Russian literature. Just about the important things. Styles, directions and trends
Three pillars of Russian literature
Dostoevsky rightly deduces all Russian literature “straight from Pushkin.” And this is not an exaggeration: it was in Pushkin’s works that the three main principles that underlie Russian classical literature were first laid down and developed: the principles of free personality, historicism and universalism.
• Freedom of the individual.
The individual in Pushkin’s works confronts his environment and openly declares his rights, the main one of which is the right to happiness. This leads to inevitable conflict.
Such is the conflict in all of Pushkin’s romantic (“southern”) poems, such is the intrigue of “Eugene Onegin.” The three main characters of this novel - Onegin, Tatyana and Lensky - constantly find themselves in conflict with the environment that surrounds them, and inevitably fail. They all end up unhappy.
Pushkin shows that if a hero stands out even a little from his environment, he will definitely be unhappy, because society needs stupid vulgarities and mediocrities (like Olga Larina or Uncle Onegin, who “for forty years cursed with the housekeeper, looked out the window and crushed flies” , that is, he was drunk). Here all the great Russian writers agree with Pushkin (except, perhaps, Tolstoy, who deliberately creates the epic novel “War and Peace” with happy heroes): Chatsky is unhappy in Griboedov’s “Woe from Wit,” Katerina is unhappy in Ostrovsky’s “The Thunderstorm,” Bazarov in Turgenev’s Fathers and Sons, Oblomov is unhappy in Goncharov’s novel of the same name. All of them were not afraid to contrast their values with the values of the environment and openly declared their values and the right to happiness.
The roots of this phenomenon must be sought in romanticism, the heir of which was Pushkin’s realism. Even the first critics of Pushkin’s works argued that the Russian poet borrowed a lot from Byron and other romantics. The hero who puts his own interests above the interests of the team, of course, also comes from romanticism. As the French romantic George Sand accurately said, “individualism is the need for happiness that consumes us. Maybe this is not a vice, but the right of every person.”
• Historicism.
The second principle is that literary heroes were inscribed in a specific historical era. This is how the concept of “modern man” arose, that is, a person who is different from people of previous generations.
Historicism also came from romanticism and appeared thanks to the Great French Revolution. Under feudalism there was no sense of different eras: if your grandfather was a carpenter, then your father and you will be one. The revolution turned everything upside down: Napoleon, the son of a petty lawyer, became Emperor of France. Man grabbed the backbone of history, and an understanding of the difference between eras, important for realism, came.
The concept of “modern man” was again first formulated by Pushkin in “Eugene Onegin” - a novel “in which the century is reflected and modern man is depicted quite correctly.” And later Mikhail Lermontov brought out modern man in the form of an aphoristic formula - “Hero of our time.” These discoveries seem obvious today. But at the beginning of the 19th century, they gave Russian realism a concrete connection with the time in which the work was written.
• Universalism
- the concept according to which everything in this world is connected and should be in harmony. Russian classics also borrowed this idea from the romantics. In their works it usually had a religious-mystical character. British poet William Blake wrote:
See eternity in one moment,
A huge world in a grain of sand,
In a single handful - infinity
And the sky is in the cup of a flower.
Seeing the big in the small is the task that Russian writers set themselves. And this led them to the most important principle - typification. According to the classic definition of Friedrich Engels, “realism means ‹…›, in addition to fidelity to detail, fidelity in the reproduction of typical characters in typical circumstances.”
In depicting a typical hero, Pushkin was again the first in Russian literature, along with his contemporary, Alexander Griboyedov. The appearance of Onegin and Chatsky tells the reader that in the early 1820s an educated minority arose in Russia, which did not suit society. These people did not hide their ideas, expressing them out loud. It was they who came to Senate Square in 1825, and then went to the mines of Siberia for this. Judging by Pechorin, in the 1830s (“the era of timelessness”), heroes appeared suffering from their uselessness, feeling certain “immense forces” and “high purpose,” but not knowing where to apply these forces. It is about them that Lermontov will say:
I look sadly at our generation!
