Society of Russian Literature. Communion of Russian literature

The first Congress of the Society of Russian Literature opened on May 25, Philologist's Day, in the Moscow state university them. M.V. Lomonosov. The delegates and guests of the congress were prominent scientists, members Russian Academy Sciences and the Russian Academy of Education, politicians, teachers of leading Russian universities, school teachers from Russian regions, writers and cultural figures, representatives of the parent community, public organizations, students and clergy.

On May 26 of the year in the Column Hall of the House of Unions, the plenary session of the congress was chaired by His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus' together with the President of RAO, President of MAPRYAL and ROPRYAL L.A. Verbitskaya.

The meeting was attended by the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin. Speaking about the Russian language and literature, the President emphasized “that we're talking about about preserving - no more, no less - national identity, about being and remaining a people with its own character, with its own traditions, with its own identity, without losing historical continuity and the connection of generations. For Russians, this means being and remaining Russian.”

At the congress there was a representative delegation from Moscow State Pedagogical University: vice-rector, director of the Institute of Philology and foreign languages L.A. Trubina, head Department of Russian Language N.A. Nikolina, manager Department of Literature Teaching Methods V.F. Damn, boss. Department of General and Applied Linguistics O.E. Drozdova, head Department of Pre-University Teaching of Russian Foreign Languages ​​E.A. Khamraev, professor A.D. Deykina, S.A. Zinin, E.G. Chernyshova, K.P. Smolina, E.V. Getmanskaya, V.N. Bazylev, associate professors E.L. Erokhin, L.Yu. Komissarova,M.V. Sarapas, L.G. Latfullina, N.A. Popova.

Tell friends:

In contact with

Classmates

Show discussion

Discussion

No comments yet

At the beginning of March, Professor of the Department of Russian Literature of the 20th-21st Centuries at the Institute of Philology of Moscow State Pedagogical University Yanina Viktorovna Soldatkina took part in the “Geek Zona” program on Teos radio, which actively cooperates with Moscow State Pedagogical University on issues...

On March 6, 2019, an international online webinar on the topic “ Recognized by the world Abai”, dedicated to Abai Kunanbayev (1845-1904) - the great poet of the Kazakh people, humanist philosopher, composer,...

Center for Russian Language and Culture named after. A.F. Losev Institute of Philology, within the framework of the Exchange Program of the Cultural and Educational Project "Russia - Italy" (PRIA) of the Moscow Department of Education, a now traditional round...

On March 2, at the Center for Russian Language and Culture named after A.F. Losev, a round table, dedicated to the 120th anniversary of the birth of Yuri Karlovich Olesha. Teachers from the Institute of Philology took part in the live conversation...

On February 22, a round table dedicated to the centenary of the birth of the American writer Jerome David Salinger (January 1, 1919 - January 27, 2010) was held in the Main Building of Moscow State Pedagogical University, in which...

On February 28 – March 1, students and undergraduates of the Institute of Philology of the Moscow Pedagogical State University spent together with Irina Georgievna Mineralova, professor of the Department of Russian Literature of the 20th-21st centuries, at Brest State University...

On February 28 – March 1, 2019, the XXIII International scientific-practical conference“Linguistics for everyone” on the topic “Serious and entertaining in language different areas life." More than 150 participants attended the conference...

February 27, 2019 at the National Eurasian University. L.N. Gumilyov (Astana, Republic of Kazakhstan) opened an international conference of young scientists, which was held via videoconference. Moscow Pedagogical State University, Institute of Philology,...

February 27, 2019 at State Museum history of Russian literature named after V.I. Dahl (State Literary Museum), in the House of I.S. Ostroukhova in Trubniki as part of the exhibition and research project “ Literary wars 1920-1930s:...

At the end of February, a working visit of the delegation of the Institute of Philology to the Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce (Poland) took place. The delegation includes the director of the institute, head of the department of Russian classical literature, Doctor of Philology E.G. Chernysheva...

The MPGU video channel has set another record - the number of its subscribers has exceeded 30,000 people! Thus, our YouTube channel is among the top three among the official video channels of Russian universities.

Center for Russian Language and Culture named after. A.F. Losev Institute of Philology organized and held interactive platforms as part of the celebration of the Day native language. According to good tradition, on February 21 at the Moscow Pedagogical State University...

The collection contains articles by participants in the IV scientific and practical conference of young scientists “Media processes in the modern humanitarian space: approaches to study, evolution, prospects”, held at Moscow Pedagogical State University on May 12, 2018.

February 17, 2019 Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Department of General Linguistics at Moscow State Pedagogical University, specialist at the Center for Russian Language and Culture named after A.F. Loseva Andrey Vladimirovich Grigoriev spoke on radio Mayak about...

Celebrating International Mother Language Day brightly and widely has become a good tradition at Moscow Pedagogical State University. As in many countries of the world, on February 21 at the main pedagogical university in Russia they say...

On February 16, at the Institute of Philology, a meeting was held with prose writer Tatyana Menshchikova, timed to coincide with the release of her book “My Father Lighted the Stars” in the Compass Guide publishing house. The debut story of a young talented writer is addressed to teenagers...

On February 21, the whole world celebrates Mother Language Day. Students of the Preparatory Faculty of the Russian Foreign Language took part in a university-wide celebration and held one of the platforms - “We speak different languages, but the planet...

On February 20, the IV student scientific and practical conference “Teacher of the 21st Century”, organized by the Department of Literature Teaching Methods, was held at the Institute of Philology. More than 200 students of 2-5 years of undergraduate and...

On February 21, 2019, as part of the celebration of Mother Language Day at MPGU (Corpus of Humanitarian Faculties), university students participated in many cultural and educational events. The interactive linguistic quiz game “Vocabulary” aroused great interest...

On February 16, the Institute of Philology hosted a lecture-forum “Fonvizin - Griboyedov - Gogol: playwrights - our contemporaries.” Participants of the lecture-forum led by Irina Georgievna Mineralova, Doctor of Philology, Professor of the Department of Russian Literature...

