The word "criticism" comes from the Greek kritike - the art of analyzing, judging. Critical judgments about literature arose almost simultaneously with its very birth, initially as the opinion of the most respected, sophisticated readers. Standing out already in the era of antiquity in Greece and Rome, as well as in ancient India and China as a special professional occupation, Literary criticism for a long time, in a number of other types of creativity, it retained the “applied” meaning of a general assessment of a work, encouragement or condemnation of the author, and recommendation of a book to other readers.
Theoretical definition Literary criticism must be understood historically. So, criticism of the 17th-18th centuries. - in accordance with the classicist aesthetics - it demanded only an impartial and common taste assessment of the work, indicating individual "errors" and "beauty". In the 19th century criticism developed as a special kind of literature, and the writer's activity began to be considered in its relation to the era and society.
History Literary criticism in the West, closely connected with the history of literary schools and trends, the development of literary thought, directly or indirectly expresses the social relations and contradictions of its time. The most significant critics and writers put forward a program for the development of literature, formulated its social and aesthetic principles (for example, D. Diderot and G. Lessing - back in the 18th century, J. de Stael, G. Heine, V. Hugo, E. Zola - in the 19th century). Starting from the 1st half of the 19th century. Criticism finally won the right of one of the literary professions in Europe. Influential critics for their time were: S. O. Sainte-Beuve, I. Ten and F. Brunethier - in France, M. Arnold - in England, G. Brandes - in Denmark. In the USA, the most notable achievements Literary criticism belong to the first half of the 20th century. and are associated with the names of W. L. Parrington and Van Wyck Brooks.
First steps in Russia Literary criticism belong to the middle of the 18th century. (M. V. Lomonosov, A. D. Kantemir, V. K. Trediakovsky). The range and possibilities of criticism were expanded by N. M. Karamzin, who for the first time gave it a public character. Decembrist critics (A. A. Bestuzhev and others) defended the idea of nationality and originality of Russian literature from revolutionary-romantic positions. N. I. Nadezhdin, who in many respects preceded V. G. Belinsky, was approaching the realization of the principles of realistic criticism. The first high examples of Russian Literary criticism developed in the critical prose of A. S. Pushkin and N. V. Gogol, who left subtle judgments about the purpose of literature, about realism and satire, about the essence and tasks Literary criticism In the criticism of V. G. Belinsky, who put forward the concept of critical realism, the evaluation of the work is already based on the interpretation of it as an artistic whole, in the unity of its ideas and images, and the writer's work is considered in connection with the history of literature and society. Not satisfied with the assessment of the work in the light of the author's ideological intent, N. G. Chernyshevsky and N. A. Dobrolyubov substantiated as the main task Literary criticism a judgment about life itself, its processes, social types, compiled on the basis of the artist's true testimonies - the paintings he depicts. The fundamental novelty of their approach, which expanded the very concept of criticism, consisted in such an interpretation of a realistic work that made it possible to reveal the true depth of its life content.
Revolutionary-democratic critics of the 60-70s. (Chernyshevsky, Dobrolyubov, D. I. Pisarev, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin and others), who continued the traditions of Belinsky, managed to merge the literary work with active speeches against serfdom and autocracy, for the emancipation of the people. Their activity took shape in the ideological and literary struggle against the liberal tendencies of "aesthetic criticism" (A. V. Druzhinin, V. P. Botkin, etc.), which tried to tear art and literature away from public life, and the non-social understanding of the popular nature of literature in criticism called soil farmers (A. A. Grigoriev, N. N. Strakhov, and others). Many of the specifically critical works of these critics had undoubted merit, they provided a meaningful analysis of individual literary phenomena, but on the whole their activity opposed the progressive movement of Russian revolutionary democratic criticism.
A new, truly scientific methodological basis Literary criticism created the teachings of K. Marx and F. Engels, which revealed the basic laws of socio-historical development, their speeches on issues of art and literature. Marxist criticism in the West, which arose in the second half of the 19th century, was represented by the outstanding writers F. Mehring (in Germany) and P. Lafargue (in France), who were the first to treat the problems of art from the standpoint of historical materialism.
