General characteristics of the period. The emergence of a new literary trend - the "natural school". The role of fiction in the social life of Russia, the importance of literary criticism. Trade magazines in the 1840s.
Journalism of the period of the "gloomy seven years" (1848-1855): the creation of committees for press affairs, reprisals against Petrashevists, the emigration of Herzen, the death of Belinsky. Censorship of periodicals. The Politics of Magazines in the Period of the "Gloomy Seven Years".
Journalism of the Slavophiles in the 40s. "Sinbirsky Collection" by D.A. Valuev and "Collection of historical and statistical information about Russia and its peoples of the same faith and tribal" (1845). The Moskvityanin magazine, its historical concept... Article by S.P. Shevyreva "A Look at the Contemporary Direction of Russian Literature". "Young edition" of "Moskvityanin" (1850s), participation in the journal of A.N. Ostrovsky.
Journalism of the 1840s. Main literature: textbooks and teaching aids
Esin B.I. History of Russian journalism (1703-1917). M., 2000.
Esin B.I. History of Russian journalism of the XIX century. M., 2003.
The history of Russian journalism in the 18th-19th centuries. / Ed. prof. A.V. Zapadova. 3rd ed. M., 1973.
History of Russian journalism of the 18th-19th centuries: Textbook / Ed. L.P. Thunderous. SPb., 2003.
Essays on the history of Russian journalism and criticism: In 2 volumes. Vol. 1. L., 1950.
Journalism of the 1840s. additional literature
Annenkov P.V... Literary memoirs. M., 1983.
Berezina V.G. Russian journalism of the second quarter of the 19th century (1840s). L., 1969.
Voroshilov V.V. History of journalism in Russia. SPB., 1999.
Esin B.I., Kuznetsov N.V. Three centuries of Moscow journalism. M., 1997.
Ivlev D.D. The history of Russian journalism in the 18th-early 20th centuries. M., 2004.
V. I. Kuleshov Slavophiles and Russian Literature. M., 1976.
Lemke M. Nikolaev gendarmes and literature of 1826-1855. SPb, 1908.
Lemke M. Essays on the history of Russian censorship and journalism of the 19th century ("The era of censorship terror"). SPb, 1904.
Panaev I.I. Literary memoirs. M., 1950.
Pirozhkova T.F... Slavophil journalism. M., 1997.
Chicherin B.N. Moscow forties. M., 1929.
Journalism of the 1840s. Texts
Aksakov K.S. , Aksakov I.S. Literary criticism. M., 1981.
I. V. Kireevsky Criticism and aesthetics. M., 1979.
Journalism of the 1840s. General characteristics of the period
Slavophiles
Slavophilism is one of the directions of Russian social and philosophical thought of the 19th century.
The originality of Russia is in the absence of a class struggle
in the Russian land community and artels,
in orthodoxy
Negative attitude towards revolution
Monarchism
Religious and philosophical concepts opposed to the ideas of materialism.
They opposed the assimilation by Russia of the forms and methods of Western European political life and order.
Westerners
representatives of one of the directions of Russian social thought 40-50-ies. 19th century
advocated the elimination of serfdom
recognized the need for the development of Russia along the Western European path
Historical views of the Slavophiles
Idealization of pre-Petrine Russia
Rapprochement with the people
Studying the history of the peasantry in Russia
Collecting and preserving monuments of Russian culture and language:
- collection of folk songs by P. V. Kireevsky,
- dictionary of the living Great Russian language Dahl, etc.
In the 1840s, an acute ideological struggle was fought in the literary salons of Moscow: A.A. and A.P. Elagin, D.N. and E.A. Sverbeyevs, N.F. and K.K. Pavlov.
Avdotya Petrovna Elagina,
niece and friend of V.A. Zhukovsky, mother of I.V.
and P.P. Kireevsky; one of the most educated
women of her time, mistress of the famous
literary salon
"Natural school"
The term was first used by Bulgarin ("Northern Bee") as a contemptuous nickname for the literary youth of the 1840s.
Reconsidered by Belinsky: "natural" - "truthful depiction of reality."
Natural school writers:
I.S. Turgenev
A.I. Herzen
ON. Nekrasov
F.M. Dostoevsky
I.A. Goncharov
M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin
Distinctive features of the "natural school"
deep interest in the life of the common people
new hero - a native of the national "lower classes"
criticism of serfdom
images of the city's social vices, the contradiction between poverty and wealth
predominance of prose genres: novel, story, "physiological sketch"
A.I. Herzen:
"For a people deprived of public freedom, literature is the only tribune from the height of which they make them hear the cry of their indignation and their conscience."
Literary controversy of the 1840s.
Dispute about Lermontov
Controversy around
"Dead Souls"
N.V. Gogol
Controversy around
"Natural school"
"Lighthouse"
"Library for reading"
1840s: "the journalistic period of Russian literature"
Publishing is becoming a lucrative business
The duties of the editor are separated from those of the publisher.
High fees are used to attract the right writers
The number of professional journalists and writers is increasing: work in publications is becoming the only means of subsistence.
Thick monthly are the dominant type of publication, the ideological centers of the country's life.
"Son of the Fatherland" (1812-1852)
changeover in editors. Involvement of Polevoy in the editing of the journal:
- defense of official ideology
- misunderstanding of new literary trends, protection of the aesthetic principles of romanticism
- as a result, there is a lack of readers' interest and a drop in circulation.
"Russian Bulletin" (1840-1844)
Publishers - N.I. Grech, N.A. Polevoy, N.V. Puppeteer
- criticism of leading writers
- support for the "original Russian outlook".
- Circulation - 500 copies, irregular publication.
"Library for Reading" (1834-1865)
- decrease in circulation from 5 to 3 thousand copies
- Brambeus' wit lost to Belinsky and Herzen
- rejection of the "natural school", incorrect assessment of the advanced phenomena of literature
"Gogol, as a fiction writer, is much lower than the Puppeteer"
O.I. Senkovsky,
1852 g.
Journalism of the Slavophiles in the 40s
"Sinbirsky Collection" by D.A. Valuev (1845)
"Collection of historical and statistical information about Russia and its peoples of the same faith and tribal" ("Slavic") (1845)
"Moskvityanin" magazine (1841-1857)
Publishers:
Mikhail Petrovich Pogodin
Stepan Petrovich Shevyrev
Two periods in the existence of the journal
1) 1841-1851: the direction and composition of the closest employees remained almost unchanged
2) 1851-1856: the so-called "young editorial board" begins to play a leading role in the magazine, and the appearance of "Moskvityanin" changes
The main sections of the "Muscovite"
"Spiritual Eloquence"
"Fine Arts"
"Science"
"Materials for Russian history and the history of Russian literature"
"Criticism and Bibliography"
"Slavic news"
"Mix (Moscow Chronicle, Internal News, Mods, etc.)".
Stepan Petrovich Shevyrev (1806 -1864)
Russian literary critic, literary historian, poet
1835-37 - leading critic of the Moscow Observer
since 1837 - professor at Moscow University
From 1841 - together with M.P. Pogodin headed "Moskvityanin"
"Moskvityanin" was published,
"Moskvityanin" was published,
As best he can, by itself!
