Above, in the chapter on the fictitious name literary hero, I have already touched upon the democratic literature of the seventeenth century. For a long time, in its main part, it did not attract much attention, it was then discovered by careful research and publications by V.P. Adrianov-Peretz *(( I will only mention the main works of V.P. Adrianov-Peretz: Essays on the history of Russian satirical literature XVII century. M.; L., 1937; Russian democratic satire of the 17th century; 2nd ed., add. M., 1977.)) and immediately took its rightful place in the historical and literary studies of Soviet literary critics.
This democratic literature includes "The Tale of Yersh Ershovich", "The Tale of Shemyakina Court", "The ABC of the Naked and Poor Man", "Message to the noble enemy", "The Tale of Luxurious Life and Joy", "The Tale of Thomas and Yerema" , “Service to a tavern”, “Kalyazinskaya petition”, “The Tale of Priest Savva”, “The Tale of the Hen and the Fox”, “The Tale of the Hawk Moth”, “The Tale of peasant son”, “The Tale of Karp Sutulov”, “Healer for Foreigners”, “Painting about Dowry”, “The Word about Jealous Men”, “A Poem about the Life of the Patriarchal Choirs” and, finally, such a significant work as “The Tale of Mount Misfortune” . In part, the autobiography of Archpriest Avvakum and the autobiography of Epiphanius adjoin the same circle.
This literature is spreading among the common people: among artisans, small merchants, the lower clergy, it penetrates into the peasant environment, etc. It opposes the official literature, the literature of the ruling class, partly continuing the old traditions.
Democratic literature is in opposition to the feudal class; this is literature that emphasizes the injustice that prevails in the world, reflecting dissatisfaction with reality, social orders. The union with the environment, so characteristic of the personality of the previous time, is destroyed in it. Dissatisfaction with one's fate, one's position, others - this is a feature of the new, not known to previous periods. Connected with this is the striving for satire and parody that prevails in democratic literature. It is these satirical and parodic genres that become the main ones in the democratic literature of the 17th century.
For democratic literature of the 17th century. the conflict of the individual with the environment is characteristic, the complaints of this individual about his lot, the challenge to social order, sometimes self-doubt, prayer, fear, fear of the world, a sense of his own defenselessness, faith in fate, in fate, the theme of death, suicide and the first attempts confront your fate, correct injustice.
In the democratic literature of the XVII century. a special style of portraying a person develops: a style that is sharply reduced, deliberately everyday, asserting the right of every person to public sympathy.
The conflict with the environment, with the rich and noble, with their "pure" literature demanded an accentuated simplicity, lack of literariness, deliberate vulgarity. The stylistic "arrangement" of the image of reality is destroyed by numerous parodies. Everything is parodied - up to church services. Democratic Literature strives for the complete exposure and exposure of all the ulcers of reality. Rudeness helps her in this - rudeness in everything: the rudeness of the new literary language, half colloquial, half taken from business writing, the rudeness of the depicted life, the rudeness of erotica, the corrosive irony in relation to everything in the world, including oneself. On this basis, a new stylistic unity is being created, a unity that at first glance seems to be a lack of unity.
The person depicted in the works of democratic literature does not occupy any official position, or his position is very low and "trivial". This is just a suffering person, suffering from hunger, cold, from social injustice, from the fact that he has nowhere to lay his head. At the same time, the new hero is surrounded by the ardent sympathy of the author and readers. His position is the same as that of any of his readers. He does not rise above the readers either by his official position or by any role in historical events, nor its moral high ground. He is deprived of everything that distinguished and exalted the actors in the previous literary development. This man is by no means idealized. Against!
If in all previous medieval styles of depicting a person, this latter was certainly somehow higher than his readers, was to a certain extent an abstract character, hovering in some kind of his own, special space, where the reader, in essence, did not penetrate, now the character appears quite equal to him, and sometimes even humiliated, demanding not admiration, but pity and indulgence.
This new character is devoid of any pose, any kind of halo. This is a simplification of the hero, taken to the limits of the possible: he is naked, if he is dressed, then in “ gunka tavern» *{{ The Tale of Mount Misfortune. Ed. prepared D. S. Likhachev and E. I. Vaneeva. L., 1984. S. 8.)) V " fired ferizas» with bast strings *(( “The ABC of a Naked and Poor Man”: Adrianov-Peretz V.P. Russian democratic satire of the 17th century. S. 31.}}.
He is hungry, he has nothing to eat, and no one gives", no one invites him to his place. He is not recognized by his family and is expelled from his friends. He is depicted in the most unattractive positions. Even complaints about disgusting diseases, about a dirty toilet * (( Likhachev D.S. Poem about the life of the patriarchal choristers. // TODRL. T. XIV. 1958, p. 425.)), reported in the first person, do not confuse the author. This is a simplification of the hero, taken to the limits of the possible. Naturalistic details make this person completely fallen, " low”, almost ugly. A person wanders somewhere on the earth - such as it is, without any embellishment. But it is remarkable that it is precisely in this way of depicting a person that the consciousness of value appears most of all. human personality by itself: naked, hungry, barefoot, sinful, without any hope for the future, without any signs of any position in society.
Take a look at a person - as if inviting the authors of these works. Look how hard it is for him on this earth! He is lost among the poverty of some and the wealth of others. Today he is rich, tomorrow he is poor; today he made his money, tomorrow he lived. He's wandering between the yard”, eats alms from time to time, wallowed in drunkenness, plays dice. He is powerless to overcome himself, to go out on " saved way". And yet he deserves sympathy.
Particularly striking is the image of the unknown young man in The Tale of Mount Misfortune. Here, the sympathy of readers is enjoyed by a person who has violated the worldly morality of society, deprived of parental blessings, weak-willed, acutely aware of his fall, mired in drunkenness and gambling, who has made friends with tavern roosters and bonfires, wandering who knows where, contemplating suicide.
The human personality was emancipated in Russia not in the clothes of conquistadors and wealthy adventurers, not in the pompous confessions of the artistic gift of Renaissance artists, but in “ gunka tavern”, at the last step of the fall, in search of death as liberation from all suffering. And this was a great harbinger of the humanistic character of nineteenth-century Russian literature. with its theme of value little man, with her sympathy for everyone who suffers and who has not found his true place in life.
The new hero often appears in literature on his own behalf. Many of the works of this time are in the nature of "internal monologue". And in these speeches to his readers, the new hero is often ironic - he seems to be above his suffering, looks at them from the side and with a grin. At the lowest stage of his fall, he retains a sense of his right to a better position: And I want to live, like good people live»; « My mind was firm, but dashing in my heart I have a lot of every thought»; « I live, a kind and glorious man, but I have nothing to eat and no one gives»; « I would have washed Belenko, dressed up well, but nothing».
And some are now persecuting the burden-bearers.
God grants honor to Ovom, they redeem the barn,
Ovii laboring, Ovii entering into their labor.
Ovi jump, Ovi cry.
Ini having fun, ini always tearing up.
Why write a lot that they don’t like anyone from the poor.
It is better to love whom money beats.
What to take from the wretched - order him to shackle
*{{ABC about a naked and poor man. S. 30.}}.
It is remarkable that in the works of democratic literature of the 17th century. there is a teaching voice, but it is not the voice of a self-confident preacher, as in the works of the previous time. This is the voice of the author offended by life or the voice of life itself. Actors perceive the lessons of reality, under their influence they change and make decisions. This was not only an extremely important psychological discovery, but also a literary and plot discovery. The conflict with reality, the impact of reality on the hero made it possible to build a narrative differently than it had been built before. The hero made decisions not under the influence of the influx of Christian feelings or the prescriptions and norms of feudal behavior, but as a result of the blows of life, the blows of fate.
In The Tale of Grief of Misfortune, this influence of the surrounding world was personified in the form of friends-advisers and in the form of an unusually vivid image of Grief. At first, well done in "The Tale of Mount Misfortune" and " small and stupid, not in full mind and imperfect in mind". He doesn't listen to his parents. But then he listens, although not completely, to his random friends, asking them for advice himself. Finally, Grief itself appears. The advice of Grief is unkind: it is the embodiment of pessimism engendered by bad reality.
Originally Woe" dreamed"Well done in a dream to disturb him with terrible suspicions:
Refuse you, well done, to your beloved bride -
be spoiled for you by the bride,
you still have to be strangled by that wife,
from gold and silver to be killed!
Grief advises the young man to go to the king's tavern", drink your wealth, put on yourself" gunka tavern"- For the naked, Grief is not a chaser, but no one will bind to the naked.
