Characteristics of literature in the second half of the 19th century. Russian literature of the second half of the 19th century, or the Novel in Russian

06.04.2019

In the second half of the nineteenth century, Russian literature and culture flourished. Important events took place in the public life of the country during this period: Crimean War, numerous peasant unrest, the abolition of serfdom, the emergence of capitalism. In general, social relations overcome a certain bar, a certain level, after which a return to the recent past seems impossible. First of all, this concerns attitudes towards a person, his problems, without distinction between categories and classes. The process of formation of the “new man”, his social and moral self-awareness begins. It is not surprising that such aspirations made realism the main direction in Russian literature by the mid-19th century, through which the principles of depicting reality were developed. His new stage was closely connected with an attempt to penetrate in detail into the depths of human feelings and relationships. The authors demonstrate a desire not only to convey their emotions through characters, but also to reveal the main causes of social evil. As a result, authors are increasingly turning to folk themes in their works; the image of a peasant, a peasant, is becoming one of the main ones in fiction. The traditions of realism laid down by Lermontov, Pushkin, Gogol are being consolidated, and their works in many ways become a standard for new authors. Critical reviews of works acquire considerable significance and weight. This was largely due to the activities of Chernyshevsky, including his dissertation “Aesthetic Relations of Art to Reality.” One cannot help but remember that it was at this time that a significant event took place: the Russian Empire abolished serfdom, which of course is reflected in fiction. The desire for further reforms on this basis led to controversy and the emergence of two camps: liberals and democrats. The first proposed political and economic reforms gradual change public relations, the latter insisted on immediate, radical changes, usually through revolutionary processes. Dobrolyubov, Herzen, Nekrasov, Chernyshevsky, among others, belonged to the democratic camp, and Dostoevsky, Turgenev, Druzhinin, Leskov adhered to liberal views. As a rule, the exchange of views and ideas was carried out through polemics on the pages of literary magazines. Also in the literature there are disputes between supporters of “pure art” and adherents of the “Gogolian” movement, and later - between “soilists” and “Westerners”. Under the influence of the ideology of commoners, ideas develop “ real criticism", the problem is raised positive hero. The creative searches of realist writers lead to new artistic discoveries, enriching the novel genre, strengthening psychologism. In the second half of the 19th century, a whole galaxy of talented Russian writers appeared: F.M. Dostoevsky (Poor people, Crime and Punishment), I.S. Turgenev (Fathers and Sons, Notes of a Hunter), I.A. Goncharov (Ordinary history, Oblomov, Precipice), A.N. Ostrovsky (Thunderstorm, Not everything is Maslenitsa for the cat, Lack of dowry, Our own people - we will be numbered), N.A. Nekrasov (Princess Volkonskaya, Who Lives Well in Rus'), M.E. Saltykov - Shchedrin (The History of a City, Lord Golovlyov, Poshekhon Antiquity), L.N. Tolstoy (War and Peace), A.P. Chekhov (Novel of a Doctor, Novel of a Reporter, Ward No. 6, Death of an Official, Melancholy, Vanka, The Cherry Orchard).

Prose of the 2nd third of the 19th century. Main names, issues and genre diversity.

The 19th century is a significant century in Russian literature. He gave the world such great names as A.S. Pushkin, M.Yu. Lermontov, N.V. Gogol, I.S. Turgenev, F.M. Dostoevsky, L.N. Tolstoy... The literature of this time is clearly divided into two periods: the first half of the 19th century and the second half of the 19th century. The artistic works of these periods are distinguished by their ideological pathos, themes, artistic techniques, and mood.

A.N. Ostrovsky is rightfully considered a reformer who brought a lot of new things to Russian drama. His innovation was reflected in the fact that he sharply turned the Russian theater towards life and its current social and moral problems. Ostrovsky was the first to turn to the life of the Russian merchants, described the life and customs of this huge layer of Russian society, and showed what problems exist in it.

In addition, it was Ostrovsky who became the “developer” of psychological drama, showing inner world heroes, the excitement of their souls. The plays of this playwright are filled with symbolism. All these features will be continued in the plays of Chekhov and playwrights of the 20th century.

I.S. Turgenev went down in the history of not only Russian, but also world literature as an unsurpassed psychologist and artist of words. This writer is known primarily as the author of the novels “Fathers and Sons”, “The Noble Nest”, “Rudin” and others. In addition, he is the creator of prose poems, full of lyricism and deep reflections on life, and other prose works.

Defining main feature his creative path, Turgenev said: “I tried, as far as I had the strength and ability, to conscientiously and impartially portray and embody what Shakespeare called the very image and pressure of time.”

The classic managed to show in his work the purity of love, the power of friendship, passionate faith in the future of his Motherland, confidence in the strength and courage of the Russian people. The creativity of a true artist of words involves many discoveries, and Turgenev is proof of this.

All works of F.M. Dostoevsky is an artistic study of man, his ideal essence, his fate and future. Dostoevsky's man is a being who has lost his integrity; he is a man in discord, in disagreement with reality and with himself. We can say that Dostoevsky's hero is a restless hero who is constantly in search of himself. This path is full of suffering, blood, sin. But this is always a thinking person trying to know himself. In his denial of both God and life, Dostoevsky’s hero is much more honest than many “believers” and “respectable” people.

Dostoevsky's characters are connected by blood to God, although they often deny him. Without knowing it themselves, they often follow the path of many evangelical saints, literally “suffering” their faith.

Dostoevsky's world is the world of the “humiliated and insulted.” The writer’s gaze is turned specifically to them, exposing the life and suffering of these people. In many ways, this is why F.M. Dostoevsky is called the “great Russian humanist.”

The depiction of a person’s spiritual growth, the “dialectics of the soul” is perhaps the most characteristic in the work of L.N. Tolstoy. This artistic feature can be traced throughout the writer’s entire creative path. Tolstoy writes in such a way that it is clearly visible: the more influence on a person secular society, the poorer his inner world, a person can achieve inner harmony in communication with the people, with nature. Tolstoy is convinced that class barriers have a depressing effect on character development.

Tolstoy's heroes are no strangers to contradictions; there is a stubborn internal struggle in them, but the best spiritual qualities never cheat on them. Natasha's intuitive spiritual sensitivity, Pierre's nobility, the analytical mind and moral beauty of Prince Andrei, the subtle soul of Princess Marya - all this unites the heroes of War and Peace, despite the individuality of each character. We can say that all of Tolstoy’s best heroes are united by the richness of their spiritual world and the desire for happiness.

All works by A.P. Chekhov's works are not only very realistic, but they also contain deep philosophical meaning. “The vulgarity of a vulgar person” is what the writer fought against all his life. Protest against everyday life and philistinism is the main thing in his works. Some of the writer’s heroes strive to break out of this “vicious circle” (three sisters from the play of the same name), others obediently plunge into this quagmire, gradually putting their soul to sleep (Doctor Startsev from “Ionych,” for example).

Chekhov's works are complex and very subtle. They contain several layers of meaning, which only an attentive and knowledgeable reader can reveal. All the works of this Russian writer are filled with many symbols, allowing one to reveal their full depth.