On February 15–16, 2019, the International Scientific and Practical Conference “Modern Paradigm of Teaching and Learning Russian as a Foreign Language” was held at MPGU, organized by the Department of Russian as a Foreign Language in vocational training Institute of Philology...

Professor of the Institute of Philology of Moscow State University Irina Georgievna Mineralova on the “Red Line” channel in the program “Telescraper. Moritz and Bushin are lumps, The Gulag Archipelago is a bad book.”

February 9 as part of the All events Russian school Poetry at the Institute of Philology took place the third meeting of the scientific and creative seminar OPOYAZ-2, which resumed its activities after an almost 20-year break. Meeting in the form of a Christmas Poetry Afternoon...

On February 9, 2019, in the Building of Humanitarian Faculties of Moscow State Pedagogical University, the Department of Local History and Historical and Cultural Tourism of the Directorate for the Study of History of Moscow State Pedagogical University conducted an educational quest “Labyrinth of Epochs” for students of Moscow universities and schoolchildren....

On February 9, the Institute of Philology hosted a lecture “Modern children’s literature: names, traditions, trends” Natalya Yuryevna Bogatyreva, Candidate of Philology, Associate Professor of the Department of Russian Literature of the 20th-21st centuries at the Institute of Philology, at a lecture dedicated...

February 5, 2019, specialist of the Department of Local History and Historical and Cultural Tourism of the Directorate for the Study of History of Moscow State Pedagogical University E.R. Polatkhanova, together with students from the Institute of History and Politics, the Institute of Philology and the Institute of Childhood, conducted...

Department of Rhetoric and Speech Culture in in full force completed training at the Moscow State University Library on compiling a list of references for work program disciplines. The head of the reference and bibliographic department, Maria Nikolaevna Svirina, taught teachers how to effectively...

Literature Ancient Rus': materials of the X All-Russian conference " Old Russian literature and its traditions in the literature of modern times", dedicated to memory Professor Nikolai Ivanovich Prokofiev; Epic tradition in Russian literature of the 20th–21st centuries: materials of the XXIII Sheshukov readings.

01/31/2019 – 02/02/2019 was held at Novosibirsk State University VII International scientific-practical conference Total dictation“Dynamic processes in the modern Russian language”, in which the professor of the Russian language department of the Institute of Philology took part...

On February 1, 2019, the International Scientific and Practical Conference “Mythological and Historical in Russian” was held at the Moscow Pedagogical State University literature XX-XXI centuries. XXIV Sheshukov Readings.

Moscow Pedagogical State University was represented at the International scientific conference“Dialogue of Cultures X” in the Czech Republic on January 15–16, 2019. The conference, held at the University of Hradec Králové, was attended by teachers...

The Russian Center in Berlin, with the support of the Russkiy Mir Foundation, held from January 28 to 30, 2019 the International Conference on working with Russian-speaking children “Formula for Happy Holidays”, which...

International scientific and practical conference “World literature for children and about children”, under the patronage of which an international forum is held every 2 years at Moscow State Pedagogical University and jointly with the Crimean Federal University. IN AND....

January 21, 2019 Center for Russian Language and Culture named after. A.F. Losev Institute of Philology, Moscow State Pedagogical University, held a webinar dedicated to summing up the results of the All-Russian Universiade “Great, Mighty”, in the organization of a remote tour of which he took part...

Rector of Moscow State Pedagogical University, Professor Alexey Vladimirovich Lubkov on the “Russia 1” channel in the “Morning of Russia” program.

January 15 at the Center for Russian Language and Culture. A.F. Losev Institute of Philology, Moscow State Pedagogical University, held a meeting on issues related to the opening of the Russian Language and Culture Centers named after. A.F. Loseva in...

On December 27, 2018, at the department of Russian as a foreign language in vocational training, a New Year’s evening was held, aimed at studying the traditions of celebrating the New Year in Russia. Students took part in it...

The Preparatory Faculty of the Russian Foreign Languages ​​Institute of the Institute of Philology wishes everyone a Happy New Year! And remembers New Year's celebration for foreign students of the faculty. It took place on December 27 in the hall of the humanities faculties building. Real Grandfather...

On December 27, in the foyer of the Main building of Moscow State Pedagogical University, a New Year tree was held for the children of teachers, organized by the Laboratory student initiatives of the Institute of Philology and the student council of the philology department with the support of the Primary Trade Union Organization of Moscow State Pedagogical University. Every...

Within the framework of the development of the Institute of World Literature named after. M. Gorky (IMLI RAS) of the project “RUSSIAN ESTATE IN LITERATURE AND CULTURE” on December 26, 2018 in the former estate of Prince. Trubetskoy "Narrow" (now Federal Scientific Center for RR...

The MPGU YouTube channel, which is increasingly gaining active and caring supporters, has overcome a new important psychological milestone: the number of its subscribers has exceeded 25,000 people, and the number of channel views has amounted to more than 4 million 100 thousand visits.

2018 is ending. It was filled with intense studies, interesting meetings and events. Among them are acquaintance and communication with employees of the Moscow Literary Museum-Center K. G. Paustovsky. Its director Anzhelika Igorevna Dormidontova provided...

On December 20 and 24, teleconferences were held at the Institute of Philology with teachers from the Moscow Institute of Arts of Weinan Normal University in China. We discussed the format of the winter session for students. Russian language exam as...

On December 13, 2018, the Department of Methods of Teaching Literature of the Institute of Philology held the V student Olympiad “Golden Pages of Domestic Methods” (chairman of the organizing committee - Prof. A. M. Antipova). This year it was dedicated...

The Society of Russian Literature was headed not by writers and philologists, but by clergymen of one of the religious organizations of Russia. Photo from the site www.patriarchia.ru

The Society of Russian Literature has been created in our country. Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus' announced this on March 9 of this year, opening a meeting of the Patriarchal Commission for Culture on the territory of the historical park at VDNKh. The facade of the pavilion where the historical park “Russia” is located. My story,” decorate the portrait of Alexander III and the famous words of the emperor that Russia has only two allies - the army and the navy. Modern Russia added Russian literature to the number of allies. Apparently accurate Russian word, according to the Kremlin (the patriarch said that the idea of ​​​​creating a society comes from Putin), will help unite the country.

