On May 25, 2016, at the 1st Congress of the Society of Russian Literature, a meeting of the section “Teaching the Russian language and literature in universities as strategic priority educational policy in multinational state". The organizers and moderators of the section were Dr. philological sciences, Professor, Vice-Rector of Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov T.V. Kortava and Doctor of Philology, Professor, Dean of the Faculty of Philology of the Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Herzen N.L. Shubin.
The meeting of the section "Teaching Russian language and literature in universities as a strategic priority of educational policy in a multinational state" was attended by 72 people from 53 educational, scientific and public organizations.
Among them are members of the Russian Language Council under the President of the Russian Federation, the Federal Educational and Methodological Association for Linguistics and Literary Studies, headed by Academician L.A. Verbitskaya, representatives of Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, St. Petersburg State University, six federal universities (North Caucasian, Crimean, Far Eastern, Southern, Baltic, Northeastern), leading national research and classical universities ( graduate School Economics, Moscow Pedagogical State University, Saratov State University named after N.G. Chernyshevsky, Voronezh State University, Ryazan State University named after S.A. Yesenin, Mari State University, Syktyvkar State University named after Pitirim Sorokin, Moscow State Linguistic University, All-Russian State University of Justice, Perm State University, Oryol State University, Academy of Civil Protection of the Ministry of Emergency Situations of Russia, Moscow City open university, Bashkir State University, Kostroma State University named after N.A. Nekrasov, Yaroslavsky state university named after P.G. Demidov, Russian the University of Economics named after G.V. Plekhanov, Russian University Friendship of Peoples, Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Herzen and others).
At the meeting of the section, 20 reports were made, including the report of the rector of the North Caucasian Federal University A.A. Levitskaya and the rector of the North Ossetian State Pedagogical Institute L.A. Kuchieva.
May 26, 2016 in the Hall of Columns with the participation of the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin hosted a plenary session of the 1st Congress of the Society of Russian Literature chaired by Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus'.
WITH welcome speech speaker State Duma RF S.E. Naryshkin and Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation D.V. Livanov.
The Presidium of the Society of Russian Literature, consisting of 75 members, was elected at the plenary session. Among them, the rector of the Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, Academician V.A. Sadovnichiy, Rector of St. Petersburg State University Professor N.M. Kropachev, rector of the Moscow state institution International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Academician A.V. Torkunov, Rector of the Moscow State University of Printing Arts named after Ivan Fedorov Professor K.V. Antipov, I. O. rector Literary Institute named after A.M. Gorky Professor A.N. Varlamov, I. O. rector of the Moscow State Linguistic University I.V. Manokhin.
The composition of the Bureau of the Society of Russian Literature is 13 people, including Academician A.V. Torkunov.
Dedicated to the creation of the Society of Russian Literature. His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus' made a presentation.
Society of Russian Literature
About existing initiatives
Despite the difficulties that our country is experiencing today, much is being done to draw attention to cultural life our people. In my opinion, very creative undertakings and projects appear, and many of them are based on the experience of their predecessors, who jointly achieved important results in areas that are significant for society. Thus, in 2012, the efforts of the state, scientists and public figures revived the Russian historical society, which was before the revolution the locomotive of studying and popularizing national history. Four years ago, the Russian Military Historical Society was created, educating the younger generation on the examples of the military prowess of our ancestors. The activities of the Russian Geographical and many other scientific societies are actively developing.
In 1992, at the initiative of Academician D.S. Likhachev, the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature was revived, the meetings of which began to be held in the House-Museum of Marina Tsvetaeva. The society was active largely due to the extraordinary energy and enthusiasm of its secretary Raisa Nikolaevna Kleimenova. But, unfortunately, after her death in 2010, the organization practically ceased its activities, at least visible across the country.
Join forces
Given the scale of the changes that have taken place over these six years in our society and education, I consider it appropriate and timely to give the Society of Lovers of Literature new life filling its agenda with consideration of urgent tasks. And we have gathered today to unite our efforts in preserving perhaps the most important segments of the national heritage - literature and the Russian language, which are a reliable foundation for the successful development of Russia not only in the 21st century, but, if God bless human history, for many centuries to come. Of course, both the Russian language and literature should be perceived as the most important elements of the national education system.
traditional school
The traditional Russian school is an integral part Russian civilization, the main forming beginning of which historically is the spiritual and moral criterion, the spiritual and moral basis. As the Primate of the Church, I cannot fail to note that our civilization has largely grown from the Christian understanding of the essence of being, from Orthodox faith, educating the beauty of the people's soul, which is captured in Russian literature and art. Cultivating love for a virtuous life from the very beginning early childhood formed the basis of pedagogy. Surprisingly - a virtuous life as an indispensable condition for the formation of personality! The agreement of the spiritual principles of education in the family and school was the key to successful moral education the younger generation, and there was no opposition - what was taught at school, that was taught at home.
Domestic education assumed the development, as they used to say in the old days, of “the mind and abilities of the soul” with the help, on the one hand, exact sciences, especially highlighting mathematics, and on the other - the Russian language, classical literature, history, ancient and new languages, the Law of God. All this formed a healthy national identity, a high level of morality and, as a result, loyalty to their homeland.
Similar associations existed in Russia before. As I said today, in 1811 the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature was formed in Russia, with the goal of "contributing to the success of domestic literature as the main means of spreading enlightenment." At the meetings of the Society, F.I. presented their first experiments. Tyutchev and A.I. Polezhaev. One of the founders of the Society, Vasily Lvovich Pushkin, read the poems of his nephew Alexander at the meetings. Through the efforts of the Society, which brought together scientists and writers, statesmen and public figures, over the 119 years of its existence, thousands of outstanding works Russians literary critics and linguists, domestic philological education has become one of the most successful in the world, and deep learning the best works Russian literature is firmly established in school education. Here is a great example public initiative and development of the school as a state institution. Thanks to this, despite all the trials and changes that befell Russian society in the Soviet period, it was possible to maintain and develop highest culture and not to lose the continuity with the thousand-year-old national tradition.