He's used to it! - will gather,
Wanders into the printing house,
Crawling to the bookbinder
After that, it will crawl into the shop!
The reader is waiting, waiting
Scold, and home!
And the most respectable publisher,
However, my good friend,
No matter how you give it out, out of hand!
Dmitriev
"Young edition" "Moskvityanin" (1851-1853)
"Young edition":
A.N. Ostrovsky
A.F. Pisemsky
A. Grigoriev
L.A. May
E. N. Edelson
T. Filippov and others
A. Grigoriev
“Old trash and old rags pruned all the shoots of life in the Moskvityanin in the 1950s. You would write, sometimes, an article about modern literature - well, let's say, at least about lyric poets - and suddenly, to your amazement and horror, you see that the names of Pushkin, Lermontov, Koltsov, Khomyakov, Ogarev, Fet, Polonsky, Mei were added to it in the neighborhood are the names of Countess Rostopchina, Mrs. Karolina Pavlova, Mr. M. Dmitriev, Mr. Fedorov .. and oh, horror! - Avdotya Glinka! You see and you can't believe your eyes! It seems that I even read the last proofreading and the layout, - suddenly, as if by a wave of a magic wand, the named guests appeared in print! "
"Moskvityanin"
"Gloomy Seven Years" (1848 - 1855) in the history of Russia
Police measures intensified, the provinces were flooded with troops.
The universities reduced the number of students, banned philosophy.
Survey of the content of magazines, the establishment of the "Buturlinsky Committee".
"Buturlinsky Committee", or "Committee on April 2"
Standing Press Committee with Exclusive Powers: Committee orders were considered personal orders Nicholas I.
The committee was taciturn. He did not replace, but controlled the censorship department.
Repression of writers and journalists
Saltykov-Shchedrin- exiled to Vyatka for the story "Confused Business"
In 1849, a reprisal against the Petrashevites was organized, a civil execution ceremony over Dostoevsky
Slavophil Samarin exiled to Simbirsk province
Established police supervision of Ostrovsky
Arrested Ogarev, Satin
Turgenev was sent to his estate for Gogol's obituary
Grim Seven Years Journalism
A number of magazines are discontinued
The magazines have lost the severity of the direction
Principled controversy stopped
Significant events are not covered
The idea of "art for art" is discussed
Appearing in large numbers:
- historical and literary works
- feuilletons
- scientific publications.
Chapter 8
JOURNALISM 1840s
§ 1. Ideological searches of the "era of consciousness"
Forties of the XIX century - one of the most interesting periods in the history of Russian journalism. This decade, outwardly not marked by any outstanding events, was a time of intense theoretical research, one of the key stages in the development of Russian social thought. The passionate devotion of the progressive Russian intelligentsia to the world of ideas and ideals, the dedication of ideological quests created a special aura around this period, gave it special significance.
VG Belinsky called the 1840s "the era of consciousness." The specificity of the ideological life of these years was determined, first of all, by the process of decomposition of feudal-serf relations, the crisis state of the state system. This crisis manifested itself in both the economic and political life society. There is an increase in the number of peasant uprisings against the landlords and, at the same time, an increase in political pressure from the autocratic state. The crisis of the serf system in the forties became more and more evident in connection with the growth of capitalist relations within the feudal state. At this time, there is a rapid industrial development of the country, a revival of trade, and an increase in the class of small producers. If in the sphere economic crisis it was just beginning to manifest itself, then in the field of ideological life it manifested itself most clearly.
In the forties of the XIX century. the activation of public thought led to the search for the most effective means influence on the consciousness of contemporaries. Journalism has become such a means. "Magazines-
with a geek in the pasha all the time, "- wrote in these years Belinsky. "The magazine is everything, and ... nowhere in the world does it have such great and important importance as in our country." At the same time, the position of the press was determined by the policy of the autocracy in relation to the media. According to the censorship charter of 1828, Russian journalism was deprived of the right not only to criticize, but also to discuss any actions of the government and persons in the public service, even those who stood on the lower rungs of the estate and bureaucratic ladder. To strengthen control over periodicals, the government used Section III. As part of the imperial chancellery, it stood not only outside the general system of government institutions, but to a certain extent, significantly higher than them. In 1841-1842. in the III Section was organized - in addition to the four that existed - the fifth, censorship, expedition. She was entrusted with the "higher supervision" of periodicals. The expedition received a legal copy of all publications published in Russia, officials of the 111th Branch were part of each censorship committee, the number of which increased to twelve. Oversight of the press has officially come under the mandate of the political police. The control of the press became widespread.
In one of the memoranda to Section III of F. Bulgarin, a loyal publisher of Severnaya Beele, a gay man contains curious evidence of the grip of journalism at that time. Bulgarin wrote: “For example, if I discovered that the baker was drunk and insulted a passing woman, I would gain enemies: 1) the Minister of Internal Affairs. 2) Military Governor-General. 3) Chief of Police. 4) Chiefs of Police. 5) Private bailiff. 6) Quarterly Overseer. 7) City non-commissioned officer. " Even Bulgarin, who can hardly be suspected of free-thinking, expressed dissatisfaction with such a system of multi-stage control over the press.
The “system of concealing the truth,” as Bulgarin called the police-bureaucratic machine that governed public opinion in autocratic Russia, functioned well. Realizing the growing influence of the press on the mentality of society, the government in these years continues to expand its spheres of influence in this area. One of them is the strengthening of the provincial press. Since 1838, in 41 provinces of Russia, “Gubernskie vedomosti” began to appear, which were of an official nature. Their content was strictly regulated. Provincial Gazette consisted of two parts - official and unofficial. The official printed the orders and orders of the provincial boards, permitted by the government.
information about state affairs - as a rule, a reprint from St. Petersburg newspapers, most often from "Severnaya Beelya". In 1846, a circular was created to regulate the content of the unofficial part of Vedomosti. Here could “be placed, on the basis of the definition of the provincial government, the following news: 1) about emergencies in the province, 2) about market reference prices for various needs, 3) about the state of both state and private significant factories and plants, 4) on the privileges granted for invention and compilation of companies, 5) on ways to improve agriculture and home economics ”, etc. 22 paragraphs scrupulously list the topics that were allowed to cover the provincial journalists. Under such a system of government and gendarme control, the provincial bulletins of those years were, as a rule, mouthpieces of government information. In a secret circular order dated March 19, 1846, the chief of the gendarmes charged his subordinates with the duty to have "unremitting observation of the provincial statements published in the provinces, reading them with attention, and to gain time to inform his Excellency directly to his Excellency the chief of the gendarme corps." The very fact of encouraging publications in the provinces and close control over them testified to the fact that the tsarist government was aware of the importance of the press as a means of political influence on society. Proceeding from this, everything was done to slow down the development of private publishing activities and, conversely, to give scope to official publications. Departmental special editions were encouraged, mainly designed for a relatively narrow circle of readers, such as "Nuvellist", "Musical Light", as well as all kinds of "Notes" of various societies. In total, 53 editions were opened from 1839 to 1848. Among them there are 11 magazines, only 4 of which were literary and public in nature: "Otechestvennye zapiski", "Mayak", "Moskvityanin", "Finsky Vestnik". The bulk of the publications, along with the "Gubernskie vedomosti", were magazines, almanacs, collections. There were much fewer newspapers, and they were usually of a specialized nature. Only a few of them can be typologically classified as literary public publications.