The head of the Russian Orthodox Church recalled that in the 19th and 20th centuries the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature already operated at Moscow State University. However, pre-revolutionary society was led by writers and academics, not hierarchs, despite the fact that the Church was then a state institution. “I accepted this proposal precisely because we are talking about the humanitarian dimension of our lives, individuals, society, state, and the humanitarian dimension is part of the spiritual responsibility of the Church,” this is how the patriarch explained the president’s proposal to lead the new society to him, the leader religious organization. By the way, the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature existed after the revolution, until the 1930s, in democratic Russia it was recreated and still exists. Patriarch Kirill, in his report at the meeting on March 9, mentioned a parallel structure, but believes that its activities “practically ceased” in 2010.

The founding meeting of the Society of Russian Literature adopted a resolution that outlined the goals: “consolidating the efforts of scientists, teachers, cultural figures, and the general public to preserve the leading role of literature and the Russian language in the education of the younger generation, strengthening a single cultural and educational space, development best traditions domestic humanitarian education, cultural and educational activities.” The main activity of the society will be work related to recommendations for teaching literature in secondary schools. One of these recommendations, according to media reports about the debate that unfolded after the patriarch’s announcement of the creation of the society, will be the formation of a list of literature for schoolchildren to read. Problem general list It has long occupied the minds of officials, and its discussion has even risen to the presidential level.

“The story with the list of works has been going on for several years: it began back in the late 90s, when, in the name of the Unified State Examination - for ease of verification - a wide recommended list of works for school study was narrowed and became the “Mandatory Minimum,” recalls Mikhail Pavlovets, Associate Professor at the School of Philology at the National Research University Higher School of Economics, participating in the group developing the “Approximate Basic educational programs", which is supervised by the Russian Ministry of Education and Science. – Then the so-called “Putin’s list of 100 books” appeared that every Russian school graduate should read, several alternative lists from different organizations and persons, finally a list in the “Concept of School Philological Education”, which was developed by the Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature (ASSUL), which gathered under its wing the mainly conservative part of domestic literature specialists. That “Concept”, contrary to the wishes of its creators, never received official, normative status, but if we carefully read the list of the created Society of Russian Literature, then in it we will find most of the names associated with ASUL, and with the “Concept”, and with that the list itself."

According to Pavlovets, the Russian Orthodox Church itself will not compile any lists, but it acts as the patron of a group of experts, giving a certain administrative weight to their findings. “Although certain wishes will most likely be expressed,” the expert adds, “the positions of writers who are still in the late Soviet time through the efforts of leaders of the so-called Russian party in Soviet culture and education were recorded as “protectors” and “conservatives”: in this sense, Dostoevsky has an advantage over Tolstoy, Shmelev over Bulgakov (about whose “The Master and Margarita” some believers have many questions - but not about his “White Guard”), Yesenin in front of Mayakovsky, etc. At the same time, it is unlikely that any significant names will drop out of the list: the creators of this kind of lists know that any author can be made a supporter of any ideology, including the Orthodox-protective one: it is no coincidence that in the context of the list one recalls the experience of the Soviet school, in which the poem Blok’s “The Twelve” was taught as an apology for the revolution, and Gogol’s “Dead Souls” was taught as a denunciation of serfdom.”

Indeed, at the founding meeting, Patriarch Kirill more than once spoke kindly of the Soviet school and even admitted that during a recent visit to Antarctica he almost recited Gorky’s “Petrel” out loud.

Previously, Christian Churches compiled lists of prohibited books. The Catholic Index librorum prohibitorum is known. However, the Russian Orthodox Church of imperial times also contributed to the prohibition of “spiritually harmful” works, such as: “On the causes and nature of the union in western Russia" Kostomarov, "Folk Russian Legends" by Afanasyev, the 6th volume of the collected works of 1889 by Leskov (about the life of the clergy), "Resurrection" by Tolstoy, etc. Already today there is a struggle either with Nabokov or with Pushkin’s “The Tale of the Priest and His Worker Balda.”

Immediately after the announcement of the creation of the Society of Russian Literature, the Church Commission for Family Affairs made a proposal to remove some stories by Chekhov, Bunin and Kuprin from the school curriculum. This statement appeared so inopportunely that the chairman of the Synodal Department for Relations of the Church with Society and the Media, Vladimir Legoida, hastened to present it as a purely private opinion.

With the creation of the Society of Russian Literature, the Russian Orthodox Church turns to the formation of its “positive” Russian and Soviet classics. Pavlovets says: “The mandatory list has several meanings: firstly, it is given the state meaning of the “spiritual bond” of the “single educational space of Russia” - so that, relatively speaking, in the Udmurt school of Tatarstan they read the same “War and Peace” in literature lessons, as in the Russian school of Kaliningrad or Sakhalin. This will emphasize the state-forming role of the Russian Orthodox Church, which supports a single list.”

It is not difficult to imagine on what basis the Church will formulate its recommendations. “Our civilization has largely grown from the Christian understanding of the essence of being, from the Orthodox faith, which nurtures that beauty people's soul, which is imprinted in Russian literature and art,” Patriarch Kirill formulated this position.

“Literature is valuable in the eyes of the Church only if it meets the goals of Christian preaching,” says culturologist Roman Bagdasarov. – Let’s try to imagine that today “ Dictionary living Great Russian language" (which was once published by the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature) would be published under the editorship of Patriarch Kirill. He would have to include such words as “motherfuck”, “havchik”, “scum”, as well as the immortal expression “soak in the toilet”. Is he ready for such a turn? Hardly. Meanwhile, Dahl's dictionary contained stylistically similar words and expressions in abundance, because it set the task of showing the lexical composition that was relevant at that time as a whole. This was what Vladimir Dahl intended. This is the only way to seriously judge the trends in language development, much less try to somehow influence them.”