The School That Survived “Laboratory Methods”
The domestic school of the Soviet period, having experienced separation from the Church, experienced the introduction of a “class approach” to education, of various kinds. laboratory methods» training, which my mother told me with horror. As far as I remember, it was about the fact that not everyone prepares for the lessons individually, but “laboratory”, that is, all together. This means that someone was placing commas, and someone at that time was chasing pigeons or doing other important things. As a result, someone knew something, but, in general, the generation that studied in schools in the 20s and early 30s was illiterate, including literary illiterate. However, in the pre-war years they returned to the pre-revolutionary tradition of education, at least they took decisive steps. The principles of scientific and systemic nature in education, an orientation towards a harmoniously developed personality, began to be affirmed again. Soviet high school began to structurally correspond to the imperial gymnasium, borrowing a lot from it, including the completeness of teaching general education disciplines.
Any Soviet schoolboy could easily read Tatyana's letter by heart, an excerpt from Borodino, quote Griboedov, Dostoevsky, Nekrasov, Tolstoy, Gorky, which I recently became convinced of while walking along the embankment of the Strait of Magellan before a trip to Antarctica and talking with members of the delegation. We vied with each other quoting the "Song of the Petrel" - after all, even the elderly had something left from those very years of schooling. Reading these works, comprehending them, children got to know the world, they formed ideas about good and evil, about truth and lies, about decency and crime, assimilated the experience of previous generations, developed a culture of speech and thinking, acquired artistic taste; finally, they were involved in national history.
Literature and cultural self-identification of a person
In Russia, literature has traditionally been entrusted with a special high mission in the field of intellectual, aesthetic, spiritual and moral development of the individual. Our predecessors understood that native language and literature participate in the formation of the cultural self-identification of the individual, provide a connection with the history of the native people, with previous generations. Without this connection, cultural and, therefore, value continuity is destroyed. After all, a people is a community of people, not only living people, but also a community of present and past generations. The concept of "people" unites people both horizontally - living today, and historically vertically.
What has been said is true, but not only in relation to the Russian language and literature, but also in general in relation to the school as a concept and institution.
I will not hide the fact that I am worried about the growing number of appeals from various people - parents and teachers, cultural figures and scientists who are sounding the alarm in connection with a sharp drop in the knowledge of schoolchildren, especially in the field of literature and the Russian language. Literacy is rapidly declining - to be convinced of this, it is enough to read posts in social networks. We are happy to welcome the return of the practice of writing essays to the school, but we cannot yet call the situation in education rosy. We have ceased to be, as I said, one of the most reading countries, and the USE score in the Russian language has been reduced.
What does this indicate and what consequences can this have? Of course, a schoolchild who does not know his own language and does not join the national culture and, first of all, literature, breaks away from his roots. It is more difficult for him to realize and even more so to feel ownership of the same historical vertical with his people, with the great events of the past, to share moral, spiritual and cultural ideals with national heroes and prominent personalities.
Modern society is accustomed to saying that the younger generation is individualistic, pragmatic, has poor command of words, and does not like to read. I have to communicate with young people, and I see how their eyes light up when you talk about examples from the past, including literary examples when they suddenly learn something that, unfortunately, they did not learn at school. There is a lively interest in all this, but it cannot be otherwise. We must not rule out that genetic inheritance endures not only physical or mental potencies, but also inclinations and even ideals formed by previous generations. So what needs to be done to open these potencies? We need to help children, and I think it is very important that this help starts at school, including the development of a serious approach to teaching the Russian language and literature.
I believe that the Society being created, consisting, among other things, of well-known specialists in the field of the Russian language and literature, will be able to contribute to solving the problems that the school faces in the field of teaching these disciplines. It is known that today some ideas are offered for public discussion that have both their supporters and opponents. It is good that different ideas are being put forward, but it is very important that there is a place that is neutral and supportive enough to allow competent and respectful discussion so that solutions can be reached that are in line with the aspirations of many people, solutions that will really help our schools to overcome the undoubted crisis and reach the level of teaching the Russian language and literature, which will in many ways contribute not only to the revival, but also to the further progressive development of our culture and, perhaps most importantly, the progressive moral and spiritual development of the individual so that future generations Russians were able to distinguish good from evil, truth from falsehood, decency from crime, so that they were able to build a peaceful, just and prosperous country. And may God help us in this.
Resolution of the Constituent Assembly of the Society of Russian Literature
1. Problems of teaching literature and the Russian language in modern Russian school raised in the reports and discussions at the founding meeting of the Society of Russian Literature require broad professional and public discussion.
2. A decision was made to establish the Society of Russian Literature.
3. Goals and objectives of the society:
Consolidation of the efforts of scientists, teachers, cultural figures, the general public to maintain the leading role of literature and the Russian language in educating the younger generation, strengthening a single cultural and educational space, developing the best traditions of the national liberal education, cultural and educational activities.
4. The participants of the meeting come up with the initiative to hold a congress of teachers of literature and the Russian language and a forum of the parent community in order to develop an agreed position on the most acute and topical issues school philological education.
5. At the next meeting of the Society of Russian Literature, present the results of a professional and public discussion of the identified problems related to the teaching of literature and the Russian language in modern Russian schools.
Press Service of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'
Everyone knows such milestones in Russian culture as the dictionary of V.I.Dal, the monument to A.S. Pushkin in Moscow, the monument to N.V. Gogol by N.A. Andreeva. It would seem, what do they have in common? This commonality is often not named in studies on these subjects, which is especially offensive. And what they have in common is that the dictionary was published by the Society of Lovers of Russian (Russian) Literature, the celebration of the opening of the monument to Pushkin in 1880 with the famous speeches of Dostoevsky and Turgenev was also organized by the Society. And for the monument to Gogol, it also raised money, participated in organizing a competition for the design of the monument, and was looking for a place to install it. For this alone, the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature deserves attention and respect. The contribution of the Society to the development of Russian culture and literature remains, unfortunately, still poorly understood.