Thus, Russian literature of the second half of the 19th century is very diverse and vibrant. Every writer of that time is a real figure not only of Russian, but also of world literature. Despite all the differences, all these artists are united by a love for their homeland and a desire to improve the lives of Russian people. In addition, all writers used classical traditions, creating on their basis something of their own, new, which, in turn, also became a classic.

Main trends in the development of Russian literature in the 2nd third of the 19th century.

By the middle of the 19th century, the process of development of the basic principles of depicting reality had ended in Russian literature, realism established itself. AND literature XIX V. becomes a real driving force in the entire Russian artistic culture. Russian culture of this period was later called the “golden age” of art. He was declared the founder of Russian realism Pushkin(this is a generally established fact). Realism becomes, to a certain extent, a method of artistic cognition of reality.

"natural school"" Creation Gogol

"natural school"

Basic feature of realism How creative method is increased attention to social side reality. The task of truthfully showing and exploring life presupposes in realism many techniques for depicting reality, which is why the works of Russian writers are so diverse in both form and content. The main thing in this method, as theorists of realism claim, is typing.

The images of a realistic work reflect general laws of existence, not living people. Any image is woven from typical traits manifested in typical circumstances. This is the paradox of art. An image cannot be correlated with a living person; it is richer than a specific person - hence the objectivity of realism. Each has its own principle for selecting facts of reality, which necessarily reveals the subjective view of the artist. Each artist has his own measure.

Realism as a method of depicting reality in the second half of the 19th century. got the name critical realism, because his main task was to criticize reality, and the main issue that received wide coverage was the question of the relationship between man and society. To what extent does society influence the fate of the hero? Who is to blame for a person being unhappy? What to do to change a person and the world? - these are the main questions of literature in general, Russian literature of the second half of the 19th century. - in particular. The main question that worried the entire thinking intelligentsia was the question: “Which path will Russia take?” He divided everyone into two camps: Slavophiles And Westerners. The differences between them were in determining the main direction in which Russia should go:

1) in the Western way, focusing on the life experience of the civilized West.

2) in Slavic, referring primarily to national characteristics Slavs

There were also religious differences between Slavophiles and Westerners. The Slavophiles proposed to compare everything earthly with the heavenly, and the temporal with the eternal. Only when looking from there (from the point of view of Divine reality) can one appreciate everything that is found here (on Earth). Westerners believed that earthly happiness depended on an enlightened mind. But they were united in one thing: they hated serfdom and fought for the liberation of the peasants from it.

Slavophiles: Khomyakov, Kireevsky, Const. Aksakov, Samarin. The foundations of the Slavophil teaching were laid by Alexey Stepanovich Khomyakov and Ivan Vasilyevich Kireevsky, later they were called senior Slayanophiles. The first one to throw a bomb at public consciousness, was Pyotr Yakovlevich Chaadaev, who wrote “ Philosophical writing“,” the historical role of Russia was defined as educational for distant descendants: “Alone in the world, we gave nothing to the world, we took nothing from the world...” Khomyakov and Kireyevsky gave a worthy answer to Chaadaev, proving the uniqueness of the experience Russian people. Kireevsky believed that Orthodoxy is a genuine Christian religion in its undistorted form, unlike Catholicism and Protestantism, it forms relationships between people on a disinterested basis. Younger Slavophiles even more categorically declared the chosenness of the Russian people, “carrying Christ in their soul, for whom the thread connecting the earthly with the heavenly has not been broken...”. They idealized the peasant community, since, admittedly, they did not know the people.

Westerners: Chaadaev, Belinsky, Herzen, Stankevich. They believed that it was the Western European path that should lead Russia to equality before the law, the establishment of freedoms, including freedom of speech - in other words, to the victory of liberalism (liberalis - free). 1840-50 passed under the sign of the struggle between Westerners and Slavophiles. The struggle was waged everywhere: in magazines, in literary salons, at public lectures. The debates were heated, the struggle was fierce: friends became enemies.

In 1860-80 XIX century Two camps were more sharply defined: democrats And liberals. Democrats called for revolutionary changes, and liberals called for gradual, economic ones. At the center of the struggle between the two camps is the abolition of serfdom.

Democrats: Herzen, Nekrasov, Dobrolyubov, Chernyshevsky, Pisarev and others.

Liberals: Turgenev, Goncharov, Druzhinin, Fet, Tyutchev, Leskov, Dostoevsky, Pisemsky, etc.

Heated controversy flared up on the pages of magazines of both directions. Magazines of that time - the arena of socio-political struggle.

2. Natural school. Representatives and almanacs. “Physiological” essay as the main genre. Using the example of 2-3 works.

In the 40s, a direction arose designated as "natural school"" Creation Gogol largely determined the content and direction of the “natural school”. Gogol was a great innovator, discovering that even an insignificant event, such as the acquisition of an overcoat by a minor official, can become a significant event for understanding the most important issues of human existence. No wonder one of the writers said famous phrase: "We

everyone came out of Gogol’s “The Overcoat”. "Natural School" became initial stage development of realism in Russian literature. The new direction proposed topics that had not previously been recognized as important. Life, customs, characters, events from the life of the lower classes became the object of study by “naturalists”. The leading genre was the “physiological essay,” which was based on accurate “photography” of the life of various classes. TO "natural school" adjoined to one degree or another Nekrasov, Grigorovich, Saltykov-Shchedrin, Goncharov, Panaev, Druzhinin etc. They needed their own collection, including works by “naturalists,” and in 1845 two parts of the collection “Physiology of St. Petersburg” were published. Since 1847, Pushkin’s former magazine Sovremennik became the “mouthpiece” of the new direction.

The almanac “Petersburg Collection” has already worked for five outstanding writers. It opened with Dostoevsky's novel Poor People. It contained two works by Turgenev, a poem by A.N. Maykov "Mashenka", poems by Nekrasov, articles by Belinsky, translation of "Macbeth" from in English. The almanac “Leviathan” was being prepared for release.

The dominant method of the natural school was critical realism. Representatives of the school often moved to the edge of naturalism. The real fact was very important for the school. IN AND. Dahl (Lugansky) wrote essays entitled “Daggerotypes.” The principles of realistic writing were just being mastered by the natural school. These principles reflected the psychology of the multitude. The genre of physiological essay is becoming popular. An ordinary person became a hero. The school's goal was to enlighten and educate readers. The little man was considered as a full-fledged aesthetic image.

Physiological essay came from the traditions of French literature (Honoré de Balzac). But the natural school borrowed only a trend. The physiological sketch was a laboratory of social typification. It reflected the anthropological approach to man. Social typification prevailed over psychology. The dramatic collisions of the essay constituted the inevitability of the path dictated by the environment of the class for its individual representative. The question of personal activity was not raised (“Wednesday is stuck”- F.M. Dostoevsky). And yet, the best representatives of the natural school raised the question of individual responsibility. An important principle of the natural school is the active author's position.

A typical work the natural school becomes Grigorovich's essay "Petersburg organ grinders". In the introduction, the author proves the importance of describing poor St. Petersburg. It gives national and social types organ grinders and their listeners - the inhabitants of St. Petersburg. A whole cross-section of society is given. In conclusion, Grigorovich talks about empathy. Through the essay, society learned about itself.