A new stage in the development of Russian critical thought was marked by Marxist criticism, which inherited and developed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. traditions of revolutionary-democratic criticism of the time of its heyday; it took shape in the struggle against the populist (N. K. Mikhailovsky) and decadent (A. Volynsky) Literary criticism In the works of G. V. Plekhanov, the principle of a historical-materialistic approach to the phenomena of literature, their evaluation from class positions, was substantiated and implemented. Critical to the development of Marxist Literary criticism had articles and speeches by V. I. Lenin. In a series of articles on Leo Tolstoy, Lenin substantiated the "reflection theory" as applied to literary creativity. The principle of the party nature of literature put forward by him (in the article "Party Organization and Party Literature", 1905), his attitude to cultural heritage, and the defense of the realistic traditions of classical literature had a great influence on the formation of Marxist literature. Literary criticism in Russia: its development is associated with the names of V. V. Vorovsky, A. V. Lunacharsky, M. Gorky and others.
Lenin's works were of fundamental importance for the establishment of the methodological foundations of Soviet literary criticism and Literary criticism
After the October Revolution of 1917 in Russia, and especially as a result of the emergence of the socialist camp in the middle of the century, Marxist literary criticism and Literary criticism become one of the leading international destinations; he is presented as Literary criticism socialist countries as a whole, as well as many Marxist critics in the bourgeois countries of the West and East (for example, R. Foke, K. Caudwell, and others).
Marxist criticism considers works of art in the unity of all its aspects and qualities - from the sociological, aesthetic, ethical point of view. Literary criticism, as well as artistic creativity itself, serves as a means of knowing life, influencing it, and, like literature, can be attributed to the field of “human science”. Hence the high responsibility of criticism as a means of ideological and aesthetic education.
Criticism indicates to the writer the merits and shortcomings of his work, contributing to the expansion of his ideological horizons and the improvement of skill; Turning to the reader, the critic not only explains the work to him, but involves him in a living process of joint comprehension of what he has read at a new level of understanding. An important advantage of criticism is the ability to consider a work as an artistic whole and to realize it in the general process of literary development.
In modern Literary criticism various genres are cultivated - article, review, review, essay, literary portrait, polemical remark, bibliographic note. But in any case, the critic in a certain sense must combine in himself a politician, a sociologist, a psychologist with a literary historian and an esthetician. At the same time, criticism needs a talent that is related to the talent of both the artist and the scientist, although not at all identical with them.
In Soviet criticism, the party orientation of critical speeches, the thoroughness of the Marxist-Leninist training of the critic, who is guided in his work by the method socialist realism - the main creative method of all Soviet literature. The resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU "On Literary and Artistic Criticism" (1972) stated that the duty of criticism, deeply analyzing the patterns of the modern artistic process, to contribute in every possible way to strengthening the Leninist principles of party spirit and nationality, to fight for the high ideological and aesthetic level of Soviet art, to consistently oppose the bourgeois ideologies
Soviet Literary criticism, in alliance with Literary criticism other countries of the socialist community and the Marxist Literary criticism countries of capitalism, actively participates in the international ideological struggle, opposes bourgeois-aesthetic, formalistic concepts that try to turn off literature from public life and cultivate elite art for the few; against the revisionist concepts of "realism without shores" (R. Garaudy, E. Fischer), calling for peaceful ideological coexistence, i.e., for the surrender of realistic currents to bourgeois modernism; against leftist-nihilistic attempts to "eliminate" the cultural heritage and cross out the cognitive value of realistic literature. In the 2nd half of the 20th century. in the progressive press of different countries, the study of V. I. Lenin's views on literature intensified.
One of the topical issues of modern Literary criticism is the attitude to the literature of socialist realism. This method in foreign criticism has both defenders and implacable enemies. The speeches of the "Sovietologists" (G. Struve, G. Ermolaev, M. Hayward, Yu. its origin and development.
M. Gorky, A. Fadeev, and other writers once substantiated and defended the principles of socialist realism in Soviet criticism. An active struggle for the establishment of socialist realism in literature is waged by the Literary criticism, which is designed to combine the accuracy of ideological assessments, the depth of social analysis with aesthetic exactingness, a careful attitude to talent, to fruitful creative searches. Evidence and persuasive Literary criticism gets the opportunity to influence the course of the development of literature, the course of the literary process as a whole, consistently supporting the advanced and rejecting alien trends. Marxist criticism, based on scientific methods of objective research and a lively public interest, opposes impressionistic, subjectivist criticism, which considers itself free from consistent concepts, a holistic view of things, a conscious point of view.