OLRS arose in 1811 at the turn of Russian literature to a new direction, to new forms in a changing general cultural process. It saw its goal in creating a "sane" literature. To do this, it began to study the heritage of Russian literature from Lomonosov, since it believed that modern Russian culture began precisely with him. It dealt with the problems of the Russian language, collected materials for various dictionaries.
In the dispute about the Russian language, which at that time played big role in the development of culture, the Society did not act either on the side of A.S. Shishkov, or on the side of N.M. Karamzin, since they saw the truth somewhere in the middle. From the first years of its existence to the last, it never came out with a sharp criticism of the work of this or that writer. It recognized the talent of its contemporaries, but left the final assessment for later, chose as its members the opponents of Shishkov and Karamzin, the classicists and romantics. Society was repeatedly reproached for not appreciating Pushkin's work during his lifetime, that "it did not keep pace with the rapid pace of Russian literature." But it didn't want to. Only a few decades later, after the opening of a monument to Pushkin in Moscow in 1880, the Society began a campaign to canonize Pushkin. One of the founders of the Society, its main ideologist A.F. Merzlyakov, wept over Pushkin’s writings, felt how wonderful it was, but he could not give them a sober assessment, bring them under the rules known to him, he could not ...
In 1836, when the Society turned 25, its life came to a standstill, although it would seem that everything should have been the other way around. Russian literature at that time already had Batyushkov, Zhukovsky, almost all of Pushkin, Gogol, ending with The Government Inspector. And at the meetings, as before, the appendices of the psalms were read, the innocent poetic exercises of the members. The society made attempts to revive its activity, which had declined after the Decembrist uprising. N.I. Nadezhdin even drew up a plan according to which, again, everything had to be started with M.V. Lomonosov, but the publication by Nadezhdin of “Philosophical Letter” by P.Ya. The Society did not enjoy the support of the university management either. A.E. Gruzinsky, assessing the activities of the Society for the first period in 1911, said: “The biggest literary novelties read in 25 years were excerpts from the Gnedich Iliad, a number of Krylov’s fables, scenes from Yuri Miloslavsky Zagoskin. Among the huge number of Shatrovs, Salarevs, Smirnovs, Filippovs, Kokoshkin, Merzlyakov, and V.L. Zhukovsky from less significant, and early translations from Horace F.I. Tyutchev 1816-1819. ... For 25 years, it has not moved a single step forward. The whole flowering of our fiction. Chained for 25 years to cherished dream to publish an ode to Lomonosov, it did not notice either Pushkin or Gogol. You can be sure that Lomonosov himself would not have approved of this.” But the meaning of the Society in this period was different. It began a systematic study of Russian literature, its language, it created the environment, the soil on which talents grew. The pupils of the boarding school, university students were involved in the work of the Society, were accepted there by employees. Among them was a pupil of the University noble boarding school F.I. Tyutchev and a student A.I. Polezhaev.
The 27 volumes of works published by the Society played a significant role in the development of philological science. They contain materials for dictionaries, discussions about the problems of Russian grammar, the Slavic language, the history of Russian literature and literary experiments contemporaries of Pushkin, reflecting the level of literature over which the poet ascended. We should not forget the work of the members of the Society in publishing the speeches of the professors of Moscow University, delivered in Russian. This publication is also a kind of milestone in Russian culture. It put an end to the dispute over which language to teach at the university - in Russian, or German, or Latin. The publication showed that the Russian language has reached the height that makes it possible to teach any science.
In the second period of its activity (1858-1877), both in the previous and subsequent ones, the Society saw its main purpose in the study of the past. It again dreamed of publishing Lomonosov's works, but due to a lack of funds, this dream was never realized. At that time, the Society was headed by Slavophiles or persons close to them in terms of views, which left its mark on its activities. literary movement, unfolding in the 60s of the century before last in St. Petersburg, was not reflected in the activities of the Society. It deliberately moved away from him. As a result, both in the first period and in the second, the Society was unable to create anything significant in the criticism that it wanted to see "sound and harmless." The society took upon itself such an important task in the Slavophile current as the study of the people, namely their folklore, their language. The result of this was the publication of ten editions of songs collected by P.V. Kireevsky, a dictionary by V.I. Dal. With the help of the Society, several more folklore collections are being published at this time. The society did not lock itself into one Slavophile direction. All well-known writers were admitted to its members: A.N. Ostrovsky, A.N. Maikov, F.I. Tyutchev, L.N. Tolstoy, I.S. Turgenev, A.A. , M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, A.K. Tolstoy, I.A. Goncharov, F.M. Dostoevsky. Society welcomed A.F. Pisemsky, who was expelled from St. Petersburg. The society preserved its literary traditions, cultivating in respect for them numerous visitors to its public meetings. The Society began its second period with the struggle for freedom of speech, for the sake of serving which it arose. In order to speak freely without being subjected to censorship, it even refused to publish its own works, which, according to the new censorship charter, were to be censored.
A milestone in the life of the Society was a dispute about literature in 1858 between L.N. Tolstoy and the chairman of the Society A.S. Khomyakov about the meaning artistic element in literature. In 1911, Tolstoy's speech had not yet been found, and the literary critic A.E. Gruzinsky regrets this in his review of the activities of the OLRS. Then, in the 1920s, while working on the collected works of L.N. Tolstoy, A.E. Gruzinsky would find it in the archive and carefully rewrite it. The second period, according to Gruzinsky, was closer to modern literature: “Moscow for the first time heard a number of poems by K. Aksakov in these meetings ... Fet, Pleshcheev, Maikov, A. Tolstoy, Ostrovsky’s new things, scenes from all of Pisemsky’s new novels and dramas , starting with “The Troubled Sea”, from several works by L. Tolstoy”2. Gruzinsky also noted the "brilliant" reviews of the literature by Khomyakov, MN Longinov, Kotlyarevsky, Buslaev. But even during this period of its activity, the Society was not at the forefront of the literary struggle. It seemed to be watching the modern literary process from the outside, while it was itself directed to the past, to the study of archives, to their collection, to the study of folklore. At the meetings of the Society, they constantly talked about the importance of collecting materials about their contemporaries, about their significance for the further study of Russian culture. From the first years of its existence to the last years of its existence, the Society has never acted with sharp criticism of the work of this or that writer. It recognized the talent of its contemporaries, but left the final assessment for later.