“This is probably why Patriarch Kirill and his associates decided to found another society rather than recreate the old one,” continues Bagdasarov. “Before Kirill’s statement, not a single philologist was included in the Patriarchal Council for Culture, even at the level of honorary members.” The expert recalled that the preface to Dahl’s dictionary was once written not by an ordinary specialist in philology, but by a world-famous linguist, Ivan Baudouin de Courtenay.

Similar concerns in a tendentious approach, but already to the literary heritage and the current literary process, are expressed by Mikhail Pavlovets: “Russian culture (and literature in particular) is too rich - and continues to be actively replenished in recent decades (including due to previously prohibited or forgotten works): none mandatory list will not be able to give an idea of ​​all the diversity - artistic, ethnocultural, ideological and philosophical - of our literature, but he can leave part of this diversity behind, and pass off the other, much smaller part through educational institutions as the main, top one.” The expert recalls that, in accordance with the tradition that developed in Soviet times, this is primarily the literature of realism. Participation in the discussion of the Russian Orthodox Church, in his opinion, will additionally highlight works in which Christian motifs are significant.

“A single list will make the fate easier for those teachers who simply do not have the resources or desire to expand their professional horizons: having mastered a certain mandatory list once and for all, you can work on it from year to year, relying on the work of previous years: hence the participation of members of the teachers’ association in the project . And finally, modern education is becoming more and more varied, its content is updated following successes modern science and culture, which is why educational publishing houses suffer: textbooks cease to be the main source of information, in particular - in literature, the variety of books studied in different classes and schools kills the very idea of ​​a textbook, and here a single list will be a great help (therefore, in the story with a list, active representatives of some publishing houses). The main problem that such a list will not solve, but, on the contrary, will worsen, is the problem of “Alexia”, non-reading of modern children and youth. But supporters of the list do not see this as a big problem: they are fighting against the “hedonic” approach to reading (confusing aesthetic enjoyment with physiological), they talk about reading the “classics” primarily as hard spiritual work that should be forced: the religious thought about the salvation of suffering is also included in the ideological arsenal of the adherents of the list. Thus, the classics are perceived as something like the ancient languages ​​that were previously studied in gymnasiums: these languages ​​have a dead trunk - but living roots, they are in no way in demand by modernity - but they commune a person with eternity and tradition. This approach is not in great demand by the modern education system, aimed at adapting a person to the fluid modernity and preparing him for an uncertain future: there is a systematic approach, a conflict between two cultural models, two value systems, two understandings of the purpose of education. And one of them, with the active support of the state, has a chance to establish itself in our country for some time, despite the fact that from a historical perspective it is most likely doomed,” sums up Pavlovets.

The creation of the Society of Russian Literature will allow the Russian Orthodox Church to expand its presence in the education system. The Moscow Patriarchate has long and regularly reminded that the existing format of “spiritual and moral education” in schools, namely the pluralistic course “Fundamentals religious cultures and secular ethics” does not satisfy him at all. In addition to proposals to expand ORKSE to all years of study, which the Ministry of Education and Science has so far successfully fought off, the Church is trying to invade other areas of knowledge. Theology has recently achieved recognition as a scientific discipline.

The rationale for such a strategy can be heard from the lips of Patriarch Kirill. “Domestic education assumed the development, as they said in the old days, of “the mind and abilities of the soul” with the help, on the one hand, of the exact sciences, especially mathematics, and on the other, the Russian language, classical literature, history, ancient and modern languages, and the Law of God “, said the head of the Russian Orthodox Church. The Moscow Patriarchate is just these days discussing the draft “Educational Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church,” which states that “The Church throughout its history has strived for the churching of a culture that includes various aspects spiritual and social existence of a person, transforming it and filling it with Christian content.”

The Russian Orthodox Church is looking for new ways to “church” education and culture – and finds them. The state, it seems, is ready to hand over the entire humanitarian sphere to the clerics for “nurturing.” The benefit for the Church from this does not require comment, but the benefit for society remains a topic of debate.

On March 9, under the chairmanship of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus', an extended meeting of the Patriarchal Council for Culture was held, dedicated to the establishment of the Society of Russian Literature. The Society included a permanent author of the “Russian People’s Line”, professor of the Department of Russian Literature and intercultural communication State Institute Russian language named after A.S. Pushkin, Doctor of Philology, Chairman of the Russian Association of Researchers, Teachers and Teachers of Rhetoric, Honorary Worker of Higher Education vocational education Russian Federation Vladimir Annushkin.

Vladimir Ivanovich shares his impressions of the event:

The event that took place, in my opinion, is of extreme importance. We finally have the Society of Russian Literature - after the Russian Geographical Society and the Russian Historical Society. I am confident that we now have the opportunity to turn in all its breadth to the problems of words and literature as tools that organize and constitute the essence of our life. The idea of ​​the Word is the main idea of ​​not only Russian, but also European philosophy, philology and culture. Man is the image of God, and therefore verbal.

It is also remarkable that the Society was headed by His Holiness Patriarch Kirill, whose verbal personality (allow me to be frank!) one cannot help but admire... And this time at this meeting he brilliantly commented on the speeches of the speakers, correctly, for example, noting Nikita Sergeevich Mikhalkov that we do not need “ coups and revolutions”, and we will act “meekly and humbly”, but gradually and persistently... How persistently he sought an answer from the “general” speech of an authoritative colleague, what texts are proposed to be studied at school... However, it seems he never got it...

What should the Society do if we already have ROPRYAL (Russian Society of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature), Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature at school, a similar one at university, International Association teachers of Russian language and literature (MAPRYAL)? I would like to believe that it is the Society of Russian Literature that will deal with many unresolved problems relating to both the “life of language”, our verbal existence, and the problems of teaching the Russian language and literature (as well as literature and rhetoric itself), which was most of all discussed at the founding meeting on March 9.