Soviet Literary criticism fights dogmatic criticism, which proceeds from preconceived, a priori judgments about art and therefore cannot realize the very essence of art, its poetic thought, characters and conflicts. In the struggle against subjectivism and dogmatism, criticism is gaining authority - public in nature, scientific and creative in method, analytical in terms of research methods, associated with a vast readership.
In connection with the responsible role of criticism in the literary process, in the fate of the book and the author, the question of its moral obligations is of great importance. The profession imposes significant moral obligations on the critic, implies fundamental honesty of argumentation, understanding and tact in relation to the writer. Any kind of exaggeration, arbitrary quoting, labeling, unfounded conclusions are incompatible with the very essence Literary criticism Directness and sharpness in judgments about handicraft literature is a quality inherent in progressive Russian criticism since the time of Belinsky. There should be no place in criticism, the resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU "On Literary and Artistic Criticism" indicated, a conciliatory attitude towards ideological and artistic marriage, subjectivism, friendly and group preferences. The situation is intolerable when articles or reviews “... are one-sided, contain unfounded compliments, are reduced to a cursory retelling of the content of the work, do not give an idea of its real meaning and value” (“Pravda”, 1972, January 25, p. 1 ).
The scientific persuasiveness of the argument, combined with the Party's certainty of judgment, ideological adherence to principles and impeccable artistic taste, is the basis of the moral authority of the Soviet Literary criticism and its influence on literature.
O Literary criticism in individual countries, see the sections Literature and Literary Studies in articles about these countries.
Lit.: Lenin V.I., On Literature and Art, 4th ed., M., 1969; Belinsky V. G., Speech about criticism, Poln. coll. soch., vol. 6, Moscow, 1955; Chernyshevsky N. G., Aesthetics, M., 1958; Plekhanov G.V., Literature and aesthetics, vol. 1-2, M., 1958; Gorky M., O literature, M., 1961; Lunacharsky A.V., Criticism and criticism, Sat. articles, M., 1938; him, Lenin and literary criticism, Sobr. soch., v. 8, M., 1967; Essays on the history of Russian journalism and criticism, vol. 1-2, M., 1950-1965; History of Russian criticism, vol. 1-2, M. - L., 1958; Ryurikov B.S., The main problems of Soviet literary criticism, in the book: The Second All-Union Congress of Soviet Writers, M., 1956; Fadeev A., Tasks of literary theory and criticism, in his collection: For thirty years, M., 1957; Belinsky and modernity, M., 1964; Essays on the history of Russian Soviet journalism, vol. 1, 1917-1932, M., 1966; v. 2, 1933-1945, Moscow, 1968; Actual problems of criticism and literary criticism, "Questions of Literature", 1966, No. 6; Kuleshov V.I., History of Russian criticism, M., 1972; Bursov B., Criticism as Literature, "Star", 1973, No. 6-8; Soviet literary criticism and criticism. Russian Soviet literature (general works). Books and articles, 1917-1962 Bibliographic index, M., 1966 (sections "Literary criticism" and "Lit. discussions"); Weiman ., "New Criticism" and the development of bourgeois literary criticism, M., 1965; the formation of Marxist literary criticism in foreign Slavic countries, M., 1972; Tasks and possibilities of literary criticism. (At the International Congress in Reims), "Foreign Literature", 1972, No. 9; Teeter L., Scholarship and the art of criticism, "A Journal of English literary history", 1938, no. 5; Peyre., Writers and their critics, lthaca, 1944; Kayser ., Das sprachliche Kunstwerk, 12 Aufl., Bern - Münch., 1967 (bibl. available); Weliek R., Warren A., Literary theory, criticism and history, in their book: Theory of literature, 3 ed., . ., 1963 (there is a bibl.).
V. L. MATVEEV
Article about the word Literary criticism" in the Great Soviet Encyclopedia was read 19820 times
Literary criticism arose simultaneously with literature itself, since the processes of creating a work of art and its professional evaluation are closely interconnected. For centuries, literary critics belonged to the cultural elite, because they had to have exceptional education, serious analytical skills and impressive experience.