The good fellow did not believe his dream, and Woe appears to him for the second time in a dream:
Ali you, well done, unknown
nakedness and barefoot immeasurable,
lightness, great bezprotoritsa?
What to buy for yourself, then it will break through,
and you, well done, and so you live.
Yes, they don’t beat, don’t torture the naked, barefoot,
and naked barefoot will not be kicked out of paradise,
and with that the world will not come out here,
no one will be attached to him
and barefoot to make noise with a row.
With amazing force unfolds the story of the picture emotional drama well done, gradually increasing, accelerating at a pace, acquiring fantastic forms.
Born of nightmares, Grief soon appears to the young man and in reality, at the moment when the young man, driven to despair by poverty and hunger, tries to drown himself in the river. It requires the young man to bow to himself before " damp earth And from that moment on, he relentlessly follows the young man. Well done wants to return to his parents, but Woe " went ahead, met a young man on an open field', croaks over him, ' that an evil crow over a falcon»:
You stand, did not leave, good fellow!
Not for an hour, I am attached to you, ill-fated grief,
I'll torment myself with you until death.
I am not alone, Woe, still relatives,
and all our relatives are kind;
we are all smooth, sweet,
and who will join us in the seed,
otherwise he will be tormented between us,
such is our fate and lutchaya.
Although I throw myself at the birds of the air,
although you will go into the blue sea as a fish,
and I will go with you arm in arm under the right.
It is clear that the author of "The Tale of Woe of Misfortune" is not on the side of these "lessons of life", not on the side of Grief with his distrust of people and deep pessimism. In the dramatic conflict between the young man and Grief, who embodies evil reality, the author of The Tale is on the side of the young man. He deeply sympathizes with him.
Such a separation of the author's point of view from the moralizing presented in the work, the justification of a person who, from the church point of view, could not but be considered a "sinner", was a remarkable phenomenon in the literature of the 17th century. It meant the death of the medieval normative ideal and the gradual exit of literature onto a new path of inductive artistic generalization - a generalization based on reality, and not on a normative ideal.
In close connection with general trends justification of the human person, so characteristic of democratic literature, is found in all of Avvakum's work. The only difference is that in the work of Avvakum this justification of the individual is felt with greater force and carried out with incomparable subtlety.
The justification of man is combined in the work of Avvakum, as in all democratic literature, with the simplification of the artistic form, the desire for vernacular, the rejection of traditional ways idealization of man.
The value of feeling, immediacy, inner, mental life of man was proclaimed by Habakkuk with exceptional passion. Sympathy or anger, scolding or affection - everything is in a hurry to pour out from under his pen. " Strike the soul before god» *{{ Hereinafter quoted from the publication: The Life of Archpriest Avvakum, written by himself // Monuments of the history of the Old Believers of the 17th century. Book. I. Pg., 1916 (italics mine.- D. L.). )) - that's the only thing he aspires to. No compositional harmony, no shadow " convolutions of words"in the depiction of a person, nor the usual in ancient Russian educational literature" red verbs”- nothing that would constrain his exorbitantly ardent feeling in everything that concerns a person and his inner life. Church rhetoric, which is not uncommon in the work of Avvakum, did not touch the image of a person. None of the writers of the Russian Middle Ages wrote as much about his feelings as Avvakum. He grieves, mourns, cries, is afraid, regrets, marvels, etc. In his speech, there are constant remarks about the moods he is experiencing: “ oh, woe to me!», « much sad», « I'm sorry..."And he himself, and those about whom he writes, now and then sigh and cry:" ... pretty little ones cry, looking at us, and we at them»; « smart person look, but it’s less to cry, looking at them»; « weepingly rushed to my karbas»; « and everyone cries and bows". Habakkuk notes everything in detail external manifestations feelings: " my heart was cold and my legs were trembling". He also describes bows, gestures, and prayers in detail: beats himself and groans, but he himself says»; « and he, bowing low to me, and he himself says: "God save"».
He seeks to arouse the sympathy of readers, complains about his sufferings and sorrows, asks for forgiveness for his sins, describes all his weaknesses, including the most everyday ones.
One must not think that this justification of man concerns only Habakkuk himself. Even enemies, even his personal tormentors, are portrayed by him with sympathy for their human suffering. Just read the wonderful picture of the suffering of Avvakum on Sparrow Hills: “ Then the tsar sent a half-head with archers, and they took me to the Sparrow Hills; right there - the priest Lazarus and the elder Epiphanius, cursed and shorn, as I was before. They put us in different yards; relentlessly 20 people of archers, yes half a head, and a centurion stood over us - they took care, complained, and at night they sat with a fire, and escorted them to the yard. Have mercy on them Christ! straight good archers those people and children will not be tormented there, with fiddling with us; the need is what happens, and it’s different, cute, happy... Onet the goryuny drink until drunk, but swearing swearing, otherwise they would be equal with the martyrs ». « The devil is dashing before me, and people are all good before me,” Avvakum says elsewhere.
Sympathy for one's tormentors was completely incompatible with medieval methods of portraying a person in the 11th-16th centuries. This sympathy became possible thanks to the writer's penetration into the psychology of the persons depicted. Each person for Avvakum is not an abstract character, but a living one, closely familiar to him. Avvakum knows well those he writes about. They are surrounded by a very concrete life. He knows that his tormentors are only doing their archery service, and therefore does not get angry with them.
We have already seen that the image of a person is inserted into a everyday frame in other works of Russian literature of the 17th century - in the Life of Uliania Osorina, in the Tale of Martha and Mary. In democratic literature, the everyday environment is clearly felt in "The Tale of Yersh Ershovich", in "The Tale of Shemyakina Court", in "Service to the Tavern", in "The Tale of Priest Sava", in "The Tale of the Peasant's Son", in "A Poem about Life patriarchal choristers, etc. In all these works, everyday life serves as a means of simplifying a person, destroying his medieval idealization.
In contrast to all these works, Habakkuk's commitment to everyday life reaches a completely exceptional force. Outside of everyday life, he does not imagine his characters at all. He clothes in everyday forms quite general and abstract ideas.
Avvakum's artistic thinking is all permeated with everyday life. Like the Flemish artists, who transferred biblical events to their native environment, Habakkuk even the relationship between the characters church history portrays in the social categories of his time: " I am like a beggar, walking the streets of the city and begging through the windows. Having finished that day and having nourished his household, in the morning he dragged again. Taco and az, dragging all day long, I also take it to you, church nurseries, I suggest: let us have fun and live. At rich man I will beg Christ from the gospel for a loaf of bread, from Paul the Apostle, from rich guest, and from the messengers of his bread I will beg, from Chrysostom, from trading man, I will receive a piece of his words, from David the king and from Isaiah the prophets, from townspeople, asked for a quarter of bread; having collected a purse, yes, and I give you residents in the house of my God».
It is clear that life here is heroized. And it is remarkable that in the works of Avvakum the personality is again elevated, full of special pathos. She is heroic in a new way, and this time life serves her glorification. Medieval idealization elevated the individual above everyday life, above reality - Avvakum, on the other hand, forces himself to fight this reality and heroizes himself as a fighter with it in all the little things of everyday life, even when he, " like a dog in a straw', lying when his back ' rot" And " there were a lot of fleas and lice when he ate all filth».
« It’s not for us to go to Persis the martyr- says Avvakum, - and then the houses of Babylon have amassed". In other words: you can become a martyr, a hero in the most everyday, homely environment.
Identity conflict with surrounding reality, so characteristic of democratic literature, reaches a terrible strength in his "Life". Avvakum seeks to subdue reality, to master it, to populate it with his ideas. That is why it seems to Avvakum in a dream that his body is growing and filling the whole Universe with itself.
He dreams about this, but in reality he continues to fight. He does not agree to withdraw into himself, in his personal sorrows. He considers all the questions of the world order to be his own, and he is not excluded from any of them. He is painfully hurt by the ugliness of life, its sinfulness. Hence the passionate need for preaching. His "Life", like all his other works, is a continuous sermon, a sermon, sometimes reaching a frenzied cry. The preaching pathos is revived in a new way, in new forms in the works of Avvakum, along with it monumentality is revived in the depiction of a person, but the monumentality is completely different, devoid of the former impressiveness and former abstraction. This is the monumentality of the struggle, the titanic struggle, until death, martyrdom, but quite concrete and everyday. That is why life itself acquires some special shade of pathos in the works of Avvakum. The chains, the earthen prison, the hardships of poverty are the same as in other democratic works, but they are sanctified by his struggle, his martyrdom. The cabbage soup that Avvakum eats in the basement of the Andronikov Monastery is the same as in any peasant family that time, but an angel gives them to him. The same black hen, which he got himself in Siberia, but she carries Avvakum two eggs a day. And this is interpreted by Habakkuk as a miracle. Everything is sanctified by the halo of martyrdom for the faith. His whole literary position is consecrated by him.