The third period (1878-1910) was distinguished by a qualitatively different nature of the Society's activities. It can be titled "From the monument to Pushkin to the monument to Gogol." The opening of the monument to Pushkin in 1880 and the opening of the monument to Gogol in 1909 are two peaks in the life of the Society. In 1880, the Society did a great job of convening all the writers of Russia for the holiday, and invited guests from abroad. The holiday was a success. Speeches famous writers, especially Dostoevsky and Turgenev, the feeling of freedom inspired the holiday, forced to talk about it, remember it forever. Much has been done here for the first time. For the first time they started talking about the unity of writers. It was practically their first congress. Here began the canonization of Pushkin. For many who spoke about Pushkin for the first time, this topic has become a constant. The exhibition dedicated to the poet, organized for the first time by the Society, gave rise to many other exhibitions, which contributed to the preservation of a large number of memorial items and archives. The publication of albums and catalogs of these exhibitions consolidated, often collected for the first time and often completely unknown before, materials. At this celebration, Pushkin was placed first among Russian writers. And immediately a number of great Russian writers began to line up, who needed to erect a monument, who needed to be canonized. The first was the name of Gogol. At the Pushkin festival, it was decided to raise funds for a monument to Gogol. And the Society took on this mission. The celebration of the opening of the monument to Gogol in 1909 in terms of the number of invited guests, both Russian and foreign, was much larger than Pushkin's. Russian literature received international recognition. These two holidays, organized by the Society, attracted the attention of all thinking Russia, made them realize what heights Russian literature and Russian culture had reached.
In the late 19th - early 20th century, the Society felt confident. It lined up Lermontov, Zhukovsky, Griboedov and many others in line with Pushkin and Gogol. In addition to scientific meetings, it began to arrange paid literary and musical evenings, and attracted artists to its work. The growing revolutionary events influenced the choice of the problems studied by the Society. The study of the role of literature in the liberation movement was brought to the fore. The society moved away from the Slavophil direction, although the study of folklore continued, although not on such a large scale as in the 60s and 70s.
In the 1890s, it became finally clear that Belinsky entered the consciousness of most of the educated Russia. OLRS put him in the first place in criticism, celebrating in 1898 the 50th anniversary of his death. Society regretted that these celebrations did not become all-Russian because of the government's refusal to support them. Society was unable to isolate itself from the revolutionary events. It supported student unrest and protested against the arrest of writers. Its chairman was called to the police about the speeches of some of its members, it had to notify the police about the programs of its meetings, gendarmes were sent to its meetings. The society was not allowed to hold some public meetings, and it was forced to make them closed with guests, that is, without inviting students. Nevertheless, the Society managed to get through all these drinkings without great losses.
The main thing for the Society at the end of the century before last was the popularization of great Russian writers. Its meetings were attended by all segments of the population. Special readings were organized for the lower strata. Society sought to ensure that the name of Pushkin was known to all the people, it was then that he would be truly popular. Three works by Pushkin were published specially for the general population - "Boris Godunov", "Eugene Onegin", "Poltava". The work of writers was also popularized with the help of literary and musical evenings organized by the Society. Many of its members were contemporary writers, whose works were heard more than once at its meetings, for example, L. Tolstoy, I.A. Bunin. A.P. Chekhov was even chosen as temporary chairman.
In the fourth period of its activity (1910-1930), the Society entered the apogee of its glory. It enjoyed prestige both in Russia and abroad. On its 100th anniversary, it summed up the results of the path traveled. It is quite enough. The society managed to pass through the revolutionary storms. The Chairman of the Society since 1921, P.N. Sakulin, said that the Society saw a necessary stage in the revolution historical development country, which opens up broad prospects for scientists and writers, that the Society lives in a period when there is a rapid change of trends in literature, a critical review of the main issues in science and literature, and a conscious and firm self-determination is required from the Society. Sakulin and many of the remaining members of the Society believed that the revolution opened the way to the realization of those ideals that Russian literature had long cherished, "freedom-loving and people-loving Russian literature."
I.A. Bunin, K.D. Balmont, M.N. Minsky, V.A. Gilyarovsky, B.K. Zaitsev, D.S. Merezhkovsky, Vas.I. Nemirovich-Danchekno, S.G.Skitalets, I.N.Potapenko, V.V.Veresaev, N.D.Teleshov, V.Ya.Bryusov, I.S.Shmelev and many others. After the revolution, F. Gladkov, L. Leonov, Bor. Pilnyak, Pant. Romanov, E. E. Nechaev, A. S. Neverov, M. P. Gerasimov were elected. A.E. Gruzinsky, P.N. Sakulin, N.K. Piksanov, N.L. Brodsky, M.O. Gershenzon, V.E. Ermilov, P.S. Kogan, V.L. .Lvov-Rogachevsky, N.M. Mendelson, N.P. Sidorov, A.A. Kizevetter, V.F. Savodnik, P.E. Shchegolev and many others. From 1910 to 1930, the works of Ostrovsky, Nikitin, I.S. Aksakov, Khomyakov, Belinsky, Dobrolyubov, Turgenev, Lermontov, Griboedov, Goncharov, L.N. Tolstoy, Zlatovratsky, Mamin-Sibiryak, Pomyalovsky, Ogaryov, E .P. Rostopchina, Stankevich, Saltykov-Shchedrin, Odoevsky, Herzen and many others. After the death, the Society commemorated L. Andreev, D.N. Ovsyaniko-Kulikovskiy, S.A. Vengerov, A.A. Blok, V.G. Korolenko, P.D. Boborykin, I.V. Bryusov, M.O. Gershenzon, N.A. Kotlyarevsky, S. Yesenin, etc. In 1918, the 100th anniversary of the birth of I.S. Turgenev was celebrated. The Society worked commissions - Pushkin, Turgenev, modern literature. The main theme was the study of Pushkin's legacy. The Society also participated in the opening of monuments to Herzen and Ogaryov, Ostrovsky, Zlatovratsky on Vagankovsky cemetery. Meetings, equal in scale to the meetings on the opening of monuments to Gogol and Pushkin, it has never held. All these responsibilities gradually passed into other hands.