The government treated such publications with special suspicion: it was they who enjoyed the greatest success with the reader. In the early 1840s, an attempt was made to paralyze the "harmful" influence of Otechestvennye zapiski by creating two new social and literary journals - Mayak (1840) and Moskvityanin (1841).
They were headed by S. A. Burachek and M. P. Pogodin - writers whose way of thinking was in full accordance with the official ideology. 11the government had high hopes that they would be able to resist liberal and democratic ideas. But that did not happen. The magazines were published at a low professional level, did not take into account the requests of readers very much, and did not differ in topicality. The circulation of these publications was small, and the public impact was not comparable to the journalism of Otechestvennye zapiski. "Mayak" and "Moskvityanin" preached official patriotism, and often militant obscurantism.
At a difficult historical crossroads, after the suppression of the Decembrist movement, the country "frightened into thought", according to N. P. Ogarev, faced the problem of comprehending the ways of further development, the place of Russia among other peoples and states. Revolutionary events in Europe became the catalyst of this process. In the bizarre interweaving of theories, teachings, political schemes in Russian society in the forties, the main ideological currents were determined - serfdom, liberal and democratic. The concepts of official nationality, Westernism and Slavophilism, as well as the ideology of Russian democracy are being formed.
The backbone of government ideology was the so-called theory of the official nationality. Its main postulates were formulated back in the 1830s by the minister public education S. Uvarov. The very fact of the emergence of this theory and the support that the government gave it were logical. After the defeat of the Decembrist uprising, in connection with the strengthening of the liberation movement in Europe, the revolutionary events of the thirties in France, which shook the foundations Of the sacred union, the Russian government acutely felt the need for such an ideological system that could resist both the ferment of the minds inside the country and the influence of the social movement in the West, and in particular in France, where the word “revolution” hated by the monarchs again flashed in the civil lexicon.
The establishment of a single ideological regime in the country was seen as a reliable means against the influence of revolutionary ideas "of the West." Truly Russian protective principles "Uvarov called Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality, which, as he wrote," the last anchor of our salvation and the surest guarantee of the strength and greatness of our fatherland "The monarchical form of government, according to the concept, was declared the only one corresponding to the spirit of the Russian people, and serfdom was a natural state.
loyal subjects; religion was called to sanctify these principles. "The task of the theory is to pacify" stormy impulses to the foreign, to the unknown, to the abstract in the vague area of politics and philosophy "," to multiply, where possible, the number of mental dams. "
At the other pole of public life in the forties, the opposite official ideology of Russian democracy was formed, which was distinguished by a deep intransigence towards the serf system, which hindered the development of the country, and a desire for social reorganization of society. The "great confrontation" of these ideologies clearly revealed the ideological crisis of the serf system.
In the 1840s, liberal trends of Westernism and Slavophilism took shape. Despite the well-known conventionality of these terms, they quite accurately reflect the content and internal orientation of the ideological programs created by representatives of these directions. It should be noted that until the forties, Russian social thought, opposition to the government, essentially did not know any division, was to a certain extent homogeneous, despite the many shades within it.
Born out of the crisis of the serf system, the intensive search for ways to change the social system in the forties went in two directions. One part of Russian thinkers, the so-called Westernizers, focused their main attention on the study of the historical experience of the West, the state structure of countries that are more economically and politically developed. The Russians were especially interested in France, which had experienced major revolutionary upheavals. The "Europeanization" of Russia, for which the Westernizers stood up, meant, first of all, the desire to include the country in a single process of world historical development.
Westerners were critical of serfdom, but the revolutionary character of the reforms was alien to them. It is no accident that the final ideological demarcation in this camp came in the second half of the forties, when the revolutionary movement began in Europe. On the eve of the revolution, discrepancies between the liberal part of Westernism and its radical wing, headed by Belinsky and Herzen, were clearly revealed. Both ge and others were focused on the study of the historical experience of Europe. But the liberal part of Westernism was more interested in the problems of the state, cultural, economic development of Europe, which had embarked on the path of capitalist development. The ideologists of revolutionary democracy scrutinized the social experience of Europe and, most carefully, the experience of the revolution.
Having arisen on the same axis of social tension as the West,
In search of the ideal of social order, the Slavophil tendency turned to the study of history, state structure and spiritual life of pre-Petrine Russia. The Slavophiles put forward the thesis of the original path of the historical development of Russia. This originality, in their opinion, was given to it by the fact that Russia, which adopted Christianity from Byzantium, did not know any conquests and therefore formed its own way of social life, inherent only to it, based on the Christian community. The Slavophiles, who focused their attention on the religious foundations of Russian life, were alien to the idea of the inevitability of revolutions and social upheavals. They rejected serfdom as a form of violence against the individual, contrary to the spirit of Christian brotherhood. Belinsky and Herzen sympathetically perceived the criticism of serfdom by the Slavophiles, but at the same time they sharply criticized the theory of the Slavophiles for historical limitation and religious mysticism.
I [the presence of three political forces in society, the three ideological camps were reflected in the press. The following directions are determined in the editions of this time. First of all, these are numerous publications of the official direction, reflecting the ideological attitudes of the feudal state: magazines of ministries (Ministry of Internal Affairs, public education, state property), provincial bulletins, "Northern Bee", government bulletins and the bulk of specialized publications. In addition, the press of this period reflected the processes associated with the development of bourgeois relations and realized in the ideology of liberalism, which united political forces opposed to the tsarist autocracy - Westernizers and Slavophiles. On the left flank of this trend, the ideology of revolutionary democracy was formed.
The process of political differentiation of society in the forties was most directly reflected in the press. As Belinsky wrote, "magazine opinions divide the public into literary coteries." The reader's attention to this or that organ of the press was determined primarily by its direction, and this direction, in turn, by that. what ideological positions the publication preached.
However, one cannot imagine the matter as if there were press organs that “sterile” strictly adhered to one or another ideological orientation. In terms of political qualities, the press of the forties was an extremely complex, variegated and contradictory phenomenon. Almost every publication has experienced ideological fluctuations over the course of a decade. This happened, for example, with the Moskvityanin magazine. Created as a body of official ideology
ology, in 1845 it passed into the hands of the Slavophiles and, under the editorship of P.V. Kireevsky, changed its direction. This period did not last long, only three months. Then the magazine again returned to the original positions of the official nationality. In 1843, there were changes in the direction of the official newspapers "Moskovskie vedomosti" and "Russian invalid". Despite the fact that these newspapers were controlled by government agencies - Moscow University and the Ministry of Defense, respectively, they were rented by private individuals. EF Korsh became the editor of the unofficial part in Moskovskiye Vedomosti, and AA Kraevsky for the Russian Invalid. Since that time, their content has been formed under the strong influence of the democratic journal Otechestvennye zapiski. The same thing happened with St. Petersburg Vedomosti in 1847, when the newspaper was headed by A. N. Ochkin.