In the face of martyrdom and death, he is a stranger to lies, pretense, cunning. " Hey, that's good!», « I don't lie!”- his writings are full of such passionate assurances of the veracity of his words. He " living Dead», « earthen user"- he should not cherish the external form of his works:" ... after all, God does not listen to the words of the Reds, but wants our deeds". That is why it is necessary to write without sophistication and embellishment: “ ... tell me, I suppose, keep your conscience strong».
Avvakum wrote his compositions at a time when the halo of martyrdom was already flickering over him, both in his own eyes and in the eyes of his adherents. That is why both his vernacular and his "bytovism" in describing his own life had a special, heroic character. The same heroism is felt in the image he created as a martyr for the faith.
All his writings, all literary details are permeated with the pathos of struggle: from the earthen pit and the gallows to the titanic landscape of Dauria with its high mountains and stone cliffs. He enters into an argument with Christ himself: “... why did you, Son of God, let me kill him so painfully? I have become a widow for your widows! Who will judge between me and You? When I stole, and You didn't insult me like that; but now we do not know that we have sinned! »
In the works of Avvakum, in the special style developed by him, which could be called the style of the pathetic simplification of man, literature Ancient Rus' again rose to the monumentalism of the old art, to universal and "world" themes, but on a completely different basis. The power of the individual in itself, outside of any official position, the power of a person deprived of everything, plunged into an earthen pit, a person whose tongue has been cut out, takes away the ability to write and communicate with the outside world, whose body is rotting, who is seized by lice, who is threatened the most terrible tortures and death at the stake - this power appeared in the works of Avvakum with tremendous force and completely overshadowed the external power of the official position of the feudal lord, which was followed with such fidelity in many cases by Russian historical works of the 11th-16th centuries.
The discovery of the value of the human person in itself concerned in literature not only the style of depicting a person. It was also a discovery of the value of the author's personality. Hence the emergence of a new type of professional writer, the realization of the value of the author's text, the emergence of the concept of copyright, which does not allow a simple borrowing of the text from predecessors, and the abolition of compilability as a principle of creativity. From here, from this discovery of the value of the human person, comes the characteristic of the 17th century. interest in autobiographies (Avvakum, Epiphanius, Eleazar Anzersky, etc.), as well as personal notes about events (Andrey Matveev about the Streltsy rebellion).
In the visual arts, the discovery of the value of the human personality manifests itself in a very diverse way: parsunas (portraits) appear, linear perspective, which provides for a single individual point of view on the image, illustrations appear for works of democratic literature depicting an “average” person, and splint is born.
Democratic Literature of the Second Half of the 17th –beginning of the eighteenth century
The 17th century in Russian history is a time of gradual liberation of the human personality, awareness of the value of human individuality, an interest in the inner life of a person develops. From the middle of the XVII century. "mental reading" is pushed into the background by historical and everyday stories, democratic satire, translated chivalric novels, collections joke stories and anecdotes. Reading is no longer for the salvation of the soul, but for entertainment.
The Tale of Frol Skobeev
The Tale of Frol Skobeev is a picaresque short story about a clever rogue, created, most likely, in the time of Peter the Great (late 17th or early years of the 18th century), but still closely connected with the previous one. literary tradition. Linguistically, the story is interesting in that book-Slavic “decorations” are no longer used, but new artistic means have not yet been developed. A combination of business style with expressive means is used colloquial speech.
The author leads his story in a brisk clerical style: In the Novgorod district had nobleman Frol Skobeev. In the same Nougorod district there were estates of the stolnik Nardin-Nashchokin, had daughter Annushka, who lived in those Novgorod estates(clericalisms are underlined; lexical pickup is highlighted in color, creating a chain stringing, characteristic of business writing).
There are many new words and phrases in the narrative, mainly from the business language: “Well, you rogue, what are you going to live for?” - “If you please know about me: there is nothing else that to follow orders". - "Stop, rogue, walk for sneak! AND estates available, fiefdom mine, in the Sinbirsk district, which according to the census, it consists of 300 hundred households. do it, rogue, follow yourself and live constantly».
Loanwords from Western European languages are often and habitually used: apartment (stayed in the apartment - came to his veterinary), register, person(meaning "person") banquet, corket, coachman, lackey dress, publication And public(in the same sense) .
The stylistic setting is the rejection of verbal "beauty". Some glimpses of the book-Slavonic style can only be found in the episode of the hero's "repentance": “Gracious sir, first steward! Let go of the guilty A ho, like ra ba, which WHO ymel n re you boldness».
There are many colloquial constructions in the syntax, especially in the replicas of the characters, and the author individualizes the speech of the characters, separates their statements from the author's. Many examples testify to the normalization of colloquial speech, the emergence of speech etiquette. For example, appeals sister, brother, friend; verb usage if you please as a courtesy:
Then the steward Nardin-Nashchokin went to the monastery to his sister, for a long time he did not see his daughter, and asked his sister: “ Sister what I don't see Annushka? And his sister answered him: Enough, brother, mock! What should I do when I'm heartless with my petition to you? I asked her to send to me; it is significant that you to me don't dare to believe, but I don’t have time to send it to her.”
Frol Skobeev is typical of the 17th century. figure. His adventures are dated 1680, a year later the tsar and the boyars set fire to the lists of discharge books: from now on, it was necessary to serve "without jobs", the path to power and wealth was open to enterprising people of any origin (such as Frol Skobeev).
Satire second half of XVII V. - a qualitatively new phenomenon in the literature of Ancient Rus'. Previously, there were only satirical episodes (among the chroniclers, with Daniil Zatochnik and others). But satire as a literary genre first appears in the urban environment during the period of exacerbation of its dissatisfaction with power, feudal oppression, etc. The struggle against the traditions of the old bookish language is most clearly found in parodies, which was widespread in Russian manuscript literature late XVII V. Literary genres, various types of Church Slavonic and business language were parodied. Thus, the semantic renewal of the old language forms took place and the paths for the democratic reform of literary speech were outlined.
The Tale of the Shemyakin Court
The Tale of the Shemyakin Court is an example of Russian democratic satire (More). The combination of the colloquial manner with the book style created an individual style of the story (colloquial elements are underlined, book ones are highlighted in color).
V nѣ which mѣ stokhliving two brothers, earthlingѣ faces, one is rich, others are poor. The rich are lending a lotѣ t wretchedly V but you cannot fulfill his poverty. For a few times, come to the rich and ask horses on what heѣ firewoodlead… And always give him horse, he, take it, start from him collar ask. And be offended at him, brother, beginning to revile his wretchedness, saying: And that you have ѣ tb that of his collar».
The story of the judicial procedure is full of realities that reproduce the situation of the city court in the second half of the 17th century, and the corresponding terms (to beat with a forehead; there will be a package for him from the city, and not go, otherwise it will beѣ zd bailiff to pay, Bringtake his petition against him,Popa hundred seek the death of your son, having gone out the plaintiffs with the defendant and to the order, according to the judicial decree etc.).
The Tale of Ersh Ershov son
The story about Ersh Ershov son was very popular: more than 20 versions of the story (manuscript, popular print and oral) have been preserved. After the "Great Destruction" early XVII c. the voivodship court had to conduct especially a lot of land litigation caused by violent seizures of land (some of the land was abandoned by the owners, some of the owners lost documents). Power was often on the side of those who could more generously pay for a court decision.
In the older edition, the story has the title "List from the court case, how the gray bream competed about Rostov Lake and the rivers." Indeed, the author imitates court lists (minutes of court sessions), and the entire court procedure is exactly followed (More).
Although tropes and other verbal embellishments are alien to business style, there are many expressive elements in the parody of court lists. For example, in the petition, a number of evaluative words are given: on a stubble on a thief, on a thief on a robber, on a thief on a deceiver, on dashing, on cancerous eyes, on sharp bristles, on a badly unkind person.
The main satirical device is irony: I am a kind person, they know me in Moscow princes and boyars and boyar children, and heads of archers, and clerks and clerks, and merchant guests, and zemstvo people (all classes are listed) and the whole world in many people and cities, and they eat me in the ear with pepper and shavfranom and with vinegar, and in all sorts of patterns, and put me in front of them ondishes, and many people justify me with a hangover.
Another example in which irony turns into fiction ( folk genre): And Yershtak said: “Lord, I tell you, I had ways and data and all sorts of fortresses on that Rostov lake. And it’s a sin for my sake in the past, my lords, that Rostov Lake burned for a long time, and until Semyon’s days of summer, and there was nothing to flog at that time, because the old straw stuck, and the new straw did not ripen at that time. My paths and data have burned down.” There are many other folklore elements in the story.