3. Tale of the 40s. Problems genre specificity. (“Ordinary History” by Goncharov, “Anton Goremyk” by Grigorovich, “Tarantas” by Sollogub, etc.). Using the example of 2-3 works.

In Ordinary History, every person at any stage of his development will find the necessary lesson for himself. The naivety and sentimentality of Sashenka Aduev is funny in a business atmosphere. His pathos is false, and the loftiness of his speeches and ideas about life are far from reality. But the uncle cannot be called an ideal either: a efficient breeder, a respected person in society, he is afraid of sincere living feelings and in his practicality goes too far: he is afraid to show sincere warm feelings for his wife, which leads her to a nervous breakdown. There is a lot of irony in the uncle's teachings, but the simple-minded nephew takes them too directly - first arguing with them, and then agreeing.

Deprived of false ideals, Alexander Aduev does not acquire genuine ideals - he simply becomes a calculating vulgarity. Goncharov's irony is aimed at the fact that such a path is no exception. Youthful ideals disappear like “hairs” from a son’s head, which Aduev Jr.’s mother so laments. This is an “ordinary story”. There are not many people who can resist the pressure of the big city and bourgeois society on their mind and soul. At the end of the novel, we see that the cynic uncle is much more humane than his capable student nephew. Alexander Aduev has turned into a business man, for whom nothing is more important than career and money. And St. Petersburg expects new victims - naive and inexperienced.

Dmitry Vasilyevich Grigorovich also belongs to the writers of the natural school. He studied at the Moscow gymnasium, and then at the St. Petersburg boarding school. In 1836 he became a cadet at the Main Engineering School. In 1840 he entered the Academy of Arts, then served in the office of the St. Petersburg Bolshoi Theater. N.A. Nekrasov introduces Grigorovich to writers and invites him to participate in his publications. Grigorovich becomes close to Turgenev and I. I. Panaev. He participates in Nekrasov’s collection “Physiology of St. Petersburg”. In 1845 he published the essay “Petersburg Organ Grinders”. The knowledge of the life of organ grinders, gained by Grigorovich from direct observations, was combined in the essay with acute social observation. Grigorovich’s first story, “The Village” (1846), was distinguished by its innovation and vivid realism of concept.

The next work made Grigorovich a famous writer - this is the story “Anton Goremyka”. L. N. Tolstoy pointed out the social significance of the story in a letter to Grigorovich: “You are dear to me... especially because of the unforgettable impressions that your first stories, together with Notes of a Hunter, made on me.” Tolstoy noted that the Russian peasant - our teacher and nurse - “can be described without mocking and not to enliven the landscape, but can and should be written to his full height, not only with love, but with respect and even awe”1.

The novel “Fishermen” brought Grigorovich great success in the 50s. It is entirely devoted to the theme of folk life. The writer is interested in the traits of the spiritual power of common people, their moral strength. It was these forces that he looked for in the people. Nekrasov considered “Fishermen” an excellent study of folk life.

In developing the peasant theme, D. V. Grigorovich proceeds from familiarity with folk poetry and the peculiarities of folk speech. In the stories “The Village” and “Anton the Miserable” he reproduces the features of peasant life: hustling in the village, women’s activities “each with some kind of work, a spinning wheel, a comb or bobbins.” The writer notices the description of the costume of the village women: the more prosperous women in “high tussocks” trimmed with sequins and braiding with low cuffs, in motley cats and bright striped underpants; who is poorer - simply tied a scarlet handkerchief around his head, keeping the ends apart, and pulling a gray chupan over his husband's shoulders...2. Grigorovich also describes the red goods of a merchant-trader visiting the village of Kuzminskoye: “cufflinks, namistya, glass beads, bundles of red gum,” etc. The writer resorts to a description of the landscape: the road to the Lublin water mill, a description of the bank of the Oka, the village of Antonovka (“Plowman and amaranth").

Grigorovich also conveys the demonological ideas of the peasants, introduces into the text “terrible” stories about evil spirits, about meetings with brownies and goblin, about the appearance of the dead that exist among the peasants. Thus, in the story “The Plowman and the Velvet Plant” they are associated with an “unkind” place in the area called Glinishche, which conveys the peasants’ “rumors” about it. The writer also reproduces an ethnographically correct picture of peasant wedding rituals: unbraiding the bride’s braids, the arrival of the groom, the groomsmen’s verdicts, the wedding, the wedding table. The ritual of blessing is accompanied by the verdict of the groomsmen: “Fathers, priests, mothers, mothers and all good neighbors, bless our young lad on his journey, into an open field, into green meadows, under the eastern side, under the red sun, under the bright moon, under pure stars, To God's temple, the ringing of bells"3. Grigorovich pays a lot of attention to the description of the festive table: “... a dashing treat was started! Whatever your heart desired, there was plenty of everything... Various dishes, bowls of cabbage soup, pea jelly, oatmeal jelly, cold soup and porridge, huge cups filled to the top with carrot pies, porridge pies, unleavened and butter cheesecakes and all sorts of others... damask glasses with fusel, liqueurs, more or less sweetened with honey... Worts and mash stood in large buckets”4. All these details reproduce the peasant setting. As epigraphs, the writer uses Russian folk songs, proverbs and sayings, which enhance the reproduction of social pictures and, as it were, predetermine the tragic fates of the peasant heroes, emphasizing the narrative of the bitter life of the peasants. Thus, the epigraph from the folk song “Far away in a remote corner grew a thin White birch...” symbolizes the hopelessness of the life of a peasant woman, as well as the proverbs: “I will solve someone else’s troubles with my hands, but I won’t put my mind to my own”, “Live if you can, die if you want”, “Sir, whatever the carpenter wants, then and knock it out."

D. V. Grigorovich recreates pictures of rural labor with its calendar conditionality. The writer notes: “In rural working life, especially from April to October, time flies with incredible speed; Before you have time to finish one job, you look, another is already ready... Hands work tirelessly, sweat flows in streams for six whole months.”5 At the same time, the use of ethnography and folklore in Grigorovich’s works has its own specifics. They create a general background, pictures of everyday life, are woven into the plot, and complement the idea of the image of the hero and his environment. Folklore also projects the poeticization of images, their certain correlation with folk poetry - fairy tales, songs (“Village”, the image of Akulina). In the story “Anton Goremyka” folklore has the character of an everyday phenomenon. In the manner of presentation of folklore and ethnographic material, Grigorovich approaches Dahl.

The writer also turns to folklore and ethnography as illustrative external color to depict both idyllic pictures of folk life and the peasant characters themselves (“Plowman”, 1853). He sought to discern the poetic principles in peasant labor, in the peasants’ activities: in plowing, in harvesting, the ritual of “dressing” the last sheaf, the wisdom of the peasant, his unity with nature and his native land. It is in this way of rural life of the people, according to Grigorovich, that one can see the “real Russian field”, hear folk speech and a real Russian song and feel involved in the people’s world: “Your heart will beat sweetly, if only you love this song, this people and this land" Trying to present readers with a comprehensive description of life in the empire, Sollogub put the narrative in the form of travel sketches and built it on the conflict of judgments and points of view of the main characters (according to another point of view, on their comparison and interaction). The journey of heroes, typical of Russian society of that time, lasts from Moscow to Mordas, which covers almost the entire central Russia. The author set his main goal “to determine the national essence of life in his homeland.” At the same time, artistic research different sides life was not an end in itself. Among the positive aspects of the story, the researchers included a truthful depiction of Russian life, coupled with satirical richness, colorful scenes, and the narrative style itself, while noting at the same time the inconsistency when following realism (“... did not reveal true reasons..."). At the same time, the author also showed irony in relation to his own views.