The newspaper world of this period was not very diverse. The Russian reader still perceived badly the difference between a newspaper and a magazine. Defined since the 18th century. type of official newspaper, like. for example, "St. Petersburg Vedomosti" was still firmly on its feet. The detachment of the official and semi-official press was represented by the provincial Gazette and the semi-official "Northern Bee". Nevertheless, in the forties, there have been some changes both in the content model of newspapers and in the expansion of the typology of publications.
The type of "literary newspaper" that emerged in the early 1930s with the participation of A. Pushkin was finally established in the forties. Literaturnaya gazeta of this period became one of the leaders of the newspaper market and shared the democratic positions of Otechestvennye zapiski.
Her creative biography consists of several periods, the most interesting of which were 1841-1845. At this time, I.A.Nekrasov actively collaborated in the newspaper, and in 1844-1845. - VG Belinsky, other authors of Otechestvennye zapiski were published. The newspaper's social and literary position was clearly manifested in its polemics with Severnaya Beelya and other pro-government publications. The democratic press considered the Bulgarin publications as a means of disorienting the reader and constantly exposed their methods of influencing subscribers.
The assertion of the principles of critical realism in literature, the defense of the gains of the "natural school" with its close attention to the tragedy of the individual under the conditions of an autocratic state, the upbringing of a thinking, critical of reality
chi i atela - this is an incomplete list of problems raised by the newspaper.
The intensification of polemics in the Literaturnaya Gazeta with Bulgarin coincided with the campaign against the head of the "reptilian" literature, which in 1842 and 1843. Belinsky was especially active in Otechestvennye zapiski. In almost every article in the series "Literary and Journal Notes," he did not miss an opportunity to respond to the vicious remarks of the publisher of "Severnaya Beelya" or comment on his opinion.
Neutralizing Bulgarin was important for the progressive press also because Gogol and Lermontov were constantly criticized on the pages of his publications, that is, writers whose work Belinsky associated with the development of a new method of literature - critical realism. The interpretation of Gogol's works is one of the main controversies in the forties. Literaturnaya gazeta was completely in solidarity with the position of Otechestvennye zapiski. It is characteristic that the main speeches of the newspaper about the work of Gogol coincided in time with Belinsky's reviews in Otechestvennye zapiski.
When, at the end of 1842, Gogol's collected works were published, Literaturnaya Gazeta hastened to immediately inform its readers about this. Commenting on this event, she called Gogol's novel "The Overcoat" and the play "Marriage" first published there "wonderful". The article in a parody form set out all possible opinions of critics about the work of Gogol. And although not a single surname was mentioned here, it was clear that the newspaper was fighting the same targets as Belinsky: “In Moscow, they will begin to prove,” the reviewer sarcastically, “that Gogol is Aristophanes and Terentius of the present century; others will refute this and will only show that before and after Gogol there was and will not be Russian literature; still others will find fault with typos and incorrect phrases of the language. " “Finally, the fourth,” the author wrote, bearing in mind, of course, Bulgarin’s point of view, “will begin to prove that Gogol is a completely incompetent person, whom his friends glorify in order to drop other satirical writers. Well, this will be pure satire on Russian literature: where are these satirical writers who can be dropped and who could at least somehow measure themselves with Gogol. "
For the purposes of polemics, Literaturnaya Gazeta used any hint. So, about Bulgarin, she sarcastically remarked: "He mixes the format with the size of the paper, and this is the same difference as in the works of Gogol and Bulgarin." The polemical meaning of this comparison will become clear if we bear in mind that Bulgarin has repeatedly stated that Gogol has no talent and argued that he cannot be compared
even with such writers as Odoevsky and Sollogub, "who are higher than Gogol, as Chimboraso is higher than Pulkovo Mountain."
Along with the defense of Gogol against his false interpreters, the newspaper drew attention to the work of Lermontov. In a review of Lermontov's Poems, it was pointed out that the development of his talent “promised a lot of brilliant and imaginative”. Literaturnaya Gazeta was one of the few Russian editions that reported on the death of the poet. A message about this appeared in the 89th issue of 1841 under the heading "Literary and theatrical news". Apparently, for censorship reasons, the newspaper was unable to devote more space and attention to the death of the disgraced poet.
The speeches of the Literaturnaya Gazeta on theatrical art are also of great interest. Let's name the main directions along which theatrical criticism developed on the pages of the newspaper. This is, firstly, a deep dissatisfaction with the repertoire of theaters, the desire to influence the formation of the aesthetic tastes of the viewer, to educate him in a critical attitude to the theater of entertainment, which prevailed at that time. Secondly, serious reflections on the specifics and purpose of dramatic genres, on the role of the theatrical critic. Thirdly, the fight against the pseudo-patriotic works of the written Russian playwrights G. Obodovsky and N. Polevoy, the exposure of their anti-artistic essence.
In 1844 and 1845. in the newspaper, as already noted, Belinsky and Nekrasov collaborated most intensively. In the field of literary theory, Belinsky's article "A Look at the Major Phenomena of Russian Literature in 1843", published in numbers 1 and 2 for 1844, and "On Parties in Literature" - in number 17 for 1845 g.
Of great interest in the Literaturnaya Gazeta was the "Notes for the Owners" section. It was led by AI Zablotsky-Desyatovsky, a well-known Russian economist, author of the famous article "On the causes of fluctuations in bread prices in Russia", which was published in 1847 in Otechestvennye zapiski and received an approving response from Belinsky. In 1845, in the 8th issue of the Literaturnaya Gazeta, a note appeared signed by Nikifor Rabotyagin entitled “On the current state of prices for bread in different places Russia ”, apparently written by Zablotsky, which can be considered a kind of preparation for a large journal article. The newspaper's general democratic position was reflected even in such a seemingly insignificant subsection as "Kitchen". It was led by V.F.Odoevsky, who, in a feuilleton
he mocked those whose "gastric functions are the main and only ones in life."
In 1845, a material appeared with the title "Letters to Dr. Poof". In the first letter, the author, who called himself Doc of the Knuf Mountains, asked, for example, questions: “Tell me, why are there many, many people who have nothing to eat? What will your rich science give to the poor man who has chaff for his food? Teach me how to make consommé, salami, pudding or roast beef from chaff and water? " “... Do not forget,” the author warned, “that this is a very important subject. The poor, I think ... are the majority everywhere. " Hints of this kind acquired a social sound, and the “Kitchen” column was just a kind of screen behind which topical thoughts were hidden.
In 1845, six weeks after the publication of F. Engels's book The Condition of the Working Class in England, the first Russian review of it appeared in Literaturnaya Gazeta, which indicated the publication's obvious interest in acute social problems.
The newspaper "Moskovskie vedomosti" changed direction since 1843, when E.F. Korsh became its editor. E. Korsh was friends with Herzen, Granovsky, Ogarev and shared their views. Moskovskie vedomosti showed great interest in the study of social problems.
In particular, a lot of materials on economic issues are published here. The issues of freedom of trade, tariff systems, scientific literature on economics were especially actively discussed. Moskovskie vedomosti initiated a polemic on these issues. At the same time, economic problems were considered together with social ones.
Typical evidence is, for example, the article “On the Future of Money”, published in 1846. “Whoever has money,” it said, “enjoys everything: honor, distinction, pleasure and peace. The rich man plays the main role everywhere, sets the tone, controls, orders. The poor means almost nothing or is only a thing that others use, deriving their own benefits from it. " The article directly expressed the hope that such an order would be eliminated: "There is no way to allow the domination of money and the resulting perverse way of life to have an infinite future in front of them."