His future is either empty or dark,
Meanwhile, under the burden of knowledge and doubt,
It will grow old in inactivity.
Chichikov became a symbol of the businessmen who emerged in the 1840s among the impoverished nobles. They could no longer look into the “bedside table with money”, like Onegin, so they began to earn money themselves - including through all sorts of fraud and deception. It was in the 1840s that the first shoots of capitalism appeared in Russia.
Bazarov's hobbies say that in the 1850s, university youth became interested in the natural sciences: chemistry, biology, medicine. Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, published in 1859, gave a powerful impetus to the development of natural sciences throughout the world. Therefore, Bazarov, who studies frogs in Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and Sons,” puzzles the “fathers” - Nikolai Petrovich and Pavel Petrovich Kirsanov. They studied twenty years earlier, and in the 1830s the main sciences were considered to be the humanities: philosophy, history, literature.
Even Raskolnikov can be called a typical hero of the 1860s. This does not mean that then students took axes and went to kill old women. But after the abolition of serfdom in 1861, capitalism developed rapidly in Russia, and stratification in society increased: the rich became richer, and the poor became poorer. And Raskolnikov’s protest against social injustice is quite understandable and typical.
Russian literature is read all over the world. People from different countries are interested in following characters who are looking for answers to complex moral questions. Writers pay more attention to the inner world of characters rather than external literary effects. Russian literature is based on three principles introduced by Pushkin: personal freedom, historicism and universalism. In this book, we will look at the most important works of Russian literature of the 19th century and find out what other unique features make it great.
1820s CHATSKY and ONEGIN
(hero - “Decembrist”)
1830s PECHORIN
(hero of the “era of timelessness”)
1840s CHICHIKOV
(the hero is a bourgeois entrepreneur, or a “scoundrel-acquirer”)
1850s BAZAROV
(hero-naturalist, “chemist” and “nerd”)
1860s RASKOLNIKOV
(a hero who sharply protests against the imperfections of the world)
1870s VERKHOVENSKY
(terrorist hero)
1880s BELIKOV
(a quiet fiscal teacher who dreams of hiding the whole world in a “case”)
Periodization of Russian literature
All Russian literature can be divided into the following historical periods:
- Old Russian literature (XI - XVII centuries);
- Literature of the 18th century;
- Literature of the 19th century;
- Literature of the XX century;
- Modern literature (literature of the 21st century).
Old Russian literature includes all works written in Old Russian and Old Church Slavonic languages. This is the earliest stage in the development of Russian literature. Most of the monuments of ancient Russian literature have not reached us, but from those that have survived the passage of time, we can conclude that the works of that era were characterized by a desire for historical accuracy, religiosity, patriotism and anonymity.
Note 2
The plots of ancient Russian literature were mostly based on the Bible or Gospel. Christianity had a great influence on the development of literature; Christian values were praised in their lives, words and walks.
Finished works on a similar topic
Course work Characteristics of Russian literature 420 ₽ Abstract Characteristics of Russian literature 230 ₽ Examination Characteristics of Russian literature 190 ₽
Receive completed work or specialist advice on your educational project Find out the cost
The literature of the 18th century, the time of the “Russian Enlightenment,” adhered to strict genre canons.
According to many literary scholars, the most significant figure in Russian literature of the 18th century was Mikhail Vasilyevich Lomonosov - “the father of Russian literature.” It was he who became the first Russian poet to express the idea of Russian national identity, which later migrated to the work of writers and poets of the 19th and 20th centuries.
The literature of the 18th century, like ancient Russian literature, was characterized by socio-political themes. It was during this period that the foundations of classical Russian poetry and prose were laid. The 18th century became the basis for the literature of the 19th century; It was at this time that the foundation was laid on which the Russian literary tradition was subsequently built.
The 19th century is called the Golden Age of Russian literature. It was during this period that literature received its maximum development.