The nature of the social movement of the 1970s, the course of the entire post-reform development, led to a further intensive process of the versatile democratization of literature. It found expression in the desire of realist writers for a broad and comprehensive study and coverage of the social changes in the life of the masses, in the determination to penetrate into the ideology and psychology of the worker, into his life, culture, and beliefs. Intensive work on the study of folk life, done in the 60s, brought its results.
Understanding the people's view of the world, assessing what is happening from the point of view of people's interests, comprehending the moral foundations of the people's worldview, penetrating the aesthetics of folk art, mastering the riches of folk thought and language, striving to create literature necessary for the people - these are the main aspects of the process of democratization of the literature of this time. She embraced creativity a wide range writers of various talents and trends.
Undoubtedly, the largest and central figure in democratic literature in this period was Nekrasov. His influence on the development of literature, as is now obvious, is not limited to poetry. His work and organizational activities cover all literature, including various aspects of the aesthetic perception of reality.
It is precisely in this that the reasons for the enthusiastic perception of Nekrasov's poetry by the revolutionary circles of populism, and even by such ideological opponents of the revolutionary change of the world as Dostoevsky, are rooted. “How much,” he exclaimed, “Nekrasov, like a poet<...>occupied places in my life!”.
Nekrasov's influence on democratic literature in the 1970s was multifaceted and profoundly fruitful. The creation of the poem "To whom it is good to live in Rus'" opened up truly boundless prospects for literature on the path of realism and nationality.
Nekrasov, like none of his contemporaries, represented the ways of comprehensive democratization of literature not only theoretically, but he himself, with his creativity, practically solved these problems. For him, the aesthetics of folk art, literature addressed to the people, were not abstract concepts.
Together with Nekrasov, Saltykov-Shchedrin went in the same direction, but on his own creative paths, for whom the people's point of view on the world became the basis of his sharp and uncompromising criticism of the existing order. “The only fertile soil for satire,” he declared, “is the soil of the people<...>The further the satirist penetrates into the depths of this life, the more weighty his word becomes, the clearer his task is drawn, the more undeniably the significance of his activity comes out.
Undoubtedly, this declaration was essentially a program for literature in general. For the work of the satirist himself in the 70s. characteristic is the growth of "heartache" for the people and those who lay down "the soul of life" for its vital interests.
The extreme importance of the problems of people's life for the development of literature was also deeply realized by other prominent realist writers. This realization was not only speculative, but also a spiritual experience, a creative impulse in practical literary activity. For Dostoevsky, due to his life experience, the folk theme did not become the subject of a wide creative development.
But as an ideologist, he well understood the central importance of the problems connected with the position of the people. “The question of the people,” he wrote in the “Diary of a Writer” in 1876, “now we have the most important question, in which lies our whole future, even, so to speak, our most practical question now.”
In the novels "Teenager" and "The Brothers Karamazov" social problems people's life, people's worldview have taken an important place, have become key to characterizing the ideological and spiritual searches of the main characters. However, the understanding of the role of the people by the writer himself, especially the historical fate of the Russian people, was very complex and contradictory.
The 70s for L. Tolstoy were milestones in comprehending the issues of people's life and at the same time in understanding the meaning of their activities. The consciousness of duty to the people has always distinguished the writer, it was essentially decisive in his ideological and creative path. The work on the "ABC" in the 70s, the creation of books for the education of the people, for the people's reader are indubitably connected with the phenomena that took place in literature and in public life.
Tolstoy closely follows the political trials of the revolutionaries, the fate of the defendants is of concern to the writer. Occupy him and artistic intentions associated with the life of the people. The social tragedy of the working masses during the famine in the Volga region in 1873-1874. deeply struck the heart of the writer. All this, with inevitable regularity, led Tolstoy to spiritual crisis, to the ideological restructuring that took place in the late 70s - early 80s. and found its expression in the "Confession" and other works of journalistic and religious-philosophical nature.
Significant in the ideological and creative path were the 70s for Leskov, Pisemsky. P. I. Melnikov-Pechersky is also close to them. It can be said that it was precisely the problems of folk life, a versatile study of the fundamental foundations of Russian reality, that “led away” these original realist artists from the camp of ideological and political reaction, which had such a detrimental effect on their work in the 60s.
In the subsequent period, they got out of the ideological and creative impasse and, with all the complexity of their ideological positions, were able to create large realistic canvases of the life of a heterogeneous Russia. Such are “Soboryane”, “The Tale of the Lefty”, “Little Things of Bishop's Life” by Leskov, the novel “Petty Bourgeois”, the drama “Baal”, “Financial Genius” by Pisemsky, the novels “In the Forests” and “On the Mountains” by Melnikov-Pechersky.
Questions of folk life were closely intertwined in the work of writers of different ideological orientations with the problem of historical activity, activity in order to change reality, with the question of a positive hero in the situation of the 70s.
In solving this problem, the attitude of the authors of certain works to the modern social movement as a whole, and to the revolutionary struggle of the populists in particular, was determined with the greatest "frankness" and sharpness. In solving this problem, the evolution of a number of writers over this period was most clearly defined - from "Demons" to "The Brothers Karamazov" by Dostoevsky, from "Smoke" to "Novi" by Turgenev, as well as the departure from anti-nihilistic themes by Leskov and Pisemsky.
An important role in the growth of the self-awareness of Russian society was played by the mentioned political trials of participants in the revolutionary populist movement, starting from the trials of the Nechaevs and Dolgushins and ending with the trials of the second half of the 70s. (over V. I. Zasulich, in the case of 50, 193, etc.).
Judicial materials, despite all the police and censorship restrictions, revealed to the public the drama and selflessness of the struggle of the revolutionaries, showed - contrary to the intentions of the organizers of the trials - courage, heroism, the height of their spiritual and moral character. Of course, writers followed these processes with intense attention. A sympathetic attitude towards the "nihilists" was reflected in a number of works by Nekrasov, Saltykov-Shchedrin, Ch. Uspensky, Osipovich-Novodvorsky and others.
It would be an exaggeration to think that all these events dealt a blow to anti-nihilistic literature - it also interpreted this material in its own way. However, undoubtedly, for those writers and readers who at a certain stage were sincerely mistaken about the life image of the "nihilists", the materials of the trials contributed to the elimination of erroneous and one-sided ideas.
An important feature of the literary and social life of the 70s. is the expansion of Russia's ideological, literary and artistic ties with the social life and literature of Western Europe. The development of bourgeois relations in the West, the growth of the revolutionary movement of the working masses, new trends in philosophical and scientific thought found a lively and effective response in the advanced democratic circles of Russia. The events of the Paris Commune deeply agitated the revolutionary youth, including literature.
Increasingly, reports about the works of Marx and Engels penetrate the pages of the Russian press and into radical circles. This is facilitated by the extensive personal ties between the founders of Marxism and leaders of the Russian revolutionary movement.
True, in this period Marxism often reached Russia in a populist interpretation, nevertheless this expanded the ideas of Russian society about the progressive thought of the West. At the same time, the ideologists of populism contributed a lot to the spread of the ideas of positivism, which also captured the field of aesthetics. This could not but have a negative impact on the level of Russian aesthetic and critical thought in the 1970s.
Broad acquaintance with the latest literature of foreign countries was essential for Russian society. On the pages of the largest printed organs (in Otechestvennye Zapiski, Delo, Vestnik Evropy, etc.), the reader found many translated novels, short stories, essays, poems by both well-known and sometimes very minor writers and poets.
French literature was especially popular (V. Hugo, Erkman-Chatrian, E. Zola, A. Daudet, E. and J. Goncourt), F. Shpilhagen, K. Gutskov, W. Thackeray, D. Elliot, G. Longfellow, M. Twain, etc. In the late 70s - early 80s. increasingly appear in the Russian translation of the works of writers Slavic countries, especially Poland (G. Senkevich, B. Prus, E. Ozheshko, L. Kondratovich and others).
The artistic searches of Western European writers were actively discussed on the pages of Russian literary magazines. Of particular interest were the experiences and aesthetic declarations of E. Zola.
His novels were translated extensively throughout the 70s and 80s. If the research experiments of Zola the novelist could not but attract, then the aesthetic manifestos of naturalism in the heyday of Russian realistic literature did not find any significant sympathy, on the contrary, they were subjected to versatile criticism.
Along with the growth of literary communication, the recognition of the world significance of Russian literature is also becoming wider. The work of Turgenev, L. Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, as well as the most important works other realist writers, become an important factor in the development of world literature.