E. Korsch's newspaper published sharp materials of an anti-serfdom character, for example, "The Liberation of Negroes in the French Colonies." In an allegorical form, the article sounded demanding
emancipation of the Russian peasants from serfdom, their position was directly compared with the slavery of blacks.
This article of 1844 attracted the attention of the censorship, especially the following passage: “Slavery is contrary to the laws of morality; it corrupts both master and slave; the former by the fact that it gives him irresponsible, constantly oppressive power over the slaves ... the latter by the fact that he likens him to cattle, replacing any rational activity with the fear of a whip and blind obedience. " The chief of the gendarmes A. Orlov rightly found in it "a more extensive meaning that does not belong to blacks alone." The newspaper was issued a warning, but despite this, in 1846 in the article "Slavery in the French Colonies" the same thoughts were sharpened to the limit: as soon as possible. "
In 1847, the first attempt was made to create a city newspaper. It was "Moscow City Leaf". The newspaper existed for only one year. It was published 2 times a week and, judging by the content, intended to become a competitor to the country's leading newspaper, Bulgarin's Severnaya Beele. The editor of the newspaper V. Drashusov made efforts to establish constant information about the life of Moscow. In January 1847, the "Department of Urban Rumors" appeared, which soon gave way to others: "Trade Movement", "Spectacles and Amusements", "Announcements", "Moscow". But the newspaper failed to establish an information service.
The editors could not decide on the direction either. The editorial staff was extremely variegated. S. Shevy-rev, M. Zagoskin, D. Veltman - literators and publicists of the official direction were published here, at the same time A. D. Galakhov, a regular author of Otechestvennye zapiski, collaborated. The newspaper published an essay by A. I. Herzen "Station Edrovo". published "physiological sketches" E. Grebenka, the writer of the "natural school".
The inconsistency of the position of the "Moscow City Leaf" can be illustrated by the following example. Beginning with the 3rd issue, it published lectures by the professor of Moscow University S. Shevyrev "A general view of the history of art and poetry in particular." Much space was devoted to Western fiction. Western literature, according to the author, has outlived its usefulness: "The spiritual personality of the West has ended its period."
100 RUR first order bonus
Select the type of work Diploma work Course work Abstract Master's thesis Practice report Article Report Review Test work Monograph Problem solving Business plan Answers to questions Creative work Essays Drawing Essays Translation Presentations Typing Other Increasing the uniqueness of the text PhD thesis Laboratory work Online help
Find out the price
V national history The 1840s entered as “the era of agitation of mental interests” (A. I. Herzen), the period of an amazing rise of philosophical, social and literary critical thought. The formulation and solution of all socio-political, philosophical, historical and aesthetic issues in this "remarkable decade" (P.V. Annenkov) was determined by the confrontation between the two currents of Russian social thought that emerged at the turn of the 1830s and 1840s - Westernism and Slavophilism. At the heart of the disputes between Westernizers and Slavophiles was a vital question about the place of Russia in the historical process, the connection of its cultural and historical past with the present and future, its possible contribution to world history... The assessment of certain phenomena of literary history and modernity depended on the answer to it.
WESTERNS(V.G.Belinsky, A.I. Herzen, T.N. Granovsky, 1C D. Kavelin, V.P. Botkin, 11 V. Annenkov, etc.) the first plan of the idea of freedom and self-worth of the human person, emphasized the exhaustion of those principles that formed the basis of ancient Russian life. The programmatic speeches of the Westerners were public lectures by T.N. Granovsky, articles by Belnisky, which appeared in "Notes of the Fatherland" for 1841 and later received the general name "Russia before Peter the Great", and KD Kavelin's work "A Look at the Legal Life of Ancient Russia" published in the first issue of Nekrasov's Sovremennik.
Slavophiles(A.S. Khomyakov. IV. And P. In Kireevsky, K. S. and I. S. Aksakovs, Yu. F. Samarin, D. A. Valuev and others) - published their articles on the pages "Moskvityanin", "Moscow literary and scientific collections", "Russian conversation", opposed the transfer of schemes to the history of Russia European history... Justifying the opposition "Russia-Europe", they emphasized that Europe arose as a result of the conquests of some peoples by others, and Russia - peacefully; in the West, rational Catholicism has taken root, in Russia - an integral Christian faith; in European life, the individualistic principle prevails, and in Russian life, the communal one. The Slavophiles saw the main task facing the Russian nation in building life on communal and genuinely Christian principles and thereby embarking on the path to true unity - "conciliarity."
Despite heated disputes among themselves, the Westernizers and Slavophiles were allies in a common desire to transform Russian life. Both of them criticized the Nikolaev regime, demanded the abolition of serfdom, defended freedom of conscience, speech, and press. Characteristic is the later confession of A.I. Herzen “... we were their opponents, but very strange ... early years one strong, unaccountable ... feeling of boundless love, embracing the whole existence of the Russian people, the Russian way of life, for the Russian mentality. And we, like Janus or like a two-headed eagle, looked in different directions, while our heart was beating one. "
The tribune of social and aesthetic disputes in the 40s, as in the previous decade, remains Russian journalism, which has undergone major changes. In the history of Russian literature, the "journal period" begins. Responding to the weight of the most significant phenomena of the mental life of Russia and Europe, absorbing all domestic and translated fiction (Otechestvennye zapiski, Sovremennik, Moskvityanin, etc.), “turned into an unusually important factor in the socio-political and cultural movement and have become the centers of the country's ideological life ”.
The growing influence of the magazines Belinsky and Gsrtsen was favorably assessed. According to Herzen, they “have spread over the past twenty-five years a huge amount of knowledge, concepts, ideas. They made it possible for residents of Omsk or Tobolsk provinces to read novels by Dickens or Georges Sand. two months after their appearance in London or Paris. "
The publishers and editors of the journals tried to impart ideological unity to all materials published here: journalistic, critical, artistic and scientific. An even more important place than before was taken by literary criticism. In the magazines of that time, according to the just remark of N. G. Chernyshevsky, "aesthetic issues were ... for the most part only a battlefield, and the subject of the struggle was the influence on mental life in general." The concept of "literary direction", which Polevoy actively defended back in the 1830s, acquired a decisive significance for journals. Magazine polemics on various issues flared up with renewed vigor, attracting the attention of reading and thinking Russia.
In the 1840s, the types of periodicals became more diverse than before. Along with literary monthly magazines, the theater magazine "Repertoire and Pantheon" by FA Koni, the weekly illustrated magazine "Illustration" by N. Kukolnik, are published, designed for a wide audience. The importance of newspapers is growing: in a number of cities, the publication of "Gubernskiye vedomosti" has been consolidated. Entrepreneurial relations are increasingly penetrating the publishing industry, and the number of professional journalists and writers. A new democratic reader from the ranks of the bureaucracy, merchants and clergy appears alongside the noble reader.