Note 3
The prose writers of the 19th century are the classic writers we all know. These are authors whose works are examples of their genre.
The Golden Age drew heavily on the literary traditions and achievements of 18th-century authors. For example, it was from the previous era that the writers of the Golden Age adopted the journalisticism and love of satire characteristic of A.D. Kantemir. In the literature of the 19th century, authors exposed the vices and shortcomings of their contemporary society - just as the writers of the 18th century criticized the shortcomings of their Russia. A distinctive feature of the Golden Age is its great psychology; The inner world of the hero is increasingly interested in writers.
The literature of the 20th century reflected the changes that swept the country. Soviet literature and literature about the Great Patriotic War form the basis of Russian literature of the twentieth century.
Modern literature includes all works that were published after the collapse of the USSR in 1991.
GDZ in literature grade 9 Zinin part 1 From Russian literature XVI
1. Describe the literary situation that developed at the beginning of the 18th century in Russia. What influence did Western European classicism have on the development of Russian literature? What is unique about Russian classicism as an artistic phenomenon? What is the role of Feofan Prokopovich, A.D. Kantemir and V.K. Trediakovsky in the formation of modern literature?
The transformations of Russia, which were the result of the activities of Peter I and began in the 1st quarter of the 18th century, radically changed the country. Old Russian literature is a thing of the past. In modern Russian culture in the 18th century in general and in verbal art in particular, cardinal qualitative changes occurred. By the end of the 18th century, the state of mind in Russia was influenced by Western European bourgeois revolutions, which transformed the social and state system of a number of countries, for example France.
New Russian literature begins with the creation of a permanent tradition of secular fiction in the second half of the 18th century. The starting point of all further literary development is the assimilation of the rules of French classicism by four people born under Peter, and their more or less successful efforts to transfer these rules and norms to Russian literary soil, creating original works corresponding to them. These four people are Kantemir, Trediakovsky, Lomonosov and Sumarokov.
2. What is the significance of M.V.’s literary activity? Lomonosov for the development of Russian literature? What determined the “timeliness” of Lomonosov’s theory of the “three calms” for the new literary era?
Meaning.
1. Great contribution to the reform of the Russian literary language on a folk basis (he completed the reform of versification, which can be seen in his own odes).
2. Created RUSSIAN classicism, breathing modern problems and was the father of ODE, one of the most popular genres to this day.
3. Determined the direction of literature for centuries (it should be patriotic, civil, sympathetic).
4. By his personal example, he proved what a poet, a writer who serves his reader should be (this is what his discussions with his contemporaries “talk about”). He laid the foundation for Russian criticism.
The theory of "three calms". It was necessary because in his time the Russian language was littered with church and foreign words, outdated words. He systematized everything that corresponded to the modern state of the language. 3. Describe the features of the genre of ode to the work of Lomonosov. How do the famous Lomonosov odes correlate the classicist canons and the obvious innovation of the poet, his desire to go beyond the “shores” of the genre standard? How were the author’s social views reflected in Lomonosov’s lyrics?
In 1834, in “Literary Dreams,” the young V. G. Belinsky wrote about Lomonosov’s role in the formation of Russian literature: “... our literature begins with Lomonosov; he was her father and nurturer; he was her Peter the Great. Need I say that he was a great man and marked by the stamp of genius? All this is undeniable truth. Is it necessary to prove that he gave direction, albeit temporary, to our language and our literature? This is even more certain.”
Lomonosov was the first poet to lay the foundations of the new Russian literature of the 18th century. on ways to introduce it to the experience and achievements of European culture. Lomonosov’s most important merit was that the mastery of European traditions was combined in his work with the active use of the riches of national cultural experience based on taking into account the priority needs of the new cultural construction of Russia, awakened by the reforms of Peter I.