Despite the fact that literary criticism appeared in antiquity, it took shape as an independent profession only in the 15th-16th centuries. Then the critic was considered an impartial "judge", who had to consider the literary value of the work, its compliance with genre canons, and the verbal and dramatic skill of the author. However, literary criticism gradually began to reach a new level, since literary criticism itself developed at a rapid pace and was closely intertwined with other sciences of the humanities cycle.
In the 18th and 19th centuries, literary critics were, without exaggeration, "arbiters of fate", since the career of a writer often depended on their opinion. If today public opinion is formed in somewhat different ways, then in those days it was criticism that had a paramount influence on the cultural environment.
Tasks of a literary critic
It was possible to become a literary critic only by understanding literature as deeply as possible. Nowadays, a journalist can write a review of a work of art, and even an author who is generally far from philology. However, during the heyday of literary criticism, this function could only be performed by a literary scholar who was no less well versed in philosophy, political science, sociology, and history. The minimum tasks of the critic were as follows:
- Interpretation and literary analysis of a work of art;
- Evaluation of the author from a social, political and historical point of view;
- Revealing the deep meaning of the book, determining its place in world literature through comparison with other works.
The professional critic invariably influences society by broadcasting his own beliefs. That is why professional reviews are often distinguished by irony and a sharp presentation of the material.
The most famous literary critics
In the West, the strongest literary critics were originally philosophers, among them - G. Lessing, D. Diderot, G. Heine. Often, reviews of new and popular authors were also given by venerable contemporary writers, for example, V. Hugo and E. Zola.
In North America, literary criticism as a separate cultural sphere - for historical reasons - developed much later, so its heyday falls already at the beginning of the 20th century. During this period, V.V. Brooks and W.L. Parrington: It was they who had the strongest influence on the development of American literature.
The golden age of Russian literature was famous for its strongest critics, the most influential of which are:
- DI. Pisarev,
- N.G. Chernyshevsky,
- ON. Dobrolyubov
- A.V. Druzhinin,
- V.G. Belinsky.
Their works are still included in the school and university curriculum, along with the masterpieces of literature themselves, to which these reviews were devoted.
For example, Vissarion Grigoryevich Belinsky, who could not finish either the gymnasium or the university, became one of the most influential figures in literary criticism of the 19th century. He wrote hundreds of reviews and dozens of monographs on the works of the most famous Russian authors from Pushkin and Lermontov to Derzhavin and Maikov. In his works, Belinsky not only considered the artistic value of the work, but also determined its place in the socio-cultural paradigm of that era. The position of the legendary critic was sometimes very tough, destroying stereotypes, but his authority to this day is at a high level.
Development of literary criticism in Russia
Perhaps the most interesting situation with literary criticism developed in Russia after 1917. No industry has ever been as politicized as it was in this era, and literature is no exception. Writers and critics have become an instrument of power, exerting a powerful influence on society. We can say that criticism no longer served lofty goals, but only solved the problems of power:
- hard screening of authors who did not fit into the political paradigm of the country;
- the formation of a "perverted" perception of literature;
- promotion of a galaxy of authors who created the "correct" samples of Soviet literature;
- maintaining the patriotism of the people.
Alas, from a cultural point of view, this was a “black” period in national literature, since any dissent was severely persecuted, and truly talented authors had no chance to create. That is why it is not at all surprising that representatives of the authorities acted as literary critics, among them - D.I. Bukharin, L.N. Trotsky, V.I. Lenin. Political figures had their own opinion about the most famous works of literature. Their critical articles were published in huge editions and were considered not only the primary source, but also the final authority in literary criticism.
Over the course of several decades of Soviet history, the profession of literary criticism became almost meaningless, and very few of its representatives remained due to mass repressions and executions.
In such "painful" conditions, the emergence of opposition-minded writers was inevitable, who at the same time acted as critics. Of course, their work was classified as prohibited, so many authors (E. Zamyatin, M. Bulgakov) were forced to work in immigration. However, it is their works that reflect the real picture in the literature of that time.
A new era in literary criticism began during Khrushchev's "thaw". The gradual debunking of the personality cult and a relative return to freedom of expression revived Russian literature.
Of course, the restrictions and politicization of literature have not gone away, but articles by A. Kron, I. Ehrenburg, V. Kaverin and many others began to appear in philological periodicals, who were not afraid to express their opinions and turned the minds of readers.