Central to journalism in the 1840s was taken "Notes of the Fatherland", which in 1839 passed into the hands of A.A. Kraevsky, who was close to literary circles. In an effort to resist the journal monology of F. Bulgarin. N. Grech and O. Senkovsky, A. A. Krasvsky attracted talented writers of various orientations to the publication. Among the staff of "Otechestvennye zapiski" were writers of the Pushkin circle (PA Vyazemsky, V.A. Zhukovsky, V, F. Odoevsky), who began creative way young writers (Lermontov, Turgenev, Dostoevsky, Panaev, etc.). The magazine, which was solid in terms of volume (up to 40 printed sheets), included eight sections: "Contemporary Kropim of Russia". (Science "," Literature "," Arts "," Housekeeping, agriculture and industry in general "," Criticism "," Modern bibliographic chronicle "," Mix. " department of the magazine, and his friends - Botkin, Katkov, Granovsky, Ketcher, Kudryavtsev Soon, close critics Herzen, Ogarev and Nekrasov began to collaborate in Otechestvennye zapiski.
Became the organizational center of Westerners, the Otech. Notes ”actively advocated the Europeanization of Russian life, acquainting readers with the highest achievements of European scientific and artistic thought. In the "Notes of the Fatherland" the best works of Russian literature, created in the late 1830s - 1840s, were foaming: Lermontov's poems and individual parts of "Gsroy of Our Time", "songs" and "thoughts" by Koltsov, Herzen's works, Turgenev's early works, stories poems by Nekrasov, stories by Dostoevsky and Saltykov-Shchedrin In addition to the above-mentioned writers, D.V. Grigorovich, V.I.Dal, V.A, Sollogub, GF Kvitka-Os-novyanenko, A.A. Fet and many other. Transferable fiction was represented by the works of J. Side, Dickens, F. Cooper. G. Heine.
In the late 1840s, he took the leading position in Russian journalism "Contemporary". Published after the death of Pushkin by P.A.Pletnev and did not attract long years active reader's attention, this magazine in 1847 passed into the hands of N.A., Nekrasov and I.I. Panaev and acquired, thanks to the participation of Belinsky and Herzen, a radical orientation,
With the aim of opposing advanced Russian journalism in the early 1840s ruling circles gave permission to publish two new editions - the magazines "Mayak" (ed - Burachok) and "Moskvityanin" (ed - Pogodin). "Mayak" violently attacked German philosophy, persecuted modern French literature and sought to instill a protective spirit in Russian literature, evaluating it exclusively from the standpoint of religiosity, "patriotism" and "nationality." "Moskvityanin" - slanderous adjustments to advanced journalism and literature, angry invectives addressed to the West, mired in debauchery, exhausted from "fractures and destruction", here side by side with a deep assessment of the foundations of European and Russian enlightenment in I. Kireevsky's articles, insightful, albeit one-sided judgments about the work of Gogol in the articles of K. Aksakov, with faith in the peasantry as the guardian and exponent of popular beliefs and aspirations in the speeches of A.S. Khomyakov.
In connection with the growing disagreements in the circle of Westernizers, polemics began on a number of problems between Sovremennik and the journal Otechestvennye zapiski. However, the most fundamental line of confrontation lay in the 1940s between Otechestvennye Zapiski and Sovremennik as organs of the democratic direction, on the one hand, and I am a Moskvityan on the other.
Critical articles and bibliographic notes "Notes of the Fatherland" in possessing the unity of the aesthetic, historical and ethical principles of the examination of works. A large number of review articles in the journal testified to the desire of critics to outline the main trends in historical and literary development. Belinsky, Galakhov, Botkin defended "the poetry of reality, inspired by the living national interest, The "humane subjectivity" of the artist, welcomed the movement of Russian literature along the path of realism. On the pages of the magazine, tendentious criticism began to take shape, criticism "about", which will take a central place in the magazines of the next decade. In this regard, the admission of A. D. Galakhov is characteristic: “... we were interested not so much in the content of the essay being analyzed, as in the relation of the content to the beliefs that are dear to us. We used the new work of a writer or scientist as an opportunity to talk about what constituted the task of the journal, what gave it color, corresponded to the essence of its program. "
In general, the criticism of the late 1840s - early 1850s, recalling the “calm before the storm,” reflects the concentrated expectations of the literary community associated with changes in political life.
Journalism of the 40s of the XIX century was marked by an important step forward, and this is primarily due to the active participation of Belinsky in it.
Belinsky was the first, proceeding from the real situation of the 40s, to seriously advance the principles of journalism. He perfectly studied and appreciated the experience of Karamzin, Pushkin and Polevoy - the most prominent journalists of the first third of the 19th century.
In the conditions of the growing contradictions of the serf system, the intensification of peasant revolts against the landowners, the question arose of the ways of further progress, the ways of development of Russia, and the development of a correct revolutionary theory, more acutely than under the Decembrists.
Under these conditions, such ideological trends as "official nationality" (M.P. Pogodin, S.P. Shvyrev), "Slavophiles" (I.V. and P.V. Kireevsky, A.S. Khomyakov, K. S. Aksakov and others), "Westerners" (V.P. Botkin, T.N. Granovsky). A group of revolutionary democrats (Belinsky, Herzen) soon emerged in the ranks of the "Westernizers".
"Notes of the Fatherland" by Kraevsky
Each trend strove to publish its own printed organs for the sake of setting out the program provisions. Supporters of the "official nationality" were conservative: they did not want to change anything in life, only to strengthen the present, that is, autocracy and Orthodoxy. Slavophiles, criticizing many of the shortcomings of Russian life, tried to look for the ideal of social order in the distant past, represented in an idealized form, defending the identity of Russia. "Westerners" saw the example of social order in the peaceful development of European bourgeois relations. And only the revolutionary democrats, wishing to Europeanize Russia, did not stop at the bourgeois legal order, aspired to socialism, to a just society without exploitation and private property. However, in the 40s, when it was still necessary to prepare a broad public opinion in favor of the abolition of serfdom, education and progress, “Westerners-liberals and revolutionary democrats could collaborate together in such publications as the magazine "Notes of the Fatherland". The journal "Otechestvennye zapiski", published since 1818 as a historical one, far from the spite of the day, acquired new life since 1838, edited by A.A. Kraevsky.
The magazine's initial success was built on the opposition to the "Library for Reading". All those who suffered from the arrogance of Senkovsky and his allies in the triumvirate rallied around the new magazine and entered into a rivalry with semi-official and sometimes vulgar journalism that stood in the way of progress.
The main force behind the popularity of Otechestvennye zapiski is associated with the name of Belinsky, who moved from Moscow to St. Petersburg and in 1839 began to actively collaborate in the magazine as a literary critic and publicist. Under him, Kraevsky's encyclopedic journal acquired a clear direction, which was carried out through all departments of the journal, but primarily through the department of criticism and bibliography. The absence in Russia of other forms of manifestation of social activity predetermined in the 19th century. such a value of literature, literary criticism and bibliography. Soon such outstanding Russian writers and journalists as N.A. Nekrasov, A.I. Herzen, I.I. Panaev, N.P. Ogarev. Here M.Yu. Lermontov, I.S. Turgenev and other writers.