By its nature and the way it exists in the cultural context of our time, Lomonosov’s solemn ode is. an oratorical genre to the same extent as a literary one. Solemn odes were created with the intention of reading aloud in front of the addressee; the poetic text of a solemn ode is designed to be a sounding speech perceived by ear. The typological features of oratorical genres in a solemn ode are the same as in a sermon and the secular oratorical Word. First of all, this is the attachment of the thematic material of the solemn ode to a specific “occasion” - a historical incident or event of national scale. Lomonosov began writing solemn odes in 1739 - and his first ode is dedicated to the victory of Russian weapons - the capture of the Turkish fortress of Khotyn. Until 1764 - the date of his last solemn ode - he created 20 examples of this genre - one per year, and these odes were dedicated to such major events as the birth or marriage of the heir to the throne, the coronation of a new monarch, the birthday or accession to the throne of the empress. The very scale of the odic “occasion” provides the solemn ode with the status of a major cultural event, a kind of cultural culmination in the national spiritual life: thus, in contrast to satire, which is entirely associated with private everyday life, the ode immediately reveals an attraction to the ideal spheres of existence.
In the appendix to the “Letter on the Rules of Russian Poetry,” Lomonosov gave his first ode, “Ode to the Capture of Khotin.” It was written under the impression of the news of the brilliant victory of Russian troops over the Turks at the Khotyn fortress in 1739.
According to contemporaries, the ode made a great impression in St. Petersburg with the unusualness of its poetic form: iambic tetrameter with alternating cross and paired rhymes created the impression of great rhythmic energy, well consistent with the content of the ode, glorifying the exploits of the victorious Russian soldiers. Academician J. Shtelin noted in his notes that “Lomonosov’s odes were written in a completely different, new meter.”
What was also new was that the literary work reflected an important event of our time, characterized by historical analogies: the author recalled the recent brilliant victories of the Russians under the leadership of Peter I and the “pacifier of the Kazan countries” - Tsar Ivan IV, who “shocked the proud Selim "(Selim - Turkish Sultan Suleiman II).
Modernity and history were organically combined in Lomonosov’s ode, written with great inspiration, bright and figurative language, which also undoubtedly amazed the first readers of this work:
The love of the Sons of Russia strengthens the fatherland in spirit and hand; Everyone wants to shed all their blood, The sound of the menacing invigorates them. For the hills, where the scorching abyss, Smoke, ashes, flames, death burps, For the Tigris, Istanbul, plunder your own, That tears up stones from the banks; But in order to stop the eagles from flying, there are no such obstacles in the world, The water, the forest, the hillocks, the rapids, the wilderness steppes are their equal path. Wherever the winds can blow, the eagle's shelves are accessible there. The civic spirit of ancient Russian literature turned out to be an important element in the creation of “high” poetry in the 18th century. The ode, with its journalistic sound in glorifying the heroic events of the past, with its “educational” attitude towards the present, was the ideological heir to the best works of ancient Russian literature. Lomonosov was the creator of the Russian ode, in which he expressed his educational ideas. He believed in the enormous possibilities of Russia and considered his odes as propaganda of the sciences and arts:
Look at the high mountains, Look at your wide fields, Where the Volga, the Dnieper, where the Ob flows; Wealth, hidden in them, will be openly revealed by Science... For Lomonosov, the Motherland was a high ideal, and he considered his creativity in the most diverse fields of knowledge from the point of view of the benefit that it brings to his “beloved” - the Fatherland. Patriotism in Lomonosov's works acquires the character of the social position of a great scientist.
