should imitate ancient authors, which then caused a well-known dispute: who achieved a more perfect result - “ancient” or “new” authors.
Boileau brings the thesis of imitation of nature as close as possible to the requirement to imitate the ancients, since the latter created enduring models. Nature for him appears to be liberated in advance, “cleared of flaws” by the efforts of the ancients and therefore has become more majestic, ideally organized. Although rationalism is already noticeable among the thinkers of the Renaissance, the cult of antiquity is subordinate to the cult of reason only among the classicists. Reason becomes the highest regulator of creativity. He outlines the boundaries of imagination, fiction, decides what is probable and what is plausible. Boileau notes in Ronsard "a bad way to imitate the ancients", since he is blind and empirical, not enlightened by the principle of rationality. The requirement to imitate nature means, in practice, following reason, which subordinates the will of the poet to a moralistic goal and prevents uncritical adherence to the models of the ancients. Reason in Boileau's concept indicates and defines patterns, forms rules.
The thesis about the need for rules, doctrines was put forward by the poets of the French Pleiades, but in practice, they advocated free imitation, not constrained by time frames. Ronsard and Du Bellay, in their understanding of imitation, gravitated towards the provisions of Roman rhetoric. If Vida substantiated the need to imitate nature with the authority of the classics, and Scaliger saw in Virgil as if “second nature”, then Boileau attaches exceptional importance to reason. Boileau believes that the ancients slavishly followed nature, so the French look to antiquity for visual confirmation that their own means are correct and express "nature and truth" in the best way hitherto known. Criticism of Boileau is less learned, appeals to what is known to every common sense, he has no scientific claims, philological or historical interests, for him Virgil is not the father of all sciences and arts. The ancients lose their all-encompassing significance (in Canto I, Boileau does not speak of them). “Ancients” for Boileau are examples to prove his own theses. He admires the “ancients”, but recognizes their significance insofar as in all ages man remains the same being: the passions, feelings of people are identical, psychologically unchanged.
Boileau's mind takes on a pantheistic coloration, and nature acquires a reasonable content.
The truthful as identical with the rational is the most important systematic foundation of Boileau's poetics:
Only the truth is beautiful. Only the truth is pleasant.
It must reign everywhere... (Message IX, vv. 43-44).
Reason elevates everyday nature, making it majestic in works of art.” Gradually, Boileau limited the scope of imitation, nature became the subject of poetry only in its conceptual content, and not in the external manifestation of sensually perceived objects. Nature for a classicist is not a world of phenomena in its infinite multiplicity and diversity, not a collection of sensory data, but something that is mentally recreated by a person. For the external "landscape" nature, the classicists have no place in poetry, they limit themselves to depicting a person in his general human, abstract, and not individual consciousness and behavior. The poet imitates nature by moving from its outward appearance to its logical essence.
Enlightenment theories of artistic creativity largely retain the classic understanding of imitation. Imitation of nature, Diderot believes in the Salon of 1765, is the basis of all arts and aims to create a correspondence between the image and the thing. To faithfully recreate nature and observe this correspondence, one must learn to “see” it, and knowledge of ancient samples is a necessary condition for poetic creativity: “It seems to me that one should study antiquity in order to learn to see nature” .." Diderot believes that, imitating nature , the author must create a certain impression in the listener, influencing him with his moralistic concept.But nature does not carry ethical principles, poets need to create the illusion of truth in the depiction of nature for the purpose of moral impact, i.e., imitation of nature goes in accordance with a given ideal In the introduction to the "Salon" of 1767, Diderot points out that the process of imitation involves the reproduction of an ideal model and the elimination of individual and insignificant features of the natural prototype. In this respect, the ancients constitute an example of how to choose the beautiful and create ideal poetry. He denies the validity of the assertion that any nature is beautiful, since the peculiarity of a truthful image lies in its universal character: "Truthful in this sense is nothing but general."
The poet improves nature, approaching it with a certain degree of probability, since he does not copy reality, but reproduces the picture; that has arisen in his imagination, which always deforms what we necessarily imitate.
Diderot's ideal remains absolute and unchanged. “I want my morality and my taste to be eternal.”
The need for aesthetic choice led to the creation of a theory of imitation of "beautiful nature". This new concept was most fully and consistently expounded by S. Batte, who reduced all poetry and all forms of art to the principle of imitation of “beautiful nature”. According to Butte, the artist chooses their most beautiful aspects from various objects and then combines them into one whole: “All the efforts of a genius should have been directed towards choosing the most beautiful elements from nature and combining them into“ a single perfect whole, more perfect than nature itself, but at the same time not losing its naturalness. Nature in art is cleansed of its shortcomings and elevated to ideal perfection. The ugly and ugly has no place in poetry, since nature is freed from its “non-representative” sides. "Beautiful nature" is nothing but a stylized ideal of a typically universal "nature". The pleasant illusion of art is that the depicted nature is plausible enough not to contradict the real one in any way, and beautiful enough to be higher than the everyday one. In his bold attempt to reconcile the depiction of reality with the idealizing tendency of classicist art, Batte had to expand the usual concept of nature, including four areas in its content: 1) actual existing world(physical, moral, political); 2) the world of history (great events and famous people); 3) the world of plot fiction (imaginary gods and heroes); 4) the world of ideas as the realm of the possible, where things exist only as generalities.
Batte's theory was actively accepted by Russian classicists.
So, in the Renaissance, the principles of imitation of nature and models are combined, the classicists put forward a normative ideal. “Nature” remains a shaky and abstract psychological concept. The concept of fiction stands out from the realm of rhetoric, where it was identified with the "image", and passes into the realm of poetics.
The connection between fiction and imitation is outlined, although not firmly.
The theorists of Russian classicism continued the ancient and Western European traditions, but the significance of the independent conclusions of Russian theorists is undeniable.
The need to preserve and develop national identity was clearly recognized by Russian authors. Lomonosov emphasized: “In order not to introduce anything objectionable, but not to leave good things, one must look to whom and in what it is better to follow.”
Developing the theory of fiction and imitation, Russian theorists proposed a peculiar interpretation of it. This theory was the basis of the entire system of literary views of the Russian classicists.
Lomonosov's "rhetoric" brings us close to the problems of artistic figurativeness, which he reveals in the doctrine of poetic fiction. Fiction is a distinctive and specific side of the process of poetic creativity. The term “description” Lomonosov means such “image of some thing”, which can be divided into “truthful and fictitious”. In the first case, “a thing is depicted that really is and was”, and there are many such “descriptions in the writers of true stories and in geographical books, like Pomponius, Pliny”. In the second case, “a fictitious description depicts a thing that does not exist and never happened,” but it “does not differ from fiction,” and “such descriptions are very often found among poets.”
Thus, fiction distinguishes the poet from the historian and geographer, constituting the soul of poetry.
Fiction is an essential prerequisite for poetry, since he represents the idea contained in the poem "more magnificent, stronger and more pleasant." Lomonosov distinguishes fiction from the ornate speeches of the baroque - which are more "consisting of thoughts and subtle reasoning." “Fiction is taken away from mental things and presented vividly, as something sensitive, - in this statement he emphasizes the specific nature of artistic fiction, its visibility, accessibility to perception. Fiction does not come close to the constructions of abstract thought either. It is not equivalent to allegory, because in it "the ideas themselves, and in allegory only speech is transferred."
Lomonosov departs from the theories of French classicism, where fiction is tantamount to an allegorical addition with imperceptibly hidden morals, and from baroque theory, where fiction is tantamount to decoration and is purely formal. For baroque poets, poetry is a game in which the rules of reality have no force, they are created anew each time, showing more and more ingenuity. Truth and fiction are on different levels in baroque poetry, so that the distinction between truth and falsehood remains unimportant. In Lomonosov, fiction retains cognitive significance.
The high style of poetry derives its “magnificence” from fictions, “which, especially in poetry, have great power and can rightly be called the soul of high verse, which can be clearly seen in glorious poets.”
Here Lomonosov distinguishes fiction from a rhetorical figure, embellishment, and considers it a particularly effective means of poetically recreating reality, when the poet is in a state of admiration and “presents himself as amazed in a dream that comes from a very great, unexpected or terrible and miraculous deed.” Fiction is not a category of stylistics, but a concept that characterizes the sphere of artistic epistemology.
Depending on how closely fiction is connected with history, Lomonosov distinguishes two varieties of it: “pure” and “mixed”, that is, something that “has never happened in the world” and that is partly fictional. Fiction as a result of fantasy and historical facts, when combined into an artistic whole, do not contradict each other. Fiction is specific to poetry, but at the same time does not oppose the truth of a single fact.
Including “Aesopian parables, Apuleian fables about the golden donkey, Petronius Satyricon, Lucian conversations, Barclay’s Argenides, Gulliver’s journey” in the realm of pure fictions and highlighting Homer’s “Iliad” and “Odyssey”, Virgil’s “Aeneid”, Ovid’s “Transformations”, “Adventures Telemachus” Fenelon into a special area of “mixed” fiction, Lomonosov pursues the goal of distinguishing between the epic and the narrative of the romantic type. The epic, according to Lomonosov, must have a historical basis, since its main pathos is to sing of the "glorious men" of national history and "glorious deeds of great heroes." Thus, the plot basis of the epic poem does not mechanically combine historical (in the understanding of the people of the 18th century) and fictional facts, but organically processes them. This can be confirmed by yet another classification of Lomonosov - “solid” and “private” fictions, in which the epic refers to “solid” fictions, covering all sides - of a work of art. This also includes tragedies, comedies, eclogues, fables, parables, stories, i.e.
main genres of classical literature.
Lomonosov reveals the concept of fiction not only in comparison with fantasy as a means of “pairing strange and far-off” ideas, but, which is very important for understanding the intentions of Lomonosov the classicist, with the requirement of plausibility. Fiction is the “invention” of the plausible, giving “a clear and lively representation of the action with the circumstances by which it is imagined in the mind, as the action itself” (13, VII, 282]. Lomonosov insists on observing “the likeness of a fictitious image with the thing itself”, to which “actions, properties and circumstances of the thing itself” must be attached.It is important not only to “observe the similarity of a fictional image with the thing itself”, but also “we should try so that the fictional image of a part, action and circumstance has some properties of the thing that is under it seems to be ". With the help of fiction, there is a transition from the perception of an object to its artistic image, and the poet's living representation is realized in verbal form. In the process of "fiction" it is necessary to constantly correlate the artistic image with the requirements of likelihood. The logic of artistic reproduction is based on the laws of reality, limits and the boundaries of fiction are set by the mind, which not only compares fiction and reality, but also controls their correspondence.