Work on “Tarantas” began in the era of the formation of Westernism and Slavophilism. The story became an expression of the author's irony regarding the ideological struggle that captured his peers (for example, the Gagarin brothers [Comm. 20]). The ideological opponent of the pro-European-minded Ivan Vasilyevich, aimed at searching for the ideal Russian nationality and embodying an “abstract, bookish view of Russia,” is the patriarchal landowner Vasily Ivanovich, who is not devoid of practicality. Acting as a mocking skeptic regarding the dreams and ideas of his idealistic companion, who constantly deals with the harshness of Russian reality along the way, Vasily Ivanovich at the same time himself embodies “the limitations of “common sense”.” In general, Sollogub took the ideological component of the story more seriously than his previous works. Among the reasons that pushed him to do this, researchers name the growing attention of society to the problems of national identity, the further demarcation of Westerners and Slavophiles, the controversy caused by the appearance of Gogol’s “Dead Souls” and “Russia in 1839.” A. de Custine. As a result, the heroes’ conversations touch on such topics as the class problems of merchants and officials, the role of the nobility and the vicissitudes privacy of this class, the history of Russia, Russia and Europe, schism, etc. Final chapter“The Dream,” which is a utopia, is based on contradictory statements and shows Russia “inside out,” testifying at the same time to the author’s skepticism about the present and hope for the country’s future. The little-known continuation of “Ivan Vasilyevich in the Caucasus,” rather a “corrective remark,” already reflects the “transformation” of the former idealist Ivan Vasilyevich into his sensible opponent.

Critics perceived Tarantas differently. Bulgarin considered it a trinket, and Yu. F. Samarin’s review was sharply negative. Gogol and Zhukovsky spoke positively about the book in letters to Sollogub, and extreme guardians (I.N. Skobelev, P. Sharsh) spoke positively about the book in reviews. According to the latter, the story was successful and in the spirit of “ official nationality" An intermediate position was occupied by Nekrasov, who combined praise and reproaches in his review, and Belinsky [Comm. 21]. The latter, however, in his review “Russian Literature in 1845” put, although with reservations, “Tarantas” in first place among the published books. It was he, according to A. S. Nemzer, who discovered the deepest understanding of the book. Noted by almost all reviewers, the writing of “Tarantas” in the spirit of the natural school was reproached as a procession in the path of Gogol and his followers, while Belinsky considered this its main advantage. Moreover, the critic shared the discrepant visual structure of the work and the views of Sollogub himself and considered the former without taking into account the latter

1. Which of the 4 control schemes is used to implement the control scheme of a CNC machine?

2. What precedes the development of a program algorithm and the software production of chess pieces?

3. What do the following operators mean: %GENER(k)%, %CUTTER(d), %FROM(p,z), %THICK(t)?

4. Why are figure base processing and figure surface pretreatment procedures necessary?

5. Explain the text of the program for processing the base of a figure, pre-processing the surface and finishing the surface of a figure?

1. The main trends in the development of Russian literature in the second half of the 19th century. 2

2. Love lyrics by N. A. Nekrasov (“Panaevsky cycle”) 5

3. Socio-psychological roots and moral essence of Oblomovism (based on the novel by I.A. Goncharov “Oblomov”). 8

4. The theme of Russian women in the poetry of N. A. Nekrasov. eleven

5. The significance of the chapter “Oblomov’s Dream” in the implementation of the ideological plan of I. A. Goncharov’s novel “Oblomov”. 12

7. Oblomov’s test of love as a decisive test of his viability. Oblomov and Olga Ilyinskaya. Oblomov and Agafya Pshenitsyna. 14

8. Raskolnikov’s theory in F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment.” 15

9. The meaning of contrasting Stolz with Oblomov. Stolz’s ideological and artistic vulnerability (based on the novel “Oblomov” by I. A. Goncharov) 17

10. The theme of punishment in the novel by F.M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment". 19

11. Goncharov’s realism and Gogol’s realism. Oblomov and Manilov in the novels “Oblomov” and “Dead Souls”. 26

12. St. Petersburg as depicted by F. M. Dostoevsky (based on the novel “Crime and Punishment”) 30

13. The complexity of I. A. Goncharov’s relationship with Oblomov. Disputes about the novel “Oblomov” in criticism in the 1860s. 32

14. The role of Sonya Marmeladova in F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment.” 33

15. Creative history plays “The Thunderstorm” by A. N. Ostrovsky. Theme, idea, main conflict. 35

16. Human and inhuman in the rebellion of the main character of the novel F.M. Dostoevsky "Crime and Punishment". 38

17. Stages of life and creativity of A. N. Ostrovsky. 41

18. Depiction of the life of the humiliated and insulted in F. M. Dostoevsky’s novel “Crime and Punishment.” 46

19. A. N. Ostrovsky - creator of original Russian drama and Russian national theater. 48

20. Originality artistic manner Dostoevsky "crime and punishment". 49

21. Genre and compositional originality of A. N. Ostrovsky’s play “The Thunderstorm”. 52

22. Problematics and poetics of the novel by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin “The History of a City”. 54

23. Life and customs of the “dark kingdom” in the play by A.N. Ostrovsky "The Thunderstorm". 58

24. The relevance of the work of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin in our days. 60

25. I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” as a novel of ideological disputes. 62

26. Social satire in “Fairy Tales” by M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. 64

27. Bazarov and Bazarovshchina. Love for Odintsova as a refutation of Bazarov's nihilism. 66

28. The character and tragic fate of the Russian person in the works of N.S. Leskova (based on the novel “The Enchanted Wanderer.” 67

29. Bazarov, his views and the spiritual world in I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons.” 69

30. “People's thought” and ways of its disclosure in the novel by L.N. Tolstoy "War and Peace". 70

31. Critics’ disputes about I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons.” 73

31. Disputes about I. S. Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons” in Russian criticism. 74

32. The story of the great life of L.N. Tolstoy. 76

35. Richness of feelings in love lyrics F.I. Tyutcheva, her artistic originality. 80

36. Dialectics of characters in the novel by L.N. Tolstoy “War and Peace”, Andrei Bolkonsky. 84

38.The theme of nature in the poetry of A.A. Feta. 85

41. The originality of the creative position of A. A. Fet (Fet is a poet of “pure art”) 87

46. Favorite heroine L.N. Tolstoy. 89

48. Dialectics of characters in the novel by L.N. Tolstoy "War and Peace", Pierre Bezukhov. 91

49. The theme of the homeland and people in the poetry of N.A. Nekrasova. 92

Main trends in the development of Russian literature in the second half of the 19th century

By the middle of the 19th century, the process of development of the basic principles of depicting reality had ended in Russian literature, and realism had established itself. And literature of the 19th century. becomes a real driving force in the entire Russian artistic culture. Russian culture of this period was later called

"golden age" of art. Pushkin was declared the founder of Russian realism (this is a generally established fact). Realism becomes, to a certain extent, a method of artistic cognition of reality.