Next to the OLRS, which united many prominent writers and scientists, and was the center literary life, numerous literary organizations are growing like mushrooms. The society maintained contacts with many of them. Its members were often their members as well. In the pre-revolutionary and post-revolutionary period, in the reigning confusion of styles and directions, the Society found its way. It did not abandon the legacy of the past and was in no hurry to stigmatize currents that for some reason did not like it, did not suit it. It listened to many, while trying to adhere to the historical and cultural school. It saw the richness of literature in the diversity of literary movements. Society, wise by experience, condescendingly looked at the statements of the young "throw" old literature from a modern steamer. The Society's centenary coincided with Mayakovsky's first performances. Society felt confident, it was in the midst of contemporary events, its interest in the past did not contradict the current course of the literary process. But the Society, willy-nilly, fell into that “junk” that Mayakovsky destroyed. He was convinced that a new life needed new forms and new content in art. But the war didn't work out. The Chairman of the Society P.N. Sakulin, there were cases, spoke on the side of Mayakovsky, defended him. Mayakovsky's arrival in June 1924 to a meeting of the Society, at which it welcomed Vyach. Ivanov, made the meeting more dynamic, the members of the Society listened to Mayakovsky's poems, as a result, everyone was satisfied with each other.
The "new life", which was welcomed by Mayakovsky and the Society of Russian Literature Lovers, in fact turned out to be not what the writers imagined it to be. main idea the Bolsheviks invested in it. The one-dimensional approach was most suitable for bringing their idea to life. socialist realism, officially proclaimed in 1934. In 1930, the “new life” no longer needed either Mayakovsky or the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature. And in one year, Mayakovsky died, two leaders of the Society, A.E. Gruzinsky and P.N. Sakulin, died. The Society, having managed to hold commemorative meetings dedicated to Mayakovsky and Gruzinsky, after the death of Sakulin in September 1930, no longer met, a new chairman was never elected.
The period from 1910 to 1930 was full of revolutionary events. This is the time when in Russia there was a radical change in life itself, in the minds of the people. Russian culture, literature, and philological science are characterized by an unusual rise and fall by the 1930s, by the time the Society ceased its activities. By 1930, everything that did not correspond to the depiction of historical reality in revolutionary development, the idea of art serving the working class, helping it to build socialism, and then communism, was practically expelled from art and literature. On this path, neither “sympathizers” nor “reforgings” were needed, everything that did not meet Bolshevik requirements. Neither an ardent defender of a new life, but not fitting into the framework allotted to him, Mayakovsky, nor the Society of Russian Literature Lovers adapting to new circumstances were needed. The process of sifting literature went so fast that twenty-seven years after the termination of its activity, the former member of the Society N.K. Gudziy asked with bewilderment: “We recognize that pre-October academic science in the field of exact, natural history disciplines, as well as technology, created great values, which we can be proud of, and when it comes to academic humanities, We for the most part We don't say anything in her favor. How did it happen that we were so weak in one of the most important areas of our culture? Are we not sacrificing our national pride in this case?”
The Society of Russian Literature Lovers did not run ahead of literature, it slowly followed it, collecting materials, archives, systematizing, putting everything in its place. The path of the Society is one of the ways of understanding the formation of Russian literature, Russian culture, and social thought.
The Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, revived in 1992, tries to follow the traditions of the previously existing Society. We are trying to "preserve the spiritual connection of times", to the best of our ability to popularize the enormous wealth accumulated in philological science, to fight for the purity of the Russian language. At the end of each month, we hold meetings mainly in the House-Museum of M. Tsvetaeva, but sometimes in other museums (V. I. Dahl, A. S. Pushkin, L. N. Tolstoy). The peculiarity of our meetings is that practically on every problem one can give an excursion into the history of its study in the Society.
More than twenty books have been published under the heading of OLRS, including: R.N. Kleymenov. Society of lovers of Russian literature. 1811-1930 (2002); Pushkin and OLRS (1999); IN AND. Dahl and OLRS (2002); Gogol and OLRS (2005).
The society unites teachers, librarians, scientists, professors of universities, museums, writers, poets and simply lovers of literature.
The main goal of our Society is seen in the study and popularization of philological science, Russian literature, the Russian language, in the association of lovers of Russian literature.
Record of meetings of the RLRS 1992–2003
Speech by F.F. Kokushkina on the influence of light poetry on the language
“The Ministry of Education vaguely represents
features of Russian civilization"
— The selection of books to read and study at school is far from a minor problem. This choice can be destructive for our entire society, or it can become strengthening, educating new generations in the best traditions of our people.
Starting from early childhood, books educate a growing person, lay the foundations of his personality. And this process should not be left to chance. For example, at Literaturnaya Gazeta we try to regularly give reviews and recommendations on children's literature. There were even special applications in children's and youth literature. But after all, the Union of Writers did a lot of this before. And the association for children's and youth literature was one of the most influential - it included the classics of children's literature. I still remember Lev Kassil, who headed this association. And, of course, the current hack would simply not slip past such people. But now, unfortunately, we call writers those who published a book. But these are different things. The writer is not the one who wrote something, but the one who can and should be read.
Of course, you can not neglect the classics. You can not give the opportunity to put some second-rate works into the program instead of them. Classic is the base. And these are books that capture the language norm. And, most importantly, they contain our national code.
After all, unfortunately, we have a lot of books, reading which, you will not understand where the author was born, where he lives.