The doctrine of plausibility is an essential part of the classic theory of imitation, and it cannot be considered as a requirement for realistic reproduction, since the artistic world created by means of fiction is closed in itself and is built according to a pattern internally set by the mind only in general, logical agreement with the real. Lomonosov understands the requirement of verisimilitude as an internally conditioned correlation of individual aspects of a work, “when many properties, parts or circumstances of the most likeable thing and the very similarity, decently demolished among themselves, are offered” . Reality is cognized by the mind of the poet in the aspect of the possible and probable, because the world of the possible is more reasonable and ideal than the everyday world with its unforeseen accidents. Fiction is the means most appropriate to this circumstance of elevating the actual as separate to the possible and probable as general. Fiction as a "power of thinking" forms and regulates associations of the imagination in the process of imitation.
The principle of likelihood is a consequence of the Aristotelian and Renaissance understanding of the differences between history and poetry: the first refers to the truth of a single fact, and the second to its appearance, to a reliable similarity with it. This is how Gottsched put it: “I understand poetic plausibility as the similarity of fiction with what can happen in reality.”
Boileau strictly separated the truthful and the plausible:
The unbelievable cannot be touched.
Let the truth always look believable:
We are cold-hearted to absurd miracles, And only the possible is always to our taste.
“We demand from art not truth, but an ennobled likeness,” wrote Marmontel. French classicism especially emphatically absolutized the differences between what happened and what could happen.
The classicists distinguished between what actually happened, what could happen, and what could happen by mental assumption. The first is the subject of history, the second and the third - possible and probable - form the sphere of poetry. Fiction is the specifically creative principle of poetry. Therefore, a consistent classicist denies the use of works with such a plot, which is unknown to the public and depicts unusual circumstances, although they can be confirmed by historical documents. The reader or spectator will not be interested in what he has little faith in, and will rather agree with a fictitious plot if it seems plausible to him. In assessing the credibility of an image, the subjective confidence of a person as the most important aspect of his psychology is of decisive importance. Plausibility is a form of expression of the possible, but not in itself, but in relation to “ public opinion” about what is depicted.
The poet, using fiction to make the transition from the directly given world of phenomena to the logically forced world of reason, must comply with the requirement of plausibility.
The reality of a real fact, confirmed by history or tradition, may seem incredible to the mind. Since the poet must actively influence the reader's consciousness, it is not the documentary nature of what is depicted, but its internal logical persuasiveness that determines the poet's success.
The concept of plausibility in the system of classicism helps to understand the essence of their view of the “single” of poetry, which differs from the “single” of history, since these are only appearances of the single. Poetry, like philosophy, deals with the general, but unlike the latter, it does not renounce the expression of the individual. Reaching a certain degree of plausibility of the image, the artist excludes the play of chance, characteristic of the individual, and introduces it into the sphere of the universal. Yu. N. Davydov formulates the features of the Aristotelian tradition in the following way in the interpretation of the relationship between the general and the individual: “Art gives the public only the appearance of knowing the individual, imitating this appearance with the help of the “general” (probable and necessary)” . In the concept of classic verisimilitude, the process of imitation involves the reproduction of "general" reality, equal in size to "general" art, and the "invention" of "individual" art, which does not coincide with the "individual" reality. It is in the requirement of plausibility that the semantic spheres of imitation and fiction are united. The degree of probability of the events and characters depicted in the work is verified by the perception of the public. The greatest degree of reliability and persuasiveness of what is depicted in works of art leads readers and listeners to the idea of its identity with the subject of the image.
The classicists do their best to reduce the illusion of artificiality to a minimum.
Sumarokov points out:
Try to measure my hours in the game by hours, So that, forgetting, I can believe you, That if it’s not a game, the action is yours, But then the existence itself happened.
And do not strum in verse with empty words to me, Tell me only what the passions themselves will say.
But they did just the opposite. Highlighting the achievement of a strong impression from a work of art, they glossed over the question of the truth of the characters and positions depicted. The illusion of authenticity among the classicists blurs the boundaries of art and reality - such is the price of moralistic teaching.
The material of art is often not the true, but what seems true and probable in imaginary situations. “The poet has the right to prefer verisimilitude to truth,” critics of the French Academy said in 1638 about Corneille’s tragedy “Sid”, “and it is better to develop a plot that is fictional, but reasonable, than truthful, but does not meet the requirements of reason.” - Moreover, “it would be incomparably better when developing the plot of “Sid” to sin against the truth,” and it seems unforgivable to them “transferring to the stage a genuine historical event in all its ugliness.”
Lomonosov repeatedly reminds that fiction must be plausible and consistent with the requirements of “decent” (a synonym for plausibility).
In the chapter “On the spread of “ideas”, he writes: “Through intention it is quite possible to spread an idea if it is presented that it is possible and convenient or impossible and inconvenient, has obstacles or aids, which can be taken from the properties of place, time and signs of the thing itself. on which the intention is laid, and the one who undertook it” .. The idea of a “decent” image can be traced throughout the “Rhetoric”:
"invented ideas" should be portrayed by "decent and chosen sayings", placing and connecting them "in a decent order"; “decency” is observed in the use of metaphors (“it is obscene to transfer speeches from low things to high and important things”), grammatical forms, rhetorical figures, up to “the finest philosophical imaginations and reasonings”, which “we have decent and expressive speeches” .
Thus, in the theory of fiction, Lomonosov acts as a classicist.
Genetically, Lomonosov's theory is connected with the "school" poetics of the turn of the 17th-18th centuries. It is known that he was familiar with it from the textbook by F. Kvetnitsky, written for the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy in 1732. This author called poetry, “the art of any matter to interpret in a measured style with plausible fiction for amusement and benefit listeners." Fiction is a necessary condition for the poetic, otherwise we have before us “not a poet, but a versifier”, “poetically, to invent means to find something invented”, and “fiction is not a lie”, since “to lie means to go against reason”. But these genetic links do not give grounds to identify the theory of Lomonosov-classicist with the "school" theory, since similar provisions function in different systems.
Academic literary criticism of the 19th century, considering the theory of Lomonosov, one-sidedly emphasized the influence of Gottsched. With regard to the theory of fiction, there is very little evidence for this. In our opinion, Lomonosov here drew close to Gottsched's opponents, the Swiss critics Bodmer and Breitinger. Influenced by the philosophical teachings of Leibniz, who argued that we live in the best possible world, they advocated expanding the role of imagination, fantasy, and the miraculous.
The requirement to increase the rights of the subjective side of poetry led them to search for new types of individual expressiveness. Bodmer and Breutinger turned to the feeling of the sublime, put nature and reason above the rules, united reason and imagination and began to assert the possibility of a “supernatural” content of poetry.
Lomonosov, in his own way, comes to a similar interpretation of fiction, namely: fiction is abstraction not only with the help of reason, but also with the help of imagination. The idea of the existence of "possible" worlds strengthened the position of those who emphasized the active role of creative imagination in the theory of fiction. But the theories of Bodmer and Breutinger did not contain a general critique of the concept of imitation, since, while asserting the rights of fantasy, they remain rationalists and act from the standpoint of classic plausibility.
The very concept of nature expanded. Lomonosov does not specifically use the term “imitation of nature”, but the general meaning of his remarks is “do not act against nature”; “the natural is, which follows nature itself, as it requires, which happens according to time, place or dignity” - and an understanding of the relationship between fiction and plausibility indicates that he objectively shared this theory, focusing his primary attention on fiction as the main means imitations. Fiction in Lomonosov is a specific means of recreating the essence of nature in poetry. Possessing a creative character, he is closely connected with fantasy, imagination, but these connections are subject to control by the mind, which is manifested in the requirement to respect the likelihood.
Very interesting remarks about the leading role of fiction in poetry are contained in an anonymously published article in the journal Monthly Works (1755, May) entitled “Discourse on the Qualities of a Poet”. Here the demand for independent and original fiction is clearly put forward. In contrast to those who saw ways to improve skills in imitation of exemplary authors, this article affirms the idea of active fiction: “If a happy mind were filled with literature, then it would not only by imitation, but also by its own invention, could give birth to something new and unprecedented.” The author of the article explains the creative beginning of fiction with the peculiarities of poetry as a whole: “The rules of poetic science alone do not make a poet, but his thought is born both from deep erudition and from the high spirit and natural poetic fire added to it” .
G. N. Teplov made his contribution to the creation of a general theory of imitation. The starting point of his reasoning "On the beginning of poetry" was Aristotle's idea of the innate imitation. Teplov pointed out that “solitude gave the shepherd in the forests with birds to bow to imitation” and that “the human natural tendency to imitate is not the only one acting in him”, “love of fun and fun” joins it. These assumptions serve as Teplov’s basis for determining the “nature or affinity of poetry”: “The innate tendency in a person to imitate nature and to have fun has produced many sciences and arts, including poetry showing its foundation”; imitation of nature is connected with everything that “has happened or could happen to a person in life”. Teplov, speaking about the emergence of poetry, about its sources and about imitation as the essence of poetry, continues the ideas of Aristotle: if a person “did not have a tendency from his birth to imitate and to recapture the image visible to him, then he would never have understood to do anything, don't say."
Aristotle, as you know, believed that man is by nature prone to imitation, and from this feature he drew an important conclusion for art in general: any imitation brings knowledge of the new and this gives pleasure. Poetry and everyday life have similar beginnings in their internal processes.
The proof of this is what happens in everyday life: “What we really look at with disgust, we look at the most accurate images of it with pleasure, such as the image of disgusting animals and corpses.”
This is how Aristotle wrote in the Rhetoric and summarized his thought as follows:
“Since teaching and admiration are pleasant, everything like this, for example, imitation, namely painting, sculpture, poetry, and in general any good imitation, even if the object of imitation in itself does not represent anything pleasant, will necessarily be pleasant; in this case, we experience pleasure not from the object of imitation itself, but from the thought that this (imitation) is equal to that (object of imitation), so that here is cognition. This joy from imitation in art is explained by the fact that by comparing the image and the prototype, a person acquires new knowledge. The thesis about the cognitive nature of art, put forward by Aristotle, found a creative continuation in the Russian theory of poetry of the 18th century.