In the 1940s, a direction emerged designated as the “natural school.” Gogol's work largely determined the content and direction of the “natural school.” Gogol was a great innovator, discovering that even an insignificant event, such as the acquisition of an overcoat by a minor official, can become a significant event for understanding the most important issues of human existence. No wonder one of the writers uttered the famous phrase: “We

everyone came out of Gogol’s “The Overcoat”. The “Natural School” became the initial stage in the development of realism in Russian literature. The new direction proposed topics that had not previously been recognized as important. Life, customs, characters, events from the life of the lower classes became the object of study by “naturalists”. The leading genre was the “physiological essay,” which was based on accurate “photography” of the life of various classes. To one degree or another, Nekrasov, Grigorovich, Saltykov-Shchedrin, Goncharov, Panaev, Druzhinin and others joined the “natural school”. They needed their own collection, including works by “naturalists”, and in 1845 two parts of the collection “Physiology of St. Petersburg” were published " Since 1847, Pushkin’s former magazine Sovremennik became the “mouthpiece” of the new direction.

The main feature of realism as a creative method is the increased attention to the social side of reality. The task of truthfully showing and exploring life presupposes in realism many techniques for depicting reality, which is why the works of Russian writers are so diverse in both form and content. The main thing in this method, according to the theorists of realism, is typification. L. N. Tolstoy precisely said about this: “The artist’s task... is to extract the typical from reality... to collect ideas, facts, contradictions into a dynamic image. A person, say, during his working day says one phrase that is characteristic of his essence, he will say another in a week, and a third in a year. You force him to speak in a concentrated environment. This is a fiction, but one in which life is more real than life itself.”

The images of a realistic work reflect the general laws of existence, and not living people. Any image is woven from typical traits manifested in typical circumstances. This is the paradox of art. An image cannot be correlated with a living person; it is richer than a specific person - hence the objectivity of realism.

“An artist should not be a judge of his characters and what they say, but only an impartial witness... My only job is to be talented, that is, to be able to distinguish important testimony from unimportant ones, to be able to illuminate figures and speak their language,” - wrote A.P. Chekhov to Suvorin. “An objective view of the world is rare, the artist is always subjective.” Each has its own principle for selecting facts of reality, which necessarily reveals the subjective view of the artist. Each artist has his own measure.

Realism as a method of depicting reality in the second half of the 19th century. received the name critical realism, because its main task was to criticize reality, and the main issue that received wide coverage was the question of the relationship between man and society. To what extent does society influence the fate of the hero? Who is to blame for a person being unhappy? What to do to change a person and the world? - these are the main questions of literature in general, Russian literature of the second half of the 19th century. - in particular. The main question that worried the entire thinking intelligentsia was the question: “Which path will Russia take?” He divided everyone into two camps: Slavophiles and Westerners. The differences between them were in determining the main direction in which Russia should go:

1) in the Western way, focusing on the life experience of the civilized West, or

2) in Slavic, referring primarily to the national characteristics of the Slavs.

Slavophiles: Khomyakov, Kireevsky, Konst. Aksakov, Samarin. The foundations of the Slavophil teaching were laid by Alexey Stepanovich Khomyakov and Ivan Vasilyevich Kireevsky, later they were called senior Slayanophiles. The first to throw a bomb into the public consciousness was Pyotr Yakovlevich Chaadaev, who wrote “Philosophical Letter”, the historical role of Russia was defined as educational for distant descendants: “Alone in the world, we gave nothing to the world, took nothing from the world... “Khomyakov and Kireevsky gave a worthy answer to Chaadaev, proving the uniqueness of the experience of the Russian people. Kireevsky believed that Orthodoxy is a genuine Christian religion in its undistorted form, unlike Catholicism and Protestantism, it forms relationships between people on a disinterested basis. Younger Slavophiles even more categorically declared the chosenness of the Russian people, “carrying Christ in their soul, for whom the thread connecting the earthly with the heavenly has not been broken...”. They idealized the peasant community, since, admittedly, they did not know the people.

Westerners: Chaadaev, Belinsky, Herzen, Stankevich. They believed that it was the Western European path that should lead Russia to equality before the law, the establishment of freedoms, including freedom of speech - in other words, to the victory of liberalism (liberalis - free). 1840-50 passed under the sign of the struggle between Westerners and Slavophiles. The struggle was waged everywhere: in magazines, in literary salons, at public lectures. The debates were heated, the struggle was fierce: friends became enemies.

In 1860-80 XIX century two camps were more sharply defined: democrats and liberals. Democrats called for revolutionary changes, and liberals called for gradual, economic ones. At the center of the struggle between the two camps is the abolition of serfdom.

Democrats: Herzen, Nekrasov, Dobrolyubov, Chernyshevsky, Pisarev, etc. Liberals: Turgenev, Goncharov, Druzhinin, Fet, Tyutchev, Leskov, Dostoevsky, Pisemsky, etc.

Heated controversy flared up on the pages of magazines of both directions. Magazines of that time were an arena of socio-political struggle.

2. Love lyrics by N. A. Nekrasov (“Panaevsky cycle”)

Nekrasov's love poems represent one of the remarkable achievements of Russian poetry of the 19th century. The depiction of the life of the heart by Nekrasov the poet was based not so much on personal experience, not so much on the perception and transformation of literary tradition, but was the result of comprehension, a correct understanding of what many could have.

“Prose in Love,” with its constant quarrels and quarrels, with its mutual torment, with its infrequent joys, was destined to occupy a significant place in Nekrasov’s love lyrics, which is natural and logical, for one of the most characteristic features of his creative method was the desire to depict that part the truth of life, which is defined by the concept of “the prose of life,” - one of the oldest non-krasologists, V. E. Evgeniev-Maksimov, once summed up the results of many years of observations.

All the inconsistency of feelings, the complexity and depth of the relationship between a man and a woman were expressed in Nekrasov’s “lyrical novel” dedicated to Avdotya Yakovlevna Panaeva, whose beauty, “her intelligent coquetry could not but make a strong impression on Nekrasov, and the emerging feeling soon turned into a hopeless passion.” .

These poems, inspired by the relationship with Panaeva, form, as it were, a single lyrical diary, capturing all the shades of the poet’s feelings, or, better said, the lyrical hero. The strength of these poems lies in the realistic concreteness of the experience, in the desire to truthfully and accurately convey the complex process of mental life, starting from traditional sanctimonious morality. Hence the intense drama of this stormy lyrical confession, the freshness and expressiveness of poetic speech, the free use of the rich possibilities of prosaic verse. What was essentially new was precisely prosaization - a complete shift in the main setting of verse speech - the fundamental possibility of any foreign voices entering into it.

Features of the “Panaevsky” cycle are spontaneity, even sharpness of expression of feelings, emphasized openness of confessions, a plea for forgiveness; and behind all this is a feeling of authenticity of a love drama, which is based on faith in the power of feeling, respect for the human dignity of a woman:

You are always incomparably good,
But when I'm sad and gloomy,
Comes to life so inspirationally
Your cheerful, mocking mind;

You want to laugh so brightly and sweetly,
This is how you scold my stupid enemies
Then, hanging his head sadly,
You make me laugh so slyly;

You are so kind, stingy with affection,
Your kiss is so full of fire,
And your beloved eyes
So they dove and stroke me, -

What's wrong with you?
I bear it wisely and meekly,
And forward - into this dark sea -
I look without the usual fear...