In “A Conversation with Anacreon,” Lomonosov answers the Greek poet, the singer of love joys and fun:
The strings are forced upon me; a heroic noise sounds. Don’t disturb my loving thoughts and mind any more. Although I am not deprived of tenderness of heart In love, I am more delighted with the eternal glory of heroes. The poet’s duty, according to Lomonosov, was to inspire people with the example of national heroes and encourage them to take action necessary for the Fatherland. In response to Anacreon’s proposal to the painter to paint the image of his “kind”, lovely girl, Lomonosov writes:
I now imitate you and choose a painter, so that he may strive to paint my beloved mother. O first master in painting, You are the first in our side, Worthy to be born of Minerva, Depict Russia for me. Depict her mature age, And her look of cheerful contentment, The joy of clarity in her brow And her head lifted up. The brightness of Lomonosov's poetic style, where baroque elements merge into the classicist system, is one of the characteristic features of his odic creativity. By pushing the rigid boundaries of the strictly regulated poetics of classicism, Lomonosov revealed the possibilities for the further development of Russian verse. His techniques would be used by the romantic poets of the early 19th century. Lomonosov enriched the ode genre with new civic content and developed a poetic form that corresponded to these high patriotic ideas. In “Rhetoric” of 1748, in which Lomonosov outlined his literary views in accordance with the normative poetics of classicism, he included a section “On the invention of florid speeches,” in which he considers the diverse types of poetic personification, “when parts, properties or actions are given to things from others, which are of a different kind. In this way, the word is attached to dumb animals, to people - excess parts from other animals, ... to incorporeal or mental beings, as virtues and actions, - flesh and so on. His own poems, included in his “Rhetoric,” seemed to reveal an example of such “inventions”:
And now with a crimson hand the dawn has opened the gates to the world, from the robe the rosy light pours into the fields, into the forests, into the city, into the seas. Lomonosov’s famous ode of 1747, dedicated to Elizaveta Petrovna, is replete with vivid metaphorism and hyperbole: Beloved is the delight of kings and earthly kingdoms silence, Bliss of villages, city fence, Since you are useful and red! Around you, flowers are colorful and the fields in the fields are turning yellow, ships are full of treasures, daring into the sea after you, you are scattering your wealth across the earth with a generous hand. An emotional and metaphorical style, unexpected and bold comparisons, tropes and “florid speeches” gave Lomonosov’s poetry aesthetic qualities that were not characteristic of the rationalistic system of classicism and brought it closer to baroque sophistication. Rhetorical figures and the introduction of Church Slavonicisms and Biblicalisms have this purpose. In an ode of 1742, Lomonosov wrote: There the horses with stormy legs soar thick ashes to the sky, There death between the Gothic regiments Runs, furious, from rank to rank, And the greedy jaw opens, And stretches out cold hands Their proud spirit, tearing away... This special “elation” "style is a characteristic feature of Lomonosov's odic and oratorical creativity, the origins of which, most likely, should be sought in the functional purpose of these genres, traditionally associated with magnificent palace ceremonial. G. A. Gukovsky very successfully defined the figurative structure of Lomonosov’s poetry. He wrote: “Lomonosov builds entire colossal verbal buildings, reminiscent of the huge palaces of Rastrelli; his periods, by their very volume, by their very rhythm, give the impression of a gigantic rise of thought and pathos.”
The stylistic appearance of Lomonosov's odes evoked sharp and irreconcilable criticism from Sumarokov, a supporter of the purity of style and clarity of poetic thought characteristic of classicism. Sumarokov’s “nonsensical odes” were a literary and polemic against Lomonosov, and in them the author angrily ridiculed Lomonosov’s vivid metaphors and likenings. This literary controversy occupied a large place in the public life of the 50s and 60s. XVIII century
Lomonosov’s very bright victorious and patriotic ode is “Ode to the Capture of Khotin.” It was written in 1739 in Germany, immediately after the capture by Russian troops of the Turkish fortress of Khotyn, located in Moldova. The garrison of the fortress, together with its commander Kalchakpasha, was captured. This brilliant victory made a strong impression in Europe and raised Russia’s international prestige even higher.