But two words must be said about history, because we already had a Society of Lovers of Russian Literature, which was opened at Moscow University in 1811. It played a colossal role in the development of Russian education, and, in particular, verbal education. It is enough to cite this fact: Vladimir Ivanovich Dal He published his dictionary precisely at the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature. It was through the efforts of members of the Society of Lovers of Russian Literature that a monument to Pushkin was erected in Moscow. All famous Russian writers took part in its activities. In 1930 the Society was closed, but in 1990 it was revived on the initiative of the academician Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev.

Many of our literary philologists, my colleagues, including me, took an active part in the monthly meetings of the Society, held mainly at the Marina Tsvetaeva Museum. The society existed mainly due to the extraordinary energy and enthusiasm of its secretary Raisa Nikolaevna Kleimenova(1940-2010). Through her efforts, more than twenty books were published under the stamp of OLRS, including the study “Society of Lovers of Russian Literature. 1811-1930 (2002)"; “Pushkin and OLRS (1999)”; "IN AND. Dahl and OLRS (2002)"; "Gogol and OLRS (2005)". But with the passing of Raisa Nikolaevna, the Society somewhat lost its activity and now actually does not exist under that name, although it holds separate events.

I have great hopes for the new Society, because the new name should justify the meanings inherent in the word “literature”.

Our intelligentsia, our philological science are responsible for ensuring that people understand the role and meaning of the word - language - speech in their lives, because like the language, so is life, like the language, so is the person. Here, each of us bears our share of responsibility for how we, philologists, disseminate knowledge about the “great Russian word”, how we are able to form in ourselves and our students the art of mastering the word, which begins, of course, with moral philosophy and ethics set out in the main cultural texts of humanity. When discussing the problems of words and literature, we always touch upon the main thing: what is Truth? How to live according to “God’s truth” (and in our speeches only “human” truth is often defended)?

Will the Society of Russian Literature be able to justify the hopes placed on it during its creation? It depends on our “personal” initiatives, inspiration, will, ingenuity, determination, intelligence and tact... Can we hope that the Ministry of Education and Science will listen to the opinion of the Society? It depends on the efforts of both parties. After all, the danger of democracy is that they listen to your opinion, thank you, and then simply do it their own way without regard to the opinion expressed. However, a drop wears away a stone...

Speaking about our initiatives, I want to tell you that in the very near future we will organize a series of lectures at the International Foundation of Slavic Literature and Culture. On March 28, my evening on Russian literature “Russian language in poetry and music” will take place.

The most significant initiative is the educational project “Culture Lens”, within the framework of which regular lectures will be held at the Moscow Government House on Novy Arbat. On April 7, 2016, the first evening entitled “ Living word and literature." We will talk about the culture of modern Russian speech, the music of the Russian word and the word in music. . If you disagree, we ask you to leave the site and not use it. You can disable cookies in your web browser settings.
The site"s official website uses cookies to ensure high-quality work and storage of users" settings on their devices. We also collect some data for site statistics using Google Analytics, Yandex.Metrika, Mail.ru and Sputnik counters. By clicking OK and continuing to use our website, you acknowledge you are informed of and agree with that and our Privacy Policy. If you are not agree we kindly ask you to leave our website and not to use it. You may switch off cookies in your browser tools.

Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus' became the head of the established Society of Russian Literature, which will be a new discussion platform for discussing issues of teaching the Russian language and literature.

“You all know very well what kind of public discussions are taking place in the country. How public opinion and the opinion of the expert community are divided on a number of issues related to the teaching of literature and the Russian language from the point of view of the attitude towards the ongoing educational reform. The scale of this reform, its severity, goal-setting, maybe even political and cultural implications may be such that this discussion cannot be limited only to departments and expert communities,” the head of the Russian Orthodox Church said on Wednesday at a meeting of the founding meeting of the Society of Russian Literature.

According to him, President Vladimir Putin offered him to head the Society of Russian Literature.

In addition, during the meeting, the Patriarch expressed concern about the results in Russian language and literature that Russian schoolchildren demonstrate in last years at the Unified State Exam. In his opinion, this speaks “of the low level of development of society.” “What is acceptable in underdeveloped countries cannot be acceptable in the country of Pushkin, Lermontov, Dostoevsky, in a country where illiteracy was overcome in the most difficult times, in a country that has reached a very high level of education,” the primate of the Russian Orthodox Church is convinced .

The Society of Russian Literature included professors and teachers from the Institute of Linguistics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Russian Language named after A.S. Pushkin, Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov, HSE, Literary Institute, director of the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company Oleg Dobrodeev, writers Sergei Shargunov, Zakhar Prilepin, Yuri Polyakov, poet Yuri Kublanovsky, filmmakers Nikita Mikhalkov and Stanislav Govorukhin, as well as many public and cultural figures, scientists.

Alexander Prokhanov comments on the event:

With interest and deep sympathy I learned about the creation of the Society of Russian Literature. It is also interesting that this is being done under the auspices of the Church, under the auspices of the growing Orthodox worldview, which is increasingly replacing nihilism, depressive consciousness, and deliberate corruption of the Russian language. This initiative is extremely necessary against the backdrop of a very powerful cohort that is engaged not just in literature and philology, but is a huge ideological combine seeking to mobilize a liberal project in Russia. This project is in Lately retreats, opening up space for the state, imperial world consciousness. But this influence is still very modest, and the liberal crowd, no, no, and demonstrates its ability to control cultural space Russia. Consider the recent statement of the PEN Club in defense of Savchenko, which resembles a powerful ideological invasion that threatens the very existence of the Russian state. Therefore, the creation of this Society is a phenomenon of national importance.

But like an artist, like a person experienced in all the vicissitudes literary processes over the past thirty to forty years, I also have concerns. Russian literature carries within itself many factions, mixtures, trends, which turned our literature into a phenomenon that contains the complexity of the universe; in it at the same time the plans of the Lord sparkle and the forces of devilish darkness curl. I am afraid that church tutelage over modern literature would result in strict censorship, because many Christian postulates are very far from the hidden and complex laboratories in which novels or poems are born.