A real surge of literary criticism occurred only in the early nineties. Huge upheavals for the people were accompanied by an impressive pool of "free" authors, who could finally be read without a threat to life. The works of V. Astafiev, V. Vysotsky, A. Solzhenitsyn, Ch. Aitmatov and dozens of other talented masters of the word were vigorously discussed both in the professional environment and by ordinary readers. One-sided criticism was replaced by controversy, when everyone could express their opinion about the book.
Literary criticism is a highly specialized field these days. Professional evaluation of literature is in demand only in scientific circles, and is really interesting to a small circle of connoisseurs of literature. Public opinion about a particular writer is formed by a whole range of marketing and social tools that have nothing to do with professional criticism. And this state of affairs is only one of the inalienable attributes of our time.
Literary criticism
Literary criticism- the field of literary creativity on the verge of art (fiction) and the science of literature (literary criticism).
Engaged in the interpretation and evaluation of works of literature from the point of view of modernity (including pressing problems of social and spiritual life); reveals and approves the creative principles of literary trends; has an active influence on the literary process, as well as directly on the formation of public consciousness; relies on the theory and history of literature, philosophy, aesthetics. It is often journalistic, politically topical in nature, intertwined with journalism. It is closely connected with related sciences - history, political science, linguistics, textual criticism, bibliography.
History
It stands out already in the era of antiquity in Greece and Rome, also in ancient India and China as a special professional occupation. But for a long time it has only "applied" significance. Its task is to give a general assessment of the work, to encourage or condemn the author, to recommend the book to other readers.
Then, after a long break, it again takes shape as a special type of literature and as an independent profession in Europe, starting from the 17th century and until the first half of the 19th century (T. Carlyle, C. Sainte-Beuve, I. Ten, F. Brunetier, M. Arnold, G. Brandes).
History of Russian literary criticism
Until the 18th century
Elements of literary criticism appear already in written monuments of the 11th century. Actually, as soon as someone expresses his opinion about any work, we are dealing with elements of literary criticism.
Works containing such elements include
- The word of a kind old man about reading books (included in the Izbornik of 1076, sometimes erroneously called Svyatoslav's Izbornik);
- Metropolitan Hilarion's Sermon on Law and Grace, where there is an examination of the Bible as a literary text;
- The word about Igor's Campaign, where at the beginning the intention to sing with new words, and not as usual "boyanov", is declared - an element of discussion with the "boyan", a representative of the previous literary tradition;
- Lives of a number of saints who were the authors of significant texts;
- Letters from Andrei Kurbsky to Ivan the Terrible, where Kurbsky reproaches the Terrible with too much concern for the color of the word, about weaving words.
Significant names of this period are Maxim the Greek, Simeon Polotsky, Avvakum Petrov (literary works), Melety Smotrytsky.
18th century
For the first time in Russian literature, the word "critic" was used by Antioch Kantemir in 1739 in the satire "Education". Also in French - critique. In Russian spelling, it will come into frequent use in the middle of the 19th century.
Literary criticism begins to develop along with the advent of literary magazines. The first such journal in Russia was Monthly Works for the Benefit and Amusement of Employees (1755). N. M. Karamzin, who preferred the genre of monographic reviews, is considered the first Russian author who turned to the review.
Characteristic features of the literary controversy of the XVIII century:
- linguo-stylistic approach to literary works (the main attention is paid to the errors of the language, mainly the first half of the century, especially characteristic of the speeches of Lomonosov and Sumarokov);
- normative principle (characteristic of the dominant classicism);
- taste principle (put forward at the very end of the century by sentimentalists).
19th century
The historical-critical process takes place mainly in the relevant sections of literary magazines and other periodicals, therefore it is closely connected with the journalism of this period. In the first half of the century, criticism was dominated by such genres as replica, response, note, later the problematic article and review became the main ones. Of great interest are the reviews of A. S. Pushkin - these are short, elegantly and literary, polemical works, testifying to the rapid development of Russian literature. The second half is dominated by the genre of a critical article or a series of articles approaching a critical monograph.
Belinsky and Dobrolyubov, along with "annual reviews" and major problematic articles, also wrote reviews. In Otechestvennye Zapiski, Belinsky for several years led the column "Russian Theater in St. Petersburg", where he regularly gave reports on new performances.