Complexity, richness, diversity and at the same time often inconsistency overall picture literary life 70s, closely connected with the political struggle of that time, with conflicting theories of transformation human society, determined the intensity and intensity of ideological and aesthetic searches in artistic creativity, in the development of realism.
Aesthetic declarations, theoretical reflections on the ways of the development of literature, various assessments of specific works are made not only by literary critics, but also by the creators of literature - poets, writers, playwrights. These speeches themselves are clothed not only in the form of articles, reviews, but are often taken out on the pages of works of art.
Such, for example, are Saltykov-Shchedrin's reflections on the development of the social novel in the essays "Lords of Tashkent", Dostoevsky's discourses about the Russian novelist in "The Teenager", not to mention his "Diary of a Writer". The problems of the democratization of literature and its ideological and artistic restructuring occupied L. Tolstoy. While working on the ABC, he reflects on the further development of Russian literature and predicts its new revival among the people. More than once about the development of democratic literature wrote in his essays Ch. Uspensky.
Literary criticism has not played such an active, active role in the literary process as revolutionary-democratic criticism played in the 1960s. The most significant in its place in the literary and social struggle of the 70s. there was populist criticism (N. K. Mikhailovsky, P. N. Tkachev, A. M. Skabichevsky, and others). It played a significant role in supporting and propagating democratic literature and in the fight against reaction.
The critical sections of Otechestvennye Zapiski and Dela paid much attention to polemics on issues of contemporary literary and social life. At the same time, populist critics were unable to appreciate and reveal the deep progressive ideological and aesthetic meaning of a number of major achievements. modern literature, - including such works as "Anna Karenina" by Tolstoy, "The Brothers Karamazov" by Dostoevsky, "Nov" by Turgenev, - the dramaturgy of Ostrovsky, etc.
Populist criticism was prevented from doing this by undoubted deviations from the principles of revolutionary democratic criticism and the aesthetics of the 1960s. towards positivism, a mechanistic approach to the problems of artistic creativity.
Other trends (conservative-idealistic, as well as reactionary-protective character) in the criticism of the 70s. did not put forward any significant concepts of understanding literature. Only the emergence of Marxist literary criticism in the subsequent period advanced the development of the theoretical foundations of literature and the understanding of the deep links between artistic creativity and reality.
Meanwhile, the literature of the 70s, which in many ways did not satisfy contemporaries, not only because of the difference in the ideological positions of the writers, but also in their aesthetic, artistic features, represented, as it became clearly clear in a historical perspective, a picture of extraordinary artistic wealth, a variety of aesthetic values, creative directions, a fruitful search for a new, deeply promising for the further development of the artistic word.
These achievements, searches, discoveries are in direct connection with the best traditions of realism in Russian and world literature, at the same time they are generated by the ideological demands of the time, the sharpness and drama of the unfolding social struggle, the high intellectual level of the participants in this struggle, the awareness of its deep national origins in the social, spiritual and material life of the Russian people.
Development creative method realism in literature, as well as in art in general, proved at this stage its fruitfulness, inexhaustibility in renewal artistic means knowledge and reflection of reality.
The need for a radical restructuring of the existing society necessarily led writers of democratic aspirations to a comprehensive analysis of the social aspects of the life of the most diverse strata of society, the broad working masses in particular. It was during this period that an "artistic" study of the life of the peasant masses, the post-reform village, unparalleled in scope, unfolded.
In connection with this study, one should put the great importance of the work of Nekrasov and Saltykov-Shchedrin, Gleb Uspensky and the whole galaxy of writers of a populist, democratic orientation, which consisted in the fact that they were able to advance the development of existing genres in new historical conditions - poems, novels, essays.
This led to the renewal, enrichment of the artistic possibilities of these genres - such is the uniqueness of the epic “Who Lives Well in Rus'” created by Nekrasov, such are the “social” novels and cycles of essays by Saltykov-Shchedrin filled with a sharp social analysis of reality, the cycles of peasant essays that are epic in terms of the breadth of coverage of folk life Gleb Uspensky.
It is noteworthy that it is the novel and the essay that undergo the most intensive changes during this period, and in their development there has been a clear desire for demarcation (such, for example, a decisive rejection of the form of the novel by Gl. Uspensky), and synthesis (such, for example, "essay" origin of the populist novel).
History of Russian literature: in 4 volumes / Edited by N.I. Prutskov and others - L., 1980-1983
The formation and development of the revolutionary-democratic ideology in Russia is associated with the names V. G. Belinsky, A. I. Herzen, N. G. Chernyshevsky, N. I. Dobrolyubov, D. I. Pisarev, as well as with the names of M. V. Butashevich-Petrashevsky and M. A. Speshnev. The revolutionary democrats fought for the abolition of the autocracy and serfdom, and were supporters of the socialist transformation of the country. Their socialism was called utopian, since it was believed that the transition to socialism through the transformation of the peasant community, bypassing capitalism, was not feasible by peaceful means. They created a philosophical and sociological doctrine, which, in terms of theoretical richness, in breadth and depth of posing and solving problems, surpasses much of what was done in philosophy by other representatives of this trend.
Revolutionary democrats mastered German classical philosophy and adopted its dialectics and Feuerbach's materialism, got acquainted with the ideas of the utopian socialists and French materialists, as well as with the economic theories of A. Smith and D. Ricardo. AI Herzen was familiar with the views of K. Marx and F. Engels.
The revolutionary democrats were united in understanding ways to transform Russia. This path was associated with the building of socialism in Russia on the basis of communal, collective ownership of the means of production. At the same time, the construction of socialism by V. G. Belinsky was conceived as a path of revolutionary transformations and the expropriation of landowners' lands and possessions, Herzen was a supporter of calm revolutionary transformations without violence and civil war.
Democratic revolutionaries exaggerated the specifics of Russia believing that it will not follow the capitalist path of development.
Peasant reform of the 60s. 19th century put an end to the originality of the Russian countryside, and it began to develop along the path of establishing bourgeois relations in it.
The greatest thinker representing democracy in Russia was Alexander Ivanovich Herzen (1812-1870), who left an indelible mark on Russian philosophy.
Herzen was born in Moscow on March 25, 1812. In 1834, a year after graduating from Moscow University, he was arrested and then exiled to Vyatka for organizing a circle, which included his friend N. P. Ogarev. He ended his exile in Vladimir. After the exile, he lived in St. Petersburg for one year. A sharp review in a letter to his father about the police was followed by a new exile to Novgorod for one year. After serving this exile, Herzen took up theoretical work. It is believed that " feature ideological development of Herzen 1833 - 1839. there was a desire, following some Saint-Simonists, but under the decisive influence of the conditions of Russian life, to consider socialism as a new religion of mankind. "However," at the turn of the 30-40s. religious views A. I. Herzen are changing. "In 1842, he came to materialism. In 1844 - 1845, he creates his main philosophical work, Letters on the Study of Nature. In the 40s, he took shape as a revolutionary democrat. In 1847 A. I. Herzen died in 1870. “Going abroad, Herzen was full of faith in democratic Europe, which, having carried out a socialist revolution, would give impetus to the Russian revolution. He met the beginning of the revolution in France in 1848 with enthusiasm, but it ended with the victory of the bourgeoisie and the execution of the workers. The illusion about the advent of the "social kingdom" collapsed, and Herzen, shocked by the tragic events that took place before his eyes, fell into deep pessimism for a while - he spoke about the decrepitude of old Europe, about its inability to further historical progress. "V. I. Lenin wrote: "The spiritual collapse of Herzen, his deep skepticism and pessimism after 1848 was the collapse of bourgeois illusions in socialism. Herzen's spiritual drama was the product and reflection of that world-historical epoch when the revolutionary spirit of bourgeois democracy was already dying (in Europe) and the revolutionary spirit of the socialist proletariat had not yet matured.
"Starting from the 50s, Herzen associated all his hopes for a happy future of mankind with Russia. In a number of works - "From the Other Shore", " old world and Russia", "Russian people and socialism" and in many others - he develops his theory of "Russian socialism", based on the conviction that feudal-serf Russia will come to socialism, bypassing capitalism. This conviction was based on the idea that The rural community that remains in Russia contains the germs of the future socialist society in the form of the right of everyone to land, communal land use, artel labor and secular government. It seemed to Herzen that in this way Russia would avoid capitalism and the conflicts it engendered. Russia's path to socialism is presented to him as the path of the abolition of serfdom and the development public principles in economic life, combined with the establishment of the republic. Predicting the triumph of socialism in the future, the thinker wrote: “Socialism will develop in all its phases to extreme consequences, to absurdities. Then the cry of denial will again break out from the titanic heap of the revolutionary minority, and the mortal struggle will begin again, in which socialism will take the place of the current conservatism and will be defeated by the coming a revolution unknown to us." Regarding this prophecy of Herzen, Plekhanov noted, firstly, that Herzen's argument is deductive and therefore unconvincing; secondly, that if in the future a "denial of socialism" arises, this will not mean a return to pre-socialist forms of life, but will be a continuation and development of the achievements of socialism.