I am interested to know how the Society will deal with Tolstoy, who is still, despite the lapse of time and time, an unloved and unwanted writer for the modern church elite. How will the Society perceive the grandiose culture of the Silver Age, in which there is enough ungodly things for the church. The culture of the Russian Silver Age is the precious, unique “Inonia” of Yesenin, the creations of the Symbolists, which in many ways can be interpreted as courtly, erotic, which contradicts the ideas of the Church.

It seems to me that the Society of Russian Literature should not turn into a factory of censored texts. There is a huge problem - to find a language that connects the Church with young people, often corrupted, confused, speaking in slang. Our parish priests, in their sermons, which, as a rule, are worthy and deeply canonical, often do not find access to the hearts of young, exalted people. Therefore, the creation of this Society is in itself beneficial. It seems to me that the Society should join a broader movement of Russian writers of various directions and views, which resists the monstrous onslaught of liberal nihilism. And if one of the goals of the Society is to counter aggressive, caustic, acidic liberal energy, then it must be adequate. Antidotes must be found for liberal poisons. A tip filled with light must be pointed against the darkness, like the spear of Peresvet. And this movement must be acutely social and, if you like, bloody, because Russian literature after 1991 was pricked by liberal hatred.

I am also surprised by the composition of the assembly. Of course, Nikita Mikhalkov, who polemicized with the Patriarch, is a beacon of our culture. But Nikita Sergeevich is a director, not a novelist or philologist. I don’t understand why this ensemble did not include, for example, Vladimir Lichutin, the real creator of today’s and tomorrow’s Russian language, to whom even enemies take off their hats. And I, a sinner, probably have nothing to do with literature, I don’t know how to express my thoughts, I haven’t written a single novel. We, Russian writers, who have been fighting for Russian literature for three decades, are disappointed that the Church today has joined this movement, and battle veterans who managed to defend our values ​​suddenly find themselves on the sidelines from the Society.

On May 26, 2016, His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus' spoke at the plenary session of the Congress of the Society of Russian Literature.

Dear participants of the First Congress of the Society of Russian Literature! I warmly greet you all.

I would like to note right away: although, as we know from Russian history, societies of lovers of Russian literature were created earlier, such a representative collection, dedicated to issues Russian language and Russian literature, held for the first time. In 1811, two societies were created in Russia, uniting people who were not indifferent to the fate of Russian literature. One of them, the literary and scientific “Society of Lovers of Russian Literature” at Moscow University, existed until 1930. Another, “Conversations of Lovers of the Russian Word,” which united St. Petersburg writers, unfortunately disbanded already in 1816, after the death of its founder Gabriel Derzhavin.

“Society of Lovers of Russian Literature” at Moscow University, which included, in addition to scientists and writers, government and public figures, outstanding sons of our Fatherland, worked for the benefit of the people of their country for almost 120 years. During this time, the Society published many outstanding artistic and folklore works, scientific works and dictionaries. Thanks to him active work The teaching of philological disciplines in Russia has reached an unprecedented flourishing, and issues of the Russian language and literature have always been in the center of public attention and discussion.

In 1992, on the initiative of academician Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev, the “Society of Lovers of Russian Literature” was revived. But a few years later, after the death of Dmitry Sergeevich and the energetic secretary of the Society, Raisa Nikolaevna Kleimenova, it, alas, practically ceased its activities.

And now all of us who care about fate Russian culture, united to preserve our national treasure- Russian language and great Russian culture. The main goal of the newly formed Society of Russian Literature, as before, is the study and popularization of Russian literature and the Russian language, as well as increasing the role of philological disciplines in educational and educational processes at all levels of the national school - from primary to higher education.

We, representatives of the older generation, remember our school teachers with gratitude and are deeply grateful to them for their professionalism, for high quality teaching that they exhibited. Of course, the education system in the Soviet Union was largely ideological. But this is precisely the strength and greatness of Russian literature: it is capable of putting the light of truth, goodness and love into the hearts of readers, overcoming any peculiarities of the ideological context, including ideological blinders, “ iron curtains"and other harmful external circumstances.

The great Russian classical literature, which so providentially reached its most powerful age at the beginning of the tragic twentieth century, took on another important mission, a task beyond the capabilities of any other humanitarian sphere at that time: it fulfilled the purpose of preserving for posterity not only Russian culture, but also our national history.

Finally, Russian literature - albeit contradictory, but steadily and courageously - has always led its reader to the knowledge of the highest spiritual and moral values, to the knowledge of the highest meaning of life, to the knowledge of God.

In this regard, I recall the remarkably precise words of Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev about the role and significance of literature and philology in general: “Literature is not only the art of words. This is the art of overcoming words.<…>Understanding a text is an understanding of the entire life of one’s era behind the text. Therefore, philology is the connection of all connections.<…>It underlies not only science, but all human culture. Knowledge and creativity are formed through the word, and through overcoming the rigidity of the word, culture is born.”1

It is no coincidence that, perhaps not fully consciously rationally, but vividly feeling in their hearts, many people of the middle and older generation considered literature teachers to be their favorite teachers at school. But today the same literary scholars, our contemporaries - both young teachers and teachers of advanced age - are desperately sounding the alarm bell, seeing and realizing more clearly than others the danger of the situation that has developed in the current philological education.

The opinion that young people read little these days has become a common truth for many. But this fact, fortunately, is highly controversial. Firstly, not all young people read a little. And secondly, this problem is not insoluble.

I remember how in the 1950s and 60s they were worried that film adaptations of literary works would lead to teenagers stopping reading, just as they now say that computers and adapted books will completely wean young people from reading the classics. Of course, this can happen if the teacher does not instill a taste for literature and reading. That is why in our computerized times, the role of a mentor is especially important - a person who transfers knowledge from heart to heart, from mind to mind. Indeed, in this communication there is not only a rational, but also a spiritual, emotional principle. I think everyone present here has long forgotten the content of the lectures of their professors in higher education. And when we say: “We had a wonderful professor,” the last thing we think about is the content of these lectures. The very fact of meeting with wonderful person, and not only on a rational level.