Sections of criticism of the first half of the 19th century are formed on the basis of literary movements (classicism, sentimentalism, romanticism). In criticism of the second half of the century, literary characteristics are supplemented by socio-political ones. In a special section, one can single out writer's criticism, which is distinguished by great attention to the problems of artistic skill.
At the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries, industry and culture were actively developing. Compared with the middle of the 19th century, censorship is significantly weakened, and the level of literacy is growing. Thanks to this, many magazines, newspapers, new books are published, their circulation is increasing. Literary criticism is also flourishing. Among the critics there are a large number of writers and poets - Annensky, Merezhkovsky, Chukovsky. With the advent of silent cinema, film criticism was born. Before the revolution of 1917, several magazines with film reviews were published.
20th century
A new cultural surge occurs in the mid-1920s. The civil war is over, and the young state gets the opportunity to engage in culture. These years saw the heyday of the Soviet avant-garde. They create Malevich, Mayakovsky, Rodchenko, Lissitzky. Science is also developing. The largest tradition of Soviet literary criticism in the first half of the 20th century. - formal school - is born precisely in the mainstream of strict science. Eikhenbaum, Tynyanov and Shklovsky are considered its main representatives.
Insisting on the autonomy of literature, the idea of independence of its development from the development of society, rejecting the traditional functions of criticism - didactic, moral, socio-political - the formalists went against Marxist materialism. This led to the end of avant-garde formalism during the years of Stalinism, when the country began to turn into a totalitarian state.
In the subsequent 1928-1934. the principles of socialist realism, the official style of Soviet art, are formulated. Criticism becomes a punitive tool. In 1940, the journal Literary Critic was closed, and the section of criticism in the Writers' Union was disbanded. Now criticism had to be directed and controlled directly by the party. All newspapers and magazines have columns and sections of criticism.
Famous Russian literary critics of the past
| | | next lecture ==> | |
"Each era of Russian literature had its own consciousness of itself, expressed in criticism," wrote V. G. Belinsky. It is difficult to disagree with this judgment. Russian criticism is a phenomenon as bright and unique as Russian classical literature. It has been repeatedly noted that criticism, being synthetic in nature, played an enormous role in the social life of Russia. Critical articles by V. G. Belinsky, A. A. Grigoriev, A. V. Druzhinin, N. A. Dobrolyubov, D. I. Pisarev and many others contained not only a detailed analysis of works, their images, ideas, artistic features ; Behind the fate of literary heroes, behind the artistic picture of the world, critics sought to see the most important moral and social problems of the time, and not only see, but sometimes even offer their own ways to solve these problems.
The articles of Russian critics had and continue to have a significant impact on the spiritual and moral life of society. It is no coincidence that they have long been included in the school curriculum. However, for many decades, in literature lessons, students mainly got acquainted with radical criticism - with articles by V. G. Belinsky, N. G. Chernyshevsky, N. A. Dobrolyubov, D. I. Pisarev and a number of other authors. At the same time, a critical article was most often perceived as a source of quotations, with which schoolchildren generously "decorated" their essays.
Such an approach to the study of Russian classics formed stereotypes of artistic perception, greatly simplified and impoverished the picture of the development of Russian literature, which was distinguished by fierce ideological and aesthetic disputes.
Only recently, thanks to the appearance of a number of serial publications and in-depth literary studies, has our vision of the development of Russian literature and criticism become more voluminous and multifaceted. Articles by N. M. Karamzin, K. N. Batyushkov, P. A. Vyazemsky, I. V. Kireevsky, N. I. Nadezhdin, A. A. Grigoriev, N. N. Strakhov and other prominent Russian writers. The complex, dramatic quests of critics of the 19th and early 20th centuries, differing in their artistic and social convictions, are recreated in the Library of Russian Criticism series. Modern readers have finally got the opportunity to get acquainted not only with the "pinnacle" phenomena in the history of Russian criticism, but also with many other, no less striking phenomena. At the same time, our understanding of the "tops", of the scale of significance of many critics, has been significantly refined.
It seems that the practice of school teaching should also form a more voluminous idea of how Russian literature of the 19th century was reflected in the mirror of domestic criticism. It is important that the young reader begin to perceive criticism as an organic part of Literature. After all, Literature in the broadest sense is the art of the word, embodied both in a work of art and in literary criticism. A critic is always a bit both an artist and a publicist. A talented critical article necessarily contains a powerful fusion of the moral and philosophical reflections of its author with subtle and deep observations on the literary text.