Teplov especially emphasizes the result of imitation, which is visible in the acquired knowledge, which is useful and enjoyable when contemplating works of art:
“Let us imagine the breaking of a ship, the killing of a baby, a snake; a dragon or a reptile, the corpse of a dead person: all this is very unpleasant for our eyes: it induces fear, horror and abomination. But when we see the same thing with great pictorial art imitated in a picture, we do not disdain to supply magnificent houses for beauty. Such pleasure to the eyes comes from nothing else, but from the fact that we are by nature inclined to imitate, therefore, art is pleasant to us, which makes our inclination satisfy. Teplov is far from the principle of Sh. Batte - to imitate the “decorated” nature, pre-selected, cleared of external unattractive features. For Teplov, “not only what is pleasant in nature, but also the very things from which we have fear, disgust and disgust, when we see their nature vividly depicted in the picture, feels pleasure in our hearts and in our eyes” . Teplov believes that everything in nature deserves to be the object of poetic creativity. Art is capable of translating any reality, so great is the power of creative fiction. In this he is undoubtedly close to Boileau:
Sometimes on the canvas a dragon or a vile reptile With living colors catches the eye, And what in life would seem terrible to us, Under the brush of a master, becomes beautiful.
Thus, the Aristotelian doctrine of the typifying, transforming role of art in the process of recreating reality was the basis for the development of the Russian theory of classicism. During the depiction of reality, an act of its cognition is performed. But unlike Aristotle, Teplov places more emphasis on the sensual side of perception both in the creation and contemplation of works of art. So, in accordance with the classic theory of passions, Teplov emphasized the role of love feelings in creating lyrical songs and noted that poetry is born in the depths of human feelings as a result of a special delight and a special kind of imagination.
Trediakovsky approached the analysis of the concepts of "fiction" and "imitation" from a different angle. He resolutely insisted that the verse form is an insignificant feature of poetry. This point of view was also shared by Lomonosov: “Although the prose from the poem differs for excellent composition, and therefore should be different in calmness, however, in the reasoning of the society of matter, it is very similar to it, because you can write about one thing in prose and verse.”
Trediakovsky consistently pursued the idea of distinguishing between genuine poetry and “poetry”: “But how long has the soul of poems been in poetry? And can he be called a piit who only composes verses alone, without any piit spirit? “verse is not a great thing, but piit in humanity is something rare.” He strictly distinguished between poetry and poetry throughout his creative activity, since the fundamental primacy of content for him was undeniable. “The direct concept of poetry,” he writes in the article “Opinion on the Beginning of Poetry and Poetry in General,” “is not to compose poetry, but to create, invent and imitate,” since “the soul and life of a poem” (vol. e. any poetic work according to the then terminology) constitutes “creation, invention and imitation”, and the verse “is the language of this”; poetry is “internal in those three; and the verse is only external.”
In the early stages of the development of the classical theory of poetry, the problem of distinguishing between the poetic and the non-poetic was decided on the basis of one criterion of poetic form. The patterns of outwardly ordered speech with the help of rhythm were a kind of determinant of the poetic, sometimes the distinctive features of “measured” speech were used as a criterion for distinguishing poetry from rhetorical prose.
So, in the neo-Latin tradition of the theory of poetry (Pontan, Masen, Foss), as well as in. Scaliger, and Boileau, the poetic form remained an essential aspect of poetry. Russian theorists seek to define the essence of poetry using the theory of imitation and fiction. And here again the tradition of Aristotle turns out to be significant, to which Trediakovsky refers, quoting him from the translation of Alexander of Pavia: “Verse and prose do not distinguish between the historian; with piit: for although Herodotus' history will be composed in verse, it will always be, as before, history.
The separation of poetry and poetry was already outlined in “school” poetics in the formula “differentia inter poetam et versificatorem”, but in most cases poetry was considered as a kind of eloquence, although expressed in the form of verse. This division in school poetics remained within the limits of external form; in Trediakovsky it received a deeply meaningful interpretation.
Mentioning that “many, writing about the origins of poetry, sometimes merged it with poetry,” Trediakovsky complains that etymologically, in its internal form, the word “poetry” does not correspond to its true meaning, since it does not contain an indication for imagination and imitation. He establishes the equality of prose and poetic forms: “You can create, invent and imitate prose, and you can represent true actions in verse.” in the Argenis and Fenelon, in the Travels of Telemachus, he calls them the real “piites.” This high title he denies to Lucan, the author of the Pharsalia, since he only stated historical plot in the form of a poetic story. In this regard, we can recall Scaliger, who defended the right of Lucan to be called a poet.
Trediakovsky's desire to exclude the poetic form as a defining feature of the poetic should not be seen as a denial of the possibilities of verse in poetry. As you know, he attached great importance to verse, its forms and types, but did not link this with the general category of the poetic: “A verse is a human invention, in contrast to their ordinary word.” In the second edition of The Method for the Composition of Russian Poems, he once again recalled the division of speech into “free, or prose, which especially belongs to rhetors and historians,” and to verse, which “for the most part use piites.” Defending the naturalness of the epic as "an imitator of nature", he noted that "non-verbal" speech "is more natural in its origin than verse".
Similar trends can be traced in the German theory of poetry (I. E. Schlegel, K. F. Bremer); the dispute about the advantages of poetic and prose forms was intense in France of the 18th century, although due to the peculiarities of French versification it was reduced to the question of the use of rhyme.
How did Trediakovsky imagine the distinctive and essential properties of poetry - fiction and imitation? Referring to the legacy of Aristotle, he compares the historian and the poet and emphasizes those words of the ancient philosopher, which noted that “the historian of the act as it was, but as it could be, suggests” . In the preface to "Argenida" he develops this idea: in what order they were produced, but in such a way as they really could be. Having established the need for plausible fiction, he explains the essence of “fiction” as a process of imitation of nature: “This means that piit is an imitator of nature, so that at least Livy made his hysteria into verse, and Virgil his own Aeneid into prose, however, there would be the first absolutely as much and then the historian, how much the latter would certainly drink, for one would write directly in verse, and the other in prose in a way that is similar to probability by nature. Plausibility is not an end in itself for the classicists, it is only a condition for aesthetic impact.
When Trediakovsky analyzes the verse poems of Virgil, Tasso, Milton, Voltaire in the preface to Barclay's Argenide, he points out that “all these are not piites because they wrote in verse; for poetry, they would only be poets, as Quintilian calls them, or versifiers, as Scaliger calls them. Turning to a specific consideration of Barkley's work, he once again emphasized that Barkley "did not write in verse because he did not want to be a versifier, but only imitated one nature, and in the reasoning of verses, not imitating any of the poets"; “He wanted himself to be an original and others would imitate him.” Trediakovsky consistently holds the idea that the essence of poetic creativity is the imitative reproduction of the laws of nature through creative fiction.
In accordance with this, Trediakovsky divided the process of creating a work of art into three stages: “creation”, “invention”, “imitation”.
Creation is “the arrangement of things after the election”, i.e., depicting natural phenomena, the poet groups them anew. The next stage is “invention”: “not such a representation of actions as they are in themselves, but as they can be, or should be.”
The result of “piitic fiction” is imitation: “following in all nature by the description of things and deeds according to probability and likeness to truth.”
Trediakovsky repeatedly emphasized the active nature of fiction in poetry.
Reviewing the tragedy of Sumarokov, he noted the advantage of fiction in poetry over logic: “Excellent wit is not only in the concept, but also in fiction and invention. In the preface to "Argenida" Trediakovsky gave his classification of the types of fiction. The first type consists of those in which the reader encounters “certainly known”, “undoubted”, that “the author’s thought completely declares and then directly leads to the understanding of what he proposes”; here he also refers that “in the end, by the addition of names and by the transformation of them, it is clearly and accurately known.” The second type includes "those descriptions from which nothing can ever be concluded, nor can they be directly applied to anything known." The third type occupies, as it were, a middle place in it, it speaks of things "neither directly known nor completely doubtful." In these arguments, taken in the context of the entire preface to Argenida, one can see Trediakovsky's attempt to separate fiction from fiction and give its use in poetry a special meaning. Of course, he does not achieve the penny of clarity that we observe in Lomonosov, but the main thing is the establishment of connections between fiction and reality by the facts of reality, when the “probability of a fable” is combined with the “truth of history”.
In the theory of fiction, Trediakovsky "closely comes to the question of the philosophical understanding of nature (nature, nature), in poetry: “Piistic possibility is a philosophical possibility, proven by reason”, “Piistic fiction happens according to reason, that is, how a thing could be or should With the help of fiction, the poet, in the process of imitation, carries out a generalized reproduction of reality, which is clearly demonstrated, according to Trediakovsky, by the heroic poem, which, “nailing this very story to a single point, will allow it to be in a form that is very attractive more, and this as a reduction from it huge space, and adding to it the most cheerful roundabouts.
From the fact that fiction is the basis of a poetic work, the conclusion follows: fiction is not equivalent to fiction, but carries a cognitive meaning: as "a lie is a word against reason and conscience". Reason gives fiction cognitive energy. Further concretization of the question of whether the poet is a liar due to the use of fiction is contained in the preface to the Tilemakhida, where the relation of the requirement of plausibility to fiction is considered, which Trediakovsky separates from “witty by natural conformity false words” that have “all the importance of truth” .
It is fiction as the invention of a possible and probable confluence of characters, circumstances and situations that distinguishes a true poet. The theory of fiction allows Trediakovsky to briefly but clearly outline the main difference between poetry as spiritual creativity and the creation of material objects: “Piit is also not a craftsman: every artist makes in a different way from piit,” since “to create in a piit way is to imitate the likeness of possible things , true image”. This formula, amazing in its brevity and capacity, contains the essence of Trediakovsky's poetic theory. In it, he emphasizes the spiritual and creative specificity of poetry, in which the objective world of reality is creatively transformed into the world of art. As for “other hand-made arts”, they “represent their deeds as they are directly and really in nature or in what state they were” .
Trediakovsky's indication of the difference between poetry and “handicraft arts”, in which not fiction dominates, but a mechanically accurate copying of the external appearance of objects, to a certain extent opposes the views of Teplov, who believed that “maybe more than one poet remained hidden in a handicraft man for that only, that he was born in such circumstances, that it was easier and closer for him to learn a craft than to accustom his innate talent for the spirit of poetry to become a perfect poet.