Gradually, the magazine becomes the mouthpiece of the struggle against serfdom, routine, stagnation, and Asiaticism. An important role here was played by the defense of the Gogol trend in literature as a direction of critical realism. No less important was the critical attitude to idealism in the field of philosophy. Herzen's articles on philosophical issues"Dilettantism in Science", "Letters on the Study of Nature", published in the journal, were highly regarded by contemporaries as a defense of an advanced, materialistic worldview. Belinsky and Herzen interpret philosophy as the algebra of revolution.
Belinsky acts as an active polemicist against all opponents of progress, as well as against the apologists of bourgeois relations, a polemic begins with the Slavophiles. Monuments of this struggle are articles by Belinsky "Pedant", "Parisian secrets", "Answer to the Muscovite" ", annual reviews of literature, etc. Belinsky turned" Notes of the Fatherland "into a political platform for the struggle against serfdom, preparation public conscience to the inevitability of the abolition of serfdom. Analyzing the works of Lermontov, Pushkin, Gogol, he built his own system of values in Russian literature, gave a deep interpretation of their work.
Belinsky's articles were imbued with ardent love for the homeland. The publicist critic defends human dignity in people, education, high morality; preaches advanced art and literature. The critic works especially well in the genre of reviews. His articles, according to the testimony of his contemporaries, were read eagerly. There were cases when young people bought up the right to be the first to read the magazine with Belinsky's materials. Otechestvennye zapiski soon became the most popular magazine. In 1846 they had 4,000 subscribers. In the conditions of the crisis of the serf system, the journalism of Belinsky and Herzen, the poems of Nekrasov were an important factor in public life, the struggle for progress, socialism.
However, political caution and exploitative tendencies of Kraevsky forced Belinsky, Nekrasov, Herzen and others to leave the magazine in 1846.
"Contemporary" Nekrasov
In 1846 Nekrasov and Panaev acquired from P.A. Pletnev magazine "Contemporary", founded by Pushkin. Belinsky became the ideological director of the magazine. 1847-1848 - a short, but most remarkable period in the journalistic and socio-political activities of Belinsky. It can be understood only in the light of the famous "Letter to Gogol" - the only work of Belinsky, written without regard for censorship and well-known long time only in handwritten lists. In this work, the publicist defended the civic significance of literature, against the serf-owners and the autocratic form of government, against the dogmas of the Orthodox Church. The most important, urgent tasks of his country, he proclaimed the abolition of serfdom, the abolition of corporal punishment and the introduction of elementary legality. Fulfillment of these requirements would ensure Russia's progress. It is from these positions that Belinsky assesses the state of literature and journalism, and conducts polemics with everyone who interferes with the country's social and social progress. His reviews of Russian literature in 1846 and 1847, articles about Gogol's latest works ("Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends") became a manifesto of the progressive movement in Russia, although many writers did not agree with Belinsky's assessment of Gogol's Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends , having seen in this book the important religious and moral searches of the Russian writer.
After Belinsky left Otechestvennye zapiski, Kraevsky's journal adopted a moderately liberal position.
"Moskvityanin"
The emerging Slavophil magazines also took a moderate position. They were published mainly in Moscow - "Moscow Observer", "Moskvityanin" and others. The largest of them "Moskvityanin" in the 40s he had a department "Spiritual eloquence", defended the national identity of Russia, published Serbian, Bulgarian, Czech authors. The leading role in it was played by the brothers Aksakovs, Khomyakov, I. Kireevsky and others. Slavophiles tried to challenge Belinsky's views on Gogol's poem "Dead Souls", his ideas about progress.
In the 50s, the journal published the playwright N.A. Ostrovsky, the original critic of A. Grigoriev. An objective assessment of the merchants, high moral qualities of merchants, their wives, daughters substantially supplemented the usual negative picture of the life of this class.
Ap. Grigoriev (who later worked in the Dostoevsky brothers' magazines "Time" and "Epoch") as a critic did not adhere either to Belinsky's camp, or to supporters of an aristocratic, aesthetic direction, believing that literature and art reflect life, convey the color and smell of the era, and criticism looking for a connection with reality in works of art. However, he considered the ideal not progress, but patriarchal originality, moral purity of the heroes. Grigoriev was a heartfelt interpreter of Ostrovsky's plays, female images of Russian literature.
Later, the Slavophiles published several newspapers: "Rumor"(1857), "Parus" (1859), etc. Unfortunately, they were quickly closed by the government for opposing the life of the common people and the gentlemen (K. Aksakov's article "The Experience of Synonyms: The Public - the People" in the newspaper "Rumor"), for the demand of the Slavophiles freedom of speech, publicity.
Review questions
1. What made Otechestvennye Zapiski the best magazine of the 1840s?
2. In what articles does V. G. Belinsky defend progress and the Gogol trend in literature?
3. By what means in Sovremennik N.А. Nekrasov was the preparation of public consciousness for the abolition of serfdom?
4. Remember which magazines were marked with the participation of Slavophiles in the 1840-1850s?
5. What did the controversy between the Slavophiles and V.G. Belinsky around "Dead Souls" by N.V. Gogol?
Topic: "Western" and "Slavophil" journalism of the 1840s.
1.Russia of the 1840s The theory of "official nationality" in print in the 2nd section of the 30s - early 40s.
2. The founders of "Slavophilism". Alexey Stepanovich Khomyakov and Ivan Vasilievich Kirievsky.
3. Slavophil editions.
4. The social meaning of "Westernism"
Literature
1. Esin B.I... History of Russian journalism of the 19th century: Textbook. - M .: Flinta, Nauka, 2002.
3. Blagova T.I. The founders of Slavophilism. A.S. Khomyakov and I.V. Kirievsky. - M., 1995.
4. Pirazhkova T.F. Slavophil journalism. - M .: Publishing house of Moscow. state University, 1997.
5. Chicherin B.N. Moscow forties. - M., 1997.
In the 40s. Х1Х century. socio-economic contradictions within Russia continue to grow, which caused the movement of noble revolutionaries. Serfdom slowed down economic and cultural development country, the situation of the people remained difficult. The discontent of the masses is growing from year to year.
In the report of the III branch for 1841 year recorded: “The thought of the freedom of the peasants smolders between them incessantly. These dark ideas are developing more and more and promise something bad. " Peasants spontaneously rise to uprisings and riots. According to far from complete data, in 1830s biennium It was 105 peasant unrest, and in 1840s - 273 excitement, i.e. almost in 3 times more. Lynching of landowners and arson of estates are becoming commonplace in the Russian countryside. The situation was so serious that the government at the end 1839 d. creates a special committee to consider measures related to alleviating the situation of serfs.
Domestic policy Nicholas I was aimed at delaying the disintegration of serfdom and preserving the landlord system by all means.
Active defenders of the theory of "official nationality" in the press in the 2nd section of the 30s - in the 40s were historian and journalist Mikhail Petrovich Pogodin, writer and journalist Stepan Petrovich Shevyrev, Faddey Venediktovich Bulgarin, Stepan Anisimovich Burachek. Periodicals in the spirit of the theory of "official nationality" (autocracy, Orthodoxy, nationality) become "Moskvityanin", "Northern Bee", "Son of the Fatherland", "Lighthouse", "Library for Reading" .