After the peasant reform of 1861 Herzen comes to the understanding that Russia will not be able to bypass capitalism, but does not give up the idea that Russia will make the transition to socialism differently than other peoples. He believed that there could not be one general formula for the realization of the socialist ideal. One of the essential features of Herzenian socialism was that he preferred a socialist revolution that would not allow bloody means. However, he understood that a violent coup could also be inevitable, and yet he believed that it was better not to allow preparation for violence, not to provoke it. He was against Bakunin's setting for an immediate revolt, and advocated the preservation of the state.
Reflecting on the historical paths of development of Western Europe, Herzen warned that if it turns out to be possible "to achieve for all the well-being of small shopkeepers and poor owners," then Western Europe can calm down in "philistinism," i.e., capitalism.
The socio-political searches of Herzen are intertwined with philosophical and natural sciences.
He considered philosophy as the science of the universal laws of being. In his opinion, this science should have a practical orientation. Herzen's materialistic views were expressed by him in his Letters on the Study of Nature. The main idea stated in this work is that philosophy should be in alliance with natural science. He argued: "Philosophy without natural science is just as impossible as natural science without philosophy." For the union of philosophy and natural science, a correct solution of the question of the relationship between thinking and being is necessary. At the same time, he believed that the key to solving this issue was the idea of the development of nature, as well as the recognition of its primacy in relation to thinking.
Herzen expressed deep, close to perfect understanding ideas about motion, matter.
He defended the idea of the knowability of the world, insisting on the unity of experience and speculation in cognition, that is, the unity of the sensory and rational stages of cognition.
Herzen made an enormous contribution to the development of the problem of the dialectical method. As its main advantages, he singled out the requirements to consider phenomena in development, in integrity.
Mastering Hegel's dialectic, Herzen did a lot to comprehend the connections of philosophical categories (essence and phenomenon, content and form).
Herzen interpreted dialectics as the algebra of revolution, that is, he considered it necessary to use dialectics both to comprehend reality and to organize activities to transform it.
He criticized the views of the vulgar materialists Vogt and Büchner, who regarded thought as a "secretion" of the brain.
Herzen made a significant contribution to ethics. His whole philosophy is imbued with high respect for man. He strove for such a change in life that would allow a person to be more free, developed, moral.
He opposed asceticism and insisted on the human right to happiness, and was also against the opposition of duty and inclination. Morality, dominant in the bourgeois world, he considered as a means to protect the authorities and property. Herzen was not only a revolutionary, a philosopher, but also outstanding writer to be convinced of this, it is enough to get acquainted with his work "The Past and Thoughts".
Another representative of revolutionary democracy in Russia was Vissarion Grigoryevich Belinsky (1811 - 1848), who went down in the history of the socio-political "philosophical thought of our country as an outstanding literary critic, a fighter against serfdom, an adherent of socialism. Unlike Herzen, Belinsky considered capitalism a natural stage of social development. He combined socialism with the class struggle."
Belinsky is revered by aestheticians as one of the founders of materialistic aesthetics in our country. He "didn't write one specifically philosophical essay. His philosophical views - materialism and dialectics - he outlined briefly and fragmentarily. His true element was literary criticism and aesthetics."
The aesthetic theory of Belinsky became one of the achievements of the Russian culture XIX V. On the one hand, she summarized the successes of the advanced domestic art, which firmly embarked on the path of realism, and, on the other hand, established the norms of the realistic (then called natural) school, determining its development for a long time.
Aesthetics of Belinsky is diverse. He did not leave a consolidated, logically coherent presentation of his views. Nevertheless, it is possible to single out some key points, the main principles, and group Belinsky's thoughts around them.
"The first, important principle can be indicated by the position: Art is a product of society, it reflects and reveals the development of society."
The second principle can be expressed as follows: what is depicted in art must correspond to life.
However, art does not copy life, but reflects the typical in it.
"The third principle of Belinsky's aesthetics can be formulated as follows: art is of great social importance, it educates people and serves as a weapon in the social struggle."
"The fourth principle of his aesthetics was that realistic art is, in its content and meaning, folk art."
"The fifth principle of Belinsky's aesthetics was the demand for the ideological nature of art and the correspondence between the content and form of a work of art."
So, relying on materialism and dialectics, Belinsky was able to express positions that remain unshakable throughout the subsequent development of aesthetic thought. The guidance on the part of the artists by the principles developed by Belinsky turned art into a means of serving the idea, into a means of affirming the ideals of revolutionary democracy.
In philosophy, Belinsky stood on the positions of materialism. He recognized the primacy of the material in relation to the spiritual, considered matter, space and time to exist objectively, recognized the infinity of the world in space and time. community development, according to Belinsky, like everything in the world, goes in a spiral. The world is dominated not by blind chance, but by necessity. Necessity works its way through the chain of negations.
He considers man as a product of society. Belinsky, like Herzen, sought, having mastered Hegel's dialectic, to apply it to explain the world. However, Herzen in sociology as in the theory of knowledge was able to do this more successfully than Belinsky. However, it must be admitted that Belinsky's moralizing criticism, through criticism of literary works, of Russian reality did a lot to awaken in young people of various ranks an awareness of the need to change the then existing order.
In the 60s. 19th century Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky (1828-1889) was the head of the revolutionary-democratic camp. In his works he developed questions of political economy, philosophy, ethics and aesthetics.
Chernyshevsky was born into the family of a Saratov priest. He studied at the theological seminary, but did not finish it. Entered St. Petersburg University. After graduating in 1851, Chernyshevsky taught for 2 years at the Saratov Gymnasium, and then moved on to teach at the St. Petersburg Cadet Corps.
Chernyshevsky realized that a deep economic and political crisis was growing in Russia, which should end with a revolutionary break in the existing regime. Back in 1852, he stated that "the displeasure of the people against the government, taxes, officials, landlords is growing. Only one spark is needed to set fire to all this. At the same time, the number of people from an educated circle, hostile to the real order of things, is growing" . Chernyshevsky believed in the proximity of the Russian revolution and intended to take part in it. "I'm not satisfied," he said, "neither dirt, nor drunken men with clubs, nor massacres."
All subsequent activities of Chernyshevsky were devoted to the ideological and practical preparation of the peasant revolution. Comparing Chernyshevsky with Herzen, V. I. Lenin wrote: "Chernyshevsky was a much more consistent and militant democrat. The spirit of class struggle emanates from his writings."
Chernyshevsky believed that the peasant reform of 1861 could not save the autocracy.
When asked what path Russia would take after the revolution, Chernyshevsky gave the following answer: it would follow the non-capitalist path of development towards socialism, relying on the rural community. He considered socialism the highest stage of human development at the moment. However, it must eventually be replaced by the social system, which he called communism. According to Chernyshevsky, socialism and communism differ in terms of the principle of distribution. Whereas under socialism the means of production and land are socialized, under communism distribution is also socialized, and people receive products according to their needs.
Chernyshevsky's activities attracted the attention of the government, he was arrested on July 7, 1862 and sentenced to 14 years of hard labor. The king cut the term in half. He spent 21 years in prison and then in exile. In 1883 he was allowed to settle in Astrakhan, and in 1888 in Saratov. In 1889 he died. While in the Peter and Paul Fortress, Chernyshevsky wrote the novel What Is to Be Done?
The main philosophical work of Chernyshevsky is "The Anthropological Principle in Philosophy". In it, he, like no one before him, substantiated the principle of partisan philosophy.
Chernyshevsky deepened the substantiation of the material unity of the world.
He contributed to the further development of the materialistic theory of knowledge, deepened the understanding of philosophical categories.
One of the most prominent associates of Chernyshevsky was Nikolai Aleksandrovich Dobrolyubov (1836-1861). He was major publicist, critic and theorist of revolutionary democracy.
Dobrolyubov considered it his duty to prepare society for revolution by criticizing social institutions and ideas that contributed to the preservation of the old system.