N.A. Nekrasov in his “lyrical novel” gave a unique formula, which was readily accepted when talking about his lyrics - “prose of love.” But it would be wrong to consider the “prose of love” of Nekrasov’s poems only as a sphere of quarrels and squabbles. Nekrasov entered here into an unusually rich and complex area contradictory human feelings and relationships, into an infinitely more psychologically complex and higher area of comprehension of the human spirit.

The lyrical heroine of Nekrasov is written as more than the owner of a certain character: she is a person who knows worries, anxieties, feels the need to affirm what seems fair to her, and knows how to find a way out of sad circumstances herself.

But not only the collision of two completely different personal worlds makes the denouement of a rapidly developing “love affair” “inevitable”; the ending is destined and determined by the very complexity, contradictory nature of human nature, combining good and evil, dark and light, love and hate.

Thus, the originality of Nekrasov’s lyrics lies in the fact that in it, lyrical isolation is destroyed, lyrical egocentrism is overcome. And Nekrasov’s love poems are open to the heroine, to her. She enters the poem with all the richness and complexity of her inner world.

Nekrasov’s intimate lyrics reveal the internal, psychological complexity and contradictory nature of the poet’s feelings. This is, first of all, a deep experience of both the joy and suffering of love.

“The exceptional originality of Nekrasov’s love poems is that no one else spoke as willingly about prose in love as Nekrasov. He looked at the relationship between a man and a woman without poetizing it, and saw little ideal in love,” wrote I. N. Rozanov.

The “plot” of the “love story” has reached its finale, its tragic ending. But the separation of two loving people did not resolve the complex ambivalent psychological situation in which the heroes were placed. “Fatal duel”, love-struggle, intense dialogue-argument are not completed; the contradictions are insurmountable, just as the thirst for faith in love as the basis of the foundations of the universe is irresistible:

We parted ways halfway

We were separated to the point of separation

And they thought: there will be no flour

In the last fatal "sorry".

But I don’t even have the strength to cry.

Write - I ask for one thing...

These letters will be nice to me

And holy, like flowers from the grave -

From the grave of my heart!

“The Lyrical Novel” by N. A. Nekrasov unusually deeply reflected the growing sense of crisis in the modern life order, profound changes in the sphere of individual self-awareness, and the reaction of a thinking person to the accelerated process of democratization of Russian society. And love in Nekrasov’s “Panaev” cycle appears in a different capacity; it can no longer serve as a moral “norm.” The lyrical hero of the “Panaev” cycle could never finally free himself from this egocentric feeling, the desire for self-affirmation in the sphere of love. He was not given the opportunity to achieve that freedom of spirit, that selflessness in love.

In the “love novel” by N.A. Nekrasov's intentions of harsh and merciless self-exposure, a deep consciousness of his guilt before his beloved woman, who organically carried, preserved, defended, defended the metaphysical, creative, true essence of love. Lyrical hero imbued with the consciousness of the absolute value of love and beauty, the female feat of self-denial.

In the minds of people - readers and critics - of the 19th century, literature was given an important role in public life. Reading was not entertainment, not a form of leisure, but a way of understanding reality. For the writer, creativity became an act of spiritual and civil service to society; he believed in the effective power of the artistic word, in the possibility with its help to elevate human soul, educate the mind and influence the socio-political situation.

From this faith was born the pathos of the struggle for this or that idea of transforming the country, this or that path of development of Russian life and literature. The 19th century was the heyday of Russian critical thought. The printed speeches of the best critics entered the golden fund of Russian culture and confirmed the high rank of criticism as special type literature.

Slavophiles and Westerners

In the 1840s, two social movements arose - Slavophiles (A.S. Khomyakov, brothers K.S. and I.S. Aksakov, brothers I.V. and P.V. Kireevsky) and Westerners (V.G. Belinsky , A.I. Herzen, N.P. Ogarev, N.A. Westerners saw in the reforms of Peter I the beginning historical development Russia, and in following European traditions- her Right way. They were skeptical about pre-Petrine Rus', considering the lack of rich ancient history advantage of Russia: the key to the rapid assimilation of the progressive ideas of Western Europe.

During these years, a radical movement emerged among Westerners, based on the teachings of the French utopian socialists - Saint-Simon and Fourier. At the apartment of M.V. Butashevich-Petrashevsky gathers a political circle, which includes young people passionate about socialist ideas. These meetings are also attended by writers, many of whom will later reconsider their attitude towards the Petrashevites - F.M. Dostoevsky, A.N. Maikov, M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin et al.

Utopian socialists saw the main social evil in inequality, in a distorted social order. The solution, in their opinion, was to re-educate the ruling class. The most radically minded part of this movement considered revolution as the only possible way of social transformation.

The Slavophile program for reforming Russia was based on the ideas of an independent path of development for a country with a history no less rich than the European one, independent of the West. “The Slavophiles considered the special, integral type of thinking, inherited from the Orthodox East and rooted in the deep layers of national life, as an indisputable advantage of Russian culture, requiring its development and improvement,” writes modern scientist Yu.V. Lebedev. The Slavophiles accepted the assimilation of the achievements of Western civilization only to the extent that this did not contradict the foundations of Russian culture. And if the West cares about human life directs to the improvement of external circumstances, then Orthodox Russia calls, first of all, for the moral improvement of man. European civilization, according to the Slavophiles, suffers from a spiritual disease of unbelief, individualism, deification of man and disappointment in spiritual values.

The divergence in views on the fate of Russia between Westerners and Slavophiles was also expressed in the different assessments that representatives of both philosophical movements gave to the work of N.V. Gogol. Westerners saw in this writer the founder of the social-critical trend in Russian literature, while Slavophiles emphasized a special element of the author’s artistic worldview “ Dead souls"- epic fullness and high prophetic pathos. However, both of them recognized Gogol’s fruitful influence on the development of Russian literature as indisputable.

"Natural School"

In the 1840s, a galaxy of word artists grew up, creatively developing the achievements of their older contemporary. The group of writers who rallied around Belinsky was called the “natural school.” The main object of depiction in their work was the “unprivileged” classes (janitors, artisans, coachmen, beggars, peasants, etc.). The writers sought not only to give a voice to the “humiliated and insulted”, to reflect their way of life and morals, but also to show the whole of vast Russia from a social point of view. At this time, the genre of “physiological essay” became popular, in which various social strata of Russian society were described with scientific rigor, thoroughness and factual accuracy (the best essays were written by N.A. Nekrasov, V.I. Dal, I.I. Panaev, D.V. Grigorovich, I.S. Turgenev, G.I. Uspensky, F.M.

Democratic revolutionaries

By the beginning of the 1860s, the confrontation between Westerners and Slavophiles had almost exhausted itself: by this time the ideologist of Westernism V.G. Belinsky and Slavophiles A.S. had passed away. Khomyakov and P.V. Kireyevsky. However, there was still no unity in the views of the Russian intelligentsia on the main issues of Russian life. In the context of a changing historical situation (the rapid development of cities, industry, the improvement of the education system), new forces are coming into literature - commoners, people from different social strata (clergy, merchants, philistines, peasants, bureaucrats and impoverished nobility), who received education and broke away from the previous its environment. In criticism and literature, revolutionary democratic ideas laid down by Belinsky are being developed. Representatives of this movement put pressing socio-political issues at the center of their creativity.