Changes in public sentiment are taking place. The best people of their time, they no longer wanted to put up with the intolerable situation of the Russian population, with the age-old backwardness of their homeland. The example of the Decembrists inspired them to fight for freedom. The abolition of serfdom and democratic reforms have become a historical necessity in the country. From 1840 to 1860, all social issues in Russia are reduced to the struggle against the serfdom.
On the other hand, the defeat of the Decembrists forced them to look for new ways of further development of the country: methods and means of its implementation. It was on these issues that they disagreed. Westerners and Slavophiles... The problem on which the discussion ensued, mb. is formulated as follows: is historical path Is Russia the same as the path of Western Europe, or does Russia have a special path and its culture belongs to a different type?
- The founders of "Slavophilism". Alexey Stepanovich Khomyakov and Ivan Vasilievich Kirievsky.
The answer given by the Slavophiles about the essence and purpose of Russia is controversial. All the same, they retain the enduring merit of a clear formulation and discussion of the problem of Russian national identity. The services of the Slavophiles, despite the romanticism of their worldviews on the Russian past, are great.
Slavophilism- a direction in social, literary and philosophical thought in Russia in the middle of the 19th century. The main ideologues are Alexey Stepanovich Khomyakov (May 1 (13), 1804 - October 5, 1860 - 56 years old)... Born in Moscow, on Ordynka, in an old noble family, received a home education. In 1821 he passed the exam for the degree of candidate of mathematical sciences at Moscow University. Was actively published (poems, translations). In 1822 he was assigned to military service. F 1825 leaves the service, goes abroad, is engaged in painting, writes the historical drama "Ermak". In 1828 - 1829. Khomyakov participates in Russian-Turkish war, after the end of which he retires and leaves for his estate, deciding to take up the farm.
Collaborates in various magazines. The main theoretical position of Slavophilism is outlined by him in the article "About the old and the new"(1839). In 1838 he began work on his main historical and philosophical essay "Notes on World History".
As a public figure, Khomyakov spoke from a liberal position for the abolition of serfdom, death penalty, for the introduction of freedom of speech, press, etc. Since 1850 Special attention devotes to religious issues, the history of Russian Orthodoxy.
He considered the monarchy to be the only form of government acceptable for Russia, advocated the convocation of a "Zemsky Sobor", linking with it the hope of resolving the contradiction between power and the land that arose in Russia as a result of Peter's reforms.
Being engaged in the treatment of peasants during a cholera epidemic, he fell ill. Died on September 23 (October 5), 1860 in the village of Speshnevo-Ivanovsky, Tambov province (now in Lipetsk region). Buried in Moscow.
He is the father of Nikolai Alekseevich Khomyakov - Chairman III State Duma Russian Empire.
brothers Ivan Vasilievich and Petr Vasilievich Kirievsky - sons of the Oryol landowner Vasily Ivanovich Kirievsky and Avdotya Petrovna, nee Yushkova. They are champions of Slavophilism and representatives of its philosophy. The source of the European crisis of the European enlightenment was seen in the departure from religious principles. He considered the task of the original Russian philosophy to be the processing of the advanced philosophy of the West in the spirit of the teachings of Eastern patristics.
In his youth and youth, I.V. Kirievsky was not very religious. It so happened that he married the spiritual daughter of Seraphim of Sarov, an intelligent, well-educated girl. At first, he did not like his wife's deep religiosity, and he allowed himself more than once to blaspheme in her presence.
The turning point happened during the joint reading of Schelling's works, when it turned out that much of what Schelling wrote was known to his wife from the works of the Holy Fathers of the Church. This struck him so much that he himself began to read the works of St. Fathers and struck up relations with the elders of the Optina Hermitage.
brothers Aksakovs (Konstantin Sergeevich and Ivan Sergeevich), Yuri Fedorovich Samarin... A literary and philosophical circle formed around these people.
Slavophilism took shape ideologically in 1839, when Khomyakov in the cabin Avdotya Petrovna Elagina read the report "About the old and the new" ... This is the mother of the Kirievsky brothers, her teacher was V.A. Zhukovsky, stayed with them on the estate, Elagina - the second surname, Kirievsky at one time opened at his own expense expanded the Oryol hospital where the wounded were kept, was an educated person, collected a library, died of typhus). The house of Avdotya with Yelagin (writer and translator) became the cultural center of Moscow in the 1920s and 1950s. Х1Х century. Gathered fellow practitioners of her children, professors of Moscow University, writers, poets.
Avdotya Petrovna actively participated in public life: she helped her son in publishing the magazine "European", petitioned for censorship permission for "Philosophical Letters of P. Chaadaev, was a translator Last years Elagina spent her life on her estate, coming to Moscow only for the winter.
I.V. Kirievsky responded with an article "In reply Alexey Stepanovich Khomyakov " , which was not intended for printing (published in 1861). Both of these documents became programmatic for Slavophilism.
The main idea of the Slavophiles is only true, undistorted Christianity - Orthodoxy can give a person spiritual integrity. Only elimination to Orthodoxy will eliminate the spiritual dichotomy that Russian educated society has suffered since the time of Peter.
Kirievsky and Khomyakov understood that Russian philosophical thought was more deeply rooted in Christianity than Western thought. The salvation of Russia lies in the development of Orthodox education and Orthodox culture, and not in imitation of European culture.
A brilliant analysis of the contradictions between Russian and European principles was given by I.V. Kirievsky in the article "On the nature of education in Europe and its relationship to the education of Russia."
In the history of Russia, the spiritual values of Orthodoxy merged with the life of the people. As a result of this, the “spirit of the people” took shape, thanks to which the people become a true subject of the historical process.
The greatest merit of the Slavophils lies in the fact that they began to regard the nation as a spiritual phenomenon, suppressed the tendencies of blind imitation of European culture.
The structural unit of the organization of Russian folk life to the Slavophiles was the community, main characteristic which is self-government .. The communal structure is based on the principles of common responsibility, the development of joint decisions in accordance with the voice of conscience, a sense of justice, folk customs.
They belonged to the timid idea of democracy, which gave them the glory of the opposition. However, this was a noble reaction to the capitalization of the country, which became characteristic feature life of Russia 1830s - 1840s. The pressure of capitalist relations is increasing. Trade, both internal and external, is growing, industrial enterprises are growing, and methods of entrepreneurship are penetrating into noble estates.
The theory of the special development of Russia was no less conservative than the idea of "official nationality", despite criticism of certain aspects of the autocracy. The attempts of the Slavophiles to find some special properties, qualities of the national spirit were of an abstract nature. Objectively, they also defended the existing, only in an idealized, purified form. Slavophiles dreamed of patriarchal, peaceful relations between the peasants and the nobility, the monarchy, Orthodox Church... In Russia there will be neither revolution nor capitalism; philosophy, divorced from faith, is alien to it. They pinned great hopes on the rural community.
Many Slavophiles were outraged by serfdom and spoke out for the emancipation of the peasants, but in their criticism they were moderate and did not want to part with the privileges of the nobility. It is also known that the Slavophiles rather sharply criticized the regime of Nicholas I, believing that the ruling circles of the St. Petersburg aristocracy did not care much about the interests of the country. That is why the government treated the Slavophils with distrust and forbade them to publish, although in their assessment of autocracy the Slavophiles have always been convinced supporters of the monarchy.