Dobrolyubov presented the content of history as a process in which the "reasonable" or "natural" order of things is subjected to an "artificial" distortion, for example, by introducing "unnatural" serf relations. The meaning of history consists in the movement of mankind towards "reasonable" ("natural") principles, from which it has deviated. Distortions do not stem from human nature, they are the result of abnormal relationships in which a person is placed, therefore, first of all, unreasonable social relations are subject to correction. As a revolutionary democrat, Dobrolyubov promoted the idea of the need for fundamental changes in all public life. He rejected the possibility of restructuring society on the initiative from above, under the cover of the rule of law.
"Natural" social relations, according to Dobrolyubov, are based on labor; the degree of respect for labor determines the true value of a given stage of civilization; the whole history is the struggle of "working people" with "parasites". He included the feudal lords, the capitalists, and all those who oppress the working people into the latter.
The life of people should, in his opinion, be based on reasonable selfishness and consciousness. The aesthetic ideal of Dobrolyubov is in the fusion of science and art, science and poetry.
Dmitry Ivanovich Pisarev (1840-1868) was an outstanding revolutionary democrat. On the whole, he did not share the views of Chernyshevsky and Dobrolyubov. His views were peculiar, he was a thinker who prepared the transition from revolutionary democracy to populism. Assuming that the revolution could be carried out through violence, he considered more acceptable the way of enlightening the people, preparing them for revolutionary transformations. After graduating from St. Petersburg University, he began to collaborate in the Russian Word magazine.
For a pamphlet directed against the reigning house, he was imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress, where he spent 4.5 years in solitary confinement (1862 - 1866). He strove in the articles of 1863-1866. to comprehend the history of society more deeply, to base their conclusions on the natural sciences.
In 1863, one of his most significant articles, Essays from the History of Labor, was written, later entitled The Origin of Culture. The central idea of this work is that capitalism will inevitably be followed by socialism based on public property, private property will be eliminated. Socialism is achieved in a revolutionary way, but the revolution is a matter of the future.
He called his views idealism. In the revolution he staked on the thinking proletariat, that is, on the intelligentsia.
On philosophy, Pisarev wrote little, but in his articles he declared himself a materialist, but he treated dialectics with distrust. He fought against idealism and mysticism.
Narrow party, group consciousness is good for destruction; it is not always suitable for consolidating the forces of society.
Revolutionary democratic ideology was developed by raznochintsy, with the exception of Herzen and Pisarev. The moralizing criticism of society by natives of the people, such as V. G. Belinsky, N. G. Chernyshevsky, N. A. Dobrolyubov, was fueled by the conviction that they, as popular thinkers, know better where Russia should go. At the same time, the revolution did not frighten them, since those strata from which they came, as it seemed to them, would gain more than they would lose, and most importantly, the people for whom they considered themselves to suffer would receive enormous benefits. They thought that Russia might well make the leap into the realm of freedom. However, as practice has shown, Russia in the XIX century. wasn't ready for it. Freedom is not achieved by a single action, stained with the blood and suffering of millions. This is just the beginning of the road to freedom. It is achieved at the cost of a lot of work, at the cost of many years of concerted efforts by all members of society, no matter what strata and nations they belong to. When in a society one class, stratum, or one nation strives to settle down at the expense of another, then such a society does not move forward, but either marks time, or goes back, and possibly moves towards its death.
Summing up the consideration of the ideas of revolutionary democrats in Russia in the 40-70s. XIX century., It should be noted that not only their findings and achievements are instructive, but also their delusions and illusions.
Democratic writers gave a huge
material for the knowledge of economic
life... psychological characteristics
people ... depicted his manners, customs,
his moods and desires.
M. Gorky
In the 60s of the XIX century, the formation of realism as a complex and diverse phenomenon is associated with the deepening of literature in the coverage of peasant everyday life, in inner world personality, in the spiritual life of the people. The literary process of realism is an expression of various facets of life and, at the same time, a desire for a new harmonic synthesis, a merger with the poetic element of folk art. The artistic world of Russia with its original, highly spiritual, primordially national art folk poetry constantly aroused the close interest of literature. The writers turned to the artistic understanding of folk moral and poetic culture, the aesthetic essence and poetics of folk art, as well as folklore as an integral folk worldview.
It was the folk principles that were the exceptional factor determining, to some extent, the development of Russian literature in the second half of the 19th century, and especially Russian democratic prose. Folklore and ethnography in the literary process of time become the phenomenon that determines the aesthetic character of many works of the 1840-1860s.
The theme of the peasantry pervades all Russian literature of the 19th century. Literature delves into the coverage of peasant life, into the inner world and national character people. In the works of V.I. Dahl, D.V. Grigorovich, in the "Notes of a Hunter" by I.S. Turgenev, in "Essays from Peasant Life" by A.F. Pisemsky, in the stories of P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky, N.S. Leskov, early L.N. Tolstoy, P.I. Yakushkina, S.V. Maksimov, in Russian democratic prose of the 60s and in general in Russian realism of the second half of the 19th century, the desire to recreate pictures of folk life was imprinted.
Already in the 1830s and 1840s, the first works on the actual ethnographic study of the Russian people appeared: collections of songs, fairy tales, proverbs, legends, descriptions of the customs and customs of antiquity, folk art. A lot of song and other folklore and ethnographic material appears in magazines. At this time, ethnographic research, as noted by a well-known literary critic and critic XIX century A.N. Pypin, proceed from a conscious intention to study the content of folk life and the legends of antiquity true character people in their true terms.
The collection of ethnographic materials in the following 50s "took on truly grandiose proportions." This was facilitated by the influence of the Russian Geographical Society, the Moscow Society of History and Antiquities, a number of scientific, including literary, expeditions of the 50s, as well as a new organ that arose in the 60s folk studies- Moscow Society of Lovers of Natural Science, Anthropology and Ethnography.
The role of the outstanding folklorist-collector P.V. Kireevsky. Already in the 30s of the 19th century, he managed to create a kind of collecting center and attract his outstanding contemporaries to the study and collection of folklore - up to A.S. Pushkin and N.V. Gogol included. Songs, epics and spiritual poems published by Kireevsky were the first monumental collection of Russian folklore.
In the collection of songs, Kireevsky wrote: “Whoever has not heard a Russian song over his cradle and whom its sounds have not accompanied in all the transitions of life, of course, his heart will not tremble at her sounds: she is not like those sounds on which her soul has grown up, or she will be incomprehensible to him as an echo of the coarse mob, with whom he feels nothing in common; or, if she has a special musical talent, she will be curious to him as something original and strange…” 1 . The attitude to the folk song, which embodied both personal inclinations and ideological convictions, led him to turn to practical work on collecting Russian songs.
Love for the Russian song will subsequently unite the members of the “young editorial board” of the Moskvityanin magazine, and S.V. Maksimov, P.I. Yakushkin, F.D. Nefedov, song genre folk poetry will organically enter their literary work.
The Moskvityanin published songs, fairy tales, descriptions of individual rituals, correspondence, articles about folklore and folk life.
M.P. Pogodin, editor of the magazine, writer and prominent public figure, with exceptional perseverance put forward the task of collecting monuments of folk art and folk life, intensively recruited collectors from different walks of life, attracted them to participate in the magazine. He also contributed to the first steps in this field of P.I. Yakushkin.
A special role in the development of the ethnographic interests of writers was played by the “young editors” of the Moskvityanin magazine, headed by A.N. Ostrovsky. As part of the "young edition" in different time included: A.A. Grigoriev, E. Endelson, B. Almazov, M. Stakhovich, T. Filippov, A.F. Pisemsky and P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky.
Already in the 1940s and early 1950s, Russian literature turned more deeply to the peasant theme. The natural school occupies a leading place in the literary process of the time.
NATURAL SCHOOL - the designation of the type that existed in the 40-50s of the XIX century Russian realism(according to the definition of Yu.V. Mann), successively associated with the work of N.V. Gogol and developed his artistic principles. The natural school includes the early works of I.A. Goncharova, N.A. Nekrasov, I.S. Turgenev, F.M. Dostoevsky, A.I. Herzen, D.V. Grigorovich, V.I. Dahl, A.N. Ostrovsky, I.I. Panaeva, Ya.P. Butkova and others. The main ideologist natural school was V.G. Belinsky, the development of its theoretical principles was also promoted by V.N. Maykov, A.N. Pleshcheev and others. Representatives were grouped around the magazines " Domestic notes" and later "Contemporary". The collections "Physiology of Petersburg" (parts 1-2, 1845) and "Petersburg Collection" (1846) became the program for the natural school. In connection with the latest edition, the name itself arose.