The position of the Ministry of Education means a lot here. But this position is extremely flawed. In my opinion, the people working there have a very vague idea of the features of our Russian civilization. I have encountered this many times. And even there was once a scandal. I once asked a representative of the Ministry of Education: “Why did you include so many emigrant writers, and the third wave, in the list of literature recommended for schoolchildren? Not the first, when there was a revolution, a catastrophe, a forced separation from the Motherland, namely, the third, when people left on their own, simply because they did not like living here. And the official of the Ministry of Education says to me: “Does it really matter where the writer went and where he lives?” I was just indignant: “But what?! Who do you want to educate? A man who got an education here and then took a suitcase and went to Silicon Valley? Then let's include those who left. Because a writer who left of his own free will, even if he writes very well, will still show his attitude towards the country from which he left.
All these misunderstandings are not at all as harmless as they might seem. It is about the existence of language, literature, people.
«
80 percent of parents are unhappy
textbooks and programs on the Russian language and literature"
Alexey Vladimirovich Gusev , chairman of the coordinating council of the "National Parent Association social support family and protection family traditions" (Moscow):
— The Russian language is not just school subject but a living phenomenon, a fundamental value for the people. Too much in our lives depends on his condition and the level of teaching. And today there are many problems. But simple solutions No.
They often say: give us time on television, a special program on Channel One, let's call it, for example, "The Russian language is our everything." But in itself it will not give anything, will not solve anything. Children need to watch this show. And they are all on the Internet, and they play electronic games. And our information, our influence in this field is not. But this is exactly what is needed now.
Everyone knows the example when in Pushkin's book a 2-year-old child tries to push the picture apart with two fingers - as on a screen. This means that children from an early age perceive the world in modern formats. And we cannot be left behind – we need to use such formats, enter this field. And this is a serious struggle for our children, for our future.
We have something to offer children, we have something to educate them on. Take at least famous fairy tale « The Scarlet Flower"- not in an adapted version, but in original text. How much priceless lexical material is there that needs to be studied. Incidentally, this also applies to family relations, and vocabulary of family communication - with expressions such as "friend of the heart" and many others, sparkling like the edges of a diamond.
At the same time, one cannot ignore the global threats and challenges that exist in the world. Let's take the so-called "Creole languages", which are actively developing in different countries and are a mixture of local vocabulary with anglicisms and international slang. On the one hand, this leads to simplification of communication, on the other hand, to spiritual impoverishment. And this can be a huge danger for the language, for the national culture.
How can one not recall the words spoken at one time by Vladimir Dal: “Russian speech will have one of two things: either e utterly impossible, or, sensibly, turn to another path, taking with him all the stocks left in a hurry.
The situation is not easy right now. And the question of textbooks, the choice of works for schoolchildren, the level of teaching becomes very important. Here is the data of recent mass surveys among parents. It turned out that: 81 percent of respondents are not satisfied with the level of teaching Russian language and literature at school; resort to extra classes in these subjects, 72 percent; claims to textbooks and programs express more than 80 percent. By general opinion, when choosing works for study in schools, expertise is needed at three levels: academic, pedagogical and public.
The opinion of the vast majority of parents that the autonomization of schools has become a colossal blow to the unity of education in the country looks just as unanimous.
What can not be found in the lists of books that children go through lower grades different schools instead of studying good classic literature. Here and "Murder in the Rue Morgue" by Edgar Allan Poe, and the anonymous diary of a 15-year-old drug addict "Blue Grass", and numerous variations on the themes of orcs and goblins. Parents are sounding the alarm: urgent action is needed!
“This is a cry from the heart: parents in the ministry are not heard!”
Nadezhda Alekseevna Ilyukhina , Head of the Department of the Russian Language, Samara University named after S.P. Koroleva, Doctor of Philology (Samara):
- The situation is extremely alarming. And I just want to make a cry from the heart: they don’t hear us! The opinion of the parent community is ignored in educational policy. Now there is a vital need for a mechanism for communication between the public (civil society), teachers and the ministry.
And many problems today require joining the efforts of the family with the school. One of them is the impact of the Internet on language culture, or more precisely, on language security. The Internet can be used for good, but you need to learn it, clearly understand what and for whom it is intended. After all, the same thing can have completely different effects on different age groups. The so-called "Albanian language" for an adult, as a rule, is not dangerous. All these "preved", "handsome" and so on are used as a game communication format. But for the child it is harmful and dangerous. After all, as a result, he does not form the correct image of the word. And this undermines the basis of literacy.
Or take emoticons. For an adult, this is normal, it saves time. For a child, it's bad. After all, he no longer needs to memorize words and expressions (I am upset, satisfied, etc.), it is enough to hit the key with his finger.
So it turns out that many young people, including students, are unable to create a detailed text. This effect is exacerbated by the practice of the Unified State Examination, which dictates the methods of teaching the Russian language and provides a benchmark for tests.
We hardly notice that from our life, from communication, High style. We can say that he stayed only on May 9th. But for a normal harmonious life, this layer is necessary. Without it, we are poorer. And our spiritual culture is more flawed.
It so happened that colloquial and everyday speech prevails today. This is a dangerous twist. And in order to correct it, to prevent a further roll, a counterbalance is needed - it is necessary to teach children competent coherent speech, including necessarily written speech.
Elena Leontievna Gerasimova , head of the Perm regional center children's reading, Honored Worker of Culture of the Russian Federation (Perm):
I can say with complete certainty that family reading is a guarantor of the preservation of the Russian language, our national language culture. We did extensive research and found out that it is - main factor impact on the child from the family. The second factor is the home library. The third is the motivation of parents.
The choice of literature for family reading is not such an easy question. Poor awareness of parents about modern literature today is a very big problem. It's a pity that they usually don't know the capabilities of the library. And in this they need to be enlightened in every possible way.
And another very serious problem: parents do not have enough time for family reading. And why? There are few at home, they work a lot. In fact, they prioritize careers. They believe that by doing this they do a lot for children, provide them with material well-being and a future. But this is a dangerous delusion! Family communication, family education, family reading are vital and irreplaceable. Otherwise, there is a huge threat to the moral health of children, their cultural, spiritual development.