The study of a critical article yields very little if its main points are taken as a kind of dogma. It is important for the reader to emotionally and intellectually experience everything said by the critic, to think about the logic of his thought, to determine the measure of evidence of the arguments put forward by him.
The critic offers his own reading of a work of art, reveals his perception of the work of a particular writer. Often a critical article makes you rethink a work or artistic image. Some judgments and assessments in a talentedly written article can become a real discovery for the reader, and something may seem erroneous or controversial to him. It is especially fascinating to compare different points of view about the same work or work of a particular writer. This always provides rich material for thought.
This anthology contains the works of the leading representatives of Russian literary-critical thought of the 19th and early 20th centuries, from N. M. Karamzin to V. V. Rozanov. Many editions, according to which the texts of articles are printed, have become a bibliographic rarity.
The reading book will allow you to look at Pushkin's work through the eyes of I. V. Kireevsky and V. G. Belinsky, A. A. Grigoriev and V. V. Rozanov, to get acquainted with how the poem "Dead Souls" was perceived differently by Gogol's contemporaries - V. G. Belinsky, K. S. Aksakov, S. P. Shevyrev, how the characters of Griboedov's comedy "Woe from Wit" were assessed by the critics of the second half of the 19th century. Readers will be able to compare their perception of Goncharov's novel "Oblomov" with the way it was interpreted in the articles by D. I. Pisarev and D. S. Merezhkovsky, see in Ostrovsky's plays, thanks to the work of A. V. Druzhinin, not only penetrating into it with lonely light "rays", but the many-sided and multi-colored world of Russian national life.
For many, the articles of L. Tolstoy's contemporaries about his work will undoubtedly become a discovery. The main signs of L. Tolstoy's talent - the ability to show the "dialectics of the soul" of his heroes, the "purity of moral feeling" - were one of the first to identify and reveal N. G. Chernyshevsky. As for N. N. Strakhov's articles on "War and Peace", it can be rightfully asserted that in domestic literary criticism there are few works that can be placed next to them in terms of the depth of penetration into L. Tolstoy's intention, in terms of accuracy and subtlety of observations above the text. The critic believed that the writer "gave us a new Russian formula for the heroic life", for the first time after Pushkin he was able to display the Russian ideal - the ideal of "simplicity, goodness and truth."
Of particular interest are the reflections of critics on the fate of Russian poetry collected in the anthology. The problems posed in the articles by K. N. Batyushkov and V. A. Zhukovsky, V. G. Belinsky and V. N. Maikov, V. P. Botkin and I. S. Aksakov, V. S. Solovyov and V. V. Rozanova. Here we will find original judgments about the genres of "light poetry" and the principles of translation that have not lost their significance, we will see the desire to penetrate the "holy of holies" of poetry - the poet's creative laboratory, to understand the specifics of expressing thoughts and feelings in a lyrical work. And how true, how vividly the creative individuality of Pushkin, Lermontov, Koltsov, Fet, Tyutchev and A. K. Tolstoy is defined in these publications!
It is noteworthy that the result of difficult searches and often fierce disputes was the desire of critics at the beginning of the 20th century to "return" Russian culture to Pushkin, to Pushkin's harmony and simplicity. Proclaiming the need for a "return to Pushkin", V.V. Rozanov wrote: "I would like him to become a friend in every Russian family ... Pushkin's mind protects from everything stupid, his nobility protects from everything vulgar, the versatility of his soul and interests that occupied him guard against what might be called "an early specialization of the soul."
We hope that the anthology will become an indispensable guide to the works of outstanding Russian artists of the word, will help to truly understand these works, compare the various ways of interpreting them, and discover in the read what went unnoticed or initially seemed unimportant and secondary.
Literature is the whole universe. Her "suns" and "planets" had their own satellites - literary critics caught in the orbit of their inevitable attraction. And how we would like that not only the classics of Russian literature, but also these critics, we could call our eternal companions.
All writers fall into two categories. The first includes the creators of literary works. To the second - those who dedicate critical articles to these works. There is also a third category, which includes people who cannot write, but highly respect this creative process. But in today's article we will not talk about them. We have to understand what criticism is. What is it for? What is the job of a literary critic?