Therefore, the role of the teacher cannot be overestimated. He does not simply transmit information, as a computer does, he refracts what is said through himself and transmits part of his soul, his mind to those who listen to him. And if this is a sincere person, if he is a devotee of his craft, then nothing can compare in terms of the power of persuasion and influence on the audience with the words of a true master of his craft - a teacher.

And here, in my opinion, lies the root of the problem. Of course, the range, level and quality of reading of a growing, emerging person is influenced by the modern rhythm of life, and introduction to Internet culture, and the innovations of the electronic age. But the main problem, I think, is that school, society and the state, in the end, do not always take care with due diligence and responsibility to instill in young people a taste for reading, teach them to understand and love literature, and to learn from what you read, the most important lessons for life.

This problem is complex, but completely solvable. To do this, special attention must be paid to the training of teaching staff in the humanities. It is impossible for people to enter pedagogical institutes according to the residual principle: if you don’t get into an elite university, where to go? To the pedagogical! Pedagogical universities must become intellectual, cultural centers our country, and the prestige of teachers should be comparable to the prestige of scientists, astronauts, and athletes. In that case capable people will go to pedagogical universities, and it is they who will form the new generation, even if not everything goes well with the programs and manuals. Because a talented teacher can convey a powerful emotional, spiritual, intellectual signal over bureaucratic documentation - believe me, I know this first-hand.

Nevertheless, it is useful for us to think about school and university programs that are so actively discussed today, including their variability. I hope we will talk about this topic again, but, looking forward to the discussion, I would like to express my opinion: there is no need to be afraid of the word “variability.” Some shy away from him as if from a scarecrow. But the whole question is what to choose from. If we choose between two works by Dostoevsky, we will not lose anything. But if a great classic is contrasted with a writer whose work does not evoke universal admiration and whose personality does not evoke respect, then this is no longer variability; a different term should be applied to such a phenomenon.

Therefore, there is no need to be afraid of variability. We need to talk about the intellectual, spiritual, and cultural content of school education programs. It is important that behind smart and attractive formulations such as “modular teaching”, “thematic principle”, “variable content”, “strengthening subjectivity in teaching”, “the teacher’s ability to formulate his own program, adapting it to the specifics of the school, class, region” , - stood verified and time-tested pedagogical methods, and did not hide, as happens, pedagogical helplessness, essentially unnecessary and dubious experiments, taste, restless desire for reforms, unprofessionalism, in the end. But it’s not a matter of terms - it’s a matter of content, a good head and a kind heart. Then we will have reached a national consensus on all the most complex issues, including those we are currently considering.

Certainly, school program generally overloaded, and the child does not always cope with it successfully. I remember my school years: my family was poor, and I was forced to work and study. I didn’t have a minute of free time either on the tram or on the bus - I was always with a book. I know what it's like to be overwhelmed. But I thank my wonderful teachers, who, despite this overload, armed me not only with knowledge, but also with a love of literature, and taught me how to write essays. And trying to make it easier for children to study by providing the opportunity to remove from the curriculum great works of literary fiction recognized throughout the world is, of course, unacceptable.

In preparing for this speech, I tried to delve into the main controversial issues relating to the teaching of literature in school. There are problems that I would like to propose for our joint discussion.

Some “experts” claim that Russian classical literature - its language, heroes, value paradigm - is incomprehensible modern schoolchildren, and therefore almost useless in the field of education. Another thing, in their opinion, is the literature of modern times, which talks about familiar realities, qualities needed for successful life, trends, excuse the word, etc.

“Trend” is a foreign word. “Tendency” is also foreign, but Latin. Why Latin word"tendency" was replaced by English "trend", explain to me, educated people? Or is the word “trend” an indicator of education? For me this is a very bad sign. That is why I did not delete the word “trend” from this text, wanting to express my opinion about the often completely illogical, unjustified use of foreign, primarily English, words in our modern Russian language.

Of course, the best works of literature at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries should be studied in school, but they should be introduced into the curriculum without haste, remembering the ideological function of literature, which can awaken “good feelings,” in the words of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, and can promote both in allegorical , and in explicit form, images and ideas that are destructive for children.

It is necessary to find a reasonable balance between the basic, mandatory and variable parts of the list of works offered for classroom and extracurricular reading. The need for responsible discussion and adoption of the so-called “golden canon” seems fundamentally important. It can be called whatever you like: “golden canon”, “national canon”, “canon of Russian literature”, but there must be a set of texts that must be studied in secondary school. Without this, we simply will not be able to form in children a holistic perception of Russian literature, and therefore Russian culture. I think there is no need to be afraid that in such a situation teachers are deprived of choice. There is always a choice: to work conscientiously or carelessly, to sincerely love children and your profession or to be indifferent to it. But the most important thing is the choice that I mentioned earlier. The teacher can choose from the two best the best, from his point of view. But the choice cannot be between the best and the mediocre, between obligatory for everyone due to the unique contribution of the work to Russian and world culture and a purely conceptual text, interesting at the moment, but losing significance with the disappearance of the historical context. Attaching liberal arts education solely to the context of the era is the wrong method. Undoubtedly, education should actualize ideas emanating from culture, from tradition. Without this, culture and tradition die. The modern context cannot fully control educational process, because what is very important in our fast-flowing time will not be important tomorrow. How we suffered from the problems of the 90s! I remember what was happening in this room. Such was the battle between right and left! Where are these battles, where are these people? Everything is gone, but Pushkin hasn’t left! So, I think that it is necessary to find a reasonable balance between the basic, mandatory and variable parts of the list of works offered for classroom and extracurricular reading. Fundamentally important is the need to preserve, as I have already said, a certain canon. And I believe that this is what we should focus on: what kind of canon is this, what kind of books are and how variability can operate within this canon.