In Lomonosov's ode, three main parts can be distinguished: introduction, depiction of military operations and glorification of the victors. The battle scenes are presented in Lomonosov's typical hyperbolic style with a lot of detailed comparisons, metaphors and personifications that embody the tension and heroism of the battle scenes. The moon and snake symbolize the Mohammedan world, the eagle soaring over Khotyn symbolizes the Russian army. The Russian soldier, “Ross”, as the author calls him, was brought out as the arbiter of all events. L. writes with admiration about the feat of this nameless hero. The tension and pathetic spirit of the narrative is enhanced by rhetorical questions and exclamations of the author, addressed either to the Russian army or to its enemy. The ode also refers to the historical past of Russia. The shadows of Peter I and Ivan the Terrible, who at one time won a victory over the Mohammedans, appear over the Russian army: Peter - over the Turks near Azov, Grozny - over the Tatars near Kazan. This kind of historical parallels will become, after Lomonosov, one of the stable features of the odic genre.
“Ode to the Capture of Khotin” is an important milestone in the history of Russian literature. Not only in content, but also in form, it belongs to the new poetry of the 18th century. Lomonosov, in the “Khotyn” ode, was the first in Russian literature to turn to iambic tetrameter with male and female rhymes, that is, he created the meter in which the vast majority of odes of the 18th and early 19th centuries would be written, including Derzhavin’s “Felitsa” and Radishchev’s “Liberty.” Iambic tetrameter will become the favorite size of Pushkin, Lermontov, Blok and other authors of the 19th and 20th centuries.
The composition of the solemn ode is also determined by the laws of rhetoric: each odic text invariably opens and ends with appeals to the addressee. The text of the solemn ode is constructed as a system of rhetorical questions and answers, the alternation of which is due to two parallel operating settings: each individual fragment of the ode is designed to have the maximum aesthetic impact on the listener - and hence the language of the ode is oversaturated with tropes and rhetorical figures. As for the sequence of development of the odic plot (the order of individual fragments and the principles of their relationship and sequence), it is determined by the laws of formal logic, which facilitates the perception of the odic text by ear: the formulation of the thesis, proof in a system of successively changing arguments, a conclusion repeating the initial formulation. Thus, the composition of the ode is subject to the same mirror-cumulative principle as the composition of satire, and their common proto-genre - sermon. And only occasionally this strict logical scheme is diversified by associative poetic transfer, the so-called “odic impulse” or, in the words of Lomonosov himself, “bringing together distant ideas”, which keeps the solemn ode within the boundaries of the lyrical genre with all its oratorical potential. The uniformity of the formal features that the solemn ode possesses as a poetic text - the so-called “odic canon” - also testifies to the close relationship of the solemn ode with oratorical genres, firmly subordinated to a system of purely formal regulations. The concept of “odic canon” includes stable meter and stable stanza.
All of Lomonosov's solemn odes are written in iambic tetrameter, and many are written in pure iambic tetrameter, i.e. without pyrrhic. All of them consist of ten-line stanzas with a specific, almost unchanged, rhyme system: aBaBvvGddG. The odic canon ensures the formal uniformity of the genre in its structural and content elements. By this, the solemn ode as a genre is likened to the equally stable genre structure of Cantemir’s satire, with which the ode turns out to be difficult to correlate in its poetics. By analogy, ode and satire are correlated as genres that have a common oratorical genesis and common oratorical formal-structural features, and also as “senior genres” that lie at the origins of new Russian literature. In contrast, ode and satire are correlated as genres that have opposite attitudes (negative in satire, affirmative in ode), associated with different spheres of reality (satire with material life, ode with ideal existence), and, finally, as the embodiment of the poles of genre-style hierarchy of classicism: satire is the standard of low style, ode is high. But this opposition also has points of intersection: opposite genre models are created at the same levels of poetics, which are the word and the peculiarities of word usage, the typology of artistic imagery, and the world image.
4. What was the uniqueness of Russian theater in the age of enlightened absolutism? What genres of drama were developed in the works of D.Yu. Fonvizina, V.V. Kapnist and Ya.B. Princess? What will distinguish Fonvizin the playwright from the galaxy of contemporary writers? What are the social and moral lessons of Fonvizin’s “Undergrowth”?