The main platform for the revolutionary-democratic wing of Russian criticism was the magazines Sovremennik, Otechestvennye zapiski and Russian word" Philosophical foundations of a critical approach to works of art were laid down in the master's thesis of N.G. Chernyshevsky “Aesthetic relations of art to reality.” Democratic revolutionaries viewed literature from the point of view of political and social significance, to literary text treated as the reproduction of life, and based on the analysis artistic image passed a harsh verdict on reality. This method of analysis is the young talented critic N.A. Dobrolyubov called it “real criticism.”

"Aesthetic criticism" and "organic criticism"

Didacticism in the perception of artistic creativity was not accepted by representatives of “aesthetic criticism” (V.P. Botkin, P.V. Annenkov, A.V. Druzhinin), who proclaimed the intrinsic value of art, its independence from social problems and utilitarian tasks.

“Organic criticism” sought to overcome the limitations of “pure art”, which solves exclusively aesthetic problems, and social determinism (the subordination of creativity to political ideas and public interests). According to its principles developed by A.A. Grigoriev, and then N.N. Strakhov, true art is born, not “made”; it is the fruit not only of the mind, but also of the artist’s soul, his “thought of the heart”; all aspects of human existence are reflected in it.

Soilists and nihilists

These ideas were close to the socio-philosophical movement, which was called “soilism”. Its representatives (A.A. Grigoriev, P.P. Strakhov, F.M. Dostoevsky, N.Ya. Danilevsky), developing the views of the Slavophiles, warned against the danger of being carried away by social ideas in isolation from reality, traditions, people, and history. Thinkers called for understanding Russian life, to comprehend the ideal embedded in the people's consciousness, in order to derive the principles of the organic development of the country. On the pages of the magazines “Time” and then “Epoch”, the “soilists” criticized the self-confident rationalism of revolutionary-minded opponents, and determined the viability of philosophy and art by connection with folk life, Russian culture and history.

The soil scientists saw one of the main dangers in their contemporary reality in nihilism (from the Latin nihil - nothing). This phenomenon became widespread among young commoners in the 1860s and was expressed in the denial of established norms of behavior, art, religion, historical traditions, cultural values, recognized authorities and the dominant worldview. Moral categories were replaced by the concepts of “benefit” and “pleasure.”

A complex of spiritual, moral and social problems associated with nihilism is reflected in the novel by I.S. Turgenev’s “Fathers and Sons” (1861), which caused a heated discussion in the press. Main character Turgenev's novel, Bazarov, who denies love, compassion, art and harmony, was enthusiastically greeted by D.I. Pisarev, a leading critic of the revolutionary-democratic magazine “Russian Word” and the main ideologist of nihilism. In the proclamation of the “godless freedom” of man, in the destructive passion of the new phenomenon, many thinkers saw a serious danger for Russia. In the literature of this time, a special genre of “anti-nihilistic novel” was developing (I.A. Goncharov, F.M. Dostoevsky, A.F. Pisemsky, N.S. Leskov). The conservative magazine “Russian Messenger”, published by M.N., took an irreconcilable position towards nihilistic revolutionaries. Katkov.

Development of the novel genre

Generally literary process The second half of the 19th century was marked by the development of the novel genre in all its diversity: the epic novel (“War and Peace” by L.N. Tolstoy), the political novel (“What is to be done?” by N.G. Chernyshevsky), the social novel (“Gentlemen” Golovlevs" M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin), psychological novel(“Crime and Punishment” and other works by F.M. Dostoevsky). The novel became central epic genre era, most corresponding to the most important task that time set for the artist: to explore the complex interactions of man and the surrounding life.

Poetry of the 2nd half of the 19th century

After the Golden Age, having lost its dominant significance as the ruler of thoughts and feelings, poetry continued to develop powerfully and prepare the ground for new ups and downs. In the 1850s, poetry experienced a short but vibrant period of prosperity. The lyricist of “pure art” (A.A. Fet, Y.P. Polonsky, A.N. Maikov) gains recognition and fame.

Attention to people's life, history, folklore, characteristic of literature in general, is reflected in poetry. Main, key points national history received poetic interpretation in the works of A.N. Maykova, A.K. Tolstoy, L.A. Meya. Folk legends, epics, and songs determine the stylistic searches of these authors. The other wing of Russian poetry of the 50s and 60s (the work of the populists M.L. Mikhailov, D.D. Minaev, V.S. Kurochkin) was called “civil” and was associated with revolutionary democratic ideas. The indisputable authority for poets of this movement was N.A. Nekrasov.

In the last third of the 19th century, the work of peasant poets I.Z. became a noticeable phenomenon. Surikova, L.N. Trefoleva, S.D. Drozhzhin, who continued the traditions of Koltsov and Nekrasov.

The poetry of the 1880s was characterized, on the one hand, by the development and enrichment of romantic traditions, and on the other, by the enormous influence of Russian prose, the novels of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky with their deep and subtle psychological analysis human character.

Drama of the 2nd half of the 19th century

The second half of the 19th century became the era of the formation of an original national drama. Widespread use of folklore, attention to merchant and peasant life, the folk language, interest in Russian history, social and moral issues, expansion and complication of the traditional genre range, a complex combination of romanticism and realism - this is the general character of the works of Russian playwrights of the second half of the 19th century - A. N. Ostrovsky, A.K. Tolstoy, L.V. Sukhovo-Kobylina.

The variety of artistic forms and styles of dramaturgy of the 2nd half of the 19th century largely predetermined the emergence at the end of the century of such innovative phenomena as the dramaturgy of L.N. Tolstoy and A.P. Chekhov.

Literature of the 2nd half of the 19th century is divided into 3 periods:

Literature before the 60s (1852-66/7)
1868-81 (81 – important date, since Dostoevsky dies and Alexander dies 2)
1881-94

1 period

The beginning of this period was marked by the following events. In 1852, Gogol and Zhukovsky die, a separate edition of Turgenev’s “Notes of a Hunter” is published. In addition, in 1855, the Crimean Company ended (unsuccessfully for Russia) and the reign of Nicholas 1. This defeat is a disaster in ideological sense, since the company itself took place under the banner of Russia’s superiority over the West (an example from Leskov in “Lefty”: even if everything is fine with them in the West, but we have myrrh-streaming icons). The corruption and technical backwardness of Russia were revealed. Reforms were needed. Alexander II comes to power. Preparations for reforms begin. The beginning of the reign of Alexander II was the most liberal time of the 19th century. Politics in the full sense of the word has appeared in Russia.

In the early 60s - reforms:

peasant
zemstvo
judicial (public proceedings, jury trial, competition). A competitive identification of truth appears. Portrayal of the jury in The Brothers Karamazov and the Resurrection (negative attitude).
military

To many, the reforms seemed half-hearted. In the early 60s, the protest movement intensified, underground organizations appeared (including Earth and Freedom). The government responded with repression. As a result - 04.04.66 - Karakozov's attempt on Alexander 2. The beginning of the reaction. Closing of many lit. magazines (Sovremennik, Russian Word). 68 – exit Crime and Punishment. Great novels begin in Russian literature. The end of this era.