Obviously, one of the reasons for the decline in interest in Russian literature and its generally unsatisfactory knowledge among the younger generation was, among other things, the ongoing educational reforms over several years. I do not want to criticize any specific institutions, or people, or the very idea of ​​reform. Professionals have already made various comments and will probably continue to criticize certain aspects of this reform. It is also impossible without reforms. You can't stand in one place. The world is developing, the school is developing, our country is developing. On May 24, the day of Cyril and Methodius, I was at a concert on Red Square. A girl was sitting next to me. I look - he sings very well, with a clear voice, very clearly. I started talking to her. The girl is studying in the 5th grade, I looked at her and couldn’t believe my eyes - sitting in front of me was an adult, relaxed, smart, knowledgeable. I remember myself in the 5th grade - I would not only be afraid to say a word to the Patriarch, I would be afraid to say a word to the school principal. But this is a different generation, and if we say that the school of the 50s-60s should be the indisputable gold standard for us, we will ruin the school, the standard, and everything else.

At the same time, I am sure that it would be wrong to consider education reforms, as I have already said, from an exclusively critical point of view. As a result of long-term reforms that affected all areas and levels of education, it was necessary to radically reduce the minimum threshold in the Unified State Examination. We are now touching on this difficult topic. Regarding the One state exam I will express my opinion - I have already expressed it several times in different audiences, I think it is important to do it now, without, of course, claiming any special positive assessments - it seems to me that completely abandoning the Unified State Exam would be the wrong step. I became acquainted with the Unified State Exam in Finland about 30 years ago. I had a connection to this country - I managed our parishes there, being the rector of the theological academy in St. Petersburg. And then one day I came to this country on a spring day, and I saw how many young people were wearing white caps. They explained to me that these are those who passed the state exam for high school. I ask: “What does this status give?” - “Student title.” - “Have they already entered universities?” - “No, and many will not do so. But they are already students, they have their own status recognized by the state.” And they told me about the Unified State Exam system, and I thought it was a good thing when there is some kind of directive assessment of a student’s knowledge.

But there is something in this good idea that you definitely need to pay attention to in order to adjust it for the better, because the current state of the Unified State Exam causes too many complaints from parents, children, and teachers. The first criticism and objection is the test response system. There are subjects whose knowledge cannot be assessed in a test manner. You can pass the traffic rules in a test manner, but in some countries they refused: they offer to examine certain situations on computers. At one time I took my license in Switzerland - you put crosses and that’s it. But people realized that this was not entirely correct, that such an assessment system for a whole range of subjects was insufficient.

Therefore, it seems to me that, firstly, the introduction of an essay is already a very big step forward. It is important that an oral component be added to the Unified State Examination, which would not serve as the only method for determining knowledge. After all, a personality reveals itself when it talks, and the girl revealed herself when she started talking to me. And if you gave her some template, it remains to be seen what she would say. Therefore, I am deeply convinced that the oral component when passing a state exam in a number of subjects is very important point. Of course, this primarily concerns the Russian language and literature. It is impossible to “drive” all the wealth of our literature into tests and short answers to questions. Recently, at the awards ceremony for the Patriarchal laureates literary prize I already recalled the words of Yuri Mikhailovich Lotman, with whom I had the joy of personal acquaintance and communication. I can’t say that we were friends, but we were mutually interested interlocutors. I knew both him and his wife, and I gained a lot from communicating with this man. So, he said that eternal ideas and values ​​invariably put on the clothes of time, and the reader only needs to correctly recognize these thoughts. Today I would like to quote another remarkable statement by this outstanding philologist. Speaking about categories such as culture and information, he said: “Culture is not a warehouse of information at all.<…>Culture is a flexible and complexly organized mechanism of cognition”2. It is impossible to imagine literature as a collection of data about writers, their works and main characters. Reading a literary work is always reflection, deep inner work mind and heart, which cannot be seen and assessed by correctly checking the boxes.

It is no coincidence that in the 50s and 60s, critical remarks were sometimes made about the film adaptation of classical works. What happens to a person when he reads a classic literary work? And the more talented the author, the more powerfully what I’m about to say affects a person. Everyone who reads fiction creates an artistic image in their mind. And the stronger the writer, the brighter image in our minds. I do not live by the images that I saw in films based on the novels of Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. I have developed my own images, even my own room interiors; how I imagine the clothes based on what was written in these texts, what the characters looked like. In other words, each of us, reading a literary text, becomes a co-author; for himself - we have already talked about actualization today - he personally updates the content of the work of art. And this cannot be replaced either by cinema, although even there it is interesting to observe the skill of the director and actors, or by theatre, although there it is important to see the beauty of everything that the director and actor creates. Because with reading, you are the director yourself, you are the artist yourself, you are the director yourself. It is in this part of assimilation literary text, I think, contains its enduring significance for the formation of personality, for the formation of human culture.

An extremely important topic that also needs our joint discussion is the issue of training future teachers. I have already said this and will not dwell on it. I will only say that Russian literature is, without exaggeration, one of the pillars of our national life, the most important foundation of the civilization of the Russian world, I would say, the cultural pillar of state life. Therefore, the future of the Russian language and literature should be a subject of discussion not only among professionals, but also among everyone Russian society. This is a strategic task today that must be resolved responsibly.

The fertile field of Russian literature should not be an arena for ideological battles, for lobbying someone's interests, or inappropriate experiments. We need to clear this platform of internecine strife that we inherited from the 90s. We must fully realize that over the past years and decades, mistakes and distortions have, of course, been made, but there is no life without mistakes and without distortions. It is very dangerous when a mistake is not noticed, when, due to political and human factors, it is hushed up and becomes part of the flesh and blood. folk life. That's when this mistake becomes a historical crime. I think we are all called today - not only society, but also the Government, the writing workshop, readers - to realize that we are at a very important point in our spiritual, cultural development. What will happen to our school, to our literature, to our writing workshop and to our readers depends to a large extent on what this development will be like.

Thank you for attention.

1 ― Likhachev D.S. About the art of words and philology.

2 ― Lotman Yu.M. Culture and information // Lotman Yu.M. Articles on semiotics of culture and art.

Press service of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'