The sphere of fiction is the possible and the probable, and everything depicted in it must retain a general similarity and similarity with the real world. “Master artists” have “a possibility as well as a historical one, which is narrated, but from artists, as if by a true narrative, it is mechanically produced.” Thus, Trediakovsky singled out poetry not only from the field of philosophy and history, but also brought it beyond the limits of “mechanical” arts. The division into "free" and "mechanical" arts, which began in antiquity, was the first attempt to distinguish spiritual creativity from the realm of human activity. Until the 18th century the distinction between science and art remained largely formal, and Trediakovsky's efforts in this area deserve to be noted as innovative and enlightening.
How are the limits of likelihood established? How can fiction be limited? Although Trediakovsky's answer is somewhat general, it leaves no doubt that the regulator of fiction is nature (“nature”) and “mind”. This is the limit beyond which the artist's fiction does not go. “The funny art should be a copy of the funny that is in nature,” writes Trediakovsky. “The very art of comedy [consists] in sticking to nature and never departing from it”; “The most rude of nature always likes the marks more than the most tender, which are not by nature.” Trediakovsky formulates the connection between the requirement of plausibility and the observance of a probable similarity with nature: “Holding only firmly on nature, it turns out that probability is one unfalse leader, which must be followed.” He also speaks of this in the preface to the Tilemachida: “A dramatic poem must, within the course of a word, be invariably similar to nature.”
Briefly summarizing his point of view: “Pit is the painter of nature” - and insisting on the unity of the poetic and pictorial principles of reflection, Trediakovsky defines the poet’s task not only to simply describe things, but also to represent them in a way that is only living and real, that everyone imagines them in faces. see" . And this is achieved with the help of artistic fiction. Not so much imitation of models as imitation of nature with the help of fiction underlies the theory of classicism in Russia.
In the process of imitation with the help of fiction in poetry, knowledge of the truth of passions takes place. Exalting the dignity of the author. “The Adventures of Telemachus”, Trediakovsky discovers in his work “a bright flame, which alone is supplied by nature”, so that “everywhere art becomes nature”. But sometimes his attention was attracted by “dressed up, cleaned and reddened” nature. Here is what he writes in the article “On the Immaculateness and Pleasantness village life”: “Everyone would wish, if it were possible not to part for an hour with a stay that was only kind and pleasant. At least they have already tried, consoling themselves in the impossibility of making themselves some kind of seduction by the transfer, so to speak, the villages and fields are not simple and respect the rough look, which does not know beauties other than natural, and does not borrow anything from art, but villages, fields, let it be allowed to say , combed, dressed up, tucked away, and read I uttered a blushed decorum. Here Trediakovsky clearly alludes to the features of the depiction of nature in the genres of idyll, eclogue, although he deviates from the central premises of his theory. As for the “important” genres, there “the height lies in the imitation of simple nature, the preparation of adventures in such a subtle way that it is impossible to foresee them, and in the conduct of those with such art that everything new would seem natural” . The author in the epic always follows "nature in all its differences." “Invention according to reason” goes within the framework of strictly sustained genres, the reasonableness of the image is achieved through the design of the work according to the laws of the genre: in “Argenide” “natural beauty, that is, such as matter required it, otherwise it would be unnatural” .
“Art” and “nature” in Trediakovsky are opposed to “enthusiasm” (i.e.,
imagination). He casts doubt on the thesis of Italian poetry theorists about the superiority of Virgil's work over Homer - the first one gave an example of orderliness, correctness, clarity and completeness of presentation. According to Trediakovsky, Virgil failed by convening an artificial work devoid of the simplicity of Homer. But Homer's "enfusiasm" sometimes "leads to the oblivion of art, to the neglect of order, to the fact that it goes beyond the limits of nature." On the contrary, “the magnificent magnificence, the reasoning, the mature and dignified procession of Maronovo are sometimes transformed into correctness, excessively decent, than he seems to be more a historian than a piit.” At the end of the comparison between Virgil and Homer, Trediakovsky asks why modern “philosophizing piites” admire Virgil. And again, the criterion for it is the imitation of nature:
“Is this not happening, I think, from their feeling that it is more convenient to imitate the great reasoning of the Latin poet with art, rather than the exquisite fire-breathing of the Hellenic piit, which is taught by nature alone?” .
Trediakovsky opposes the poetic concepts of the Baroque, considers “everywhere and always to decorate, lavish and luxuriate” as a false taste, and only then recognizes the descriptions as “magnificent” when they are natural and “not only written off from nature, but also from the amiable nature.” True, sometimes he slipped wording that to a certain extent brought him closer to representatives of the Baroque. Thus, in a “Letter to a Friend on the Present Usefulness of Poetry to Citizenship,” he remarks that a person enjoys in art “the struggle of witty inventions, the skillful copulation and position of colors and colors, the amazing harmony of strings, sounds and singing” . But such thoughts occur in him by chance, clearly falling out of the general system of views.
The main thing is to keep to nature, to follow nature, to create like nature. The poet does not enter into competition with nature, since he cannot surpass it with the power of his individuality.
The intelligibility and intelligibility of a work is unattainable without probability, and "everything is pretty good with it." The greatest credibility was achieved by the author of The Adventures of Telemachus, who “connected the whole and the parts with subtle and precise comparisons, which nature alone observes diligently in all his works.” Since the task of the poet is to teach the truth, the likelihood permeates all aspects of the work: "The action will be likely and like the truth in the procession, as it is true in the very essence." Trediakovsky's remarks about Sumarokov's tragedy “Khorev” are interesting in this regard: “We do not argue, tragic love is a joke; however, the tragic author, as if presenting an important matter, should not have called it a joke; for they know that everything in tragedy is feigned, but they consider it to be an important truth.
His rigoristically consistent implementation of the principle of likelihood led him to a negative assessment of rhyme. At the beginning of his poetic activity, Trediakovsky believed that "rhyme makes our poems the most beautiful." He saw in it a certain semantic content, forbidding the alternation of male and female rhymes. Later, in the early 1950s, Trediakovsky began to resolutely deny the need to use rhyme, believing that it deprives a poetic work of the necessary credibility. In 1752, he pointed out that "rhyme is not essential to poetry, but only an extraneous decoration used to delight the ear."
Rhyme arose in “barbarian times”, and in the classical era it was unused. Trediakovsky demanded to turn to genuine antiquity, free from layers of the "Gothic" era. Reasonable credibility determines the possibility of using rhyme: “The use of rhyme in general should be such that reason is always preferred: that is, that always, when composing a verse, try more about the pure meaning in it than about rich rhyme; it will be impossible for both of them to be together, so that for the richness of rhymes of solid meaning, nowhere and never be neglected.
Rhyme, he writes in the preface to the Tilemachida, prevents the majestic and smooth flow of the syllable in the heroic poem.
Rhyme is the threshold on the path of this current:
“Adolescent rhyming agreement is a toy unworthy of male rumors.” “Natural and preeminent versification” (that is, the verse of Russian folklore) was without rhyme.
It is especially important to observe the principle of verisimilitude and decorum in dramatic works: “Dramaturgical poem must be in the course of the word, all the same with nature”, therefore “the effort to unceasing rhyme detracts infinitely from the heat and zeal of dramatic piima”. The dramaturgy is based on the conversation of the characters, and “is it natural that there is an interview that incessantly ends with a female rhyme, like a sea on a mountain, and a male one, like a widow, alas,” ironically Trediakovsky. “Indecent” rhyme and odes.
On the question of the role of rhyme in the creation of a natural style, Trediakovsky's position was shared by Sumarokov and Kantemir. Sumarokov was proud of the fact that he had the opportunity to write a whole tragedy in unrhymed verses: “I promised to compose a tragedy without rhymes. This kind of writing is more successful with us than perhaps with the French; but who, without penetrating, will believe that it is even more difficult to compose poetry without rhymes than with rhymes?
The word put in place of rhyme should be as strong as rhyme, and this requires a very skillful writer. Cantemir deliberately preferred white verse. Explaining that in composing poetry one can do without rhyme, he cited Trissino's poem "Italy Liberated", Milton's poem "Paradise Lost", his own translations of Horace and Anacreon as examples.
Sumarokov makes the use of rhyme dependent on the general content:
The opinion of the French theorist of the 18th century is aphoristically expressive. J. B. Dubos about rhyme, coinciding with the thoughts of Trediakovsky: “In the works of a simple rhymer, you will never find a real imitation of nature”; “rhyme, like duels and feudal estates, owes its origin to the barbarism of our ancestors.”
It should not be that she (rhyme. - A.S.) Captured our thought, But that she was our slave.
No need to chase after her without a memory:
It must itself meet us in the mind.
Russian classicists came to a common conclusion - not formal moments determine the creation of a poetic image, but “reasonable” plausibility. And in this they are unanimous with Western European theoreticians of poetry. The question of rhyme was part of the well-known dispute between "ancient" and "modern" in France, during which the problem was raised whether it was possible to translate ancient authors into prose, or whether they should be translated into verse. Ch. Perrot, W. de Lamotte, Fénelon, Dubos, Montesquieu advocated the advantages of prose, Voltaire was a witty defender of the rights of verse. If verse and rhyme do not constitute the basic condition of the poetic, then what can be its essence - this is the question that remained unresolved by the middle of the 18th century.
The composition of the problems of plausibility included the question of the "wonderful" in poetry. It was concretized in the course of a discussion of how expedient and decent it is for a poet of modern times to use the images of ancient mythology and the Christian religion. And again, the principle of likelihood becomes the decisive criterion: the author can “contribute a lot of extraordinary things, but in such a way that these extraordinary things seem probable in every possible way from the truth of similarity combined with them” .
“Fictitious divas and passions” should have the appearance of truth, since the reader perceives what seems incredible or monstrous “with annoyance and disgust, since the field of poetry is possible and probable, there is always a danger of falling into “extreme miraculousness”. Trediakovsky very sensitively noted all cases of inaccurate use of “wonderful” by Sumarokov: he considers the words “let Homer multiply the gods” as “false in thought” and “impious in mind” and suggests replacing it with an allegorical expression. The passage in Sumarokov's writings, where it was said that Neptune "gives his scepter" to Peter I, turned out to be a violation of "decency": ). He reproached Sumarokov for the fact that his tritons sing songs to Peter I. In these statements, Trediakovsky contradicts his early position of 1735, when he explained that “through Apollinus one should understand the desire of the heart, which I have, so that science is divorced in Russia poetic." “But, by the way,” he explained, “everything in it (in the Epistle to Apollinus. - A.S.), no matter how it is written, is in a poetic way that skillful people know enough; For this, Christians who are zealous for us in piety have no reason for temptation here. No less eloquent is his then interpretation of the word Cupid: “The word Cupid should not be tempted to give reasons for cruel virtue to a Christian, because it is not accepted here for the rotten Venus fictitious son, but for a passion of the heart, which in lawful love and for its great ardor is blasphemed to be never deserved it anywhere.”