We understood that we need to create family reading programs. We accept parents of children 2-4 years old. Often, parents themselves do not know why, for example, read fairy tales to children. We recently discussed with one dad why to read Ryaba the Hen. He then talked a lot about it with his friends. And I came to the conclusion that this fairy tale is about the fact that everything must be given in due time, including the golden egg. Well, that might make sense. The main thing is to think, to arouse interest.
It is necessary to go to the Internet sites, where both children and young parents are present, to create websites, forums, and networks there. For example, we launched the Reading with Passion website for parents. One mother wrote the text “10 criteria for selecting books for children” there, now it is being very actively discussed and argued.
This opens up many interesting ways to introduce children to reading. There is, for example, such a feature of child psychology: children need to read for someone, then they are interested. Here we have Santa Claus or another coming from time to time fairy tale character and the children read aloud to him. With great pleasure! And if it’s just like that, then often you won’t force it.
“The last thing I read was traffic rules”
Tatyana Mikhailovna Barinova , Professor, Department of Primary and School Education, North-Eastern State University (Magadan):
— Global problem today - what does a child mean for a family, for parents. It turns out that young parents themselves do not always understand this well. They, who grew up in the 1990s, are often themselves brought up somehow, they read little and poorly. I was talking to a young father recently and asked him what was the last book he read. Answer: "SDA". At first I did not understand what it meant: a detective, or something, some? He explained: “The rules traffic". Like this!
It became obvious that today's parents practically do not know Russian folklore, which for many generations has been used with great effect in raising children. All these “sips”, “water off the goose ...” and other funny rhymes and sayings - after all, they will not only make you laugh and entertain, but they educate very well, create the right contact. Alas, this practice is leaving family communication. And this is also the consequences of a decrease in interest in reading, language, folklore. We must take this into account. And to understand that it is impossible to separate the problem of linguistic culture from common problem young family.
“A child learns what he sees in his home”
Lyudmila Viktorovna Zolotnitskaya , executive director of the Ural Women's Forum (Yekaterinburg):
The problem is that many parents have very different and often weak ideas about the choice of reading for children. Parental education is desperately needed right now. What to read and how to read, few of them know. We conducted research by interviewing both children and their parents. So, the children answered that they read an average of 1-2 hours a day. And the parents laugh at it. Don't believe? Or do they not know?
This is a broken link in the system of family education, which is ineffective without family reading. After all, you can captivate reading only by your own example. There is an old saying: "A child learns what he sees in his home." She is basically right.
So I told my child what I read, he answered that he reads himself. It was useful to me and to him, it gave us a lot. Thanks to the stories of my son, I discovered some authors.
Much needs to be done in this direction and to promote the existing experience. For example, there is a large and useful project "Reading mother - reading nation", but who knows about it? ..
"We need Russification of the world"
Victoria Alexandrovna Dmitrieva , Head of the Department of the Faculty of Psychology, St. Petersburg State University, Director of the Scientific Foundation "Antonio Meneghetti" (St. Petersburg):
— The Russian language needs a variety of support and protection. The situation will change for the better if our students strive to study in Russia and not abroad. It is necessary to destroy the myths about Russia as an ignorant and aggressive country, to develop and promote the possibilities of our education. Let, on the contrary, we have more students from abroad. St Petersburg University, for example, has students from Latvia, Ukraine, Latin America, Central Asia, European countries. We offer foreign students cultural program, because it is necessary to use all the opportunities to promote the Russian language and Russian culture. We need Russification of the world, as Americanization was done.
“We have to look for old textbooks in the sheds”
Elena Yurievna Masyuk , mother of many children(Tyumen region):
“Now in schools, children are taught literature and the Russian language using terrible textbooks. It often happens that if a child missed some classes, then it is impossible to catch up on his own according to the textbook. The content is just bad. These textbooks discourage reading. We have to look for old textbooks in the sheds. We are already starting to draw up a petition to collect signatures on the need for a unified state textbook.
But if children do not read enough, they will speak badly. And this will hinder their success in life. When a person does not know how to speak freely, speak in public, reads from a piece of paper - this, as a rule, pushes people away from him.
The situation at the school is difficult. folklore is an important indicator. Look how many jokes about the Ministry of Education have been coming up lately. This is saying something!
A lot of language distortions come from officials and the media. And no responsibility! We have already come up with an initiative: to fine for grammatical and language errors in outdoor advertising, in official documentation. So we will fight this, and at the same time replenish the budget. This proposal is currently being discussed. But they are afraid. There will be too many wrongdoers.
And on the Internet for errors it would be necessary to block sites!
“Not just to teach, but to educate - this is in Russian”
Andrey Ivanovich Lazarev , founder of the Alexey Andreevich Khovansky Foundation (Voronezh):
- No need to reinvent the wheel. We have already burned ourselves on alien systems, test checks and other borrowings. And we have our own invaluable experience. And this is not only much of the recent Soviet past, which has often been discussed recently. But these are also purely Russian discoveries in the field of literature and pedagogy. This, in particular, is about the methodology of Alexei Andreevich Khovansky. He was translated into other languages, based on his experience in different countries, but in our country his works and experience are still in oblivion. Khovansky was called the “teacher of teachers”, his journal Philological Notes, which has been published since 1860 and has been renewed now, was recognized as the best publication in this area. The essence of Khovansky's methodology is to teach and educate, and not just to teach. This is still the best method! And much needed.
"Where are the bookstores, where are the children's books?"
Irina Petrovna Medvedeva , chairman of the Primorsky organization "Council of mothers of many children" (Vladivostok):
- What to choose for reading to children is a matter of principle. But no less important is a purely practical question: where to buy good book? This is faced by a huge number of parents in the regions. Here we have only two bookstores in the whole of Vladivostok. Well, what is sold there, for the most part, with a big stretch, can be called literature. There are only individual worthy authors, such as P. Bazhov, and for the most part, there are numerous publications like Harry Potter.