Definition
What is literary criticism? It is impossible to answer this question in two words. It is a rich, varied concept. Writers and scholars have repeatedly tried to define literary criticism, but each of them got their own, author's. Consider the origin of the word.
What is "criticism"? This is a word of Latin origin, which translates as "judgment". The Romans borrowed it from the Hellenes. In ancient Greek there is a word κρίνω, meaning "to judge", "to pass judgment". Giving a general definition of criticism, it is worth saying that it can be not only literary, but also musical. In every field of art there are people who create works, and those who analyze and evaluate them.
There are professions such as restaurant critic, theater critic, film critic, art critic, photo critic and so on. Representatives of these specialties are by no means idle observers and idle talkers. Not everyone can analyze and analyze a work, whether it be literature, painting or cinema. This requires certain knowledge and skills.
Musical critic
This profession arose not so long ago - only in the 19th century. Of course, even before that there were people who talked about music and devoted their notes to this topic. But only with the advent of the periodical press appeared specialists who could already be called music critics. They wrote treatises no longer on general humanitarian and philosophical topics, mentioning from time to time the work of this or that composer. They occupied a hitherto free niche.
What is music criticism? It is an analysis and evaluation based on deep knowledge and experience. This is a specialty that is acquired in a higher educational institution. In order to become a critic in this area, one must first graduate from a music school, then a specialized school, then enter a university, for example, the Tchaikovsky Conservatory, the Faculty of History and Theory. As you can see, acquiring this profession is not easy.
The emergence of criticism
The foundations of this science originated in ancient Greece. In antiquity, of course, there were no theorists who zealously controlled the literary process. Athenian citizens did not gather in the square to listen to a literary critic's treatise, smashing Aeschylus' Oresteia or Euripides' Medea to smithereens. But the long, lengthy reasoning of Aristotle and Plato is nothing more than an attempt to understand why a person needs art, according to what laws it exists and what it should be.
Goals of criticism
The ground for the emergence and development of this science is the emergence of literary texts. What is criticism? This is something that cannot exist without fiction. The critic in his work pursues the following goals:
- Identification of contradictions.
- Analysis, discussion.
- Error detection.
- Scientific verification of historical accuracy.
Every year a great number of literary works are created. The most talented of them find their readers. However, it often happens that a work devoid of any literary value arouses considerable interest. Literary critics do not impose their opinions on readers, but they have a huge influence on their perception.
Once upon a time, an unknown writer from Little Russia appeared in the literary field. His small, romantic stories were worthy of attention, but it cannot be said that they were read out. The work of the young writer received a resonance in society with the light hand of an eminent critic. His name was Vissarion Belinsky. Novice writer - Nikolai Gogol.
Criticism in Russia
The name of Vissarion Belinsky is known to everyone from the school curriculum. This man had a huge influence on the work of many writers who later became classics.
In Russia, literary criticism was formed in the 18th century. In the 19th century, it acquired a magazine character. Critics increasingly began to touch upon philosophical topics in their articles. The analysis of a work of art has become a pretext for reflection on the problems of real life. In the Soviet era, especially in the twenties of the last century, there was a process of destruction of the traditions of aesthetic criticism.
Critic and writer
It is easy to guess that the relationship between them is not going too smoothly. There is an inevitable antagonism between the critic and the writer. This antagonism is exacerbated when the creation of literary texts and their consideration are influenced by ambition, the desire for superiority, and other factors. A critic is a person with a literary education who analyzes a work of art without regard to political and personal predilections.
Domestic history knows many cases when criticism was in the service of power. This is exactly what is told in Bulgakov's world-famous novel The Master and Margarita. The writer has repeatedly faced unscrupulous critics. In real life, he could not take revenge on them. The only thing left for him was to create unsightly images of Latunsky and Lavrovich, typical critics of the 1920s. On the pages of his novel, Bulgakov took revenge on his offenders. But this did not change the situation. Many prose writers and poets still continued to "write" on the table. Not because their works were untalented, but because they did not correspond to the official ideology.
Literature without criticism
It should not be assumed that critics are only engaged in exalting or destroying the work of this or that author. They in some way control the literary process, and without their intervention it would not have developed. A real artist must adequately respond to criticism. Moreover, he needs it. A writer who is convinced of the high artistic value of his creations and does not listen to the opinions of his colleagues is more likely not a writer, but a graphomaniac.