The internal inconsistency of Trediakovsky’s views on the problem of the “wonderful”, which consisted in the simultaneous striving for both allegorization and enrichment of poetic imagery, was finally removed only in the 60s in the preface to “Tilemachida”: ”, and since a person is “by nature a lover of the extraordinary,” he “seeks to saturate himself with dreams that are in line with his wishes.” If earlier Trediakovsky, condemning Sumarokov for the misuse of mythological images, contradicted the theory of Boileau, who proved their right to exist in poetry, then in 1766 he tried to emphasize his unity with him in denying the images of Christian saints, so often used in baroque poetry. According to the researcher of French classicism S. S. Mokulsky, “Boileau fundamentally contrasted the miracles of ancient mythology with the miracles of the Christian religion, which, in his opinion, are unsuitable for depiction in poetry, because they are incomprehensible from the point of view of reason, and only understandable can be the object of poetry ” .
Trediakovsky repeatedly insisted on the need to subordinate the miraculous to the plausible: the epic action “should be miraculous, but probably,” since “we are not surprised at what seems to us to be impossible.” This is precisely the merit of the works of Fenelon, that he, "having moved away from the knots that are common to modern romances or fictional stories," "did not get mired equally in extreme miraculousness." Trediakovsky is ironic about the images of folklore: “horses speak”, “tripedal tables walk”, “fighting clubs worth a hundred pounds”, “thrown over the clouds and from the height of the toy falling on the Iroan head”. Trediakovsky tried to connect the miraculous with the principle of imitation of nature, declaring it a special kind of fiction. A classicist must always remember the requirement of reasonable plausibility: “Piit should never annoy the mind, although it sometimes goes beyond the limits of nature.”
Lomonosov also joined the general conversation about the miraculous, who in the theory of fiction often combined two issues: the creation of a poetic image as a result of the poet's imagination and the features of “inventing the miraculous”. Like Trediakovsky, Lomonosov put forward the requirement of reasonable plausibility: “it is necessary to try so that from the combination of these (“simple ideas.” - A. S.) natural and consonant thoughts occur, and not forced or false and absurd, only sound reasoning is valid in this case. In a note to a 1747 manuscript of rhetoric, he was critical of German poet baroque G. Kh. Lems, who, as can be seen from the quotes cited by Lomonosov, clearly violated the classic requirement of “decent” in the use and semantic content of metaphors.
Sumarokov, in his epistle on poetry, also dwelled on the problem of the miraculous.
Noting that the epic verse is “full of transformations” and that “in it virtue boldly passes into a deity, accepts spirit and body,” he specifically dwelled on the meaning of mythological personifications as an arsenal of allegorically expressive images:
Minerva is wisdom in him, Diana is purity, Love is Cupid, Venus is beauty.
Where there is thunder and lightning, there the Angry Zeus proclaims fury and frightens the earth.
When there is excitement and a roar in the seas, It is not the wind that makes noise, - Neptune shows anger.
And this is not the sound that the voices repeat, That the Nymph remembers through the tears of Narcissus.
Thus, on the issue of the role, meaning and limits of the use of the miraculous in poetic creativity, Russian classicists occupied largely similar positions.
The question of the miraculous and the probable, the plausible and the natural is decided exclusively in the humanitarian aspect, religious considerations, still so important for art 50-100 years ago, when the symbolic system of artistic thinking dominated, are not taken seriously. Russian classicists finally broke with the scholastic motivations of artistic creativity (including the depiction of certain events and characters), which indicates the dominance of a new, secular worldview in Russian literature of the 18th century.
IN medieval representations about art, it is difficult to find a logical justification for the problem of depicting the miraculous, since all the particular problems of ideology and art were directly dependent on the dominant theocentric view of things:
god is "wonderful" in all his creations. At that time, the truth of judgment was based not on what was revealed to immediate consciousness, but on divine authority.
Independent poetic truth is alien to medieval artistic consciousness.
A new attitude to the problem of the "wonderful" arises in the Renaissance. Since, within the framework of the theory of imitation of Nature, there is no object or phenomenon of reality that would represent a miracle in itself, then, according to humanists, “miraculous” is ancient mythology. The images of the pagan pantheon were declared fictitious, because if they are presented in art seriously, then the public can accept and believe in their supernatural existence.
The “reason” of the classicists excludes Christian miracles as a subject of art, even the ancient gods he recognizes only in the form of allegories.
Christian miracles, like magic and sorcery, go beyond the boundaries of natural phenomena, they are impossible in reality, implausible in their supernatural nature, testifying to the arbitrariness of the imagination. Boileau in the third song of the "Poetic Art" sharply denies the artistic expediency and significance of epics, which are based on a plot from Christian history. The Christian "wonderful" is mysterious and irreproducible in a sensuously plausible form. In pagan mythology, with all the exclusivity of acting characters, there is no mystery and internal logical contradictions. The actions of the heroes and exceptional persons of ancient authors are hypothetically plausible, just as the conversation of animals in a fable is plausible, despite its unthinkability in reality.
“Wonderful” in the doctrine of classicism had the meaning of conditional plausibility, externally it existed within the framework of imitation of nature, and internally it was an assumption of fantasy under the guise of mythological images. "Wonderful" is a rationalized use of mythology. If the mythology of the ancients assumed the specific use of "wonderful" characters and situations, then for the classicists they are only allegories.
Sumarokov addressed the problem of fiction and imitation, based on the requirements of simplicity and naturalness of the artistic image. His thesis - "nature is superior to art" - led directly to the assertion of the cognitive significance of poetry: "Piitic expressions and their images, although they are fictional, serve to the knowledge of nature." Naturalness for Sumarokov is the main condition of artistry. In the article “On Unnaturalness”, he sharply condemned and ridiculed those poets who follow “only the only rules (so! - A.S.), and sometimes only the only desire to crawl to Helikon, not in the least entering into passion”, who “write only what reasoning or ignorance will say without asking the heart, "as a result of which such "unthinking rhymers" do not have the convenience of imitating nature's simplicity, which is the most difficult thing for a writer, although the simplicity of nature seems easy from afar" . The clarity of the image appears to Sumarokov as the most important aesthetic criterion.
Sumarokov develops the thoughts of Descartes and Boileau that the clarity and distinctness of a poetic image are essential signs of truth. Naturalness and clarity are the necessary prerequisites for the moralistic impact of art. If nature and art are identical in goodness and beauty, then poetic pictures should directly express the perfection inherent in reality. The inexorable logic of things, the natural course of events, being cleansed in art of random layers, must be forcibly recreated in the perceiving consciousness of the public. But the naturalness of art is the result of great creative efforts, which are designed to provide the necessary degree of intelligibility. Art and reality within the framework of the theory of imitation exist in unity, Sumarokov's Fiction does not oppose the truth of reality and the truth of history: “Fictions almost arouse heroic souls to imitation, as much as history. Being based on fiction, "piitic expressions ... serve the knowledge of nature, the aversion from vices ... and often they are more successful than preached morality."
Fiction is only able to help the poet achieve the reliability of the image when it is plausible. The poet should not blindly submit to the play of the imagination, since his fantasy must always be enclosed in the strict framework of nature.
This limitation of fiction by the requirements of naturalness did not lead Sumarokov to ignore the specifics of poetic creativity: “Logicians draw their deeds with solid conclusions, physicists with experiments, mathematicians with calculations”, and “poets are allowed to depict what seems to be true.” And further: “How many philosophers who have compiled poetic systems!.. There is such a difference between a poet and a physicist as there is between a mitologist and a historian.”
No less clearly Sumarokov formulates the thesis that the imitation of nature in art has great cognitive significance: imitating the nature of the creator, nourishing their imaginations, expanding the concepts and power of the majesty of our souls by swimming in the finest knowledge of nature.
Issuance of a document called a ship radio station license. In large companies ... "OIL AND GAS UNIVERSITY" ophj`g 11.08.2015 No. 3456 O / P On enrollment On o ... "it is necessary to pay as much attention as possible to the education of the personality of a teenager. References 1. Akopov GV Methods for the prevention of suicidal behavior. Samara-Ulyanovsk, 2005.2. Aron R. Stages of times ... "action). In 1896, it was proposed by E. Lewis (USA). A barter transaction is an exchange of directly goods and services without monetary participation. Basorama advertising panel with backlight...»
“Question 1. The subject of social. psih., the main point of view. The relationship of social psycho. with general psychology, sociology, and other sciences. Having arisen at the junction of the psycho. and social, social psycho. retains its special status. The main reason for this is the existence of a class of facts of social life that can only be investigated with the help of a psycho. and social…”
“Lunar calendar Lunar calendar of a gardener-gardener for April 2016 April picks up water, opens flowers. April is a good time for tree grafting. Fruit trees and shrubs at this time must also be treated against wintering pests. In April, they continue to care for seedlings of tomatoes and peppers, spend its peaks ... "
Mental functions of a person.2. Requirements for the level of preparation of the student, s ... "circumstances, a new goal. For example, this happens when the driver is faced with an unexpected situation during an emergency stop of the car engine ... "
"The AC-6 peptide complex (thymus peptides) - stimulates the processes of tissue regeneration, the synthesis of tissue-specific proteins, the proliferative and metabolic activity of cells, accelerating the renewal of cells in various tissues, activates the functions of cells with..."
"GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION DECISION dated June 27, 2014 No. 589 MOSCOW On approval of the charter of the federal state budgetary institution Russian Academy of Sciences Government Russian Federation DECIDES: 1. To approve the attached charter of the federal state budgetary institution of the Russian ... "
"Olympiad "Zvezda" Talents in the service of defense and security" in RUSSIAN LANGUAGE grades 10-11 (full-time round) OPTION I Part I Task 1. Divide the adjectives below into three groups according to the topic for ... "
Classicism(from lat. classicus- exemplary), like baroque, turned out to be a phenomenon of a pan-European scale. The poetics of classicism began to take shape in the late Renaissance in Italy. On the eve of classicism is the tragedy of the Italian playwright J. Trissino "Sofonisba" (1515), written in imitation of ancient tragedians. It outlined features that later became characteristic of classic dramaturgy - a logically built plot, reliance on the word, and not on stage action, rationalism and the supra-individual nature of the characters. A significant influence on the formation of classicism in European countries was exerted by the "Poetics" (1561) by the Italian Yu. Ts. Scaliger, who successfully anticipated the taste of the next century, the century of logic and reason. Nevertheless, the formation of classicism dragged on for a whole century, and as an integral artistic system, classicism initially developed in France by the middle of the 17th century.