How, in such conditions, to instill good reading taste, interest in the best literary traditions and high standards of the Russian language?
“Without Dostoevsky we will not be Russian”
Vladimir Alexandrovich Akimkin , father of many children (Tver region):
“I have seven children in my family. A large family is, of course, a lot of problems, but also rich opportunities for education. older girl- 14 years old, the eldest boy - 13. And they are already quite responsible people, developed, conscious, masters. The life of a large family is arranged in such a way that the elders take care of the younger ones, help their parents and develop faster. At the same time, family reading helped us a lot. From personal experience I can say that the Russian classics are necessary as the basis of language and soul. Without Dostoevsky we will not be real Russians. On this basis, you can already read everything. But there must be a foundation. Without roots, the plant dies. So is the individual and the nation. Of course, everything must be given and received on time. But that's what they are parents for, in time to offer a suitable book.
And calligraphy is very important! My children have been writing with pen since the very beginning. This gives excellent handwriting. Develops the ability to read, think, speak. I suggest that everyone introduce the following rule: the first three classes in schools should be written with a pen. And to return as a single discipline - Russian literature, including the Russian language, literature, rhetoric, calligraphy.
Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus' became the head of the established Society of Russian Literature, which will be a new discussion platform for discussing issues of teaching the Russian language and literature.
“You all know well what public discussions are taking place in the country. How public opinion and the opinion of the expert community are divided on a number of issues related to the teaching of literature, the Russian language in terms of attitudes towards the ongoing education reform. The scale of this reform, its sharpness, goal-setting, maybe even political cultural implications may be such that this discussion cannot be limited only to the framework of departments and expert communities," the head of the Russian Orthodox Church said on Wednesday at a meeting of the constituent assembly of the Society of Russian Literature.
According to him, President Vladimir Putin offered him to head the Society of Russian Literature.
In addition, during the meeting, the patriarch expressed concern about the results in the Russian language and literature, which Russian schoolchildren demonstrate in last years in the Unified State Examination. In his opinion, this speaks of "a low level of development of society." “What is permissible in underdeveloped countries cannot be permissible in the country of Pushkin, Lermontov, Dostoevsky, in a country where, at the very hard times illiteracy was overcome, in a country that has achieved a very high level education," the primate of the Russian Orthodox Church is convinced.
The Society of Russian Literature included professors and teachers of the Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Institute of the Russian Language named after A.S. Pushkin, Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov, HSE, Literary Institute, director of the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company Oleg Dobrodeev, writers Sergei Shargunov, Zakhar Prilepin, Yuri Polyakov, poet Yuri Kublanovsky, filmmakers Nikita Mikhalkov and Stanislav Govorukhin, as well as many public and cultural figures, scientists.
Alexander Prokhanov comments on the event:
With interest and deep sympathy, I learned about the creation of the Society of Russian Literature. It is also interesting that this is being done under the auspices of the Church, under the auspices of the growing Orthodox worldview, which is increasingly crowding out nihilism, depressive consciousness, and deliberate damage to the Russian language. This initiative is extremely necessary against the backdrop of a very powerful cohort that is not just engaged in literature, philology, but is a huge ideological combine seeking to mobilize a liberal project in Russia. This project has recently been receding, opening up a place for the state, imperial world consciousness. But this influence is still very modest, and the liberal crowd, no, no, and demonstrates its ability to control cultural space Russia. What is the recent statement of the PEN Club in defense of Savchenko, reminiscent of a powerful ideological invasion that threatens the very existence of the Russian state. Therefore, the creation of this Society is a phenomenon of national importance.
But as an artist, as a person experienced in all the vicissitudes of literary processes over the past thirty or forty years, I also have concerns. Russian literature contains many factions, batches, tendencies that have turned our literature into a phenomenon that embraces the complexity of the universe, in which the plans of the Lord sparkle and the forces of devilish darkness curl at the same time. I'm afraid that church guardianship over modern literature would not result in strict censorship, because many Christian postulates are very far from the hidden and complex laboratories in which novels or poems are born.
I am interested to know how the Society will deal with Tolstoy, who is still, despite the passing of time and time, an unloved and undesirable writer for today's church elite. How the Society will perceive the grandiose culture of the Silver Age, in which the church has enough of the ungodly. The culture of the Russian Silver Age is the precious, unique "Inonia" of Yesenin, the creations of the Symbolists, which in many ways can be interpreted as courtly, erotic, which contradicts the ideas of the Church.
It seems to me that the Society of Russian Literature should not turn into a factory of censored texts. There is a huge problem - to find a language that connects the Church with the youth, often corrupted, confused, speaking in slang. Our parish priests in their sermons, as a rule, worthy and deeply canonical, often do not find access to the hearts of young exalted people. Therefore, the creation of this Society is beneficial in itself. It seems to me that the Society should merge into a broader movement of Russian writers of the most diverse trends and views, which is opposed to the monstrous onslaught of liberal nihilism. And if one of the goals of the Society is to counter the aggressive, caustic, acidic liberal energy, then it must be adequate. Antidotes must be found for liberal poisons. Against darkness, a point filled with light, like a spear of Peresvet, should be put up. And this movement should be sharply social and, if you like, bloody, because Russian literature after 1991 was punctured by liberal hatred.
I am also surprised by the composition of the Assembly. Of course, Nikita Mikhalkov, who argued with the Patriarch, is the beacon of our culture. But Nikita Sergeevich is a director, not a novelist or philologist. I do not understand why, for example, Vladimir Lichutin, the real creator of today's and tomorrow's Russian language, did not get into this ensemble, to whom even enemies take off their hats. And I, a sinner, probably have nothing to do with literature, I don’t know how to express my thoughts, I haven’t written a single novel. We, Russian writers, who have been fighting for Russian literature for three decades, are disappointed that the Church today has joined this movement, and the veterans of the battles, who managed to defend our values, suddenly find themselves on the sidelines of the Society.