Since classicism prevailed at that time, there was a division of genres into high, noble, and low. There was a development of the tragedy genre, which belonged to the high genres. The main motive is the internal struggle of the heroes, the opposition of conscience and duty. In addition, in the 18th century, theater became an elite art, in contrast to the Middle Ages, when it was considered the entertainment of the common people. The distinctive feature and originality of the Russian theater is that the vast majority of actors were serfs.
Creativity of D.I.Fonvizin
Of all the Russian playwrights of the 18th century, Denis Fonvizin (1745 – 1792) is perhaps the most famous. From school, many generations of students remember his sparkling and lively comedy “The Minor.” It is considered the pinnacle of the playwright’s work, which somewhat deviates from the traditions of classicism and follows the genre of realistic drama.
Brought up on the theater, the author dreamed of creating a national comedy from a young age. His first literary experiments were translations of French plays. Observations of contemporary life gave the young playwright the necessary food to write his first serious dramatic work in the 1760s - the comedy “The Brigadier”. The play premiered in 1780 at the theater on Tsaritsyn Meadow.
The comedy is written in truly folk, aphoristic language. Soon after the premiere, it was dismantled into quotes. In the center of the work is a brigadier (a rank higher than a major, but lower than a colonel in the tsarist army), suffering from pronounced gallomania. His desire to show his literacy and enlightenment leads to comic situations. The simplicity of the plot helps Fonvizin create a morally descriptive picture of the life of “high society” and condemn its vices.
The second comedy, “The Minor,” is dedicated to the problems of education. But the meaning of “Undergrowth” cannot be reduced to just one catchphrase -
“I don’t want to study, I want to get married.”
The central place in it is occupied by the clash of wild feudal landowner orders and the ideals of enlightened humanism. Evil, according to the author, lies not only in the lack of education, but also in the despotism of landowners, the violation of the rule of law, and the violation of human rights. The anti-serfdom pathos of the play put Fonvizin in the front ranks of the fighters against the tyranny of the landowners. “Talking” names (a feature clearly borrowed from classicism) such as Starodum, Pravdin, Prostakova, Tsyfirkin, Vralman helped the playwright to more fully reveal the idea of the comedy.
“The Minor” was first staged by the author and Dmitrievsky in St. Petersburg at the theater on Tsaritsyn Meadow. Dmitrievsky played Starodum in the play. The production was a stunning success with the public. In 1783, the play triumphantly appeared on the stage of the Petrovsky Theater in Moscow.
Fonvizin’s last play, “The Tutor’s Choice,” was written in 1790 and is dedicated to the theme of education. At the center of the comedy are false teachers-adventurers who destroy the foundations of the education of noble society.
Creativity of Ya.B.Knyazhnin and V.V.Kapnist
18th century playwrights Yakov Knyazhnin (1742 – 1791) and Vasily Kapnist (1757 – 1823) went down in history as authors of satirical comedies. Their plays were distinguished by their acute social orientation. They caustically criticized noble society, ridiculed and exposed the vices of high society.
Satirical comedy was more associated with the classicist tradition than realistic comedy. It is characterized by the same 5-act structure, presentation in poetic form. At the same time, satirical comedy has a close connection with folk theater (games).
The main technique used by Ya.B. Knyazhnin is the grotesque. In his comedy “The Braggart,” written in 1786, the author ridicules favoritism, a leading feature of Catherine II’s reign. The nobles presented in the comedy are grotesquely implausible, comical, and ignorant. They can easily be deceived by playing on weak character traits.
Having fallen into disgrace due to criticism of the reigning regime, the playwright Knyazhnin changes his tone. A significant part of his work is occupied by political tragedies. The action in them takes place, as a rule, in the era of Ancient Rus', but the situations have a modern background. Thus, Catherine perceived the tragedy of “Vadim Novgorodsky” as a personal insult. After its second performance, the Empress forbade this work to be staged in theaters, and ordered the published books to be confiscated and burned.
Another personal enemy of Catherine could be considered the Russian playwright of the 18th century V.V. Kapnista.