The development of classicism in France is closely connected with the establishment and flourishing of centralized royal power (absolute monarchy). Autocratic statehood limited the rights of the willful feudal aristocracy, sought to legislate and regulate the relationship between the individual and the state, and clearly distinguish between the spheres of private and personal life. The spirit of regulation and discipline extends to the sphere of literature and art, determining their content aspect and formal features. In order to control literary life, on the initiative of the first minister, Cardinal Richelieu, the French Academy was created, and the cardinal himself repeatedly intervened in literary disputes in the 1630s.
The canons of classicism evolved in sharp controversy with precision literature, as well as with Spanish playwrights (Lope de Vega, Tirso de Molina). The latter ridiculed, in particular, the demand for the unity of time. ("As for your 24 hours, what could be more absurd than that love, which began in the middle of the day, would end in the evening with a wedding!") Continuing certain traditions of the Renaissance (admiration for antiquity, faith in reason, the ideal of harmony and measure), classicism was the Renaissance and a kind of antithesis, which made it related, for all their deep differences, with the baroque.
The humanists of the Renaissance saw the highest value in the freely manifesting natural nature of man. Their hero is a harmonious personality, freed from the power of a class corporation and unrestrained in his individualism. The humanists of the 17th century - the founders of classicism - due to the historical European experience, passions seemed to be a force destructive, anarchic, generated by egoism. Moral norms (virtues) now take precedence in the evaluation of a person. The main content of creativity in classicism is the contradiction between the natural nature of man and civic duty, between his passions and reason, which gave rise to tragic conflicts.
The classicists saw the goal of art in the knowledge of truth, which acts for them as an ideal of beauty. The classicists put forward a method to achieve it, based on the three central categories of their aesthetics: reason, model and taste (these concepts have also become objective criteria of artistry). To create a great work, according to the classicists, it is necessary to follow the dictates of reason, relying on "exemplary", i.e. classical, works of antiquity (antiquity) and guided by the rules of good taste ("good taste" is the supreme judge of "beautiful"). Thus, the classicists introduce elements into artistic creativity. scientific activity.
The principles of classic poetics and aesthetics are determined by the system of philosophical views of the era, which are based on the rationalism of Descartes. For him reason is the highest criterion of truth. Rational-analytically, one can penetrate into the ideal essence and purpose of any object or phenomenon, comprehend the eternal and unchanging laws that underlie the world order, and hence the basis of artistic creativity.
Rationalism contributed to the overcoming of religious prejudices and medieval scholasticism, but it also had its own weakness. The world in this philosophical system was considered from metaphysical positions - as unchanging and motionless.
This concept convinced the classicists that the aesthetic ideal is eternal and unchanged at all times, but with the greatest completeness and perfection it was embodied in the art of antiquity. In order to reproduce this ideal, it is necessary to turn to ancient art and thoroughly study its rules and laws. At the same time, in accordance with the political ideals of the 17th century, special attention was drawn to the art of imperial Rome (the era of concentration of power in the hands of one person - the emperor), the poetry of the "golden age" - the work of Virgil, Ovid, Horace. In addition to Aristotle's Poetics, Horace's Epistle to the Pisons relied on N. Boileau in his poetic treatise Poetic Art (1674), bringing together and summarizing the theoretical principles of classicism, summing up artistic practice their predecessors and contemporaries.
Trying to recreate the world of antiquity ("ennobled" and "corrected"), the classicists borrow only "clothes" from it. Although Boileau, referring to contemporary writers, writes:
And the customs of countries and years you need to study.
After all, the climate cannot but affect people.
But be afraid to soak in vulgar bad taste
French spirit of Rome... –
it is nothing more than a declaration. In the literary practice of classicism, people of the 17th-18th centuries are hidden under the names of ancient heroes, and antique stories discover the formulation, above all, of the most acute problems of our time. Classicism is fundamentally anti-historical, as it is guided by the "eternal and unchanging" laws of reason.
Classicists proclaim the principle of imitation of nature, but at the same time they do not at all strive to reproduce reality in its entirety. They are not interested in what is, but in what should be according to the ideas of their mind. Everything that does not correspond to the model and "good taste" is expelled from art, declared "indecent". In cases where it is necessary to reproduce the ugly, it is aesthetically transformed:
Embodied in art, and the monster and the reptile
We are still pleased with a wary look:
The artist's brush shows us transformation
Objects vile into objects of admiration...
Another key problem of classic poetics is the problem of truth and plausibility. Should the writer depict exceptional phenomena, incredible, out of the ordinary, but recorded by history ("truth"), or create images and situations that are fictitious, but corresponding to the logic of things and the requirements of reason (i.e., "plausible")? Boileau prefers the second group of phenomena:
Do not torment us with incredible things, disturbing the mind:
And the truth is sometimes not the truth.
Wonderful nonsense I will not admire:
The mind does not care what it does not believe.
The concept of plausibility also underlies the classic character: a tragic hero cannot be "petty and insignificant",
But still, without weaknesses, his character is false.
Achilles captivates us with his ardor,
But if he cries, I love him more.
After all, in these little things, nature comes to life,
And the truth is that our picture is amazing.
(N. Boileau, "Poetic Art")
Boileau is close to the position of J. Racine, who, relying on the "Poetics" of Aristotle, in the preface to the tragedy "Andromache" wrote about his heroes that "they should be average people in their spiritual qualities that is to say, to possess virtue, but to be subject to weaknesses, and misfortunes must fall upon them as a result of some error capable of arousing pity for them, and not disgust.
Not all classicists shared this concept. P. Corneille, the initiator of the French classic tragedy, tended to create exceptional characters. His heroes do not shed tears from the audience, but cause undeniable admiration for their stamina and heroism. In the preface to his tragedy "Nycomedes" Corneille declared: "Tenderness and passions, which should be the soul of tragedy, do not have a place here: only heroic greatness reigns here, throwing a glance full of contempt at its sorrows that it does not allow them to tear out of the heart the hero does not have a single complaint. It is faced with an insidious policy and opposes it only with noble prudence, marching with an open visor, it foresees danger without a shudder and does not expect help from anyone except from its valor and love ... "Corneille motivates the persuasiveness of the created them images with the concept of vital truth and historical authenticity: "History, which gave me the opportunity to show the highest degree of this greatness, was taken by me from Justin".
The cult of reason among the classicists also determines the principles of creating character - one of the central aesthetic categories of classicism. For the classicists, character does not imply a set of individual traits of a particular person, but embodies a certain generic and at the same time eternal warehouse of human nature and psychology. Only in the aspect of the eternal, unchanging and universal character did it become an object of artistic research in classic art.
Following the theorists of antiquity - Aristotle and Horace - Boileau believed that "art" should preserve "for each of his special feelings." These "special feelings" determine the psychological make-up of a person, making one a vulgar dandy, another a miser, a third a spendthrift, etc. Character, thus, was reduced to one dominant trait. Even Pushkin noticed that the hypocrite Tartuffe even "asks for a glass of water, the hypocrite" in Moliere, and the stingy Harpagon is "stingy and nothing more." There is no point in looking for more psychological content in them. When Harpagon talks to his lover, he behaves like a miser, and with his children he behaves like a miser. "There is only one paint, but it is superimposed thicker and thicker and, finally, brings the image to the level of everyday, psychological implausibility." This principle of typification led to a sharp division of heroes into positive, virtuous and negative, vicious.
The characters of the characters in tragedies are also determined by some one leading feature. The one-line character of Corneille's heroes emphasizes their integrity, which substantiates the "core" of their character. Racine is more difficult: the passion that defines the character of his characters is contradictory in itself (usually it is love). It is in exhausting the whole gamut of psychological shades of passion that the method of Racine's characterization consists - a method, like that of Corneille, deeply rationalistic.
Embodiing in the character traits that are generic, "eternal", the classicist artist himself strove to speak not from his special, uniquely individual "I", but from the standpoint of a statesman. That is why "objective" genres predominate in classicism - primarily dramatic ones, and among the lyrical genres those dominated by those where the impersonal, universally significant orientation is obligatory (ode, satire, fable).
The normativity and rationality of classic aesthetics are also manifested in the strict hierarchy of genres. There are "high" genres - tragedy, epic, ode. Their sphere is public life, historical events, mythology; their heroes are monarchs, generals, historical and mythological characters. Such a choice of tragic heroes was determined not so much by the tastes and influence of the court, but by the measure of the moral responsibility of those people who were entrusted with the fate of the state.
"High" genres are opposed to "low" genres - comedy, satire, fable - turned into the sphere of private daily life of nobles and townspeople. An intermediate place is given to "middle" genres - elegy, idyll, message, sonnet, song. Depicting the inner world of an individual, these genres did not take any noticeable place in the literary process during the heyday of classic literature, imbued with high civic ideals. The time for these genres will come later: they will have a significant impact on the development of literature in the era of the crisis of classicism.
Prose, especially fiction, is valued by classicists much lower than poetry. “Love thought in verse,” Boileau exclaims at the beginning of his treatise and “raises to Parnassus” only poetic genres. Those prose genres that are primarily informational in nature - sermons, memoirs, letters - are spreading. At the same time, scientific, philosophical and epistolary prose, becoming in the era of the cult of science in the public domain, acquires the features of a truly literary work and already has value not only scientific or historical, but also aesthetic ("Letters of the Provincial" and "Thoughts" by B. Pascal, " Maxims, or Moral Reflections" by F. de La Rochefoucauld, "Characters" by J. de La Bruyère, etc.).
Each genre in classicism has strict boundaries and clear formal features. No mixture of the sublime and the base, the tragic and the comic, the heroic and the ordinary is allowed: what is allowed in satire is excluded in tragedy, what is good in comedy is unacceptable in epic. Here reigns "a peculiar law of the unity of style" (G. Gukovsky) - each genre unit has its own rigid formal-stylistic canon. Mixed genres, for example, tragicomedy, which was very popular in the first half of the 17th century, are being squeezed out of the boundaries of "real literature". "From now on, only the entire system of genres is capable of expressing the diversity of life."