F.V. Bulgarin (Northern Bee, 1846, No. 22) used it to discredit the writers of the new trend; Belinsky, Maikov and others took this definition, filling it with positive content. The novelty of the artistic principles of the natural school was most clearly expressed in "physiological essays" - works that aim at the most accurate recording of certain social types ("physiology" of the landowner, peasant, official), their specific differences ("physiology" of the St. Petersburg official, Moscow official), social, professional and everyday features, habits, sights, etc. By striving for documentary, accurate detail, the use of statistical and ethnographic data, and sometimes the introduction of biological accents into the typology of characters, the "physiological essay" expressed the tendency of a certain convergence of figurative and scientific consciousness at that time and ... contributed to the expansion of the positions of realism. At the same time, it is unlawful to reduce the natural school to "physiology", since other genres towered above them - novel, short story 3 .
The writers of the natural school - N.A. Nekrasov, N.V. Gogol, I.S. Turgenev, A.I. Herzen, F.M. Dostoevsky - known to students. However, speaking of this literary phenomenon, one should also consider those that remain outside literary education schoolchildren writers like V.I. Dahl, D.V. Grigorovich, A.F. Pisemsky, P.I. Melnikov-Pechersky, with whose work the students are not familiar, and in their works the peasant theme is developed, being the beginning of literature from peasant life, continued and developed by writers of the sixties. Acquaintance with the work of these writers seems necessary and deepens the knowledge of schoolchildren about the literary process.
In the 1860s, the peasant element most widely penetrated into cultural process era. In the literature, the “folk direction” is affirmed (the term of A.N. Pypin). Peasant types and the folk way of life are completely included in Russian literature.
Russian democratic prose, represented in the literary process by the work of N.G. Pomyalovsky 4 , V.A. Sleptsova, N.V. Uspensky, A.I. Levitova, F.M. Reshetnikova, P.I. Yakushkina, S.V. Maksimov. Entering literary process during the period of the revolutionary situation in Russia and in the post-reform era, it reflected a new approach to the image of the people, highlighted the real pictures of his life, became "sign of the times", recreated the peasant world in Russian literature at a turning point in history, capturing various trends in the development of realism 5 .
The appearance of democratic prose was caused by changing historical and social circumstances, the socio-political conditions of life in Russia in the second half of the 19th century, the arrival of writers in literature, for whom “the study of folk life has become a need” (A.N. Pypin) 6 . Democratic writers reflected the spirit of the era, its aspirations and hopes in an original way. They, as A.M. Gorky, "provided a huge amount of material for the knowledge of the economic life, the psychological characteristics of the people ... portrayed his manners, customs, his mood and desires" 7 .
The sixties drew their impressions from the depths of people's life, from direct contact with the Russian peasant. Peasantry as the main social force Russia, which at that time defined the concept of the people, became the main theme of their work. Democratic writers created in their essays and stories a generalized image of people's Russia. They created in Russian literature their own special social world, their own epic of folk life. “The whole of hungry and downtrodden Russia, sedentary and wandering, ruined by feudal predation and ruined by bourgeois, post-reform predation, was reflected, as in a mirror, in the democratic essay literature of the 60s ...” 8 .
The works of the sixties are characterized by a range of related themes and problems, commonality of genres and structural and compositional unity. At the same time, each of them is a creative individuality, each one can notice his own special style. Gorky called them "variably and sweepingly talented people."
Democrat writers in essays and stories recreated the artistic epic of the life of peasant Rus', approaching and individually separating in their work in depicting the folk theme.
Their works reflected the very essence of the most important processes that made up the content of Russian life in the 60s. It is known that the measure of the historical progressiveness of each writer is measured by the degree of his conscious or spontaneous approach to democratic ideology, which reflects the interests of the Russian people. However, democratic fiction reflects not only the ideological and social phenomena of the era, it definitely and widely goes beyond the ideological and ideological trends. The prose of the sixties is included in the literary process of the time, continuing the traditions of the natural school, correlating with artistic experience Turgenev, Grigorovich, which reflected the peculiar artistic coverage by democratic writers people's peace, including an ethnographically accurate description of life.
Democratic fiction with its ethnographic orientation, which stood out from the general stream of development of Russian prose, took a certain place in the process of the formation of domestic realism. She enriched him with a number of artistic discoveries, confirmed the need for the writer to use new aesthetic principles in the selection and coverage of life phenomena in the conditions of the revolutionary situation of the 1860s, which posed in a new way the problem of the people in literature.
The description of folk life with authentic accuracy of an ethnographic nature was noticed by revolutionary-democratic criticism and was expressed in the requirements for literature to write about the people “the truth without any embellishment”, as well as “in the faithful transmission of real facts”, “in paying attention to all aspects of the life of the lower classes ". Realistic everyday life was closely connected with elements of ethnography. Literature took a fresh look at the life of the peasants and the existing conditions of their life. According to N.A. Dobrolyubov, the explanation of this matter has become no longer a toy, not a literary whim, but an urgent need of the time. The writers of the 1960s reflected in their own way the spirit of the epoch, its aspirations and hopes. Their work clearly recorded the changes in Russian prose, its democratic nature, ethnographic orientation, ideological and artistic originality and genre expression.
In the works of the sixties, a general circle of related themes and problems, a commonality of genres and structural and compositional unity stand out. At the same time, each of them is a creative individuality, each one can notice his own individual style. N.V. Uspensky, V.A. Sleptsov, A.I. Levitov, F.M. Reshetnikov, G.I. Ouspensky contributed their understanding peasant life into literature, each in his own way captured folk paintings.
The Sixties showed a deep ethnological interest. Democratic literature aspired to ethnography and folklorism, to the development of people's life, merged with it, penetrated into the people's consciousness. The works of the sixties were an expression of everyday personal experience of studying Russia and the life of the people. They created in Russian literature their own special social world, their own epic of folk life. The life of Russian society in the pre-reform and post-reform era, and, above all, the peasant world, is the main theme of their work.
In the 60s, the search for new principles for the artistic depiction of the people continued. Democratic prose gave examples of the ultimate truth in the reflection of life for art, confirmed the need for new aesthetic principles in the selection and illumination of life phenomena. The harsh, “idealless” depiction of everyday life led to a change in the nature of prose, its ideological and artistic originality and genre expression 9 .
Democratic writers were artists-researchers, writers of everyday life; in their work, artistic prose came into close contact with the economy, with ethnography, with folklore 10 in the broad sense of the word, operated with facts and figures, was strictly documentary, time for artistic study of Russia. The writers of the sixties were not only observers and registrars of facts, they tried to understand and reflect social causes that gave birth to them. Genesis contributed to their works a tangible concreteness, vitality, authenticity.
Naturally, the democratic writers were guided by folk culture, by the traditions of folklore. In their work there was an enrichment and deepening of Russian realism. The theme of democracy has expanded, literature has been enriched with new facts, new observations, features of the way of life and mores of people's life, mainly peasant life. The writers, for all the brightness of their creative individualities, were close in expressing their ideological and artistic tendencies, they were united by ideological closeness, artistic principles, the search for new themes and heroes, the development of new genres, and common typological features.
The sixties created their art forms- genres. Their prose was predominantly narrative-essay. Essays and stories of writers appeared as a result of their observation and study of the life of the people, their social status, way of life and customs. Numerous meetings at inns, taverns, at post stations, in train cars, on the way, on the steppe road determined the peculiar specificity of the style of their works: the predominance of dialogue over description, the abundance of skillfully conveyed folk speech, the contact of the narrator with the reader, concreteness and factuality, ethnographic accuracy, appeal to the aesthetics of oral folk art, the introduction of abundant folklore inclusions. IN art system The sixties showed a tendency to everyday life, life specificity, strict documentaryism, objective fixation of sketches and observations, originality of the composition (split of the plot into separate episodes, scenes, sketches), publicism, orientation to folk culture and traditions of folklore.
Narrative-essay democratic prose was a natural phenomenon in the literary process of the 60s. According to M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, the sixties did not claim to create complete, artistically complete paintings. They were limited to "excerpts, essays, sketches, sometimes remaining at the level of facts, but they paved the way for new literary forms, more widely covering the diversity of life around" 11 . At the same time, in democratic fiction itself, integral pictures of peasant life were already indicated, achieved by the idea of an artistic connection of essays, the desire for epic cycles (“Steppe essays” by A. Levitov, cycles by F. Reshetnikov “ Good people”, “Forgotten people”, “From travel memories”, etc., the contours of the novel from folk life were visible (F.M. Reshetnikov), an ideological and artistic concept of the people was formed.
The short story-sketchy democratic prose of the sixties organically merged into the literary process. The very trend of depicting folk life turned out to be very promising. The traditions of the sixties developed domestic literature subsequent periods: populist fiction, essays and stories by D.N. Mamin-Sibiryak, V.G. Korolenko, A.M. Gorky.