In the comedy “The Yabeda” (1793), he paints an unattractive picture of Russian legal proceedings, fueled by personal observations (Kapnist had to sue over an estate). Much of the comedy seems to be taken from real life; a particular case of the wild revelry of the blind Themis develops to the level of generalizations. This comedy is also interesting because it was the first time a Russian man was brought to the stage. A royal ban was imposed on Yabeda after its fourth performance at the St. Petersburg Theater.
5. What motifs and images, picked up by Russian poetry of the 19th century, are embodied in the lyrics of G.R. Derzhavin? What is hidden behind the “funny Russian style” that the author of “Monument” takes credit for?
Derzhavin began to destroy Lomonosov's theory of the “three calms”. He is the first of the poets who, next to Old Slavonicisms (words of “high style”), put colloquial words (words of “low style”), thus simplifying Russian speech, making it more entertaining and easier to read.
6. What is unusual about the composition of A.N.’s book? Radishchev "Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow"? What artistic task did the writer set for himself, drawing on the tradition of travel literature? Why was the author of travel notes declared “a bottler worse than Pugachev”?
1.What is unusual about the composition of Radishchev’s book “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow”? From the point of view of its thematic composition, Radishchev’s book clearly gravitates towards a polyphony of micro-themes and micro-plots, closed within one compositional unit: each chapter, as a rule, has its own isolated plot basis: in “Lyubani” it is a plowing peasant, in “Chudov” - “ sisterbeck story”, in “Zaitsev” - a peasant’s story about the rebellion of the serfs, in “Kresttsy” - an educational treatise, in “Khotilov” - “Project for the Future”, etc. Sometimes two chapters are combined within one chapter, rarely - two three independent microplots. 2.What artistic task did the writer set for himself, drawing on the tradition of travel literature? Radishchev, turning to his reader - that is, to any person who picks up his book - does this through an intermediary who maximally facilitates the contact of the reader’s individuality with the author through his universal human averageness. The traveler and his personality are the point at which the individuality of the reader and the individuality of the author can most easily intersect. Minus their individual properties, the author-Radishchev, the traveler-narrator and the reader are equally “anyone”, any person armed with the same tools to understand reality - eyes and ears, heart and mind. The originality of “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” lies in the fact that Radishchev, taking the form of a “journey,” filled it with accusatory content. 3.Why was the author declared a rebel, worse than Pugachev? This was facilitated by Radishchev’s book “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow,” in which “the audacity of thoughts and expressions goes beyond all limits.” Obviously, it was the instinctive fear of a “Russian revolt, senseless and merciless.” Radishchev, without realizing it, was preparing, perhaps not completely senseless at first, but certainly a merciless revolt, which in world history was and is called the October Revolution. Catherine the Second, despite all her playful Voltairianism, felt even more acutely than Pushkin the danger for the empire in Radishchev’s book, saying about the author: “... he is a rebel, worse than Pugachev...”. 7. How do the features of classicist, sentimentalist and realistic literature correlate in “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow”? What is the meaning of the epigraph that precedes the book?
The work “Journey from St. Petersburg to Moscow” is written about the ordinary Russian people. The problem in this work is the sociological conflict between society and the state, and from this it follows that the work is of a classicistic nature of that time, and this work is also realistic in nature because Such problems remain relevant to this day.
As the epigraph to his book, Radishchev took a verse from Trediakovsky’s poem “Tilemakhida”, slightly changing it: “The monster is oblo (i.e. round), mischievous, huge, snarling and barking.” (This place describes the torment of vicious people, “and especially evil kings,” in the afterlife. This description ends with the fact that the despot kings, looking in the mirror, which showed “the abomination of their vices,” looked in it more terrible than various hellish monsters. One of them (the dog) is the “oblo monster,” etc. Radishchev calls the autocratic-serf system of Russia of his time such a monster. 8. What was the uniqueness of the “Karamzin era” in Russian literature of the late 18th and early 19th centuries What was the main achievement of sentimentalism as a literary movement?