The rationalistic approach also determined the attitude to the poetic form:
You learn to think, then write.
Speech follows the thought; clearer or darker
And the phrase is modeled after the idea;
What is clearly understood, it will sound clearly,
And the exact word will immediately come running.
(N. Boileau, "Poetic Art")
Each work must be strictly thought out, the composition must be logically built, the individual parts must be proportionate and inseparable, the style must be clear to the point of transparency, the language must be concise and precise. The concept of measure, proportion, symmetry is inherent not only in literature, but also in the entire artistic culture of classicism - architecture, painting, gardening art. Both scientific and artistic thinking of the era has a pronounced mathematical character.
In architecture, public buildings are beginning to set the tone, expressing the idea of statehood. The basis of planning schemes are regular geometric shapes (square, triangle, circle). Classicist architects mastered the construction of a huge complex, consisting of a palace and a park. They become subject to detailed, mathematically verified compositions. In France, for the first time, new trends were fully embodied in the grandiose ensemble of Versailles (1661–1689, architects L. Levo, A. Le Nôtre, J. Hardouin-Mansart, and others).
Clarity, logic, compositional harmony are also distinguished by the paintings of the classicists. N. Poussin - the creator and head of French classicism in painting - chose subjects that gave the mind food for thought, brought up virtue in a person and taught him wisdom. He found these stories primarily in ancient mythology and the legendary history of Rome. His paintings "The Death of Germanicus" (1627), "The Capture of Jerusalem" (1628), "The Rape of the Sabine Women" (1633) are devoted to the image of "heroic and unusual actions". The composition of these paintings is strictly ordered, it resembles the composition of ancient bas-reliefs (the actors are located in a shallow space, divided into a number of plans). Poussin clearly draws the volumes of the figures in an almost sculptural way, carefully calibrates their anatomical structure, puts their clothes in classic folds. The distribution of colors in the picture is subject to the same strict harmony.
Strict laws also reigned in verbal art. These laws were especially rigidly established for high genres, clothed in a mandatory poetic form. Thus, the tragedy, like the epic, must necessarily be expounded in the majestic Alexandrian verse. The plot of the tragedy, historical or mythological, was taken from ancient times and was usually known to the viewer (later the classicists began to draw material for their tragedies from Eastern history, while the Russian classicists preferred plots from their own national history). The fame of the plot set the viewer not to perceive a complex and intricate intrigue, but to analyze the emotional experiences and opposing aspirations of the characters. According to the definition of G. A. Gukovsky, "classical tragedy is not a drama of action, but a drama of conversations; the classical poet is not interested in facts, but in analysis, directly formed in the word" .
The laws of formal logic determined the structure of dramatic genres, especially tragedy, which was supposed to consist of five acts. Comedies could also be three-act (one-act comedies would appear in the 18th century), but in no case four- or two-act ones. For dramatic genres, the classicists raised the principle of three unities - place, action and time, formulated in the treatises of J. Trissino and J. Scaliger, based on Aristotle's "Poetics", into an indisputable law. According to the rule of unity of place, all the action of the play must take place in one place - a palace, a house, or even a room. The unity of time required that the whole action of the play fit within no more than a day, and the more it corresponded to the time of the performance - three hours - the better. Finally, the unity of action assumed that the events depicted in the play must have their beginning, development and end. In addition, the play should not contain "extra" episodes or characters that are not directly related to the development of the main plot. Otherwise, theorists of classicism believed, the diversity of impressions prevented the viewer from perceiving the "reasonable basis" of life.
The requirement of three unities fundamentally changed the structure of the drama, as it forced the playwrights to depict not the entire system of events (as was the case, for example, in medieval mystery plays), but only the episode that completes this or that event. The events themselves were "taken off stage" and could cover a large period of time, but they were of a retrospective nature, and the viewer learned about them from the monologues and dialogues of the characters.
At first, the three unities were not formal. The principle of plausibility underlying them, the fundamental principle of classicism, developed in the struggle with the traditions of the medieval theater, with its plays, the action of which sometimes stretched over several days, covering hundreds of performers, and the plot was full of all kinds of miracles and naive naturalistic effects. But, elevating the principle of three unities into an unshakable rule, the classicists did not take into account the peculiarities of the subjective perception of art, which allows for artistic illusion, the non-identity of the artistic image with the reproduced object. The romantics, who discovered the "subjectivity" of the spectator, will begin the assault on the classical theater by overthrowing the rule of three unities.
Of particular interest on the part of writers and theorists of classicism was the genre epic, or heroic poem, which Boileau put even above tragedy. Only in the epic, according to Boileau, did the poet "gain space for himself / Captivate our mind and gaze with high fiction." Classical poets in the epic are also attracted by a special heroic theme based on major events past, and heroes of exceptional qualities, and the manner of narrating events, which Boileau formulated as follows:
Let your story be mobile, clear, concise,
And in the descriptions and magnificent and rich.
As in tragedy, the moral and didactic setting is important in the epic. Depicting heroic times, the epic, according to V. Trediakovsky, gives "a firm instruction to the human race, teaching this one to love virtue" ("Foretelling about the Heroic Poem", 1766).
In the artistic structure of the epic, Boileau assigns a decisive role to fiction ("Laying a myth as a basis, he lives by fiction ..."). Boileau's attitude to ancient and Christian mythology is consistently rationalistic - the ancient myth attracts him with the transparency of an allegory that does not contradict reason. Christian miracles cannot be the subject of aesthetic embodiment, moreover, according to Boileau, their use in poetry can compromise religious dogmas ("Christ's sacraments are not for fun"). In characterizing the epic, Boileau relies on the ancient epic, primarily Virgil's Aeneid.
Criticizing the "Christian epic" T. Tasso ("The Liberated Jerusalem"), Boileau also opposes the national heroic epic based on the material of the early Middle Ages ("Alaric" J. Scuderi, "Virgin" J. Chaplin). The classicist Boileau does not accept the Middle Ages as an era of "barbarism", which means that plots taken from this era cannot have aesthetic and didactic value for him.
The principles of the epic formulated by Boileau, focused on Homer and Virgil, did not receive a full and comprehensive embodiment in the literature of the 17th century. This genre has already become obsolete, and J. G. Herder, the theorist of the literary movement in Germany "Storm and Onslaught" (70s of the XVIII century), from the position of historicism, explained the impossibility of its resurrection (he is talking about the ancient epic) : "The epic belongs to the childhood of mankind." In the 18th century, attempts to create a heroic epic based on national material within the framework of the classicist artistic system were all the more unsuccessful (Voltaire's Henriade, 1728; Rossiyada by M. Kheraskov, 1779).
Ode, one of the main genres of classicism, also has a strict form. Its obligatory feature is a "lyrical disorder", suggesting the free development of poetic thought:
Let Ode's tempestuous style strive at random:
Beautiful crumpled beautiful her outfit.
Away with timid rhymers whose minds are phlegmatic
In the passions themselves, a dogmatic order is observed...
(N. Boileau, "Poetic Art")
Nevertheless, this "dogmatic order" was strictly observed. The ode, like an oratorical word, consisted of three parts: an "attack", that is, an introduction to the topic, reasoning where this topic developed, and an energetic, emotional conclusion. "Lyrical confusion" is purely external: passing from one thought to another, introducing digressions, the poet subordinated the construction of the ode to the development of the main idea. The lyricism of the ode is not individual, but, so to speak, collective, it expresses "the aspirations and aspirations of the entire state organism" (G. Gukovsky).
In contrast to the "high" tragedy and epic, the classic "low genres" - comedy and satire - are turned into modern everyday life. The purpose of comedy is to educate, ridiculing shortcomings, "to correct temper with a mockery; / To laugh and use its direct charter" (A. Sumarokov). Classicism rejected the pamphlet (that is, directed against specific individuals) satirical comedy of Aristophanes. The comedian is interested in universal human vices in their everyday manifestation - laziness, extravagance, stinginess, etc. But this does not mean at all that the classic comedy is devoid of social content. Classicism is characterized by a clear ideological and moral-didactic orientation, and therefore the appeal to socially significant issues gave many classic comedies a public and even topical sound (Tartuffe, Don Giovanni, Misanthrope by Molière; Brigadier, Undergrowth by D. Fonvizin, "Snake" by V. Kapnist).
In his judgments about the comedy, Boileau focuses on the "serious" moralizing comedy presented in antiquity by Menander and Terence, and in modern times by Molière. Boileau considers "The Misanthrope" and "Tartuffe" to be the highest achievement of Molière, but criticizes the comedian for using the traditions of the folk farce, considering them rude and vulgar (the comedy "The Tricks of Scapin"). Boileau advocates the creation of a comedy of characters as opposed to a comedy of intrigue. Later, this type of classic comedy, which touches on problems of social or socio-political significance, will be assigned the definition of "high" comedy.
Satire has much in common with comedy and fable. All these genres have a common subject of the image - human failings and vices, the general emotional and artistic assessment is ridicule. At the core compositional structure satire and fable lies the combination of the author's and narrative principles. The author of satire and fable often uses dialogue. However, unlike comedy, in satire the dialogue is not connected with the action, with the system of events, and the image of life phenomena, unlike the fable, is based in satire on a direct, and not on an allegorical image.
Being a poet-satirist by his talent, Boileau in theory retreats from ancient aesthetics, which attributed satire to "low" genres. He sees satire as a socially active genre. Giving a detailed description of satire, Boileau recalls the Roman satirists Lucilius, Horace, Persia Flaccus, who boldly denounced the vices of the powerful of this world. But above all he puts Juvenal. And although the French theorist notes the "square" origins of the Roman poet's satire, his authority for Boileau is undeniable:
The terrible truth of his poems live,
And yet the beauty in them sparkle here and there.
The temperament of the satirist prevailed over Boileau's theoretical postulates in his defense of the right to personal satire directed against specific, well-known people ("Discourse on satire"; it is characteristic that Boileau did not recognize satire on faces in comedy). Such a technique brought a topical, journalistic color to the classic satire. The Russian classic satirist A. Kantemir also widely used the technique of satire on faces, giving his "supra-individualistic" characters, personifying some kind of human vice, a portrait resemblance to his enemies.