Cultural traits that were formed during this time.

It's question time. Everything was questioned and discussed, from the peasant question to women's emancipation. The figure of a publicist appears who can give an answer to everything (Chernyshevsky, Leskov). Politics appears (in the 50s) and disappears (60s).

Another new character is a commoner. Starts to play important in literature and social life. There is a gap between the cultural elite and the authorities. In the 50s, the government tried to overcome it. For example, Grand Duke Constantine organized expeditions to different provinces to recruit sailors. Ostrovsky, Leskov and others were involved there, but nothing much came of it.

Power is unevenly distributed between these 2 groups:

physical, above the body - in the bureaucracy
over the minds and souls - among the intellectual elite

It can be noted that this era is distinguished by the absence of a great state. figures, commanders (well, except for Skobelev). The fact is that every culture is a field of struggle for prestige. At this time, it was more prestigious to become a publicist and revolutionary than a minister.

Russian society was divided into left (radicals) and right.

The left was carried away by positivism (Feuerbach): the rejection of metaphysics and transcendence, the occupation appearance things, natural sciences - what can be known. 50-60 is generally the time of passion for natural sciences (remember Bazarov from Fathers and Sons). In the 60s, Bram’s work “The Life of Animals” was translated, everyone read it. There is a lot of amateurism, but it gives impetus to science: Sechenov, Pavlov, Mechnikov, Kovalevskaya.

For the right and moderate liberals, the main science was history. Archives were opened, historical magazines and plays began to be published. There was a lot of fuss and amateurism, but historical schools grew - Kostomarov, Soloviev.

The main literary institute remained magazine. An important metamorphosis: permission to publish a magazine with socio-political news. All the magazines took advantage of this. Literature coexists with politics. Social issues and problems of Russia demanded from her. life. Magazines differ in their political stance. Purely literary polemics are no longer conceivable. In 1856, a split occurred in Sovremennik, as Chernyshevsky arrived, brought Dobrolyubov, and a conflict occurred with old employees (Turinev, Gomarov). The “Library for Reading” and “Notes of the Fatherland” (Druzhinin, Botkin, Turgenev) continue to exist. Another old magazine is “Moskvityanin”. Was Slavophile. New, young edition (Apollo-Grigoriev, Ostrovsky). There they formulate the doctrine of pochvennism. New magazines are also appearing. Most important:

1) “Russian Messenger”. 56 years old, Katkov. First liberal, then conservative. It existed for a very long time. All the novels of Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Leskov were published here.

2) Russian word (left edge; Blagosvetlov G. E.). This magazine was associated with nihilists. Pisarev collaborated here.

3) “Time” and “Epoch” in the early 60s (magazines of the Dostoevsky brothers)

All sorts of Slavophiles (Mayak, Dom. conversation, Day, etc.) ??

Literature was read almost exclusively in magazines.

2nd period

The era of great novels begins (with Crime and Punishment); with the death of Dostoevsky, this era ends. The assassination attempt of Karakozov, the closure of radical leftist magazines, the beginning of the reaction. 1868 is very important because this is the year when the first populist works and organizations appear. One of the most notorious events of the late 60s was the Nechaev affair, which Dostoevsky quite reliably reflected in The Possessed. Members of the Nechaev group killed one of the members of the organization, cat. I decided to get out of it and possibly report it to the police. The case had a wide resonance. The government acted very wisely by making the case public. At the same time, the first populist circles appeared, and already in the 70s. the campaign among the people begins (1874). This outing to the people ended rather disastrously: most of these people were arrested. The authorities reacted to all this extremely inadequately: huge sentences, hard labor. The next wave was called “life with the people,” but this enterprise ended in much the same way. Gradually, those involved in this popular movement began to experience a feeling close to despair or even bitterness. And now the second “Land and Freedom” is being created. By 1878, it split into two organizations, which differed in fact: one was the “Black Redistribution” (it was they who professed peaceful measures to change the situation), the second, “People’s Will,” was inclined to violent actions. The wave of terror that swept Russia began in 1878, when Vera Zasulich shot at Governor Trepov. She was acquitted, and the revolutionaries were not tried again by a jury. On the one hand, this event showed society’s sympathy for terror, on the other, the duality of power. The next terrorist act is associated with the name of Kravchinsky, who committed an attempt on the life of the chief gendarme (he killed him with a dagger, jumped into the carriage and disappeared). Since 1878, the terrorist struggle begins. The government responded in kind, and also issued an appeal to the people asking them to counteract moral terror. The terrorists had a clear moral advantage.

History is gradually being replaced by historiosophy. Danilevsky “Russia and Europe” - this treatise largely precedes Spengler. During the same period, what is politely called Russian philosophy began to take shape (late 70s). 1870-1871 – “ABC social sciences"Bervy, "the situation of social classes in Russia." At the center of the idea of progress is the labor of the population, the people, and the fruits of this progress are enjoyed by a very narrow circle of people, while those through whose efforts this is accomplished receive nothing. Lavrov coined the term “critically thinking person.” So this person must realize the situation and feel indebted to the people. The idea of community and the belief that the Russian people already have such an institution and can come to socialism, bypassing capitalism.

In 1868, Nekrasov began editing Otechestvennye zapiski. Throughout the 70s. This magazine is moderately populist. Their ally and competitor is Delo magazine. Vestnik Evropy tried to take a rather liberal position. The centrist position traditionally turned out to be the most vulnerable. An important phenomenon is the “Diary of a Writer”, published by Dostoevsky. Slavophile ephemeral publications continued to appear and were quickly closed. Lit level Critics were very low.

This is still the time of prose, the era of the great novel. As for dramaturgy, it’s about the same as it was. What could be called Ostrovsky’s theater is taking shape. Nobody still reads poetry. Only one person could gain popularity - Nekrasov (and his epigones). The flourishing of revolutionary poetry.

3rd period

1880s politically one of the most boring eras. The reign of Alexander 3 the Peacemaker, during which Russia did not wage a single war. A time of intellectual decline and stagnation. The only new intellectual passion is Social Darwinism. Literature as an institution is characterized by the decline of the thick magazine. Chekhov is indicative in this sense: for a long time he did not publish in a thick magazine and did not consider it necessary. But small-scale journalism is flourishing. Big Idea Fatigue: Writers give up the moral right to teach someone. No heroic characters are created; the place of novels is taken by a short story or short story (again, Chekhov, Korolenko, Garshin). Interest in poetry is awakened. The main figure of the era in this regard was the poet Nadson, who enjoyed enormous popularity. At the same time, there are no new forms. There was no brightness of talents. Garshin is an interesting and tragic fate. He took part in the Balkan War, which greatly affected him. A model Russian intellectual. It is Garshin who is depicted in the face of the son killed by Ivan the Terrible. He committed suicide. His entire legacy is a 200-page book. The feeling is secondary in relation to everything that has already been written. G. had a conscious attitude: the priority of ethics over aesthetics. Another characteristic figure is Korolenko. The writer is so-so, but a good person.