An important contribution of classicism to the further development of literature was the development of a clear and harmonious language of works of art ("What is clearly understood, it will sound clearly"), freed from foreign vocabulary, capable of expressing various feelings and experiences ("Anger is proud - he needs arrogant words, / But the sorrows of the complaint are not so intense"), correlated with the characters and the age of the characters ("So choose your language carefully: / Can't speak like a young man, an old man").
The formation of classicism in both France and Russia begins with linguistic and poetic reforms. In France, this work was started by F. Malherbe, who was the first to put forward the concept of good taste as a criterion of artistic skill. Malherbe did a lot to clean up French from numerous provincialisms, archaisms and the dominance of borrowed Latin and Greek words introduced into literary circulation by the poets of the Pleiades in the 16th century. Malherbe carried out the codification of the French literary language, which eliminated everything accidental from it, focused on the speech skills of the enlightened people of the capital, provided that literary language should be understood by all segments of the population. Malherbe's contribution to the field of French versification is also significant. The rules of metrics he formulated (the fixed place of the caesura, the prohibition of transfers from one poetic line to another, etc.) not only entered the poetics of French classicism, but were also assimilated by the poetic theory and practice of other European countries.
In Russia, M. Lomonosov carried out similar work a century later. Lomonosov's theory of "three calms" eliminated the variegation and disorder of literary forms of communication, characteristic of Russian literature of the late 17th - first third of the 18th century, streamlined literary word usage within a particular genre, determining the development of literary speech up to Pushkin. No less important is the poetic reform of Trediakovsky-Lomonosov. Reforming versification on the basis of the syllabo-tonic system, which is organic to the Russian language, Trediakovsky and Lomonosov thus laid the foundation for the national poetic culture.
In the 18th century, classicism experienced its second heyday. The decisive influence on it, as well as on other stylistic directions, is exerted by enlightenment- the ideological movement that has developed in the conditions acute crisis absolutism and directed against the feudal-absolutist system and the church supporting it. The ideas of enlightenment are based on the philosophical concept of the Englishman J. Locke, who proposed a new model of the process of cognition, based on feeling, sensation, as the only source of human knowledge about the world ("Experience on the Human Mind", 1690). Locke resolutely rejected the doctrine of R. Descartes' "innate ideas", likening the soul of a born person to a clean slate (tabula rasa), where experience writes "its own letters" throughout life.
Such a view of human nature led to the idea of a decisive influence on the formation of the personality of the social and natural environment, which makes a person good or bad. Ignorance, superstition, prejudices, generated by the feudal social order, determine, according to the enlighteners, social disorder, distort the original moral nature of man. And only general education can eliminate the discrepancy between existing social relations and the requirements of reason and human nature. Literature and art began to be regarded as one of the main instruments for the transformation and re-education of society.
All this determined fundamentally new features in the classicism of the 18th century. While maintaining the basic principles of classic aesthetics in the art and literature of enlightenment classicism, the understanding of the purpose and tasks of a number of genres is significantly changing. Especially clearly the transformation of classicism in the spirit of educational settings is visible in the tragedies of Voltaire. Remaining true to the basic aesthetic principles of classicism, Voltaire seeks to influence not only the mind of the audience, but also their feelings. He is looking for new topics and new means of expression. Continuing to develop the ancient theme familiar to classicism, in his tragedies Voltaire also refers to medieval plots ("Tancred", 1760), oriental ("Mohammed", 1742), associated with the conquest of the New World ("Alzira", 1736). He gives a new rationale for tragedy: "Tragedy is a moving painting, an animated picture, and the people depicted in it must act" (that is, dramaturgy is thought of by Voltaire not only as the art of words, but also as the art of movement, gesture, facial expressions).
Voltaire fills the classic tragedy with a sharp philosophical and socio-political content related to the actual problems of our time. The playwright focuses on the fight against religious fanaticism, political arbitrariness and despotism. So, in one of his most famous tragedies "Mohammed" Voltaire proves that any deification of an individual leads, in the end, to its uncontrolled power over other people. Religious intolerance leads the heroes of the tragedy "Zaire" (1732) to a tragic denouement, and merciless gods and treacherous priests push weak mortals to commit crimes ("Oedipus", 1718). In the spirit of high social issues, Voltaire rethinks and transforms the heroic epic and ode.
During the period of the French Revolution (1789-1794), the classicist trend in literary life is of particular importance. The classicism of this time not only generalized and assimilated the innovative features of Voltaire's tragedy, but also radically rebuilt high genres. M. J. Chenier refuses to denounce despotism in general, and that is why he takes as the subject of the image not only antiquity, but also Europe of modern times ("Charles IX", "Jean Calas"). The hero of the tragedies Chenier promotes the ideas of natural law, freedom and law, he is close to the people, and the people in the tragedy not only enter the stage, but also act along with the main character (Kai Gracchus, 1792). The concept of the state as a positive category, opposed to the personal, individualistic, is replaced in the playwright's mind by the category "nation". It is no coincidence that Chenier called his play "Charles IX" a "national tragedy."
Within the framework of classicism of the era of the French Revolution, a new type of ode is also being created. Preserving the classic principle of the priority of reason over reality, the revolutionary ode includes like-minded people of the lyrical hero in its world. The author himself no longer speaks on his own behalf, but on behalf of fellow citizens, using the pronoun "we". Rouget de Lisle in the Marseillaise pronounces revolutionary slogans, as it were, together with his listeners, thus prompting them and himself to revolutionary transformations.
The creator of classicism of a new type, corresponding to the spirit of the times, in painting was J. David. Together with his painting "The Oath of the Horatii" (1784), a new theme comes to French fine art - civil, journalistic in its straightforward expression, new hero- a Roman republican, morally whole, above all putting duty to the motherland, a new manner - severe and ascetic, opposed to the exquisite chamber style of French painting of the second half of XVIII century.
Under the influence of French literature in the 18th century, national models of classicism were formed in other European countries: in England (A. Pope, J. Addison), in Italy (V. Alfieri), in Germany (I. K. Gottsched). In the 1770s-1780s, such an original artistic phenomenon as "Weimar classicism" (J. W. Goethe, F. Schiller) appeared in Germany. Turning to the artistic forms and traditions of antiquity, Goethe and Schiller set themselves the task of creating a new high-style literature as the main means of aesthetic education of a harmonious person.
The formation and flourishing of Russian classicism fall on the years 1730-1750 and take place in quite similar to French terms the rise of an absolutist state. But, despite a number of common points in the aesthetics of Russian and French classicism (rationalism, normativity and genre regulation, abstractness and conventionality as the leading features of the artistic image, recognition of the role of an enlightened monarch in establishing a fair social order based on the law), Russian classicism has its own unique national traits.
The ideas of the Enlightenment have nourished Russian classicism from the very beginning. The assertion of the natural equality of people leads Russian writers to the idea of the extra-class value of a person. Already Cantemir in his second satire "Filaret and Eugene" (1730) declares that "the same blood flows in both free and slaves," and "noble" people "will show one virtue." Forty years later, A. Sumarokov, in his satire "On Nobility," will continue: "What is the difference between a master and a peasant? Both that and that animated lump of earth." Fonvizinsky Starodum ("Nedorosl", 1782) will determine the nobility of a person by the number of deeds performed for the fatherland ("without noble deeds, a noble state is nothing"), and the enlightenment of a person will be directly dependent on the education of virtue in him (" the main objective of all human knowledge - good manners").
Seeing in education a "guarantee of the welfare of the state" (D. Fonvizin) and believing in the usefulness of an enlightened monarchy, Russian classicists begin a long process of educating autocrats, reminding them of their duties towards their subjects:
The gods did not make him king for his benefit;
He is the king, so that a man be to all people mutually:
He must give his people the whole time,
All your cares, everything and zeal for people ...
(V. Trediakovsky, "Tilemakhida")
If the king does not fulfill his duties, if he is a tyrant, he must be deposed from the throne. This can also happen through a popular uprising ("Dmitry the Pretender" by A. Sumarokov).
The main material for Russian classicists is not antiquity, but their own national history, from which they preferred to draw plots for high genres. And instead of an abstract ideal ruler, a "philosopher on the throne", characteristic of European classicism, Russian writers recognized a very specific historical figure - Peter I, as an exemplary sovereign, "worker on the throne".
The theorist of Russian classicism Sumarokov, relying on Boileau's Poetic Art in his Epistle on Poetry (1748), introduces a number of new provisions into his theoretical treatise, pays tribute not only to the masters of classicism, but also to representatives of other trends. So, he raises to Helicon, along with Malherbe and Racine, Camões, Lope de Vega, Milton, Pop, the "unenlightened" Shakespeare, as well as contemporary writers - Detouche and Voltaire. Sumarokov speaks in sufficient detail about the heroic-comic poem and the epistle, not mentioned by Boileau, explains in detail the features of the fable "warehouse" on the example of the fables of the bypassed Boileau La Fontaine, and dwells on the genre of the song, which the French theorist mentions in passing. All this testifies not only to Sumarokov's personal aesthetic predilections, but also to the changes that are ripening in European classicism of the 18th century.
These changes are associated primarily with the growing interest of literature in the inner life of an individual, which ultimately led to a significant restructuring of the genre structures of classicism. A characteristic example here is the work of G. Derzhavin. Remaining "predominantly a classic" (V. Belinsky), Derzhavin introduces a strong personal element into his poetry, thereby destroying the law of the unity of style. Genre-complex formations appear in his poetry - an ode-satire (“Felitsa”, 1782), anacreontic poems written on an odic plot (“Poems for the birth of a porphyry-born child in the North”, 1779), an elegy with features of a message and an ode (“ On the death of Prince Meshchersky", 1779), etc.
Giving way to new literary trends, classicism does not leave literature without a trace. The turn to sentimentalism takes place within the framework of the "middle" classicist genres - elegies, messages, idylls. The poets of the early 19th century, K. Batyushkov and N. Gnedich, while remaining fundamentally faithful to the classical ideal (partly also to the canon of classicism), each went their own way to romanticism. Batyushkov - from "light poetry" to psychological and historical elegy, Gnedich - to the translation of the Iliad and genres associated with folk art. P. Katenin chose the strict forms of Racine's classic tragedy for his Andromache (1809), although he, as a romantic, is already interested in the very spirit of ancient culture. The high civic tradition of classicism found its continuation in the freedom-loving lyrics of the Radishchev poets, the Decembrists and Pushkin.
